Because most collage professors these days are investing their money in Obama that's why.
"The liberalization of America" is one of those empty catch phrases designed just to drum up fear. I really don't think it's a new trend that academics tend to be more liberal than a lot of the mainstream, and yet even so, plenty of young Republicans manage to graduate college every year with their conservative ideals intact.
Progress is generally the result of liberal values and conservative ones pulling against each other, such that there tends to be a net movement toward "liberal" values as time goes on. The United States is much more "liberal" than it was 100 years ago, for instance, and I think most conservatives will say that this is a good thing, because those changes aren't considered particularly "liberal" anymore.
Conservative values usually keep the new and the liberal from shaking up the social order every time a new and potentially useful idea comes along, and liberal values keep conservatives from clinging to the familiar when there may be better ways of doing things. That, at least, is the way it should work. Look to countries like Afghanistan and Iran to see what happens when all "liberalization" is demonized. At the other end of the spectrum you have plans like socialism that aim to solve all of a society’s conflicts with sweeping, drastic reforms. Neither one is good.
Now, if there is a danger of over-liberalism or over-conservatism in this very Christian nation, right now I believe it is the latter.
Half of Americans say they believe the theory of evolution is wrong, and
well over half are open to teaching children creationism alongside evolution in schools. At the very least, I doubt we are in danger of “liberalization” anytime soon.
To clarify: You don't like anything conservative/republican. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Simply because you dislike all that is "liberal" does not mean I must then be stewing in hatred of conservatism if I contradict you. You seem to see the world in black and white, my friend; I invite you to see it in shades of gray.
I used to be more conservative than I am now, more so than my moderately liberal parents, at least, when I was younger. I tend to be pretty practical with regard to what I put my faith in, and I still understand the appeal of many conservative positions. I disagree, sometimes vehemently, with much of what the Republican party currently stands for, but please try not to confuse ideological differences with partisan cheerleading. This is not a Democrats Vs. Republicans baseball game, and I don’t play it that way.
She did a very good job in Alaska and there's no way around it.
Simple contradiction is not a convincing argument.
She's doing great for a media rookie.
What kind of excuse is that? If she can't handle the politics of dealing with the media, how is she supposed to handle the even more important politics involved in dealing with foreign heads of state? Oh, that's right; she doesn't believe in diplomacy. I guess that's not a problem, then. (Only half joking, there...)
Of course they don't make sense to you if you disagree with almost everything she says.
I don't think you understood... this might be a language issue, so bear with me, here. When I say she "doesn't make sense," I don't mean her ideology (that is a separate set of issues); I mean that the actual sequences of words coming out of Palin's mouth do not make logical sense. It is often difficult to tell what she even wants to say when she speaks off-script. I
disagree with McCain. I disagree with a lot of people
because I understand, or feel I understand, what they are trying to say.
It's the presidential election, aye. They're being careful as they are with McCain, or were rather. I see he's appeard on The View recently. Anybody that has time and is interesting in this, watch Obama on The View and watch McCain on the View and see if you can spot the difference in questions 
This is a presidential election, yes. And in an election like this, it is really unheard of for a VP nominee to be sequestered away from the press the way Palin has been. McCain has indeed been on the View, which is dominated by women with liberal views. Not an easy assignment, but he handled it with aplomb. Obama went on Bill O’Reilly’s show which is dominated by a guy with conservative views; he did very well indeed. Both presidential candidates have done countless televised interviews with those who agree with them and those who don’t. Even the famously flub-prone Biden, the Democratic VP candidate, has been on TV time and time again. Palin has done
three interviews, one of them with Fox News, and no amount of excuses about how the media doesn't deserve to talk to her until they can show her "deference" can explain why she is being handled differently.
I'm looking forward to the day she comes on The O'Reilly Factor or maybe Oprah show, but the latter will probably happen next year. Obama had a good interview on The Factor.
I don’t think it will be to the Republicans’ advantage to have her on O’Reilly’s program when they’re being so parsimonious with her coverage. They’d be preaching to the choir, and the rest of America would take it as further evidence that she’s not up to “real” interviews.
On election day, the electorial votes of Alaska will go to Republicans.
Alaska has been Republican for a long time. Going to the Republicans in this election will not prove Sarah Palin’s awesomeness any more than California’s democratic votes will prove anything about Obama.
Hold on. I highly doubt you even saw the speech. I don't know where your information comes from but MSNBC's Keith Olbermann or the like aren't even pretending to be unbiased anymore, they're in the tank for Obama. Discrace to journalism.
Well here's Palin's the speech from RNC, that energized the republican party.
