BS: Popular Views on Palin

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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: Amos
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 09:33 PM

The alternative is a far better choice. Intelligence, balance, and an understanding of diplomacy. Almost every major position McCain has that is gaining any traction is lifted from Obama's policy book.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 09:00 PM

What ever she did, or did not do, the only hope now is to support her and McCain. Look at the alternative.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 08:34 PM

groan... The Guardian is right.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Amos
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 07:30 PM

Friday October 3 2008
Guardian.co.UK
Flirting her way to victory

Sarah Palin's farcical debate
performance lowered the standards for both female candidates and US
political discourse. At least three times last night, Sarah Palin,
the adorable, preposterous vice-presidential candidate, winked at
the audience. Had a male candidate with a similar reputation for
attractive vapidity made such a brazen attempt to flirt his way into
the good graces of the voting public, it would have universally
noted, discussed and mocked. Palin, however, has single-handedly so
lowered the standards both for female candidates and American
political discourse that, with her newfound ability to speak in
more-or-less full sentences, she is now deemed to have performed
acceptably last night. By any normal standard, including the ones
applied to male presidential candidates of either party, she did
not. Early on, she made the astonishing announcement that she had no
intentions of actually answering the queries put to her. 'I may not
answer the questions that either the moderator or you want to hear,
but I'm going to talk straight to the American people and let them
know my track record also, she said.

And so she preceded, with an almost surreal disregard for the
subjects she was supposed to be discussing, to unleash fusillades of
scripted attack lines, platitudes, lies, gibberish and grating
references to her own pseudo-folksy authenticity. It was an
appalling display. The only reason it was not widely described as
such is that too many American pundits don't even try to judge the
truth, wisdom or reasonableness of the political rhetoric they are
paid to pronounce upon. Instead, they imagine themselves as
interpreters of a mythical mass of 'average Americans' whom they
both venerate and despise. In pronouncing upon a debate, they don't
try and determine whether a candidate's responses correspond to
existing reality, or whether he or she is capable of talking about
subjects such as the deregulation of the financial markets or the
devolution of the war in Afghanistan .

The criteria are far more
vaporous. In this case, it was whether Palin could avoid utterly
humiliating herself for 90 minutes, and whether urbane commentators
would believe that she had connected to a public that they see as
ignorant and sentimental. For the Alaska governor, mission
accomplished. There is indeed something mesmerising about Palin, with
her manic beaming and fulsome confidence in her own charm. The force
of her personality managed to slightly obscure the insulting
emptiness of her answers last night. It's worth reading the
transcript of the encounter, where it becomes clearer how bizarre
much of what she said was. Here, for example, is how she responded
to Biden's comments about how the middle class has been
short-changed during the Bush administration, and how McCain will
continue Bush's policies:

'Say it ain't so, Joe, there you go again pointing backwards again.
You preferenced [sic] your whole comment with the Bush
administration. Now doggone it, let's look ahead and tell Americans
what we have to plan to do for them in the future. You mentioned
education, and I'm glad you did. I know education you are
passionate about with your wife being a teacher for 30 years, and
god bless her. Her reward is in heaven, right? ... My brother, who I
think is the best schoolteacher in the year, and here's a shout-out
to all those third graders at Gladys Wood Elementary School , you
get extra credit for watching the debate.'

Evidently, Palin's pre-debate handlers judged her incapable of
speaking on a fairly wide range of subjects, and so instructed to
her to simply disregard questions that did not invite memorised
talking points or cutesy filibustering. They probably told her to
play up her spunky average-ness, which she did to the point of
shtick - and dishonesty. Asked what her Achilles heel is -- a
question she either didn't understand or chose to ignore -- she
started in on how McCain chose her because of her 'connection to the
heartland of America . Being a mom, one very concerned about a son
in the war, about a special needs child, about kids heading off to
college, how are we going to pay those tuition bills?' None of
Palin's children, it should be noted, is heading off to college. Her
son is on the way to Iraq, and her pregnant 17-year-old daughter is
engaged to be married to a high-school dropout and self-described
'fuckin' redneck'. Palin is a woman who can't even tell the truth about the most quotidian and public details of her own life, never
mind about matters of major public import. In her only
vice-presidential debate, she was shallow, mendacious and phoney.

What kind of maverick, after all, keeps harping on what a maverick
she is? That her performance was considered anything but a farce
doesn't show how high Palin has risen, but how low we all have sunk.

