Under the headline, “Sex, Lies and Scandal”, US Weekly - a magazine managed and edited by Jann Wenner, ultrapartisan Obama supporter. But the politics aside, this is simply unacceptable and I intend to call it to the attention of all parents of Down Sydrome children. If you want to make political hay - fine, but leave the children out of it.
Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 3332
Location: My only friend, the end
PhantomPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:16 am
Media Gift to Palin; 100 million will watch her speech tonight
The venom dripping hate filled attacks the Liberal Media are fomenting on Palin because she is a bright, young, attractive conservative who will be around for decades and may just be the next Ronald Reagan are a GIFT in some ways, or as Palin says there are silver linings even in tough circumstances.
More people than ever in the modern era will tune in to watch Palin's speech tonight.
McCain/Palin will get a HUGE advertising lift and will be able to in effect, address the ENTIRE nation.
The media circus has brought this attention and interest to Palin and now as Reagan did so well, she will address the people directly without the media filter.
Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 3332
Location: My only friend, the end
resignedPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:26 am
Click your heels together...
Joined: 14 Aug 2006
Posts: 27605
Location: "Onboard" pathenry's desk
dithersPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:39 am
apodixis wrote:
The incident raises a legitimate political discussion issue over whether the Republican social conservatives are in error over their moralistic condemnation of sex before marriage; and opposition to sex education in schools.
Bullshit! You obviously missed this part of my post:
There is no excuse, no argument, no scenario, no crying the blues, nothing, zero, zip, zilch, nada that you can throw back at me that can in any way, shape or form excuse this outrage. Shame, shame and triple shame on anyone who accepts this or takes part in it.
You diminish yourself by continuing down this road. If you want to have a political discourse on morals and sex you don't need to throw this young girl under the bus to do so. Don't try to use fancy logic to excuse behavior that is not worthy of an adult in this society.
Pretty in Blonde
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Posts: 3468
plhtx1Posted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:40 am
Phantom wrote:
Media Gift to Palin; 100 million will watch her speech tonight
The venom dripping hate filled attacks the Liberal Media are fomenting on Palin because she is a bright, young, attractive conservative who will be around for decades and may just be the next Ronald Reagan are a GIFT in some ways, or as Palin says there are silver linings even in tough circumstances.
More people than ever in the modern era will tune in to watch Palin's speech tonight.
McCain/Palin will get a HUGE advertising lift and will be able to in effect, address the ENTIRE nation.
The media circus has brought this attention and interest to Palin and now as Reagan did so well, she will address the people directly without the media filter.
LMAO. It's as if the media is giving the McCain/Palin ticket free campaign advertising! Keep it coming! They really are threatened by Sarah Palin. This may backfire on the left.
Joined: 15 May 2006
Posts: 2225
Location: The Vail Valley
PhantomPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:44 am
plhtx1 wrote:
LMAO. It's as if the media is giving the McCain/Palin ticket free campaign advertising! Keep it coming! They really are threatened by Sarah Palin. This may backfire on the left.
May? It definitely will!
Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 3332
Location: My only friend, the end
dithersPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:46 am
Quote:
apodixis wrote:
The incident raises a legitimate political discussion issue over whether the Republican social conservatives are in error over their moralistic condemnation of sex before marriage; and opposition to sex education in schools.
dithers wrote:
Bullshit! You obviously missed this part of my post:
There is no excuse, no argument, no scenario, no crying the blues, nothing, zero, zip, zilch, nada that you can throw back at me that can in any way, shape or form excuse this outrage. Shame, shame and triple shame on anyone who accepts this or takes part in it.
You diminish yourself by continuing down this road. If you want to have a political discourse on morals and sex you don't need to throw this young girl under the bus to do so. Don't try to use fancy logic to excuse behavior that is not worthy of an adult in this society.
Oh, one last thought Apo. Look at the pot calling the kettle black. Who's spewing moralistic condemnation and outrage here? I would say it's the Left.
