I'm starting this one because Venusian said I could (http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showpost.php?p=8912631&postcount=285). (I know, you regretted that the moment you typed it)

It's a sad, sad, state we are in. Sadder than Alaska in the middle of winter.

Damn, you beat me by a few seconds...If I only hadn't switched to this tab to check,

Although to please Pharoh, I was going to name it the "One and Only Palin Vaginal Leakage Thread."

Hey, I've been in Alaska in the middle of winter, and ... yeah, well, okay...

http://i37.tinypic.com/2435dgn.jpg

:lol:

Wait, so Palin distracting from Obama's speech was a brilliant move, but Palin distracting the RNC is a lockable offense? ;)

-confused-

Am I missing something? What's the point of this thread?

anybody got a copy of this?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v452/PhattyBoomBatty/pfft/vpilfs.jpg

-confused-

Am I missing something? What's the point of this thread?

To distract from Obama's inexperience.

To distract from Obama's inexperience with surprise babies.

To distract from Obama's inexperience.

Obama counters by saying he has managed more funds and people during his campaign.

After reading this thread, he will claim to have more leakage than Palin based upon news organizations announcing the Biden pick before he announced.

To distract from Obama's inexperience with surprise babies.Please read our rule about "fixing" other people's posts in this forum.

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=448146

It's the first one under "The rules:".

What the hell does a leaking levy have to do with Palin.

What the hell does a leaking levy have to do with Palin.

4... more... years...

What the hell does a leaking [Levi] have to do with Palin.
9 months ;)

Please read our rule about "fixing" other people's posts in this forum.

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=448146

It's the first one under "The rules:".

this place is fun. yeah.

this place is fun. yeah.<i>Mod note: no one is forcing you to post here.</i>

<i>Mod note: no one is forcing you to post here.</i>

does everything I post warrant a response? I know you're a mod, but I didn't say anything out of turn.

You having problems with the YouTube too huh :D

-confused-

Am I missing something? What's the point of this thread?

Well, if you read the rules of the forum, "This forum is meant for mature people to have "grown-up" conversations (to distinguish from the mature/adult aspects of the "Adult forum" ) about real world happenings."

I don't think this falls into that category at all. I'm personally surprised this thread has been allowed and continues to be allowed when it clearly does not follow the spirit of the forum.

does everything I post warrant a response? I know you're a mod, but I didn't say anything out of turn.

Brack, don't start acting silly in a thread about vaginal leakage!

If this thread does nothing but siphon off the garbage that was going on in the other Presidential threads, nothing lost.

<i>Mod note: no one is forcing you to post here.</i>
Amen.

Amen.

hey, this is a political forum, that offends me.

http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s272/abelkems/1220231986388.png

http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s272/abelkems/juneau.jpg

-confused-

Am I missing something? What's the point of this thread?

The thread is to discuss the selection of Palin as a VP candidate since the discussion was leaking over multiple threads. The title is a joke on what became the topic of conversation in the closed RNC thread

http://i37.tinypic.com/2435dgn.jpg

That other daughter has a "wide stance".

http://www.avatarimage.net/imagehosting/files/tag9ianywn0zi0cngwdy.jpg

I usually ignore politics, as much as is possible (which is what makes it so nice that I teach medieval literature--they're all dead, so we can look at their politics through the lens of history, instead of thinking we know the whole story 10 minutes after it's been reported), but I'm (1) loving this reaction to Palin and (2) disgusted by the ability of feminists to engage in some pretty damned misogynistic slurs.

30 years from now, reading analyses of this election is going to be very interesting.

(2) disgusted by the ability of feminists to engage in some pretty damned misogynistic slurs.
It's funny watching 'women's rights' posters, including a female, engage in it too.

It's funny watching 'women's rights' posters, including a female, engage in it too.


What I fear is that this will not be looked back upon as the time when we finally entered the post-racist, post-sexist age, but as the time when the shit actually hit the fan.

A news columnist today actually said that there would be race riots of Obama loses.

This is all some very frightening shit, but people are too busy clinging to their beloved ideologies to notice.

There will be some small incidents, but nothing like the riots of the 60's or even the LA Riots of the 90's if Obama loses.

If you really want a scenario where we could have some serious riots, then Obama would be elected...then assassinated sometime later.

Hopefully none of these things happens. Because I would sincerely be ashamed, and we would prove ourselves just like those unstable countries on other continents.

There will be some small incidents, but nothing like the riots of the 60's or even the LA Riots of the 90's if Obama loses.

If you really want a scenario where we could have some serious riots, then Obama would be elected...then assassinated sometime later.

Hopefully none of these things happens. Because I would sincerely be ashamed, and we would prove ourselves just like those unstable countries on other continents.

I wouldn't be surprised if an attempt was made, successful or not.

But you know, we're already to the point of no return. Our political life has metamorphosed into precisely the kind of warfare that passes for politics in unstable countries. I'm not sure we can put that genie back in the bottle, short of chucking a hell of a lot of politicians out of office and rethinking the two-party system.

Aw. See, I was all optimistic and cheerful, and now I'm trapped in a mire of pessimism and doom.

Somebody get me a drink.

I'm skeptical of this whole riots thing. Basically we're saying that blacks are unable to take their candidate losing so they will act out violently?

I'm skeptical of this whole riots thing. Basically we're saying that blacks are unable to take their candidate losing so they will act out violently?

Hear it from Fatimah Ali, not me:

http://www.philly.com/dailynews/opinion/20080902_Fatimah_Ali__We_need_Obama__not_4_more_years_of_George_Bush.html

Hear it from Fatimah Ali, not me:

http://www.philly.com/dailynews/opinion/20080902_Fatimah_Ali__We_need_Obama__not_4_more_years_of_George_Bush.html
Holy shit @ that article. She gets paid for writing that?

I usually ignore politics, as much as is possible (which is what makes it so nice that I teach medieval literature--they're all dead, so we can look at their politics through the lens of history, instead of thinking we know the whole story 10 minutes after it's been reported), but I'm (1) loving this reaction to Palin and (2) disgusted by the ability of feminists to engage in some pretty damned misogynistic slurs.

30 years from now, reading analyses of this election is going to be very interesting.

What I find interesting is that when Hillary was running, women were constantly told that we shouldn't vote for Hilary simply based on her gender and that she shouldn't get a free pass. But now that Palin is on the ticket, if we question her position on women's issues (or other issues), we are told by these same people that we are somehow cutting down our own gender if we don't support her nomination.

I am pretty disgusted that people think feminists should support an anti-feminist candidate simply because she has a vagina.

A true feminist thinks every woman should be judged for her actions and not her gender. Isn't that what feminists are doing in this case?

I am not angry with Palin, although I disagree with her strongly and do not think she is suited to the VP position. I think she showed bad judgment and naivete at accepting the nomination. But my main problem is with McCain for making such a cynical and naive choice. I think it is very insulting to women to think we can be thrown any woman candidate, no matter her views, and we will all line up like sheep to support her, even if her policies will hurt women, the environment, etc.

Not only that, but I think making such a nomination, when there were admittedly better qualified females (and males) in the Republican party sends a horrible message. As people debate Palin's lightweight qualifications, it makes it harder for all women to be taken seriously. Every woman coming after her will have to battle twice as hard to make sure people don't think she is a Barbie doll. McCain may have lifted one woman up by making this pick, but I think he has brought thousands of others down. Affirmative action is great if it opens doors to qualified people who would otherwise not be able to get their foot in a crack, but when that door is opened for someone not worthy it just makes it that much harder for the next person to try and come through. If McCain had picked a woman like Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Christine Todd Whitman, or Condoleeza Rice, there would not be this sort of reaction. Those are women who I and many others may disagree with, but I think most people at least respect.

