McCain Chooses Palin as Running Mate

Senator John McCain has selected Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate, according to Republican sources.
Post by Mike

On Aug 29, 2008, at 7:56 AM, Jeffery Haugen wrote:
Get on board Jason. Vote for real change.
Jeff

On Aug 29, 2008, at 9:02 AM, Jason Levine wrote:
It seems to undermine McCain's entire premise of experience is important with her having only two years of experience and it reeks of pandering of the Clinton vote considering Alaska has like 50 people living there. On the other hand, she's hot, which may sway me.
Jason

On Aug 29, 2008, at 9:59 AM, Mike Inks wrote:
Undermine nothing... Palin was a Mayor and a Governor... Obama has never run anything past community organizations. Alaska may not have the largest population in the country at 700,000 in 2006, but it most certainly is one of the most important States in the union when you consider it's our largest source of oil and natural gas. To govern that State alone, is far and above anything even remotely close to Obama's experience or "pay-grade." Heck, Palin has more experience than Obama and Hillary put together. According to polls, Palin is the most popular Governor in the country. You want "change?" You've got it in McCain and Palin. This race just got way more interesting boys... Hold on to your seats.
Mike

On Aug 29, 2008 at 18:40 PM Jason Levine wrote:
I stand corrected. She has been in office for 20 months, not two years. You are right, this is a game changer, but I would imagine she is going to get schooled by Biden. But she sure is hot.
Here's a little of Obama's "nothing" accomplishments:
As US Senator:
Whistle blower and reformer for the Veterans Hospitals.
Pushed through and co-wrote the nuclear proliferation treaty
Headed and co-wrote the strongest ethics reforms in history
Introduced the protections from mortgage lender fraud abuse
Introduced bill to block no-bid contracts
Introduced bills to create CAFE standards and bio-fuel tax credits
Headed and pushed through the now law allowing people to web search who and what Congress passes (before hidden from public view)
Lead the debate on negotiations with Iran - which 18 months later, the Bush administration are now doing just that
Lead the debate on placing a timeline on US troops in Iraq, and now, Bush is doing just that
Said that the surge would not lead to political reconciliation and was correct
Warned that the Iraq War would not help defeat terrorism and would weaken the military's ability to take them on in Afghanistan- which is what even Rice admitted has happened

He was a community advocate for 2 years and organizer to help out of work steel workers find jobs
He was a State Senator for 8 years
President of Harvard Law Review
Professor of US Constitutional Law
Not to mention a graduate on his own merit and not by powerful friends or family of Harvard and Columbia, two of the best schools in the world. Graduated top of his class by the way.

You really, honestly, think that these accomplishments have no merit?
Jason


On Aug 29, 2008, at 23:29 PM, Jeffery Haugen wrote:
Your Obama accomplishments list is fluff. Nobody cares where he went to school, or what he did in school. And as a legislator, it is a list of group participation. (and party line politics) As in “...helped create...” as a junior senator with no power and no say. He has been a congressman for 4 years. And most of that time he has been running for president. He hasn’t done anything, he has no record. I think you underestimated McCain, I think nominating Governor Palin was brilliant. And has changed the playing field. Nominating Biden was weak and a compromise and truly uninspired.
Jeff

On Aug 30, 2008, at 12:10 AM, Jason Levine wrote:
Oh I agree, it is a brilliant move. She is the perfect manchurian candidate- she ticks all the social conservative boxes that you guys are craving for, she will shave some of the Hillary voters away and she is an empty vessel in need of being handled for the national stage.
This is the same as running for president when the other part of the ticket is a 73 year old man with chronic cancer and illness issues which puts her likelihood of fulfilling the role of president relatively high in comparison to other presidencies. Listen, she has no national experience and no international experience of any kind. Not even cursory.
If this woman was not as attractive or was a man, there is no way she would be on the ticket. This in my perspective makes her run a large risk of being a liability. Not to mention if she all of a sudden was given the awesome job of president for any reason.
And as far as Obama, I disagree. Your schooling does matter. It matters a great deal and that is why the majority of success stories come from the elite schools because it requires being the best to succeed there. And lastly I only listed the bills he authored and were passed into law. Not those he sponsored, which is where you only sign your name on a list to have it put in front of the senate for a vote. So, no, you are incorrect understating his role.

Mike, step out of the Republican armor for a second.

She was Mayor of a town of 2,000 households. She has a Bachelors degree in Journalism from a small school ranked 65th. She has only been in office for 2 years and was on maternity leave for a good percentage of it. If you take out the hotness factor and the personal story factor there is very little to run on. Think of it this way, if this was a man with this pedigree, do you honestly think that this person would be selected as being a heartbeat from the most powerful position in the world?