Pretty in Blonde
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Posts: 3468
apodixisPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:46 am
plhtx1 wrote:
LMAO. It's as if the media is giving the McCain/Palin ticket free campaign advertising! Keep it coming! They really are threatened by Sarah Palin. This may backfire on the left.
That's what happened with all of the stupid false attacks on Obama. They backfired and gained him sympathy.
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 3223
Location: State of Jefferson, Ecotopia
plhtx1Posted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:49 am
dithers wrote:
Quote:
apodixis wrote:
The incident raises a legitimate political discussion issue over whether the Republican social conservatives are in error over their moralistic condemnation of sex before marriage; and opposition to sex education in schools.
Oh, one last thought Apo. Look at the pot calling the kettle black. Who's spewing moralistic condemnation and outrage here? I would say it's the Left.
Unbelievable, isn't it.
Joined: 15 May 2006
Posts: 2225
Location: The Vail Valley
PhantomPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:49 am
apodixis wrote:
That's what happened with all of the stupid false attacks on Obama. They backfired and gained him sympathy.
ROFLMAO! Sympathy for someone who can't even put two words together in an intelligent manner without a teleprompter?
Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 3332
Location: My only friend, the end
apodixisPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:51 am
I love ths smell of conservatives burning in the morning.
Apocalypse now. !!!!!!!!
Last edited by apodixis on Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:51 am; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 3223
Location: State of Jefferson, Ecotopia
plhtx1Posted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:51 am
apodixis wrote:
That's what happened with all of the stupid false attacks on Obama. They backfired and gained him sympathy.
Wait and see. I would have thought when the Republicans are at their lowest ratings ever, Obama would have been up in the polls by a landslide. So far....not
Joined: 15 May 2006
Posts: 2225
Location: The Vail Valley
plhtx1Posted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:52 am
apodixis wrote:
I love ths smell of conservatives burning in the morning.
Apocalypse now. !!!!!!!!
Turn on the news. I think the liberals are the desperate ones, this morning
Joined: 15 May 2006
Posts: 2225
Location: The Vail Valley
PhantomPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 11:20 am
Dems Better Watch Out Sarah Palin is NO PUSHOVER
Bill Kristol tells this true story that he heard from a McCain staffer:
A nervous young McCain staffer took it upon himself to explain to Palin the facts of life in a national campaign, the intense scrutiny she'd be under from the media, the viciousness of the assault that she'd be facing, etc.:
Palin: "Thanks for the warning. By the way, do you know what they say the difference is between a hockey mom and a Pit Bull?"
McCain aide: "No, Governor."
Palin: "A hockey mom wears lipstick.
In the end what may kill the democrats is overconfidence. Their attacks on Sarah Palin's kids will blow back in their faces, because Americans hate when politicians and the press beat up kids.
Beyond that they are severely underestimating the GUTS of Sarah Palin
What the Republicans missed about Sarah Palin then--and what the Democrats seem poised to miss now--is that she is a true political savant; a candidate with a knack for identifying the key gripes of the populace and packaging herself as the solution. That keen political nose has enabled her to routinely outperform her resume.
Palin is now in the "Big Time," and I guarantee that the "Big Time" will never be the same:
The Case Against the Case Against Palin
A very good friend, who is a lifelong Alaskan and one of the smartest people I know, offers this word of caution to those (yes, like me) inclined to take Sarah Palin lightly:
At the end of 2005, a close friend called to say that he begun writing speeches and talking points for a certain gubernatorial candidate.
"Remind me," I asked. "Who is Sarah Palin?"
I was dismayed at my friend’s choice of political entree. Why was he wasting his time on a relative nobody, trying to beat an incumbent governor (and former three term senator) in the Republican primary? It was utter folly. "Wait until the big money starts coming in for Murkowski," I said. "Wait until the party machinery goes to work on Palin. They will eat her for lunch."
