|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
seoulteacher
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: Seoul
|
 Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 1:19 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Go Sarah, go!
I'm not American, but I do hope that this is predictive:
"In her speech at the convention Sarah Palin cut right to the core of who they are and what they believe: the people who work the hardest and fight our wars. The voters who live in small towns in Missouri and Michigan and Ohio will decide this election."
'Sarah Palin: John McCain's secret weapon to win over the Reagan Democrats'
from:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/johnmccain/2695021/Sarah-Palin-John-McCains-secret-weapon-to-win-over-the-Reagan-Democrats.html
Telegraph (UK)
Saturday 06 September 2008
By Tim Shipman in Sterling Heights, Micigan
Last Updated: 5:00PM BST 06 Sep 2008
The Republican presidential candidate signalled his intentions by using his first weekend of campaigning since his party's convention to launch a political raid into the heart of Reagan-Democrat country, home of the fabled blue collar voters who Mr Reagan captured from the Democrats in the 1980s.
Mr McCain, and particularly Mrs Palin, met with a rapturous reception as they held a rally in Macomb County, Michigan, where pollsters first identified the breed of patriotic conservative, blue collar workers who the McCain camp now believes hold the key to victory in November.
On Friday night in Sterling Heights, Mr McCain's selection of Mrs Palin appeared to have utterly transformed his campaign and made easier the task of converting Reagan Democrats to McCain Democrats.
Where he once played to a few hundred people, he was greeted by an electrified crowd of 6,000 chanting "Sa-rah, Sa-rah!", "John Mc-Cain, John Mc-Cain!" and "U-S-A!"
Mrs Palin immediately made explicit how the McCain campaign will take on Democratic candidate Barack Obama in the coming weeks. "We went right from the convention to small town USA," she said. "It's true that they grow good people, people who are working hard for America.
You love your country in good times and bad and you're always proud to be Americans."
The self-described "hockey mom" wooed her peers, holding up a Detroit Red Wings hockey shirt and describing how her son Track, now a soldier soon to deploy to Iraq, once played for a local high school team. "Michigan, you took care of my boy and now that boy is serving in the US Army and he's going to take care of you."
Casting the double act as political outsiders, Mr McCain urged voters to "send a team of Mavericks who aren't afraid to go to Washington and break a little china".
With the polls deadlocked after the most exciting convention season in three decades, both Republicans and Democrats are set to wage electoral war on the small town battlefields of middle America.
Stan Greenberg, the pollster who first coined the phrase Reagan-Democrat in 1985, published a new report in Macomb County two weeks ago, which found that Mr McCain has a seven point lead there because disaffected Democrats are uncomfortable with Barack Obama's inexperience on national security issues and his economic policies. "The Reagan Democrats are back," it concluded.
Mr Greenberg told The Sunday Telegraph: "These are people who have escaped the city to pursue their version of the American dream. Bill Clinton made it his mission to get them back and he partially succeeded. Reagan Democrats are a metaphor for the challenge Democrats are facing in this election."
Mr Greenberg added: "Obama has to fight for the older blue collar Catholic voters. If Obama wins Macomb, he takes Michigan and the election."
Frank Luntz, the Republican pollster, said Sarah Palin is now the key to Mr McCain's chances in Macomb County and the election as a whole. "Small town America has leaned Republican since 1980 but was pulled away to the Democrats by the Republican failures of the last few years. In the 2006 congressional elections small town America voted Democrat.
"In her speech at the convention Sarah Palin cut right to the core of who they are and what they believe: the people who work the hardest and fight our wars. The voters who live in small towns in Missouri and Michigan and Ohio will decide this election."
Former White House official Jim Nuzzo, an early fan of Mrs Palin, agreed: "This is an absolutely classic class war fight. It's the toffs in the Obama camp versus the working people. Sarah Palin is John McCain's bridge to the working class."
On Friday in Sterling Heights a poster proclaimed: "Sarah You are The One," a sly dig at Mr Obama's image. Another read "Real Women are Pro-Life", a reference to Mrs Palin's anti-abortion stance.
