Anyone else think that Sarah Palin resembles....

As a woman I was insulted because I felt they nominated her as a political gimmick and not because of her experience or knowledge.

I agree. Her selection was definitely because she was a woman and not because she was necessarily the best candidate.

I'm all for a woman VP (or pres>I would have voted for Hillary), but this seems more a case of trying to win some votes (but most political manoeuvers are).
 
In any event, what really gets me about her is the incredible arrogance she showed in the way she personally attacked Barack Obama. I mean, the whole speech was incredibly condenscending, mean-spirited, sarcastic, demeaning ..... and way below the belt, she didn't attack him on issues but personally.

Maybe she is acting as McCain's hit man? I didn't listen to their speeches, aside from a bit from McCain, but isn't he staying away from personal attacks?
 
The interesting argument to people evoking God's will is that if people didn't do that, America may never have been colonized. The Pilgrims and others felt it was God's will to go and colonize America. Manifest Destiny is also God's will. If we didn't follow that, we wouldn't have moved all the way across the country to California.

Evoking God's will has long been used to move the masses. And back then, lots of people were ignorant and uneducated. Logical argumentation would have been lost on them.

Manifest Destiny as God's will? I'm not sure about that. It certainly has been taken to extremes in the colonization of populated countries, where the 'natives' have been at best subjugated, at worst killed off.

I think natural human curiosity and the desire to know more (which you would perhaps say are gifts from God) could also be the moving force behind colonization. The expanding population also necessitated it.
 
As this is a thread intended to allow for personal opinion - I think McCain hit it out of the park when he chose her . . . I myself, think she was absolutely the best candidate. And as you are not alone in your opinion, there are significant numbers that agree with me. However, I believe this forum isn't truly representative of the opinions of the general population in that respect (at least that's my take from reading most of these threads). In a few months, we'll get our answer.
 
I'll join in with the crowd who finds Ms. Palin highly scary... As several others have said... Sarah Palin in no way speaks for THIS American woman. As one columnist put it, I have nothing in common with her but a chromosome.
Well said, MC (your entire post, but I will save server space by not quoting it all!).

And speaking of censorship: anyone see the video of the reporter arrested at the Republican convention for trying to cover a protest? You probably didn't, because most news services aren't covering it. Civil rights don't seem to mean much in some circumstances.
 
You cannot fight ideology with weaponry.

Religion - I don't think anyone in the US persecutes Christians for their beliefs. ...At most, I'd say Christians are "marginalized", but keeping Christianity (or, honestly, ANY religion) out of government is hardly persecution. Religion (and again, let me emphasize-- ANY religion) don't mix well.
Well said (again...How about I just let you type, and I agree with you?).

As to the first point, the Republicans are making a big point about McCain being a better leader of the military, because of his experience. But haven't we moved into a century (or should have) where diplomacy is more important than military might? (And an intelligent president doesn't have to be an 'expert' in all things: just know to choose advisors who are).
 
In the letter of termination it doesn't say that she is terminated for refusal to remove books, Sarah Palin is smart enough to not do that. So no, there really is no direct evidence. I guess I can never state with certainty that Sarah Palin tried to fire the librarian because the librarian refused censorship, but I guess one could call it circumstancial evidence :p. Usually if it walks like a duck, it quacks like a duck, it usually is a duck.

Sounds like a duck to me....quack quack!
 
Maybe she is acting as McCain's hit man? I didn't listen to their speeches, aside from a bit from McCain, but isn't he staying away from personal attacks?

That is what the media has been saying. They claim it is typical for the VP's to go at it and try to keep the main candidate from having to do the dirty work. This is politics. I don't expect anyone to play fair. And being sweet and polite to each isn't going to happen. The sarcastic quips on both side do not bother me at all. It's all part of the game. Which is also why I HATE politics! ;)
 
Maybe she is acting as McCain's hit man? I didn't listen to their speeches, aside from a bit from McCain, but isn't he staying away from personal attacks?

Well, I know she is McCain's hit woman!!! I can't say that I ever liked personal attacks in politics or in any other setting. To me a discussion should be about issues but McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis stated very clearly that this election will NOT be about issues but personalities.

Now, I don't know how everyone else feels about that but with the country down in the dumps, I am REALLY interested about issues as to where and how the respective candidates are planning to lead the country and what they are going to do to get that tank out of the ditch.
 
