McCain's Choice?

[LivingAlmostLarge]

What the hell is McCain thinking? Is he thinking Hillary voters would like him with his new partner Palin? Hell no.

Read this. Sarah Palin « Mudflats

She is pro-life, pro-drilling, no experience, homosexual hating conservative. I voted for hillary and HELL no would I ever for him now. Though I wasn't an obama supporter, I can't believe McCain would pick someone with less experience and younger than Obama???

[jIM_Ohio]

I cannot see myself voting for a democrat even though I am not too happy with the Repulican candidate.

I cannot bring myself to vote for someone which says he will raise taxes.

[sweeps]

Only a small minority of Americans would see their taxes raised under Obama's plan.

[jIM_Ohio]

Originally Posted by sweeps

Only a small minority of Americans would see their taxes raised under Obama's plan.

I have watched a few of his speeches- he has yet to present a detailed plan in a speech or debate which I have watched.

Therefore I believe he will raise my taxes until he is smart enough to be specific in his policy speeches.

[sweeps]

Then you haven't been looking very hard.
Tax plan face off: Obama vs. McCain

[LivingAlmostLarge]

Read my blog Jim the top 5% of American earners will be having taxes raised. And I'm betting the he'll repeal the bush tax cuts. Like I care. I didn't benefit crap from Bush.

Is $250k/year Rich? | LivingAlmostLarge

Bush's cuts were for the rich anyway.

[kork13]

I am inherently non-political. I try to largely ignore the political madness that surrounds us, and i'm pretty happy just living my life trusting that those we have (for better or worse) elected generally have our best interests in mind...

However, I'll also say that while I've never staunchly supported McCain, I have been hoping he'll win simply because I'm afraid of the Democrats and the policies they bring about. Particularly being in the military, I would much prefer a former military member as my commander in chief than someone who believes the military is misguided (Hillary Clinton). You might say I'm not republican.... simply.... anti-democratic.... hahaha

Now then... Having said that I've mostly been hoping for McCain, I'll admit that when I saw the announcement, I thought to myself "Well, there goes the presidency." I immediately thought that this might be considered insulting to many of Hillary Clinton's supporters, who McCain and Obama are both trying to court.

While Palin does have positives, she also has alot of negatives, which tend to move me toward questioning if McCain will be able to succeed. I don't think I want to lay out all of those pro's/con's about her here (remember my generally apathetic nature toward politics), but I think this race is about to get very interesting... I'm not without hope, but there is a distinct fear that Obama could win.....

[LivingAlmostLarge]

She just had a baby 4 months ago. I wonder when that will come up? How can she run for the nomination 24/7 and have a 4 month old child? The child also has down's syndrome.

[kork13]

Originally Posted by LivingAlmostLarge

She just had a baby 4 months ago. I wonder when that will come up? How can she run for the nomination 24/7 and have a 4 month old child? The child also has down's syndrome.

My best guess is that her husband is going to have to step in a great deal here.... I just hope that he can, with the help of the older children.

Raising an infant is tough... raising an infant with a developmental problem is tougher... raising an infant with a developmental problem AND raising 3 other children AND running for the presidency.... wow.... Some people are alot better than I think I could be.

[SnoopyCool]

I can think of another candidate with no experience.

[sweeps]

Originally Posted by kork13

Particularly being in the military, I would much prefer a former military member as my commander in chief than someone who believes the military is misguided (Hillary Clinton).

Not me. The reason the Constitution calls for a civilian to lead the military is the risk that a military leader's first reaction to a crisis may be military action, rather than diplomatic or other nonmilitary actions first.

The comment about Hillary thinking the military is misguided... can you elaborate on that?

[kork13]

Originally Posted by sweeps

Not me. The reason the Constitution calls for a civilian to lead the military is the risk that a military leader's first reaction to a crisis may be military action, rather than diplomatic or other nonmilitary actions first.

A very fair point. However, he's not currently in the military, and hasn't been for decades. He's not inside military circles influencing, or being influenced by, our top generals--politicians never are, regardless of their background. I simply make the point that I would prefer someone up top that has experience in the military, because such a person knows what faces the military and what it requires with a first-hand knowledge. This part is more directed at concerns for proper funding for both equipment and manning/personnel/family support.

As for crisis reactions, 98% of military leadership prefers diplomatic and non-military actions. It's ingrained into our training... Intelligence gathering, diplomacy talks, humanitarian aid (influences the people to support the US cause), psychological/informational warfare (e.g., leaflets...still work today), economic pressure... We use "DIME" to outline our 4 primary policies/"weapons" against a threat: Diplomacy, Information/Intelligence, Military action, Economy. Military leadership (note: McCain was an officer, he would have received similar training) stresses the non-military aspect more than anything---military action is our nation's last resort.

Originally Posted by sweeps

The comment about Hillary thinking the military is misguided... can you elaborate on that?

