What's a Palin

[ygmir]

well,
at least the term 'myopic' is clearer for me...........

[dr.placebo]

So Obama is guilty (or some unspecified crime) by being marginally associated with a legally innocent man?

I was once within 100 feet of Richard Nixon (at a campaign stop in NJ when I was 9 years old). I am therefore to blame for Watergate?

Let's get back on track. Palin is a right-wing fembot who is now on a mud-hurling mission against Obama. The red team is getting desperate as they slide lower in the polls, so they fall back on full-strength Rove tactics. There is a reason that "Swift Boat" entered the political lexicon. The phrase stands for political slander, so let's recognize it as it returns.

McCain and Palin can't discuss the issues, because it would be obvious that they are recycling the idiocy of the Bush administration. New ideas? Not bloody likely. Maverick? Nope, both McCain and Palin are firmly lap dogs of the right. At least Palin has always been that way; McCain used to resist a bit.

And the paraphrase from Sec. Albright? Palin probably does not realize it, but being a woman does not automatically constitute support of women. In fact, given her gender and her positions, one might even say that she has gone far towards earning herself a very warm room in the afterlife.

One might claim that she had the courage of her convictions. I would respect that rationale more if I thought that she understood the consequences of her actions.

[lurker]

It is interesting. Suggesting that someone's judgement might be flawed based on the people they choose to associate with is 'guilt by association'? Guilt? No. But definately something to think about. Ayers loved America so much that he was--and is--willing to blow it up, innocents civilians and all, just to make a point. Obama didn't run screaming from that attitude.......

Let's get back on track. Palin is a right-wing fembot who is now on a mud-hurling mission against Obama.

Attack is the traditional role of the VP candidate. She shouldn't do it? Why? 'Cos she's got tits?

There is a reason that "Swift Boat" entered the political lexicon. The phrase stands for political slander, so let's recognize it as it returns

Actually, 'swiftboating' refers to ripping down the lies of a blatant liar with facts they can't refute--but that's the 'right wing' version. On the left it means 'call the person exposing you a liar enough times and, with the help of a complicit media, it'll stick". Oh, wait, that's not just 'swiftboating', it's SOP on the left.

Different definitions for different sides--for the same word. There's that huge divide again.

And the paraphrase from Sec. Albright? Palin probably does not realize it, but being a woman does not automatically constitute support of women. In fact, given her gender and her positions, one might even say that she has gone far towards earning herself a very warm room in the afterlife.

Oh, we all know this--even though Allbright didn't add the caveat. You have to be a woman who thinks the way you're told to think(or a minority who thinks the way you're told to think) to get the support of the purported 'womans' advocacy organizations. Freethinkers need not apply.

But that's socialism for you--it needs ants, not people.

[Elderberry]

Actually, 'swiftboating' refers to ripping down the lies of a blatant liar with facts they can't refute--but that's the 'right wing' version. On the left it means 'call the person exposing you a liar enough times and, with the help of a complicit media, it'll stick". Oh, wait, that's not just 'swiftboating', it's SOP on the left.

Different definitions for different sides--for the same word. There's that huge divide again.

No, actually swift-boating means telling unsubstantiated, blatant lies to impugn someone's integrity or reputation unjustly; invented by and used primarily by right wing republicans.

JK

[cowboyangel]

amazing how the republicans keep producing candidate after candidate who lower the pathetic bar of political discourse beyond what is conceivable.

[unjonharley]

amazing how the republicans keep producing candidate after candidate who lower the pathetic bar of political discourse beyond what is conceivable.

Just when you thought Bush was as low as anyone could go..........

[Elderberry]

amazing how the republicans keep producing candidate after candidate who lower the pathetic bar of political discourse beyond what is conceivable.

Well thank goodness John McCain has pledged to run a respectful campaign!

[youtube][/youtube]

[youtube][/youtube]

JK

[dr.placebo]

Obama didn't run screaming from that attitude...

