After doing some web detective work, the most remarkable thing about Christen appears to be the lack of public information about her politics. (Isn’t that how it’s supposed to be for a judge?) I’ve found defenses of her from both ends of the political spectrum. I’ve seen her called a “moderate” and an “independent”, but I haven’t seen any evidence for those labels.
Also, a lot of Palin supporters (mostly on the Free Republic) are saying that Christen was on the board of an organization that went on to become a branch of PP, but not of PP itself.
So it seems Palin had three choices: 1.) appoint the moderate, 2.) appoint the more liberal candidate, or 3.) throw a hissy fit because those nasty checks and balances didn’t let her appoint an appropriately fire-breathing conservative. I guess we’re supposed to be happy that she didn’t go for the hissy fit, and given the disposition of the Republicans these days, that is more remarkable than it ought to be. (Then again, the story is less than 24 hours old, so there’s still plenty of time for a good hissy fit.)
Sam, I know you wanted to see the libertarian side of Palin, and you may be able to find evidence for it in her record in Alaska. But you have to see that it was her social conservative cred that got her on the national ticket (over McCain’s choices of Lieberman and Ridge), and that during the campaign she talked the talk of, as you put it, a “religious conservative wacko”.
As someone on the left who likes Huckabee, I think you’re failing to understand what “liking Huckabee” means for someone on the left. I would never, ever vote for Huckabee, and would laugh and :dubious: at anyone who would. However, he’s an articulate, intelligent man with a great sense of humor who gives good interview. He seems like a genuinely appealing, decent human being, who I happen to disagree with violently on just about everything. Unlike The Tao’s Revenge, I can find it in my heart to like Republicans and think they’re OK guys, even while I despise everything they stand for politically.
I do not feel this way about Sarah Palin, though. I think people like her are more of the same ala George Bush, and they are ruining the Republican party. Go back to your roots, so thoroughly lost of late: fiscal conservatism, personal rights, and freedom from big government. Forget the religious nuts and haters… and that includes the very likable Gov. Huckabee. My favorite Republican right now is Arnold Schwarzeneggar. Who’da thunk it?
In the interest of fighting ignorance, that’s not what she said. It became a convenient Dem talking point, but this is what she actually said:
I realize “let’s pray that we’re following God’s will” doesn’t have the zing of something like “Jesus wants us in Iraq,” but if you want to form an opinion, it should be based on what she actually said.
Most recently, Palin has proposed consolidating all of the state’s electric utilities. Why, that sounds like something one-a-them gol-durned socialists would come up with!
Mitt Romney? Mitt fucking Romney? An asshole Mormon misogynist cocksucker in the White House, controlling policy related to American women? Fuck him and everyone like him.
Wait, what? Why? I was cellphone-less at the grocery store, hoping I was picking out the right flavor of Fizzelwitz for Mrs. Dvl. I wasn’t hoping that when I got home she’d change her preference to fit what I was picking out, I was hoping that my actions were in conformity to her desire.
I’m not good at the whole religion thing, but elevating it to Kantian levels to consider hoping that one’s actions conform to that of a perfectly good will (i.e., acting from, not in accordance with duty).
I’m not sure what side that falls down on – that she thinks we’re doing/following the Big Guy’s will, and is praying she’s correct. That pretty much implies that she believes what was going on was divine intent, kind of cutting out Stratocaster’s nuance. But I really don’t think it means she’s asking God to fit his/her/its will to fit what she’s already doing.
What Rhythmdvl said. Every day I pray that I will be an instrument of God’s will, that my choices are in accordance with His plan. That doesn’t mean I hope he changes His will to match what I already chose.
It’s a pretty common thought, and Palin’s actual words were pretty innocuous politician-speak. I wouldn’t have blinked if the same exact words had come from a Democrat. It’s standard stuff–“God bless our troops, and let’s pray we’re following God’s plan in the missions we choose for them.” I don’t see any way to interpret it to be some form of, “No worries, God told us to invade Iraq.” But that’s the way they’re portrayed. The words themselves suggest the absence of an unambiguous message from God. If such a message existed, we needn’t pray for direction. Nope, this one was tortured into a useful, cynical talking point.
