PDA

View Full Version : Palin it is...



Chopstick
08-29-2008, 08:41 AM
Way to go Mac. Nice one. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

jayalley
08-29-2008, 08:49 AM
Yahoo !!!!

Deeman3
08-29-2008, 08:52 AM
Hey, I predicted this! Do I get a cupie doll? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Good choice. Of course, soon she will be found to be a horrible person who kills puppies and won't wear pant suits by many. She obviouly has a temper and is subject to outbursts in the Alaskan Tundra that Gayle's friends witnessed personally. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

It is strange that among all the people on both tickets, she is the only one with real executive experience. She should make people a little more comfortable with McCain's age as an issue. I just hope she can spew retoric. The opposition, as I have said, is the best, so far, at giving speeches. We shall see if she ignites some passion that McCain can't. If McCain pulls this off, still doubtful, and improves the situation in the U.S. we could have our first glance at a women who would have a real chance at being the first female President in 2012 or 2016.

I still can't figure why Obama was not the first to jump on the women's bandwagon and left that to McCain. ???? That may prove to have been a mistake. I know he could not, in all good conscience, have picked Hillary but it would seem, out there in the Democratic Party, there might have been one qualified woman. Maybe not, in his opinion.

I still think McCain has an uphill battle and will have to shine in the debates and next week.

jayalley
08-29-2008, 09:01 AM
Let's see Angry Gayle spin this one !!!!

Ha! Ha! Ha!

After months of her spittle-inflected blubbering about sexism and the inability of women to get a chance at power, Obambi picks a blowhard with bad hairplugs and old John outfoxes him with a shocker.

Hey, Angry Gayle, to use one of your favorite devices.........."Bwaaah, Bwaaah, Bwaaaah, Bwaaah, Bwaaahhh!!!!" (or something like that)

Wally_in_Cincy
08-29-2008, 09:03 AM
She's pro-life. I can hear Gayle sharpening her fingernails right now.

STAY OUTTA MY WOOOOMB!!!!!

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w144/Wally-Cincinnati/palin-5.jpg

Deeman3
08-29-2008, 09:04 AM
Wow, this lady has chops and is married to a production worker! she actually knows and sleeps with a real working American. To boot it seems he's the 3 time snowmobile champion, has 5 kids and has a reputation for cleaning up corruption at times going against the party to do so.

jayalley
08-29-2008, 09:15 AM
Yea, but she doesn't have a Cadillac and a boat and the fat life to sit around all day and blog about socialism like our working class Gayle in Md.

Hey, where is our resident feminine Angry spokesperson ???

jayalley
08-29-2008, 09:16 AM
Great magazine cover, Wally !!!!

jayalley
08-29-2008, 09:19 AM
Oh, I know where Angry Gayle is......
...she is logged in over at The Huffington Post right now getting her talking points that she can paste in here at BD NPR.

Wally_in_Cincy
08-29-2008, 09:28 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jayalley</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oh, I know where Angry Gayle is......
...she is logged in over at The Huffington Post right now getting her talking points that she can paste in here at BD NPR. </div></div>

Didn't take them long:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-kelly/governor-palin-has-what-i_b_103702.html

Back in January, the secretary of the interior was considering whether or not polar bears should be on the endangered species list. There were strong feelings on both sides of the issue. Childish romantics, who think there should be more bio-diversity on Earth than cows and us, wanted them listed. Grown-ups (and oil company lobbyists) argued that the answers are never that simple. But what about the scientists? Governor Palin wrote an op-ed for the New York Times that said:

"I strongly believe that adding them [polar bears that is, not scientists] to the list is the wrong move at this time. My decision is based on a comprehensive review by state wildlife officials of scientific information from a broad range of climate, ice and polar bear experts."

<span style="color: #FF0000">The plain truth is, polar bears are not endangered at all. They are doing just fine. This whole polar bear thing is strictly to keep us from accessing the oil.

Maybe somebody can explain how an oil field the size of an airport on the edge of a 16 million acre nature reserve could harm polar bears. Good grief.</span>

Chopstick
08-29-2008, 09:32 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey, I predicted this! Do I get a cupie doll? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Good choice. Of course, soon she will be found to be a horrible person who kills puppies and won't wear pant suits by many. She obviouly has a temper and is subject to outbursts in the Alaskan Tundra that Gayle's friends witnessed personally. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

<span style="color: #3366FF">That's part of the beauty of it. When she does we can rag on her about being a sexist. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif </span>

It is strange that among all the people on both tickets, she is the only one with real executive experience.
<span style="color: #3366FF">I like that too. Get somebody in there who actually knows how to run something. Not another idiot politician who just knows how to get elected.</span>
She should make people a little more comfortable with McCain's age as an issue. I just hope she can spew retoric.
<span style="color: #3366FF">Have you ever seen a woman who couldn't talk your head off?</span>
The opposition, as I have said, is the best, so far, at giving speeches. We shall see if she ignites some passion that McCain can't. If McCain pulls this off, still doubtful, and improves the situation in the U.S. we could have our first glance at a women who would have a real chance at being the first female President in 2012 or 2016.
<span style="color: #3366FF">Either that or a new Fox News anchor. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif </span>

I still can't figure why Obama was not the first to jump on the women's bandwagon and left that to McCain. ???? That may prove to have been a mistake. I know he could not, in all good conscience, have picked Hillary but it would seem, out there in the Democratic Party, there might have been one qualified woman. Maybe not, in his opinion.
<span style="color: #3366FF">I think that bunch scares even him. I can't think of a single one I wouldn't cross the street to avoid.</span>

I still think McCain has an uphill battle and will have to shine in the debates and next week.
<span style="color: #3366FF">I wouldn't count him out. He came from behind to get this far. That man has been tested by tragedy in ways that would have easily broken most men ad no one would have blamed him if it did. He not only overcame them he became fantastically successful. I do not agree with some of his ideas but he is a remarkable character and he has proven his metal. That is something Obama has yet to do. He was foolish to preach change then bring in an old school same old. </span>

</div></div>

jayalley
08-29-2008, 09:35 AM
Hey, Wally, great idea....maybe we should post their points over here ourselves and address them immediately, before A.G. can spin them.

jayalley
08-29-2008, 09:39 AM
You nailed it, Chopstick. John McCain is a warhorse and he has defied the odds so far. He is a remarkable personality.

