BuffettNews.com

ejr wrote:

ph4ever wrote:

ejr wrote:

Frank4 wrote:On Sunday, breaking with a 150 year tradition of never endorsing a Democratic Candidate for President. The Chicago Tribune endorsed Barack Obama for President.

And for those that think this is because Obama is from Illinois, the Tribune never endorsed Adlai Stevenson when he was the Democratic nominee for President.

No offense to anyone from Chicago - but the endorsement of the Chicago Tribune really does not impress me thanks to Howard Witt and his attempts to stir up racial problems in the south by making some issues much more than what they really are.

Totally unrelated to anything the paper's editorial board might do.

true - however the same upper management that condones his writing also condones the editorial staff. Because of him I'm not impressed with the Tribune. It's a personal decision.

jackiesic wrote:Well, this should make everyone feel much more secure

ABC News’ Matthew Jaffe Reports: Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., on Sunday guaranteed that if elected, Sen. Barack Obama., D-Ill., will be tested by an international crisis within his first six months in power and he will need supporters to stand by him as he makes tough, and possibly unpopular, decisions.

“Mark my words,” the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. “It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We’re about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”

No kidding. Sounds like Joe may finally have developed some foreign policy expertise.

There's a reason all the bad guys in the world (Al Qaeda, Chavez, Putin, etc.) want Obama to win the election. As soon as he's in, we'd better all watch out...

Lightning Bolt wrote:

green1 wrote:

lati2d wrote:That would require that Palin actually hold a Press Conference. She has been the Republican nominee for V.P. of the United States of America for 7 WEEKS - AND she STILL has not held a press conference !

What are you trying to hide, John McCain? Are you afraid that the American public will actually get to hear first hand that she is totally unqualified for the position of V.P.?

I didn't realize that public speaking was the only necessary qualification of a VP candidate. And here I thought executive experience should count for something. You know, balancing a budget, taking on corrupt businesses and incumbents, military experience, she was after all commander in chief of the Alaska National Guard.

Maybe I am missing something, but how exactly does the Democratic VP candidate have any experience similar to Palin's?

well, there's Russia for one...

oh wait, Joe Biden has ACTUALLY made official U.S. visits to Russia, Georgia, and other former Soviet bloc satellite countries.

Sarah Palin is the one who has a good view of a Russian iceberg from her place.

no....you're right.
Joe Biden does not have that kind experience that Sarah Palin does.

..and just think, in a few weeks, she'll be able to quietly enjoy that view again! YAY!!

You know I think that Obama will probably win, but I wouldn't be so c*ocky about it. I do not think its a lock that Obama wins, and I hope he doesn't.

diverg wrote:

Lightning Bolt wrote:

green1 wrote:

lati2d wrote:That would require that Palin actually hold a Press Conference. She has been the Republican nominee for V.P. of the United States of America for 7 WEEKS - AND she STILL has not held a press conference !

What are you trying to hide, John McCain? Are you afraid that the American public will actually get to hear first hand that she is totally unqualified for the position of V.P.?

I didn't realize that public speaking was the only necessary qualification of a VP candidate. And here I thought executive experience should count for something. You know, balancing a budget, taking on corrupt businesses and incumbents, military experience, she was after all commander in chief of the Alaska National Guard.

Maybe I am missing something, but how exactly does the Democratic VP candidate have any experience similar to Palin's?

well, there's Russia for one...

oh wait, Joe Biden has ACTUALLY made official U.S. visits to Russia, Georgia, and other former Soviet bloc satellite countries.

Sarah Palin is the one who has a good view of a Russian iceberg from her place.

no....you're right.
Joe Biden does not have that kind experience that Sarah Palin does.

..and just think, in a few weeks, she'll be able to quietly enjoy that view again! YAY!!

You know I think that Obama will probably win, but I wouldn't be so c*ocky about it. I do not think its a lock that Obama wins, and I hope he doesn't.

I think Obama is going to win, it will be a lot closer then most think it will. John McCain will make it interesting, for no other reason then he is a fighter.

ph4ever wrote:

ejr wrote:

ph4ever wrote:

ejr wrote:

Frank4 wrote:On Sunday, breaking with a 150 year tradition of never endorsing a Democratic Candidate for President. The Chicago Tribune endorsed Barack Obama for President.

