NationStates Jolt Archive

She just replaced the entire board because they didn't do what she wanted? That doesn't sound like the act of a good leader.. That sounds like the act of someone who wants to control everything, which is not the sort of person I want in my federal government, especially not in a position where she could become the President.

She sounds like a Bushevik's wet dream. Authoritarian and goat-headed stubborn to boot.

Rhinoceros Party. http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm199/God_of_the_Bloody_Tongue/emotes/emot-colbert.gif

Touché!

While her policy on gay marriage is less than desirable, at least the policies she's embraced regarding providing healthcare to gay employees partners is more enlightened than that of the Democrat governor of my state.

Also, as an Ohioan for virtually all of my life, I rather appreciate her anti-corruption viewpoints. My state is riddled with bullshit corruption in both parties, and I'm damn sick of it. The Republicans lost most of the executive in 2006 because of corruption, we're already down a Democrat Attorney General, and we've already got our second major Democrat scandal under way.

McCain used to be anti-corruption too. Look what happened. Like Joe Biden said, it's "George... er John McCain".

I can't believe nobody used this one mistake to joke here. :D

(I'm not sexy BTW. Or sexist.) :p

I think you're sexy. :)

I think you're sexy. :)

What's your gender again? o_O

Hehe....

From a press release from the McCain camp:
"Governor Palin is a tough executive who has demonstrated during her time in office that she is ready to be president."

"Her experience in shaking up the status quo is exactly what is needed in Washington today."

Yeah, they just undermined the ONLY attack they've ever had against Obama. Apparently, experience isn't as important as what you do with that experience. Who knew?

So - being young and inexperienced, is actually a virtue if it means you're less jaded by the process, and more likely to actually shake things up?

I bet the Democrats are kicking themselves now. If only they'd come up with a younger, more incendiary candidate focused on change.

Personally, I think Palin is an interesting choice. In some ways, it is a good pick. I do think it is cool that McCain picked a woman -- even if it is a cynical attempt to wedge-away Clinton supporters.

But selecting someone with so little political experience (a few years on the City Council and as mayor of a very small town and less than 2 years as a governor of a small state!!!!) completely contradicts McCain's arguments about Obama's alleged lack of readiness.

If Palin is qualified to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency, how can anyone argue that Obama is not qualified to be President?

Further, looking at various profiles on the web (including On the Issues (http://www.ontheissues.org/Sarah_Palin.htm)), Palin not only is unknown and inexperience, but doesn't have any record whatsoever on important issues of the day. She brings right-wing conservative views on social issues -- like denying same-sex marriage, but that is about it.

Overall, I don't think this gamble will work. There will be a few bitter Clinton supporters that will be happy with the pick, but most people will see through it.

Young black male attacking young white female. What does this look like in the American collective unconscious?

Every mainstream movie before the Civil Rights Act, and every porno flick since the Civil Rights Act?

What's your gender again? o_O

Haven't you run into this problem before? Or was that Hydesland...

She may fight corruption, but that doesn't mean she herself isn't corrupt also.


Isn't she currently under investigation?

(Yes - I know that being under investigation is practically an entry requirement for the current Republican line-up, but even so...)

No, but you can chalk up some foreign relations experience for the Hamburger.

Especially if it was a "Royale with Cheese".

Haven't you run into this problem before? Or was that Hydesland...

I HOPE it was Hydesland. o_O

I don't like abortion, It's an unfair fight. You're talking about a baby versus a doctor. Even if the doctor is 80 years old, the baby cannot win. Maybe if we gave all babies guns before an abortion...



oh it's a great idea but should be changed a bit

strap a bomb to the doctors head and slip the detonator up into the uterus

whoever aborts the other first wins

Personally, I think Palin is an interesting choice. In some ways, it is a good pick. I do think it is cool that McCain picked a woman -- even if it is a cynical attempt to wedge-away Clinton supporters.

But selecting someone with so little political experience (a few years on the City Council and as mayor of a very small town and less than 2 years as a governor of a small state!!!!) completely contradicts McCain's arguments about Obama's alleged lack of readiness.

If Palin is qualified to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency, how can anyone argue that Obama is not qualified to be President?

Further, looking at various profiles on the web (including On the Issues (http://www.ontheissues.org/Sarah_Palin.htm)), Palin not only is unknown and inexperience, but doesn't have any record whatsoever on important issues of the day. She brings right-wing conservative views on social issues -- like denying same-sex marriage, but that is about it.

Overall, I don't think this gamble will work. There will be a few bitter Clinton supporters that will be happy with the pick, but most people will see through it.
i do like her on first glance. what other major candidate has been out on the spouse's fishing boat helping bring in the catch?

as a woman it reminds me very much of george bush realizing that he should replace sandra day occonnor with another woman and picking the first one he saw--harriet miers, white house council. as if anyone with a vagina would do.

there are plenty of very qualified republican women he could have chosen. why did he choose someone with almost no qualifications?

Okay, the opportunities to dispute each other's mathematical skills are wondrous and limitless, but the problem is whether 'Available, but with more limitations' is for or against abortion.

Technically, it sounds like the situation mightn't be a dichotomy, or not totally encapsulated by the poll.

The problem is, you're falling into Baldy's little trap.

He set it up in such a way that he can claim the stats say what he says, but that's not the point.

I am against abortion. I am also pro-choice. Someone who believes abortion should be legal, but with tighter restriction - still pro-choice.

only 24% of women vote to illegalise abortion - which is the demographic Palin represents.

Baldy's claim is a little disingenuous, since he KNOWS that the 37% of women favouring retaining abortion with a little more control, fit into the 'pro-choice' demographic.

what is so worth voting for?

she is utterly unqualified for the job.

its a puzzling choice when there are so many better qualified republicans that were passed over.

I believe that Baldy is saying she's a great choice because - despite having no experience (which is BAD, remember) and being an outsider (which is BAD, remember) and being a bit of a populist choice (which is BAD, remember) and having no active service experience (which is BAD, remember) or Washington experience (which is BAD, remember) or Foreign Policy experience (which is BAD, remember) - she IS rabidly onside with the militant 'moral' agenda.

The problem is, you're falling into Baldy's little trap.

He set it up in such a way that he can claim the stats say what he says, but that's not the point.

I am against abortion. I am also pro-choice. Someone who believes abortion should be legal, but with tighter restriction - still pro-choice.

only 24% of women vote to illegalise abortion - which is the demographic Palin represents.

Baldy's claim is a little disingenuous, since he KNOWS that the 37% of women favouring retaining abortion with a little more control, fit into the 'pro-choice' demographic.

No shit, but I didn't very much think he'd listen to me calling him names.

Two different statments, not moving the goalposts.

Then... you're admitting your initial point was bullshit?

I believe that Baldy is saying she's a great choice because - despite having no experience (which is BAD, remember) and being an outsider (which is BAD, remember) and being a bit of a populist choice (which is BAD, remember) and having no active service experience (which is BAD, remember) or Washington experience (which is BAD, remember) or Foreign Policy experience (which is BAD, remember) - she IS rabidly onside with the militant 'moral' agenda.
which is ALL she is helpful with.

but will the disaffected base who would not bother to come out to vote for mccain/anyone else come out for mccain/palin?

she isnt going to bring in many other types of voters.

another +, she's against Gay marriage, but also Against discrimination, which is kinda the position I am at right now.

There's no such position.

If you oppose gay marriage, you are active in discriminating. There's no third estate.

Her wikipedia entry is full of stuff she's done - why is nobody commenting on her eloping or her being married to an Inuit - holy shit they just changed her wiki! :eek2::eek2:

Half an hour ago it had TONS of shit on her private life (eats moose burgers, broke her fingers in commercial fishing job, husband, kids, one of them with Down Syndrome, NRA member, EVERYTHING - now it's all gone.


Saved in case it disappears from archive:

Family and personal life
Palin's husband, Todd Palin,[76] works for BP energy corporation at an oil field on Alaska's North Slope[77] and works as a fisherman in his hometown in the summers. Todd is a champion snowmobiler, winning the 2,000-mile (3,200 km) "Iron Dog" race four times.[7] Todd is one-eighth Yup'ik. The two eloped shortly after Palin graduated from college; when they learned they needed witnesses for the civil ceremony, they recruited two residents from the old-age home down the street.[7] The Palin family lives in Wasilla, about 40 miles (64 km) north of Anchorage.

On September 11, 2007, the Palins' then eighteen-year-old son Track, eldest of five, joined the Army.[78] He now serves in an infantry brigade and will be deployed to Iraq on September 11, 2008.[79] She also has three daughters: Bristol, Willow and Piper.[13]

On April 18, 2008, while in office as governor, Palin gave birth to her second son and fifth child, Trig Paxson Van Palin, who prenatal genetic testing showed would have Down syndrome.[80] She returned to the office three days after giving birth.[18] Her decision to have the baby was applauded by the pro-life community.[81][82]

Details of Palin's personal life have contributed to her political image. She hunts, eats moose hamburger, ice fishes, rides snowmobiles, and owns a float plane.[20][83] Palin holds a lifetime membership with the National Rifle Association. In December 2007, Palin posed for a photo spread in the fashion magazine Vogue.[84]

? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maynard_James_Keenan)

limit.

Yay! Maynard James Keenan! That's who McCain should have picked!

the more I learn about Sara Palin, the more I like her.

I actually quite like her. I thought she made a good speech, and tried really hard.

I don't think liking her is necessarily a good qualification for VP. But then - at least twice in the last half-century, it's been enough to elect a president, so what do I know?

What's your gender again? o_O

Oh, don't go getting all Republican on me now....

Saved in case it disappears from archive:

Family and personal life
Palin's husband, Todd Palin,[76] works for BP energy corporation at an oil field on Alaska's North Slope[77] and works as a fisherman in his hometown in the summers. Todd is a champion snowmobiler, winning the 2,000-mile (3,200 km) "Iron Dog" race four times.[7] Todd is one-eighth Yup'ik. The two eloped shortly after Palin graduated from college; when they learned they needed witnesses for the civil ceremony, they recruited two residents from the old-age home down the street.[7] The Palin family lives in Wasilla, about 40 miles (64 km) north of Anchorage.

On September 11, 2007, the Palins' then eighteen-year-old son Track, eldest of five, joined the Army.[78] He now serves in an infantry brigade and will be deployed to Iraq on September 11, 2008.[79] She also has three daughters: Bristol, Willow and Piper.[13]

On April 18, 2008, while in office as governor, Palin gave birth to her second son and fifth child, Trig Paxson Van Palin, who prenatal genetic testing showed would have Down syndrome.[80] She returned to the office three days after giving birth.[18] Her decision to have the baby was applauded by the pro-life community.[81][82]

Details of Palin's personal life have contributed to her political image. She hunts, eats moose hamburger, ice fishes, rides snowmobiles, and owns a float plane.[20][83] Palin holds a lifetime membership with the National Rifle Association. In December 2007, Palin posed for a photo spread in the fashion magazine Vogue.[84]

I notice the first thing to drop from the wiki article was the bit about how she used to smoke pot, but didn't like it. Apparently.

Interesting choice for President of the Senate. Her stance on ethics and reputation as a political outsider probably appeals to McCain. But can someone so new to the scene keep from being stomped senseless by the Senate?

Also, considering McCain, if elected will be the oldest man ever to BE elected, I suspect we should consider whether she'll make a good President. :p

Exactly. If this choice of VP is any indication of his judgment, he's creating great cause for concern with this pick. Palin has no foreign policy experience, and no experience in government at the national level whatsoever. This is not a person I can imagine facing down the Senate, much less Putin. To suggest, as McCain is by picking her, that she is ready to lead should that be necessary is borderline indefensible. And to potentially put the nation in such a risky position, to me, seems unconscionable.

On face value, this appears to be an awesome choice.

The Republicans have done what the Democrats should have done.

Hillary Clinton should have been on the Democrat ticket.

Majority of Dems want Clinton to be V.P. (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/13/majority-of-dems-want-clinton-to-be-vp/)

Obama failed to do the right thing.

The Republicans certainly look more progressive with this pick, and I think it will seal the deal when the votes are counted in November.

This is an amazing choice. Yet for McCain, a really poor choice.