I recently spoke with someone whose close friend worked in the white house as a military aide under Pres. Clinton. (Third-hand source, i know, but he also wrote a book about his experiences... i haven't found it yet, but would be curious to do so...) He spent many elevator rides with her, around which experiences he partly focuses his book. Basically, in the "privacy" of the elevator, Mrs. Clinton would frequently berate (basically just speaking her thoughts) various people within and outside the white house. She also, seeing him in uniform, frequently made remarks that she considered our military actions at the time (Bosnia, Kuwait, others) a waste, misguided, military leaders were cracks, ... on and on. He called her a snake in the grass--as soon as the doors opened, she was her wonderfully-presented self... hopefully i'm explaining this decently.... then of course, there's also the fact that Pres. Clinton slashed the funding and manning of the military, from which we have been slowly recovering over the last decade or so. I understand that this is not her actions directly, but you must admit that the first lady (whoever she may be) frequently discusses matters with/influences the president.

In all, I simply never trusted her with adequate and responsible leadership of the military.

[cargirl86]

kork13, when you describe Hillary Clinton that way, I hope you know that pretty much ALL politicians are like that, from the local level all the way to the White House.

Those plans, IMO, mean diddly-squat. Our taxes are going to be raised, no matter who gets in the White House. I'd be surprised if they didn't. We have a massive debt. How are we going to pay it? You don't think Donald Trump's gonna dig America out of the hole after helping Ed McMahon, do you?

[LivingAlmostLarge]

I wouldn't want McCain as CIC. He's got a temper!

[bjl584]

Originally Posted by sweeps

Only a small minority of Americans would see their taxes raised under Obama's plan.

I seem to remember another Democrat by the name of Bill Clinton promising a middle class tax cut when he was running for office. Only to get elected and raise EVERYONES taxes. I see the same thing when I hear Obama speak. A targeted tax cut strategy basically means that you aren't going to get one.

As for Governor Palin; I don't have a problem with her. She would appear to be a true Conservative. She isn't even running for President and her experience is being questioned. Personally, I think that she has more experience than Obama. He was a community organizer in Chicago. I'm not sure what that even is. Then he made his way to State Senate where he voted "present" 137 times because he was affraid to take a stand one way or the other on any issue. Finally, he made his way to the Senate where he basically accomplished nothing in the short time that he was there. McCain isn't the strongest candidate, but at least we know what we'll be getting with him.

[sweeps]

Originally Posted by bjl584

I seem to remember another Democrat by the name of Bill Clinton promising a middle class tax cut when he was running for office. Only to get elected and raise EVERYONES taxes.

Who controlled Congress at that time?

[cptacek]

Originally Posted by LivingAlmostLarge

What the hell is McCain thinking? Is he thinking Hillary voters would like him with his new partner Palin?

I think it was a brilliant choice. McCain wasn't going after Hillary supporters...he was going after his base. Palin is a Conservative with a capital C. She is almost the definition of conservative. She has Republicans cheering again. She is getting people to compare her experience as govenor with the Democrats' #1 experience as "Senator" (I put that in quotes, because really, how many times has he even voted?) and people are finding him wanting.

How do you even compare their experience and think he has more? Really, how? Please tell me, cause I don't get it.

Originally Posted by LivingAlmostLarge

She just had a baby 4 months ago. I wonder when that will come up? How can she run for the nomination 24/7 and have a 4 month old child? The child also has down's syndrome.

I find this offensive, and lots of other voters do too. She will do this just like she has done every other thing in her life. Successfully, with grace, competence and lots of help from her family.

[genchan]

Let's be honest here. She is a Social Conservative with a capital C but far from a Fiscal Conservative - just look at all the earmarks she has requested and her Bridge to Nowhere (which she lies about her former and unqualified support for)

[LivingAlmostLarge]

A lot of women take time off more than 4 months for maternity leave. And a lot of fathers do too. They are on the road campaigning and what leaving their children to be raised by a nanny? From what I can tell, with a pregnant 17 year old they aren't doing a bang up job of parenting, both of them. Obviously other things have been more important to both of them that their "family values" which is preached by the republican party didn't stick at home.

I mean she talks about God's Plan, but won't answer honestly if she believes the Iraq war is a mission from God. Hmm....She avoids the question.

And she does lie about her earmarks. She hired a lobbyist when she was mayor.

[cptacek]

Originally Posted by genchan

Let's be honest here. She is a Social Conservative with a capital C but far from a Fiscal Conservative - just look at all the earmarks she has requested and her Bridge to Nowhere (which she lies about her former and unqualified support for)

I need some help here. I wrote a post a few months ago asking if, as a fiscal conservative, I should accept money from the federal government for programs that I don't think should exist and don't agree with, but qualify for:
Should you take the money?

The advice I got from you-all was to vote to effect changes I wanted but accept the money if I qualified for it. And no one seemed to think that was hypocritical. So, when she supported it, it was as a governor that was on the receiving end of the money. How is that different from my situation that I asked you guys about (except that it is a much larger sum)?