jenfly00 0 #1 September 17, 2008 some are multifaceted and worth indepth looks; some are a bit weird but worthy of comment, BUT there is one that is so obvious it amazes me there are actually people who claim they believe Palin is ready to step into the whitehouse and possibly the presidency?!?!?!?! Lots of issues worth discussing but anyone on the pro-Palin side of this one is: a) a political zealot who abandoned all sense of honesty and worth listening to for amusement value only b) Dumber than dirt. c) A lawyer (lawyers [as a uniform professional trait] long ago abandoned any sense of what is true and just for what can be sold as sounding true and just).----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #2 September 17, 2008 Both of which, BTW, also describe Palin, so there might be a connection there. Of ALL the people that McCain could have picked, was ANYBODY on this Forum seriously backing PALIN as a VP candidate before it was announced? No. Not a single person was saying, "Oh, you know who has a ton of experience and is the perfect counter to the Hillary thing; Palin." Not a single one of the people here that are backing her now.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #3 September 17, 2008 So we see that the thought is just as rigid on one side as another. But this is where subjective matters come into it. How is a person "ready" to step into the Presidency? That's a question that cannot really be answered. It is not objective truth that Palin isn't ready for the job. (Actually - perhaps you should help with the experiment and vote for McCain). SHe's actually got some experienced that Obama and Biden do not - executive governmental experience. And it McCain lasts three years as President before he takes a dirt nap, that's three years of experience Palin would have as veep. I think the issue is so much looking at Palin as "she's not ready now." And also, inherently, "Palin will not be ready ever." Do you think that with a couple of years in the White House under her belt she'd be ready? What about 6 years? Or do you think she is will simply never be "ready" for the job because you have different beliefs that you do? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jenfly00 0 #4 September 17, 2008 Quote So we see that the thought is just as rigid on one side as another. But this is where subjective matters come into it. How is a person "ready" to step into the Presidency? That's a question that cannot really be answered. It is not objective truth that Palin isn't ready for the job. (Actually - perhaps you should help with the experiment and vote for McCain). SHe's actually got some experienced that Obama and Biden do not - executive governmental experience. And it McCain lasts three years as President before he takes a dirt nap, that's three years of experience Palin would have as veep. I think the issue is so much looking at Palin as "she's not ready now." And also, inherently, "Palin will not be ready ever." Do you think that with a couple of years in the White House under her belt she'd be ready? What about 6 years? Or do you think she is will simply never be "ready" for the job because you have different beliefs that you do? Ahh, good points ...thanks. I now see the need for a third option. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #5 September 17, 2008 Quote Lots of issues worth discussing but anyone on the pro-Palin side of this one is: a) a political zealot who abandoned all sense of honesty and worth listening to for amusement value only b) Dumber than dirt. Anyone who likes Palin as VP is either a zealot or dumb? How do you come to that conclusion? Anything objective, as lawrocket said? The gallup polls have been back and forth across even for weeks. Do you honestly believe half the country is completely out to lunch? What makes her less ready than Obama? -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #6 September 17, 2008 Well, you can think what you want. She doesn't have my vote. But it is not because I dont' think that she or McCain are "ready" for the Whitehouse - nobody was ever more "ready" to be a VP than Cheney. Tom Brady wasn't ready to win a championship when Bledsoe was hurt. Now, Brady's replacement started his first football game since he was a senior in high school. And he's done pretty well thus far. For someone who isn't "ready" hes done pretty well. Clinton wasn't ready. He did a fne job as POTUS. Bush, Sr. was "ready" and he lasted one term. "Ready" is an individual definition. You think she is not "ready." That's your viewpoint. I respect your views, though I cannot say that I have a great deal of respect for the way you put them out there. So, as opposed to just saying Palin isn't "ready" how about putting some substance to it. Explain your personal subjective viewpoints of what "ready" is. And then explain who is "ready" for the position. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #7 September 17, 2008 SO your inability to convince people your opinion is the correct one somehow means others are flawed? Maybe your argument has too many holes.....nah it couldn't be that. www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #8 September 17, 2008 QuoteWhat makes her less ready than Obama? I'll give you one thing that very few people talk about as far as her "readiness" goes; we simply don't know who she is. People, some people anyway, make a big deal out of Obama not being well enough known. Some people think he's a "secret" Muslin and others think he's not even really a citizen of the US. Well, obviously that's hogwash because he's been under very tight scrutiny ever since he stepped up to the mic at the DNC years ago. Palin, on the other hand, stepped onto the national stage just a few weeks ago. True, she has been under intensive scrutiny since then, but the American public still only barely knows who she is other then she's McCain's running mate, has a pregnant daughter and a few other "tabloid" crumbs of her life. We know NOTHING about who's really backing her and how she got to where she got in Alaska of all places. We do know that she fought oil . . . but only in favor of GAS. WTF is that? Just a slightly different part of the same side of the energy coin. Essentially, she has NOT been vetted by the American people and, if the stories are correct, she's only been barely vetted by McCain. Further, she's not helping the situation! She has an almost blanket "no interview" policy surrounding her. True, she has granted a couple of interviews now, but on a daily basis, doesn't do ANY. I personally think it's extremely dangerous to think about her sitting in the Oval Office any time soon.