Republican National Convention

[wmanion]

Is anyone watching the RNC? I have been watching but IMO it lacks the energy and excitement of the DNC. Is it just me or has anyone else noticed?

Bill

[Rick336]

I watched Lieberman speak tonight. I'll probably watch Palin's speech tomorrow night and McCain give his acceptance speech on Thursday night.

I agree, it doesn't have the spirit the Democratic Convention had, but then, I'm a little biased because I'm a Democrat.

Rick

[Daniel]

I was watching PBS, and the sound in the studio was bad, that is, you could hear this really bad music in the background- must have been coming from the convention floor- while they were broadcasting. And the stage- God Bless Them- looked pretty shoddy too. And that just reeks of shoddy production values. The democratic convention? Perhaps over produced, but a snazzy event from start to finish. Even the stadium venue came off pretty well- and I was expecting that it to go badly: big places like that are notoriously hard to manage.

Now. Does the Republican pow-wow have to be over the top? No. But attention to detail really counts. And for a party that is all about appearances....well...it saying something, doesn't it?

One though occurred to me: they had McCain and Palin's names splashed on the background, and I wondered if the stage manager had made a slide (that how it's done usually) for any other VP. If mean- it could happen. Palin could withdraw, and they have to be ready to put up another pick if needed.

I would love to be behind the scenes right now. If anyone knows anything, it's the stage manager. ;)

The speeches? Thompson needed to sound like he did tonight during his own campaign. Back then, it was like he was asleep. And Lieberman? Oy! I always feel like the Rabbi is lecturing. And he continually has that smug look on his face.

Good for McCain that Bush phoned it in. I kept hearing that the McCain people were relieved about that.

And I am curious to see how much they let Sarah Palin out the box she's been placed in the last day or so.

[nmwolfboy]

i keep trying to watch the RNC on C-SPAN, but invariably my eyes glaze over and i start listing to one side (oddly enough, usually to the left.) There seems to be no substance to the speechifyin' i've heard. The whole thing thus far reminds me of an extended "people not connected to reality" segment in a television comedy show.

[tdogg]

It's nearly impossible for me to listen to the speakers at the RNC. We're trying to watch, my partner is much better at it than me. I can only take a few minutes at a time.

Which had me asking last night - Did the speakers at the DNC make sense because I agreed with them (for the most part) or did I agree with them because they made sense?? Anyways...

Sorry, it's been difficult to listen to the RNC. And besides, I have loads of homework every week, and that's a priority. Plus, I always have my friends here to listen in and report back. I'll take your word for it! :rolleyes:;):lol:

[Daniel]

I wonder. I am watchng the Republican Convention again this evening. Huckabee is speaking at the moment. He's trumpeted the issues of abortion and an anti-gay marriage amendment. Same old same old.

What interesting to me is hearing the arguments of the speakers. By-and-large, what I hear are tired old ways of being- one thing that stands out large is the class war that is apparent.

Conservatives talk about less government, and I have to wonder what they mean by that. After all, G.W. Bush's policy's have lead to a huge growth in government. It's a bait and switch tactic. This has been written about in a great book called What happened to Kansas.

Do we need less medicare? Less Social Security? I don't think so. In fact, it's what government isn't doing that is the issue.

For the first time in the history of our country, the majority of Americans believe that their children won't have- or be able to achieve- the same opportunities as their parents. What does this say? That programs like the GI Bill etc were a way for the middle class to become what it is today.

But there is nothing like that anymore. Are the days of great American's over? I wonder about that. Seems like we have become a nation of greed: get all that you can while you can. Your neighbor? He/she had better take care of him/herself.

[wmanion]

So far all I am hearing is the same old story. The fear of liberals taking over and how it will damage the family. I guess you would think that none of us liberals value their families.

[Rick336]

It's nearly impossible for me to listen to the speakers at the RNC. We're trying to watch, my partner is much better at it than me. I can only take a few minutes at a time.

It's the same with me. It's hard to listen to. The few speeches that I have managed to sit through, I found myself saying, "Yeh...right," over and over again during the entire speech. As in: "Ours is the party of real change in America!"

Yeh....right.


Rick

[BruceChris]

Issues? We don't need issues. Between John McCain's nobility in Vietnam,and Sarah's family values and vast experience in government, we don't need no stinkin' issues.

BC

[ctozrn]

My partner is making me watch the convention. Actually, she's not that mean but I really want to stay where I am and so I am forced to listen to this bullsh*t. It is really firing me up to hear all the nasty things they are saying about Obama. I really, really like him. To hear them start laughing when they talked about Obama being JUST a "community organizer" That means he actually went into the streets and worked with people instead of being oblivious to the needs of everyday people.

I don't know if I can stand to watch this anymore.....

[tdogg]

Issues? We don't need issues. Between John McCain's nobility in Vietnam,and Sarah's family values and vast experience in government, we don't need no stinkin' issues.

BC

I love how the Republican politicians at the RNC talk about how much more experience Palin has than Obama. Like being an Alaskan small town mayor and then governor for less than 2 years, is way more qualification to run the country than all the years Obama has in the US Congress. HUH? What are they smoking at that RNC??? I thought it was just those danged liberals who got high...:D

[ctozrn]

Do these fools not know that Osama Bin Laden is in Pakistan and Afghanistan and not in Iraq?

Rudy Guliani is a terrible speaker! I can't believe they put this adulterer out there to represent family values.

Ok, I am done now. I am taking slow, deep breaths....:mad:

[Daniel]

And the moment she walked out, the audience went nuts. Of course I mean Sarah Palin.

Cindy McCain is dressed in acid green.

So- we've had green and grey to look at. An odd combination. One might call Ms. Palin's color a battleship grey. A fitting one for what she's going to be facing in the coming months. Will she go down with the ship or will she sail into history as the next Vice President? I guess we'll see.

Palin has just referenced her son who is going to serve in Iraq. If I was that kid's mom- much less father- I wouldn't let him serve in a war for oil profits.

It's interesting to hear Palin speak. I don't hear any gravitas. Oh...she's yakking about family now.

