Vice president choices
Moms View Message Board: The Kitchen Table (Debating Board): Vice president choices
so..now that we finally know who obama has picked, who do you think mccain will pick? I like Joe Biden, I would have voted for him if he had the nomination, but I will not vote for Obama. I hope McCain picks carefully..
The ticket seems lopsided. Biden looks more like the Presidential candidate. I saw him speak the other day (he likes the sound of his own voice), and Obama sat there like a little kid. Biden is old enough to be his father. He has also been in the Senate since 1972! So much for "change".
No, I won't vote for Obama either. I, too, hope that McCain picks carefully. I think that Romney would do a good job but I don't know if uninformed voters could get past his Mormon faith. It seemed to be an issue in the primaries.
I was very impressed with Senator McCain in the Saddleback interviews with Pastor Rick Warren. I loved his answers. He was poised and prepared and didn't hesitate. It was so uncomfortable watching Obama stutter and stammer his way through the questions, and "tap dance" around them.
It should be interesting.
Of course, there could be a couple of reasons Senator McCain seemed "prepared". He wasn't in the Cone of Silence that Rick Warren and the audience thought he was in. He was in his motorcade heading to Saddleback. And while his spokesperson said that McCain didn't listen to the interview with Obama, she carefully didn't say that no one on his staff didn't listen. And McCain lied. Warren started his questions to McCain by asking, "Now, my first question: "Was the cone of silence comfortable that you were in just now?" McCain responded, "I was trying to hear through the wall." If that wasn't an outright lie (which it was) it was certainly intended to mislead.
Second, McCain's answers were his same-old, same-old sound bite answers, and sometimes non-answers. Sometimes when he was asked a question he didn't answer the question itself, but instead came out with one of his canned responses that sort of touched on the subject of the question but didn't answer it.
I think that the women here at MV should run the country! We all get along, listen to each other, answer truthfully, get back if need be to ponder an idea, question or issue. Then the secret service could drive our kids to their events! LOL
Even take our pets to the vet! 
As far as that interview goes, Obama should have at least sounded like he had a bit of a clue as to what an evangelical pastor was going to ask him. I thought McCain did great on that interview.
Collette, I agree. Annie, I also agree with you. LOL!
I am hoping he picks Romney too, but I wouldn't put money on it.
All I can say at this point is that his choice is interesting. I can't wait to learn more about her!
Well, I think he picked a woman partly to continue to try to convince Hillary supporters that they were victimized by the Democrats - in the hope that if women continue to think of themselves as victims they might vote for McCain. Probably a good psychological tactic, but not one that I buy into.
As one who supported Hillary most of the way, I agree with her - if I was only supporting Hillary because she is a woman, I might feel dissed, but if I was supporting Hillary because I believe in the positions she advocated and the values she promotes, I want a Democrat in the White House in January. My reasons for supporting Hillary were because of her positions, so my vote in November is very clear.
Ditto Ginny.
I am not sure what to think about her yet. I think it's an interesting choice but not the best choice. I really need to know more about her, but I am voting for McCain regardless (and he is NOT my first choice) so I hope he made a good choice.
Ditto, Colette....i need to read up on her. It was a gutsy move by McCain
Is it totally wrong for me to say that I wonder about how a woman of a young special needs baby can focus on being a Vice President? I'm not sure if I'm judging too much on this one, honestly, so feel free to tell me so! She also has 4 other kids I think (if I remember correctly, maybe 3), although the little one concerns me the most. We all know the emotions involved when you have an infant. I realize she has 'round the clock care so she's probably not keeping regular mom hours I'm sure, but still, the emotional part of having a baby concerns me. Tack onto that the continuing special needs of the child, as he grows. Maybe I'm thinking of it too much from my own personal point of view, and how I would feel with such a major job and so many children, one of which who is an infant.
Very gutsy move, and I'm not sure if it was a good one or not. I wasn't voting for him anyway, so it doesn't affect my decision, just makes me think. I'm curious to hear what others think.
I had to do a quick search on her, because I am not American, so don't follow this very closely.
Her baby is only 6 months old, so she really has no idea what this life with a child with special needs will involve. I hope that her child does not lose out because of this, but I can't see how he won't.
As a mom of 5, including some with special needs, I can hardly find time to jump in the shower. I can't imagine doing what she's planning on doing.