Chopstick
08-29-2008, 09:57 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Wally_in_Cincy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<span style="color: #FF0000">The plain truth is, polar bears are not endangered at all. They are doing just fine. This whole polar bear thing is strictly to keep us from accessing the oil.

Maybe somebody can explain how an oil field the size of an airport on the edge of a 16 million acre nature reserve could harm polar bears. Good grief.</span>
</div></div>

They did the same thing down here with the damn manatees. It wasn't powerboats that put them on the endangered species list it was a virus and at the time they put them on the list there were more manatees around than any time in recorded history. That didn't make any difference though. All it took was a couple of pictures of a manatee with prop marks on it's back and it was raining tree huggers. Funny thing about those manatees. Who would have thought that their favourite place to hang out was right in front of all of those multi-million dollar waterfront homes, requiring the declaration of a special idle speed only zone and a police boat posted there every day to enforce it. Now down the channel deep in the mangroves away from human activity, oh hell no a manatee would never go there, it's full speed ahead.

And the gators. They're yanking people off the golf courses and right out of their own back yards and they are still protected.

Did you see where Skennedy called Gayle barnacle butt? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

Wally_in_Cincy
08-29-2008, 10:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body">


And the gators. They're yanking people off the golf courses and right out of their own back yards and they are still protected.

</div></div>

We are going to a resort on the St. Lucie river. I don't know whether to worry more about the Gators or the hurricanes.

Deeman3
08-29-2008, 10:11 AM
Ever had a Polar Bear burger? Not as tasty as a Manatee roast but fewer carbs than gator.

Of the three, I've only had gator but would be willing given the right bar-be-que sauce.

jayalley
08-29-2008, 10:12 AM
The Obambi campaign has just issued an attack statement criticizing Palin's lack of experience to be a national leader.

The OBAMBI folks are talking about EXPERIENCE !!!!???????

jayalley
08-29-2008, 10:35 AM
Watching the TV ....every network...it's all Palin....all McCain....even the Obama Media (ABC,NBC,CBS,MSNBC,CNN)...all McCain/Palin all the time.

Was there something about a convention in Denver this week????
Was there some scripted, overrated speech somewhere????

It's already swallowed up by history, Baby.

They out maneuvered the Democrats brilliantly.

wolfdancer
08-29-2008, 10:41 AM
"Maybe somebody can explain how an oil field the size of an airport on the edge of a 16 million acre nature reserve could harm polar bears. Good grief."
(notice the quote signs , as you suggested)
I didn't know the bears were ant- big oil....but I seem to remember a few years back in one of the mags, that the oil lines that we already have up there, were changing the migration patterns of the raindeer/caribou...
I know the simple answer is, who cares...but that might affect the eco-system up there.
Since I don't have your facts, I can only hope the experts can decide between what's best for the bears Vs what's best for America.....

Wally_in_Cincy
08-29-2008, 10:43 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ever had a Polar Bear burger? </div></div>

As an evil corporate fascist pig I prefer "Spotted Owl on a stick".

jayalley
08-29-2008, 10:53 AM
Wow, just watched Palin's speech !!!!
Very well written and delivered.

She honored Hillary with a great line by saying she had already put "18 million cracks in the glass ceiling"

To expropriate a cliche from the Obambi media...."she hit it out of the park!"

Wally_in_Cincy
08-29-2008, 10:57 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jayalley</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wow, just watched Palin's speech !!!!
Very well written and delivered.

</div></div>

I listened to it. That's the most fired up crowd ever at a McCain rally. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

She did great. What timing by the McCain campaign. Took BHO right out of the spotlight.

Unfortunately, now the "knives of the Left" will be unsheathed.

Wally_in_Cincy
08-29-2008, 11:03 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I seem to remember a few years back in one of the mags, that the oil lines that we already have up there, were changing the migration patterns of the raindeer/caribou...
</div></div>

The carribou are definitely suffering

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w144/Wally-Cincinnati/caribou.jpg

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

wolfdancer
08-29-2008, 11:12 AM
see, now there's the living proof....they are all on this side of the fence....and it's obvious....the grass is greener on the other side.

wolfdancer
08-29-2008, 11:18 AM
there may be some unkind remarks that will surface re: her qualifications....it is politics after all, and BCA rules do not apply.
But, we are electing a President, not the second banana.
She may not be enough to swing the undecided vote over to McBush.

Deeman3
08-29-2008, 11:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
"Maybe somebody can explain how an oil field the size of an airport on the edge of a 16 million acre nature reserve could harm polar bears. Good grief."
(notice the quote signs , as you suggested)
I didn't know the bears were ant- big oil....but I seem to remember a few years back in one of the mags, that the oil lines that we already have up there, were changing the migration patterns of the raindeer/caribou...
</div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Wolfdancer,

You can believe this or not, but I do remember them interviewing the Wildlife scientists a few years after the pipeline went in and asking the impact. The reply was that the pipelinie had proven to increase the Caraboo survival rate over the winter, cuased by the warmth of the oil in the pipeline causing the animals to gather around it and not freeze to death. IN fact they actually increased hunting permits to control the population growth so Palin and her evil hunting friends now have more to hunt.

