McCain VP- Sarah Palin

antichrist

Well-known member
Sep 7, 2004
8,208
0
68
Atlanta, GA
Tempest said:
I never said it was the most important... but cleary it is important to you... perhaps her kid is rebelling against her family... but kids never rebel :rolleyes: ... perhaps she feels her curriculum is better for the majority and realizes it is not effective 100% (her daughter case in point) and is not foolish enough to switch it based on it not working for her daughter... she is using better judgement by analyzing its effect over time....
I stand corrected, you didn't say "most important".

As for the rest, if that were her only whacky position I might agree. But it goes part and parcel with her adamant stance again abortion, and teaching creationism in schools. When you put them all together it demonstrates that she is clearly out of touch with parts of the real world around her.
 

Tempest

Well-known member
Mar 11, 2008
393
0
Orlando, FL
antichrist said:
I'm talking about someone who wants to withhold important information from kids and substitute something that doesn't work as the "right" (and only) information.

Ok Tom, where's your proof... time put numbers behind your reasoning that "it doesn't work" list the stats... before and after numbers for Alaska.

I'm not saying it is right or wrong, I've been ok using both methods so far... (that I am aware of)... but I'd like to see some numbers as proof points...
 

antichrist

Well-known member
Sep 7, 2004
8,208
0
68
Atlanta, GA
p m said:
but every now and then a person of stature of the U.S. President has nobody to consult with before making a decision but his conscience.
Not just the president. I think there are many times when that applies to all of us.
 

Tempest

Well-known member
Mar 11, 2008
393
0
Orlando, FL
Or we can just agree to disagree... which is fine too. I'm not saying I fully agree with her methods/means... but perhaps it works or perhaps it doesn't work... shit, it might depend on the background, history, beliefs, etc... perhaps it does work well for Alaska... maybe not in New York... rather base judgement on facts/numbers of its application...
 

antichrist

Well-known member
Sep 7, 2004
8,208
0
68
Atlanta, GA
Tempest said:
Ok Tom, where's your proof... time put numbers behind your reasoning that "it doesn't work" list the stats... before and after numbers for Alaska.
I hope you're smart enough to know I didn't mean it never works. If you look further back you'll see my position is that I have no problem teaching abstinence in schools. Unlike Palin however, I don't think it should be the only sex-ed.
 

Leslie

Well-known member
Apr 28, 2004
3,473
0
52
Kingsport TN
hamsquatch said:
I would not say the Republican convention looked like a country club, more like church on sunday morning. A bunch of old white people listening to christian music.



You say that as if it's a bad thing.
 

MarkP

Well-known member
Apr 23, 2004
6,672
0
Colorado
antichrist said:
. . . teaching creationism in schools. When you put them all together it demonstrates that she is clearly out of touch with parts of the real world around her.

I believe what she said is "don't be afraid of information". I think she is in favor of teaching evolution and creationism along side each other. Her approach seems much more real world than teaching only one perspective, in touch with all the parts vs. only the anti-christian part.
 

p m

Administrator
Staff member
Apr 19, 2004
15,617
837
58
La Jolla, CA
www.3rj.org
antichrist said:
So essentially your position is that because two people of national leadership positions lied under oath that it's ok for the VP to promote giving such obviously bad information to school kids as part of the lesson plan?
No!
What I keep saying is - Palin's conflict between her promoting abstinency in school and teenage pregnant daughter is nothing compared to the level of hipocrisy we've been exposed to in the last 10 years (regardless of party affiliation, if it pleases you).

Edit: are you confusing this point with teaching creationism in schools? I've expressed my opinion on this subject already.
 

Blue

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2004
10,043
856
AZ
hamsquatch said:
Not following you here. Is that some sort of racist remark?

I would not say the Republican convention looked like a country club, more like church on sunday morning. A bunch of old white people listening to christian music.

Be careful here folks.

Hmmmm...you must be slow. By that rationale, yes it most certainly would be a racist remark.
 

apg

Well-known member
Dec 28, 2004
3,019
0
East Virginia
Steve said:
There is no hypocrisy here. McCain had asked for revisions and considerations that actually improved veteran rights. He's had a long history of that but some people can't see the forest for the trees. Sometimes a bill is a bad bill.

