U.S. Presidential Race: Official Thread

Obama or McCain/Democrat or Republican..you decide

  • McCain

    Votes: 14 7.5%
  • Obama

    Votes: 173 92.5%

  • Total voters
    187
  • Poll closed .
Obama has correctly condemned bringing up family issues certainly the child.

The fact the left wing blogs are bringing this up is because of the hypocrisy of the 'family value' party....and Obama does not control them just as McCain does not control (I think) an inbred racist like Corsi.

the rest of the MSM is as always interested in gossip....sensationalism...

Bill Ayers issue is a desperate right wing smear campaign that has no life.....because it is not true.....
 
Obama has correctly condemned bringing up family issues certainly the child.

"Child" - funny, she is big enough to feck around but when it comes to facing the consequences she is a poor innocent child.

Palin is a liability and as the campaign goes on there will be more and more little side stories to distract the electorate. This kind of ices the current story for me:

Sex Education - Palin is a "firm supporter of abstinence-only education in schools" according to CNN in 2006.[118] When running for governor in 2006, Palin wrote, "Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support," in response to a questionnaire by the Eagle Forum Alaska. ......Palin's children were home schooled. We reap what we sow hey...LOL
 
just watched the beeb news and they showed Thompson taking baout McCain's background and the prisoner of war times. tough time for McCain alright but it got me wondering: where was Bush when McCain was a guest in the Hanoi Hilton? I mean it's fine to laud McCain for his service but they seemed to have totally forgotten that Bush never served overseas. funny how now it's ok to talk it up.
 
I've been watching the RNC tonight, and what stands out more than anything else...


The are almost no multicultural people in the audience. I've counted:

1 - Female African-American
1 - Male African-American

2 - Female Hispanic
1 - Male Hispanic

1 - Female Asian
1 - Male Asian

Sorry no Middle-Eastern sightings, as of yet...

... too approximately 10,000 wealthy white people.


I'm sure Jon Stewart is going to have a field-day with this group of that looks like a KKK gathering.
 
Wasn't a particulary moving night of speeches but none of the big name repubs are really going to rock the house (ok really boring stuff).
 
just watched the beeb news and they showed Thompson taking baout McCain's background and the prisoner of war times. tough time for McCain alright but it got me wondering: where was Bush when McCain was a guest in the Hanoi Hilton? I mean it's fine to laud McCain for his service but they seemed to have totally forgotten that Bush never served overseas. funny how now it's ok to talk it up.

I'm not sure what you're getting at. Why can't they talk up McCains military service?
 
seems like a bad time for us republicans to move to the States :cool:

Considering the republicans are supported by the religous right and other nut jobs it is certainely one hell of a cock up to elect a vice president who has a 17 year old pregnant daughter. No matter what you say, for the religous this is an issue that matters. Considering that back-ground, McCain should have picked another VP or the girl should have kept her legs shut as her mom told her to or alternatively used a condom. She was 17 years old - how stupid can you get?
 
seems like a bad time for us republicans to move to the States :cool:

Considering the republicans are supported by the religous right and other nut jobs it is certainely one hell of a cock up to elect a vice president who has a 17 year old pregnant daughter. No matter what you say, for the religous this is an issue that matters. Considering that back-ground, McCain should have picked another VP or the girl should have kept her legs shut as her mom told her to or alternatively used a condom. She was 17 years old - how stupid can you get?



Makes perfect sense to me... the US Republicans are fecked.
 
Wrong.

It is about a teenage girl who SHOULD be allowed to go about her business, just as Al Gore's son was allowed to do so after he was caught and arrested for reckless driving before the 2000 election.

This would be just as traditionally happens with children of candidates. Palin's grandchild will not be born until the New Year. The campaign will have no impact on her grandchild.

This is now about the media deciding there are two rules - one rule for Democrats and one rule for Republicans - and that for the Republicans to have the temerity to actually have families who are not perfect makes them "selfish twats".

Remember, 27 year old Chelsea Clinton can publicly campaign for her mother, but when she is characterised in an unfavourable light on a news channel the host was suspended for a week and forced to apologise.

Now this 17 year old CHILD is involved in a personal issue, and suddenly it is worth all of this attention and derision and insulting behaviour from the media and critics.

That is what it is about. I hope this helps.

I hope they carry on, though. Every single time a surrogate of the Obama campaign or a media pro-Bama slams Palin for having a child who is pregnant, or on abstinence education, Obama has lost another little group of voters in that audience.