And for those that think this is because Obama is from Illinois, the Tribune never endorsed Adlai Stevenson when he was the Democratic nominee for President.

No offense to anyone from Chicago - but the endorsement of the Chicago Tribune really does not impress me thanks to Howard Witt and his attempts to stir up racial problems in the south by making some issues much more than what they really are.

Totally unrelated to anything the paper's editorial board might do.

true - however the same upper management that condones his writing also condones the editorial staff. Because of him I'm not impressed with the Tribune. It's a personal decision.

That may be true, but the point still remains that this traditionally conservative, Republican leaning paper has, for the first time, endorsed a Democratic candidate for President.

green1 wrote:

lati2d wrote:That would require that Palin actually hold a Press Conference. She has been the Republican nominee for V.P. of the United States of America for 7 WEEKS - AND she STILL has not held a press conference !

What are you trying to hide, John McCain? Are you afraid that the American public will actually get to hear first hand that she is totally unqualified for the position of V.P.?

I didn't realize that public speaking was the only necessary qualification of a VP candidate. And here I thought executive experience should count for something. You know, balancing a budget, taking on corrupt businesses and incumbents, military experience, she was after all commander in chief of the Alaska National Guard.

Maybe I am missing something, but how exactly does the Democratic VP candidate have any experience similar to Palin's?

According to the commanding officer of the Alaska National Guard, she's never issued one order.

Biden, for all his gaffe-prone statements, has spent most of his career working in foreign policy. He will be a huge asset to Obama, bringing his special expertise on Israel to the table. Other than Hillary, I don't think there's anyone who's a better friend to Israel than Joe Biden. He sure outshines her there.

Ask the citizens of Wasilla about Palin's ability to balance a budget. She left the town in debt.

She abused her power. Over a brother-in-law.

Biden plagerized a document.

To me, there's a huge difference.

Biden's accessible to the press. Palin is not. Scripted answers in tightly controlled situations is not access. Whatever you want to know about Biden, you can find in previous interviews. Palin couldn't even name a Supreme Court case she disagreed with or what newspapers she reads (she said she flubbed the interview with Couric because she was mad ... yeah, and the dog ate my homework.)

I don't think Biden's wife has ever been a member of a political party who preaches secession. That scares the beejesus outta me.

Biden has been a champion of women's right and has supported. He's authored legislation to prevent violence against women. Palin charged rape victims for the kits necessary to convict their assailants.

In a poll taken this weekend, 52% of people who identified themselves as Republicans said Palin was not ready to be vice president.

In the same poll, some 97% of Democrats said Biden is ready.

Conservative columnists are denouncing McCain's choice.

I don't hear about liberal columnists saying to dump Biden.

Differences in experience? Oh, yeah. There are differences.

East Texas Parrothead wrote:According to the commanding officer of the Alaska National Guard, she's never issued one order.

Which makes her smarter than LBJ. Simply because she never had to issue an order does not mean she was not responsible for those soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines.

East Texas Parrothead wrote:Biden, for all his gaffe-prone statements, has spent most of his career working in foreign policy. He will be a huge asset to Obama, bringing his special expertise on Israel to the table. Other than Hillary, I don't think there's anyone who's a better friend to Israel than Joe Biden. He sure outshines her there.

Agreed

East Texas Parrothead wrote:Ask the citizens of Wasilla about Palin's ability to balance a budget. She left the town in debt.

And when has Joe Biden ever balanced a budget? Or even been responsible for one? As for Wasilla, what sort of debt? Why was it in debt? What did she spend the money on? All valid questions that need to be answered before I would say she was irresponsible with the budget

East Texas Parrothead wrote:She abused her power. Over a brother-in-law.

Biden plagerized a document.

To me, there's a huge difference.

To me too. I don't know the specifics, but from what I have read, that is something that needs more scrutiny, or perhaps simply more reading from my part.

East Texas Parrothead wrote:Biden's accessible to the press. Palin is not. Scripted answers in tightly controlled situations is not access. Whatever you want to know about Biden, you can find in previous interviews. Palin couldn't even name a Supreme Court case she disagreed with or what newspapers she reads (she said she flubbed the interview with Couric because she was mad ... yeah, and the dog ate my homework.)

I agree that she is not prepared before the cameras, and does not come off well. But as I first said, since when does being able to speak well in front of a camera mean that he/she will be a competent executive.

