₦airaland Forum

@BigB1,

How could you compare Palin (an unknown entity, who is currently being shielded from being interviewed) to Obama ( a man who has shown the world in many ways his ability to lead and unite)?

See my response above regarding press interviews. As to Obama being able to unite, please show us his record of doing that. For your information, Palin is now more popular than Obam and McCain. Go figure.

Apart from what the republican clowns are busy feeding you, could you please identify one or two incredible accomplishment or anything about this chick (Palin)?

You might want to read my reponse to Davidylan above. Please replace Palin with Obama in your sentence above while responding to that same question.

FYI: Check my record; you wouldn't go too far to realize that I do not stop, I usually go for the kill. There is absolutely no turning back for me till this chick and Papa Ajasco fall.

Do you uinderstand what you are responding to at all. You plan to continue attacking everybody that do not agree with you based on RACE? Believe me, you are absolutely inconsequentil in the scheme of things. You may huff and puff till you are out of breathe, but you got nothing on America's Sweetheart - Sarah Palin.

@Ibime,

I heard somewhere that Palin will not be giving interviews for the next two months. Is this because she is too inexperienced to hang with the big dogs?

Your first statement is a lie. She's scheduled for a TV interview next week. In any case, have you asked why Obama avoided Foxnews like a plague and never accepted Hannity's invitation for a no-holds-barred interview?

Did you hear Hasselback's comment recently about Mrs McCain's interview on the VIEW? She said she is glad no one censored what questions they could ask Mrs McCain even though that was the case with Mrs Obama. I wonder who is controlling and censoring what info the press is allowed to provide to the public.

@BigB1,

The wind will soon blow and I assure you that the chicken smelly ass will be exposed

We are beginning to see the yansh already. Palin is exposing that putrid part of the DNC.

The last thing Americans need at this point is to place another bunch of clueless clowns into the white house; I think 8 years of rubbish is more than enough.

The last thing we need is a liberal in the White House. One who plans to raise taxes on initiatives and enterpreneurship.

Again, the chick attended 6 colleges in 6 years.

Do you know about Biden's educational background?

@karmaMod,

She supported the bridge to No where til everyone made fun of it hence the name and then she backed out with "thanks but no thanks"
The woman is full of it.

the bottom line is this: Sarah palin stopped the bridge to no-where project. Save for her veto, tax payers would have been burdened by that white elephant project.

Only those who will not accept this truth are full of it.

@BigB1,

@Tayo-D:
in addition to answering davidylan's question, why not bless us all by also answering my questions?

Message for folks that think 99% of blacks are only supporting Obama because the dude is black, I have couple of questions for you.

What happened to the same blacks:

1. When Jessie Jackson ran for presidential election in 1984, and did not get this type of overwhelming support from blacks that Obama is currently commanding?

2. When Al Shapton also ran in 2004, and did not even get 2% black votes?

You should probably ask Davidylan this question. You guys are just having a debate with yourselves. The only people that are making this race about RACE are the Democrats and theri supporters. Davidylan was so much out of ideas (a very rare thing), that he decided to play the RACE card. You guys should please stop it already.

@Davidylan,

I asked earlier, mention just ONE SPECIFIC EXAMPLE of this and i will forever shut up.

I doubt if anything vcan ever shut your mouth. Have you ever heard of the bridge to no-where? And while you read the article in the link below, please share with us how ever Obama stood up to the status quo and what changes he ever made.  http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94100439

@Davidylan,

don't be ridiculous. There is worse racism here in the US than on this thread. Racism is perhaps the only reason Republicans still have a shot at the white house after the catastrophic Bush years.

Your blind support of Obama is obviously affecting your judgement. Racism in the US and Obama got about the same number of votes as Hillary? You should be ashamed of yourself.

In your estimation, the reason I am not supporting Obam is because he is black?

@Davidylan,

Sarah Palin's resumee is even thinner. What is your argument? Obama has spent only 2 years in the Senate . . . what did you expect?

Her resume may be thinner by your judgement but she's got a record of taking on the establishment and wimming. Obama on the other hand has a record of being a part of the establishment without doing anything to upset the status quo. That is not change we can believe in.

@sleek_p,

The only reason Obama might lose is if "good" whites, blacks, Latinos etc stayed at home on november 4.

What do you mean by "good' whites. The level of racism I see on this thread is mind-boggling.

@BigB1,

Black folks voted for many years for White people because they felt these folks were qualified and competent enough to carry this nation toward the right path.

I wonder if those words "qualified and competent" can be used with regard to Obama. Someone who voted "present" 175 times sounds more like indecisive to me.

