More media/political fuel

[xobehs]

Received by email today

"
Interesting . . . .

If you're a Democrat, and choose an outspoken long-time senator with extensive foreign relations experience as your running mate, you're "reckless."
A senior citizen Republican who doesn't fully vet -- but chooses a running mate solely because she's young, attractive and female -- is a "maverick."

If you grow up in Hawaii you're "exotic."
Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, you're the quintessential "American story."

Name you kid Barak, you're "unpatriotic."
Name your kid Track, you're "colorful."

If you spend 3 years as a community organizer growing your organization from
a staff of 1 to 13 and your budget from $70,000 to $400,000, become the
first black president of the Harvard Law Review, spend 12 years as a
Constitutional Law professor, spend nearly 8 more years as a State Senator
representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's
Health and Human Services committee, then spend nearly 4 years in the United
States Senate representing a state of nearly 13 million people, sponsor 131
bills, and serve on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and
Veteran's Affairs committees, you are woefully inexperienced.

If you spend 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with fewer than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with 650,000 people, then you have the most executive experience of anyone on either ticket, are the Commander in Chief of the Alaska military, and are qualified to handle foreign affairs because your state is closest to Russia.

If you are a Democratic male candidate who is popular with millions of people, you are an "arrogant celebrity." If you're a former beauty queen and news anchor and popular Republican female candidate, you are "energizing the base."

If you're 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton, the right-wing press calls you "First dog" and says you have a big nose.
If you're a 17-year-old pregnant unwed daughter of a Republican, the right-wing press calls you "beautiful" and "courageous."

If you are a married, Republican male senator who solicits gay sex in an airport bathroom, you get to return to your job in the Senate with full benefits and are encouraged to run for re-election.
If you're a Democrat who is no longer running for anything, and you have an affair with a woman, your political career is over -- and your wife who has terminal cancer is condemned because she supported your campaign.

After a hurricane, a white person taking food from a store is "fighting for survival."
A black person doing the same is "looting."

If you're a straight-A student from a low-income family, admitted to college through affirmative action, you enjoyed "preferential treatment."
If you're a wealthy C student with behavior problems, admitted to Harvard or Annapolis because your father and grandfather went there, you're part of a proud tradition.

If you're a Democratic war hero with purple hearts and shrapnel in your leg, it's fine for others to attack you with bold-faced lies about your military service, and it's hilarious when Republicans belittle you by wearing band-aids with purple hearts drawn on them.
If you're a Republican war hero, anyone who criticizes or questions you -- about anything you did, even long after your military service -- is "unpatriotic."

If you're a Democrat married to a wealthy ketchup heiress, you're "out of touch" and "French."
If you're a Republican married to a wealthy beer heiress, you're "All American."

If you're a younger male candidate who thinks for himself and makes his own decisions, you are "presumptuous."
If you are an older male candidate who makes last minute decisions you refuse to explain, you are a "shoot from the hip" maverick.

If you're a self-made man, raised in poverty by a single mom, later earned a Harvard law degree -- then used your education to serve your community rather than join a corporate law firm -- you are "an elitist-out of touch" with the real America.
If you are a legacy (dad and granddad were admirals) graduate of Annapolis with poor grades, wear $400 boots, and married to a woman who wore a $3,000 designer dress to your inauguration, you're a "salt-of-the-earth" American.

If you go to a south side Chicago church, your beliefs are "extremist."
If you threaten to fire librarians because they won't ban books you don't like, don't believe global warming is man made, fire someone because he refused to fire your sister's ex husband, kill animals you do not intend to eat, cruelly gun down wolves from an airplane, sue the Bush Administration for declaring polar bears endangered, you are "strongly principled."

If you're a Democratic woman running for president, and you're the wife of a former president, you are an opportunist who would be nowhere if it weren't for your famous husband.
If your heiress wife and her father introduced you into the right social and political circles, no one says you owe your success to your wife.

If you cheated on your first wife with an heiress nearly 20 years younger than you, abandoned your wife who was disfigured in a car accident, then married the heiress the next month (and later cheated on her), you're a Christian with strong family values.
If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years, raising two beautiful daughters, are proud to say you worship "an awesome God," plan to fund faith-based initiatives, and have attended a Christian church for 20 years, you're "risky," not a Christian, not "one of us."

