Slashdot Mirror
McCain Picks Gov. Palin As Running Mate
Many readers have written to tell us about McCain's choice of Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin as his VP choice. "Palin, 44, a self-described 'hockey mom,' is a conservative first-term governor of Alaska with strong anti-abortion views, a record of reform and fiscal conservatism and an outsider's perspective on Washington. [...] If elected, Palin would be the first woman US vice president, adding another historic element to a presidential race that has been filled with firsts. Obama, 47, is the first black nominee of a major US political party. The choice of a vice president rarely has a major impact on the presidential race. Palin will meet Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in a debate in October."
Joe Biden: "Governor Palin, I served with Dan Quayle; Dan Quayle was a friend of mine. Governor, you're no Dan Quayle."
Bryan J. Casto
bryan.casto(a)gmail.com
I worked with her last year, doing some linux consulting work for the State of Alaska. I'd definitely tap her :)
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
The Republican ticket is now complete, with John McCain picking Sarah Palin, the Republican Governor of Alaska as his running mate. And sure, she is hot (safe for work) but it would appear she is also a proponent of teaching creationism alongside Evolution in public schools. I don't mean to start a flame war here (ok maybe just a little) but seriously, how can anyone take a candidate seriously when they shamelessly pander to the stupid lobby?
Prediction: The real iPhone killer is going to be sex robots from Japan. Think about it.
I think this is a great pick. The Democrats seem to want to attack Palin on experience but, in the minds of many, every attack/criticism they make against Palin will be silently re-asked by viewers about the Democrats' presidential pick.
Democrats are in a catch-22. Great political move by McCain. And Palin's speech in Dayton was excellent and motivating and inspirational, far more than what I heard from Obama last night at the DNC convention.
Skin color and ethnicity should matter in an election, but Obama is half-"white American" half "Black African." While that technically makes him half African-American, he does not share the full cultural heritage that is commonly understood by the term "African-American."
His dad was from Africa, not the son or grandson of a sharecropper and not the descendant of slaves from pre-Civil-War America.
I will grant you that he grew up in the '60s and '70s in a time where his skin color gave him distinct disadvantages, but that's not the same as having parents and grandparents who faced the same obstacles.
Barak Obama has far more in common with lawyers from Harvard than your average African American.
Thankfully, for today's generation and the ones to follow, the cultural differences are becoming more about economic differences rather than differences in skin tone and whether your ancestors were property.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Well she just asked "What exactly does a vice president do?", on CNBC. Um, ok that is scary. This is just a female Dan Quayle that instead of golfing hunts, fishes and wrestles bears. Unfortunately she does none of these things naked.
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
Face it, though, neither Palin (a self-admitted creationist) nor Biden (a proponent of stronger police powers) is a 'nerd-friendly' pick.
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
I myself don't want to see McCain in the White House, but if they (McCain/Palin) actually do get elected, I wouldn't mind becoming an intern to Palin in the White House. You know what I am talking about! Yeah Baby!
-- Brought to you by Carl's JR
Well, given the title, I am tempted to assume you're joking. But the capacity of Republicans and their supporters for self parody can't be down played. Perhaps you're actually serious. Next you're going to be going on about Palin's experience and readiness to be president in a job that is, as they say, a heart beat away.
I think that the opposite of your claim is true: McCain is doomed. He just destroyed the "Obama doesn't have the experience to lead" meme. Sure Palin is a hard right social conservative. But she also happens to be an ex-beauty queen with an ethical scandal in Alaska. The social conservatives claim that women should be at home, not running for the Vice Presidency. Of course they're a bit inconsistent on this. I think that you'll find that Palin and her big breasts are a huge liability for McCain. If nothing else, she'll emphasize that he's very old.
Just a little something I read about the government not being allowed to outlaw or advance any particular religion. And, yeah, any form of ID? Yup, that's a religious belief, not a scientific one.
