or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Once the initial defensiveness re: Palin dies down...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Once the initial defensiveness re: Palin dies down... - Page 7

post #241 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

I think you make a valid point but I would suggest that you not consider it a personal failure if such a thing or something like it were to materialize.

This past Sunday my pastor gave a message which addresses this very issue in many ways.

I think any and all here should listen to his message and see the perspective he shares. I know I was impressed with the perspective which I never thought about before hearing his approach to difficult children making questionable choices.

Please watch or listen to his message:

"08/31\t
Moving from Hurt to Hope"


From this page:

http://www.theharvestchurch.org/medi...entSermons.cfm

With complete respect,

Fellows

You right Fellows, the baby himself is of course not a failure. By failure, I meaned the way I educated my child.
Once the mistake is done, we have to deal it, the best way we can, and that's another story and I respect nearly all the choices.

I just wanted to say IMHO that 17 is not the right age to raise a baby. At 17 99,99 % of the time you are not mature enough to raise a child.

PS : the audio message is interesting, but it deal more with rebellion than anything else. I am not sure that in her case it's rebellion. Perhaps it's a lack of education. I just spoke with one of my patient who had a child at 19. She said that it was really young, and at the time, her mother did not teached her anything about "these things". She said to me, that she managed to teach more her daughters for avoiding such issues.
Friendly
Powerdoc
post #242 of 836
One thing is for darn sure in all of this...McCain got everyone talking about something other than Obama and the DNC purdy darn fast.

Whether that was by design (or evolution) who knows. This whole thing is probably good for another two weeks after which the media and people will rub the sleep from their eyes and recall, "Hang on, wasn't there someone else running for President too?"
post #243 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powerdoc View Post

I just wanted to say IMHO that 17 is not the right age to raise a baby. At 17 99,99 % of the time you are not mature enough to raise a child.

I agree very much with you
Quote:
PS : the audio message is interesting, but it deal more with rebellion than anything else. I am not sure that in her case it's rebellion.
Friendly
Powerdoc

I think how I received the message about as you correctly point out "rebellion" is the message of a wayward child who abandons conventions which are known to be secure and viable long term for short term desires sometimes driven by temptations to "do it my way" yet down the road of time the child realizes that so very much (all) of the conventions they were instilled with were meaningful and wise and this child returns home.

It is a beautiful journey and so often in life the human experience.

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #244 of 836
Abstinence:
You are 16 + penis, you are aroused 24/7 and someone says to you: " It'll pass in 60 years... and by the way masturbation is against god."
Ok so you become insane, violent and a rapist/alcoholic/drug addict but thats cool because you are living in Jesus image and your chances of testicular cancer have improved.

You are 16 + vagina, you sit inclass and the vagina is throbbing 24/7. You don't know what's going on and someone says to you: "It'll pass in 35 years.. and by the way praying will make it better. Just don't touch yourself or let anybody else touch you."
Ok so you become confused and emotionally ill. You start smoking and maybe try heroin afterall that lessens the urges you can't understand. Than you go out with a boy and he gives you beers and all of a sudden your period stopps.

If you don't believe any of this read some Freud.


The new name of the GOP is now Republiberal.
post #245 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

I agree very much with you


I think how I received the message about as you correctly point out "rebellion" is the message of a wayward child who abandons conventions which are known to be secure and viable long term for short term desires sometimes driven by temptations to "do it my way" yet down the road of time the child realizes that so very much (all) of the conventions they were instilled with were meaningful and wise and this child returns home.

It is a beautiful journey and so often in life the human experience.

Fellows

I am not so sure this is the case, Fellows. Maybe in some circumstances, but it cannot be universal otherwise human society would not be dynamic and have a changing set of moral guidelines overtime...

It is a good story, but it isn't true.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #246 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

I am not so sure this is the case, Fellows. Maybe in some circumstances, but it cannot be universal otherwise human society would not be dynamic and have a changing set of moral guidelines overtime...

It is a good story, but it isn't true.

It is not universal but rather universally understandable.

It is a good story and it is quite relevant to anyone not putting on self imposed blinders.

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #247 of 836
Found this kind of interesting:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20...PiWkfT8iis0NUE

Particularly the last part about pre-marital sex... before the current fuss.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #248 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by sslarson View Post

One thing is for darn sure in all of this...McCain got everyone talking about something other than Obama and the DNC purdy darn fast.

Whether that was by design (or evolution) who knows. This whole thing is probably good for another two weeks after which the media and people will rub the sleep from their eyes and recall, "Hang on, wasn't there someone else running for President too?"

I say again: that's an awesome way to pick a veep.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #249 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I say again: that's an awesome way to pick a veep.