She has virtually no experiance, thus rendering all his accusations about Obama's inexperiance now moot, destroying one of his best weapons against him. During the VP debates, Bidan will eat her alive, which I think will be a glorious thing to witness.

Also, she hasnt been....whats that term team Obama used all the time during the primaries, vetted? We'll go with that. The dirt digging now begins, and everything thrown on the headlines about her will be new. And unless she handles it like Obama's team did, it will stick.

I dont think McCain thought very hard about this. I think he thought "OMG! A woman! Now all the psedo feminists who think that by not electing Hillary the DNC is sexist will now vote for me!"

Considering she is pro-life, which is a very unfemanist stance, I dont think this will help McCain as much as she thinks. "Look! I picked a woman! Im all about women and their rights and roles in government! Her and I just dont think women should have a say about their own bodies!"

This was an excellent choice from the DNC's standpoint, from the GOP's, Im thinking it is a rather poor one.

On face value, this appears to be an awesome choice.

The Republicans have done what the Democrats should have done.

Hillary Clinton should have been on the Democrat ticket.

Majority of Dems want Clinton to be V.P. (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/13/majority-of-dems-want-clinton-to-be-vp/)

Obama failed to do the right thing.

The Republicans certainly look more progressive with this pick, and I think it will seal the deal when the votes are counted in November.



:rolleyes: Im sorry, I missed the part where this is somehow about Hillary. I think we've had a zillion other threads on that.


As I said, this wont help the Reps at all. Her stance on abortion totally negates any "femanists points" they will get from choosing her.

I notice the first thing to drop from the wiki article was the bit about how she used to smoke pot, but didn't like it. Apparently.

Yes - I know I'm responding to my OWN post.

I just tracked down an earlier version of the wiki article, before they jumped on that.

"Details of Palin's personal life have contributed to her political image. She eats moose burgers and rides snowmobiles.[3] She admits that, when marijuana was legal in the state, she used it; however, she didn't like it.[4]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sarah_Palin&oldid=208445494

And here's the source it came from:

"Palin said she has smoked marijuana -- remember, it was legal under state law, she said, even if illegal under U.S. law -- but says she didn't like it and doesn't smoke it now.

"I can't claim a Bill Clinton and say that I never inhaled.""

http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/governor06/story/8049298p-7942233c.html

On face value, this appears to be an awesome choice.

The Republicans have done what the Democrats should have done.


Picked a token minority with extremist views and no experience?

Yes - I know I'm responding to my OWN post.

I just tracked down an earlier version of the wiki article, before they jumped on that.



http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sarah_Palin&oldid=208445494

And here's the source it came from:



http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/governor06/story/8049298p-7942233c.html
hmmm i wonder how old you have to be to have that be a big negative.

On face value, this appears to be an awesome choice.

The Republicans have done what the Democrats should have done.

Hillary Clinton should have been on the Democrat ticket.

Majority of Dems want Clinton to be V.P. (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/13/majority-of-dems-want-clinton-to-be-vp/)

Obama failed to do the right thing.

The Republicans certainly look more progressive with this pick, and I think it will seal the deal when the votes are counted in November.

Ah, now I finally get it. It IS about someone on the ticket having a vagina, isn't it? It WAS NOT about competence or anything like that. Because otherwise, what other reason would you have to support Sarah Palin, that only resembles Hillary Clinton in the fact that both have XX chromosomes?

Here's what came to my mind as soon as I'd heard the news.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/RepublicanTicket.jpg

(Yes, I made it just now.)

On face value, this appears to be an awesome choice.

The Republicans have done what the Democrats should have done.

Hillary Clinton should have been on the Democrat ticket.

Majority of Dems want Clinton to be V.P. (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/13/majority-of-dems-want-clinton-to-be-vp/)

Obama failed to do the right thing.

The Republicans certainly look more progressive with this pick, and I think it will seal the deal when the votes are counted in November.
Good lord, is there any play left on the head of that drum you keep banging? You got any more notes on that trumpet? These instrument metaphors doin' anything for ya?

McCain didn't 'do what the democrats should have done' by your estimation, he did not nominate Clinton. You did not say, "They should nominate a woman," you specified Clinton. This post suggests that the selection is purely about gender.

Is it? Is that what you're coming out as having been about this entire time?

McCain's pick is anti-choice and heavy conservative. This is in no way Clinton except that they use the same public bathroom. If this is what does it for you, then your selection criteria is, to be frank, piss poor. No doubt there will be Clinton supporters for whom this does it, but the term for them, without generosity, is 'tools.' It's alright to vote for a woman, be excited about a woman candidate, even be excited by the fact that the candidate is a woman-but not "any woman will do."

Exactly. If this choice of VP is any indication of his judgment, he's creating great cause for concern with this pick. Palin has no foreign policy experience, and no experience in government at the national level whatsoever. This is not a person I can imagine facing down the Senate, much less Putin. To suggest, as McCain is by picking her, that she is ready to lead should that be necessary is borderline indefensible. And to potentially put the nation in such a risky position, to me, seems unconscionable.

The same arguments can be made of Obama. The man has spent more time avoiding his duties within the "National level" scene than he's spent actually giving a meaningful vote on any real issue. His consistent votes of present didn't qualify him for a position in the senate, and it doesn't qualify him to be president.

Sarah Palin is running for vice-president, not president. It's easy to speculate McCain's death, but unless someone has a fool-proof method of seeing the future we all don't know about, it is just as likely he will live out his four (or eight) years as president than otherwise. Obama, on the other hand, who flip-flops, avoids the issues, and chose to go to the gym rather than actually visit with wounded veterans, would be president - no getting around that.

And, if Sarah Palin did become president, I would be entirely satisfied with that. I don't agree with her on all the issues - the most glaring disagreement is the issue of abortion - but I don't agree with any candidate on all the issues. One issue is not going to cause me to vote against a candidate, there has to be a lot more there.

i especially like the elephant dung GN

The same arguments can be made of Obama. The man has spent more time avoiding his duties within the "National level" scene than he's spent actually giving a meaningful vote on any real issue. His consistent votes of present didn't qualify him for a position in the senate, and it doesn't qualify him to be president.

Sarah Palin is running for vice-president, not president. It's easy to speculate McCain's death, but unless someone has a fool-proof method of seeing the future we all don't know about, it is just as likely he will live out his four (or eight) years as president than otherwise. Obama, on the other hand, who flip-flops, avoids the issues, and chose to go to the gym rather than actually visit with wounded veterans, would be president - no getting around that.

And, if Sarah Palin did become president, I would be entirely satisfied with that. I don't agree with her on all the issues - the most glaring disagreement is the issue of abortion - but I don't agree with any candidate on all the issues. One issue is not going to cause me to vote against a candidate, there has to be a lot more there.

So, one ISSUE won't make you not vote for a candidate, but a fake story about going to the gym will?

i especially like the elephant dung GN
Thank you. You have a great eye for detail. ;)

hmmm i wonder how old you have to be to have that be a big negative.

If they were old enough, I'm guessing she'd bring in the key 8th-10th graders swing votes.

Honestly though, I can't see how this would be a strong negative to anyone. Age does factor in (at least with prevalence rates for usage of the drug), but I don't see her past use being a problem among the demographic that Palin was probably designed to bring to the fold.

The same arguments can be made of Obama.
Not about inability to deal with foreign leaders: Obama has shown that he can go overseas and receive respect. Whether Palin could remains to be seen.
His consistent votes of present...
were correct parliamentary procedure within the Illinois senate for one who wants to put reservations about the form of a bill on the record.
It's easy to speculate McCain's death, but unless someone has a fool-proof method of seeing the future we all don't know about, it is just as likely he will live out his four (or eight) years as president than otherwise.
"Just as likely"? I would not rate his chances of living out one term, let alone two, as high as 50%. Extreme stress levels are a risk factor for cancer recurrence, and he will have other health problems at his age.

The Republicans certainly look more progressive with this pick, and I think it will seal the deal when the votes are counted in November.

I don't understand your choice of the word "progressive". Sarah Palin isn't a progressive in the sense used in US Politics. It's true that every female nominee is a step forward for women in politics, but surely that's not the only measure of "progressive"?

I don't understand your choice of the word "progressive". Sarah Palin isn't a progressive in the sense used in US Politics. It's true that every female nominee is a step forward for women in politics, but surely that's not the only measure of "progressive"?

'One step forward, three steps back...'

hmmm i wonder how old you have to be to have that be a big negative.

Anyone who remembers the kind of shitfits pitched about Slick Willy should see more than a little issue.

I don't understand your choice of the word "progressive". Sarah Palin isn't a progressive in the sense used in US Politics. It's true that every female nominee is a step forward for women in politics, but surely that's not the only measure of "progressive"?

Not to mention that this 'progressive' move come only 24 years after the Democratic Party did it. You have to twist an impressive pretzel to paint this as more progressive.

So, one ISSUE won't make you not vote for a candidate, but a fake story about going to the gym will?

10 points for an adorable misconstruing of what I said, -35 points for lack of reading comprehension.

Nothing in Obama's career inspires me to vote for him. Frankly, it's almost impossible to determine where he stands on any issue, other than a general dislike of Republicans and an underlying streak of sexism. So, in looking at issues to vote for on the side of the Democrats, I'm kind of stuck. I find his general lack of morals disheartening, however.

Sarah Palin has, on the other hand, quite a few well-defined issues. I disagree on the abortion, but agree completely with her stance on gun ownership. I'm divided on her support of the death penalty - I believe it's appropriate in some cases, but not all.

an underlying streak of sexism.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA-aha...haha...ah...aha....*deep breath* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA-aha...haha...ah...aha...haaaaaa



Oh my. Thank you for that. I needed that. Anyway, source?

I find his general lack of morals disheartening, however.

Lack of morals? Dont make me laugh that hard again.

10 points for an adorable misconstruing of what I said, -35 points for lack of reading comprehension.

Nothing in Obama's career inspires me to vote for him. Frankly, it's almost impossible to determine where he stands on any issue, other than a general dislike of Republicans and an underlying streak of sexism. So, in looking at issues to vote for on the side of the Democrats, I'm kind of stuck. I find his general lack of morals disheartening, however.

Sarah Palin has, on the other hand, quite a few well-defined issues. I disagree on the abortion, but agree completely with her stance on gun ownership. I'm divided on her support of the death penalty - I believe it's appropriate in some cases, but not all.

http://ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm

There's this thing called google...

So, in looking at issues to vote for on the side of the Democrats, I'm kind of stuck. I find his general lack of morals disheartening, however.

Isn't it possible that's more about you than him?

http://ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm

There's this thing called google...

Saying "I dont know where Obama stands, therefore he doesnt have a stand!" is just so much easier then actually looking all that up.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA-aha...haha...ah...aha....*deep breath* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA-aha...haha...ah...aha...haaaaaa



Oh my. Thank you for that. I needed that. Anyway, source?



Lack of morals? Dont make me laugh that hard again.

What he said...

On face value, this appears to be an awesome choice.

The Republicans have done what the Democrats should have done.

Hillary Clinton should have been on the Democrat ticket.

Majority of Dems want Clinton to be V.P. (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/13/majority-of-dems-want-clinton-to-be-vp/)

Obama failed to do the right thing.

The Republicans certainly look more progressive with this pick, and I think it will seal the deal when the votes are counted in November.

Uh, what does she have to do with Clinton? She's definitely a woman. Is that what you're saying? You think any pick is a good pick if it's a woman?

Otherwise, perhaps you'd like to clarify what Sarah has in common with Hillary.

she's against Gay marriage, but also Against discrimination

...so she supports banning marriage altogether, then?

This was the first thing that came to my mind when I saw her.

<piccy snip>
If she's half the bitch Roslin is, the fracker deserves a quick exit out the airlock.

:p



The Republicans certainly look more progressive with this pick
A anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, pro-creationism in schools candidate looks more progressive?

Seriously?

The same arguments can be made of Obama. The man has spent more time avoiding his duties within the "National level" scene than he's spent actually giving a meaningful vote on any real issue. His consistent votes of present didn't qualify him for a position in the senate, and it doesn't qualify him to be president.