Murkowski, for his part, expressed a similar view. "If I decide to," he said, "I will run and I will win. It's that simple."
The folly, of course, turned out to be my own (and Murkowski's), as Palin slaughtered the incumbent in the primary--posting a 30 point margin of victory--and went on to win the general (over a former Democratic governor) without seeming to break a sweat. She then quickly fulfilled an implicit campaign promise by slapping down ExxonMobil, BP, and ConocoPhillips in negotiations over a proposed Alaska natural gas pipeline, even though they, too, by all accounts, were well prepared to dine on her tender little frame. Not bad for a lightweight.
Listening to the Democratic leadership respond to John McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate, one hears echoes of the Alaska Republican leadership from just a few years ago. Barack Obama’s spokesman, Bill Burton, put it this way: "Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency." Former mayor? If you're going to skip over her job as governor and, before that, her job heading the commission that oversees production of the largest petroleum reserves in America, why not "former high school student"? Bah, what does it matter: She's just a small town mayor, just a hockey mom, just a beauty pageant queen. Palin has never shunned these belittling monikers, in part, I imagine, because the camouflage has served her so well. Soothed by the litany, her opponents tend to sleep too late, sneer too much, and forget who it is that hires them.
Watching Palin operate over the past few years has been like witnessing a dramatic reading of All the King’s Men. In 2002, Murkowski had interviewed but passed over Palin in selecting a replacement for the senate seat he vacated to become governor. In a grand act of nepotism, he chose his own daughter instead. Palin was tossed a bone: She chaired the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, which oversees the production of petroleum in Alaska. When she reported conflicts of interest and other ethical violations by another commissioner, she was ignored by Murkowski’s chief of staff and ultimately resigned in frustration. One can imagine how the quick double dose of corruption--insiders having their way with the polity and its resources--sickened the young Palin. It also fired a savage competitiveness that is not, perhaps, apparent at first glance.
What the Republicans missed about Sarah Palin then--and what the Democrats seem poised to miss now--is that she is a true political savant; a candidate with a knack for identifying the key gripes of the populace and packaging herself as the solution. That keen political nose has enabled her to routinely outperform her resume. Nearly two years into her administration, she still racks up approval ratings of 80 per cent or better.
One might reasonably ask to what extent her local popularity is buoyed by the high price of oil (and thus, a budget surplus, and thus, the ability to carry a stick into meetings with big oil). One might speculate about the durability of her anti-corruption stance in light of her conflict of interest in the dismissal of her director of public safety. And only the truly feckless would not concern themselves about her dearth of foreign policy experience. But in probing this candidate, it would behoove the Democrats and the pundits to shed the notion that they are dealing with some dimwitted bumpkin (Dan Quayle seems to come up a lot lately) who’s going to start crying when they ask her to name the president of Azerbaijan; or that Palin is the townie who was brought into the Skull & Bones initiation night for the amusement of all; or that somehow the prom queen ballots got mixed up with the Alaska gubernatorial poll. Trivialize her at your own peril.
Sarah Palin is a living reminder that the ultimate source of political power in this country is not the Kennedy School or the Davos Summit or an Ariana Huffington salon; even now, power emanates from the electorate itself. More precisely, power in 2008 emanates from the working class electorates of Pennsylvania and Ohio.
Sooner or later, the Obama camp will realize that the beauty pageant queen is an enormously talented populist in a year that is ripe for populism. For their own sake, it had better be sooner.
Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 3332
Location: My only friend, the end
apodixisPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 11:24 am
She has her chance to convince the American people that she can Wrassle the likes of Putin and Bin Laden tonight.
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 3223
Location: State of Jefferson, Ecotopia
PhantomPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 11:26 am
apodixis wrote:
She has her chance to convince the American people that she can Wrassle the likes of Putin and Bin Laden tonight.
Well, I haven't seen anything from Obama that he can.
Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 3332
Location: My only friend, the end
ACPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 11:28 am
Phantom wrote:
Well, I haven't seen anything from Obama that he can.