I want to hear about foreign policy. I've read that she doesn't know the difference between the factions in Iraq.

I guess her son will fill her in. That is, if he comes home in one piece.

And lastly, she would do well to get rid of that whiny nasally tone. Her poisoned darts- and sarcasm- is not what I want to see in an elected official. Know that? It's all bromides and platitudes. She might as well be running for homecoming queen.

[nmwolfboy]

i give up. i tried to watch, even though it drove my partner from the room. But with profanities leaping out of my mouth, shocking my own ears, it became undeniable that my time is much better spent meditating on the principles of non-violence.

One more thing before retiring for the night - the ethnic diversity in the crowd of the Democratic Convention warmed my heart. But the RNC crowd is so overwhelmingly white that it creeps me out. :eek:

Pax,
scott

[Daniel]

i give up. i tried to watch, even though it drove my partner from the room. But with profanities leaping out of my mouth, shocking my own ears, it became undeniable that my time is much better spent meditating on the principles of non-violence.

One more thing before retiring for the night - the ethnic diversity in the crowd of the Democratic Convention warmed my heart. But the RNC crowd is so overwhelmingly white that it creeps me out. :eek:

Pax,
scott

But oh...I've seen some African-Amercan folks. They seat them- one or two at time- right up in front of those cameras.

Is that non-violent of me? Let's not go there! :rolleyes:

Ok...I promise to meditate before I go to bed.

Oh....she's talking about more pipelines (the one asserted in June at her church that God was behind) and more drilling.

And now she's going after Obama's character. It says a lot about one's character when you can't muster any respect for your opponent.

Talk about talking the high road!

What is this woman for? I haven't the slighest idea. Her approach is a very snide one. Did Rove write this speech? It's the politics of hate.

Can't wait to see her debate Biden.

[wmanion]

She might as well be running for homecoming queen.

Well according to McCain's campaign manager this election is not going to be about the issues...so, I would guess it must be a popularity contest much like that of Homecoming King and Queen. I guess the only issue they will have to discuss is if the shirt on his tux is going to match her dress for the inaugural dance.

The politics of fear. Well, I have changed channels and am watching Bill Maher...at least I get to laugh every now and then.

Bill

[Rick336]

Giuliani gave a terrible speech. But Palin gave a good speech even though I disagree with most of what she said.

But one thing Palin and Giuliani and Huckabee all did was to tell the news media to back off. They blamed the media for attacking Palin and Palin's family. What they really meant was, "stop scrutinizing and investigating Palin".

I think anybody running for the 2nd highest office in America needs to be investigated and scrutinized to make damn sure she's up for the job.

Rick

[ctozrn]

She made fun of Obama for being a Community organizer. Everyone laughed. This is something he did in the 1980's before attending Harvard Law school. This is an honorable thing, he was out in the neighborhoods, helping the people.

For me, to hear the Republicans laughing at this says it all.

[Steven E. Webster]

She made fun of Obama for being a Community organizer. Everyone laughed. This is something he did in the 1980's before attending Harvard Law school. This is an honorable thing, he was out in the neighborhoods, helping the people.

For me, to hear the Republicans laughing at this says it all.

Actually, I think Barak was a community organizer AFTER Harvard Law School. You are right--I think this GOPers don't think community organizer is a REAL job. I googled "community organizing" and read the Wikipedia article on it. It has alot more to do with leadership than the kind of pandering to prejudice and greed that Palin has engaged in.

Steven Webster

[Rick336]

Photo is of Sarah Palin taken a few years ago in Alaska riding an ATV with her young daughter Piper.

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2008-08/41978962.jpg

Why would a loving, responsible mother allow a child to be on an ATV without a helmet?


Source: http://www.courant.com/la-na-palin20_k6fqg5nc,0,1407133.photo#2

News on ATV safety: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/24/health/healthy_living/main676379.shtml


Rick

[matthewspeed]

Sorry folks, I actually am enjoying the convention. I like Sarah Palin. I may not agree on all the issues, but she is the real deal. I have to be objective here. She is tough, and she gets things done. Plain and simple. Her experience as a governor shows that. She will buck heads with her own party if needed. I see this more with the Republicans. The Democrats seem more about party unity. And about her knocking Obama, that is politics, whether we like it or not. The Dems do the same thing. We've got to get thick skin folks.

I am an independant. I have a love/hate relationship with both parties. I want gay rights and health care, so I am for the Dems in that manner. On the other hand, I am pro life and I want national security. I want to get out of Iraq just like anyone else, but I am not convinced that Obama/Biden have the experience with foreign affairs and dealing with terrorists. On the other hand, Biden has more experience in this arena than Obama, and that is a good thing.

It's a false notion that McCain will be a Bush clone. How can that be when the Republican party originally did not want McCain due to his position as more of an independant? He, like Palin, will challenge his own party on issues that don't meet up to their own convictions.

I am still weighing out everything. I will probably be one of those voters to make my final decision on voting day! LOL! I am being pulled in both directions.

I have made my decision that I am not going to vote democrat just because I am gay. Many of my gay friends think I should do just that. I am an independant thinker with many convictions, as many on this forum are. Before I can make an ethical decision, I have to be objective and read betweeb the lines on every word from both candidates.

This truely is the hardest presidential race for me to decide on.

[Daniel]

Sorry folks, I actually am enjoying the convention. I like Sarah Palin. I may not agree on all the issues, but she is the real deal. I have to be objective here.

What's your objective view of Sarah Palin's record on gay rights? In point of fact, she is against every right you have or could have. That's a great deal more than simply not agreeing with someone. She has worked, and will continue to work to make sure you are a second-class citizen. If elected, she and McCain will in the position to put 3 conservative judges on the supreme court with the goal of overturning Roe-vs-Wade as well as the reversal of Sodomy laws. Think it can't happen? Think again.

So- what is it that you like about Palin? Please clue me in, because her actions in the past as well as her conservative beliefs (are those off the table for discussion?) speak volumes. And if you see something else that I'm not seeing, I'd love to be informed.