East Texas Parrothead wrote:I don't think Biden's wife has ever been a member of a political party who preaches secession. That scares the beejesus outta me.

Not me, this is a red herring. Nothing more.

East Texas Parrothead wrote:Biden has been a champion of women's right and has supported. He's authored legislation to prevent violence against women. Palin charged rape victims for the kits necessary to convict their assailants.

I have heard this before, where was she when she did this? Wasilla? The same place that you just said she left in debt?

East Texas Parrothead wrote:In a poll taken this weekend, 52% of people who identified themselves as Republicans said Palin was not ready to be vice president.

In the same poll, some 97% of Democrats said Biden is ready.

Conservative columnists are denouncing McCain's choice.

I don't hear about liberal columnists saying to dump Biden.

Differences in experience? Oh, yeah. There are differences.

If you poll enough people you will get any answer you want. There are still people out there that if polled would say that we never went to the moon.

So, when has Biden ever had to put his signature on an executive document? When has he ever had to make cuts on a budget? When has he ever been responsible for anything? Never. He has been a congressman, conviently sheltered away from the real world, as has McCain, as has Obama. None of them have ever had to make tough decisions. That is why I don't like senators becoming presidents. And the US as a whole feels the same way. Look at the records of presidential elections where a senator ran against a govenor or incumbent president. The senator is almost always on the losing end.

East Texas Parrothead wrote:

green1 wrote:

lati2d wrote:That would require that Palin actually hold a Press Conference. She has been the Republican nominee for V.P. of the United States of America for 7 WEEKS - AND she STILL has not held a press conference !

What are you trying to hide, John McCain? Are you afraid that the American public will actually get to hear first hand that she is totally unqualified for the position of V.P.?

I didn't realize that public speaking was the only necessary qualification of a VP candidate. And here I thought executive experience should count for something. You know, balancing a budget, taking on corrupt businesses and incumbents, military experience, she was after all commander in chief of the Alaska National Guard.

Maybe I am missing something, but how exactly does the Democratic VP candidate have any experience similar to Palin's?

According to the commanding officer of the Alaska National Guard, she's never issued one order.

Biden, for all his gaffe-prone statements, has spent most of his career working in foreign policy. He will be a huge asset to Obama, bringing his special expertise on Israel to the table. Other than Hillary, I don't think there's anyone who's a better friend to Israel than Joe Biden. He sure outshines her there.

Ask the citizens of Wasilla about Palin's ability to balance a budget. She left the town in debt.

She abused her power. Over a brother-in-law.

Biden plagerized a document.

To me, there's a huge difference.

Biden's accessible to the press. Palin is not. Scripted answers in tightly controlled situations is not access. Whatever you want to know about Biden, you can find in previous interviews. Palin couldn't even name a Supreme Court case she disagreed with or what newspapers she reads (she said she flubbed the interview with Couric because she was mad ... yeah, and the dog ate my homework.)

I don't think Biden's wife has ever been a member of a political party who preaches secession. That scares the beejesus outta me.

Biden has been a champion of women's right and has supported. He's authored legislation to prevent violence against women. Palin charged rape victims for the kits necessary to convict their assailants.

In a poll taken this weekend, 52% of people who identified themselves as Republicans said Palin was not ready to be vice president.

In the same poll, some 97% of Democrats said Biden is ready.

Conservative columnists are denouncing McCain's choice.

I don't hear about liberal columnists saying to dump Biden.

Differences in experience? Oh, yeah. There are differences.

Some interesting differences. I heard somewhere last week, that Sarah Palin was the thrid choice for McCain. That Lieberman, the Gov of Louisana, both said no. So John McCain was down to his third choice for VP.

I really do not like the fact that for a "maverick", she sure picks and chooses her moments. I am starting to think she does not have one orginal thought in her head.

green1 wrote:

East Texas Parrothead wrote:According to the commanding officer of the Alaska National Guard, she's never issued one order.

Which makes her smarter than LBJ. Simply because she never had to issue an order does not mean she was not responsible for those soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines.

Just curious - how does that make her smarter than LBJ?

ph4ever wrote:

green1 wrote:

East Texas Parrothead wrote:According to the commanding officer of the Alaska National Guard, she's never issued one order.

Which makes her smarter than LBJ. Simply because she never had to issue an order does not mean she was not responsible for those soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines.

Just curious - how does that make her smarter than LBJ?

