Our country wouldn't be in so much trouble if Clinton could have run a third term. Being a Bush lover won't gain you any IQ points or respect, lol.

Thank you, he obviously has no idea how old he is, lol.

WELL DESERVED OBSERVATIONS about her. She is no good for Alaska or America...plain (Palin), and simple. It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to see this, but then same goes for electing Bushwacker TWICE. Enough said about stupid people. at least for tonight

I saved too many to count. Now your turn. What are you 10, 12, 14?

Biden has a great reputation, and just as you said, he is human. Joe Biden is one of the most intelligent men in the public eye. He can answer any question that might be asked because he is smart and he is experienced. He is a great communicator and he knows how to be humble. He is the MOST QUALIFIED on Foreign Policy and certainly could win against Palin in a contest of "Stump the Candidate"... I love that line, thanks Palin. You don't get answers from McCain or Palin, you just get bashing of the Democratic opponents. In fairness to McCain, he may have married a c*nt, since he is such a d*ck.

Electrophile, in her mid 20's and not "qualified" by the standards we are expecting, would make Sarah look like the moron she is...lol. I wish Electrophile and other "average, liberal women" could question Palin. Oh wait, they tried that at the Townhall Meeting last night, it didn't work. She had no answers... srplane, you have been asked now by me and Babs, how old are you anyway? If you tell me you are still in Junior High, i may be able to understand you a little better.

If she was "smart" at least, she would answer the question. It's not that hard to understand the concept of a Townhall Meeting. You are asked about your qualifications and plans for the country, and you answer the questions. Evasive anwers = I am stupid and don't have an answer, = Sarah Palin... Joe Biden answers the questions he is asked and with knowledge. Sarah Palin stumbles and makes small talk...just what we need. A female Bush. Joe Biden will tear her up when they debate...and he will do it with courtesy. She will feel like a defendant on the witness stand...and ta, thet and um will be here most used words, lol. I am looking forward to this debate. Sarah better take some Atenolol before this debate. so srplane, how are doing tending to that boy crush on Mrs. Palin? Sorry again she didn't want you for her hunting mate...

From tonight's Townhall, Palin Asked straight out: about her "perceived lack of foreign policy experience" the question was to respond to that criticism and give specific skills that she can bring to the White House to mitigate that concern. Her answer: I think thet because i'm a Washington outsider thet ta thet opponents are goin to be lookin for a whole lot of things thet they can criticize and thet they can kinda beat the candidate ta here that chose me as his partner to um to kinda tear down the ticket but as for foreign policy you know i think that i am prepared and i know that on Jan 20th if we are so blessed to be sworn into office as your President and Vice President certainly we'll be ready, i'll be ready, i have that readiness, and if you want specifics with specific policy or specific countries, go ahead and and you can ask me you can you can play stump the candidate if you want to um but we are ready to serve. SHE NEVER ANSWERED THE QUESTION, LOL. The above was taken from Larry King Live. Just what i expected. She has NOTHING to offer. Electrophile, nobody believes any of us "Libs/Dems" are threatened by Palin. They are just using the "intimidation" tactics that the Bush Admin. and Repubs think work (and they do on many of the less educated). I am not intimidated, i am aware and educated. I listen to the debates, the reports, the Larry King Live and AC 360 type shows, and i make up my mind based on common sense. Common sense would dictate we dump the sh*t the last eight years imposed on us and go with people who care about this country. Not just people who care (Sarah Palin) about their own agenda. McCain just wants the title of President. If he really cared, he would have chosen a sound, ready and knowledgeable running mate. I am however afraid if McCain wins, that both will continue to ruin our country in the same vein as GWB has done. There will be no difference, and i fear for my future and especially for my child's. Our country is being ruined, literally, by the Republican Administration and McNoChange, more of the same will continue the trend. Palin will set both feminists and the country back 50 years. We can't afford these two. It was 100% obvious from day one McStupid picked her not for the good of the country (because he didn't know her much better than i did) but because it was the Karl Rove scumbag move, and he was desperate. I also think, like srplane, McCain has a boyish crush on her. Must have something to do with her "fertility"...lol. She is nothing like the average American woman, and if anyone read the link i posted about the Alaskan Anti-Palin Rally from 2 days ago, apparently many Alaskan women don't like her either. She will be exposed. That doesn't guarantee the stupid people will see this. Yes, our country has been dummied down, anyone who voted for Bush made that happen.

Larry King Live now...will review McStupid/Palin

She stuttered like her stupid self, lol, because she has no idea. In addition, she needed Grandaddy to save her...pathetic. McCain should have chosen a woman who is both experienced and intelligent, cause we know he needs someone smart by his side. This woman will show her lack of knowledge and lack of what the country really needs when Biden debates her. Until then, i continue to look forward to what other skeletons turn up in her closet. Oh sorry, did Sarah turn down your offer to go hunting with her and her hubby? Little boy crushes can be painful...awww...

