Palin breaks with McCain on gay marriage

[bicker]

Palin makes it impossible to vote for McCain.

 

[dvcgirl]

Seems to be working for Obama.

That argument....that Palin is as qualified or more qualified than Obama just never held water. It's ridiculous in my opinion.

I don't even think that most conservatives (if they're being honest with themselves) believe that one any longer.

 

[bicker]

That argument....that Palin is as qualified or more qualified than Obama just never held water. It's ridiculous in my opinion.

Indeed; and as soon as the shock of McCain's poor judgment wore off, even Republican insiders began saying it as well. Now, some of the most well-known Republicans are are acknowledging it.

 

[Master Mason]

Palin makes it impossible to vote for McCain.

If you had said that Palin made it impossible for you to vote for her, or even you and others, you would have been correct, however your blanket statement is proven false by the fact that I and many others have or are going to vote for McCain.

Putting someone in the office of president that I feel is unqualified is much worse than putting someone in the office of vice president, that I feel is unqualified.

 

[Master Mason]

That argument....that Palin is as qualified or more qualified than Obama just never held water. It's ridiculous in my opinion.

I don't even think that most conservatives (if they're being honest with themselves) believe that one any longer.

Regardless of anyones views on palin, I do not personally understand how you could vote for Obama if you feel him to be unqualified. Even if his level of unqualification is higher than that of the VP candidate on the other side.

 

[bicker]

If you had said that Palin made it impossible for you to vote for her, or even you and others, you would have been correct

My statement was correct, regardless, in the context of the message it was replying to.

All comments are only legitimately evaluable in their context.

Putting someone in the office of president that I feel is unqualified ....

The man you feel is unqualified is qualified according to the man you feel is qualified, McCain having described Obama as, "a person you do not have to be scared of as president of the United States". So either your preferred candidate isn't qualified because he lies (not the case), or your concern about the other candidate being (specifically) "unqualified" is unfounded.

 

[dvcgirl]

Regardless of anyones views on palin, I do not personally understand how you could vote for Obama if you feel him to be unqualified. Even if his level of unqualification is higher than that of the VP candidate on the other side.

I don't feel that he's unqualified, or even under-qualified. I think he's qualified to be the President, but with less experience than most who run for office. But on the topic of qualification.....in my opinion.....Obama and Palin aren't even on the same playing field.

And on the experience argument, George W. Bush's resume from eight years ago would present him as quite qualified for the office. Look where that got us.

Obama is very bright, has excellent instincts and has surrounded himself with a very experienced team. Unlike Bush, I think he's smart enough to recognize when a certain plan or strategy isn't going well. Bush was incredibly stubborn. Stubborn to a fault.

But listen, I don't think that this guy is the messiah. I recognize that whoever wins is being left with the "mother of all messes" with respect to our economic situation. But McCain, for someone who is more experienced than Obama on paper, sure looked flustered when the pooh was hitting the fan a few weeks back. He really was all over the place....had a "plan a day". I said this a few weeks back and now I see Powell and Adelman saying the same thing in the past few days.

 

[bicker]

Very well-said dvcgirl. Folks here know I was all set to vote for McCain until he demonstrated very poor judgment, betrayed his own centrist values, and began acting erratic and unrealiable. Obama is no where near my first choice; he's probably in the second third! However, McCain is in the third third, now, based on his own poor judgment and the abandonment of his own personal integrity.

 

[ChrizJen]

Thanks for taking the time to tell me about your experience (see, I was reading the Cliff's notes from his book ). Bureacracy.....UGH! That is a pain and unfair to boot. As a conservative I oppose bureacracy on principle. It is an unthinking, uncaring way of carrying out the will of the people. I want less of it (end infomercial).

DW and I have mutual life-long friends who are gay (they are dudes), have been in a committed relationship for nearly 12 years and have had the same kind of challenges in adopting a child you relate above (Texas does the one parent primary thing also). We were very proud when they asked us recently if we would be character references for them.

They went through a private referral agency in the Dallas area and it is costing them a good bit of money,time and sanity, but they will get their child. We can't wait til it happens (which could be literally any day now).

