Look, my friends, this is the new POLITICS THREAD

by **phdave** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 15:18:39

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f13Dj2HaRWg&feature=related[/youtube]

by **Woody** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 15:26:45

Pointing out Palin gaffes just feels like piling on at this point, but this is pretty important stuff that she should know by now:

Q: Brandon Garcia wants to know, “What does the Vice President do?”

PALIN: That’s something that Piper would ask me! … [T]hey’re in charge of the U.S. Senate so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom.

by **jerseyhoya** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 15:28:43

Patty Wetterling sucks too since she ran on the "Oooo, my child was kidnapped. Overlook the fact that I'm a flaming liberal and none of you agree with me on any issues whatsoever because my child was kidnapped" platform.

At least El Tinklenberg is sort of conservative and fits that district.

Plus, Wetterling ran one of the three most absurd ads of all of last cycle, about Bachmann and Mark Foley.

by **Woody** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 15:30:45

Do I get more or less political hate/junk mail because I'm registered independent? Apparently every Republican in my area is satan!!!!

by **dajafi** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 16:06:21

jerseyhoya wrote:Patty Wetterling sucks too since she ran on the "Oooo, my child was kidnapped. Overlook the fact that I'm a flaming liberal and none of you agree with me on any issues whatsoever because my child was kidnapped" platform.

At least El Tinklenberg is sort of conservative and fits that district.

Plus, Wetterling ran one of the three most absurd ads of all of last cycle, about Bachmann and Mark Foley.

Fair enough, but there's irrelevant-to-the-job personal horror/heroism (a point that could be made regarding McCain as well as Wetterling) and then there's just rabid-dog vicious...

That said, I think the challenger's biggest problem is that his name is Tinklenberg. The slogan on his yard sign should be "he's not a sissy!" Or maybe he should just go by "Mr. T."

by **philliesphhan** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 16:23:41

phdave wrote:[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f13Dj2HaRWg&feature=related[/youtube]

the reaction of that woman sitting to the left is awesome

by **jerseyhoya** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 16:35:09

philliesphhan wrote:the reaction of that woman sitting to the left is awesome

(Patty Wetterling)

by **pacino** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 18:06:34

Anybody else see that the RNC wants Obama to release a list of all donators who gave less then $200? Why...to make sure Frank the Terrorist isn't giving 10 bucks?

by **pacino** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 18:15:24

phdave wrote:
Woody wrote:Damn -- how do some of these people get elected in the first place? They seem to lack the most basic of common sense far too often

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJ4wtwcrybM&feature=related[/youtube]

was she giving her stump speech in a freaking church?!

by **phdave** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 18:29:49

Did McCain change his stance on stem cell reearch? Some people think he did based on his answers to the ScienceDebat2008 questionnaire:

There has been some evidence during the campaign that McCain;s position on embryonic stem cell research was softening. I was skeptical of drawing any conclusions having discussed it with McCain several times. But now the more optimistic prediction has come to pass.

We have Sen. Sam Brownback to thank for this, I am sure.

In response to a questionnaire submitted by ScienceDebat2008, the McCain campaign indicated a McCain administration would continue the present limitations on research instituted by President Bush and would seek to outlaw somatic cell transfer completely.

The scientists quoted in the article are not too happy with McCain's apparent shift on the issue.

My friend John Jakubczyk of Phoenix, who has known McCain a long time, had been bugging me about this all summer. I kept telling him, "No way, no way is McCain going to change on this." To which he replied, "But Sam [Brownback], I know, is talking to him."

I guess this is one case where I set my sights too low. . . . lesson learned.

Here is the statement on his campaign website:

Addressing the Moral Concerns of Advanced Technology

Stem cell research offers tremendous hope for those suffering from a variety of deadly diseases - hope for both cures and life-extending treatments. However, the compassion to relieve suffering and to cure deadly disease cannot erode moral and ethical principles.

For this reason, John McCain opposes the intentional creation of human embryos for research purposes. To that end, Senator McCain voted to ban the practice of "fetal farming," making it a federal crime for researchers to use cells or fetal tissue from an embryo created for research purposes. Furthermore, he voted to ban attempts to use or obtain human cells gestated in animals. Finally, John McCain strongly opposes human cloning and voted to ban the practice, and any related experimentation, under federal law.