Makes me mostly terrified about how thorough his other picks and appointments as President will be...
post #250 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I say again: that's an awesome way to pick a veep.

Well heck, we're about to elect a President because he gives good speech. Seems fitting for the season.
post #251 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by sslarson View Post

Well heck, we're about to elect a President because he gives good speech. Seems fitting for the season.

Do you honestly believe that? It's like the republican equivalent of democrats believing Bush won because people would like to have a beer with him.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #252 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flounder View Post

Do you honestly believe that? It's like the republican equivalent of democrats believing Bush won because people would like to have a beer with him.

First, that does seem to be a pretty common belief among liberals and Democrats. That and that the voting public is just dumb or easily duped into voting for someone (of course if they vote for a Democrat then they're not so dumb or easily duped but rather wise and have seen the light.) Whatever.

But...

I have lost any confidence I might have had that the vast majority of the voting public makes their choice on things other than a handful of superficial things. This year I've heard enough of "he just seems like the right guy" or "he feels right to me" or "it's the right time" or "he just feels like the one" talk to assume that things will be any different this year.
post #253 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by sslarson View Post

Well heck, we're about to elect a President because he gives good speech. Seems fitting for the season.

You say that as if there's some other reason people get elected.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #254 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by sslarson View Post

First, that does seem to be a pretty common belief among liberals and Democrats. That and that the voting public is just dumb or easily duped into voting for someone (of course if they vote for a Democrat then they're not so dumb or easily duped but rather wise and have seen the light.) Whatever.

I have no idea how common that belief is among liberals, but I agree that it's silly. Which is why I thought your previous statement was silly.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #255 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by sslarson View Post

First, that does seem to be a pretty common belief among liberals and Democrats. That and that the voting public is just dumb or easily duped into voting for someone (of course if they vote for a Democrat then they're not so dumb or easily duped but rather wise and have seen the light.) Whatever.

But...

I have lost any confidence I might have had that the vast majority of the voting public makes their choice on things other than a handful of superficial things. This year I've heard enough of "he just seems like the right guy" or "he feels right to me" or "it's the right time" or "he just feels like the one" talk to assume that things will be any different this year.


Quote:
First, that does seem to be a pretty common belief among liberals and Democrats


It was much more than the speech. I'm sorry but people like Obama. He genuinely has a good handle on the people of this country. That's why the speech went over.

Speaking of sitting down and having a beer with Bush it's been a common belief among most people for awhile now that Bush has been totally ineffective and is out of touch. Not just democrats and liberals. It's pretty bad when the new guy wants to distance himself from the incumbent.

The neocons had their chance ( and then some ). If they had been effective things should be going pretty good for the country right now. What we actually have is a near disaster.

And it's really no use to try to pin this on the liberals. Who's been in exclusive charge for 6 out of the last 8 years?

Given this bottom line of negative conditions : Bad economic conditions and incredible debt, Iraq occupation that everyone except the diehards are tired of, the way the rest of the world views us now, and ( I know you won't agree but no matter ) an errosion of our personal freedoms. People just don't like the republicans right now. Blunder after blunder. Time to try something else.

Also as I've said if the democrats are even partially successful at righting the ship the conservatives will give something else the credit.

It doesn't matter if the republicans agree or not as long as some things are put right again. They certainly have their work cut out for them this time!

However that's how this country works. One side balances the other. Only this time we've had an extended period of bad decision making.

By the way we have a local media personally here in the NW that's conservative and very vocal named Lars Larson. Any relation?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #256 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Here's where you miss the boat: I do not favor abstinence-only education.

Here's where you miss the boat: I never said you favor abstinence only education.

I was commenting on your assertion that abstinence works 100% of the time it is tried. It doesn't.
post #257 of 836
Looks like Palin was offended by the phrase "Bridge to nowhere" when she was trying to get elected governor:

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsO...25537020080901

...but she said during her speech with McCain that she told congress, "No thanks".

People in Alaska seem to feel a little used.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #258 of 836
From Alaska: so it begins.

http://www.adn.com/monegan/story/513137.html

http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/newsr...ry/513368.html

Palin is staying away from people until her acceptance speech. She is even having somebody pick up an award for her.

http://community.adn.com/adn/node/130277

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #259 of 836
McCain was on Fox News touting Palin as more qualified than Obama... here's an article printed in an Alaskan newspaper showing where McCain was wrong.

In my opinion, the interviewer should have checked his info and called him on it on the spot, but this is Fox News.

http://www.juneaublogger.com/updates/?p=932

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #260 of 836
Palin's lawyer "welcomes the investigation and intends to cooperate" but claims that the bipartisan Legislative Council has no authority to conduct such an investigation. Instead, it should be handled by a three person personnel board appointed by Palin.