Sarah Palin is running for vice-president, not president. It's easy to speculate McCain's death, but unless someone has a fool-proof method of seeing the future we all don't know about, it is just as likely he will live out his four (or eight) years as president than otherwise. Obama, on the other hand, who flip-flops, avoids the issues, and chose to go to the gym rather than actually visit with wounded veterans, would be president - no getting around that.

And, if Sarah Palin did become president, I would be entirely satisfied with that. I don't agree with her on all the issues - the most glaring disagreement is the issue of abortion - but I don't agree with any candidate on all the issues. One issue is not going to cause me to vote against a candidate, there has to be a lot more there.

I'm happy for you that you've found a decision you can live with, but I've read your post three times and everything you say against Obama and in favor of Palin is ubervague. (Except for the gym thing, which I guess you got off of the McCain campaign ad?) So to a certain extent I understand others' reaction to your post.

Since I assume that elsewhere you've elaborated on Obama in more detail, could you explain more specifically why you think Sarah Palin would make a good VP? Since I don't know much about her, I'm curious to find out what others see in her. EDIT: Sorry, I missed what you said later about gun ownership & the death penalty, so I'd rephrase my question -- is it just the issues that make you pro-Palin, or something else?

On face value, this appears to be an awesome choice.

The Republicans have done what the Democrats should have done.

Hillary Clinton should have been on the Democrat ticket.

Majority of Dems want Clinton to be V.P. (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/13/majority-of-dems-want-clinton-to-be-vp/)

Obama failed to do the right thing.

The Republicans certainly look more progressive with this pick, and I think it will seal the deal when the votes are counted in November.

Why is John McCain ignoring all of the millions of Mitt Romney voters? After all, he won so many votes, he deserves to be the VP. This Palin woman was a slap in the face of the Republican party.

Why is John McCain ignoring all of the millions of Mitt Romney voters? After all, he won so many votes, he deserves to be the VP. This Palin woman was a slap in the face of the Republican party.

Do you wanna be my friend?

Do you wanna be my friend?

As long as you promise not to get any of your relatives fired for leaving the family. (http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/2008/08/29/palin_troopergate_scandal.html)

A anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, pro-creationism in schools candidate looks more progressive?

Seriously?
The Republican's pick a female for the 2nd highest post in the country for the first time. That is progressive.

Her son is in the military. That is progressive for Republicans.

She proposed plans to cut green-house gases and address climate change. That is progressive for Republicans.

Opposes same sex marriage but is against discrimination against gays but believes in giving full rights to gays. She signed same-sex benefits law that predecessor wouldn’t. That is progressive for Republicans.

Proponent of eliminating pork barreling in and for Alaska. That is progressive for Republicans.

Served on Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Committee before blowing whistle against corrupt Republican leaders in the state. She resigned over the the matter to make her point. She exposed state Republican party chairman Randy Ruedrich who resigned and was forced to pay record fine. That is progressive for Republicans.

I certainly wasn't trying to imply that she was more progressive then Democrats, although, I do believe that sexism played a part in Clinton not getting the VP nod for the Democrats.

As long as you promise not to get any of your relatives fired for leaving the family. (http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/2008/08/29/palin_troopergate_scandal.html)

Many more will come. We all have our skeletons. Politicians have more. Shes too new for them all to be known.

I certainly wasn't trying to imply that she was more progressive then Democrats, although, I do believe that sexism played a part in Clinton not getting the VP nod for the Democrats.

*Opens CH Dictionary*

"Sexism: "Not getting the VP nod from the guy that I attacked and dragged through mud until way after I myself stopped being a viable candidate."

Oh, right. THAT'S what "sexism" means in your language. See? That's why we need translators, people!

That is progressive for Republicans.
In a sense I think you're right.

Though, and I freely admit this is from the perspective of an outsider on the other side of The Pond, I get the feeling Palin represents a wing of the Republican party that hasn't seen prominence in the Bush years; a wing that's been pushed aside by the neoconservative and religious-right sections (and affiliations) of the party.

I certainly wasn't trying to imply that she was more progressive then Democrats, although, I do believe that sexism played a part in Clinton not getting the VP nod for the Democrats.
Sexism on the part of the party, the primary voters, or both?

As long as you promise not to get any of your relatives fired for leaving the family. (http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/2008/08/29/palin_troopergate_scandal.html)

I, Heikoku Jayel, do hereby solemny promise not to get any of my relatives fired for leaving the family, and to look cute and sexy to serve as a little piece of biscuit for the true candidate that's rotting while alive and twenty-eight years my senior!

If she's half the bitch Roslin is, the fracker deserves a quick exit out the airlock.

:p

A anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, pro-creationism in schools candidate looks more progressive?

Seriously?

SHE HAS A VAGINA!!! That's automatically progressive, don't you know? I mean, just because the Dems selected a woman before and that time she was selected not because a woman would help them win, but because she was the best pick, doesn't mean that we shouldn't forget that AND that the dems put up a minority candidate for the top spot.

Nah, the dems are less progressive because they didn't pick the specific person CH wanted.

(Even though that was sarcasm, pretending to believe something to patently absurd was actually painful.)

SHE HAS A VAGINA!!! That's automatically progressive, don't you know? I mean, just because the Dems selected a woman before and that time she was selected not because a woman would help them win, but because she was the best pick, doesn't mean that we shouldn't forget that AND that the dems put up a minority candidate for the top spot.

Nah, the dems are less progressive because they didn't pick the specific person CH wanted.

(Even though that was sarcasm, pretending to believe something to patently absurd was actually painful.)

Minding, she has a vagina that would likely be better fit for its function than Clinton's ever was, so, due to fitness to do the job, I guess Republicans would still have won on THAT unless Obama got THE ACTUAL MISS Alaska to run. Or maybe Miss Vermont.

The Republican's pick a female for the 2nd highest post in the country for the first time. That is progressive.


First time the republican party have done it maybe. Rumour has it that Geraldine Ferraro was a woman.

If you think being 24 years behind the democrats is progressive... if you think picking a female candidate in the same year that primaries almost set a female presidential candidate for the democrat run, is progressive... well, we have different definitions of progressive.


Her son is in the military. That is progressive for Republicans.


Doesn't McCain's have a son is in the military?


Opposes same sex marriage but is against discrimination against gays but believes in giving full rights to gays. She signed same-sex benefits law that predecessor wouldn’t. That is progressive for Republicans.


Horseshit. Do your research. She objected to signing, and stated she was signing under duress, and was ONLY signing because she had been given legal counsel that said it would be unconstitutional to do otherwise. She's also come out strongly in support of the 98 ban on same sex marriage.

She's progressive if 'caves under pressure' is your definition.


Proponent of eliminating pork barreling in and for Alaska. That is progressive for Republicans.


We'll see. We'll find out who she has made herself beholden to, if she wins, eh?


Served on Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Committee before blowing whistle against corrupt Republican leaders in the state. She resigned over the the matter to make her point. She exposed state Republican party chairman Randy Ruedrich who resigned and was forced to pay record fine. That is progressive for Republicans.


So - exposing corruption isn't de rigeur for republicans?


I certainly wasn't trying to imply that she was more progressive then Democrats, although, I do believe that sexism played a part in Clinton not getting the VP nod for the Democrats.

Of course it did. The same as racism will be involved in people voting FOR McCain. My mother-in-law quite openly admits that she'll be voting for McCain because he's a 'strong white leader' (her exact words).

That's the problem with democracy - you let people choose stuff, they show their bias.

The difference is - the populace may have shown sexism in the nomination of Obama over Clinton (or may not, there's really no way to know how much)... but McCain's choice was (at least, in theory) all him. If McCain picked a female candidate JUST because she's a female candidate, that's discrimination - and it's personal discrimination by the man who would be king.

The Republican's pick a female for the 2nd highest post in the country for the first time. That is progressive.

Her son is in the military. That is progressive for Republicans.

She proposed plans to cut green-house gases and address climate change. That is progressive for Republicans.

Opposes same sex marriage but is against discrimination against gays but believes in giving full rights to gays. She signed same-sex benefits law that predecessor wouldn’t. That is progressive for Republicans.

Proponent of eliminating pork barreling in and for Alaska. That is progressive for Republicans.

Served on Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Committee before blowing whistle against corrupt Republican leaders in the state. She resigned over the the matter to make her point. She exposed state Republican party chairman Randy Ruedrich who resigned and was forced to pay record fine. That is progressive for Republicans.

If she just believes in a right to trial, that would be progressive for Republican leadership these days. Doesn't really say much about it being a good pick.

One might consider that McCain floated the idea of a pro-choice candidate. He didn't go with the more progressive pick. He went with the LESS progressive pick. Lieberman would have been more progressive. Of course, he doesn't have the equipment you seem to think is necessary to be a VP pick.


I certainly wasn't trying to imply that she was more progressive then Democrats, although, I do believe that sexism played a part in Clinton not getting the VP nod for the Democrats.

Yeah, probably. It certainly couldn't have anything to do with the fact that McCain camp is already playing clips of what she had to say about Obama during the primary. Nah, clearly, it's her vagina that must have driven the decision.

She literally said McCain would be a better President than Obama. That is pretty much a guaranteed way to keep her from gettting the pick. But don't let today be the day you let reason get in the way.

Minding, she has a vagina that would likely be better fit for its function than Clinton's ever was...

How so? You don't think HillDog is a goer? Know what I mean? Eh? Eh? A bit of a goer? *nudge nudge wink wink* say no more!

I'd tap that.

I get the feeling Palin represents a wing of the Republican party that hasn't seen prominence in the Bush years; a wing that's been pushed aside by the neoconservative and religious-right sections (and affiliations) of the party.



I must disagree. Anti-choice, anti-gay rights, pro-creationism in science class sounds very neo con/religious loon to me.

Nah, the dems are less progressive because they didn't pick the specific person CH wanted.
Let's be fair; CH has made it clear he wasn't meaning the Republicans were more progressive than the Democrats, just promoting a progressive candidate compared to other potential Republican candidates (whether that's the case or not).



I must disagree. Anti-choice, anti-gay rights, pro-creationism in science class sounds very neo con/religious loon to me.
Sounds socially conservative; not necessarily religious, and certainly not neoconservative.

One might consider that McCain floated the idea of a pro-choice candidate. He didn't go with the more progressive pick. He went with the LESS progressive pick. Lieberman would have been more progressive. Of course, he doesn't have the equipment you seem to think is necessary to be a VP pick.

There are surgeries for everything, but what doctor specialized in gender reassignment would wanna touch THAT?

In a sense I think you're right.
That is what I was trying to portray, not just that Palin is a woman.

Though, and I freely admit this is from the perspective of an outsider on the other side of The Pond, I get the feeling Palin represents a wing of the Republican party that hasn't seen prominence in the Bush years; a wing that's been pushed aside by the neoconservative and religious-right sections (and affiliations) of the party.
I didn't consider the above, but it certainly would be another progressive plus for the Republicans.

Sexism on the part of the party, the primary voters, or both?
From Obama supporters, primary voters, and the media.

How so? You don't think HillDog is a goer? Know what I mean? Eh? Eh? A bit of a goer? *nudge nudge wink wink* say no more!

I'd tap that.

Okay, first of all, EW.

Second of all, the cobwebs would be a problem.

Let's be fair; CH has made it clear he wasn't meaning the Republicans were more progressive than the Democrats, just promoting a progressive candidate compared to other potential Republican candidates

But, aside from her vagina, there is nothing progressive about Palin. At all.

That is what I was trying to portray, not just that Palin is a woman.

I love when you attempt to revise what you say after the fact to make it look everyone is reading you wrong. Tell me again specifically, what about Palin demonstrates what the Dems should have done in choosing Hillary as VP? What's the logical relationship there.

On face value, this appears to be an awesome choice.

The Republicans have done what the Democrats should have done.

Hillary Clinton should have been on the Democrat ticket.

Majority of Dems want Clinton to be V.P. (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/13/majority-of-dems-want-clinton-to-be-vp/)

Obama failed to do the right thing.

The Republicans certainly look more progressive with this pick, and I think it will seal the deal when the votes are counted in November.

Yeah, obviously, you weren't implying that her sex was the important bit. Nah. I'm sure you were talking about those policy issues. That certainly must have been what you mean when you said that first bolded bit.

Yep, makes perfect sense provided you don't actually think about it.

From Obama supporters, primary voters, and the media.

