Republican Vice Presidential Candidate Sarah Palin
The question Barbadians and others have been asking since the announcement is – who the hell is Sarah Palin? To be honest the BU household has read her name in our VECO readings. She has developed quite a reputation as the new Alaskan Governor who is a fierce anti-corruption advocate, several political stalwarts, Ted Stevens et al having been indicted under her tenure.
The Barbados economy like many around the world is interwoven with that of the USA. Most Caribbean people have families who reside in the USA. It seems natural that we should have a healthy interest in the political shenanigans currently going on in the USA.
We know that Sarah Palin is a pro-lifer. To prove the point she delivered a child while having prior knowledge that the child would be born with Down Syndrome. She is anti-corruption in government and in her short stint as Governor of Alaska, only two years, she has the record to prove it. She presents the perception that she places a high importance on family despite her political career.She is knowledgeable on oil issues which is very topical.
What her selection by John McClain does is to run a platform which presents two politicians who are mavericks and anti-Washington. The fact that Americans select Presidents and not Vice Presidents maybe shattered in this election. While Obama has had the Primaries to be tested Americans will not get the opportunity to do the same with Sarah Palin.
The political pundits have agreed that the selection of Palin by McClain as a long pass-will the ball be caught?
114 responses so far ↓
Adrian Hinds // August 31, 2008 at 2:54 PM
ha ha ha ha She is your avarage American woman,wife, mother etc, many of whom you don’t know. :)
……….Politically this was a great pick. The more the democrats negatively focus on her from a prospective of no experience, the more there are shining the light on Barack Obama. sweet. and two years as a govenor (executive experience) beats as much as ten years in the senate. Two years running a state, being commander in chief of the Alaskan National guard, to my mind beats 3 years in washington. It’s kind of sad that the Democrats have been force to compare their NUMBER ONE PICK to the Republicans NUMBER TWO PICK. well not really. :)
Check this out, since Obama likes to play God, he could say that he foretold McCain’s Sarah Palin’s vp pick when he said during his acceptance speech “CHANGE DOESN’T COME FROM WASHINGTON, CHANGE COME TO WASHINGTON” ha ha ha ha ha and all the way from Alaska. :)
Ian Bourne // August 31, 2008 at 3:11 PM
Voting for McCain, is like a 3rd term 4 Bush… On the other hand Obama would destroy our offshore entities – who is more beneficial to the Caribbean and what proof do they offer?
2 yrs as Gov, is more than 10 in Senate – what planet are you from? In Alaska with VECO 4 God’s sake? Her claim to fame is a former beauty queen!
Adrian Hinds // August 31, 2008 at 3:13 PM
@David
when you said “It seems natural that we should have a healthy interest in the political SHENANIGANS currently going on in the USA.
…. are you suggesting some confusion on your part with something in particular or with all US politics?
Eddie // August 31, 2008 at 3:20 PM
Ms. Palin IS the woman we all know – In the West, we refer to her as the married professional woman.
This is McCain’s biggest gamble in the sunset of his long career. My bet is that he will loose.
Palin will not win over any majority of Clinton voters – she is not made of the same material and voters are not that naive.
From what I’ve been reading and watching, Obama, far from playing God, is a very humble man. What we don’t want to concede is that he is extraordinarily gifted!
Palin will be fodder for Biden.
David // August 31, 2008 at 3:20 PM
@Adrian
We agree with you argument that it nullifies the inexperience rebuttal which the Obama camp might table. What we want to read about is the perception by the American public at the selection. McClain is not your regular Joe running for President, he is 72 years old having had several bouts with cancer.
Conceivably Sarah Palin could be President of the USA if McClain is elected , we are talking probability here.
How does the American public feel about a woman who has been Governor of a relatively small state, 2 years and who is a heartbeat away from running the largest economy of the world and as far as we can judge has hardly operated outside the USA borders in any capacity, well she has this in common with Bush!
Juris // August 31, 2008 at 3:22 PM
What is this experience of which people speak. Does being a Governor really prepare one for leadership of the free world?
Adrian Hinds // August 31, 2008 at 3:34 PM
Ian Bourne // August 31, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Voting for McCain, is like a 3rd term 4 Bush… On the other hand Obama would destroy our offshore entities – who is more beneficial to the Caribbean and what proof do they offer?
2 yrs as Gov, is more than 10 in Senate – what planet are you from? In Alaska with VECO 4 God’s sake? Her claim to fame is a former beauty queen!
=================================
ha ha ha now let me see. Owen Arthur and the BLP remains convince that the last 14 years Bajans never had it so good. BU just reminded us that the Barbadian economy is interwoven with that of the US. Eight of those years Bush was in the white house. Your prophetic claim is that McCain the Maverick who is not trusted by core republicans, that was courted by Democratic Presidential nominee John Kerry, will as president be like it GW for a third term, and you say this not to be charitible i presume but to suggest something very negative, yet from a Barbados perspective you can clearly sight a policy position from Barack that will directly affect Barbados. Certainly you did not make your contribution to quiet the concerns of BU!
btw I am from the planet that understands the perceptions of people who will be electing the next President and VP of AMERICA. If indeed her only claim to fame was that of being a Beauty Queen she would be a democrat and you would probably be a fan “riri” re. the entertainment value. :) I actually read the details of Veco and her involvement, and i understand your willingness to gloss over the same. Uh mean yesterday one Scout wrote that she was facing “impeachment” in Alaska. Is that true? :)
Adrian Hinds // August 31, 2008 at 3:38 PM
Juris // August 31, 2008 at 3:22 pm
What is this experience of which people speak. Does being a Governor really prepare one for leadership of the free world?
=================================
am I am talking about the United States presidential elections. But you aint see that Albert Brandford just wrote an article questioning whether Barbados has a democracy or not! If the source he quoted are correct in their opinions any so called leader of the free world might not be wunnuh leader. :)
Reference to Nationnews article “A model democracy?” by Albert Brandford Published on: 8/31/08.
Bush tea // August 31, 2008 at 3:59 PM
It would not surprise me at all if this woman becomes president. The USA has sunk to such depth that that it is difficult to dismiss the prophecies in Isaiah 3 where because of the institutionalized sinfulness, God ‘removed the benefits of their food and drinks’, displaced their wise leaders and brave men and ‘
Et dabo pueros principes eorum,
et effeminati dominabuntur eis’ .
…translated for David’s benefit, -” And I will give children to be their princes, and the effeminate shall rule over them”
Isaiah goes on to describe the process of ’scraping the very bottom of the barrel’ in search of leaders.
Who would have thought that George Bush would be elected over Al Gore?
J // August 31, 2008 at 4:11 PM
But BT is Isaiah’s use of effeminate does not mean feminine.
If means eunuch’s, homosexuals, wiccas, bullers, transexuals etc.
It does NOT refer to women.
NUH LINGA-(The Jamaican Dance) // August 31, 2008 at 4:26 PM
I do not care who wins the American elections. Bajans have this stupid notion that they are a part of America. Americans care nothing about BAjans >>>>>
but
I believe that this pick was one of desperation
NUH LINGA-(The Jamaican Dance) // August 31, 2008 at 4:35 PM
The lack of experience rebuttal works more in OBAMA’S favour not MCCAIN’ S because MCCAIN was saying that OBAMA was inexperienced. Mccain cannot now us that argument.
Heard that the war in Georgia was Started to help
MC CAIN ‘S campaign
Straight talk // August 31, 2008 at 4:36 PM
Adrian H,
I don’t know about a call for impeachment, but it seems she ordered a police chief to sack her brother-in- law, he refused and reported her, perhaps that is the matter for which she is being investigated.
Moral: Don’t sue the governor’s sister for divorce.
On a plus note for Palin, she has a son in service and he is on his way to Iraq.
A very rare event for American political families.
Green Monkey // August 31, 2008 at 4:45 PM
Jon Stewart’s/Steve Colbert’s report on the McCain VP pick:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Aj2w0OdiIM
Bill Maher’s take on the VP pick:
Green Monkey // August 31, 2008 at 5:02 PM
Or did she?
Sargeant // August 31, 2008 at 5:40 PM
The Republicans have said that because Alaska shares a border with Canada and is close to Russia that counts for foreign policy experience. Reasoning like that makes me think that because I flew in a plane I have aeronautical experience.
As for Adrian H argument that she ran a state, yes Alaska is the largest state in the Union but the population is less than that of Chicago. The number of votes she received to win was 112,000 which is smaller than some congressional districts. Alaska is like the wild West and corruption is endemic (does VECO ring a bell?) The electorate hungered for a change and Palin took on the good old boys and won but that in no way qualifies her to be the VP.
One of the ironies of the election is that in the Miss Alaska contest she was runner up to an African American (you can’t make this stuff up)
Here is a local Alaskan blogger’s take:
http://mudflats.wordpress.com/
JC // August 31, 2008 at 6:44 PM
Its going to get crazier than ever mark my words!
The scout // August 31, 2008 at 8:09 PM
I think McCain has just dug his grave a few feet deeper. He’s obviously scrapping the bottom of the barrel. This woman he chose has some much dark clouds hanging over her head, plus she’s not very popular in her own state.