That said, I was impressed with this piece i read on Wikipedia:

"Governor Murkowski appointed Palin Ethics Commissioner of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission,[10] where she served from 2003 to 2004 until resigning in protest over what she called the "lack of ethics" of fellow Alaskan Republican leaders, who ignored her whistleblowing complaints of legal violations and conflicts of interest.[11][3] After she resigned, she exposed the state Republican Party's chairman, Randy Ruedrich, one of her fellow Oil & Gas commissioners, who was accused of doing work for the party on public time, and supplying a lobbyist with a sensitive e-mail.[12] Palin filed formal complaints against both Ruedrich and former Alaska Attorney General Gregg Renkes, who both resigned; Ruedrich paid a record $12,000 fine.[3]"

This is my point- if McCain's entire premise is that Obama isn't experienced enough for the presidency, then what does it say about him selecting someone to be the president in waiting that has even less experience than Obama? It means one of three things- amount of experience doesn't count, he is pandering, or he sincerely believes that 2 years as governor makes you a president.
Jason

On Aug 30, 2008, at 12:32 AM, Mike Inks wrote:
Quote from Jason describing Governor Palin...

"she is an empty vesile in need of being handled for the national stage."

Wow... you leave me "almost" speechless Jason. I had no idea you could ever be so out of touch with reality... but you clearly can be. That goes for everything else you just said too. Wow... I'm dumbfounded to be honest with you.
Good night man... get some rest. You really, really need it.
Mike

On Aug 30, 2008, at 8:09 AM, Jeffery Haugen wrote:
I could replace Palin’s name with Obama in your diatribe Jason. I think you see her as a threat to Obama, that is why you are being the attack dog. In reality you (and the Liberal Left) are afraid that this might upset the apple cart. Your concerns about what a huge mistake and gamble this is, are largely a smoke screen. I smell fear. People don’t elect Vice Presidents, but they might this time. John F. Kennedy was a junior Senator and younger than Palin when he was elected. Abraham Lincoln was also a relatively unknown, considered unqualified by the establishment and a considerable long shot. And yet both went on to be great presidents. McCain survived 5 years as a prisoner of war and 25 years in Congress, I think your concerns are convenient and lame. His chronic cancer is skin cancer, which is carefully watched, and 100% curable. And unless you can predict the future, which you can’t, you have no idea of McCain’s longevity. Are you an ageist now also? Like much of your rhetoric, it’s an inch deep. And no, nobody cares where he went to school, except maybe the Elitist Left. Certainly the electorate doesn’t, and if you think they do, you are mistaken.
They have done studies on graduates of the elite military academies such as West Point and Annapolis, and they have found that they are no more likely to be great military leaders than those who went to no name colleges and graduated from Officer Candidate School.
Jeff

On Aug 30, 2008, at 8:51 AM, Jason Levine wrote:
Guys,
I don't mean to attack her. I think she is great, and like I have said, she is hot and that is a big improvement over Mr. Pasty that sits in that position now. What I meant by an empty vessel is that she seems smart enough to know that she does not have any experience with the kind of scrutiny, examination, interrogation and analyzation she is now about to endure. If she is smart, she will follow the lead of her handlers and advisers to make sure she stays on message and is not a liability to McCain. I am saying that the McCain camp want that - someone they can trust that can be molded in a way they want. I am also not saying anything bad about her. I don't even think her experience is bad- its just small time. Mind you, she has accomplished more than I could, but it is not evidence you can lead a country of 300 million when you led a town of 2,000 households or a state for just over a year and a half.
You must, I would hope, look objectively why McCain would pass up far more experienced options with name recognition and go with someone he met just once before selecting her? Would she be on the ticket if she was fugly? Would she be if she was a man? Couldn't you say the arguments you made about Lincoln and Kennedy are just as appropriate about Obama?
The answers, if you are being objective, are obvious. She fits a mold to take votes and is far less about the importance of her resume.
What I am saying is that this undermines McCain's entire argument all along of why Obama is not qualified due to a lack of experience.
And Mike, am I a radical because I support Obama? Does that mean that half of the country are also radicals? Should I go get my Stalin t-shirt on now?? Enjoy the long weekend guys!
Jason