Yep. I didnt vote for Hillary because that damn woman was out of the kitchen where she belongs.



My god man, drop the Hillary thing. You bring it into every US politics thread. And, knowing the reactions you are going to get, Mods have already said it s flaimbaiting, so stop.

From Obama supporters, primary voters, and the media.

So, let me get this straight.

The guy that praises Republicans for picking a woman because she's a woman (sexism) claims Hillary, after dragging Obama through the mud, was eschewed because of sexism.

That's...

That's...

THAT'S THE MOST RIDICULOUS THING I EVER READ IN MY ENTIRE LIFE! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Sounds socially conservative; not necessarily religious, and certainly not neoconservative.

Wait, teaching creationism in science class doesnt sound religious neocon to you?

Wait, teaching creationism in sounds class doesnt sound religious neocon to you?

She has a vagina. People with vaginas are always progressive!

Let's be fair; CH has made it clear he wasn't meaning the Republicans were more progressive than the Democrats, just promoting a progressive candidate compared to other potential Republican candidates (whether that's the case or not).




Sounds socially conservative; not necessarily religious, and certainly not neoconservative.

Yes, CH has mastered historical revision. If not for the fact that we can actually quote him, one might actually believe he meant what he's claiming. Damn that quote function. Damn it to hell.

From Obama supporters, primary voters, and the media.
I can't say I've seen that myself; certainly not from the majority of voters or media outlets.


But, aside from her vagina, there is nothing progressive about Palin. At all.
I, nor CH, are claiming that she is, when compared to a broad political spectrum. I see her as a rather frighteningly non-progressive candidate, but I think it's fair to say that, compared to some sections of the Republican party, on some issues she is progressive.

I can't say I've seen that myself.



I, nor CH, are claiming that she is, when compared to a broad political spectrum. I see her as a rather frighteningly non-progressive candidate, but I think it's fair to say that, compared to some sections of the Republican party, on some issues she is progressive.


yes she is progressive in a few ways for a republican.

its not unlike being the prettiest girl in wasilla alaska--nice but not that great a feat.

From Obama supporters, primary voters, and the media.

Yes, remember when the Obama campaign said that the only reason Hillary got as far as she did was because she was female. Oh, wait, that was Hillary's campaign.

Oh, well, then it must have been his campaign that tried to make her look more female in pictures. Oh, that was also Hillary's campaign.

Oh, well, then there must be polling evidence that Obama benefitted from those that vote primarily on sex. Nope, that was her campaign again.

Once, again, reality seems to be biased against you. It's really unfair, if you ask me.

I can't say I've seen that myself; certainly not from the majority of voters or media outlets.

Oh, but RUNNING AGAINST HER is sexist.

VOTING AGAINST HER is sexist.

THINKING ANYTHING BAD ABOUT HER is sexist.

That's CH's world to you. That's HER indoctrination, mind you. HER narrative.

Wait, teaching creationism in science class doesnt sound religious neocon to you?

Sounds a liddle bit religious to me. You know, just a teensy bit.

Yes, remember when the Obama campaign said that the only reason Hillary got as far as she did was because she was female. Oh, wait, that was Hillary's campaign.

Oh, well, then it must have been his campaign that tried to make her look more female in pictures. Oh, that was also Hillary's campaign.

Oh, well, then there must be polling evidence that Obama benefitted from those that vote primarily on sex. Nope, that was her campaign again.

Once, again, reality seems to be biased against you. It's really unfair, if you ask me.

Well, Obama did have to be dragged kicking and screaming to admit that his opponent would be a better President than McCain, who was diametrically opposed to both in all issues. No, wait. Her, right? Ah, well.

I, nor CH, are claiming that she is, when compared to a broad political spectrum. I see her as a rather frighteningly non-progressive candidate, but I think it's fair to say that, compared to some sections of the Republican party, on some issues she is progressive.

The abortion ban, the gay marriage ban, or the pushing creationism in schools?

I can't decide which is most progressive, myself.

First Obama undermines his previous "outsider" image and "change" message with his choice of an establishment figure, now McCain substantially weakens one of the main previous virtues of the ticket, "experience". What the hell are the campaign teams up to at the moment?

I, nor CH, are claiming that she is, when compared to a broad political spectrum. I see her as a rather frighteningly non-progressive candidate, but I think it's fair to say that, compared to some sections of the Republican party, on some issues she is progressive.

Um, what CH actually claimed was...

The Republicans have done what the Democrats should have done.

Hillary Clinton should have been on the Democrat ticket.

Yup, no reason to suspect that's at all related to her being female. Nah, clearly, her and Clinton are cut from the same cloth.

Wait, teaching creationism in science class doesnt sound religious neocon to you?
It sounds religious, certainly, but not to the extent some (in her party) have gone. But there is nothing neoconservative per se about teaching creationism.

Neoconservatism is largely to do with foreign policy and a certain picture of the USA's place in 'world leadership' (something, BTW, which Obama seems to happily embrace), and has little, or nothing, to do with religion.

True, neoconservatives have often capitalised upon the religious-right, galvanised it indeed, but the philosophy has little to do with religion itself. Leo Strauss, Irving Kristol, and the other leaders of modern US neoconservatism are not the "religious loon" types at all. On a policy level, they view(ed) religion more as a useful tool for US interests, rather than an ultimate truth.



Yes, CH has mastered historical revision.
I see little revisionism in CH's posts on Palin... would you care to elaborate?

The abortion ban, the gay marriage ban, or the pushing creationism in schools?

I can't decide which is most progressive, myself.

http://www.lightandmatter.com/html_books/1np/ch03/figs/galileo-trial.jpg

PROGRESS!

Sounds a liddle bit religious to me. You know, just a teensy bit.

Yeah, well, obviously, "Marriage is between a man and a woman" and "Creationism should be taught along side of Evolution as all theories are equal" and "abortion is evil" isn't religious at all. It's PROGRESSIVE.

McCain catered to the religious right and CH is calling it progressive.

(No, those aren't actual quotes, but summaries of her positions.)

Yup, no reason to suspect that's at all related to her being female. Nah, clearly, her and Clinton are cut from the same cloth.

Aha! I have solved the apparent conflict:

CH said:

"The Republicans have done what the Democrats should have done.

Hillary Clinton should have been on the Democrat ticket."


Now - maybe I'm reading it wrong... but, what the Dems DIDN'T do that they SHOULD have (according to CH)... is put Hillary on the ticket. And, the Republicans did what the Dems SHOULD have done, right?

CH obviously thinks that Sarah Palin IS Hillary Clinton.

Yeah, well, obviously, "Marriage is between a man and a woman" and "Creationism should be taught along side of Evolution as all theories are equal" and "abortion is evil" isn't religious at all. It's PROGRESSIVE.

McCain catered to the religious right and CH is calling it progressive.

(No, those aren't actual quotes, but summaries of her positions.)

I find myself wondering. I assumed McCain would pick someone a little more centrist than himself, so he could appeal to the (republican) heartland a little more, shifting position a little further right.

Now that he's picked a... well, pretty hardcore social conservative... is he actually gooing to try to reposition himself as a real centrist?

Aha! I have solved the apparent conflict:

CH said:

"The Republicans have done what the Democrats should have done.

Hillary Clinton should have been on the Democrat ticket."


Now - maybe I'm reading it wrong... but, what the Dems DIDN'T do that they SHOULD have (according to CH)... is put Hillary on the ticket. And, the Republicans did what the Dems SHOULD have done, right?

CH obviously thinks that Sarah Palin IS Hillary Clinton.
that must be it

its not like ms palin has earned her spot as hillary would have.

Im personally crossing my fingers that Palin was in a porno or something.

I see little revisionism in CH's posts on Palin... would you care to elaborate?

See the post above yours. He compared her to selecting Clinton for the ticket.

Now I would have bought that comparison if he'd have said that picking Palin played to the base (which picking Clinton would have done), but instead he claimed picking Palin was progressive. The only thing commonly progressive about about both Hillary and Sarah is that they are both women.

Otherwise, Palin is bring in the base. She does it well. Plus, she has the added rather clumsy effect of appealing to the jaded Clintonites (see CH for an example). His first post on the subject compares her to Clinton. That was exactly what McCain and Palin want.

CH obviously thinks that Sarah Palin IS Hillary Clinton.

If I had been drinking something, I'd need a new keyboard...

Im personally crossing my fingers that Palin was in a porno or something.

She CAN pull it off...

See the post above yours. He compared her to selecting Clinton for the ticket.

Now I would have bought that comparison if he'd have said that picking Palin played to the base (which picking Clinton would have done), but instead he claimed picking Palin was progressive. The only thing commonly progressive about about both Hillary and Sarah is that they are both women.

Otherwise, Palin is bring in the base. She does it well. Plus, she has the added rather clumsy effect of appealing to the jaded Clintonites (see CH for an example). His first post on the subject compares her to Clinton. That was exactly what McCain and Palin want.

The problem for McCain is the convention worked WAY too well for Palin to make much of a difference among Hillary's former supporters. Add to that the fact that she cost McCain his biggest cudgel to attack Obama with, and McCain just shot himself in his wrinkly old foot.

She CAN pull it off...

She is quite cute. Id nail her.


Too bad for her I dont vote for the candidate Id most like to blow me.

She is quite cute. Id nail her.


Too bad for her I dont vote for the candidate Id most like to blow me.

She was a runner-up to Miss Alaska, y'know. And yes, I'd also do her. And as you, I don't vote for the person I'd like to have sex with, or else Morrigan Aensland would get write-in votes from me.

See the post above yours. He compared her to selecting Clinton for the ticket.
I don't think he did; he said that "the Republicans have done what the Democrats should have done." By this, I take it to mean 'pick a women for the nominee'.

He's not saying, as far as I can tell, that Palin=Clinton.

Now I would have bought that comparison if he'd have said that picking Palin played to the base (which picking Clinton would have done), but instead he claimed picking Palin was progressive.
She is progressive on certain issues, despite being 'safe' on other issues, when compared to much of the Republican party.

Which is what CH claimed.

Im personally crossing my fingers that Palin was in a porno or something.

She CAN pull it off...

That sounds like quite a violent porno.

I don't think he did; he said that "the Republicans have done what the Democrats should have done." By this, I take it to mean 'pick a women for the nominee'.

So, if Biden gets a surgery, CH will shut up? *Starts raising funds for the Biden For Post-Op VP Alliance*

She was a runner-up to Miss Alaska, y'know.

Really?


Wow, McCain is insane if he thinks she'll pull in the jaded pseudo feminist votes.

She is anti-choice. Such a thing makes both real and fake feminists unhappy. Both camps of feminists are also rather unhappy with the beauty pagents.


McCain you old fool. Can you ever, ever do anything right?

That sounds like quite a violent porno.

Did I make a mistake in the expression? o_O

Really?


Wow, McCain is insane if he thinks she'll pull in the jaded pseudo feminist votes.

She is anti-choice. Such a thing makes both real and fake feminists unhappy. Both camps of feminists are also rather unhappy with the beauty pagents.


McCain you old fool. Can you ever, ever do anything right?

By all means, let's just watch the old cod screw up. ;)

that must be it

its not like ms palin has earned her spot as hillary would have.

Personally, my hat is off to Hillary. I wasn't a big fan, to start with. She ran a hell of a gauntlet just to be pipped at the post. She was a bit savage during the run, but she was the best booster Obama could have hoped for at the DNC.

Hillary had a baptism of fire in this race... and she came so close. I really can hope for Clinton '12.

I don't know which makes me feel more sad - that McCain would think popping Palin on the ticket would somehow equate to that... that Palin herself was willing to be a pawn in that fashion... or that I'm worried the Republicans might clinch the election off the back of it.

She was a runner-up to Miss Alaska, y'know. And yes, I'd also do her. And as you, I don't vote for the person I'd like to have sex with, or else Morrigan Aensland would get write-in votes from me.

She's only 3-1/2 years older than me. I'd do her, and it wouldn't even be a "Mrs. Robinson" sort of thing. I just wouldn't vote for her.

She is progressive on certain issues, despite being 'safe' on other issues, when compared to much of the Republican party.


I guess my biggest question is....what issues?

If I had been drinking something, I'd need a new keyboard...

To be honest, all this Hillary talk has me a little over excited too...

Errr. I mean. I think I spilled something, also.

To be honest, all this Hillary talk has me a little over excited too...

Errr. I mean. I think I spilled something, also.

It's, er, MILK! YEAH, MILK!

Im personally crossing my fingers that Palin was in a porno or something.

That's not your fingers.

And, that's not really 'crossing' it, either.

I guess my biggest question is....what issues?

Oh, I'm sure as a woman that hates her own gender enough to be in a party that wants to relegate it to the kitchen and make the US into Gilead from The Handmaid's Tale she has a LOT of issues.

I guess my biggest question is....what issues?
See here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=13967353).

Once again, no-one, not CH nor myself, is claiming that Palin is a progressive candidate, just that she is progressive one some issues compared with some wings of her party.

She is quite cute. Id nail her.


Too bad for her I dont vote for the candidate Id most like to blow me.

Wouldn't make a difference to me. I'd be voting Gravel, either way. :o

Wouldn't make a difference to me. I'd be voting Gravel, either way. :o

>.>

*Throws up at the meaning of this.*

<.<

See here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=13967353).

Once again, no-one, not CH nor myself, is claiming that Palin is a progressive candidate, just that she is progressive one some issues compared with some wings of her party.

Heres the thing. Only the environmental thing is progressive. Republicans always have been all about military service. And she was very upset over giving gays any rights, and she made this statment.

I don't think he did; he said that "the Republicans have done what the Democrats should have done." By this, I take it to mean 'pick a women for the nominee'.


Awesome.

Any woman will do, eh?

Policy? Nah. Position? Nah. Experience? Nah.

What the dems did wrong was not selecting enough vaginas.

Awesome.

Any woman will do, eh?

Policy? Nah. Position? Nah. Experience? Nah.

What the dems did wrong was not selecting enough vaginas.

I don't have a job. If I have a sex-change, do I get to be VPOTUS?

*Grabbing a pair of scissors*

>.>

*Throws up at the meaning of this.*

<.<

Come on... he made a campaign ad about pwning n00bs in Halo. What's sexier than that?

I don't have a job. If I have a sex-change, do I get to be VPOTUS?

*Grabbing a pair of scissors*

You can probably tuck and get away with it. It seems like the similarity isn't expected to be too deep anyway.

Heres the thing. Only the environmental thing is progressive.
An issue you asked for, an issue you were given.



Awesome.

Any woman will do, eh?
I never said I shared the position, or that it made sense, but let's try and represent the position accurately, eh?

I don't think he did; he said that "the Republicans have done what the Democrats should have done." By this, I take it to mean 'pick a women for the nominee'.

He's not saying, as far as I can tell, that Palin=Clinton.


She is progressive on certain issues, despite being 'safe' on other issues, when compared to much of the Republican party.

Which is what CH claimed.

I love how we're supposed to read huge leaps into CH's post.

You took the earlier bit to mean "pick a woman as the nominee". After which, he said it would come off as progressive. There is no other context that he didn't add in later that doesn't actually make sense.

Well, unless we're to believe that CH is so poor at communication that he thought we we think he was talking about her policies when the only thing he mentioned was her sex.

Let's see if I can get away with that -

"In calling on OJ Simpson on his nonsense, I've done what people should have done with CH.

I'm tired of murderers getting away with blatant lies."

Now, one could read that as two seperate points, but I'd have to be completely devoid of any understanding of language to assume people wouldn't think I was implying CH is a murderer.

The first line alone, certainly only suggests I'm talking about calling people on the nonsense, but the second part is additional context. People read things as if they have a train of thought. If CH derailed his, that's his issue and he should apologize for that glaring shortcoming, not blame other people for taking the reasonable reading of the post.

Come on... he made a campaign ad about pwning n00bs in Halo. What's sexier than that?

http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd63/ginga_megami/morrigan-aensland-038.jpg

You can probably tuck and get away with it. It seems like the similarity isn't expected to be too deep anyway.

Good, I was afraid Little Heikoku would feel bad.

"In calling on OJ Simpson on his nonsense, I've done what people should have done with CH.

I'm tired of murderers getting away with blatant lies."

Now, one could read that as two seperate points, but I'd have to be completely devoid of any understanding of language to assume people wouldn't think I was implying CH is a murderer.



Hey hey hey. We all know OJ was innocent.;)

There isn't a person here that doesn't have their palm on their head going, "Balderdash, when you're in a hole, stop digging!"

Yes there is, I'd like him to pick up some Chinese for me.

I never said I shared the position, or that it made sense, but let's try and represent the position accurately, eh?
But you did suggest that it's normal to change your meaning after the fact. None of what you're claiming he meant existed in the post. It's an add-on that requires us to believe that he had no idea what his original post would imply. I'm sorry, but I give CH more credit than that. He's welcome to correct me, but I'd be surprised if he showed up and explained that he doesn't know what context is.

An issue you asked for, an issue you were given.



Ok, being progressive on ONE issue is not nearly being "progressive".

Wow we are really grasping at straws here.

I love how we're supposed to read huge leaps into CH's post.
I fail to see how reading that CH wishes a woman (Hilary) was chosen for the nomination is a "huge leap". It's his clearly stated position.

You took the earlier bit to mean "pick a woman as the nominee". After which, he said it would come off as progressive.
And you feel it doesn't?



Ok, being progressive on ONE issue is not nearly being "progressive".

Wow we are really grasping at straws here.
Once again, for those of us who fail to grasp the most rudimentary of arguments:

Palin is progressive on certain issues, despite being 'safe' on other issues, when compared to much of the Republican party, and not compared to the rest of the political spectrum.

Are you able to understand now?

Yes there is, I'd like him to pick up some Chinese for me.

Me too, I'd specifically like Zhang Ziyi.

http://lh4.ggpht.com/nicolexiejm/RvfgPxWlQVI/AAAAAAAAAYE/pvw6RTO5c7U/s800/platinum-zhang-ziyi-hq5.jpg

I gotta take a cold shower...

I'm sorry, but I give CH more credit than that. He's welcome to correct me, but I'd be surprised if he showed up and explained that he doesn't know what context is.

Keep in mind that we ARE talking about a guy that thinks EVERY political thread is a "Clinton should be VP" political thread.

I never said I shared the position, or that it made sense, but let's try and represent the position accurately, eh?

I'm trying.

What was it that the republicans did that the dems didn't? Put a woman on the ticket.

That says nothing about experience, ability, position, party loyalty... nothin'.

All it says is, CH thinks the Democrats fell down by not including enough vaginas. Because that's what it comes down to. We shouldn't elect our presidents and other ministers on the track records they forge, on their abilities, or what they will do or have done. We should elect them based on what junk is in their collective trunk.

I fail to see how reading that CH wishes a woman (Hilary) was chosen for the nomination is a "huge leap". It's his clearly stated position.

Interesingly, that's not what we're debating, is it? How about you join the convo. You're claiming the woman part had nothing to do with the progressive comment. That's the huge leap. Everyone except CH agrees that he was talking about her gender in that post. You're claiming that half way through, he suddenly stopped talking about her gender and started talking about the issues without given ANY indicators that this was so.


And you feel it doesn't?

He denied that the woman part was the point. That's what we've all been debating. You and he are both pretending it was about actual issues.

Are you even reading the point? Because you just seriously stepped all over yourself.

Me too, I'd specifically like Zhang Ziyi.

http://lh4.ggpht.com/nicolexiejm/RvfgPxWlQVI/AAAAAAAAAYE/pvw6RTO5c7U/s800/platinum-zhang-ziyi-hq5.jpg

I gotta take a cold shower...

Wasn't she in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon?

I'm trying.

What was it that the republicans did that the dems didn't? Put a woman on the ticket.

That says nothing about experience, ability, position, party loyalty... nothin'.

All it says is, CH thinks the Democrats fell down by not including enough vaginas. Because that's what it comes down to. We shouldn't elect our presidents and other ministers on the track records they forge, on their abilities, or what they will do or have done. We should elect them based on what junk is in their collective trunk.

So, two hermaphrodites running for office would have THE best track record! :eek2:

Wasn't she in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon?

Yes. Yes, she was. *le sigh*

She was in Hero, too...

Wasn't she in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon?

Yuppers.

Once again, for those of us who fail to grasp the most rudimentary of arguments:

Palin is progressive on certain issues, despite being 'safe' on other issues, when compared to much of the Republican party, and not compared to the rest of the political spectrum.

Are you able to understand now?

One wonders if you are, because you're all over the map. We're pointing out that he was referencing gender as progressive. Rather than address the meaning, you suggest we're claiming there is nothing progressive about a female VP candidate.

Of course there is, but it's also 24 years behind the Dems.

You also claimed it was about the issues, but there were NO issues mentioned, only a reference to having a woman on the ticket.

"Are you able to understand now"?

So, two hermaphrodites running for office would have THE best track record! :eek2:

Well, if I learned anything from the last 8 years, it's that Republicans aren't afraid to use a Bush when they need it, but they secretly hold that all the real power is in Dick.

Yes. Yes, she was. *le sigh*

She was in Hero, too...

Yuppers.

Neat. I thought she looked familiar.

Personally, my hat is off to Hillary. I wasn't a big fan, to start with. She ran a hell of a gauntlet just to be pipped at the post. She was a bit savage during the run, but she was the best booster Obama could have hoped for at the DNC.

Hillary had a baptism of fire in this race... and she came so close. I really can hope for Clinton '12.

I don't know which makes me feel more sad - that McCain would think popping Palin on the ticket would somehow equate to that... that Palin herself was willing to be a pawn in that fashion... or that I'm worried the Republicans might clinch the election off the back of it.
to equate what hillary did in coming so very close to the nomination with picking a woman who has less than 2 years as governor of a tiny population state who wasnt even angling for the job is ...well...claiming that any vagina will do. a young-ish pretty one all the more qualified.

Interesingly, that's not what we're debating, is it? How about you join the convo. You're claiming the woman part had nothing to do with the progressive comment.
I am?

How enlightening.


Wasn't she in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon?
Yes; it's the role she became famous in the West for.

She's also in House of Flying Daggers, among many other Wushu and non-action Chinese movies.

Well, if I learned anything from the last 8 years, it's that Republicans aren't afraid to use a Bush when they need it, but they secretly hold that all the real power is in Dick.

...

LG, you have a challenger!

I'm trying.

What was it that the republicans did that the dems didn't? Put a woman on the ticket.

That says nothing about experience, ability, position, party loyalty... nothin'.

All it says is, CH thinks the Democrats fell down by not including enough vaginas. Because that's what it comes down to. We shouldn't elect our presidents and other ministers on the track records they forge, on their abilities, or what they will do or have done. We should elect them based on what junk is in their collective trunk.

NO NO IT'S ABOUT THE ISSUES. NO, WAIT, HE WAS TALKING ABOUT PUTTING A WOMAN ON THE TICKET. NO, WAIT, IT WAS ABOUT THE ISSUES.

Seriously, I hope everyone is enjoying this, because this is some serious flexibility.

to equate what hillary did in coming so very close to the nomination with picking a woman who has less than 2 years as governor of a tiny population state who wasnt even angling for the job is ...well...claiming that any vagina will do. a young-ish pretty one all the more qualified.

She has a "naughty librarian" feel to her, doesn't she? VPILF anyone?

Palin is progressive on certain issues, despite being 'safe' on other issues, when compared to much of the Republican party, and not compared to the rest of the political spectrum.


Heres the cute thing. CH never explained that he meant that Palin was progressive on certain issues. He just said she was progressive, and then listed off a whole list of "reasons", where only one was legit. He also implied that just by virtue of her anatomy she was a good choice and qualified.

Are you able to understand now?

Dont be condescending. Its flamebaiting.

I am?

How enlightening.

Good, so we agree that he made no mention of any progressive stance by her, and only her gender and how Dems hadn't participated in that "progress".

Good. Too bad that is what CH said he was trying to say. We were chastising him for making this all about her vagina and calling it a good pick based on such things.

Opposes same sex marriage but is against discrimination against gays but believes in giving full rights to gays.

Can I get some cheese for that pretzel? It's not possible to do the bold AND the underlined.

NO NO IT'S ABOUT THE ISSUES. NO, WAIT, HE WAS TALKING ABOUT PUTTING A WOMAN ON THE TICKET. NO, WAIT, IT WAS ABOUT THE ISSUES.