Eddie // August 31, 2008 at 11:52 PM
Dear J,
You are right when you say that Isaiah’s use of the word “women” in Is 3:12 does not refer to women. You are however, wrong when you analogise it to Homos, lesbians, transvesites etc.
Bush Tea was rolling on the right track in stating God’s giving up Israel because if institutionised sin.
Kings ruled Judah, not women or children. The symbolism is that the rulers (Kings) with no aptitude or experience in sound spiritual leadership would lead the Israelites to their peril as if they were lead by women and children
The words “chidren” and “women” are not to be taken literally. Israel was a male-dominated society. Women were treated as 2nd class citizens. Hence the reference to “women leading” was in reference to the Kings’ style of weak leadership.
This characterized Israelite leadership in its closing phase before Babylonian captivity.
The scout // September 1, 2008 at 3:19 AM
JC
I agree with you ; the craziness has only just begun. This is going to expose the woes in america politics.
David // September 1, 2008 at 5:03 AM
@Adrian H
We said shinnanigans because we have always been a little confused about the electoral system which occurs in the USA.
Primaries and Caucuses, we have never understood how a few hundred/thousand people can enter a town hall and shout for who they want to vote for like selling cows in the market.
We never understood how Gore could have been defeated in Florida and it was not contested given the obvious inefficiency in the chad system.
We never can understand how an Electoral College could elect a president and not the people directly.
Don’t misunderstand us, it is a system which has worked for the USA and we respect it just that it seems very complicated and INEFFICIENT!
Donald Duck, Esq // September 1, 2008 at 8:53 AM
Any idea who paid for PM Thompson to attend the DNC convention?
Green Monkey // September 1, 2008 at 12:37 PM
Good old boys Jacky and Dunlap of Red State Update discuss the McCain VP pick.
Inquiring Housewife // September 1, 2008 at 1:14 PM
I am sure you all would agree that this story was leaked at this time when all eyes are on New Orleans and Gustav. Palin’s 17 year old daughter is 5 months pregnant. Rather interesting considering the conservative nature of the Republican party, not to mention McCain.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/01/1318541.aspx
Inquiring Housewife // September 1, 2008 at 1:23 PM
Okay this grows more interesting as we research it , quesitons regarding if Palin is the 5th child’s mother or is she covering for her daughter. Said daughter that is now pregnant again. Go figure
http://www.zimbio.com/Bristol+Palin/articles/49/Follow+up+Bristol+Palin+pregnancy+rumor
David // September 1, 2008 at 2:21 PM
How does the BU family feel about the report that Palin’s 17 year old daughter is five months pregnant?
Isn’t Palin’s selection to appeal to the consertives in the party?
Sargeant // September 1, 2008 at 3:18 PM
David
They will spin this as a great achievement to further cement the Sarah Palin’s pro life credentials. It just confirms what the bloggers have been saying all along i.e that Palin was not vetted.
Dr James Dobson of “Focus on The Family” issued this statement which reads in part:
“In the 32-year history of Focus on the Family, we have offered prayer, counseling and resource assistance to tens of thousands of parents and children in the same situation the Palins are now facing. We have always encouraged the parents to love and support their children and always advised the girls to see their pregnancies through, even though there will of course be challenges along the way. That is what the Palins are doing, and they should be commended once again for not just talking about their pro-life and pro-family values, but living them out even in the midst of trying circumstances”.
Do you think that he would issue the same statement if the Obama’s had a teenage daughter who was unmarried and pregnant?
The scout // September 1, 2008 at 3:36 PM
“When ya white ya alright, when ya black stay back.” If Obama had chosen someone like Palin which so much baggage carrying around, all you Obama hating racist would shin the man alive but ya know what this girl is white so she has morals, blacks can’t even spell the word.
Adrian Hinds // September 1, 2008 at 4:16 PM
Sargeant // September 1, 2008 at 3:18 pm
Do you think that he would issue the same statement if the Obama’s had a teenage daughter who was unmarried and pregnant?
=================================
So let me see, am Sarge,….you aint really have a problem with the Palin’s as a result of their daughters pregnancy, you are just upset that similar compassion would not have been directed at Obama???? How do you know this to true?
Sufficient number of whites have forgiven Obama for his Pastor’s comments that they deemed racist.
Sufficient number of whites have forgiven Obama for his continued association with unrepentant terrorist Bill Aires.
The Governor of Massachusetts Deval Patrick a black man and person from whom Barack borrowed his “Just Words” speech, just found out that his daughter is gay, and no one is holding it against him, but he is a democrat, contrast that to when Black conservative Alan Keyes ran against Barack for Illinois senator and his daughter came out and announce that she was gay, the democrats made much hay out of it.
Sargeant // September 1, 2008 at 5:08 PM
@Adrian Hinds
I don’t have a problem whether she is pregnant or not I have a problem with HYPOCRITES. Isn’t this the same constituency that was critical of the Spears family when Britney’s teenage sister became pregnant. What does this discussion have to do with white people? As to the gay issue why do you bring red herrings to the topic who cares who is or isn’t gay?
Isn’t there any other negative things that you know about Obama or have you exhausted them? You brought up the Ayers connection earlier, we need to hear your views on the Madrasses he supposedly attended in Indonesia? What about his half siblings?
Keep listening to Sean Hannity he may have some more or if you want I can direct you to some right wing sites for more spin.
Georgie Porgie // September 1, 2008 at 7:26 PM
@ Sargeant
Re Profhannity We should hire him to talk into Hoad’s cow shit digester for six months, and turn the shit he talks into energy for the national grid!
me // September 1, 2008 at 8:41 PM
alan keyes is such a bigot …
The scout // September 1, 2008 at 8:44 PM
Adrian
I wonder if McCain’s rev friend is going to say that Gustav’s visit to New Orleans and it’s surroundings was another curse from God.
Sargeant // September 1, 2008 at 10:35 PM
The lies are out in full force. McCain said he knew about the young girl’s pregnancy, sure and if you believe that then I have some bajan beach front property to sell to you….cheap. He interviewed her for all of 15 minutes for a job which is potentially a heartbeat away from the most powerful office in the world. Meanwhile the Republicans have sent an investigative team to Alaska to find out if there are any more surprises in store, talk about closing the barn after the horse has bolted. When they arrive they’ll probably find the National Enquirer and all the tabloid press has beaten them to the punch..
Alaska must really be a backwater that’s why those corrupt politicians could escape examination for years and VECO could thrive. Gov Palin didn’t know what she was getting into the big leagues where politics is a blood sport. They’ve been trying to dig up stuff on Obama for two years, that’s why Hillary hung in so long she was hoping for a July surprise.
Gov. Palin must be a real caring mother to subject her daughter to such intense scrutiny from the national press at such a private moment. Meanwhile they’ve also announced that the young lady will marry her “fiancé”, Gov Plain is reputed to be a good shot, so they must be shotguns somewhere.
David // September 1, 2008 at 11:09 PM
@Sargeant
We agree that if this was Obama’s daughter it would be Good Night night nurse!
This is our opinion Adrian H.
The other Senators/Governors who have worked in public life for so many years on the Republican side must be wondering what has McClain done.
Some how we think that this is not the last of reading about the Palins.
PS.Are we hearing right that McClain confirmed that he knew of the daughter’s pregnancy and he went ahead and selected her anyway? We respect Obama’s call for some level of privacy for the 17 year old girl but if the blogs in America did not start to chatter about the child of Governor Palin being the daughter’s when would they have come clean? Finally it does not matter what Obama or McClain think about whether this is private or not it is what Americans think.
What do they think?
Kathy // September 2, 2008 at 1:47 AM
In a pro-choice speech, Obama has already implied what would happen if his daughter made a mistake – he would not want her “punished with a baby”. He is not only pro-abortion, but actively fought against the “born-alive” act which gives medical attention to babies born alive from late term abortions, like Gianna Jessen, for example. I googled her name and found her statement to the House in 1996.
What if McCain crossed the aisle and picked John Edwards as his VP instead! Edwards, his friend Young, and his girlfriend Ms. Hunter probably had the approved Planned Parenthood birth control education, plus they are all a lot older than 17, and probably all pro-choice, and two of them still got “punished” with a baby (Obama’s term)! And Ms. Hunter can’t even marry the father(s!) because I understand that they’re both married. But Edwards was the Democrat pick for VP 4 years ago, and might have made it again this year as Obama’s pick if the National Enquirer hadn’t staked him out in his girlfriend’s hotel room at 2 AM. With the baby there too (the baby that they are saying belongs to Edwards’ friend, Young).
Why is there such a double standard, and why should a little 17-year-old Republican, who is not running for office, be held to a higher standard than three hard-back old Democrats with privileged upbringings?
Sargeant // September 2, 2008 at 7:55 AM
The question is not about abortion, there is not one poster here who said the baby should have been aborted. This is the party of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson et al, the Family Values party, the Moral Majority party which has longed castigated unwed teenage mothers; the party whose platform at this convention at this convention promotes abstinence for teens.
This is a party that believes only the children of “godless liberals” become unmarried teenage mothers. The question asked would how would they respond if it was Obama’s teenage daughter.
And we do know the answer to that.