We ourselves are on a 3yr "glide path" to adopting a child (need to get the youngest one into school before we make the plunge though). It will cost us a good bit of $ also (but will be infinitely worth it).

There are bureacratic hurdles we all must cross. I say we work on removing these hurdles by removing Govt from every detail of our lives. this is the kind of change I am hoping for.

I guess what I am saying is, there are layers to us conservatives too......kinda like onions (am I allowed a Shrek reference on a Disney board?)

I'd venture to say that as far as Government staying out of social issues, the republican candidates have their hands far deeper in that cookie jar than any of the democratic candidates. Anyone who willingly stands up and admits to the nation that he/she is in favor of amending our United States Constitution in order to deny an entire population rights? Well, that's one too many grubby hands in my cookie jar, thanks very much.


As for your efforts to adopt, kudos to you! I'm thankful that there are folks like you who are willing to make the sacrifices necessary to adopt a child.

But with all due respect, I was not referring in my post to any of the normal, everyday expenses or hurdles that are involved in adopting and/or raising a child. I accept those costs willingly. I realize that all parents (adoptive, biological, gay, straight, etc) have expenses. It's not cheap to adopt, and it's not cheap to raise a child.

But that's where the equality ends. Why should your dear gay friends and I have to make ADDITIONAL sacrifices and jump through ADDITIONAL hoops (aren't there enough hoops to jump through already?) to have the same rights that you and your wife are automatically afforded?

How would it make you feel if you went through the entire process involved, made as many sacrifices as your wife, and then were told that you don't get to be a parent. Only your wife gets to. You're on your own, and you'll have to get a lawyer and petition for a second parent adoption (if you're lucky enough to have that as an option), otherwise just have some papers drawn up to make it so that you'll be granted some of the rights that your wife has.

I cannot support a candidate who will openly, in front of God and country, say that he/she is willing amend the United States Constitution in order to keep me from having those rights.
And I don't understand how anyone who claims to care about the rights of others could in good conscience vote for them either.

We'll probably just have to politely agree to disagree on our respective choices for President and VP.

 

[JR6ooo4]

Really the President can impose their personal beliefs on the entire country? When exactly were they granted those powers?

They were not given, but the last 8 years they were certainly taken!

Mikeeee

 

[Castlebound]

I was one of the undecided until McCain announced Palin as his VP choice. The more I learned about her the less I liked. She scares me! I thought that "W" was too far to the right for me, and from everything that I've seen Palin is worse. I think that she should keep telling America what she is for and against maybe it will at least make people stop and take another look.

I don't really feel like either party represents me. I am pretty moderate on social issues and fairly conservative on economic issues. Neither candidate's economic plan is really winning me over. As it stands for me I see my choices as the Dems. being economically liberal and socially moderate, or the Reps. being economically liberal and socially conservative to the point of repression.

 

[TomLovesBecky]

As soon as she does something that makes sense or shows me that she has half a brain, I promise I will.

Amen! She just gets dumber and dumber. She definitely cost McCain two votes, from my household.

 

[Master Mason]

My statement was correct, regardless, in the context of the message it was replying to.

All comments are only legitimately evaluable in their context.

The man you feel is unqualified is qualified according to the man you feel is qualified, McCain having described Obama as, "a person you do not have to be scared of as president of the United States". So either your preferred candidate isn't qualified because he lies (not the case), or your concern about the other candidate being (specifically) "unqualified" is unfounded.

I don't have to agree with everything my choosen candidate thinks or believes, including his opinion about his opponent.

They were not given, but the last 8 years they were certainly taken!

Mikeeee

Please by all means show me where the current president has made an executive order that forces his personal beliefs on everyone. Just one will do.

 

[Cindy F]

I don't have to agree with everything my choosen candidate thinks or believes, including his opinion about his opponent.

If Palin had said "I support a constitutional amendment to prevent African Americans from marrying", would you feel different? Could you support someone and vote them into office if they had made that statement? What is the difference? The very bottom line, no matter what you argue, or what side of the fence you're on is this:

Palin supports a constitutional amendment to ban a group of people from the same rights another group of people are allowed. Bottom line. Period.

