I agree to a point that experience is overblown. What I'm pointing out is that if the left wants to point out Palin's lack of experience, it's more than fair to make issue of Obama's really thin resume' of actual accomplishments. Furthermore, on day one the inexperienced Palin will be the V.P. and the inexperienced Obama will be the Prez. Which is the worst case scenario is anybody's guess. Both tickets are lame IMO.
Palin More Qualified Than Obama
- Thread starter AAAintheBeltway
- Start date
I agree to a point that experience is overblown. What I'm pointing out is that if the left wants to point out Palin's lack of experience, it's more than fair to make issue of Obama's really thin resume' of actual accomplishments. Furthermore, on day one the inexperienced Palin will be the V.P. and the inexperienced Obama will be the Prez. Which is the worst case scenario is anybody's guess. Both tickets are lame IMO.
The only people I ever heard attacking HC based on gender were Obama supporters. Conservatives who remember and admire Thacher are well aware of how able women are to lead.
But Obama and the Democrats telling me to hand over half my income or go to Federal prison is an exercise in libertarianism, eh?
Does anyone know her position on illegal immigration? If it's gun'em down as they cross the border I might give her and Mac my vote. Perhaps she could help Mac grow some balls on the most important issue of our time.
She's a Buchananite. Pallin is as close as we'll ever see to either Patrick J. himself or Ron Paul being on a major party ticket.
She recommends giving every illegal an AK47 and sending them back where they came from to fix the problem
As I skim over the threads and posts here of the last couple of days it occurred to me that what the US really needs, IMO. Is a good old fashioned all out civil war. Right vs left, I guess the moderates and indecisive s that didn't want to participate could just hunker down until the smoke clears.
Extreme? Maybe. But it would remove an awful lot of bad blood. And while it would certainly be expensive in the short run. In the long run just think of the potential progress this nation could make with out all the petty bickering and politics of the left vs right we have now.
Seems to me we've been stuck in an "us vs them" stalemate for decades. In fact I think we could fire the entire congress tomorrow and, except for the budget deficit plummeting, you would never even know they were gone.
Now it won't be long before some not so bright, arrogant lefty posts a reply to the effect, "bring it on" we would win any way. I wouldn't be so so sure. I'm confident that in this type of situation the MAJORITY (not all) of the military would side with the right. Personally I think you don't know much about the people serving if you think otherwise. But, for the sake of argument let's say the military splits down the middle. There are still far and away more gun owners on the right than on the left. And of those owners far more on the right that would be willing to go into harms way.
Next of course some slightly smarter but still arrogant lefty will claim that the right wing folks would never have the spine to fight in such a war. A statement that certainly applies to a large number of folks, on both sides. But I'd bet that on average far more on the right would see such a war a necessary evil that in the long run would benefit the nation. And therefore consider it their patriotic duty to fight. Most (NOT all) of the liberals, that hang around here anyway, don't seem to have any concept of patriotic duty. Though they THINK they do.
Then there will be yet another that will claim that I would never risk my skin. That's it's easy to make such a suggestion. My response is : you don't know me very well. Killing, under the right circumstances, has never bothered me and probably never will. I've felt the ground rumble under my feet from exploding artillery. Fired numerous handguns, rifles, 40mm grenades and even a towed 20mm vulcan cannon once. For better or worse, to be honest I find that sort of thing rather fascinating. Even enjoyable.
At some point some one will probably make a statement to the effect. "I suppose you think might makes right".
To that I would say, that in theory no it doesn't.
BUT in practice, in reality, in the real fucking world I'm afraid it does.
Always has and probably always will.
Comments and thoughts welcome.
Don't hold back, I have pretty thick skin.
Extreme? Maybe. But it would remove an awful lot of bad blood. And while it would certainly be expensive in the short run. In the long run just think of the potential progress this nation could make with out all the petty bickering and politics of the left vs right we have now.
Seems to me we've been stuck in an "us vs them" stalemate for decades. In fact I think we could fire the entire congress tomorrow and, except for the budget deficit plummeting, you would never even know they were gone.
Now it won't be long before some not so bright, arrogant lefty posts a reply to the effect, "bring it on" we would win any way. I wouldn't be so so sure. I'm confident that in this type of situation the MAJORITY (not all) of the military would side with the right. Personally I think you don't know much about the people serving if you think otherwise. But, for the sake of argument let's say the military splits down the middle. There are still far and away more gun owners on the right than on the left. And of those owners far more on the right that would be willing to go into harms way.
Next of course some slightly smarter but still arrogant lefty will claim that the right wing folks would never have the spine to fight in such a war. A statement that certainly applies to a large number of folks, on both sides. But I'd bet that on average far more on the right would see such a war a necessary evil that in the long run would benefit the nation. And therefore consider it their patriotic duty to fight. Most (NOT all) of the liberals, that hang around here anyway, don't seem to have any concept of patriotic duty. Though they THINK they do.
Then there will be yet another that will claim that I would never risk my skin. That's it's easy to make such a suggestion. My response is : you don't know me very well. Killing, under the right circumstances, has never bothered me and probably never will. I've felt the ground rumble under my feet from exploding artillery. Fired numerous handguns, rifles, 40mm grenades and even a towed 20mm vulcan cannon once. For better or worse, to be honest I find that sort of thing rather fascinating. Even enjoyable.
At some point some one will probably make a statement to the effect. "I suppose you think might makes right".
To that I would say, that in theory no it doesn't.
BUT in practice, in reality, in the real fucking world I'm afraid it does.
Always has and probably always will.
Comments and thoughts welcome.
Don't hold back, I have pretty thick skin.