Comments Posted By Bald Ninja
Displaying 61 To 70 Of 77 Comments
CONSERVATIVE COLUMNIST ASKS PALIN TO WITHDRAW
Chuck (and others),
You asked in what way is Palin more qualified than Obama? She has actual executive/leadership experience. She's gone against corrupt politicians in her own party and made great strides in cleaning up politics in Alaska. These are all things Obama SAYS he has but Palin had DEMONSTRATED. I'll agree with you that it would be nice to have more thorough interactions between Palin and the media - but I also place equal if not more merit on a candidates past choices and their record. There are many reasons why someone (like Palin) would not do a stellar job at interviewing - but looking at what someone has actually done is a more precise and accurate way of seeing who they really are.
Do you want to know what her specific plans and views are relative to international and domestic affairs? That's a fair question to ask but - as Rick points out - she probably doesn't have the answers people are looking for. She's the governor of Alaska for crying out loud. She could probably speak much more eloquently and powerfully about the issues she's had to actually deal with as governor than "what should be done about Iran or Pakistan?". Obama only has an opinion about these matters (if you can even pin him down on what he actually thinks) because he has to as a presidential candidate and he's been 'running' for president for years. Palin was basically plucked out of thin air as a VP - I think it would be odd if she had all sorts of well formed opinions about what to do in order to bring about world peace and domestic bliss.
Comment Posted By Bald Ninja On 26.09.2008 @ 18:05
Surabaya,
So McCain should say, "Hey guys, I know were all trying to hash out some sort of agreement and all but I got this gig in Mississippi - what do ya say we take a short 8 hour break?". It would be selfish of McCain to expect all of the other Senators and Representatives to hold off while he leaves.
Comment Posted By Bald Ninja On 25.09.2008 @ 20:49
On the other hand not much may be going on for those 8 hours and he could slip away and return. I believe he's left that option open. I believe all he's said is that his priority is finding a resolution to the economic crisis.
Chuck,
Perhaps hot MILF is the only thing conservatives and liberals can agree upon in this election.
Comment Posted By Bald Ninja On 25.09.2008 @ 20:08
Birch,
I think the thing that most excites conservatives about John McCain is Barack Obama. Given the two candidates McCain is by far the lesser of two evils to a conservative.
For some actual selling points on McCain (as I see it):
1. He has about a good a record fighting corruption and trying to clean up Washington as anyone there does. I'm not a fan of McCain-Feingold but I believe McCain has a genuine interest in doing something to clean up Washington. Obama hasn't done much except talk about fighting corruption. Palin has done more than Obama in this regard.2. He is a man of principles. Some of them I don't agree with. Some of them I do agree with. Buy he is a known quantity and he shares more conservative values with me than Obama does.
3. I trust his judgement over that of Obama's. I think he has more relevant experience that will inform the decisions he makes. Of course in your post you accuse him of being rash. I don't know how he can be painted as more rash than Obama who seems to change his position on many issues from day to day.
Comment Posted By Bald Ninja On 25.09.2008 @ 20:06
funny man,
Comment Posted By Bald Ninja On 25.09.2008 @ 19:11
I agree that Palin is no Thatcher. Liberals make her out to be some sort of conservative Frankenstein monster - one part hick, one part retard, one part corrupt politician, one part fascist leader, etc - and too many conservatives are hailing her as 'the One' who's going to transform the Republican party and lead us to victory. I like her. Is she a boost to McCain's campaign? Yes. Is she perfect? No. Is she amazing? Probably not but only time will tell.
Also, I think there is a difference between being a cry-baby about how the media treats 'our side' and pointing out the hostile environment they create and in which conservatives must operate. Limiting her exposure to the media is one tactic to take in combating it and probably not a bad one given how hysterical the media are towards her. She's also not an amazing extemporaneous speaker (though arguably better than Obama) so any faults she shows in speaking will be magnified while Obama's will go mostly ignored (another reason why limiting her media exposure may be a good idea).
I'm a conservative and I'd like to see more serious media interactions with Palin - she hasn't done well (or horrible for that matter). But given how the media has treated her so far it makes sense that her exposure to them would limited by the McCain campaign. Obama hasn't received any negative press to speak of - while McCain and Palin have to deal with falsehoods about them being reported as news on a regular basis - and he (Obama) is also closed off to the press more than they would like. The media just seem to squawk more about McCain/Palin.