So much for "Hope" and "Change".

Instead it is nasty Chicago gutter politics using a 17 year old girl as a punching bag.

I tend to think America would be more interested in hearing about Obama's friend, former terrorist Pentagon Bomber Bill Ayres, via 3 front page stories on the New York Times than they would the fact that someone's teenage daughter is pregnant. But they're not being given that opportunity.

It only helps me to believe you're not all that intelligent. Honestly, being totally non-partisan, I have a hard time believing anyone believes this kind of crap.

People like you are so very much the problem. Republicans, Democrats - Oceania, Eurasia. Meanwhile, those of us in the middle suffer because people like you focus on shit like Ayers.

Good luck with the Ayers thing. I'm going to continue wondering about the Iraq War, the economy and health care. And no, I'm not voting for Obama. Sort of undermines you're entire pathetic rant there, huh?

Hope that helps.
 
I hope they carry on, though. Every single time a surrogate of the Obama campaign or a media pro-Bama slams Palin for having a child who is pregnant, or on abstinence education, Obama has lost another little group of voters in that audience.

It's absolutely right to slam Palin on abstinence education, because she doesn't couple it with sex education. It's harebrained, panders to a religious agenda, and results in kids doing what they want to do in an unsafe way.
 
Palin: average isn't good enough

Palin: average isn't good enough

She's not qualified to be president, and in picking her, McCain shows that he has little respect for the presidency.
By Sam Harris
September 3, 2008


So let us ask the question that should be on the mind of every thinking person in the world at this moment: If John McCain becomes the 44th president of the United States, what are the odds that a blood clot or falling object will make Sarah Palin the 45th?

The actuarial tables on the Social Security Administration website suggest that there is a better than 10% chance that McCain will die during his first term in office. Needless to say, the Reaper's scything only grows more insistent thereafter. Should President McCain survive his first term and get elected to a second, there is a 27% chance that Palin will become the first female U.S. president by 2015. If we take into account McCain's medical history and the pressures of the presidency, the odds probably increase considerably that this bright-eyed Alaskan will become the most powerful woman in history.

As many people have noted, placing Palin on the ticket has made these final months of the already overlong 2008 campaign much more interesting. Is Palin remotely qualified to be president of the United States? No. But that's precisely what is so interesting. McCain not only has thrown all sensible concerns about good governance aside merely to pander to a sliver of female and masses of conservative Christian voters, he has turned this period of American history into an episode of high-stakes reality television: Don't look now, but our cousin Sarah just became leader of the free world! Tune in next week and watch her get sassy with Pakistan!

Americans have an unhealthy desire to see average people promoted to positions of great authority. No one wants an average neurosurgeon or even an average carpenter, but when it comes time to vest a man or woman with more power and responsibility than any person has held in human history, Americans say they want a regular guy, someone just like themselves. President Bush kept his edge on the "Who would you like to have a beer with?" poll question in 2004, and won reelection.

This is one of the many points at which narcissism becomes indistinguishable from masochism. Let me put it plainly: If you want someone just like you to be president of the United States, or even vice president, you deserve whatever dysfunctional society you get. You deserve to be poor, to see the environment despoiled, to watch your children receive a fourth-rate education and to suffer as this country wages -- and loses -- both necessary and unnecessary wars.

McCain has so little respect for the presidency of the United States that he is willing to put the girl next door (soon, too, to be a grandma) into office beside him. He has so little respect for the average American voter that he thinks this reckless and cynical ploy will work.

And it might. Palin's nomination has clearly excited Christian conservatives, and it may entice a few million gender-obsessed fans of Hillary Clinton to vote entirely on the basis of chromosomes. Throw in a few million more average Americans who will just love how the nice lady smiles, and 2009 could be a very interesting year.

Tune in next week and watch cousin Sarah fuss with our nuclear arsenal ... .

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-harris3-2008sep03,0,5745350.story
 
Wrong.

It is about a teenage girl who SHOULD be allowed to go about her business, just as Al Gore's son was allowed to do so after he was caught and arrested for reckless driving before the 2000 election.

This would be just as traditionally happens with children of candidates. Palin's grandchild will not be born until the New Year. The campaign will have no impact on her grandchild.