Ditto Deanna and Marcia. As another mom to a child with special needs, I think this is a VERY gutsy move and I wonder if she has any idea what she's getting herself into. It really makes me question her priorities and her motivations for running for vice president. I'm still undecided about who I'll vote for, although I was already leaning towards Obama. I'll be doing a LOT of research into Palin to see her limited track record as Mayor and Governor. McCain did manage to heighten my interest with his choice!
Well, now you can add to it that she has a 17 year old who is pregnant. Not judging there at all, because I was 17 when I had my daughter, but I think this will also take away from her ability to give herself fully to either the presidency or motherhood...
I just read this news as well Adena. I agree - it happens, it's not a bad mark against her, but it is one more thing that will take away from her job as VP. The pregnant daughter is really going to need a mother, just as the little one does/will, besides her other children. How can she be so supportive (as her statement said) when she's the VP of a country, in hard times nonetheless?
If I were voting for McCain (and I'm not necessarily against him, I don't *love* either choice)I would be reconsidering based on his VP choice. I think it was a bad move personally.
I am still on the fence as to what I think about the choice. There are thousands of people who deal with teenage daughters who are pregnant and the sons who helped get them that way.... I just don't think it is near as taboo as it once was. Not that I am all for it, but it just isn't the same black mark it once was. Families are changing, maybe the dad will take a more active role with the kids and be more of a stay at home dad while she is being a VP...... as I said, families are changing and I think she REALLY represents that change.
Now, that said, I still have a very traditional family and we don't represent that change, but it is still out there and many people can identify with her.
I don't think it is the mere fact of a pregnant teenager, but more of a "how can she be a good mom and a good VP?" It is tough enough just being a working mom at any job, but with all the additional pressure of press and world matters, I would be fearful for my child and grandchild's need for my attention if I held that job. And she has a baby? I think she needs to focus more on family, esp if she is so pro-family to begin with. Work takes you away from family, I don't care who you are.
When he announced his running mate, I just went "HUH?"
And I agree with Ginny on the Hilary thing. If you were voting for Hilary, chances are it was because of her platform, not her sex. What a stupid reason to vote for someone. I would not go with McCain just because he chose a women VP.
I still don't like either choice. So I'm not sure what I will do. I dislike both pretty strongly.
I am a died-in-the-wool lefty liberal and haven't voted for a Republican national candidate in years. That said, why doesn't anyone question how a man with multiple children (maybe one or more with special needs) can handle his job, especially if it is a political job?
Hardly anyone questions a single mom working, whether her children "need her" (of course they need her!) or not. Very few people question a married woman with children working if her husband's income doesn't cover expenses, or if he loses his job.
Thinking about this, I thought back to when my sons were 3, 4-1/2 & 9-1/2 and I was musing about going back to work. Almost everyone told me I shouldn't go back to work - my children needed me at home. A few months later my husband's business went belly-up because his biggest customer went into bankruptcy, and we had to apply for welfare - he is an electronics engineer and this was during a major electronics slump. The same people who had been insisting my kids needed me at home were now asking me why I didn't get a job rather than go on welfare. Go figger!!
I don't often post on the debate board, but this topic gets to me. Please know, I am not attacking or responding to anyone in particular.
I have to wonder how much of this would seem important if Palin were a man. My guess is that it would get very little press coverage. Many women of this nation are focusing on her ability to be a mother and VP and thinking that she can't be good at both. Do we hold this woman to a higher standard than we would a man running for VP with the exact same family issues? Would we think that a father would love his children less, be neglectful of a special needs child, be less available to his children in general, or have his priorities out of order if he were to become VP? I just don't think these would be questions we'd be asking if Palin were a father instead of a mother.
That said, I think it was an interesting choice of running mate for McCain and agree with Ginny and believe that most Hillary supporters voted for her because of who she is and not because of her gender. I also am not thrilled with either candidate, but I have pretty much made my decision. I will be voting against rather than for president this time in the hopes that we get what I consider to be the "lesser of two evils" and I will be hoping for two new candidates in four years.
I was writing as you were posting Ginny and all I can say is that you said it very well and I agree with you 100%!
Ditto Ginny 100%
I think we(as a whole)really need to start looking at what a candidate stands for, instead of worrying about their family life. She has obviously done a very good job in Alaska, she has a 86%(I think this is right) approval rating.
I will say that I am not a big Obama fan, but I was very impressed with what he said when asked his feelings about the pregnancy of Palin's daughter.
And, I know a lot of woman who are VERY successful business woman, and have happy, healthy children and husbands. Personally, could I do it? I don't know. But, it seems to be working for her so far.
