What is your take on Sarah Palin?

[jefferiah]

'What about your claim that you are for change as you admit you voted with Bush 90% of the time?'

'I/he was a POW!'

'Have you always been faithful to Cindy?'

'How dare you ask me/him that! I/he was a POW!'

'What about Cindy's prescription drug use?'

'McCain was a POW!'

And on and on it goes.

It's pretty easy to make this argument, when you are writing the script. This is how American Woman views Republicans in her little play. This is actually her fantasy because if this is how they really think then it makes the Democrats right. The problem is no one actually responds to those questions the way she has them written in her script.

[bush_cheney2004]

Yet another double standard/hypocrisy:

There is no single standard....never has been.

No one better dare refer to Palin as "Miss Congeniality." It would be sexist! It would be horrible! It would be true, but that's beside the point.

That's right...you better find some kryptonite fast!

But when it comes to Obama, evidently it's perfectly ok to refer to him as "the Messiah," a "Black Jesus."

Talk about your lowlife's.

Of course it's OK....just ask Jon Stewart.

[Guest American Woman]

It's pretty easy to make this argument, when you are writing the script. This is how American Woman views Republicans in her little play. This is actually her fantasy because if this is how they really think then it makes the Democrats right. The problem is no one actually responds to those questions the way she has them written in her script.

Nope. It's not how I view "Republicans," just the totally predictable ones -- the "you guys" I made reference to -- who fit the bill. There are some Republicans who are critical thinkers, who are intelligent, who have my respect.

But the predictable ones could all be cast for my "play," which, by the way, is based on real life.

[bush_cheney2004]

It's pretty easy to make this argument, when you are writing the script. This is how American Woman views Republicans in her little play. This is actually her fantasy because if this is how they really think then it makes the Democrats right. The problem is no one actually responds to those questions the way she has them written in her script.

It is "ironic" in the end....these righteous types think theirs is the way to the promised land while railing against the other righteous types that they hate. Hillary Clinton made the same arrogant mistake.

Edited September 7, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

[WIP]

So your ideal role model would advocate teaching abstinence over birth control, forcing children of incest to carry their baby to term, taking away a woman's choice, having more interest in state matters than national, forcing a woman who was raped to further pain by forcing her to have the rapist's baby, telling same sex couples they can't marry. Fair enough. But that's not being a role model for women, that's being a role model for the Christian Conservatives.

It may very well be possible that the Republican strategists are stupid enough to believe that women who supported Hillary will flock to Sarah Palin because she is a woman too -- after all, they countered Barack Obama's nomination for the Senate by parachuting in the only black Republican available at the time, Alan Keyes.

[BubberMiley]

The problem is no one actually responds to those questions the way she has them written in her script.

You clearly haven't been paying very close attention.

[jefferiah]

So you're rah-rah-ing a woman for the executive office because you love her, even though you hate her views.

You do realize this is a national political election, right?-- Not a popularity vote for class president?

Well, I don't see any conflict of interest here. Kimmy is allowed to like people. By the way she isn't voting in your election anyway. Did she say she would vote for Palin if she were American?

Leftwingers hate those who don't agree with them. And they even hate those who say they have admiration for those who don't agree with them. Such is the compassion of the left.

Edited September 7, 2008 by jefferiah

[WIP]

In other Palin news, hot air levels from conservative windbags like Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity and Laura Ingram, should be even higher than normal election year levels as Sarah Palin's handlers have whisked her Back to Alaska for at least the next three weeks.. They are making a concerted effort to keep her away from challenging interviews for as long as possible. No word on whether or not she will do Meet the Press or the other Sunday Morning shows.

With reporters unable to get at Sarah to ask questions, conservatives will have lots of bellyaching to do about the liberal media, since reporters have to talk to someone when they can't get at their source. They'll talk to friends, enemies, and everyone else in Alaska and define Sarah Palin when she refuses to step out and define herself!

The same thing will probably start happening with McCain too, since he has cut off access to reporters who have been used to following him around. Up till now, McCain has had an easier than deserved ride from the MSM because he has always been available. But, that's all changed now apparently.

[jefferiah]

There are some Republicans who are critical thinkers, who are intelligent, who have my respect.

(Note to the reader: She means the ones who are always caving into to liberals, and making apologies to them for being right in the first place.)