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #9 September 17, 2008 Quotec) A lawyer (lawyers [as a uniform professional trait] long ago abandoned any sense of what is true and just for what can be sold as sounding true and just). So that means that Obama (lawyer) and Biden (lawyer) should not be President. Palin (non-lawyer) and McCain (non-lawyer) would likely be the best bet. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #10 September 17, 2008 QuoteQuoteWhat makes her less ready than Obama? Quote I'll give you one thing that very few people talk about as far as her "readiness" goes; we simply don't know who she is. From that entire response, all I got was that she's not ready because she hasn't been in the public eye long enough. I guess if that's your measuring stick then Obama is definitely more qualified since all he's done with his "political career" is campaign. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #11 September 17, 2008 So what your saying is that since there isn't enough known about her, she can't be "ready." If there isn't enough known about her, then how can you conclude she is NOT "ready?" So she hasn't been "vetted" by the American people. Okay. I can see that. That doesn't implicate her readiness to assume the position. It more implicates your (and others') subjective mistrust of her. She's the rookie who hasn't proven herself. That I can understand. But that's not readiness. There is only one way to find out if anyone is ready - and that's to put them in there and see how they do. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,107 #12 September 17, 2008 QuoteSo what your saying is that since there isn't enough known about her, she can't be "ready." If there isn't enough known about her, then how can you conclude she is NOT "ready?" One example: we know the "troopergate" inquiry isn't complete and the Alaska GOP is now trying to block it (after being all for it BEFORE she was elevated). What we conclude is that we don't know enough to trust her.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites downwardspiral 0 #13 September 17, 2008 How many politicians do you actually trust?www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites livendive 8 #14 September 17, 2008 Quote Of ALL the people that McCain could have picked, was ANYBODY on this Forum seriously backing PALIN as a VP candidate before it was announced? Actually, I believe Vinnie was. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #15 September 17, 2008 QuoteSo what your saying is that since there isn't enough known about her, she can't be "ready." Because it's a two-way street. Let's say you owned a very large business. Let's further say you wanted to hire a VP. Let's say it came down to two candidates, both with equal amounts of experience, one you and the rest of the people on your staff knew and had worked with for some time and another that was a complete unknown, but "technically" had the same qualifications. Who do you pick? The person that you've worked with before and even if they might have some issues you know about them or . . . the wild card that "might" be great or "might" just as easily be a complete and total disaster? The devil you know or the devil you don't know?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #16 September 17, 2008 QuoteQuote Of ALL the people that McCain could have picked, was ANYBODY on this Forum seriously backing PALIN as a VP candidate before it was announced? Actually, I believe Vinnie was. Blues, Dave Link it! I wanna see the date on that post!quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #17 September 17, 2008 QuoteQuoteSo what your saying is that since there isn't enough known about her, she can't be "ready." If there isn't enough known about her, then how can you conclude she is NOT "ready?" One example: we know the "troopergate" inquiry isn't complete and the Alaska GOP is now trying to block it (after being all for it BEFORE she was elevated). What we conclude is that we don't know enough to trust her. Absolutely understandable! Which is different from saying she's not ready. She may very well be. You just don't know. Where you and the original poster differ is that you say, "Here's why I cannot vote for her. I do not know enough, and there is an open investigation." Versus superciliousness. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites livendive 8 #18 September 17, 2008 QuoteQuotec) A lawyer (lawyers [as a uniform professional trait] long ago abandoned any sense of what is true and just for what can be sold as sounding true and just). So that means that Obama (lawyer) and Biden (lawyer) should not be President. Palin (non-lawyer) and McCain (non-lawyer) would likely be the best bet. That's what it sounded like she was saying to me. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #19 September 17, 2008 That's the choice, Paul. And for some it is different. Anyone might be a complete and total disaster. Even the one you know. I.e., Cheney. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #20 September 17, 2008 Actually, I believe that she was commenting on me personally. For me not to respond to your post would be abandoning any sense of what is true and just for what can be sold as sounding true and just. I just figured she must be serious, so she clearly cannot vote for two lawyers in good conscience. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites livendive 8 #21 September 17, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote Of ALL the people that McCain could have picked, was ANYBODY on this Forum seriously backing PALIN as a VP candidate before it was announced? Actually, I believe Vinnie was. Blues, Dave Link it! I wanna see the date on that post! http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3309748#3309748 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3308092#3308092 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3265452#3265452 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3180531#3180531 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3264589#3264589 Looks like he goes back to April 11 of this year. One of those is a thread he started in July on McCain's VP choice, and he offered Palin as, in his opinion, bringing the most to the ticket. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites downwardspiral 0 #22 September 17, 2008 Wow....impressive Vinny.www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FallingOsh 0 #23 September 17, 2008 Quote Because it's a two-way street. Let's say you owned a very large business. Let's further say you wanted to hire a VP. Let's say it came down to two candidates, both with equal amounts of experience, one you and the rest of the people on your staff knew and had worked with for some time and another that was a complete unknown, but "technically" had the same qualifications. Who do you pick? The person that you've worked with before and even if they might have some issues you know about them or . . . the wild card that "might" be great or "might" just as easily be a complete and total disaster? The devil you know or the devil you don't know? Exactly. Hire the devil you know and put them in the VP position. The problem is that you're looking to hire the no-experience devil you know for CEO. And what proof has Obama ever given that he won't be a total disaster? -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #24 September 17, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Of ALL the people that McCain could have picked, was ANYBODY on this Forum seriously backing PALIN as a VP candidate before it was announced? Actually, I believe Vinnie was. Blues, Dave Link it! I wanna see the date on that post! http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3309748#3309748 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3308092#3308092 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3265452#3265452 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3180531#3180531 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3264589#3264589 Looks like he goes back to April 11 of this year. One of those is a thread he started in July on McCain's VP choice, and he offered Palin as, in his opinion, bringing the most to the ticket. Blues, Dave Ok. My apologies to Vinnie then for his somewhat interesting thoughts on the subject so early on. I do notice that at that time the idea was being summarily dismissed. THAT not withstanding, anybody else? Anybody? Beuller? Beuller?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #25 September 18, 2008 QuoteDo you honestly believe half the country is completely out to lunch? Considering the results of the 2000 and 2004 elections, it would appear so.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 1 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
lawrocket 3 #11 September 17, 2008 So what your saying is that since there isn't enough known about her, she can't be "ready." If there isn't enough known about her, then how can you conclude she is NOT "ready?" So she hasn't been "vetted" by the American people. Okay. I can see that. That doesn't implicate her readiness to assume the position. It more implicates your (and others') subjective mistrust of her. She's the rookie who hasn't proven herself. That I can understand. But that's not readiness. There is only one way to find out if anyone is ready - and that's to put them in there and see how they do. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,107 #12 September 17, 2008 QuoteSo what your saying is that since there isn't enough known about her, she can't be "ready." If there isn't enough known about her, then how can you conclude she is NOT "ready?" One example: we know the "troopergate" inquiry isn't complete and the Alaska GOP is now trying to block it (after being all for it BEFORE she was elevated). What we conclude is that we don't know enough to trust her.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #13 September 17, 2008 How many politicians do you actually trust?www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #14 September 17, 2008 Quote Of ALL the people that McCain could have picked, was ANYBODY on this Forum seriously backing PALIN as a VP candidate before it was announced? Actually, I believe Vinnie was. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #15 September 17, 2008 QuoteSo what your saying is that since there isn't enough known about her, she can't be "ready." Because it's a two-way street. Let's say you owned a very large business. Let's further say you wanted to hire a VP. Let's say it came down to two candidates, both with equal amounts of experience, one you and the rest of the people on your staff knew and had worked with for some time and another that was a complete unknown, but "technically" had the same qualifications. Who do you pick? The person that you've worked with before and even if they might have some issues you know about them or . . . the wild card that "might" be great or "might" just as easily be a complete and total disaster? The devil you know or the devil you don't know?