And what about Palin's real-time governance of Alaska? She's sitting pretty on a very large surplus, a surplus that exists because of federal aid as well as oil profits. In that sense, she has very little experience dealing with the problems that other governors face. Problems like the mortgage and fiscal crisis (remember all that money that Bush has borrowed to pay for the war?).

And let's look at the policy of McCain. He has pledged that he wants even deeper tax cuts for corporations as well as a continuation for Bush's tax cuts which favor the wealthy. This would reduce tax revenue by 1 trillion over the next 4 years. And how, I ask you, is that sound economic policy?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/04/opinion/04thu1.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin

Who exactly is going to pay for the war?

[BruceChris]

For the last few presidential conventions, I have been watching patterns evolve. On the Democrat's side, there is recognition of problems and the offering of solutions by the different candidates, and an overall feeling of hope.

On the Republican side, there is little mention of any problems, except those that can, and are blamed on the Democrats. There is an overall feeling of celebration:

*We are better than they are, they have problems or more likely are the problem, and we feel wonderful about ourselves because we are morally superior to them, we have no problems, and we're going to win.*

Where I once expected to see nostalgia, they go right past nostalgia and directly into denial. They deny that there are issues for them to worry about and need to address, and then proceed to celebrate that *fact*.

The Republican party is one vast enabler. They tell each other "There is no 54 Trillion dollar debt that will come due within most of our lifetimes, everything is wonderful, and we are going to win". And every 4 yaers, they get a little better at it.

Peace, Love, and a little Paranoia, Bruce Chris

[BruceChris]

"Who exactly is going to pay for the war?'

Why Daniel, I thought that you knew. The Saudi's and the Chinese are our bankers. We owe them each about One $Trillion dollars

[Matt Algren]

For the last few presidential conventions, I have been watching patterns evolve. On the Democrat's side, there is recognition of problems and the offering of solutions by the different candidates, and an overall feeling of hope.

On the Republican side, there is little mention of any problems, except those that can, and are blamed on the Democrats. There is an overall feeling of celebration:

*We are better than they are, they have problems or more likely are the problem, and we feel wonderful about ourselves because we are morally superior to them, we have no problems, and we're going to win.*

Where I once expected to see nostalgia, they go right past nostalgia and directly into denial. They deny that there are issues for them to worry about and need to address, and then proceed to celebrate that *fact*.

The Republican party is one vast enabler. They tell each other "There is no 54 Trillion dollar debt that will come due within most of our lifetimes, everything is wonderful, and we are going to win". And every 4 yaers, they get a little better at it.

Peace, Love, and a little Paranoia, Bruce Chris
It's a big game of "They're Different Than Us". It's kind of sad, while at the same time maddening.

The front page of CNN's site this morning, offered without comment:

http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/9527/t1widepalinthurcnnna3.jpg

[matthewspeed]

So- what is it that you like about Palin? Please clue me in, because her actions in the past as well as her conservative beliefs (are those off the table for discussion?) speak volumes. And if you see something else that I'm not seeing, I'd love to be informed.

Sarah Palin does not give in to the intimidation of large corporations. She has fought for the people of her state. Over the opposition of oil companies, she approved an increase in taxes on the oil industry. This has generated new wealth for the state, while oil prices are increasing. Some of that money will be given to the residents of Alaska. Palin gained approval to send $1200.00 to every citizen in Alaska to help cope with rising gas prices! And in Alaska, the gas prices are just about the highest in the nation.

These checks that will be sent to the residents of Alaska will be added to an annual dividend of about $2000.00 that each resident could receive this year from an oil wealth savings account.

This sounds like an independent more than a Bush Republican! She has faced the oil companies and has given back to the people. This is the kind of leadership that is needed.

I realize she is not for gay rights, but I will say this, though not popular at all on this fourm, but there are other rights that can supercede our Gay rights. With out a strong America, we won't have a chance to fight for our rights.

I hate the war and polls show that a large amount of Republicans do not like this war. But, we cant just make a date and pull out. It has to be done correctly. We are dealing with terrorists like we have never dealt with before. McCain has the know how and the strategy to win this war. I'm sorry, but I do NOT feel safe with Obama as our protector. Obama is a brilliant man. He is a man of character and honor. He would be awsome with domestic issues, but I just don't see him defending our country against the evils of the middle East, or Russia, for that matter. I'm sorry, but experience is a necessity in this area. Again, with out a safe nation, our rights will be non existent.

The safety for our nation is my first concern for this election, not my gay rights. First, lets keep our nation safe and then we can concentrate on rights for all people.

[Daniel]

Sarah Palin does not give in to the intimidation of large corporations. She has fought for the people of her state. Over the opposition of oil companies, she approved an increase in taxes on the oil industry.

She's fighting and praying for a pipe line to be build over protected land. I would hardly characterize that as not giving in to the intimidation of a large corporation.

[Matt Algren]

This sounds like an independent more than a Bush Republican! She has faced the oil companies and has given back to the people. This is the kind of leadership that is needed. The oil companies aren't the problem. American over-consumption is the problem, as is the purchase of gas guzzlers by people who don't need them.

I realize she is not for gay rights, but I will say this, though not popular at all on this fourm, but there are other rights that can supercede our Gay rights. With out a strong America, we won't have a chance to fight for our rights.What rights do the American people need to give up to make a 'strong America'? What gay rights would hamper a 'strong America'?

I hate the war and polls show that a large amount of Republicans do not like this war. But, we cant just make a date and pull out. It has to be done correctly. We are dealing with terrorists like we have never dealt with before. McCain has the know how and the strategy to win this war.
John McCain and the Republican party have no intention of pulling out, and John McCain is in favor of torturing prisoners using the same methods used upon him in Vietnam.

Or do the (unlawful) prisoners have to give up rights too?
I'm sorry, but I do NOT feel safe with Obama as our protector. Obama is a brilliant man. He is a man of character and honor. He would be awsome with domestic issues, but I just don't see him defending our country against the evils of the middle East, or Russia, for that matter. I'm sorry, but experience is a necessity in this area. Again, with out a safe nation, our rights will be non existent. I don't follow your logic. Are you saying that since he doesn't have a lot of experience with foreign policy he'd hand over the keys to Lebanon? And is there a credible threat to our country coming from the middle east?