This woman is no Barbie doll. Her records speaks to that. She's shown more balls in her years in public service than most do in their entire career.

And why is she an anti-feminist candidate? Is there only one proper way to be a feminist? Certainly she has the part of being the one who wears the pants in the house down pat. And she's having it all--marriage, children, career.

You need to do some more research on this woman, because she's been in the blogosphere for at least 6-9 months. I remember reading about her ages ago.

Stop listening to the MSM and see what there really is to see.

Sorry, I don't see how anyone can call themselves a feminist while being against reproductive rights for other women. She pats herself on the back for her and her daughter's "choices" while she would deny women the right to even have a choice to make. That is not a feminist. Women should respect each other enough to let them make their own decisions, not the government. You can be pro-life and pro-reproductive rights at the same time.

I agree. You can be pro-lie and pro-reproductive. :D

I agree. You can be pro-lie and pro-reproductive. :D

Oops - it's late, but that was a funny slip. :D

Sorry, I don't see how anyone can call themselves a feminist while being against reproductive rights for other women. She pats herself on the back for her and her daughter's "choices" while she would deny women the right to even have a choice to make. That is not a feminist. Women should respect each other enough to let them make their own decisions, not the government. You can be pro-lie and pro-reproductive rights at the same time.

I know you meant to say "pro-life" rather than "pro-lie", but your Freudian slip actually revealed the oxymoron of the great lie of saying one can simultaneously find abortion abhorrent while saying that it's perfectly all right for others to commit infanticide.

After all, what does "pro-life" mean if not an opposition to abortion? And why be opposed to abortion if there is nothing morally wrong with it? And, if one holds that position, why is it morally wrong?

I find it curiously contradictory to imply that "feminists" cannot respect Palin (as you suggested in your previous post) for her stance that children should not be terminated by anyone...not even their mothers. In fact, I find it so BIZARRE to even be suggesting that mothers...who have throughout history represented the epitome of caring and sacrificing for the good of children...should even consider killing their own children. Common sense would suggest that mothers should be the LAST persons to advocate killing children...especially their own children. I guess those "feminists" (who evidently support the "reproductive rights" of those cultures who abort FEMALES in staggeringly high numbers simply because male children are preferred) do not subscribe to the image of the mother ferociously defending her children against any threat.

Tacitly permitting the killing of children is probably the most ANTI-FEMINIST position that a woman could take.

Cloaking the process of abortion...scientifically speaking, the act of terminating a developing human being in that person's earliest stages of life...by using euphemistic language such as "reproductive rights" may make you feel better about the ugly truth of abortion, but it doesn't change the facts.

And...for those who insist on saying that "a fetus is not a child" (the tired old "blob of cells" argument that makes absolutely NO scientific sense)...what do you make of Sen. Obama's insistence on protecting the "right" to kill children who are delivered alive due to botched abortions? Who is being extreme in this case?

Personally, I have no respect for the common sense or judgment of those who see nothing wrong with killing children. In fact, it is absolute COWARDICE to say (as did President William J. Clinton and my own turncoat Sen. Albert Gore, Jr....who had an epiphany after years of running as a candidate opposed to abortion)...that one is "personally opposed" to abortion while allowing others the privilege to kill their own children.

Think of it this way:

"I'm personally an abolitionist because I believe slavery is wrong... but I can't tell others that they shouldn't own slaves because that would be judgmental and imposing my morality upon others".

Or, how about this?

"I'm opposed to National Socialism but I can't tell the SS not to gas Jews & burn them in large ovens."

The only difference is that at least African-Americans and Jews could fight back against their oppressors/killers. Unborn children cannot.

Then again, I never advocated "respect" for slaveowners & Nazis, so I guess that makes me "intolerant".

Sorry, I don't see how anyone can call themselves a feminist while being against reproductive rights for other women. She pats herself on the back for her and her daughter's "choices" while she would deny women the right to even have a choice to make. That is not a feminist. Women should respect each other enough to let them make their own decisions, not the government. You can be pro-life and pro-reproductive rights at the same time.
A true feminist wouldn't endlessly make excuses for women who are too stupid, too lazy, or just too damn sorry to properly manage their reproductive rights before an unwanted pregnancy occurs, not afterwards. There are countless methods of birth control on the market, and all of them are extremely effective. In this day and age, there really is no legitimate excuse for any woman to experience an unwanted pregnancy, unless she's the victim of rape.

Or maybe a woman is a feminist and also believes in rights for the unborn? Oh the horror!

A true feminist wouldn't endlessly make excuses for women who are too stupid, too lazy, or just too damn sorry to properly manage their reproductive rights before an unwanted pregnancy occurs, not afterwards. There are countless methods of birth control on the market, and all of them are extremely effective. In this day and age, there really is no legitimate excuse for any woman to experience an unwanted pregnancy, unless she's the victim of rape.

It's too bad Palin doesn't even support "unless she's a victim of rape."

It's too bad Palin doesn't even support "unless she's a victim of rape."

Really?

Why did McCain pick her? Was Anne Coulter unavailable?

Really?

Why did McCain pick her? Was Anne Coulter unavailable?

Now SHE would be one to watch in a VP debate!

A true feminist wouldn't endlessly make excuses for women who are too stupid, too lazy, or just too damn sorry to properly manage their reproductive rights before an unwanted pregnancy occurs, not afterwards. There are countless methods of birth control on the market, and all of them are extremely effective. In this day and age, there really is no legitimate excuse for any woman to experience an unwanted pregnancy, unless she's the victim of rape.
I believe Palin is abstinence only, so all those birth control methods are not allowed under her views.

I believe Palin is abstinence only, so all those birth control methods are not allowed under her views.

abstinence only education...not necessarily anti-birth control...atleast i haven't seen any proof of it, just conjecture

So it's wrong that McCain chose Palin to appeal to female voters, but it's not wrong to make the claim that McCain chose Palin specifically to appeal to female voters, as if her gender and party affiliation was the only reason she was chosen?

If that's the case, he could have gone with Kay Bailey Hutchinson and picked a female who is not for overturning Roe v. Wade but is still well established enough in the party to still pull lots of support from the base, meanwhile representing a large state.

McCain chose Palin because of her record as a reformer. He knows that to capture the independent voters, he needs to recapture that maverick label, but he can't get too far away from the base. So, he brings in a VP that has the reformer label, which also shows him as someone willing to go outside the box, meanwhile he can continue the part rhetoric to appease and energize the base.

The fact that she's young, a woman, and attractive certainly didn't hurt her chance, but that's by no means the only reason she was picked.

I'll tell you - the Dems are digging deep on her. They've gone after the down syndrome baby, then they went after the daughter, then they went after the husband, now they're releasing her SSN on the internet.. someone's scarred.

abstinence only education...not necessarily anti-birth control...atleast i haven't seen any proof of it, just conjecture
We can tiptoe around whether it's "anti" birth control, but not telling kids about birth control (specifically condoms) makes it less likely that they'll use it IF they do have sex like her teenage daughter. And getting preggo is just one of your worries. There are STD's as well. This is all known information to the forum, but I was just pointing it out to emphasize that I strongly disagree with her take on sex education or the lack thereof for the youth.

I believe Palin is abstinence only, so all those birth control methods are not allowed under her views.That's simply not true.

She's pro-contraception.

We can tiptoe around whether it's "anti" birth control, but not telling kids about birth control (specifically condoms) makes it less likely that they'll use it IF they do have sex like her teenage daughter. And getting preggo is just one of your worries. There are STD's as well. This is all known information to the forum, but I was just pointing it out to emphasize that I strongly disagree with her take on sex education or the lack thereof for the youth.

My wife was an OB/GYN nurse for decades...working both in the delivery room & doing the interviews & scheduling for prenatal care.