[Sashahomeschoolmama]

that's quite a list

[Earthmama]

America, the land of the double standard.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Yep, but the email is really not being fair here:

If you spend 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with fewer than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with 650,000 people, then you have the most executive experience of anyone on either ticket, are the Commander in Chief of the Alaska military, and are qualified to handle foreign affairs because your state is closest to Russia.
She was also in the PTA, damn it.

[Sashahomeschoolmama]

Ironically, FoxNews (they who complain about the biased liberal media) are airing a 2 hour special called "Sarah Palin: American Woman" right now.

[Tweet]

Oh, puke. They'll be unbiased when they start airing specials that include other female political pioneers. I really fail to see anything special at all about Palin.

[sweetkisses]

Emails like that tend to irritate me; but I'm a little tempted to copy and paste it and send it out to everyone who keeps sending me Obama sucks, Obama has no experience, Republicans rule type emails.

[Babyhellfire]

Emails like that tend to irritate me; but I'm a little tempted to copy and paste it and send it out to everyone who keeps sending me Obama sucks, Obama has no experience, Republicans rule type emails.

I feel the same way

[Gigi]

Every. Single. One. of these people are politicians by trade.

It is their job to woo people into giving them lots of money (to spend on what - commercials about the other politicians?) and be charming and write checks with their mouths that their policies can't cash.

Every. Single. One. of these people have ideals that are held by both the majority and the minority of the citizens of this country. Where one is strong, the other is weak...it doesn't matter about what.

These people will not change the world. They will not bring Peace on Earth. They will not be our Savior, our Tax Reform, our Social Healer.

They will sit in an office that is bigger than some of our homes, in a House that most certainly is bigger than some of our homes and pass and veto laws and initiatives set before them by another group of politicians that have their own ideals and agendas and policies and promises to fulfill.

At the end of the day, the name on the door isn't going to change a thing.

Tearing them down isn't going to change anyone's opinion of them, either.

[JudyJudyJudy]

These people will not change the world. They will not bring Peace on Earth.
Unfortunately, George W. Bush and his crew did change the world, but they certainly didn't bring peace to the earth while doing so.

[Indigo]

Yep, but the email is really not being fair here:


She was also in the PTA, damn it.

I know and when McCain claimed that making all the difference and her level of experience as far superior because of it, dh and I sat there with our mouths hanging open, "did he just say PTA?" "Yes." " Huh, this is scary."

[Gigi]

Unfortunately, George W. Bush and his crew did change the world, but they certainly didn't bring peace to the earth while doing so.


You assume the outcome would've been different had, say...Gore, been in office?

September 11th still would've happened...Americans would still have cried out for vengeance.

[Indigo]

Every. Single. One. of these people are politicians by trade.

It is their job to woo people into giving them lots of money (to spend on what - commercials about the other politicians?) and be charming and write checks with their mouths that their policies can't cash.

Every. Single. One. of these people have ideals that are held by both the majority and the minority of the citizens of this country. Where one is strong, the other is weak...it doesn't matter about what.

These people will not change the world. They will not bring Peace on Earth. They will not be our Savior, our Tax Reform, our Social Healer.

They will sit in an office that is bigger than some of our homes, in a House that most certainly is bigger than some of our homes and pass and veto laws and initiatives set before them by another group of politicians that have their own ideals and agendas and policies and promises to fulfill.

At the end of the day, the name on the door isn't going to change a thing.

Tearing them down isn't going to change anyone's opinion of them, either.

There is a lot at stake here, the world has been changed over the last 8 years and not for the better. We are in real trouble and it absolutely matters who is sitting there if you think otherwise, you are damn wrong.

They can appoint justices to the supreme court, push through or stop legislation that affects all aspects of our lives. Make and break political allies and connections. We are in such trouble from attitudes like this that I am terrified about this election.

Of course no candidate is perfect, and they all have things I don't care for, but it will make every difference which team wins this time.

[Wolverine]

Ironically, FoxNews (they who complain about the biased liberal media) are airing a 2 hour special called "Sarah Palin: American Woman" right now.

I watched OReilly interview Obama earlier tonight on Fox. It might have been intersting if OReilly didn't cannstatly talk over Obama. I don't know why I even bothered. Blech.

[JudyJudyJudy]

You assume the outcome would've been different had, say...Gore, been in office?

September 11th still would've happened...Americans would still have cried out for vengeance.
"Vengeance" against whom? Iraq? There was no reason for us to go into Iraq, and, no, Gore wouldn't have gone into Iraq. Also, not all Americans believe in vengeance.