This is now about the media deciding there are two rules - one rule for Democrats and one rule for Republicans - and that for the Republicans to have the temerity to actually have families who are not perfect makes them "selfish twats".

Remember, 27 year old Chelsea Clinton can publicly campaign for her mother, but when she is characterised in an unfavourable light on a news channel the host was suspended for a week and forced to apologise.

Now this 17 year old CHILD is involved in a personal issue, and suddenly it is worth all of this attention and derision and insulting behaviour from the media and critics.

That is what it is about. I hope this helps.

I hope they carry on, though. Every single time a surrogate of the Obama campaign or a media pro-Bama slams Palin for having a child who is pregnant, or on abstinence education, Obama has lost another little group of voters in that audience.

So much for "Hope" and "Change".

Instead it is nasty Chicago gutter politics using a 17 year old girl as a punching bag.

I tend to think America would be more interested in hearing about Obama's friend, former terrorist Pentagon Bomber Bill Ayres, via 3 front page stories on the New York Times than they would the fact that someone's teenage daughter is pregnant. But they're not being given that opportunity.

You know Jason, besides the Palin on abstinence thing, there's plenty more in that rant that's questionable. In the first place, Obama has clearly said that he won't bring up the kid. In the second, there's loads more media sources than the NY Times or the "liberal media" as you term it. You only have to go on the internet or turn on Fox News.
 
was watching the Colbert Report last night. some funny stuff there.

Palin is the only one on the ticket with executive experience. so she should be the headliner ;)

seriously though. that case about the trooper and her involvement in that is more of an issue imo than her daughter's pregnancy. btw: have they set a date for the wedding yet? after November no doubt.
 
Well this whole thing has really got me thinking. I think Obama needs to drop out of the race. He has two young children at home and I see no way he can give them the attention and love they need while he's President. How unbelievable selfish of him to run for perhaps the most important job in the world while he's raising a family. They'll be put in the spotlight through all of their formative years. What a disgrace.
 
seems like a bad time for us republicans to move to the States :cool:

Considering the republicans are supported by the religous right and other nut jobs it is certainely one hell of a cock up to elect a vice president who has a 17 year old pregnant daughter. No matter what you say, for the religous this is an issue that matters. Considering that back-ground, McCain should have picked another VP or the girl should have kept her legs shut as her mom told her to or alternatively used a condom. She was 17 years old - how stupid can you get?

Palin can't do that if she supports the abstinence-only campaign. These people have an issue with condoms and won't teach about them.

Jon Stewarts Republican convention/New Orleans spot was hilarious
 
Well this whole thing has really got me thinking. I think Obama needs to drop out of the race. He has two young children at home and I see no way he can give them the attention and love they need while he's President. How unbelievable selfish of him to run for perhaps the most important job in the world while he's raising a family. They'll be put in the spotlight through all of their formative years. What a disgrace.

Yes. A pregnant daughter being in the spotlight of America is the same thing as two normal kids. Go back to satire school, you've failed miserably.
 
Yes. A pregnant daughter being in the spotlight of America is the same thing as two normal kids. Go back to satire school, you've failed miserably.

What satire? And I'm assuming they won't be normal for long if takes the job.
 
What satire? And I'm assuming they won't be normal for long if takes the job.

If it's not bad satire, then you're an idiot. Please make your choice.

The future baby's grandmother speaks.
Sherry Johnston said she was worried about her son dealing with all the attention. She said it was difficult enough for teenagers to deal with any pregnancy, having the entire nation watching made it worse.

Levi Johnston, a high school hockey player for Wasilla High School, is not listed on the team roster for 2008-2009, and his mother wouldn't say if he graduated. She said simply he's no longer a student and any further information would have to come from him. The intense media scrutiny has stunned this suburban community about 40 miles north of Anchorage, with reporters camping out near the Johnston home.

"This is out of my league," Sherry Johnston said. "I'm just a country gal and I want to keep it that way."
 
If it's not bad satire, then you're an idiot. Please make your choice.

The future baby's grandmother speaks.

:rolleyes:

Maybe now the boy can a job and support that kid. Grandma should have coached him up on safe sex or abstinence.
 
Why didn't you quote the rest of the article AlwaysRedwood? You know the part where grandma calls the baby "a bonus" on top of the plans to marry they already had. They don't seem to be looking at it in the negative light you're trying to paint.

BTW, he is an adult so will he not be there to support his family? Why is this just moms job?
 