Q // September 2, 2008 at 8:52 AM
I said that this pick was a bad pick
my vibe told me so
any time women get involve in anything the whole dynamic changes and usually it changes to the dis-advantage of all
this was a desparate move by MC . CAIN
to pander to women voters etc
I dont really care who win the election but I am trying to demonstrate that I can make an observation.
Whoever wins would still be american with american ideas and imperialistic tendencies , cia inspired and manipulated operations and all the other nefarious activities associated with neo-colinalistic escapades. I doubt that the election result would be of any help to us here in Barbados
Anonymous // September 2, 2008 at 9:06 AM
Kathy
Obama opposed that leglislation on the grounds that it was worded badly.
As it stands in the US, doctors are currently required by law to render aid and life support to all viable fetuses born under any circumstances. The Born Alive Act would require doctors to render aid and life support to non-viable fetuses as well.
That’s non-viable, as in they will not survive outside the womb. If they do render aid it could open them up to a whole host of malpractice suits if the child dies, despite it being non viable.
Adrian Hinds // September 2, 2008 at 9:59 AM
=================================
Sargeant // September 1, 2008 at 5:08 pm
@Adrian Hinds
I don’t have a problem whether she is pregnant or not I have a problem with HYPOCRITES. Isn’t this the same constituency that was critical of the Spears family when Britney’s teenage sister became pregnant. What does this discussion have to do with white people? As to the gay issue why do you bring red herrings to the topic who cares who is or isn’t gay?
Isn’t there any other negative things that you know about Obama or have you exhausted them? You brought up the Ayers connection earlier, we need to hear your views on the Madrasses he supposedly attended in Indonesia? What about his half siblings?
Keep listening to Sean Hannity he may have some more or if you want I can direct you to some right wing sites for more spin.
=====================================================================
Sargeant , it is not my place to tell people what they should or shouldn’t do, and it seems to me that you think you have that right to so do. You continue to suggest that I am getting my talking points from right wing talk show hosts and blogs, and you do this as if to suggest that I cannot reason and think and have an opinion of my own making. Now I am very familiar with this approach I have seen it from many liberals and Democratic Party supporters and I am of the opinion that this occurs when there is difficulty in responding without anger and condescending to points that they may not readily overcome with facts. This not to say that I believe you are a liberal or a democratic supporter, as I don’t care if you are. Now I do not listen to Sean Hannity, as I have said before in response to an earlier assumption of yours, I do not watch foxnews as I do not have cable. What I do is listen to both sides of the fence as I am quite confident that I can pick the best practices from the left and the right and come to my own conclusions. For me arguments have to have merit, consistency, and be fact base or I will more likely than not dismiss them, or in the least question them.
You cannot decide for me what issue I will discuss, I did not talk about the “Madrasses he supposedly attended in Indonesia” because I did not see any merit in the statement. The negatives that I highlight about Obama are the ones that I have pursued and found to have merit, and are consistent with other position I hold to. My views on Rev. Wright are consistent with my views on race in America. My views on the need for experience in becoming the President has always been that it is not a necessary requirement and neither is Foreign policy experience, and as such I have never spoken out in favor of John McCain’s previous strategy of “Not Ready”. What is really needed in Washington is “Change” and Obama knew this from the start and that to my mind is the single most reason why he gain traction so early (followed closely by the color of his skin). John McCain has come around to the mood of America that “Change” real change I might add is the key to the white house, and politically with his VP pick he is trying to send that message, and has switch his strategy from “lack of experience” to attempt and overtake of Obama’s “change” strategy. It can work. My Opinion is that on the face of it, Joe Biden, John McCain, and Obama are part of an institution that by its actions or lack thereof, over the years makes the call for “Change” so urgent, there approval rating clearly shows this. Per the requirement set out in the constitution as to what the qualifications for president are, Sarah Palin is as qualified as any and as far as the perception of the American voters that there is a need for change, she is more Presidential than John McCain, Joe Biden. Barack Obama’s “newness” to Washington makes him to my mind a good candidate, but when you look at his policies, his associations and his ideological bent he is not as attractive to the majority of Americans, as Sarah Palin. I am for Sarah Palin as President of the United States. Leader of the free world can go to the EU and the French President. :)
Adrian Hinds // September 2, 2008 at 10:22 AM
Sargeant // September 2, 2008 at 7:55 am
This is the party of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson et al, the Family Values party, the Moral Majority party which has longed castigated unwed teenage mothers; the party whose platform at this convention at this convention promotes abstinence for teens.
=================================
And what political party does the following persons belong too? Arnold Schwarzenegger, Rudy Giuliani,Lincoln Chaffee, Log Cabin Republicans.
Abstinence for teens is a Republican policy only???????
In the mist of all the rhetoric and comments to the contrary, The UN of all the liberal socialist institutions, release a recent study that shows that Abstinence Education Lowering HIV/AIDS Rates.
“The report says that, in Zimbabwe, there has been a drop in the infection rate among pregnant women from 26% in 2002 to 18% in 2006 and that abstinence is playing a role in encouraging people to have less casual sex.
In nations like Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, and others, younger people are reportedly waiting longer to begin having sex. In Cameroon, the UN study says the percentage of children under 15 having sex has dropped from 35% to 14%.
Fewer people are dying — a decline of 200,000 from 2006-2007 — and new infections dropped by 300,000 last year.
Though the abstinence message has helped, the UN study says more focus need to be placed on it so prevention can hold down the numbers of new cases.”
The scout // September 2, 2008 at 11:30 AM
Adrian
Even though the young lady’s pregnancy is of concern, what concerns me more is the vindictive manner in which Palin acted in getting her way because of a problem with her sister and her ex-husband. She has behaved like a typical bajan executive woman that you and others would have criticised. Is she above board?
David // September 2, 2008 at 11:44 AM
@Republicans
Why not make the announcement to coincide with the VP announcement?
Why let the pregnancy be a distraction at this time?
Adrian Hinds // September 2, 2008 at 11:56 AM
The scout // September 2, 2008 at 11:30 am
Adrian
Even though the young lady’s pregnancy is of concern, what concerns me more is the vindictive manner in which Palin acted in getting her way because of a problem with her sister and her ex-husband. She has behaved like a typical bajan executive woman that you and others would have criticised. Is she above board?
=================================
Scout it is not my style to engage in debates base purely on conjecture. You have no way of knowing what my reponse would have been to the hypothetical scenario you have proposed.
….. If what you contends to be the truth and what to mind certainly does look “fishy” of course she needs to be held to account. This is what is currently ongoing, via a special investigation by the Alaskan legislature, and by the Attorney General.
Adrian Hinds // September 2, 2008 at 12:03 PM
The truth so far is that polls that so many rely on show Barack after all the hoopla and money spent last week is flat in approval ratings. John McCain’s Maverick pick of a VP further took the spot light away from Barack, the unintended intervention of Gustav stole some of that back. Right now the presidential race is consumed by teenage pregnancy, not a good topic for democrats. John McCain is a true and true gambler. Politically so far she has been a good pick, and social and moral issue further revelations of Sarah Palin will either break him or create a big win for him.
J // September 2, 2008 at 12:13 PM
Why are people getting excited about this girl’s pregnancy?
We know that sex before marriage (and adultery during marriage) is the NORMAL PRACTICE in every society on the face of the earth and it has ALWAYS been so. Not the belief, but the PRACTICE.
We know that nobody “believes in sex for teenagers,” but we also know that we as teenagers, as well as our parents, and grand parents, and great grand parents, HAPPILY practiced sex before marriage and adultery during marriage.
Why else do we think that there have always been
abortions
shotgun weddings
orphanages – most childen in arphanages/children’s homes have 2 LIVING biological parents
children “given” in adoption – most children “given” in adoption have 2 LIVING biological parents.
unmarried mothers
visiting relatonships
liv-wid couples etc
abscent fathers
welfare mothers
abandoned children
divorces
second marriages (often the second wife and her recycled husband have horned the first wife unmercifully)
third and subsequent mariages
Why do we think that DNA tests are showing that about 10% of us have the “wrong” daddies. And yes that includes those of us born before 1950.
Show me the couple who were BOTH virgins until marriage and NEVER committed adultery in a marriage that lasted 40 years or more
The reason that the Bible has a “do not commit adultery ” commandment is because adultery (and fornication) is commonplace. There is no need to forbid an action that never or seldom occurs.
I can’t understand why we are getting excited about a preganant 17 year old. It has ALWAYS happened, it will ALWAYS happen.
Sexual desire is about ensuring the survival of the species. It is powerful. It can sometimes be briefly restrained . It can NEVER be eliminated. Young people, young animals, young birds will always have that urge to merge.
I can’t believe the mddia frenzy about a COMMONPLACE.
J // September 2, 2008 at 12:22 PM
Why do we think that no society places an empahsis on male virginity.
If most men on marriage are non-virgins (and proud of it too!!!!!) who then did we think that they had sex with?
Clinics in Europe have long made a good business from restoring virginity in young women from deeply “religious” deeply conservative families. The Europens are now being joined by clinics in North America. And they are all making a mint of money.
I don’t know how come none of our Barbadian GYN/OBY’s have got into this very lucrative medical tourism business
My only questin is if virginity can be restored for $3,000 USD why do society’s still place an emphasis on virginity.