I just heard it on Anderson Cooper on CNN. Maybe there is some You Tube footage (my pc won't allow me to view You Tube, but i hope to upgrade when finances allow for it). I don't doubt they will pull a Bush on her. They have already hid her way too long. It's obvious why, but what a shame. I meant to add this link on McCain, find it interesting that he has never had a plan for the economy, and now this is going to be the hottest topic (as our country keeps falling farther into trouble). http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?articl...economic_agenda What Is McCain's Economic Agenda? The man who famously admitted that economics is not his strong suit wants to fundamentally alter the government's role in the economy by deeply cutting non-defense spending, from discretionary programs to entitlements. Jared Bernstein | March 17, 2008 | web only Next time you catch a John McCain interview, watch for what, at least to my ears and eyes, is a fascinating, albeit subtle, shift. When he's talking about almost anything other than the economy -- foreign policy, the war, Congress, immigration -- he exudes the typical confidence of a veteran Washington player. He deftly shifts the question to his turf, he ardently hits his message points ... just about what you'd expect, actually. But when the topic turns to the economy, his whole demeanor changes. His body language becomes uncomfortable; he almost seems to shrink a little. His edgy smile becomes forced, his words a bit -- sometimes more than a bit -- hesitant. Putting aside your views on his positions and evaluating his performance on form only, when he's on the other topics, he's a basketball player driving the lane. On the economy, he's looking to pass ASAP. In economic discussions, he makes mistakes, both small and not so small. He famously admitted that economics is not his strong suit, though he assured us that he owns Greenspan's book. I've heard him speak of the "alternate" minimum tax (it's "alternative" -- can you imagine Hillary getting that wrong?). In a recent interview in The Wall Street Journal, he was unaware that his Web site endorsed a different plan regarding Social Security than the one he was touting to the interviewer. It's hard to imagine a discrepancy like that regarding the war. He missed the current downturn -- though he's far from alone on that count -- by a long shot, stressing the strengths of the economy's "fundamentals" as recently as January (now he apparently believes we're in or headed for a recession but still can't resist the "strong fundamentals" nonsense). McCain's answers to questions regarding the policy responses to the current downturn are way off base, far worse than you'd get from say, Secretary Paulson or even Bush. In a recent Wall Street Journal interview, when asked what measures would best deal with the current downturn, he touted making the Bush tax cuts permanent in 2010 and cutting corporate tax rates. Other than Larry Kudlow and The Wall Street Journal's editorial page, I can't imagine many folks would be inspired by that plan. So he isn't exactly Adam Smith. But I still think there's a lot for the electorate to consider regarding McCainonomics. Given his predilection to follow the George W. Bush agenda, some critics have labeled him "McSame," attempting a guilt-by-association strategy. There's a lot to be said for that strategy. His voting record reveals him to share Bush’s deregulatory zeal, but I don't think it's that simple. In his heart, I think candidate McCain wants to fundamentally alter the economic landscape of government's role in the economy by deeply cutting non-defense spending, from discretionary programs to entitlements. He gets there not because he's heartless but because that's the unforgiving combination of his arithmetic and his ideology. He's Not a Mathematician Perhaps one shouldn't expect candidates' numbers to add up. Tally up Clinton and Obama's expenditures on health care and tax cuts and you will find that they both spend more than they raise. But McCain's numbers are out of whack by orders of magnitude beyond those of either Democratic candidate. Here's the gist of it: Despite his earlier opposition, he now wants to make the Bush tax cuts permanent. Price tag: more than $2 trillion over 10 years. He wants to repeal the alternative minimum tax. Price tag: "up to $2 trillion" according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP). He wants to keep the war going ad infinitum, at a cost of between $100 billion and $150 billion per year, according to CBO estimates. Then there is his health-care plan, which ends the employer tax exemption for the cost of covering employees, and uses the proceeds to subsidize the purchase of health coverage in the private market. The costly part has to do with the poor, the old, and the sick. As health economist Jon Gruber noted, "his plan will require huge subsidies he's not talking about." Oh, and did I mention he wants to cut the corporate tax rate too, from 35 percent to 25 percent, and allow businesses to fully write off capital investments as soon as they make them? Bob Greenstein, the director of the CBPP, is not prone to hyperbole. But he called McCain's program "one of the most fiscally irresponsible plans we've seen by a presidential candidate in a long time." According to Len Burman of the Brookings Institution's Tax Policy Center, McCain's tax cuts would shrink federal revenues by 25 percent over 10 years, at which point they would account for about 15 percent of GDP, compared to 19 percent last year. Now, I understand that this is absolutely sweet music to the ears of the Grover Norquists of the world—the "starve the beast" contingent. But let's play all this cutting out a bit further, turning to the spending side of the equation. Note that McCain made the "no new taxes" pledge, though he recently backtracked slightly. (He told The Wall Street Journal, "I'm not making a 'read my lips' statement … but I'm not saying I can envision a scenario where I would [raise taxes], OK?") For all of his nervousness around economic issues, when McCain moves into "government-waste, spend-cutting mode" he relocates his mojo. He has clearly seen the government waste money over his long tenure, and he clearly doesn't like it. I don't either. But the cuts he has articulated don't even start to begin to commence to fill the budget hole he creates. His most common target is earmarks -- those provisions quietly embedded in legislation to steer funding to some desired project or constituency. But there are two problems here, one big, one little. The big one is that the total earmark bill is much too small to pay for even a tiny fraction of McCain's agenda. Most estimates score them at around $20 billion per year, though the McCain folks say they can get up to $60 billion. That's a few months in Iraq, John. Second, of course it's the case that there are lots of earmarks that should go, and that the process should be much more transparent. But once it is, we will find out that a number of these projects are important and worthy. McCain himself was cutting up recently about an earmark to do research on bear DNA: "I don't know if it was paternity issue or criminal, but it was a waste of money." Problem is, The New York Times pointed out that scientists were doing the research to estimate the bear population, "a prerequisite for sensible administration of the Endangered Species Act." I'd bet you that for every 10 "bridges to nowhere" there are at least a few of these good earmarks (a friend of mine promotes earmarks for the Special Olympics and cancer research). So, let's review. McCain is shaky on economic policy, has quite massive plans to cut taxes while kicking up spending on health care and the war, is loathe to raise taxes, and is articulating only tiny spending cuts. Or is he? He's a Deep Cutter John McCain, along with his top economic adviser, economist Doug Holtz-Eakin, talk a lot about "entitlement reform." What does this mean? First, let me say that I am a huge admirer of Holtz-Eakin, an economist and former CBO director who is congenitally incapable of cooking books or spinning numbers. I suspect that's one reason why he and McCain appeal to each other (yes, the "straight-talk express" has been off track lately, but I think McCain actually has a pretty low tolerance for economic spin). And both of them must know that they can't implement their agenda without deep cuts, both on non-defense, domestic spending, and on entitlements, especially Medicare. As Holtz-Eakin put it a few years ago in an opinion piece for The Washington Post, a serious fiscal approach "should rethink the package of support for old-age medical care, long-term care services and retirement income." Much like the material on McCain's Web site, that sounds innocuous enough. It also has the benefit of being true. Absent a "rethink," Medicare will swamp the federal budget. This increase in health spending as a share of government spending is itself a symptom of the unsustainable rise in economy-wide health-care costs, i.e., this is not exclusively a "Medicare" or public-sector problem. (Social Security poses less of a fiscal challenge; it can be put on a sound funding basis with a few reasonable changes.) But here's the rub: words like "reform," "rethink," and "making tough choices" sound a lot different than words like "cut, and cut deeply." Holtz-Eakin has integrity, and he likes his numbers to add up. He knows that they can't do what they say they're planning to do without going after entitlements big time. As he put it the other day in The Wall Street Journal, "You can't keep promises made to retirees" (to be fair, he also noted that "you can pay future retirees more than current retirees"). In fact, you can keep those promises. It won't be easy, and he or she who chooses to do so will need the vision to make the case, along with the political skill and will to make it happen, part of which is about reintroducing competence and faith in government. That means ending the war, raising the revenues needed to meet social needs, and reforming the health-care system with an emphasis on risk-pooling and cost controls. When it comes to economic stewardship, this election is truly a fork in the road. There are surely those who want to travel McCain's route, deeply cutting the size and obligations of the federal government in order to pay for tax cuts and war. But I think there are more of us who recognize that this path is a dangerous one. We've seen the outcome of Bushonomics. Its inattention to good government and its deregulatory zeal are evident from Katrina to Iraq to the current recession. Its reverse Robin Hood tax policies have exacerbated market-driven inequalities. Yet, much to some conservatives chagrin, Bush was never willing or able to pursue a true slash and burn approach to fiscal policy. His privatization plans failed, he laid nary a finger on the entitlements (other than to expand Medicare), and his tax cuts will not be made permanent by the time he leaves D.C. As I see it, McCain wants to change that. He may come across as fumbling in interviews, but to see where he is headed, you have to blend an understanding of his campaign platform, his advisers, and his ideology. What you're left with is a plan to considerably shrink that part of government that functions to enhance economic security at a time when we arguably need a lot more of it.