Seriously, I hope everyone is enjoying this, because this is some serious flexibility.

Can I bring myself to do it? Can I? I know I'll feel soiled if I do, but.. it's just so tempting....

FLIP-FLOPPING!


Okay. I feel better now. But dirty. And not in the good, used-panties, way.

She has a "naughty librarian" feel to her, doesn't she? VPILF anyone?

Okay, now it's my turn. You owe me a keyboard.

[QUOTE=CanuckHeaven;13967353]Opposes same sex marriage but is against discrimination against gays but believes in giving full rights to gays.[QUOTE]

Can I get some cheese for that pretzel? It's not possible to do the bold AND the underlined.

I will let you, but I will not allow you to. I will give you, but it will not be given you by me.

Okay, now it's my turn. You owe me a keyboard.

To be sure, the "naughty librarian" joke I pilfered from someone else.

She has a "naughty librarian" feel to her, doesn't she? VPILF anyone?

Can you tell me if there is going to be 3 months of this? Because I'll just put you on ignore and save the damage to my forehead.

No, that's not a joke. I wouldn't find it any more funny if you spent the majority of your time demonstrating your racism.

to equate what hillary did in coming so very close to the nomination with picking a woman who has less than 2 years as governor of a tiny population state who wasnt even angling for the job is ...well...claiming that any vagina will do. a young-ish pretty one all the more qualified.

I can't be the only person that this gives a kind of 'creepy, leering-at-underage-teen-cheerleaders' feeling to?

Vote Loli in '08.

She has a "naughty librarian" feel to her, doesn't she? VPILF anyone?
would you stop that.

she's from alaska. she'll kick your ass so hard that youll forget you ever HAD that kind of thought about her.

would you stop that.

she's from alaska. she'll kick your ass so hard that youll forget you ever HAD that kind of thought about her.

I haven't checked her wiki recently... is she still from Alaska?

Heres the cute thing. CH never explained that he meant that Palin was progressive on certain issues. He just said she was progressive, and then listed off a whole list of "reasons", where only one was legit.
So, he never explained why he thought she was progressive for the Reps, but only explained why he thought she was progressive for the Reps?

K.


Good, so we agree that he made no mention of any progressive stance by her, and only her gender and how Dems hadn't participated in that "progress".
Only if you ignore this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13967353&postcount=309) post.


EDIT: Seriously folks, I understand some of you are (understandably) pissed that CH mad a big fuss over Hilary not getting the nod, but what's the beef? Every single US election thread now seems to be a 'prove CH was wrong on every conceivable level' thread.

I can't be the only person that this gives a kind of 'creepy, leering-at-underage-teen-cheerleaders' feeling to?

Vote Loli in '08.
i dont know what to think about it. nominating a woman is a fine idea but why not one who is fully qualified to take over as president in a disaster?

Can you tell me if there is going to be 3 months of this? Because I'll just put you on ignore and save the damage to my forehead.

No, that's not a joke. I wouldn't find it any more funny if you spent the majority of your time demonstrating your racism.

Do you ACTUALLY slap your forehead there? o_O

In my defense, GnI thought it was funny. :p

would you stop that.

she's from alaska. she'll kick your ass so hard that youll forget you ever HAD that kind of thought about her.

Which laska is she from? o_O

(He said, using the worst pun ever)

Can you tell me if there is going to be 3 months of this? Because I'll just put you on ignore and save the damage to my forehead.

No, that's not a joke. I wouldn't find it any more funny if you spent the majority of your time demonstrating your racism.

While it has been taken too far, can you honostly say that you never, ever check out a politician or their significant other?

Dont get me wrong, Im not saying youd ever vote for someone based on that, but you didnt look at Palin and think "cute" or anything like that?

Do you ACTUALLY slap your forehead there? o_O

In my defense, GnI thought it was funny. :p

Yeah. But I'm a dumass.

Yeah. But I'm a dumass.

So am I! Let's talk about things we can do to annoy people!

I haven't checked her wiki recently... is she still from Alaska?

I just read the wiki article. Geez, it's all over the map because people are just jamming stuff in it and taking stuff out. It's kind of funny.

I don't think he did; he said that "the Republicans have done what the Democrats should have done." By this, I take it to mean 'pick a women for the nominee'.

He's not saying, as far as I can tell, that Palin=Clinton.
You understand perfectly. The others are making mountains out of molehills.

She is progressive on certain issues, despite being 'safe' on other issues, when compared to much of the Republican party.

Which is what CH claimed.
Exactly.

You understand perfectly. The others are making mountains out of molehills.


As long as you can admit that Chumbly articulates your point better then you do.

Do you ACTUALLY slap your forehead there? o_O

In my defense, GnI thought it was funny. :p

You didn't answer the question. Please do. I'd prefer to just settle this now.

Seriously, you don't have to be an adult all the time. You really don't. But it would be nice if every female politician isn't treated like meat by you.

Yes, I know, I know, Hillary Clinton forced you to flame. It's totally her fault. But this isn't Hillary and you're still showing the exact same level and quality of sexism. Some of it's funny, but at some point, the pattern here can't be ignored. You, however, can.

You understand perfectly. The others are making mountains out of molehills.

No, that's not a molehill, that's you claiming the second most powerful job in the world should be given to someone according to their genitalia.

So, since you're claiming the second most powerful job in the world should be given to someone according to their genitalia, I beg of you:

Please, tell me why you think the second most powerful job in the world should be given to someone according to their genitalia.

I'm repeating it so you and others can realize how absurd this is. This is the notion that the second most powerful job in the world should be given to someone according to their genitalia.

I just read the wiki article. Geez, it's all over the map because people are just jamming stuff in it and taking stuff out. It's kind of funny.

If you go back a couple of pages in this thread, I posted a link to a revision from back in... about April, I think. Back when she still admitted she had smoked pot but 'didn't like it'.

It is astounding how thoroughly that page is getting reamed, right now. It's almost Chinese-doctoring-the-records-of-Olympic-gymnasts in it's scope.

I haven't checked her wiki recently... is she still from Alaska?
i think she HAS to stay "from alaska" being governor and all. hard to edit around

i hope she doesnt quit her day job.

personally i found her remark about shattering the glass ceiling to be a bit pre-mature. after all ferarro broke the vp nomination ceiling and hillary was going for the presidential ceiling. for palin to break the presidential ceiling mccain has to be elected and die.

If you go back a couple of pages in this thread, I posted a link to a revision from back in... about April, I think. Back when she still admitted she had smoked pot but 'didn't like it'.

It is astounding how thoroughly that page is getting reamed, right now. It's almost Chinese-doctoring-the-records-of-Olympic-gymnasts in it's scope.

That is pretty funny. It wasn't a "they're not underage" kind of doctoring. It was a "yeah, so, now that we did this, what can you do about it?"

i think she HAS to stay "from alaska" being governor and all. hard to edit around

i hope she doesnt quit her day job.

personally i found her remark about shattering the glass ceiling to be a bit pre-mature. after all ferarro broke the vp nomination ceiling and hillary was going for the presidential ceiling. for palin to break the presidential ceiling mccain has to be elected and die.

If Palin were elected she'd be the first female VP. Geraldine Ferraro didn't do that. She only tried to.

Yeah. But I'm a dumass.
I'm an Alexandre Dumas, let's be friends!

personally i found her remark about shattering the glass ceiling to be a bit pre-mature.
Her whole speech was a bit ropey, which is, I suppose, to be expected.

McCain didn't look very pleased at some points, and appeared to be snooping her speech at others.

i dont know what to think about it. nominating a woman is a fine idea but why not one who is fully qualified to take over as president in a disaster?

Well... she IS a sop to the evangelical vote, which was definitely the weakest card in his hand... and that IS death to a NeoCon candidate. But, it's also transparent that she's ONLY a vehicle. This wasn't a decision based on what would happen AFTER he took office, it was about trying to appeal to bases and minimise damage, so that he MIGHT stand a chance.

The scary thing is - I now keep hearing pundits talking about what a 'brave gamble' this is.

Excuse me?

We want a President that thinks longshots are good policy?

If Palin were elected she'd be the first female VP. Geraldine Ferraro didn't do that. She only tried to.
yeah but thats not the glass ceiling that hillary cracked.

You understand perfectly. The others are making mountains out of molehills.


Or maybe, a lack of molehills?

The republicans did what the dems should have done... what did you mean by that?

It LOOKS like you meant 'selected a woman for VP'.... but you perhaps mean something else?

i think she HAS to stay "from alaska" being governor and all. hard to edit around

i hope she doesnt quit her day job.



But... if they could just change that bit... make her from.. North Carolina, would be good. That'd cinch it. That Bible Belt isn't sitting too comfortable at the moment, and picking an Alaskan ain't gonna have helped that none.


personally i found her remark about shattering the glass ceiling to be a bit pre-mature. after all ferarro broke the vp nomination ceiling and hillary was going for the presidential ceiling. for palin to break the presidential ceiling mccain has to be elected and die.

Maybe that was in the pre-nup. Or whatever they call such things in politics.

Well... she IS a sop to the evangelical vote, which was definitely the weakest card in his hand... and that IS death to a NeoCon candidate. But, it's also transparent that she's ONLY a vehicle. This wasn't a decision based on what would happen AFTER he took office, it was about trying to appeal to bases and minimise damage, so that he MIGHT stand a chance.

The scary thing is - I now keep hearing pundits talking about what a 'brave gamble' this is.

Excuse me?

We want a President that thinks longshots are good policy?
that part really bugs me because he could have nominated heather wilson who IS fully qualified--veteran, rhodes scholar, congresswoman, phd in international relations.

(with a few big time negatives of her own that arent worth mentioning now)

he could have nominated condi rice for god's sake. she cant be a great campaigner but THAT would have been a bold choice.

As long as you can admit that Chumbly articulates your point better then you do.
Trolling and flamebaiting?

That is pretty funny. It wasn't a "they're not underage" kind of doctoring. It was a "yeah, so, now that we did this, what can you do about it?"

What documents?

It never said that! Prove it!

What documents?

etc.

that part really bugs me because he could have nominated heather wilson who IS fully qualified--veteran, rhodes scholar, congresswoman, phd in international relations.

(with a few big time negatives of her own that arent worth mentioning now)

he could have nominated condi rice for god's sake. she cant be a great campaigner but THAT would have been a bold choice.

Ah, but Condi already turned him down. I'd been watching that angle. :)

It's a bit of a headfuck, because there are several better picks, and he went right ahead and picked someone with all the same 'qualities' he'd said were flaws in Obama, but with one more vagina - which apparently forgives all sins.

It's not too late to change his mind, is it? Could he still pick Condi if she threw herself upon his mercies, so to speak?

Trolling and flamebaiting?

You know what else is trolling and flamebaiting? Entering every thread to annoy us because you think that the second most powerful job in the world should be given to someone according to their genitalia.

Trolling and flamebaiting?

Given that your position has been questioned quite thoroughly over, what, a dozen pages? since that post... and you've not really come any closer to answering the questions...

EXCEPT to basically tip the nod to Chumbly as your apologist...

I'm not really sure you can say too much about it.

Given that your position has been questioned quite thoroughly over, what, a dozen pages? since that post... and you've not really come any closer to answering the questions...

EXCEPT to basically tip the nod to Chumbly as your apologist...

I'm not really sure you can say too much about it.

You mean the position of thinking that the second most powerful job in the world should be given to someone according to their genitalia?

Come on, how many times will I have to repeat it till CH realizes how absurd it is?

Ah, but Condi already turned him down. I'd been watching that angle. :)

It's a bit of a headfuck, because there are several better picks, and he went right ahead and picked someone with all the same 'qualities' he'd said were flaws in Obama, but with one more vagina - which apparently forgives all sins.

It's not too late to change his mind, is it? Could he still pick Condi if she threw herself upon his mercies, so to speak?
that condi rice is a smart woman!

maybe he couldnt get a better candidate to agree to run with him. its a big boost for ms palin but not such a good deal for already established national figures.

The scary thing is - I now keep hearing pundits talking about what a 'brave gamble' this is.