In the thousands of cases she saw (including the many unwed teen mothers-to-be), she never met a single case in which the females were not aware of birth control methods. No matter how young the female, she was ALWAYS aware of condoms, birth control pills, etc. They may not have known EVERY method known to humans (IUDs, for instance), but they all knew about 'rubbers'.

In every instance, the girl/woman made a CHOICE not to use birth control...more often than not at the insistence or cajoling of their male partner. We're talking about the girls who had no desire to become pregnant, not the females who wanted a baby for various reasons.

Teaching young woman to be assertive in demanding respect from selfish males will do more good than 'teaching' the females about methods which they already know.

Well it's all a moot point since the 10th amendment specifically forbids the federal government from getting involved in education systems. :lol:

In the thousands of cases she saw (including the many unwed teen mothers-to-be), she never met a single case in which the females were not aware of birth control methods. No matter how young the female, she was ALWAYS aware of condoms, birth control pills, etc. They may not have known EVERY method known to humans (IUDs, for instance), but they all knew about 'rubbers'.

Teaching young woman to be assertive in demanding respect from selfish males will do more good than 'teaching' the females about methods which they already know.
I wonder where they learned about the birth control methods?

Teaching women to be assertive will do as much good as teaching them about STDs, and birth control methods. You can't have one without the other.

I usually ignore politics, as much as is possible (which is what makes it so nice that I teach medieval literature--they're all dead, so we can look at their politics through the lens of history, instead of thinking we know the whole story 10 minutes after it's been reported), but I'm (1) loving this reaction to Palin and (2) disgusted by the ability of feminists to engage in some pretty damned misogynistic slurs.

30 years from now, reading analyses of this election is going to be very interesting.

I'm worried it'll take 30 years for another woman to have any shot at the Presidency. The level of hatred towards Sarah Palin and the smear campaign launched against her and her family by the media(who are taking their lead from the likes of DailyKos) will a) make it very unappealing for any woman to run for President and b) set a precedent that misogyny is perfectly acceptable in campaign reporting.

We actually have reporters, including female ones, who are questioning whether she should be running for VP when she's a mother of five. No one ever asked Barack Obama about his two young daughters and who would look after them. Nor did they ask John Edwards about his kids or his cancer-stricken wife back in 2004 or this year before he dropped out of the race.

It's not just the double standard that bothers me. I accept that the media is biased towards the Democrat Party. I accept that the feminist movement only supports women who are liberal and pro-choice. What troubles me is that we're witnessing a sexist campaign against this woman on every major network and every major newspaper and magazine. I honestly feel like I'm in a time warp that's launched me back to the 1950's.

I wonder where they learned about the birth control methods?

Teaching women to be assertive will do as much good as teaching them about STDs, and birth control methods. You can't have one without the other.

And explain why it should be the role of the school system vs the parents?

If they really want to promote abstinance, what they should do is this:

1) Make students watch Nanny 9-1-1 and that show where they give teenagers real kids for a week.

2) Actually give teenagers real kids to watch for a week (see show in #1).

3) Tell them about the various types of birth control methods out there, and the probability that each one fails (which is surprisingly high). Otherwise they'll learn about condoms on their own and think they're 100% effective.

4) Bring in good looking people with STDs to talk about how horrible it is to have them, and how people won't date you, and how you have to take medication, and how it hurts to pee.

5) Tell them about the percentage of people in the US population with STDs (surprisingly high), the fact that some can be passed even with a condom, and the probability of contracting other STDs even with the use of a condom.

And explain why it should be the role of the school system vs the parents?

Parents had their chance. Now it's time for the government to step in, in the interest of national security. ;)

Any way you cut it, Palin as VP was a horrible decision, and not thought-out too well. It speaks loud and clear as to McCain's decision-making faculties.

If he chooses a running-mate this poorly, could you imagine the horrible choices he'd make as president?

And explain why it should be the role of the school system vs the parents?

Have you ever talked to kids in a public school system? We have kids that don't bathe regularly and who's only meals come from the school. Do you think their parents give a crap about their sexual development?

These types of decisions are not made to be authoritarian. They are made to give ALL kids the same footing on which to be a human being. Believe it or not, there are many MANY parents who are ill equipped to live their own lives let alone manage a child's.

It's not just the double standard that bothers me. I accept that the media is biased towards the Democrat Party. I accept that the feminist movement only supports women who are liberal and pro-choice. What troubles me is that we're witnessing a sexist campaign against this woman on every major network and every major newspaper and magazine. I honestly feel like I'm in a time warp that's launched me back to the 1950's.

And this is what they call "CHANGE"?

I wonder where they learned about the birth control methods?


Probably the same place you & I learned about them.

Certainly not from Hollywood. There, no one gets pregnant or STD's unless it's a major plot point (Juno, for example).

In Hollywoodland, people just tear off their clothes and go at it without any physical consequences.

And explain why it should be the role of the school system vs the parents?
It's good public policy.

We teach kids about other health issues such as diseases, eating right, exercising and taking care of their bodies. Why can't we teach them about properly taking care of their bodies when it comes to sex?

If they really want to promote abstinance, what they should do is this:

1) Make students watch Nanny 9-1-1 and that show where they give teenagers real kids for a week.

2) Actually give teenagers real kids to watch for a week (see show in #1).

3) Tell them about the various types of birth control methods out there, and the probability that each one fails (which is surprisingly high). Otherwise they'll learn about condoms on their own and think they're 100% effective.

4) Bring in good looking people with STDs to talk about how horrible it is to have them, and how people won't date you, and how you have to take medication, and how it hurts to pee.

5) Tell them about the percentage of people in the US population with STDs (surprisingly high), the fact that some can be passed even with a condom, and the probability of contracting other STDs even with the use of a condom.

They could show the old boot camp training films about the horrors of STDs. That'd make quite a few give up on all sexual contact for a decade or so.

They could make a double feature with the driver's ed "fatality" films (I passed out during one of those...and I wasn't the only one!)

Probably the same place you & I learned about them.
Actually, I learned about birth control in sex ed class in school (I think it was 6th grade). My dad had a talk with me a couple of years later, but I already had all the information. He was glad that I already knew. :shrug:

Any way you cut it, Palin as VP was a horrible decision, and not thought-out too well. It speaks loud and clear as to McCain's decision-making faculties.

If he chooses a running-mate this poorly, could you imagine the horrible choices he'd make as president?




Absolutely!!


Because there has never before been a President who made a weak, (perceived or real), VP selection who went on to making sound and beneficial decisions as President.

Sorry, slop101. The more this carries on, the better the pick is seeming to me.

If she knocks it out of the park (or lets America get to second base with her) in her speech tonight, it could really be strong.

I'm sure our Obama fans who were in shock and awe over Obama's speech will jump all over her no matter what, but it's the impression of the public at large that will count.

My position is this - if we are going to have public schools in this country, and if my taxes are going to fund the schools in my area, then I want kids educated in all forms of birth control, without regard to political agendas. I want them to know that not having sex is the only 100% guarantee of not getting pregnant or contracting an STD. But I want them to be aware of every possible other form of birth control, and I want them to be educated on their use without stigma or judgment. And I'd probably want free condoms passed out in the hallways of our classrooms.

Any way you cut it, Palin as VP was a horrible decision, and not thought-out too well. It speaks loud and clear as to McCain's decision-making faculties.

If he chooses a running-mate this poorly, could you imagine the horrible choices he'd make as president?

Really? I think it's a fantastic decision. And the more I think about it, the better the decision is.

It's good public policy.

We teach kids about other health issues such as diseases, eating right, exercising and taking care of their bodies. Why can't we teach them about properly taking care of their bodies when it comes to sex?


I have no problem with sex education when it's done in an effort to present factual information about human reproduction and contraception.

