HAS OBAMA "MESSED HIS PANTS" IN PICKING BIDEN FOR VP?

[Dee]

I'm not sure it was as much as a lack of charisma, as it was, the media wanting to, and successfully picking the candidates. I remember a debate where Paul kicked every one's butt, and Sean Insanity interviewing him afterwards. Sean went after him like he was a liberal, and instead of getting angry, Paul simply told him, he (Hannity) needed to research before he spoke, as he (Hanity) was wrong, and as it turned out Hanity WAS wrong.
Hannity gave him a very hard time, because he didn't want him, even though he was winning several states. Why folks listen to jackasses like Hannity puzzles me. He just talks over folks, and listeners mistake it for being right.
A lot of folks here on this forum done a lot of switching around, which was exemplary of the rest of the country, and this is why we are where we are now for candidates.
Very little, and in some cases no individual research was done on ANY candidates, and as a whole they voted for the one the media promoted with small exerts of the candidate's political stances.
It was indeed a shallow look at the candidates, and as they began to fall out of the race, the populace simply took the easy way out, and latched on to the next in line candidate, until he fell out also. NONE OF THE CANDIDATES' voting records were as PRO CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS, as Ron Paul's, but the folks refused to look, and took the next in line candidate that the media was giving air time to. It was a lazy voting populace, and now EVERY ONE is holding the noses and following the piper.

[Cabin4]

Dee,

I agree. This goes to my complaints about the media coverage as a whole in this country. I expect Hannuity to do what he did because he his openly bias and states so. Just Like I would not reley on Colms who is openly bias to the Dems or Olberman for that matter who is an openly left wing nut case.

The real issue is the general so called "unbiased media" coverage is NOT vetting these candidates for the American people. By in large, the major media outlets have paved the path for Obama to get the nomination because most Americans have unknowingly delegated their responsibility as a voter to ABC, CBS & NBC and their hundreds of affiliate stations around the country.

If we looked at the the original list of candidates in a pure "paper" comparison on the issues, experience and trust, RP would have a vastly differant outcome then we see now. I'm talking about a a qualitative analysis versus the shallow perceptive analysis employed by most Americans.

[lrs]

I listen to Hannity, and I respect him for stating his conservative bias.   Same with Colmes. 
I do not listen to, nor can I stand the sight of, any of the mainstream media personalities.
There is a bit of paradox though.
I think they are all puppets, and they all share the same puppet masters.
Powers that be did not want Ron Paul.  They want McCain or BHO.  Probably McCain.
They make a good show of it, and keep up appearances remarkably well.

[MGMorden]

There is a bit of paradox though.
I think they are all puppets, and they all share the same puppet masters.
Powers that be did not want Ron Paul.  They want McCain or BHO.  Probably McCain.
They make a good show of it, and keep up appearances remarkably well.

The paradox is that if there were some true sinister conspiracy theory, and that indeed they're all just "puppets" as you say, then honestly, it wouldn't even matter WHO got elected - so why go through all the trouble to pick and choose?

The simplest explanation (and hence the most likely) is that Ron Paul, unfortunately, just didn't capture the attention of the average American voter.  Despite me trying to talk up Ron Paul at every chance I got, everyone locally that I talked to was either all over Romney or McCain.  The reason for that goes back to the same stuff we saw in high school: the popular kids aren't always the best at any given job or task, but they certainly can drum up attention for themselves. 

[Dee]

Well, I would have to agree with these last three posts. That has to be a first somewhere.
Ron Paul was not dynamic in his speech, he was more like an old Sheriff that used to come into my office when he needed help in the County I worked.
I doubt the old Sheriff ever owned a holster, but he instead carried a WWII issue 45acp, tucked into his waist band, never cared if his pants legs were down over his boots. He would look you right in the eye when he spoke. I never minded helping him, even though he slow and methodical, and not the least bit flashy. He would however, put a large hole in you if you needed one.
He caught a serial killer named Lucas, and even thought he was named lawman of the year in Texas because of it, the big names got the so called glory.
Ron Paul is such a man. He is a straight shooter, abides by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, but is not shiny enough for the general population of so called conservatives. They want a race horse and Paul is a PLOW HORSE. In other words, Paul is PRACTICAL!

[nomosendero]

Sounds like the Sheriff did not say stupid stuff, sadly Paul did. Still, he was a better choice than McCain, but Duncan Hunter was better than Paul.

[Dee]

nomosendero, I am sure it must have happened at some point in time, but I cannot remember. What stupid stuff did Ron Paul say, that ruined his credibility?

[BBF]

RP  said to get rid of the FBI and a whole lot of other Govt Agencies. That is unrealistic. Cutting what isn't necessary I can support. Bob Barr was on Beck's show last nite and he impressed me. Not that he has a better chance then a snowball in Hades. Well, today McCain is going to tell uswho his stable
mate will be.

