Sarah Palin - Stupidest VP decision ever?

<p>
[quote]
YouTube - Damon Condemns Palin</p>

<p>check it out.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hahahahaha. "It's like a really bad Disney movie." I've never thought about it, but it does kind of fit.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Only the left would care what a spoiled Hollywood celebrity has to say. Why would anyone put stock in what ANY celebrity, athlete or any of the such say? I know they all live in the real world with the rest of us... At least look up to someone who runs a business or something...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Here's the thing. You shouldn't judge a person's opinions by who they are, but by the opinions themselves. Matt Damon raises several important points. It doesn't matter that he's a Hollywood star. But for the record, Matt Damon went to Harvard.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Possibly so. I'm not voting for Palin to be POTUS though so that doesn't overly concern me.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Of course. Everyone voting for McCain is blocking out the fact that Palin just might take over the presidency in 4 years. Scary, huh?</p>

<p>The only thing not funny about Sarah Palin to me is the significant chance that she could be running our country in the next 4 years.</p>

<p>
[quote]
"Palin just might take over the presidency in 4 years. Scary, huh?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Not as scary as if Obama took it over now. In four years when she would take over, she would have more experience than Barack Obama has now.</p>

<p>Oh, whoops, I misspoke. What I meant to say was, "Palin just might take over the presidency within the next 4 years", i.e., if McCain were to die in the next couple of years. </p>

<p>I think Palin would at least have a reasonable amount of experience after 4 years of being VP. In fact, I'll admit that she would have more experience than Obama has right now. But I'm not worried about Palin being president in 4 years; I'm worried about her being president right now if something were to happen to McCain.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I think Palin would at least have a reasonable amount of experience after 4 years of being VP.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>She has had 40+ years of experience to learn how not to be an idiot, and still hasn't passed the grade. Four years as vice president is not going to be a magic cure for that.</p>

<p>On yet another note of Republican hypocrisy, remember when they accused Obama of only talking about change and not offering actual solution? Guess what J-Mac is doing! He talks about change and change, and then some more about change, but when pressed, he can't come up with any concrete notions of what change is!</p>

<p>
[quote]
Everyone voting for McCain is blocking out the fact that Palin just might take over the presidency in 4 years. Scary, huh?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Better her after some VP experience than Obama now.</p>

<p>No one knows how long anyone will live. That's why VP candidates should have the knowledge and other abilities to take over the presidency at any time after the inauguration. This is true no matter how old the presidential candidate is.</p>

<p>And Presidential candidates should have those same traits and abilities at the inaguration...</p>

<p>
[quote]
No one knows how long anyone will live. That's why VP candidates should have the knowledge and other abilities to take over the presidency at any time after the inauguration. This is true no matter how old the presidential candidate is.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Great point. You Republicans have basically admitted that Palin needs at least four years as VP to become ready to be president. Therefore, she instantly fails the most important quality of a VP, which is the ability to step into the Oval Office as president on any given moment.</p>

<p>
[quote]
And Presidential candidates should have those same traits and abilities at the inaguration...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Obama IS ready. He has millions of votes in the Democratic primaries that says he is (unlike the autocratically-chosen Sarah Palin). And what Obama lacks in wrinkles and melanoma, he makes up for in right judgment.</p>

<p>So votes from a largely uninformed electorate make someone qualified? It may make them POTUS but it doesn't mean jack about their preparedness. Obama may be a good or great POTUS but there is nothing to suggest he is ready...any more than McCain, Biden or Palin.</p>

<p>Polls are talking now. This tends to sway the swayable. Millions of people may have spoken too soon.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Obama may be a good or great POTUS but there is nothing to suggest he is ready...any more than McCain, Biden or Palin.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You probably weren't saying that when Sarah Palin wasn't in the picture. You would've argued back in, say, July, that neither Obama nor McCain had any more experience than the other when it came to the presidency? Likely not.</p>

<p>Now you have to sacrifice John McCain's beloved experience just to make Palin palatable as a VP. Does it hurt your lips when you have to talk out of both sides of your mouth?</p>

<p>I never said experience equalled qualified. Eventually the personal attacks will get you banned and I'll be quite glad when it happens. You're putrid, seething hate isn't valued here.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I never said experience equalled qualified. Eventually the personal attacks will get you banned and I'll be quite glad when it happens.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>When have I personally attacked you? Just because your arguments don't hold up doesn't mean that I'm attacking your character.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Your ancestors were pimps and whores. And they practised their trade secretly, so there is no record of their illicit activities. Now prove me wrong. Otherwise, I can assume that what I said is true.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Such statements are beneath you. There were others (not directed at me btw...personally I don't care about personal attacks towards me, I always consider the source and dismiss them) but when I looked for them they had been cleaned up by the mods. You generally make well thought out, cogent points (I don't often agree with you but that's beside the point) and why you stoop to things like this is beyond me.</p>

<p>That wasn't a personal attack (and it wasn't even aimed at you; it could've been aimed at anyone to make the point). It's called rhetoric.</p>

<p>I would call it ridiculous rhetoric that does nothing to further the debate.</p>

<p>I actually never claimed that nba attacked me directly. Unfortunately the posts I referred to were removed before I could copy and past them over. One was where he flat out called another poster a "moron" for voicing an opinion that he disagreed with. That's pretty personal for this board.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Such statements are beneath you. There were others (not directed at me btw...personally I don't care about personal attacks towards me, I always consider the source and dismiss them) but when I looked for them they had been cleaned up by the mods. You generally make well thought out, cogent points (I don't often agree with you but that's beside the point) and why you stoop to things like this is beyond me.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I was trying to show the ridiculousness of the "It's true because you can't disprove it!" defense. If pmrlcomm wants to claim that creationism is a viable theory merely because we have no means to disprove it, then he has to stomach the possibility that his ancestors moonlighted as pimps and whores.</p>

<p>Lehman Bros in bankruptcy, Merril forced into selling to BoA, AIG needs cash. This is a severe crisis. Can you imagine if Sarah Palin were in charge during this chaos?! We need smart people in DC and we need them NOW! Its too serious to be made into a crass joke by McCain. I didnt think I could overestimate Bush but this is a new low. McCain is too old and Palin is too clueless and this is too serious.</p>