Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well I dont see Sarah Palin or John McCain wanting a stadium in which to speak!
I don't see them going before bands at a FREE rock concert in another country and speaking to them and saying they were there to see him which is a lie they were there for the free concert!
You set yourself up for this - Palin and McCain can't fill a stadium, they couldn't even fill the seats last night.
Obama wanted the general public to be able to attend his speech. What a jerk!!!
Hmmm, so the idea is McCain's counter attack wasn't about bringing in another woman--he counter attacked with another messiah figure.
LOL, I think you could be right... and now it'll be a campaign of "our messiah is newer than your messiah."
Anyway, I just wanted to say I watched the rnc last night. (C'mon, it was that or Gilligan--of course I watched the convention!) Whether she's the "new token woman" or the "new messiah" I thought Sarah Palin did a good job. Not a good enough job to suddenly bring 18 million Clinton supporters on board, IMO. But she did a good enough job to make her a strong candidate in 2012. And by then her messiah image will have worn off, too, and we will be able to see her as a real candidate.
Congratulations to her, and IMO it's nice to see both teams having homeruns this election year. It's keeps the ball game interesting, and that's what reminds people that they need to vote.
Then, in a single night, in a single speech from a relatively unknown person (at least outside GOP circles) we see the very exact same thing take place. Before you know it, the party faithful are flopping around in the aisles, talking in tongues, hands raised in praise and joyous rapture of the second coming of Reagan in pantyhose.
When the issue of experience is yet again raised, it falls upon deaf ears, as after all, she is attractive and can pronounce multi-syllable words and speaks in complete recognizable sentences and that is all that matters.
The speech was written by former White House speechwriter Matt Scully. Maybe he should have been the VP pick.
There *is* a personality cult rivalry going on. 'Twas ever thus.
Such politicking has gone on here in since our country's infancy.
However, despite how others might feel, I don't think our "saviors" are interchangeable.
The speech was written by former White House speechwriter Matt Scully. Maybe he should have been the VP pick.
Ummmm, yes, that would make sense if giving a speech was the only ability you needed for someone who will need to take over as POTUS at a moment's notice.
It'll be interesting to watch this. I hated the whole "messiah" phase with Obama. Oh man--I was relieved when we finally moved on to presenting him as a serious candidate. I've always seen him as a leader with strong policies and sound ideas, and the whole messiah thing was embarrassing. For me.
But, who knows--maybe I'm in the minority. Maybe a messiah is what the people want.
If that is the case, I think part of me would rather see Obama lose. I don't want to see him win as a messiah, I'd rather wait to see him rule when the people are ready for a real leader--because in my opinion that's what I see him being.
Of course, that's a big if. I don't think the American people are really looking for a messiah. By November, we will remember we need real leaders. I hope.
The voting public has turned their mind over to the government and the media.
The government has always been there. The media, however, is a new entity, garnering a lot of one-sided information, delivering the same with all their pretty boys and girls. One more reason I don't watch tv.
I agree with your statement, though. The "voting public" as a whole are lemmings, running here and there, taking information out of context and spouting their own understanding of it, or how that information relates to them. There are far too few folks in these United States who will search for the truth, if the truth can even be found on the Internet. Mind games, and I'm not referring to Lennon, either.
Then, in a single night, in a single speech from a relatively unknown person (at least outside GOP circles) we see the very exact same thing take place. Before you know it, the party faithful are flopping around in the aisles, talking in tongues, hands raised in praise and joyous rapture of the second coming of Reagan in pantyhose.
LOL, and nicely phrased! A+ for good writing skills.
The voting public has turned their mind over to the government and the media.
Quote:
Originally Posted by normie
It's keeps the ball game interesting, and that's what reminds people that they need to vote.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueWillowPlate
There *is* a personality cult rivalry going on. 'Twas ever thus.
Such politicking has gone on here in since our country's infancy.
However, despite how others might feel, I don't think our "saviors" are interchangeable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta Planter
The government has always been there. The media, however, is a new entity, garnering a lot of one-sided information, delivering the same with all their pretty boys and girls. One more reason I don't watch tv.
I agree with your statement, though. The "voting public" as a whole are lemmings, running here and there, taking information out of context and spouting their own understanding of it, or how that information relates to them. There are far too few folks in these United States who will search for the truth, if the truth can even be found on the Internet. Mind games, and I'm not referring to Lennon, either.
In a generalize reply to all of the above...
Partisan politics is nothing new, I think just about everyone can agree with that statement. In addition, I was recently reading some historical newspaper clippings from the turn of the 20th century and guess what, the media back then was every bit if not more biased, slanted and partisan.
While there are no doubt great differences between the candidates, the methods employed to reach their base by both sides are nearly identical. In addition, the people who make up each given political party share the same exact manner of thinking, even if their schtick is different.
As I mentioned in a previous thread about my inability to bring myself to vote for either candidate, not because I think that either one is better or worse but because I see them as the same. They are the same in the context that people have externalized their views on politics, always seeking some outside source as the cause of our problems or the solution to them.
I happen to think there are some fundamental issues that are internal and should give us pause to look in the mirror and see that each election cycle is going to bring some political savior to fix all that is broken. We appear trapped in a perpetual cycle of awaiting the arrival of this political savior while the house falls down around us. This is one of the things I found attractive about Ron Paul as he spoke about some of the ailing aspects of our government and economic process, that right or wrong, at least got mentioned.
Both McCain and Obama have enough flip flops to fill a football stadium, yet when they give their speeches, their respective bases will rise up in rapturous adulation that looks to me more like hero worship than anything else. Both political parties constituent base have this odd ability to overlook every negative aspect and only see those things they agree with. The problem with this is that when any given politician does wrong, acts immorally, or even illegally, half the population are willing to forgive and forget while the other half salivates over pointing out this out. During the course of this, life goes on, nothing changes and each party then awaits the coming of the next political savior (whatever party they may be) to save us from the last one. We end up in a never ending cycle.
Is it so hard to look at something and ask, is this right or wrong on its own merits and unto itself? I guess at my age, I should give up on any notions of idealism and just stick with moral relativism for the sake of being part of the herd.
There is no question that there is hipocrisy on both sides, but the problem is that we unfortunately only have a two party system in this country - which I REALLY wish would go away. The two party system means you either have to pick a side or stay out of it. I have been a long time Republican and was a avid supporter of McCain in the past, but I feel that he has sold his soul to the radical right to the point where I can't support him any longer - so I had to pick a side...
There is no question that there is hipocrisy on both sides, but the problem is that we unfortunately only have a two party system in this country - which I REALLY wish would go away....
I definitely agree. It's time for some strong third and fourth parties. I'd really like to see the Clintons start their own party. Now that would be a legacy for them. And I'd like to see Bob Barr do really well this year.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
