OK, trader. Lets place them in to comparison here, shall we? I can see your point about Fox News, OK? But here you have a
CONSERVATIVE VP candidate, that hasn't appeared on any news cast whatsoever. As soon as Joe Biden was announced, Biden was taking questions from the press; out there shaking hands with the public
(while on his own I may add!).Now Sarah Palin? Here is a
CONSERVATIVE VP candidate, and she can't even appear on Fox News?! Right leaning Fox News?! Don't you find that just a tad bit strange?!
In the spirit of, you and I, My friend, "getting real," I say no, it is not strange at all. First, you over look the factual point that even American's when polled said they recognize that "the media at large” has been attacking and unfair to Palin in the two to three weeks she has been in the spot light. Let us not even mention your Fox news attack dog alter reality MSNBC, HUFF & POST and KOSNOSTRA.
In getting real, we both know "this media, who, oddly recognizing it HAD A PRECEIVED BIAS PROBLEM FOR OBAMA with what the people actually saw and heard from them. They understood so well they needed to gather All three Major Networks anchors together and spend nearly an hour defending themselves as to how they treated Palin as a candidate and as a women, trying justify just how fair they were to her. Now if they were actually so fair, why in the world would the three major network competitors need to gather to defend their fairness hey comrade?
Likewise the Democrats attack dogs went to work in another making it real recognition that they were clearly surprised by Plain's selection, as, as has been reported, so was she. She has, at best, had three or four weeks to wrap her head around being in the position she is in as a Republican Female VP candidate.
Your false argument comparison using Biden is NOT keeping it real at all.
Biden, The Bloviate of Bloviates, until 3 months or so ago, was running for President and said [I]"Obama was not prepared to lead the country himself,"[/iIn truth Biden has never met a camera or microphone he did or does not seek out to embrace.
Also, Biden with 36 years In Congress, is a man you and the facts cannot deny has proven he has a bellicose nature. Which, I will show below. he has proven often he has a well deserved reputation for running toward any Camera or Microphone and talking, and talking to no end. Biden is even known to have pushed his way towards the microphone or cameras in group party announcements.
So to say Biden is courage for going on TV and or camera in comparison Palin, is like saying Democrats are really more honest and fair than Republicans historically speaking, the absurdity of which stands in its face. That is true andit is real.Oh, lets get real with this, OK? You Republicans
I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN, never joined any party like any church, nor will I ever. Just getting real in you mistaken view of me as a person. In truth, I have voted far more down and up the line for Democrats, till the leftist took over.have been so much on this poor guy's name, it's been worse than stink on manure.
First, you are off mark entirely, the point I made was about ABC being an Obama media forum. I did not write one word about Obama’s name nor did the ABC interview mention it in the context you twisted far from being real. You never read in my post any mention of Barrack Hussein Obama’s name anywhere.
Second, no one who opposes him, named him, as is his truly lawful name that is a fact in the spirit of getting real. Since you brought it up and not I, his “names” are, in the Islamic world, very common, in comparison to say persons here with three names, such as William Jefferson Clinton, or Billy Bob Smith and or Mary Sue Smith, to name but a few three part names. So blaming others as if they are evil in mentioning his given and lawful name is NOT real, it unreal in fear of his real and complete name I surmise.
Furthering our getting it real, no common voter who opposes him, created the environment that has our western world confronting radical Islam, where at a time he, Barrack Hussein Obama, has a Muslim name, and is running for President, at time we are at war with radical Muslims, now did they?
So that is a false arguement made in fear of what his name association might imply to some voters. It's real that it is his cross to bear, that he runs from like you fear in excuse of. But it is providence his name is what it is, to be played out ,as it will, as we fight the extremes of Islam every day.
In getting real, as polls have proven, few who oppose Obama, do so because he has a Muslim name or even believe he is Muslim, or even as many, including Obama himself, race bait, in racial mongering, oppose him, because of the color of his skin. Because, in fact, Obama is no more Black, than he is white, and that is real and factual and most people know that.
Of course, as on the left and right, there are fringe minorities who use both to vote against him or equally for him, as your side uses Conservative, Republican elit arrogance topwars small town bitter America clinging to their guns and religion, in fear of elite differences to vote against his opposition. But they are not large enough to cause him or his opposition to lose the election and we both know that is real too.It's no telling why he hasn't accidentally spoke this more than once; it's probably on his mind everytime questions are asked about his name, so there is no wonder why he made that guffaw.