[Dee]

The FBI can do nothing the Secret Service can not do just as well, and probably better. I have worked with both agencies, and the Secret Service is far more efficient, and honest from my experience with both. That someone from "another country" could make such an analogy with NO REAL CONCEPT of what is going on with either agency has no credibility on the subject.
I would also eliminate the BATF, and the CIA, and numerous other bureaus that OVERLAPE one another for no apparent reason other than to waste tax payer money, and perform "duplicate duties" in MANY CASES. Another agency would be ANY AGENCY formed around this farce called the Patriot Act, which does no good thing, other than to undermine the Constitution and Bill of Rights. It after all was ALREADY ILLEGAL to fly planes into buildings full of people. AND THESE SAME AGENCIES (FBI, CIA, BATF and others) WITH HELD INFORMATION FROM "EACH OTHER", CAUSING THE 911 PLAN TO SUCCEED.
Ron Paul was CORRECT in his analogy. 911 was but a grotesque example of his wisdom.

[ironglow]

   McCain made the best possible choice....

       As Nomosendoro said, if McCain picks a pro-gun, (NRA Life member), pro-life (Christ-driven that way), pro-drilling
   (wants a future for Alaska..drill..including ANWR), woman (will be obvious, first runner-up, Miss Alaska).
   Qualifications for this very conservative lady are staggering ..(check Sarah Palin in Wikipedia) remember, it's Wikipedia,
  but the facts will be checked over.
     She is very bright, a dedicated hunter, long distance runner married to an oil field worker who is 4 time champion of
  the "Iron Horse"..world's longest snowmobile race. She is for the oil production..without being owned by the oil companies.
  Her son Track, joined the Army last September and will be deployed with his infantry brigade this month. The two Republican
  ticket leaders have 3 offspring in the military, all of which will have served in the war zone..Obviously these two are NOT
 "pro-war"...but they are without question..Pro-America...

   Now women (Democrats and Republicans) can "put their vote where their mouth is ! How many Hilleryites will rather "switch
  than fight".. Here is a chance for a woman to be prez in 4 years, or Heaven forbid...even before !

         Smartest choice he could have made !

[torpedoman]

   McCain made the best possible choice....

       As Nomosendoro said, if McCain picks a pro-gun, (NRA Life member), pro-life (Christ-driven that way), pro-drilling
   (wants a future for Alaska..drill..including ANWR), woman (will be obvious, first runner-up, Miss Alaska).
   Qualifications for this very conservative lady are staggering ..(check Sarah Palin in Wikipedia) remember, it's Wikipedia,
  but the facts will be checked over.
     She is very bright, a dedicated hunter, long distance runner married to an oil field worker who is 4 time champion of
  the "Iron Horse"..world's longest snowmobile race. She is for the oil production..without being owned by the oil companies.
  Her son Track, joined the Army last September and will be deployed with his infantry brigade this month. The two Republican
  ticket leaders have 3 offspring in the military, all of which will have served in the war zone..Obviously these two are NOT
 "pro-war"...but they are without question..Pro-America...

   Now women (Democrats and Republicans) can "put their vote where their mouth is ! How many Hilleryites will rather "switch
  than fight".. Here is a chance for a woman to be prez in 4 years, or Heaven forbid...even before !

         Smartest choice he could have made !

I second that motion

[nomosendero]

The FBI can do nothing the Secret Service can not do just as well, and probably better. I have worked with both agencies, and the Secret Service is far more efficient, and honest from my experience with both. That someone from "another country" could make such an analogy with NO REAL CONCEPT of what is going on with either agency has no credibility on the subject.
I would also eliminate the BATF, and the CIA, and numerous other bureaus that OVERLAPE one another for no apparent reason other than to waste tax payer money, and perform "duplicate duties" in MANY CASES. Another agency would be ANY AGENCY formed around this farce called the Patriot Act, which does no good thing, other than to undermine the Constitution and Bill of Rights. It after all was ALREADY ILLEGAL to fly planes into buildings full of people. AND THESE SAME AGENCIES (FBI, CIA, BATF and others) WITH HELD INFORMATION FROM "EACH OTHER", CAUSING THE 911 PLAN TO SUCCEED.
Ron Paul was CORRECT in his analogy. 911 was but a grotesque example of his wisdom.

I was refering to statements like getting rid of the FBI, as 45-70 mentioned. It is not that the FBI is great & I agree with you on this but several statements were made like this without laying out a clear cut & logical plan. Paul maybe had a plan, but that is irrelevant sadly, if not explained. It is too easy with sweeping remarks to acquire a "radical"
label that you cannot shake. He could NEVER scare me with such remarks, but that is not the way it works with many. But after what happened today it is a moot point.

[ironglow]

  Ron Paul struck me as an utterly sincere man..with no guile or spin in him. The part that troubled me was that he seemed to want to
  pretend that the rest of the world doesn't exist..and ignoring it was the best way of dealing with the world. I just can't go along with
  that idea.
  I liked Duncan Hunter from the start, but he shared the lack of "charisma and cool" as  well..so he did not prosper in the imagination
  of voters.
  Certainly McCain was not my first choice, but his sparring match with Obama at Saddleback, showed me some things I did not realize
   about him..so I decided I could vote for him with a clear conscience.
  With his selection of Gov. Palin, with all her excellent credentials and values, means I will write them a check tomorrow..

[Cabin4]

I liked Tom Tancerto as well.

[ironglow]

 agreed, Tom was a good one also..but seemed just a bit "one tune" only...important though that tune is..