The safety for our nation is my first concern for this election, not my gay rights. First, lets keep our nation safe and then we can concentrate on rights for all people.Describe for me the ways in which John McCain will 'keep our nation safe' that Barack Obama won't.

We've given up a lot of rights in the past eight years in the name of national security. How are we safer now than we were before?

Also, define 'safe'.

[Gennee]

I wonder. I am watchng the Republican Convention again this evening. Huckabee is speaking at the moment. He's trumpeted the issues of abortion and an anti-gay marriage amendment. Same old same old.

What interesting to me is hearing the arguments of the speakers. By-and-large, what I hear are tired old ways of being- one thing that stands out large is the class war that is apparent.

Conservatives talk about less government, and I have to wonder what they mean by that. After all, G.W. Bush's policy's have lead to a huge growth in government. It's a bait and switch tactic. This has been written about in a great book called What happened to Kansas.

Do we need less medicare? Less Social Security? I don't think so. In fact, it's what government isn't doing that is the issue.

For the first time in the history of our country, the majority of Americans believe that their children won't have- or be able to achieve- the same opportunities as their parents. What does this say? That programs like the GI Bill etc were a way for the middle class to become what it is today.

But there is nothing like that anymore. Are the days of great American's over? I wonder about that. Seems like we have become a nation of greed: get all that you can while you can. Your neighbor? He/she had better take care of him/herself.

When Ronald Reagan became president in 1981, America was the world's greatest creditor. When he left, the US owed money to everybody. So much for the party that says it wants less government.

Gennee

[matthewspeed]

First of all, I am for my gay rights. I do want the right to marry a man some day. But I have come to the realization that our federal government, Democrat or Republican will not legalize gay marriage on the federal level in my life time. It will continue to be up to the states. In spite of Bush being in office, we still have seen some states legalize civil unions and gay marriage. We will continue to fight state by state. This will not stop.

It is obvious that Obama has not had the experience over the years with foriegn affairs and war. John McCain knows the mentality of terrorists a hell of a lot more than Obama. Am I for torturing prisoners of war? No, but I don't feel it's necessary to give terrorists the same rights. I want a commander in cheif that won't be worried about an extremists rights. I want justice. And I feel McCain will do just that. He has a lot more experience and knowlege than Bush ever had!! As an American citizen, I want zero tolerance for terrorists, when they are captured. Plain and simple.

But as I said, no matter who is in office, I will fight for my gay rights. I may have to fight a bit harder with a Republican in the office, but I will fight. In the meantime, I will feel safer with McCain in office. I realize I will be cornered on this forum and I will not be popular with my ideals. I have restled with myself WANTING to vote for Obama/Biden. But I just can't.

We all have our convictions and I have to follow mine. If McCain is elected and things don't turn out as I had hoped, I will be the first to admit my mistake in voting for him, but until then, I have to do what I think is right. I voted for Bush, but I would definitely not vote for him again!! I am taking a risk, but I feel strongly about my decision. I want all on this forum to challenge me. I welcome your challenges. But I would hope you would take into consideration some of my thoughts.

I believe both McCain and Obama want what is best for this country. They are both men of high integrity and character. That has made it difficult for me to decide, but at this point in time, I have to side with McCain.

[Zerbie]

I am an independant.

Me too. I voted for McCain's reelection in 2004 bc of his then image as a maverick, and apparently a man of integrity. Since 2004, I have been nothing but sorry for casting that vote. He has reinvented himself these past 4 years in the image of precisely whatever Bush and that administration want him to be. This, after the way they trashed him, was it in 2000?

It's a false notion that McCain will be a Bush clone. How can that be when the Republican party originally did not want McCain due to his position as more of an independant? He, like Palin, will challenge his own party on issues that don't meet up to their own convictions.

I don't trust that. He has given in over and over again these past few years to precisely what the party and administration demand.

He first started alienating me when he supported the AZ marriage amendment a few years ago. I wasn't shocked, but I was irritated.
Within about a year of that time, the torture issue came up on the national scene. At first, he bucked Bush. I sent him a letter thanking him for standing up against torture, especially given how he understands from personal experience how dangerous it is for our troops if we encourage torture as a nation -- how easy would it then be for our attackers to follow suit?

Within days, suddenly McCain had flipped position and followed the party line, agreeing with Bush. He voted against prohibiting torture.
Given what he knows about the repercussions of what he did, that action was unforgiveable. I can never vote for him again.

To be candid, I was surprised McCain got the nomination. The far right did not trust him because of his maverick past image (to which they still cling as if it were still true). Yet, by pandering to Bush and being remade according to whatever the Bush administration wants him to be these past few years, he has alienated party moderates, and also the independents like me.

Which is his real face? If he gets in office, will the maverick rise from the ashes? Or will George Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and James Dobson pull the strings to make him dance however they desire?

I heard that McCain wanted Joe Lieberman for VP. That he would lose the support of the religious evangelical base if he picked Lieberman, so he chose Palin reluctantly to court the Republican party's religious base. That doesn't sound like a man of conviction to me. It sounds like someone willing to cave at the drop of a pin just to make a personal political gain.

McCain has totally alienated me. I definitely don't trust him. If the base he has sold out his convictions for doesn't trust him either, that is extremely ironic. Given that he has alienated moderates AND evangelical conservatives alike, I was shocked he glided so easily into the nomination.

This post is starting to really ramble. Short point being: I don't trust him. Can't tell where the heck he stands anymore, and I don't want our highest executive office occupied by someone beholden to the same party administration that gave us the last 8 years.

This truely is the hardest presidential race for me to decide on.

I can respect that difficulty. To throw a further wrench into things, I really want you to know how much McCain has changed these past few years and become a Bush clone. It's not a myth. He has been a completely different politician since 2004. I'm his constituent - I know, I've been watching the transformation from a front row seat.

[Matt Algren]

I want a commander in cheif that won't be worried about an extremists rights. I want justice.Wow.

