The teetering-on-the-edge-of-Faulkner VP Pool thread

[halplm]

did I say "all?" do you think I meant "all?"

[Primula Baggins]

I find it frightening that democrats have put politics and hatred of Bush above the safety of the country and its people.

Where did you except any Democrats, halplm?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

It's a pretty sweeping generalization. Perhaps more importantly, it is a mischaracterization of the point being made. It is possible to be genuinely concerned about limitations on civil rights without it being a sign of "putting politics and hatred of Bush above the safety of the country and its people."

[Primula Baggins]

Yes. Safety does not always trump freedom. What was it Franklin said? "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

[halplm]

terrorists are enemy combatants in this war, they do not have the same rights. Democrats in congress have politicised this out of hatred for bush in order to slow down or prevent success of Bush and the war on terror.

This is at the cost of the safety of the US, its allies, and its people.

the overly simplified statement in Palin's speach was addressing this concept. It was certainly the lowest point of the speech, as it didn't really make its point, and will be taken the way you all are because you completely misunderstand the position.

I don't expect to convince anyone.

[Primula Baggins]

Democrats in congress have politicised this out of hatred for bush in order to slow down or prevent success of Bush and the war on terror.

This is at the cost of the safety of the US, its allies, and its people.

So we should take them all out and shoot them?

Or is it remotely possible there's a principle involved here that you don't see?

(And, how has concern for a few prisoners' civil rights doomed the war on terror?)

[halplm]

Didn't say it doomed it, just made it harder, which was the point of Palin's statement.

it wasn't to erode civil liberties.

[sauronsfinger]

No Hal. The point of Palins remark was to indicate that Obama cares more about the rights of terrorists that are trying to kill us than he cares about the American people.

[Primula Baggins]

I don't deny that following the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions can inconvenience an investigation. But it doesn't make it impossible; the Nazis went to trial, and plenty of them were hanged for their crimes.

Which of our American principles should we be expected to abandon in the name of convenience—for the government?

[The Watcher]

terrorists are enemy combatants in this war, they do not have the same rights. Democrats in congress have politicised this out of hatred for bush in order to slow down or prevent success of Bush and the war on terror.

This is at the cost of the safety of the US, its allies, and its people.

the overly simplified statement in Palin's speach was addressing this concept. It was certainly the lowest point of the speech, as it didn't really make its point, and will be taken the way you all are because you completely misunderstand the position.

I don't expect to convince anyone.

And, your evidence for this is what, exactly? I rarely try and confront you hal, but that statement just blows me away.

Hatred for Bush? How about trampling the Bill of Rights, providing outright lies and misleading evidence to even get involved with Iraq, and then covering it all up? How about Bush secretly hating the fact that his father never took out Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War, even though the Senior Bush practically acknowledged the hornets nest that would be stirred up by such actions? How about innocent Americans getting treated like terrorists by being placed on "watch lists" and other such practices with no explanation or remedy from the federal government? This is progress against terrorists? Please, we are more in danger from our own government at this time than we are from abroad. Give the federal government just one ounce of leeway in anything and it will develop fivefold. Aren't you against government intrusion? Yet, you somehow support the current administrations as being "non-intrusive" and think that the McCain/Palin plan would be equally or less so?

[halplm]

I don't approve of a lot or even much of what bush and company did or wanted to do.

but I disapprove of everything that was done in inventing new rights and priviledges for captured terrorest, or even suspected terrorists for political purposes.

[yovargas]

It was certainly the lowest point of the speech, as it didn't really make its point, and will be taken the way you all are because you completely misunderstand the position.