And for strict biblical literalists, teaching a heliocentric model of the solar system is going against their religion. Are we supposed to teach geocentrism in public schools, as well?
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
I suspect:
Personally, I wouldn't mind the ticket being reversed: Palin/McCain. But given what we've got, Palin's speech this morning was far more inspirational and motivating than Obama's. And she didn't even have a crowd of 80,000 at Invesco field to drum up the energy.
What's sad is that when Democrats run women, it's looked at as somehow genuine but when Republicans run a woman it's looked at as pandering.
Because when people talk about presenting "both" sides of an issue, they usually don't mean the "informed" and "uninformed" sides.
If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
I've heard a few people comment that she should hold her own against Biden, who has a tendancy to talk over people. While this may be acceptable against a man, albeit rude, against a woman, all she has to do is start tapping her foot or give some other indication that her speaking time is being infringed and it really makes Biden look bad. "The man" holding her down, etc.
Good contrast in beliefs, senatorial v. executive experience, should be interesting! I really didn't know who I wanted as VP but hearing her speak this morning, I think she can be solid.
I think you overestimate how much the people will care.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Are you saying she should have? I thought it was all about the "woman's right to choose" with the abortion crowd.
She tried to get a state trooper fired for divorcing her sister and after that failed, fired his boss for not firing him.
True, she has been accused of this. But so far, the only people implicated in trying to get this state trooper fired are members of her family and staffers in her office, without her knowledge. The only documentation of any action by her pre-dates when she was elected governor.
I don't think it's going to get traction, because the state trooper isn't exactly a sympathetic figure. He was suspended for using a stun-gun on his 10-year-old stepson, and is alleged to have threatened Palin's father (among other things).
Story here, with links to background material: http://www.adn.com/politics/story/468174.html
Somehow you're COMPLETELY overlooking the Hillary/Obama race, and I'm honestly shocked you don't see it.
Hillary/Obama race was often summed up as: First woman or First black man?
You don't remember that?? Because, at least in my neck of the woods, there are still many who wish it had gone the other way. Many who would rather give the woman thing a go first...
Now McCain gets to tap into that vibe, and probably shore up at least a few of those voters that would have preferred Hillary over Obama. They didn't really WANT to vote McCain before, but they would have just for the woman factor, and because they have some kind of irrational hatred for Obama. Now they've been handed a reason to want to vote for him, too.
In short, my grandmother who has voted Democrat for the last 50 or 60 years will now almost certainly vote Republican.
Genius, really.
1. Evolution has nothing to say one way or another about the planet's origins. It doesn't even address the origins of life. It addresses solely how individual Species might originate.
2. At the time Darwin published his book, most people generally agreed that the earth was at least a few hundred thousand, possibly millions of years old. The concept of a 6000 year old Earth was introduced by Thomas Aquinas and largely ignored until the 19th century. And even he was simply speculating on the length of time since Adam left the Garden, based on genealogies given in the Bible, not on the age of the entire Earth, and certainly not on the relative age of the universe. Even amongst Christians, a 6000 year old universe didn't become an article of faith until the rise of radio preachers in the 1920s.
3. Evolution was widely accepted in 1859, when Darwin published his book. What was hotly debated was the mechanism by which species may evolve. The revolutionary idea Darwin put forth was that natural selection alone would be powerful enough to be that mechanism. There were many other theories being put forth at the time.
If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
Where's the justice in firing a police commander who protects a thug? Are you serious?
Far too many police departments protect bad cops. I say, kudos to Palin for cleaning house.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
I think that the opposite of your claim is true: McCain is doomed. He just destroyed the "Obama doesn't have the experience to lead" meme. Sure Palin is a hard right social conservative. But she also happens to be an ex-beauty queen with an ethical scandal in Alaska.
Ethical scandal? Really? She pushed for the firing of some cop who tazer'd his own nephew, and then threatened the life of his soon-to-be-ex father in law? Seems like a fireable offense to me. Regardless of how she's related to the family.