Say what you want, but opposition to sex-ed is of the same order of stupidity and poor judgement as is the Catholic church's opposition to condoms. It's a matter of degree, not of kind.

That's a tough one really, the sex ed part. I have 3 children, all teens, and while I do want sex education I'm not sure school is the right place. This is a somewhat personal and sensative issue to be put in the hands of people you don't know much about. On the otherhand it is vital as so many kids who never get the information they need otherwise.
 
I dont understand the sex ed debate. Most teenagers have sex therefore why not provide them with some information before they live out their primal destinies. Not doing so seems bizarre and counterproductive to reason.
 
I dont understand the sex ed debate. Most teenagers have sex therefore why not provide them with some information before they live out their primal destinies. Not doing so seems bizarre and counterproductive to reason.

Ok, but who gives the education? Parents, counselors, school teachers? As a parent I don't think it's all that outrageous to actually be concerned about what, when, where and by whom your childern get such information. I'm not saying don't have sex education but it's a personal choice and shouldn't be a government mandate.
 
Why didn't you quote the rest of the article AlwaysRedwood? You know the part where grandma calls the baby "a bonus" on top of the plans to marry they already had. They don't seem to be looking at it in the negative light you're trying to paint.

BTW, he is an adult so will he not be there to support his family? Why is this just moms job?

Are you actually this obtuse? Are you really unable to grasp the extraordinarily simple argument I have put forth? Please explain.
 
Ok, but who gives the education? Parents, counselors, school teachers? As a parent I don't think it's all that outrageous to actually be concerned about what, when, where and by whom your childern get such information. I'm not saying don't have sex education but it's a personal choice and shouldn't be a government mandate.

Nevermind. You are unworthy of discussion.
 
Ok, but who gives the education? Parents, counselors, school teachers? As a parent I don't think it's all that outrageous to actually be concerned about what, when, where and by whom your childern get such information. I'm not saying don't have sex education but it's a personal choice and shouldn't be a government mandate.

what's the big deal about who gives this education? So 16 years are old enough to drive cars in the States but still too young to hear about sex from strangers?
 
Ok, but who gives the education? Parents, counselors, school teachers? As a parent I don't think it's all that outrageous to actually be concerned about what, when, where and by whom your childern get such information. I'm not saying don't have sex education but it's a personal choice and shouldn't be a government mandate.

Students are generally given the option to opt out of sex-ed courses, at their parent's discretion.
 
what's the big deal about who gives this education? So 16 years are old enough to drive cars in the States but still too young to hear about sex from strangers?

Kids are getting sex education much younger than 16. I think it's more like around fifth grade, 11 years old. I'm also not saying it can't be a stranger but I do think that parents should know exactly what will and will not be covered. And if there is a personal conflict than it should be addressed. Everyone has a differences in the way they raise their children, is there a problem with that? Just because someone thinks it should be done differently doesn't make them right or wrong. It's their belief. If people want to homeschool their kids and teach them sex ed at 18, that's their perogative. I wouldn't agree with that but who am I to tell them when they should or should not do it.

Your analogy isn't quite what I'd say, also. At 18 (in the US) you are old enough to be drafted and die at the request of your government, yet you're not legally old enough to purchase a beer.
 
Students are generally given the option to opt out of sex-ed courses, at their parent's discretion.

True. It is an option but knowing kids I'm not a big fan of it. It sort of falls in line with letting kids not say the Pledge Allegiance. The argument was they don't have to participate. Kids single other kids out at almost any opportunity and this would be another. I've said before, I don't know the right answer or if there even is one.
 
Regardless of whether kids have had some formal "sex education" class in a school setting, teens know where babies come from, the activities needed to create the kid, and how to prevent that occurance. It's just that so many people that age think they are bullet-proof--"whatever bad that might occur from a particular pattern of conduct will happen to someone else, not me."

Those of you who are actually over the age of 17, think back to when you were that age. Was the fact that unprotected sex could lead to pregnancy a major mystery to any of you? Did you know what steps to take to prevent that disease--even if you didn't take the precautions.

In a place where 16 year old girls are supposed to be able to get abortions without parental consent, it seems rather bizarre that anyone would make a big deal out of the fact that a 17 year old is pregnant, apparently without the consent of her mother.

