Antievolution.org - Antievolution.org Discussion Board -Topic::Presidential Politics & Antievolution

Posted: Sep. 01 2008,23:31

Advice to Sarah Palin: Whatever they offer, don't accept that offer of a special guest appearance on "Are You Smarter than a 5th Grader?"

Edited by Wesley R. Elsberry on Sep. 01 2008,23:31

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

JAM

Posts: 517
Joined: July 2007

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,00:06

Quote (carlsonjok @ Sep. 01 2008,21:13)

I did and I see nothing to support your statement that McCain is "her guy." �It is typically FtK; as in noncommittal. There is nothing to indicate who she will vote for, only that the race is shaping up to be interesting to her.

Really? What do you make of this?
� �

Quote

I've never been one to particularly support a women in those positions,but this gal impresses me a lot more than 'ol Hillary ever has.

� � �

Quote

�The following statement of hers implies that she has yet to make up her mind yet.

Statements don't imply, people do. What we're doing is called inference.
� �

Quote

For the first time in history, we'll have either an African American or a Female in the Presidential or VP position. Seriously cool.

I don't see how you can infer that she hasn't made up her mind from that statement.
�

Quote

Indeed, I do remember at least once in the past that FtK indicated that she might not vote GOP in this election.

Indeed, I also remember her indicating many things, particularly about biology, that are clearly false, as well as a lot of us here calling her on them. Given her record, I infer that she probably was being deceptive. Given statements like this:

Quote

All this liberal BS is nausiating...

I doubt that she would vote for the most liberal Democrat to be nominated since McGovern.

Quote

I am sure you are right about who FtK will vote for. It is just a shame the poor dear hasn't caught up with you yet.

Given that we can predict her dishonest arguments before she advances them, it's not exactly an intellectual triumph.

JAM

Posts: 517
Joined: July 2007

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,00:09

Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,00:53

Palin captures critical evangelical swing vote:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/01/palin.evangelicals/index.html

unlucky Obama, you Muslim.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

carlsonjok

Posts: 3326
Joined: May 2006

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,01:15

Quote (JAM @ Sep. 02 2008,00:06)

Quote (carlsonjok @ Sep. 01 2008,21:13)

I am sure you are right about who FtK will vote for. It is just a shame the poor dear hasn't caught up with you yet.

Given that we can predict her dishonest arguments before she advances them, it's not exactly an intellectual triumph.

You know, JAM, call me when you can find FtK saying "I will vote for McCain" or you can calculate CSI on her political posts. Until then I hope you've been able to vent your spleen enough to take the edge off.

Editted to reduce snarkiness by 2-3%

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it. �We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

Posts: 545
Joined: Sep. 2007

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,05:47

Quote (Richardthughes @ Sep. 02 2008,00:53)

Palin captures critical evangelical swing vote:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/01/palin.evangelicals/index.html

As I mentioned on Ed's blog, I can confirm that anecdotally, even more so after talking to more friends last night. The evangelicals, so far, absolutely love her. (As do I.) It has nothing to do with what the evangelical leaders are saying, indeed in many cases such as mine it would have to be in spite of what they are saying--it is a powerful, visceral response, fair or not, that "she is really us, not a groomed, plastic, blow-dried Ralph Reed type pandering for our vote."

This could all change, and at any rate having the evangelicals rally behind her, especially if the so-called leaders make a big fuss, could end up a net minus instead of a net plus--such analyses are above my pay grade. But the fact, I suspect now beyond refute, is that the choice has indeed energized the sleeping evangelical base. Whether it was a sleeping bear or sleeping paper tiger I don't know.

I would also add my guess that no current (plausible) stories, even should they prove true, would dampen the excitement in that community. And I would also add, again, that these observations are purely anecdotal, based on talking to my friends who have talked to their friends, etc.

The one criticism of her that might have some legs among evangelicals is that given all her personal family problems, which is a big part of her appeal, is being VP in the best interest of her family? My guess is that she cannot come up with a slam dunk answer to this, but she'll come up with some answer, and that will be enough.

Bottom line: FTK is not the only one gushing, not by a long-shot.

