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 8

post #281 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

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.

post #282 of 836
Like I said... balls.
post #283 of 836
Thread Starter 
trumptman:

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

Now that's a non-sequitur. To kill a story about Palin faking a pregnancy just show Palin pregnant. That's how I killed it in the thread here about that short-lived conspiracy theory and it worked very well.

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

Isn't that better than throwing your own daughter to the media wolves?

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

Palin's the one who threw her daughter out there for a feeding frenzy, save your faux outrage for who deserves it.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #284 of 836
Interesting video: Palin talking at her church earlier this year.

Some points made (among many):

She has a nanny to take care of the kids.
The war in Iraq is a mission from God.
The group she is talking to are "Cool-looking Christians".


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0..._n_123205.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 #285 of 836
The idea that releasing the news that her daughter was pregnant to counter the "Palin was pretending to be pregnant to cover a pregnancy" is just a convenient excuse, as it was clearly coming out imminently anyways.

If anything, it was designed to drag a fairly ridiculous theory into the limelight and ascribe it to all Democrats and/or Obama and/or the "liberal media." They intentionally dragged it out into the spotlight so they would have something to righteously and indignantly shout down.
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 #286 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Interesting video: Palin talking at her church earlier this year.

She has a nanny to take care of the kids.

I'm really not into jamming up working mothers. Of course she has a nanny. She has 5 fscking kids! If I could afford a nanny I'd get one.

And don't spin it where Palin is a hypocrite because she's a religious family values person and having a nanny is counter to that.

You have to pick if you are for women's right and equal treatment (mentally, professionally and legally) or you are not. Bergermeister is not.
post #287 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

trumptman:
Now that's a non-sequitur. To kill a story about Palin faking a pregnancy just show Palin pregnant. That's how I killed it in the thread here about that short-lived conspiracy theory and it worked very well.

It worked well for some. My response was to someone demanding medical records be released to prove a pregnancy.

Quote:
Isn't that better than throwing your own daughter to the media wolves?

If she truly is in her fifth month, then she would be right on the edge of no longer being able to hide it. The only way not to get this out there is to somehow hide the daughter. Then we would have all the "Palin hides the shameful daughter she hates" stories. There isn't a way to be a son or daughter of a major candidate and not receive some attention if you screw up.

Quote:
Palin's the one who threw her daughter out there for a feeding frenzy, save your faux outrage for who deserves it.

The media respected the boundaries set by Obama on his family. In some areas there is still discussion as to what should be off or on limits like with Michelle. I still find it pretty fascinating that her actual public statements can be "off-limits" but the media found and aired a DUI from Todd Palin in around 24 hours. I guess the spouses aren't off limits.

"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 #288 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by FormerLurker View Post

I'm going to withhold judgment on this one till I see an in-depth analysis of the kerning in Palin's medical records.

Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Indeed.

I know that some bloggers are banging away at this but has anyone at this site actually started a thread on it?

Not that I care to go through it, but at least being native born is a requirement for the job whereas proving a child came from your uterus isn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

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.

John Kerry made the claims himself and support was asked for the claims when there were counter claims made by others. Additionally John Kerry made allegations against others based off that service record and again, support was asked for to support that.

If you are John "I've got a fucking silver star" Kerry pointing a finger at me and telling me I eat live babies, I'm going to ask about the silver star and also deny the eating live babies part.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flounder View Post

The idea that releasing the news that her daughter was pregnant to counter the "Palin was pretending to be pregnant to cover a pregnancy" is just a convenient excuse, as it was clearly coming out imminently anyways.

If anything, it was designed to drag a fairly ridiculous theory into the limelight and ascribe it to all Democrats and/or Obama and/or the "liberal media." They intentionally dragged it out into the spotlight so they would have something to righteously and indignantly shout down.

It is that Republicans are always evil and evil when Democrats are evil it is only because Republicans made them be that way argument. Interesting.

"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 #289 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

It is that Republicans are always evil and even when Democrats are evil it is only because Republicans made them be that way argument. Interesting.