On Aug 30, 2008, at 10:15 AM, Mike Inks wrote:
Jason,
You're a radical precisely because of all that you just wrote. You can't even see how hilariously ironic your arguments are.
In most cases you do at least some investigation before you talk this way. You've obviously done very little on Sarah Palin before you've flipped her off as being inexperienced. She has 12 years of public office. You don't admit that and you continue to minimize her accomplishments due to population. Buddy... if the population of the town she was Mayor of were 10 she'd still have more experience than Obama. Same goes for her 2 years as a Governor. She has Mayor and Governor on top of all the community service that Obama is running on. Obama has no foreign policy experience other than to toss out his personal opinions as a Senator. He's never run anything, managed anything, been responsible for a staff or anything. He has held no public office nor has he ever attempted to do so... UNTIL he decided he was ready to become President of the United States because he got a standing ovation for his speech he made at the last Democratic convention.
If you'll remember, when Obama first started campaigning for this office I spoke about him in a very complimentary way. I saw what I thought was a honest, Godly man. I was willing to give him a chance regardless of the party he represented. But then I got to know him. It took a matter of a month or more before I started realizing he was just a very intelligent and gifted Lawyer who could talk his way into or out of anything. I learned about his voting records that indicated radical left, then I learned about his church and heard with my own ears his lies in attempts to cover up his knowledge of the hateful propaganda that his minister taught. I learned of his ties with criminals and terrorists. I listened to him ridicule good American people and accusing them of clinging to their guns and religion. I've listened to him promise global changes no man could ever deliver on. I watched him shift his position on the Iraq war from immediate withdraw, to a one year planed withdraw to what he now describes as a "responsible" withdraw... his latest stance since witnessing John McCain's suggestion of the surge has worked and rather than admit it he's attempted to adjust his rhetoric and hope no one will recall his words of the past. He positions himself as wiser than McCain for voting against the war in the first place. Easy to do now considering the way things turned out but A.) He's misrepresenting the truth and B.) things could easily have gone the other way if a few things had been done differently.

1) First, it took well over a year and 17 failed Iraqi / U.N. resolutions before we finally went to Iraq. All that time Saddam could very well have been transporting the weapons the WORLD'S intelligence insisted were there, to a neighboring country. (Iran)

2) Second, if the congress had listened to McCain in the first place, 300,00 troops would have entered Iraq on day one and this would have been a completely different story.

3) Third, Obama fails to recall the spirit of those days. America had yet again been the target of terrorist attacks only this time it was on our own soil and cost the lives of 3000 Americans. The country and the world had reached a boiling point of toleration. The war on terror began and the Bush administration took it on with all seriousness. Saddam was playing games with the U.N. and thumbing his nose at the world. He spoke openly about his financial support of suicide terrorists in Israel. It was widely known that he himself used acts of aggression and weapons of mass destruction to bully his way around the region. He swore to attack America on her own land when we least expect it. In a war on terror he was a key and obvious target and his country was a strategic location from which to launch that war. The world saw it that way and so did the majority of our congressmen and Senators who voted that way. You, Obama and the rest of the left either have very poor memories or you simply choose to forget for self motivated political reasons. Either way, it's dishonest revisionist history that Obama spews about the entire event.

4) Fourth and I personally believe most importantly, our very own Media and left wing party are more to blame for the bolstering of insurgents into Iraq than any other thing. Our own media and Democratic party did more to trash our reputation around the world than anything an enemy could dream of doing. The world simply began to echo their own rhetoric. Thanks very much Liberals.

McCain chose Palin for a number of reasons...

1) He heard and saw a large majority of Americans strongly indicate they were ready for a woman in the White House. He listened to their voices and acknowledged their votes. Isn't that what an elected official is SUPPOSED to do?

2) He himself is advocating a shake up in the government. He saw in Sarah a fellow politician that not only saw a need for that in her own state but she had been exceptionally successful at taking it on and making important big changes.

3) He saw in Palin a natural born leader. They come along very infrequently throughout our history but every so often and seemingly out of nowhere they just pop up.

4) McCain heard Americas cry for CHANGE. His long road of experience, combined with a fresh new female perspective is what I believe America is practically begging for and John McCain was a big enough man to recognize and accept that.

5) I can not think of a single man in the country McCain could have selected who could have instigated as much hope of real change and fresh perspective in Washington. Republicans were evenly split on all the candidates this past year. None of them excited the majority of the party. None of them could have breathed life into the campaign. You would be hard pressed to try and suggest McCain's choice of Palin has not done that.

