|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jul 14, 2010 8:34:14 GMT -8
If Sarah Palin is such a nothing, why do so many people and publications on the Left spend so much time attacking her? Well, here is an article from the Left (the New Republic) which is . . . gasp! . . . not the typical hatchet job on the woman. In fact, it's pretty even-handed, even more or less neutral. Makes some cogent points about Sarah's tactics which are in a sense complimentary. www.tnr.com/article/politics/75944/media-maven?page=0,0&passthru=NThlZGFlZTAyYTJkZWQxMGM4NTJmNzRmNTcxMzcxYjU AzWm PS: For the record, I am not a huge Sarah fan. I like her well enough, but I don't think she has the (pardon the expression) gravitas to be President. She would be well advised to keep on what she's doing rather than run for office. Well, she might win election as Senator, but that would really not be as good a gig as what she has fashioned for herself. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Jul 14, 2010 13:57:18 GMT -8
If Sarah Palin is such a nothing, why do so many people and publications on the Left spend so much time attacking her? Well, here is an article from the Left (the New Republic) which is . . . gasp! . . . not the typical hatchet job on the woman. In fact, it's pretty even-handed, even more or less neutral. Makes some cogent points about Sarah's tactics which are in a sense complimentary. www.tnr.com/article/politics/75944/media-maven?page=0,0&passthru=NThlZGFlZTAyYTJkZWQxMGM4NTJmNzRmNTcxMzcxYjU AzWm PS: For the record, I am not a huge Sarah fan. I like her well enough, but I don't think she has the (pardon the expression) gravitas to be President. She would be well advised to keep on what she's doing rather than run for office. Well, she might win election as Senator, but that would really not be as good a gig as what she has fashioned for herself. Why do they attack her? Simple, she gives them lots of ammunition. She is not very bright and poorly educated. I thought she was an embarrassment to the McCain campaign. |
|
|
|
Post by uwaztec on Jul 14, 2010 14:21:26 GMT -8
If Sarah Palin is such a nothing, why do so many people and publications on the Left spend so much time attacking her? Well, here is an article from the Left (the New Republic) which is . . . gasp! . . . not the typical hatchet job on the woman. In fact, it's pretty even-handed, even more or less neutral. Makes some cogent points about Sarah's tactics which are in a sense complimentary. www.tnr.com/article/politics/75944/media-maven?page=0,0&passthru=NThlZGFlZTAyYTJkZWQxMGM4NTJmNzRmNTcxMzcxYjU AzWm PS: For the record, I am not a huge Sarah fan. I like her well enough, but I don't think she has the (pardon the expression) gravitas to be President. She would be well advised to keep on what she's doing rather than run for office. Well, she might win election as Senator, but that would really not be as good a gig as what she has fashioned for herself. William..... why do you say only people on the Left?... many centrists dislike, or make fun of, her. I think she is talented on the public stage and for sure a good marketer. I think she resonates especially with the people that think that the Earth is 5,000 years old and that Man and dinosaur walked the Earth at the same time. She has never denied these beliefs by the way. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Jul 14, 2010 15:13:51 GMT -8
Some Palin stuff, FWIW: www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/p/our-little-sarah.htmNothing about the "earth is (only) 5000 years old" issue, but you could probably fit that fearsome constituency in a single phone booth. No, I think the attacks are mostly following Alinsky's rules... fix the target and attack, never let up. Anyone who disagrees on policy issues with the left is racist, homophobic, bigoted, wing-nutty, snake dancing religious fools... Do keep slinging those epithets, though.... because the more they are used, the more pathetic they become in their impotence. |
|
|
|
Post by uwaztec on Jul 14, 2010 16:17:09 GMT -8
Some Palin stuff, FWIW: www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/p/our-little-sarah.htmNothing about the "earth is (only) 5000 years old" issue, but you could probably fit that fearsome constituency in a single phone booth. No, I think the attacks are mostly following Alinsky's rules... fix the target and attack, never let up. Anyone who disagrees on policy issues with the left is racist, homophobic, bigoted, wing-nutty, snake dancing religious fools... Do keep slinging those epithets, though.... because the more they are used, the more pathetic they become in their impotence. Sid... going issue by issue. How many people on here do you consider "Left"? Are there any moderates or centrists on the political board? I think if you sat down with me over a cup of coffee, you might be surprised. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 14, 2010 16:23:37 GMT -8