The truth is, virginity is NOT important. However good health and integrity have always and will always be important.
Adrian Hinds // September 2, 2008 at 12:38 PM
The DailyKos is saying that the Trig is really Bristol’s baby. Now I love to speculate and have some fun as well. Now my wife told me that some report on television said that when she was pregnant with Trig that she didn’t “show” and many people where surprise at his birth, and with her returning to work 3 days after supposedly giving birth had my wife asking if she gave birth vaginally or by c-section. I jokingly said maybe that child is not hers but her daughter’s. Further to this speculation is the talk about the father being a stay at home dad which makes me wonder if he was at any point a stay at home dad in Alaska. Ummm ummmm. Maybe Trig’s father is really Sarah’s husband, and his Mothers is not Sarah. Maybe Todd and Sarah are in fact, bothTrig’s Maternal and Praternal grandparents. :) and his Dad is shipping out to Iraq. Maybe John McCain knew all of this and is quietly waiting for it to blow up in his face so that he can remove her as his VP and pick Joe Lieberman as a last minute stand in. We all know that Joe was his real choice. :)
At least John McCain would still win West Verginia, ha ha ha ha and this is in accordance with a recent statement Dick Cheney made and that he subsquently apologize for.
The scout // September 2, 2008 at 1:15 PM
Adrian
On an article placed on the net 16 mins ago, there are some very damaging information that has been released on Palin. I think that McCain might be having second thoughts on her V.Pship. It is advisable for him to bite the bullet and remove her now, since the Obama camp is going to have a field day. It has nothing to do with her daughter.
Adrian Hinds // September 2, 2008 at 1:30 PM
The scout // September 2, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Adrian
On an article placed on the net 16 mins ago, there are some very damaging information that has been released on Palin. I think that McCain might be having second thoughts on her V.Pship. It is advisable for him to bite the bullet and remove her now, since the Obama camp is going to have a field day. It has nothing to do with her daughter.
================================
Man Scout stop withholding and post de article. So far you have given me a lot of emotional and alarmist infomation of a partisan nature. I think i have a good handle on what you think, so just post the information so that i can decide for myself. :)
The scout // September 2, 2008 at 2:12 PM
Adrian
Check washingtonpost.com story by Paul Kane. I saw an updated story but I can’t find it.
This story claims that Palin did some underhand deeds that are now coming to light and there is huomour that McCain might ditch her for Lieberman who he really wanted in the first case. I was trying to find the updated version
Q // September 2, 2008 at 5:11 PM
If Palin–(cock) does not withdraw or if she is not ditched , I shall CONSIDER eating 10 telephone poles.
I dont see this woman continuing ——-
Really now... // September 2, 2008 at 5:30 PM
Doesn’t it seem that the US is on the way to being a “has been” power? A McCain-Palin administration would accelerate the demise of the US as a super power. The only problem is the serious damage the US could do as it tries desperately to maintain its grip on power. Obama may preside over a less ego driven fall from the super power status i.e not as predisposed to futile military agression to intimidate others particulary the Chinese, the Russians or the fundamentalist Moslems.
Sargeant // September 2, 2008 at 6:12 PM
Who is Sarah Palin and what does she bring to the table? Given the praise by the editors of the Wall Street Journal on a a recent TV program for a moment I thought that Margaret Thatcher had overcome her dementia and was making a reappearance on the political scene, BTW I think the Thatcher comparison will not be long in coming from some of spin masters in the media. If the Democrats had proposed a politician with so thin a resume as their VP the same Republican media would be frothing at the mouth, but that’s politics hold your nose and proclaim membership in the PTA is a prerequisite for negotiations with Putin.
The only thing that seems to be important to the evangelicals that make up much of the base of the Republicans is that Palin is anti abortion. That is the litmus test if you are anti abortion that’s good enough for us no other issues matter. Being anti abortion is one thing but Palin is also anti choice which means if a woman becomes pregnant as a result of rape or incest Palin would insist that the fetus should not be aborted. These people care about babies before they are born but not after, they hold such sway in Republican politics that the Bush administration withheld funding from a UN agency which was promoting contraception in Third World countries. A few years from now when war or drought produces a famine and the results of this non contraception are on their TV screens with frail bodies and distended stomachs then Bush’s successors will send some bags of grain and the US will pat itself on the back and declare what a generous country we are.
David // September 2, 2008 at 6:38 PM
We asked a number of questions earlier which have been ignored? One of those questions was to ask Adrian H what are Americans feeling about the VP appointment. The latest Gallup Poll answers our question.
Wishing In Vain // September 3, 2008 at 1:36 AM
Obama Hits 50 Percent In New Gallup Poll
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has reached the 50 percent milestone in the latest Gallup Poll, the first time he has hit the threshold considered to be a safe number for victory.
According to Gallup’s Daily Tracking Poll, the Democratic presidential nominee now maintains an 8-point lead over Republican John McCain, 50 percent to 42 percent.
McCain, despite enjoying the media spotlight at this week’s Republican National Convention, is “well below” his 48 percent top support level, recorded in late April/early May, in a hypothetical match-up against Obama, said Gallup pollster Lydia Saad. He is “just slightly better” than the 40 percent he was getting during the Democratic convention last week.
Meanwhile, the percentage of undecided voters is at its lowest since early June at 8 percent. “This, in part, reflects movement of voters toward Obama over the course of the Democratic National Convention, a lead which has been sustained in subsequent days,” Saad said.
However, Gallup surmised that 24-hour news coverage of Hurricane Gustav and Monday’s news that the unwed 17-year-old daughter of McCain’s vice presidential pick Sarah Palin is pregnant crowded out traditional coverage of the convention.
“The Republicans hope to start up a more traditional convention schedule today in St. Paul, with the goal of capturing the same kind of media and public attention the Democrats did last week in Denver,” wrote Saad.
Today’s numbers included polling from Aug. 30 through Sept. 1. The margin of error is 2 points in the poll of 2,772 registered voters nationwide.
David // September 3, 2008 at 6:35 AM
We have asked several questions and made several observations on this topic. We are still waiting for answers…lol.
Here we go again.
If America is suppose to be the country of immigrants (melting pot) why did we see only White America in attendance at the Republican Convention last night?
A simple question not meant to be putting the race card to the debate but you know what, we are playing the race card!
Race is the biggest elephant in the room in this election and in our opinion it explains why Obama’s lead is not in double digits considering a weak economy, low rating for the Republican incumbent President and Democrat controlled Houses.
The scout // September 3, 2008 at 7:16 AM
David
The closer it comes to the elections, the more race will become an issue. The thing is whites don’t talk the race card, they act the race card. Look how they are covering for the mess Palin is in, one would think she’s an angel sent down from heaven to guide McCain into the white house. If the Barbados’ P.M’s teenage daughter had become pregnant, the vultures would have been eating him alive,yet we have bajan here who are saying there nothing wrong. What then do you expect from american. This is a topsy turvy world we live in. White all right; black stay back.
Tony Hall // September 3, 2008 at 8:42 AM
We shall see if she lasts and how long because she seems to have a fair amount of skeletons in the family closet. McCain interviewed her for 15 mins. The selection was forced upon him by the racists conservative Evangelicals.
ru4real // September 3, 2008 at 8:46 AM
Barrifle of rubbish here…………..
What does it matter that Mrs Palins daughter is pregnant she aint running for VP?
Immigrants can come in all colors and all political leanings.
Who is Barbados to be so self righteous?
Who cares anyhow?
Adrian Hinds // September 3, 2008 at 9:15 AM
David // September 2, 2008 at 6:38 pm
We asked a number of questions earlier which have been ignored? One of those questions was to ask Adrian H what are Americans feeling about the VP appointment. The latest Gallup Poll answers our question.
=================================
If is obvious that you wish to gloat by asking a question to which tha answer is readily known and to which you favour. The margin of Obama’s lead in the polls is very small and this after his convention and nomination speech. It can be easily overcome by John McCain.
The scout // September 3, 2008 at 9:55 AM
Adrian
Did you check washingtonpost.com and see the article? These accusations of federal money which she squandered and now denying it. The facts are there. No wonder she is McCain’s V.P. Same lies, same denials even though the facts are there. Is this what a world leader country likeamerica want for President and Vice President? If this happens, america would be trampled by nations like China, Russia, even Iran. America needs strong leadership at this point and Obama/ Biden is the better of the two evils .
Adrian Hinds // September 3, 2008 at 10:27 AM
David // September 1, 2008 at 5:03 am
@Adrian H
We said shinnanigans because we have always been a little confused about the electoral system which occurs in the USA.
Primaries and Caucuses, we have never understood how a few hundred/thousand people can enter a town hall and shout for who they want to vote for like selling cows in the market.
We never understood how Gore could have been defeated in Florida and it was not contested given the obvious inefficiency in the chad system.
We never can understand how an Electoral College could elect a president and not the people directly.
Don’t misunderstand us, it is a system which has worked for the USA and we respect it just that it seems very complicated and INEFFICIENT!
=================================
Is this real confusion, and a willingness to understand, or just the typical condescending attitude of an aloof bajan? How different is the American Political party presidential selection process from the political party leader selection process in Barbados’ ill conceived adaptation of the Westminster? How different is the caucus shouting from the table top banging and shouts of yeh or ney when Member of Parliament elucidate, pontificates and opinionates for or against a cause that has been long decided?