Other studies had showed how changes in migratory paths would kill many of the animals and they found that is simply did not happen, the caraboo were smart enough to pass through the raised sections of the pipeline just fine. </span>

wolfdancer
08-29-2008, 11:29 AM
I guess that I just read the original story, and not the follow up.
I think that maybe, just like Republicans, them Raindeer, ain't as dumb as they look /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

Chopstick
08-29-2008, 11:48 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Wally_in_Cincy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body">


And the gators. They're yanking people off the golf courses and right out of their own back yards and they are still protected.

</div></div>

We are going to a resort on the St. Lucie river. I don't know whether to worry more about the Gators or the hurricanes. </div></div>

Let me know when. I'll bring the boat down. I'm only a couple hours north. If you catch something don't reach for it use a net. These ain't bass. Everything in the water down here has got teeth or stickers or something. There was a fellow over in mosquito lagoon pulled in a red fish. A shark hit it right beside the boat. Left nothing but the head. Gators will do the same thing.

If you ask people what they are more afraid of sharks or gators they will say sharks. That's the wrong attitude. Think about how big the oceans are. A shark can live a hundred lifetimes and never even see a human. A shark doesn't know what you are. All he wants is a fish. Now a gator knows exactly what you are and how to sneak up on ya. Another thing about gators is they can come straight up out of the water on their tails. IF you let them get close enough they will do it.

The St. Lucie river down by the inlet is all brackish. Gators don't like salt water so you don't have to worry about them. There's a few crocs around but they tend to keep to themselves. I've come up on them cast netting and the just ran off. I never have heard of a croc going after anyone.

Chopstick
08-29-2008, 12:03 PM
Check these out. Scratchin' their back on it. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif http://www.alaskastock.com/pr/1041283474/Alaskastock_103AR_AD0001_005.jpg

Wally_in_Cincy
08-29-2008, 12:08 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

The St. Lucie river down by the inlet is all brackish. Gators don't like salt water so you don't have to worry about them. There's a few crocs around but they tend to keep to themselves. I've come up on them cast netting and the just ran off. I never have heard of a croc going after anyone. </div></div>

Gee. I feel better now /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/shocked.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

We're going to a place called Club Med Sandpiper (not as fancy as it sounds /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif ), just for a long weekend.

It's on the river, which looks very wide (more like a bay) from the pics I've seen.

Wally &lt;~~ hoping for brackish

Sid_Vicious
08-29-2008, 12:34 PM
The very first thing I thought was, here the ticket has a 72 year old possible pres, selecting a VP who kinda looks like Mary Poppins compared to Hillary, if she were to have to fill in as president in any serious event, say if McCain were to die in office.

This stunt may get some swing votes, but it definitely ain't strength in the top two of this country's government. If Hillary was run down the road down for her supposed gender weakness, then this one is merely a caraboo yearling, in any event she'd have to serve the duty of an acting president in a crisis.

Oldest man and a first term governor 44yr old female as backup to national security. Rice must have turned him down. What a cartoon show this is becoming, but hey...from a non-rep voter's view wanting the dems to win, I like his choice in the end...sid

Vapros
08-29-2008, 02:00 PM
McCain has rolled the dice - no doubt about that. I just hope he has not thrown in the towel. This lady is probably at least as qualified to be president as is Barack H. Obama - altho there is not much comfort in that - and considerably more acceptable to this country and the world. But I would not like to see her debate with Joe Biden, as he is probably too experienced for her in that area. He is a professional there, and she is not. Obama was wise to refuse to debate with McCain, and Palin is in the same position with Biden.

This is a strange situation, because the Democratic ticket is upside-down. The whole thing would make a lot more sense if it were Biden-Obama vs McCain-Palin. Much nearer to 'traditional' at the very least. It's a jumble, as it stands.

I hope McCain has made a good move.

Bobbyrx
08-29-2008, 02:22 PM
"Oldest man and a first term governor 44yr old female as backup to national security"

I guess a first term senator with the old geiser as backup is ok with you though....

Wally_in_Cincy
08-29-2008, 02:25 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Vapros</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

This lady is probably at least as qualified to be president as is Barack H. Obama - </div></div>

She has a hell of a lot more integrity for one thing.

BHO's shennanigans with Wm. Ayers and the Annenberg project will be coming out soon. Add that on top of Rev. Wright and Rezko and it might be the last straw for him.

Dems say "Hey, let's nominate a guy from the cesspool of the Chicago Machine." Brilliant.

sack316
08-29-2008, 05:49 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sid_Vicious</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> If Hillary was run down the road down for her supposed gender weakness, then this one is merely a caraboo yearling... </div></div>

I dunno, hearing about her athletic history where she was nicknamed "Sarah Barracuda" and seeing pictures of the lifetime NRA member handle a gun... she may be tougher than she appears /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

I think it's a gamble, and as with any gamble it will carry a high risk or high reward with it. Some positives I've thought of include:

-Obviously stands a far better chance of gaining more of the disenfranshised hillary supporters

-She may take the "attack" out of attack dog Biden. How hard can he go after a 44 year old mother of 5, one with Down Syndrome, before looking like a monster?

-She will raise curiosity in the campaign. Just as the dems have done a good job of having many voters interested in any event going on in which they are a part of, this gives McCain a decent boost in viewer interest. Let's face it, more people will want to hear Obama talk than they would McCain... this will, at least in short term, give more attention and interest to the campaign.