LBJ dinked with (and caused problems) in the Vietnam war effort, ordering certain tactics/strikes from the White House instead of letting the commanders do their jobs.

Palin understands that politicians shouldn't be making battleground strategy. THAT'S how Palin is smarter than LBJ.

ph4ever wrote:

green1 wrote:

East Texas Parrothead wrote:According to the commanding officer of the Alaska National Guard, she's never issued one order.

Which makes her smarter than LBJ. Simply because she never had to issue an order does not mean she was not responsible for those soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines.

Just curious - how does that make her smarter than LBJ?

Read the history of the Vietnam War and political interference with the strategic and tactical decision making process.

Here's the link to an article about the debt in Wasilla. http://www.mysanantonio.com/30804829.html - about the 15th paragraph down

Here's the article from the Anchorage paper re: abuse of power.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story ... 368&page=1

I disagree with you about her camera skills. She speaks very well in front of the camera ... when she's given the words to say. Her acceptance speech was brilliant. But, it was a speech. When it comes to hard answers, she cannot deliver.

Here's a piece on the rape kit issue. If you want, I'll go back into the AP archives and look up the original story.

http://www.collegenews.com/index.php?/a ... _kits_367/

They had to pass legislation outlawing it ... her police chief made a trip to the state capitol to lobby against it ... and this in the state with one of the highest incidents of violence against women in the union.

I agree on the polls ... but they asked the same question to both Republicans and Democrats ... how could they get such diverse answers on the same question?

Is Sarah Palin ready to be president? - to Republicans
Is Joe Biden ready to be president? - to Democrats

How can they skew that?

So, when has Biden ever had to put his signature on an executive document? When has he ever had to make cuts on a budget? When has he ever been responsible for anything? Never. He has been a congressman, conviently sheltered away from the real world, as has McCain, as has Obama. None of them have ever had to make tough decisions. That is why I don't like senators becoming presidents. And the US as a whole feels the same way. Look at the records of presidential elections where a senator ran against a govenor or incumbent president. The senator is almost always on the losing end.

Maybe being a senator is a losing proposition ... but this time, it seems to me that the three senators have it all over the governor.

We'll see on Nov. 4.

Probably a repost here.
Hunting with Palin
http://www.addictinggames.com/huntingwithpalin.html

krusin1 wrote:

ph4ever wrote:

green1 wrote:

East Texas Parrothead wrote:According to the commanding officer of the Alaska National Guard, she's never issued one order.

Which makes her smarter than LBJ. Simply because she never had to issue an order does not mean she was not responsible for those soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines.

Just curious - how does that make her smarter than LBJ?

LBJ dinked with (and caused problems) in the Vietnam war effort, ordering certain tactics/strikes from the White House instead of letting the commanders do their jobs.

Palin understands that politicians shouldn't be making battleground strategy. THAT'S how Palin is smarter than LBJ.

green1 wrote:

ph4ever wrote:

green1 wrote:

East Texas Parrothead wrote:According to the commanding officer of the Alaska National Guard, she's never issued one order.

Which makes her smarter than LBJ. Simply because she never had to issue an order does not mean she was not responsible for those soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines.

Just curious - how does that make her smarter than LBJ?

Read the history of the Vietnam War and political interference with the strategic and tactical decision making process.

This is what I find ironic and amusing. When the Iraq war broke out many were comparing it to Vietnam. Those from the Bush camp and in favor of the war complained that it was an unfair comparison. Of course Bush changed his mind in 2006

Now - during election people are saying "Palin is smarter than LBJ". You see - we don't know that now do we? We don't know what type of stragety she would deploy IF McCain were elected, died and she took office. Remember that LBJ left office 40 years ago. That's the best you can do? It simply does not make sense to me to compare her to a President that died when she was 9 years old.

ejr wrote:

Frank4 wrote:On Sunday, breaking with a 150 year tradition of never endorsing a Democratic Candidate for President. The Chicago Tribune endorsed Barack Obama for President.

And for those that think this is because Obama is from Illinois, the Tribune never endorsed Adlai Stevenson when he was the Democratic nominee for President.

The Salt Lake Tribune just endorsed Obama today........big deal in UTAH...there are like.....maybe 12 Democrats here. Ballsy move for them....I'm sure some people canceled subscriptions today.

pbans wrote:

ejr wrote:

Frank4 wrote:On Sunday, breaking with a 150 year tradition of never endorsing a Democratic Candidate for President. The Chicago Tribune endorsed Barack Obama for President.