The social conservatives claim that women should be at home, not running for the Vice Presidency. Of course they're a bit inconsistent on this.
Pardon, but I think perhaps you may not be qualified to speak for "the social conservatives".
You don't remember that?? Because, at least in my neck of the woods, there are still many who wish it had gone the other way. Many who would rather give the woman thing a go first...
Because they've outgrown misogyny but not racism?
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
That's because it is? How concerned have you ever seen the Republican party over women's rights? Hell, they have a hard time caring about anything other than wealthy, property owner rights.
That is all.
AND, no one has been able to link Palin directly to the firing in question. Not through phone logs, witnesses, or anything else.
It also appears that Hillary voters are moving to Palin in a big way, according to some of their blogs.
Not that this is the basis for my vote, but I'd like to point out that Palin was the Gov. of Alaska, one of the states that McCain is older than. Made me smile, at least ; - )
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ahjlNLo_3TFE&refer=home
She did not fire that cop for the right reasons. She fired him for the wrong reasons. And you should not encourage that.
If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
I think he's senile now.
if you subscribe to the Bush doctrine on torture (as McCain now does), then McCain himself was never "tortured" at the Hanoi Hilton and the anti-American statements he made to his captors are, in fact, truthful and accurate intelligence.
from a comment on a story in the Wash Post.
The ethical scandal is that she then got the commissioner fired for not doing as she wished. *That* is the big problem... she is, just like the current executive, intolerant of people who are not yes-men.
I, for one, do not want another my-way-or-the-highway executive, because no person is infallible.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
Errr, no, she was already vetted during the primary...how much more is needed. The only thing they'd want to know would who contributed to Bill's presidential library. Only the bloviating media ever thought she was in the running for VP.
What's sad is that when Democrats run women, it's looked at as somehow genuine but when Republicans run a woman it's looked at as pandering.
Because, when Democrats run women, it's based on a long history of, y'know, actually having supported women's issues.
Since Republicans have a long history of voting *against* things like equal work for equal pay, then yeah - it's pandering.
Unfortunately (Well, unfortunately for the GOP - I'm fairly happy about it), I don't think it's going to be very effective - I have doubts most of the GOP is actually familiar with her record. So the xenophobes that are going to be really ticked at a 'tacking towards the center' approach, are going to be really ticked anyway, while the moderates that might be gained by *actually* tacking towards the center will be the ones that look up her record and decide 'No Thanks'.
On top of which, we have a McCain campaign screaming about Obama's lack of experience, but anointing someone younger and with *no* national or foreign policy experience.
Pug
An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
Teaching creationism in schools != teaching creationism as science. Your argument is a red herring. It's not relevant because She has specifically stated that she believes ID/creationism should be taught alongside evolution as a viable alternative theory to explain the origin of species. This is not acceptable because ID is not science. We have been through this REPEATEDLY, and the public and our elected officials STILL don't get it, which is precisely what the ID proponents are banking on. They are relying on the public's ignorance of what it means to do science to blur the line of scientific legitimacy. By all means, go ahead and teach ID in its historical context. But it has absolutely NO place in the science classroom, except perhaps as a brief exercise in discussing what is, and is not, science.
McCain very effectively put the experience issue to rest by picking Palin, which makes you wonder what the last month of crap from him and his surrogates was about. Obama as celebrity? Palin has actually won beauty contests. Obama passes legislation with his name on it in the U.S. Senate; Palin governs a state with less population than Austin, TX. Palin is also a creationist, arguing for equal time in science class.
Magoo very effectively hijacked the media cycle with this choice, but one wonders why he didn't choose from a legion of much more qualified, experienced, effective female Republicans.
Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
We dont know what Obama stands for except that he for the most socialist policy that i have ever read...coming just shy to that of marxism.
Yeah, Obama was totally promoting all sorts of government and worker ownership of the means of production last night. Right after he did the crowd surfing.
Read a book before you rant. And perhaps a reference on Obama's economic policy, too.
