Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary
Maybe they already do, and no one has told us :eek:
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary
Maybe they already do, and no one has told us :eek:
Perhaps... So what is the answer? (I hate that I still have to add the disclaimer, but here goes... I would have replied to ES, but she is still 'ignoring' me. Childish, but what are ya gonna do. I apologized for being a tool.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Grace
Seriously, I am certianly no expert in macro-economics, but really, what is the answer to this issue? Sure, we would all like stuff to be "made in the USA". But the facts are this... The cost of US produced goods rarely comes close to that of goods made overseas. Generally, the overseas product is also of superior quality.
What is to blame for that? Unions? Our fat arsed lazy selves? What?
FWIW, I care very much about this issue. I has a great deal to do with my business.
We know the problem, lets hear some solutions. Here are mine.
1.) Limit Labor Unions. Yes, a fair wage should be expected, but $30 an hour to push a button in a steel plant?
2.) Eliminate sales tax on US produced goods.
3.) Education. Lets actually teach our kids real world skills, rather than worry about sex ed and all the nanny state crap.
I've got more, but lets hear yours. :)
I wonder how many Americans realize the government is borrowing money to pay for the Iraqi War?
And that war debt? From whom are we borrowing? Who will our children and grandchildren owe money to? To whom will this country owe?Quote:
The baseline budget numbers alone are mind-numbing: more than $490 billion in federal spending on the Iraq war so far -- including interest on the war debt. That's nearly 10 times the $50 billion the Bush administration originally estimated the war would cost.
The untold story -- one every American needs to hear -- is that the costs of this war go beyond these budget numbers. The Congressional Joint Economic Committee has determined that if the President's 2008 funding request is approved, the full economic cost of the war -- including the economic impact of deficit financing, the future care of our wounded veterans, and disruption in oil markets -- will total $1.3 trillion just by the end of 2008.
That's $16,500 for every family of four. And, if this war continues, that figure could jump to almost $37,000 for a family of four over the next decade.
Sparks19 is right.You cannot lower taxes and make more war!Quote:
Lower taxes but more programs
I was floored by this statement coming from the McCain camp on when
they will "allow" palin to speak to any newsmedia. She wants Americans
to vote her into the 2nd highest office in the country, but she is not
capable of answering any questions? If she's not up to tough political
questions, she should just say so.
Palin Media Avoidance Watch: Day 9 -- McCain Camp Says She Won't Do Interviews Until It Knows She'll Be Treated with "Deference"
September 07, 2008 9:41 AM
Rick Davis, campaign manager for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., just told Fox News Channel's Chris Wallace that McCain running mate Gov. Sarah Palin won't subject herself to any tough questions from reporters "until the point in time when she'll be treated with respect and deference."
Davis assailed the way the media had discussed Palin and her family in the last week and said the campaign would wait until a less hostile media environment.
So when will she subject herself to questions?
"When we think it's time and when she feels comfortable doing it," Davis said, praising a Fox News Channel profile of Palin that ran last night.
Why is she scared of answering questions? Wallace asked.
"She's not scared to answer questions," Davis said, "but you know what? We run our campaign not the news media."
Wallace said inappropriate intrusions into Palin's family and personal life aside, there are legitimate questions about whether she is prepared to be vice president.
"Sarah Palin will have the opportinity to speak to the American people," Davis said. "She will do interviews, but she'll do them on the terms and conditions" the campaign decides.
In fairness, an Alaska TV reporter did get to ask Palin a question Thursday, something along the lines of
"Governor, we feel like we're losing you - are you still going to be there for Alaska?"
- jpt
That's what I've been asking myself recently. You better believe if Obama shut himself off from the press, there would be tougher queries than that one by the Republicans.Quote:
Why is she scared of answering questions? Wallace asked.
From POLITICO -
Quote:
Palin agrees to interview
By: Mike Allen
September 7, 2008 02:57 PM EST
Under pressure for being shielded for questioning, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) has a agreed to sit down with Charles Gibson of ABC’s “World News Tonight,” according to an ABC News official.
No other interviews are scheduled. It will be the first TV interview for Palin since she was named 10 days ago as running mate to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).
Palin had planned to return to Alaska this weekend but is so popular on the stump that she is going to stay out a few more days before returning home. One of her sons deploys to Iraq on Thursday.