Are you a teenager by any chance? You appear to be about 14 (although i have known many 14 years olds who make you still look dumb). You never provide any sources to back up your worthless commentary. Your boyish crush on Palin is laughable. Your fantasies of hunting with Palin and her hubby, more to laugh about. Put on CNN and listen to Palin stutter in attempts to answer "real" questions. She is clueless on the economy. When asked what she would do, McCain jumped in an attempt to save her, diverting the question and talking about how wonderful she played sports. She has no idea (and probably doesn't give a damn) what direction we need to go in to bail out our poor country. Just as sad, McCain is just as clueless...and he's really the one that should matter. This article should be filled with details of McCain/ Palin's plans to improve our country, but it's as devoid of information, as this team is. Their strategy is to "bash"...but offer nothing in their plans for actual leadership... LINK: September 17, 2008, 9:51 PM At Town Hall With Palin, McCain Takes Lead In Criticizing Obama Posted by John Bentley (CBS)From CBS News' John Bentley: (GRAND RAPIDS, Mich.) – While it was Sarah Palin’s first time to take questions from voters tonight, the man who credits over a hundred town halls in New Hampshire for reviving his candidacy was also on stage, taking over the role of criticizing the Republicans’ rival. “Sen. Obama said in recent days that he may delay his economic plan because of the adverse impact of his tax increases,” John McCain said. “We can’t elect a president whose agenda would hurt our economy.” The Obama campaign disagreed with that assessment. “Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin may have taken questions together for the first time, but they didn’t give a single answer about what they would do differently from George Bush to fix the economy,” said Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor. “Instead of explaining why Sen. McCain thinks the fundamentals of the economy are strong, they offered more lies about Barack Obama’s record.” McCain went on to say that he and Palin would not raise taxes, because “the worst thing you can do is raise taxes in difficult times.” But the running mates didn’t agree on every issue. When a member of the audience asked if Palin had convinced McCain to drill in ANWR, something McCain said he does not want to do, Palin admitted to trying to change his mind. "I'm still working on it," she said. “What do you expect from two mavericks?” McCain said by way of explanation on their disagreements. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whatever you have to do to make yourself feel like a man. Good luck with that...