My mom, to be perfectly honest, whom I love dearly and talk with nearly every day, is by most people’s standards here a “Religious Conservative Wacko”. She would love government to be driven purely by Christian values, she fully believes in the Rapture, and she has seen people speaking in tongues on many occasions and fully believes it to be a supernatural phenomenon. The idea of gay marriage to her is completely abhorrant, even though she had a very good friend who was gay.
Well, she voted for Obama last election. I guess that one act means all those other opinions she holds are inconsequential, and she is no longer a religious conservative, according to the OP’s logic.
“Let’s pray we’re following God’s will” has plenty of zing- I’m no Kantian parser, but 'seems ta me that would include “we maybe aren’t following God’s will”. Entertaining doubt is not the province of religious wackos, however the statement is construed.
I am gratified that months after you were so cruelly silenced you have found the courage to speak out again.
I do not however view Palin’s picking what she must have seen as the lesser of two evils as judge, as evidence of her being a “social moderate”.
She apparently had two choices - one, to pick a supposed moderate with a remote connection to Planned Parenthood, or to select a liberal environmental wacko who might do something horrific like limiting the shooting of wildlife from planes.
Not much wiggle room there.
When conservatives cast Palin and others like her into the outer darkness and start coming up with some real leadership possibilities, they can start being taken seriously again. And we need an intelligent and principled counter to the current Administration.
Well, intelligent anyway. Can’t have totally unrealistic hopes.
But praying isn’t hoping. Praying is petitioning. Praying is asking God for something. If you are doing X, and you “pray that it’s God’s will,” what can that possibly mean other than that you are asking God to make what you are already doing into his will?
If that’s not what you’re asking God for, then what ARE you asking for? I see no willingness to actually stop what you’re already doing in that construction. Palin didn’t say she was asking for God to SHOW his will, or indicate she would do anything different if it wasn’t.
Think about it for 5 seconds. What semantic meaning can “praying for X to be God’s will” have OTHER than asking God to make X his will? If that’s not what you’re asking, then what ARE you asking?
Hear, hear. So we are to applaud Ms. Palin for offering words that show that her conviction is so much less than certain that it requires ongoing prayer. Seriously, again, why would someone pray for ongoing guidance or wisdom if one was already certain that the current path was the true, divinely ordained one?
And I offer this thought again: Would those words have really seemed so wacky or zealous if they had been uttered by, say, Hillary on the campaign trail? Really, read them again–they are off-the-shelf, politician-speak sentiments, suitable for all occasions. “God bless our guys and gals in uniform, and may He give us the wisdom to follow only His plan for them.” Try not to read them through partisan glasses. Pretend John Kerry or John Edwards had said them. The words themselves (not what certain pundits wish they were) are pretty innocuous.
ETA: Diogenes you’re trying too hard. Her words DO mean that if this is not God’s will, that He show us and we change. They were harmless, innocuous words, similar to those uttered by politicians on both sides of the aisle about a billion times before.
I don’t hear any doubt in that. I hear arrogance disguised as false humility. Asking for God to SHOW his will, or to inicate that you would alter what you are doing if it’s NOT God’s will would show humility, but just saying “I’m going to do this and ask God to conform his will to fit it” is egotistical and actually kind of blasphemous.
She didn’t ask for wisdom or guidance, she asked God to make his will fit hers. I’ll ask again, what else can “praying that I’m doing God’s will” possibly mean. What exactly are you asking God for if you’re asking for what you’re already doing to be his will?
Yes. I cringe whenever any of them babble self-serving religious platitudes.
Dio, you’re torturing the words. Are you seriously suggesting that the likeliest intended meaning for these words was that Palin hoped that if we were conducting our affairs contrary to God’s will, that he might consider a change in company policy? Come on.
But do you automatically categorize each of them as a religious wacko?
I dn’t see any other way the words can be parsed, but I’m open to correction. If you are praying that you are doing God’s will," what, exactly, are you asking God for?
It depends on whether I think they really believe what they’re saying. Usually, I think politicians (right and left alike) are just cynically pandering for votes when they go to the God card. Most of them aren’t crazy, just phony. The religious crazies that do exist seem to be on the right, though (Michelle Bachman, for instance). If you can show me any prominent Democrats who deny evolution or believe in the rapture, I will happily call them wackos, though.