But as I said, no matter who is in office, I will fight for my gay rights. I may have to fight a bit harder with a Republican in the office, but I will fight. In the meantime, I will feel safer with McCain in office.
The ten-year-olds who are just figuring out what makes them different can't wait.

In all sincerity, that's what drives me now. I'm not as worried about MY rights as I am for the rights and the lives of the kids who are going through the same shit I went through, and I know several, assuming my gaydar isn't faulty.

[Zerbie]

I realize she is not for gay rights, but I will say this, though not popular at all on this fourm, but there are other rights that can supercede our Gay rights. With out a strong America, we won't have a chance to fight for our rights.
Again, with out a safe nation, our rights will be non existent.

The safety for our nation is my first concern for this election, not my gay rights. First, lets keep our nation safe and then we can concentrate on rights for all people.

Can anyone provide me the correct name for who said the following (I believe it may have been Ben Franklin)?:

"People willing to give up liberty for safety deserve neither."

[u-dog]

Matthew,

If you vote for McCain you ARE voting for George Bush again. This is not just democratic rhetoric. We don't REALLY vote for individuals for the presidency in this country. We vote for ideological coalitions and power blocks. The ideological coalition of big business and social conservatism that brought you George Bush is trying to bring you John McCain. The John McCain of this RNC is not the John McCain of the 2000 election. He has tailored himself to be acceptable to the only conservative power coalition that can help him get elected. George Bush's agenda is THEIR agenda and it will be the agenda of a McCain administration. IT IS AN AGENDA THAT HAS FAILED AMERICA IN EVERY SINGLE ASPECT OF OUR NATIONAL LIFE !!!! John McCaIN was, at one time, a maverick. He has given that up in order to get elected. John McCain is owned.

Obama is the candidate of a coalition of center/left interests which includes glbt interest groups, environmental concerns, Labor, and disenfranchised middle class voters.

You need to ask yourself as you decide what is right ... what aspects of the last 8 years do you want repeat? and WHY do you think a McCain administration would be any different?

[Zerbie]

It is obvious that Obama has not had the experience over the years with foriegn affairs and war. John McCain knows the mentality of terrorists a hell of a lot more than Obama. Am I for torturing prisoners of war? No, but I don't feel it's necessary to give terrorists the same rights. I want a commander in cheif that won't be worried about an extremists rights. I want justice. And I feel McCain will do just that. He has a lot more experience and knowlege than Bush ever had!! As an American citizen, I want zero tolerance for terrorists, when they are captured. Plain and simple. .

There is something you need to know. The US has now given is executive branch the power to decide who is a terrorist, with OR WITHOUT evidence of any kind, and imprison them indefinitely without charge.

That means that IF the government were to decide that you were a terrorist (say, because you have the same name as someone else who made mysterious phone calls to suspicious persons overseas), they have the "right" to carry you off and torture you for years, and if your innocence is ever proven, they owe you no restitution.

That is the most severe danger I can imagine.

The problem is that we think our innocence can protect us and that only those who've done something wrong can be arrested. Neither is true.

[u-dog]

Can anyone provide me the correct name for who said the following (I believe it may have been Ben Franklin)?:

"People willing to give up liberty for safety deserve neither."



It was INDEED Ben Franklin

[Matt Algren]

Can anyone provide me the correct name for who said the following (I believe it may have been Ben Franklin)?:

"People willing to give up liberty for safety deserve neither."
You're right, it was Ben Franklin. The full quote is "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

[Zerbie]

In the meantime, I will feel safer with McCain in office.

I realize I will be cornered on this forum and I will not be popular with my ideals. I have restled with myself WANTING to vote for Obama/Biden. But I just can't.
.

Just now noticed this: that you said "I will *feel* safer."

I think that's the major persuasive point for their campaign, and I think a lot of us will (or are tempted to) vote for the ticket that will make us "feel" safer. But feeling safer is different from *being* safer. It's hard to buck a 'feeling.' Boy do I know. And so does the Bush/McCain party.

Speaking of which, you wrestle with "wanting" to vote Obama/Biden. That's fascinating. Why do you want to vote for them? Is it a feeling? A passing thought? Exactly what is that based on?

[u-dog]

The problem is that we think our innocence can protect us and that only those who've done something wrong can be arrested. Neither is true.

You are SO RIGHT ZERBIE !!!

3800 people were killed on 9/11 and that was a terrible tragedy and an heinous crime ... But not worth shredding the constitution over.

Ten times that number are killed on the Highways EVERY SINGLE YEAR and we are not even willing to pass a national seatbelt law.

THe Bush administration (and the fascists who got him elected and who are supporting John McCain) are a FAR GREATER THREAT TO OUR SAFETY AND OUR LIBERTY

[ctozrn]

Not to mention that we are fighting a war in Iraq when like Obama said in his speech the other night Al Qaeda is in 80 countries! If Osama Bin Laden is in Pakistan and Afghanistan then why are we fighting this war in Iraq? Makes no sense exept for oil.

A vote for McCain is a vote for Bush. We need to get new faces in Washington who will actually go after the terrorists that we say that we are fighting!

Christine

[matthewspeed]

Thank you for your posts. These are many things to consider. At this point I am leaning heavily toward McCain, but we have two months to decide. I have done my research. But I also listen to other viewpoints as well. I really want to see the debates in the coming weeks. I want to see Sarah Palin on Meet the Press and other news programs. I need to see the two candidates and their V.P. running mates answer questions without speech writers.

It is an interesting election, I must say! :eek:

I do take all of your thoughts to heart. We all want what is best for our country and ourselves. We all need to read between the lines of these candidates and that is precisely what I intend to do. This has been such a struggle for me during this election. I so much want to vote the right way. It saddens me to see the world, our country, the condition that is in. It brings tears to my eyes and the struggle make the right decision is great. I don't know if anyone else is feeling these inner turmoils as I am.

Again, I appreciate your honest and candid responses. I really do appreciate this forum.

God bless you all!