*sigh*
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
When the story broke, he was stripped of all committee assignments and asked to resign, which he refused to do. What more do you want, Nancy Pelosi to spike him in the eye with a high heel?
Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
Some people EARN the grief they get and it has squat to do
with whatever "oppressed monority group" they would like to
have themselves associated with.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
That has nothing to do with her being a woman.
it has a lot to do with her being a general snob and/or jackass. :-)
To quote a blogger on National Review, if this person with all of her credentials and history had been a man, would she have gotten nominated? If you think that this pick didn't have anything to do with trying to pander to disgruntled Hillary Clinton voters, then I've got a bridge to nowhere in Alaska to sell you.
Libertarians somehow believe that private businesses should be stronger than governments but weaker than individuals.
If a sizeable portion of the population holds to an "uninformed" side, then you had better teach that, too. Heck, I try to teach my kids what Democrats think and we have a great discussion about it.
I'm sorry, being a mayor of a town of 9000 doesn't qualify you to be Vice President, especially when the presidential candidate has age and a history of health problems going against him.
As for governor, Alaska has a population of 670,000, roughly twice the population of the CITY I live in.
Alaska also does not face the same challenges as other states. They basically don't have many taxes since they get all their wealth from oil, and so they don't have to deal with the budget issues other states have been stuck with. And she's only been governor for 2 years. At least George W. Bush had a lot more experience than that as governor of Texas. Also, they've been getting a huge windfall of revenue whereas most states are struggling to balance their budgets due to the high oil prices. There are no statewide income, sales, property or inheritance or state taxes (some localities have their own local taxes). Palin actually RAISED taxes on the oil companies and limited their exploration and development (which affects everyone else).
She has no international experience, or for that matter, any national experience.
Obama had millions of votes for him as a senator, several times the entire population of Alaska. Even as a state senator he represented far more people than she has as a mayor.
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
She said no thanks to Sen. Ted "Internet Tubes" Steven's 100 million dollar "bridge to nowhere",
Anchorage Daily News, 10/5/06: Palin Said She Supported The So-Called "Bridge To Nowhere," But Was Concerned Money "Flow" Was "Going to Slow"
Might want to revisit your history....
When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
You've missed the point that in no way was it her or her office's responsibility or duty to fire this guy. She strong-armed the guy's boss into firing him. It wasn't something she should have even been involved with. She overstepped her bounds and used her political office to gain revenge for a family member.
Point of clarification: As far as I can tell, Wooten (the state trooper) is still on the force. He was suspended for cause for 10 days, reduced to 5 days after a grievance was filed by the union.
http://www.adn.com/news/politics/story/510080.html
Reading between the lines, it appears that Palin's husband was responsible for a lot of the pressure.
Are you saying she should have? I thought it was all about the "woman's right to choose" with the abortion crowd.
Seriously. Choosing to have a child with Down's Syndrome is brave and not something any pro-choice advocate should have a problem with. They might suspect that she was pressured into it by her community/party/husband/church, but that'd be a concern, not a reason to condemn the decision.
No. The problem pro-choice women will have with Palin isn't that she chose not to abort a baby with Down's. The problem they will have is that she would like to deny them the opportunity to choose in the same situation.
The enemies of Democracy are
But don't listen to me. I'm just an evil conservative.
I think you're confusing Conservative and Liberal with being conservative or being liberal. Conservative (little c) generally means you want less drastic change -- you're content with the status quo (in my original post, this was a two century run of white male vice presidents - which as it happens has more to do with culture than with race, I'd suspect). I'm conservative about some things and liberal with others.
Conservative, these days, often gets mixed up with war-loving Neo-cons, while Liberal is a peace-loving, communistic hippy. It hurts to see descriptions of thinking become insults, and then have that be the understood definition.
There's good and bad to both sides: conservatives generally want you to do it yourself without the government's help (and everyone's taxes) -- America offers you the opportunity, it's up to you to grasp it. Liberal thinking is that not everyone really gets that opportunity without some effort on other people's part. Both sides have merit...we can neither be too hard nor too soft.