-She is a good balance to the recent attacks on McCain's wealth, and his supposed lack of understanding with the "normal" people. He now has a VP by his side who can relate to family struggles.

Obviously nobody knows all that much about her. I'm sure a lot of good and bad will likely come out over time here. I know the experience claims may well be negated now, but then again McCain can still say "My #2 still has more experience than the person on the top of your ticket". This thing just got a lot more interesting, and if nothing else this pick just changed the argument that this is another "same ol' same ol'" republican ticket

Sack

pooltchr
08-29-2008, 06:59 PM
She is by no means a lightweight. She has taken on big oil as governer, brought back the meaning of the term ethics, and actually has the highest approval rating (90%) of any governor in the country. I'm really looking forward to the VP debate. I think Biden would make a huge mistake going after her...something tells me she could cut him to pieces and have him thanking her for the conversation. If he goes on the attack too hard, she is going to get the sympathy...but something tells me she really doesn't need it. I think she can handle herself just fine.

The only problem I see with the ticket....it's backward!
Palin-McCain in '08 has a better ring to it.

Damn! We finally get a candidate I could support...and she's running for the number 2 spot!

Steve

DickLeonard
08-29-2008, 11:24 PM
Vapros my favorite columnist Maureen Dowd said the most inexperienced person in Washington is George Bush and he has been in office 7 1/2 years.

As for Johm Mc Cain he is Alzheimer all over again. The first move for Barack is to demand a mental examination. If you don't know how many homes you own your suffering from diminished capacity. I don't think I can say more because I suffer the same disease and I only receiced one blow to the head. ####

Vapros
08-30-2008, 08:07 AM
Dick, I think anyone who goes into big-time politics should leave the house every morning wearing a crash helmet. There has to be something in their makeup that drives them to take the abuse and ridicule that comes with the job. They need the skin of a bull elephant. And it's been a long time since there were any statesmen in positions of authority. Today it's nothing but politicians. The way we pick our leaders is pretty scary.

That said, I think Mr. McCain has pulled a very neat hidden-ball trick, and he might score with it. We've never before seen a campaign where there will be such a heated argument over whether our VP candidate is better qualified to be president than your presidential candidate. Maybe McCain's age will have a lot to do with fueling that debate. I will go out and vote - I always do -but my heart won't be in it. As I said, it's pretty scary.

One more thing. The women of this country will be much better served if Ms. Palin gets to serve, as compared to what Hillary Clinton's resume could be expected to resemble at the end of four years. This lady kicks butt and takes names and gets things done. There is a bunch of old politicos from both parties, up in Alaska, wearing bandaids this year. We could use some of that.

Do something dice, even if it's wrong. My arm is getting tired.

Qtec
08-30-2008, 12:31 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Wally_in_Cincy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Vapros</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

This lady is probably at least as qualified to be president as is Barack H. Obama - </div></div>

She has a hell of a lot more integrity for one thing.

BHO's shennanigans with Wm. Ayers and the Annenberg project will be coming out soon. Add that on top of Rev. Wright and Rezko and it might be the last straw for him.

Dems say "Hey, let's nominate a guy from the cesspool of the Chicago Machine." Brilliant. </div></div>

LOL, she is under investigation. This says it all.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com//gadgets/slideshows/249/webpix//slide_249_4.jpeg

Q

PRQL8R
08-30-2008, 01:47 PM
So the Republicans picked a woman as their VP choice... Big Surprise...NOT!

Had Clinton won the nomination it would have been equally unsurprising that the Republicans would have chosen a member of some minority, preferably one that was also a woman... that being of course if they could find one.

With the Obama nomination in place, the Republican agenda for VP pick would have been:

1. <u>Must</u> not have a penis,

2. <u>Must</u> strongly favour pro-life

3. <u>Must</u> be relatively young.

No VP candidante for any party is <u>primarily</u> chosen because they would be a likely successor should the President become incapacitated or die. They are chosen because they might somehow bring in some swing votes or balance some supposed weakness of the main candidate.

Had Clinton hypothetically not been a candidate in this race, Obama would have certainly chosen her as a running mate. If it turned out to be a successfull Presidency she would have been a lock for the next election. This nomination was there for her only to lose and unfortunately for her she did. As it was she was much too strong a candidate herself to be seriously considered for VP. No President want's any confusion as to who the real leader is.

This is why the Vice-Presidency is often viewed as not that great a job but can serve as a steppingstone to a shot at the top office. For Palin it certanly could become a step out of the wilderness, even if McCain doesn't win. Only time will tell if she can measure up in a full open primary as Obama certainly did.

Although it has happened (Clinton - Gore) It's been a rarity in the past to have two strong candidates for both President and Vice-President. Candidates for VP are much more likely to be of the Dan Quayle variety.

For the Democrates with Biden... he was clearly chosen to shore up a percieved weakness of Obama in experience and in the international arena. The plus for the Democrats is that Biden will, because of his long standing history, probably play and important advisory role. Palin's contribution would mostly end with whatever votes she can garner and her opinions likely would't carry much weight in the Republican back rooms. That's not to say she's not an intelligent, good and competent Govenor of Alaska. For <u>this</u> election she's only required to be the token female and hopefully for the Republicans, pick up a few of those disgruntled Hillary supporter votes.

Easy to con someone if they think the've been unfairly denied something and you tell them you can give it to them... even when in the case of Palin... it's not really true. ...Bob

Bobbyrx
08-30-2008, 03:48 PM
"Easy to con someone if they think the've been unfairly denied something and you tell them you can give it to them"...