-Matthew

[keltic63]

moderator's note:

let's not devour our own.....


matthewspeed is one of ours, but of a different opinion than the majority of us. we all seem to be doing a good job of sticking to issues, but I want to remind all of us to keep it that way. let's not make it personal and cause hurt feelings on either side.


/moderator hat off/

[Daniel]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/05/us/politics/05donate.html?hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1220572947-hIifwNM4403PEquYedavAQ

At McCain’s Convention, Big Money Still Talks

ST. PAUL — Of all the whales at the Republican National Convention this week, Robert Wood Johnson IV, the billionaire heir to the Johnson & Johnson fortune and owner of the New York Jets, may be the biggest.

He wore a thick stack of credentials around his neck all week, providing access to many of the convention’s most exclusive sanctums. He shared a skybox at the Xcel Energy Center with Rick Davis, the manager of Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign. More significantly, he was the only top fund-raiser with his name emblazoned on his own hospitality suite, the “Woody Johnson Minneapolis-St. Paul 2008 Host Committee Private Lounge.”

Mr. Johnson’s exalted status here shows that for all of Mr. McCain’s efforts to purge the influence of money in politics, the big donors still wielded sizable influence over this convention, getting singular access to the campaign and shaping the endless chain of parties and events outside the convention hall.

Of course, both sides of the aisle have been filling their coffers with the money of wealthy people. That's not the issue. What is at issue is the McCain's stance regarding campaign finance reform.

His actions don't quite agree with his verbage. What's that say about him to this voter? That he is playing the money game. Is that bad? Perhaps not. However, my point is simply this: we should look very carefully at what candidates actually do, not what they say they will do. In this case, McCain's actions do not agree with his own stated policy. Is that hypocrisy? One wonders. And it begs the question: is McCain the Maverick the he is touted as being, or another just another politician playing the game?

It strikes this viewer that something is amiss: Palin made much of the Washinton Elite last night, as though she and McCain were somehow different. But as I see it, you can't play the same game and say you aren't like those who you- in essence- seek to become.

A real maverick does more than claim the label. And the sad truth is that in the last year, McCain has adopted the same policies of president Bush. That says to the voter that McCain has sold his soul to get ahead. Nothing maverick about that.

[nmwolfboy]

It is obvious that Obama has not had the experience over the years with foriegn affairs and war.

Obama has served on the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations for four years. This also has entailed service on these subcommittees:
Subcommittee on African Affairs
Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs
Subcommittee on European Affairs
Subcommittee on International Development and Foreign Assistance, Economic Affairs and International Environmental Protection
Subcommittee on International Operations and Organizations, Democracy and Human Rights
Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South and Central Asian Affairs
Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Peace Corps and Narcotics Affairs.

Obama's running mate, Senator Biden, is chair of the Foreign Relations Committee. Obama has also made numerous trips abroad on foreign issues, often with Republican counterparts (such as the Russia trip in August 2005 with Republican Senator Dick Luger.)

If you've not checked out Project Vote Smart (http://votesmart.org) I highly recommend it. You can easily look up just about any candidate's biography, voting records, etc. Research, research, research!

I have compared the ratings given by a wide range (right to left) of Foreign Policy interest groups to both Presidential candidates, and Obama is consistently rated much higher than McCain on foreign policy issues. As a voter, that carries weight for me on their foreign policy credibility more than any media spin, regardless of whether the spin comes from the right or the left.

While Obama wasn't my first (or second) choice of candidate, I've moved solidly behind him since his record and positions have been consistent, match his rhetoric, and he routinely exhibits a better grasp of important issues than McCain. Also, Obama's choice of advisers far outclasses McCain's, imo. Obama continually selects his advisers from across the political spectrum, while McCain's choices more often tend to conservative idealogues and/or lobbyists. That's a stark contrast that I find unavoidable. Also, Obama is running a successful, positive, paradigm changing campaign while McCain's has been easily characterized as fraught with gaffes, ever-shifting positions, personal attacks and outright lies.

I believe that what we need most is a leader who inspires us to work together regardless of our differences rather than a fear mongering leader who thinks nothing about promoting divisiveness.

[ctozrn]

Wow. Very well said. Great research! Thanks for all the interesting information. I also really respect the positiveness of his campaign. I feel as though he is being honest and truthful. I really trust him. I think he is a good man. I don't get that feeling from McCain. Even as Palin continues to say that the Democrats are trashing her family, his only comment has been that Palins family is off limits. Obama has not said one negative thing about her family and has even defended their privacy!

I thought it was interesting to see that the Palin family will be on the front cover of People magazine this week. It hits the stands Friday I think.

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20223201,00.html

I thought she wanted privacy???

Christine

[Rick336]

I thought McCain gave a very unimpressive speech. The only part that moved me was his story of being captive in the Vietnam prison. He's sure not the great speech maker that Obama (or even Palin) is.

After Palin's speech last night I was a little worried that the Republican Convention would overshadow the Democratic Convention. Now, I'm not worried.

I've been in front of the TV every night for a month with the Olympics and the two conventions on every night. Now that it's all over, there's nothing on TV!!

I wonder when the new fall TV schedule starts.

Rick

[u-dog]

I hope, Rick, that you have been faithfully watching the Daily show and the Colbert report every night after the RNC. Otherwise, you should probably seek immediate treatment for PTSD. Intrusive Sarah Palin images ... Joe Lieberman flashbacks ... recurring John McCain nightmares. It could get ugly. :)

[Daniel]

Meaning- I agree with the points made in an editorial in the NYTimes.


Editorial

The Real John McCain

Published: September 4, 2008
By the time John McCain took the stage on Thursday night, we wondered if there would be any sign of the senator we long respected — the conservative who fought fair and sometimes bucked party orthodoxy.

Certainly, the convention that nominated him bore no resemblance to that John McCain. Rather than remaking George W. Bush’s Republican Party in his own image, Mr. McCain allowed the practitioners of the politics of fear and division to run the show.

Thursday night, Americans mainly saw the old John McCain. He spoke in a moving way about the horrors he endured in Vietnam. He talked with quiet civility about fighting corruption. He said the Republicans “had lost the trust” of the American people and promised to regain it. He decried “the constant partisan rancor that stops us from solving” problems.