Nope, that's the the objective reality. They were going to have to announce she was pregnant, so why not use it to their advantage?

I'm not faulting them for it or claiming it was "evil" at all. It was a sound strategy.

To wit: you are carrying the water for them in your own comment, assigning the "was there a pregnancy cover-up" thing to all Democrats, and calling them evil to boot!

I didn't call republicans evil. You, on the other hand, didn't hesitate with democrats.
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 #290 of 836
It seems to me that the only messianic character in this entire race is Palin.

Look at the way even secular conservative pundits are glowing over her.

I have read more than several editorials suggesting that Palin's intense faith will change america for the better.

It makes me sad.

It is one thing to suggest that someone will do something to bring change, it is another to suggest that a person's mere presence is enough to do it. The first is the realm of the inspirational leader, the second is the role of a messiah.

She supports the war in Iraq calling it "a task that is from God."
She believes the $30 B in federal funds for an Alaskan pipeline was god's will.

This sort of irrational justification is absolutely terrifying. She has no moral accountability for any of her actions -- they are all part of god's will. This isn't something a secular nation needs in an executive, and we are a secular nation -- held together in the raison d'etre of protecting those of diverse and non-faiths. Palin and the religious right seem to desire to get over this last hurdle and create some sort of paradise for the second coming...

Edit: Will principled libertarians vote for this ticket?
"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 #291 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by mydo View Post

I'm really not into jamming up working mothers. Of course she has a nanny. She has 5 fscking kids! If I could afford a nanny I'd get one.

And don't spin it where Palin is a hypocrite because she's a religious family values person and having a nanny is counter to that.

You have to pick if you are for women's right and equal treatment (mentally, professionally and legally) or you are not. Bergermeister is not.


I was listing a few points she made in the video, offering no opinion.

 

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 #292 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flounder View Post

The idea that releasing the news that her daughter was pregnant to counter the "Palin was pretending to be pregnant to cover a pregnancy" is just a convenient excuse, as it was clearly coming out imminently anyways.

If anything, it was designed to drag a fairly ridiculous theory into the limelight and ascribe it to all Democrats and/or Obama and/or the "liberal media." They intentionally dragged it out into the spotlight so they would have something to righteously and indignantly shout down.

True. If she had responded only about herself, the original rumor would not look as vile as the repubs want it to. They desperately wanted to pin this rumor on Obama, but they know he doesn't play that way, so that didn't pan out. The avalanche of other points was entirely unexpected, I believe. They must be sweating pretty hard.

 

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 #293 of 836
McCain's campaign is upset with the media:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080903/...8CRAoLLl2s0NUE

"This nonsense is over"



EDIT to add:

The McCain campaign now refuses to answer anymore questions about the vetting process. Is this how he will run the WH? No freedom of the press?

 

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 #294 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

McCain's campaign is upset with the media:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080903/...8CRAoLLl2s0NUE

"This nonsense is over"

Us McCain still running? I thought he'd been replaced by Palin.
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 #295 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Us McCain still running? I thought he'd been replaced by Palin.

He must be jealous of all the attention she's getting.

 

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 #296 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I know that some bloggers are banging away at this but has anyone at this site actually started a thread on it?

Not that I care to go through it, but at least being native born is a requirement for the job whereas proving a child came from your uterus isn't.

You don't care to go through it because it's completely stupid.

It's like claiming I wasn't born in the US because I don't have my original copy of my birth certificate. I got a replacement one from the state I was born in. Want to check the kerning?
post #297 of 836
And another claims that she has foreign affairs experience due to proximity to Russia and Canada.

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_10370655

 

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 #298 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

And another claims that she has foreign affairs experience due to proximity to Russia and Canada.

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_10370655

*sigh*

And I *like* Huntsman. Hell, I'll probably vote for him when he's up for re-election.
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 #299 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

You don't care to go through it because it's completely stupid.

It's like claiming I wasn't born in the US because I don't have my original copy of my birth certificate. I got a replacement one from the state I was born in. Want to check the kerning?