If Sarah Palin is such a nothing, why do so many people and publications on the Left spend so much time attacking her? Well, here is an article from the Left (the New Republic) which is . . . gasp! . . . not the typical hatchet job on the woman. In fact, it's pretty even-handed, even more or less neutral. Makes some cogent points about Sarah's tactics which are in a sense complimentary. www.tnr.com/article/politics/75944/media-maven?page=0,0&passthru=NThlZGFlZTAyYTJkZWQxMGM4NTJmNzRmNTcxMzcxYjU AzWm PS: For the record, I am not a huge Sarah fan. I like her well enough, but I don't think she has the (pardon the expression) gravitas to be President. She would be well advised to keep on what she's doing rather than run for office. Well, she might win election as Senator, but that would really not be as good a gig as what she has fashioned for herself. William..... why do you say only people on the Left?... many centrists dislike, or make fun of, her. I think she is talented on the public stage and for sure a good marketer. I think she resonates especially with the people that think that the Earth is 5,000 years old and that Man and dinosaur walked the Earth at the same time. She has never denied these beliefs by the way. UW, You have more White Supremists in the NAACP than you have people who fit your 5000 yr claim or model. There is no problem between Creationists and true open minded Scientists. I suggest that you look into "Reasons to Believe" and see how open minded science looks at this issue. Dr. Hugh Ross can set you straight if you will take the time and can understand the science. www.reasons.org/ |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 14, 2010 16:29:05 GMT -8
If Sarah Palin is such a nothing, why do so many people and publications on the Left spend so much time attacking her? Well, here is an article from the Left (the New Republic) which is . . . gasp! . . . not the typical hatchet job on the woman. In fact, it's pretty even-handed, even more or less neutral. Makes some cogent points about Sarah's tactics which are in a sense complimentary. www.tnr.com/article/politics/75944/media-maven?page=0,0&passthru=NThlZGFlZTAyYTJkZWQxMGM4NTJmNzRmNTcxMzcxYjU AzWm PS: For the record, I am not a huge Sarah fan. I like her well enough, but I don't think she has the (pardon the expression) gravitas to be President. She would be well advised to keep on what she's doing rather than run for office. Well, she might win election as Senator, but that would really not be as good a gig as what she has fashioned for herself. Why do they attack her? Simple, she gives them lots of ammunition. She is not very bright and poorly educated. I thought she was an embarrassment to the McCain campaign. They attack her because she is a threat. You can see she is one of the leading reasons that we are on the verge of getting a new Senator elected from Nevada. You can say whatever you want about her "smarts" or education, but the fact remains that she is very effective and liberals are frightened. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 14, 2010 16:30:55 GMT -8
Some Palin stuff, FWIW: www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/p/our-little-sarah.htmNothing about the "earth is (only) 5000 years old" issue, but you could probably fit that fearsome constituency in a single phone booth. No, I think the attacks are mostly following Alinsky's rules... fix the target and attack, never let up. Anyone who disagrees on policy issues with the left is racist, homophobic, bigoted, wing-nutty, snake dancing religious fools... Do keep slinging those epithets, though.... because the more they are used, the more pathetic they become in their impotence. Sid... going issue by issue. How many people on here do you consider "Left"? Are there any moderates or centrists on the political board? I think if you sat down with me over a cup of coffee, you might be surprised. Don't you think that many people are much different than what they appear to be? |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Jul 14, 2010 16:40:35 GMT -8
Some Palin stuff, FWIW: www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/p/our-little-sarah.htmNothing about the "earth is (only) 5000 years old" issue, but you could probably fit that fearsome constituency in a single phone booth. No, I think the attacks are mostly following Alinsky's rules... fix the target and attack, never let up. Anyone who disagrees on policy issues with the left is racist, homophobic, bigoted, wing-nutty, snake dancing religious fools... Do keep slinging those epithets, though.... because the more they are used, the more pathetic they become in their impotence. Sid... going issue by issue. How many people on here do you consider "Left"? Are there any moderates or centrists on the political board? I think if you sat down with me over a cup of coffee, you might be surprised. I'd love to sit down with you over a cup of coffee. I'm sure we would find more areas of agreement than not. I don't know how many on here are "left", but there certainly are a few. Consider: >>so you hate n*^(*^(*^ and f*^3, I'm sure Mel Gibson needs some friends now D << or, risible nonsense like this: >>>I can hardly wait for the cons to take over. Then we can have them passing laws that require cameras in everyone's bedrooms to make sure that the proper sexual practices are followed.<<< These are typical gratuitous slings from the left at anyone who might disagree with them on policy matters, and I simply say for them to keep at it because it means they can't offer anything of substance to defend their position. The more they do it, the more impotent their bull$#!+ becomes. >>>A threat to theonce-proud REPUBLICAN PARTY that used to have my vote until nutcases took it over.<<< See what I mean? the repubs are nutcases, so yer stuck with us..... |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 14, 2010 19:28:25 GMT -8
