The gall of the Democrats- Bull’s Eye Palin

[vetfromindy]

These are the depths to which the Democrats have fallen to. They can't
legitimately attack Governor Palin's character or record, so they resort
to a bunch of stupid jokes!

 

[mdjgirl7]

These are the depths to which the Democrats have fallen to. They can't
legitimately attack Governor Palin's character or record, so they resort
to a bunch of stupid jokes!

I totally agree. The other thing I found offensive was the scroll on the bottom text in your vote who won the debate. I thought OMG is this a popularity contest. The media turns it into a circus all for the sake of ratings shame shame on the media.

 

[rayboyusmc]

They can't
legitimately attack Governor Palin's character or record, so they resort
to a bunch of stupid jokes!

Her record yes, and even her character of vindicitiveness they can attactk, but jokes are you taling about?

 

[Truthmatters]

Maybe if she actually answered the questions asked instead of spouting her preprepaired answers to the questions they Thought Ifil would ask then I could have some respect for her.

Where exactly does the McCain campaign differ from Bush policies anyway?

 

[KittenKoder]

The media will always work for ratings, they don't care about facts unless it gets them ratings. From what I saw, all Palin kept doing was deflecting the questions or using scripted answers. Nothing more. At least Biden answered with some thought most of the time, even if he did sidetrack sometimes. Either way, still not voting either McCain or Obama.

 

[mdjgirl7]

The media will always work for ratings, they don't care about facts unless it gets them ratings. From what I saw, all Palin kept doing was deflecting the questions or using scripted answers. Nothing more. At least Biden answered with some thought most of the time, even if he did sidetrack sometimes. Either way, still not voting either McCain or Obama.

Yes I wonder how much thought Biden put into ALL the lies he told. But the masses like lies so he did well.

 

[KittenKoder]

*shrugs* Whether lies or not, campaign promises cannot be lies and those are the important ones. Even then, we never know what either will do until they are in office anyhow.

 

[pegwinn]

*shrugs* Whether lies or not, campaign promises cannot be lies and those are the important ones. Even then, we never know what either will do until they are in office anyhow.

I don't get the bolded part above. Seems to me that if he promises something and doesn't deliver then absent a full explanation of "why", it was a lie. Also, to state as a fact when you know you cannot deliver it is a lie. Maybe I am missing something.

Example: Obama says that he will only increase taxes above the 250K mark.

It's a lie because Obama knows that he personally cannot increase taxes, he can only approve or veto tax legislation.

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

I don't get the bolded part above. Seems to me that if he promises something and doesn't deliver then absent a full explanation of "why", it was a lie. Also, to state as a fact when you know you cannot deliver it is a lie. Maybe I am missing something.

Example: Obama says that he will only increase taxes above the 250K mark.

It's a lie because Obama knows that he personally cannot increase taxes, he can only approve or veto tax legislation.

Since the "buck will stop ~there~" and he will have to decide to approve or disapprove by a veto or not, then the responsibility will be on him, he will own it, and he will certainly garner the blame. By accepting the responsibility, he will own the deed.

Now, if, through participation in the legislative process he sends to some Congressperson or another, a bill that he wants passed, as was done -for example- with THE PATRIOT ACT, and it gets through congress in roughly its original form, and then he signs the bill into law, then he will, despite no longer be part of the Congress, in actual fact have "raised taxes" or done whatever it is.

If he vetoes a bill that would raise taxes for the under $250,000s then it would, by an override, be Congress, not him who does it.

So, no LIE.

 

[doeton]

I totally agree. The other thing I found offensive was the scroll on the bottom text in your vote who won the debate. I thought OMG is this a popularity contest. The media turns it into a circus all for the sake of ratings shame shame on the media.

yeah, try C-span.

 

[Diuretic]

*shrugs* Whether lies or not, campaign promises cannot be lies and those are the important ones. Even then, we never know what either will do until they are in office anyhow.