[WIP]

(Note to the reader: She means the ones who are always caving into to liberals, and making apologies to them for being right in the first place.)

No, she means the ones who are not so dogmatic that they can accept that some conservative policies may be wrong, or at least have had some harmful consequences.

I think they're on the endangered species list.

[jefferiah]

You clearly haven't been paying very close attention.

You are right. I just turned on the tv and lo and behold, there was an actual interview with a republican on tv, the same as American Woman's screenplay ("Republicans Nuke Gay Baby Whales"), word for word.

[Guest American Woman]

In other Palin news, hot air levels from conservative windbags like Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity and Laura Ingram, should be even higher than normal election year levels as Sarah Palin's handlers have whisked her Back to Alaska for at least the next three weeks.. They are making a concerted effort to keep her away from challenging interviews for as long as possible. No word on whether or not she will do Meet the Press or the other Sunday Morning shows.

With reporters unable to get at Sarah to ask questions, conservatives will have lots of bellyaching to do about the liberal media, since reporters have to talk to someone when they can't get at their source. They'll talk to friends, enemies, and everyone else in Alaska and define Sarah Palin when she refuses to step out and define herself!

The same thing will probably start happening with McCain too, since he has cut off access to reporters who have been used to following him around. Up till now, McCain has had an easier than deserved ride from the MSM because he has always been available. But, that's all changed now apparently.

This doesn't surprise me in the least. I was just saying this morning that McCain was probably betting on the short time between her nomination and the election to keep them safe from any 'probes' that might take place.

I really hope the American public is smart enough to see through this ploy and be angry that she's not answering questions herself.

I look forward to the McCain-Obama and Palin-Biden debates. That's something they won't be able to worm their way out of -- or "perform" their way out of using other people's words. It'll just be them, and their views, their answers.

As a side note, I find this quote interesting in light of the fact that McCain's slogan is "country first:"

Palin suggested in a July interview with CNBC news that she would insist on making Alaskan issues a high priority before agreeing to serve as a vice-presidential candidate. "We want to make sure that that VP slot would be a fruitful type of position, especially for Alaskans, and for the things we're trying to accomplish up here for the rest of the US, before I can even start addressing that question," she said.

Add that to her answer to "are you ready to be president of the country if needed?" : "I am ... I am up to the task, of course, of focusing on the challenges that face America," [...] "And I am very pleased with the situation that I am in, when, when you consider the situation now that Alaska will be in.

"And that is Alaska, and Alaskans will be allowed to contribute more to our great country and they'll be allowed to do that because I -- if we're elected -- will be in a position of opening the eyes of the country to what it is that Alaska is all about and what Alaska has to offer. So, I am happy to and very honored to be asked to do this. I know it's going to be great for Alaska."

Maybe they're just making sure she is putting Alaska first.

Edited September 7, 2008 by American Woman

[jefferiah]

My own play.

"Democrats Don't Nuke Gay Baby Whales"

Q: Do you support the nuking of gay baby whales.

Obama: Um, er, well I think no one in America, um er, could answer that question, um er, without asking themselves first--Are the people who, um, support the nuking of gay baby whales, are they the real agents of change we need in this country? And, um er, are gay baby whales the agents of change we need in this country? I think in the end thats a decision that would have to be made by the, um, UN Security Council, complete with France's approval.

Edited September 7, 2008 by jefferiah

[betsy]

So your ideal role model would advocate teaching abstinence over birth control, forcing children of incest to carry their baby to term, taking away a woman's choice, having more interest in state matters than national, forcing a woman who was raped to further pain by forcing her to have the rapist's baby, telling same sex couples they can't marry. Fair enough. But that's not being a role model for women, that's being a role model for the Christian Conservatives.

And an openly Christian Conservative I am.

How do you know she was humiliated? I haven't seen her say any such thing. Do you also state that Palin's humiliated in public by her 17 year old daughter's out of wedlock pregnancy?

I and other people (mostly women in talk shows and other media) were emphatizing with her, putting ourselves in her shoes. It was mentioned though at a segment in Meet The Press of how she and her husband had sought the counsel of one of the evangelists (I think it was Graham), trying to cope during those turbulent time.

It was a very public betrayal by a spouse, not only about the Lewinski affair but also the other sexual shenanigans that were disclosed after that.

I'll give it to you and point out that "feminists" would relate to that better than someone trying to control people's private lives; dictating to women/girls what they have to do with their own bodies.

