jimmytavino 16 #1 September 2, 2008 ..... as has been stated and printed, "the glass ceiling is nearly shattered, and soon to be broken" ( paraphrasing).. In fact i heard Ms Palin use words of that very nature within 24 hours of the announcement of her having been selected. I M H O , it is wrong on McCains' part and the G O P , to attempt to create a scenario whereby ( against all sanity, and common good for this country, ) If his ticket were to prevail in Nov,,, the person who could possibly ascend to the presidency as the 'first Woman president' would be someone, UNELECTED to that SPECIFIC office,,, by the general public... I can see the possibility of This Rep. candidate, for Pres, not living 4 more years, ( for whatever reason), and would find it to be a slap in the face to all the FINE and patriotic women who serve and have served in our state and national government(s) for as far back as Susan B Anthony ( how about a shout Out for Rochester NY !!! ) , up through and including Leaders like Shirley Chisolm, Barbara Jordan, Senators Boxer , Pelosi, H Clinton, and many many other loyal and public minded women, to be forced to watch what i would assess, as a "newbie" to politics,,( namely this woman from Alaska, ) ascend to that office, through the path which the G O P , is orchestrating.... It'd be different if the choice had been Eliz. Dole, or hell, Shirley Temple, for all i care,,, or ANY other better proven, better tested, washington DC veteran, or state legislative representative with waaay more than 8 or 10 years "experience"... i see in this Palin,,,,,, a former 'big hair' newscaster, who went ahead to become mayor of a small town, ( happens all the time) and then , for whatever reasons, got elected as governor... of a state with a little over half the population of the state of Rhode Island, and about 100 times the land area...the absolute WRONG person to step into the Role of First Woman POTUS......that's all.... well okay,, maybe NOT the absolute worst,,,, but i can sure think of many many others who are more deserving, of the chance... Women from Both Parties... As for her election as governor, well in a state with lots of dudes,,,a 'beauty queen type' could very well win the majority vote, on looks ALONE...agreed???? anyway... it's not her place to be in the position, whereby she realistically could attain the role of President.. this isn't a damn popularity contest, nor a joke... nor a referendum on guns, and abortion. it's a serious situation in which the current undeniable damage, inflicted on this country by the bush administration, must be recognized, and undone.. It won't be easy and I wouldn't want the job, and will never understand why ANYone would....... it's not so much that i have anything against McCain , himself... It's that he works for the wrong team,, The G O P ... and NOW when they NEED a 9th inning relief pitcher, who can close out the Game,,, instead of bringing in a "Goose Gossage", or a Rollie Fingers, they bring in a damn Cheerleader/ Pom Pom Girl.... NOT that i have ANYTHING againt POM-POM girls,,,,,it's just that i see this move as an indication of desperation... anyway... we'll be watching... jmy a 3914 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #2 September 2, 2008 As I stated in other threads.. I was waiting to see who Senator McCain would select for a running mate...because I dont think he can possibly live thru the stress of a 4 year term after what he has been thru in his life. The thought of her being the president.. scares me to freakin death....I did not think it was possible to EVER find anyone less qualified than Bush... I think the Repubicans have found one...This could only turn out very very bad for our country. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steveorino 7 #3 September 2, 2008 Maybe it is just me, but I think someone without a lot of Wash DC ties might be the best thing that has happened to the USA in many decades. JMHO I'm not sure how others see it but as a former Alaskan I find it somewhat condescending when people bring up the population of a state, such as Alaska, to render it less important than those other states like CA, FL, IL & NY. I guess Alaska is now the ultimate "fly over" country, or would that be "fly under"?? steveOrino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #4 September 2, 2008 Quote ..... as has been stated and printed, "the glass ceiling is nearly shattered, and soon to be broken" ( paraphrasing).. In fact i heard Ms Palin use words of that very nature within 24 hours of the announcement of her having been selected.I M H O , it is wrong on McCains' part and the G O P , to attempt to create a scenario whereby ( against all sanity, and common good for this country, ) If his ticket were to prevail in Nov,,, the person who could possibly ascend to the presidency as the 'first Woman president' would be someone, UNELECTED to that SPECIFIC office,,, by the general public... I'm confused, here. ANY president takes office, and there exists the possibility that the vice president could end up as president, "unelected" as you said. Why would it be any different if Obama won and then died and Biden became president, "unelected by the people?" (Perhaps his name is fitting: he'd be "biden" his time as VP until some angry white supremacist took out Obama?)Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,133 #5 September 2, 2008 >but I think someone without a lot of Wash DC ties might be the best thing >that has happened to the USA in many decades. I agree - which is one reason I think Obama, with his limited amount of time in Washington, would be a better choice than McCain, who will enter office with decades of political debts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