Now, what is wrong with blacks voting for another incredible candidate?

Absolutely nothing. Obama is incredible in so far as he is the first black man to earn a major Party presidential ticket. I see nothing more after that.

After, witnessing all these childish and desperate tricks, something serious is simply wrong with you if you still think McCain is the right person for this job.

The tricks is coming from no less than the Democratic camp. First Obam played the race card and now he is trying to play the victim card. Someone should please tell him that Hillary never got too far with the victim card and Sarah Palin didn't get to where she is by palying victim.

@topic,

I don't know why you all are hating on the guy. Is it Yaradua's fault that he loves Naija so much that he is exhibiting the same symptoms of the country he presides in his body?!

@TPS360,

I knew it's a ploy to attract the female population comprised of moderate, on-the-fence and disgruntled Hillary supporters.

You may chose to delude yourself if it rocks your boat. Since her selection, Palin has only made one reference to Hillary and you think she is obsessed by her?

Palin's choice was for one major reason - to energize the social conservative base and to unite the Party. This she has done with flying colours with an icing on the cake - she's put the DNC in dissarray while revealing the hypocrisy of the feminist movement.

Let's assume for a moment that she was chosen primarily to get Hillary's supporters, don't you think it reveals an error in judgement by Obama? Obama had about the same number of votes as Hillary to win the nomination, and yet he did not even vet that woman for the VP. And yet he is seeking her help now that his choice has backfired. McCain has shown himself to be a master strategist, and I'll rather have him than Obama deal with Putin.

@Ibime,

Don't bother yourself. Tayo is a ridiculous guy. Socialism my ass. Republicans will forever accuse Democrats of Socialism. If you want to see Socialism, go to Venezuela. . . . you will see that khaki no be leather.

Thanks for the compliments. In cany case, do you think they will just become a Socialist party overnight? They are gradually moving us there.

Was it not Obama who said the Govt should care for the least of these, yet cannot help his half-brother who lives on a $1 a day? They know to spend govt money but can't spend theirs on others. To them, the govt is the solution to everything, and they will continue to grow the govt. The same govt that rendered social security bankrupt is the same one that now wants to take over our health care.

@Bamolowo & Queenisha,

So you don't get it ehn. Let me give you more. The same Party has promised a redistribution of wealth by taking away a company's profit and giving it to others. This is the same Party that limits American's access to their natural resources. They are behind the senseless mandates of biofuels that has caused a sky-rocketing of food prices. This is the Party that is against free speech by proposing that privately owned radios should give equal time to opposing view-points. This is the Party that has forced down our throats, the use of mercury filled incandescent light-bulbs in the name of global warming. This is the Party that just forced down on enterpreneurs a minimum wage thereby making it more expensive to do business. Should I continue with the list?

@Queenisha,

I can teach my children dignity,Christian values and whatever republicans say they're fighting for.

This is not all the Republicans are fighting for. Infact, the Republican party of today has become the Democratic party of yesterday, while the Democratic party of yesterday is gradually turning itself into a Socialist Party.

I do not vote along party lines but on people who are most aligned with my philosphy. I believe in freedom, and as someone said, I'm not sure if it is Reagan or Lincoln, "The Government that can give you everything is the same Govt taht can take everything away from you." I therefore want a smaller govt and free trade.

Who represents this more between the two evils called DNC and RNC? It is obviously the RNC. The DNC preach freedom but thrives on control. They want to control everything from what we eat to how we live. Can you imagine them banning deep fried foods at their convention? And to think one of their Senators that came to the RNC Convention was seen eating deep fried food! That is how much control they want to exact. They deprive us of choices with the mantra that the Govt knows best what is good for me. Theirs is a Nanny State and I totally don't need a baby sitter.

@Bastage,

The benefit system here actively encourages teenagers to have children out of wedlock. They know they'll get a house and a state income. To pretend otherwise is just an utter joke.

That has been my point. There is no deterence to abortion and having babies outside of wedlock. When the teens know that they will have to eventually pay for the State to raise those kids, there will be less pregnancies.

Look at it this way, even though the State help single mothers around here, they eventually go after the Fathers for the money.

@Davidylan,

uncle Tayo my answers o.

It is not my job to educate you. What have you done with the info I provided you already?

how about you take a look at the sodomy law that was in force in the US states in times past.

You don't get it do you? laws are not made to criminalise people to maintain law and order while upholding the constituion. You still haven't old me sho is criminalising homosexuality o. Last I checked, the disagreement is on homesexual marriage.

To force your polarizing beliefs one people borders on fanacism.  It's what people like the Taliban and Bin laden do. Give people a choice.

