 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Popular Views on Palin
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Ebbie Date: 12 Oct 08 - 09:50 PM Yep. Rig is right- let's put Palin in the top spot so this country can become a Christian god-fearing nation with all the values you could possibly wish for - and some you wouldn't wish for in a hundred years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Riginslinger Date: 12 Oct 08 - 10:15 PM Putting Obama there would put you right smack into the same place--remember Reverend Wright? The difference is, nobody has to die first. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Alice Date: 12 Oct 08 - 10:17 PM Today, speaking in Ohio, Palin continued her divisive us-versus-them by asking the crowd who the "bad guys" are. Palin, good guys and bad guys, CNN news "For one thing, we know who the bad guys are, OK?" That statement elicited scattered shouts of "Obama!" throughout the crowd. " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: TIA Date: 12 Oct 08 - 10:28 PM We all want an elite pilot flying our plane, and an elite brain surgeon removing our tumor, and elite fighting men and women protecting the homeland..... But we don't want an elite leading the coutnry. We want a g-dropping, uneducated, uncurious, unread, flirty, juss-folks. WTF America? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Riginslinger Date: 12 Oct 08 - 11:00 PM TIA - I don't think that analogy works. The voter is stuck with the decision of - "Who is loyal to the people of the country?" And for a lot of us, it sure ain't the elite. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: dick greenhaus Date: 12 Oct 08 - 11:17 PM I think that the Troopergate report points out her concept of ethical leadership. Just imagine what she could so if she could have the IRS and FBI as resources for intimidating people she doesn't like. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Ebbie Date: 13 Oct 08 - 01:25 AM Elite is as Elite does, Rig, to coin a phrase. To me, the people who matter in this world are all elite in some fashion. I think that's true for all of us- elite people, by their very nature, are people who are special to us, not necessarily people who were born with the proverbial silver spoon - although I have no doubt but that some of them are elite. IMO, of course. I realize that my view is not the ruling one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 13 Oct 08 - 08:48 AM Well, I wouldn't want McCain flying the plane anyway, in the light of his flyiong record... And Palin would be too busy shooting out the window at anything on four legs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Amos Date: 13 Oct 08 - 09:50 AM Rig: Is your continuous effort to conflate Obama with Wright--and an inaccurate and distorted picture of Wright, at that--the product of disingenuousness, hypnotic mind control by demagogues, a shrinking of mental capacity, or just small-mindedness and bitter-heartedness on your part? Because it's really inaccurate and --not to put too fine a point on it--stupid. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Riginslinger Date: 13 Oct 08 - 10:12 AM Amos - It's no effort of mine. He sat in the pew for 20 years with no help from me. But my larger problem with it is, I had hoped for better from the Democratic Party. If all we're going to get from both parties is more blathering idiots, it would be better to back the Republican because that way I think the public will see the light sooner. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Amos Date: 13 Oct 08 - 10:20 AM It is an effort of yours, my friend. You are responsible for taking up a partial set of facts and condensing them into a biased and inaccurate fusillade of one-liners. Pontius PIlate does a better job of washing his hands than you can here--ya gotta answer up for your own choices and reasons. For example, no-one in their right mind would accuse Barack Obama of being a blithering idiot. He doesn't do blithering, unlike your friend W and MS Palin and to some degree McCain. And he is anything but an idiot. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Riginslinger Date: 13 Oct 08 - 10:42 AM That's blathering! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Amos Date: 13 Oct 08 - 10:51 AM Mebbe so. And your mindless parrot-headed recitations are blithering. All in a days kafluffle. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Amos Date: 13 Oct 08 - 10:58 AM IN THE scheme of things -- that is to say, in the larger context of a financial meltdown -- the special counsel's report concluding that Sarah Palin engaged in an unethical abuse of power in trying to have her former brother-in-law fired as an Alaska state trooper is a relatively minor event. But the report nonetheless offers a revealing and relevant portrait of the governor. It shows her and her husband pursuing a personal vendetta against the trooper, Mike Wooten, despite repeated warnings that they were impermissibly intruding into internal -- and already concluded -- disciplinary issues. Likewise, Ms. Palin's decision to repudiate her earlier pledge to cooperate fully with the inquiry does not offer assurance about how she would conduct herself as vice president. The McCain-Palin campaign's response to the inquiry has been internally contradictory -- simultaneously assailing the investigation as a partisan witch hunt and mischaracterizing as vindication the report's finding that Ms. Palin was within her rights as governor to remove the commissioner who had refused to act