It is one thing to state that you do not "agree with homosexuality" or that "my religion teaches me it's wrong" ok to each his own HOWEVER; that is a far cry from supporting a constitutional amendment limiting legal/constitutional rights to a specific group of taxpaying, American citizens.

That is wrong. I don't care how much one may want to support their own agenda/candidate/ prejudices etc., it is wrong to do that. I honestly don't see how anyone could support such a thing...the very nature and tone of it is repulsive to me. I firmly believe history will remember those who treat gay people in this manner they same as it remembers George Wallace standing on the front steps of U.A.....and it will be deserved.

Everyone is so quick to jump on the slippery slope arguments in this election.....why not slide down this one for a minute:

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)

It is not my intent to attack anyone, I just don't understand why people can not see how wrong this is. It's just wrong

 

[cats7494]

I'd venture to say that as far as Government staying out of social issues, the republican candidates have their hands far deeper in that cookie jar than any of the democratic candidates. Anyone who willingly stands up and admits to the nation that he/she is in favor of amending our United States Constitution in order to deny an entire population rights? Well, that's one too many grubby hands in my cookie jar, thanks very much.


As for your efforts to adopt, kudos to you! I'm thankful that there are folks like you who are willing to make the sacrifices necessary to adopt a child.

But with all due respect, I was not referring in my post to any of the normal, everyday expenses or hurdles that are involved in adopting and/or raising a child. I accept those costs willingly. I realize that all parents (adoptive, biological, gay, straight, etc) have expenses. It's not cheap to adopt, and it's not cheap to raise a child.

But that's where the equality ends. Why should your dear gay friends and I have to make ADDITIONAL sacrifices and jump through ADDITIONAL hoops (aren't there enough hoops to jump through already?) to have the same rights that you and your wife are automatically afforded?

How would it make you feel if you went through the entire process involved, made as many sacrifices as your wife, and then were told that you don't get to be a parent. Only your wife gets to. You're on your own, and you'll have to get a lawyer and petition for a second parent adoption (if you're lucky enough to have that as an option), otherwise just have some papers drawn up to make it so that you'll be granted some of the rights that your wife has.

I cannot support a candidate who will openly, in front of God and country, say that he/she is willing amend the United States Constitution in order to keep me from having those rights.
And I don't understand how anyone who claims to care about the rights of others could in good conscience vote for them either.

We'll probably just have to politely agree to disagree on our respective choices for President and VP.

I am sorry you have to jump through all the ridiculous hoops; life stories like yours just break my heart. I have never understood why a whole population of people are not given basic human rights! Why am I allowed to marry the love of my life and you are not? It just makes me sad and angry.
Good luck to your family! Bless you for adopting!

 

[RainbowBrite]

How about we put a federal ban on marriage for anyone named Sarah Palin and see how she likes being denied her human right?

 

[LukenDC]

Amen! She just gets dumber and dumber. She definitely cost McCain two votes, from my household.

She has cost McCain several votes among my friends, neighbors, colleagues, and family. I was seriously considering a vote for McCain, but the addition of Palin made that impossible. She is not qualified and does not even sound intelligent. I want a president/vice president who is well-traveled, well-spoken, and intellectual.

 

[ChrizJen]

I am sorry you have to jump through all the ridiculous hoops; life stories like yours just break my heart. I have never understood why a whole population of people are not given basic human rights! Why am I allowed to marry the love of my life and you are not? It just makes me sad and angry.
Good luck to your family! Bless you for adopting!

Thank you! We're having our final home visit in a few weeks, then we'll just be waiting for a placement.

 

[RickinNYC]

Even my very Republican Father takes issue with her.

I didn't bother to read the entire thread only because it's more of the same old same old. The above, however, caught my eye. My own father, a tried and true Republican, staunch conservative, retired military officer and very devout dude said the other day, "Rick, one thing we can thank Palin for is bringing the two parties together, at least in this family. We can all agree she's a moron."



I love my far right Republican conservative Dad!

 

[RickinNYC]

If we're going to support Colin Powell for breaking with his party, she deserves to be respected for her opinion as well.

Oh my God. Comparing Powell and Palin? Powell has brains. Palin is a complete and total idiot. No comparison there, hence no respect for the girl.