Our former PM, John Howard, an accomplished deceiver, when questioned about his propensity for breaking campaign promises, famously divided them into "core" promises and "non-core" promises.

 

[Alpha1]

Maybe if she actually answered the questions asked instead of spouting her preprepaired answers to the questions they Thought Ifil would ask then I could have some respect for her.

Where exactly does the McCain campaign differ from Bush policies anyway?

I'm sure hearing outright lies and deceptions by Biden was more to your liking...

 

[jillian]

I'm sure hearing outright lies and deceptions by Biden was more to your liking...

Palin wasn't exactly forthcoming either...

FactCheck.org: FactChecking Biden-Palin Debate

 

[pegwinn]

Since the "buck will stop ~there~" and he will have to decide to approve or disapprove by a veto or not, then the responsibility will be on him, he will own it, and he will certainly garner the blame. By accepting the responsibility, he will own the deed.

Now, if, through participation in the legislative process he sends to some Congressperson or another, a bill that he wants passed, as was done -for example- with THE PATRIOT ACT, and it gets through congress in roughly its original form, and then he signs the bill into law, then he will, despite no longer be part of the Congress, in actual fact have "raised taxes" or done whatever it is.

If he vetoes a bill that would raise taxes for the under $250,000s then it would, by an override, be Congress, not him who does it.

So, no LIE.

I prefer to assign blame or credit to the individual acts. This particular deception is being spread in one form or another by both factions. The premise is that "he" will be the one to do it. The deception is that most Americans, thanks to apathy, don't know that he alone cannot keep the promise.

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

The argument is about how the process works.

Also, you must consider, since this is dealing with lawyers, and lawyer mindset, intent or lack of intent are really important. Intent can both do or facilitate, or attempt to prevent. "Intent" is a major element of courtroom argument, whether criminal or civil, and a whole case may turn on that alone. Since the situation is about presenting arguments, a position, it really cannot be looked at from a strict yes/no POV. I cannot see intent to "lie" out of this.

Would you have felt more comfortable if he had said "I will not sign a bill that raises taxes, etc. on those making less than...

I suppose it is a matter of comfort zone. I am less comfortable with one who all about the "anything is fair in war and everything is a war" mentality. Basic lack of trust in all areas.

And, since I must see and hear for eight years, East Coast Irish and Chicago plus multicultural Hawaii is more appealing than the "Wallace" pained grin and listening to that too nasal entirely reminiscent of Edie McClurg accent. On Edie it is meant to be funny. On a VP it just sounds ignorant. I have had it with eight years of "nuke-you-lar" and presenting the country as Boobi Ignorami Americani. I want more, I expect more. I demand more.

The choice was either one way or the other, Ron Paul or ?????

Ron Paul was our chance to rest, regroup, and think. I see him as a real gentleman.

From a woman's point of view, since I cannot have the "gentleman" I can trust, I will choose "stuff and nest feathering" over a blatant abuser. Self interest. Comes down to that.

Between that and having lived around "military" so long, I know who is genuine and who isn't and I know a stinker when I see one.

 

[pegwinn]

Comfort is what it is. In my case, I want someone that speaks in sentences instead of soundbytes. I want my President to come out and say, "I will veto any bill with any earmarks in it until we get real tax reform". IOW I want him or her to talk about what they can do within the limits of thier authority. If they make a promise that they know they cannot keep due to the seperation of powers...... then it is an intentional lie.

 

[Jeepers]

These are the depths to which the Democrats have fallen to. They can't
legitimately attack Governor Palin's character or record, so they resort
to a bunch of stupid jokes!

The only joke here is her character and record...

 

[rachelluetle]

The money is gone, the health-care is soon to be gone, no social security, no homeland security, no guns to clutch(pawned it), and not a moral left standing, and i can't afford the gas to drive to my kids to school, and the food bank is empty... the only way out is to click my heels three time and say" there is no place like home, there is no place like home, there is no place like home", to bad I just lost my home, and my 401k, my stocks,my job, and my hope... thnx for nothing red shoes.........