But there were also chilling glimpses of the new John McCain, who questioned the patriotism of his opponents as the “me first, country second” crowd and threw out a list of false claims about Barack Obama’s record, saying, for example, that Mr. Obama opposed nuclear power. There was no mention of immigration reform or global warming, Mr. McCain’s signature issues before he decided to veer right to win the nomination.

In the end, we couldn’t explain the huge difference between the John McCain of Thursday night and the one who ran such an angry and derisive campaign and convention — other than to conclude that he has decided he can have it both ways. He can talk loftily of bipartisanship and allow his team to savage his opponent.

What makes that so vexing — and so cynical — is that this is precisely how Mr. Bush destroyed Mr. McCain’s candidacy in the 2000 primaries, with the help of the Karl Rovian team that now runs Mr. McCain’s campaign.

There could not have been a starker contrast between Mr. McCain’s night on the stage and the earlier days of the convention, a carnival of partisan rancor. It was not a forum for explaining policies or defining ideals, certainly none ever associated with Mr. McCain.

On Wednesday, the nastiest night of the week, Mr. McCain’s running mate, Sarah Palin, and other speakers offered punch lines, rather than solutions for this country’s many problems — ridiculing the Washington elite (of which most were solid members) and Barack Obama.

“Al Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America, and he’s worried that someone won’t read them their rights,” Ms. Palin said.

Mr. Obama, in reality, wants to give basic human rights to prisoners in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, only a handful of whom are Qaeda members, and shield them from torture. So, once upon a time, did Mr. McCain, but there was no mention of that in St. Paul, or of the bill he wrote protecting those prisoners.

Mike Huckabee dismissed Mr. Obama, the first black candidate of any major party, as a mere “symbolic” choice for president.

At the same time, the Republicans tried to co-opt Mr. Obama’s talk of change and paint themselves as the real Americans. It is an ill-fitting suit for the least diverse, most conservative and richest Republican delegates since The Times started tracking such data in 1996.

It was, in short, a gathering devoted almost entirely to the culture war refined by Mr. Rove in Mr. Bush’s two campaigns.

On Thursday, Mr. McCain said he would reach out to “any willing patriot, make this government start working for you again.” Mr. Bush, too, promised the same bipartisanship in his campaigns, and then governed in the most divisive, partisan way.

Americans have a right to ask which John McCain would be president. We hope Mr. McCain starts to answer that by halting the attacks on Mr. Obama’s patriotism and beginning a serious, civil debate.

Maverick McCain? I heard him proclaim himself as one. But using the tactics of Rove and Co? Nothing maverick about that.

Know what disturbed me the most when Palin spoke? When the audience started chanting "Drill Baby Drill!" It was the response of a mob.

What does that say about the Republican Party? That Republicans are very angry. And they are- as another Times columist has pointed out- promoting the politics of resentment. Know what? If democrates aren't careful, it could get McCain elected.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/05/opinion/05krugman.html?hp

[Matt Algren]

Okay, I didn't watch the speech last night (darn not having reliable signal), but I'm reading the transcript. A couple observations:

I've fought the big spenders in both parties, who waste your money on things you neither need nor want, and the first big-spending pork-barrel earmark bill that comes across my desk, I will veto it. I will make them famous, and you will know their names. You will know their names.
You'll know the name of Governor Sarah Palin, who is an expert at pork-barrel earmarking (http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-earmarks3-2008sep03,0,284198.story). Wasilla received $11.9 million in earmarks from 2000 to 2003. As a candidate for governor in 2006, Palin backed funding for the bridge to nowhere. After her election, she killed the project when it became clear the state had other priorities. Palin didn't 'reject' the funds as she indicated last Friday, she just moved the 223 MILLION DOLLARS from the federal government to other unspecified projects in her state. This year she submitted to Congress a list of Alaska projects worth $197.8 million.

I've fought to get million-dollar checks out of our elections.

The McCain campaign is using a loophole in the federal matching funds program (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/04/mccain.transcript/) allowing him to accept personal donations 30.4 times larger than Obama's individual limit of $2,300. Sen. McCain's advantage is that he can stop fund raising now, collect the $84.5 million he is due in federal matching funds and concentrate on campaigning.

Doesn't sound like a reformer to me.
My tax cuts will create jobs; his tax increases will eliminate them.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but is he talking about trickle-down economics? Seriously?

For workers in industries -- for workers in industries that have been hard-hit, we'll help make up part of the difference in wages between their old job and a temporary, lower paid one, while they receive re-training that will help them find secure new employment at a decent wage.
Forgive me, but I sincerely doubt this is true. First of all, it goes well outside the standard definition of 'small government'. In fact it smacks of welfare. And I'd like to see something more specific than 'a decent wage'.

Let's remove barriers to qualified instructors, attract and reward good teachers, and help bad teachers find another line of work.
The biggest barrier to qualified instructors is NCLB. Any plan that doesn't remove or make drastic changes to that program is cosmetic at best. And again, this 'help bad teachers find another line of work' is pretty darn anti-small-government, never mind the question of which teachers are bad and which ones are good.
Defend the rights of the oppressed.
You seriously don't want to go there, John.

[ctozrn]

I have read pages and pages of links to all these articles on Sarah Palin on all of these posts on this forum. It is clear that she is lying about so many things. My question is this, how come my local paper has reported none of it? There are no articles on the REAL Sarah Palin that we have all read about from various sources such as NY Times, Time magazine, and Anchorage Daily News to name a few. I am really afraid that people are not going to hear about these really important truths. There are many people that use their local paper as their only source of information. How come we aren't seeing this reported everywhere?

Christine

[Rick336]

The LA Times has a great editorial by Gloria Steinem about Sarah Palin:

"She believes that creationism should be taught in public schools but disbelieves global warming; she opposes gun control but supports government control of women's wombs; she opposes stem cell research but approves "abstinence-only" programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions; she tried to use taxpayers' millions for a state program to shoot wolves from the air but didn't spend enough money to fix a state school system with the lowest high-school graduation rate in the nation; she runs with a candidate who opposes the Fair Pay Act but supports $500 million in subsidies for a natural gas pipeline across Alaska; she supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, though even McCain has opted for the lesser evil of offshore drilling. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger."