They attack her because she is a threat. Yeah. A threat to theonce-proud REPUBLICAN PARTY that used to have my vote until nutcases took it over. Sure thing John!  |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jul 14, 2010 19:29:33 GMT -8
Sid... going issue by issue. How many people on here do you consider "Left"? Are there any moderates or centrists on the political board? I think if you sat down with me over a cup of coffee, you might be surprised. I'd love to sit down with you over a cup of coffee. I'm sure we would find more areas of agreement than not. I don't know how many on here are "left", but there certainly are a few. Consider: >>so you hate n*^(*^(*^ and f*^3, I'm sure Mel Gibson needs some friends now D << or, risible nonsense like this: >>>I can hardly wait for the cons to take over. Then we can have them passing laws that require cameras in everyone's bedrooms to make sure that the proper sexual practices are followed.<<< These are typical gratuitous slings from the left at anyone who might disagree with them on policy matters, and I simply say for them to keep at it because it means they can't offer anything of substance to defend their position. The more they do it, the more impotent their bull$#!+ becomes. >>>A threat to theonce-proud REPUBLICAN PARTY that used to have my vote until nutcases took it over.<<< See what I mean? the repubs are nutcases, so yer stuck with us..... Since you used one of my posts as an example of a gratuitous sling from the left I think it only fair for you to remember the thread where it was posted. Any gratuitous insults from the right there? Did afan strike you as having anything of substance to offer? Since you are positing yourself as the voice of reason here I am interested in your opinion. Context means a lot. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Jul 15, 2010 7:17:33 GMT -8
Why do they attack her? Simple, she gives them lots of ammunition. She is not very bright and poorly educated. I thought she was an embarrassment to the McCain campaign. They attack her because she is a threat. You can see she is one of the leading reasons that we are on the verge of getting a new Senator elected from Nevada. You can say whatever you want about her "smarts" or education, but the fact remains that she is very effective and liberals are frightened. Win, she would be torn apart in an election down here in the 48. You had to have seen that interview with Katie. What an embarassment! |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Jul 15, 2010 8:00:18 GMT -8
They attack her because she is a threat. Yeah. A threat to theonce-proud REPUBLICAN PARTY that used to have my vote until nutcases took it over. John, by now, you know that I do not take most of the political posturing seriously. I am neither an ultra rightest or an ultra leftist. For the most part I am in the Middle along with most Americans (though for the board's sake, I am a leftist for the present time.) All my life when it comes to close personal interactions (like in dealing with the wife) if she says something that I initially perceive as hurtful (I think she used to argue with her first husband, and knew how to trip his triggers), I say to my self, "IT JUST DOES NOT MATTER." I then resolve to forget the statement and let it go without a curt reply. It takes two to argue, and I do not pick up the glove. I will smile at her and raise my eyebrows. (The raised eyebrows - if they are shaggy like an old wise man - seems to have a magical effect on women, and they cease and desist their argumentative stance. No arguments! I do not argue with my wife. You can ask her. By the way I have a theory on this act and believe it goes back to our earliest NEAR orangutan or gorilla evolution days. If you watch male gorillas or orangutans, you will see a lot of eyebrow movement by the adult males. Seriously! The females all respond to this as if he was giving out orders. So now, I go around the house with all kinds of weird expressions on my eyebrows, and observe the quick responses of the females in my house. I look at something that is amiss, raise my eyebrows into a furrowed (Something is fuggin wrong here!) expression, and my women instantly go to it and correct it without my having said one single word. Gawd, it is great to be the total master of my own house! |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Jul 15, 2010 8:02:21 GMT -8
[ They attack her because she is a threat. All I have to do is flash her with my eyebrows, and she will run to cover and cower in a corner. Bet on it. |
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Jul 15, 2010 9:47:25 GMT -8
Why are wrong headed policies and secretive corruption engineered by a clever and well-schooled Marxist somehow more desirable than better policies and a transparent government directed by someone with less "book learnin" and more common sense?
Taking a twist on the biblical verse "a tree is known by its fruit", "Who is Sarah Palin" can be answered by looking at her enemies.
She is hated by the Eastern Media (Example - Couric filmed 2 Hours of gotcha questions and compiled a few five-minute hit pieces for air), Democrats (can you say"Threat"?), Feminists (Can you say "Hypocrite"?), and RINOs (See Kathleen Parker, Peggy Noonan and other "Enlightened" GOP members).