That, my friends, is change we can believe in.

As far as laying low goes, I would imagine she's holed up with campaign tutors, getting a cram course on issues 'n shit.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #261 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

That, my friends, is change we can believe in.

post #262 of 836
Looks like the McCain campaign has done the impossible: offered up a line of bullshit so egregious that even the somnolent press isn't buying.

During the Bush years the right has gotten so comfortable with just making barking noises, safe in the knowledge that the press would play along, pretending they were making sense, that I don't think they know how to stop. They've talked about how being in the proximity of Russia is much like foreign policy experience, they've claimed that being mayor of a tiny town is executive experience that puts even McCain to shame, they act like Palin's been out commanding the Alaskan National Guard on maneuvers in Iraq.

At some point I expect the campaign and its surrogates to just start insisting that Sarah Palin is the single most qualified candidate for the Vice Presidency in this nation's history, and one of the greatest heroes the country has ever seen.

If the press actually gets sufficiently annoyed at being treated like idiots (although why they would now, after the last eight years, I can't say) then McCain is well and truly fucked-- because there is very little coming out of his campaign that isn't eye-wateringly stupid. It's just that there's been this gentlemen's agreement that everyone would pretend like it was statesmanship.

I guess if news organizations start wondering aloud what the hell the McCain people are talking about, they can always go with the "liberal media trying to tear down a decent American because they're all vile, hateful hippies" thing. But that would mean alienating his base, the press.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #263 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Looks like the McCain campaign has done the impossible: offered up a line of bullshit so egregious that even the somnolent press isn't buying.

Can I buy a DVD of that? That is hilarious!

I love the announcer's little grin just before they switch over to duffus again at 40 sec.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #264 of 836
Hurricane Palin at the Washington Post:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the...ting_star.html

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #265 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Hurricane Palin at the Washington Post:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the...ting_star.html


It sounds like McSame didn't know her very well at all. He saw what he wanted to see.

That's what you get when you make desperate choices.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #266 of 836
Though not illegal, Palin did accept campaign money in 2002:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/cvn_palin...jW_KoOpV.s0NUE

She also cut funding for teenage moms earlier this year:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the...l?hpid=artslot

There will literally be volumes on this girl by the end of the week.



Where is she, by the way?

---
Just discovered this morning that I get CBS and perhaps NBC or ABC news once a day off satellite; better than watching the wacky announcers on CNN.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #267 of 836
A good summary is here:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/cvn_palin...jW_KoOpV.s0NUE

Another one:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/TheNo...3105288&page=2

They did their first vetting by Googling!

This one won't last very long.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #268 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by sslarson View Post

One thing is for darn sure in all of this...McCain got everyone talking about something other than Obama and the DNC purdy darn fast.

Whether that was by design (or evolution) who knows. This whole thing is probably good for another two weeks after which the media and people will rub the sleep from their eyes and recall, "Hang on, wasn't there someone else running for President too?"

obama and media thought his speech would carry the energy through a long weekend, then boom, mccain neutralized obama with his choice, now obama's speech is old news, so yesterday, nobody is talking about it......wow good strategy, then gustav wasn't listening to m moores "god" and no republican damage....this is a wondrous political season full of twists and turns..much more entertaining than most.
many of my friends think hilliary called up mccain and suggested palin, because hilliary gains the most if mccain wins, she becomes democrat top dog obama will be a "also ran" and hilliary can say "i told you so" play victim and rebuild HER democratic machine.
we should have a poll "who's idea was it to pick palin"
john mccain
cindy mccain
karl rove
hilliary
this election is a hoot....now it's mommy wars, its funny nobody talks of biden you know, obama's vp pick....
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
post #269 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOFEER View Post

obama and media thought his speech would carry the energy through a long weekend, then boom, mccain neutralized obama with his choice, now obama's speech is old news, so yesterday, nobody is talking about it......wow good strategy, then gustav wasn't listening to m moores "god" and no republican damage....this is a wondrous political season full of twists and turns..much more entertaining than most.
many of my friends think hilliary called up mccain and suggested palin, because hilliary gains the most if mccain wins, she becomes democrat top dog obama will be a "also ran" and hilliary can say "i told you so" play victim and rebuild HER democratic machine.
we should have a poll "who's idea was it to pick palin"
john mccain
cindy mccain
karl rove
hilliary
this election is a hoot....now it's mommy wars, its funny nobody talks of biden you know, obama's vp pick....