Isn't this the Democratic strategy in every election??? Obama's speech is a perfect example.
But you are right, they all will do or say whatever they think it takes to get elected.

nAz
08-30-2008, 04:24 PM
No way any Hillary supporter would swing over just because she is a women... the former beauty queen is anti abortion no?
that is just wish full thinking something for the Reps to feel good about.

btw from what i read about her she thinks creationism should be taught in public schools? WTF who would vote for that????

one more thing how many people new anything about after she was announced?

pooltchr
08-30-2008, 07:01 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nAz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No way any Hillary supporter would swing over just because she is a women... <span style="color: #FF0000"> Sure they will. The radical feminists who knew nothing of her politics, only that she was a female, but supported her anyway, could easily be swayed by another female in the mix. VP is better than nothing.</span> the former beauty queen is anti abortion no? <span style="color: #FF0000">True. But how many voters actually consider political stands when choosing a candidate. How many women voted for Clinton because he was "charming"? </span>
that is just wish full thinking something for the Reps to feel good about. <span style="color: #FF0000"> I think it was a very calculated move. McCain has a lot of conservatives concerned due to his non-conservative history. Palin has a record as a true conservative. A lot of people who weren't happy with either candidate will start looking at the number 2 position as more of a deciding factor.</span>

btw from what i read about her she thinks creationism should be taught in public schools? WTF who would vote for that???? <span style="color: #FF0000">A LOT!!!!! </span>

one more thing how many people new anything about after she was announced? </div></div> <span style="color: #FF0000">Probably just people who actually follow politics and don't just follow the 10 minute nightly spoonfeeding presented by the networks. She was one I personally would have supported for President 6 months ago. Even now, I wish the ticket read "Palin - McCain" and not vice-versa. </span>

While many may not know her that well right now, I think she will build a very strong base of support over the next 60 days.
Steve

mike60
08-30-2008, 08:48 PM
VERY SIMPLY PUT, DREAM ON FOOLS. WHAT'S HER NAME GETTING HILLARY'S VOTERS? IN YOUR DEMENTED LITTLE WORLD. AS IF.

NEXT....

miguel james kopp doing forever as some guys bitch.

sack316
08-31-2008, 02:11 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mike60</div><div class="ubbcode-body">VERY SIMPLY PUT, DREAM ON FOOLS. WHAT'S HER NAME GETTING HILLARY'S VOTERS? IN YOUR DEMENTED LITTLE WORLD. AS IF.

NEXT....

miguel james kopp doing forever as some guys bitch. </div></div>

Well there was already the group of Clinton voters that were gonna vote for McCain now anyway, regardless. Then the group that simply wouldn't support Obama. So in a nutshell, it ain't gonna hurt. I personally can't wait to see if she will wear her ovaries on the outside in some debates.

Sack (Gayle's gonna get me for that one... rightly so I may add)

sack316
08-31-2008, 02:25 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nAz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No way any Hillary supporter would swing over just because she is a women... the former beauty queen is anti abortion no?

<span style="color: #3366FF">But pro union. Ahhhhh /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif</span>

that is just wish full thinking something for the Reps to feel good about.

<span style="color: #3366FF">We need something, don't we? Unfortunately we don't have a candidate with a mind straight out of Camelot (http://stolemyhubcaps.com/covers/The%20Care%20Bears%20Movie.jpg) (no, that's not a typo)</span>

btw from what i read about her she thinks creationism should be taught in public schools? WTF who would vote for that????

<span style="color: #3366FF">eh why not? Teach it all and let the kids decide</span>

one more thing how many people new anything about after she was announced?

<span style="color: #3366FF"> Nobody, that's who. Except a few thousand people in Alaska maybe. But I do know that what things she has done seem to have been successful... except for maybe getting her brother in law fired or whatever. But the rest seems cool.

BTW, what's the over/under on who we will know first between her and Obama? Because I plan to play a parlay on that, and the experience tale of the tape, along with "things we have done"</span>
</div></div>

Sack

PRQL8R
08-31-2008, 10:35 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[<span style="color: #3366FF"> eh why not? Teach it all and let the kids decide</span> Sack </div></div>

YIKES!!! Now thats got to be one of the most bizarre educational concepts I've yet heard of.

The reason we send our kids are to school is because they lack foundational knowledge and cognitive skills. This sort of education takes place during their most impressionable years. My job as a teacher was always to give my students the most proven, sound information available. It's important to teach them logical and organized methods of reasoning not promote any particular confusing unsubstantiated religious dogma.

To just toss that sort of mess into their young laps and say "hey... now you choose." would be totally irresponsible.

And if that's Palin's approach to education then that makes here even more than irrelevant as a VP candidate... with of course the primary exception that she doesn't have a penis. ...Bob

sack316
08-31-2008, 10:53 AM
well, I don't think just anything should quite be taught in say kindergarten or elementary school per say. Besides, I'm sure you know me well enough to sense my sarcasm in that entire post.

Sack

editing to add, though, that teaching theories of creationism would in fact be no different than teaching the theory of evolution. To learn what different people believe and how those things came about is important in learning as a social science... but must be taught respinsibly

Gayle in MD
08-31-2008, 11:58 AM
It is unconstitutional to teach religious dogma in our public school system, period. Creationism is not a science.

Palin's stance on this issue proves that she would be just another Republican Religious nut who wants to force her religious beliefs on the whole country, into our schools, into our bedrooms, and into our private, personal, family and medical decisions.

McCain has just proven he is unfit to protect this country, and that his mental issues are such that he cannot make reasonable decisions.

He has just offended every single thinking woman in this country, and above all, those whome who voted for Hillary Clinton because she had the experience and judgement to lead this country.

John McCain couldn't lead a duck to water, hence, Bush, a lame duck, wouldn't even listen to him.

