Quote :

"All other things equal, if Sarah PalinBarack Obama was a malewasn't black, she would not have been picked. By definition, that is tokenism."

bingo...

9/2/2008 11:44:15 PM

^ that is retarded.

All stupid, baseless arguements aside... was the Palin the best possible candidate for VP from the Republican party?

9/3/2008 1:40:22 AM

^^are you saying that if obama were white, clinton woulda beat him in the primaries?

9/3/2008 1:45:47 AM

I'm still really surprised she was the pick. Hell, I would think if they really wanted a politician with tits they could have found another woman with more lasting power.

[Edited on September 3, 2008 at 1:54 AM. Reason : grammarz]

9/3/2008 1:54:33 AM

^I agree they could have found female Republicans that were way better in a lot of ways.

They tried to do too much though. They wanted to capture female voters by picking a woman. But they also wanted to bring in more of the religious right, and it looks like that's where they veered into Alaska and ended up with a horrible runningmate.

9/3/2008 4:52:10 AM

Quote :

"But again, please tell me why Palin is more qualified or better suited on nearly any metric than any of the other names that were being tossed around. You know, besides the fact that she's a woman and may sway some of the more idiotic PUMA (yeah i know, redundant) people"

I don't think anybody has really said that. Nobody said she's the BEST choice McCain could've made, I think most Republicans are just satisfied with the pick because it wasn't a "bad" choice (even though some now think so because her daughter is PREGNANT )

Tokenism or not, a far right selection like Palin was probably a better addition to the ticket than somebody like Lieberman

9/3/2008 7:57:12 AM

Quote :

"All other things equal, if Sarah PalinBarack Obama was a malewasn't black, she would not have been picked. By definition, that is tokenism."

um.. do you realize the difference in how Obama was nominated versus Palin?

I completely despise Obama and his naive views, but your statement is simply ignorant.

9/3/2008 8:36:25 AM

Modern liberalism has 1 ultimate goal:

1) The breakdown of American society and the destruction of the family.

and here is how it's accomplished today:

a) mainstreaming the idea that individualism is out and family is not a valuable unit to society
b) proclaiming that fatherhood an motherhood is worthless and in fact hurtful to us economically/developmentally/ and environmentally
c) continued heavy taxation of such families that are profitable and prosperous
d) to give way to a fully liberal media with no standards and no account of the truth in reporting in order to harass and break down those same individuals and families


there you have it folks.

9/3/2008 9:56:22 AM

Don't forget about
e) the moonbat-human crossbreeding program which will wipe out the pure white Christian race by 2112.

9/3/2008 10:02:32 AM

^you could put it in a much more subtle way, but yeh, you get the picture

9/3/2008 10:05:31 AM

Look there's a lot of working women out there with families. Many of these families have teenagers..who are notorious for doing stupid things.

Obama risks a major backlash from this group if his media pals keep up the attacks on Palin for too much longer.

9/3/2008 10:41:32 AM

There isn't a single mother with or without children or who is single with a job that will buy into such nonsense.

9/3/2008 1:56:52 PM

I think its great how the repubs up here keep blaming obama for the media making a big deal out the whole baby-mama-drama.

CAUSE HE TELLS THEM WHAT TO DO.

9/3/2008 2:24:48 PM

^^^^^^ At first I laughed, but then I realized you might actually be serious

9/3/2008 7:21:13 PM

no, you misunderestimate him... csharp is a liberal.


he KNOWS.

9/3/2008 7:23:03 PM

Quote :

"I completely despise Obama and his naive views, but your statement is simply ignorant."

Which of his views do you find naive? I'm not saying he hasn't any; I'm just curious.

9/3/2008 9:08:23 PM

Quote :

"I think its great how the repubs up here keep blaming obama for the media making a big deal out the whole baby-mama-drama."

Whether Obama is or isn't doesn't matter. If the public, especially working women, start blaming Obama for the viscious attacks on Palin..he's toast.

9/3/2008 11:33:04 PM

Get ready for wave 2 of the Liberal attack machine against Palin today.

It's out on the march to take out the roll of mothers and family proudly and nobly.

9/4/2008 11:39:27 AM

Pointing out someone's blatant lies is not an attack. It's finding and telling the truth.

9/4/2008 11:40:55 AM

How are you going to say that the Democrats are out of touch when it's the Republicans who put their nominee's speech up against the opening of the NFL season?

9/4/2008 11:42:22 AM

^ see people

take notes from this guy. now that is a sound argument that i have nothing against.


the rest of you far lefties need to get your geek squad helmets off and join the rest of the normal world. the rest of you must browse the internet for statistics taken out of context all day, go outside and enjoy life a little.

9/4/2008 1:35:26 PM

Quote :

"um.. do you realize the difference in how Obama was nominated versus Palin?"

of course I realize how Obama was nominated. Call it semantics, whatever...all things being equal if he was white Hillary would have beat him for the nomination.

9/5/2008 1:35:21 AM

All things equal, Palin would have never even made it to the primary, let alone compete.

9/5/2008 2:07:53 AM

^ Truth

9/5/2008 2:19:41 AM

mccains wife wore a $300k outfit at the RNC, who is really out of touch here

9/5/2008 6:24:04 AM

Quote :

"This is exactly what Sarah Palin is. A mother, worker, wife, and politician who has out succeeded her husband and other men and who is also taking care of her kids. "

You forgot to mention that she has executive experience and lives near Russia, and on top of that she is a former beauty queen. Beauty and brains, she is the whole package and is just what this country needs.

9/5/2008 4:14:30 PM

Quote :

"^^are you saying that if obama were white, clinton woulda beat him in the primaries?"

you are fucking right I am saying that. And pretty much everyone knows it. But few, on the left, will admit it.

