Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by JustChristian, Sep 26, 2008.
But is was Guillanni for the Republicans. Where was VP candidate Palin?
Now that you mention it, where was she? I guess they were afraid she would be asked a question...
Sarah Palin, MIA
Amusing moment on CNN just now. Wolf Blitzer, coming out of a commercial:
"We've been getting some emails from views out there wondering why we spent some time interviewing Joe Biden, the Democratic vice presidential nominee and not Sarah Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee. We would have loved to interview--we'd still love to interview Sarah Palin. Unfortunately we asked, we didn't get that interview...We're hoping that Sarah Palin will join us at some point down the road."
I'm told that Biden appeared on every major network tonight except ABC (which only turned him down because Palin wasn't available, on an equal-time sort of basis).
It's pretty strange when a candidate can't trust his own running mate to be out there spinning on his behalf.
As a Republican, I am very disappointed that Palin has been shielded from the media. The VP candidate should be able to address all the major issues of the election without fear. Now, I don't think it's absolutely necessary to have an abundance of experience, but the VP candidate should at least be conversant with the hot points of the campaign.
Sarah Palin, I fear, is not. I was very excited about the pick in the beginning, but I'm starting to think it was a mistake. I never thought McCain would have selected someone without experience AND without thorough knowledge as a VP.
It looks like Palin is turning out to be an albatross around John McCain's neck!
Palin's fifteen minutes of fame has officially ended!
I won't be surprised if the McCain campaign tries to get the VP debate cancelled next week.
This is what I don't get--why on earth can't McCain's aides brief Palin enough to be serviceable? You could give her a crash course in a couple of weeks, and she should be good to go. A person of reasonable intelligence with decent communication skills should be fine after that point. Would she be an all-world debater? No, but she should be able to handle an interview.
I believe Palin will speak when the time is right. The democrats and their networks and the voters who require someone else to think for them, are picking on Palin in hopes to take the spotlight away from the fact that Obama is not qualified nor exerienced enough to be President.
Was she being shielded? Perhaps we should find out why she didn't speak before we make assumptions.
Now you have raised a great point here, the feedback from the polls say the campaign is breaking the Palin everyone fell in love with by having her out of her comfort zone with canned answers that aren't her. The consensus is she was better and more attractive to voters when her answers were non DC. They knew she didn't have a lot of the DC knowledge but were confident with her quick ability to learn and past experience to fall back on.
If this is so, the campaign is taking their best asset and degrading it by fixing it. :BangHead:
It is no assumption she is shielded. the only question is why? We are 38 days from voting, if America is not given a factual answer they will have to go with either the ones the Democrats offer or with their own assumptions. In the absence of facts, assumptions become the facts.
The Obama campaign has the Biden gaffomatic on a tight lease now.
They won't send him to a supermarket opening without a telepromter and somebody to stuff the gag in his mouth as soon as he finishes reciting the prewritten party lines.
Wrong, the machine was active today in FL. I sure wish he'd dump the gaff machine and pick up Hillary.
So where's your evidence then? The only thing I know is that she didn't speak. I don't know why. That's my point. You assume she is being shielded. Why didn't you assume her child was sick? Or she was speaking elsewhere? Or something else? You assume she was being shielded. But you didn't offer any evidence of it.
Incorrect. In the absence of the knowledge of facts, assumptions are treated as facts. I think your statement reveals something that is terribly wrong, both here and in the world at large. Facts are never absent. They are sometimes unknown. But when you don't know a fact, you have no right to make up your own.
Good post... Very well said. :applause: :applause:
You are right, we have no right to make our own which is another flaw in man...