jackattack

All but the last two. Dang both Fred Thompson and Joe Lieberman really knocked it out of the park. I missed John Boehner though. I think Mike Pence is up tomorrow.

Nobody dies for a flag. When will we get this straight? People may die for the ideals of the country the flag represents. I know that's what your getting at, but please, just say it instead of "people have died for the/that flag". I don't know how burning a flag is somehow connected with "burning the people who have worked for the flag". Burn all the flags you want. I believe that burning a flag (if it's done in a peaceful protest of some nature) is very bluntly stating you're sick and tired of what that flag represents. Burning a flag is a cry for change. Both of my grandfathers fought in wars, and in no way do I feel like someone is disrespecting what they did by burning a flag. They are not disrespecting the past so much as they are concerned for the future. A flag is a flag. Don't get caught up in someone lighting some cloth on fire. Actually people have died for the actual flag itself. That's like having died for a paper bag. Not really. Have you ever seen the movie Glory? That wasn't an uncommon thing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Harvey_Carney Edit: Messed up on quoting.

No she wasn't. She's been a Republican since 1982. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080902/ap_ ... n_politics

That was a nice little smear you had going about her being in the AIp to bad it's not true. They vetted her and they knew what they were getting. edit: We have a clear plan and McCain is the one who supports opening up new sources of domestic energy. And I'm not so sure you want to bring up comments made by the vp choices because Biden flat out said Obama was not qualified to be President. Not even Romney said anything that bad about McCain.

Drilling in Anwr is good, the natural gas pipeline is good, getting the corrupt people out of the government is good. You might also want to try...

None of those things are good. And haven't you already copy pasted that? The energy policy of 2005 was the same one written by Cheney which gave tax breaks to oil companies, The Iraq war deescalation act would have made sure that the war was lost, being on committee's doesn't mean anything unless you do anything, and he hasn't had one major hearing on the subcommittee he chairs.

The Jefferson state kind of makes sense to me. People up past Chico just don't feel like Californians to me. It just feels like another state. I mean I've never been there but who has? It might as well be death valley. But if any state would secede it would be Vermont. I remember seeing some thing where like more than 12% of the population wanted to.

It was actual days in the senate. No, it wasn't actual days in the senate. He took office in January of '05. Still about Two and a half years. By the way, Obama made it to more votes than McCain, so playing that card is useless. No, you cannot loaf it once in office, especially if you plan on getting elected president. He did more in a short period of time than most. As a governor, you aren't just handed a state by the federal govt. and get told: "Run it." Obama is in charge of keeping over 12 million people happy. Palin is in charge of a mere 670,000. Senators work just as hard as governors, especially those who are running for president. Senators do not work as hard as governors. And I mean actual days where the senate was in session and he was there. He did not really do anything much in the senate aside from voting for Cheney's 2005 energy bill that had tax cuts for oil companies(which McCain voted against), propose the Iraq war deescalation act which would have insured that we lost in Iraq. Everyone like to say "ethics reform". Even Obama. At saddleback they asked him one thing he did against his party for the good of the country. His answer was the ethics bill that he worked on with John McCain in 05 or 06. In fact they worked together for less than a week and after McCain sent Obama this letter... Obama decided against working in a bipartisan effort and did what the democratic leaders wanted. Not to mention that democratic leaders supported that bill so it wasn't really against his party. And I think Obama was also one of the one who endorsed Lieberman in the primary and then turned right around and endorsed Lamont. Party has to come first right?

My mom works for United so one time they were flying some airplane that they had just redone through SFO. I flew on it just for the flight and may I say if you are ever going to Frankfurt(I think that's where it goes) be sure to take business class. It had a plasma screen for every seat. I had my own remote control to pick from a list of all kinds of movies, t.v. shows, games(mostly lame games like insaniquarium but it was awesome. :thumbup:

Why would I take it out? It's already been quoted. And Hillary was one of the democrats who endorsed Lamont in the Connecticut senate race. Obviously she's no fan of jews/neocons so I don't think picking him would have gotten McCain any democrat votes. Maybe a few people who voted for Gore. Lieberman's going to be a lame duck if the dems pick up even one or two seats. He'll probably get his committee taken away, despite the fact that he still caucuses with the democrats. His only chance is if McCain makes him secretary of state or head of homeland security.

I remember last time I went to six flags there was this one ride that shot people off hella fast and people would be talking with their heads not against the headrest. When it shot off their heads snapped against it and when they came by the second time I could see them rubbing their necks :lol:

No because the democrats don't take to kindly to jews these days.

I just hate the pictures. Anytime you are somewhere having a good time someone pulls out the camera and starts taking pictures. And they are all going to end up on myspace or facebook. That or when people take a picture of themselves in the mirror or something.

