Random Thoughts (Political Edition)

If I didn't know better, I'd think you were trolling.

Have you read the above posts? You complain when I say something that isn't mean but say nothing about the comments that are the opposite? Perhaps it is you who are the troll.
 
He is trolling. I think it's all he knows, really..

So is not posting insulting remarks about Palin trolling?

As for my remarks about you...........trust in saying that if you move to Britain because of the leadership at home you will only have the same problem there. That is because it isn't the leaders that are the problem, it is you.
 
Last edited:
Have you read the above posts? You complain when I say something that isn't mean but say nothing about the comments that are the opposite? Perhaps it is you who are the troll.

oh_snap.jpg


More experience than Obama or Biden, who's served in the Senate long enough to be Palin's creepy uncle? I hate her because she seems to represent the lowest common denominator of American politics: using trite, meaningless phrases to appeal to the close-minded, hypocritical Christian fundamentalist right without any semblance of logic whatsoever, to paint a false portrayal of "real America" where you're either a Jesus-fearing jingoistic bigot - a real American - or a terrorist. "Drill baby drill!" and pitbulls with lipstick, whatever...

And I don't give a damn if you call into question my own patriotism: I may love America and think it's the greatest country on Earth, but if she became President, horror of horrors, I'd be on the same flight to England with VB there. And it shouldn't be surprising, either - after all, Republicans threatened to move out of the country if Obama won, but since they hate everybody they have nowhere to go!

But I suppose it's nice and comfortable in there, you know, with your head firmly planted within your posterior.
 
More experience than Obama or Biden, who's served in the Senate long enough to be Palin's creepy uncle?

I said she has more experience running government, something that Biden and Obama have no experience in. Being in the Senate is not comparable to governing a state in respect to executive experience.

I hate her because she seems to represent the lowest common denominator of American politics: using trite, meaningless phrases to appeal to the close-minded, hypocritical Christian fundamentalist right without any semblance of logic whatsoever, to paint a false portrayal of "real America" where you're either a Jesus-fearing jingoistic bigot - a real American - or a terrorist. "Drill baby drill!" and pitbulls with lipstick, whatever...

That is fine, I usually ignore such fluff because it is present in all politics these days. I would like you to acknowledge that Obama and Biden appealed the same type of lowest common denominator in their dealings with their supporters. The left is just as guilty as the right in these respects.

And I don't give a damn if you call into question my own patriotism: I may love America and think it's the greatest country on Earth, but if she became President, horror of horrors, I'd be on the same flight to England with VB there.

Then I feel sorry for you. It appears that you have never really understood America. The "government" is just a smaller part of what the country is. You may not believe that but it is indeed true. To abandon the country because of the current head of that government is not to your liking shows a shortsightedness that is disappointing. Presidents come and go, the country is still here.
 
http://www.oregonlive.com/clackamascounty/index.ssf/2009/07/jury_hears_father_recount_fait.html

OREGON CITY -- Carl and Raylene Worthington told detectives that they never considered calling a doctor, even as their 15-month-old daughter deteriorated and died.

"I don't believe in them," Carl Worthington said of doctors. "I believe in faith healing."

Raylene Worthington said that her religious beliefs do not encompass medical care and that she would not have done anything different for her - daughter, who died at home of pneumonia, a blood infection and other complications.

As a commenter said elsewhere, "if they want to live in the middle ages, put them in a trebuchet and aim it at a big wall."
 
I said she has more experience running government, something that Biden and Obama have no experience in. Being in the Senate is not comparable to governing a state in respect to executive experience.

Well, on that logic, she was more qualified than John McCain.

To abandon the country because of the current head of that government is not to your liking shows a shortsightedness that is disappointing. Presidents come and go, the country is still here.

I look forward to your onward support for Barack Obama, then.
 
I look forward to your onward support for Barack Obama, then.

Why? One can choose not to support the current president and still stay in the country, that the is the whole point I have been trying to make.
 
I still like Sarah Palin. The only real measurement one can use to determine how she would be as president would be to look at how she governed Alaska. But I haven't seen anyone debate her record as yet, rather her smarts (or lack thereof).
 
As far as her skills as governor, Alaska now has a deficit in the 2 billion range. The only time they've recently enjoyed a budget surplus happened to coincide with extreme oil prices; Alaska enjoys high revenues from their oil industry. If it wasn't for state savings under those high oil prices (byproduct of existing laws before her tenure) the state would be borrowing money for the current fiscal period. And she bailed on her first term.

I agree with the previous statements concerning her being the lowest common denominator. Jet, there's a difference between a well crafted slogan and pure dumbfuckery and you know it. "Hopey changey stuff" is good advertising, so was "Country First", but "I don't know about [insert major national issue] because I'm a hockey mom...but he's a terrorist" is ineffective rabble rousing for the sake of rabble rousing. Don't hide behind a faux veil of ignorance concerning the differences between routine national political strategy and the crap that she employed. Why do you think there's still major contention between the McCain staff and the Governor? Because they didn't want to pull the hijinx that she did...