Read anything that is even halfway accurate and you'll realize how slight the connection was. Ayers was an idiot (probably still is), and if the prosecutors had been honorable they might have pinned something on him. McCain actually pulled strings for Keating, and I wonder how many lives were ruined there.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/ ... rick/print

Attack is the traditional role of the VP candidate. She shouldn't do it? Why? 'Cos she's got tits?

Her gender is incidental in this case. She's lying, as well as being slimy. McCain pledged to run a clean campaign. That's one broken pledge among many. I called her a fembot because she seems incapable of saying anything unprogrammed.

Actually, 'swiftboating' refers to ripping down the lies of a blatant liar with facts they can't refute--but that's the 'right wing' version.

There's another right-wing lie. The term came about because it referred to a smear campaign against John Kerry. The divide between honesty and poltical propaganda is indeed wide. I'm not a fan of left-wing propaganda, either. The left in the US is almost non-existent, though, so much of what gets labeled as leftist in the US is actually centrist.

You have to be a woman who thinks the way you're told to think(or a minority who thinks the way you're told to think) to get the support of the purported 'womans' advocacy organizations. Freethinkers need not apply.

Palin is a Bible-thumping fundamentalist who believes in creationism. Her ability to think is questionable, and her ability to think freely even more so.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/st ... alin/print

But that's socialism for you--it needs ants, not people.

I've not espoused socialism, although I do believe in social responsibility. The people who value social justice, and education, and equal rights are not ants, and are very often not socialists.

[Elderberry]

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/ ... rick/print

Palin is a Bible-thumping fundamentalist who believes in creationism. Her ability to think is questionable, and her ability to think freely even more so.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/st ... alin/print

Interesting read. My favorite line was the sub-title: "The scariest thing about John McCain's running mate isn't how unqualified she is - it's what her candidacy says about America"

JK

[ygmir]

ok,
I gotta ask:
Are you guys all sitting in the same hot tub, with "laptops" (hhhmmmi I'm not sure I want to draw that picture), posting and giggling?..........

[Elderberry]

ok,
I gotta ask:
Are you guys all sitting in the same hot tub, with "laptops" (hhhmmmi I'm not sure I want to draw that picture), posting and giggling?..........

Well you got the laptop right...sitting right on the coffee table. Everytime someone posts, I get an email and of course, just can't resist seeing who's saying what.

Guess I need to get a life, huh? My partner's teaching a class tonight so I'm just home alone bored.

JK

[ygmir]

ok,
I gotta ask:
Are you guys all sitting in the same hot tub, with "laptops" (hhhmmmi I'm not sure I want to draw that picture), posting and giggling?..........

Well you got the laptop right...sitting right on the coffee table. Everytime someone posts, I get an email and of course, just can't resist seeing who's saying what.

Guess I need to get a life, huh? My partner's teaching a class tonight so I'm just home alone bored.

JK

I dunno,.........I'm getting a psychic vision of you guys sitting in the hot tub, laptops floating on flowered floaty tubes, sipping Manhattans, and giggling as you pen these, at at least some, ridiculously funny missives.........
and watching us "noobs" scratch our heads..........


hahahahaha

[Simon of the Playa]

well, IM sitting in a hot tub while my Maid, a Minority Type person, who, you know, actually CAUSED this whole banking problem by living beyond her means, serves me my Mimosas and gently puffs a line of cocaine into my nose, ayuhuasca style.

all day, i am updated by my Indian, (or pakistani, they all smell the same) Internet GURU who manages all of my Sock Puppets and Myspace Personas.

at Night, i go to Fancy Clubs and even Fancier Restaurants and eat Nouvelle Nouveau Cuisine, and hob-knob with Media Types, Wall St. Bankers, and Jews who dont think they're Jews.

Yes, Life is good, here on E-Playa, and for Liberal Political Ops, life is UBER GUT, JA?


now, go get daddy another bump.

[Das Bus]

Just been catching up on the posts here.

Someone mentioned that the VP debate was a wash, and that no one's mind was changed. That's not true. Mine was.