And for those that think this is because Obama is from Illinois, the Tribune never endorsed Adlai Stevenson when he was the Democratic nominee for President.

The Salt Lake Tribune just endorsed Obama today........big deal in UTAH...there are like.....maybe 12 Democrats here. Ballsy move for them....I'm sure some people canceled subscriptions today.

I find that to be a shocker... but maybe not so surprising.
I was in Utah last January, during the first primary in Iowa, and the local news outlets were simply amazed that Mitt Romney didn't win.
They absolutely demonized McCain as a flip-flopping faux-Republican

ph4ever wrote:

green1 wrote:

East Texas Parrothead wrote:According to the commanding officer of the Alaska National Guard, she's never issued one order.

Which makes her smarter than LBJ. Simply because she never had to issue an order does not mean she was not responsible for those soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines.

Just curious - how does that make her smarter than LBJ?

beceuase she never picked up a puppy by it's ears.

Lightning Bolt wrote:I was in Utah last January, during the first primary in Iowa, and the local news outlets were simply amazed that Mitt Romney didn't win.

Damn racists.

green1 wrote:

ph4ever wrote:

green1 wrote:

East Texas Parrothead wrote:According to the commanding officer of the Alaska National Guard, she's never issued one order.

Which makes her smarter than LBJ. Simply because she never had to issue an order does not mean she was not responsible for those soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines.

Just curious - how does that make her smarter than LBJ?

Read the history of the Vietnam War and political interference with the strategic and tactical decision making process.

I think I know the history of the Vietnam War very well. If you are going to claim that the politicians lost the war then I think you are very much mistaken.

There are some aspects to the conflict in Vietnam that have assumed the character of myth - widely believed, accepted with little or no evidence and yet still belonging to the realm of fantasy. One of these myths is that the politicians kept the troops from 'going for the win' in Vietnam. This was not the case.

Another Vietnam era myth is that the folks back home (politicians and protesters) let the troops down by bringing them back home when victory was still possible.

One of the most outlandish myths that has grown with the passage of time is that our military acted with 'restraint' in the conduct of the war in Vietnam. On the contrary, our military forces turned the entire Vietnamese countryside into a virtual 'free fire zone'. The unintended end result of such misguided efforts, including the CIA-run Phoenix program and the strategic hamlet concept, was to enact on the Vietnamese population the idiotic philosophy of 'better dead than red' because that's how many of the Vietnamese civilian population ended up - dead.

The aftermath of the conflict in Southeast Asia shows clearly that we acted with little or no restraint in the conduct of that war and yet such behavior still wasn't enough for us to somehow 'win' it. I don't think political interference can be used as an excuse for what happened in Vietnam.

Painful as it may be for some to acknowledge, we had no noble purpose in Vietnam. We shouldn't have been there at all. In fact, the argument can be made that we backed the wrong side from the beginning - the so-called 'Domino Theory' notwithstanding.

There are striking historical parallels between the invasion of Iraq and the invasion of Vietnam in that both actions were preceded by manufactured emergencies. Many of us were stampeded into believing that Saddam Hussein posed a military threat to us based on fabricated evidence. Similarly, many folks were convinced of the necessity of our action in Vietnam by the Tonkin Gulf incident, which as it turns out, was largely fabricated.

With over 58,000 combat deaths in Vietnam, and over 4000 combat deaths in Iraq so far, (we don't count the non-combatant civilian deaths but they number in the hundreds of thousands in both wars) the inevitable question of "what was it all for?" demands an answer that makes sense of that enormous sacrifice. But the simplistic idea that we are the 'good guys' and that we always wear the 'white hats' in a 'black and white' world isn't the answer that we should be settling for.

The fact that Sarah Palin's Governorship of Alaska makes her in a sense the Commander in Chief of the Alaska National Guard is, I think, irrelevant to the question of whether or not she is a suitable candidate for the office of Vice President or President. What makes Sarah Palin unsuitable for either of these offices, in my opinion, is that she epitomizes just the kind of 'black and white' world view that we've already had too much of in this country.

It seems that Barack Obama's grandmother is seriously ill in Hawaii ... and he's going over Thursday to be with her.

Please ... say a prayer for the family.