Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

McCain picks woman for VP slot


Recommended Posts

And Abraham Lincoln had virtually no executive experience or legislative experience, something I have said a few times. A two year experience as state governor does not constitute qualification to be President of the United States, since it says nothing on what a candidate's performance will be if they get the job. After all, Bush Jr.'s failure proves that it takes more than executive experience to be able do the job.

Thank you for taking the bait....now you have disqualified Abe Lincoln (considered by many to be America's greatest president), Woodrow Wilson, and George W. Bush. I am sure there are other US presidents who would not qualify in your expert opinion, but fortunately, such an observation is quite irrelevant.

Edited by bush_cheney2004
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

"Law is BORING!"

"I am smarter than my professors"

LOL

Have you replaced your teach yet grasshoppa?

How did you learn anything if all the profs were "fumbling leftover hippie professors"?

You crack me up. Lawyer, infuckingdeed. LOL

I took a bit of business law and I never thought of it as "boring". If law is so "boring" why did you major in it? Perhaps planning a future in politics? You certainly have the language and rhetoric down pat -- call McCain now! (but only if you are "hot" so you can look good on stage) LOL

I don't teach - I do.

Also, LERAN TO RAED!!!

I called con law professors leftover hippies. Never made reference to other fields of law.

Edited by Sulaco
Link to post
Share on other sites
Americans sure gave a shit about Foreign Policy right after 9/11. That is how the ignorant and stupid were lead to beleive in false items that lead to the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. Now you say they are not interested in Foreign Policy? It is because of the Foreign Policy that things like the economy, healthcare, price of gas at the pump are the items that were affected by the Foreign Policy. Ignoring how one affects the other is absolute ignorance. And there is no excuse for absolute ignorance. If my feeble Canuckian mind can understand that, any stupid American should be able to understand it.

Of course....we are just stooopid Americans romping and stomping all over the planet, even as foreign policy is not the concern of many. That's how easy it is for us.

... Canada again .. But I will use Jerry's idea of, we are not talking about Canada. What do you expect from Canadian Optics. If you don't like the views, there are plenty of political forums in the US that you might feel more comfortable in.

I love Canadian optics....it's so...ummmm...cute! :lol:

What do you expect from a Canadian political website?? Australian Optics?

No, the Australians are not American wannabes. They can define themselves without references to the Americans or their elections.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't teach - I do.

Also, LERAN TO RAED!!!

I called con law professors leftover hippies. Never made reference to other fields of law.

You edited your post, but missed two typos... Learn and read are spelled incorrectly in your post.

"Con" law -- is that your teen-text-shorthand for "contractual law" by any chance?

Law graduates don't normally type or speak in "text" language. So I call your post "bullshit!". You are no law grad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You edited your post, but missed two typos... Learn and read are spelled incorrectly in your post.

"Con" law -- is that your teen-text-shorthand for "contractual law" by any chance?

Law graduates don't normally type or speak in "text" language. So I call your post "bullshit!". You are no law grad.

Pardon me - constitutional law - I would have thought the context would make that clear. Given that I was responding to Blubbersomething regarding constitutional law professors.

The spelling errors were intentional.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for taking the bait....now you have disqualified Abe Lincoln (considered by many to be America's greatest president0, and Woodrow Wilson, and George W. Bush. I am sure there are other US presidents who would not qualify in your expert opinion, but fortunately, such an observation is quite irrelevant.

:lol: :lol: It is because Abraham Lincoln was in my opinion the greatest President the US ever has that I view the "but she has executive experience/ but he has legislative experience" arguments as non-sense. But if the Palinites want to play the experience card, they've got to realize that by tthe standard they set 2 years is not enough.

PS: I would consider Wilson to have been better than the average Presidents. Bush Jr... the only reason he is not the worse US President of the 20th century after Harding and Carter is that he became President in the 21th century :lol: :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol: :lol: It is because Abraham Lincoln was in my opinion the greatest President the US ever has that I view the "but she has executive experience/ but he has legislative experience" arguments as non-sense. But if the Palinites want to play the experience card, they've got to realize that by tthe standard they set 2 years is not enough.

You are contradicting yourself....President Wilson had no more experience as the Governor of New Jersey. It is your 2 year standard that doesn't pass political or historical muster.

PS: I would consider Wilson to have been better than the average Presidents. Bush Jr... the only reason he is not the worse US President of the 20th century after Harding and Carter is that he became President in the 21th century :lol: :lol:

Of course, you have to make an exception for Wilson or Lincoln because your "2 year rule" is a non-starter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pardon me - constitutional law - I would have thought the context would make that clear. Given that I was responding to Blubbersomething regarding constitutional law professors.

The spelling errors were intentional.

Well, being that you were taught by "fumbling leftover hippie professors" how could you possibly know anything about contractual law?

You are only as good as your best teacher so obviously (if I believed you) you would be (if you truly were a lawyer) a fumbling lawyer.

Those do-it-yourself courses on the back of "Easy-To-Do-Crosswords" do not qualify as real education. :rolleyes:

Edited by Drea
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are contradicting yourself....President Wilson had no more experience as the Governor of New Jersey. It is your 2 year standard that doesn't pass political or historical muster.

Of course, you have to make an exception for Wilson or Lincoln because your "2 year rule" is a non-starter.