You know what....I have not either!
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3895
plhtx1Posted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 11:33 am
AC wrote:
You know what....I have not either!
Me three
Joined: 15 May 2006
Posts: 2225
Location: The Vail Valley
yankee-in-francePosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 11:34 am
Tell me, what is this group that Sarah's husband supposedly belongs to that wanted to secede from the union? Is this a malicious rumor or is it a fact?
YIF
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 6598
Location: France
yankee-in-francePosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 11:35 am
plhtx1 wrote:
Me three
Well, maybe it is an impossible task as obviously Bush and Cheney haven't been able to either and they've had eight years. More importantly, I haven't seen anything from McCain that he is up to the task and he, not Sarah, is the presidential nominee.
YIF
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 6598
Location: France
PhantomPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 11:36 am
yankee-in-france wrote:
Tell me, what is this group that Sarah's husband supposedly belongs to that wanted to secede from the union? Is this a malicious rumor or is it a fact?
Last I heard Sarah Palin's husband wasn't asked to be VP.
And if you want to bring spouses into the argument, well.......
Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 3332
Location: My only friend, the end
ACPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 11:37 am
yankee-in-france wrote:
Well, maybe it is an impossible task as obviously Bush and Cheney haven't been able to either and they've had eight years. More importantly, I haven't seen anything from McCain that he is up to the task and he, not Sarah, is the presidential nominee.
McCain was a POW.....if ANYONE who is running for office would know the sacrifice, he would. I do believe he is up to the task.
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3895
ACPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 11:39 am
Phantom wrote:
Last I heard Sarah Palin's husband wasn't asked to be VP.
And if you want to bring spouses into the argument, well.......
Heck, I still want to know what happened to Vince Foster. I always thought Hillary and Bill both knew a lot more about his death. JMO
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3895
PhantomPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 11:41 am
AC wrote:
Heck, I still want to know what happened to Vince Foster. I always thought Hillary and Bill both knew a lot more about his death. JMO
And what about that rumor that Webb Hubbell was Chelsea's father?
Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 3332
Location: My only friend, the end
PhantomPosted:
Wed Sep 03, 2008 11:43 am
A Negotiator Without Preconditions
Would you trust Sarah Palin to negotiate with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without preconditions?
Well, why not?
Palin came into the governor's office and found a mess on her desk. The oil deal struck by defeated Republican governor Frank Murkowski wasn't working. Through creative accounting by big oil and ambiguous reporting standards, the Murkowski plan just wasn't giving the State of Alaska the pay-off that was expected. So the former mayor of Wasilla (population 9,000, as the MSM always points out) demanded that the agreement be renegotiated and the terms be nailed down. They laughed when she sat down to negotiate, but in the end she had a new deal that delivered 50 percent of the oil revenues to the Alaska Permanent Fund, and enabled Palin to send a check for $1,200 to every qualified Alaskan citizen.
Now one of the major companies involved was BP, a.k.a. British Petroleum, before that, the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. It was Anglo-Iranian, at that time a British parastatal (70 percent owned by the British government and the Bank of England) that started the Middle East conflict in 1958. Anglo-Iranian was using creative accounting and payments to dummy corporations to pretend to the Iranian government that there was virtually no profit. They demanded that the Iranian government uphold the original contract made decades before. Prime Minister Mohammed Mossedegh threatened to nationalize Anglo-Iranian. The British responded with a naval blockade of Iranian ports.
The Americans stepped in to help. U.S. Ambassador George McGehee, an experienced former petroleum engineer, and Gen. Richard Walters, the linguistic wizard, huddled with Mossedegh in sessions in Washington and New York. They got him to agree to accept a 50-50 split, a reasonable proposal by the then international standard, similar to the contract that U.S.-owned Aramco had renegotiated with Saudi Arabia. But the British refused. Instead they plotted a coup against the Iranian government, and then prevailed upon on the incoming Eisenhower administration to implement it with the assistance of British agents on the ground. Iranian production was taken over by an international coalition that agreed to the 50-50 split. There was plenty enough blame to go around on all sides, but one of the first acts of Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979 was to toss out all foreign oil companies and confiscate their assets.
