She’s originally from Idaho.
She sounds eerily like Principal Victoria.
Once again Hector the Librarian has shown himself incapable of honest and correct characterization of an opponent’s words…and those of his own side as well.
I don’t have time to go into it right now, but I couldn’t let this lying douchebag get away with trying to intimidate FoieGrasIsEvil for seeing the point of my post, a point which is perfectly obvious to anyone not so thoroughly invested in the combative ultra-leftie mindset of Hector the Librarian.
SA:
May I ask why you post on a message board, when you are so completely uninterested in dialog?
I didn’t “mischaracterize” your comments; I simply clarified them. You make this even clearer in the quote above, in which you quite unambiguously assert that the only thing you care about is keeping the reins of government out of the hands of “lefties” (as if Obama could be described, by any stretch of the imagination, as a “lefty”).
And it has everything to do with wanting to support a corrupt system, as the current Republican administration unarguably is; as well as starving the poor, since the practical result of the sort of conservative economic policies you champion, which has been clearly demonstrated in countless empirical studies, is an ever increasing rate of poverty.
With regard to extending an olive branch, I have no idea what you’re referring to. If anything, I’ve come back to the realization that berating and insulting other posters accomplishes nothing, and reflects poorly on myself as a member of the board. I apologize to others here (not to you) for having lost my temper.
Since you are immune to reason and matters of empirical fact, and since berating you only serves to antagonize you and make me feel dirty, I’ve decided for the time being that my only option is to give up on you and others like you. I’m addressing you directly at the moment just for the sport of it, but for the most part from here on out I will probably limit myself to posting commentary on the idiocy you spew, so as to help others understand exactly what you are your fellow nitwits are actually on about.
Regarding Reagan’s senility, see for example the following:
I personally remember seeing him come off his script during the opening of a baseball game, and sitting up in wonder as I realized he had become completely confused on national television. That was the first time I realized he had begun to be senile, and was certainly a year or more before he left office after his second term.
Couple more points:
The problem is that you almost never support your assertions with anything more than your own, apparently infallible, opinion. Evidence to the contrary is dismissed with a wave of the hand. Logical arguments against your views are ignored. For these reasons your opponents have lost all respect for you. You’re welcome to hold any little ole opinion or view your heart desires; but if you are going to post on a message board with the intent of discussing that opinion or view, you should reasonably be prepared to support it, and to take into account evidence or arguments that contradict it.
But the concept of democracy as the best form of government relies on the idea of an informed and rational public, electing leaders based on their own best interests.
You are being attacked here because you are fundamentally unable to support your arguments with evidence or logical argument, and are simultaneously impervious to the good will, counter-evidence, and arguments of those who disagree with you.
This is, in my opinion, the only way to rectify this situation. It won’t change you, of course, but defeating McCain and electing Obama may be the first baby-step towards correcting what currently ails the Republic.
OK, so could you comment on the issues discussed in this article?
Okay fine,
What makes you think she’s prepared to be a half a heart-beat away from the Presidency? Was it her 8 years as mayor of a small Hamlet or her 20 months as governor of one of the smallest states?
How do you respond to her abuses of power? Are you happy with that? Is that the way you think government officials should behave? Should they appoint people to $95,000 a year jobs because they were friends in high school? What about how she fired people she didn’t agree with?
Do you seriously think that this combination is a good one? Are you a supporter of Bush’s tactics?
I think we’ve seen this before: Intellectually incurious, Steadfastly assured in her current beliefs, shoot-from the hip mentality, placing loyalty above competence with regards to people she hires and finally being exteremly secretive (Why does she use private email for official government business). She’s literally Bush in a dress.
So yeah. That’s probably about the list of questions I’d like to ask.
I’ll contend that if you still like her in spite of these flaws, then you simply must be liking her because of her “image” which, while cool, is simply a front to a much more serious thing.
So this is probably why I think you like Palin, but I’d like to hear why.
In that case, she’s clearly ineligible, having already been twice elected to the office of President.