I did not put my 17 year old daughter into a convent, nor did I invest in a chastity belt, so I can assure you that no matter what my wife or I teach, preach, lecture, or encourage as far as behavior goes, if my daughter decides to get pregnant, there won't be anything we can do to stop it.
 
Regardless of whether kids have had some formal "sex education" class in a school setting, teens know where babies come from, the activities needed to create the kid, and how to prevent that occurance. It's just that so many people that age think they are bullet-proof--"whatever bad that might occur from a particular pattern of conduct will happen to someone else, not me."

Those of you who are actually over the age of 17, think back to when you were that age. Was the fact that unprotected sex could lead to pregnancy a major mystery to any of you? Did you know what steps to take to prevent that disease--even if you didn't take the precautions.

In a place where 16 year old girls are supposed to be able to get abortions without parental consent, it seems rather bizarre that anyone would make a big deal out of the fact that a 17 year old is pregnant, apparently without the consent of her mother.

I did not put my 17 year old daughter into a convent, nor did I invest in a chastity belt, so I can assure you that no matter what my wife or I teach, preach, lecture, or encourage as far as behavior goes, if my daughter decides to get pregnant, there won't be anything we can do to stop it.

useless without pics Fresnobob, you know the rules ;)
 
I've been a single father for the majority of my daughter's life. When she turned 11, I knew she would be doing the 5th grade sex-ed talk.

As I am a caring and slightly over-protective parent, I explained to her...

'If you allow a boy to put his penis inside your body, it will spray deadly acid inside you, and it will kill you.' adding, 'This explains why some girls have so many pimples, they attempted something called 'oral' .'

'One last note of interest, if you try to do one or the other... and you survive, I will kill you.'

:)

New Jersey School of Sex-Ed over.
 
Not to change the topic... because it is boring the feckin' hell outta me.


Palin is preparing to speak, and the media is in a fever-pitch over Palin's personal and family transgretions. The Alaskan Indepence Group issue is not going away.


Looks like I was spot-on with the assessment of the various Christian groups that are creaming themselves over the appointment of Palin. The Exec. Dir. of Regent Uni. spoke about how it makes the ticket more appealing, on CNN. They, also, interviewed a Southern Baptist minister that had just returned from a So. Baptist convention, saying, 'We are very excited, by this nomination of Palin...'


This might be a bit slightly more off topic... It's been a while since the media caught a high level Republican solicitating a male prostitute or making moves on a young boy. That could only be the cherry on top of the abortion that is this year's RNC.

:lol:
 
Wrong.

It is about a teenage girl who SHOULD be allowed to go about her business, just as Al Gore's son was allowed to do so after he was caught and arrested for reckless driving before the 2000 election.

This would be just as traditionally happens with children of candidates. Palin's grandchild will not be born until the New Year. The campaign will have no impact on her grandchild.

This is now about the media deciding there are two rules - one rule for Democrats and one rule for Republicans - and that for the Republicans to have the temerity to actually have families who are not perfect makes them "selfish twats".

Remember, 27 year old Chelsea Clinton can publicly campaign for her mother, but when she is characterised in an unfavourable light on a news channel the host was suspended for a week and forced to apologise.

Now this 17 year old CHILD is involved in a personal issue, and suddenly it is worth all of this attention and derision and insulting behaviour from the media and critics.

That is what it is about. I hope this helps.

I hope they carry on, though. Every single time a surrogate of the Obama campaign or a media pro-Bama slams Palin for having a child who is pregnant, or on abstinence education, Obama has lost another little group of voters in that audience.

So much for "Hope" and "Change".

Instead it is nasty Chicago gutter politics using a 17 year old girl as a punching bag.

I tend to think America would be more interested in hearing about Obama's friend, former terrorist Pentagon Bomber Bill Ayres, via 3 front page stories on the New York Times than they would the fact that someone's teenage daughter is pregnant. But they're not being given that opportunity.



For me this is misdirection.

Is having sex before you marry a sin or not? Where in the bible does it say that this sin is less of a sin than say sleeping with a man if you are a man?

Why then does this behaviour demand understanding (which I think it does) when the other behaviour is demonised. (Which I think it shouldn't be)

This is the problem with basing your personal morality on a two thousand year old book.
 
Sorry, pervboys! :nono:
It's different for dads. Our only requirement is to be prepared to kill any male within a five mile radius.

:lol:

my daughter, thankfully, is too young for sex-ed but I'm not looking forward to those days. I'm expecting trouble down the line though.