It is stupid which is why no one is bringing it up. So now let's keep mentioning the stupid point that no one has brought up over and over so that we can yet again, affirm it is stupid and of course note again, that no one has brought it up.

"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 #300 of 836
CNN is showing the above video from Palin's church on their international channel; the whole world is getting this one.

God's work = fighting in Iraq and building pipelines through pristine wilderness.

---

Supposedly the church's site has crashed due to traffic.

 

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 #301 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flounder View Post

Nope, that's the the objective reality. They were going to have to announce she was pregnant, so why not use it to their advantage?

I'm not faulting them for it or claiming it was "evil" at all. It was a sound strategy.

To wit: you are carrying the water for them in your own comment, assigning the "was there a pregnancy cover-up" thing to all Democrats, and calling them evil to boot!

I didn't call republicans evil. You, on the other hand, didn't hesitate with democrats.

While I am sure the story would have eventually come out, the act of forcing it out with outrageous claims is the fault of Democrats with their insanely sexist ranting. I'm all for that though because as I noted in the media thread, because it plays their own biases against them. Those Hillary voters have got to be wondering what the hell the media and their party are doing asking if a bright intelligent woman should forgo her career due to family concerns.

Joe Biden took his oath from beside a hospital bed due to family concerns and no one ever said to him, maybe this isn't the best time to become a Senator.

Oh wait.... he is a man. The Democrats defend community activist as valid experience while calling mayor on the mommy track a joke. Alaska is three electoral votes and is "small." Delaware is three electoral votes and makes you ready for the presidency.

It is nothing more than sexism and the Hillary voters grew tired of it throughout the primaries. The spin can be there. The justifications can be long-winded. The reality is that no one has dared suggest that Barack or Michelle, both who have young school age children ought not have their career or even that their careers ought to in any fashion be dictated by their children. Biden can literally have had his family lying in hospital beds and no one questioned his career choices.

I'm not just spinning this either. I'm on the record if you want to do the search. When Howard Dean ran and his wife didn't want to go campaign with him because she has a thriving medical practice, I fully supported that decision.

None of these Palin concerns would even be raised if she were a Democrat or a man. No one has dared suggest that Michelle Obama should not be sitting on a hospital board earning $300k+ a year because she has two kids at home. If anyone did then it is offensive and sexist. They might question hospital policies made by that board and that would be fair ground in my view.

However honestly, I love and encourage the Democrats to keep doing this. I have no doubt that Palin's talents will define her beyond the media spin and likewise the Democrats tossing away any percentage of 18 million votes thrills me.

"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 #302 of 836
Turns out her broadening experience in one of the three countries she's been to outside of the United States, Ireland, was due to a military transport stopping to refuel.

I think the McCain people have put Palin in a worse light than necessary, just by being so aggressively stupid in how they are accounting for her weak areas. They practically demand push-back and further scrutiny when they say things that a child would be offended by.

I can't even figure out what they mean by their demand that the media stop it. They say they welcome scrutiny of her record, which is, in fact what is happening, by and large, but that, I guess, too much scrutiny is sexist. An effort to destroy a woman.

So, wondering about a candidate's professed thinking on government spending and pork and earmarks vs. their actual track record is sexist? Considering the fact that they are being investigated for abuse of power is sexist? Looking in to political affiliations is sexist? What a bunch of fucking wankers.

It's the old Republican two-step: Democratic women are bitches, shrill, emasculating, dykes. Attacking them is fine, since, not only do they have it coming, but they can certainly take it, nasty pieces of work that they are.

Republican women are virtuous mothers, kindly, compassionate and gentle. Attacking them is to attack the very flower of American femininity. Like mugging a debutante in an alley.

To believe all this is to "truly support women", to notice that it's misogynistic bullshit is, of course, sexist.
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 #303 of 836
Trumpt, your fundamental problem is your ongoing assumption the the media is in bed with and ergo represents Democrats and does things with the idea of getting dems into office or making republicans look bad.

They are in bed with ratings, and nothing more.
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 #304 of 836
Remember the CNN clip where the announcer asked the McCain droid to give one example, just one?