I watched it the other day online, and quickly realized, that Biden wasn't who I thought he was. (I had mistaken him for another old white guy).

First off, Biden was extremely respectful of Palin. He looked at her, and was eager to debate. (Unlike McCain who didn't look at Obama once during their debate, and refused to engage him)

Biden clearly has the knowledge and experience to be VP or President. I also did some research on him, and he seems like a decent person. If something terrible were to happen to Obama, I have no doubt that Biden could step in and do the job. I'm not saying that he's be a GOOD President, (hopefully he would), but saying that he is quite capable of running the country. If Obama wins, I hope that he will draw extensively on Biden's experience.

Second: Unfortunately, there's a lot NOT to like about either Party. And whoever gets elected, has a big mess to clean up.

At this point, my vote is going for Bob Barr. I'll watch the rest of the debates, and maybe I'll change my vote to Obama. But that's doubtful, as I'm disgusted with BOTH Parties.

[lurker]

Wow, there's just so much here.

Let's start with 'swiftboating'. I'm sorry, but it's not a 'lie' to tell you that the right uses the term in a different manner than the left. To them, it refers to John Kerry not being able to factually and decisively refute the statements made about him by other swifties.

The left can call it what it wants, but to the right, it kept Kerry out of office--in simpler terms, it worked.

Don't like it? Fine. But it DOES illustrate that divide, no?

And, I'm real sorry, but have you all been lecturing me about how aquited terrorist William Ayers association with Obama is unimportant--and then gone on to attack McCain for the Keating 5 scandal(comprised primarily of Democrats) when he was found to have done nothing wrong save having poor judgement in who he associated with?

Is that what you're really trying to say? Are we back to 'it's bad if a Republican does it, but fine if a Democrat does it'?

And, Dr Placebo, if you're advocating socialistic ideals--like social responsibility and social justice, you're advocating socialism. Which is a system better suited to the hive insects that use it than humans. People who value justice, education, and equal rights aren't ants--so that stuff doesn't work for us. And it's very interesting to note that things like freedom and liberty get left out of your point. Individual justice, personal responsibility, equality before the law, equality of opportunity, these are things that people need--to secure their freedom and their liberty.

[Apollonaris Zeus]

Palin has long time associations with members of the radical anti-american government group that you can associate with the people like the Freemen of Montana. The Alaskan Independence party. She even married one of them.

The anti-us government group call the Alaskan Independence Party has called for Alaska Succession from the USA.

Her administration even looked into the matter.

Here are some issues on what their platform stands for:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaskan_Independence_Party

Like other groups of this nature, they are primarily a Wise Use Group that wish to rape our environment.

More later!

AIIZ

[unjonharley]

Here's a vision for you.

Alaskan Hill Billyies go to Washington

[Ugly Dougly]

Obama didn't run screaming from that attitude.......

Believe it or not, there are patriots who care so deeply for their country that they are willing to do what is necessary to defend it, or consider their options at any rate.

For me, this is similar to Clinton being "tarred" by the suggestion that he smoked pot, cheated on his wife and did what he needed to do to get out of Viet Nam. Heaven forbid!

[dr.placebo]

I doubt that we are going to get anywhere with this, but there are some points that I have to take issue with.

And, Dr Placebo, if you're advocating socialistic ideals--like social responsibility and social justice, you're advocating socialism. Which is a system better suited to the hive insects that use it than humans.

Individual justice, personal responsibility, equality before the law, equality of opportunity, these are things that people need--to secure their freedom and their liberty.

When advocating social responsibility and social justice is taken as socialism I feel that lurker is confusing some issues. It is quite ironic that social responsibility and personal responsibility are placed on opposite sides. Not all of us believe that they are different.

And do you think that equal rights is not part of social justice? That equal access to education is not part of social responsibility? Conservatives consistently opposed both Suffrage and Civil Rights; it was the liberals who worked for equal rights.