I honestly believe you are blinded with so much disdain for Republicans and conservatives that you honestly can't see what an awesome and historic event just took place yesterday... and in OUR lifetime. It's a real shame Jason. Yes Sarah is a beautiful woman... but to suggest she is an "empty vessel" is pathetically lame and desperate rhetoric that saddens me you would stoop to.
Mike

On Aug 29, 2008, at 11:24 AM, Jason Levine wrote:
Some corrections for you in your reply:
-Obama was a State Senator for eight years prior to being a US Senator, so there is 12 years of government service, 16 years in total of public service.

-There is new evidence that the Vice President's office suppressed intelligence "White House 'buried British intelligence on Iraq WMDs' - Times Online"

-I just want to make sure I heard you right; Dan Rather has more influence over the world's leaders and their policies than George Bush. You may want to correct your statement there...

-I have yet to hear what policy shift he is advocating that would be considered change. The policies he did have, against the tax cut, immigration reform, against drilling, etc. were positions he did hold from the administration but has since flipped to the administration's point of view. So what's changing?

-Congress did not make the recommendation for 140,000 troops. Biden was the one with McCain saying 300,000 to 400,000. It was Rumsfeld who made the decision. Look it up.

-The first party to nominate a woman VP was the Democrats in 1984 so unless McCain wins, the Dems already hold that title of setting a new precedence.

-I will give you three names that would have been more qualified VP picks that would have created a barn storm: Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell and Jeb Bush. So no, she wasn't the only choice. If that were true, the Republican bench is scary thin.

-No. I don't have disdain for Republicans. I have been very even handed with my criticisms. I have never said one bad thing about McCain's character or him as a person. I plan on voting for Reichert, my Republican Congressman in November because he is a moderate and has done a good job. Hell, I put up with you don't I???
Jason

On Aug 31, 2008, at 10:48 AM, Mike Inks wrote:
In-line responses to Jason's points:
- I'll post a list of Palin's resume for you to compare in the next post
- Let's see where this "new evidence" leads.
- Yes, you heard me right. Our Media is heard around the world and has every bit as much if not more influence than our politics. Just look at how the media transformed a no-name Senator with speaking skills into the heart-throb, messiah of the world in less than a year. There is no need for me to correct anything I've said.
- McCain's entire career is widely known for taking unpopular stands in face of his own party's criticism. I won't bother to list them all here... you know as well as I do that McCain is no puppet and by no means a third term Bush copy cat.
- I stand corrected on this one but my point wasn't about congress anyway it was about McCain and you just confirmed my actual point. McCain was right from the start. Good for Joe to have agreed with him.
- Yes, no one is denying the Dems were first to nominate a woman to run for V.P. But this was the year above all others, that the voice of the American people was loud and clear that they wanted a woman in office and McCain listened.
- If you remember correctly my avatar on Messenger used to be a photo of Condi Rice with the message "Condi for President in '08." I actually voted for her as McCain's V.P. pick on a News Max poll just last week. Unfortunately she nor Powell want anything to do with the office so I didn't include them when I said I can't think of a single "MAN" who could have filled that spot and inspired the party. "Jeb Bush???" You're joking, right? America will never vote for another Bush to be in the White House... not even the Republicans.
- I believe your quick response to trashing Palin is a clear sign your ears and eyes are closed and your mind is already made up. That's what I see, hear and believe. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong but you can't convince me otherwise. Yes, you "tolerate me" but would you vote for me if I were running for a public office? I kind of doubt that.
Mike

On Aug 31, 2008, at 11:09 AM, Mike Inks wrote:
Here is a list of the experience the Liberals don't want to admit Governor Palin has.
Sara Palin:
• 1992-1996 - Served 2 Terms / 4 years City Council Member
• 1996-2002 - Elected mayor of Wasilla, served the maximum 2 terms
• 2002 - Appointed chairwoman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission
• 2006 - Defeated 2 Term Democratic Governor Tony Knowles to become Governor of Alaska
• Commander in Chief of the Alaska National Guard
Total 13 years of public service and counting.

This is hardly "no experience" and clearly more actual hands on management experience than Barack Obama can claim to have by a long shot. Ms Palin's 4 years as Mayor of a city... big or small, gives her more actual public service and management experience than in Obama's entire career. A mayor or governor is a full time, 24 hours a day responsibility. Governors and Mayors are responsible for making daily and hourly decisions that effect the lives of their citizens. A Senator is an advisor, a consultant if you will and votes on key issues but they in no way can claim to have the hands on responsibilities that a mayor or governor has. Mayors and governor positions are smaller in scale but at least similar in nature to a V.P. or President. A senator over a longer period of time can gain great wisdom and experience but can in no way claim to have better experience than a mayor or governor. That is just not a case that could ever be made.
Mike