Gov. Palin speech -- a great political debut

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
GoIllini said:
FairEconomist said:
No VP nominee - ever - has needed to hide from the press while he/she "coordinated messages" with the nominee. Sarah Palin's not even ready to be interviewed by Bob Schaeffer - and people are trying to claim she's ready to negotiate with Putin, Hu, or Abdullah? And if she doesn't have at least a passing familiarity with the Rwanda genocide she should NEVER be in line for the White House EVER.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can support your first statement with facts.

According to the Meet the Press web site, today's interview with Biden is described as follows: "Exclusive! In his first Sunday morning interview since accepting the Democratic Party's nomination for Vice President, Sen. Joe Biden goes one-on-one with Tom Brokaw live from Wilmington, Delaware."

So Biden waited until the second weekend after he was nominated. If Palen interviews NEXT weekend, she will match that. If she waits another week, still plenty of time to hear her out and make a judgement, if that's what you need to do so. It sounds, however, like you've already made up your mind.
Click to expand...

Note the Sunday *morning* disclaimer. Biden had already been interviewed last week Sunday *evening* on 60 minutes. Didn't you watch it?
 
no_vaseline said:
Nude said:
Palin's first interview will be with ABC's Gibson later this week.
Click to expand...

Pray tell, when will she start taking reporters questions after speaches and political appearences?
Click to expand...
Shortly after you learn to spell "speeches" and her son is deployed (on 9/11 from what I remember from press coverage).

Edited to add: "appearances" :)
 
Nude said:
no_vaseline said:
Nude said:
Palin's first interview will be with ABC's Gibson later this week.
Click to expand...

Pray tell, when will she start taking reporters questions after speaches and political appearences?
Click to expand...
Shortly after you learn to spell "speeches" and her son is deployed (on 9/11 from what I remember from press coverage).

Edited to add: "appearances" :)
Click to expand...

If that's all you got to bring to my game I'm in good shape. You aren't going to stick it to me on my factual gaffes? As many words as a blowhard like me spews you should be able to find plenty.

Just for you I'll use MS Word on every post I make from now on.
 
Dear lord... what have these forums come to? Nude being a spell cop? Now I have seen it all, and hell is definitely freezing over. The next thing you you know, IR or I will be calling the housing bottom, which will also mean hell has completely froze over. :P
 
graphrix said:
Dear lord... what have these forums come to? Nude being a spell cop? Now I have seen it all, and hell is definitely freezing over. The next thing you you know, IR or I will be calling the housing bottom, which will also mean hell has completely froze over. :P
Click to expand...

He can't defend the indefensible. His only option is to point out I can't spell and hopefully discredit whatever I write/cite based on........Webster’s.
 
cdm said:
In regards to the comment about Obama and thinking: I think that Obama is an exceptionally bright guy. In fact, he is probably the smartest guy in the room in most instances. Historically, this has been problematic - the last three Presidents to be the "smartest guy" in the room have been Clinton, Nixon, and Hoover. People who are this smart usually have problems in three areas: They think that the rules do not apply to them, as they can argue a way around them (Clinton and Nixon); they prove that raw intelligence and common sense are not the same thing (Clinton): and they tend to be intellectually lazy (Hoover).
Click to expand...

Hahah. Thats a sublte joke right? You talk about people breaking the rules nad you leave out Bush? You realize Bush has ordered illegal wiretaps, has stomped on the constitution, has put partisan puppets in positions that arn't supposed to be partisan, lied about a war...and you're citing Clinton and Nixon as people who think the rules don't apply to them?
 
With more than 6 threads dedicated to Palin or McCain/Palin, I'm going to post this here because it seems to fit with the thread's intent:

...

Clinton voters, in particular, have received a political wake-up call they never expected. Having watched their candidate and their principles betrayed by the very people who are supposed to be the flame-holders for equal rights and fairness, they now look across the aisle and see a woman who represents everything the feminist movement claimed it stood for. Women can have a family and a career. We can be whatever we choose, on our own terms. For some, that might mean shooting a moose. For others, perhaps it's about shooting a movie or shooting for a career as a teacher. However diverse our passions, we will vote for a system that allows us to make the choices that best suit us. It's that simple.

...
Click to expand...
I realize that Tammy Bruce has fallen out of favor with some on the Left since she took on Patricia Ireland and lost, but she's always had my respect for being true to her beliefs as the political landscape has changed. The full piece can be read here. Please take the time to read it before trashing the quote =)
 
skek said:
.
Click to expand...

No, you're just too stupid to comprehend my point: I was invalidating what he said by proving that intelligence has nothing to do with thinking you can break rules.

I think the reason we "can't debate" politics here is because people like you either have low reading comprehension or a low IQ, though not mutualy exclusive.
 
Nude said:
With more than 6 threads dedicated to Palin or McCain/Palin, I'm going to post this here because it seems to fit with the thread's intent:

...

Clinton voters, in particular, have received a political wake-up call they never expected. Having watched their candidate and their principles betrayed by the very people who are supposed to be the flame-holders for equal rights and fairness, they now look across the aisle and see a woman who represents everything the feminist movement claimed it stood for. Women can have a family and a career. We can be whatever we choose, on our own terms. For some, that might mean shooting a moose. For others, perhaps it's about shooting a movie or shooting for a career as a teacher. However diverse our passions, we will vote for a system that allows us to make the choices that best suit us. It's that simple.

...
Click to expand...
I realize that Tammy Bruce has fallen out of favor with some on the Left since she took on Patricia Ireland and lost, but she's always had my respect for being true to her beliefs as the political landscape has changed. The full piece can be read here. Please take the time to read it before trashing the quote =)
Click to expand...

