wayneL
VIVA LA LIBERTAD, CARAJO!
- Joined
- 9 July 2004
- Posts
- 25,955
- Reactions
- 13,248
Just a point in our celebrity obsessed cultures(s). That such and such an actor, singer or chop socky celebrity, is supporting xyz candidate, whether its McCain, Obama, or Obe Wan Kinobe, is about the very last reason folks should be supporting said candidate.
That's ridiculous.
Make your own decisions folks. (Fortunately it's just spectator sport for us, we don't have to vote for any of these mugs)
So, you mean we shouldn't support Obama, because of the fact that the Hollywood elite loves him. I agree!
It's obvious to me that the McCain/Palin ticket is the way to go.
Hey Sam - You do realize that Chuck Norris has endorsed McCain, right? He only did it after McCain chose Palin. He was going to sit it out before the Palin selection.
http://townhall.com/Columnists/ChuckNorris/2008/09/09/the_maverette
Continue here:
http://townhall.com/Columnists/ChuckNorris/2008/09/09/the_maverette
Sam, your hero is for McCain/Palin - you better get with the program, or they will both kick your a..
Energy dependent?I predict that the U.S. will become energy dependent within the next 25 years.
Doris (or anyone else): is the VP debate on ABC TV1 tomorrow 11am our time?
So, you mean we shouldn't support Obama, because of the fact that the Hollywood elite loves him. I agree!
It's obvious to me that the McCain/Palin ticket is the way to go.
www.sbs.com.au
Here's the schedule:
Saturday September 27 The First Presidential Debate
10:55am – 12:30pm Barack Obama v. John McCain on domestic policy.
Friday October 3 The Vice-Presidential Debate
10:55am – 12:30pm Joseph Biden v. Sarah Palin on domestic and foreign policy.
Wednesday October 8 The Second Presidential Debate
11:55am – 1.30pm Barack Obama v. John McCain in a “town meeting” format.
Thursday October 16 The Third Presidential Debate
11:55am – 1.30pm Barack Obama v. John McCain on foreign policy.
Palin Proved to Be Formidable Foe in Alaska Debates
By JOEL MILLMAN
ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- There are two things people here remember about Sarah Palin's debating style during her race for governor two years ago.
One is the stack of color-coded cue cards she took to the podium for help whenever she was asked a policy question. The other is how quickly she was able to shuck those props, master the thrust-and-parry of jousting with her opponents and inquisitors, and project confidence to an audience of television viewers watching from home.
"That's the Sarah Palin I remember from the 2006 debates: positive, confident and upbeat," recalls Libby Casey, an Alaska public-radio reporter who served as a debate moderator on two occasions that year.
I certainly hope that she would permit drilling in Anwr. ...
Palin and McCain: At odds over the environment
Someone, please, clarify something for me: what happens when a president and his vice-president "agree to disagree"?
At least the George W Bush administration was consistent within itself. But with the new Republican ticket, we are faced with the prospect of a US president who is against drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge paired to a VP who staunchly supports it, and says the two will just have to "agree to disagree".
What does that mean?
And will she be equally conciliatory about their opposite views regarding the causes of climate change? It's difficult to follow McCain's mercurial views, but he backs the scientific consensus that industrial activities are causing climate change and has supported cap and trade. Palin, on the other hand acknowledges that global warming is happening, but is "not one who would attribute it to being man-made".
When couples agree to disagree, it's generally a way of closing a discussion, shelving it, putting it away, forgetting about it entirely. But this is crunch-time for the climate. In Copenhagen in 2009, world leaders will have to make arguably the most important environmental decision of their respective terms in office.
For the new US government, it will be their first great foray into international climate negotiations. After years of supreme isolationism, finally broken by the Bush administration's astonishing performance at UN climate talks last December, the world will be looking to the US. What - what - will happen if the country's leaders have "agreed to disagree"?
"When it comes to environmental issues, the only difference between George W Bush and Sarah Palin is lipstick," said Kate Troll, executive director of Alaska Conservation Voters, a local green group... etc .
"Little is done when many command" ...She's for drilling in the ANWR, but he's against it
Here's a compromise statement they can use and still be consistent: "God is causing Global Warming but if we stop dumping carbon into the atmosphere, God will stop making it warmer." Hope that helps, hate to see these two kids have a disagreement.
Most continental Western European countries have very low teenage birth rates. This is varyingly attributed to good sex education and high levels of contraceptive use (in the case of the Netherlands and Scandinavia), traditional values and social stigmatization (in the case of Italy and Spain) or both (in the case of Switzerland).[3]
The teenage birth rate in the United States is the highest in the developed world, and the teenage abortion rate is also high.[3]
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?