I am talking about Hillary's husband, Bill.

How do you know feminists - thinking feminists - would relate to that? If you really analyze it, Bill was in control.

Quite a glimpse of how it would've been had Hillary made it to the White House, don't you think?

So it wouldn't have been a real victory for feminists - unless they insist on fooling themselves it is.

Better than who? Palin? She certainly would have been better qualified for the VP position.

Qualified or not, she wasn't chosen by Obama. Thanks to Bill. And according to Hillary, thanks to the sexism that still exists within the party! I wonder if in a moment of pique she included Bill within that group!

It was difficult to ascertain that from your response to Kimmy. It seems as if you supported her "love the woman/hate the views" rah-rah line of thought.

What do you think?

As a Conservative rooting for Palin, of course I am supporting... and would love to encourage Kimmy's rah-rah line of thought. Similar to the reactions of both female journalists I've mentioned above!

Actually I am counting on that line of thought from other American liberal women.

Edited September 7, 2008 by betsy

[WIP]

This doesn't surprise me in the least. I was just saying this morning that McCain was probably betting on the short time between her nomination

"And that is Alaska, and Alaskans will be allowed to contribute more to our great country and they'll be allowed to do that because I -- if we're elected -- will be in a position of opening the eyes of the country to what it is that Alaska is all about and what Alaska has to offer. So, I am happy to and very honored to be asked to do this. I know it's going to be great for Alaska."[/i]

Maybe they're just making sure she is putting Alaska first.

Sounds like "move aside Texas, with our oil, we're going to run the whole country." No wonder she quit the Alaska Independence Party.

Here in Canada, I wonder if similar thinking led many former Quebec separatists to join the Liberal and Progressive Conservative parties!

[WIP]

As a Conservative rooting for Palin, of course I am supporting... and would love to encourage Kimmy's rah-rah line of thought. Similar to the reactions of both female journalists I've mentioned above!

Actually I am counting on that line of thought from other American liberal women.

I am not going to speak for liberal women, but I seriously question how many REAL liberal women will support a woman who believes the Earth was created 6000 years ago, and people walked the planet alongside the dinosaurs and that the 2nd Coming and Jesus's return will happen during her lifetime. Considering her beliefs that "Our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God," , this is the lethal combination of believing the end is coming, combined with the belief that God is on our side!

Forget liberals; even rational, less religiously motivated conservatives are going to be nervous about having someone this trigger happy having possession of the "suitcase." Bush was close enough to this combined lunacy of beliefs. At least he didn't declare that he was expecting the end during his lifetime. Sarah Palin is a female doppleganger of Mahmound Ahmadinejad!

[bush_cheney2004]

Forget liberals; even rational, less religiously motivated conservatives are going to be nervous about having someone this trigger happy having possession of the "suitcase." Bush was close enough to this combined lunacy of beliefs. At least he didn't declare that he was expecting the end during his lifetime. Sarah Palin is a female doppleganger of Mahmound Ahmadinejad!

Just undermined your own theory....almost eight years after President Bush's inauguration, your prediction hasn't come true. Try again...and be afraid....be very afraid.

[WIP]

Just undermined your own theory....almost eight years after President Bush's inauguration, your prediction hasn't come true. Try again...and be afraid....be very afraid.

You don't read very carefully do you? I just got finished saying that at least Bush didn't declare a belief that we are already in the end times. He could put it off somewhere in the future. But his stupid idea that he had the hotline to God, and he is carrying out God's will by going to war is bad enough!

[bush_cheney2004]

You don't read very carefully do you? I just got finished saying that at least Bush didn't declare a belief that we are already in the end times. He could put it off somewhere in the future. But his stupid idea that he had the hotline to God, and he is carrying out God's will by going to war is bad enough!

Well make up your mind...was it bad or not? Was being too close to the "suitcase" the thing that scares you so much? Is that what this is all about for you? Being scared and not being able to do a goddamn thing about it?

Maybe the "suitcase" is "God".

Edited September 7, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

[Guest American Woman]

I and other people (mostly women in talk shows and other media) were emphatizing with her, putting ourselves in her shoes. It was mentioned though at a segment in Meet The Press of how she and her husband had sought the counsel of one of the evangelists (I think it was Graham), trying to cope during those turbulent time.