Uh, no. I watched the speech. Very heavy on the rhetoric, and her talk about being a reformer and anti-earmark and anti-Bridge to Nowhere is so much bullshit, but she does just fine reading a prepared speech off a teleprompter. That is not what I’ve been referring to. Look up Palin’s interview with Charles Gibson. Look up her interview with Katie Couric. Tell me those are the words of an intelligent person with an in-depth knowledge of the subject at hand.
My “information” comes from having watched Palin speak, Nap. I find it bizarre and dishonest that you would speak so glowingly of O’Reilly’s show and act scandalized at the very existence Keith Olbermann’s, which is an
opinion show, almost an exact liberal counterpart to O’Reilly’s. It is not supposed to be straight reporting, so you can ease up on the outrage just a touch.
Interesting. So then a president can inderectly overturn Roe V. Wade. But I don't think McCain's inclined to that do. Simply because women like you would go nuts and McCain doesn't have time for another bunch of protesters. But, I could be wrong.
What is interesting is that you don't really appear to understand US politics terribly well (and I wouldn’t expect you to), yet you seem to be heavily invested in the Republican campaign.
Yes, you are wrong. McCain said on
The View, which you implied you had watched, that he disagreed with Roe V. Wade and thought it should be overturned. I don’t think he’s worried about women like me “going nuts” and descending on the capitol with our harpy wings spread open wide...
McCain isn't afraid of protests. Why would he be? What can protestors do to him?
*shakes head* enough with your dopy comparisons, we're talking about a fetus/baby!
“Won’t somebody PLEASE think of the children?!”
You said you weren't comfortable with the idea of aborting something baby-shaped, and I pointed out that "it looks like a baby" is a very unscientific standard upon which to base your opinion of other people's reproductive rights or lack thereof.
Right, we agree.
You agree that you have no idea what it's like to carry a child, nor will you ever. So your opinion on the subject is largely irrelevant.
So it all comes down to: Is it worth it?
This is
not a philosophical question. It is a personal question, every single time.
This is not a gotcha game. Of course all of you liberal democrats are smart! Come on!
I find it difficult to tell when you’re being ironic, but... “Gotcha game?” What are you talking about? Isn't that the new catch phrase used by Conservative pundits to explain why Sarah Palin comes off as such a dim bulb interviews? Come on, you’ve got plenty of time to think before you post here. If you don’t think it’s fair to question your statement, you should explain why. Otherwise, just concede the point and move on.
I belive Rice said she didn't want to be VP. But yeah she would be a fine choise. But the Republican party has a good VP.
Way to miss the point, Nap. Unless you’re implying that Rice is the only other Republican woman in the United States qualified to run for VP? Surely not.
There are a ton of Republican women out there who are conservative through and through; who are articulate; who have enough political experience that McCain could continue to successfully denigrate Obama for his relative lack of experience.
Hold on. No political experience! Coming from someone who will be voting for Obama that is a quite a statement, considering how little experience Obama has. But hey if we count his running for president he got some hard won experience curtesy of Ms. Clinton! 
You are acting quite dense, and I can't tell if you're doing it on purpose. I said this:
“Palin is about the
closest thing to a ditzy beauty queen with no political experience that McCain could get away with.”
Do you understand that you cannot take three words out of context like that and expect to be taken seriously? You said McCain would have chosen a beauty queen if he wanted just a pretty face (which makes no sense in the real world, but that’s what you said), and I further clarified that the imaginary beauty queen alternative, that
you referred to would presumably also be a ditz and have no political experience, because being a beauty queen in itself doesn’t disqualify someone from running for public office, now does it?
Palin is a former beauty pageant finalist, but yes, indeed, she’s had
some political experience. Length of experience is honestly not something that I am overly concerned about with regard to Palin or anyone else. I do think Palin is ditzy, though, and that is my point. Please quit twisting my words to correspond with Republican talking points and actually think about what you are reading.
It's extremley subjective, so you're right. He won on the substance according to you. We appreciate your opinion.
"We?" Am I talking to a hive mind? Anyway, I’m curious as to whether you’ve even seen the entire debate yet.
This is way too much work and I don’t think this is going anywhere, so unless some new point comes out, I’m going to have to really limit my response next time.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
People are speculating that Palin is going to exceed expectations in the VP debate through a combination of severely lowered expectations, intense coaching, and perhaps even a fitted earpiece. Conservative pundits will explode with smug glee if that happens, and I fully anticipate and fear the possibility. The GOP is up to something...
I really wish the election would get here soon. I'm tired of this sick feeling in my stomach whenever I think about the next four to eight years. Let's just get this over with.
[edited for typos]
If you actually listen to the substance of the responses, Obama won the day. On terms of holding their ground, you could say it was a tie. There's just no way McCain got one over on Obama, even if you believe the campaign ads claiming McCain's victory... 