Camp McCain responded... by declining to let Larry King interview John McCain.

http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallas...palins-ex.html

---

Cindy disagrees with Palin over abortions: Cindy thinks they are OK in cases of rape or incest.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/poli...h_palins_.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 #305 of 836
Might want to pause here and take note of how the Republican push-back is going to work:

1)Pretend like there is no difference between blogs, the Obama campaign, and "the liberal media." Hence, anything on any blog will be casually attributed to Obama, and the liberal media will be excoriated for for its scurrilous, prurient stories, even if no such stories have been published.

We've already seen the McCain campaign attempting to foreground the never mainstreamed, already abandoned paternity story as somehow being the focus of press inquiries. They're claiming that during off-the-record conversations, they were peppered with these questions. Since no mainstream news source that I'm aware of is actually, you know, writing stories about same, the McCain campaign is the only one keeping it in front of the voters.

2)Pretend like there is no difference between whatever Inquirer level stuff is knocking around and legitimate questions into Palin's political past.

"We decry the feeding frenzy that has led the press to such grotesque depths as to QUESTION THE PATERNITY OF SARAH'S SAINTED LITTLE BABY, INVADE THE PRIVATE LIFE OF HER PLUCKY, SWEET LITTLE DAUGHTER, ask questions about (mumble mumble earmarks mumble bridge mumble mumble trooper mumble mumble mumble God loves pipelines mumble fuck America mumble OH MY GOD WHAT A GROTESQUE SPECTACLE INDEED OBAMA/LIBERAL/MEDIA FOR SHAME.

My guess is that the press, acclimated as they are to years of being mau-maued by the right, will agree that their interest in Palin's background is unseemly, followed a sudden surge in Palin "backlash" stories after her speech at the convention. We will suddenly be informed that the "American people" are deeply decent and respectful, are sympathetic to pregnant teenage daughters, and will regard any further talk of Palin's hypocrisy and extreme right view-points as "piling on."

The press can then return, with a huge sigh of relief, to their standard narrative of normal Americans vs. weirdoes.
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 #306 of 836
Palin doesn't believe man is impacting the environment... why? Because she wants jobs a cash for Alaska.

Maybe she should read the morning news:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080903/...9hW041ORis0NUE

 

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 #307 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Palin doesn't believe man is impacting the environment... why? Because she wants jobs a cash for Alaska.

Maybe she should read the morning news:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080903/...9hW041ORis0NUE

But wait, according to McCain's campaign commercials, she takes on Big Oil®:

Quote:
"She has a record of bipartisan reform," an announcer says, as newspaper headlines appear next to images of Palin or Obama. "He's the Senate's most liberal. She took on the oil producers.

Just because she's the Governor of a state that makes 80% of it's revenues from the oil industry, doesn't mean she can't be anti-oil!!

You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
post #308 of 836
http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/20...placing-palin/

CNN Cafferty File

The question is: Should McCain consider replacing Palin.

The responses are amazing.

 

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 #309 of 836
Thread Starter 
Quote:
It worked well for some. My response was to someone demanding medical records be released to prove a pregnancy.

It's still a non-sequitur. You can never please some people.

Quote:
If she truly is in her fifth month, then she would be right on the edge of no longer being able to hide it.

Sure, but she was still thrown to the wolves. You yourself argued that trotting her out was a response to the "Sarah isn't Trig's mother" rumor. Using a daughter's pregnancy as a political chip is disgusting.

Just let it ride, chide the media outlets that talk about it, and move on.

They politicized a 17-year-old girl's pregnancy.

Quote:
The media respected the boundaries set by Obama on his family.

This is a joke, right? You're not serious.... right?
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #310 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

It's still a non-sequitur. You can never please some people.

That four month old child can't be from my daughter who is five months pregnant.

That sounds logical enough to me.

Quote:
Sure, but she was still thrown to the wolves. You yourself argued that trotting her out was a response to the "Sarah isn't Trig's mother" rumor. Using a daughter's pregnancy as a political chip is disgusting.

