• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

The lady joins good company

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
In the vice-presidential debate tonight, Sarah Palin was able to join the select,and bipartisan, company of two presidents, Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush: she consistently pronounced "nuclear" as "nucular".

Best regards,

Doug
 
In the vice-presidential debate tonight, Sarah Palin was able to join the select,and bipartisan, company of two presidents, Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush: she consistently pronounced "nuclear" as "nucular".

I watched the "debate" wich just "ended". In fact, I stayed up (despite the US time 6-9 hour difference with Central European time) to watch it. What a disappointment. They just played their respective (broken) records, didn't interact, and both failed to confront their opponent on the silly remarks made.

Sigh.

Bart
 

doug anderson

New member
I watched the "debate" wich just "ended". In fact, I stayed up (despite the US time 6-9 hour difference with Central European time) to watch it. What a disappointment. They just played their respective (broken) records, didn't interact, and both failed to confront their opponent on the silly remarks made.

Sigh.

Bart

Sarah Palin didn't really answer two thirds of the questions she was asked. She kept retreating to the buzz words and phrases she'd been taught.

Biden looked exhausted and was not terribly exciting, although I was moved by his "single parent" response. In terms of answering the questions, he won.


I wish Obama had picked Jim Webb for VP. He would have rallied the difficult voters in the south.

Both candidates had wrong info on some answers (see factcheck.org).
 
I guess I am one of those "difficult" voters in the south, whatever you mean by that, and it would not matter who he picked for his running mate. There is no way on earth I would ever vote for Obama. I am not quite so fed up with the situation as to completely throw away our great country just yet. He is a pretty good show pony I suppose but that is all. Don't get me wrong. I am not so happy with McCain as a choice either but between the two, he gets my vote no questions asked. Palin is a breath of fresh air but still not enough to cancel out the stench coming from the true politicians. If her only problem is in her pronunciation of a stupid word, then she is the one for me.
 

Nill Toulme

New member
... There is no way on earth I would ever vote for Obama. ...

Why?

It's a serious question. I'm very interested in the reasoning of people who make statements like that. I wonder, just how much worse would things have to get to make them change their minds? (One of the most poignant memories of my life is the time my father, a career US Army officer, sat across the kitchen table from me and said, "You were right about Nixon — I was wrong.")

Nill
 

doug anderson

New member
Why?

It's a serious question. I'm very interested in the reasoning of people who make statements like that. I wonder, just how much worse would things have to get to make them change their minds? (One of the most poignant memories of my life is the time my father, a career US Army officer, sat across the kitchen table from me and said, "You were right about Nixon — I was wrong.")

Nill

I agree, Why? Presumably there are some specific answers that address actual issues?

D
 
It's a serious question. I'm very interested in the reasoning of people who make statements like that. I wonder, just how much worse would things have to get to make them change their minds?

I'm one of those "there's nothing Obama/Biden can say that would make me vote for them" folks. Why do I feel that way? These are my reasons and I'm just talking about Obama, so let's just pretend McCain doesn't exist right now. McCain has no effect on my opinion of Obama.

1) Obama has not accomplished anything of significance beyond getting nominated to run for President. I'm sorry but the "I've managed my campaign to run for President, therefore I'm qualified to be President" comment was ridiculous. I thought it was a joke from one of the late night commedians.

2) Obama has more "present" votes than he does yes/no votes. I see that as an unwillingness to stand for what he believes to be right because it might jeopardize his ambition to be President. That's not leadership, which is what I consider to be the President's job. In my opinion, the President should know where we have to go without any direct input from the masses, then he should chart a course there and convince us that it's the right thing to do. JFK said we're going to the moon and here's why. He didn't have a focus group tell him that a bunch of people thought it was a waste of money, he convinced us we had to do it and it would be worth the cost.

3) I don't trust anyone that came to national prominence through the Chicago political machine. Those are some of the most radical people in the country, and regardless of whether Obama believes what they believe, he has to take their calls.

4) He chose Joe Biden as his running mate. How can you possibly see that as congruent with his change message? That was old school party politicking. Obama says he's all about change, but if you look at who he surrounds himself with and the way his campaign is being run, it screams old style Tammany Hall politics.

5) I'm a libertarian, so every time Obama talks about the government getting into health insurance, and day care, low income housing, or anything else beyond interstate commerce, national security, and foreign policy he loses points with me. Anything else is something the states need to step up and handle.