There's no clear win for McCain with her. She takes the experience argument off the table. She accentuates McCain's age. She won't deliver any more states in the election. She'll raise focus on the Ted Stevens indictment. She has her own ethics problems. She won't bring in the Hillary delusionals when they find out she's pro-life. The only thing she does is excite the shriveling GOP base for a couple weeks.
Biden will wipe the floor with her at the VP debate.
She angered Big Oil in Alaska, maybe she was forced on McCain to get rid of her. If McCain is elected and doesn't complete his term, she might be very malleable to the hidden hands in Washington, which are much stronger than those in Alaska.
Wait. I'm a conservative... I have a girlfriend... What the hell am I doing here?
Such declarations get bandied about so much that one hardly bats an eye; in my opinion, though, you've just lowered yourself more than anyone else here could.
I like McCaain, but from what little I've learned so far, this VP selection pushes me away from him a little.
XML causes global warming.
> I think that the opposite of your claim is true: McCain is doomed. He just destroyed the "Obama
> doesn't have the experience to lead" meme.
Not really. Obama is putting that sort of crap out today and you are faithfully echoing it. I expect it to abruptly stop as soon as somebody with a clue in camp Obama manages to get a handle on this unexpected event. Both Palin and Obama have about the same experience in high office, Obama entered the Senate in '05 and effectively left to campaign for POTUS in early '07. Palin was elected Governor of AK in early 07 and was doing that 100% until today. Palin can claim a few years experience on various statewide offices, Obama can claim a few years in the IL legislature. And Obama is at the top of his ticket, not the sidekick. So if Obama keeps talking about lack of experience he invites media outlets to do stories comparing the candidates and he loses that argument.
> But she also happens to be an ex-beauty queen with an ethical scandal in Alaska.
Only in the minds of Dems. The Dems in the legislature manufactured a 'scandal' because the anti corruption efforts were starting to interfere with their (not that she wasn't also at war with the totally corrupt Repubs like Stevens, etc.) feeding at the public trough. And even then the worst case in this supposed 'scandal' is that the story is true. She got a brother in law who was beating her sister fired from his State Trooper position. I wanna see the NOW gang taking a position on that one. Should be fun.
Because of course they WILL oppose Palin, we all understand 'diversity' is celebrated in everything except thought. NOW, the race hustlers, they all say one thing but what they really mean is "we support SOCIALISTS of every race, religion and sexual orientation."
Would I want Palin as POTUS now? No, she is a little green. But assuming the Presidency is different. If the unthinkable happened McCain would already have a functioning administration, all the Cabinet positions would be staffed with (hopefully) competent folk, etc. And assuming she in the loop she would be getting a crash course in the things she needs to know to assume the office. And give her a couple of years in office and, yea she will be ready to be President in her own right. She already seems to know the things that can't be taught easilly and appears to be a fast study by observing her fast rise through the ranks.
On the other hand Obama is just as green and has zero accomplishments to his name other than getting elected to the US Senate.... by defeating Alan Keyes. Wow. Just Wow. Got handed editor of the Harvard Law Review as a Equal Opportunity hire and published nothing. Taught in a University and published NOTHING in a publish or perish world... and somehow didn't perish. Worked as a socialist agitator (what other name do you piy on somebody putting the teachings of Saul Alinksy into practice?) and can't point to a single action where he actually accomplished something noteworthy.
The only executive experience he could claim was on that Annenberg Challenge fiasco where his own final report says the money spent accomplished exactly zero improvement in the schools. And since the original grant proposal was written by a terrorist[1] (William Ayers) who kept the lead active role in handing out all that money to political cronies instead of helping improve education (the stated goal in the proposal) Obama really wants to make the whole experience disappear from his resume.
