Sarah Palin was Mayor of town with population 6,000
Sarah Palin was Governor 20 months
Alaska population 650,000

Illinois population 13 million
Obama was 8 years Illinois state legislature
Obama US Senator 2 years

Abe Lincoln Illinois
Abe Lincoln 8 years Illinois state legislature
Abe Lincoln 1 year US House of representatives
Abe Lincoln elected President

If you are going to state facts, then make sure you are correct on them. Example:obama was not 2 years - it was 143 days.

I think that putting her on the ticket is an insult to women. He thinks that we are that stupid.

Hey Winx,

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps McCain put Palin on the ticket not to court votes from the Democrats but from his own party? Come on, Winx--the choice was for his party not for the other one. In other words, he doesn't think you are "that stupid" it's just that his choice wasn't about you. By the way, what exactly is it about her that is insulting to women? She would be the first woman Vice President in the history of this republic---how exactly is the second in command to the Executive branch an "insult?"

-Drew

Palin is just a beard like his trophy wife. Thats all old rich guys think about women.

Biden is such a great choice, too. He never had a chance in hell of ever getting the nomination himself, and he has tried. The only reason Obama picked Biden was to give the illusion that there's some experience on the ticket.

I don't like any of the Replublicrats running, but resorting to calling Palin a "beard like his trophy wife" just shows how desperate the Obama people are to find something bad to say. Stick to the real issues that have some substance and fact behind them.

Writing before finding out the facts follows your uninformed opinions with regard what I said about Lincoln earlier, Mirror. No surpise here!

Abraham Lincoln was an American hero.

Quoted from "An African-American Icon Speaks Truth to the Lincoln Cult" by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo139.html

"Lincoln not only talked like a white supremacist; as a state legislator he supported myriad laws and regulations in Illinois that deprived the small number of free blacks in the state of any semblance of citizenship. Bennett gives us chapter and verse of how he supported a law that "kept pure from contamination" the electoral franchise by prohibiting "the admission of colored votes." He supported the notorious Illinois Black Codes that made it all but impossible for free blacks to earn a living; and he was a "manager" of the Illinois Colonization Society that sought to use state tax revenues to deport blacks out of the state. He also supported the 1848 amendment to the Illinois constitution that prohibited the immigration of blacks into the state. As president, he vigorously supported the Fugitive Slave Act that forced Northerners to hunt down runaway slaves and return them to slavery for a bounty. Lincoln knew that this law had led to the kidnapping of an untold number of free blacks who were thrown into slavery."

Your American "hero" was a white supremacist?

Geesh, folks have McCain DEAD already!

I think it was a good choice as both are bipartison..and just MAYBE something will be accomplished.

A true conservative leaves issues such as abortion to each state, as it should be. Same for gay unions/marriages.

Example of Universal Healthcare at it's best! Ugh!

** Elderly 'go hungry in hospital' **
Elderly people are going hungry in hospital because staff fail to ensure they are fed, a charity says.
< http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/2/hi/health/7580549.stm >

and

More on Universal Healthcare.

** Hospital 'starved' elderly mother **
A woman claims a Birmingham hospital "starved" her elderly mother rather than continue her treatment.
< http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/england/west_midlands/7486166.stm >

I ran across this lil tidbid as to Obama/Biden, and it pretty much sums up the sneakiness of the Dems (like their "tabled" Charlie Rangel "Draft Bill":
==========
In case you’ve forgotten, there is a bill in the Senate, INTRODUCED BY SENATOR BARACK OBAMA, that will require the U.S. to move towards global governance and for its citizens to pay a GLOBAL TAX.

While I’m sure that some bloggers here on Townhall are aware of this bill and its fast track handling, I doubt that the unwashed masses are aware of this abomination. I remember uproar surrounding the bill earlier in the year, but it’s gone practically silent until now. I stumbled onto the current status last night and found myself worrying about it as I fell asleep and thinking about it again this morning. Maybe I’ve been asleep at the wheel for the last couple of months, but where’s the uproar? Did I miss it? The silence is deafening.

The House has already passed the bill (by a voice vote so there will be no record of an individual’s vote). And Sen. Joe Biden has rushed the bill through the Senate Foreign Relations Committee with another voice vote and without any hearings. It is now ready for a full Senate vote. Harry Reid just has to schedule it.

Senate bill S.2433, called The Global Poverty Act of 2007, has 23 sponsors and, “Directs the President, through the Secretary of State, to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the U.S. foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the United Nations Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide who live on less than $1 per day.”

Therein lies the “kicker.” The part about achieving the U.N. Millennium Goal (now called the Millennium Declaration) would also commit the U.S. to sign onto many dangerous treaties, including the International Criminal Court, the Kyoto Protocol, licensing of what the U.N. calls the “global commons,” meaning fees (to the UN) for the use of air, water, and natural resources (The Law of the Sea Treaty fits this category), and there is more just as bad.

Obama’s bill would commit the United States to spending 0.7 percent of our Gross National Product (GNP) on additional foreign aid over 13 years – on top the amount we already spend.

