The Sarah Palin Thread: 'Controversial Controversy' Edition

[StorminNorman]

If you think they are misled and following an evil path, you are still condescending to them (and myself), as well as still being unable to work with them. How can you work with people whose goal is evil tyranny? You will thereby live on the fringe unless your party has a major majority. And in this scenario you can contribute nothing beyond partisan bickering, which is wholly unneeded.

I believe that the number of individuals that are truly "progressive" make up a small percentage of the population. I believe many don't understand, and are in fact actually frustrated by the results of progressive policies like State Capitalism (another word for Corportism) which benefits Big Business.

I believe I can win over "neo-liberals" by stressing my drug policy, immigration policy, gay rights policy, foriegn policy. I am to the "left" of most Democrats on those issues. I believe THOSE are the issues that most liberals care about.

It doesn't matter if it's a "Republican" issue or a "Democrat" issue. "Left" or "Right". It's liberty or government. Those are my party lines.

No. I just point out that your ideology would condone both...or at least the preservation of both. In fact, it is your ideology that Southern states used to defend both practices. To ignore that is to ignore reality in favor of a form of revisionist history.

And by comparing you to Sean Hannity, I mean you called the other side's philosophy evil and have walked it back now to saying they are "well intentioned" but misguided in their evil deeds. That is Beckian, but the ending note is that the other side is evil and your views are righteous. That is what Sean Hannity implies every night. He just does it in a smugger, more dishonest way. But the end post is still the same: "They are bad and we are good." You can rationalize it any way you want, but you have the same message.

I have never ignored the fact that the cries of "States Rights" and "Nullification" were used to defend slavery as an instititution (an institution that my ideology would find intolerable due to it's recognition of individual rights - but that's another point), however that does nothing to weaken the integrity or soundness of the argument.

You, however, have run from the obvious connection between Progressive ideology and fascism. FDR and Hitler had the same solution to the Great Depression. (Hint, neither's solution was to slaughter the jews)

Are you saying you don't believe the lies were spread that are well documented and McCain has commented on many times...that have also appeared in descriptions of conversations he had with Bush in Woodward books? Or are you asking for direct evidence that the rumormongers that implied that he had fathered a black child out of wedlock, was attending brothels, and that Cindy McCain was a drug addict were originated by Karl Rove. That I'd have to look up, but everyone knows who was responsible for those lies. His name starts with a "K" and ends "arl Rove." But like the months before Scooter Libby came clean, there's no concrete evidence the Bush administration leaked that, right?

I have no doubt McCain claims it happened, but never any primary material. It seems to me that such an explosive call, that was undoubtedly left on more than one answering machine, never was documented anywhere. Nor have I seen anyone who actually received one ever interviewed.

I guess we do agree. BTW you didn't comment on his running on persecution of gays and unconstitutional bigotry in the 2004 election.

Because he was running on bigotry in 2004. Bush was Neoconservative.

Perhaps your partially right; the progressives also pursued the foolish prohibition that led to a spike in criminality. I tend to consider minimum wages a good thing however (though rent controlled housing is another story).

But overall the progressive agenda has done a lot of good things for this country and to say that it springs from evil is just insulting. And has no room in the national discourse from someone who thinks he'll become a senator or governor one day. It only contributes to a terrible wall of noise that has more to do with cable news' perceptions of reality than the problems we as a country do face.

I have a problem with individuals believing they have the right to restrict the rights of others. I hate the idea of the government being able to tell any business owner of any type that he can't throw anyone of any type for any reason out of his business. It is not a "civil rights" issue for, because race is irrelevant - motive is irrelevant. I don't believe the very institution of government has the moral right to invade on the owner's soverignty.

I believe in natural rights and I see progressivism as a rejection of the concept. Even if their intentions are good.

For the record my view of history stems from knowing historians from multiple backgrounds in academia, public policy, and the private sector my whole life. And learning from them, as well as reading numerous biographies and historical texts--particularly around the area of the Antebellum Period through Reconstruction in the South--and the Southern politics that formed as a result of those events leading to race riots and segregation by the end of the century. I am no scholar on the 20th centur, though I have studied Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, and Nixon exhaustively. I also have enjoyed talking to many people who actually lived through the Depression and WWII...not just read about it in a book.

Excuse my tyrade, work fueled frustration getting the better of me - it's beneath me to get in "a contest of 'whose bigger'". Don't get me wrong, I am still confident in such a measurement - but it was immature.

You try to view history through a political philosophy....I prefer just to view history and gather my thoughts on what it meant from there. Historical context comes first, philosophical musings and interpretations come after. Your brand of libertarianism is more likely to be found articulated in a political science class by cocky undergrads trying to prove their superior intellect with argumentative, contrarian, and highly inaccurate viewpoints. And that is why their view is a footnote in history.

You clearly do not understand "my brand" of libertarianism.