Thinking Hillary should be "humiliated" because Bill and Monica did wrong is a pretty Dark Ages attitude, one I'm guessing most feminists wouldn't share. I'm sure they'd put the "humiliation" squarely on those responsible. As for "trying to cope during those turbulent times," I'm sure 17 year old Bristol and the Palin family and the Johnston family are all "trying to cope" during their "turbulent times" too. So I repeat. Are you declaring that Sarah Palin has been "humiliated in public" too?

It was a very public betrayal by a spouse, not only about the Lewinski affair but also the other sexual shenanigans that were disclosed after that.

Again, the "betrayal" was by her husband. As for "the other sexual shenanigans that were disclosed after that," I won't even get into it. I'll just say any "sexual shenanigans" would be by her husband. Not her. So why would she be humiliated? Are you yourself often humiliated by other people's wrongdoings? She did nothing wrong. She has nothing to be humiliated for. Again, your claim that she should be is anything but "enlightened."

I am talking about Hillary's husband, Bill.

How do you know feminists - thinking feminists - would relate to that? If you really analyze it, Bill was in control.

Again, your opinion. Do I need to repeat my response? I'll c&p it for you:

I'll give it to you and point out that "feminists" would relate to that better than someone trying to control people's private lives; dictating to women/girls what they have to do with their own bodies.

Quite a glimpse of how it would've been had Hillary made it to the White House, don't you think?

Nope. Your opinion doesn't mean squat to me when I think of what kind of president Hillary would have made.

So it wouldn't have been a real victory for feminists - unless they insist on fooling themselves it is.

Again, your opinion. However, I think it's a fact that it would "not be a real victory for feminists" to have Palin and her desire to dictate to girls/women what to do with their bodies elected.

Qualified or not, she wasn't chosen by Obama. Thanks to Bill. And according to Hillary, thanks to the sexism that still exists within the party! I wonder if in a moment of pique she included Bill within that group!

You seem awfully fixated on Bill. Not a very "feminist" attitude, I must say.

What do you think?

As a Conservative rooting for Palin, of course I am supporting... and would love to encourage Kimmy's rah-rah line of thought. Similar to the reactions of both female journalists I've mentioned above!

Actually I am counting on that line of thought from other American liberal women.

Good for you. If you can live with that, go for it. But don't expect me to have any respect for the "kimmys" who have jumped on your bandwagon/you manage to get on your band wagon, cuz it ain't happening.

So go ahead and support Palin as the "openly Christian Conservative" that you admit to being, but don't try to pass yourself and Palin off as anything else. To claim your views or hers are in sync with "feminists" is something you're not going to be able to sell to me or any other enlightened critical thinking liberal out there.

Edited September 7, 2008 by American Woman

[kimmy]

So you're rah-rah-ing a woman for the executive office because you love her, even though you hate her views.

You do realize this is a national political election, right?-- Not a popularity vote for class president?

Let me be clear about this:

I am *NOT* rah-rahing for Palin to be the next Vice President or a future President.

What I *AM* doing is taking issue with many of the attacks being made against her, both by people on this message board and by the media at large.

-she's been mocked for having been in the Miss Alaska pageant 24 years ago.

-she's been called a lousy parent.

-she's been accused of causing her baby to be Downs' Syndrome through negligence, either through working while pregnant, flying while pregnant, or flying home after her water broke.

-she's been accused of adultery through the most circumstantial evidence imaginable.

-she's been accused of lying about her baby's parentage.

-it has been argued that if she really loved her special needs baby, she would quit her job and be a full time mother.

That is the stuff I have taken issue with. It makes my blood boil. It particularly disgusts me that women are cheering along or even writing this kind of crap, for no other reason than they don't like the politics of the woman being smeared.

And then the stuff making light of her background because Alaska is a small state, or Wasilla is a small town, or because she went to a small college, also strikes a raw nerve with me. (My parents' families are both from the remote north, too.) Too much of the coverage I've seen of Palin has a contemptuous tone when speaking about her small town and remote state. It has the same tone we often hear in Canada when central Canadian media talk about politics or politicians from Alberta. When the Reform Party of Canada first arrived on the federal stage nearly 20 years ago, it was regarded with mockery and ridicule by the national (read, Toronto) media. As the party rose from regional upstart, to regional force, to national factor, to national government, the Toronto media's reaction went from derision, to disbelief, to anxiety, to grudging acceptance. And maybe I am projecting, but the initial reaction to Palin strikes me as somewhat the same. The idea that a politician from Alaska was arriving in the national campaign was as funny to US media as the idea that these yokels from Alberta were entering the national dialogue in Canada was funny to Canadian media. Ultimately, in Canada, the central Canadian media (the "elites", I suppose, to borrow the current US terminology) learned something about the yokels. I think that maybe the people who've been ridiculing the Alaska angle on this could likewise learn a few things.

