first black president or first woman V.P.

[ManNamedTruth]

FINALLY things are really moving forward. What took so long? These are some historical times we're living in. I've really liked Nader for a long time but its hard to justify voting for him when you think of what could be.

Also wanted to add that if McCain wasn't up against a black candidate (not that I think any of that kinda shit makes anything difference, we're all just people) I don't think he would have been as radical in his approach to getting a female running mate. What if he was up against two white guys, do you think he would've still chosen a woman?

[getinthevan]

While it is possible, I kind of doubt he would have chosen a woman.  It also could have to do with trying to catch all those "Pro-Hillary but against Obama" votes.  I think thats more likely.

[The DARK]

It's a strange move, and I don't think it will do anything but hurt him. Except for some radical feminists, there's no one who's gonna be drawn to this, and it's making the rest of his supporters a little uneasy. McCain needs to get his "inexperience ads" off the TV pronto.

[getinthevan]

McCain needs to get his "inexperience ads" off the TV pronto.

Somewhere this morning I read about this.  He's slamming Obama for only being 47, which apparently equates to a lack of experience.  Then he chooses a 44 year old running mate.  Doh!

[mjkoehler]

McCain needs to get his "inexperience ads" off the TV pronto.

Somewhere this morning I read about this.  He's slamming Obama for only being 47, which apparently equates to a lack of experience.  Then he chooses a 44 year old running mate.  Doh!

That was the first thing I said. How dare he slam Obama on his suppossed inexperience when he chooses someone with far less experience. Those ads need to disappear and quick. THIS FRIGHTENS THE SHIT OUT OF ME.

People, please consider that McCain is no spring chicken and is not in the greatest of health. You have to consider this. Do you potentially want her as Prez? Hell NO and it has nothing to do with her being a woman. I could care less about race or gender. She has no "national" experience. She has no working knowledge of how things really work in Washington. I'm sorry but being the major of a little town in Alaska and being Gov of the state with the least amount of people does not give you national exposure. Do you honestly expect her to get negotiate with the likes of Putin? I'm very very freightened by this prospect. I am going to be campaigning for Obama even harder now.

[getinthevan]

I remember reading an article about her a while back.  She has had one, if not two children while holding public office.  I understand that you have to do this sometime, but to me it seems like it would be a huge distraction to both bring a child into this world and run a state at the same time.

[MMJ_fanatic]

Not if you are a capable multitasker and have a capable hsuband along side.  Also I don't think McCain needs to remove the "inexperienced" ads one bit because that is what Obama is--one year (appox) as a senator and he's acting like its his divine right to be prez?  Additionally by saying those ads need to go leaves the implication that you expect McCain to keel over dead as soon as he takes the oath of office, which is rather macabre and very likely not the case.  She IS running for VP not Prez--sheesh!

[ycartrob]

what I find funy is all the discussion over people being picked as candidates solely on sex (Palin) or race (Obama); when, for the past 200+ years, no one really ever questioned that you had to be a white male to be president; no one ever questioned that the "best" candidate might not be a white male, but was only picked b/c they were a white male.

Progress   :)

[Salacious D]

^^What bothers me about that is that some people are still choosing who they will vote for *because* of arbitrary details like sex or race.

Is there really any difference between voting for someone simply because they are a white male and voting for someone *because* they are black or a female.

I was irritated when the CNN newscaster implied that a lot of women will be voting for McCain simply because he now has a female on board. That seems to imply that the newscaster doesn't find women capable of selecting an officer based on qualifications and his or her stance on the issues.

Yes, I'm glad this country seems to be willing to accept something other than the standard, but I wish more people were concerned about the important details, rather than the mundane ones.

/diatribe.

[ItStillJaimoe]

I wonder where Palin stands regarding equal pay for equal work? McCain doesn't support this simple human rights gender equality that "almost" all first and several developing and third-world nations  adhere to.

[Crispy]

While it is possible, I kind of doubt he would have chosen a woman.  It also could have to do with trying to catch all those "Pro-Hillary but against Obama" votes.  I think thats more likely.

Palin won't get a single of the Clinton voters, she's staunchly anti-abortion - she was picked to pander to the male voters who like her for the MILF factor, to the religious folks for her pro-life stance, and to the gun nuts. It was a desperation move, and it won't work.

[The DARK]

While it is possible, I kind of doubt he would have chosen a woman.  It also could have to do with trying to catch all those "Pro-Hillary but against Obama" votes.  I think thats more likely.

Palin won't get a single of the Clinton voters, she's staunchly anti-abortion - she was picked to pander to the male voters who like her for the MILF factor, to the religious folks for her pro-life stance, and to the gun nuts. It was a desperation move, and it won't work.

Very much so, and I don't know why. He'd been getting better over time in the polls. More and more people were starting to turn against Obama. He's losing every bit of momentum he's built up over the past few months. It would take a masterstroke (or obama would have to completely fall apart) for him to win the election now.