The problem I have is that it's often done with a 'nudge, nudge, wink, wink' approach that indicates that the instructors EXPECT many of the students to engage in sexual activities. That is undoubtedly a fact, but acting as if it's an approved activity (and I realize that many in this forum have no objections to unmarried or even teenage intercourse) can't help but give the appearance of adult approval.

Also, I get the impression that many advocates of sex education would prefer to be dismissive of recommendations for abstinence (or would eliminate it entirely as being "unrealistic" and counterproductive since the kids wouldn't give credence to the rest of the talk). You hear this opinion expressed so often as "Kids are going to have sex regardless". I would amend that to say that "Some (not all) kids are going to have sex anyway".

We hear so much about 'the audacity of hope'...why do we insist on self-fulfilling prophecies regarding sex education? As has been pointed out, we don't instruct kids on the safest ways to do smoke, for instance (Now, kids, if you're going to smoke, be sure to use light tar & nicotine). It's the problem I've always had with designated driver programs...it gives the impression that one expects that parties have to be accompanied by underage drinking, therefore we're going to assist you & give you less reason not to participate.

For those who insist on the 'good' that conceding the moral positions in favor of "practicality", who knows how many kids might have behaved more responsibly if the adults didn't act as if they condoned the behavior even while advising against it?

All I'm saying is that he could've chosen better, a lot better.

I mean, say you're hiring for your medical practice and you pass over the Harvard-med grad for a beauty contestant from Greater Granada med school, well, you've made a bad decision.

Because there has never before been a President who made a weak, (perceived or real), VP selection who went on to making sound and beneficial decisions as President.

Correct. Let's look at George H.W. Bush for example...

Okay, bad example... :)

I have no problem with sex education when it's done in an effort to present factual information about human reproduction and contraception.

The problem I have is that it's often done with a 'nudge, nudge, wink, wink' approach that indicates that the instructors EXPECT many of the students to engage in sexual activities. That is undoubtedly a fact, but acting as if it's an approved activity (and I realize that many in this forum have no objections to unmarried or even teenage intercourse) can't help but give the appearance of adult approval.

Also, I get the impression that many advocates of sex education would prefer to be dismissive of recommendations for abstinence (or would eliminate it entirely as being "unrealistic" and counterproductive since the kids wouldn't give credence to the rest of the talk). You hear this opinion expressed so often as "Kids are going to have sex regardless". I would amend that to say that "Some (not all) kids are going to have sex anyway".

We hear so much about 'the audacity of hope'...why do we insist on self-fulfilling prophecies regarding sex education? As has been pointed out, we don't instruct kids on the safest ways to do smoke, for instance (Now, kids, if you're going to smoke, be sure to use light tar & nicotine). It's the problem I've always had with designated driver programs...it gives the impression that one expects that parties have to be accompanied by underage drinking, therefore we're going to assist you & give you less reason not to participate.

For those who insist on the 'good' that conceding the moral positions in favor of "practicality", who knows how many kids might have behaved more responsibly if the adults didn't act as if they condoned the behavior even while advising against it?
I can only speak from my own experience in the public school system, but every sex ed/health class I was ever in, the instructor always told us the only 100% fool proof way to avoid STDs and pregnancy is abstinence, so I never experienced these other scenarios you're presenting and if in fact that's how some schools are teaching sex ed, they are doing wrong in my opinion.

My position is this - if we are going to have public schools in this country, and if my taxes are going to fund the schools in my area, then I want kids educated in all forms of birth control, without regard to political agendas.

I would agree. Sex-ed is an important part of any health class and it's important to know what is available, how that affects odds of pregnancy, STD prevention, etc.

I may dispute certain methods of teaching these things, but I strongly believe that they should be taught, along with the benefits of abstinence.

Yes, parents can teach this at home to an awkward extent, but not nearly as effectively.

My position is this - if we are going to have public schools in this country, and if my taxes are going to fund the schools in my area, then I want kids educated in all forms of birth control, without regard to political agendas. I want them to know that not having sex is the only 100% guarantee of not getting pregnant or contracting an STD. But I want them to be aware of every possible other form of birth control, and I want them to be educated on their use without stigma or judgment. And I'd probably want free condoms passed out in the hallways of our classrooms.


I really do understand your position but feel that you undermine it with your final statement. Do you actually feel that passing out free condoms in the hallways is NOT advocating a political agenda?? How can one promote abstinence even while handing out condoms?

"Gun control legislation is the safest way to prevent the public massacres that we've been seeing in the news. Oh, by the way...here's the safest way to handle your AK-47."

No mixed message there??

And explain why it should be the role of the school system vs the parents?

Why should it be the role of the school system to teach kids math or English or physics?

I really do understand your position but feel that you undermine it with your final statement. Do you actually feel that passing out free condoms in the hallways is NOT advocating a political agenda?? How can one promote abstinence even while handing out condoms?

"Gun control legislation is the safest way to prevent the public massacres that we've been seeing in the news. Oh, by the way...here's the safest way to handle your AK-47."

No mixed message there??

Every time I've ever been on an airplane, I've never had any doubt in my mind whatsoever that the pilot has no interest in bringing us down in the middle of a lake, notwithstanding the fact that I am informed that my seat cushion can be used as a flotation device.

Why should it be the role of the school system to teach kids math or English or physics?

Because John Dewey said so.

Every time I've ever been on an airplane, I've never had any doubt in my mind whatsoever that the pilot has no interest in bringing us down in the middle of a lake, notwithstanding the fact that I am informed that my seat cushion can be used as a flotation device.

No...but, if the pilot behaved as if he/she EXPECTED a crash to happen, I'd be booking another flight ASAP.

"Gun control legislation is the safest way to prevent the public massacres that we've been seeing in the news. Oh, by the way...here's the safest way to handle your AK-47."You're barking up the wrong tree buddy. I'm from Kentucky. I was taught weapons safety in grade school and how to field strip an M-16 in high school.

Too bad, your comparison might have worked with just about anybody else. :lol:

Every time I've ever been on an airplane, I've never had any doubt in my mind whatsoever that the pilot has no interest in bringing us down in the middle of a lake, notwithstanding the fact that I am informed that my seat cushion can be used as a flotation device.

I love how they announce it without much concern. My view:
*If we crash, but don't manage to kill you, please exit promptly via the wing exits, before the plane catches fire.
*If the hull ruptures and all the air rushes out, please try breathing from oxygen masks while we make an emergency descent.

All I'm saying is that he could've chosen better, a lot better.

I mean, say you're hiring for your medical practice and you pass over the Harvard-med grad for a beauty contestant from Greater Granada med school, well, you've made a bad decision.

Nope. I think that all things considered, that was the best decision.

And, really, are we questioning her abilities because of her appearance? The last time I checked, she was governor of a state (and has the highest approval ratings among all 50 states), while the top of the democratic ticket's "management experience" is derived from his run for president (those are his words, not mine).

If she's a "beauty contestant from Greater Granada med school" then Obama is the guy who starts commercials with "I'm not a doctor, but I play one on TV".

And please don't pull out that DNC talking point about her being "the mayor of a town of 9,000." I'll take a mayor over a "community organizer" any day. Then again, I'll take the governor over a major oil producing state with two international borders over an absentee senator. So what do I know?

You're barking up the wrong tree buddy. I'm from Kentucky. I was taught weapons safety in grade school and how to field strip an M-16 in high school.

Too bad, your comparison might have worked with just about anybody else. :lol:

You got me cold, wenders. Total surrender on my part!! You expertise has just won the Border War with this Tennessean.

I couldn't find a smilie with both hands up, so I'll just salute you with a :toast:

As an example of one of the reasons this was such a good pick...

Obama's major "legislative accomplishment" according to his surrogates and website is an ethics reform bill.