Ohhh... and JMHO, but just because your pro family, doesn't mean you can't have a life outside of that family. And, I know some working moms that spend more quality time with their kids then some stay at home moms.
I'm one of those crazy women who just feel that a child's bond with their mother is a special thing. That sometimes a child just needs their mother.
These are special circumstances. And being vice president is a twenty four hour a day job. Being Vice President and being a career woman are two totally different things.
I don't think a mom has to stay at home to provide good care. But I guess I think hmmm...she has a pg 17 year old, I know it happens, but don't we all think maybe the parenting ball was dropped a little? None of us wish for our high school children to become parents. So she is going to emotionally deal with and support her daughter and grandchild, plus the special needs child, and our country. I know that no one gets to decide if our plates are too full, but I am sorry it looks too full to me. Of course I am the one that said John Edwards was a crappy husband running for pres while his wife had cancer.
I think republicans stand on family values. I look at her and see someone who isn't the family values I want represented. I don't care if it is a dad or a mom, but a parent needs to spend time with their children, a special needs child needs even more. I don't see how being the vp will allow for that time. I guess they will have hired help (and probably already do).
On top of that, typically presidential candidates don't have young children. I know Obama does, that concerns me a little too. But we can't just look at palin as vp, her pres will be our oldest and has had melanoma. What are the chances that he will live through his 4 years.
Oh and if she has an infant, is she done? Will our VP get maternity leave? I just can't wrap my head around how that works. There are just some issues that men don't have to face.
I am rather liberal myself and I think that with the right support from family and friends she could be vp and a good mother. I know her family is going through a hard time but I also know that a 17 year old getting pregnant is not something that a parent even the best can stop if the teen is determined. All she can do now is take it in stride and try help direct her dd to make the right choices. Because her dd is going to do what she wants and has proven this.
As far as her ability to be a good vp.. I know very little about her except that she has kids and what their going through. (I have not been reading much about her) My guess is that she has thought all this through and has a plan for the next 4 years and will be as good of a mother and a vp as any man could be.
As for this making me want McCain to be pres.. well I think not.. The only VP choice that McCain could have picked that would have made me think twice about wanting to vote for him would have been Libermen and well I knew that wouldn't happen. I am one of those Hilary supporters. I still haven't decided who I will vote for..I think if the momsview women were up I would vote for y'all.. But these 2 that I have to choose from well I don't know who is the lesser of the 2 evils.
One of my concerns was Palin saying, in an interview, that she doesn't really know what a Vice President does. Among other things, the Vice President presides over the Senate, and casts a tie-breaking vote in the event of a tie. I would have hoped that McCain or his staff would have briefed her on at least some of the things a VP does before she accepted.
I have lived through the death of Franklin Roosevelt and Truman becoming President, the assassination of John Kennedy, with LBJ becoming President, and the resignation of Nixon, with Ford (who was appointed Vice President after the resignation of the elected Vice President, Spiro Agnew) becoming President. And Reagan was shot, fortunately surviving. Immediately after 9-11, Cheney was taken to a safe secret location, because President Bush was publicly known to be far from the White House and it was known he would have to fly back to Washington, and possibly be a target. So this is a very real deal for me. As is being said, the Vice President is only a heartbeat away from the presidency.
I must say that I am some what surprised that everyone is saying it is too much for her to do. This is a once in a lifetime thing for her. I know that if I were in her shoes, I would want to go for it. How many time in your life are you going to be asked to be the VP? As I said, I am sure that her dh would move to Washington with her and would likely take on the role of primary caregiver to the children. What is so wrong with that? Why isn't it a mark against Obama that he has small children like it appears to be for her? I am sure his daughters would like to have their father around too. But that never seems to be an issue. I can't believe we are still living under that double standard!!
I don't just mean the talk here, so don't anyone take offense. It seems to be the talk every where!
As far as the teenager getting pregnant, that happens in all types of families. I don't usually look at it as a parenting defect. I don't know of many parents that tell their kids to go out and have sex with no protection and get all excited when they turn up pregnant. It is usually teenagers being teenagers and not thinking it is going to happen to them. Maybe she was on the pill and it didn't work.
I wasn't saying anything in a sexist kind of way. I was reacting as a control freak kind of mom. I can't imagine sending a nanny, or anyone else, to all of the medical and therapy appointments we've had over the years. I can't imagine being away for any length of time, when I know that the best thing I've given my kids is my time. I've been told, more than once, that my youngest daughter would never have learned to walk or talk the way she does if it wasn't for all of the extra work I've done with her. Her little guy is in the same boat.
