Her appointee lobbied against changing the law to abolish the practice of requiring victims to pay for forensic rape kits. That’s sufficient for this “small town mayor” to shoulder the “actual responsibility” for the position.
Thanks.
Thanks, again. I’m all charged up and ready to go now.
Regards,
SA
Actually, the police chief prior to her appointee did not make victims pay. It was a practice that was phased in under Palin’s administration.
:eek:
Regards,
Shodan
Hentor:
Do you have a cite for that assertion?
As we all know, wearing those skirts, they’re just asking for it.
At any rate, the whole point of this argument is that you ex-Bush supporters ought to fucking know better. We democrats didn’t offer up another Kerry this year because we learned from our fucking mistakes.
It’s just so obvious that she’s clearly not fit to be President yet you guys defend her to the hilt. How can you not see the similarities between this and Bush?
We’re not having these discussions about Biden for a reason. The guy IS qualified. He isn’t perfect, but nobody was terribly surprised at this announcement.
All I’m saying is that you really look stupid defending this woman. But it’s not really stupidity as much as it is mindless following of Republican bullshit. I seriously don’t expect the few hardcore Republicans here to do anything else, but those like Sam Stone (who seemed to kind of like Obama) surprise me. They see her as a victim, but she shares all of the same qualities that bush had.
Haven’t you realized that there’s no winning this debate? They’ve admitted that facts are irrelevant. If you offer the facts and evidence behind your opinions, they will change the question, move the goalposts, and declare your facts irrelevant, while offering nothing substantial of their own. Or will openly, unabashedly admit that the facts just generally don’t matter, that you can’t change their minds, and that they only support Palin because McCain picked her-- if Obama had picked someone similarly ridiculous, they’d nail both his and her ass to a board. But the Republicans picked her, therefore, defend her to the hilt/make excuses/ignore the facts/change the subject.
This thread should open your eyes, as it has mine. There is no room for an intelligent, fact-based discussion of Palin’s qualifications, because her qualifications don’t matter to conservatives, only that she tows the party line, and looks cute and sassy doing it. End of story.
Come on now, seriously, did anyone open this thread expecting to find rational debate? It’s just another rabid attack on Palin, reflecting the real concern liberals have that she’s swung this whole campaign against them. Gone are the days of the euphoric and triumphal Obama threads, now it’s just down and dirty attacks.
Rubystreak:
It appears you’ve answered the OP’s question.
I tried to engage in rational debate. I really did, in good faith, answer questions that were asked of me, only to be told that wasn’t the actual question, and that facts don’t matter. I don’t think I made any “rabid attacks,” unless any and all discussion of her qualifications will now be characterized that way. Thus, my final fuck you to Starving Artist, when I realized he had no interest in the answers to the questions he posed. There is no point in trying to have a conversation with people who do not care about facts, and who will say that any criticism or questioning of them is a spurious attack, regardless of its content.
Notice I didn’t scream “rabit attack” and the questions about Biden, despite their inanity. Nor have I said anything about some of the really idiotic sallies against Obama. Ask whatever questions you want, but please, listen to and regard the answers. Otherwise, you are trolling people to get them to respond to you when you don’t care about their answers.
All the news stories I’ve seen, USA Today’s and one from the AP that’s been reprinted in numerous papers and news sites, are unclear on when the practice was introduced.
The original Alaska Frontiersman article indicates that Wasilla was unique in charging victims or their insurance companies the cost of the rape kits.
Perhaps you recall saying that no facts would likely change your mind and vote for McCain? Just more hypocirisy and intellectual dishonesty from you, I’m afraid.
And how much support for Biden did you express before Obama picked him? Or isn’t it really that you just support him because he’s the Democrat candidate that Obama picked, and that you’d support any other Democrat selection just as strongly. (Unless of course it was perhaps to bitch about it if you felt the selection was poor and thereby harmful to your ticket?)