Let's look at Palin's ethics background...


Governor Murkowski appointed Palin to the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, where she chaired the Commission from 2003 to 2004, and also served as Ethics Supervisor. Palin resigned in January 2004 in protest over what she called the "lack of ethics" of fellow Republican members.

After resigning, Palin filed formal complaints against the state Republican Party's chairman, Randy Ruedrich, and former Alaska Attorney General Gregg Renkes. She accused Ruedrich, one of her fellow commissioners, of doing work for the party on public time and working closely with a company he was supposed to be regulating. Ruedrich and Renkes both resigned and Ruedrich paid a record $12,000 fine.


Hmm... a guy running for president who co-authored a bill about ethics or a whistleblower who risked her entire career and made herself a pariah (she was hated in the AK Republican party for years) for identifying and actually fighting ethics.

Governor Palin's ethics record is mixed at best. There's an awful lot of evidence that suggests her problem isn't with corruption, so much as it is with corruption that is not to her benefit.

And please don't pull out that DNC talking point about her being "the mayor of a town of 9,000." I'll take a mayor over a "community organizer" any day. Then again, I'll take the governor over a major oil producing state with two international borders over an absentee senator. So what do I know?Does Florida have an international border then?

Does Florida have an international border then?

There are no international waters between Russia and Alaska. It's only 20 miles between the two countries. There are international waters between Florida and Cuba.

And if you think that a water border is insignificant, you haven't read about Russian fighters and warships threatening US ships and planes.

Governor Palin's ethics record is mixed at best. There's an awful lot of evidence that suggests her problem isn't with corruption, so much as it is with corruption that is not to her benefit.

Really? So how was it to her advantage to take on the AK republican party?

And what other "corruption" is there? The pissed off former employee who claims he was wrongly fired? Over 50% of my fired employees have come back and claimed that I screwed them. I even had a guy quit who came back and threatened me with a lawsuit for creating too much "stress".

Should we even get into Obama or Biden's backgrounds?

There are no international waters between Russia and Alaska. It's only 20 miles between the two countries. There are international waters between Florida and Cuba.Well the Bering Strait is actually 53 miles wide although Little Diomede and Big Diomede are separated by only 2.5 miles.

Still, while they technical share a border in sparesly populated areas, is there any documentation of Palin's contact with the Russians? Does proximity really add to her experience? I'm perfectly willing to give you Canada.

There are no international waters between Russia and Alaska. It's only 20 miles between the two countries. There are international waters between Florida and Cuba.

Are you sure about that? International waters are generally 200 natical miles offshore. Florida is only 90 miles form Cuba.

Really? So how was it to her advantage to take on the AK republican party?

She's got political enemies within her own party, as most politicians do. Your question is like asking how it was to Senator Obama's advantage to take on fellow Democratic Senator Clinton?

And what other "corruption" is there? The pissed off former employee who claims he was wrongly fired? Over 50% of my fired employees have come back and claimed that I screwed them. I even had a guy quit who came back and threatened me with a lawsuit for creating too much "stress".

Gee, I can't imagine why. You seem like such a people person.

In any event, it's not just one pissed-off former employee. One of her first acts as mayor of Wasilla was apparently to try to fire many high level civil servants (police chief, fire chief, etc.) because they did not support her politically.

Should we even get into Obama or Biden's backgrounds?

Haven't we been doing that for the past 18 months?

Are you sure about that? International waters are generally 200 natical miles offshore. Florida is only 90 miles form Cuba.I wasn't sure about that either. According to wikipedia, Territorial waters stop 12 nautical miles out then there's an Exclusive Economic Zone from 12-200NM. I'm assuming because the Diomedes Islands are so close the territorial waters area applies meaning Alaska and Russia do have a true international border.

I'd say that being governor of Florida conveys far more international experience than being governor of Alaska, but I wouldn't say Florida has an international border.

Are you sure about that? International waters are generally 200 natical miles offshore. Florida is only 90 miles form Cuba.

Nope. Territorial waters extend 12 miles. I believe you're talking about the "economic exclusion zone" that extends 200 miles out to sea.

If Doug Stanhope offends you, you probably shouldn't watch. (if I broke any rules, sorry)

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/R8hlj_UFi-g&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/R8hlj_UFi-g&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

If Doug Stanhope offends you, you probably shouldn't watch. (if I broke any rules, sorry)

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/R8hlj_UFi-g&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/R8hlj_UFi-g&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
That's pretty pathetic.

I LOLed.

If Doug Stanhope offends you...


Only his lack of "Funny" offends me. :down:-ohbfrank-

I'd say that being governor of Florida conveys far more international experience than being governor of Alaska, but I wouldn't say Florida has an international border.

Alaska has a lot of international issues, including territorial issues over the Arctic ocean, issues with the Russian military (including the positioning of US early warning launch systems and the missile shield), Russia / US / Canada fishing rights and natural resource rights, and issues with the Canadian land border, etc.

Florida's governor obviously has to deal with ethic diversity in his state and controversy over Cuba, but it's not like he has to meet with the Cuban president or government over issues, but he does have to be well informed on the situation.

Texas / Arizona / New Mexico / California also have to deal with Mexican land border issues quite a bit, so their government and officials generally has to be well informed on the topic.

A foreign relations subcommittee chairman who has never held a meeting of his subcomittee but did make a speech to Germans and visit Iraq (but went to work out instead of meeting with injured soldiers)? Not so much.

If Doug Stanhope offends you, you probably shouldn't watch. (if I broke any rules, sorry)

It's not so much that it offends (though, come on, he's making fun of down syndrome?) me that it's just not funny.

Alaska has a lot of international issues, including territorial issues over the Arctic ocean, issues with the Russian military (including the positioning of US early warning launch systems and the missile shield), Russia / US / Canada fishing rights and natural resource rights, and issues with the Canadian land border, etc.I'm fairly confident she's had contact with Canada. They physically border each other in actual regions where people live. Anway, I already said that. However, I'm going to ask it again: Is there any record of any contact between Palin and Russia? Have there even be any issues she's had to deal with at all concerning Russia?

I'm fairly certain the answer is a resounding no. Mrs. McCain and other Republicans got made fun of a lot for trotting out this line and as far as I can tell they've had absolutely no rebuttal. I looked, but couldn't find anything, maybe you'll have better luck.

Let's try and be intellectually honest here.

It's not so much that it offends (though, come on, he's making fun of down syndrome?) me that it's just not funny.I didn't find it funny. I generally like Stanhope too.

if you overthink it, of course it's not funny. it's supposed to be offensive.

if you overthink it, of course it's not funny. it's supposed to be offensive.And that pretty much sums up Doug Stanhope and his act.

And that pretty much sums up Doug Stanhope and his act.

yep. anti-PC comedy is where it's at.

Alaska has a lot of international issues, including territorial issues over the Arctic ocean, issues with the Russian military (including the positioning of US early warning launch systems and the missile shield), Russia / US / Canada fishing rights and natural resource rights, and issues with the Canadian land border, etc.


Those are issues that come up during the history of Alaskan Governors, just not during her term. All her Administrative Orders have been State-oriented, including the creation of a sub-committee on Climate Change, which she believes is not man-made.

The Early Warning Radar system as well as Missile Shield were developed and implemented before she became Governor; she didn't have to confront the issue.

Russia hasn't been involved with Alaska in regards to fishing rights in the past two years; Canada did in May of this year and the US negotiated to giving up Alaskan rights in order to placate the Canadians and stop them from fishing. So she wasn't able to sway the US to keep an important part of the State's economy alive. Not sure that's something to be proud of.