You know when you hear news when you're in a group and people just say the first thing that comes to mind? I heard "Hillary supporters", "Going to look weak talking about Obama's youth", "She's hot" (they're not all winners) and my involuntary contribution was: "Maverick". I'd had an article about McCain trying to set himself up as a maverick stuck in my head and this move really made sense to me in that context. What works for him the most imo is that the "maverick" label is firmly stuck in subtext - "Obama is looking for foreign policy experience" says people that Obama wants to project foreign policy experience and only really preaches to the choir but "McCain has selected an outside choice who is A WOMAN" says maverick in the analysis but it doesn't seem contrived. McCain isn't offering evidence that he's different from Bush - that's not an option - and instead he's going "Take a look at me! Am I crazy or what? I don't play by the rules. Oh THOSE rules? Well, sure I play by those but the other rules? Out the window! Except for any rules you happen to be specific about"

Given that your position has been questioned quite thoroughly over, what, a dozen pages? since that post... and you've not really come any closer to answering the questions...

EXCEPT to basically tip the nod to Chumbly as your apologist...

I'm not really sure you can say too much about it.
That is because everybody was too busy making assumptions and when clarification was offered, they chose to ignore that. There are two people on this thread that I no longer reply to. They know that and they try to take advantage of the situation. I think I will have to add a 3rd person, because all he wants to do is the same as the others.

I thank Chumbly for going to bat against those who know that I won't be replying to.

EDIT: especially since I received a warning about not "egging" those people on.

That is because everybody was too busy making assumptions and when clarification was offered, they chose to ignore that. There are two people on this thread that I no longer reply to. They know that and they try to take advantage of the situation. I think I will have to add a 3rd person, because all he wants to do is the same as the others.

I thank Chumbly for going to bat against those who know that I won't be replying to.

EDIT: especially since I received a warning about not "egging" those people on.

If you stop responding to EVERYONE, will you stop posting that annoying tripe about Hillary?

EXCEPT to basically tip the nod to Chumbly as your apologist...
'Apologist'?

I am not arguing for or defending CH's position; merely attempting to prevent misrepresentation. NS:G has been plagued recently by this little feud over the Democratic nomination, and, frankly, a number of posters have gone down in my estimation of their character.

I only hope my clarification of others' positions will help deflate such incessant bickering, and let us return to... incessant bickering on a different subject.

That is because everybody was too busy making assumptions and when clarification was offered, they chose to ignore that. There are two people on this thread that I no longer reply to. They know that and they try to take advantage of the situation. I think I will have to add a 3rd person, because all he wants to do is the same as the others.

I thank Chumbly for going to bat against those who know that I won't be replying to.

EDIT: especially since I received a warning about not "egging" those people on.

I wonder which categorisation I'm falling into - since I've specifically made points and asked questions, and found you singularly adept at specifically not providing any actual concrete responses.

'Apologist'?

I am not arguing for or defending CH's position; merely attempting to prevent misrepresentation. NS:G has been plagued recently by this little feud over the Democratic nomination, and, frankly, a number of posters have gone down in my estimation of their character.

I only hope my clarification of others' positions will help deflate such incessant bickering, and let us return to... incessant bickering on a different subject.

I wasn't saying you were CH's apologist, mon ami, merely that he was tipping the nod to you as his apologist.

I think CH made a poorly-thought-out post, and rather than suck it up, has tried to defend it. I also think that he's specifically hidden behind that post, and allowed others to fight his fight for him. I've been sitting here trying to get some kind of real sense out of it - and I still can't get it to be anything more than, at heart, a claim that 'a woman' is considered a progressive political advantage (for maybe the first time in American political history?)... and that, it basically doesn't matter which one.

My contention wasn't with you, but with CH - but he's letting you stand in. Which is a shame. On the other hand, I'm not minding our little diversion. :)

If you stop responding to EVERYONE, will you stop posting that annoying tripe about Hillary?
And who was it that FIRST raised the "tripe about Hillary" in this thread? And long before I posted in this thread.

What's the URL for that "Oh, Jeez, not this shit again" poster? Because I got this crap during the Hillary victimization fest...
Would that be your post?

And more:

Oh, I got unfairly called sexist so many times during the Clinton debacle, I figured I might as well indulge. But be fair, I'd be finding other names for other Republicans.

And more:

Nope, I was accused of doing it to democrats by Clinton backers. So I figured I might indulge in some now that Palin is the choice. But do relax, were she a male, I'd call "him" a pimp, gigolo or whatever. On it goes. They're enemies.
You were saying?

Note: I break my vow of silence to you (just this one time) because I just can't help myself.

I wonder which categorisation I'm falling into - since I've specifically made points and asked questions, and found you singularly adept at specifically not providing any actual concrete responses.
Perhaps due to your playing to the crowd at times? I find it rather difficult to debate anything here anymore.

Question, what's the inuit word for "bimbo"?

I'm not going to list all the sexist things you've said in this thread. I'm just going to say your continuing theme of sexist remarks demonstrate a flaw that you should do some serious thinking about.

This isn't a "you don't like her, so you're a sexist" thing. It's a continually referring to a woman as a bimbo, a sex object, as nothing more than her looks, etc., so your being sexist thing.

Others, including a Mod, have called you on this bullshit and yet you continue to spout sexist comments.

Really. Go have a good think about how your representing yourself.



How is that? She has the same number of years in office and more governing experience than Obama.

EDIT: the lady is a working mom of five, has good ethics proven by her fighting corrupt politicians in her own party, proven energy policy in Alaska and canada natural gas pipeline treaties etc., and womens rights goes without saying. Looks like a very strong conservative candidate for VP to me.

1. I admire Gov. Palin's fight against corruption in her own party, but the rest of what you say is either not particularly true or irrelevant.

2. And, by what bizarre measure, do you claim Gov. Palin's years in office are the same as Obama?

3. It "goes without saying" that Gov. Palin has a good record on women's rights? Because she has a vagina? Are Phyllis Schafly and Anita Bryant also great pioneers of women's rights?

Sarah Palin is in favor of Working Women's rights. Do you really want to try and make an argument otherwise> lol

What, pray tell, are these "working women's rights" that Sarah Palin is in favor of and what exactly has she done to champion them?

Others, including a Mod, have called you on this bullshit and yet you continue to spout sexist comments.


If he was calling all women bimbo's, then it would be sexist. Calling an individual woman a bimbo is not sexist, unless he is merely calling her a bimbo simply because she is a woman and nothing more, although I don't think that's the case.

Perhaps due to your playing to the crowd at times? I find it rather difficult to debate anything here anymore.

Please. You are the one that started this "debate" off with a comparison of Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton and claiming the Republicans had done what the Democrats should have done.

There is no rational comparison. It was a silly "point." Just admit you were wrong. It won't hurt that much.

As for your and Chumbly's subsequent argument that Palin is relatively progressive compared to parts of her party, that is (1) rather like saying one of my cats is rather more qualified to be President than the other one and (2) not particularly true given her extremely conservative views on most issues on which her opinion is known.

I'm not going to list all the sexist things you've said in this thread. I'm just going to say your continuing theme of sexist remarks demonstrate a flaw that you should do some serious thinking about.

This isn't a "you don't like her, so you're a sexist" thing. It's a continually referring to a woman as a bimbo, a sex object, as nothing more than her looks, etc., so your being sexist thing.

Others, including a Mod, have called you on this bullshit and yet you continue to spout sexist comments.

Really. Go have a good think about how your representing yourself.


Now, be fair: I made ONE remark about her looks after the mod thing.

If he was calling all women bimbo's, then it would be sexist. Calling an individual woman a bimbo is not sexist, unless he is merely calling her a bimbo simply because she is a woman and nothing more, although I don't think that's the case.

1. Care to tapdance through the rest of Heikoku's sexist statements? Or are you just going to be willingfully blind?

2. On what basis other than her gender was Heikoku calling Gov. Palin a "bimbo"?

EDIT: On second thought, don't answer those questions. My comment was directed at Heikoku's conscience. Either the message gets through or it doesn't. I'm not going to debate the relative sexism of Heikoku's comments.

Perhaps due to your playing to the crowd at times? I find it rather difficult to debate anything here anymore.

Heh. So - my problem is that I'm a 'celebrity'?

Made me laugh...


I really don't know what you expect. I've explained what I think is to be received from your opening gambit. I've analysed it in a couple of variants - and it really seems to come down to one of two things - you HONESTLY believe that being 'a woman' is the qualification that makes Palin so particularly apropos a selection at this point... or you see her as some kind of spiritual heir to Hillary Clinton.

And, since - let's face it - Hillary wouldn't wipe her ass on the manifesto that Palin seems intent on pushing... I really don't see what you think Palin has going for her, that couldn't have been provided better, by a number of other candidates... except for a vagina.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned. Maybe it's just the way we do politics down our way - but I'll pick a manifesto over a particular arrangement of genitals just about every time.

If he was calling all women bimbo's, then it would be sexist. Calling an individual woman a bimbo is not sexist, unless he is merely calling her a bimbo simply because she is a woman and nothing more, although I don't think that's the case.

Okay, first of all, I cut it out a while ago (though McCain IS using her status as a female). Second of all, could we let sleeping dogs lie before they find a way, and they will, to bite me in the ass?

If he was calling all women bimbo's, then it would be sexist. Calling an individual woman a bimbo is not sexist, unless he is merely calling her a bimbo simply because she is a woman and nothing more, although I don't think that's the case.
it was sexist to the core.

disliking a woman because she is the republican nominee is par for the course. taking that as an excuse to call her a bimbo and go on and on with sexual remarks when you know nothing else about her can only be called sexist.

On what basis other than her gender was Heikoku calling Gov. Palin a "bimbo"?

Her looks. But, again, were she old and male I'd have called "him" a geezer, senile, cod, or whatever. It has less to do with her gender or looks than with her political affiliation and the candidate she's currently helping.

Okay, first of all, I cut it out a while ago (though McCain IS using her status as a female). Second of all, could we let sleeping dogs lie before they find a way, and they will, to bite me in the ass?

Fine, not sure why I decided to interject in the first place.

it was sexist to the core.

disliking a woman because she is the republican nominee is par for the course. taking that as an excuse to call her a bimbo and go on and on with sexual remarks when you know nothing else about her can only be called sexist.

Good, but:

1- I get a free pass once because Clinton's supporters called me sexist for supporting Obama.

2- I stopped calling the woman a bimbo some 25 pages ago.

Fine, not sure why I decided to interject in the first place.

Sorry. I thank you for defending me, but this subject was supposed to be closed.

Sorry. I thank you for defending me, but this subject was supposed to be closed.

Yet you seem to be continuing it with still. :)

Yet you seem to be continuing it with still. :)

So, uhm, what did you have for dinner last night? :p

Good, but:

1- I get a free pass once because Clinton's supporters called me sexist for supporting Obama.

2- I stopped calling the woman a bimbo some 25 pages ago.
you dont get any free pass for anything that CH has written.

he doesnt have a dog in this fight any more than you do so his crap doesnt count.

you dont get any free pass for anything that CH has written.

he doesnt have a dog in this fight any more than you do so his crap doesnt count.

LBJ - '64 - Dictatorship.

Your foreign policy matters to us.

And, since - let's face it - Hillary wouldn't wipe her ass on the manifesto that Palin seems intent on pushing...
And will, I'm sure, be slating Palin's platform (especially her 'feminist' credentials) in the days, weeks and months to come. Hilary wanted a part in this election and, although it certainly ain't the part she hoped for, her role, and that of the other female Dems, has just grown significantly bigger.

And will, I'm sure, be slating Palin's platform (especially her 'feminist' credentials) in the days, weeks and months to come. Hilary wanted a part in this election and, although it certainly ain't the part she hoped for, her role, and that of the other female Dems, has just grown significantly bigger.

Yeah - it might work out for the best. Hillary can really go for Palin now, far more than she could have done if she was president-candidate or VP-candidate.

Well, if I learned anything from the last 8 years, it's that Republicans aren't afraid to use a Bush when they need it, but they secretly hold that all the real power is in Dick.

...I do believe you just won the thread.

LBJ - '64 - Dictatorship.