All of the speeches and debates have very little effect because they're just words and frankly, I don't believe that anything a politician says can be taken at face value. It's a game where you pick some words and try to get the focus group to turn their response dials to the right position. You have to look at what a candidate has done in the past and see how their rhetoric compares to their actions. Obama sounds great when he talks - I remember being very impressed with him when he was elected as a Senator and thinking he was a new kind of politician. The problem is after the speeches, he doesn't actually do anything except work toward becoming President. That indicates to me that he isn't running for President because he needs the power to accomplish some goal, his end goal is to be the first black US President.

Sarah Palin is interesting to me but only because if McCain wins she will most likely get the party's nomination to run for President after his term. I'm probably going to vote libertarian this year because I live in Texas - my vote won't make one bit of difference to the republicans, but it could help the libertarians get enough votes to at least get their candidate into the debate next time.

-Colleen
 
Last edited:

doug anderson

New member
I'm one of those "there's nothing Obama/Biden can say that would make me vote for them" folks. Why do I feel that way? These are my reasons and I'm just talking about Obama, so let's just pretend McCain doesn't exist right now. McCain has no effect on my opinion of Obama.

1) Obama has not accomplished anything of significance beyond getting nominated to run for President. I'm sorry but the "I've managed my campaign to run for President, therefore I'm qualified to be President" comment was ridiculous. I thought it was a joke from one of the late night commedians.

2) Obama has more "present" votes than he does yes/no votes. I see that as an unwillingness to stand for what he believes to be right because it might jeopardize his ambition to be President. That's not leadership, which is what I consider to be the President's job. In my opinion, the President should know where we have to go without any direct input from the masses, then he should chart a course there and convince us that it's the right thing to do. JFK said we're going to the moon and here's why. He didn't have a focus group tell him that a bunch of people thought it was a waste of money, he convinced us we had to do it and it would be worth the cost.

3) I don't trust anyone that came to national prominence through the Chicago political machine. Those are some of the most radical people in the country, and regardless of whether Obama believes what they believe, he has to take their calls.

4) He chose Joe Biden as his running mate. How can you possibly see that as congruent with his change message? That was old school party politicking. Obama says he's all about change, but if you look at who he surrounds himself with and the way his campaign is being run, it screams old style Tammany Hall politics.

5) I'm a libertarian, so every time Obama talks about the government getting into health insurance, and day care, low income housing, or anything else beyond interstate commerce, national security, and foreign policy he loses points with me. Anything else is something the states need to step up and handle.

All of the speeches and debates have very little effect because they're just words and frankly, I don't believe that anything a politician says can be taken at face value. It's a game where you pick some words and try to get the focus group to turn their response dials to the right position. You have to look at what a candidate has done in the past and see how their rhetoric compares to their actions. Obama sounds great when he talks - I remember being very impressed with him when he was elected as a Senator and thinking he was a new kind of politician. The problem is after the speeches, he doesn't actually do anything except work toward becoming President. That indicates to me that he isn't running for President because he needs the power to accomplish some goal, his end goal is to be the first black US President.

Sarah Palin is interesting to me but only because if McCain wins she will most likely get the party's nomination to run for President after his term. I'm probably going to vote libertarian this year because I live in Texas - my vote won't make one bit of difference to the republicans, but it could help the libertarians get enough votes to at least get their candidate into the debate next time.

-Colleen

Does that mean you trust the Bush administration?
 

Nill Toulme

New member
I certainly didn't read your post that way, and I suspect if Doug rereads it, all the way through, he won't either.

My question would be, rather, does that mean you don't care who wins the election, or think it doesn't matter?

Nill
 

Cem_Usakligil

Well-known member
Hi everybody,

I think Asher said it all in this post, but let me emphasise the need to conduct these debates with utter respect for each other. In other words, please do not start accusing others of what and how they might actually think. When in doubt, asking open and honest questions would be the way to go. Closed questions, however, might lead to negative feelings and ditto responses.

Thanks :).


Cheers,
 

Jack_Flesher

New member
In debate, that's called begging the question. You didn't answer the question.

I disagree -- Colleen answered your first question in detail. Her response to your second question is what is referred to as "rhetorical question," usually posed without the expectation of a reply to illustrate the obvious in the face of a non-sequitur or sophomoric statement.