Palin plans to sit down with Gibson later this week in Alaska, the source said.
The McCain campaign kept her off Sunday shows this weekend and plans to be sparing with high-risk network encounters, which they contend are unimportant to voters despite the media’s fixation on them.
But McCain officials could see her reticence was feeding the narrative of her being unprepared for the job.
Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, her counterpart on the Democratic ticket, challenged her Sunday to submit to network questioning.
““She's a smart, tough politician,” Biden told Tom Brokaw in a “Meet the Press” interview live from Wilmington, Del. “So I think she's going to be formidable. Eventually, she's going to have to sit in front of you like I'm doing and have done.
Eventually, she's going to have to answer questions and not be sequestered.
Eventually, she's going to have to answer on the record.”
Oh my word. Pun intended.
The same reason the Bo won't do interviews is not the probably the same reason that SP will not.
But then again, If you ummm and ahhhh a great deal, that may look like you are not prepared or can't answer a question, In SP's case she might not be trusted to keep from pulling out a gun during the convo...
One of the late night talk show hosts did a joke about that...
What is it with VPs and guns, What could possibly go wrong?:p
Wow! :eek::eek: Unless the press tells the story the way they want it told - no interviews. More of the same as we get today!
Unfortunately, digging dirt on candidates and their families is as American as apple pie. Andrew Jackson's marriage to his wife before her divorce was final was a major scandal in its day and a big issue in the campaign. Some say it killed her.
Abraham Lincoln's wife also took a lot of heat from the press. She was from a slave owning family.
Negative press is what drove Nixon to make the famous "Checkers" speech and more recently we had the infamous Swift Boating. Anyone remember some hosility toward Kerry's wife? I can recall some pretty nasty things said about her right here on PetTalk! About her voice, her looks, her money.
I assume they are keeping Palin off the radar to control the message and to train her to talk about something other than mooseburgers.
Pity they don't think her capable of handling the heat.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
That's odd. I heard Barak Obama being interviewed on one of the Sunday morning talk show this morning. It was a pretty tough interview. And he handled some questions well and some questions not so well.
But he was interviewed.
Or does Bo refer to someone else?
She is being prepped. I read in last night's paper -Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary
Quote:
Experts Helping Palin Brush Up on Foreign Policy
ST. PAUL, Minn., Sept. 4 -- Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman is among several national security experts helping brief Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin on foreign policy issues as she prepares to hit the campaign trail while cramming for a debate with her Democratic opponent, Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (Del.), in less than a month, according to officials from Sen. John McCain's campaign.
I'm going to take this totally out of context because "flip flop" is one of my latest pet peeves - amongst many others (but I had to read/reply quickly because we're getting to our destination).Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
It's one of my pet peeves because he Republicans made such a big deal about it during the last electrion with Kerry, and they had already started on it in this election with Obama. Then I hear......at first Palin supported the "bridge to nowhere" but then "changed her position" and now she opposes it.
Why is it that when Republicans are speaking, Democrats "flip flop" and Republicans "change their position?"
I just don't understand why it has to be this way? Why can't everyone just realize that politicians - like everyone else in the world - can change their minds as they learn more about and issue/subject? Why must it be put in a negative light (when Democrats are involved) and be labeled as flip flopping instead of being heralded as "Hey, this man/lady must be intelligent. He/she looked into the details of the issue and realized the error of his/her ways?" (as it is when Republicans are involved).
Maybe if flip flopping hadn't been such an issue during the last elections, our fine sitting president (snicker) might not have been such a bull head......oh.....that's a topic for another conversation........:rolleyes:
Oh, and when I first logged onto PT today this topic was the first listed in the Dog House section and after reading the title of the thread, why was I not surprised to see Edwina's Secretary as the last poster to the thread?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubby & Peanut's Mom
It's so good to hear from you again.:D Hope you're able to pop in
a little more often.:)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubby & Peanut's Mom
But doesn't "honey, let's change position" sound far more romantic than "honey, let's flip flop" when you are dealing with politicians and who is in bed with them?;)
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008...s-his-critics/
The reason I post this is... NOW context matters? I don't care about BO's religion, but I do care about the press suddenly caring about context. It never mattered before, so why now?
Interesting...
http://www.newsweek.com/id/157986/page/3
Seems to be that a lot of the rumors about Mrs. Palin are FALSE or are taken WAY out of context. Shocker.