McCain - Palin Dirty Politics

  • Thread starter Thread starter islamirama
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 20
  • Views Views 4K
islamirama

islamirama

Account Disabled
Messages
4,194
Reaction score
608
Gender
Male
Religion
Islam
It's 2008 & there are still large pockets of America that think & believe like these red-blooded Americans! Folks like these are a huge voting & influential bloc and they are getting organized & fired up!

Great commentary from MSNBC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fB0lBXRdnU



Speach of the hateful mob:

Al-Jazeera visits rednecks of ohio:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRqcfqiXCX0


Obam is a terrorist:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjxzmaXAg9E

part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJghQMq49dw
 
This is really scary!!!! Imagine an ignorant fool becoming a VP of 72 yr old president.......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8__aXxXPVc

--------------


Vote no to Palin on PBS poll

PBS has an online poll posted, asking if Sarah Palin is qualified. The poll will be reported on PBS and picked up by mainstream media. It can influence undecided voters in swing states.

Please do two things -- takes 20 seconds.

1) Click on link and vote NO!
http://www.pbs.org/now/polls/poll-435.html

2) Forward it to your friends.

We have to consciously work for the change. Thanks
 
From what I am seeing through western Minnesota and South Dakota is McCain selecting Palin for a VP has turned Public opinion against him. At least in the areas I travel through. I have not seen as much as one McCain campaign sign in the past 2 weeks and Obama signs are popping up in peoples yards like mushrooms.
 
I think there is evidence that the Bradley Effect is at play in this election. For those who don't know what that is, it is when voters tell pollsters one thing and intend to do something else on election day. Palin is very popular with the base of the Republican Party, more than John McCain anyway, although that isn't saying much.
 
Keltoi said:
Palin is very popular with the base of the Republican Party, more than John McCain anyway, although that isn't saying much.
Click to expand...
It's not saying much to say that she's easier on the eyes.*

I'm just sayin'.

*Obama is also easier on the eyes than McCain. And he's a man.
 
The scary thing about McCain is: If he picked Palin as VP, who would he appoint for his cabinet? The cabinet is the real strength of the President, once selected they are the ones who essentially run the country.
 
Woodrow said:
The scary thing about McCain is: If he picked Palin as VP, who would he appoint for his cabinet? The cabinet is the real strength of the President, once selected they are the ones who essentially run the country.
Click to expand...

He has promised a bipartisan cabinet. Meaning Dems and Reps. It would more than likely be an impressive gathering. Palin was an election pick, not a policy pick.
 
Keltoi said:
I think there is evidence that the Bradley Effect is at play in this election. For those who don't know what that is, it is when voters tell pollsters one thing and intend to do something else on election day. Palin is very popular with the base of the Republican Party, more than John McCain anyway, although that isn't saying much.
Click to expand...

I never quite understand this. Aren't 'the base of the Republican Party' going to vote for the Republican candidate anyway? I suppose it's just a way to get them out to vote? But still, why scare away moderates with Palin to please people who support you anyway. I would assume they would go out to vote anyway if the stakes get high enough?

Beh, I'm sure the McCain campaign thought this through!
 
KAding said:
I never quite understand this. Aren't 'the base of the Republican Party' going to vote for the Republican candidate anyway? I suppose it's just a way to get them out to vote? But still, why scare away moderates with Palin to please people who support you anyway. I would assume they would go out to vote anyway if the stakes get high enough?

Beh, I'm sure the McCain campaign thought this through!
Click to expand...

You got it right. The base of the Republican Party has never been John McCain's greatest fan. Before Palin, the base planned on holding their noses and picking the lesser of two evils. With Palin they have somebody to vote for instead of simply voting against Obama. Victory for Republicans has always hinged on base turnout. That is what elected George Bush Jr. in 2004.
The undecided voters are important, but if the Republican base comes out in droves it doesn't matter what the undecided voters do.
 
Keltoi said:
Environmentalists usually have no understanding of wildlife conservation. Hunting is an essential part of conservation.
Click to expand...

True, but the environmentalists have a big voice and use emotionalism very well.
 
Keltoi said:
Environmentalists usually have no understanding of wildlife conservation. Hunting is an essential part of conservation.
Click to expand...

Only if the hunters travel in small bands and are armed with spears. Guns overtip the balance. And hunting for sport is disgusting, people who do it are just taking life for their own sick pleasure.
 
Fishman said:
Only if the hunters travel in small bands and are armed with spears. Guns overtip the balance. And hunting for sport is disgusting, people who do it are just taking life for their own sick pleasure.
Click to expand...

The method of hunting has nothing to do with it. Animals only have a certain amount of territory they depend on as a food source. Without hunting those populations will increase to the point where that food source isn't large enough to sustain the population.

That is why hunters have to buy tags to hunt most animals. They decide on the number of tags given out by how limited or over-populated that animal is at the time. I hunt for sport ever year. It is part of our culture. It is also vital for conservation.
 
Keltoi said:
The method of hunting has nothing to do with it. Animals only have a certain amount of territory they depend on as a food source. Without hunting those populations will increase to the point where that food source isn't large enough to sustain the population.
Click to expand...
</p>
Yes, that is what happens. The population increases until the animals can't be supported anymore, and then some die, until the population is low enough to be sustained. It is a natural cycle that does not need arrogant humans to be perpetuated. Furthermore, what the animals are hunted with does make a difference. I would try to explain more, but my computer security settings won't let this posting program make paragraphs, which are essential for explanation. Plus, my general writing skills are a bit broken at the moment. :D
 
Fishman said:
</p>
Yes, that is what happens. The population increases until the animals can't be supported anymore, and then some die, until the population is low enough to be sustained. It is a natural cycle that does not need arrogant humans to be perpetuated. Furthermore, what the animals are hunted with does make a difference. I would try to explain more, but my computer security settings won't let this posting program make paragraphs, which are essential for explanation. Plus, my general writing skills are a bit broken at the moment. :D
Click to expand...

Starvation and disease is a result of overpopulation. The deer population in Colorado was devastated because of a disease caused by overpopulation. Not to mention the increase in deer/vehicle accidents and Lyme disease. Farmers also have to deal with overpopulations of deer that are forced to eat crops because of lack of natural food sources.

Starvation is not a natural cycle. Populations are controlled by either predators or hunting. The deer has few natural predators in the U.S these days, unless you are talking about the Rocky Mountains or other mountain lion habitat. The wolves are mostly gone except for tightly controlled populations in the Yellowstone. Human beings are the primary source of population control, and usually it is not enough. Agencies are very conservative on the number of tags they allow each season, and usually they are for a certain gender at a certain age. Contrary to popular myth, hunters do not simply go out and shoot whatever moves. I usually take one or two deer a season, and that is fairly expensive. Of course I hunt on federal lands.
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top