I do have a hubby who is fully involved, and I wouldn't want him to be away that much, either. I would doubt that he'd want to be.
I really like Sarah Palin. She is the complete antithesis of Hillary, who I cannot stand! She is bright, articulate, and enthusiastic. I believe, too, that she will be a good VP because she isn't trying to be PRESIDENT, like Hillary would have been. Hillary wouldn't have been content to be a "second banana".
No one has the right to ask how she can do the job with such a large family (tho I understand what you all are saying about being the Mom of a special needs child). No one would ask that of a man. Also, the lefty press was so blind-sided by this choice that they don't know what to do! They are digging..trying to find dirt on her, and the best they can can come up with is a DUI charge against her husband when he was 20, and a pregnant 17 year old daughter. Come on! (Notice how the John Edwards thing faded away quickly).
I believe that she is decent. She is a born-again Christian who loves the Lord and loves her family. She has been with her husband since high school. She is good balance for John McCain. She brings youth and optimism (not that he doesn't believe in America's potential, too). The Democrats want to talk about what is wrong with America. The Republicans talk about what is RIGHT with America. Alaska is a "baby" state and a new frontier. The people who come from there are rugged and self-reliant, which is the Republican platform. Love your family and WORK for what you want. Don't expect a government hand out.
As far as her gender, if we have to bring it up, unlike Hillary, she is a credit and inspiration to women. She is feminine and lady like, as is Cindy McCain. Hillary is shrill and loud and crass.
I loved the Republican convention and watched every bit of it. (I had no interest in the "rock concert" setting of the Democratic convention). Senator McCain's speech was VERY stirring and inspiring. Like President Reagan, he made us feel proud to be Americans. I liked what Sarah said about "always being proud of her country", an obvious counter-point to Michelle Obama. Michelle comes accross to me, too, as another Hillary...angry and militant. Senator McCain talked about "making a difference" and "getting involved" to bring about the change you want to see.
I have never in my life voted for a Democrat, and after last night, I definitely will vote Republican again.
one quick counter point. Alaska is full of government hand outs. They don't pay federal taxes, the gov pays 1000 a person to live there. Called a permanent residence fund, has to do with oil.
John edwards fell out of the news because he isn't running for president anymore.
I don't disagree with McCain's choice, but I do think you have to understand where the other side comes from. Republican preach, family values, conservative in Religion and values. It is a little hard to see a knocked up 17 year old, with her very young boyfriend, the tatoo ring, the gum chewing (really?!?!), and feel that she represents me. I know it could happen to me, but I guess I just expect more out of my president. And she has to be looked at as president, because it could happen in the blink of an eye.
"an obvious counter-point to Michelle Obama". See i took that as an obvious dig at Mrs Obama. I don't feel like Mrs. Obama is not proud to be an American, but there are certainly things about America to not be proud of.
Did we hear Palin's husband speak? Really I don't know, I didn't watch much.
And I think I do have a right to ask, can she do a good job with the family that she has. It is my vote, she is running to be MY V-POTUS. She has the right to choose not to answer, she has the right to show me what a great job she has done so far. But I do feel uncomfortable with it. I have my own special needs child and only 3 kids and can't imagine trying to run the most powerful country in the world, I can barely run my own household. So I feel like one of her jobs is going to need a lot of help, is that going to be the mommy job, or the vp job? You really can't do it all. So I am curious which is she going to pick. As a voter you want her to say, I will hire out all the nanny help I need. But as a mommy I want her to say I will drop the vp business in a heartbeat if I feel like it is detrimental to my job. Wrong or not, I don't feel that way about a man. My mommy voice doesn't think those things. Do i think it is difficult to be a hands on good father when you are the vp? Yep I do, but I just know so many men who aren't hands on that I know mom often carry the lions share of the work. I wanted to see the father look nurturing and "mom like". And he didn't do that, the 17 year old took care of the baby, not him.
That won't be the only reason I vote for or against them, but it will weigh in. Lots of things weigh in.
Plain and simple for me. Times have gotten tough, the economy is bad, oil prices are high, our deficit is INSANE. I want those things better. I don't feel safer, I don't feel like we are making the difference in Iraq that we hoped. So which candiate is addressing and recognizing those issues? That is who will get my vote.