9/5/2008 5:21:33 PM

i think you might be racist burro

9/5/2008 5:31:35 PM

wait. I'm racist for pointing out that Obama was selected by the Democrats on account of his race?

9/5/2008 5:35:05 PM

Bob Johnson (black man, founder of BET, owner of Bobcats) also said he was nominated because of his race

he must be racist against other black people

btw, when you criticize palin for not being able to both work a job and raise a family, thats not sexist, its simply true...liberal double standard ftw

9/5/2008 5:39:42 PM

what I don't get is how they figure the hillary supporters would want to jump ship for someone such as her. they tout her as a woman's woman, but her stance is anything but.



[Edited on September 5, 2008 at 6:13 PM. Reason : .]

9/5/2008 6:11:11 PM

well, a lot of the crowd hillary was counting on were supporting hillary solely because she was a woman. It was plainly obvious.

9/5/2008 6:15:40 PM

^that's not true at all actually. Some women I'm sure could be put in that category, but if you look at places such as Pittsburgh, where you have a HUGE liberal working class, Hillary was their savior (among the women). Now, those women weren't happy about the outcome, but there was no way they'd vote for McCain, and I can't see how throwing someone even MORE conservative in there will sway them. Woman or no woman. They might not have voted at all, but Palin just seals it (in obama's favor that is).


[Edited on September 5, 2008 at 6:22 PM. Reason : .]

9/5/2008 6:19:35 PM

it absolutely is true and you know it. Listening to the news, you would constantly hear people say "I think it's about time we had a woman president." You see signs all over the place about "breaking up the good-ole-boys' club." Hillary's main draw as a candidate was her vagina, and you know it. The only other draw she had was the last name that belonged to the penis that went into her vagina (some of the time)

9/5/2008 6:22:51 PM

^dude, you seriously don't know what you're talking about. I'm not pulling that out of my ass. you have no idea how stupid you sound saying that all the hillary supporters were just voting for her because she was a woman. You have to look at the deomographics, which you haven't. You're just basing that on total assumption, where I've actually read a shitload on the subject seeing as how I'm liberal and I followed that very closely. In fact, I was quite worried that the hillary supporters WERE going to jump ship until they appointed Palin.

note: by jump ship, as I said before, I don't necessarily think they would automatically vote for mccain. I figured some wouldn't vote at all. I do agree that some women did like hillary because she was a woman. But in the places where it really matters, like Pittsburgh, those woman aren't going to abandon their liberal values for an uber conservative.

[Edited on September 5, 2008 at 6:27 PM. Reason : .]

9/5/2008 6:25:07 PM

I really thought they'd go with bobby jindal honestly. Or lieberman. Those two scared me.

9/5/2008 6:30:15 PM

wow, strawman much? I never said that ALL of hillary's supporters were voting for her vagina. But keep saying it man.

9/5/2008 6:33:25 PM

Quote :

"Hillary's main draw as a candidate was her vagina, and you know it."

if this is true, why weren't all of the republican women supporting her?

no, people that are liberal are not going to abandon their values for an uber conservative who is the complete opposite of hillary. maybe, MAYBE palin would have been able to swing some moderate votes (women voters) if she wasn't so conservative. plus, you kind of just reiterated why people found palin's nomination to be offensive to dem women. bravo.

9/5/2008 6:35:34 PM

oops I did it again!

9/5/2008 6:35:52 PM

Quote :

"if this is true, why weren't all of the republican women supporting her? "

because I wasn't saying that the all of the republican women were voting for hillary in the first place, maybe? Man, you must be fucking a scarecrow or something, cause you looooooooove the strawman

9/5/2008 6:43:31 PM

maybe the Hillary supporters WOULD jump ship because they didn't like how Obama's campaign smeared Hillary for 6 straight months?

9/5/2008 6:44:19 PM

yeah, it's weird that someone can't get with your bulletproof logic

^exactly. but now they won't, that's the point. not for palin.

[Edited on September 5, 2008 at 6:45 PM. Reason : .]

9/5/2008 6:44:42 PM

how exactly could someone get with my logic when, you know, it wasn't my logic to begin with...

9/5/2008 6:46:46 PM

Quote :

"Obama's campaign smeared Hillary"

[Citation needed]

9/5/2008 6:47:28 PM

haha you need a citation to remember the Democratic primaries?

9/5/2008 6:48:14 PM

[Citation needed] or get the fuck out.

9/5/2008 6:48:41 PM

ok here's approximately 469,000 citations since you seem to have trouble remembering whats happened in politics this year

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=obama+campaign+attacks+hillary&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=

wait, maybe that was a rhetorical way of just proving how out of touch you really are...my mistake, gg

9/5/2008 6:50:19 PM

I mean, they didn't really SMEAR hillary. It was politics as usual. It's not like the swift vote fiasco. now that's a smear campaign

9/5/2008 6:52:42 PM

Typical GOP attack. Make a bold claim, and then when pressured you can't back it up.

The first page of that link contains nothing that anyone would refer to as "smearing." In fact, the fourth link is Clinton smearing Obama. Some of the other links on the page relate to Clinton attacking Obama as well.

The last link, referring to the monster comment, and the ONLY link related to anything relevant to Obama "smearing" Clinton, was made by an aide and not authorized by the campaign. She also resigned right afterwards.

So, I think we've established that you're full of shit. Goodbye.

9/5/2008 6:53:31 PM

did you watch the democratic primaries at all. Hillary was attacking obama, this smearing that youre referring to is pretty much bullshit

9/5/2008 6:53:33 PM