Back to Palin and the debate. I saw it differently than you, IMHO she trounced Biden. Poor old Joe kept trying to steer back to his prepared talking points by saying, "But I want to get back to..." He did this whenever he was asked a question he didn't want to answer, and frankly made him look like the same old Washington politician we've seen for the past 50 years. By contrast I found Palin's home-spun manner a breath of fresh air.
 
In debate, that's called begging the question. You didn't answer the question.

No, you asked me a question completely irrelevant to what I wrote, so I was trying to determine what the connection was in your mind. The original question was "Why could you not be convinced to vote for Obama?" and that has absolutely nothing to do with the Bush administration. My opinion of Obama's suitability to be President is independent of my opinion of anyone else. I wouldn't presume that I know a person's position on every issue just because they tell me their party affiliation. You can't deduce a real person's entire belief system from their position on one issue unless they've been indoctrinated

Frankly the question "does that mean you don't care who wins the election, or think it doesn't matter?" confuses me. Why would not voting for Obama mean that I don't care who wins? Maybe I wasn't explicit enough about what "I live in Texas" means. It means that there is a very large probability that McCain/Palin are going to win this state. Because we've got a winner take all system, I might as well vote for who I truly want to win but hasn't got a chance, i.e. the libertarian candidate, on the chance that they might break the vote threshold it takes to get ballot access and participate in the next election's debates. Am I annoyed that contrary to the founder's expectations I can't vote for a president and vice president separately? Absolutely. I'm I irritated that our current voting system makes it impossible to accurately capture people's real preferences. You betcha. Am I angry that we've institutionalized a two party system and made it practically impossible for a third party or independent candidate to get into the national debates and on the ballot in all 50 states? No doubt.

Y'all do realize that there are going to be more than two choices on your ballot right? (well maybe not in some states, but you can always write in your choice)

-Colleen
 
Last edited:

Nill Toulme

New member
...Back to Palin and the debate. I saw it differently than you, IMHO she trounced Biden. Poor old Joe kept trying to steer back to his prepared talking points by saying, "But I want to get back to..." He did this whenever he was asked a question he didn't want to answer, and frankly made him look like the same old Washington politician we've seen for the past 50 years. By contrast I found Palin's home-spun manner a breath of fresh air.

Jack are you serious? You're scaring me.

Nill
 

Nill Toulme

New member
...Frankly the question "does that mean you don't care who wins the election, or think it doesn't matter?" confuses me. Why would not voting for Obama mean that I don't care who wins? Maybe I wasn't explicit enough about what "I live in Texas" means. It means that there is a very large probability that McCain/Palin are going to win this state. Because we've got a winner take all system, I might as well vote for who I truly want to win but hasn't got a chance, i.e. the libertarian candidate, on the chance that they might break the vote threshold it takes to get ballot access and participate in the next election's debates. ...
Actually that makes perfect sense. I'm thinking about the overall vote, which will be close, vs. the vote in particular states, in many of which it will not. So you're absolutely right.

Y'all do realize that there are going to be more than two choices on your ballot right? (well maybe not in some states, but you can always write in your choice)
Where I don't think your approach makes (much) sense is in a state where the outcome is in doubt, i.e., where your vote might really count for something... Florida, for example, or the way things are going, maybe even, with a miracle, Georgia. In a state like that it seems to me that voting third party only makes sense if you don't care who wins, or don't think it matters.

If it weren't for Ralph Nader, Al Gore would have been elected in 2000, and the world we live in would be a very different place today. Much better in my opinion, maybe not in yours, but certainly different.

Nill
 
If it weren't for Ralph Nader, Al Gore would have been elected in 2000, and the world we live in would be a very different place today. Much better in my opinion, maybe not in yours, but certainly different.

Well I disagree - if Al Gore had won his home state he would have been elected in 2000. If Al Gore had convinced more people in Florida to vote for him he would have been elected. The way I see it, if Al Gore couldn't convince people to vote for him instead of Nader, he didn't deserve to win. Who's to say if Nader wasn't in the race those folks would have stayed home? The bottom line is Al didn't get it done.

The only reason that there's an illusion of "spoilers" is because the two parties in collusion with the media work very hard to convince people that having more than two parties is a pipe dream. You saw how irritated the front runners get when they have to deal with candidates like Kucinich in the democratic primaries.You have to work a lot harder to differentiate yourself and study up on a lot more issues when you have more than one serious opponent. It's also harder to report when there is more than an either/or choice. If there were 5 serious candidates for President, do you think there would be hours and hours of analysis of one interview that one candidate did?