I think that everyone should compare Sarah to people that are at the same level as her, like Biden. Hilary didn't want to be vp and that was obvious by her running for president. And Sarah shouldn't be compared to Michelle Obama either, when Michelle is just going to be the first lady. She shouldn't have anything to do with the election, if we don't want Sarah's family issues brought into things then we shouldn't look at the other candidates families either.
I agree that elections should stick to the candidates and leave their families alone but that is not what is/has been done on either side.
Holly, well said and I agree with you 100%, as I usually do on these issues. Sarah Palin has finally made me excited about this election. I like and support McCain, but was not overly excited until now.
Ditto Kaye's last response - I almost totally agree and well said. Also Tarable. I don't think that Sarah should be compared to Michelle Obama either - completely different roles there.
I thought the speeches by both Palin and McCain were very disappointing (and I consider myself to be a Republican). I thought Palin came off lacking seriousness, and McCain was ANYTHING but inspiring to me. He sounded boring and like he was forcing enthusiasm. All I keep thinking is that this guy could die (God forbid) in the next 4 years and she will be president. It doesn't make me feel good.
I agree that if Palin were a man, no one would care how many kids he had, but that's just the way it is. Mothers are held to a higher standard when it comes to their children. That might not be fair or right, but I think it's true. Has Palin said she's a born-again Christian and loves the Lord? How many people live in Alaska, like 20???? Yes, I'm being a bit sarcastic...couldn't help it! That's the first thing that both DH and I said when we heard the news.
I have never understood why so many people hate Hlllary Clinton. I've had my quarrels with her sometimes, but there seems to have been an almost visceral hatred against her from the moment Bill Clinton was elected. Strident? Strong woman, which many men find strident, but I doubt Sarah Palin is any less strident. Some of the accusations made against Hillary Clinton include Whitewatergate, an investigation of her supposed sins while she was a lawyer - an investigation which went on for years, with a special prosecutor, and which came up empty. Travelofficegate (firing the staff of the White House travel office shortly after she became First Lady) - as far as I know, most new residents of the White House do a lot of staff changing, which is their prerogative. Kind of like the new President replacing all of the attorneys general (which every new president has done). She spoke in less than complimentary terms about the traditional request for a cookie recipe from the wives of presidential candidates - but for heaven's sake, the woman was a full-time high-powered attorney - why would you even ask her for a cookie recipe? That she "stood by her man"? Bill Clinton behaved totally improperly and was totally stupid about it - but their marriage is family business and that she chose to not say anything publicly against him and to not divorce him is certainly her business. I'll admit she has a grating laugh - but then, so do I. She's no Barbara Bush, her immediate predecessor as First Lady. I admire Barbara Bush; she is a very good woman and a fine lady. I'm inclined to think that a lot of the visceral feelings against Hillary Clinton are because she didn't fit the First Lady mold (neither did Eleanor Roosevelt), had her own career, and is a strong and outspoken woman. Not liking her political positions is one thing, but that doesn't explain many of the strong negative feelings about her that have been being expressed for years.
Sarah Palin. She is a Pentacostalist, which is a branch of conservative, evangelical Protestant Christianity. She has stated publicly that the war in Iraq is God's war. She asked for prayers at her church for her plans for the building of a gas pipeline across Alaska, which she termed as "God's plan".
She was never against the Bridge to Nowhere. She was, in fact, for it, and said she was for it during her campaign for Governor. And after the "earmark" was removed from the money, she kept the money in Alaska's budget anyhow. She may be against earmarks now, but while Mayor of Wasilla, she hired a lobbyist closely connected to (now indicted) Senator Stevens, and got $27 Million in earmarks for Wasilla.
She may be against taxes, but she raised the sales tax in Wasilla to fund a sports arena. When she became mayor, Wasilla was debt free; she left Wasilla with over $20 million in debt.
She spoke glowingly of the values of people who live in small towns. I have nothing against small towns or small town values, but honestly, people who live in big cities have values too, many of them conservative values. I don't know why there has to be a war between small towns and big cities.
Google "Anne Kilkenny e-mail" to read a lengthy e-mail from a woman who has known Sarah Palin for years. Kilkenny doesn't like Palin, that's clear. But she gives a lot of facts, along with her personal opinions.