But I'll tell you this...
How many verbal miscues has Sarah Palin made? Huh? Oh! That's right! She is still in the closet having people like Rick Davis come out of the house and making comments for her. It's like my father has told me: "Son, if you never do anything, you will never make a mistake." I think Sarah is pretty innocent of making mistakes so far. What do you think?
Here is what I think:
The GOP convention is done with all the revelry--proud, bulldog speeches with automatic applause; fancy lights flashing around; confetti falling. Honeymoon is over, folks!
John McCain is going to have to take that leash off of Sarah Bulldog/Barracuda Palin. With all of this stuff being thrown around out there people are going to want to know why it's taking her so long to defend herself. Why? We are waiting.
The above is a fair statement and the next 57 days will tell, the tell of providence for sure. It is as they say, game time, in the NFL ( Not (for) Fu**in Long) in big leagues of Presidential Politics. Obama inexperience as Sarah stands on it own merits before the people who will decide who is worthy of gamne ball and who is not.
But I say this, in keeping it real, if Obama does not win, it will be, in American History, one of the biggest defeats of an ideology ever. I fully expect the advantage is his, as it all stacks up for him, in devine worhip of the Kossheep, in reverence of the media, in piles and piles of money advantage, and historically in Democratic voters advantageing nearly 2 to 1 to his favor. If he loses the far left is dead for a long time and America returns to center as is it normallcy.
I add one major point you missed entirely, I was not making a commentary about Obama's name nor his gaffe, if you re-read what I said about Obama's gaffe. I never thought he was or is a Muslim, and I understand a gaffe when I hear one.
It was HOW his media friends, that Palin is to face, raced, as panic lap dogs, to his rescue and corrected him, instead of letting his words matter and mean what he said when he said them.
The Point is and was Palin has every right to take a few weeks to face a media she knows is pro Obama and to get prepared to face the grueling task that Obama has been at for 23 months and Biden for 36 years, and that is as real as you can get. P.S. Biden the 36 years palter Bloviate:
Oh, That Joe! (No. 10 in a Series) -- The Verbose Blue Hen Riffs on Iraq
September 07, 2008 8:25 PM
On a flight to Kalispell, Mont., Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., was asked by a reporter, "Do you still believe in a tripartite solution to Iraq?"
His answer lasted 13 minutes, 20 seconds.Before we reprint it, in full, it's only fair to ponder how long Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's answer to such a question would be.
Mr. Biden's response:
"The Bush administration's policy in the beginning -- and John's -- continues to be a strong, central government, democracy, that will gain the confidence of all the Iraqi people that would be a democratic institution that would make the dominoes of the oligarchies fall in the Middle East. That was success, that's what they talked about. Now what's happened? Where there's relative peace, where is it? It's up in the Kurdish area. Where? Where they don't allow Shia troops to come up. Where they don't allow the Iraqi army to come up without their permission. There is now relative calm in Anbar. Why? They did exactly what I proposed two years ago. They turned over authority and trained homegrown local Sh-- Sunnis. And said, 'we promise you, those Shia aren't coming and patrolling your streets.' That's called the awakening. That's what got all of the sheikhs to come together and say OK. I predicted if you ask the sheikhs to have their sons join the army or join the police force, the security forces, and you told them they'd protect their own area, they'd join in droves. The first day Petraeus wisely made that offer, 1,000 Sunnis showed up for the police force. Virtually none showed up before. So, what's happening? Where's it working? It's working from the ground up. Exactly what I've proposed is happening. We're about to have regional elections. What are the regional elections? The Iraqi constitution says in article 114, 15, 16, it says that any of these areas can conclude that they want to be, not a governate, there's 18 of these things, but they can be essentially a state, like the state of California or the state of Massachusetts. They can write their own constitution. They can have their own laws relative what you teach your kids in school, like California versus Alabama. They can have their own laws, their own security force, their own cops, not a national police force sent out. That's why it's working. And the second reason why it's working is that, so far is, what else did they do? They did exactly what I've been calling for for two years. It's the mix of forces. You may remember, if you had to cover this, my saying it's the wrong mix of forces in Iraq. We need counterinsurgency forces. And what did they do? They brought them back from