Republicans are becomming more comical, more bitter and more desperate by the minute.

Biden will make her look like just what she is, a hockey mom, who is under investigation for inappropriate interference in State matters, trying to use her governorship and political power to destroy another person for refusing to do the wrong thing.

Ain't that just like a Republican!

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
08-31-2008, 12:12 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For this election she's only required to be the token female and hopefully for the Republicans, pick up a few of those disgruntled Hillary supporter votes.

Easy to con someone if they think the've been unfairly denied something and you tell them you can give it to them... even when in the case of Palin... it's not really true. ...Bob
</div></div>

The women who voted for Hillary are not stupid. They can see right through this, and believe me, they're insulted. What McCain is doing falls into a category of sexism. He is assumming that the women who voted for Hillary dod os just because she was a woman. Nothing cound be further from the truth. He's also asumming that they are so dumb they won't figure out what he's up to, nor how dangerous his decision is for the whole country.

The woman is under investigation for inappropriate actions as governor. She has no experience to take over foreign decisions when McCain flies into one of his famous rages, has a stroke and drops dead. His nickname on The Hill, is the WHITE TORNADO! His temper, and out bursts, are famously called Insane McCain, on The Hill.

I don't think many Americans want a hockey mom at the red button, who doesn't even know what the vice president is supposed to do.

The only advantage to McCain with Palin, is that he has just insured that the religious right wing evangelical nuts in this country will all show up and vote for him, and his absurd choice, and poor decision making. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Kerbouchard
08-31-2008, 12:17 PM
Well, the religious right wing evangelical nuts' votes count, too. He has also secured millions of gun owners who had been hesitant to support him due to him reaching across the aisle a few too many times in regards to Gun Control.

Put a fork in it, the Dem's just lost an un-losable election.

Gayle in MD
08-31-2008, 12:30 PM
First of all the gun issue was born through the efforts of Republicans, in the first place. Jim Brady, ever heard of him?

Secondly, McCain will lose. As more people step out and reveal his notorious mental and emotional problems. Americans don't want an emotional nut and a religious nut, hockey mom holding the black box.

The woman has no international, or national experience. she the under two year governor of a state in the wilderness, who satated...

"What does the vice president do?"

McCain made my week! After 38 million viewers, obama was able to get his message out. The reviews have been unprecedented. None other than Pat Buchannon was full of praise.

McInsane has just given a gift to Democratics.

sack316
08-31-2008, 01:32 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is unconstitutional to teach religious dogma in our public school system, period. Creationism is not a science.
</div></div>

I didn't say creationism was a science... but studying the people and why and how beliefs came about is a social science. So you feel it bad to learn about the history of Christians, Muslims, Atheists, whatever belief... it would be wrong to learn about different beliefs, and who and why and how they came about? You seem to think I mean we should have a teacher at a podium reading out of a bible to teach. That's not what I'm saying at all... more I guess the social context of it, i suppose you could say.

Nah, you're right... horrible thought. That may bring about less ignorance and more tolerance into the world if we were able to learn about different things. Heaven forbid we should try to understand and learn about one of the most influential entities of the human race. The key thing is it's purpose. If it is taught with the purpose of promoting a certain religion, then I am completely in agreement with you. Which is why i said originally "taught responsibly". But keeping it out for no other reason than just that, is as ignorant as a school keeping out studying evolution for the same reasons.

Sack

Gayle in MD
08-31-2008, 01:40 PM
Creationism has no place in any classroom other then a religious enterprise, church or school of some kind. It is unconstitutional to teach religion in a public school classroom. None of what I wrote says anything about preventing people from studying anything they are interested in studying. I have spent a fair share of my own time studying the religious view of various religions. Creationism is not a science, and therefore, does not meet the standard as an appropriate subject in science classes in publicn schools.

Gayle in Md.

sack316
08-31-2008, 02:10 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Creationism is not a science, and therefore, does not meet the standard as an appropriate subject in science classes in publicn schools.

Gayle in Md. </div></div>

I think you are confused. I said social sciences... science is not exclusive to things like biology or chemistry, but rather a broad range of various studies. If you read my post I say, social sciences... which to save you some searching is defined as "academic disciplines concerned with the study of the social life of human groups and individuals including anthropology, economics, geography, history, political science, psychology, social studies, and sociology"... to which it falls into quite well

Sack

Gayle in MD
08-31-2008, 02:15 PM
I didn't misunderstand, and it does not fit into any of those at all. I had mentioned that Palin wanted it taught in science classes, if you recall, along with evolution, which was in fact a scientific study.

Creationism is a religious doctrine, nothing more, nothing less.
It also has nothing to do with any of the subjects you have listed. Nor is it appropriate to be taught in public schools, according to The Constitution Of The United states Of America.'

Organized religion has not, historically, brought about social tolerance, either.

However, a good book on the subject, is Joseph Campbells, The Power Of Myth which provides an excellent opportunity to study religious dogma, myth and the reasons why mankind, well, some of mankind, locks onto such myth.

Gayle in Md.

sack316
08-31-2008, 02:29 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
It also has nothing to do with any of the subjects you have listed.
Gayle in Md. </div></div>

Sociology: Areas studied in sociology range from the analysis of brief contacts between anonymous individuals on the street to the study of global social interaction. Numerous fields within the discipline concentrate on how and why people are organized in society, either as individuals or as members of associations, groups, and institutions

Anthropology: the study of humanity. Cultural anthropology in particular has emphasized cultural relativity and the use of findings to frame cultural critiques. (i.e. creationism is part of religion... religion I would say is part of all cultures... seeing how this would fit in?)