[1] No sane person would disagree with the statement that Ayers was a domestic terrorist. Ayers, as late as 2004 repents none of his acts, thus isn't really debatable that he should be labeled a terrorist in the present tense.
Democrat delenda est
she's a vicepresident candidate and has MORE government experience than Obama
Uhm, not quite:
From Wikipedia:
Barack Obama:
Senator:
January 4, 2005 to now (3.5 years)
Illinois Senate:
January 8, 1997 - November 4, 2004 (8 years)
Sarah Palin:
Governor:
December 4, 2006 - now (not quite 2 years)
Mayor:
1996 - 2002 (6 years)
Welcome to Math 101.
That said, I like her stance on corruption, but she's only the VP candidate, so being VP under someone whose campaign is pretty much owned by the special interests she spurns is going to cripple any chance she has of doing anything unless McCain kicks the bucket.
She's also a creationist, anti-abortion, anti-contraception (!), all of which adds up to someone that Hillary supporters will have a hard time with.
I dunno whether this is a smart move by McCain or not, but you rarely go wrong counting on voters to be stupid, so it may help in the end. The GOP doesn't represent Republican voters, as they're clearly not for smaller government or less government spending (see also: Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43 with a vengeance), or securing America (Bush 43, again with the vengeance), but the GOP always manages to sucker the Republican populace into *believing* they are for those things by *simply* saying they are. McCain doesn't have to win over any blue states, he just needs to tip enough states that are in contention.
Most pundits seem to be focused on Palin's being a woman, but I see her as a way for McCain to reach out to the libertarian crowd. One commentator described her as the "libertarian VP candidate," or at least the closest thing to a libertarian that we're likely to see on a major-party ticket:
I'm not seeing it. I'm not a libertarian, but I do agree with a good number of their ideals and have voted for their candidates in the past. I don't know a lot about Palin, but my quick research did not really shout "libertarian."
In short, I see her pretty well aligned with the mainstream Republicans. I think her lack of history and relative obscurity is going to be a big asset since it lets people speculate and engage in a lot of wishful thinking. The libertarians would like her to be aligned with their position, or at least more aligned than other candidates because it provides hope. In reality, she seems more like a VP who would have little power under the assertive McCain and who is no more aligned with the libertarians than and of the other presidential or vice-presidential nominees.
You see, you can argue about Creationism. You can make very good philosophical arguments for and against Creationism in all its forms -- Intelligent Design being one of them. And you can make very good philosophical and scientific arguments for and against Evolution.
What is clear, however, is that Evolution is a scientific theory. Creationism isn't.
In other words: Right or wrong, Evolution is science. Creationism isn't. That's not an opinion, it's a fact -- by definition, "I think the Earth is six thousand years old because an old book told me so" is not science.
The only place Creationism has in a science classroom is as an object lesson of something that is not science.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
I don't have any religious beliefs, but I have no problem with the state using force to prevent you (or anyone else) from murdering other human beings.
Suggesting that an unborn child has no human rights until the instant of birth is absurd.
Suggesting that an egg gains full legal rights at the instant of conception is equally absurd.
This isn't an either-or situation. The answer isn't "pro-choice" or "pro-life".
I think that most all of us can agree that a clump of cells too small to be seen with the naked eye doesn't deserve any particular legal recogintion.
On the other hand, a unborn child that has developed enough that it could expect to survive outside the womb probably should have the same rights inside the womb as it would have outside.
In between these two points we can have reasonable laws the balance the interests of the mother with the interests of the unborn child.
If we'd quit listening to the people who say there is no middle ground then we could actually solve this argument and move on with life.
None of this means a bit to people who believe in immortal souls granted by God upon conception. I think that's where the real argument lies.
Bruce Perens.
So you're saying that the number two spot doesn't matter? That she wasn't hired to actually do anything on the job. To say that it doesn't matter that Palin is less experienced is to say that the VP is a position with no meaning and no sway, so it doesn't matter if experience doesn't matter. It's an admission that Palin was put on the ticket for one reason - not because of her strengths, not because of what she brings to the White House, only because she's a woman. We don't expect her to actually do anything, so it's okay that she has no experience.