I find it interesting that all of the speeches at the Republican Convention - except McCain's, but including Palin's - spent much more time taking jabs at Obama and Biden and the Democratic party than they did talking about what McCain plans to do. Even McCain spent most of his speech talking about his past instead of his plans. I think that John McCain is an honorable man who has served his country well. But I also think he is a flip-flopper. He'd rather lose a presidential campaign than lose a war, but he has changed his position on a lot of important matters in order to gain the Republican nomination, including his stand on torture and his stand on the Bush tax cuts.
You all know I wouldn't vote for a Republican candidate anyhow, but I'd like to think my reasons are based on the candidates' political positions, not their personalities.
I heard one journalist comparing the conventions as the superbowl; with one team playing at a time.
The team in the spotlight plays offensively, receives great cheers, while the other team waits to play; and reacts defensively.
I like reading all of your posts. You all have theory/facts to back up your opinions.
Ginny I am one of those who hate Hillary. I guess for me some of the reasons are she didn't fit the traditional role. But I think she married a snake for a husband only to get ahead in this world. She certainly knew of his affairs long before Monica. I feel like they always had a plan, first you then me. But publically when the whole crazy thing happened. She didn't not publically out him, but she did very very publically support him. When I always felt like she should say something like "Our marriage is obviously having a hard time and I am not going to speak about it".
As far as flip flopping on votes. This is a touchy subject. I know as a parent I have made decisions then later realize that wasn't the best choice, so had to make a different one. I think there are times that it is the right choice. For example, George bush SR. mr read my lips no new taxes, then raising taxes. Did he do so because he just wanted to? No he didn't want to, but after looking at other things realized it was better for the country to raise taxes.
I guess I am also unsure why "earmarks" are a bad thing. We earmark things in our personal finances. So why shouldn't the government look ahead and plan ahead? I really just don't know enough about the concept.
As far as the debt in the small town. What was the debt on? Again looking at personal finances, we were debt free two months ago, now we are 30k in debt, well we bought a car, that seem reasonable. So before I judge her on those numbers I want to see how it was spent. Did they just build a new building to replace an old or to provide a new facitily, etc?
I think both candidates have some really good stuff about them. I think their VP choices are interesting. Simply when it comes to voting we all have different priorities and we will vote for that.
I have typically voted for the Reb candidate. I tend to be more conservative socially. But I am voting for Obama this go round. I think we just need to readjust how we spend our money.
As bad of a pres I think dubya has been, most of that has been personal. I think he handle 9-11 well. It was a tough situation. I think he missed on the war. But the debt doesn't suprise me when you look at those two things combined. I think our country would have been better off if he had only had one term. So I am not taking my chances of a third term by voting mccain.
I actually like Palin. Yes, I am sure she has made mistakes, find me a politician who hasn't. Sure, she may have changed her stance on things, once again, find me a politician who hasn't. As far as her experience, I find it interesting when people criticise Palin's experience. What about Obama? How much experience does he have, and he will be our President if elected. As far as the email about her. I read it. I think it has a lot more opinion then fact. I find it hard to believe that so many people don't really like her, but are scared to say anything. About the things she has done, I would have to hear her side of it, and why she decided to do them, before I decide what I think about it.
I am not a person who really likes Hillary. I don't know why, she just tends to rub me the wrong way. But, I would much rather vote for Hillary then Obama. His lack of experience really worries me. Also, I have heard all these things he plans to do, and everytime he is asked where he will get the money for it, he says he is going to raise the taxes of the rich. Well, I guess I don't get it, if he raises the taxes of the rich(I think I heard this is 5% of the population), but he lowers taxes for the middle class and poor, how is he going to balance the budge, pay for universal health care, and everything else he wants to do. I just don't see it happening. And, if he increases taxes for big busniness, they will make up their money somewhere. Probably, by cutting back on employees, those same people he is trying to help.
I don't dislike Palin as a person, and I suspect I might like her if I met her. She is certainly a hard-working woman, bright, and has gone very far. She seems to have a loving husband and a good marriage, and a fine family. What I dislike about her is her politics, and her dishonesty. It's not unusual for mayors and governors to seek earmarks, but she says she is opposed to earmarks. She put support for the bridge in her campaign for governor, but now she says she was against it. It's OK to try to get federal money for state projects, and a lot of politicians campaign on their ability to get outside money for their home towns and states - but to then deny that she did just that bothers me.
No, I don't think that Obama's present plans would balance the budget, but I am absolutely certain that McCain's plan to continue the tax cuts as they are and to try to bring about more tax cuts will unbalance the budget even more. McCain talks about cutting government spending, but the biggest chunks of government spending are in places that either can't be cut because they are legal obligations (the national debt, government bonds) or it would be political suicide to try to cut them and Congress would never go for it (Social Security, Medicare, the military budget).