No, I think I understand the position very well. There are many many many people who, since 9/11, have proven themselves to have little concern or interest in the concepts of civil liberties. Listen to some talk radio during a debate about this sort of thing and you'll hear scads of those people. There are plenty - plenty! - of people who are happy to hear the gov is throwing terrorists in jail and throwing away the key, evidence and due process be damned. And her remark was directly aimed at winning that ignorant-sack-of-&#*$ demographic (sorry, but I can't think of any other way to describe what I think of that mentality). And that mentality is far more dangerous and frightening to me than the terrorists we're supposed to be fighting. If she doesn't buy the rhetoric herself, she's at least guilty of pandering to this awful, ignorant mentality. Either way, I'll condemn her loudly and feel plenty justified in doing so.

[superwizard]

Well I definitely understood that phrase very differently from you hal. I absolutely do not see what democrats and others (I don't consider myself a democrat for one though I agree with many of their views) have argued for these past several years as simply a political tool to demonize Bush. I have personally watched with alarm every time a new law has come that has attempted to curtail liberties simply because it strikes fear into my heart.

Maybe its because I'm a young liberal living in that crazy liberal place that's called the Bay Area or maybe its because quite frankly I know that I'm going to be one of the first people that is going to get hit if things decline too far. Come on lets face it; I'm a young male arab american muslim here in the States. There are many people out there already who don't believe I belong here in the first place! I've actually had the horror of reading about someone arguing that arabs should be put into camps like the sort that the japanese were put in during world war 2! What does it matter if I'm actually a pacifist that loves diversity and argues for human rights? Really all that does is make the radical terrorists hate me as well! So that's why when I hear statements like the one Palin did I do not think of terrorists being denied their rights but instead I think of innocent civilians caught in the middle of this mess- wouldn't you want the US to keep its human rights if you were one of those innocents?

[Cenedril_Gildinaur]

Her actual record matters little. Her experience matters little. So they will go through all types of mental gymnastics to prove that she has more experience than Obama or a better record or any such stuff. They believe for one reason ... because they want to believe.

I don't know about that - their resumes do speak for themselves in ways not entirely anticipated. For instance there's this Weekly Standard article which compares the resumes of Palin and Obama.

For instance here's this analysis of Obama's resume.

WHAT STORY DOES Barack Obama's résumé tell? Obama became the head of the Harvard Law Review in 1990 and graduated Harvard Law magna cum laude in 1991. These accomplishments suggest great intelligence and strong interpersonal skills. They also suggest limitless potential.

So what did Obama choose to do with his limitless potential after leaving Harvard? Not much. His first two years out of law school, he began writing a book, commenced lecturing at the University of Chicago Law School and returned to his old vocation of community organizing. Obama's résumé would probably advertise the fact that he eschewed big money options to better serve humanity in these various capacities. Many members of the legal community would view these claims of selflessness with skepticism. Some cynical readers of his résumé would infer that he spent the time "trying to find himself," and perhaps think of the old Bill Cosby crack that after two years of searching, he should have been able to find not just himself but a couple of other people as well.

All readers of his résumé circa 1993 would ask what Obama accomplished at his serial vocations. And there the story gets grim. He didn't finish his book during the two years in question. He didn't pursue any scholarship at the University of Chicago, so his career there stalled at lecturer and never advanced to the professor level. And as is ever the case with something as nebulous as community organizing, pointing to tangible accomplishments would be impossible.

Thus begins a pattern of under-achievement, or more specifically non-achievement, that has followed Obama since law school. In later years, Obama practiced law for a few years and then he had enough of that. His 1995 book, Dreams From My Father showed much promise, yet Obama didn't further explore his skills in this area until over a decade later with the best forgotten campaign tome, The Audacity of Hope. Similarly, Obama was a part time state legislator of minimal accomplishments. When Obama went to the United States Senate, he impressed his colleagues with his potential. But he again never attempted to tap that potential, beginning a run for president shortly after his arrival in the World's Greatest Deliberative Body.

On the other hand here's an analysis of Palin's resume.