[j_rud]

I wonder where Palin stands regarding equal pay for equal work? McCain doesn't support this simple human rights gender equality that "almost" all first and several developing and third-world nations  adhere to.

Are you talking about the Ledbetter Bill? So McCain doesnt support equal pay because he didnt support a bill thats sum total of purpose was to remove the statute of limitations imposed on those who want to sue their employer? Thats just what America needs, more lawsuits and more government involvement in private business. Just another example of using a simple phrase or sound byte to argue a position in an issue that is much broader than a simple slogan. You can still support equal pay even if you dont get behind silly bills that twist language and dont really address the issue.

The irony behind the "Hope and Change" Barackalypse is that the whole "power to the people" idea is a joke. Power to the people by making the government bigger? Sure, that makes a ton of sense.

[The DARK]

What bothers me about that is that some people are still choosing who they will vote for *because* of arbitrary details like sex or race.

Is there really any difference between voting for someone simply because they are a white male and voting for someone *because* they are black or a female.

I was irritated when the CNN newscaster implied that a lot of women will be voting for McCain simply because he now has a female on board. That seems to imply that the newscaster doesn't find women capable of selecting an officer based on qualifications and his or her stance on the issues.

Yes, I'm glad this country seems to be willing to accept something other than the standard, but I wish more people were concerned about the important details, rather than the mundane ones.

/diatribe.

Very true. I think Obama's done a good job of downplaying that factor, even though it's giving him a rout in the southern states.

[mjkoehler]

Not if you are a capable multitasker and have a capable hsuband along side.  Also I don't think McCain needs to remove the "inexperienced" ads one bit because that is what Obama is--one year (appox) as a senator and he's acting like its his divine right to be prez?  Additionally by saying those ads need to go leaves the implication that you expect McCain to keel over dead as soon as he takes the oath of office, which is rather macabre and very likely not the case.  She IS running for VP not Prez--sheesh!

I agree with you on the parent thing. I don't see that as an issue.

However on the experience, there is a big difference. Obama has some National experience (granted not decades) and he has a VP that isn't sickly and would be a great advisor and would be capable of taking over. Obama is known and knows who he can trust and work with. What and who does she know? Granted, not being a Washington insider is probably good, but if you do not know how things work, you are going to get nowhere.

I do not think my view as morbid. This is a very real scenario that needs to be considered and many polical analysts do. That is one of the roles of the VP, asume control when the Prez is incapable of doing so. Yes McCain is older and has has serious health issues. And McCain himself has even has said that he might not live through his entire administration. Again it is a very real scenario that needs to be considered.

Also, is she going to be a valuble advisor? I do not think so. I think this is just a move on his part to try to appeal to woman voters and I hope it backfires. He has never worked with her and other then their announcement, has only met her once. He only decided on her after talking to her on the phone. If this is how he decides things, yikes. I do not think this was a wise choice and not very well thought out on his part. I am not saying this because I am a diehard Dem. If I was a McCain supporter, I would be furious.

[j_rud]

Not if you are a capable multitasker and have a capable hsuband along side.  Also I don't think McCain needs to remove the "inexperienced" ads one bit because that is what Obama is--one year (appox) as a senator and he's acting like its his divine right to be prez?  Additionally by saying those ads need to go leaves the implication that you expect McCain to keel over dead as soon as he takes the oath of office, which is rather macabre and very likely not the case.  She IS running for VP not Prez--sheesh!

I agree with you on the parent thing. I don't see that as an issue.

However on the experience, there is a big difference. Obama has some National experience (granted not decades) and he has a VP that isn't sickly and would be a great advisor and would be capable of taking over. Obama is known and knows who he can trust and work with. What and who does she know? Granted, not being a Washington insider is probably good, but if you do not know how things work, you are going to get nowhere.

You got that right. How else would he have navigated the corrupt Chicago political machine that he came up through? Its amazing that he could get through that without forming questionable relationships with politicos like Emil Jones and the Stroger family. Ohhh, thats right...he did.

[Crispy]

Power to the people by making the government bigger? Sure, that makes a ton of sense.

Are you really playing the "bigger government" card, just because Obama is the Democratic candidate? Seems to me that the GOP has done an incredibly poor job of fulfilling their promises of smaller government. How about fixing the government to work better, not bigger? Maybe we'd be better off if we could look at what each candidate really wants to do, and not just automatically dismiss their ideas based on worn-out preconceptions of party affiliation. If my vote for Obama helps get him elected (which it won't cuz I'm in OK), and it turns out that he wrecks the country with his humungous gubmint progrums,  then color me the stupid liberal, and by all means let's get one of those "conservative" republicans in office next time - but the last time this country had a budget surplus was when one of those commie Democrats was in charge. And I could give 2 shits about what kind of "experience" the various candidates has, what matters to me is what kind of policies they will put into place when they are placed in office. Personally, after the events of the last 8 years, I'd like to see less power being wielded by the executive branch, and see it distributed evenly amongst the 3 branches in the manner that the founders envisioned.

