It raises an interesting point. If someone is repeatedly saying stupid things is there a law of diminishing returns that makes any individual stupid thing less problematic?
I think it may, which really would keep my own political ambitions afloat, but at the same time it raises the likelihood of a nuclear gaffe which could be fatal.
An interesting hypothesis, but it rests on a very unlikely scenario: someone actually paying attention to Joe Biden!
Precisely! Nobody pays attention to the guy drooling and ranting in the corner. Again, unless he takes a dump or something.
And did someone actually think I meant nuclear-weapons related when I said "nuclear gaffe"?
XBL Gamertag: RobVarak
"Ok I'm an elitist, but I have a healthy respect for people who don't measure up." --Aaron Sorkin
JackB1 wrote:
No it's not just a Bush/Palin thing, but I can't do anything at present about JFK or FDR. I wouldn't have liked it then and I don't like it now. I think newer generations are more resistant to lumping everyone under the same "God beliefs" grouping and to combining politics & religion. Hopefully one day, we can make a clean break here.
Fair enough. But you left out Obama. How about his request to God?
Do you have this entire quote? I would like to read it and then comment.
I don't like ANY politician who combines God & Politics or even worse, makes decisions because they believe it's "God's plan" or such. This is their job and their job is to serve the interests of the American people. So until the American people are all one united religion, you have to leave that stuff to a personal level. Can you imagine if I walked into my bosses office and said I decided to cancel a meeting because it was "God's plan"?
It raises an interesting point. If someone is repeatedly saying stupid things is there a law of diminishing returns that makes any individual stupid thing less problematic?
I think it may, which really would keep my own political ambitions afloat, but at the same time it raises the likelihood of a nuclear gaffe which could be fatal.
An interesting hypothesis, but it rests on a very unlikely scenario: someone actually paying attention to Joe Biden!
Between Palin not knowing much and Biden's gaffes the VP debate might be hugely entertaining, yet cringe-worthy.
[url=http://sensiblecoasters.wordpress.com/][b]Sensible Coasters - A critique of sports games, reviews, gaming sites and news. Questionably Proofread![/b][/url]
It raises an interesting point. If someone is repeatedly saying stupid things is there a law of diminishing returns that makes any individual stupid thing less problematic?
I think it may, which really would keep my own political ambitions afloat, but at the same time it raises the likelihood of a nuclear gaffe which could be fatal.
An interesting hypothesis, but it rests on a very unlikely scenario: someone actually paying attention to Joe Biden!
Precisely! Nobody pays attention to the guy drooling and ranting in the corner. Again, unless he takes a dump or something.
And did someone actually think I meant nuclear-weapons related when I said "nuclear gaffe"?
I agree. Which leads me to this thought. I've always said, that I don't think Biden would be a good choice for VP. Now that he has given Obama absolutely nothing, while Palin is riling up democrats and republicans alike, is it time for a re-think? Can Obama campaign pull of a Zavanelli maneuver, and produce a new VP now? I know it's unlikely, but wouldn't that be fun, if all of a sudden Clinton emerges as VP, after Biden pulls Stan Van Gundy and exits for "familiy reasons"? And wouldn't it be even more fun if it was Bill and not Hillary Clinton this time?
Damn, I am good. Rob, if you decide to run for office, can I manage your campaign?
"Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite."
-- John K. Galbraith
Brando70 wrote:
An interesting hypothesis, but it rests on a very unlikely scenario: someone actually paying attention to Joe Biden!
Precisely! Nobody pays attention to the guy drooling and ranting in the corner. Again, unless he takes a dump or something.
And did someone actually think I meant nuclear-weapons related when I said "nuclear gaffe"?
I agree. Which leads me to this thought. I've always said, that I don't think Biden would be a good choice for VP. Now that he has given Obama absolutely nothing, while Palin is riling up democrats and republicans alike, is it time for a re-think? Can Obama campaign pull of a Zavanelli maneuver, and produce a new VP now? I know it's unlikely, but wouldn't that be fun, if all of a sudden Clinton emerges as VP, after Biden pulls Stan Van Gundy and exits for "familiy reasons"? And wouldn't it be even more fun if it was Bill and not Hillary Clinton this time?
Damn, I am good. Rob, if you decide to run for office, can I manage your campaign?
I like that idea in that it gives McCain an out with Palin. Bringing the attention back to Obama vs McCain...where it belongs.