klingeme 1 #6 September 2, 2008 Quote ..... as has been stated and printed, "the glass ceiling is nearly shattered, and soon to be broken" ( paraphrasing).. In fact i heard Ms Palin use words of that very nature within 24 hours of the announcement of her having been selected.I M H O , it is wrong on McCains' part and the G O P , to attempt to create a scenario whereby ( against all sanity, and common good for this country, ) If his ticket were to prevail in Nov,,, the person who could possibly ascend to the presidency as the 'first Woman president' would be someone, UNELECTED to that SPECIFIC office,,, by the general public... I can see the possibility of This Rep. candidate, for Pres, not living 4 more years, ( for whatever reason), and would find it to be a slap in the face to all the FINE and patriotic women who serve and have served in our state and national government(s) for as far back as Susan B Anthony ( how about a shout Out for Rochester NY !!! ) , up through and including Leaders like Shirley Chisolm, Barbara Jordan, Senators Boxer , Pelosi, H Clinton, and many many other loyal and public minded women, to be forced to watch what i would assess, as a "newbie" to politics,,( namely this woman from Alaska, ) ascend to that office, through the path which the G O P , is orchestrating.... It'd be different if the choice had been Eliz. Dole, or hell, Shirley Temple, for all i care,,, or ANY other better proven, better tested, washington DC veteran, or state legislative representative with waaay more than 8 or 10 years "experience"... i see in this Palin,,,,,, a former 'big hair' newscaster, who went ahead to become mayor of a small town, ( happens all the time) and then , for whatever reasons, got elected as governor... of a state with a little over half the population of the state of Rhode Island, and about 100 times the land area...the absolute WRONG person to step into the Role of First Woman POTUS......that's all.... well okay,, maybe NOT the absolute worst,,,, but i can sure think of many many others who are more deserving, of the chance... Women from Both Parties... As for her election as governor, well in a state with lots of dudes,,,a 'beauty queen type' could very well win the majority vote, on looks ALONE...agreed???? anyway... it's not her place to be in the position, whereby she realistically could attain the role of President.. this isn't a damn popularity contest, nor a joke... nor a referendum on guns, and abortion. it's a serious situation in which the current undeniable damage, inflicted on this country by the bush administration, must be recognized, and undone.. It won't be easy and I wouldn't want the job, and will never understand why ANYone would....... it's not so much that i have anything against McCain , himself... It's that he works for the wrong team,, The G O P ... and NOW when they NEED a 9th inning relief pitcher, who can close out the Game,,, instead of bringing in a "Goose Gossage", or a Rollie Fingers, they bring in a damn Cheerleader/ Pom Pom Girl....NOT that i have ANYTHING againt POM-POM girls,,,,,it's just that i see this move as an indication of desperation... anyway... we'll be watching... jmy a 3914 And electing a guy with less experience to be president is a good idea just because he's a good public speaker? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #7 September 2, 2008 QuoteI'm not sure how others see it but as a former Alaskan I find it somewhat condescending when people bring up the population of a state, such as Alaska, to render it less important than those other states like CA, FL, IL & NY. I see it in a completely different way. It is one hell of a lot smaller pool of POSSIBLE candidates with a set of qualifications... there are what... 200,000 POSSIBLE voters.. let alone how few would even try to run for office.....where the odds are good.. but the goods.. are indeed ODD. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