against her former brother-in-law. The amount of attention that the newly elected governor, her husband and her subordinates -- her personnel director, attorney general and chief of staff, among others -- devoted to getting Mr. Wooten fired was extraordinary. Within a few weeks of Ms. Palin's inauguration, her newly installed public safety commissioner, Walter Monegan, was summoned to a meeting with the governor's husband, Todd Palin, at which the "First Gentleman" pressed Mr. Monegan to reexamine the already concluded disciplinary case against Mr. Wooten. The governor herself called Mr. Monegan, e-mailed him and met with him in person to discuss her unhappiness with Mr. Wooten's continuation on the force. Equally extraordinary was the Palins' persistence in the face of warnings that their intervention could run afoul of personnel rules and risked creating precisely the kind of public uproar that ensued. Ms. Palin's refusal to cooperate with investigator Stephen Branchflower reflects poorly on her. So, too, does Ms. Palin's mischaracterization of the report as finding that there was "no unlawful or unethical activity on my part" and "no abuse of authority at all in trying to get Officer Wooten fired." In fact, Mr. Branchflower concluded that Ms. Palin "knowingly permitted a situation to continue where impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda, to wit: to get Trooper Michael Wooten fired." It's unfortunate that Ms. Palin does not understand -- or chooses not to acknowledge -- the seriousness of the mess she helped create. (WaPo) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Riginslinger Date: 13 Oct 08 - 11:14 AM Of course, she would not have refused to cooperate if she hadn't been running for VP. She was simply putting country before self in this case. It was important to prevent Obama and his cronies from taking over the US government. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Amos Date: 13 Oct 08 - 11:25 AM Cronies? What a slanted expression. "Taking over"???? How about "being elected to"? Do you not hear the bias in your own choice of angry terms? It is far more important to keep Ms Palin off the seat of power than ity is to prevent Obama from ascending by popular election. She has already demonstrated a certain looseness with regard to the constraints of power. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: beardedbruce Date: 13 Oct 08 - 11:30 AM Cronies? What a slanted expression. I seem to recall "cronies" being used by Amos, in description of those whom he opposes.... More double standard, I guess. Can we just have the ballots printed up with the "correct" candidate already chgecked off, to avoid the bother of having anyone actually vote? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Amos Date: 13 Oct 08 - 11:35 AM First rate idea, there, Bruce!! I am sure Rig will concur. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: beardedbruce Date: 13 Oct 08 - 11:37 AM I had thought the Democrats were already printing them... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 13 Oct 08 - 12:27 PM "She was simply putting country before self in this case." Now that really Assuming it's not heavy irony, but that wouldn't really seem consistent with Rig's ernthusiasm for the lady. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: dick greenhaus Date: 13 Oct 08 - 01:11 PM actually, what she was doing was abusing power, covering up and lying. Obviously good for the country. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Bill D Date: 13 Oct 08 - 01:14 PM I don't understand, Rig....when Wright's rhetoric got mean, Obama disowned him and left that church. Now, will you try to explain why McCain was soliciting help from John Hagee, whose views are more radical than Wright's? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Amos Date: 13 Oct 08 - 02:23 PM Sarah Palin has insisted that a formal investigation into the "Troopergate" controversy in Alaska has exonerated her of "unlawful or unethical" activity. The Republican vice-presidential pick has told critics to read the report by an investigator appointed by the State Legislative Council to determine whether she had abused her power as Alaska governor to push for the firing of a state trooper formerly married to her sister. But the report's finding that Palin breached the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act is very clear. The Facts Within weeks of becoming governor of Alaska in November 2006, Sarah Palin began putting pressure on state officials to fire her former brother-in-law, Mike Wooten, who was embroiled in a bitter child custody dispute with Palin's sister Molly. She made her wishes clear in e-mails to her newly installed public safety commissioner, Walter Monegan. Monegan resisted the pressure from Palin and her husband to fire Trooper Wooten, and was dismissed in July 2008 on the grounds of poor performance and not being "a team player." On August 1, the Republican-dominated Alaska legislature hired an independent investigator, Stephen Branchflower, to look into the matter. The Branchflower report, published on Friday and available in full here, concluded that Palin had the legal right to fire Monegan. However, it also concluded that Palin had "abused her power by violating Section 39.52.119(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act," which is worded as follows: The legislature reaffirms that each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust. The Branchflower report concludes that Palin "knowingly permitted a situation to continue where impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda, to wit: to get Trooper Michael Wooten fired." It adds that she and her husband Todd attempted "to get Trooper Wooten fired for personal family related reasons." Subordinates were placed in the situation where they had to choose whether to "please a superior or run the risk of facing that superior's displeasure," a clear conflict of interest. According to Branchflower, the Palins declined to cooperate fully with his investigation. The governor's lawyer, Thomas Van Flein, has depicted the Branchflower report as a partisan attempt to "smear the governor by innuendo." Van Flein argues that Branchflower's findings are flawed because Palin received "no monetary benefit" from her actions. The Pinocchio Test Whether or not the Branchflower report -- which was launched by a bipartisan committee -- was a partisan smear job is debatable. What is not debatable is that the report clearly states that she violated the State Ethics Act. Palin has reasonable grounds for arguing that the report cleared her of "legal wrongdoing," since she did have the authority to fire Monegan. But it is the reverse of the truth to claim that she was cleared of "any hint of any kind of unethical activity." From WaPo's FactCheck section. Looks like her truth quotient is not as high as one might wish for a senior exec... A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Richard Bridge Date: 13 Oct 08 - 02:36 PM Isn't it odd that those like Rig, who firmly oppose any sort of affirmative action, are so resolute to defend the Rebublican's first official hiring of the mentally handicapped. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Riginslinger Date: 13 Oct 08 - 02:42 PM All they would have to do to fix affirmative action, Richard, would be to make it economically based instead of race based. By continuing along the lines they are going now, the create more problems than they solve. And I am certainly not one to defend Republicans. Ronald Reagan really was mentally handicapped, and that's basically how we got into the mess we're in today. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: dick greenhaus Date: 13 Oct 08 - 05:36 PM "All they would have to do to fix affirmative action, Richard, would be to make it economically based instead of race based" Oddly enough, Tig, that's what Obama proposed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 13 Oct 08 - 05:40 PM ""Isn't it odd that those like Rig, who firmly oppose any sort of affirmative action, are so resolute to defend the Rebublican's first official hiring of the mentally handicapped."" I thought Geedub was the first! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Riginslinger Date: 13 Oct 08 - 06:12 PM "Oddly enough, Tig, that's what Obama proposed." Yeah, but he proposes something different every twenty minutes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Alice Date: 13 Oct 08 - 09:28 PM http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1849383,00.html?xid=feed-cnn-to Palin's Blown Opportunity on Energy Independence Sarah Palin promises to focus on energy independence if she becomes vice president, a mission she claims to be uniquely qualified for as governor of an oil and gas-producing state. snip At no time did Palin or her government cite the desire to preserve Alaskan gas for the lower 48 states. The Sempra terminal began operations just four months after Palin announced unconditional support for the Marathon and ConocoPhillips request and a month before DOE approved their plans to export gas to Asia. The development of the Mexico plant was well-known and much anticipated in energy circles. According to Senator Ron Wyden, the Alaskan gas slated for Asia between 2009 and 2011 could meet the annual consumption of 1.4 million American families. The Oregon Democrat has accused Palin of a "major contradiction" between her support for gas exports and campaign emphasis on more drilling to slake US energy needs. "It's pretty outrageous to scare Americans about energy shortages while she has been approving export of billions of cubic feet of natural gas that could be providing energy to homes in Alaska and the lower 48 states," he said. snip http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1849383,00.html?xid=feed-cnn-to |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Ron Davies Date: 13 Oct 08 - 09:30 PM "...every twenty minutes..." So, Mr. Hypocrite, what is your evidence for this particular smear? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Little Hawk Date: 13 Oct 08 - 09:31 PM Still at it, Mr Snide? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Riginslinger Date: 13 Oct 08 - 09:46 PM "So, Mr. Hypocrite, what is your evidence for this particular smear?" Ron - You need to invest in a stop-watch! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Amos Date: 13 Oct 08 - 10:19 PM Rig: Your bloviating generalization is unfounded. If you use the brains God gave you, you will find his principles have been straightforwardly consistent since he first stepped forward, and his programmatic suggestions have evolved based on new conditions, as an intelligent person's does. Your innuendos belong innurendo. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Greg F. Date: 14 Oct 08 - 09:31 AM ..the brains God gave you... In this case, verdict not proven. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Amos Date: 14 Oct 08 - 09:37 AM I was stipulating, I grant you. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Riginslinger Date: 14 Oct 08 - 10:31 AM "If you use the brains God gave you, you will find his principles have been straightforwardly consistent since he first stepped forward,..." Nobody gave me nothin', but you're refeging to the pledge to take campaign matching funds, I suspect. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: dick greenhaus Date: 14 Oct 08 - 11:05 AM Obama stated his position in a response to a question about his daughters' eligibility for affirmative action. He's never changed that position, as far as I know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Donuel Date: 14 Oct 08 - 11:16 AM "nobody gave me nothin" Rig, I'll give you somthing but then again I am not a nobody. What would you like? Or would you like somebody to give you nothing instead? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Amos Date: 14 Oct 08 - 12:49 PM Rig: The figure of speech was not meant literally, and has nothing to do with your adamantine opposition to theism, but more to do with your adamantine opposition to reason, logic, and ordinary wisdom about people. Obama made a smart move when he changed his position about funding constraints. It was a successful change. More power to him. When campaign finance reform occurs, if it ever does, the game will change. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Riginslinger Date: 14 Oct 08 - 12:53 PM If he would renege on that, he would renege on everything else he says. That's what makes him such a poor choice for president. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Charley Noble Date: 14 Oct 08 - 12:53 PM Meanwhile, there a report out on MSNBC that her newly constructed family home in Wasilla was the beneficiary of "in kind donations" from a major building supplier that was subsequently awarded a major contract for a $20 million sports arena. Maybe she learned something from Sen. Stevens. There's nothing like combining the personal goodies with the public good! I don't think anyone has mentioned this Salon.com investigation yet. Charley Noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Charley Noble Date: 14 Oct 08 - 01:03 PM Correction on above post; it was The Village Voice not Salon.com that did this story and the total cost of the sports arena was $12 million. Here a link to the story: click here for report Charley Noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Richard Bridge Date: 14 Oct 08 - 05:26 PM It seems to me that an intelligent person may alter their view based on rational argument an to oppose that thesis is dinosaurism. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Richard Bridge Date: 14 Oct 08 - 05:28 PM Oh, oops, sorry, Palin does not believe in dinosaurs, they are not listed in th bible as created by God which makes them either the creatures of the devil or fantasies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Little Hawk Date: 14 Oct 08 - 06:20 PM They're not listed in the Bible at all, Richard, unless you count the phrase "there were giants in those days". (Some Christians do use that line to say, "See! The Bible does refer to the dinosaurs. They're really stretching when they do that.) There are a great many things which are not spoken of in the Bible. This doesn't prove that they are not from God or anything else, and it doesn't prove anything about the Bible either...it just indicates that they are not spoken of. You want to know why? Because the men who wrote the various stuff that is in the Bible wrote about the things they either knew firsthand...or had heard about...and they certainly had not heard about dinosaurs...nor had anyone else until quite recently in history. For instance, if you had spoken to someone in the Elizabethan age he would not have had a clue about dinosaurs, but he would have definitely heard of dragons and other mythical monsters of that sort. People write about stuff they know about and are concerned about. The Bible was written by people of a certain historical era, and they wrote about the things they knew about and were concerned about. This did not include dinosaurs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 14 Oct 08 - 06:31 PM America's definitely not in the Bible. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Amos Date: 14 Oct 08 - 06:57 PM I think your proposition holds no water, Rig. It is a hypotheical dub-over generated by some FUD that you swallowed somewhere along the line, that you have never faced squarely. ANd that hypothesis is just as grounded in firm fact as yours. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: frogprince Date: 14 Oct 08 - 09:44 PM I think I've got it! I've figured out Rig's logic, and he just may be right. Start with the premise that all politicians are liars: McCain is promising to continue to minimize taxes for the very rich, while continuing the war in Iraq until we achieve a clear victory; a sure fire recipe for driving us the last quarter mile into bankruptcy. Obamma is promising to make the very rich pay at least a somewhat more credible share of taxes. Since each of them will do the opposite of what he promises, we're screwed if we elect Obama. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: Bee Date: 14 Oct 08 - 09:58 PM You people need an anti-serious break. Point and click. Open main door more than once. Explore. ;-D http://palinaspresident.com/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin From: akenaton Date: 15 Oct 08 - 03:20 AM Is that what political satire looks like in the USA? I can just imagine what the other set of morons could accomplish with Mr Obama sitting in the Presidents chair. |
