Final election thoughts part 2

One thing to think about . . .

In spite of the huge push by ACORN, by musicians, by hollywood, by the press, and in spite of a very unpopular president, an ongoing unpopular war, and bad economy, McCain and Palin were close. Percentage wise, democrats did better than republicans and that was the difference.

I've read where some believe McCain lost with his pick of Palin. Of course, this comes from lefty bloggers who seem to understand little of how the right thinks and operates. Let's say John picks Leiberman, or Pawlenty. Do you really think he would have done as well as he did? Do you think Joe or Tim would have been drawing those crowds? Uh, no. Not even close.

Of course, for the left that just means we're all stupid, gun tottin' bible thumpers if we think Palin was a good choice for VP. I say it shows your ignorance and inability to get past the lemming talk of the left. Believe what the news tells you, little lemmings. Don't have independent thought!

One blogger wrote that the next republican candidate cannot win if he/she doesn't embrace climate change. Wow. That gets double retard points. First, as a collective, we question whether man creates the seasons. Second, as a collective, we recognize that even if there's the possibility of the chance that maybe man causes . . . seasons . . . that it's not up to the US, ALONE, to do something about it. Lastly, as a collective, even if there is the possibility . . . you get it . . . there's a smart way to go about emission reduction. It's not cap and trade. It's not carbon play money. It's not fluorescent light bulb mandates.

Besides, does anyone really believe in man made seasons anymore? It's been so thoroughly debunked, the models flawed, the consensus not, and new reports saying it ain't so, that I figured the only one carping about it anymore was Gore. Much to most people's amusement. The most accurate of readings . . . satellites from above and robot probes in the oceans, have completely obliterated model suggestions.

Believing in man made seasons, to me, is akin to believing in the embryonic stem cell research hype.

Uh oh.

Despite the promise of "change", an unpopular president, a war, a tanking economy, huge push for democratic turn out, and a biased media, McCain did pretty good.

I feel pretty good.

Sarah Palin vs Hillary Clinton 2012

Think of that, would ya!

Hillary will be 65 then. While 72 is obviously older, I wonder how many will think her too old to be president?

You know what? While the thought of it makes me verp, I hope Palin starts campaigning right away.

Palin vs Biden

Uma . . . Oprah.

Considering that expectations were low for Sarah, that she had had a bad week of interviews, and that Biden was considered Mr.Debatathon 8000, I thought Sarah did extremely well. So did Joe, actually. He didn't gaffe or go on, as was expected of him. In fact, I'll give him the foreign policy portion of the debate. He was much more versed on the issues than was Palin. Funny though that I disagree with some of his stances and what to do about its. McCain had the same mastery over Obama.

On virtually everything else, including poise and connection, I thought Sarah did real well. Of the two, she did the more forward talking while still getting some barbs in on Obama. Biden constantly railed on Bush to a point where I wonder if he knew George wasn't running. The point was, of course, to tie McCain to Bush . . . which some say he did.

Still, Sarah exhibited the same sort of "spunk" she did when first offered the job. She was refreshing. While I have to admit that Joe did very well, I thought Sarah did more "rising to the occasion" than did Joe. Thus I give the edge to her.

BTW, Gwen did an excellent job of moderating. Any fear she would show bias was completely unfounded.

Reasoning with lemmings

A few thoughts on the campaign.

First, it's interesting that the left continues to go after Palin's experience. Though, it has quieted some. Mostly as it's backfiring. More to the point, why are we comparing the left's PRESIDENTIAL candidate to the right's VICE PRESIDENTIAL candidate? They can't go head to head with McCain as he has 5 times (or so) the tenure Obama does.

Then there are all the lies. The baby, the pictures, the book banning, cutting funding, etc. The left is awfully quick to jump on claims with no fact checking. I'm often late on some of my opinions. This is why. Be it on the right or left, I find it a good idea to let a day or so pass while actual facts present themselves.