At lunch, I was watching the Straight Talk Express jetliner land followed by a drawn out photo op with young Bristol Palin and her studly boyfriend in tow. So now that McCain has chosen to bring studly boyfriend into the campaign, does this now mean he no longer feels they are off limits? BTW, shouldn't they be in school?

At lunch, I was watching the Straight Talk Express jetliner land followed by a drawn out photo op with young Bristol Palin and her studly boyfriend in tow. So now that McCain has chosen to bring studly boyfriend into the campaign, does this now mean he no longer feels they are off limits? BTW, shouldn't they be in school?

So I guess because Obama's kids were on stage last week at the Democrat convention talking to their dad in front of a national audience, they're now fair game?

Unless Bristol and Levi are out there on the campaign trail giving speeches, they're off limits. Even Obama and Biden are saying this. Why is this so difficult for people to understand?

does this now mean he no longer feels they are off limits? BTW, shouldn't they be in school?

Wait, Obama had his kids at the convention. I guess that means they're fair game. I heard Malia was caught holding hands with a boy at lunch!

When Bristol Palin and/or the baby daddy start making political speeches, they're fair game. Until then, they're off limits. See how that works? It's the same rule with spouses. If a spouse just talks about how great his/her spouse is, then that person is off limits (see Cindy McCain, Jill Biden, and Todd Palin). As soon as the spouse mentions a political opponent or a talking point, that person is open for attack (see Michelle Obama or Hillary Clinton in 1992), unless he/she has a terminal illness (see Elizabeth Edwards).

Levi is not part of the family. He should be in school, probably. Why did they bring Levi to Minnesota? For the photo op perhaps? What issue are you going to make of Obama's little girls? :lol:

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20080903/i/r3718999671.jpg?x=400&y=257&q=85&sig=ccMozbFThFlNA0yD9RdUPA--

Why is this so difficult for people to understand?

I am having absolutely no difficulty. This is probably the first time I brought up the kid. Relax.

At lunch, I was watching the Straight Talk Express jetliner land followed by a drawn out photo op with young Bristol Palin and her studly boyfriend in tow. So now that McCain has chosen to bring studly boyfriend into the campaign, does this now mean he no longer feels they are off limits?

Chelsea Clinton, the Bush twins, and Obama's kids appeared with their parents during conventions, and even stood on stage during campaign stops, but they were still off limits. Unless they start making speeches, they aren't public figures.

this is conservatives in alaska, they're home schooled

At lunch, I was watching the Straight Talk Express jetliner land followed by a drawn out photo op with young Bristol Palin and her studly boyfriend in tow. So now that McCain has chosen to bring studly boyfriend into the campaign, does this now mean he no longer feels they are off limits? BTW, shouldn't they be in school?

He is pretty dreamy, isn't he?

Great article by Peggy Noonan about all of this. Here's the link...

http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html

He is pretty dreamy, isn't he?

And the multi-millionaire McCains wouldn't even buy him a suit. :lol: I'm sure he'll have $500 shoes on tonight though.

So, if she wins, how soon till they put Air Force Two up on eBay?

That would pay for what, a day in Iraq?

Speaking of children off limits, remember when John McCain made that awful Chelsea Clinton joke back in '98? Karma, baby.

Great article by Peggy Noonan about all of this. Here's the link...

http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.htmlI'm surprised you can actually wade through Noonan's stream-of-consciousness rantings. I can rarely finish one of her columns. But, what I could get out of that one was pretty good.

Levi is not part of the family.

He's a fiancee -- close enough for government work.

He should be in school, probably.

I'm sure his mother will write a note excusing him for the day. But it's touching that you care.

Why did they bring Levi to Minnesota? For the photo op perhaps? What issue are you going to make of Obama's little girls? :lol:

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20080903/i/r3718999671.jpg?x=400&y=257&q=85&sig=ccMozbFThFlNA0yD9RdUPA--

Reporters snapping pictures with telephoto lenses is hardly a photo-op.

Palin sold the jet. But she also increased the sales tax, including groceries, to pay for a multi-million hockey area in her town of 7,000 people. What a reformer!

Reporters snapping pictures with telephoto lenses is hardly a photo-op.

Yeah, I guess you missed the next shot of them all lined up for the press.

http://www.nypost.com/photos/galleries/news/nationalnews/pp_20080903_mccainfam/photo01.jpg

To repeat what I think someone already said: I think she's a risky, but possibly good pick to try and win the election, but a horrid pick for the nation.

Those are issues that come up during the history of Alaskan Governors, just not during her term. All her Administrative Orders have been State-oriented, including the creation of a sub-committee on Climate Change, which she believes is not man-made.

Climate Change. The biggest scam out there these days. :lol:

Anyway, she most certainly did deal with foreign countries on these issues. She also had to deal with Russians as part of the AOGCC. Just because an executive order wasn't issued doesn't mean that there wasn't contact, discussion, and/or an understanding of an international problem.

The last time I checked, Biden didn't issue any executive orders on international policy, yet his is considered to be well versed in international affairs because of his contact, discussion, and understanding of international issues.




The Early Warning Radar system as well as Missile Shield were developed and implemented before she became Governor; she didn't have to confront the issue.

She didn't install it, but she's certaintly dealt with the consequences. Obviously, the Secretary of State isn't sending her to Moscow to negotiate the problem, but you can be that she's well versed on the issue.



So she wasn't able to sway the US to keep an important part of the State's economy alive. Not sure that's something to be proud of.

Is that sort of like how some people called for unconditional withdraw from Iraq and the division of a sovereign nation into three parts to placate the American people? I think being completely wrong in that situation is much worse than anything that could happen with fishing waters (not to mention that we don't know who made the call on that one - as Governor, she doesn't have the final say in international treaties and agreements. Who does? Oh yeah, the Senate).

Speaking of children off limits, remember when John McCain made that awful Chelsea Clinton joke back in '98? Karma, baby.

The real karma for Senator McCain's "joke" was when his own daughter got used against him in a whispering campaign in 2000.

So, if she wins, how soon till they put Air Force Two up on eBay?

That would pay for what, a day in Iraq?

Or about 15 minutes of the ensuing shit-storm that would occur in a destablized Middle East.

Speaking of children off limits, remember when John McCain made that awful Chelsea Clinton joke back in '98? Karma, baby.

In case anyone is wondering, McCain is reported to have said the following:

"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?
Because her father is Janet Reno."

Now THAT is class.

To repeat what I think someone already said: I think she's a risky, but possibly good pick to try and win the election, but a horrid pick for the nation.

How so? I've got another hour to kill before UPS shows up with my "Palin for President" bumper sticker.

Or about 15 minutes of the ensuing shit-storm that would occur in a destablized Middle East.

What ensuing shit-storm? The outrage of the Sunnis that Palin sold Air Force Two?

That is damned good question. I hope someone has the balls to ask that question in a debate.

In case anyone is wondering, McCain is reported to have said the following:

"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?
Because her father is Janet Reno."

Now THAT is class.
:lol:

Classless but funny as hell.

How so? I've got another hour to kill before UPS shows up with my "Palin for President" bumper sticker.

This is what happens when the Braves are out of it in May. :lol:

:lol:

Classless but funny as hell.

Like "Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran?"

To repeat what I think someone already said: I think she's a risky, but possibly good pick to try and win the election, but a horrid pick for the nation.

:up:

And I think Peggy Noonan touched on something in that op-ed piece: no matter what happens in this election it will be set at Palin's feet. If McCain loses, it will be her fault. If he wins, it will be credited to him choosing her.

:up:

And I think Peggy Noonan touched on something in that op-ed piece: no matter what happens in this election it will be set at Palin's feet. If McCain loses, it will be her fault. If he wins, it will be credited to him choosing her.I don't think any more than Eagleton was blamed for McGovern's loss. It was McGovern who messed up by choosing him, not Eagleton. Although I seem to recall Eagleton conveniently failed to mention his electoshock treatments.