I'm quite fond of freedom and liberty. This administration has been the most coercive attack on liberty since Nixon. Given their supporters and advisors, I don't have any reason to expect different from McCain/Palin (her approach to libraries is especially creepy).

Now, I suppose that you have the "right" to define a term (like swiftboating) as you wish. But that's not the generally accepted definition. And it was a sleazy campaign based on innuendo, and the claims were refuted publicly by a number of people who knew John Kerry well. That the mud stuck is a consequence of the Big Lie method of propaganda, which has a long and dishonorable history. And it is a method that McCain and Palin are grasping at.

The Ayers thing is typical. Obama has denounced the radical practices of the Weather Underground. Obama was on a board with Ayers, but has not done him favors. The campaign to paint Obama (by association) as a bomb-throwing radical is transparent and dishonest.

On the other hand, McCain had a long (and profitable) relationship with Keating, and only regretted it when Keating was caught. Here's something from the Rolling Stone article:

McCain still attributes the attention to nothing more than Keating's "great respect for military people" and the duo's "political and personal affinity." But Keating, for his part, made no bones about the purpose of his giving. When asked by reporters if the investments he made in politicians bought their loyalty and influence on his behalf, Keating replied, "I want to say in the most forceful way I can, I certainly hope so."

And, since this is nominally a Palin thread, I have to close with the observation that not only was the state corporate jet not sold on eBay, as she originally claimed, it was sold at a $600,000 loss to a Palin campaign contributor.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 722_2.html

[ygmir]

Obama didn't run screaming from that attitude.......

For me, this is similar to Clinton being "tarred" by the suggestion that he smoked pot, cheated on his wife and did what he needed to do to get out of Viet Nam. Heaven forbid!

So, did you give Bush a pass on the same issue?......
I bet not.........

[unjonharley]

Obama didn't run screaming from that attitude.......

For me, this is similar to Clinton being "tarred" by the suggestion that he smoked pot, cheated on his wife and did what he needed to do to get out of Viet Nam. Heaven forbid!

So, did you give Bush a pass on the same issue?......
I bet not.........

ya we gave bush a pass on: Being a drunk druggy, USAF awol,.. Cus he unlike his old man didn't puke in anyones lap on camera.. But we do not forgive his rapeing the public of there vote"twice"

[ygmir]

UJ: yerrrr killin' me

[Elderberry]

ya we gave bush a pass on: Being a drunk druggy, USAF awol,.. Cus he unlike his old man didn't puke in anyones lap on camera.. But we do not forgive his rapeing the public of there vote"twice"

What do you mean, WE!?

Actually, I've wondered if he might not have been such a bad president if he wouldn't have become born again and stopped drinking and doing coke.

JK

[lurker]

When advocating social responsibility and social justice is taken as socialism I feel that lurker is confusing some issues. It is quite ironic that social responsibility and personal responsibility are placed on opposite sides. Not all of us believe that they are different.

Social responsibility proceeds from personal responsibility. All too often the left favors the 'social' over the 'personal'. Yet without personal responsibility, social responsibility is not possible.

And do you think that equal rights is not part of social justice?

Define 'equal rights'. I think our definitions may be somewhat different.

That equal access to education is not part of social responsibility?

Equal access to education? Access? Every citizen(and quite a number of non-citizens) have equal access to the craptastic basic education our government now supplies. The left routinely blocks access to better education for the less well off. The left tends to oppose private competition with the public schools--they oppose vouchers that would allow people to use the tax dollars wasted on our atrocious public school system at better private schools. The only 'equal access' you are promoting is equal access to a crappy education. Let the children suffer--as long as everything LOOKS equal.

Conservatives consistently opposed both Suffrage and Civil Rights; it was the liberals who worked for equal rights.

When I see statements like this, using 'liberal' and 'conservative' in place of 'Democrat' and 'Republican', I am wont to believe that it's because if the party names were used, Democrats would look bad.