Her stance is the antithesis of feminism. She argues that "having a woman in the White House, and not as The Spouse, is a change whose time has come, despite the fact that some Democratic Party leaders have decided otherwise." So it seems that Palin's only merit is the fact that she is a woman. This is contrary to what a feminist believes in. A "true" feminist would argue that the most qualified person for the job should be nominated DESPITE being a woman. That is exactly why Hillary was such a compelling candidate. She is a woman that was undoubtedly qualified for the job. Only in her case she was criticized (mostly from the right) that she wouldn't be able to handle the presidency due to the fact that she is a woman.
 
green_cactus said:
A "true" feminist would argue that the most qualified person for the job should be nominated DESPITE being a woman. That is exactly why Hillary was such a compelling candidate. She is a woman that was undoubtedly qualified for the job. Only in her case she was criticized (mostly from the right) that she wouldn't be able to handle the presidency due to the fact that she is a woman.
Click to expand...
Undoubtedly, Clinton was the most qualified Democratic candidate, and yet the Democrats failed to nominate her. That wasn't because "the right" was critical of her, it was because the Democrats were critical of her. And then Obama refused to even consider her for the VP spot. But since the Democrats have nominated the LEAST qualified candidate, contrasting Palin's inexperience to be VP versus Obama's inexperience to be President is a losing strategy for the Democrats. So the attacks were instead focused on her gender politics rather than her qualifications and that is where the Democrats threw feminism under the bus: they want women in politics, as long as they agree with Dem policies. Tammy Bruce's point was that "true" feminism means fighting for women's ability to choose for themselves how far they go in life rather than be restricted by the glass ceiling, not just women who vote/run as Democrats.
 
Nude, I read Bruce's article and I get her point. But there is also a very large part of her life that she is ignoring if she continues to support Palin, and by default, the Republican Party.

Tammy Bruce is a lesbian. I have met her.

I'm not debating her absolute right to vote for the candidates of her choice, but I'd prefer a candidate that had the majority of my interests in mind, not just a few. To me, that screams Democratic Party.

I did a Google search trying to find out which books Palin allegedly tried to remove from the public library shelves....but there is so much garbage, I can't tell what's true and what isn't. If and when that story is confirmed (and it will be sooner than later I imagine), who wants to make a bet with me that some of the potentially banned books showed homosexuality in a positive light. Anyone ?

Oh, and since Obama's church made it into the spotlight.....it's time for Palin's church.

The headline reads Palin church promotes converting gays

Now answer me this. What self respecting lesbian would EVER champion, let alone vote for someone like Palin ? It baffles me.
 
Trooper said:
The headline reads Palin church promotes converting gays

Now answer me this. What self respecting lesbian would EVER champion, let alone vote for someone like Palin ? It baffles me.
Click to expand...

Promotes converting gays, as in, to christianity, or converting them to 'straight'? If the former...I don't see anything wrong with that (unless you think converting anyone is bad, in which case the gay part is irrelevant), though I can see why the later is quite offensive.
 
Trooper said:
Nude, I read Bruce's article and I get her point. But there is also a very large part of her life that she is ignoring if she continues to support Palin, and by default, the Republican Party.

Tammy Bruce is a lesbian. I have met her.

I'm not debating her absolute right to vote for the candidates of her choice, but I'd prefer a candidate that had the majority of my interests in mind, not just a few. To me, that screams Democratic Party.

I did a Google search trying to find out which books Palin allegedly tried to remove from the public library shelves....but there is so much garbage, I can't tell what's true and what isn't. If and when that story is confirmed (and it will be sooner than later I imagine), who wants to make a bet with me that some of the potentially banned books showed homosexuality in a positive light. Anyone ?

Oh, and since Obama's church made it into the spotlight.....it's time for Palin's church.

The headline reads Palin church promotes converting gays

Now answer me this. What self respecting lesbian would EVER champion, let alone vote for someone like Palin ? It baffles me.
Click to expand...

I agree with you Troop and as distasteful as the idea is (converting), I believe it is about political support, not ideals.

good luck

-bix
 
read the article 25.

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — Gov. Sarah Palin's church is promoting a conference that promises to convert gays into heterosexuals through the power of prayer.
 
Troop, I was fully aware that Tammy is gay. I'm also aware that there is an entire faction of the Republican party that is gay, yet still Republican. Neither you nor I completely agree with our preferred party's platform, yet we still tend to support those parties. If McCain and Palin were running an anti-gay marriage amendment, pro-life amendment, declare war on Iran tomorrow campaign I wouldn't be voting for them. As she put it:

Yes, both McCain and Palin identify as anti-abortion, but neither has led a political life with that belief, or their other religious principles, as their signature issue. Politicians act on their passions - the passion of McCain and Palin is reform. In her time in office, Palin's focus has not been to kick the gays and make abortion illegal; it has been to kick the corrupt and make wasteful spending illegal. The Republicans are now making direct appeals to Clinton supporters, knowingly crafting a political base that would include pro-choice voters.

emphasis added
Click to expand...
Let me be clear here, I am not trying to sway anyone's vote. Anyone who hasn't yet made up their mind probably won't bother trying to read a housing blog for their political information. I'm just interested in how the dynamic has changed since Palin was picked. For the first time in 24 years a woman is part of the ticket and yes, representing one side of the abortion issue, but also representing all the other issues that are gender specific (equal pay, sexual harrassment, etc.) that every American woman has to deal with today. Yet, rather than being embraced as a welcome addition to the national stage, she's been treated as a pariah by the party that is nominally for women's rights. That she has built her political career on non-gender issues tells me that she considers doing the right thing more important that doing the politically correct thing. In the end, I agree with Tammy Bruce: adding Palin to the ticket has changed the role of women in politics forever, win or lose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top