Quote John Goodman: "Emergency rooms are a last resort for healthcare for anyone because, by law, emergency rooms can't turn away a patient in need of immediate care. The next president of the United States should sign an executive order requiring the Census Bureau to cease and desist from describing any American -- even illegal aliens -- as uninsured." :eek::eek::eek:

I guess the president can also sign an executive order declaring that there are no unemployed people - they are just on vacation or leisure time. Problem solved.:confused:

LOL!

Add that there is no such thing as global warming (wait, Bush already has said that, hasn't he?).
 
He also said that some Americans (one of his co-workers definitely) confuse socialism with communism. They are two VERY different things!
I think that's true.
We already have several "socialist" programs in the US, just not called that, including Social Security.
 
I just want to add a bit about my experience with "socialized medicine" (what's a better term for this?) I lived in the Netherlands for 2 years and then in Britain for 2 years, and had the free nationalized healthcare experience in both. Some things were great and some things were not.

I had started writing this out in paragraphs but it got too long, so I shortened to some pros and cons:

Pros--
--easy to see the regular doctor, he was nearby and it was free, so I probably took myself and my kids to the doctor more than I do here.
--again, free health care is definitely awesome!

Cons:
--my kids and I saw the same doctor in England rather than them having a pediatrician.
--less common to go to a specialist than it is here
--in the Netherlands was the program for children--I didn't have to worry about when my baby had scheduled checkups or immunizations--they gave me a little handbook with all the visits needed and scheduled them out for me every time.
--when I had my second baby in England, he was born in a wonderful birth center (we had to pay extra for this private place) but then he had a problem and we had to go to the hospital--in the hospital I shared a room with 3 other women and their babies--no nursery for the babies and no way for my husband to stay past visiting hours
--the reason we had him in a private birth center is because the hospital we started with was so incredibly crappy (and the elevators would go out, for pete's sake so I was climbing stairs holding a 2-year old and incredibly pregnant)
--taxes are on average higher than we are used to here (esp. in Holland)

OK, so I came up with more cons, but that free thing is a big big pro, and would be an even bigger pro for the poor, of course. I am still torn about this issue and how the U.S. should deal with it. I think there's got to be a better way than we're doing healthcare, but also a better way than it was done in Britain.

OH, and about Bill Gates for president--NO FREAKIN' WAY. Maybe Steve Jobs. No, probably not him either, now that I think about it.

As for Palin, this little one-person jury is still out on her. I'm a left-leaning independent from a very right-wing family and with a right-leaning independent husband. It's tough sometimes to even figure out where I stand myself, much less to figure out who to vote for. I've got a couple months to think about it, though.
 
Personally, I feel we have vacation or leisure time now...according to some acquaintances of mine and my foster mom...its called Unemployment...it's not enough for me to live on, but I do know some people that do...

quote]

That may be, eternal optimist that I am though, I believe the majority of people who get unemployment would rather have a job.

You would think...but some think of it as a vacation...like I said, I know a few people who really know how to abuse the system...sad huh.
 
You would think...but some think of it as a vacation...like I said, I know a few people who really know how to abuse the system...sad huh.

But on the other hand can we collectively advocate agaist something that in itself is a good thing because a few bad apples will abuse the system?

Lainie, Holland is basically the same system as the German system. It's not really "free" though. If you are employed a percentage of your income goes towards the health insurance and it is split equally by employer and employee. Basically the same as if the employer in America provides health insurance / benefits.

My older son was born in Germany and my younger son in the US 3 years later, so I had a direct comparison. There was a huge difference in the care I received in Germany and the one here. I had what would be considered pretty good insurance in the US, I could chose my doctor, etc. Just a few examples

I had to have unscheduled c-sections both times. In the US, I had to wait for another hour to get the surgery approved by the health insurance. In Germany, the doctor made the decision it was medically necessary and I was in the OR within 10 minutes.

In Germany after the c-section I was in the hospital for 9 days, had a private room, any of my visitors could stay as long as he wanted to, DH was able to stay overnight, I had a menu of healthy foods to choose from, fruit, yogurt, oatmeal, poached fish, etc. My co-pay was $ 500.