Here's the article:


http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-steinem4-2008sep04,0,7915118.story


Rick

[kara speltz]

The LA Times has a great editorial by Gloria Steinem about Sarah Palin:

"She believes that creationism should be taught in public schools but disbelieves global warming; she opposes gun control but supports government control of women's wombs; she opposes stem cell research but approves "abstinence-only" programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions; she tried to use taxpayers' millions for a state program to shoot wolves from the air but didn't spend enough money to fix a state school system with the lowest high-school graduation rate in the nation; she runs with a candidate who opposes the Fair Pay Act but supports $500 million in subsidies for a natural gas pipeline across Alaska; she supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, though even McCain has opted for the lesser evil of offshore drilling. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger."

Rick

That is the clearest, most succint description I've yet seen. Truthfully, after hearing her speech on Wednesday, it occurred to me that there's another way the Republicans are carrying on the Bush traditions. Just as Cheney was an insurance policy for Bush, so too, is Palin. If they win the election and anything happens to McCain, we're in for more trouble that we can even begin to imagine. It's absolutely terrifying.

kara

[Thaddus]

I didn't get much out of the RNC either. I am am now certain that Cindy Mccain can sure read me a great bedtime story. And John, i wish had a set of pom poms for the end of his go, go, go, fight, fight, fight, win, win, win rah. But, then again, I was sorta beside myself worrying that Sarah would experience some sort of wardrobe pop-out malfunction. :eek:

[Daniel]

Thanks for posting it Rick. Would have missed it otherwise.

[Zerbie]

. My question is this, how come my local paper has reported none of it? There are no articles on the REAL Sarah Palin that we have all read about from various sources such as NY Times, Time magazine, and Anchorage Daily News to name a few. I am really afraid that people are not going to hear about these really important truths. There are many people that use their local paper as their only source of information. How come we aren't seeing this reported everywhere?

Christine

If this is something you feel strongly about, how about a letter to the editor of your local paper. Cite the points you've learned that concern you about Palin, write them into a short letter to the editor, and submit it. If they print it, you will have informed thousands of readers.
(Check your paper's guidelines for word limits, and how they want letters submited, and always include your name and phone # so they can verify that you wrote it.)

[ctozrn]

That's a great idea, maybe I will! I just can't believe she has gotten so popular despite what we read here.

Kinda scary!

[sauu4equality]

Didn't get to read this a few weeks ago. While I am having an extremely hard time finding compassion for the views of those leaning McCain I can sympathize with being filled with turmoil about who to vote for. 4 years ago I voted for Bush. I was crying in the booth. I didn't know if I was making the right decision. I felt like a vote for Kerry would be betraying my family who always taught me that the Republicans were "the good guys." I live in Texas, so my vote wasn't really a factor. I can certainly understand being torn. I have watched the bipartisan career with McCain with great respect. His campaign, however, has been dirty. Way dirtier than Obamas. This to me highlights that there is a character problem. Also, do you trust someone who has used hatred as a way to get votes? The pick of Sarah Palin was a pick to get back Evangelical voters. She herself is an evangelical. Her judgement of the world and our place in Wars and other foreign policy is severely clouded by her worldview. While McCain will likely be in charge of military action he will likely not survive his first term. Sarah Palin will be the president if McCain is elected. While you have bought into the media's exact description of both candidates (McCain: national security, family values (pro-life) Obama: Economy, social justice) you are not seeing the new McCain for who he is. To me National Security starts with Diplomacy. That means you don't take military action until you have to. That is Obama's plan. If you really believe we should shoot first and ask questions later then vote for McCain. That is the national security argument. As for being pro-life Obama was quoted by his Law Professor as saying we should seriously consider the opinions of those concerned about the rights of an unborn fetus. And the Democrats anti-death penalty/anti-war views are much more pro-life than any republican view (Obama is not Anti-war or anti-gun just so you know). I too describe myself as an independent and am registered as such. But I want a president who considers all of its citizens. While Obama has been painted as a leftist, he is far from this. He is willing to hear the concerns of all Americans. Can you say that about McCain?

[Gennee]

Sorry folks, I actually am enjoying the convention. I like Sarah Palin. I may not agree on all the issues, but she is the real deal. I have to be objective here. She is tough, and she gets things done. Plain and simple. Her experience as a governor shows that. She will buck heads with her own party if needed. I see this more with the Republicans. The Democrats seem more about party unity. And about her knocking Obama, that is politics, whether we like it or not. The Dems do the same thing. We've got to get thick skin folks.

I am an independant. I have a love/hate relationship with both parties. I want gay rights and health care, so I am for the Dems in that manner. On the other hand, I am pro life and I want national security. I want to get out of Iraq just like anyone else, but I am not convinced that Obama/Biden have the experience with foreign affairs and dealing with terrorists. On the other hand, Biden has more experience in this arena than Obama, and that is a good thing.

It's a false notion that McCain will be a Bush clone. How can that be when the Republican party originally did not want McCain due to his position as more of an independant? He, like Palin, will challenge his own party on issues that don't meet up to their own convictions.

I am still weighing out everything. I will probably be one of those voters to make my final decision on voting day! LOL! I am being pulled in both directions.

I have made my decision that I am not going to vote democrat just because I am gay. Many of my gay friends think I should do just that. I am an independant thinker with many convictions, as many on this forum are. Before I can make an ethical decision, I have to be objective and read betweeb the lines on every word from both candidates.

This truely is the hardest presidential race for me to decide on.

Hi, Matthew. I like what you say. You have a good grasp of your bliefs and opinions. I am a registered independent. I left the Democratic party a few years back because they are not the party that I once knew. I agree with the Republicans on some issues but, IMHO, don't speak to the average citizen. Also being a minority, I don't find Republicans all that welcoming to folks of a different nationality. I may be wrong on this but that's my opinion.

Gennee