Mr. McCain Picks a Woman for V.P. Mate

[treelizard]

[treelizard]

I don't know, pushing for the most liberal guy in the senate sure makes you sound like a liberal.

Yeah well.

[treelizard]

I'm not a liberal. I'm an independent!!

And I like some conservative white males.

Have fun on your outdoor trip! I want to go camping...

[darrianation]

Tanto1- I am Teddy Roosevelt in 1900

Nice one Tanto

Treelizard- It's all lies.

Spoken like a true liberal. (sorry couldn’t resist)

The liberal’s definition of media bias= anything a conservative white male says. Of course now we have to add Female Alaskan governor’s running for VP.

Alright I have to run but you all take care. Even you Treelizard.

[treelizard]

did that come from the biased liberal media?

[Tant01]

Wall Street Journal posted Thursday, September 04, 2008 10:58:50 AM

Who Am I?

I am under 45 years old,

I love the outdoors,

I hunt,

I am a Republican reformer,

I have taken on the Republican

Party establishment,

I have many children,

I have a spot on the national ticket as vice president

with less than two years in the governor's office.









Did you guess?
































I am Teddy Roosevelt in 1900

[treelizard]

LOL.

Let's start with her writing a book called The Virtue of Selfishness.

[Tant01]

Just do it!

LOL. Okay, I bought that part. I do wilderness survival things too.

So is this my cue to lay into Ayn Rand now?

Knock yourself out girl... Ahem... Ms G. (TL)

As you wish...The floor is yours.

[treelizard]

LOL. Okay, I bought that part. I do wilderness survival things too.

So is this my cue to lay into Ayn Rand now?

[Tant01]

Darrianrocks

It's all lies.

No... He's really going to be out of town for a while, some wilderness survival instruction thing...

[treelizard]

It's all lies.

[darrianation]

I am getting ready to go out of town for a while so you will get a break from me.

BTW my thoughts and prayers (and a $200 donation) goes out to those affected by Ike.

But before I go I just want to recap some of the highlights of why Obama is a bad choice for America.

In Heller vs. DC the case was decided by a single vote (5-4). Barrack Obama won’t just appoint liberal judges to the bench but leftist judges who are likely to change a lot of things we do and how we do them.

One thing is for sure if another 2nd amendment case comes before the Supreme Court with Obama appointees on it instead of municipalities all over this country repealing their gun bans there will be cities all over this country enacting gun bans.

Consider this; the next president is likely to appoint 3 judges to the Supreme Court. If the republicans loose any more seats in the senate they won’t be able to stop Obama from putting far left judges on the bench. This will have disastrous affects to our nation and constitution far into the future long after Obama is gone from the White House.

He has made terrible blunders in foreign policy- agreeing to meet with heads of extreme rouge states like Iran, Syria, Venezuela, and N. Korea without preconditions. And in fact leaders of such terror groups as Hamas and Iran have endorsed Obama. Obama has shown his propensity to back down to opposition as evidenced by his 360’ turn around on his ‘undivided Jerusalem’ comment once the Palestinians began to complain.

He wants to decrease our military’s capability while we are at war, in the face of rising tensions of major powers; the Russians and Chinese. He wants to decrease our ability to obtain information in the face of nuclear weapons seeking extremists like Iran and stateless terror groups. If you think he can negotiate his way out of these risks think again. In no time in history has negotiating from a position of weakness worked for us. Like Ronald Reagan proved beyond any shadow of doubt it takes superior strength to negotiate successfully with the likes of Russia and terror states successfully.

Barrack Obama has proven himself over and over again to be the candidate of:

Flip flops



And lies


And Thank God McCain’s plan is so different than Obama’s!


Barrack Obama is not proud of his country either as evidenced by a long list of anti-American mentors, confidants, friends, and associates and his refusal to wear a flag pin essentially saying the flag represents the wrong kind of patriotism.

Barrack Obama has no plan that will solve the current economic situation; in fact his aggressive tax initiatives will likely slow the economy even further as investment slows. Barrack Obama wants to tax America to the tune of over $800 billion in ‘NEW’ government programs. But under Obama’s plan raising the capital gains tax and other corporate taxes the government will actually collect less money—this isn’t theory this is reality as history has already born out.

Small business owners will have to pay more taxes on capital gains, dividends, and on payroll, Medicare, social security, and health insurance for their employees; as investment slows they won’t be able to get funds to expand their business and they end up getting hurt by Obama’s plan more so than the big corporations. But under Obama’s tax plan neither small nor big business will do much expanding meaning fewer jobs becoming available.

Employees are hurt because the cost of their benefit packages will go up and their 401ks, IRAs, and pensions will be negatively affected by Obama’s tax plan. So while it may be true the middle class will pay fewer taxes overall they end up paying more for things like slower wage increases, insurance, retirement, and for other products and services. Would-be employees are hurt because jobs will be harder to find.

If that isn’t bad enough, Barrack Obama wants to redistribute America’s wealth in the billions of dollars to foreign nations under his ‘Global Poverty Tax’ plan. That’s American tax dollars being given away to folks that in many cases hate us. Wealth redistribution of the worse kind because any booger sandwich eating moron knows that more often than not the corrupt leaders of those nations benefit while those the money is intended to help are left to suffer.

Worse of all as far as I am concerned Obama, like most liberals, simply does not care about the federalist principles this country was founded upon. He believes in bigger more controlling government which he will expand taking more federal control of our states, schools, public lands, private enterprise, and intrusion into our daily lives.

There is no doubt in my mind that Barrack and his wife Michelle, are elite socialists. At the end of the day everyone gets hurt.

Simply put Barrack Obama is a bad choice for America.

[treelizard]

I actually teach a unit on media bias and propaganda.

I think advertising can indeed show bias, especially if it's advertising for campaigns. Also sometimes media outlets spin stories more positively for companies that run ads in order to keep their advertising. But some don't. It really depends.

If the media does appear biased in favor of Obama, and again I agree that there's not "one media," it may have something to do with Bush treatment of the media in the past... or it may have to do with a lot of other things... I guess I don't buy the whole "we're victims of the media" BS. There is always more to it than that.

[treelizard]

blogs are usually considered the media because they are considered opinions, they are generally not expected to live up to "journalistic Integrity" and be objective and unbiased.

Most of the political blogs are just partisan commentators.

Anything in a blog needs to be fact checked and scrutinized before it should be accepted as the truth.
"

I agree that everything should be fact-checked and scrutinized. I just don't believe there is one media conglomerate. I mean there are major media owned by corporations, but there is also a lot of independent media. There is advertiser influence, but different advertisers want different things. Also some media outlets like PBS and NPR and my local community radio station have underwriters instead of media, which is a little different. News executives often hang out with politicians, but which politicians differs by which station it is. Some media outlets rely on PR and press releases and others not so much. Pressure groups influence some media outlets and not others. Media is often driven by readership, but there are different audiences for different media outlets. The New York Times is read by different people than say The Wall Street Journal or the Washington Post; BBC reports differently than Fox which reports differently than the View. Some outlets censor and some do not. It really depends on WHAT you are reading or watching. The same news story is often reported differently in different places.

For example, one of the propaganda units I teach in my advisory class focuses on tobacco advertising. So one could say "the media" promotes tobacco. But if you read scientific and health journals, they run anti-smoking articles. So one could say "the media" is opposed to tobacco. Or one could just admit there is more than one media outlet and they all have different audiences, purposes and influences.

[treelizard]

Question: Is Fox news "the media"? What about independent blogs, like this one? Women Against Sarah Palin Are they "the media"? Is defend.net "the media"? What about newspapers that endorse McCain? Are they "the media" too?