Why then are you forcing your polarising belief on me? Why should you force me to accept homosexual marriage and abortion? This is where the constituion take pre-eminince and the principle that "your right ends where muine begins". The woman has no right to kill that life.

@Ibime,

No contrary views here. . . . I am strongly anti-abortion. . . but if I was President, I can never criminalise it, so please allow me to put on my hard nosed political hat on. . . .

So for political expediency, you will go against your conscience? besides, isn't the Govt meant to secure the right to life according to the declaration of independence? una do o.

I am strongly anti-homosexual, but I can never criminalise it if I was President of America. . . . do you see what I am getting at here?

Tell me, who has criminalised or intend to criminalise homosexuality? What some people, me include are against is homosexual marriage. I am against it just as I am against polygamy, polyandry etc,

You can add abortion to that list. . . unfortunately, when you pass certain freedoms like the Americans always have, you end up with an irreveribly morally decadent society. . . . it is impossible to curb such things without criminalising half of the population. . . . only a few decades ago, homosexuality was illegal but only a stupid President will make it illegal again. . . . same with abortion. . . . unless you want to put half of your population in prison.

How about encouragin people to bear the responsibilities of their actions? Let me tell youo what I will do as President. I will not encourage abortion but will rather put the babies in orphanages and up for adoption. The cost of taken care of the babies will be borne by the parents through special taxes. However, those who are raped will not be made to pay up. this way, I can fully say I have secured the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

The truth is that abortion is not and should not be high on the political agenda.

So why are you bursting a vein over it. You can ignore it if you don't consider it important.

I am still waiting for the Republicans to tell me who would pay for all their unwanted babies since they are already unhappy with the amount of public spending.

Very simple - the parents. And by the way, who is paying for the abortion?

If the economics is an overiding concern, does that mean I can go kill my kids if I do not have money to take care of them?

Since they value all life equally, I am also waiting to hear what sentence should be passed to mothers who abort their babies. Should it be a life sentence like they would for the murder of a fully grown adult?

The principle is very clear. No cruel and unusual punishment. If you take a life, your life should also be taken.

@Davidylan,

To be honest, neither do you. I've pointed out no less than 3-4 BLATANT LIES from you on this foreign affairs thread today alone.

Your accusations are based on your ignorance, so you shouldn't take them seriously. Please itemize the lies you have pointed out.

where are the facts to support this blatant lies again?

Are you asking me to educate you again? Seriously, you mean you don't know this?

@Davidylan,

The democrats also have drilling on the table, unlike the republicans however they think renewable energy is a more long term policy to pursue.

You obviously don't consider the facts when you make your uninformed statements. In Bush's first term in office alone, more wind power were generated than the 8 years in office of Clinton and Al Gore. Here's a link to keep you a little informed -
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/news_detail.html?news_id=11924

1. Obama does not support all of these - Again you are caught in a lie. Have you read Obama's energy policy? 10% of America's energy must come from renewable enrgy by 2012 and 25% by 2025. I say we are tired of reading lies from the republican war machine.

You obviously don't know anything about Obama's policy, and yet you are blindly supporting him. America has the world's largest coal reserves and yet he will not explore the use of clean coal. he does not support the use of nuclear energy. Are these options not part of the "all" that I mentioned? You really need to get yourself informed of what is going on.

@Ibime,

This is the most idiotic statement you have ever made on here.

It is only less idiotic to yours.

Just like Obama, I have a personal pro-life stance but for Government, I have a pro-choice stance. The current laws do not stop me from practicing my pro-life stance. If my girl is pregnant, I will keep the baby, whether planned or not. However, not everyone has the religious beliefs I do. Should I force them to keep unwanted pregnancies?

So in your understanding of public service, you will choose what is best for your personal life but promotes second best for your society? And by the way, that was just a lie by Obama. In playing to the conservatives at Saddleback, he insisted he was pro-life personally, but he was the one who insisted he will not want his teenage daughter "punished" with a child if she became pregnant. How do you reconcile the two? Or have you also been smitten by the messiah?

This is not about religious belief, but about the constituion. Have you read Thomas Jefferson's Declaration of Independence? It states thus in part: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men Do you see the order there? Life comes ahead of liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and the Govt is meant to secure this right. Thoms Jefferson will be turning in his grave now seing what the DEMs are making of the Govt.