Hentor:
Thanks for the link. In all honesty I’m always skeptical of info coming from DK, and while there’s some interesting info at your link, it’s far from a smoking gun – at least to me.
Well, I do appreciate and share your general skepticism, and I don’t regard it as the smoking gun. However, for it not to be sufficient to establish the timing of the beginning of the program, the author has to be lying about speaking with the previous police chief, or he has to be lying about not charging rape victims. The author would also have to be lying about the budget figures showing the city paying for previous rape kits.
These things are certainly possible, granted. Certainly, other journalists should be able to follow up on the information presented there.
The line-item stuff is pretty telling, but we would need to find some way of proving that Palin knew specifically about why incidentals had suddenly sunk to such a low level, or that the decision to charge victims for rape kits had actually emanated from her office. She may simply have put pressure on the Sheriff to reduce costs, for example, and the decision to charge victims may have been made by him. (Judging from your source, rape-kits are included under rubric of “incidentals” and not listed as a specific item.)
I seem to remember reading somewhere that kits cost about $1500, and that there are on average between 1 and 3 registered rapes a year in Wasilla.
You think he’s correct that the Republicans deserve another 4 years because of this nebulous and entirely subjective assertion that liberals are full of hate and have single-handedly ruined America, despite the majority of the time being controlled by conservatives? Ignoring, of course, the hatred that the right has shown for gays, the poor, and anyone they perceive as a “terrorist,” regardless of the evidence. What legislation have the Democrats passed, or agendas have they pushed, that rival the Bush regime’s treatment of gays, for instance? Have Democrats questioned the patriotismof Republicans, as the right has done to anyone who opposed their war of aggression based on lies? Does the left call anyone with an education an elitist and sneer at them for being educated and articulate?
IOW, every bile-filled accusation made towards liberals can just as fittingly be applied to conservatives. I don’t see liberals as being full of hate, and just saying it doesn’t make it so. I do see a lot of hateful reverse-elitism emanating from the right, and have offered concrete examples of conservative policies that illustrate that hate. What have you got? People on a message board, frustrated by the rejection of facts and blind partisanship, losing their tempers and insulting you. Well, after 8 years of your supremacy, and the concommitant fallout for Americans and the world, I think we’re being pretty mild. Let’s see how civil and temperate you are if there’s 8 years of a Democrat-controlled White House and Congress. The whining and bitching will be deafening, I’m sure, and much nastier than what you’re getting now.
Finally, I wanted to start a new thread about this matter, but I’ll post it here because it is still related.
Palin does not have “just as much or more” experience than Obama. Can we get that straight? You could have possibly made that argument before Obama began running for the Presidency. Yes that is something that I can concede now that we have crossed that bridge. But you can’t have it both ways. These assholes who push this bullshit use the most creative accounting of Obama’s experience to push this bullshit.
“He’s only been a Senator for two years before he began running for President!”
This is bullshit and an misleading. So if you are going to discredit his experience in the Senate since January 2007, you aren’t going to credit him with running a national campaign for a year and a half? That’s a pretty big deal, and Obama has, through it all, kept his campaign running like a well-oiled machine. That’s kind of the reason why all this experience stuff is BS. He’s proven time and again that he’s capable of making good decisions. Not only that, he took down the Democratic establishment with his extremely careful and thoughtful management. His victory over Clinton was one of the most remarkable accomplishments of his career.
Trying to argue that Palin is his equal simply makes you look like a naive fool who does nothing more than spout Republican talking points. It’s literally right up there with the claims of her international experience by being close to Russia. I can hear both arguments coming out of Steve Doocy’s mouth on his ridiculous morning show.
The point is, Obama’s experience running a campaign is far more than anything Palin can match. You only make yourself out to be a fool by trying to convince people otherwise. It’s Steve Doocy-esque. And I love to mention Steve Doocy here because he’s the perfect example of the empty vessel used to deliver Republican talking points. He’s surrounded by like-minded thinkers who will agree with anything he says no matter how logically strained.