And I'll use a line often heard here in defense of Obama but I'll turn it around:
Comment Posted By Bald Ninja On 25.09.2008 @ 17:55
It doesn't matter what McCain does - you'd find fault with it anyway.
McCAIN'S SPAIN GAFFE: TOO PROUD TO SAY HE COULDN'T UNDERSTAND THE INTERVIEWER
I'm convinced. Now I'm going to vote for the guy who thinks there are 59 states.
Comment Posted By Bald Ninja On 18.09.2008 @ 20:39
OBAMA THROWS 'HOPE AND CHANGE' UNDER THE BUS
Chuck,
The subprime mortgage mess we find ourselves in is because of the regulatory policies of the Clinton administration that Bush was unable to get Congress to change.
I wonder how independent you really are with your obvious disdain for conservatives and our worldview. Maybe you have just as much disdain for liberals and that makes you independent?
As for the difference between pro-corporation and pro-freemarket: bailing out failed companies is 'pro-corporation', letting the incompetent die is pro-freemarket. I am also not a fan of corporate socialism as you aptly call it - but neither do I believe that intelligent regulation is the gold-standard we should be striving for. As long as government has a heavy hand in regulation it will always decay towards less intelligent regulation. There's too many idiots and socialists in government for it not to.
Comment Posted By Bald Ninja On 17.09.2008 @ 08:57
I don't believe that most of the voters Obama hoodwinked with his "I'm a new kind of politician" spiel will turn against him - or even become disillusioned - because they will not allow themselves to see him in this light or never have the opportunity to (the MSM hasn't spent as much time vetting Obama as it has smearing Palin the last 2 weeks).
Even the Obama supporters who post here can't even defend him - they just attack McCain. Which is fine - but it shows a complete lack of confidence in Obama.
And Chuck Tuscon - cries of 'the economy is in the crapper because it's not regulated heavily enough' won't resonate with conservatives. If these financial institutions were allowed to fail in a free market the problem regulation is meant to solve solves itself. So, either Bush is pro-corporation as you claim instead of being pro-free-market or perhaps Bush realizes it's politically expedient to use the government to put these short term patches on the economy...I think any Democrat would do the same.
Comment Posted By Bald Ninja On 15.09.2008 @ 14:26
OBAMA'S FULL COURT PRESS AGAINST FREE SPEECH
I listened to the show and the majority of Obama supporters who called in to complain (that were put on the air) were near hysterical and could not rebut any of Kurtz's claims - most didn't even try. Early on in the show, long before taking callers, they read the email the Obama campaign had sent out which included bullet-points to bring up. Guess what nearly every caller brought up as 'counter' arguments? Who are the sheeple here?
One of the very few 'thoughtful' Obama supporters called in and challenged Kurz with some arguments I've seen here by resident 'independents' and liberals - that all Kurz is really saying is that Obama is liberal and had an inconsequential, limited, and professional relationship with Ayers that ended years ago and that there really is no point to what Kurz was arguing.
I think that Kurz makes several good points. One is that Obama's association with Ayers and others points to someone who most likely has a far left political viewpoint and that Obama is deceiving people into thinking he is pragmatic and moderate and someone who wants to bring the world together.
Additionally Kurz pointed out how the Annenberg Foundation grants were distributed - to left-wing progressive groups over groups devoted to the fundamentals of education. The Annenberg's own internal audit, as well as a 3rd party audit both concluded that the Foundation failed to improve the Chicago education system one iota. For those of you keeping score Obama's only real leadership experience resulted in abject failure (though lots of his associates and other lefties got lots of money for their pet political projects).
This is not the Obama that's being sold to the public - someone who will be effective, cross party lines, post-racial, one who doesn't see things in terms of left or right or Democrat or Republican.
And now we know the disturbing lengths Obama will go to when the story of who he is gets challenged. First he releases a weak counter-ad but quickly follows it up with threats of civil and criminal legal action. This is the guy who might actually be in charge of the DoJ?
Comment Posted By Bald Ninja On 28.08.2008 @ 14:19