Please, Roe vs Wade is not a central political talking point. . . . only in a neanderthal country like America is it high on the agenda. . . . George Bush has been in power for 8 years, yet Roe vs Wade still stands. . . . so let people vote on what they can change, not what they cannot change. . . .it is very low on the agenda, although the Republicans try to make out that it is a central issue so they can garner Christian votes. . . . the truth is, even if they had the power to change it, they wouldnt - because they are already concerned about public spending, talkless of all the millions of unwanted babies the state would have to care for, not to mention the inevitable rise in crime 20 years down the line.

R v Wade may still stand, but Bush has taken cioncrete steps towards overturning it by his choice of Justices to the Supreme Court. You obviously have no clue what the Conservatives are up to. Let's just leave it at that for now.

@Darfur,

my problem is not john McCain, my problem is the republican who are running his campaigne and who will run his presidency(if he wins) john is a good man. and his wife too. but his frieends are the problem.

Oh, and I am supposed to ignore Obama's friends such as William Ayers, Rev Wright etc.? McCain stood up to Bush so why do you think he'll stoop to all these people you mentioned?

for now you've admitted, albeit unwittingly(in the absence of a response to my charge), that the republicans are a shameless, decietful cult whose interest is power and power alone.

it is Obama who wants to hang on to power by all means. In the process, he refered to his grandmother as a typical prejuduced white woman. While in one day saying he cannot distance himself from Rev Wright because he is like an uncle, he gladly threw him under the bus a few days after. Who is desperate here?

we

ll, if the so called blue collar uneducated voters insist on voting for them, good. but if obama wins, hey bro, i'm coming there.

You obviously don't know anything about the US. The blue collar workers are voting Republicans. it is the uneducated once whom the DNCs have in the tank through welfare that is their power base.

catch ya

Not even close.

@darfur,

kobojunkie and tayo-D, response please. rspond to the jon stewart discovery of republican methodology

You don't really want to talk about hypicrisy do you. You don't want to talk about Obama's supposedly personal pro-life stance, but pro-choice stance on policy. You sure this is the conversation you want to have?

@Davidylan,

and Palin's "drill away" is your own best solution?

it's part of the solution. Nuclear, clean coal and all renewables are on the table. Obama does not support all of these. if drilling isn't part of the solution, we might as well stop importing our oil na.  

Let me ask a question here - can any one of these Palin appologists give us ONE SPECIFIC DETAILED EXAMPLE where she "stood up to special interests"?

Since you have failed to read some of the things I've said so far, how about the "bridge to no where"? What about the renegotiation of the oil deals in Alaska when she became a Gov? Please tell us what Obama has done.

Isnt this exactly the case against McCain? What "change" is he crying about? Isnt it the same republican government in power or has Bush switched parties?

I'm sure you know what it means to be called a maverick. That is your answer right there.

He didnt get anything wrong. The surge on its own didnt work, what worked was the Sunni's got tired of killing each other and stood up to fight alqaeda. Why hasnt such a similar surge worked in Afghanistan?

Even Obama took this stand until yesterday when he confesse on the O'Reilly show that the surge has worked beyong anybody's wildest dream. What you and him need to understand is that the surge worked as planned, but people like McCain. So who is wrong here, you or Obama.

Abegi we are tired of repeating same old republican lies.

So is Obama now repeating RNC lies too?

@davidylan,

Your criticims doesn't make you sexist. However, you reveal nothing but sexism when you say and I quote, actually paraphrasing that "Sarah Palin brings nothing but her vagina to the race".

@Davidylan,

How do you know that? you live in his head? What if the daughter wants to keep the baby? He'D put a gun to her head? And people keep saying we are the ones being subjective. Give me a break please.

I don't live in his head, but i heard him say if his teenage daughter makes a mistake and get pregnant, he wouldn't want her to be "punished" with a baby. What does that mean to you?

Lets not decieve ourselves. We know this is flatly lying.

That may be your take on it, but her most important role was to unite the base. Why did Obama also picked Biden? Was it not to make an in-road into the middle-class? It's not McCain's fault that he checkmated Obama is it?

Obama has always voted to fund the war, infact it was one of the problems he had with those claiming he had flipflopped since he initially opposed the war.

Of course he was funding the war until the election btw him and hillary was so tight. He then voted against funding. Talk about political expediency.

No one spends so much money and energy to lose an election.

Does this apply only to Obama or to bothe of them?

@Bawolomo,

translation all we have against palin is the fight with big Oil, the focus falls on energy alone  again. wasn't it joe biden that helped pass the violence against women's act. here is a little except for u,

Energy alone. She balanced the budget and even had excess within two years in office. isn't energy independence America's biggest challenge now?