[hidesome]

Unfortunately, George W. Bush and his crew did change the world, but they certainly didn't bring peace to the earth while doing so.

I'm curious. How did "they" change the world?

[JudyJudyJudy]

I'm curious. How did "they" change the world?
The ways are many, but to give just a few examples, by attacking Iraq, they caused an increase in animosity toward the US government and toward the American people as well. In a survey done in 21 countries, the large majority said that they felt negative for world security after Bush's reelection. Also, an American intelligence report said that the campaign in Iraq had actually increased the terrorism threat. This threat isn't just to America.

[Gigi]

"Vengeance" against whom? Iraq? There was no reason for us to go into Iraq, and, no, Gore wouldn't have gone into Iraq. Also, not all Americans believe in vengeance.


No, vengence against the people who attacked us.

I do not agree with the decision to go into Iraq before our business with Bin Laden was finished.

You can't prove Gore wouldn't have done the same thing (in Iraq) any more than I can prove that 9/11 would not have happened if he (or Kerry...got my election years mixed up!) had been in office at the time.

[xobehs]

You assume the outcome would've been different had, say...Gore, been in office?

September 11th still would've happened...Americans would still have cried out for vengeance.
I am not trying to be snarky...
Are you agreeing, and deflecting or disagreeing and deflecting? This is always the argument that comes back after this statement is made, not just here, but I hear it everywhere.

[xobehs]

You can't prove Gore wouldn't have done the same thing (in Iraq) any more than I can prove that 9/11 would not have happened if he (or Kerry...got my election years mixed up!) had been in office at the time.

IMHO you CAN prove that it wouldn't have been done by a different administration, hell even a different repub administration.
Ron Suskind is a very enlightening read.
Heck, W's old man didn't even agree with the invasion.

[xobehs]

The ways are many, but to give just a few examples, by attacking Iraq, they caused an increase in animosity toward the US government and toward the American people as well. In a survey done in 21 countries, the large majority said that they felt negative for world security after Bush's reelection. Also, an American intelligence report said that the campaign in Iraq had actually increased the terrorism threat. This threat isn't just to America.
THis administration seriously altered how the CIA functions and IMHO that had a massive change on the world, not just our nation.

[xobehs]

They will sit in an office that is bigger than some of our homes, in a House that most certainly is bigger than some of our homes and pass and veto laws and initiatives set before them by another group of politicians that have their own ideals and agendas and policies and promises to fulfill.
.

Hey, if McCain is elected he will have so many homes to choose from he will get confused.

[Sashahomeschoolmama]

You assume the outcome would've been different had, say...Gore, been in office?

September 11th still would've happened...Americans would still have cried out for vengeance.

While Bill Clinton ignored plenty of signs leading up to 9/11, Bush did too. Frankly, we don't know *what* would have happened if another leader had been in office.

And America crying out for vengeance has absolutely nothing to do with Iraq. I don't think anyone can claim that charade anymore.

[Gigi]

xobehs, I'm not sure which of those I was doing, LOL!

My point was that a lot of things beyond anyone's control happen. 9/11 didn't happen because Bush was president.

Americans (or most Americans, I should say) were out for blood after that happened on our soil. We wanted the ones responsible to pay with their lives for the ones they took. Eye for an eye and all that jazz...human gut reaction to injustice.

I said in a later post that I don't think Iraq has anything to do with 9/11. I have always said that Iraq was a "family matter." By that I mean Bush II making up for what Bush I didn't finish. But even then, the Generals were the ones who called the dogs off of Sadam in 1991, not Bush I, so that isn't really a valid argument.

Bah....I've ceased to make any sense, so I will shut up! LOL


ETA: The Generals comment came from a friend whose husband was a Marine in Desert Storm...I have no other info or facts to back that up. He (the Marine) said that they (whether he was actually part of "they" or not, I do not know) had Sadam in their rifle sights and they were told to hold fire.

[MissionaryMomma]

One thing is for sure, Democrats would NEVER think of putting a spin on things.

Democrats give emails like these a big, hearty amen, while Republicans give other ones a big amen. It just depends on what camp your in as to who gets the amen.

[xobehs]

x

My point was that a lot of things beyond anyone's control happen. 9/11 didn't happen because Bush was president.

Americans (or most Americans, I should say) were out for blood after that happened on our soil. We wanted the ones responsible to pay with their lives for the ones they took. Eye for an eye and all that jazz...human gut reaction to injustice.

Maybe we wanted an eye for an eye, but were LIED to about whose EYE we were going for, remember that?

