That argument holds no water. That list could continue on, and that's fine, but I want people who ARE running for President not to be ignorant of world affairs and I want them to be well traveled. Again, Palin does not meet this criteria.

 

Imagine had Obama been the one without the forgein travel experience...the neo-cons would have been all over him! I guess it just comes down to what side of the fence you are on as to which side you throw your stones at! :lol:

That has been my contention from the beginning and exactly why I raise this point. Palin has less than 60 days to make that case and she is currently not accepting questions.

Presidential campaign's were much shorter in Wilson's day, so I doubt that he had much more than 60 days to make his case to voters.

 

Like any good VP candidate, between now and the election Sara Palin's foreign policy will be the same as her party's candidate for president. Palin does not need to develop and articulate her own foreign policy over the next 60 days - that is not the role of the VP candidate and it never has been in modern campaigns.

Imagine had Obama been the one without the forgein travel experience...the neo-cons would have been all over him! I guess it just comes down to what side of the fence you are on as to which side you throw your stones at! :lol:

For the record, I am not a neo-con. I am a true conservative. Many people do not understand the difference.

Like any good VP candidate, between now and the election Sara Palin's foreign policy will be the same as her party's candidate for president. Presidential campaign's were much shorter in Wilson's day, so I doubt that he had much more than 60 days to make his case. Palin does not need to develop and articulate her own foreign policy over the next 60 days - that is not the role of the VP candidate and it never has been in modern campaigns.

 

I don't feel like digging it up, but I've made that point in other threads. However, the problem is answering a question that doesn't have a neat, packaged campaign answer, or a question the campaign has not opined on. She will be called upon to make FP and economic statements that don't have a playbook answer.

I don't feel like digging it up, but I've made that point in other threads. However, the problem is answering a question that doesn't have a neat, packaged campaign answer, or a question the campaign has not opined on. She will be called upon to make FP and economic statements that don't have a playbook answer.

I am pretty confident that Palin will be well versed on likely questions concerning foreign policy and that she and McCain are probably already on the same page on economic policies. This campaign will not be decided on something as trivial as Palin getting stumped on a question like naming the president of Belarus. People will be more interested in what the ticket intends to do to reduce the cost of gasoline and jump start the economy - and she is much better prepared to answer those questions than either Biden or Obama.

For the record, I am not a neo-con. I am a true conservative. Many people do not understand the difference.

 

Many don't understand the difference between liberal, socialist and communist, either. :lol:

Many don't understand the difference between liberal, socialist and conservative, either. :lol:

Many of us do.

Many of us do.

 

See my corrected post. Exchange "communist" for "conservative."

Obama was not thinking clearly when he picked Biden as his running mate. He should have gone with a Washington outsider to reenforce his campaign's change theme.

Seriously, is there any Democrat that Obama could have picked that you wouldn't be critical of?

 

Frankly, if you're being critical of Obama's pick, it must have been a good one.

McCain and Palin are taking the change theme away from Obama by talking about the changes that they have already made.

What changes have they already made?

 

I kept hearing "change" mentioned at the Republican convention ... haven't they noticed which party has been totally in charge in Washington for six of the last eight years?

Many don't understand the difference between liberal, socialist and communist, either. :lol:

Amen ...

For the record, I am not a neo-con. I am a true conservative. Many people do not understand the difference.

I would cast my vote for "neo-con" ...

Seriously, is there any Democrat that Obama could have picked that you wouldn't be critical of?

Seriously, if you were more active on this forum, then you would know the answer to that question. IMO, Hillary Clinton was the very obvious and safe pick for Obama but his elephant sized ego would not allow him to pick her. I would have been very critical of Clinton but not Obama's decision to pick her. I think Clinton would have made a much better president than Obama would.

 

As for Democrats that I would have preferred Obama to have selected, I made the case for Brian Schweitzer months ago at the same time that I made the pitch for Sarah Palin and for many of the same reasons. Schweitzer has been against the Iraq War, which would have appealed to the left, and he was the most knowledgeable prospective candidate on energy among elected Democrats, IMO. If Obama had adopted a more rational energy plan and allowed Schweitzer to articulate that plan, the ticket would have had more appeal to moderate Republicans and independents.

 

Sam Nunn would have been another smart pick for Obama. He has been out of the US Senate long enough to run as an outsider and nobody would have questioned his foreign policy credentials.

 

Biden was a bone headed choice that does nothing to reenforce Obama's change message. Biden is a terrible campaigner and I would not be shocked to see Obama replace him with Hillary before the election.

 

Frankly, if you're being critical of Obama's pick, it must have been a good one.

What changes have they already made?

If you are seriously questioning the records of John McCain and Sarah Palin of challenging the status quo and shaking things up in the role of reformers, then I suggest you do some serious homework.

I kept hearing "change" mentioned at the Republican convention ... haven't they noticed which party has been totally in charge in Washington for six of the last eight years?

Sarah Palin has not been in Washington at all. She is the only outside-the-beltway candidate running. McCain did not create the nickname "Maverick" for this campaign. The media has been referring to McCain as a maverick for years for his tendency to embarrass his fellow Republicans on key issues by working with Democrats to pass legislation (most of which I have opposed).

 

Neither Obama nor Biden have no record of change - all they can do is promise change in the future. Biden was a bone headed pick.

There sure are alot of posters in this thread that I never knew were women. :lol:

There sure are alot of posters in this thread that I never knew were women. :lol:

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Sarah has run a state government. What has Obama run? Gov Palin entered elected office in 1992, five years prior to Barack Obama (Illinois State Senate 1997) and is the only candidate on either ticket with civilian government senior executive experience, six years as mayor, two years Commission Chair, two years as Gov.

Gov Palin has managed the largest, most expansive reserves of natural resources in the entire country while guiding the economic and regulatory agencies responsible for supporting the uninterrupted flow of energy resources to the continental US.