Yeah, Biden sure looks like deadweight right about now. Obama played it safe, but people clearly don't want safe... they want sexy adventure!
I am looking forward to the SNL takes on all of this. Rumor has it that they are tying to work out an arrangement for Fey to play Palin throughout the season.
MACTEPsporta wrote:
I agree. Which leads me to this thought. I've always said, that I don't think Biden would be a good choice for VP. Now that he has given Obama absolutely nothing, while Palin is riling up democrats and republicans alike, is it time for a re-think? Can Obama campaign pull of a Zavanelli maneuver, and produce a new VP now? I know it's unlikely, but wouldn't that be fun, if all of a sudden Clinton emerges as VP, after Biden pulls Stan Van Gundy and exits for "familiy reasons"? And wouldn't it be even more fun if it was Bill and not Hillary Clinton this time?
Damn, I am good. Rob, if you decide to run for office, can I manage your campaign?
I'm the last thing America needs and I need to keep doing Joe McCarthy's work here...and my FIFA game would fall to pieces!
There's some debate about whether Bill could be VP. It looks like a loophole in the 22nd amendment would allow it, but most scholars agree that courts are unlikely to interpret the loophole as broadly as some commentators, particularly given the contents of the 12th Amendment and the contents of Article II itself.
And let's not discount the interpersonal dynamic at play between the Obamanistas and the Clintonistas. They're playing nice in front of the cameras, but it's unlikely that either Clinton would submit to the the Obama camp's handlers as they would have to on the bottom of the ticket.
Last edited by RobVarak on Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
XBL Gamertag: RobVarak
"Ok I'm an elitist, but I have a healthy respect for people who don't measure up." --Aaron Sorkin
MACTEPsporta wrote:Yeah...But our shenanigans are cheeky and fun, and their shenanigans are cruel and tragic, which... makes them not really shenanigans at all. Evil shenanigans!
What category does stealing speeches fall under? How about having your son as a lobbyist? THose don't sound very cheeky or fun to me.
RobVarak wrote:
And let's not discount the interpersonal dynamic at play between the Obamanistas and the Clintonistas. They're playing nice in front of the cameras, but it's unlikely that either Clinton would submit to the the Obama camp's handlers as they would have to on the bottom of the ticket.
My guess is that Clinton is hoping Obama will lose so that she can run again in 2012.
JackB1 wrote:
Do you have this entire quote? I would like to read it and then comment.
I don't like ANY politician who combines God & Politics or even worse, makes decisions because they believe it's "God's plan" or such. This is their job and their job is to serve the interests of the American people. So until the American people are all one united religion, you have to leave that stuff to a personal level. Can you imagine if I walked into my bosses office and said I decided to cancel a meeting because it was "God's plan"?
You would be fired and called a crackpot. If somebody did that it would be an extreme example of pure stupidity. That being said we're talking about America here. It was founded on religion. God in politics aren't going away. The same can be said about most countries in the Middle East. I don't think I'll be seeing a non Muslim in a leadership position anytime soon. It is what it is.
I am only posting this stuff because you seem to take delight in ripping Palins faith. Your candidate uses his faith to get votes as well. He believe's in the seperation of Church and State until he needs votes from black churches. I don't hold Obama's use of his faith aginist him at all. I just want to give you an example that it's a two way street.
Nevertheless, his spiritual life on the campaign trail survives. He says he prays every day, typically for "forgiveness for my sins and flaws, which are many, the protection of my family, and that I'm carrying out God's will, not in a grandiose way, but simply that there is an alignment between my actions and what he would want." He sometimes reads his Bible in the evenings, a ritual that "takes me out of the immediacy of my day and gives me a point of reflection." Thanks to the efforts of his religious outreach team, he has an army of clerics and friends praying for him and e-mailing him snippets of Scripture or Midrash to think about during the day. The Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell—who gave the invocations at both of George W. Bush's inaugurals and presided over the wedding of the president's daughter Jenna—is among those on Obama's prayer team.
I am a Christian. It doesn't bother me in the least bit to hear that the people that want to lead this country believe in prayer. Matter of fact I like it.
Last edited by Jackdog on Fri Sep 12, 2008 6:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.
MACTEPsporta wrote:Yeah...But our shenanigans are cheeky and fun, and their shenanigans are cruel and tragic, which... makes them not really shenanigans at all. Evil shenanigans!