As president, John McCain will strongly support funding for promising research programs, including amniotic fluid and adult stem cell research and other types of scientific study that do not involve the use of human embryos.

Where federal funds are used for stem cell research, Senator McCain believes clear lines should be drawn that reflect a refusal to sacrifice moral values and ethical principles for the sake of scientific progress, and that any such research should be subject to strict federal guidelines.

Here is what he said in the ScienceDebate2008 answer.

While I support federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, I believe clear lines should be drawn that reflect a refusal to sacrifice moral values and ethical principles for the sake of scientific progress. Moreover, I believe that recent scientific breakthroughs raise the hope that one day this debate will be rendered academic. I also support funding for other research programs, including amniotic fluid and adult stem cell research which hold much scientific promise and do not involve the use of embryos. I oppose the intentional creation of human embryos for research purposes and I voted to ban the practice of “fetal farming,” making it a federal crime for researchers to use cells or fetal tissue from an embryo created for research purposes.

I'm not sure if this counts as a change in his position or really what his position is. He says he supports embryonic stem cell research funding but only talks about the moral problems and then says nothing about supporting that on his website. It sounds like we have to guess what he would do if elected president.

by **phdave** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 18:42:50

pacino wrote:was she giving her stump speech in a freaking church?!

I guess. Hopefully she modified it somewhat for her audience. However, the guy at the end wasn't too impressed with the separation of church and state.

by **TenuredVulture** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 19:39:01

There are some wild results on 538.com. The one that strikes me (and it could be really, really noisy, and you certainly shouldn't draw any conclusions from it) is the large advantage Obama appears to have among early voters. People who have already voted are better than likely voters, they're definite voters. Also, remember, who counts as a likely voter is based on statistical models that may not be all that reliable in such a historical election.

So, I don't know if it means anything, but it seems to indicate that Obama enthusiasm is widespread.

by **VoxOrion** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 19:45:15

Speaking of enthusiasm, I noticed in school tonight that the Senator from Illinois is referred to as "Barack", not "Obama". Who refers to "John"? Who referred to "George"?

by **The Red Tornado** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 19:47:09

VoxOrion wrote:Speaking of enthusiasm, I noticed in school tonight that the Senator from Illinois is referred to as "Barack", not "Obama". Who refers to "John"? Who referred to "George"?

just a quirk, I hear W just as often as Bush.

by **VoxOrion** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 19:49:56

I don't think so - you have the hear the way they say it. It's... familiar, like they're on a first name basis with him. I'm not describing something creepy and I'm not making fun. I think "W" was popular to avoid confusion with his dad, and it's kind of funny.

by **The Red Tornado** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 19:51:46

gotcha Don

by **CalvinBall** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 20:01:17

Obama is a communist. I am not voting for him anymore!!

This stuff is getting out of control.

by **TenuredVulture** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 20:12:25

VoxOrion wrote:I don't think so - you have the hear the way they say it. It's... familiar, like they're on a first name basis with him. I'm not describing something creepy and I'm not making fun. I think "W" was popular to avoid confusion with his dad, and it's kind of funny.

We do it that way in church. We pray for George, our President, Mike, our governor.

by **dajafi** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 21:28:30

I don't think there's anything "wrong" with this, but it's interesting and, I'm guessing, unprecedented:

The RNC "appears to have spent more than $150,000 to clothe and accessorize vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and her family since her surprise pick by John McCain in late August," reports Politico.

The McCain campaign "declined to answer specific questions about the expenditures, including whether it was necessary to spend that much and whether it amounted to one early investment in Palin or if shopping for the vice presidential nominee was ongoing."

Said a spokeswoman: "The campaign does not comment on strategic decisions regarding how financial resources available to the campaign are spent."

by **drsmooth** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 21:41:31

phdave wrote:
Woody wrote:Damn -- how do some of these people get elected in the first place? They seem to lack the most basic of common sense far too often

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJ4wtwcrybM&feature=related[/youtube]

she's fool of something

she should have fasted slower - like 40 days

Archived

Look, my friends, this is the new POLITICS THREAD