She connects with social/fiscal conservative who are also similarly hated by the same crowd listed above. Nothing new.
Every pseudo intellectual that claims she is too stupid to live (or ever be in a position of responsibility at least) and at the same time supports the Democrats and their Nancy Pelosi in a position of the awesome power in the House of Representative is an out and out hypocrite.
Palin probably has been so attacked, by so many and for so long, her "1000 cuts" may be fatal for any Presidential aspiration. Just do a google on her and you can see hit piece after hit piece after hit piece starting in summer of 2008 continuing steadily to this week. All voters consider electability when they cast their vote and her opposition knows this. That is why they attack her - continually.
Question - Why wasn't the losing VP Dan Quayle, who was considered something less than an Einstein, pilloried continually after he lost in 1992? Answer - he was not a threat. Negative attention is still attention and the Democrats and RINOs have to weigh what they are doing with some uncertainty.
If the country continues on its slide because of these loony, leftist policies, the financially conservative independent may close ranks with the GOP fiscal conservatives and make a point to Washington using Sarah as the vehicle.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Jul 15, 2010 9:54:07 GMT -8
When the pendulum swings, it goes from right to left to right to left.....
|
|
|
|
Post by uwaztec on Jul 15, 2010 10:51:54 GMT -8
Why are wrong headed policies and secretive corruption engineered by a clever and well-schooled Marxist somehow more desirable than better policies and a transparent government directed by someone with less "book learnin" and more common sense? Taking a twist on the biblical verse "a tree is known by its fruit", "Who is Sarah Palin" can be answered by looking at her enemies. She is hated by the Eastern Media (Example - Couric filmed 2 Hours of gotcha questions and compiled a few five-minute hit pieces for air), Democrats (can you say"Threat"?), Feminists (Can you say "Hypocrite"?), and RINOs (See Kathleen Parker, Peggy Noonan and other "Enlightened" GOP members). She connects with social/fiscal conservative who are also similarly hated by the same crowd listed above. Nothing new. Every pseudo intellectual that claims she is too stupid to live (or ever be in a position of responsibility at least) and at the same time supports the Democrats and their Nancy Pelosi in a position of the awesome power in the House of Representative is an out and out hypocrite. Palin probably has been so attacked, by so many and for so long, her "1000 cuts" may be fatal for any Presidential aspiration. Just do a google on her and you can see hit piece after hit piece after hit piece starting in summer of 2008 continuing steadily to this week. All voters consider electability when they cast their vote and her opposition knows this. That is why they attack her - continually. Question - Why wasn't the losing VP Dan Quayle, who was considered something less than an Einstein, pilloried continually after he lost in 1992? Answer - he was not a threat. Negative attention is still attention and the Democrats and RINOs have to weigh what they are doing with some uncertainty. If the country continues on its slide because of these loony, leftist policies, the financially conservative independent may close ranks with the GOP fiscal conservatives and make a point to Washington using Sarah as the vehicle. Well I have noticed that "book learnin" has become a negative for the far right....and especially those evil "elites" (anybody with a Masters and above)!! What do you think Goldwater and W. F. Buckely would think about "book learnin"? I don't hate Palin, she is entertaining. She has used the "evil" (she hates the evil left-wing media till the check clears) media to her advantage like no other politician. She is making mounds of dough. Her daughter has also learned from Mom. geez...only $15,000 to speak on abstinence and how much do you think she got for that US cover this week? (of course she and the guy who did not abstain are abstaining till they get married...big headline  !! Reality show coming....... |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 15, 2010 11:18:48 GMT -8
They attack her because she is a threat. You can see she is one of the leading reasons that we are on the verge of getting a new Senator elected from Nevada. You can say whatever you want about her "smarts" or education, but the fact remains that she is very effective and liberals are frightened. Win, she would be torn apart in an election down here in the 48. You had to have seen that interview with Katie. What an embarassment! Not the point even if true. She can rasie money and is a lightening rod for good! |
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Jul 15, 2010 12:46:27 GMT -8