Recently, lefty bloggers have been on about specific issues during Palin's watch and how they're in direct opposition to her stance. Thus making her a liar. This makes me laugh. First, they all spin the truth. Obama's speech was no more truthful than was McCain's. But, that's not the point. Again, they all either stretch the truth or conveniently omit certain facts.

For example, Doyle used his veto powers to craft a budget more in line with what the republicans wanted some months ago. Does that mean he's turning tighty righty? Of course not. Could a lefty use that against him? Sure. Would it be fair? No. Well, yes in that any slam on Jim let-me-say-one-thing-then-turn-around-and-do-something-else would be fine with me.

You get the point.

Which is, we all allow "fudging" by our candidate. We can harp on about this or that and the other side simply won't care. Then the hypocrisy charges fly and blah blah blah blah blah.

Fact is, I like McCain/Palin. They are in line with my political leanings. McCain is not quite conservative enough, Palin a little too much so. There's a good balance for me. The other fact, Obama and Biden are liberals. There are a scant few things we're going to see eye to eye on.

For all the ragging about Palin's record, past, and experience, here's a news flash . . . VP's don't draft legislation. Oh, and the whole "heart beat away" thing . . . president's don't draft legislation. They can suggest, sign, and veto. That's about it.

Which isn't to say the president and vice president don't affect how the country is run. They do. But, whether you want to believe Palin was a "tax and spender" as Mayor or not, it in a way, doesn't make any difference. She signed on with some promises to help govern a particular way. That "way" is in line with conservative republicans. The past isn't meaningless. But I find it interesting that the left will harp on about her "record" then turn around and say she doesn't have the experience to be VP.

Wouldn't that mean she doesn't have much of a record to go on?

Gulliani & Palin

Holy moses! These two didn't just rip Obama a new a-hole . . . they enlarged it, wallpapered it, and peppered it with McCain/Palin buttons!

Wow!

Rudy is a good speaker. We all know that. And while he has his baggage, he still a guy who delivers a confident message. What many of us weren't so sure of, was Sarah's ability to deliver her message.

She did.

And some.

She was confident, funny, well spoken, and unafraid. She went after Obama right away. She answered her critics. She also showed her true maverick side. I loved the constant digs at Obama's "community organizer" cred. It reeeeealy made it look small, and goofy.

She and McCain truly represent change . . . bucking the washington machine, the washington country club politicians.

I thought she nailed it.

Sarah Palin's first week

What we "have" on Sarah thus far:

Troopergate (turns out it's legitimate)

Babygate (Lies)

Her pregnant daughter and abstinence (Smear tactic)

DUI her husband received 20 years ago (smear tactic)

Her association with Independent party 20 years ago (Non-issue)

Raised taxes as Mayor (Watching after her city at the time)

"Paper thin" resume (Not compared to Obama)

The vetting process (Reaching)

What am I missing?

Obama:

Jerimiah Wright (known associate)

The Weather Underground (known association with terrorist group)

Voting record on abortion (known)

Rezko dealing (known)

Ties with communist party when younger (known, perhaps not relevant)

Paper thin resume . . . for president. (debatable by some, but no actual executive experience).

Seriously. Which "dirt" is more substantive?

Sarah Palin's daughter vs Michelle Obama

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Obama himself get all huffy when the right and media went after Michelle?

What's changed?

Sarah Palin and Babygate

First, there were a few who questioned McCain's timing of the announcement of his VP. Clearly, they didn't realize it was going to be Sarah Palin. The news couldn't have taken the wind out of Nobama's sail any better. It was perfect.

As for babygate, I found this:

Risks Of Reporting Rumor As News About Sarah Palin's Baby Trig and Daughter Bristol

One would think this wouldn't be difficult to prove. What the assbags at the Kos don't realize is that they're actually going to make it easier for McCain.

Cheats, liars, and scumbags. Your far left libtard.