That point was reinforced by the presence in the crowd of a 40-strong group of nuns in white habits. Sister Thomas Augustin, 44, of the Dominican Sisters of Mary, Mother of the Eucarist, said: "I think she really speaks for women in a way that Hillary Clinton does not. She loves her husband and her children and I think that disaffected people who were on the fence are going to support her."
It had been assumed by many commentators that Mrs Palin could not win over those supporters of Hillary Clinton with whom she differs on abortion. But women waving Democrats for McCain posters were highly visible.
Janet Smith, 41, a special education teacher from Flint Township is a registered Democrat who supported Mrs Clinton in the Democratic primary. But she said she was now backing Mr McCain: "I just don't have a good gut feeling that Obama has what it takes to lead this country. I'm an American first before I'm a party member. McCain is an American first; he's bringing back patriotism."
Barbara Fee, 50, another Democrat for McCain who works for a car supplier, said: "I just don't like Obama. Hope and change are just words. I believe his ideas are socialist. I love Sarah Palin. I like what she's done and how she's done it. She's got spunk."
Several voters said that Mrs Palin's arrival on the ticket had made it more palatable to back Mr McCain. Jennifer Raybaud, a 42 year-old small business owner sporting a "Palin has them wailin'" sign, said: "I was going to vote Republican but I feel a whole lot better about it now. Sarah Palin is my age, she has kids. She seems like me."
Sheri Allard-Pruehs, 50, added: "I love Sarah Palin. If McCain in had picked Joe Lieberman as his running mate I probably wouldn't have voted at all."
If that enthusiasm is replicated around the country, Mr McCain could well be taking the oath of office on January 20th.
Senator Kit Bond of Missouri, the state that has picked the president in all but one election over the last 110 years, told The Sunday Telegraph that Mrs Palin's appointment has energised voters in his state too: "I'm hearing reports of great enthusiasm from my staff all around Missouri. On Sunday I had three women who don't usually discuss politics in church telling me that they are now very enthusiastic to vote for John McCain."
Mr McCain, who trails in statewide Michigan polls, was keen to convert the enthusiasm into votes in Sterling Heights: "A little straight talk," he said. "I need to win Michigan. There's 60 days left. I need you to get out there and vote." On Saturday, Mr McCain and Mrs Palin took their message to the swing states of Colorado and New Mexico. Mrs Palin will conduct her first solo campaign event on Monday in Pennsylvania, home state of her vice presidential rival Joe Biden. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
seoulteacher
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 1:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry, double post...
Last edited by seoulteacher on Sat Sep 06, 2008 4:16 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 1:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| It is a Federal aggregate of States. |
Actually, this is a highly debatable point. A good many have considered us one people, based on the first three words of the Constitution: 'We the People' (not 'We the Various States'). In the Senate we function as a collection of equal states but in the House we function as one people. Although we function as states when we elect the president, it's a highly unpopular system and the vast majority would like the election of our only nationally elected official to be done as one people, with the simple majority (or plurality) ruling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DaeguKid wrote: |
Needless to say, your so angry about your countries own political situation that your lashing out at others here. You know as well as I do it has been a joke the last 8 years.
I mean, your so pissed off at what is happening in your country your moaning about how this discussion here is not half of what it is worth in another forum.
Just vote the way you and I both want you to vote, get your friends to do the same and maybe, just maybe, you will wake up with less agro come November.
America is not doing well. The leadership has sucked for almost a decade. Time to get back on track fella. I'm sure you agree but will also find a way to argue it.
To quote you "you cannot for certain tell me that Al Gore would have been better (even though I supported him and think he would have been)." WTF??? Here is a guy who has committed his life to climate control and trying to preserve the human race. Its not like the guy disappeared after the election 8 years ago. But I cannot tell you he would have done a good job even though you think he would??? Riiiiiiggggghhhhhttttt....nuff said!
Can't get enough of that sugar crisp eh buddy! |
Precisely. Your argument countered and you resort to taunting and trolling.
Yes, the leadership sucked for the past 8 years. Nevertheless, you have already crossed your wires. On the one hand, you declared that the Americans brought it on themselves. On the other hand, you declared that the American voting system is rigged so that the majority vote alone doesn't elect the President. So which is it?
Oh, and you're too much of a coward to even admit where you're from. Keep attacking America, big guy. It'll make you feel better for your insecurity about your own country's political situation. Because things are turning around here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| After reading DK's posts on this thread, McCain is starting to look better to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| After reading DK's posts on this thread, McCain is starting to look better to me. |
Because such people tend to sound like this? Or this?
Probably one of the several top reasons I have shifted rightward in the last three or four years or so. I cannot vote with these people; I cannot participate in enabling what they stand for and represent in American politics.
B. Clinton and A. Gore always impressed me as very strong leaders, especially the former. He led and kept such supporters, staffers, appointees, etc. in line. I can no longer recall the incident exactly. But something problematic happened in the H.W. Bush White House during 1992. B. Clinton, campaigning, said, look, if that happens in my White House, they are gone. Period. And I think he governed that way. He was truly an impressive president. I think A. Gore and H. Clinton would have done the same. And that is why I supported both of them. I just do not feel the same about B. Obama. He seems to bring too many Ron-Paul-supporter-like supporters with him, if you know what I mean. And his wife and people such as Rev. J. Wright's stated and/or implied views on America. What exactly are they going to do if and when they win power?
In any case, Bucheon Bum, you should probably not let mere internet people influence your vote, especially an apparent foreigner with deeply-entrenched antiAmerican views a la Hugo Chavez. If you want to support B. Obama, then support him. And good luck in the election, by the way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blaseblasphemener
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Location: There's a voice, keeps on calling me, down the road, that's where I'll always be
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In reference to her accent/speaking, she's Barry Melrose in a wig with glasses, without the mullet.
(hockey/Saskatchewan farm boy reference) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| After reading DK's posts on this thread, McCain is starting to look better to me. |
Because such people tend to sound like this? Or this?
Probably one of the several top reasons I have shifted rightward in the last three or four years or so. I cannot vote with these people; I cannot participate in enabling what they stand for and represent in American politics.
B. Clinton and A. Gore always impressed me as very strong leaders, especially the former. He led and kept such supporters, staffers, appointees, etc. in line. I can no longer recall the incident exactly. But something problematic happened in the H.W. Bush White House during 1992. B. Clinton, campaigning, said, look, if that happens in my White House, they are gone. Period. And I think he governed that way. He was truly an impressive president. I think A. Gore and H. Clinton would have done the same. And that is why I supported both of them. I just do not feel the same about B. Obama. He seems to bring too many Ron-Paul-supporter-like supporters with him, if you know what I mean. And his wife and people such as Rev. J. Wright's stated and/or implied views on America. What exactly are they going to do if and when they win power?
In any case, Bucheon Bum, you should probably not let mere internet people influence your vote, especially an apparent foreigner with deeply-entrenched antiAmerican views a la Hugo Chavez. If you want to support B. Obama, then support him. And good luck in the election, by the way. |
Ha, I just said he looks better, didn't say I'd change my vote 
That being said, it is people such as DK (or moveon.org, Michael Moore, etc) that turn people away from Obama and other Democrats. On the other side of the spectrum of course are men like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity who turn people away from the GOP. Alas, the former has its large share of foreigners while the latter is generally domestic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, R. Limbagh and B. O'Riley and S. Hannity and A. Coulter and the others are no friends of mine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
traxxe
Joined: 21 Feb 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 7:08 pm Post subject: Re: F Sara Palin. For Americans and anyone else interested. |
|
|
| Lekker wrote: |
| This woman is the perfect model of soccer mom Christian from Hell, which is actually Alaska (Cold as hell, the people up there, cold hearted). |
Some people don't mind the cold. It is also very freaking beautiful. This has nothing to do with Palin.
I remember living in Alaska when she backed this flop project called the road to nowhere.
This was stupid and an invalid reason to reject her VP wishes.
| Lekker wrote: |
| She named her kids Track, Trigg, Bristol, Willow, and Piper. What was she thinking? |
This is unfounded and baseless. The names of her kids have nothing to do with politics. Why do some people see certain names as acceptable but others as bad? Should everyone be named Bob, David, Jessica, James, etc. etc.
Also, what evidence is there that McCain would be a passenger to her? McCain if anything has proven himself never to be along for the ride. He has been known to break ranks from time to time.
| Lekker wrote: |
She openly admits to drilling more and more oil out of a part of our country that's already been raped and chewed up. She openly admits to drilling for more oil and building more nuclear power plants BEFORE turning to alternative means of energy. "Energy, we've got plenty of it in Alaska." (crowd goes wild.) we're doomed.
If Alaska has got plenty of energy, why are so many people (Americans and foreign investors) packing up and leaving the oil industry in Alaska and going into Alberta? |
I never understood this... does drilling for oil kill the earth directly? We need cleaner ways to burn fuels and do less damage to the environment for sure. Until we find a reliable method of doing this that is cost effective more than the expensive prices of gas we should be getting as much energy internally as possible. Then once a safe reliable and affordable alternative is provided we should then change to that as soon as possible.
Is your point that we should be cutting up someone elses backyard and not our own?
| Lekker wrote: |
| Great, that's just what we need. Encouragement for American Children to use guns safely. So when will the next high school or elementary school shooting take place? |
Obama supports handguns. Obama is against assault weapons. I am a strong supporter of the 2nd amendment. Teaching kids about gun safety and the consequences of such seems brilliant to me.
The reality is that guns are around and kids should be educated about them. They should not just be IGNORED. Sort of like sex. We should teach them how to PROTECT themselves. Proper condom use, etc. Even though we HOPE they don't use them until they are adults. Beats having a teen pregnancy.
If anything child gun education is the reverse issue of her lack of sex education desire. Something I hate. I argue teaching children gun safety helps make them aware of the consquences of using a gun and should be encouraged.
| Lekker wrote: |
| Come on, she only received her passport after becoming governor. What International experience does she have? Going to visit Alaska National Guardsmen and women stationed in Kuwait and Germany? Oh and yeah, can't forget Canada, even though it's just next to Alaska. That would be like driving from Seoul to Busan. |
Good Point.
| Lekker wrote: |
| 8 years of Bush was a fucking nightmare. 4 years of McCain with Palin on his shoulders will be worse. I wouldn't be surprised if he kicks it due to old age and then we're stuck with this stupid bitch. America, we are doomed. |
Here is what I think the issues should be:
Electing Palin is a step in the direction of forcing Christianity down the throats of every person in America. That sickens me. She will continue to support faith based initiatives, religion in schools, and no proper sexual education.
This and her lack of good decision making makes her a bad choice. Keep the election about the issues. Not about your hate of Alaska or the hate of guns. None of the candidates are going to remove guns from the country. We need energy and we should continue to get it until we find a cheaper and better method for the environment.
Last edited by traxxe on Sat Sep 06, 2008 7:20 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 7:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Alberta has the oilsands, which hold more oil than the Middle East. So, if I were an investor, I would get slice of that.
The problem is trying to extract the crude. Once they find an economical way, Alberta, and Canada, are going to be extremely rich.
As for Alaska, there are plenty of natural resources there. Jesus, the state is half the size of the Contintental US.
OP, what alternative energy are you talking about? Wind and Solar are fine on the small scale, but they can't be backbone of an infrastructure.
I say, bring on the Nukes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| traxxe wrote: |
| I never understood this...does drilling for oil kill the earth directly? |
I generally agree with your position here. I can shed some light on this question. The short answer is apparently "yes," but not directly but rather cummulatively.
Normally, oil drilling seems all-right to me, although problematic because oil reserves remain limited and industrial-style drilling does indeed bring negative side-effects, like introducing machinery, waste, and pollution into so-called pristine environments. And we ought to pause before moving into the poles. This potentially impacts the entire globe, atmospherically and otherwise. And once we move into the Arctic, be certain that developing southern-hemisphere nations will clamor to exploit Antarctica. Indeed, I understand that they already clamor for this. If we can do so, they will now argue, why cannot they? They will dismiss our environmental arguments as a transparent ploy to keep them underdeveloped indefinitely. This might unleash a destabilizing chain of events, to say the least.
This being said, I think if planned wisely, we can and should begin to exploit Alaskan reserves in the near future. This is a short-term and medium-term solution at the obvious expense of the long-term. We are at war and remain dependent on unstable energy suppliers. Desperate times, desperate measures. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
Well, since we're grossly generalizing,
The quality of political understanding in the Off-Topic forum is significantly less than in the Current Events forum.
| Newbie wrote: |
Are you really proud that .5% of you favored Gored over Bush? POINT FIVE PERCENT?!?!
Listen, America is great for the most part. But the fact that W won the second time and that McCain could win this time shows that there is seriously something effed up with the place.
You know its true. |
You call that an argument?
First of all, we have no history of Al Gore governing a nation. You cannot for certain tell me that Gore would have been better (even though I supported him and think he would have been). Your argument is based on speculation.
Secondly, 0.5% of the electorate did not favor Gore over Bush. Go to my link again.
The fact that you are making this argument shows there is something truly effed up with education in wherever you came from within the Commonwealth.
. |
No, I don't call it an argument. Just an opinion. One shared by many sane Americans.
I'm not anti-American, I'm not bashing on the American system, or electorate college or any of that crap. Hell, I don't know what any of that stuff means.
All I'm saying that is when you have a country where 47-48% are stupid enough (or religious enough) to vote for someone like George or McCain, you guys have a problem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
traxxe
Joined: 21 Feb 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If drilling is a short-term project until a plausible long-term sollution can be found then I'm all for it Gopher. the reality is that we and the world are dependent on oil. We need to lay down a hardcore program with the appropriate financing that will find an alternative.
Standards for fuel efficiency need to be upgraded.
For now though the reality is that drilling is necessary and we should short-term accept the evil while pushing hard for a long-term sollution.
I think timetables should be set. Sort of like the moon challenge. The president should declare by X date we will have an alternative to switch to. Then put your dollars where your mouth is and fund a program (like NASA) with the best scientists in the field to meet the goal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gatsby
Joined: 09 Feb 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 7:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lekker wrote:
| Quote: |
This woman is the perfect model of soccer mom Christian from Hell, which is actually Alaska (Cold as hell, the people up there, cold hearted). I remember living in Alaska when she backed this flop project called the road to nowhere. There is an island up there with nothing on it, and she wanted to have this bridge connecting the mainland to it, but for some reason (because it was a strange idea to begin with) they ceased construction on it, so now you have got this bridge half completed, just sitting there. WTF? It seems like more than half of the U.S. is backing her now.
She named her kids Track, Trigg, Bristol, Willow, and Piper. What was she thinking? You do know that if McCain wins this election, he's going to be in the passenger seat during this ride. |
While I do not like Palin, I think you are missing the mark, especially in calling Alaska "hell." Only Fairbanks in the winter is hell.
There was nothing wrong in the governor of Alaska supporting federal funding for a bridge in Ketchikan. Alaska is the only state that is not included in the Interstate Highway federal funding formula. There is not a single road labeled as an Interstate highway; even Hawaii has them. Every other state gets tons of federal highway funds.
The real boondoggle bridge is the Knik Arm one, with a bureaucracy that is sucking up funds without getting anywhere.
As most Alaskans know, Willow is a town north of Wasilla, and was to be the new state capital, Bristol is for Bristol Bay, the center of the commercial salmon fishery, and Piper is for Piper Cubs, the most common form of small bird in Alaska.
The real problem with Palin is that she is one of those Christian Liars for Morality.
And if she hadn't given a Canadian pipeline company $500 million without getting any promise to actually build the natural gas pipeline, she could have built either of those bridges with entirely state funding.
It's easy being a politician when you've got billions and billions of dollars to throw around, without having to raise taxes through income tax or sales tax. Sarah Palin will do great in Washington, just spend and borrow, like the Bush administration. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