I meant to say how sorry i feel on this thread much sooner. Pink Floyd are one of my biggest influences in falling in love with rock music (and more obscure/progressive music). I bought a copy of Dark Side of the Moon when i was 11, the same time i started listening to Led Zeppelin. It's sad to lose a Pink Floyd member, but his beautiful music will always live on. RIP Rick Wright.

The First Cut Is The Deepest...Rod Stewart

Well the Republicans haven't been pushing "Family Values" this time around. I can see WHY, lol. Great stuff! I always love to read what you post! FYI...Palin wasn't picked for you liberal gals, anyway.

I Know What I Like (In Your Wardrobe)...Genesis

I'd Love To Change The World...Ten Years After

You sound like Ronniedawg, he said he never asked women out. But see, now that isn't working for you anymore. SO it's simple, if you see a girl you like, you need to approach her. It's not that big of a deal. Especially if you don't spend too much time thinking about it. Just do it! I can tell you from experience (as a girl) i have met men by them coming on to me first and by me coming on to them first. Sometimes i rejected the guy, sometimes the guy rejected me (though not often, lol, and not if they weren't already in a relationship). Everyone, male and female, are capable of being the initiator. When i was a teen i did ask guys out and ask for their phone numbers, and at that time it was considered the boy's place. I speak to you as a girl who thinks it's okay for anyone to make the first move. Whoever has the interest in the person, should be the one to do it. You deserve to give up chances of meeting a girl you like if you aren't willing to put yourself out there. Don't be so hung-up on the what if's and take a chance. I still wish you would have asked that girl for her number. You liked her, and maybe if you had taken a chance, you would be dating her right now.

Rock n Roll Fantasy...The Kinks

If you want to meet a girl sooner, you need to get over your fear sooner. What used to work for you before this slump? You say you have had lots of relationships, so what did you do to land them?

LOL, where are these men hiding? Medhb, do you know?

Like I've Never Been Gone...Robert Plant

Your welcome. I just wish you had asked her for her number. Then if she said no at least you wouldn't be feeling bad now. Well i hope you're not dwelling on her. She isn't worth it if she couldn't call you, even if it was just to talk. Although, when you think about it. Maybe she is as afraid to make the first move as you were. Spats, you need to start working on your self-esteem and women pick up's now so you will be ready next Spring (seriously).

All you do is repeat because you are stupid, lol. btw...i highly doubt Palin and her hubby would want to wolf hunt with YOU. Get over your little boy crush it's embarassing.