You can think that if you want, but then you'd still be wrong. What you are believing is the typical, revisionist story or "spin" told well after the fact. Hypocrisy is there in spades.... McCain voted against several iterations of this bill previously, because, well, Bush and/or the party told him too. Bush was against the additional spending for the vets, even though the sum total for a whole damned year of benefits would cost less that two weeks' worth of our current involvement in Iraq. Remember, McCain has voted with the prez 90 to 95% of the time, depending upon your sources. That's too damn close, especially for someone who claims to be a maverick. That, too, is a myth. But the maverick image certainly appeals to folks with a limited attention span. The McCain maverick of old died a decade or more ago.

Even when the new GI bill passed both houses - by a veto-proof, super-majority - Bush, stupidly still threatened to veto it. When Bush did eventually sign the bill, he gave scant reference to its patron, democrat Jim Webb, and didn't at all mention the bill's other patron, Senator Chuck Hagel, a republican. Hagel and Webb are both decorated vets. Instead, Bush praised McCain for his support of the bill. What a fucking lie...McCain was AWOL - like Bush has been in the past. Any Congressperson who voted against this bill needs to be ridden out of town on a rail - to keep with the western metaphor.

"John McCain needs to be on this bill," Webb said earlier. "I have said to him several times that this is not a political issue - this is about providing a fair, deserved benefit to our troops. Based on his own military history and how strongly he speaks about the positive contributions of the people who have served, I hope that he will get on board and support this new GI bill." Nope. He was a no-show...and I hope vets remember this.

Now if McCain would repudiate some of his painfully-close ties to Bush's failed policies and presidency, actually come out and say he'll "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution" as well as ALL the laws of the land and not use signing-statements to circumvent any law they see fit to, then I might, maybe be able to vote for him. But I don't see much hope in that.

The one fact that provides me some limited amount of comfort, politically speaking, is that McCain - if he is indeed elected - won't be anywhere near as abysmal as Bush - or rather the real president - Cheney. But I could be wrong.... :eek:

And for all the Bush apologists out there, how come Cheney is the first veep in the better part of a century not to try to move up a notch? Could it be that he has numbers only a point or two above Satan or Voldermort?
 
2

2FUELS

Guest
If you think that the global warming crowd is scientifically challenged, the universe in 7 days should throw up a BIG red flag...
 

Blue

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2004
10,043
856
AZ
MarkP said:
I believe what she said is "don't be afraid of information". I think she is in favor of teaching evolution and creationism along side each other. Her approach seems much more real world than teaching only one perspective, in touch with all the parts vs. only the anti-christian part.

Then shouldn't she also be in favor of teaching every other story of creation made up during the history of man? Or is creationism some kind of special story because it's in the Bible?

School is for learning facts, church is for sharing religious stories, beliefs, and traditions. Creationism has absolutely no place in (public) schools.
 

antichrist

Well-known member
Sep 7, 2004
8,208
0
68
Atlanta, GA
p m said:
No!
What I keep saying is - Palin's conflict between her promoting abstinency in school and teenage pregnant daughter is nothing compared to the level of hipocrisy we've been exposed to in the last 10 years (regardless of party affiliation, if it pleases you).
Hypocrisy? Sorry, I didn't realize you were saying it was hypocrisy. Doh!

Well, I don't see it as hypocrisy. I'm sure she didn't encourage her daughter to have unprotected sex. I suspect she didn't even know her daughter was doing it. To me hypocrisy would be that or her telling her daughter to ask for birth control from her school nurse.

I see it as a refusal to recognize reality. That no matter how much you promote abstinence, there will be a significant number of kids who won't take the advice. At least 33% in her own family's case (the percentage of failure my go down as her two youngest reach sexually active ages).

Putting it in the big political picture, it's a failure to recognize that a policy you've implemented has a significant failure rate.
 

landrovered

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2006
4,289
0
I thought it was outstanding in typical NOVA depth and breadth and the assault by the Christian Right on our society was brazen and unfortunately went largely un-noticed.