Well, I didn’t say that she herself initiated it. I said that it was a practice that was phased in under her administration. I don’t know of any evidence that she began the program herself.
The Right’s refusal to admit that (except accidentally into a hot mike, ala Peggy Noonan) is just plain partisanship. If Palin were the Democratic VP nominee, they’d be all over her, calling her an inexperienced, ludicrous tactic, which she is. But because she energizes their base and serves their purposes, they don’t care. This is hypocrisy, plain and simple. There’s no escaping it.
Wow…even has some history behind the book banning issue. thanks for the link.
Not me. He is the last. He leans heavily toward war as solving problems. We are destroying our economy with cutting taxes and waging war. It has to end fast. McCain is not healthy. That makes Palin in a spot she is not qualified for. But she talks aggressively. She casually talks of war with Russia over Georgia.
I am sure she can pray us into the right decision. She has been chosen.
Obama’s advisers would likely not be as warlike as the neocons spearheading the Repub party.
I never said any of that re: the Republicans, I only took from his post that the air of arrogant and pompous snarking towards anyone that dares to have a dissenting opinion from some of the liberals on this board is absurd. And it is.
I don’t much like the Republicans either, nor their tactics. Frankly, I view the recent history of the American two-party system as a shell game, with both sides spouting feel-good rhetoric that’s hardly ever in line with their true agendas, which don’t come out until they are elected. And I don’t think that either party is as different from the other as much as they try to claim, to me they are more alike than they are different, outside of a few core positions that likely will never be resolved, like abortion.
Right back atcha, tough guy.
I never once tried to tell you how to behave, or that you should behave like Obama…only that his unity message is in direct opposition to some folks behavior on here…including yours, not that you care, of course, as evidenced by your petty behavior.
As much as I hate to quote an actor, I think Matt Damon had a point that Palin is a Disney movie in the making. Small town hockey mom gets a shot at VP, then the older more experienced president dies suddenly after only 3 months in office and she is thrust into the limelight. But that’s OK, because she will right the wrongs of government because she brought small town common sense and family values with her!
She will get rid of all those “career politicians” that surrounded the Whitehouse - they’re obviously the problem because they don’t really care about this country - they just care about their careers! And then she will call in her closest small town friends from high school who, although not “career politicians”, will bring their small town smarts and fix all of America’s problems through practical common sense. First will be her best friend, who is an accountant, who will come in and balance the budget by stopping the military from buying $300 hammers and by reigning in the amount of paper that is used in photocopying every year. Then will come the coach of her son’s hockey team who will teach the Whitehouse staff about ‘team playing’ so that the terrible leaks that were so damaging to the Office were stopped because now all the staff could see how important their jobs really were. Then comes the PTA president who will act as the peace negotiator between Israel and Palestine because she has had so much practical experience in bringing different parental factions together back home.
Honestly, as an outsider, this whole Palin thing is really beyond belief. I know that for Americans you have to consider domestic issues - but for the rest of the world, Palin is a fucking nightmare.
I agree. However, I think it only seems worse than the arrogance and pomposity of conservatives because there are more liberals per capita, and thus, the volume is louder. However, after the election in 2004, there was some serious condescending, obnoxious crowing from the Right here on the boards, and some of the things said about liberals in this and other threads has been quite nasty. In America in general, the balance is more even, and the conservatives do seem more insular, hateful, and us v. them to me.
Hey, I really couldn’t agree more. I have been against and decried the two party system as bad for America, and have voted third party in elections from the local to the national. The Democrats are not my perfect party, and I do not support them uncritically or unequivocally. If they threw up a candidate like Palin, I would be openly critical of them (I really do believe in Obama, though). They own neither my vote nor my support; they have to earn it each election, and at times they haven’t. Consequently, I have been (somewhat naively) shocked at the partisan, knee-jerk support of Palin, the willingness to vote for (and make excuses/rationalizations for) anyone the Republicans throw up there, and the broad-brush condemnation of “liberals” I’ve seen on this board.