I could go on. My point is not that it be taught as fact per say, but as a part of culture and humanity. Creationism, as part of religions, and religions, as such an influential part of man and the basis of nations, wars, ethics, human interaction, and culture... well regardless of one's personal feelings, how could anyone say it not part of "social sciences". We're proving it right now.

Sack

cheesemouse
08-31-2008, 02:53 PM
Here Sack316 is an index of the court case so far that deal with your question. If your serious about your 'social studies' idea perhaps you will find the loop hole in the all ready adjudicated issues then you can go to your local school board and see if your boat floats....have fun.

...of course I really don't expect you to read these cases, that would be just to much to ask.

http://atheism.about.com/library/decisions/indexes/bldec_CreationismIndex.htm

Gayle in MD
08-31-2008, 03:04 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anthropology: the study of humanity. Cultural anthropology in particular has emphasized cultural relativity and the use of findings to frame cultural critiques. (i.e. creationism is part of religion... religion I would say is part of all cultures... seeing how this would fit in?)
</div></div>

(I.E. creationism is part of religion? Religion is part of all cultures. <span style="color: #000066">No, it isn't </span>


Cultural relativity and the use of findings to frame cultural critiques, are the same thing as creationism? You are taking several different subjects and treating them as one. You are saying that religion, in general, is the same thing as cultural relativity, and that creationism is the same thing as religion. That simpley isn't so.

Creationism is one belief system, which is only bleieved by a few of the many religions in the world. It holds no specific scientific merit, at all. My statement was bout a women who is running for the VP slot, who thinks that Creationisn deserves the same merit, as the Theory of Evolution.

My opinion is that anyone who believes that, is not someone that I want running my country, or next in line to run my country.

I am not going to argue with you about the vast differences between culture, culturalism, sociology, religious dogma, and creationism. They are each different subjects. Of ecah, only one is based upon pure dogma, myth, and faith, and that is creationism. It is like when they give you a picture of three vegetables, and a dog, and ask you which picture doesn't fit into the block with the rest!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/shocked.gif

Chopstick
08-31-2008, 03:14 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
LOL, she is under investigation. This says it all.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com//gadgets/slideshows/249/webpix//slide_249_4.jpeg

Q </div></div>

Yep. I've been checking her out.

PS~~ That's me in the bear suit. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

LWW
08-31-2008, 03:18 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
(I.E. creationism is part of religion? Religion is part of all cultures. <span style="color: #000066">No, it isn't </span>


Cultural relativity and the use of findings to frame cultural critiques, are the same thing as creationism? You are taking several different subjects and treating them as one. You are saying that religion, in general, is the same thing as cultural relativity, and that creationism is the same thing as religion. That simpley isn't so.

Creationism is one belief system, which is only bleieved by a few of the many religions in the world. It holds no specific scientific merit, at all. My statement was bout a women who is running for the VP slot, who thinks that Creationisn deserves the same merit, as the Theory of Evolution.

My opinion is that anyone who believes that, is not someone that I want running my country, or next in line to run my country.

I am not going to argue with you about the vast differences between culture, culturalism, sociology, religious dogma, and creationism. They are each different subjects. Of ecah, only one is based upon pure dogma, myth, and faith, and that is creationism. It is like when they give you a picture of three vegetables, and a dog, and ask you which picture doesn't fit into the block with the rest!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/shocked.gif </div></div>
Lady, you are even farther off base than usual.

Nearly every religion believes in the creation.

As a matter of fact, the dirty little secret of the Big Bang theory is that it was developed by a Catholic priest and requires a miracle at the moment of creation.

Now, before someone jumps in, please don't insult yourself by claiming that when all three dimensions of space PLUS time PLUS all the matter in the universe being non existent and then springing into existence in far less than an instant wasn't a miracle.

LWW

PRQL8R
08-31-2008, 04:22 PM
Religious Study is actually offered in a number of schools... and there are those of course who abuse this in their attempt to push their own religious dogma. However, the responsible ones simply present somewhat of a topography of the world's major faiths, comparing and contrasting the different belief systems. The key thing here is that it's just and overall examination of these different faiths with no emphasis being placed on <u>any one of them as having a lock on the TRUTH </u>.

The problem with Palin's position is that her intent in having it taught in the schools is not in any...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> studying the people and why and how beliefs came about is a social science. </div></div>

...kind of sense, but rather having it taught as if it is in some way on the same provable/definable level as evolutionary theory... which most assuredly it is not.

With this sort of irresponsible educational policy Palin is definitley crossing a very inappropriate line. ...Bob

sack316
08-31-2008, 04:27 PM
alright, I can see you are gonna fail to even listen or to attempt to wrap your mind around that point in any way shape or form. I wouldn't expect you to agree, of course... but thought maybe you could see something that makes some kind of sense. So I won't bother any longer. And by the way, I am well aware of the court cases long before you googled and provided a link. In my partial education along the way i did study some law, as well as worked in two law firms, and as well was employed by the board of education. So you are correct in that I am not reading through the link you provided, but only because I only know of what you refer to, and not for the reasons you implied.

So my next alternative is to go to the gutter, and at least have some fun with this in that case /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif With that said, here goes. Only 6.6% of American women believe that God had no part in the process of the evolution or creation of man. Apparently that is a foolish view to you from what I can gather. And at the same time women will not be so foolish to fall for the trickery of McCain picking a female VP? Now that there is a toughy /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Sack

PRQL8R
08-31-2008, 04:42 PM
The difference between the left and the right has always been a pretty close 50/50 split... with the same pretty much being true here in Canada as well.

It's those pesky swing voters and the power to simply get people out to vote who are usually to apathetic too vote...