Copyright Guardian Newspapers Limited 2008

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Amos
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 07:12 PM

Ake:

I am not expecting magic fixes or false dawns. I am expecting Barack Obama to do a far better job of wrestling with our national conundrum than any of his opponents could have done. No-one is promising rose gardens. He simply offers a saner voice and a slightly more honest one.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 05:50 PM

The people round where I live and I suspect, round where you live, have been being "realistic" for a century. That century has ultimately given us a bagfull of wars and a ten year winter stretching ahead of us..if we're lucky

Time for some unreality I think...believe in the unbelievable!


I know what you write....and I judge what I see....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Alice
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 05:36 PM

In the year 2008 I am being realistic.
The only two choices of an elected president we have are between the Democratic and the Republican candidates.
All I've done in my life to promote alternative energy, unions and the rest have been working for change.
You don't know me, so stop judging me.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 05:33 PM

Well how do you expect to get change from a mouthpiece of corporate America.
Put your energy into supporting someone who has the will to provide real change

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Alice
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 05:31 PM

Just because an American voter doesn't want the Republicans to control the Presidency after this election does not mean they think there is some magic the Democrats have. You are projecting your own misconceptions about other people whom you don't really know (like projecting your misconceptions onto me).

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Alice
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 05:28 PM

You are wrong, Ake. I'm not "taken in" by anything.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 05:24 PM

I think you're wrong on this one Hawk, as far as the UK was concerned this was "Blairs War"...nothing to do with oil on this side of the pond. Glory and political capital was the prize for Mr Blair, and to that end he single handedly convinced a craven Labour party to go with the American adventure.

There are distinct similarities between the euphoria surrounding Blair before and during his first and second term and the cheerleading of folks like Alice, Amos,and many others here who seem to have been completely taken in by the two Party "contest"

Most in the UK saw Blair as a charismatic leader for the left, who would bring a fairer "changed" society, only the old Labour dinosaurs,the "commies" and anarchists saw through him and witnessed such sleaze and hypocricy that I am sure Labour will never rule the UK again.

We must stop hailing all these false dawns...and Obama is indeed another false dawn...and start to realise that there will be no magic fix for either of our countries.   Real change will involve pain and hardship, words that Obama, McCain or Brown dare not utter, they will just carry on with the show, re-arrange the scenery ,alter the dialogue, but underneath it will be the same old show ....and we as ever, the paying customers....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 03:54 PM

"The funny thing is the way sometimes a person can start off saying both sides are pretty bad, but that one is marginally better, so they'll go with that. And before you know it, they're saying their chosen side is great and the other is unspeakably awful."


                  Yes, that is a problem. If you think one side might be just marginally better than the other, or even if the other party thinks the one side is wonderful and you do not, once you voice an opinion, you are attacked. If you try to defend yourself, you are attacked again, and then you feel like you have to say something really damaging to the side the other person is defending.
                  The only sure fire way to avoid this is to keep your mouth shut in the first place.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Alice
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 03:28 PM

Executive Experience

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 03:24 PM

Katie Couric was pretty slimy in her interview with Palin,

You mean she shouldn't have treated her with kid gloves the way she did?

...............

The funny thing is the way sometimes a person can start off saying both sides are pretty bad, but that one is marginally better, so they'll go with that. And before you know it, they're saying their chosen side is great and the other is unspeakably awful.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 03:07 PM

Which end is that?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Stringsinger
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 02:57 PM

Sarah Palin: The face of American fascism

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Amos
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 02:36 PM

Rig:

If I did not believe you were just trolling with your warped sense of humor, I would really be ashamed of you.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Alice
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 02:17 PM

Now Iraq is making deals to sell their oil to China.
Nice plan, Dick Cheney.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 01:30 PM

mercy! Entire programs and websites, many of them relatively well-known conservatives, devoted to pointing out Palin's shortcomings, skirting of the law, dissembling in the face of challenge, and basic lack of relevant exerience...and STILL some folks..(I'm lookin' at YOU Rig..) repeating the mantra:

"But by God, she is a **Republican**, and I'll look the other way, invent amazing disclaimers and totally ignore facts & logic in hopes of keeping anyone with the word 'Republican' beside their name holding on to power!"

When Nixon was shown to be a crook, there STILL 20-30% 'standing by him' and refusing to admit anything.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 12:53 PM

Ake, the reason you went into Iraq was because Iraq is sitting on one hell of a lot of oil, and Saddam Hussein had made the decision to sell that oil for Euros, not dollars, and the USA was willing to invade Iraq over that little matter, and Britain and the USA have a common policy in regards to working as partners to control as much of the world's oil as they possibly can, specially in the Middle East.