It is so easy to say so and so would have... wouldn't have... but so and so wasn't president. Bush was and still is. It is Bush's war, not Gore's non-war.
This is not aimed at you, I am just tired with the response to that question being a deflection to the only man ever elected president of the USA who didn't serve.

[xobehs]

One thing is for sure, Democrats would NEVER think of putting a spin on things.
.
More deflection. As if to say, it doesn't matter bc they do it too.

[KaraJ]

I really fail to see anything special at all about Palin.
I do! I'm thrilled to finally get a female out there that mirrors my standards. At least on the major issues.

[Gigi]

Maybe we wanted an eye for an eye, but were LIED to about whose EYE we were going for, remember that?

It is so easy to say so and so would have... wouldn't have... but so and so wasn't president. Bush was and still is. It is Bush's war, not Gore's non-war.
This is not aimed at you, I am just tired with the response to that question being a deflection to the only man ever elected president of the USA who didn't serve.


No, we weren't lied to about whose eye we were going for after 9/11. We all knew it was Al-Quieda (sp?). We all knew we were attacking them in Afganistan (sp again...no spell check here at work).

I'm not talking about Iraq when I say we wanted vengeance and we didn't go into Iraq because of 9/11.

The reason we were told we were invading Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Those ribbons weren't tied on until after it was revealed that there was misinformation (lies, as it were) about WMDs. The presence of WMDs and the reluctance of Sadam to remove them were the reason given for Iraq.

[xobehs]

The reason we were told we were invading Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Those ribbons weren't tied on until after it was revealed that there was misinformation (lies, as it were) about WMDs. The presence of WMDs and the reluctance of Sadam to remove them were the reason given for Iraq.

The documentation of WMD and their presence in Iraq were fabricated, and the CIA and our VP was in on it. Disgraceful. We were led to believe that Iraq was a training ground for Alqaeda as well. Iraq was presented to US as a threat to US. Now it is a spreading democracy mission.

[MissionaryMomma]

More deflection. As if to say, it doesn't matter bc they do it too.


The OP was very one-sided. Post the other side as well, and then we'll talk.

[Sashahomeschoolmama]

It is interesting that, in order to keep Bush from being accountable for his actions, we hold Gore responsible for what might have been.

[Gigi]

It is interesting that, in order to keep Bush from being accountable for his actions, we hold Gore responsible for what might have been.


Good Heavens, no. That's not what I said at all.

I said that it still would have happened, regardless of who was president at the time!

[Gigi]

The documentation of WMD and their presence in Iraq were fabricated, and the CIA and our VP was in on it. Disgraceful. We were led to believe that Iraq was a training ground for Alqaeda as well. Iraq was presented to US as a threat to US. Now it is a spreading democracy mission.


Not disagreeing.

But we invaded Afghanistan in October of 2001.

Iraq wasn't invaded until May of 2003.

[JudyJudyJudy]

IMHO you CAN prove that it wouldn't have been done by a different administration, hell even a different repub administration.
Ron Suskind is a very enlightening read.
Heck, W's old man didn't even agree with the invasion.
Exactly.

[JudyJudyJudy]

I do! I'm thrilled to finally get a female out there that mirrors my standards. At least on the major issues.
I suspect she mirrors your experience as well.

[JudyJudyJudy]

The documentation of WMD and their presence in Iraq were fabricated, and the CIA and our VP was in on it. Disgraceful. We were led to believe that Iraq was a training ground for Alqaeda as well. Iraq was presented to US as a threat to US. Now it is a spreading democracy mission.
Also, Bush continued to make statements that tied Iraq to 9/11. I know people who still believe it.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Good Heavens, no. That's not what I said at all.

I said that it still would have happened, regardless of who was president at the time!
Truly, we don't know that it would have happened. There is some legitimate speculation that Bush knew about 9/11 and could have stopped it in much the same way as FDR could have stopped the bombing of Pearl Harbor.

[newbie]

Good Heavens, no. That's not what I said at all.

I said that it still would have happened, regardless of who was president at the time!


You do not know that for a fact, you can assume that, but you do not KNOW that.

[xobehs]

You do not know that for a fact, you can assume that, but you do not KNOW that.

It's a commonly used deflection when the issue is brought up. I hear it all.the.time

[cream_city]

I think that, as others have said, with Gore as president things would have gone very differently. I don't know that, obviously, but I also think it's possible 9/11 itself might not have happened.

Let alone Iraq.