Well, while you are correct that she is cute and sassy, that’s hardly all there is to it. My point, as you perfectly well know, is that facts don’t matter in pursuading someone to vote a ticket diametrically opposed to their philosophies as to how a government should operate. This is not only because facts can be found to support any position, but because voting for a party that you believe does things the wrong way is stupid to the point of ridiculousness.
ETA: And thank you, too, not only for going to the trouble to explain why your ‘final fuck you’ to me was justified, but also for so graciously acknowledging my acquiesence to honor your request to use your correct screen name.
I’d have more respect for Republicans if they’d say, “Yes, Sarah Palin is underqualified to be the VP, much less President. McCain showed dubious judgment in picking her, but I’m going to vote for him anyway because I feel he best represents my views, despite this choice.” Instead of defending the indefensible, which I absolutely cannot respect. I might do the same if Obama had picked a flagrantly inappropriate candidate for VP… or I’d vote 3rd party, as I have before. But I wouldn’t dishonestly support someone I thought was a bad choice, and I never have.
Starving Artist, give it up. I’m not responding to you.
Yeah, I can tell.
She was the mayor of a village. Drive around your state and look at the small towns. Then tell me you think they are getting a background that qualifies them to run the most powerful government in the world. It is stupid. Her experience does not transfer to the big stage at all. Governor of Alaska is better but still it has 10 % of the population of NYC. It still means nothing for her qualifications to run the USA.
She is only there for electability of the ticket. McCain can not stir the religious base. He can not get the NRA nuts. He has poor heath and is too wrapped with the rich and powerful to relate to. She rallies the Bush voters that want to have a beer with her. Apparently there are a lot of them.
Oh for fuck’s sake. Making fun of someone’s username is obnoxious (and against the rules?). She shouldn’t have had to ask you.
She is doing what is the absolute most important thing she could be doing right now, and that is energizing the Republican base and other voters outside it to vote for McCain.
Her selection was stunningly brilliant. If I’d known McCain was capable of this type of shrewdness and political genius I’d have supported him long before I did. If he can deal with foreign leaders and matters of domestic concern with anywhere near that kind of adroitness, he may wind up there with Reagan in my pantheon of great presidents.
As to what may happen should McCain not survive, I’m confident that with the experience she’ll gain in the meantime, the advisors and government McCain already in place, and the intelligence, toughness and political philosophy she posesses, she’ll do just fine.
Even under the worst of circumstances she’d be nowhere near as disastrous and inept as Carter was, and the country survived even him.
And on preview, Jamaika a jamaikaiaké, it’s allowed in the Pit. And besides, I wasn’t making fun of it, I was merely teasing her with a sort of friendly familiarity based on our previous, ahem, engagements.
Well, OK,** Starv**, I’m nothing if not open-minded (batting big brown innocent non-partisan eyes…) What has she said that was smart? Even if we were to grant that none of these things she’s said or done weren’t stupid, what has she said or done that was smart? How has she impressed you with her perspicacity and insight?
What has she said about Iraq, for instance, that gives you assurance of her firm grasp of the issues?
I see. In your search for the best analogy, you pondered a possible list of “disastrous and inept” Presidents, and came up with Carter?
She was plucked from the governorship of Alaska to serve as McCain’s vice-president, largely a stand-in position when the president is unavailable, and to preside over the Senate.
I recall no other vice-presidential candidate being grilled as to what we should do about the Soviet Union, and I recall no other vice-presidential candidate being required to prove their intelligence and mettle and fitness for the job of president.
Look at Carter, a person with lots of book-learnin’ smarts, and no judgement, adeptness or leadership ability at all.
Everyone’s using McCain’s age as the basis for their hysteria over Palin’s appointment, but he’s only two years older than Reagan was when he took office, and Reagan lived another twenty years despite having been shot and a bout with cancerous polyps in his colon.
The fact of the matter is that Palin is obviously plenty tough, intelligent and driven. I have no qualms about her suitabilty to run the country if the need arises.
And on preview: Yup! And there’s more. See above. 