That is why you invaded Iraq.

As you say, pure expediency...but not political expediency. Politically, it was disastrous for both Blair and Bush. No, it was economic and financial expediency that lay behind their actions.

Ironically, though, their war has cost so much money that it appears to have defeated its own purpose, at least in a financial sense...although they do have the desired control of the Iraqi oil now.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 12:41 PM

"I suppose we in the UK have already experienced Mr Obama in the shape of Mr Blair, who was elected on a platform of "change" and professed to be a "liberal".

"For our votes we were handed War, an ever increasing differential between rich and poor, and an economy in meltdown (and don't tell me Blair and Brown didn't know what was happening to the ecomomy)" Ake

Sounds MUCH more like Bush, Ake, than Obama.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 11:58 AM

Most of the time we don't even get what we vote for.
I suppose we in the UK have already experienced Mr Obama in the shape of Mr Blair, who was elected on a platform of "change" and professed to be a "liberal".

For our votes we were handed War, an ever increasing differential between rich and poor, and an economy in meltdown(and don't tell me Blair and Brown didn't know what was happening to the ecomomy)

If Blair had not been elected we wouild not have lost one young man or woman in Iraq, as the opposition Labour Party would have voted against the war almost to a man.

The reason we are in Iraq was Blairs love of political expediency
and in that Blair and Obama seem joined at the hip.
Blair and Obama also seem similar in their religious beliefs so remember don't wish too much for "change" as it may bnot be the sort of change you have in mind...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 11:29 AM

Hey! Somebody has to keep this discussion fair and balanced:-)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 11:28 AM

Ye gods, Rig, Listen to yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 11:20 AM

Yes, Katie Couric was pretty slimy in her interview with Palin, but she had to get her career back on track.

                Pitts is a lot like Obama. If he wasn't black nobody would have any idea who he is...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 11:17 AM

I want a president and a government that is smarter than I (Hey, that isn't asking so much!), I want people with intellect and integrity and far-ranging views in office. With Sarah Palin at the helm (gaaaah! I can't believe I'm saying that), the USA will have more of what we have today- and worse. "Moral Certainty", instilled and supported by Church is worse than what we have today.


"First, let's concede the obvious: Every politician wants to be seen as Everyman or woman. That's why every primary season brings the curious sight of millionaires in plaid shirts wandering through county fairs eating fried things on sticks. It's why Hillary Rodham Clinton hit that bar and Barack Obama went bowling, badly.

"In that sense, Sarah Six Pack is nothing new. The "g" droppin', moose shootin', eye-winkin' hockey mom has plenty of antecedents. But there's a difference. Those antecedents were smart, wonkish people pretending to be one of us. Palin "is" one of us.

"And by "us," I don't mean you, necessarily, or me. I mean the lowest common denominator us, the us of myth and narrative, the us of simple mind, the reactionary, ill-informed, impatient with complexity, utterly shallow us.

"You think that's mean? Go back and look at the Katie Couric interviews again. Or the Charlie Gibson interview. I don't know about you, but I want a vice president who can identify Supreme Court rulings she disagrees with. Or define the Bush Doctrine. Or name a newspaper. Or — heck, I'm not picky — construct an intelligible English language sentence."

Leonard Pitts Column on Palin

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 11:14 AM

We certainly don't. And we don't want Reverend Wright either.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Amos
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 10:39 AM

I would think that NO religious test should be imposed positive or negative, providing the candidate does not seek to inject his private religious views into his candidacy.
And there's the rub. If God sent Bush into Iraq, we sure don't want him in the White House.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 09:22 AM

Perfectly states, akenaton!

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 05:13 AM

I'm just waitin' for the first atheist President.

In fact would it not be a good thing if the "religious", of any denomination, were barred from standing for that office....on the grounds of insanity!

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: John O'L
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 02:34 AM

Like me. I'm a Buddho-Christo-Judo O'Lennainean of the Latter Day Nazoreans. That's me alright.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Oct 08 - 09:16 PM

The world would probably be better off if they would just be themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Oct 08 - 07:48 PM

I wasn't commenting on the "Jews for Jesus" cult, I was merely saying that a person can be a Jew and also believe in Jesus, and that it is not a conflict of interest if they do.