(SID!!... if you actually do have a favoured position... VOTE!!! )... remember I'm not talking about sex here /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Obama, unlike Mcain, is showing signs that he will strongly affect those swing voters in his direction and has the potential to bring out record numbers of new voters. Try as they might with Palin... she is probably going to be pretty much irrelevant in attracting those disgruntled Hillary votes as she would be as VP... even if her and McCain were to be elected. ...Bob

pooltchr
08-31-2008, 08:26 PM
Possibly, but it's also possible that she was brought in for the purpose of getting a good hold on the conservative base, most of whom, were not real happy with McCain. So if she is here to solidify the conservative base, and along the way, pick up a few radical feminist Hillary supporters, so much the better.

By the way, those who keep saying they don't want her anywhere near the red button need to consider this. She would be the first parent of an active duty armed forces member, deployed to a war zone, to hold that high of a position in Washington in as long as I can remember. Do you think a mother of a soldier would be too quick to send the troops to war?????????

Steve

Qtec
08-31-2008, 08:55 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Possibly, but it's also possible that she was brought in for the purpose of getting a good hold on the conservative base, most of whom, were not real happy with McCain. So if she is here to solidify the conservative base, and along the way, pick up a few radical feminist Hillary supporters, so much the better.

By the way, those who keep saying they don't want her anywhere near the red button need to consider this. She would be the first parent of an active duty armed forces member, deployed to a war zone, to hold that high of a position in Washington in as long as I can remember. Do you think a mother of a soldier would be too quick to send the troops to war?????????

Steve </div></div>

Jon Stewart and Colbert nail it. LOL (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x178734)

Palin is a joke and picking her is a cynical ploy. Its a kick in the face for the many more qualified Reps that were passed over by McCain.

Q..

BTW, for those who do not know the role of the VP.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">One dKos commenter answers Sarah’s question:

1. Leaves undisclosed location for the White House.

2. Tells the President what to do.

3. Orders Chief of Staff to obstruct a series of investigations.

4. Snarls a few times.

5. Returns to undisclosed location.

Heh. </div></div>

Gayle in MD
08-31-2008, 10:21 PM
I hope you aren't getting a case of early senility, friend. I did not provide any links to any court cases. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

I also do not think that subjects such as what one beleives about God, can be investigated through any kind of poll. The subject is far too complex to be answered in simple terms.

If, for example, you are talking about what women say when asked such a question, one would first have to ask "What Is God?" and that answer would have thousands of different interpretations. Hence, these kinds of statistics, so often used by those who subscribe to the theory that they are correct in assumming that their subjective interpretation of such a question, should be taught to all children, and taught side by side as an opposing view of evolution, are either stupid, dumb, narrow minded, or legally insane. From what I observe, I'd say they are afflicted with a bit of all three, but most compromised by the last.

Of course, that is only my opinion. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

PRQL8R
09-01-2008, 11:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Possibly, but it's also possible that she was brought in for the purpose of getting a good hold on the conservative base, most of whom, were not real happy with McCain. So if she is here to solidify the conservative base, and along the way, pick up a few radical feminist Hillary supporters, so much the better.

<span style="color: #3333FF"> Not ver likely... either way</span>

By the way, those who keep saying they don't want her anywhere near the red button need to consider this. She would be the first parent of an active duty armed forces member, deployed to a war zone, to hold that high of a position in Washington in as long as I can remember. Do you think a mother of a soldier would be too quick to send the troops to war?????????

Steve </div></div>

<span style="color: #3333FF"> So the rational to vote for McCain/Palin is that he is likely to die in office so that she will then be able to execise some cautious military influence??? Cause McCain dying is the <u>only</u> way she likely to have <u>any</u> influence in a McCain Presidency. ...Bob</span>

mike60
09-03-2008, 11:40 AM
Palin brings nothing to the table. No intelligent voter would elect her to anything. Alaska has been electing scum for ever, Ted Stevens ring a bell?

In Alaska votes are bought with oil royalty checks. Screw 'em as long as they stay up there who cares?

miguel james kopp doing forever as some guy's bitch

Gayle in MD
09-03-2008, 11:59 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
By the way, those who keep saying they don't want her anywhere near the red button need to consider this. She would be the first parent of an active duty armed forces member, deployed to a war zone, to hold that high of a position in Washington in as long as I can remember. Do you think a mother of a soldier would be too quick to send the troops to war?????????

Steve
</div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">She thinks that the war is a mission from God! That alone should exclude her from consideration. We don't need another president who thinks they're taking orders from God to go kill people. Let them go join up with alQaeda! They're just as crazy!</span>

pooltchr
09-03-2008, 06:42 PM
Do people who have faith in a higher power unnerve you that much?

Steve

Gayle in MD
09-03-2008, 08:24 PM
They do when they think God is telling them to launch wars, and kill people, like your boy Bush, and the Radical Islamists!

Qtec
09-04-2008, 04:30 AM
Palin on Iraq (http://theworldwatch.com/razr86/sarah-palin-iraq-war-is-gods-plan)

Q

Gayle in MD
09-04-2008, 05:58 AM
You are so right! Obama is known for working across the isle. He championed the ethics reform bill, and managed to get the Senate behind something that hardly any of them wanted. He also work with Senator Lugar on securing Nukes that have been spread around the world, and several other important bills which have his fingerprints all over them.

McCain, OTOH, is known for his angry outbursts, sometime to the point of physical altercations, hence, several from his own party have stated that he should be ruled out as a Candidate on his emotional issues, alone.

No one will have a say in anything he decides to do, if he should ever get any power behind him, just like the decider we've been stuck with for the last eight years.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif