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
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.
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?
You've got it the wrong way around. It's McCain's camp (and the Rs in general) that have been attacking Obama's lack of experience. With Palin, they're going to need to tone it down in order avoid pot/kettle issues.
Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
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?
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 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.
Seeing as if he (McCain) somehow manages to get elected, I give his remaining lifespan a duration somewhere between James Garfield & William Harrison's presidencies. The good news is we'll have our first woman president. The bad news is she has experience leading about 670000 people total (9000 if you just want to go by her mayoral experience), is rabidly pro-life & loves Big Oil. It will be kinda like Bush, but with a vagina.
And don't bother to rail on me either, I'm voting for Barr. I've given up on the Republicrats, the only thing that will make our leaders stand up & take notice is another political party coming to power & taking it away from them.
There is a war going on for your mind.
I am not so sure this is a great political move by McCain.
One of the things the Democrats have been hammering McCain on is his lack of judgment. I can easily see Palin as another example of poor decision making.
While selecting a VP as a strategy to win the election is part of the decision tree (going after the disenfranchised Hillary votes), choosing a VP is also about having someone that can step in and do the presidents job competently.
I have a feeling this is going to backfire.
"A sample size of one is really just statistical masturbation."
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
Oh, good, then she runs Linux?
The ability of a VP to become President has to be considered. 9 VP's took over for the president. Out of 43 presidents, that is 20%.
Yea, she is pretty hot for her age, definetly a MILF, I'd tap that too if I got the chance. :)
I suppose you mean a VPILF?
"He may look like an idiot, and talk like an idiot, but don't let that fool you. He really is an idiot." - Duck Soup
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.
But having worked with her, would you vote for her?
I guess that all depends on what "I'd tap her" means...
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
This is the type of shit that pisses me off. Very, very few of us "blacks" are 100% African anymore. Being black in America is not a position to which one ascends, it is a position to which we have been assigned due to not being white. If you removed all the blacks who have any Anglo heritage from the US you would be left with immigrants fresh from some African country. I can't even find the words to express how sad ignorant statements like these make me.
that's my word, holla...
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
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.
And lets face reality, McCain's age + skin cancer concerns raises that figure for this round.
Hey, look! It's Bono's brother.
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.
Palin's elected office:
Obama's elected office:
Rounding down, that gives Palin 8 years, most of which was at the city level, and Obama 11 years, all of which is at state level or above.
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.
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?
Call her 'North Shores' and I'd drill her.
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.
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?
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.