»

[KimyReizeger]

Having absorbed bits and pieces of this tale over the last few days I find it difficult to understand why the media and the electorate focus so much on the personalities and characteristics of the candidates. Their ethnic origin, whether or not they're parents, their religious belieifs, their favourite wines... Surely politicians should be impartial towards anything thrown at them and should not make decisions influenced by where they grew up and how they live their lives. Surely a politican should be able to weigh up problems and, unheeding their own 'self' select the best route for all.

Why are the electorate so keen on seeing certain types of people in power - politicians that match their own individual status? Is it because they know that a white male, for example, will be unable to look beyond his own colour and status and natural favour the same? Or that a women with five kids and solid family values will be certain to promote a pro-life stance, literally incapable of producing a balanced stance on abortion for the whole nation? Does the electorate simply accept that a representative will be thoroughly biased towards those of their own inherited stuff-and-values?

[Hugh_Jazz]

Originally Posted by Dave

Excellent choice by McCain, although completely out of the blue. She'll pacify the pro-life, conservative wing of the party while attracting votes from those who feel Obama is too elitist and inexperienced to do the job. It's also worth noting that, of the four presidential and vice-presidential candidates, she's the only one with experience of actually governing a state, rather than representing one in Congress.

Am I missing something? Why would she attract votes from those who think Obama is inexperienced, when she has bugger all experience herself?!

She's a total unknown in her own country.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by Hugh_Jazz

Am I missing something? Why would she attract votes from those who think Obama is inexperienced, when she has bugger all experience herself?!

She's a total unknown in her own country.

She's more experienced than Obama, given that she's spent time as a town mayor and state governor, with all the responsibility that entails. Obama has only ever been a legislator, which, unless you've spent a significant time working in Congress on the myriad different challenges government presents (as McCain and Biden have done) is no kind of qualification to be President.

It's interesting to note that no member of Congress has been elected President since 1960. Having a governor on the ticket this time round is going to be a huge bonus.

[daveofficer]

Originally Posted by Dave

She's more experienced than Obama, given that she's spent time as a town mayor and state governor, with all the responsibility that entails. Obama has only ever been a legislator, which, unless you've spent a significant time working in Congress on the myriad different challenges government presents (as McCain and Biden have done) is no kind of qualification to be President.

It's interesting to note that no member of Congress has been elected President since 1960. Having a governor on the ticket this time round is going to be a huge bonus.

although as has been pointed out it's hardly a vast leap forward in experience compared to obama. 2 years as governor in alaska. that's like saying you can run the giant tesco in dundee after working as manager of a spar for a couple of months.

she's also under investigation for abuse of power as governor and doesn't appear to know what the vice president actually does...

"As for that VP talk all the time, I can't answer until someone answers me. What is it exactly that a VP does every day?"

BBC NEWS | World | Americas | McCain unveils 'The Barracuda'

but she will win lots of votes from people who care more about the fact that she's the first woman who's come close to that position.

[TheTickingTime-Bomb]

Originally Posted by daveofficer

While Jefferson may have hoped for this I certainly don't think it's been acheived.

In God they trust after all.

Yeah I was talking about this recently with a mate.

Isn't it peculiar that the only nation whose constitution demands a seperation of church and state happens to be the foremost haven of political pandering of (mostly) insincere religious reverence? Britain (a nation lacking this constitution) on the other hand happens to be a haven of freethought and a nation that still respects the secular, enlightenment values wherever politics are concerned.

Don't get me wrong - I would never want to see the end of the church, I just don't think it belongs in the political sphere.

Originally Posted by Dave

So, not a scientific study, then? Given that that book has been totally discredited as a thinly-veiled rant against those who refuse to share Harris' myopic and intolerant politics and personal philosophies, do you really want to invoke it, or would you rather find a more accurate and fair-minded assessment of the beliefs of the American people? I'd advise doing the latter.

A fair-minded assessment of the beliefs of the American people? Would the Bible/Torah/Koran about cover it? Okay - Add a dash of The Bill of Rights and a twist of the second ammendment and you're pretty much there.

Originally Posted by Dave

You're making the fundamental mistake of assuming that a proclamation of one's own faith automatically makes that person incapable of tolerating the beliefs of others. At no point has the faith of one individual President conflicted with the laws guaranteeing freedom of worship to all in America. Unlike in the UK, the head of state has no dual role as defender of faith or head of the state religion. That was the division the framers of the constitution were seeking to make, not to disbar anyone seeking office from having a personal faith or to express it whenever they saw fit. Quite the opposite in fact.

No am I not making that fundamental mistake. And to your second point - Reagan? He pretty much said that anyone who wasn't Christian wasn't American.

I agree with your last point, but I can't finish up - I gotta catch a bus!

I promise I'll get round to this - many points to raise - points that are more on topic also.

[Bigsby]

Originally Posted by TheTickingTime-Bomb

Isn't it peculiar that the only nation whose constitution demands a seperation of church and state happens to be the foremost haven of political pandering of (mostly) insincere religious reverence? Britain (a nation lacking this constitution) on the other hand happens to be a haven of freethought and a nation that still respects the secular, enlightenment values wherever politics are concerned.

Bang on the money.

[Neil]

YouTube - Why you shouldn't vote for McCain

Bet he wins. People are stupid.

[Tubthumper]

I've seen a few pictures of her now. She looks like a bimbo.

Perfect for the Republicans.

Wahey!

[Panda Strong]

She also likes to kill polar bears : \

[Humey Whilem]

Jon Stewart & Stephen Colbert's take on Palin...