Please don't get me wrong. Biden has indeed done some work but how many times has he stood up to special interests and what kind of change can he bring that he has not done all these years in Washington. Last I checked, he is not the one termed the maverick.

biden has criticized oil companies too

Bamolowo, every and any body can criticize. However, the only person who not only criticised but did something about it was Palin. Obama criticised the Iraq war, but when it was time to vote for a winnignstrategy as the 'surge", he got it wrong.

someone that has been a senator for 35yrs, once chairman of the DNC is definitely lacking compared to a former mayor turned governor of a state of 600,000.

Absolutely. You want to compare her budget and the staff to what biden has to offer?

@Davidylan,

which is essentially why Sarah Palin was picked in the first place. Her very first speech was to congratulate clinton and pick out of her 18 million cracks in the ceiling playbook.

palin was picked because of her record of standing up against special interests, just as McCain. Her primary role was to energize the base and unite the RNC. This she has done successfully. The icing on the cake is her ability to put the DNC in disarray.

We understand McCain is desperate to win, don't lie to our faces in the bid to do so.

You meant to say Obama is desperate to win. Obama was quoted as saying he does not intend to lose this election. McCain on the other hand is ready to lose the election rather than see his country lose a war. Obama, for political expediency voted to cut funding to the troops in battle. This is the same guy that now wants to be their Commander in Chief.

@Seun,

If Obama's daughter was pregnant, do you think the Republicans would leave it out of the debate?

Maybe not. But one thing is clear, Obama would have had that baby aborted. He doesn't want his daughter "punished" through having a baby. More reason why I could never vote for him.

@Adonica,

Jeez that woman butchered Obama during her speech 2 nights ago.
was all that really necessary?

Why is it lost to you that it was Obama who took the first shot by belitling her record. Obama thought he had an easy pick but he got bitten real bad.

no offence but that woman is a doofus.

No offence taken. I can see you are all troubled because of her effectiveness.

@bamolowo,

palin has a record more than joe biden?? can u explain more on this.

Please read my submissions again. I mention record of making changes, standing up to special interests and not submitting to the status quo. Biden's eldest son is a lobbyist and even though they are talking about not changing lobbying in Washington, what have they done about it? Biden was quoted as saying that Lobbying isn't wrong and yet he wants to bring change to washington? Palin on the other hand has stood up to her Party, the Democrats, and big Oil. When did biden do that?

Does Biden have an Executive experience or record like Palin? The answer is NO!!

@Davidylan,

Bros, i don't agree with you AT ALL AT ALL. Before Palin, there was Hillary Clinton . . . there was NO doubt in my mind she was perfectly qualified to be president.

Clinton qualified to be president? On what basis, being a former First lady?

Obama merely won the primary by the skin of his teeth because the Democrats were wowed by a new face. Secretly i was disappointed hillary wasnt picked for the VP slot, i thought she brought a lot more than Biden.

that shows Obama's poor judgement don't you think?

I ask again . . . what has Palin brought to the republican table? It is a valid question, to hide behind it being sexist is a typical republican stunt.

Oh my goodness. This is someone who does in one night what McCain could not do in months - energize the base and unite the RNC while throwing the DNC into confusion.

Blah blah blah . . . were did you copy all this from? You do know what stretching the truth is don't you? Read this: Some of Palin's remarks stretch the truth

You obviously don't know jack about this woman. If you were in engineering, you will understand that design can take years before construction is done. Palin never mentioned anything about construction being started, which is the lie that the paper you referenced is propagating. You are more intelligent to not point this out. Are you that biased to see this?

As per the bridge to nowhere, the bottom line is that she vetoed it after standing up against very special interests. You want me to itmeise how many times Obama has flip-flopped, all without achieving anything of purpose?

After 2 years in office (april 2003), George Bush had an approval rating of 75%. Lets just vote him in for a 3rd term then.

So you know the future enough to show us what will happen to Palin? She's shown enough proof that she is principled and walks by her principles. That we do not see with Obama.

Palin "running on a record"? This man, drink some iced tea please, your temperature is too high.
Who has Palin stood up to and what change did she demand? Selling a plane on ebay?

So you failed to read my submissions earlier. Please go back and re-read. You obviously were in a hurry to reply that you skipped over what you are responding to.

The theme of OBAMA's campaign is change. The theme of McCain's campaign was EXPERIENCE until he saw he could help himself with some stealing of ideas.

His theme was not experience but was and remains "Country First". Country first will be a change in washington where people like Obama are more loyal to their Party than their country.

I ask myself, how can republicans be claiming the idea of "change"? Just who is in the white house? A green party candidate?

Bush is not McCain in as mush as Rev Wright is not Obama. Get it?