Senator McCain did not put country first when he selected his running mate

[Pa(b)st Prime]

What makes Romney more "qualified" than Palin? I like Mitt but what makes him any more "experienced" than Palin? Because he served as Governor longer? Then by the same token why isn't the Dem ticket Biden/Obama?

Your question is like asking "did Obama put America first by running for President"?

Quote from Thunderdog:

Your observations, such as they are, have nothing directly to do with the theme of this thread. This thread is all about, and only about, Senator McCain and his apparent hypocrisy. If he were to put country first, then McCain would have chosen a more qualified running mate from the Republican ranks. I had mentioned Romney earlier, but someone noted that Romney would alienate the evangelical vote. I then suggested Huckabee, but received no reply. Are Romney and Huckabee not far better qualified to be VP than Palin? Is that what you are implying? And if they are indeed better qualified, then Senator McCain is pandering and NOT putting country first, as he would have you believe.

Please answer the question I asked rather than making tangential comments that may or may not belong in other threads.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from Thunderdog:

What's the matter? The facts aren't good enough, so you have to make stuff up? Is that all you got?

What facts? Most of your post was opinion. What did I make up?

 

[Thunderdog]

Quote from Pa(b)st Prime:

What makes Romney more "qualified" than Palin? I like Mitt but what makes him any more "experienced" than Palin? Because he served as Governor longer?

I'll give the Republican propaganda machine one thing. When you guys are told to chew and swallow, you're all standing in line with your bowl and spoon, sputtering in unison "Sir, yes sir!"

"Jump, sir? How high, sir?"

"Palin, sir? Seriously, sir? Of course, sir! Palin, sir!"

"Sir, yes sir!"

 

[Pa(b)st Prime]

Quote from Thunderdog:

I'll give the Republican propaganda machine one thing. When you guys are told to chew and swallow, you're all standing in line with the requisite "Sir, yes sir!"

"Jump, sir? How high, sir?"

"Palin, sir? Of course, sir! Palin, sir!"

"Sir, yes sir!"

I don't take political instruction from anyone.

Palin would've been my choice. 1st, 2nd and 3rd.

Thankfully McCain knew that us right wing, working types (my trading style on the floor was blue collar) don't respond to establishment type Republicans. Palin being HATED and FEARED by the left is music to my ears. Apparently the rest of middle America is singing the same tune.

 

[Yannis]

IMAO: Top Ten Reasons Liberals Hate Palin

"Every sensible person loves Palin, so why the visceral, misogynistic response from the left? I think I've stumbled upon ten reasons that happen to be in ranked, numbered order.

TOP TEN REASONS LIBERALS HATE PALIN

10. She's the quintessential American, and the one thing liberals hate most about America are Americans.

9. She's sworn that as soon as she gets to Washington, she's going to cut off the Democrats' balls and put them on eBay.

8. She's an anti-choice extremist who has had five babies and never thought of killing any of them.

7. They're physically intimidated by her husband.

6. They're physically intimidated by her.

5. They just know that whenever they're not looking at her, she's pointing and laughing at their penises.

4. She's murdered innocent moose and no one seems to care.

3. Hard working, blue-collar people are supposed to be anecdotes; they're not supposed to run for office.

2. Liberals are much more conscious of how shrill and annoying they are when they're around someone that knows how to use a gun.

And the number one reason liberals hate Palin...

It just seems unfair that someone can have the charisma of Obama with actual accomplishments to back it up."

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

While the premise of this thread is obviously absurd, it does point up a real dilemma. Intellectuals, particularly liberal/left intellectuals, really just do not like the democratic process. Their whole belief system is based on their assumption that the "ordinary" citizens are far too stupid, irresponsible, prejudiced, backward and selfish to make their own decisions. They need the wise oversight of benevolent liberals, or they risk disaster. They will be led astray by talk show hosts, evil corporations, televangelists or their own innate racism/sexism/homophobia/nativism.

This election is a perfect example. On the enlightened side, we have Obama, an african american. The man has a degree from Harvard Law School and was the first, and as far as I know , only black Editor in Chief of the once prestigious Law Review. He turned his back on a cushy legal career to be a community organizer, which is a fancy name for trying to get irresponsible black people to do the right thing and extort money from the government. Could there be a more perfect candidate? Did I mention he is a man of color?

The republican McCain is an almost comically unPC alternative. An old white guy whose chief claim to fame was committing war crimes against the progressive forces of Uncle Ho, he is also wealthy. Then, in a gesture of pure evil defiance of all that is good, he selected as VP a woman whose very existence mocked the values of progressives everywhere. Of course, the insult was too great for them to ignore and they went ballistic.

 

[Yannis]

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

While the premise of this thread is obviously absurd, ...This election is a perfect example. On the enlightened side, we have Obama, ...McCain is an almost comically unPC alternative... he selected as VP a woman whose very existence mocked the values of progressives everywhere. Of course, the insult was too great for them to ignore and they went ballistic.

Some valid points here, well framed in light political sarcasm (maybe not so very light...)

What I see is two great, but, regular Americans running for office (McCain and Palin) on one side, and a pack of evil media moguls trying to stuff THEIR pick (another regular American) down our throats... ... because (THEY feel guilty and say we NEED him, but) they know they can control him later.

It's that simple. No contest. Imo.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

While the premise of this thread is obviously absurd, ...

What's even more absurd, is WHO started it. A Canadian whose opinion on the subject is completely and utterly irrelevant. It doesn't even count for the lousy single vote the rest of us have.

 

[Yannis]

Quote from Lucrum:

What's even more absurd, is WHO started it. A Canadian whose opinion on the subject is completely and utterly irrelevant. It doesn't even count for the lousy single vote the rest of us have.

Good point. But, we love our neighbors, right? LOL

 

[RichardRimes]

Quote from Lucrum:

What's even more absurd, is WHO started it. A Canadian whose opinion on the subject is completely and utterly irrelevant. It doesn't even count for the lousy single vote the rest of us have.

Yep...lets put AMERICA FIRST...screw the rest of the world....who cares about them...ooops forgot about the "global" economy oh and that its in "our" best interests to put our collective nose into everyone else business:eek: