I predicted this.
Palin is a birfer.
Would you make the birth certificate an issue if you ran?
I think the public, rightfully, is still making it an issue. I don’t have a problem with that. I don’t know if I would have to bother to make it an issue ’cause I think there are enough members of the electorate who still want answers.
Do you think it’s a fair question to be looking at?
I think it’s a fair question, just like I think past associations and past voting record — all of that is fair game. You know, I’ve got to tell you, too: I think our campaign, the McCain/Palin campaign didn’t do a good enough job in that area. We didn’t call out Obama and some of his associates on their records and what their beliefs were and perhaps what their future plans were. And I don’t think that that was fair to voters to not have done our jobs as candidates and as a campaign to bring to light a lot of the things that now we’re seeing made manifest in the administration.
Hahaha..of course, anyone stupid enough to lard her “book” with easily detected fake plato and fake aristotle quotations mined from Quote Garden… and stupid enough to believe in teh Rapture and witchcraft exorcisms is surely going to be highly permeable for the subliminated racism of the birfer meme virus.
what their beliefs were
Spot on! Let us find out what Palin’s “beliefs” are….. like the First and Second Re-gathering, the Endtimes, and the Leftbehinders and……..perhaps…..using Israel and the Jews as staked goats to bring on teh Rapture?
“Making sense” Johnpi, and Aziz?
It is to laff.
the best definition of Palin’s speech patterns evah– i boosted it from one of TNC’s commenters.
…her usual cream of eagleword soup.
aziz 12:10 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink |
I am delighted by this news. Staying at arms’ length from Birthers was the only way Palin could have convinced Middle America she wasn’t insane. This reduces her threat to Obama in 2012 considerably.
Shams al-Nahar 12:21 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink |
I demand you retract your “making sense” statement.
Making sense and Palin are matter and anti-matter.
They cannot exist in the same contiguous sentence, or even in the same slice of spacetime.
aziz 12:36 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink |
i demand 5000 gold and a run through Sunken Temple and Zul Farrak!
Shams al-Nahar 1:59 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink |
Finals next week dude.
I barely have time to make raid protocol as it is.
And Ice Crown drops next week….im not even close to geared for killing Arthas.
Do you need more bags? I can do that in one of my drivebys.
aziz 12:39 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink |
oh, and what does her Birther statement have to do with her comments about Islam? Some people are utterly irrational on some topics and perfectly rational on others. Actually, all people are like that, come to think of it…
Shams al-Nahar 1:53 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink |
I just want her to be interviewed on this stuff.
I think if American Jews heard something like this come out of Palin’s mouth the GOP would never get a single jewish vote in this century.
…
Only on topics that are unrelated.
There is a very high probability that Palin’s ideas about muslims, MENA, Islam and Judaism are isomorphic and coherent with her pre-trib religious ideology.
Social Brain Hypothesis 101.
Abu Noor Al-Irlandee 12:28 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink |
Palin has denied/clarified/backpedaled whatever on her statements in the interview:
aziz 12:37 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink |
i can see her logic but I am hoping that her comments are taken out of context and packaged into a devastating PALIN IS A BIRTHER television commercial anyway. Im serious. The woman is a serous threat to Obama in 12.
Lawrence of Arabia 1:39 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink |
Ok, I will begin with the blasphemous admission that I don’t think who wins American elections is really very important (Obama ought to be proof enough of that)…
But…in order for her to be a serious threat, she would have to be appealing to somewhere in the neighborhood of half the American voters. Let’s say she lost in blowout & only got 40% of the American vote (which I think is completely unimaginable). That would still make her relatively mainstream (at least as mainstream as Mondale was when he got leveled by Reagan). You are worrying about something that has already happened; her views are broadly acceptable amongst the American public and represent popular values.
I don’t think Palin can be trivialized as “non-sense”. That seems more like wishful thinking on the part of her enemies than a sober evaluation of the situation.