I don't particularly want Palin to be the next Vice President, but I absolutely want her to do well, to have a campaign that shut a lot of mouths. Because there have been a lot of people who deserve to have their mouths shut when discussing Palin.

Now let me get this straight. Sarah is pro life. She cares about life. The rifle and NRA membership sort of make that a moot point.

Most people feel there is a distinction to be made between killing animals and humans.

* animal

* animal

* human

Kind of like her demanding sex not be taught in schools and then having a pregnant teenage daughter.

The claim that she's opposed to sex-education has been

debunked.

Some things speak for themselves-her being a hippocritical moron is one of them. But she's a God fearing woman. God bless her. Oh wait. Please respect her privacy but if she wants to use her baby as a prop, well golly gee its like carrying a rifle and claiming you believe in the sanctity of life. Contradiction? No. No. Who says so. Some intellectual city folk?

Bah.

Moron? I don't think anybody, particularly a woman, who has accomplished as much by age 44 as Palin can be accused of being a moron.

Her baby as a prop? That justifies the lurid accusations that have been made about her and her family? When the Obamas' little girl participated in that oh-so-cute moment at their convention, was that also an invitation for an all-out assault on the family?

Contradiction? Carrying a rifle and being pro-life is a contradiction? Just for the record, Rue, can you tell us whether you believe killing animals and killing humans are equivalent? And if the answer is no, then can you explain where the contradiction is? Care to clarify the intellectual city-folk position on that point for us?

She is a Stepford wife on amphetamines.

Ok, one of us has got a serious misconception of what the phrase "Stepford wife" implies. I've looked it up, and I'm pretty sure it's not me.

The wikipedia entry describes it thusly:

The label "Stepford wife" is usually applied to a woman who seems to conform blindly to an old-fashioned subservient role in relationship to her husband, compared to other, presumably more independent and vivacious women. It can also be used to criticise any person, male or female, who submits meekly to authority and/or abuse; or even to describe someone who lives in a robotic, conformist manner without giving offense to anyone. The word "Stepford" can also be used as an adjective denoting servility or blind conformity (e.g. "He's a real Stepford employee") or a noun ("My home town is so Stepford")

Submissive? Meek? Old fashioned subservient role? Robotic? Conformist? Inoffensive? Sarah Palin? WTF? I can't think of any way a woman who's governor can be called any of those things. Judging from the anger directed at her from Obama-boosters and lefty-type women, she's certainly not inoffensive.

Sarah Palin strikes me as the exact opposite of that definition, but perhaps you've got reasons of your own for feeling differently. Please share them.

Is it because she's conservative?

Is it because she's religious?

Is it because she has 5 kids?

Help me out here, Rue.

It's good to see you back too. I always enjoy reading a Kimmy original .

thanks

-k

[CANADIEN]

You don't read very carefully do you? I just got finished saying that at least Bush didn't declare a belief that we are already in the end times. He could put it off somewhere in the future. But his stupid idea that he had the hotline to God, and he is carrying out God's will by going to war is bad enough!

Every time I hear about how Bush pray for God's guidance, I am tempted to say: "next time God speaks to you, LISTEN."

Edited September 7, 2008 by CANADIEN

[Guest American Woman]

Every time I hear about how Bush pray for Goddddd's guidance, I am tempted to say: "next time God speaks to you, LISTEN."

And now Palin's evidently carrying out God's work through her political offices.

Oh for the good ol' days of separation of church and state!

[Guest American Woman]

delete

Edited September 7, 2008 by American Woman

[Guest American Woman]

Let me be clear about this:

I am *NOT* rah-rahing for Palin to be the next Vice President or a future President.

Perhaps you should let betsy know then.

As a Conservative rooting for Palin, of course I am supporting... and would love to encourage Kimmy's rah-rah line of thought.