Topic: Republican National Convention

[nickclone]

I was kinda hoping that someone else would do this, not because I'm against it, but because I only watched parts of it. However, I'm going to make this topic based on what I saw and hopefully you all will do the same.

Sarah Palin: I saw her speech and found it very robotic, almost like she read it off a teleprompter. She might make it as an actress, but as the VP...I have to say no.

McCain: His speech with more of the same: repeating the same jokes, coping Jr....and then attacking Jr...and then calling himself a "Maverick".

So, what did you guys think?

[angrykeebler]

i rented National Treasure 2

[scottws]

I watched part of Palin's speech.  I thought it came off as sort of fiery, but it really didn't address anything.  But like was discussed in the Dem's thread, I guess that's not really the point of these speeches.

I hate politics and wish something would really change but it won't.  We'll continue to get the same lies, corruption, and inaction.

[gpw11]

McCain is too old and Palin is a liability.  McCain being old doesn't really mean much, but it will be held against him and it's becoming more and more of a visible problem.  I do like him, but I kind of think running may have been a mistake (although I do concede he's probably the best options for the Republicans).  It's really too bad Bush took him in the 2000 primaries.

I have noticed a couple things in the last couple days though:

-The Republicans have a much more well defined general platform than the Democrats. I personally wouldn't find it appealing, but it's not entirely a bad call on their part.  A lot of people talk about how the party got hijacked blah blah blah, but really, I think it was just a strategy to try to guarantee strong support from certain segments by supporting the issues that don't really have as statistical fail/success rate and as such can't be held against them by that segment in the next round. The bad thing for them is that doing so isolates a lot of voters, but I guess in the end a lot of the swing votes up for grabs are more based on localized and time based issues rather than issues such as abortion.  I know that if I was given the choice between one guy who is  opposed to abortion but has a solid foreign trade policy which would be beneficial to my industry on the table and a guy who is pro-choice but doesn't have a portfolio I agree with on the little issues, I'd take the first guy hands down because the chances of abortion being outlawed by the executive in the current political environment are slim to none.   I imagine most swing voters are probably the same...that's why they're swing voters.

-The Democrats on the other hand play the typical role of a major party - don't do anything to isolate or scare off any votes.  It's hard to gain support but easy to piss people off, so you're best off saying as little as possible and hoping the other guy fucks up.  This is generally how major parties roll and it's a pretty good strategy. The interesting thing is how only one party is doing it here so you have the Republicans kind of trying to lock down any stray sheep through (arguably) strong arm tactics, while you have the Democrats hooping and hollering about HOPE and CHANGE without actually saying anything about HOW or TO WHAT.  It's pretty obvious that Republicans are still going to vote Republican while Democrats and college students pumped to vote for the first time and not really catching on are going to vote Democrat but the rest is kind of up in the air.  If anything, I'd say Obama has a much better chance because he looks better on television and people who vote are dumb like that.

-I have a theory that whoever the internet loves loses. Especially Digg.  As such, McCain is totally going to win.  Or Obama might win if he does something and Digg starts hating him.  Who knows?

-American Auto is dead.  Get your money out now.  I envision bankruptcy protection within 5 years and then a possible total collapse in the next 10-15 unless the whole new European business model pans out a lot better than expected.   No, this doesn't really have an effect on anything but it probably matters a lot more to American than the actual election.

[Cobra951]

The whole country is headed that way if nothing is done to staunch the bleeding.  I doubt either party will.  I know the republicans won't.  I only think the democrats won't.  That makes them the better bet.

[Ghandi]

Fun fact: Palin's speech was written by Bush speechwriters.

I watched some of it, and wasn't really impressed. I actually used to like McCain a few years ago before he turned, but nowadays I tend to tune him out because a good deal of what he's saying is just a lie. *

As for Palin, I hate her so so so much. Maybe even more than Mitt Romney, who I just kind of feel bad for because he's such a fucking idiot. Did anyone here hear his speech? It was really funny, and not in a good way.

* This is not to say that Democrats don't lie. Please don't attack me. Thanks.

[scottws]

Jennie was getting all pissed at me.  All I kept saying is how she dresses nice for an Eskimo, and other sorts of anti-Alaskan-isms.

[angrykeebler]

yeah national treasure 2 was pretty lame too

[gpw11]

Was it really??  I have it on my ipod and was planning on watching it at work.

[nickclone]

Was it really??  I have it on my ipod and was planning on watching it at work.

Its no Indiana Jones, but its still a fun movie.

[gpw11]

On a bit of a side note here, there have been a lot of stories about Palin lately.  True, untrue, who cares?  The question I have comes from one claiming she was evil because  a.) she supports offshore drilling and b.) she supports nuclear power. 