Frankly I think a third party vote is more important than ever this year. Both parties are entirely corrupt and people have forgotten where the politicians get their power. I do tend to focus my efforts more on state and local government though. I live in a town of roughly 97,000 people. The last town election I voted in only 2,000 people total voted. My state congressional district has a total population of 135,000. My federal congressional district has a population of 650,000. The state of Texas has a population of around 24,000,000 so 12 million per senator. The President answers to 300 million people. Who do you think is going to work harder for my vote and care more when I send a letter or call?

-Colleen
 

Eric Hiss

Member
I guess I am one of those "difficult" voters in the south, whatever you mean by that, and it would not matter who he picked for his running mate. There is no way on earth I would ever vote for Obama. I am not quite so fed up with the situation as to completely throw away our great country just yet. He is a pretty good show pony I suppose but that is all. Don't get me wrong. I am not so happy with McCain as a choice either but between the two, he gets my vote no questions asked. Palin is a breath of fresh air but still not enough to cancel out the stench coming from the true politicians. If her only problem is in her pronunciation of a stupid word, then she is the one for me.

Wow - surprised to read this.
 

Eric Hiss

Member
Wow Wow Wow! I can't believe it. What's up with you people? Do you not read the news? Palin is probably the least qualified VP candidate in the history of the country and the odds are 1/4 that McCain is going to die of melanoma during office were he to be elected. She's ready to go to war with Russia.
 

Eric Hiss

Member
You mean you'd take a person who appointed her friend, a realtor, to be secretary of agriculture because she wrote she liked cows on her application, a person who barely made it out of college that was mayor of a town that is but a dot on a big map.... you'd take this person to be a candidate for president? And you'd prefer that person over a slew of other possible candidates that have real educations in law and economics and real experience. Palin counts among her foreign experience a layover in an airport. And you write that Obama has no experience? I guess you must be one of those people, in that small percentage, that thinks that Bush is doing a fine job, that there really were weapons of mass destruction.



I'm one of those "there's nothing Obama/Biden can say that would make me vote for them" folks. Why do I feel that way? These are my reasons and I'm just talking about Obama, so let's just pretend McCain doesn't exist right now. McCain has no effect on my opinion of Obama.

1) Obama has not accomplished anything of significance beyond getting nominated to run for President. I'm sorry but the "I've managed my campaign to run for President, therefore I'm qualified to be President" comment was ridiculous. I thought it was a joke from one of the late night commedians.

2) Obama has more "present" votes than he does yes/no votes. I see that as an unwillingness to stand for what he believes to be right because it might jeopardize his ambition to be President. That's not leadership, which is what I consider to be the President's job. In my opinion, the President should know where we have to go without any direct input from the masses, then he should chart a course there and convince us that it's the right thing to do. JFK said we're going to the moon and here's why. He didn't have a focus group tell him that a bunch of people thought it was a waste of money, he convinced us we had to do it and it would be worth the cost.

3) I don't trust anyone that came to national prominence through the Chicago political machine. Those are some of the most radical people in the country, and regardless of whether Obama believes what they believe, he has to take their calls.

4) He chose Joe Biden as his running mate. How can you possibly see that as congruent with his change message? That was old school party politicking. Obama says he's all about change, but if you look at who he surrounds himself with and the way his campaign is being run, it screams old style Tammany Hall politics.

5) I'm a libertarian, so every time Obama talks about the government getting into health insurance, and day care, low income housing, or anything else beyond interstate commerce, national security, and foreign policy he loses points with me. Anything else is something the states need to step up and handle.

All of the speeches and debates have very little effect because they're just words and frankly, I don't believe that anything a politician says can be taken at face value. It's a game where you pick some words and try to get the focus group to turn their response dials to the right position. You have to look at what a candidate has done in the past and see how their rhetoric compares to their actions. Obama sounds great when he talks - I remember being very impressed with him when he was elected as a Senator and thinking he was a new kind of politician. The problem is after the speeches, he doesn't actually do anything except work toward becoming President. That indicates to me that he isn't running for President because he needs the power to accomplish some goal, his end goal is to be the first black US President.

Sarah Palin is interesting to me but only because if McCain wins she will most likely get the party's nomination to run for President after his term. I'm probably going to vote libertarian this year because I live in Texas - my vote won't make one bit of difference to the republicans, but it could help the libertarians get enough votes to at least get their candidate into the debate next time.

-Colleen
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi Guys,

We have had an extraordinary spread of opinions on the political race. This is not an easy time. The facts remain that we have no perfect candidates. We just had a vice-presidential debate where the questions were simply ignored! The moderator never bothered to really find out answers when they were avoided. The was no evidence of what anyone would do differently in light of the economic crisis. Why not? There were no questions on the obscene bribery to get votes to pass a dubious Wall Street rescue bill. There were no answers on the questions of nuclear security. There were no second and third-line follow-up questions so the candidates simple gave prepackaged positions and one-liners.

Meanwhile, I have had a number of complaints. Two photographers with more conservative views left complaining we're too liberal! Now, it's from the other side. Frankly I am trying to juggle getting my own work done and taking care of my bad lumbar disk problem which is a big thing this last two weeks. So, after tomorrow, I am putting this thread on rest a while so I don't have to put fires out in too many places at once!

Asher
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Must one hold "salon" in a rubber room?

Hi, Asher,
Meanwhile, I have had a number of complaints. Two photographers with more conservative views left complaining we're too liberal! Now, it's from the other side. Frankly I am trying to juggle getting my own work done and taking care of my bad lumbar disk problem which is a big thing this last two weeks. So, after tomorrow, I am putting this thread on rest a while so I don't have to put fires out in too many places at once!
I know you struggle with the paradoxes of "allowing" this kind of debate in a forum devoted to photographic technique and practice.

On one side of the coin, I find it very comforting to be able to expound on my views on social, linguistic, religious, and political matters "among my friends", where there is a very high intellectual content. On the other hand, as we even see in this thread (which, you will note, carries my signature "at the head"), we can still perhaps appreciate why we are often commended by etiquette mavens not to discuss such things in polite company!

And interestingly enough, current events well illuminate the inherent paradoxes of "self regulation".

I certainly would not presume to advise you on this matter.

In any case, what has to be paramount for you is to keep your own sanity while dealing with your medical challenge.

So take care, my friend, and my friends.

Best regards,

Doug
 

Nill Toulme

New member
...the odds are 1/4 that McCain is going to die of melanoma during office were he to be elected. ...

I have read that the actuarial odds of McCain dying in the next four years are between 1 in 6 and 1 in 7. As one columnist put it, that's approximately the probability of your birthday falling on a Wednesday.

Nill
 
When an American, living here and reaping all of the benefits that come from being lucky enough to be American, calls our President, our Commander in Chief, a moron, that pisses me off. If that is what you are trying to achieve when you make inflamatory remarks like that then you have succeeded at least on one count. Congratulations. Pat yourself on the back. And please don't start in with the old argument about how it's that very freedom of speech and the fact that we can say things like that which makes this country so great. That's bullcrap. Of course that freedom of speech is an integral part of what is so good about being an American citizen but there is so much more that goes along with it. There are also responsibilities that we have as citizens and there is some, or at least there used to be, respect shown towards other people. We should be respectful and supportive of our President, whoever it might be, especially in the times we find ourselves in now, whether we like him or not or whether we agree with all of his actions or not. Right or wrong he is still our President and at least to me that still means something. I said I would never vote for Obama and I meant that but I guarantee you that come November, if he is elected our next President, I will do everything I can to support him and everything he does in trying to make our country a better place to live. I may not agree with him on everything and I might even think something he did was completely rediculous but I also guarantee you I would never publicly call him a moron. And I will not be leaving this forum. There is no way I will let a bunch of leftwing radical liberals run me off:)
James Newman
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, James,

When an American, living here and reaping all of the benefits that come from being lucky enough to be American, calls our President, our Commander in Chief, a moron, that pisses me off.

Well, of course. I didn't previously call him a moron here.

But he is a moron.

And I truly enjoy what we have in America, not enjoyed in many other countries, in that after the next election it will be safe for me to call our president (the one now, or even the one then) a moron if he is (actually, even if he weren't).

Best regards,

Doug
 

Nill Toulme

New member
I don't think he's a moron at all. I don't believe a moron could have accomplished even a tiny fraction of the damage he's done to our country, our world and our children's future. I think he must be some kind of genius.

Nill
 
Top