Sarah Palin proposed legislation and cash incentives to encourage what? -eek-

Aerial wolf hunting?

http://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/golo/2008/08/29/3458084/48b8765b8a12c-400x518.jpg

Sarah Palin proposed legislation and cash incentives to encourage what? -eek-

Aerial wolf hunting?

http://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/golo/2008/08/29/3458084/48b8765b8a12c-400x518.jpgGov Palin's response (http://www.skinnymoose.com/palinlettertomiller.pdf) to California Rep Miller and his bill.

Great article by Peggy Noonan about all of this. Here's the link...

http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html

That was a good read. Kellyanne Conway's quote "We are a nation of Wasillas, not Chicagos" reminded me of this nugget from Flanders: "We occupy that useless mass of land between Los Angeles and New York called America!" :lol:

Sarah Palin proposed legislation and cash incentives to encourage what? -eek-

Aerial wolf hunting?

http://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/golo/2008/08/29/3458084/48b8765b8a12c-400x518.jpg

:lol: City folk.

She was with the AOGCC for one year and resigned; the AOGCC is a state agency that deals with oil in the state, nothing foreign about it.

You're right, Biden didn't issue any executive orders, but Palin's the one that's having her executive experience touted over and over again but there's nothing to show for it in regards to foreign policy experience.

The "consequences" are nothing she has control over so I don't see how the points to her foreign policy experience; she's not going to launch the missiles and she faces the same uncontrollable aspects of Russian foreign policy that all governors in the Union face. No unique qualifications there.

That we are quibbling over fishing rights points to her extremely under-qualified status. In a previous post I mentioned how McCain could have selected Kay Bailey Hutchinson if he was looking for a female reformer and now I saw this leaked video:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CrG8w4bb3kg&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CrG8w4bb3kg&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

I heard that earlier but I walked out midway and checked to see if it was what I heard. That's Mike Murphy of the 2000 McCain Campaign and Peggy Noonan; someone tell me they are liberals spreading the talking points.

That was a good read. Kellyanne Conway's quote "We are a nation of Wasillas, not Chicagos" reminded me of this nugget from Flanders: "We occupy that useless mass of land between Los Angeles and New York called America!" :lol:

This is flat out wrong. More than half the country lives in cities of more than 200,000 people (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/census/cps2k.htm), and more than three quarters in towns bigger than Wasilla. If anything, we are a nation of Chicagoans -- although the reality is we are a nation of both Chicagoans and Wasillans, and it gets a little old to hear the urban/northeastern/California/whatever experience denigrated as somehow less "American" than the small town experience.

You're right, Biden didn't issue any executive orders, but Palin's the one that's having her executive experience touted over and over again but there's nothing to show for it in regards to foreign policy experience.

The "consequences" are nothing she has control over so I don't see how the points to her foreign policy experience; she's not going to launch the missiles and she faces the same uncontrollable aspects of Russian foreign policy that all governors in the Union face. No unique qualifications there.

That we are quibbling over fishing rights points to her extremely under-qualified status.
Agreed gmanca. I like Palin actually... probably not the best choice, but I think she's smart and the kind of politician that McCain used to be. The kind of politician I could actually get excited about voting for.

I just think the touting of Palin's experience with Russia as anything more than resume padding is ridiculous. I know matta has read enough resumes to see through the BS. Maybe that's why I'm so surprised he's spouting it.

She was with the AOGCC for one year and resigned; the AOGCC is a state agency that deals with oil in the state, nothing foreign about it.

You're right, Biden didn't issue any executive orders, but Palin's the one that's having her executive experience touted over and over again but there's nothing to show for it in regards to foreign policy experience.

The "consequences" are nothing she has control over so I don't see how the points to her foreign policy experience; she's not going to launch the missiles and she faces the same uncontrollable aspects of Russian foreign policy that all governors in the Union face. No unique qualifications there.

That we are quibbling over fishing rights points to her extremely under-qualified status. In a previous post I mentioned how McCain could have selected Kay Bailey Hutchinson if he was looking for a female reformer and now I saw this leaked video:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CrG8w4bb3kg&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CrG8w4bb3kg&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

I heard that earlier but I walked out midway and checked to see if it was what I heard. That's Mike Murphy of the 2000 McCain Campaign and Peggy Noonan; someone tell me they are liberals spreading the talking points.


If I didn't want to further foster the attack that I was the same as Bush, why would I take Hutchinson?

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dkaKwJ9eOUU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dkaKwJ9eOUU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

http://www.horrortalk.com/_forum/images/smilies/rotfl.gif

repeating talking points = smackdown?

I also don't see why this deserves it's own thread.

Are you laughing on what a "smackdown" he laid on the reporter, or at the pathetically incredible stretches that he came up with to defend Palin?

And yeah, this should be in one of the existing threads.

The only thing "Newt" can smack down is his morning erection - if he even gets that anymore

Agreed gmanca. I like Palin actually... probably not the best choice, but I think she's smart and the kind of politician that McCain used to be. The kind of politician I could actually get excited about voting for.

I just think the touting of Palin's experience with Russia as anything more than resume padding is ridiculous. I know matta has read enough resumes to see through the BS. Maybe that's why I'm so surprised he's spouting it.

ITA that she comes off a very personable, likable woman with effervescent, I just don't think she's ready to be a VP pick. I was totally against the whole "It's not her baby!" crap but I'm not going to translate sympathy into a vote.

kvrdave, McCain was going to deal with the Bush connection regardless of who he chose as VP; Hutchinson is the longest serving female Republican senator who was with him on the surge, wants to drill, and believes that Roe v. Wade is constitutional. She is an infinitely better pick than Palin and I thank God that she wasn't chosen.

I don't know about 'smackdown'.

But it was nice to see someone point out how nonsensical the 'attacks' are on Palin.

The fact that any Obama supporter takes a stand on candidate 'experience' and 'qualifications' is a testament to the power of self delusion.

A sex scandal got Obama into office, he lucked up. A hell of a good speech at the 2004 DNC got him national attention. Obama is a candidate today by the most paper thin of margins, with a good portion of blind ass luck.

No one can name any one notable thing Obama has ever done because there isn't anything. Just really good speeches and blind ass luck.

kvrdave, McCain was going to deal with the Bush connection regardless of who he chose as VP; Hutchinson is the longest serving female Republican senator who was with him on the surge, wants to drill, and believes that Roe v. Wade is constitutional. She is an infinitely better pick than Palin and I thank God that she wasn't chosen.


And because she believes that about Roe, it means it would have doomed any chance of that ticket getting the full support of the base (and thus winning).

I don't know about 'smackdown'.

But it was nice to see someone point out how nonsensical the 'attacks' are on Palin.

The fact that any Obama supporter takes a stand on candidate 'experience' and 'qualifications' is a testament to the power of self delusion.

A sex scandal got Obama into office, he lucked up. A hell of a good speech at the 2004 DNC got him national attention. Obama is a candidate today by the most paper thin of margins, with a good portion of blind ass luck.

No one can name any one notable thing Obama has ever done because there isn't anything. Just really good speeches and blind ass luck.

Not saying either is very "Experienced" but who would you give the edge to?

Saw this "experience breakdown"...

Obama:
B.A in political science from Columbia University, with a specialization in international relations
J.D. in Law from Harvard, graduated magna cum laude; President of the Harvard Law Review
12 years (92-04) teaching constitutional law
7 years State Senator: sponsored more than 800 bills
4 years Senator for Illinos, a state with 12.8 million people

Palin:
Bachelor's in journalism from University of Idaho
4 years Wasilla City Council (8000 people)
6 years Wasilla mayor (8000 people)
1 year "Ethics Commissioner of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission"
20 months governor of a state with 660,000 people

And because she believes that about Roe, it means it would have doomed any chance of that ticket getting the full support of the base (and thus winning).