The rumor involved the daughter. Those sick enough to post it and propagate it would not have been satisfied with partial disclosures.

Quote:
Just let it ride, chide the media outlets that talk about it, and move on.

The also noticed the ring on the daughter's finger. Attacks have to be addressed.

Quote:
This is a joke, right? You're not serious.... right?

You're not serious about me not being serious right? That's a joke right?

"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 #311 of 836
Thread Starter 
trumptman:

Quote:
That four month old child can't be from my daughter who is five months pregnant.

That sounds logical enough to me.

It's circumlocution. The best response to "You didn't have that baby" is "Yes, I did". All I did was post a picture of Palin while pregnant and that basically shut it down.

The McCain campaign injected Brolin's pregnancy into it as a sympathy maneuver. They've used this girl's pregnancy as a political card. It's disgusting.

Quote:
The rumor involved the daughter. Those sick enough to post it and propagate it would not have been satisfied with partial disclosures.

Partial disclosures? Proving that Sarah had Trig answers the question. Only one woman can give birth to a child.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #312 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/20...placing-palin/

CNN Cafferty File

The question is: Should McCain consider replacing Palin.

The responses are amazing.


Yeah that would be a really great thing to do. " Sorry babe but business is business so you have to go! ". That would go over well with the women voters!

Maybe McSame could model all of his decision making in the Whitehouse after this. If you make a mistake don't take resposibility and stand by it! Just back track!
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 #313 of 836
I don't understand what you're saying. If you make a piss-poor decision that is going to end in disaster, you should backtrack, at the earliest opportunity. At least that shows judgment.

Instead, like Bush and the Iraq war, you charge ahead into a clusterfuck.

It's Over.
post #314 of 836
What's with the double posts lately?
post #315 of 836
The "mission from God" thing is the best the Democrats have left? What's next? The kitchen sink?

In case you haven't been paying attention for the last decade or so, Evangelical Christians tend to view all important endeavours as missions from God. Since people are dying and stuff over there, I'm guessing that Palin somehow sees it as important.

This attack was silly when it was used on Bush.
The fact that the Democratic machine has had to recycle it for Palin shows how defensive they are.

One of the best lines I've seen so far has been (as usual) from Ann Coulter:

Quote:
When liberals start acting like they're opposed to pre-marital sex and mothers having careers, you know McCain's vice presidential choice has knocked them back on their heels.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #316 of 836
McCain's campaign is knocking quite a few people!

 

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 #317 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

The "mission from God" thing is the best the Democrats have left? What's next? The kitchen sink?

In case you haven't been paying attention for the last decade or so, Evangelical Christians tend to view all important endeavours as missions from God. Since people are dying and stuff over there, I'm guessing that Palin somehow sees it as important.

This attack was silly when it was used on Bush.
The fact that the Democratic machine has had to recycle it for Palin shows how defensive they are.

One of the best lines I've seen so far has been (as usual) from Ann Coulter:

Care to explain how a war fits in with the whole Christianity thing?
"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 #318 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

The "mission from God" thing is the best the Democrats have left? What's next? The kitchen sink?

In case you haven't been paying attention for the last decade or so, Evangelical Christians tend to view all important endeavours as missions from God. Since people are dying and stuff over there, I'm guessing that Palin somehow sees it as important.

This attack was silly when it was used on Bush.
The fact that the Democratic machine has had to recycle it for Palin shows how defensive they are.

One of the best lines I've seen so far has been (as usual) from Ann Coulter:

"...The best Democrats have left..."?

Are you paying attention?

There are 100 points of contention against Sarah Palin, and no, just one out of those 100 is not "the best". It's one out of 100.

A bit touchy on religion, are we?
post #319 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

Care to explain how a war fits in with the whole Christianity thing?

Well, historically, it does. Christians are historically more aggressive than Muslims have ever been.
post #320 of 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Well, historically, it does. Christians are historically more aggressive than Muslims have ever been.

Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.

Well... unless you are Jewish, then you're just forsaken and die.
"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
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...