Your foreign policy matters to us.
no

free

pass

Also, it would really be nice if there could be an end to the commentary about Palin's appearance, whether or not people want to have sex with her, and so on and so forth. As a woman who violently disagrees with Palin on just about everything, the degree of objectification of her going on in this thread is still kinda making me feel like vomiting. It's one thing to point out that her status as an attractive female may have had something to do with McCain's choice, and criticize him for that, and quite another to suggest that she should be in pornos, that she could be a "VPILF," that her foreign policy would involve screwing people, and on and on with that sort of revolting sexist bullshit.

...and on and on with that sort of revolting sexist bullshit.
Quite.

As I've said here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=13967835#post13967835), there's no need to resort to such idiocy when the woman is such an easy target to attack (anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, pro-creationism, etc).

Also, it would really be nice if there could be an end to the commentary about Palin's appearance, whether or not people want to have sex with her, and so on and so forth. As a woman who violently disagrees with Palin on just about everything, the degree of objectification of her going on in this thread is still kinda making me feel like vomiting. It's one thing to point out that her status as an attractive female may have had something to do with McCain's choice, and criticize him for that, and quite another to suggest that she should be in pornos, that she could be a "VPILF," that her foreign policy would involve screwing people, and on and on with that sort of revolting sexist bullshit.

27 pages without any such remark and counting. Can we drop it?

Also, it would really be nice if there could be an end to the commentary about Palin's appearance, whether or not people want to have sex with her, and so on and so forth. As a woman who violently disagrees with Palin on just about everything, the degree of objectification of her going on in this thread is still kinda making me feel like vomiting. It's one thing to point out that her status as an attractive female may have had something to do with McCain's choice, and criticize him for that, and quite another to suggest that she should be in pornos, that she could be a "VPILF," that her foreign policy would involve screwing people, and on and on with that sort of revolting sexist bullshit.
seconded.

27 pages without any such remark and counting. Can we drop it?

I didn't want to do this, but your lack of self-awareness is mind-boggling.

These are just some of the comments you've made -- all of them after you were told to stop calling Gov. Palin a "bimbo."

She has a "naughty librarian" feel to her, doesn't she? VPILF anyone?

She CAN pull it off...

She was a runner-up to Miss Alaska, y'know. And yes, I'd also do her. And as you, I don't vote for the person I'd like to have sex with, or else Morrigan Aensland would get write-in votes from me.

Okay, first of all, EW.

Second of all, the cobwebs would be a problem.

I, Heikoku Jayel, do hereby solemny promise not to get any of my relatives fired for leaving the family, and to look cute and sexy to serve as a little piece of biscuit for the true candidate that's rotting while alive and twenty-eight years my senior!

Minding, she has a vagina that would likely be better fit for its function than Clinton's ever was, so, due to fitness to do the job, I guess Republicans would still have won on THAT unless Obama got THE ACTUAL MISS Alaska to run. Or maybe Miss Vermont.

And his LIKING (not his need, his LIKING) to be surrounded by sexy women that could be his daughters.

A woman possibly ascending to such high office in the republic is very immoral indeed, but to the governess' credit she seems like she would make a better president than Obama, Biden, AND McCain.

I didn't want to do this, but your lack of self-awareness is mind-boggling.

These are just some of the comments you've made -- all of them after you were told to stop calling Gov. Palin a "bimbo."

Oh boy.

So, now, ANY remark I make about looks or even age or the fact that people are using her gender as a prop is sexist? Is the woman sexy? YES? Could she be his daughter? YES. And that's just for one example.

Also, feel free to look up other people's remarks. Geez. And people claim I can't let go!

So McCain will attack Obama over his lack of experience yet be happy to have someone just a (cancer-ridden) septuagenarian heartbeat from the presidency who has little more than 2 years experience governing a state that has less people in it than a district in NY.

So why do this? In a desperate attempt to catch disgruntled Hilary voters. Doesn't matter that Palin and Hilary are polar opposites on every issue: Palin's anti-choice (even in cases of rape), anti-gay, pro-NRA, pro-Alaska drilling (her husband works for BP; anyone think she's going to be vigorously attack Big Oil?). But none of this matters to Hilary voters: The fact she's a woman is the only thing of importance.
This is the limit to which women are able to analyze, according to GOP.
Speaks volumes about their (and McCain's) attitude to women rights.

Also to GOPs logic: McCain deserves the presidency cause he was a POW; Palin deserves the VP cause she's got 5 kids - last one at age 44 and with Downs and eldest in Iraq. She's a good ol' baby making machine, she is, only too happy to replenish the ranks of the dead in Iraq. Exactly what GOP likes to see in their wimmin.
If you look closely, you might notice an absence of Policy there.

And then there's the names she's given her kids: Track, Trig, Bristol, Willow and Piper. We're to trust the USA to a woman who names two of her kids after characters in a TV show, a 3rd after a type of brush, 4th after a mathematical function and the 5th after a wheel rut?


On the plus side, any relative of Michael can't be all bad.

A woman possibly ascending to such high office in the republic is very immoral indeed, but to the governess' credit she seems like she would make a better president than Obama, Biden, AND McCain.

Before any of you ask, no, I'm NOT this guy. -_-

So, now, ANY remark I make about looks or even age or the fact that people are using her gender as a prop is sexist?
Not necessarily, but comments such as calling her "a little piece of biscuit for the true candidate" don't do you any favours.

Not necessarily, but comments such as calling her "a little piece of biscuit for the true candidate" don't do you any favours.

Okay, if I use other words to argue the exact same thing, namely that McCain is using that woman as a PROP, will people PLEASE get off my behind?

Okay, if I use other words to argue the exact same thing, namely that McCain is using that woman as a PROP, will people PLEASE get off my behind?
Unsurprisingly, if you refrain from using sexist language, then folks will stop taking you to task for it.

Unsurprisingly, if you refrain from using sexist language, then folks will stop taking you to task for it.

I did. And then the definition of "sexist" was expanded by TCT for that. Anyways, moving on before it bites me in the ass:

The woman is a prop for McCain. He picked her in the hopes of getting Hillary's voters due to the fact that she is a female.

Quite.

As I've said here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=13967835#post13967835), there's no need to resort to such idiocy when the woman is such an easy target to attack (anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, pro-creationism, etc).

There's no need to resort to that shit even if she wasn't an easy target. There's no need to ever resort to that.

We'll see...

Now, to other business:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin#Matanuska_Maid_Dairy_closure

She just replaced the entire board because they didn't do what she wanted? That doesn't sound like the act of a good leader.. That sounds like the act of someone who wants to control everything, which is not the sort of person I want in my federal government, especially not in a position where she could become the President.

Notice that the entry is now gone? Someone it seems, is busy employing a little whitewash. Article is locked now, given the rampant changes in the last 48 hours. Found the relevant link in the history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sarah_Palin&oldid=235044373#Controversy

And who was it that FIRST raised the "tripe about Hillary" in this thread? And long before I posted in this thread.


Would that be your post?

And more:



And more:


You were saying?

Note: I break my vow of silence to you (just this one time) because I just can't help myself.

Geez. But, but, Johnny did it first.

Both you and Hei seem to be justified by the fact that the other sets the bar so low that there is no need to rise to the level of reasonable debate. There is a reason and many people here are willing to have it. If you're not, well, why are you giving yourself heartburn, just don't open the thread.

Notice that the entry is now gone? Someone it seems, is busy employing a little whitewash. Article is locked now, given the rampant changes in the last 48 hours. Found the relevant link in the history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sarah_Palin&oldid=235044373#Controversy
Right now, I do believe that it is locked.

This page is currently semi-protected, and can be edited only by established registered users (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sarah_Palin&action=edit&oldid=235044373).

I did. And then the definition of "sexist" was expanded by TCT for that. Anyways, moving on before it bites me in the ass:

The woman is a prop for McCain. He picked her in the hopes of getting Hillary's voters due to the fact that she is a female.

No, not moving on. Because this is a constant problem.

That you don't recognize that talking about how she's a whore (and in fact so far every woman in the campaign has been) and how you'd like to fuck her and how her vagina compares to Clinton is sexist, is a very large problem for you. Imagine I was talking about your mother that way... that okay to do? Your sister? Your wife? Your daughter?

Whether or not she was chosen because she is a woman is a valid debate. How her vagina compares to Clinton's is not. If you can't tell the difference, perhaps it's time to examine your view of women in general.

No, not moving on. Because this is a constant problem.

That you don't recognize that talking about how she's a whore (and in fact so far every woman in the campaign has been) and how you'd like to fuck her and how her vagina compares to Clinton is sexist, is a very large problem for you. Imagine I was talking about your mother that way... that okay to do? Your sister? Your wife? Your daughter?

Whether or not she was chosen because she is a woman is a valid debate. How her vagina compares to Clinton's is not. If you can't tell the difference, perhaps it's time to examine your view of women in general.

Well, I don't really LIKE my mother... And my sister is 3, so it would be another kind of problem, really.

Anyways, the Vagina dialogue? Not started by me.

Also, I not once insulted Kathleen Sebelius or Michelle Obama. And I did insult John McCain, a male, several times. What does that tell you?

Well, I don't really LIKE my mother...

Anyways, the Vagina dialogue? Not started by me.

Actually, that explains a lot.

Meanwhile, you once again try to find any excuse to set the bar a little lower. How about we play this game where being an adult means choosing standards of behavior based on reason rather than based on choosing poor examples and striving to be like them? Sound fair?

Wait, wait, let me guess, you USED to be this wonderful person who didn't sit around and call women whores till some whore made you do it, right? Did I figure it out?

Actually, that explains a lot.

Meanwhile, you once again try to find any excuse to set the bar a little lower. How about we play this game where being an adult means choosing standards of behavior based on reason rather than based on choosing poor examples and striving to be like them? Sound fair?

Wait, wait, let me guess, you USED to be this wonderful person who didn't sit around and call women whores till some whore made you do it, right? Did I figure it out?

If you want my psychological profile, could we do it in another thread?

Nope, I'm just saying that the vagina dialogue in this thread wasn't exactly started by me. Read into it whatever you want.

Also, "Whore" I didn't use here or in any other thread.

It was an awesome choice for McCain. Not so positive for the Dems.

It was an awesome choice for McCain. Not so positive for the Dems.

May you PLEASE be able to get this thread back on track.

McCain just lost the experience cudgel...

It was an awesome choice for McCain. Not so positive for the Dems.

I fail to see how a gimmick candidate is an "awesome choice".

I fail to see how a gimmick candidate is an "awesome choice".

Not even a candidate at that. A product. I Can't Believe It's Not Hillary.

I would rather have her as President than McCain. I couldn't disagree with you more.

So, does Obama have enough experience to be President? You seem to think she does, although she really has very little. She would have never even made it through the primaries because no one really knows anything about her. Her name recognition is negative, and the bit about teaching creationism in science classes is horrid. I'm all for a comparative religion course, but not science because it doesn't fit the criteria.

It was an awesome choice for McCain. Not so positive for the Dems.
what good is it going to do him?

So why exactly are there 3 "good" choices and only one bad one?

So, does Obama have enough experience to be President? You seem to think she does, although she really has very little. She would have never even made it through the primaries because no one really knows anything about her. Her name recognition is negative, and the bit about teaching creationism in science classes is horrid. I'm all for a comparative religion course, but not science because it doesn't fit the criteria.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=836384597&play=1

So why exactly are there 3 "good" choices and only one bad one?

That's actually a very good question.

what good is it going to do him?
The fact that he has a woman on-board and Obama doesn't?

Can't really hurt with the vast sea of independent voters floating about at the moment.

The fact that he has a woman on-board and Obama doesn't?

Can't really hurt with the vast sea of independent voters floating about at the moment.

How many of those will see her as a gimmick, and how many of those will see McCain's "He's inexperient" argument weaken?

The fact that he has a woman on-board and Obama doesn't?

Can't really hurt with the vast sea of independent voters floating about at the moment.
dont be silly.

no one votes for the guy they dont like because of the person he chose for VP.

and in this case the piss poor pandering is so obvious that it might piss off more of those independents than please them.

Her name recognition is negative, and the bit about teaching creationism in science classes is horrid.
Let alone here opposition to putting the Polar Bear on the endangered species list on the basis that this might prevent oil-drilling in their breeding grounds and habitats.
And let's not forget her claim that humanity has nothing to do with the shrinking of the Arctic icecap.