Afghanistan, unfortunately, instead of adding them. And what happened? The counterinsurgency forces are now the forces that, today and yesterday, the military says are having the most success. So, folks, they may not want to call it what I was talking about. But the end result is, there is a lot of autonomy in the Anbar province today. There is a lot of autonomy up in the Kurdish area today. And there is increasing autonomy in the Shia regions. But I've always proposed a central government. A central government that has a standing army, controls the currency, controls the banking system, controls the borders, controls the foreign policy. And so, you know, John says he wants to have every shred of Iranian influence eliminated from Iraq. And he supports Maliki. You notice, every time Ahmadinejad comes to Baghdad, Maliki kisses him on both cheeks. Literally, not figuratively. You notice, before agreed to begin to negotiate the Status of Forces Agreement, what did, what did Maliki think he had to do? He had to get on a plane to go to Tehran and talk about it with the Iranians. 'Cause look, folks. It's a geographic fact of life, they've got a long border and a 5,000-year history. So, it's about time we get real here and take a look at the possibilities now, if they continue along these lines, of something good happening. And the possibilities rest in two things. One, there's a genuine political accommodation. And so, you're going to have, as I said, elections in the provinces. Supposedly -- and by the way they're supposed to take place next month. I've been predicting they're not likely to take place next month. But maybe they will. If they will, do you think the people down in Basra are going to vote for a government in Basra any different than an all-Shia government in Basra? what do you think? Want to take any bets anyone? So, come on. It's time that we had people who understand, understand what's going on in Iraq, not just sloganeering. Not just sloganeering. And the irony is, the guy who supposedly has the least experience among us, Barack Obama, got it right 14, 15 months ago. He said, 'Look, let's transfer -- let's be as responsible getting out as irresponsibly we were getting in.' And then he said, 'We need a timeline here. And you're going to go ahead and hand off authority gradually to Iraqis, and what are you going to do? You're going to pull out American combat forces.' Where, if reports are correct, and my information is based on the State Department and others, what is Maliki demanding, and what is Bush agreeing to? A timeline to draw down American combat troops. A gradual hand-off of police authority and military authority to the Iraqis. Who's the only guy, major figure in America who's standing outside that agreement? John McCain. John. And the other point I made today, and it's an important point, since you poor devils have to cover me, you should be aware of it in my view: John, I've never heard John utter a word about what he's going to do, after, after -- quote he establishes victory in Iraq? What's he going to do about Syria? Turkey? Iran? Saudi Arabia? What's he going to do to have some reason to believe whatever is worked out, that Iraqi's neighbors are going to sign on to it? And tell me, how is it possible to have a long-term stable, stable Iraq, free and open without some regional understanding of Iraq's independence? Barack and I, and I have laid this out in painful detail for two years, as Barack has. That's why we've called for a regional conference. That's why we talked about the need to bring the permanent five of the United Nations in to give the imprimatur to this. To make it clear to Iran, Syria, Turkey, Saudi Arabia -- hands off. Hands off. Whatever deal the Iraqis work out, you've got to stand by. You need the weight of the world putting pressure on the region a little like we did in Bosnia. A little like what happened in Kosovo. Could that have happened if the Germans didn't buy into the deal? If the Greeks didn't buy into the deal? If the Italians didn't buy into the deal? If the Hungarians didn't buy into the deal? So, what I -- what confuses me, and it does confuse me about John McCain and Sarah Palin's position on Iraq is, tell me the end of the story, John. Victory sounds wonderful. We're all for victory. What do you mean by victory? And so, I just say, there's, you know, you can call -- and by the way, you recall when I put forward that plan, I said there's a half a dozen ways you can implement this plan. I don't have any -- It wasn't three areas, it doesn't have to be five, it can be two, it can be seven. But there's got to be a way where we finally, if you have peace -- 'Hey, I'm a Shia. I'm not going to kill your Sunni family. And you don't have to worry the Kurds are going to come and get you, because the Kurds are basically with you.' Everybody has to get to the point where they conclude there's more in it for them staying together than there is in it them going separately."
-- by Jake Tapper and Matt Jaffe
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/20...at-joe-n-5.html That is all!!