We spent a total of $122.8 billion of foreign aid provided by Americans in 2005 (the most current data available), $95.5 billion, or 79 percent, came from private foundations, corporations, voluntary organizations, universities, religious organizations and individuals, says the annual Index of Global Philanthropy. Source: America.gov

The 0.7 percent of GNP committed to in the bill, spread out over the required 13 years amounts to $845 Billion dollars, not including the aid that is already being spent.

WTF? WTF?

And that’s not all, Obama’s Global Poverty Act specifically refers to the U.N. Millennium Goals as its guide and the 0.7 percent of GNP is taken right out of the U.N. documents. At the Millennium Summit in 2000 (attended by Bill Clinton), the U.N. set out to change some of the original language to tone down the rhetoric to sound more like suggestions and ideas than rules and regulations.

No matter; a release from the Obama Senate office about the bill declares, “In 2000, the U.S. joined more than 180 countries at the United Nations Millennium Summit and vowed to reduce global poverty by 2015. We are halfway towards this deadline, and it is time the United States makes it a priority of our foreign policy to meet this goal and help those who are struggling day to day.” They readily admit to backing the UN's Millennium Goals.

The bill defines the term “Millennium Development Goals” (MDG) as the goals set out in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, General Assembly Resolution 55/2 (2000). These goals call for “the eradication of poverty by redistribution of wealth and land” among other things. Strict adherence to the MGDs would leave little discretion for the U.S. to distribute or withhold aid based on country performance or political objectives.

At the risk of sounding like a conspiracy proponent, I’ve read a bunch of different takes on Obama’s bill and the U.N.’s MDGs and I don’t see how I could have misinterpreted what’s been written. If others find that any of my statements are wrong, please let me know – I’ll be glad to correct any misinformation. Absent my misinterpretation, its impact on the U.S. is chilling.

Essentially, if we allow this bill to become law, we’re sacrificing our national sovereignty and setting a dangerous precedent of allowing the United Nations (the U.N.!) to tax Americans. We all know what good stewards of money the U.N. is and how efficiently some of the countries spend the aid they currently get (directly into their politician’s pockets).

This Global Poverty Act is an assault on our sovereignty and our role as the leader of the free world. Is there still any doubt that Obama has global ambitions? Maybe he covets the Supreme Omnipotent Leader of the World job at the U.N.?

He must not be elected President of the United States.

The Global Poverty Act, brought to you by Barack Hussein Obama.
=================
So...we will be taxed to death to pay for crappy Universal Healthcare and THEN taxes by the UN??? I mean come onnnn, what has the UN ever accomplished??? Resolution #3,000,000, totally ignored!!

Imo, we should STOP even paying into the UN and pull out, NOT pay a "global tax"!

Anyone aware of this? Or too busy digging up dirt on each candidate.

How about knowing what you are voting in, folks??

McCain is old, yes, but he is experienced and IS no Bush..they have consistently bumped heads as to the way the war was handled, among other things.

He is his own man, and bipartison..same as Palin. I think it was a good choice.

Biden??? What a joke!! I had no intention of voting for the phony "Obama Camelot Era" anyways, but check out what Universal Healthcare entails..and how awful it is. I, for one, want to choose my doctor and not get the worse of worst, while the rich get the good doctors. I do NOT want the govt. picking my doctor.

AND the Dems have been known to be tax crazy, but now a Global Tax, to be paid to the useless UN???

I don't think so. Forget who is more experienced, the fact that McCain's wife is rich, that Palin's husband is whatever...how about what each candidate proposes to DO??

Change for the sake of change is NOT necessarily good change. And once Obama got in there, he'd be shut down, as his policies are whacky left. The very last thing we need in these times.

And Republicans shut down 3rd parties?? I'm SURE the Dems were thrilled with Lieberman going Independent and winning..and now chummy with McCain.

This country needs a moderate, who can work with "the other side" and accomplish positive, viable change. McCain proposes to fix what exists..makes sense to me! And Palin isn't running for President..McCain is. But, honestly? If I had to choose, I'd pick Palin...IF that were the case, but it's not. McCain isn't "unhealthy"...and is alive and kicking or he wouldn't be running.

I do agree the VP's are important, but am more interested in what each Presidential candidate proposes to do.

Obama is so far whacky left, we'd be a socialist government! And look around...how many socialist countries are thriving. Cubans aren't dying in boats for no reason!

How about learning what these men are proposing to DO, and debating that..instead of which is more experienced?

I'm voting McCain/Palin, as I choose to remain a democratic country and not turn into a socialist country and be beholden to the horrid UN, which accomplishes zilch without us!

Have you seen the Sarah Palin nude pictures yet ???

Hey Winx,

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps McCain put Palin on the ticket not to court votes from the Democrats but from his own party? Come on, Winx--the choice was for his party not for the other one. In other words, he doesn't think you are "that stupid" it's just that his choice wasn't about you. By the way, what exactly is it about her that is insulting to women? She would be the first woman Vice President in the history of this republic---how exactly is the second in command to the Executive branch an "insult?"

-Drew

McCain has NO executive experience either.

While it would be a great thing to have a woman as a President or Vice President, I would never vote for someone just because she's a woman.

This country can't seem to unite around a 3rd party candidate or independant, everyone wants change but they keep voting for the same!