I repeat - if McCain, the older man with bouts with disease should fall ill to old age, then this woman becomes president. Not number two, but number one. McCain has come out and said that this woman with almost no experience is actually experienced enough to be understudy to the most powerful position in the land. McCain is either short-sighted of having delusion of immortality.
And that doesn't matter? That doesn't matter that the "Experience is Everything!" campaign just decided that experience doesn't mean squat for the NUMBER TWO POSITION in the country?! Can you imagine Palin inheriting the number one spot? Is that something that the experience-loving McCain fans would be able to handle?
Yes, we know. We know Obama is running for president. We know he's inexperienced. You keep saying that. You were saying it last month, last week, yesterday, you kept saying it. So why, why now, have you given us the least bit of ability to say it about McCain?! Why would you do that? We know what you think of Obama - why would you give us the chance to change what people think about McCain?!
This whole thing just absolutely boggles my mind! I do not for the slightest moment understand the least bit of logic behind it!
Libertarians somehow believe that private businesses should be stronger than governments but weaker than individuals.
Too bad these people can't see that they'd eliminate a lot more abortions by supporting sex education and contraception then by pushing for absolute prohibition.
In a science classroom, in a public school, there is no 'debate' to be had about creationism. The Supreme Court made that crystal clear years ago - creationism is religious in nature, and has no place in a public school.
(And Intelligent Design is just creationism in a lab coat.)
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
To be fair, 'decent' would be a huge improvement on any previous VP!
but it looks like she beat out Romney in the swimsuit competition.
... the most socialist policy that i have ever read...coming just shy to that of marxism ...
You have no idea what you are talking about. Let us get one thing straight right from the start: I am a socialist. Obama will not be getting my vote, because regardless of his campaign rhetoric, his platform is in fact the same capitalist, pro-corporation shit that I see every four years. I thought for a short while that he may be different (though not socialist by any means), but suddenly he's changed from wanting to throw out NAFTA and CAFTA to this vague notion of "renegotiation." He also voted for the FISA bill and telecom immunity. None of that represents anything but the same old shit that I've come to expect from our bought and paid for government.
Now a little lesson for you. Socialism is not a welfare state. Socialism is democratic control of the economy under the people who perform the real work and provide us with everything we have: the workers. Nothing more, nothing less. Any enactment of socialism would require a permanent revolution at this point, due to how deep these multinational corporations have burrowed themselves into governments all over the world.
So let me tell you, as a socialist, that the idea of Obama being some sort of Marxist savior for the working classes in this country is, in short, fucking laughable.
"We may face a scorched and lifeless earth, but they're accountable to their shareholders first."
Creationism is a philosophy of ignorance. Ignorance has no place in a class dedicated to discovery.
Evolution:
Intelligent Design:
No recent discoveries, no predictions, no evidence, no tests that we can perform on it.
The roots of Intelligent Design mostly point to Michael Behe, a biochemist. What did he discover? Nothing. He looked at the discoveries of others, gave them a cursory analysis, and declared that God must have done it. Do discoveries, no predictions, and as far as he is concerned no falsifiability tests. God did it. That's final.
Then some folks actually took a look, discovered that the structures Behe asserted were irreducibly complex in fact were easily reducible. Any retraction from Behe? No. He had made up his mind, and no evidence to the contrary will sway him.
So I quote again, "Science is a philosophy of discovery. Creationism is a philosophy of ignorance." - Neil deGrasse Tyson
- I don't need to go outside, my CRT tan'll do me just fine.
It is not even funny that there are people out there still arguing about this.
Our knowledge about vaccination, antibiotics, genetically modified crops and pure dog breeds are firmly based in the fact that species evolve by natural selection.
This is something observable today, I will not even touch the fossil record since some people don't have the mental capacity to understand why this is fact as well.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.