You could if you wanted, understand that this country does not have national elections, if we did the Democrats would win all the time and small states like Rhode Island would have no say. Should you ponder equally as hard how is it that a political party in a country that does have national elections could lose that national election by less than 15,000 votes and yet only have two or three of the total seats in parliament. Do you call that democracy? Is that representation? So you know the US Democratic party has an electoral college they are called super delegates. Also the propose process for picking the unelected President of Barbados under their version of a Republic did not even include the popular vote, but that of the electoral college only.
I have not misunderstand your comments here
How do you respond to Albert Branford’s latest article? (A model democracy?)
Can you?
Albert opens his article with the following
“BARBADIANS need to reject the “groundless assumption and perception” that their island nation is an advanced or model democracy.”
It seems to me that you would rather spend time discussing the faults in the greatest democracy in the world when you live in a society that may not be one. How about doing both? Surely you can.
You shouldn’t gloat that your questions remain unanswered. It is usually a sign of what I think of them. :)
Adrian Hinds // September 3, 2008 at 10:53 AM
David // September 3, 2008 at 6:35 am
We have asked several questions and made several observations on this topic. We are still waiting for answers…lol.
Here we go again.
If America is suppose to be the country of immigrants (melting pot) why did we see only White America in attendance at the Republican Convention last night?
A simple question not meant to be putting the race card to the debate but you know what, we are playing the race card!
Race is the biggest elephant in the room in this election and in our opinion it explains why Obama’s lead is not in double digits considering a weak economy, low rating for the Republican incumbent President and Democrat controlled Houses.
=================================
Race is not the biggest elephant in the room, and Obama’s rating is not in double digits because the majority of voters over the years that have taken to believing that a President must have some experience, and that governership experience which is akin to that of the president at the state level but without foreign affairs experience give a sufficient snapshot of what the candidate can do. This is one of the reasons why only two SITTING senators have ever transition directly over to the whitehouse as president.
There are fewer blacks at the republican party convention that where at the DNC, not because Blacks are being kept out as you would like to be the case, but because this is a free country, people can hitch their wagon to which ever party or none at all if they so please. African Americans have decided that they can demonstrate their individualism by voting all 90% of them 100% of the time for the democrats who as Al Sharpton said just 4 years ago at the DNC convention, that African Americans are tired of being invited to the party, not has invited guest but as hired help. Free choice baby.
Concider Deval Patrick, an African American who was unamously elected in the state of Massachusetts said the following at the just concluded Democratic convention.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAwKHriAj5Q
And check this one out to.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0YbW-iVxk8
Race is not the issue, it is silly to think such concidering we are disussing the possible election of a black man to be President of the United States, and celebrating the governorship of another in State that has a dark historical past.
Adrian Hinds // September 3, 2008 at 11:10 AM
The scout // September 3, 2008 at 9:55 am
Adrian
Did you check washingtonpost.com and see the article? These accusations of federal money which she squandered and now denying it. The facts are there. No wonder she is McCain’s V.P. Same lies, same denials even though the facts are there. Is this what a world leader country likeamerica want for President and Vice President? If this happens, america would be trampled by nations like China, Russia, even Iran. America needs strong leadership at this point and Obama/ Biden is the better of the two evils .
=================================
It’s more of the same. We voted for Bill Clinton with all kinds of accusations and investigations going on in his state, we do not have to vote for Sarah Palin do we?
No Scout America needs new membership to congress so that they can in honesty give them an approval rating above 9%. How can we truly get change by electing the same law makers year after year? The occupant of the white can be change every 4 years and ultimately every 8 years, we don’t need anymore focus on change in the whitehouse, we need a process where we can at a national level decide who becomes President of the senate, and Leader of Congress. Do you know that the current Leader of Congress, stated three times in a interview that natural gas is not a fossil fuel? She is very convince. :)
Adrian Hinds // September 3, 2008 at 11:55 AM
David, since you like to gloat about the assumed strength of your simple questions, today is your day to deal with me since Sargeant hasn’t lived up to the billing i thought he could provide for . :)
Here is a simple view against the US electorial college. As you read it, reflect on how Your Prime Minister is selected, then aswer this simple question:
Is the post of Prime Minister presented on the Ballot, so that a Barbados registered elector can make a choice?
What’s wrong with the electoral college
Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president.
Sargeant // September 3, 2008 at 1:30 PM
@ David
• If America is suppose to be the country of immigrants (melting pot) why did we see only White America in attendance at the Republican Convention last night?
I believe you were referring to the absence of black faces, not the absence of immigrants as some of the white faces may be immigrants.
Everyone should support a party if they are comfortable with that organisation’s philosophy, however would you go someplace where you are not welcome?
The GOP for the past 50 years has pursued a Southern strategy in their efforts to secure the votes of white voters of some states. I will not go into details of this tactic but will attach the link at the end so perhaps Adrian Hinds could read and understand (talk about being optimistic). This approach has caused embarrassment to the few black GOP members but what can they do? they are dead ducks.
The use of certain words and images to appeal to this demographic is widespread hence when Ronald Reagan used the term “Welfare Queen” everyone knew what he meant, Similarly when the GOP ran the ad against Harold Ford in his Senate race though they never said anything racist they knew whom they were appealing to In an earlier post I said that they used the same tactics against McCain in 2000 after he adopted a young girl from Bangladesh ( McCain just hired the architect of that campaign for his staff so Obama better watch out).
Did you know that McCain voted against the MLK holiday? The former governor of his state ( Evan Mecham who was later recalled) rescinded the holiday after he was elected..
When you watch the convention observe how the cameras always focus on the few black people in attendance during any emotional moment or how they place some black people just behind the speaker to give the impression of diversity. You may be seeing the same face several times from different angles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
Sargeant // September 3, 2008 at 1:47 PM
I should have stated GOP= Grand old Party= Republican
Sorry
The scout // September 3, 2008 at 2:09 PM
Adrian
Your party is so unfair, you took Michelle Obama to the cleaners. You tried to find every little thing about her and she’s only Obama wife,yet the Republicans are now mad because the media is digging up Palin clouded history and she is one step away from becoming president.
Adrian Hinds // September 3, 2008 at 3:18 PM
The scout // September 3, 2008 at 2:09 pm
Adrian
Your party is so unfair, you took Michelle Obama to the cleaners. You tried to find every little thing about her and she’s only Obama wife,yet the Republicans are now mad because the media is digging up Palin clouded history and she is one step away from becoming president.
=================================
Not my party sir, I am not a member of any group, and the only one that i looking forward to “purchasing” a membership into is the American Association of retired persons, which i percieve will be a benefit to me. :) But the Dems are free to pillory Sarah Palin as the Republicans are to Michelle, ultimately the people will decide which attack was justified. My take is that the American people will side with Sarah Palin against the Media and the Democrats for tarring and feathering her on what is essentially a personal issue, and will be offended by Michelle self centered comment that “for the first time she is proud of America” this first time being the favourable ratings her husband was enjoying in his quest for the Democratic nomination.
@David
so you see even Michelle “hardcore” Obama saw a reason to soften her position on America still being that racist country of old. “How could it be” she seems to be asking, “if my husband is now the democratic nominee for President?” Girl yuh right to be proud even if um is de first time, and in so doing put some Bajans in their outdated beliefs in their place. :)
Adrian Hinds // September 3, 2008 at 3:25 PM
Sargeant // September 3, 2008 at 1:30 pm
When you watch the convention observe how the cameras always focus on the few black people in attendance during any emotional moment or how they place some black people just behind the speaker to give the impression of diversity. You may be seeing the same face several times from different angles.
=================================
ha ha ha so Sarge are you saying that this has occurred on the past days so far? or that this is the strategy of all the individual news media cameras going forward? Are you suggesting that Foxnews, NBC, ABC,CBS,MSNBC, BBC, have conspired to fool Americans and BU? Boy the things you does know. ;)
BTW David gave the impression that he did not see any black faces so far that Elephant’s party. Maybe your were watching foxnews and he was watching MSNBC. ;)
Adrian Hinds // September 3, 2008 at 3:40 PM
Sargeant // September 3, 2008 at 1:47 pm
I should have stated GOP= Grand old Party= Republican
Sorry
=================================
What was it called when there were a significant number of Black lincoln republicans? or was that a myth?
How would you respond to this article? Dismissing it and or a silent response are admissable. ;)
Why do black Americans forsake the party of Lincoln?
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
BY PAUL GOTTFRIED
American blacks voted twice, with large pluralities, for the Republican Dwight Eisenhower.
IN VIEW of Barack Obama’s rise to national prominence, it might be worthy of note that some black politicians have failed to attract black votes.
Why have black Republicans been singled out for noisy ridicule in the black community?
And it is not only blacks who are engaging in this ridicule. White journalists and white intellectuals, who have rallied to Barack Obama as a moral redeemer, treat black Republicans as hostile to other blacks.
