Kenshinjapan Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Sarah Palin.... # She has connections to dominionist groups, including Joel's Army. # She believes creationism should be taught in schools. # She believes religious leaders should be able to endorse political candidates. # She strongly opposes reproductive freedom for women and wants to ban abortion even in cases of rape or incest. # She supported the infamous "bridge to nowhere" and recently lied about her support. # The leading Christian extremist groups support her. the risk of Palin becoming president is too great... As jack stated, a lot of those aren't even bad things. Besides, Obama is just as bad in some of those categories. But there's really only one thing that bothers me about Obama. He flipflops. I'd rather he pick the wrong side and stick with it rather than pick the wrong and switch when he realizes that that's not the majority choice. Opinion should still matter in politics, like how it was when it all began. (Note: I'm not directing this at any particular side.) Politics shouldn't be about who has the best writers for their material and who is the most charismatic. What happened to doing what's best for the people, not for the most votes. YOU! ATTEND TET EVENTS! CLICK HERE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMoreDead Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 As jack stated, a lot of those aren't even bad things. Besides, Obama is just as bad in some of those categories. But there's really only one thing that bothers me about Obama. He flipflops. I'd rather he pick the wrong side and stick with it rather than pick the wrong and switch when he realizes that that's not the majority choice. Opinion should still matter in politics, like how it was when it all began. (Note: I'm not directing this at any particular side.) Politics shouldn't be about who has the best writers for their material and who is the most charismatic. What happened to doing what's best for the people, not for the most votes. Which of those aren't bad things? Also, you're actually saying that you'd rather vote for the wrong side than a side who gets it right eventually? By the way, if you think Obama flip-flops: http://www.bi30.org/wordpress/flipflopper.htm All politicians flip-flop. It's all about making the right decision in the end, or before it's too late. The only reason's politicians support things right as they come out is because either the feel that it's what the party wants, or it's what will end up being the law/standard. If they're right they say "Hey, look! I was right all along!" If they're wrong, they simply flop to the other side as quietly as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackattack Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 All but the last two. Dang both Fred Thompson and Joe Lieberman really knocked it out of the park. I missed John Boehner though. I think Mike Pence is up tomorrow. My carbon footprint is bigger than yours...and you know what they say about big feet. These are the times that try mens souls... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMoreDead Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 All but the last two. Dang both Fred Thompson and Joe Lieberman really knocked it out of the park. I missed John Boehner though. I think Mike Pence is up tomorrow. These are good things?: # She believes creationism should be taught in schools. # She believes religious leaders should be able to endorse political candidates. # She strongly opposes reproductive freedom for women and wants to ban abortion even in cases of rape or incest. The idea of seperation of church and state seems to have a problem with this. Plus she is anti-choice, and against anything that refutes her religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenshinjapan Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 These are good things?: # She believes creationism should be taught in schools.Freedom of speech # She believes religious leaders should be able to endorse political candidates.Freedom of speech # She strongly opposes reproductive freedom for women and wants to ban abortion even in cases of rape or incest.She Believes that everyone deserves a chance at life, nothing wrong with that. YOU! ATTEND TET EVENTS! CLICK HERE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackattack Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Woops, I meant the first two. Religious leaders already can and do endorse candidates. And opposing abortions isn't as bad as Obama who supports letting a baby who survives an abortion and is born alive be left to die. Just because any extremist groups support her doesn't reflect on her. Hamas supports Obama, does that mean anything? My carbon footprint is bigger than yours...and you know what they say about big feet. These are the times that try mens souls... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magekillr Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 These are good things?: # She believes creationism should be taught in schools.Freedom of speech # She believes religious leaders should be able to endorse political candidates.Freedom of speech # She strongly opposes reproductive freedom for women and wants to ban abortion even in cases of rape or incest.She Believes that everyone deserves a chance at life, nothing wrong with that. Freedom of speech? Are you NUTS?!?!? Let's just let them teach kids the world is flat in schools...it's the opposing theory. Freedom of speech? Only in Republican America would a black man with Bachelors degree in International Relations from Columbia University, a law degree from Harvard Law School, 10 years as a professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago, 12 years in politics, four years on the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee and manager of one of the most impressively flawless and forward thinking presidential campaigns ever not be ready for the presidency while a white female evangelical with 19 months in politics and a bachelors in journalism is considered "ready on day one." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenshinjapan Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 These are good things?: # She believes creationism should be taught in schools.Freedom of speech # She believes religious leaders should be able to endorse political candidates.Freedom of speech # She strongly opposes reproductive freedom for women and wants to ban abortion even in cases of rape or incest.She Believes that everyone deserves a chance at life, nothing wrong with that. Freedom of speech? Are you NUTS?!?!? Let's just let them teach kids the world is flat in schools...it's the opposing theory. Freedom of speech? Only in Republican America would a black man with Bachelors degree in International Relations from Columbia University, a law degree from Harvard Law School, 10 years as a professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago, 12 years in politics, four years on the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee and manager of one of the most impressively flawless and forward thinking presidential campaigns ever not be ready for the presidency while a white female evangelical with 19 months in politics and a bachelors in journalism is considered "ready on day one." Why is everyone implying that a decision made means the other will be wiped out? Do I not have the right to take a creationism class instead of a science in the same subject? Nothing is being done away with, just more choices added. Also, why does free speech go down the toilet when a republican has a new idea :s? Just wondering. YOU! ATTEND TET EVENTS! CLICK HERE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magekillr Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 I am not discussing with you why Creationism doesn't belong in the classroom, I haven't the energy. Maybe Warri0r has the energy, or Ginger. I certainly do not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMoreDead Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Why is everyone implying that a decision made means the other will be wiped out? Do I not have the right to take a creationism class instead of a science in the same subject? Nothing is being done away with, just more choices added. Also, why does free speech go down the toilet when a republican has a new idea :s? Just wondering. You shouldn't have the ability to take a creationism class instead of a Science class because they are not comprable. Creationism isn't science. There is no science involved. Free speech doesn't go down the toilet. These are not issues of free speech. The issue of creationism in school is a scholastic issue. It revolves around our children, and what they will learn. They have no reason to learn creationism in schools. The abortion issue is a woman's issue. Sure, she can support whatever she wants, but saying "Well, it's free speech" doesn't make it any less deplorable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackattack Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Only in Republican America would a black man with Bachelors degree in International Relations from Columbia University, a law degree from Harvard Law School, 10 years as a professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago, 12 years in politics, four years on the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee and manager of one of the most impressively flawless and forward thinking presidential campaigns ever not be ready for the presidency while a white female evangelical with 19 months in politics and a bachelors in journalism is considered "ready on day one." Why don't we put up some accomplishments... Palin can say she stood up to the establishment and took on her own party...Obama can say what?(He can make up stuff about some ethics bill) She can say she passed a tax increase on oil companies...Barack can say he voted for Cheney's energy bill with tax breaks for oil companies Palin can say she commanded the Alaska national guard...Obama can say he proposed legislation to ensure we lost the war Palin can say she went to the middle east to visit the troops she commanded...Obama can say he did after being forced by McCain and then went on to skip meeting injured troops in Germany because he couldn't bring cameras Palin can say she has long supported expanding American energy...Obama can say he opposed it until it became clear almost 3/4 of Americans supported it My carbon footprint is bigger than yours...and you know what they say about big feet. These are the times that try mens souls... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMoreDead Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Only in Republican America would a black man with Bachelors degree in International Relations from Columbia University, a law degree from Harvard Law School, 10 years as a professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago, 12 years in politics, four years on the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee and manager of one of the most impressively flawless and forward thinking presidential campaigns ever not be ready for the presidency while a white female evangelical with 19 months in politics and a bachelors in journalism is considered "ready on day one." Why don't we put up some accomplishments... Palin can say she stood up to the establishment and took on her own party...Obama can say what?(He can make up stuff about some ethics bill) She can say she passed a tax increase on oil companies...Barack can say he voted for Cheney's energy bill with tax breaks for oil companies Palin can say she commanded the Alaska national guard...Obama can say he proposed legislation to ensure we lost the war Palin can say she went to the middle east to visit the troops she commanded...Obama can say he did after being forced by McCain and then went on to skip meeting injured troops in Germany because he couldn't bring cameras Palin can say she has long supported expanding American energy...Obama can say he opposed it until it became clear almost 3/4 of Americans supported it Do you read ANYTHING anyone else posts? -Obama is beloved by most every foreign power. Palin went to Kuwait, once, in 2007. -Palins energy policies: [hide=]Palin strongly supports drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), which McCain has opposed. They also disagree on her belief that global warming is not caused by human activity.[/hide] -Erm, how did she stand up to her own party? Care to explain that? Obama has done plenty of praise-worthy things since he entered office. Perhaps you should try reading the posts I've made about them. -Palin has no control over the national gaurd. Again, go back and read what others have posted. -Obama supports big oil? Think again: [hide=]Democrat Barack Obama told voters Saturday he would push an aggressive economic agenda as president: cutting taxes for the middle class, raising taxes on the wealthy, pouring money into "green energy" and requiring employers to set up retirement saving plans for their workers. Campaigning in Pennsylvania, a key battleground in the fall campaign, Obama said he would take a much more hands-on approach than would Republican John McCain. He again criticized McCain's proposal for a temporary halt in the federal gasoline tax. It would "actually do real harm," Obama said, by reducing revenue for road and bridge construction even as oil companies make record profits. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=5122549[/hide] Now, go back and re-read about half the stuff you skimmed, Jack, and then we can have a debate. Until then, I will no longer respond to the same old nonsense that has already been discussed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackattack Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Who cares if Obama is loved by foreigners? And we should drill in Anwr. There isn't really any reason not to. And she is the commander in chief of the Alaska national guard. What they were talking about earlier is national missile defense stuff. She stood up to her party by endorsing a state senator against a longtime Congressman Don Young and challenged Ted Stevens to come clean about his whole thing. Obama voted for the 2005 energy bill written by Vice President Cheney which included tax breaks for oil companies. McCain voted against it for that reason. edit: not only that but she pushed for ethics investigations that lead to the resignation of 2 prominent Republicans. I think it was the attorney general and the Chairman of the state Republican party. My carbon footprint is bigger than yours...and you know what they say about big feet. These are the times that try mens souls... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrpez Posted September 3, 2008 Author Share Posted September 3, 2008 im interested in the debate between freedom of speech and separation of church and state. id like to hear the opinion of someone who has studied law, if there is a person like that on these forums. i doubt freedom of speech applies to the subject of creationism taught in a public school. there are laws against that along with the separation of church and state law. personally, i would hate for creationism to be taught in school. putting aside my animosity for religion, it would annoy me that students of different faiths in public schools would not have the option to be taught the religion of their choice. its all or none, not just the christian theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrpez Posted September 3, 2008 Author Share Posted September 3, 2008 few interesting articles if you want to read them: palin cannot run her own carwash, involuntary dissolution. planned to create a company by the name of "Rogue Cou" of which the literal french translation is "Red neck". http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-tr ... _wash.html palin believes it was "god's will" that america entered iraq and also that "God's will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built", in reference to a $30 billion gas-line she wanted built. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/0 ... 23205.html regarding the conspiracy about palin's supposed son Trig and the marriage of her daughter, Bristol Palin, to a 17 year old hockey player. http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2 ... -enqui.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cup Lion Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 That conspiracy is stupid, in my opinion. All the reporters want you to do is hear about it so much that it eventually seems like a fact to you. Funny what the human mind does. You tell it something often enough, and it becomes fact. One of the many things that happens during elections. |Signature by Jason321| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flipflop121 Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 These are good things?: # She believes creationism should be taught in schools.Freedom of speech # She believes religious leaders should be able to endorse political candidates.Freedom of speech # She strongly opposes reproductive freedom for women and wants to ban abortion even in cases of rape or incest.She Believes that everyone deserves a chance at life, nothing wrong with that. What does freedom of speech got to do with creationism being taught in public schools, that has to be one of the most [developmentally delayed] things i have ever read. well done on making my severely lacking faith in human intelligence slip just that one bit more. if America bring creationism into the classroom then i will personally laugh at how pathetic the country has become. Religion and education should never be mixed unless its a religious study class. to cite that creationism and science (namely evolution) be taught side by side is honestly [bleep] stupid. those two have no right being next to each other. one uses evidence, opinions and hypothesis to debate whether the item / article being studied is of sound scientific proof. if not it is thrown out of the window. what would u do with creationism? (The bible should never be used as scientific proof, it is a series of stories written by ancient prophets and holds no actual evidence) Politics and religion should also never go hand in hand. this is how so many countries get [wagon]-[bleep]. politics should not revolve around what ancient scripture says you should and shouldnt do. but rather it should go off the conscience of the individuals that the people have elected in charge to make decision based on the principles they believe are honest and upright. Right, so a 16 year old that was involved in a gang-rape situation now becomes pregnant because those involved didnt use protection. according to Palin this child should be forced to carry the child of those that abused and caused a lot of mental anguish to because she is against abortion. I believe that is sick and twisted. a womens body is her own and under her own control and accord. for people to interrupt and stand around condoning actions like is not only sick and twisted but really frightening. To me, Palin does not have the experience to be vice president. Mccain is 71, he may be in good health now, but it doesnt take much for old people to fall ill as there immune systems start to fail. he does, indeed have a decent chance of dieing in office. Then we have her policies which to be honest, as Im sure have been previously mentioned for quite some time now, are suspicious at best. and I would fear a country that has anyone, women or man that holds true to her beliefs and policies she wants in power. And it is not a good fear. I think Mccain simply shot himself in the foot with this choice of VP, it will more then likely be the decisive turning point in the election. (Other then Obama being a superior candidate who, unlike most politicians actually looks like he may lead a country to a decent future.) P.S Mccain told everyone his 4 year plan if got elected. his highest priority was not dieing Started new account: flipflop v2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginger_Warrior Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 That was a nice little smear you had going about her being