After the Democratic Primary, she would have pulled in enough Democrats to offset the loss of the base and still gained on the Independents as opposed to Palin. Any other year and I'd agree with you, but not this time, not with these unique attributes.

Does Palin have more executive experience than both Obama & Biden.

The last I heard the presidency was an executive office.

Hey you forgot "Community Organizer" from Obama's profile. And even with that added on, she's more qualified than him based on her accomplishments.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28370


The Best Man Turned Out To Be A Woman
by Ann Coulter (more by this author)
Posted 09/03/2008 ET
Updated 09/03/2008 ET


John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, as his running mate finally gave Republicans a reason to vote for him -- a reason, that is, other than B. Hussein Obama.

The media are hopping mad about McCain's vice presidential selection, but they're really furious over at MSNBC. After drawing "Keith (plus) Obama" hearts on their denim notebooks, Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews stayed up all night last Thursday, writing jokes about Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, the presumed vice presidential pick. Now they can't use any of them.

So the media are taking it out on our brave Sarah and her 17-year-old daughter.

They claimed Palin was chosen only because she's a woman. In fact, Palin was chosen because she's pro-life, pro-gun, pro-drilling and pro-tax cuts. She's fought both Republicans and Democrats on public corruption and does not have hair plugs like some other vice presidential candidate I could mention. In other words, she's a "Republican."

As a right-winger, Palin will appeal to the narrow 59 percent of Americans who voted for another former small-market sportscaster: Ronald Reagan. Our motto: Sarah Palin is only a heartbeat away!

If you're going to say Palin was chosen because she's a woman, you're going to have to demonstrate that the runners-up were more qualified. Gov. Tim Pawlenty seems like a terrific fellow and fine governor, but he is not obviously more qualified than Palin.

As for former governor of Pennsylvania Tom Ridge and Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman, the other also-rans, I can think of at least 40 million unborn reasons she's better than either of them.

Within the first few hours after Palin's name was announced, McCain raised $4 million in campaign donations online, reaching $10 million within the next two days. Which shortlist vice presidential pick could have beaten that?

The media hysterically denounced Palin as "inexperienced." But then people started to notice that she has more executive experience than B. Hussein Obama -- the guy at the top of the Democrats' ticket.

They tried to create a "Troopergate" for Palin, indignantly demanding to know why she wanted to get her ex-brother-in-law removed as a state trooper. Again, public corruption is not a good issue for someone like Obama, Chicago pol and noted friend of Syrian National/convicted felon Antoin Rezko.

For the cherry on top, then we found out Palin's ex-brother-in-law had Tasered his own 10-year-old stepson. Defend that, Democrats.

The bien-pensant criticized Palin, saying it's irresponsible for a woman with five children to run for vice president. Liberals' new talking point: Sarah Palin: Only five abortions away from the presidency.

They claimed her newborn wasn't her child, but the child of her 17-year-old daughter. That turned out to be a lie.

Then they attacked her daughter, who actually is pregnant now, for being unmarried. When liberals start acting like they're opposed to pre-marital sex and mothers having careers, you know McCain's vice presidential choice has knocked them back on their heels.

But at least liberal reporters had finally found someone their own size to pick on: a 17-year-old girl.

Speaking of Democrats with newborn children, the media weren't particularly concerned about John Edwards running for president despite his having a mistress with a newborn child.

While the difficult circumstances of Palin's pregnant daughter are being covered like a terrorist attack on the nation, with leering accounts of the 18-year-old father, the media remain resolutely uninterested in the parentage of Edwards' mistress's love child. Except, that is, the hardworking reporters at the National Enquirer, who say Edwards is the father.

As this goes to press, the latest media-invented scandal about Palin is that McCain didn't know her well before choosing her as his running mate. He knew her well enough, though admittedly, not as well as Obama knows William Ayers.

John F. Kennedy, who was -- from what the media tell me -- America's most beloved president, detested his vice president, Lyndon Johnson.

Until Clinton interviewed Al Gore one time before choosing him as his vice presidential candidate, he had met Gore only one other time: when Gore was running for president in 1988 and flew to Little Rock seeking Clinton's endorsement. Clinton turned him down.

To this day, there's no proof that Bill Clinton ever met one-on-one with his CIA director, James Woolsey, other than a brief chat after midnight the night before Woolsey's nomination was announced.

Barring some all-new, trivial and probably false story about Palin -- her former hairdresser got a parking ticket in 1978! -- the media apparently intend to keep being hysterical about McCain's alleged failure to "vet" Palin properly. The problem with this argument is that it presupposes that everyone is asking: "HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?"

No one's saying that.

Attacks on McCain's "vetting" process require the media to keep claiming that Palin has a lot of problems. But she doesn't have any problems. Remember? Those were all blind alleys.

Unfortunately, for the ordinary TV viewer hearing nonstop hysteria about nonspecific "problems," it takes a lot of effort to figure out that every attack liberals have launched against Palin turned out to be a lie.

It's as if a basketball player made the winning shot in the last three seconds of the game and liberals demand that we have a week-long discussion about whether the player should have taken that shot. WHAT IF HE MISSED?

With Palin, McCain didn't miss.

McCain could have immediately put a wet blanket on the media feeding-frenzy if he would have said that the father of Palin's daughter's child was John Edwards.

After the Democratic Primary, she would have pulled in enough Democrats to offset the loss of the base and still gained on the Independents ...............

No!

In case anyone is wondering, McCain is reported to have said the following:

"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?
Because her father is Janet Reno."

Now THAT is class.

That is so wrong....

Everyone knows that Webb Hubbel is Chelsea's father.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2019/2183970420_6b6a2fe37f_m.jpg

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmQ0ZTdiNDZkYmYzNDZhZGI5Zjc3NjliYzM0NmUzNDg=


To Palinize... [Victor Davis Hanson]



Palinize: to slander and caricature a working-class female public figure for the noble advancement of liberalism.

Sarah Palin—self-made woman, and governor of Alaska—is being reducing by the left to a hickish, white trash mom of five, analogous to the manner that esteemed jurists like Kenneth ("cigarette lawyer") Starr and Robert Bork were slandered by the media as incompetent right right-wing fanatics, and Clarence Thomas was pilloried as an affirmative action sex-maniac.

Why does the left and liberal media, in McCarthyite fashion, now seek to destroy rather than just oppose these public servants?

First, there is the annoited's notion that the noble ends justify the slimy means, that whether the issue is abortion or affirmative action or any other hot-button social gospel, the supposed interests of the many override the common decency that should be afforded the few.

We are supposed to think that given one's cosmic sense of fairness and caring, the white knight always is afforded a little human leeway in slaying dragons in the here and now. To save the utopian vision of "two nations" John Edwards, presidential candidate, hundreds in the media passed on verifiable stories of his adultery, the financial support of his mistress, and his blatantly untrue assertions in public press conferences; by the same token to stop "one nation" Palin, the private life of a 17-year old girl must not only be aired, but distorted and in some cases invented.

Second, as in the case of a Palin or Thomas, there is the notion that the slandered deserve it as interloppers—unauthentic women or minorities due to their conservative views, who piggyback on the hard work of feminists and those in the race/identity politics movement. They purportedly do not show enough appreciation and deference to the pioneers who suffered so much to give us abortion on demand, quotas in hiring, etc. and as ingrates thus get what they deserve. For talking-head feminists that a Sally Quin, Nancy Pelosi or Hillary Clinton—unlike Sarah Palin—had a well-connected, influential male around to energize her career is of no concern—except perhaps to make the animus against the outsider upstart even greater.

So class plays a lot too.