I am raising this query not as a GOP supporter but as an inquisitive historian. American blacks were overwhelmingly Republican from the Civil War, in which the Republicans were the party of Negro emancipation, down to the New Deal. In the 1950s, they voted twice, with large pluralities, for the Republican Dwight Eisenhower. Eisenhower’s Democratic opponent in 1952, Adlai Stevenson, ran with an avowed segregationist, John Sparkman of Alabama, as his running mate, helping deliver him the Old South, the only section of the country the Democratic ticket won.
Even as late as 1964, the Civil Rights Act passed because 90 percent of the Republicans in Congress, as opposed to about 50 percent of the Democrats, voted for it.
No effect
Nor has the fact that the current Republican administration selected blacks for high Cabinet posts meant anything to most black voters. Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell and other Republicans who have worked for this administration are judged in polls taken among blacks to be disloyal members of their race.
Nor does it seem to me that Democrats have given blacks more than Republicans have. It was the supposedly pro-black Clinton administration that abolished welfare programs that went disproportionately to lower-class blacks. Clinton was able to do this because blacks would support him unconditionally. By cutting payments to a group that voted in relatively small numbers (the underclass), Clinton could therefore create the impression of being a fiscal conservative to balance his image as a social liberal.
But those positions have little to do with specifically black interests. Although by no means a fan of the Bush foreign policy, I cannot see how Condoleezza Rice’s position on the Iraq war indicates hostility toward black people. Was Clinton’s bombing of Serbs in 1999 a more black-friendly act?
Outreach failure
In the 1980s, New York Rep. Jack Kemp, who later became Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under Ronald Reagan, tried to build a career as a Republican who knew how to reach out to blacks. Never did a politician try so hard to live up to a reputation. As a federal official, Kemp favored set-asides for racial minorities. His addresses before Republican gatherings often featured long quotations from Martin Luther King Jr. and rhetorical questions intended to appeal to white guilt about “Where were Republicans when others were riding the freedom buses?”
But there were two problems with this strategy. First, Democrats such as Jimmy Carter never rode freedom buses, but instead began their careers as segregationist politicians. Nonetheless, unlike Republicans who had spoken out against segregation, such Democrats did very well in picking up black votes. (And so did that famous onetime segregationist George Wallace by the end of his career in Alabama politics.) Second, Kemp’s desperate reaching out to blacks did not benefit his party. Although he managed to obtain the vice-presidential slot in 1996, the GOP received only 10 percent of the black vote that year. And Kemp got heckled when he spoke before black crowds.
What this failed outreach suggests is that the GOP’s attempts to appeal to black voters have generally not met with success. At the same time, the revulsion of blacks for Republicans, and particularly for black Republicans, seems unrelated to the history of either group. I, for one, am still searching for an explanation as to why this hostility is as deep and abiding as it seems to be.
Paul Gottfried, a professor of humanities at Elizabethown College in Pennsylvania, writes The Ornery Observer, copyright 2008 by Paul Gottfried and the Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation. All rights reserved.
Adrian Hinds // September 3, 2008 at 3:49 PM
@ Sargeant
The GOP for the past 50 years has pursued a Southern strategy in their efforts to secure the votes of white voters of some states. I will not go into details of this tactic but will attach the link at the end so perhaps Adrian Hinds could read and understand (talk about being optimistic).
================================
Sarge you should know there will be agruments for and against everything. This is one of the reasons i will not take sides and join a political party, for at anytime a political party will be no more that the current group of members.
Take a look at these response to the article above.
says:I am fifity foour years old, i remwmber whnethe civl rights act eas passed…. Iknow it was passed with assistance of the Republican party… all republican who particpated were drummed out of the party( Northeastern Republican) and Red Dogs left the demorcartic party ie Jessie Helms and used the republican party udner the queise of state rights to continue thier racist rant. ANd then was was tactic of using race to win the south…. under thiw tactic welfare and crimainal become the code workd for african american…. The economci policy of the republicans have adderslrya affected my community… you want my vote… earn it honsetly.. Clarenc Thoms was the birght judge for suprem court… come ..earn my vote
———————
joe beattie says:senator byrd was the democrat’s senate majority leader and is still a senator today. he is considered the honorary leader of the democratic party. as a leader of the democratic party in 1960’s and later, the senator fought civil rights legislation tooth and nail. he also was a recruiter for the KKK for many years. senator johnson who later became president, lead the fight against civil rights legislation in 1957. he lead the fight to defeat a civil rights bill proposed by republicans. senator kennedy who later became president also voted against this act as did almost every other democrat. senator fulbright was the mentor of president clinton and a lifelong segregationist. clearly saints & sinners do not line up in straight lines
8/21/2008 12:46PM EDT
—————————–
senator byrd was the democrat’s senate majority leader and is still a senator today. he is considered the honorary leader of the democratic party. as a leader of the democratic party in 1960’s and later, the senator fought civil rights legislation tooth and nail. he also was a recruiter for the KKK for many years. senator johnson who later became president, lead the fight against civil rights legislation in 1957. he lead the fight to defeat a civil rights bill proposed by republicans. senator kennedy who later became president also voted against this act as did almost every other democrat. senator fulbright was the mentor of president clinton and a lifelong segregationist. clearly saints & sinners do not line up in straight lines
8/21/2008 12:46PM EDT
—————————–
sagar816 says:Paul Gottfried’s editorial the lack of support for the Republican party among American blacks conveniently ignores that many Democrats who supported segration later became Republicans and that the Republican party openly courted segregationist and other rascist voters to win support for their party in the South. Ronald Reagan, for example, began his 1980 Presidential election by talking about states’ rights in Philadelphia, Mississippi (where attacks on civil rights workers spurred the passing of the federal Civil Rights Act). Mr. Gottfried may do well to become a better student of American history (or at least one without a selective memory) before writing conservative propaganda in disguise as a essay by an “inquisitive historian.”
8/20/2008 6:45PM EDT
—————————–
CLJ says:The Democratic party has not ignored Blacks,quite the contrary. President Bush ignored Katrina victims (White and Black) because this poor segment of society did not matter to him and his fellow Republican crones. Please Mr. Beattie, Republicans could care less about poor Black & White Americans. (they don’t care about Blacks at all regardless of economic status.Katrina victims were ignored by President Bush and his fellow Republicans..ie Condoleeza Rice, Michael Chartoff, & let’s not forget good ‘ol Brownie all ignored poor Blacks & Whites during that time of crisis. People died and are still disenfranchised because of the Republican administrations lack of response to a catastrophe that occured right in our own country, but we can go running to defend Iraq and other middle eastern nations??! These people hate America, but we run to help them?! Please Mr. Beattie spare me your defense of the Republican party. Oh and by the way, your referred to me as Mr.CLJ, but I am Ms. CLJ. Actions speak louder than words, and the Republican Party of the late 20th century has done nothing but cut programs and damage the economy espcially during the Reagan era(numerous program cuts that helped the poor)I see the Republican party for exactly what they stand for, and they certainly do not stand for the poor.. White or Black. Let’s just end this by saying we agree to disagree with each other.
8/20/2008 2:17PM EDT
——————————–
joe beattie says:president clinton’s welfare reform bill was originally part of the contract with america authored by newt gingrich & company (republicans). president clinton refused to sign the bill 3 times and was finally pressured by public opinion to sign the 4th version. all versions of the welfare reform bill were basically the same. Same thing happened with balancing the budget. it was part of the contract with america and the democrats fought it just like they fought welfare reform. maybe mr clj should reconsider his support for democrats since the democratic party tends to ignore minorities. oh by the way, when president lincoln ran for reelection, it was the democrats who wanted to give up the fight and end the war with slavery as is in the south, it was president lincoln who had the will to continue the war and end slavery.
8/20/2008 1:04PM EDT
—————————-
CLJ says:The Republican Party has never embraced Black people, the deomcratic party has and continues to address issues faced in America by Blacks. Lincoln freed the Slaves as a political move…not because he cared so much for the slaves. Clinton did a very good thing with the Welfare reform bill, this bill not only required that recipients get job training, but, it also required them to do some work for the money that they received, which in my opinion instills a sense of pride in earning your money instead of just waiting for the check to arrive in the mail each month. Mr. Gottfried is obviously a Republican who is resentful of Black loyalty to the Democratic Party.
8/20/2008 11:47AM EDT
Sargeant // September 3, 2008 at 4:02 PM
@ Adrian
• Race is not the issue, it is silly to think such concidering we are disussing the possible election of a black man to be President of the United States, and celebrating the governorship of another in State that has a dark historical past.
We talking about race and electability and you bring a you tube featuring Deval Patrick the black Gov. Of Massachusetts Is that you’re “A Game”? Since you live in the USA to use a baseball terminology you should be in “Rookie League”, you can’t hit the curve balls and change ups of the majors. Frankly I would’ve been more impressed if you had cited Edward Brooke after all he was elected more than 40 years ago in Massachusetts and as a Republican to boot.
OK, I will go over this one more time, this is about national elections, not state elections, though for a black candidate the prospect of being elected statewide is difficult enough.
I attached the link on the GOP’s “Southern Strategy” on a previous post, now for this assignment read the bio of Edward Brooke and the article by Christopher Dickie.