I've even had it said to me that THOSE republicans were liberal, that republicans today would never act as they did. Yet republicans today do not disavow them--as Democrats must constantly disavow such paragons of virtue as Bull Connor and Fred Phelps. I happily reacll the actions of the state republican party of Louisiana when David Duke tried to run as a republican--they suggested that their members support the democrat, rather than the klansman.

So, which party supported suffrage, and Civil Rights?

I'm quite fond of freedom and liberty. This administration has been the most coercive attack on liberty since Nixon. Given their supporters and advisors, I don't have any reason to expect different from McCain/Palin (her approach to libraries is especially creepy).

Ah, yes, the banned books that weren't banned.......zzzzzzzzzz

Now, I suppose that you have the "right" to define a term (like swiftboating) as you wish.

No 'right' is implied, I merely stated the fact that the two sides define it differently.

And, as I said, there is no requirement on you to like it. But I would request that you don't take umbrage at the Big Lie method of propaganda when you show no compunctions against using it--as evidenced by your 'library' comment.

The Ayers thing is typical. Obama has denounced the radical practices of the Weather Underground. Obama was on a board with Ayers, but has not done him favors. The campaign to paint Obama (by association) as a bomb-throwing radical is transparent and dishonest.

Obama 'denounced' Ayers after the man's history became an issue to his political ambitions, as he 'denounced' Wright. He did not avoid these people when it mattered--when the spotlight was off. He chose to associate with them. Not only does this speak volumes about his judgement--it speaks volumes about his sense of loyalty. He abandoned people whose support he'd welcomed without a second thought.

I do not like Ayers and Wright, but I feel that beyond their failings, Obama treated them wrong. He should have stood up and defended them and his association with them. If you've read anything that Obamas' written, he clearly shares at least some of their motivations. Yet he just kicked them to the curb when they became inconvenient.

[Elderberry]

OK Lurker, stop it with the Ayers crap already.

Vouchers, yeah right. So you can support more of them born-again, creationist teaching institutions. That's really helping our country take the lead in science and technology. If it weren't for religion, no one would be pushing the vouchers and money would be able to help make public education better. At least it won't be polluted by ignorance.

JK

[littleflower]

OK Lurker, stop it with the Ayers crap already.

lurker, keep it up! this is the best conversation i've seen in awhile ... you and dr. placebo are actually discussing this stuff without calling each other idiots! hooray!

i am on board with those who think obama is far closer to the lefty radical gang than he dare admit....

[Elderberry]

i am on board with those who think obama is far closer to the lefty radical gang than he dare admit....

OH PAAAALLLLEEEEEEEZZZZZZEEEE!

JK

[Apollonaris Zeus]

i am on board with those who think obama is far closer to the lefty radical gang than he dare admit....

me too

that's why i'm voting for him

we need radical change

[littleflower]

i am on board with those who think obama is far closer to the lefty radical gang than he dare admit....

OH PAAAALLLLEEEEEEEZZZZZZEEEE!

JK

!!! we all have our sources, JK ... we seek what we want to hear, and avoid what we want to ignore ... god knows there is enough info out there for anyone of any persuasion, no matter how narrow, to consider himself well-informed...

but i would be willing to bet than no one here knows the man, or what's really in his heart.

[lurker]

OK Lurker, stop it with the Ayers crap already.

Why?

Vouchers, yeah right. So you can support more of them born-again, creationist teaching institutions. That's really helping our country take the lead in science and technology. If it weren't for religion, no one would be pushing the vouchers and money would be able to help make public education better. At least it won't be polluted by ignorance.

Montessori schools take vouchers. Catholic schools take vouchers. Private schools, jkisha. They're not all religious. The 'religious' angle is used because 'we're in the pocket of the teacher's unions', while true, probably wouldn't garner support.

Protectionism of unions before our kids education.....social justice..bleh.

People are pushing vouchers so inner city kids(that's code for black--though not everyone in the inner city is black) can get out of the left-controlled cesspolls that pass for schools in the inner city

And I gotta say, I've never heard of a school that actively teaches a creationism only science class

And I'm not christain, what do I have to do, wear some kinda sign?