What category does stealing speeches fall under? How about having your son as a lobbyist? THose don't sound very cheeky or fun to me.
LMAO You are asking that based on this quote? Seriously?
"Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite."
-- John K. Galbraith
RobVarak wrote:
And let's not discount the interpersonal dynamic at play between the Obamanistas and the Clintonistas. They're playing nice in front of the cameras, but it's unlikely that either Clinton would submit to the the Obama camp's handlers as they would have to on the bottom of the ticket.
My guess is that Clinton is hoping Obama will lose so that she can run again in 2012.
I was just watching the train wreck of estrogen-fueled mania that is The View. Are they like this every day?
Anyway, they brought up the lipstick kerfuffle and Barbara Walters seemed to suggest that the comment was inoccuous solely because it was a cliche.
So I'm sure that by that logic, if McCain were to come out and utter the following sentence there could, by definition, be no other meaning:
"Sen. Obama claims that he is a new kind of politician, but in reality he's just a cleaned up version of the same liberal paternalists whom this country has rejected for decades. Let's call a spade a spade here, shall we?"
Something tells me that Whoopi and her pack of hyenas wouldn't be so forgiving.
I'm on record as saying that the lipstick comment was a minor transgression, but people are bending logic to its breaking point with some of these defenses.
XBL Gamertag: RobVarak
"Ok I'm an elitist, but I have a healthy respect for people who don't measure up." --Aaron Sorkin
RobVarak wrote: There's some debate about whether Bill could be VP. It looks like a loophole in the 22nd amendment would allow it, but most scholars agree that courts are unlikely to interpret the loophole as broadly as some commentators, particularly given the contents of the 12th Amendment and the contents of Article II itself.
It maybe due to my incompetence, but I feel rather sure that if that situation does arise, postive decision will be made. 22nd Ammendment is in tact as VP is not "elected" to be president, he is elected to be vice-president. 12th Ammendment does shake things up a little but I don't think that would be an overriding factor. The way I see it, there is already a precedent of someone who is not themselves eligible to run for president, who may one day become one. That's anyone running for Congress, since they can become Speaker and so on... Of course, I can be totally off base here and I am happy to acknowledge that.
"Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite."
-- John K. Galbraith
It raises an interesting point. If someone is repeatedly saying stupid things is there a law of diminishing returns that makes any individual stupid thing less problematic?
I think it may, which really would keep my own political ambitions afloat, but at the same time it raises the likelihood of a nuclear gaffe which could be fatal.
An interesting hypothesis, but it rests on a very unlikely scenario: someone actually paying attention to Joe Biden!
Between Palin not knowing much and Biden's gaffes the VP debate might be hugely entertaining, yet cringe-worthy.
See? THAT! Where in the hell did you get enough hard data to back up the assertion that Palin doesn't know much? From one interview with Gibson? From the 'Bush Doctrine' junk?
MACTEPsporta wrote:Yeah...But our shenanigans are cheeky and fun, and their shenanigans are cruel and tragic, which... makes them not really shenanigans at all. Evil shenanigans!
What category does stealing speeches fall under? How about having your son as a lobbyist? THose don't sound very cheeky or fun to me.
LMAO You are asking that based on this quote? Seriously?
RobVarak wrote: So I'm sure that by that logic, if McCain were to come out and utter the following sentence there could, by definition, be no other meaning:
"Sen. Obama claims that he is a new kind of politician, but in reality he's just a cleaned up version of the same liberal paternalists whom this country has rejected for decades. Let's call a spade a spade here, shall we?"
I personally would prefer "Pot calling a kettle black", or something along those lines.
In all honesty, there is major difference there, Rob. Lipstick thing is such a stretch that only Palin's remark about hockey moms and bulldogs made it possible for general public to make the analogy. Color, being the defining quality of Obama, for many people, is much easier to align and needs no additional quotes to make the connection.
"Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite."
-- John K. Galbraith
Slumberland wrote:
I am looking forward to the SNL takes on all of this. Rumor has it that they are tying to work out an arrangement for Fey to play Palin throughout the season.
That would be perfect!!!
Looking forward to the new season starting this Sat. I always love SNL political sketches
True, the Biden pick isn't looking too good now that it gave Obama zero bump. He should have swallowed his pride and taken Hillary.
...I would have loved to have been at that lunch.