I know that I won’t convince you after all you drank the Kool Aid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Brooke
http://www.newsweek.com/id/150576
The scout // September 3, 2008 at 4:58 PM
Adrian
I was just reading some imformation just off the net. This girl is a BIG embarrassment to the GOP. NBC just released about an hour ago enough damaging information on that girl that instead of being V.P she could be charged. GOP is claiming sexism. They said the media should not be diving into a lady’s private life. JOKE.
Sargeant // September 3, 2008 at 5:17 PM
@Adrian H
Bill O’Reilly of Fox News a supporter of your candidate called the parents of Jamie Lynn Spears “pinheads” after she announced that she was pregnant.
Here is the quote from Dec.20/07 “On the pinhead front, 16-year-old Jamie Lynn Spears is pregnant. The sister of Britney says she is shocked. I bet.
Now most teens are pinheads in some ways. But here the blame falls primarily on the parents of the girl, who obviously have little control over her or even over Britney Spears. Look at the way she behaves”
Do you think he would call the Palins Pinheads? Don’t hold your breath, Fox News is a major supporter of the GOP so the Palins are good, solid representatives of America
Here is a thought, do you think we can get Fox News to run the banner “Baby Mama” when the young lady is on screen? They did it to Michelle and she was only married to Barack for so many years. This brings us back to “code words” that I spoke about earlier.
The Palins also said that they hoped that everyone would respect their family’s privacy, yet they are bringing the baby daddy ( I was tempted to say sperm donor) to the convention (lol). Some privacy
Sargeant // September 3, 2008 at 5:20 PM
It seems that the following post has disappeared so I am reposting. If the original appears, my apologies to all
@ Adrian
• Race is not the issue, it is silly to think such concidering we are disussing the possible election of a black man to be President of the United States, and celebrating the governorship of another in State that has a dark historical past.
We talking about race and electability and you bring a you tube featuring Deval Patrick the black Gov. Of Massachusetts Is that you’re “A Game”? Since you live in the USA to use a baseball terminology you should be in “Rookie League”, you can’t hit the curve balls and change ups of the majors. Frankly I would’ve been more impressed if you had cited Edward Brooke after all he was elected more than 40 years ago in Massachusetts and as a Republican to boot.
OK, I will go over this one more time, this is about national elections, not state elections, though for a black candidate the prospect of being elected statewide is difficult enough.
I attached the link on the GOP’s “Southern Strategy” on a previous post, now for this assignment read the bio of Edward Brooke and the article by Christopher Dickie.
I know that I won’t convince you after all you drank the Kool Aid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Brooke
http://www.newsweek.com/id/150576
Sargeant // September 3, 2008 at 5:40 PM
David
I posted the same piece on Sarah Palin with two links attached; one with Edward Brook and the other a Newsweek article on the South. My handle does not appear in the area ‘Voice of the People” yet I can see the full article here which appears to be on your blog with a quote at the bottom “ your comment is awaiting moderation”
Please let me know if its there I don’t want to waste anyone’s time
David // September 3, 2008 at 6:17 PM
@Sargeant
We have been experiencing the problem as well and have submitted a report to WordPress.
@Adrian H
We never called into question the American system we said it was complicated. We understand a little of how it works but it is a work in progress.
Straight talk // September 3, 2008 at 6:24 PM
Adrian H, By your own, and other various submisssions on this thread, it is patently obvious that colour is not the essential trait most commentators believe it to be.
Politicians play whatever card necessary to gain POWER….the sole and prepossessing goal.
Black, white, pink or blue theirs is that one overriding target. Ultimate authority.
Any Caribbean wishing to believe some earth shaking event will occur to our benefit by the election of a half-white, half-arab politician in a country which barely knows we even exist, would be better waiting for Kick’em Jenny.
Our fate is in our hands.
Throw away the demeaning begging bowl, and stand up for ourselves…Pride and Industry.
J // September 3, 2008 at 6:31 PM
Dear Straight Talk:
Barack Obama’s father was NOT an Arab. He was a black East African from Kenya.
You do know this don’t you?
Dog Bite Muh // September 3, 2008 at 6:39 PM
So wait a minute sargeantnonamegreenmonkeyET AL, so you accusing Adrian Hinds of watching Fox News and drinking kool aid like it is some crime. So how come you know about kool aid and Bill O’Reilly if you don’t watch Fox News? Well at least Adrian got the guts to use ONE name, his real name . How you is so many people though?
Straight talk // September 3, 2008 at 7:12 PM
J:
You ever been to Kenya?
Barack Hussein Obama Sr. is an Arab.
Straight talk // September 3, 2008 at 7:22 PM
J:
Sorry for disabusing you of his race, my main point stands, Obama or McCain it matters not, we who are getting so excited over a man’s skin when neither of them know or care we exist.
There is no benefit directly to the Caribbean, Africa, Arabia, or in Mr Palin’s case, the Eskimo community for whover is elected in November.
There will be only one beneficiary, the same old, same old campaign donors.
The Devil // September 3, 2008 at 7:37 PM
ST wrote ” Barack Hussein Obama Sr. is an Arab.”
This is a sincere question. How do you define an “Arab”? Obama sr, was a Kenyan from the Luo tribe. His phenotypical characteristics (skin colour, hair texture, facial features etc) looked very similar to other Kenyans, who are said to be Black Africans.
That said I agree and expect that whoever wins the US presidency will act solely in the interest of lobbies and groups in the USA.
Straight talk // September 3, 2008 at 7:45 PM
He could be from the Comanche tribe for all I care, oh cloven footed one, the point is he is not the new Nelson Madela or MLK some of our community are salivating about.
He is Rockefeller’s man, and that is where is heart will be, along with his wallet.
The Devil // September 3, 2008 at 8:23 PM
ST
It was a sincere question. I was curious how you determined that Obama sr was an “Arab”. I’ll move along now.
I hope you acknowledge my last sentence in the previous post which agrees with your political position.
J // September 3, 2008 at 8:46 PM
The seniopr Obama was NOT an Arab. He was a Muslim, although apparently not a very devout one. Calling him an Arab is like calling me white becasue I am a Christian. The senior Obama was NOT and Arab. I am NOT white.
Stop telling lies. The Luo are NOT Arabs. They are Africans.
African colonised Saudia Arabia and the rest of the Arab world, not the other way around.
Go learn your history, and while you are at it crack open the geography books too.
J // September 3, 2008 at 8:50 PM
And of course any U.S. President has to act in America’s best interest, just as a Barbados Prime Minister is sworn to act in Barbados’ best interest. And when they don’t then the people will act in their best interest and throw the rascals out.
Adrian Hinds // September 3, 2008 at 11:50 PM
We talking about race and electability and you bring a you tube featuring Deval Patrick the black Gov. Of Massachusetts Is that you’re “A Game”? Since you live in the USA to use a baseball terminology you should be in “Rookie League”, you can’t hit the curve balls and change ups of the majors. Frankly I would’ve been more impressed if you had cited Edward Brooke after all he was elected more than 40 years ago in Massachusetts and as a Republican to boot
=================================
You are surely not up to the task. I am not surprise that i have impressed you, and it wasn’t my intent to so do, nor can i be encourage to meet your threshold of “more impress”. You see liberal talking points are easily torn apart, and i take no joy in what is becoming a mundane task. A liberal i can never be as they can never stand of solid ground. You continue to prove my point that race is not an issue in this campaign. Your willingness to return to times in this great country’s past demonstrates this. You time travel back 50 years to rehash the southern strategy, travel back 40 years ago to discuss Ed Brooks. I am looking at 2008 and i do not see your America.
————————————————
So David after calling my name several times, reminding that i have not answered your questions and laughing as to suggest that i could not, After pontificating that Americans who partake in our primaries and cuacuses behave like cows, and suggesting that our electorial and government system is INEFFICIENT. Did my responses and retort left you so wounded, battered and looking like a person that not only does not understand the American system but seems not to understand that of Barbados as well, all you can muster is the following?
Adrian H
We never called into question the American system we said it was complicated. We understand a little of how it works but it is a work in progress.
————————————-
Must i now inform you that you are being dishonest and a person not even vaguely familiar with the government and electorial systems of Barbados?
Albert Brandford has your number.
David // September 4, 2008 at 1:52 AM
@Adrian H
Sorry that you think we have been dishonest, you are entitled to your opinion and we have to respect it.
On the Albert Brandford comment he does write a good article betwix and between but his credibility took some heavy blows during the last election and we have to question his motives sometimes.
Like we said above we will try to explore some of the points he raised in his last article sometime.
Adrian Hinds // September 4, 2008 at 9:28 AM
David // September 4, 2008 at 1:52 am
@Adrian H
Sorry that you think we have been dishonest, you are entitled to your opinion and we have to respect it.
On the Albert Brandford comment he does write a good article betwix and between but his credibility took some heavy blows during the last election and we have to question his motives sometimes.
Like we said above we will try to explore some of the points he raised in his last article sometime.
=================================
ha ha ha ha No worries, I understand the willingness to weasel your way out of the shame your very condescending but uninformed
“HOW PEOPLE CAN ENTER A TOWN HALL AND SHOUT FOR WHO THEY WANT TO VOTE FOR LIKE SELLING COWS ON THE MARKET.”
“WE NEVER CAN UNDERSTAND HOW AN ELECTORAL COLLEGE COULD ELECT A PRESIDENT AND NOT THE PEOPLE DIRECTLY.”
have been brought to bare on you. People who use the statements “I never can understand” demonstrates befuddlement at a situation even after careful and thoughtful analysis. It is very clear to me that you did no such thing and that it is likely that facts and a willingness to be fair was not on your agenda with regards to this thread.
…I will agree with you in your general assessment of Albert Brandford, but to suggest that this particular article further proves that his credibility and motives are questionable is being totally unfair. This particular articles deals with the research of academics at UWI. Albert in this article is clearly the messenger. You must deal with it contents without reference to your opinions of the messenger. Can you? :)
Adrian Hinds // September 4, 2008 at 9:43 AM
@Sargeant
Last night Sarah Palin said “What seperates Hockey moms and pit bulls?” Lip stick!
Katie Curric, later reported on the speech by referring to Sarah Palin as “Sarah the pitbull” and no body complain and they shouldn’t as Sarah clearly made the inference.
Michelle Obama referred to Barack as her “Babies Daddy”, so why are you taking umbrage if someone refers to her as her “Babies Mama”? ????
Adrian Hinds // September 4, 2008 at 11:16 AM
Hey Scout, today seems to be a slow day in this thread, and i don’t know why :) maybe folks have just moved on to other things Local to Barbados……anyway I think i can spend some time looking at the alarms you raised about Sarah Palin. Can you post the “damaging revelations” that you were pointing me towards?
Adrian Hinds // September 4, 2008 at 11:29 AM
Straight talk // September 3, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Adrian H, By your own, and other various submisssions on this thread, it is patently obvious that colour is not the essential trait most commentators believe it to be.
=================================
Yes and no. Yes they are racial considerations, and no it is not essential or core to this election campaign.
If 90% of white America where not voting for Barack , we would have to seriously ask why and in so doing could not exclude race.
If 90% of Black America is voting for him, we should also seriously ask why and in so doing not exclude race.
…..What are the facts saying so far?
To my mind it is and it isn’t about race.
BTW has anyone ever heard of Dr. Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour , Percy Sutton,…. Don Warden perhaps????
Straight talk // September 4, 2008 at 1:28 PM
AH:
Not heard of them, until your post, but one role model I do know having spent time with him and his family, is Ken Chenault.
Charming, clever people , and well worth adding to your list.
Sargeant // September 4, 2008 at 5:20 PM
GOP Convention: Welcome to white America, out of 2,380 delegates 36 are black. This is one reason why black people won’t join the GOP.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/westmoreland-calls-obama-uppity-2008-09-04.html
David // September 4, 2008 at 8:41 PM
@Adrian H
Please reread what we wrote because you have misunderstood. We said that his credibility took a beating during the last election, it is not directed at his Sunday article at all.
Adrian Hinds // September 5, 2008 at 9:57 AM
David // September 4, 2008 at 8:41 pm
Please reread what we wrote because you have misunderstood. We said that his credibility took a beating during the last election, it is not directed at his Sunday article at all.
=================================
Why else would you have mentioned Albert’s credibility, while discussing his recent article, if not to discount the article itself? Are you now in the habit of just mentioning things about a person for no reason at all? If you wanted to draw attention to Albert’s credibility but not link it to his last Sunday article, why not be explicit in so doing? The answer is most likely that you did what you had intended, which is to dismiss his recent article under the guise of past legitimate questioning of his credibility, and now that your dismissal of this article has been question you are once again trying to weasel your way of culpability rather than concede the errors of your assessment. Dishonest? defensive? you decide. :)
Adrian Hinds // September 5, 2008 at 10:01 AM
Sargeant // September 4, 2008 at 5:20 pm
GOP Convention: Welcome to white America, out of 2,380 delegates 36 are black. This is one reason why black people won’t join the GOP.
=================================
Do you have an opinion on why so many Barbadians favour remaining a consitutional monarchy? Why so many do not think that Barbados should do away with the privy council and joing CCJ?
John // September 5, 2008 at 1:13 PM
On the lighter side ……..
Americans seem to love her but the last time someone with a very similar surname spoke about dogs in politics here is what happened.
Taken form an internet site and parphrased:
“In the House of Commons, a rather nice Labour former cabinet minister called Wilfred Paling was so incensed by something Churchill said in one of his speeches that he shouted across the floor of the House: “DIRTY DOG! ”
Churchill paused and said, “The Rt Hon Member should remember what dirty dogs do to palings.”
David // September 6, 2008 at 7:13 PM
Sarah Palin has done all that she has been asked to so far. She has certainly brought excitement to the McClain campaign which was moseying along before her arrival.
We look forward to her first press conference when she has to stand before the press core without writers notes,
Adrian Hinds // September 7, 2008 at 12:54 AM
David // September 6, 2008 at 7:13 pm
Sarah Palin has done all that she has been asked to so far. She has certainly brought excitement to the McClain campaign which was moseying along before her arrival.
We look forward to her first press conference when she has to stand before the press core without writers notes.
=================================
speaking extemporaneously, without a script, and teleprompter. Barack who had to go on vacation to wean himself off the teleprompter and who can inject more “ah” and “umms” in a simple sentence than most, has set such a low bar for Sarah Palin to overcome, that even as she sets out to face the most hostile media a VP nominee has ever had to face, she will do just fine.
The scout // September 7, 2008 at 8:10 AM
Adrian
Have you heard Palin without the teleprompter?
McCain advisers were teaching her how to speak , how come now she could be so good? By the way the Dems have increased in the polls.
David // September 7, 2008 at 9:31 AM
Unlike Palin, Obama has had to prove himself over the primay season. In recent times he has given an interview to FOX and Bill O’Reilly (very tough) which he got through without a teleprompter and yesterday he delivered a statement to the press and took questions about the bail out of the two mortgage companies. We have to say he looked very presidential in both cases.
Wishing In Vain // September 7, 2008 at 10:10 AM
David,
I think this gentleman and his running mate are the best thing that has happened in the USA in at least 8 years.
If you look at this chart http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/ you will see the DEMS leading in places where the Rep normally have won and in the areas where the DEMS have won in the past Obama’s lead is even larger than previous DEMS candidates and most noticeably is that even where Obama is being led by Mc Cain this lead is so marginal it is overtakeable, Mc Cain is not doing half as well as the undisputed clown of Presidents George Bush did in these states in previous elections as we note in this example Indiana (11EV) McCain current +4.7 Bush 2004 result +20.7 Bush 2000 result +15.7
Facts // September 7, 2008 at 1:50 PM
Adrian Hinds
You are not being true to facts when you say that So many Barbadians favour the monarchy and prefer not to do away with the Privy Council.
Where are your facts to support your allegations? – The unrepentant few who monopolise coverage in the news papers from time to time?
Aa an example of your erring contentions, there are a few people who over the years have been captalising on media coverage with their opposition to the death penalty. Can I assume that most Barbadians are againt the dealt penalty?
In any case, people on the whole abhor change.
David
You arer right, Ms. Palin never had to prove herself, unlike Obama.
Wonder how is it that she is being touted as bringing such a good candidate and the “Great Republican Hope?”
Adrian Hinds // September 8, 2008 at 8:47 AM
Facts // September 7, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Adrian Hinds
You are not being true to facts when you say that So many Barbadians favour the monarchy and prefer not to do away with the Privy Council.
=================================
Facts you are correct. I do not have any evidence to prove this.
Here endth my contribution to these Bajan blogs on anything to do with the US election.
The scout // September 8, 2008 at 8:53 PM
If Sarah Palin is the “great republican hope”, I think they are void of ideas and substance. That girl is as dumb, it’s interested to see how she is going to handle the debates. I hope she proves me wrong because I like to get a good debate.
Facts // September 9, 2008 at 8:35 AM
Adrian,
Was away for a couple days.
You can’t leave just like that. Play the man. Don’t let politics get to you.
Once your comments are factual and strong, they will be supported.
Adrian Hinds // September 9, 2008 at 8:44 AM
Facts // September 9, 2008 at 8:35 am
Adrian,
Was away for a couple days.
You can’t leave just like that. Play the man. Don’t let politics get to you.
Once your comments are factual and strong, they will be supported.
===============================
I will leave at my choosing, and don’t assume you know my rational for so doing, as you clearly don’t. The things you challenge me on and to which i conceed lack of evidence, has nothing to do with the US election. I just find it boring to be discussing something that idealougs here have demonstrated that they no little about.
The scout // September 10, 2008 at 8:08 AM
It is unfortunate that the U.S election campaign has degenerated to this level. If this is the best that the so-called biggest nation in the world can produced, the western world is in problems. The eastern block will take over sooner rether than later. The discussions/debates has reached an all time low.
Sarah Palin Could Be President Of The United States Of America!!! « Barbados Underground // September 26, 2008 at 2:06 PM
[...] Who Is Sarah Palin? Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)If a Biden Commits a Gaffe In the Forest…Joe Biden Stands Up For Hillary Clinton [...]
The Vice Presidential Debate: Sarah Palin Faces Her Biggest Challenge « Barbados Underground // October 2, 2008 at 9:27 AM
[...] Who Is Sarah Palin? [...]