In the US I was in a "semi-private" room with my room mate having the TV on the highest volume 24 hours. The food was so bad and unhealthy I don't even want to talk about it. The room was pretty crappy. I asked to be released on the second day, I would have crawled out on all four if necessary :p. My co-pay was $ 4,000.


It is absolutely incomprehensible to me that some of those politicians are refusing to fix a broken system to make it work for the citizens of this country. They really forget who they are working for.

And it is completely beyond me why some people think regulating the insurance industry is a bad thing and sound like this will turn us into a communist country.

Health insurance and profits is something that cannot not go together. It would never cross our mind to have police or fire department as something that is provided through the "free market".

When DH was employed I paid almost as much for that insurance than the one in Germany, the Germany insurance had much better coverage and less co-pay.

On a related note, I am always in awe of someone who decides to carry a baby to term who may have health issues. I think it as an act of love and as such on that issue I have great respect for Sarah Palin. However, knowing the realities of health coverage in this country, it is a lot easier for someone who gets first-class health insurance through their job, like say, a governor of a state :p to deal with that issue strictly on a financial basis.

45 mio Americans don't have health insurance and it will be next to impossible to find adequate and affordable health insurance for a child with health issues under the current system. Where is the party who advocates pro-life at the top of their lungs and where are all the other pro-lifers when it comes to making sure that people CAN make a decision PRO-life and not fear to tumble into financial disaster.

Yes, I know it is not all about money, but boy, I think it is a consideration for many. To me looking at this and seeing Sarah Palin being put on a pedestal for her decision to keep her DS baby is very hypocritical when refusing to give women and families the financial means to be able make a pro-life decision.

To me it does not match up to Gov. Palin's promise to be an advocate for special needs children and staunchly opposes access to affordable health care.

Off my soapbox now
 
My older son was born in Germany and my younger son in the US 3 years later, so I had a direct comparison. There was a huge difference in the care I received in Germany and the one here. I had what would be considered pretty good insurance in the US, I could chose my doctor, etc. Just a few examples

I had to have unscheduled c-sections both times. In the US, I had to wait for another hour to get the surgery approved by the health insurance. In Germany, the doctor made the decision it was medically necessary and I was in the OR within 10 minutes.

In Germany after the c-section I was in the hospital for 9 days, had a private room, any of my visitors could stay as long as he wanted to, DH was able to stay overnight, I had a menu of healthy foods to choose from, fruit, yogurt, oatmeal, poached fish, etc. My co-pay was $ 500.

In the US I was in a "semi-private" room with my room mate having the TV on the highest volume 24 hours. The food was so bad and unhealthy I don't even want to talk about it. The room was pretty crappy. I asked to be released on the second day, I would have crawled out on all four if necessary :p. My co-pay was $ 4,000.

I had the opposite experience, Carola--first born in the U.S. and second born in London. It sounds like I had a better hospital experience in the U.S. than you did (at least post-birth--the labor pretty much sucked--too much like being a sick person in bed rather than allowed to do a natural active labor). So I guess it might be a difference of hospitals--maybe some good and bad in both kinds of systems. :) Anyway, I do lean toward nationalized healthcare or some sort of system for insuring everyone, but I'd like it to be more efficient than what I experienced in London.
 
Well, England is a little different. I think it is run more like an HMO whereas the ones in Germany and Holland are most comparable to a PPO, just that health insurers there are not-for-profit associations and that the government regulates what they can charge and to a degree the coverage.

The hospital in Germany was pretty fancy, it was kind of a mix of natural birthing center and regular hospital. Not that I was able to take much advantage of the natural birth center stuff, not many many natural c-section options there :p
 
Well, England is a little different. I think it is run more like an HMO whereas the ones in Germany and Holland are most comparable to a PPO, just that health insurers there are not-for-profit associations and that the government regulates what they can charge and to a degree the coverage.

The hospital in Germany was pretty fancy, it was kind of a mix of natural birthing center and regular hospital. Not that I was able to take much advantage of the natural birth center stuff, not many many natural c-section options there :p

Hmm, that does not surprise me. I didn't know much about it except from personal experiences, but that makes sense. It felt like our choices were a little more limited in England and overall I would rate our experiences better in Holland (except I didn't try the birth thing there).
 

Our Newsletter

Get awesome content delivered straight to your inbox.

Top