Well, offshore drilling - fair enough, a lot of people don't like that.  What's the big deal with nuclear these days though?  I mean, apart from the downsides that have always been associated with it (could be dangerous, waste disposal, cost).  The exact quote  from the article is:

8. Sarah Palin loves oil and nuclear power.

Aside from her "drill here, drill there, drill everywhere" approach to our energy crisis, the only other things we know about Palin's energy policy, especially given her Bush-like love of avoiding the press, comes from her acceptance speech:

    Starting in January, in a McCain-Palin administration, we're going to lay more pipelines, build more nuclear plants, create jobs with clean coal and move forward on solar, wind, geothermal and other alternative sources.

Nuclear power plants. Interesting. As folks look for alternative fuel sources (and again, Palin loves oil first and foremost so her commitment to any alternative energy source is suspect at best), nuclear power is enjoying a return to vogue. But here's the problem: Even the U.S. government's own nuclear agency, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, thinks an atomic renaissance is a bad idea:

    Delivered by one of America's most notoriously docile agencies, the NRC's warning essentially says: that all cost estimates for new nuclear reactors -- and all licensing and construction schedules -- are completely up for grabs and have no reliable basis in fact. Thus any comparisons between future atomic reactors and renewable technologies are moot at best.

Not to mention /www.beyondnuclear.org/nuclearpower.html>all the other problems with nuclear energy, such as how to dispose of nuclear waste and the possibility of a catastrophic meltdown, to name a couple. Palin has no background with nuclear energy and shows no evidence of having looked into the science behind it or the dangers that come with it.

Also, it's time for Palin to drop another Bush-like tendency: Governor, the word is pronounced "new-clear."

Isn't the quote in the middle just referring to how nuclear isn't necessarily more cost effective than renewable energy sources?  Isn't still viable in areas without proper access to sufficient renewable energy sources? 

[Ghandi]

Both McCain and Obama support more nuclear energy (despite McCain's claims to the contrary during his acceptance speech). So I don't know what that article is trying to get at.

As for Palin, she is evil, but not for the reasons you mentioned. Mainly because she lied about her record - "I never supported the bridge to nowhere!". Actually, she did support it, until it became politically unpopular. And then she kept the funding for the bridge. There's also the scandal with the trooper, the fact that she doesn't believe in global warming (you live in Alaska, look out your fucking window!) and her repeated pandering to oil companies. Just to mention a few.

Oh, wait- we aren't supposed to question her record. I forgot. As Palin asked less than a year ago, "What is it exactly that the Vice President does?" Apparently they stand around and look pretty.

[gpw11]

Come on silly.  The vice president's vote is very important roughly once every thirty years. 

[Ghandi]

Whereas the opinion of the Vice President, as Cheney would agree, is important in nearly every decision made by the executive branch.

[Ghandi]

I need more opposition on here. Honestly....half the time I'm not even making solid points. COME ON PEOPLE.

[Quemaqua]

You believe in the political system, and thereby reveal yourself to be an idiot.

Is that obstinacy or opposition?  Or oppositional obstinacy?

[Ghandi]

To say that I believe in it is the same as saying that I believe in air: Of course I do; it exists.

What I assume that you mean (assumptions - ah, yes) is that I believe that the system will help me. Which is false. I don't. I just believe that it can operate much, much better than it has. Which, if you listen to either candidate, is apparently going to happen no matter who you vote for.

And actually, I was shaking my head the other day as I listened to Obama, because he kept talking about how he was going to inspire people. Give me a break. You can only inspire so much change. But at the same time, I still think that he is much, much, much smarter than McCain and far more intelligent in terms of critical decision making. He has already proven that.

[Quemaqua]

And yet that's completely irrelevant because the system is broken and what people claim to believe or not believe would have little bearing on what's going to happen in the future even if it were true, yet even less because of the fact that they're all lying scumbags.

 ... still opposition?

[Ghandi]

But at some point it does reach a climax - there is active opposition and people do take a stand. At what point does that happen? This nation is not immune to collapse. We will realize this eventually.

[Quemaqua]

Aw.  Our opposition has ended, for I fully agree.

[Ghandi]

But I had to break it down to the most basal level. I want to branch off! Let's argue specifics, dammit!

[Quemaqua]

I'm afraid you'll have to look elsewhere for specifics.  I can only make vague, general statements about how stupid I think things are.  I'm incapable of further elaboration due to extreme mental instability.

[scottws]

I'm with Que.  Why argue about the issues?  We all know that the things they are saying now have no bearing whatsoever on what will happen when they take office.

[Ghandi]

Yeah, Ignore everything I said last night. I had a little too much to drink.

[gpw11]

THE ISSUES PEOPLE!  LIPSTICK ON A PIG!!

(stolen from keith and the girl).