Go to FactCheck to get researched facts about both Obama and McCain and their proposals on taxes and other matters, and follow some of the links that FactCheck posts as the sources of their research.
Oh, and what Obama is talking about isn't really "universal" health care - that was what Hillary Clinton was proposing. Obama's plan would cut the number of uninsured a lot more than McCain's would.
Think about it - if you presently have employer paid health insurance, as I do, McCain proposes that the cost of your health benefit would be taxable income to you. I don't know about you, but I don't pay a cent for my HMO employer funded health care, and I'm sure if I had to buy it in the private market that (1) I wouldn't be able to and (2) it would cost me a lot more than the $2,000 tax credit McCain is planning to give me. My youngest son gets his health care through a private plan because he is presently in school full time, and it costs $225 a month or about $2,700 a year. A $2,000 tax credit would mean he'd still have to pay $700, plus the co-pays and deductibles, assuming he has the same kind of coverage when he starts working again.
Thinking about liking politicians, I was reminded that the nicest and brightest politician I personally met was Isidore Schwartz, who was a Philadelphia City Council member for many years, very influential and very well connected - and a serious crook, who wound up being indicted and went to jail. It taught me a lesson about "liking" a politician.
Interesting, I didn't know this, but the only job the vice president is given by the Constitution is to "preside over the senate" anything else is up to the sitting president.
I, too love to read everyone's opinion. That's one of the many wonderful things about MV...we can freely express our opinions and thoughts, and the dialogue of the responders is thoughtful and respectful. Debbie, I agree with your last post. And Ginny, who was a bigger flip-flopper than Bill Clinton? The man would change his views based on the popularity polls.
I, too, have to give President George W. Bush some credit. I also think that he handled 9/11 well. We needed a leader to take a tough stance at that time, and he did. We have not had another attack on our soil since then. Quite a few attempted attacks have been foiled due to increased military intelligence. There is no disputing that Sadam Hussein and his sons were evil men and the world is better off without them. However, our resources and military intervention should have been concentrated on Afghanistan early after 9/11. Perhaps we could have gotten Osama Bin Laden then. The sad thing is, Bin Laden is not the only person who hates America. It is an ideology directed against people who live freely.
Honestly, I applaud anyone who runs for President. Who would want the job? You and your family are constant targets for any nut job, and your life, going back to your childhood, is laid bare for all of the world to see. I agree that changing one's mind about an issue is human, and can be a good trait. Parenthood was a good example that Kaye mentioned. I would be afraid to have someone who was SO egotisitical that they would never admit they were wrong, and never change their mind.
As far as McCain and Palin talking more about themselves than the issues...their speeches were a time for us to get to know them. There will be plenty of time in the upcoming debates to discuss their plans for America. For those who remember Al Gore at the two Democratic conventions in 1992 and 1996; he spent his time telling tear jerking stories about HIS family. In 1992, he talked about his little boy being hit by a car, and cradling his near-lifeless body on the curb. In 1996, he talked about his sister dying from lung cancer from smoking. Interesting, since his family made their money in tobacco.
I am not happy about the fact that Sarah Palin is a hunter. I love animals and have fought all my life for their rights. However, I have been in the American West, and hunting is part of the culture. I am also not happy that Cindy McCain's family became wealthy distributing beer. How many people died as a result of motor vehicle accidents because of some people drinking that beer to excess. It is kind of like "blood money". JMO. However, John McCain is a patriot and a war hero. No one hates war more than a warrior. He served his country at great sacrifice and lost nearly five years of his life being imprisoned and tortured. His sons have and are serving honorably, as is Palin's oldest son. Obama has never served, nor has anyone else in his family. His birth father came to America to get one of the best educations in the world, fathered a child, then hi-tailed it back to Africa, abandoning that child. I would like to know who paid for Obama's Harvard education? Until 2004, no one had heard of this guy. He was paraded out at the Democratic Convention as a commodity. The only job that Joe Biden has held since 1972 is as a US senator. I am not in favour of "career" politicians. Another example is Ted Kennedy. They grow old there and lose their effectiveness. I am in favour of four to eight years, tops, and out you go. Time for some new blood and new ideas.