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #16 September 17, 2008 QuoteQuote Of ALL the people that McCain could have picked, was ANYBODY on this Forum seriously backing PALIN as a VP candidate before it was announced? Actually, I believe Vinnie was. Blues, Dave Link it! I wanna see the date on that post!quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #17 September 17, 2008 QuoteQuoteSo what your saying is that since there isn't enough known about her, she can't be "ready." If there isn't enough known about her, then how can you conclude she is NOT "ready?" One example: we know the "troopergate" inquiry isn't complete and the Alaska GOP is now trying to block it (after being all for it BEFORE she was elevated). What we conclude is that we don't know enough to trust her. Absolutely understandable! Which is different from saying she's not ready. She may very well be. You just don't know. Where you and the original poster differ is that you say, "Here's why I cannot vote for her. I do not know enough, and there is an open investigation." Versus superciliousness. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #18 September 17, 2008 QuoteQuotec) A lawyer (lawyers [as a uniform professional trait] long ago abandoned any sense of what is true and just for what can be sold as sounding true and just). So that means that Obama (lawyer) and Biden (lawyer) should not be President. Palin (non-lawyer) and McCain (non-lawyer) would likely be the best bet. That's what it sounded like she was saying to me. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #19 September 17, 2008 That's the choice, Paul. And for some it is different. Anyone might be a complete and total disaster. Even the one you know. I.e., Cheney. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #20 September 17, 2008 Actually, I believe that she was commenting on me personally. For me not to respond to your post would be abandoning any sense of what is true and just for what can be sold as sounding true and just. I just figured she must be serious, so she clearly cannot vote for two lawyers in good conscience. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #21 September 17, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote Of ALL the people that McCain could have picked, was ANYBODY on this Forum seriously backing PALIN as a VP candidate before it was announced? Actually, I believe Vinnie was. Blues, Dave Link it! I wanna see the date on that post! http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3309748#3309748 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3308092#3308092 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3265452#3265452 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3180531#3180531 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3264589#3264589 Looks like he goes back to April 11 of this year. One of those is a thread he started in July on McCain's VP choice, and he offered Palin as, in his opinion, bringing the most to the ticket. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #22 September 17, 2008 Wow....impressive Vinny.www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #23 September 17, 2008 Quote Because it's a two-way street. Let's say you owned a very large business. Let's further say you wanted to hire a VP. Let's say it came down to two candidates, both with equal amounts of experience, one you and the rest of the people on your staff knew and had worked with for some time and another that was a complete unknown, but "technically" had the same qualifications. Who do you pick? The person that you've worked with before and even if they might have some issues you know about them or . . . the wild card that "might" be great or "might" just as easily be a complete and total disaster? The devil you know or the devil you don't know? Exactly. Hire the devil you know and put them in the VP position. The problem is that you're looking to hire the no-experience devil you know for CEO. And what proof has Obama ever given that he won't be a total disaster? -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #24 September 17, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Of ALL the people that McCain could have picked, was ANYBODY on this Forum seriously backing PALIN as a VP candidate before it was announced? Actually, I believe Vinnie was. Blues, Dave Link it! I wanna see the date on that post! http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3309748#3309748 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3308092#3308092 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3265452#3265452 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3180531#3180531 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3264589#3264589 Looks like he goes back to April 11 of this year. One of those is a thread he started in July on McCain's VP choice, and he offered Palin as, in his opinion, bringing the most to the ticket. Blues, Dave Ok. My apologies to Vinnie then for his somewhat interesting thoughts on the subject so early on. I do notice that at that time the idea was being summarily dismissed. THAT not withstanding, anybody else? Anybody? Beuller? Beuller?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #25 September 18, 2008 QuoteDo you honestly believe half the country is completely out to lunch? Considering the results of the 2000 and 2004 elections, it would appear so.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