[hide=] Please, it was the biggest pander he could possibly make. Why would he pick her over Governor Huckabee who has a ton more experience than she does ("executive"), riles up the Conservative base, is MUCH more well known, and isn't a Washington Insider? Or what of Mitt Romney? He came in second place, is "good with the economy" (not like I believe that, but it would be his talking point), would secure Florida, make Michigan competitive, has Governor and CEO experience... Why did he pick her? Because she does what Huckabee does, plus has a chance at nabbing women voters because of her plumbing. He's also been twisting the experience line around too. Whenever people call her out on it, he says "experience doesn't make that much of a difference, I am confident in her judgment and ability." Whenever people call Obama out on it, it's "He is not experience enough to do this job!" It's a blatant hypocrisy and it was obviously a pander pick. A lot of women are pissed off to hell with it, too. Erm...so you say he's a politician, and then act like he's not...I don't get it. By the way, he did not flip-flop on Public Financing, or the war. Decriminalization on marijuana I will give you. Public financing he said he would pursue McCain about it and try and reach an agreement. He also said he would seek to change the ways that campaigns were funding. Technically, he just flipped Public Financing on its side because of how well he changed campaign financing. The war he has always said "We need to be as careful getting out as we were careless getting in." Over, and over, and over. I still concede that he's a politician, because um....he's a politician? Anyway, onto this "experience argument". I have said time and time again: Experience does not matter if the proper judgment is executed. That is what experience does: it molds character and develops the person with insight and knowledge to execute proper judgment. Now if you want to go onto the experience argument, let's go there. Obama's executive experience far exceeds anything Palin could even hope to dream of. Has anyone forgotten that he has been campaigning LONGER than Palin has been Governor? I mean, I don't know about you, but the term "managing a campaign" kind of has the hint that you need to know how to MANAGE your campaign. He faced the Clintons, quite possibly the best campaigners in the history of politics, one of which was a PREVIOUS President who no doubt had a lot of influence in how the campaign was managed, and yet...Obama beats them. I mean...give me a [bleep] break. Executive Experience... :lol: edit: Oh look what I found: http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Arc ... l=GooglePM [/hide] Just think about it. What woman who supported Hillary Clinton would like Sarah Palin? He would have gotten more women votes with Tom Ridge or Joe Lieberman. If women are pissed off about it why the hell would he have picked her to get women votes? What happened was probably his advisers flat out told him he could not pick Ridge or Lieberman and he hates Romney so he picked her. I probably would have preferred Romney, Lieberman or Ridge. He just liked Sarah Palin because she is kind of like him. A reformer who isn't afraid to go against the party. You're right about her experience though. And Obama did flip flop on public financing. When it was politically convenient he was a crusader for campaign finance reform and would aggressively pursue an agreement with his opponent to accept public financing. When he had the advantage he did the exact opposite. And I don't know what you mean by saying he changed campaign financing. And running a campaign isn't experience because you have other people do it for you. Why do you think they are both running negative ads? It's not in either of their characters. Cheney hasn't had many lapses in judgment. Maybe the Valerie Plame thing if he was actually involved in that. And if you want to bring up russia you were the one who said that is was a 3 am test that he failed. When he was the one who came out of the gate hard at russia and Obama came out with a weak statement basically saying "oh everybody should kiss and make up" And I'm pretty sure Sarkozy has said he is considering that too. Why was she in his church for 20 years?

Nobody dies for a flag. When will we get this straight? People may die for the ideals of the country the flag represents. I know that's what your getting at, but please, just say it instead of "people have died for the/that flag". I don't know how burning a flag is somehow connected with "burning the people who have worked for the flag". Burn all the flags you want. I believe that burning a flag (if it's done in a peaceful protest of some nature) is very bluntly stating you're sick and tired of what that flag represents. Burning a flag is a cry for change. Both of my grandfathers fought in wars, and in no way do I feel like someone is disrespecting what they did by burning a flag. They are not disrespecting the past so much as they are concerned for the future. A flag is a flag. Don't get caught up in someone lighting some cloth on fire. Actually people have died for the actual flag itself.

We got a bit off topic. That's not relevant anyway because it was her daughters idea to keep the baby and marry the guy.

I'm not a fan of jeans. I wear shorts mostly unless it's a very cold day.

I don't see where your going with that.

I think you have to be over 18 to get married.

You don't have the freedom to make your own choice if you are under 18. In this case it's irrelevant. And what is abortion if not murder? It might be legal but my definition of murder is ending the life of a human. If a baby is not human than what is it? I guess you might be on Obama's side of this where if a baby that is old enough to survive outside the mother somehow survives an abortion and is born alive they should let it die.

Wait so it's racist because if someone was black they wouldn't look any different and not because it said negro?

I cannot believe you just said that. Are you seriously suggesting that parents making decisions for a 17 year old, regardless of what they feel, is a good thing? Why not just keep them as slaves and marry them off for money and land like they did in the good ol' days? I see no difference. In the Land of the Free, that attitude should be unacceptable. In this case yes. Her mother actually didn't force her to keep the baby but if she had that would be fine by me. A 17 year old is still under the control of their parents and if their parents want to stop them from committing murder that's a pretty good decision. I don't see how stopping your child from getting an abortion is akin to slavery. That's a ridiculous comparison.

I guess it was over the top to say he would force her but he did say he was in favor of abortion because if his daughter got pregnant he wouldn't want her "punished with a baby" And how is Palin a hypocrite? She is pro-life and had a down syndrome baby and her daughter is having her baby instead of having it secretly killed. If she decided to have her down syndrome baby killed and still said she was pro life that would be hypocritical but she's didn't. edit: all this stuff coming from the daily kos and alan colmes that the baby isn't hers or that it's her fault that he has down syndrome it pretty similar to McCain's 2000 run when all the nutjob's said he had fathered an illegititmate black child when it was actually his adopted daughter from Bangladesh.

I think you're forgetting that as the Governor she had to work with the state legislature. Legislative experience is inferior because there is not really as much pressure. You're not really responsible for anything. You can skip votes, miss hearnings, or not introduce any legislation and unless it's an election year nobody will really care. Unless you are in a leadership position. As a governor you have to actually run the state. It was actual days in the senate.