Fair enough. I know you hate Jefferson. Something tells me though Jefferson would hate Rand. But that would be a fun debate to watch.

I can't see how Jefferson could hate Rand for a second. Maybe a personality clash, but I don't think Rand would have many objections with much of Jefferson's philosphy.

 

[Marx]

Let's keep the topic of conversation to Sarah Palin. Not body part measurements and personal campaign promotions.

 

[Dr. Evil]

Does Tina Fey want to portray Sarah Palin on Saturday Night Live for the next several years? I would think that Saturday Night Live would want a regular cast member to play Palin and groom her for that when Fey departs the role permanently. Sure, Tina works in the same building as SNL, but I don't know if she's interested in playing Palin for the next several years, especially during the 2012 Campaign season.

 

[Matt]

I'm 14 inc....*looks above*....oh.

 

[Marx]

Does Tina Fey want to portray Sarah Palin on Saturday Night Live for the next several years? I would think that Saturday Night Live would want a regular cast member to play Palin and groom her for that when Fey departs the role permanently. Sure, Tina works in the same building as SNL, but I don't know if she's interested in playing Palin for the next several years, especially during the 2012 Campaign season.

I don't think Tina Fey minds doing the occasional Palin impression. She's done it twice in public recently. (Once at a Mark Twain award acceptance and another on Letterman.)

 

[Dr. Evil]

I don't think Tina Fey minds doing the occasional Palin impression. She's done it twice in public recently. (Once at a Mark Twain award acceptance and another on Letterman.)

I don't think she minds either, but not sure if she wants to do it every week starting next Fall.

 

[Carcharodon]

Well I place political philosophy higher than pedigree in elective office. I would rather elect a libertarian chimp than a Progressive Harvard professor.

And that's precisely why you're on track to be just another partisan hack. You're not part of the solution. You're part of the problem. That's the point I'm trying to make. I can't believe I had to spell it out so explicitly, and that worries me.

Good luck, man.

 

[Marx]

I don't think she minds either, but not sure if she wants to do it every week starting next Fall.

I have a hard time believing SNL would put a Palin skit on that often. You know?

 

[Dr. Evil]

I have a hard time believing SNL would put a Palin skit on that often. You know?

Well, they have Kristin Wiig on every sketch, so it could happen. Besides the show is a bit desperate for material.

 

[Marx]

Well, they have Kristin Wiig on every sketch, so it could happen. Besides the show is a bit desperate for material.

SNL hasn't really been good for years. (Except for a few bright spots like the Palin/Clinton sketches and Kristin Wiig.)

At the height of the 2008 campaign, SNL didn't have Palin on every week. (From what I remember.)

 

[Dr. Evil]

SNL hasn't really been good for years. (Except for a few bright spots like the Palin/Clinton sketches and Kristin Wiig.)

At the height of the 2008 campaign, SNL didn't have Palin on every week. (From what I remember.)

Still though, there will be a lot more Palin in the next two years. The good thing though about Tina Fey playing Sarah Palin is that she works in the same building as SNL, so it cuts down on travel expenses and saves the SNL a lot of money.

 

[Marx]

Still though, there will be a lot more Palin in the next two years. The good thing though about Tina Fey playing Sarah Palin is that she works in the same building as SNL, so it cuts down on travel expenses and saves the SNL a lot of money.

That's very true man.

 

[Dr. Evil]

I'm actually a bit surprised that SNL hasn't used Fey to make fun of Palin's reality show. Oh well, maybe this weekend.

 

[StorminNorman]

And that's precisely why you're on track to be just another partisan hack. You're not part of the solution. You're part of the problem. That's the point I'm trying to make. I can't believe I had to spell it out so explicitly, and that worries me.

Good luck, man.

No, in fact it is the lack of principle that has been the problem in Washington - not a lack of compromise.

 

[Matt]

And that's precisely why you're on track to be just another partisan hack. You're not part of the solution. You're part of the problem. That's the point I'm trying to make. I can't believe I had to spell it out so explicitly, and that worries me.

Good luck, man.

No, in fact it is the lack of principle that has been the problem in Washington - not a lack of compromise.

Please heed Marx's request and get back on topic. If the views of Norman and his congressional campaign, or state legislature campaign, or whatever the hell it is are that important to you, either discuss it in PM or make a thread about it. Hell, even take it to the Tea Party thread, it seems to fit. But quit discussing it here or I'll start slapping down the infractions on your asses.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoff...lle-obama-book-america-by-heart_b_785784.html

A passage from Palin's new book has leaked, in which she "slams" or "cheap shots" (whatever the hell you want to call it...) the First Lady. I'm not surprised that Palin doesn't understand what Michelle Obama meant, though.

Certainly his wife expressed this view when she said during the 2008 campaign that she had never felt proud of her country until her husband started winning elections. In retrospect, I guess this shouldn't surprise us, since both of them spent almost two decades in the pews of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright's church listening to his rants against America and white people.​

​

 

[Kelly]

What exactly did Michelle Obama mean by her statement, I've never heard her explanation....