[j_rud]

Power to the people by making the government bigger? Sure, that makes a ton of sense.

Are you really playing the "bigger government" card, just because Obama is the Democratic candidate? Seems to me that the GOP has done an incredibly poor job of fulfilling their promises of smaller government. How about fixing the government to work better, not bigger? Maybe we'd be better off if we could look at what each candidate really wants to do, and not just automatically dismiss their ideas based on worn-out preconceptions of party affiliation. If my vote for Obama helps get him elected (which it won't cuz I'm in OK), and it turns out that he wrecks the country with his humungous gubmint progrums,  then color me the stupid liberal, and by all means let's get one of those "conservative" republicans in office next time - but the last time this country had a budget surplus was when one of those commie Democrats was in charge. And I could give 2 shits about what kind of "experience" the various candidates has, what matters to me is what kind of policies they will put into place when they are placed in office. Personally, after the events of the last 8 years, I'd like to see less power being wielded by the executive branch, and see it distributed evenly amongst the 3 branches in the manner that the founders envisioned.

Worn out preconceptions?

-Expanded medicaid and forced employee contributions
-Imposed a windfall profits tax on oil companies
-tax credits for buying certain cars
-government imposed sick day requirements
-tax credits and incentives to build fuel efficient cars
-tax increases for the wealthy, with the intention of letting the Bush middle class tax cuts expire in 2010
-dumping billions into environmental jobs and regulating the infrastructure industry
-raising social security taxes for those who make over 250K despite the fact that those individuals will not use social security upon retirement
-wants to "re-address" NAFTA and other trade regulations, which is the  gateway to imposing trade barriers

And thats just off the top of my head. I understand the full on infatuation with Obama. People are fed up with the current administration and the "change" mantra has struck a cord. But the sad truth is that Obama is more of the same. He's a politician like every other in America. His programs show clearly that he thinks people dont know how to handle their own lives. Rest assured that if elected big government will reign supreme. Those preconceptions are "worn out" for the same reasons things become a cliche: because they are true.

Recent estimates put Obama's spending at around 800 million. There is no way his tax increases for those making over 250K will pay for all of that. By 2010 the Bush tax cuts (the same cuts McCain wants to make permanent) will expire and the middle class will once again begin to fund the democratic "tax, spend, regulate" plans of old.

I dont dislike Obama. His is a great story and a wonderful example of what one determined individual could do in America. Its his policies (and the near religious fervor of some of his "flock") that I dont like. As a Libertarian all I see are plans to give the government more access to our wallets and more say over our lives. I dont like that. And while there was a surplus the last time the "commie Democrats" (you said it, not me) were in charge, take a look a little deeper into the past to see how plans similar to Obama (windfall taxes under Carter, for one) fared.  I'll save you the research: last time a windfall penalty was imposted it yielded half as much as expected while it dropped domestic energy production. Which would leave us...right about where we're at. But the average American hears "We're goin' after Big Oil! No breaks for them! And now YOU are gonna see some of that money!".

Finally, I agree that it would be nice to see power split between the 3 branches but I dont think Obama will do that, either. Under Obama the Supreme Court will see an influx of "progressive" justices interpreting a "living Constitution"; that is, it means whatever the hell they want it to mean. That scares the crap out of me, as it should any American.

[Kel]

Not if you are a capable multitasker and have a capable hsuband along side.  Also I don't think McCain needs to remove the "inexperienced" ads one bit because that is what Obama is--one year (appox) as a senator and he's acting like its his divine right to be prez?  Additionally by saying those ads need to go leaves the implication that you expect McCain to keel over dead as soon as he takes the oath of office, which is rather macabre and very likely not the case.  She IS running for VP not Prez--sheesh!

ACTUALLY, Obama has been an Illinois State Senator since 2005.  That would make it about three years, not one.  He was also a state legislator from 1997 to 2004 and has been on the Foreign Relations Committee since January 2007.  

Now, I can understand that is still not TONS of experience, but people need to realize that it is not JUST Obama that will be in office.  He will not make all decisions on his own.  He has a cabinet, advisors and not to mention the House and the Senate to watch his every move.  

Did you know that many people from foreign nations would actually prefer Barack Obama?  I can find the link to the article I read about this if you'd like me to.  People around the world WANT change, positivity, movement.  

[Kel]

PS - I don't understand anyone that would abandon their beliefs to vote for someone else just because of gender.  If people were going to vote for Hilary Clinton because their views were aligned with hers, moving to Palin now is only doing yourself an injustice.  She's a travesty to the modern woman.