I hope she runs for President if only because she's barely more palatable then Romney or Huckabee. And because I'll get a kick out of the simple ad any of her opponents needs to run to beat her; her resignation speech before her first term ends in a 30sec snippet on loop.
 
Have you read the above posts? You complain when I say something that isn't mean but say nothing about the comments that are the opposite? Perhaps it is you who are the troll.
I called troll because the statement I emboldened is one of the most asinine claims I heard during the previous election. We've all heard it, seen it debunked and/or laughed off as silly, and dismissed it... yet, here it comes again; much like a troll from under a bridge.

Just in case anyone here has forgotten, jetsetter just claimed that a woman who was mayor of a town of 6,700 residents for six years and governor of the 3rd least populous state for two years (before resigning) has more experience than two United States Senators with a combined 39 years experience, and by that same token, her running mate who himself has 22 years of said experience.


Let's just examine that for a second... what is the difference between the executive and judicial branch, and why doesn't experience with one apparently not adequately prepare you for experience with the other? Citing this Wikipedia article, let's examine this...

The Executive branch:

  • Faithfully executes the laws of the United States... as made by Congress
  • Executes the instructions of Congress
  • May veto laws but the veto may be overridden by Congress by a 2/3 majority.
  • Executes the spending authorized by Congress
  • Executes the instructions of Congress when it declares war or makes rules for the military
  • Appoints judges with the advice and consent of the Senate
The only things the Executive branch doesn't have in common with the Legislative branch are granting pardons, declaring states of emergency, and executive orders... the latter of the three not even having the force of law at a state level, and the former of the three only applying to state laws broken.

So, I think it's pretty clear why I called troll. Unless one really thinks that experience granting pardons for state-level crimes, declaring states of emergency, and calling special sessions of a state Congress is worth what could be construed as five times more weight (8 years* vs. 39 years) than being part of the highest level of the Legislative branch of the country...

...then I call, well, we'll say misinformed for sake of politeness.


*: 8 years, if anyone considers being mayor of a rural Alaskan town anything like being President.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if there would be the same hurra if Delaware governour Jack Markell resigned.

225px-Markell.jpg


:p
 
Over the coming days a curiously revealing event will be taking place in Copenhagen. Top of the agenda at a meeting of the Polar Bear Specialist Group (set up under the International Union for the Conservation of Nature/Species Survival Commission) will be the need to produce a suitably scary report on how polar bears are being threatened with extinction by man-made global warming.

This is one of a steady drizzle of events planned to stoke up alarm in the run-up to the UN's major conference on climate change in Copenhagen next December. But one of the world's leading experts on polar bears has been told to stay away from this week's meeting, specifically because his views on global warming do not accord with those of the rest of the group.

Dr Mitchell Taylor has been researching the status and management of polar bears in Canada and around the Arctic Circle for 30 years, as both an academic and a government employee. More than once since 2006 he has made headlines by insisting that polar bear numbers, far from decreasing, are much higher than they were 30 years ago. Of the 19 different bear populations, almost all are increasing or at optimum levels, only two have for local reasons modestly declined.

Dr Taylor agrees that the Arctic has been warming over the last 30 years. But he ascribes this not to rising levels of CO2 ? as is dictated by the computer models of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and believed by his PBSG colleagues ? but to currents bringing warm water into the Arctic from the Pacific and the effect of winds blowing in from the Bering Sea.

He has also observed, however, how the melting of Arctic ice, supposedly threatening the survival of the bears, has rocketed to the top of the warmists' agenda as their most iconic single cause. The famous photograph of two bears standing forlornly on a melting iceberg was produced thousands of times by Al Gore, the WWF and others as an emblem of how the bears faced extinction ? until last year the photographer, Amanda Byrd, revealed that the bears, just off the Alaska coast, were in no danger. Her picture had nothing to do with global warming and was only taken because the wind-sculpted ice they were standing on made such a striking image.

Dr Taylor had obtained funding to attend this week's meeting of the PBSG, but this was voted down by its members because of his views on global warming. The chairman, Dr Andy Derocher, a former university pupil of Dr Taylor's, frankly explained in an email (which I was not sent by Dr Taylor) that his rejection had nothing to do with his undoubted expertise on polar bears: "it was the position you've taken on global warming that brought opposition".

Dr Taylor was told that his views running "counter to human-induced climate change are extremely unhelpful". His signing of the Manhattan Declaration ? a statement by 500 scientists that the causes of climate change are not CO2 but natural, such as changes in the radiation of the sun and ocean currents ? was "inconsistent with the position taken by the PBSG".

So, as the great Copenhagen bandwagon rolls on, stand by this week for reports along the lines of "scientists say polar bears are threatened with extinction by vanishing Arctic ice". But also check out Anthony Watt's Watts Up With That website for the latest news of what is actually happening in the Arctic. The average temperature at midsummer is still below zero, the latest date that this has happened in 50 years of record-keeping. After last year's recovery from its September 2007 low, this year's ice melt is likely to be substantially less than for some time. The bears are doing fine.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...ar-bear-expert-barred-by-global-warmists.html
 
Top