Well, if Obama and Carter are examples of leadership that comes from "book learnin", then you can keep it. Even Clinton with all his "brains" (in his head and pants is seems) went head-long into leftist idiocy his first two years in office with complete Dem control (See Hillary care, tax increases, etc). But for the GOP House & Senate and his taking the advice of Dick Morris and triangulating with GOP policy, he would have had a failed Presidency too. That was political astuteness, not the extraordinary command of minutia and the ability to regurgitate what your left-wing ideologue professor once told you. The funny thing is that GWB went to the same or as good a school as did Gore or Kerry, and had grades as good as Kerry'a and better than Gore's? And that proves what? Are any of those three on the short list for greatness? Why are wrong headed policies and secretive corruption engineered by a clever and well-schooled Marxist somehow more desirable than better policies and a transparent government directed by someone with less "book learnin" and more common sense? Taking a twist on the biblical verse "a tree is known by its fruit", "Who is Sarah Palin" can be answered by looking at her enemies. She is hated by the Eastern Media (Example - Couric filmed 2 Hours of gotcha questions and compiled a few five-minute hit pieces for air), Democrats (can you say"Threat"?), Feminists (Can you say "Hypocrite"?), and RINOs (See Kathleen Parker, Peggy Noonan and other "Enlightened" GOP members). She connects with social/fiscal conservative who are also similarly hated by the same crowd listed above. Nothing new. Every pseudo intellectual that claims she is too stupid to live (or ever be in a position of responsibility at least) and at the same time supports the Democrats and their Nancy Pelosi in a position of the awesome power in the House of Representative is an out and out hypocrite. Palin probably has been so attacked, by so many and for so long, her "1000 cuts" may be fatal for any Presidential aspiration. Just do a google on her and you can see hit piece after hit piece after hit piece starting in summer of 2008 continuing steadily to this week. All voters consider electability when they cast their vote and her opposition knows this. That is why they attack her - continually. Question - Why wasn't the losing VP Dan Quayle, who was considered something less than an Einstein, pilloried continually after he lost in 1992? Answer - he was not a threat. Negative attention is still attention and the Democrats and RINOs have to weigh what they are doing with some uncertainty. If the country continues on its slide because of these loony, leftist policies, the financially conservative independent may close ranks with the GOP fiscal conservatives and make a point to Washington using Sarah as the vehicle. Well I have noticed that "book learnin" has become a negative for the far right....and especially those evil "elites" (anybody with a Masters and above)!! What do you think Goldwater and W. F. Buckely would think about "book learnin"? I don't hate Palin, she is entertaining. She has used the "evil" (she hates the evil left-wing media till the check clears) media to her advantage like no other politician. She is making mounds of dough. Her daughter has also learned from Mom. geez...only $15,000 to speak on abstinence and how much do you think she got for that US cover this week? (of course she and the guy who did not abstain are abstaining till they get married...big headline !! Reality show coming....... |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Jul 15, 2010 12:55:30 GMT -8
I'd love to sit down with you over a cup of coffee. I'm sure we would find more areas of agreement than not. I don't know how many on here are "left", but there certainly are a few. Consider: >>so you hate n*^(*^(*^ and f*^3, I'm sure Mel Gibson needs some friends now D << or, risible nonsense like this: >>>I can hardly wait for the cons to take over. Then we can have them passing laws that require cameras in everyone's bedrooms to make sure that the proper sexual practices are followed.<<< These are typical gratuitous slings from the left at anyone who might disagree with them on policy matters, and I simply say for them to keep at it because it means they can't offer anything of substance to defend their position. The more they do it, the more impotent their bull$#!+ becomes. >>>A threat to theonce-proud REPUBLICAN PARTY that used to have my vote until nutcases took it over.<<< See what I mean? the repubs are nutcases, so yer stuck with us..... Since you used one of my posts as an example of a gratuitous sling from the left I think it only fair for you to remember the thread where it was posted. Any gratuitous insults from the right there? Did afan strike you as having anything of substance to offer? Since you are positing yourself as the voice of reason here I am interested in your opinion. Context means a lot. OK, fair enough. Although Afan's post was laced with gratuitous hyperbole, it did have a substantial point... that of the "nanny state" attempting to legislate, or in the case of SF and the mayor dictating by executive order. You respond with something I don't think anyone has ever proposed (cameras in bedrooms). If you know of any "con" that has proposed any such thing, even informally, let me know. (I lean libertarian on quite a few issues - but conservative on defense). My point is that if anyone ever does propose such a thing, it will more likely come from the left. The left, after all, already has surveillance cameras up in many public places, and in the UK those devices are ubiquitous. The left tells us what kinds of toilets we have to install, what kinds of light bulbs we have to use, and a plethora of other intrusive rules on how we should live our lives. We even have "chimney Nazis" in my area. Now we have soft-drink Nazis, salt-Nazis, food-Nazis, paper and plastic bag Nazis, pet Nazis, water-Nazis, and on and on and on. |
|
!! Reality show coming.......