propacker 0 #8 September 2, 2008 I think what is more important is not that she would be the first woman that moved to the presidency thru succession - but that she would be a totally unqualifed vice-president that moved to that position. sort of like a female Dan Quayle. hopefully people won't see her as the Gena Davis character in "Commander in Chief" (who had a lot more qualifications when she was elected VP) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #9 September 2, 2008 Quite a few presidents first serve as Veeps, and many of them are elected, or subsequently reelected. Ford is the only exception to this in a very long time. So I don't think it's wrong of her to optimistically state that she would later be President. I long thought the road would be opened for women or minorities this way. With all the bad press and heart damage Chaney had, I thought Bush might do it in the last election. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #10 September 2, 2008 Quote >but I think someone without a lot of Wash DC ties might be the best thing >that has happened to the USA in many decades. I agree - which is one reason I think Obama, with his limited amount of time in Washington, would be a better choice than McCain, who will enter office with decades of political debts. So you must agree then that Chicago politics are less offensive than DC politics.You are getting desperate"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,133 #11 September 2, 2008 >So you must agree then that Chicago politics are less offensive than DC politics. Not at all. Now do a Google and see where the White House is - Chicago or DC. That might give you a hint as to why owing people in DC favors is more of a problem than owing people in Chicago favors is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimmytavino 16 #12 September 2, 2008 my point is that in this case it would be a woman....Joe biden nor any other V P who followed a death of a sitting pres. has been a woman... HAD Geraldine Ferraro and mondale won... and SHE filled the slot... THAT would have been MUCH different than This... agreed??? cause the electorate Knew... going in.... that mondale coullda died ,while in office.. At that time in our history,, it would have been an appropriate and acceptable way for it to happen... and then perhaps the next term she WOULD have been ELECTED as a Pres. .... or not..... But today it is different.... and while i truly look forward to when we do have a woman president, it simply cannot be this one.... my beef is with McCain and his brain trust,,, ( think Pappy O Daniel.. and his crew, in Oh Brother , Where Art Thou"...)not to respect that aspect of it. steverino, totally no disrespect meant, regarding the people of Alaska. I would feel privledged to travel there and EVER spend a nice long bit of time. From what i see, and hear and read and learn,,, it is majesty and awe and one or two "decent photographs" ... May i one day enjoy it... Live... The numbers however seem in my mind to keep it in the 'minor leagues' if you will, of 'big time politics'... The glass ceiling sits about to fall,,, Female world leaders of the present and past, Indira Ghandi, Bhottu, Thatcher, alive and passed, indeed all world leaders,,, are likely scratching their heads and wondering...The first Woman P O T U S must be elected by the electoral college system, as flawed as it may be.... and NOT ascend to That historic honor, by defaut. THAT alone would only further reinforce my decision NOT to vote republican... j Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #13 September 2, 2008 QuoteTHAT alone would only further reinforce my decision NOT to vote republican... any port in a storm........ (to take a page from the Kallend/Amazon pot stirring method) that sounds a lot like "I won't vote that ticket because it has a woman on it" ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
propacker 0 #14 September 2, 2008 ____________ The first Woman P O T U S must be elected by the electoral college system, as flawed as it may be.... and NOT ascend to That historic honor, by defaut. ____________ don't understand your reasoning. that would be say that the first jewish president couldn't suceed - (s)he would have to be elected. doesn't make sense. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimmytavino 16 #15 September 2, 2008 no sir rehmwa it's the principle of the thing... many many many , have worked and damn hard to create the social and political climate of fairness and common sense, and willingness to finally wake up and accept a "National Matriarch" i believe they did not have Ms. Palin in mind for the slot... do you wanna see a Category G aff student flying Tail on an 81 way Diamond?? or maybe somebody with a little savvy, and few hours in FF, and some KNOW HOW...??? sure maybe the AFF'er is a whiz and can Dock on it... but she really ought to have been waaaay down on the bench, in favor of one more deserving of the slot , one who may have "earned" that slot.... the hard way... follow??? jmy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #16 September 2, 2008 Quotebut she really ought to have been waaaay down on the bench, in favor of one more deserving of the slot , one who may have "earned" that slot.... the hard way... That makes me think of all the hot looking chicka's over the years with 100 jumps or less... on big ways because they were hot....looking........ and some organizer guy was trying really hard to get laid Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #17 September 2, 2008 Nope - it's ok for social barriers to break down, but apparently ONLY the person and the manner which you and your political overlords approve of. (yes, I'm being purposely antagonistic. It's just for practice - I'm trying it on for size to see if it's as fun as I'm told it is.) I understand what you are saying, but I don't think much of it. I think making such a big deal about gender (or color) in this election just shows a very strong bias about the topic. If the issue is about experience, then that's the issue - attaching a legitimate reason like experience to a sexist context is really belittling to everyone here. Edit: of course, I recognize that you have to note is the Combination of sex and inexperience that bothers you, because if it was just inexperience, then you'd have to exclude Obama also. Therefore, for Democrats, it's suddenly ok to take a sexist stance because it's not about candidates, just their color (red vs blue). To be fair, I need to now start prepping responses for the righties to start talking about how a VP can't be an old AND a white guy politician. (even though it's fine for the pres to fit that bill). ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Erroll 80 #18 September 3, 2008 Quote It's just for practice - I'm trying it on for size to see if it's as fun as I'm told it is.) You are going to have to work at it. "you and your political overlords " is not bad, but you need more thinly veiled personal attacks, generalisations, profanities, and infantile misspelling of people's names and political parties, so as to be crude and insulting. When you feel you are really on a roll, scrap good grammar, spelling, etiquette and respect. Lets see how it goes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #19 September 3, 2008 Quote >So you must agree then that Chicago politics are less offensive than DC politics. Not at all. Now do a Google and see where the White House is - Chicago or DC. That might give you a hint as to why owing people in DC favors is more of a problem than owing people in Chicago favors is. You can google it yourself. Nice tweak on the point though Especially when I was speaking to a type of politics and not to a where."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #20 September 3, 2008 by Andrea Peyser HOLY hoop skirts: When did the clock tick back to 1958? When Joe Biden tragically lost his wife and infant daughter in a car wreck in 1972, not a single colleague, friend or competitor advised him to quit his newly won Senate seat to raise his two little surviving sons. Rather, he was sworn into office from the injured boys' bedside, and took to commuting an hour and a half each way from Delaware to Washington. And when Biden's second wife gave birth to a daughter, no one thought to ask him to step aside and stay home. They all do it. John Kennedy did it; so did Barack Obama: Men run for office and serve in elected positions while creating small children without ever being patronized as "super dads" or "multi-taskers." Nor are they penalized, ridiculed or dismissed for ignoring their kids. They're good dads. If Sarah Palin, tapped as John McCain's running mate, were a man, it's unlikely we'd even be having this conversation. (A man, or a Democrat.) Palin is a mother five times over. She also hunts, fishes, coaches hockey, has a day job as the governor of the state of Alaska - and is known to commute home from the state capital of Anchorage daily during session. Just like Biden. And, until at least four months ago, Palin also had the ability to bear a child, which we've just learned is a talent she shares with her 17-year-old daughter. But women on the left, who fought long and hard for the ability to raise children simultaneously with election cash, are in spasms. (Some have simply kept silent. Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton - where are you?) The same lefty media that studiously ignored the adolescence of Chelsea Clinton can't wait to dig into Bristol Palin. The Diary section of Daily Kos Web site had a curious way to make Palin's daughter into a campaign issue: "Considering Palin was chosen solely for her religious right family values cred, Bristol's shotgun marriage and pregnancy are very fair game. They are the direct result of this lunatic abstinence-only garbage, and should be highlighted as such." The stupendously sexist New York Times printed a front-page article noting that some unnamed women argue over "whether there are enough hours in the day for her to take on the vice presidency, and whether she is right to try." Which left the field weirdly clear for Phyllis Schlafly, who helped defeat the Equal Right Amendment - and also ran for Congress while raising six children - to tell the Times, "People who don't have children, or who have only one or two, are kind of overwhelmed at the notion of five children." The only question we should be asking is: Can Sarah Palin do the job?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites