Palin steps down as governor of Alaska

[Machjo]

The Libertarian Party in U.S. are really anti-government ideologues. They probably have about 1% popular support, including survivalists, and people who would like to rescind income tax laws, or an gun restrictions and such.

The Republican neoconservatives are better described as Classic Economic Liberals (the original definition of Liberalism, based on the economics of Adam Smith), which is not really anti-government. They promote Free Trade, deregulation, privatization.. they are staunchly pro military spending. They just don't want any restrictions or social responsibilities put on big business, their primary supporters.

The Free Trade lobby has strong connections to the Pax Americana. The imperial character of Globalism, backed by American military might, is much more an economic construct, than a fight against terrorism, which is why this World Police role is essential to preventing economic nationalism from taking root.

This is the whole irony of the whole thing. Though I'm more free-market oriented overall, though by no means dogmatically so, if the government insisted on spending billions of dollars, then I'd certainly rather it go towards social investments rather than military make-work jobs with no social or economic benefit to show for it. No wonder the US is broke.

 

[petros]

The guy who works nights at the Shell on the corner might very well be an intellectual in his own right simply trying to support his family. I'd met a Pakistani engineer working in a corner store in Kitchener.

That is one of the biggest downfalls of our treatment of immigrants by disrespecting their education's and not allowing them to practice the field they are highly educated in.

When you compare the quality of their education to what is passed off as education in western nations is a joke.

We have waiting lists for surgeons where lives are being lost and yet highly qualified specialists are driving cabs or making 3 for pizzas earning a crap living instead of being a big part of this country and paying the taxes that is generated by those who have qualified skills.

 

[Machjo]

Thank you so much for clarifying the dramatic benefits of how well the scholars have guided society.

I should clarify that in my opinion a scholar does not equate with a holder of a degree. A scholar could have no formal schooling just as a non-scholar could have a doctorate degree. To me, a scholar is a knowledgeable and wise person capable of identifying social ailments accurately and proposing an appropriate cure.

Degrees are for sale these days. And if anyone denies it, then explain how a native English-speaker who says 'Is our children learning' got a degree from Harvard of all places. And a master's degree at that!

 

[Machjo]

That is one of the biggest downfalls of our treatment of immigrants by disrespecting their education's and not allowing them to practice the field they are highly educated in.

When you compare the quality of their education to what is passed off as education in western nations is a joke.

We have waiting lists for surgeons where lives are being lost and yet highly qualified specialists are driving cabs or making 3 for pizzas earning a crap living instead of being a big part of this country and paying the taxes that is generated by those who have qualified skills.

You're right in everything you said there, but stillmissed my point. Even if he hadn's had a degree, he could very well have been an intellectual in his own right. There are plenty of great men in history who have shaped our world for the better yet had no degrees.

 

[Machjo]

As for foreign degrees not being recognized in Canada, our Ministries of Education are in part to blame too. When was the last time on the news that you've heard that your provincial Minister of Education or some other MP or other member of the Ministry on the Minister's behalf was going to a conference abroad to consult on establishing common educational credentials?

Instead, they simply cant' wait for the summer holidays so they can go to the beach. For crying out loud, when I'd e-mailed the Ontario Minister of Education last year to ask for statistics on the success rate in second-language instruction in Ontario, guess what. She had none. How can she know how successful the courses are if she has no studies to measure the real rate of success among pupils beyond regular easy tests which are too low in their standards to test any level of success of any real value?

In the end, it's our Ministers of Education who are directly to blame for foreign professionals who can't have their credentials recognized here. And of course we're indirectly to blame for voting them in.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Professional politicians have never been really smart, just have to know how to play the system. If we were close to a election now, I would fear her potential. She seemed to have learned from a few of her blunders of the past, if indeed they were blunders. They at least got her noticed on the political stage.

Sorry, Shwarzenegger can never be President.

I disagree, ironsides. Joan of Arc is nowhere near to being ready for presidency. She still has huge negatives, especially among women. Being popular with the far right Republican base will probably win her the nomination, but that is a far cry from winning the presidency. As of today, Obama will eat her for lunch. Nobody knows what the conditions will be in 2012.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I'm afraid you're right. If George Is-our-children-learning Bush can win two consecutive victories, I'm sure Sarah you-can-see-Russia-from-Alaska Palin could too. I do give her credit though for being more articulate than Bush. Even she would be a step up from him.

Machjo, again that is possible, but she has a lot of work to do before she becomes a viable candidate. She currently has huge negatives (incidentally, Gingrich has the same problem). Unless she can get rid of the negatives and can get people to look at her more favorably, she can forget it.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Could Mr. Shwarzenegger hold a high level cabinet post in a Republican run
Palin Presidency, being born outside of the USA???

He probably could, Ron. Henry Kissinger did (under Nixon).

 

[SirJosephPorter]

You folks had her for a neighbor; would you seriously want her as the President of the United States?
Pray for us!

Bluedog, any religious nut who believes that the universe was created 5000 years ago in six days is unfit to hold the office of president as far as I am concerned.

 

[ironsides]

By the way, Ironsides, I've just added a hymn for you in the anthems, hymns and prayers thread.

Thank you very much.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Give Machjo a break YJ, I'll bet that Bush never relied on a teleprompter in order to speak.

That was his mistake, Captain. Bush would have done much better with a teleprompter.

Bush has done incalculable damage to his (Republican) party, and not being able to articulate his message effectively was one of the reasons for it. Because of his inarticulateness, Democrats won most of the PR wars against Bush (remember ‘Bush lied, people died?’), and that helped sink the Republican Party big time.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Ronald Reagan destroyed Jimmy Carter with a simple question: "Are you better off than you were four years ago?"

Should Sarah Palin run for President in 2012, that would be the only question she would need to ask the empiest of all empty talking heads, Barrack Hussain "57 States, teleprompter junkie" Obama.

Indeed, Yukon. And if people are really better by 2012 than they are today, if the recovery is in full swing by then (as many economists predict), Joan of Arc will sink without trace.

It really will depend upon how economy is performing at that time. If we have 25 % unemployment and 20 % inflation (as no doubt you and other Republicans fervently wish), Obama is sunk. On the other hand, if economy has started to recover, Obama will win reelection easily. Just look at what happened to Clinton.

 

[Machjo]

Machjo, again that is possible, but she has a lot of work to do before she becomes a viable candidate. She currently has huge negatives (incidentally, Gingrich has the same problem). Unless she can get rid of the negatives and can get people to look at her more favorably, she can forget it.

So how did Bush do it? Maybe Sarah could learn from him? Unless of course Bush did all the right moves by sheer accident, which is likley with him.

 

[Machjo]

That was his mistake, Captain. Bush would have done much better with a teleprompter.

Bush has done incalculable damage to his (Republican) party, and not being able to articulate his message effectively was one of the reasons for it. Because of his inarticulateness, Democrats won most of the PR wars against Bush (remember ‘Bush lied, people died?’), and that helped sink the Republican Party big time.

Would he have known how to use a teleprompter? He was beyond repair.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

YJ - Sarah uses Bluetooth and is less likely to stumble in a speech she didn't write and didn't get a chance to read?

None of today's "TV celebrity" so called politicans break script and ad lib their lies oops lines.

You would think so, wouldn’t you? However, her speech where she announced her resignation from the post of governor was terrible, most commentators thought poorly of it. It was incoherent, rambling, jumped from subject to subject and in general was very amateurish. If she is serious about a 2012 bid, she has to get better speech writers.

 

[Machjo]

You would think so, wouldn’t you? However, her speech where she announced her resignation from the post of governor was terrible, most commentators thought poorly of it. It was incoherent, rambling, jumped from subject to subject and in general was very amateurish. If she is serious about a 2012 bid, she has to get better speech writers.

Or better yet, get on a regular daily reading programme.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

By the time Obama is thru with turning the United States into Cuba, - in four short years - the people will be ready to give the bum the heave-ho, along with his stumble-bum VP and the slobbering, Obama-worshipping Congress.

I have to give you credit, Yukon. Of all the conservatives here, you are the only one who has confidently predicted that Republicans will win the control of Senate and House in 2010 and will win the presidency in 2012. I will hold you to those predictions (I have the relevant posts stored on the hard disk and I will tort them out in 2010 and 2012).

Most other conservatives here (like Captain, EagleSmack etc.) simply claim that Republicans are hugely popular; Democrats and Obama are intensely unpopular and leave it at that, without predicting Republican victory. But you have the courage of your conviction. We will see if it is simply foolhardiness.

We will see how accurate your predictions are.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

"Also, even if Barack should prove a disaster for the US, would you honestly want to replace him with someone even more likely to cause further carnage?"

Why not?

Americans replaced Bush with Obama, only to find that all the deficit Bush caused/created has been tripled by their Annoited One in less than a half a year, the biggest financial disater in human history.

But he has charisma.

Yukon, Americans replaced Bush and your beloved Republican Party because they had made a royal mess of the economy and of the foreign policy (in the form of Iraq war). They had complete control of the government for six years (including the control of Supreme Court), so they were totally responsible for the disaster that they caused, they could not blame anybody else. It was right and proper that they were booted out.

The same will happen to Democrats if they don’t deliver. If by November 2010 we have unemployment of 25% and inflation of 20% (as is probably your fervent wish), Republicans will easily win control of the House and the Senate).

IF we have unemployment of 25% and inflation of 20% in November 2012 (as is probably your even more fervent wish), anybody would win against Obama.

That is how politics works. So there is no point in whining because your party lost. Get over it, deal with it.

 

[Machjo]

SJP, making a 'royal mess of the economy' is downplaying it a little, don't you think? The government shot the debt through the roof.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

SJP, making a 'royal mess of the economy' is downplaying it a little, don't you think? The government shot the debt through the roof.

That is what conservatives usually do, Machjo. They talk a good game while in opposition, they promise responsible government, balanced budgets, fiscal responsibility etc. However, when they do assume power, they invariably shoot the deficit through the roof. Indeed, I cannot think of even one conservative leader in recent memory who has balanced the budget (Harper did it for a while, riding on Liberal coattails, but soon he went into deficit, because of his moronic GST cut).

And in this case they couldn’t even blame the mess on the Democrats, since Republicans controlled Senate and the House.

Now Democrats re in exactly the same position, they control everything. If things go sound, they have nobody but themselves to blame.