One can be a Jew and believe in just about anything, because to be a "Jew" is a cultural designation or an indication of whom one was born to, it is not necessarily a religious designation...or an indication of one's adhering to any particular belief system.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Oct 08 - 07:33 PM

That's a different issue from whether it's possible to be a Christian and a Jew at the same time. It pretty clearly is - for exampel there's a lady called Michele Guinness married to an Anglican vicar who's written a number of books about how this has worked out in her life. Nothing to do with any "Jews for Jesus" cult.

But this is rather drifting the thread a bit far

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Alice
Date: 11 Oct 08 - 04:59 PM

Jews for Jesus has a long history of fraud and deceit in recruitment. They often target people in elderly care facilities. Young Jews for Jesus cult members are trained to go in and befriend elderly Jewish people to join the group (and of course can get donations to support the cult that way). There is plenty of info about this group on the web if you just do some googling.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Oct 08 - 04:16 PM

Seems to me, Amos, that Jesus' theism was pretty much conventional for his time...he believe in the same God as the others. It was his ideas about proper human moral conduct that were quite unusual:

forgiveness
turning the other cheek
nonviolence
treating everyone the same...even if they weren't Jews
driving moneylenders out of the temple

It was those kind of radical ideas that set him apart from the Jewish authorities of his time, not his notions of theism. They were afraid he would upset the applecart, as it were.

He spoke on a level they were not prepared to deal with, and they chose to take some of his symbolic statements in a literal fashion...as fundamentalists always seem to do. I guess that subtlety escapes them. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Oct 08 - 03:59 PM

At the end of the day, you'd think they'd have more important things to worry about.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Amos
Date: 11 Oct 08 - 03:58 PM

The theism implicit in Jesus' teaching, which was molded and pressed like SPAM into the current model of Christian thought by the Apostles, their lagatees and descendants, is a distinct and clear-cut step away from Judaism, LH.

None of which has any bearing on the key issue, which is Sarah's religious aberrations have no business being entered into the business of the commons through governors or any other agents of the State.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Oct 08 - 03:38 PM

Amos, not that I am sponsoring the general views of people in Sarah Palin's church... I'm not...

But, consider this: Why can a person not "embrace Jesus and still remain true to Judaism"?

Jesus was a Jew. He was a member of the Jewish community in his own time, and he brought forth new and radical ideas which were intended to reform the Jewish church and society of the time. He was not trying to create a new religion, he was trying to reform the existing Jewish religion.

He failed because deeply conservative elements in that religion (fundamentalists of the time) were deely fearful of what he was trying to do and they had him tried and executed.

It is entirely possible to view Jesus' teachings AS the true heart of the Jewish faith if you see it that way, regardless of what the hell is the opinion of the presently ruling elders of the Jewish church.

Now, I personally know a lady who is Jewish, proud of it, and she has embraced Jesus, and she's just as liberal and modern in her outlooks as you are, Amos. She's no Christian fundamentalist. But she is a Jew and she does believe in Jesus as her personal saviour. Therefore, she is, technically, a "Jew for Jesus". I highly doubt that she shares Sarah Palin's worldview. My guess is that she would vote enthusiastically for Obama.

What are you going to do about it? ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Oct 08 - 03:31 PM

They better get Reverend Wright up there to straighten it all out.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: Amos
Date: 11 Oct 08 - 02:49 PM

"Two weeks before being tapped for the GOP ticket, Palin was in attendance at her current congregation, Wasilla Bible Church, when a leader of Jews for Jesus described terrorist attacks against Israel as "judgment" against those who have not accepted Christianity.
While a spokesman for Palin has said that Palin rejects this view, the McCain-Palin campaign has declined to say whether she shares her pastor's general support for Jews for Jesus, a group that tells people they can embrace Jesus and still remain true to Judaism.
Attention is also on Palin's involvement in a 2005 service at the Wasilla Assembly of God church. The video of the service shows a Kenyan pastor, Thomas Muthee, blessing Palin, and urging Jesus to protect her from "the spirit of witchcraft."
Critics are increasingly focusing on the speech that the clergyman gave before he brought Palin to the stage.
Muthee called for "God's kingdom" to "infiltrate" seven aspects of society, including economics.
"It is high time that we have top Christian businessmen, businesswomen, bankers, you know, who are men and women of integrity, running the economics of our nations," he said. "That's part and parcel of transformation. If you look at the Israelites, you know, that's how they won. And that's how they are, even today.""...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Palin
From: curmudgeon
Date: 11 Oct 08 - 12:33 PM

Here's
a new report , especially for Riggy, on how Palin has been spending taxpayers' money.