Let me make it clear in Palinesque... that is words that won't cause the clueless to look even more clueless. If executive experience is the measure of what makes a good President of the United States, then two years is is not enough. And executive experience, no matter the lenght, has little to do with measuring up to the task, as Lincoln proved (by being up to the task) and Varter and Bush Jr proved (by not being up to it).

But I forgot... in the same way that you are oblivious to any sense of decency and understanding of right and wrong, you are oblivious to the fact that it is the McCain/Palin campaign and their supporters who are saying - she has executive experience, that proves she can do the job. To you being a right-wing fanatic all the qualification someone needs these days.

Edited by CANADIEN
Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, being that you were taught by "fumbling leftover hippie professors" how could you possibly know anything about contractual law?

You are only as good as your best teacher so obviously (if I believed you) you would be (if you truly were a lawyer) a fumbling lawyer.

Those do-it-yourself courses on the back of "Easy-To-Do-Crosswords" do not qualify as real education. :rolleyes:

I am having a very surreal moment here. I just clarified that "con law" means constitutional law. Are you posting from some alternative reality?

Edited by Sulaco
Link to post
Share on other sites
Let me make it clear in Palinesque... that is words that won't cause the clueless to look even more clueless. If executive experience is the measure of what makes a good President of the United States, then two years is is not enough. And executive experience, no matter the lenght, has little to do with measuring up to the task, as Lincoln proved.

Since we are donating to the clueless, the requirement for "executive experience" is political, not technical. Please have your television serviced as soon as possible if you want to correctly understand that which goes on in a foreign country's election process.

Edited by bush_cheney2004
Link to post
Share on other sites
Since we are donating to the clueless, the requirement for "executive experience" is political, not technical. Please have your television serviced as soon as possible if you want to correctly understand that which goes on in a foreign country's election process.

:lol: :lol: :lol: Say that to your fellow Palinists - they are the one who are claiming that experience is key.

Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol: :lol: :lol: Say that to your fellow Palinists - they are the one who are claiming that experience is key.

I don't care what they are claiming, as long as it furthers their political objectives. Maybe we need to close caption this for you...in English and French (of course).

Edited by bush_cheney2004
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell that to a judge... next time (really if I believed you) you are in chambers or in court, ask the judge about "con" law.

Seriously. The judge will ask... do you mean "contractual law"? And will proceed to reprimand you for using unclear language. As a lawyer (if I believed you) you would know how important clear, concise language is. You are not a lawyer or you would know this.

Cheers!

Hey Sulaco, you started it with the fumbling aging hippy slur. How exactly did you become a high-powered law practitioner when all your professors were aging fumbling hippies again?

How did that work?

Did you go to the Dean and tell her/him that you were smarter than the professors? How did that work out for you? :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ding Ding....now you are catching on. It's about winning, and I don't mean winning the We're-So-Smug-And-Superior Award.

No, the USA won that award a long time ago.

Like the aged stripper who is 400lbs of fat who says "I still got it! I am still the best, you still want me! I am so still fuckable!"

The USA hegemony is fat, old and ugly. Time to move on to a younger, trimmer, more agile era.

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, the USA won that award a long time ago.

Like the aged stripper who is 400lbs of fat who says "I still got it! I am still the best, you still want me! I am so still fuckable!"

Classy....like...ummmm....Pamela Anderson

The USA hegemony is fat, old and ugly. Time to move on to a younger, trimmer, more agile era.

'Tis better to have been...than never at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
'Tis better to have been...than never at all.

So you agree then, that the USA is old, washed up, with cake makeup melting, prayin' to gawd for salvation and Jebus' return... as in a "Tammy Faye Baker" type.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ding Ding....now you are catching on. It's about winning, and I don't mean winning the We're-So-Smug-And-Superior Award.

What's this obsession you have "smug" and "superiority"? Did something or someone damage your self-respect or sense of self worth as a child? If you want examples of smugness and self-righteous superiority, review your posts. You can confine yourself to thoughtful, well-informed comments, if you just try.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What's this obsession you have "smug" and "superiority"? Did something or someone damage your self-respect or sense of self worth as a child? If you want examples of smugness and self-righteous superiority, review your posts. You can confine yourself to thoughtful, well-informed comments, if you just try.

OMG...this is the best....a self confirming "smug and superior" post.

Let's just cut to the chase....the Republicans (an American political party) have nominated their candidates.

Is that OK with you, or not?

Link to post
Share on other sites
So you agree then, that the USA is old, washed up, with cake makeup melting, prayin' to gawd for salvation and Jebus' return... as in a "Tammy Faye Baker" type.

It is certainly older than Canada, fatter than Canada, and has more cake than Canada...if that's what you mean.

Link to post
Share on other sites
OMG...this is the best....a self confirming "smug and superior" post.

Let's just cut to the chase....the Republicans (an American political party) have nominated their candidates.

Is that OK with you, or not?

There you go again, another "smug and superior" whine. What's it about those two words that so frightens you? What are you so insecure about?

Why are you here on Mapleleafweb? It's a Canadian forum. And whenever we talk about American politics you get all rattled and upset and defensive. You could just go away. What's it to you what Canadians discuss or think about? Do you think America is so weak she needs you to defend her from Canadians? You should see what your fellow Americans (I assume you're American) are saying about Americans on The Well or over at Volconvo.com.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...