If anything, to say that she is an actual threat to Obama is to suggest that her views have become more mainstream. No one suggested, for instance, that Pat Robertson, was a real threat to anyone in ‘88. No one considered Robertson as a VP candidate.
In other words, the ship has sailed.
Buzz 1:46 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink
Smug.
Shams al-Nahar 2:02 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink
well Lawrence, shez all they got.
Huckabee just went Willie Norton, Pawlenty is invisible, and Petraeus has turned them down like 20 times.
also, too…..there is a segment of the WECs that make up the bulk of the GOP now that would vote a satan ticket before nominating a mormon.
I don’t see an alternative.
Buzz 2:12 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink
If Palin is electable as suggested, then Rush and Glenn can should just stage a coup and declare themselves Grand Poobah and Vice Poobah of the Conservative Christian Oligarchy (of America).
I do not know on what alternate reality Sara Palin should be taken seriously, but she is clearly nothing but a fringe media talisman for a crumbling GOP.
Even in North Carolina.
Buzz 2:17 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink
So the country would make the same decisions and run the same whether Bush or Obama is in office?
OK, thanks. That is all I need to know.
shams 4:41 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink
You know what brother buzz?
You shud be waaaaaay more afraid of stupid people than crazy ones.
There are many, many more of them.
Buzz 6:00 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink
People are conditioned and respond according to their environment and innate qualities. There are plenty of really smart people in the US, some who would even vote for Palin, or doubt climate change or think that nuking Iran would solve something.
Clearly the environment is the main problem. This is what we can change.
aziz 6:26 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink
and this, folks, is why Bush won in 2000.
Abu Noor Al-Irlandee 6:58 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink
I thought it was the Muslim bloc vote in Florida.
Abu Noor Al-Irlandee 7:07 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink
–Arundhati Roy
Buzz 8:43 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink
Ask the people at Guantanamo whether they prefer Ivory or Tide. I think the idea that they are owned by the same people and create the same policies doesn’t wash.
Buzz 8:53 pm on December 4, 2009 Permalink
Roy’s words contain a hint of truth and a boatload of cynicism.
Muffy 8:25 am on December 5, 2009 Permalink
I think LOA is right. She’s not just a fringe candidate, not even close. I also happen to think the less people take Palin seriously, the more successful she will become. I mean, before the 2000 elections, people mocked GW Bush as an incompetent idiot, and he got elected president twice.
Buzz Kill 2:21 pm on December 5, 2009 Permalink
The more we know, the more we dismiss.
midwinterspring 2:23 am on December 5, 2009 Permalink |
Given that Guantamo is still up and running, I’m not sure the detainees there really have a preference between Ivory and Tide. But I am sure that the detainees at Bagram, which Obama doesn’t seem to have any intention of closing, couldn’t care less.
I sincerely fail to see the cynicism in Roy’s words. It seems like a pretty obvious observation to me. No one who poses a significant threat to the current distribution of wealth and power in the United States will every be freely elected under the current system. It would certainly be cynical to conclude that we ought therefore give up on our ideals of justice and equality or move to Canada (as if it’s any better there), but Roy’s speech suggested nothing of the sort.
midwinterspring 2:27 am on December 5, 2009 Permalink |
Sorry, that was meant to be in reply to the thread started by Lawrence of Arabia.
Buzz Kill 2:17 pm on December 5, 2009 Permalink |
Oh, I want to live in an America that is absolute justice and pure shangri-la too. America sucks as so many of you are won’t to express.
BUT LOOK AT THE ALTERNATIVES…Ha.
Please post when you find that perfect world.
Note of advice, if you cannot tell the difference between Bush and Obama – prepare for a long frakin search.
Buzz Kill 2:23 pm on December 5, 2009 Permalink |
Most of the critics of the West that live in the West aren’t going anywhere. Maybe the complaining helps.
Try handlotion. It helps with the chaffing from all the idle handwringing…
midwinterspring 4:09 pm on December 5, 2009 Permalink |
Why should we look for alternatives? Who here has suggested any interest in doing so? I already specifically pointed out that it would indeed be cynical to simply give up on our ideals or move to another country, so hopefully you can see why your response misses the point.
Indeed, it is you who seem to be taking up the first of the cynical options that I mentioned: acknowledging that there are deep structural flaws in the way our country is governed and concluding that we ought therefore give up on attempting to address or even discuss such problems.
“Note of advice, if you cannot tell the difference between Bush and Obama – prepare for a long frakin search.”
I’m not sure what this comment means, but if there are substantive differences in their policies that you’d like to highlight to show why I am mistaken, I’d be happy to consider them.
Buzz 6:01 pm on December 5, 2009 Permalink |
The cynicism in Roy’s words and in your position is that all leaders are alike, they all do the same thing and it matters not what we choose or who we vote for.
If I missed that point, please forgive me. Or perhaps you can stand by your comments.
All my cynicism can be summed up in the simple statement that there are no utopian states here on planet earth. Living ones life requires compromise and choosing the lesser of two evils is common place.
So yes, it DOES matter which choices we make and I am sure that even the accused in prison appreciate the relief on waterboarding.
I think that covers everything. Thanks
midwinterspring 2:55 am on December 6, 2009 Permalink |
“The cynicism in Roy’s words and in your position is that all leaders are alike”
Adjusting this to reflect at least my own stated position (and, I assume, that of Roy), we would have to say, “The cynicism in Roy’s words and in your position is that no leader elected under the current state of US democracy will represent a significant threat to the current distribution of wealth and power in the country and all leaders elected in this way will only create policies that further entrench this status quo.” But then, you may notice, you’ve not actually said anything except, “Your position is cynical.”
I do indeed stand by my comments and I find nothing cynical in suggesting that genuine change must be pursued outside the boundaries of electoral democracy.
“Living ones life requires compromise and choosing the lesser of two evils is common place. ”
It is precisely the fact that this belief is held by the vast majority of people in any given country that perpetuates such systems. After all, if everyone knew that real change, not Obama Change ™, was possible, nothing, in the words of Cummings, could stop it with all the policemen in the world.
“So yes, it DOES matter which choices we make and I am sure that even the accused in prison appreciate the relief on waterboarding.”
Oh, waterboarding can’t be so bad. I mean, if it was really bad, criminally bad, we would expect a responsible leader (one committed to change) to have the people responsible for authorizing such a practice prosecuted.
Buzz 11:54 am on December 6, 2009 Permalink |
All countries need idealists and word mincers too.
I guess you and Roy can fill that need. Good luck with your perfect representation project. When Philosophers are kings and so on…
And all the stink about Attorney General Eric Holders Civilian Court hearing of Khalid Shaikh Mohammad in NY is precisely the concern that issues like waterboarding will come out and have to be answered.
I wish the Bush Administration was prosecuted in addition to being humiliated. I wish all countries were 100% just and civil.
The great thing about being a critic and a cynic is all you have to do is flap your lips and wave your hands. No thinking and no solutions required.
midwinterspring 1:07 pm on December 6, 2009 Permalink |
“All voting is a sort of gaming, like checkers or backgammon, with a slight moral tinge to it, a playing with right and wrong, with moral questions; and betting naturally accompanies it. The character of the voters is not staked. I cast my vote, perchance, as I think right; but I am not vitally concerned that that right should prevail. I am willing to leave it to the majority. Its obligation, therefore, never exceeds that of expediency. Even voting for the right is doing nothing for it. It is only expressing to men feebly your desire that it should prevail. A wise man will not leave the right to the mercy of chance, nor wish it to prevail through the power of the majority. There is but little virtue in the action of masses of men. When the majority shall at length vote for the abolition of slavery, it will be because they are indifferent to slavery, or because there is but little slavery left to be abolished by their vote. They will then be the only slaves. Only his vote can hasten the abolition of slavery who asserts his own freedom by his vote. ”
Henry David Thoreau weeps at your scorn.
Buzz 3:01 pm on December 6, 2009 Permalink |
Precisely. Good example.
Another slacker refusnik who had nothing better to do with the days of his life than hole up in a little cabin next to a isolated pond and write angry screeds.
Today, we call that kind of person ted kaczynski.
Get a life Hank. Go out and meet some women or something.
midwinterspring 3:35 pm on December 6, 2009 Permalink
“Another slacker refusnik who had nothing better to do with the days of his life than hole up in a little cabin next to a isolated pond and write angry screeds.”
Shall I take that as an admission that you’ve never actually read Thoreau? I’m not sure how you could characterize “Walden” as an “angry screed” if you’d actually bothered to read it. Even “Civil Disobedience” itself doesn’t merit such a description.
“Today, we call that kind of person ted kaczynski.”
Really? What important historical figures has Ted Kaczynski influenced and inspired through his writings? Anyone like Ghandi or Martin Luther King Jr.?
“Get a life Hank. Go out and meet some women or something.”
I’m married, thanks. Is this really the best argumentation you can come up with? It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that you don’t actually have anything to argue and are instead venting indignation at the simple fact that someone disagrees with you.
Buzz 3:45 pm on December 6, 2009 Permalink
Hank = Henry = Thoraeu.
No sense of humor.
Typical cynic
Buzz 3:46 pm on December 6, 2009 Permalink
By the way. The argument is over.
You lost as far as I am concerned.
I am just goofing on you at this point.
midwinterspring 3:54 pm on December 6, 2009 Permalink |
In order for there to have been an argument, you would have had to present some evidence in your favor. If you recall, I previously invited you to do so. But you are, of course, free to continue to ignore this invitation and even to imagine that this constitutes winning an argument.
Buzz 4:08 pm on December 6, 2009 Permalink |
#1. This is a bad case of threadjacking.
#2. You are so idealistic that arguing with you requires the supposition that ideal political utopias are possible. A burden which you bear, not me.
#3. Do you really want me to tick off all the changes that Obama has made against Bush policy or will you concede?
You see, I have presented examples. Examples which you ignore in place of rainbows and unicorns of REAL change. Real change that you need a good imagination or some strong hallucinogenics to experience.
midwinterspring 4:20 pm on December 6, 2009 Permalink |
“#1. This is a bad case of threadjacking.”
If it bothers the original poster or if I’m in violation of some community rule, I’d be happy to let the issue drop.
“#2. You are so idealistic that arguing with you requires the supposition that ideal political utopias are possible. A burden which you bear, not me.”
I don’t see where you draw this assumption. I do indeed assume that it is possible to have a society in which the balance of power and wealth is significantly more just than at present in the US. Is that a utopia?
“#3. Do you really want me to tick off all the changes that Obama has made against Bush policy or will you concede? ”
I think this is probably a good place for us to get to the bottom of the disagreement.
Buzz 5:51 pm on December 6, 2009 Permalink |
Go ahead. Show me an example in the last century or so. Demonstrate the possibility where broad social mobility and a momre even distribution of wealth has occured.
Would be great.
shams 4:13 pm on December 6, 2009 Permalink |
well brother mid……..the American Experiment is the most progressive in the world. The basic problem it address is how do Jefferson’s Noble Yeoman Farmers get fair representation when they are incapable of self-representation through lack of Jefferson’s talents and virtues?
The Founders answer was a republic instantiated as a democratic meritocracy where the population elects a populist approximation of a philosopher king.
The system is also strongly damped….meaning resistant to rapid change and extreme swings of the pendulumn of public opinion.
It is not perfect, but certainly Obama’s election is a manifestation of an evolving electorate and an evolving culture.
But the purpose of the american system of government is government by the people, and for the people.