And yes, Sarah Palin is very unabashed about her relationship with Jesus Christ. She was born a Roman Catholic in Idaho. Her parents moved to Alaska when she was an infant and began attending an Assembly of God church. They raised all of their children in that church. Sarah was a member of a Christian athletic fellowship in high school. It is all on the web. Just google "the religion of Sarah Palin". Someone sent me an email with her adressing her home church recently and giving her testimony. I don't know how to create a link, or I would attach it here. Does that make her a perfect person? NO! Christians are not perfect, but we are forgiven. Do I think that the religion of our President and Vice President are important? Yes, I do. If ever there was a job that required a prayerful person, that is it. I also believe that the integrity of the spouse is important, since no one else has more of an influence on the candidate. Unfortunately, we never know completely what we are getting until they are in office.
I personally think that the religion of our pres and vp should have absolutely nothing to do with their election. There is supposed to be a separation of church and state and if they are always talking about their religion how in the world can there be that separation and equality for all religions in the USA? Sorry but what difference does it make if they are jewish, christian, buddist, hindu or muslim? I mean really does it make a person bad if they are not "christian"? For that matter does someone have to be "bad" if they are agnostic or atheistic?
The people elected should not be elected because of what God they pray to but how they handle their job and what they plan to do for the country and no I don't think they can always stick to the same plan things change, but we should know how they think and what they want to accomplish not who they pray to...
Sorry but religion should have nothing to do with how our country is run or we are no better than IRAN or any other religious run state.
I don't know that it really matters what religion the president is, but for me I vote for someone like me. Who might view things like I like them, vote the way I would vote. My religion is part of who I am, it defines me and my morals and values. So what religion the pres and vp are, do matter, because I think I affects the choices that are made. Would I vote for a non Christian, well maybe, but they would have to convince me that their ways and my ways add up.
As far as Obama coming out of nowhere. There are really two types of politicians, the ones who were nobodys and the ones who are well connected. There really isn't much of an inbetween. Interesting fact on Obama. When he ran the first time, he actually was probably going to lose to the reb candidate. But there was a "sex scandal" per say. Has to do with a divorce and a wife talking about her husband and interest in sex clubs. Until that story broke he was a shoe in. However he pulled out of the race, so the new candidate was not well received and Obama one. So Obama in part owes his success to sex clubs Really, circumstances happen. He was really young, but things just fell in place.
"Sorry but religion should have nothing to do with how our country is run or we are no better than IRAN or any other religious run state."
A little off of the subject, but I have to say it. No official government document by the founding fathers refers to separation of church and state. Here is a little info that I found... Was our country founded on Christian values by our fore founders? The truth is some were and some were not Christian. But even those who were not were influenced by the principles of Christianity. The first Christian concept acknowledges that the Declaration of Independence says that man is created and that the Creator, God, bestows the rights. This means that no man can take away our rights and that the government, instituted by God, protects those rights. God gave man freewill and the function of government is to protect and make sure we exercise this will. Did you know the Continental Congress called for a day of fasting and prayer within the colonies? They asked God to give them direction as to whether they should secede from England before the reps of the Congress signed the Declaration of Independence.
I am certainly not trying to preach to anyone, but I have to honestly say that I would not want any man or woman to run our Country without the power of pray on their side!
Joelle, I have nothing but respect for people of faith, being one myself. But I will disagree with you. Most of the Western world was at that time Christian - non-Christians were generally oppressed and had inferior legal rights. In general, anyone who wasn't a Protestant Christian and a member of one of very few Protestant groups was subject to discrimination - Jews, of course, and Quakers, Catholics, Unitarians. So it makes sense that most if not all of the leaders who founded our nation were either actively Christian or was deemed to be a Christian. Jefferson, for one, while nominally an Episcopalian (Church of England) was also strongly influenced by Unitarianism (belief in a singlular god, not a triune god) and is generally considered a Deist (similar to Unitarianism).
And yes, I agree that by and large the founders were men of faith. And did refer to "all men being endowed by their Creator" with certain rights in the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration however, while being one of our very important documents, is not part of our laws.
The Constitution is very clear. There shall be no state supported (i.e. tax supported) religion. And there shall be no religious test for political office.
What I find distressing is the trend, in the past 20 years or so, to almost demand that any candidate for President and other offices be a person of faith and speak publicly about his/her faith. I am even more distressed by the efforts of some religious groups to have their religious beliefs codified into law. That, I believe, is counter to the basics of the First Amendment, and discriminates against those who don't have the same beliefs.
Well said, Kaye and Joelle. I feel the same way. Also, thank you for the interesting facts.
|
Members