When I first heard her statement, my perception was that she wasn't proud until our country got to the point that it would elect a black president...it wasn't that big of a deal to me...but that is how I took it.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

I think she might have explained it. I remember people crying (literally, no joke) with that comment and Barack not wearing a flag pin because they though she was kicking America in the groin or something. Don't remember exactly, but I do think the campaign did some explaining or she did it, but not sure. I don't really think she needs to explain it, though.
I can understand how someone like Sarah Palin doesn't "get it", and it's hard for me to hold it against her too.

The way I took it, the statement was about how race relations had reached a point where someone she felt people of her background and race were accepted to the point of playing a much larger role in society that once seemed impossible. I considered it a matter of acceptance and integration in your own society that makes you feel like you, in a larger sense and not so much a personal sense, are affecting lives and playing larger roles in your own society, in your country, and not feeling like an outsider...even in the smallest of terms.

Think of it like like this, imagine when we elect a Latino U.S. President...how any Mexican-Americans who right now feel like they're policital footballs might feel (even if the President isn't even Mexican, but Puerto Rican, Dominican, Cuban, etc.). Only this was on an even larger scale because of the history our country has.

I've read, and heard, the same thing happened when John F. Kennedy was elected and how so many Irish-Catholics felt like they had finally been accepted in this larger sense of society, and didn't feel like outsiders anymore.

Sarah Palin probably pisses red, white, and blue and has nothing but stars and stripes for breakfast. And since she's always going on about how she's and probably never felt treated as some kind of outsider to her country, so I mean...how the hell can I expect her to get the whole "feeling like an outsider to your own society" thing.

 

[Marx]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoff...lle-obama-book-america-by-heart_b_785784.html

A passage from Palin's new book has leaked, in which she "slams" or "cheap shots" (whatever the hell you want to call it...) the First Lady. I'm not surprised that Palin doesn't understand what Michelle Obama meant, though.

I think Ms. Palin needs some new material.

 

[Kelly]

All of these damn politicians do....if I hear the, "Giving back the keys...." scenario one more time, I will have blood shooting out my ears....

 

[Marx]

All of these damn politicians do....if I hear the, "Giving back the keys...." scenario one more time, I will have blood shooting out my ears....

I agree. I am so tired of the 'giving back the keys', 'real americans', 'change', etc. that I could just about scream.

 

[samsnee]

I think she might have explained it. I remember people crying (literally, no joke) with that comment and Barack not wearing a flag pin because they though she was kicking America in the groin or something. Don't remember exactly, but I do think the campaign did some explaining or she did it, but not sure. I don't really think she needs to explain it, though.
I can understand how someone like Sarah Palin doesn't "get it", and it's hard for me to hold it against her too.

The way I took it, the statement was about how race relations had reached a point where someone she felt people of her background and race were accepted to the point of playing a much larger role in society that once seemed impossible. I considered it a matter of acceptance and integration in your own society that makes you feel like you, in a larger sense and not so much a personal sense, are affecting lives and playing larger roles in your own society, in your country, and not feeling like an outsider...even in the smallest of terms.

Think of it like like this, imagine when we elect a Latino U.S. President...how any Mexican-Americans who right now feel like they're policital footballs might feel (even if the President isn't even Mexican, but Puerto Rican, Dominican, Cuban, etc.). Only this was on an even larger scale because of the history our country has.

I've read, and heard, the same thing happened when John F. Kennedy was elected and how so many Irish-Catholics felt like they had finally been accepted in this larger sense of society, and didn't feel like outsiders anymore.

Sarah Palin probably pisses red, white, and blue and has nothing but stars and stripes for breakfast. And since she's always going on about how she's and probably never felt treated as some kind of outsider to her country, so I mean...how the hell can I expect her to get the whole "feeling like an outsider to your own society" thing.

Your post is spot-on. I feel like Sarah Palin is someone who expects everyone to know what it's like to walk in her shoes, but refuses to walk in anyone else's.

 

[Kelly]

I agree. I am so tired of the 'giving back the keys', 'real americans', 'change', etc. that I could just about scream.

Ya know...Bush and Biden may need a filter with some of their comments....but at least it was entertaining, surprising, and provocative all at the same time.

 

[Schlosser85]

Your post is spot-on. I feel like Sarah Palin is someone who expects everyone to know what it's like to walk in her shoes, but refuses to walk in anyone else's.

Sarah Palin also has no problem saying whatever she wants about anyone else, but can't take a single word of criticism against herself.

Her righteous indignation anytime anyone looks at her sideways got old a while back.

 

[Kelly]

I think the writer moving in next door IS A LITTLE MUCH, AND do not fault her on those complaints....

Her and Obama seem to be cut from the same cloth when it comes to criticism....neither of them seem to take it very well. As President, IMO, you better have thick skin, neither of them do...