Your posts always seem to be in the vein of someone so cracked up by an internal joke only he is getting that he can barely catch a breath between guffaws to blurt out whatever it is that has tickled his funny bone. And no one can figure out what the hell he's talking about.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #270 of 836
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Now they see a strong woman and the substantive questioning has to begin. By substantive I of course mean who is a slut or who is covering for the slut or who is a bad mom or professional for possibly rearing a slut and finally who didn't vet well enough to discover any and all possible sluttiness.

What does all this mean?

The McCain campaign released the news of Palin's daughter's pregnancy to beat the Enquirer to the punch. That's exactly how the Edwards story went.

How the fuck can you blame the mass media for exposing Palin's daughter's pregnancy when the fucking McCain campaign is the one who exposed it to the media?

Jesus Harold Christ...
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #271 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

What does all this mean?

The McCain campaign released the news of Palin's daughter's pregnancy to beat the Enquirer to the punch. That's exactly how the Edwards story went.

How the fuck can you blame the mass media for exposing Palin's daughter's pregnancy when the fucking McCain campaign is the one who exposed it to the media?

Jesus Harold Christ...

They released it to counter the story mentioned in these very forums, that Palin was pretending to be pregnant to cover a pregnancy.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #272 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

They released it to counter the story mentioned in these very forums, that Palin was pretending to be pregnant to cover a pregnancy.

Why didn't they release the relevant parts of Sarah Palin's medical record instead? Perhaps a single ultrasound image which should include the patient's name and the date on the display? Instead they had to drag the daughter into it with an unproven claim that she's 5 months pregnant (could easily be four months, or not pregnant at all).

What we need is medical evidence that Trig is Sarah's son. Why involve the daughter at all, pregnant or not, unless there's even more to be uncovered?
post #273 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Why didn't they release the relevant parts of Sarah Palin's medical record instead? Perhaps a single ultrasound image which should include the patient's name and the date on the display? Instead they had to drag the daughter into it with an unproven claim that she's 5 months pregnant (could easily be four months, or not pregnant at all).

What we need is medical evidence that Trig is Sarah's son. Why involve the daughter at all, pregnant or not, unless there's even more to be uncovered?

What the hell give people the right to demand the release of a person's private medical records just to disprove a rumor?

How do we know the ultrasound was hers? How do we know someone didn't just type, write or print the name and date on the ultrasound.

What gives you or anything the right to just go around demanding proof about the family and children of others?

I read a rumor that Obama has been infected by HIV. All he has to do is just release all his medical records to me or else he is full of crap.

What nonsense!

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #274 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

What the hell give people the right to demand the release of a person's private medical records just to disprove a rumor?

Good point.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #275 of 836
But then this is a conspiracy, so she would have thought of all that... how she got every RN, LVN, ANP, and M.D. to keep quiet....all her daughter's friends, all the father's relatives to sign away rights and keep quite in a state of only 700,000. Whooooooooo doggies, <--- look! racist canard!! racist canard!! we got ourselves a bodacious vast, Right-Wing conspiracy on our hands!


Maybe she used GlobalHawk technology to let the Saudi father out early to get the Afghanistan pipeline while the small puffs of smoke obscured the set charges?

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #276 of 836
What fun to see the enthusiasts of every Democratic "scandal", no matter how sleazy or dishonest, suddenly rediscover the virtues of circumspection. My hats off to you.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #277 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

What fun to see the enthusiasts of every Democratic "scandal", no matter how sleazy or dishonest, suddenly rediscover the virtues of circumspection. My hats off to you.

Exactly. It takes a lot of balls to be so self-contradictory and hope no one notices.
post #278 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

What the hell give people the right to demand the release of a person's private medical records just to disprove a rumor?

How do we know the ultrasound was hers? How do we know someone didn't just type, write or print the name and date on the ultrasound.

What gives you or anything the right to just go around demanding proof about the family and children of others?

I read a rumor that Obama has been infected by HIV. All he has to do is just release all his medical records to me or else he is full of crap.

What nonsense!

I'm going to withhold judgment on this one till I see an in-depth analysis of the kerning in Palin's medical records.
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #279 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

What the hell give people the right to demand the release of a person's private medical records just to disprove a rumor?

How do we know the ultrasound was hers? How do we know someone didn't just type, write or print the name and date on the ultrasound.

What gives you or anything the right to just go around demanding proof about the family and children of others?

I read a rumor that Obama has been infected by HIV. All he has to do is just release all his medical records to me or else he is full of crap.

What nonsense!

Indeed.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #280 of 836
John Kerry sure was secretive with his military records! What did he have to hide? America deserves an answer!

Fortunately, the good conservative stewards of privacy were outraged that anyone would be obliged to defend themselves against a rumor by making public their own...... oh, wait.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Once the initial defensiveness re: Palin dies down...