Sarah Palin - A closer look

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by August

It never has been that important in the past. Take Harry Truman for example. Except for a stint in the Army during WW1 he never left the country but that didn't stop him from being able to deal with foreign potentates quite effectively when he had to.

Yes, but we're in the 21st century now. Are we really going to hold politicians to 60-something-year-old standards?

[August]

Originally Posted by CCIP

Yes, but we're in the 21st century now. Are we really going to hold politicians to 60-something-year-old standards?

Our constitution is a 200 year old standard. Do you think that's out dated as well?

[GlobalExplorer]

Now lets not get into a neverending discussion about passports and Harry Truman. The question was what to make of Sarah Palin's appearances.

Btw, isn't she on TV against Biden Thursday night? Maybe she can clarify a thing or two, in any case she will be better prepared I guess the person who prepared her the last times is already somewhere in Mexico.

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by August

Our constitution is a 200 year old standard. Do you think that's out dated as well?

That's a different matter. The constitution is strengthened by its stability. The world, on the other hand, is not exactly static and the president (or VP) is not exactly immortal. Taking them at old standards is not a strength, it's a weakness. You need to be prepared to face the dynamics of today's international politics, and having qualifications certainly helps establish one's credibility. International politics today is a very different game, even if the rules the US chooses to play by are 200 years old.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by August

The bare truth is all of the above is your opinion, pure and simple. That does not make it fact.

So is everything that you, SUBMAN1, Sea Demon, Tchocky, Skybird, Sailor Steve, geetrue, Oberon, Jimbuna, Dowly, AVG and everybody else on this forum has written ever regarding just about every conceivable topic. Furthermore, each person has presented that as opinion as plain and simple fact, and never thought twice about it. Welcome to the the internet forum. I did it once, and you complain about it? Perhaps I should turn the tables. I don't think that you'd like that very much.

[August]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

So is everything that you, SUBMAN1, Sea Demon, Tchocky, Skybird, Sailor Steve, geetrue, Oberon, Jimbuna, Dowly, AVG and everybody else on this forum has written ever regarding just about every conceivable topic. Furthermore, each person has presented that as opinion as plain and simple fact, and never thought twice about it. Welcome to the the internet forum. I did it once, and you complain about it? Perhaps I should turn the tables. I don't think that you'd like that very much.

So is stating a fact, that this was your opinion, now to be considered as a complaint? Perhaps you could illuminate how what i said equals that.

[Kapt Z]

Originally Posted by Frame57

Not really! This is a symptom and not necessarily one that deals with religion. I feel morals are aside from religion this is why we have laws. But if you check that indeed what i have said is true. Perhaps another thread would be required for the child molester issue, but I feel strongly that any candidate not just Palen will be attacked by amoralsist. The progressives in the US embrace the doctrines of the EU which are precisely the people that attack our American history and any and all that have faith and morals. It is just that folks of religion tend to stand up for morals so they get the brunt of these arguments. I make no apologies for our attacked pledge of allegiance or that our sworn in officials place their hand over the bible. Palen has her rights in this country to practice her faith a faith that I am sure the likes of many will attack. But do note that she is not running a faith based campaign by no measure, but it is the attack dogs that are bringing up these issues not the GOP. It is also interesting to note that here that the arguments are from mostly non US residents. Case and point....

Palen's faith is her own concern as long as she doesn't make it my concern.
Maybe someday this country will be religiously mature enough to hear a candidate say that his/her faith, or lack of, is nobody's business and still elect them. Won't that be something!

Oh, and I actually am one of those progressive Christian US residents.

[mrbeast]

Originally Posted by August

Our constitution is a 200 year old standard. Do you think that's out dated as well?

Well you obviously seem to think so in the US, you have ammended the constitution 27 times in the intervening 200 years.

[GlobalExplorer]

Originally Posted by Kapt Z

Maybe someday this country will be religiously mature enough to hear a candidate say that his/her faith, or lack of, is nobody's business and still elect them. Won't that be something!

Oh, and I actually am one of those progressive Christian US residents.

Bravo! That's what we Europeans fail to understand, a politician should be allowed to say whether he thinks religion is really that important, or rather a romantic thing, or nobodys business, and still get elected.

Please do not overinterpret my next remark, but imo the US cannot be such a free and modern nation as they always like to be seen if politicians don't even have the freedom to say an honest opinion about religion. If someone wants to get president or senator in the US they must either be exemplary Christians or lie about this.

Same about marriage, why must all candidates be happily married with 1-2 kids? In Europe we have some homosexuals and asexuals and a lot of divorced people in politics and I don't think that this is anyone's business either.

[Tchocky]

Good point, GlobEx.

Looking at Thursday's debate, I'm a little worried.

I consider Palin to be an almost total disaster area. Notice her answer to the question regarding Hamas.

Couric asked, "What happens if the goal of democracy doesn't produce the desired outcome? In Gaza, the U.S. pushed hard for elections and Hamas won."

Palin's answer, in full, was this: "Yeah, well especially in that region, though, we have to protect those who do seek democracy and support those who seek protections for the people who live there. What we're seeing in the last couple of days here in New York is a President of Iran, Ahmadinejad, who would come on our soil and express such disdain for one of our closest allies and friends, Israel ... and we're hearing the evil that he speaks and if hearing him doesn't allow Americans to commit more solidly to protecting the friends and allies that we need, especially there in the Mideast, then nothing will."

It's not that she doesn't know the answer. She flat out doesn't understand the question.

However, we've seen from trail reporting that she is rather skilled at bumper-sticker politics. As long as the sentences are short and snappy, she can pull it off. Putting her up against Joe Biden will be like night and day. He will try to keep the longwindedness to a minimum, she will desperately roll out punchline after punchline.
With debate coverage being what it is, I fear that the latter will carry the evening.

Sigh

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Good point, GlobEx.

Looking at Thursday's debate, I'm a little worried.

I consider Palin to be an almost total disaster area. Notice her answer to the question regarding Hamas.

It's not that she doesn't know the answer. She flat out doesn't understand the question.

However, we've seen from trail reporting that she is rather skilled at bumper-sticker politics. As long as the sentences are short and snappy, she can pull it off. Putting her up against Joe Biden will be like night and day. He will try to keep the longwindedness to a minimum, she will desperately roll out punchline after punchline.
With debate coverage being what it is, I fear that the latter will carry the evening.

Sigh

Good thought here but I think this debate will be on the economy more so than world affairs. What, the first 45 minutes of the presidentual debate was about the economy? If they focus on economy, I think Palin will out do Biden. On world affairs, Biden might have the upper hand. Note...I said might. I'm willing to bet the viewership for the VP debates will be larger than the presidentual debates. Why, because VP's are supposed to be attack dogs and will go after each others presidentual nominee. Should be fun!

[GlobalExplorer]

I suggest she goes for a couple of months and does a practical somewhere in the middle east, maybe that would do her very good, also help her not to think so much black & white. As of today her education seems to come mostly from watching T.V. news.

However, I don't think she will go down on Thursday. After her last appearances someone will have done extra shifts with her, may be John himself. Thursday could be the last chance for her, if she will still not prepare she's a hopeless case.

Anyway, looking forward to it, your debates are good entertainment, and I usually learn a thing or two.

[SteamWake]

I think the Obama supporters would be wise to avoid bringing up religion and ideology.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

I think the Obama supporters would be wise to avoid bringing up religion and ideology.

And national defense policy.

[GlobalExplorer]

oohooh sounds like a threat ..