Today BP, the former Anglo-Iranian, is the third largest global energy corporation. It now claims to be privatized, and it is estimated that 70 percent of the shares are owned by British investors. At one time the Kuwait Investment Office held over 21 percent of the shares. It tried, and failed, to merge the two companies, but was blocked by a British government inquiry. Under Prime Minister Thatcher, the company went private and on a spending spree. BP bought up Standard Oil of Ohio (Sohio), Standard Oil of Indiana (Amoco) and Atlantic Richfield (Arco). BP became a major player in the U.S. petroleum industry, including Prudhoe Bay and the Alaska Pipeline. And despite its advertising campaign trying to suggest that BP means "Beyond Petroleum," the company has one of the worst environmental records in the United States with its refineries blowing up and its pipelines bursting, the result -- as testimony showed -- of parsimonious budgets for maintenance. It is a formidable corporation.
So enter the PTA community organizer from Wasilla. Without preconditions she took on a company that has a market cap of $205 billion and annual revenues of $291 billion in worldwide operations. Its budget is larger than that those of most sovereign countries, yet she won on her terms. If she can outsmart BP, the company that started the Middle East conflict, she can easily outsmart Ahmadinejad, if need be.
Then to follow up that act, she got the Alaskan Legislature to approve development of the TransCanada gas pipeline, a $40 billion deal that will go 1,715 miles from the treatment plant at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, to the Alberta hub in Canada, from which it will be transferred to the United States. This project had been sitting around for 30 years on hold because the big energy companies didn't think it would be profitable, and their corrupt cronies in the legislature obediently kept it on the shelf. Crusading against corruption and negotiating across the aisle, Palin not only got it passed in record time, but opened up the bidding when the U.S. companies were reluctant to jump in. So she went ahead and awarded the contract to low-bidder TransCanada Alaska, a firm that has already built 36,000 miles of pipelines in North America. As a final fillip, the Governor signed the bill at the Alaska AFL-CIO biennial convention. While Barack Obama's solution to the energy problem is to urge us to check the air in our tires, Palin's solution is to start building a $40 billion gas pipeline, without Federal government assistance.
SO HOW DOES the experience of Sarah Palin stack up against the experience of Joe Biden? There are some people who confuse experience in the Senate with seniority. In the Senate you get to be Chairman of something or other if you sit around long enough until all those with higher seniority pass out of the picture. Merit has nothing to do with it. That's how Biden got to be chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Most people don't realize that the SFRC is one of the dustier corners of the Senate, largely populated with snoozing Rhodes Scholars, UN-firsters, and people who intuitively know how to pronounce the name of Kyrgyzstan and how to use it in a sentence. Occasionally someone gets on the committee who is more interested in American relations with other countries, rather than their foreign relations with us, and that wakes up the committee. Usually, ambitious politicians go elsewhere. The committee's main business is to pass the Foreign Relations act, which authorizes money for the State Department and its overseas operations. Occasionally, a treaty wanders by. Sometimes the SFRC doesn't have the clout to get its bills to the Senate Floor, so it gets ignored while all of its functions are packaged into the appropriations bills, without new authorization.
No Senator on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has authority under the U.S. Constitution to conduct foreign relations or to negotiate treaties. That's why Biden has no experience in foreign relations, and Palin does. He just talks about foreign policy, and talks...and talks. Biden's long tenure on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is not necessarily a red badge of courage. He thinks he has experience, but most of his experience is wrong. We can look at a few examples of the results of his experience, and ask What Would Sara Palin Do?
If Sara Palin were campaigning for President, she probably would not have made the centerpiece of that campaign a cockamamie plan to divide Iraq into three autonomous regions.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