Unlike Obama, one wouldn't look at the early years in Sarah Palin's résumé and necessarily see unlimited potential. A 1987 graduate of the University of Idaho, Palin's greatest accomplishments from her youth would come in the "Miscellaneous Information" portion of the résumé. The fact that she had won a beauty contest would impress some people. Her sinking of a critical free throw on a broken ankle in her high school state championship would impress others. Still, there would be nothing in Palin's résumé from her younger years that would suggest potential like Obama's.

And yet throughout her adult life Palin, again unlike Obama, overachieved. In 1992, she got elected to the Wasilla, AK city council. In 1996 she became mayor. She was by all accounts a very successful mayor. Her résumé entry for her mayoral years would have all sorts of bullet points for tangible accomplishments like reducing city property taxes by 40 percent. Similarly, Palin's time as governor has been distinguished. Both would starkly contrast with the various stops in Obama's career where he occasionally held impressive titles but accomplished little.

Two things would leap out from Sarah Palin's résumé--a pattern of overachievement and a pattern of actually getting things done. Two things would also leap out from Barack Obama's résumé--an undeniable wealth of talent and an equally undeniable dearth of accomplishments.

I don't think it's a "secret handshake" that has impressed people.

[The Watcher]

superwizard -



Let us pray that we see an Obama/Biden win then, okay? I DO know your fears, and I am a several generation American with no "real need" to worry. But, I do, I do every day that I see my country heading down a path that I find repulsive and totally against what I thought it stood for.

There is NO excuse for what we have been forced to subject to in the name of "national security." All it did was give the government a thousand reasons to invade all of our privacy, and for what purpose?

Hmm, no one ever seems to be able to answer that one. "Oh, if you have nothing to hide, why should you be concerned?" Hmm, how about why are they doing it in the first place, since it is illegal? Since when did the whole concept of innocent until proven guilty get suspended over the rights of the state to assume the worst first? And, then, it seems that most of the time, they get it wrong...but, we will never know, since it is all now conducted behind closed doors.

[sauronsfinger]

No. Its the secret handshake that allows the True Believers to completely accept her and fall in love with her and then intentionally ignore her record and make excuses for it.

[ToshoftheWuffingas]

Thanks superwizard for picking up that part of the speech.
It reminded me of two statements made by Bush that crystallised my contempt for him. One was his promise shortly after the 2001 attacks to bring justice, 'Western-style' to the enemy; ie lynching. The other was when a journalist asked him about the Guantanamo prisoners and he called back to not worry about them for they were all bad people.
Now that last statement basically said, I am a ruler and I decide who is bad and should be imprisoned. I had always thought the Founding Fathers were trying to get away from that but perhaps thinking in America is different nowadays. His first statement approving the principle of vigilante murder was just astonishing for the ultimate representative of government and law.
Palin is not going to be any different if she truly believes this.

[sauronsfinger]

Interesting story on the use of music at the Republican convetion and on the campaign trail.

Republicans Lack Heart!
Posted Sep 5th 2008 8:00AM by TMZ Staff

Ann and Nancy Wilson are pissed at the Republican Party and have fired off a cease and desist letter to the McCain/Palin campaign.

Specifically, the Heart women are upset that the GOP has used their classic "Barracuda" as a theme song for Sarah Palin. TMZ obtained a statement from Heart's rep, who says "The Republican campaign did not ask for permission to use the song, nor would they have been granted that permission."

The statement goes on: "We have asked the Republican campaign publicly not to use our music. We hope our wishes will be honored."

We're told Ann was watching TV today and heard the song at the convention when Palin was touted.

UPDATE: Twenty minutes after we posted this story, the GOP ended the evening after McCain's speech with the song, "Barracuda."

Back in February of this year, Indiana native John Mellanacamp took much the same action with John McCain asking to top using two of his songs which were being used at McCain rallies.

[Primula Baggins]

Well, would you like to have to limit yourself to music by avowed Republicans?

Let's see, there's Ted Nugent . . . and . . . Ted Nugent. . . .

[sauronsfinger]

Primula- in the interest of fairness we would be lax if we forgot Pat Boone.