in the AIp to bad it's not true. They vetted her and they knew what they were getting. Wait, rewind. They vetted her and they knew this is what she was like, and STILL went and chose her? Is McCain just plain stupid? There were dozens of better candidates, but McCain chose her because she's a woman. It doesn't say much about his leadership credentials, and you'd happily trust him with possibly three fronts in the Middle East, all the while wasting billions of USD and thousands of soldiers' lives to keep the war going? That is a huge gamble. And let's be clear, there is a real possibility for McCain more than others to die in office or be forced to retire due to age, leaving Palin as President. That's not ageist, it's a fair evaluation of his physical health, and Palin's comparative inadequacy for office. Moreover, it says something about the Republican Party if they were so desperate to wind a female candidate, and she was the best they could up with. I think it's fair to say that, in the eyes of anyone who can see past Baptist morality and pro-American nationalism, this party, this President and especially this VP are not fit to take over the most powerful country in the modern world. | Favourite Game Music | Last.fm | HYT Friend Chat Rules | Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warri0r45 Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 I read in the paper today that Palin is another one of these people who thinks "abstinence only" sex education is a good thing. Of course McCain seems to be in that boat as well. This kind of attitude seriously gets under my skin. Way to completely ignore the reality that kids will have sex, no matter how much you urge them not to. What we need is to teach kids how to protect themselves from unwanted pregnancies with contraception, we can't just tell them not to do it and give them no recourse if they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1_man_army Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 I'm not usually one for randomly posting youtube videos but this is priceless. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=006axc2aELE Link in case the tags aren't working; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=006axc2aELE How can you become a VP and not know what a VP does? He who learns must suffer, and, even in our sleep, pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart,and in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God. - Aeschylus (525 BC - 456 BC) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flipflop121 Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 I read in the paper today that Palin is another one of these people who thinks "abstinence only" sex education is a good thing. Of course McCain seems to be in that boat as well. This kind of attitude seriously gets under my skin. Way to completely ignore the reality that kids will have sex, no matter how much you urge them not to. What we need is to teach kids how to protect themselves from unwanted pregnancies with contraception, we can't just tell them not to do it and give them no recourse if they do. thats actually extremely funny, because her 17 year old daughter is pregnant.... wow this gets even better lol. you support abstinance...but cant even get your daughter to shut her legs... your totaly ready for the presidency. Started new account: flipflop v2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Necromagus Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13098.html - Palin linked to antisemitism again. As late as two weeks ago she attended a sermon of Jews for Jesus, an evangelical organization that aggressively seeks to convert Jews, and who claims that terrorist attacks on Israel are God's judgment. My Tip.It Times Articles (10 and counting) || The Varrock Library Author Index projectDo you dare to dream? - Part 19 added. || The Hospital (WIP) - New story!Necromagus looks like a viking ... with glasses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginger_Warrior Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 John McCain clearly feels that questioning someone's judgement is OK - so long as it's not his. Of course, this can only be because his own judgement is totally infallible, and we should all bow down to the experience he gained... as a Prisoner... in Vietnam. McCain attacks media over Palin Does he honestly feel, with his almost Saint-like "judgement" as a politician, it's wise to go to war with the media just two months away from a General Election? The calls from the Republicans that the media are being sexist are also quiet amusing, given if that if she wasn't a woman, she wouldn't even be the candidate in the first place. Placing a woman in a position simply for being woman is sexist itself, and is quite clearly not equality. | Favourite Game Music | Last.fm | HYT Friend Chat Rules | Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magekillr Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Hey Peggy Noonan, that's not nice :lol: Btw Jack, I still don't buy that she wasn't a member (or at the very least doesn't support what they stand for) when she addresses the Party: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CookMePlox Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 As for her daughter being pregnant... Ever since the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal the GOP has portrayed themselves as the party of "family values" Hmph. Seeing as Palin accepted the VP position knowing her daughter was pregnant, knowing that would come out and knowing that it would shine a bad light on Bristol (her daughter) I don't think the GOP can really continue to be the family values party. I LOL'ed IRL when Cindy McCain said she has foreign policy experience: she's right next to Russia! Also, seeing as Mt. McKinley is the tallest mountain in the US, that must also mean she has foreign policy experience with space! OMG! [/sarcasm] By the way, that was Jon Stewart The feeble attempt to lure the Hillary voters over to the Republicans was so shallow, I find it kind of insulting to women. And people are still bringing up the point: she has more Executive than the other 3 put together. No crap. She's a governor (of a very un-populous state, I might add) Biden has been a Senator for 30 years. Who's more qualified? The one who has less foreign policy experience than I do, or the one who has been around the block, has been all over the world, and knows how Washington works? Sarah Palin even said she didn't know what the VP does. Hey, at least she was honest :wall: And ROFL at whoever said Alaska was a big state. "It takes a big man to cry, but it takes a bigger man to laugh at that man." -- Jack Handey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now