--------------
Mysticism is a rational enterprise. Religion is not. The mystic has recognized something about the nature of consciousness prior to thought, and this recognition is susceptible to rational discussion. The mystic has reason for what he believes, and these reasons are empirical. --Sam Harris

Alan Fox

Posts: 1556
Joined: Aug. 2005

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,08:19

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Sep. 01 2008,13:02)

Of course, the rest of the world is jealous of our freedoms.

Wow.

*takes own advice and refrains from further comment*

Posts: 2780
Joined: Mar. 2007

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,08:42

Quote (dheddle @ Sep. 02 2008,05:47)

Bottom line: FTK is not the only one gushing, not by a long-shot.

Dheddle, don't you feel just a tad USED by this choice of a VP candidate? McCain made a cynical calculation, and you fell for it. This woman has no substantive experience, and even those who should be her fans have little to say about her governing abilities. I couldn't care less about her personal life, but

Quote

John Harris, the (REPUBLICAN) speaker of the Alaska House, when asked about her qualifications for Veep, replied with this: "She's old enough. She's a U.S. citizen."

and

Quote

"She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?" said Lyda Green, the president of the State Senate, a Republican from Palin's hometown of Wasilla. "Look at what she's done to this state. What would she do to the nation?"

Couple that with the investigation into abuse of power vis-a-vis her former brother in law, and the revelations that she wangled $27 million in federal pork for her village of less than 7000 people, and she looks like a typical venal politician, except with even less experience. She may not be Ralph Reed, but she might be Tom DeLay or Bob Ney or Newt Gingrich (without the resumes of any of those guys).

If evangelicals are over the moon about this pick, it really does highlight how they can overlook just about everything else and still support a co-religionist regardless of reality.

That's just sad.

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
� � � � � � � � � � � � - Pattiann Rogers

Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,09:21

Quote (Alan Fox @ Sep. 02 2008,14:19)

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Sep. 01 2008,13:02)

Of course, the rest of the world is jealous of our freedoms.

Wow.

*takes own advice and refrains from further comment*

Wow also.

{Follows Alan's advice}

Louis

P.S. Although I choose to follow Alan's advice, it is very good advice, I want it on record that any comment I would have made before I took Alan's advice would have further confirmed Godwin's law.

--------------
Bye.

Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,09:29

Quote (Albatrossity2 @ Sep. 02 2008,14:42)

[SNIP]

If evangelicals are over the moon about this pick, it really does highlight how they can overlook just about everything else and still support a co-religionist regardless of reality.

That's just sad.

And the same is true even if the potential Rep. VP is an atheist.* Cheerleading because someone is on your team misses the point of democracy. Or at least it misses the point of democracy if you are one of the people and not one of the elected. The elected have a distinctly vested interest in distracting the people from the issues. It might be the least bad system we have, but that doesn't make it perfect!

Reading up about your potential POTUSes and VPOTUSes has scared the crap out of me. Maybe I'm just getting old and cynical, and maybe I am disturbed at the political trends here in the UK (current operating system = USA emulator version 1.2). I can't see that McCain/Palin is going to be a good choice for the USA based on the issues. And based on promises they might have to keep I'm not so sure about Obama/Biden. At least Obama seems science friendly and his stated desire (however honest) to keep the negative campaigning out of the process is pleasing.

Louis

*Not that atheism is a religion, yadda yadda yadda, blah, blah, blah etc.

--------------
Bye.

Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,09:37

Quote (dheddle @ Sep. 02 2008,05:47)

Quote (Richardthughes @ Sep. 02 2008,00:53)

Palin captures critical evangelical swing vote:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/01/palin.evangelicals/index.html

As I mentioned on Ed's blog, I can confirm that anecdotally, even more so after talking to more friends last night. The evangelicals, so far, absolutely love her. (As do I.) It has nothing to do with what the evangelical leaders are saying, indeed in many cases such as mine it would have to be in spite of what they are saying--it is a powerful, visceral response, fair or not, that "she is really us, not a groomed, plastic, blow-dried Ralph Reed type pandering for our vote."

This could all change, and at any rate having the evangelicals rally behind her, especially if the so-called leaders make a big fuss, could end up a net minus instead of a net plus--such analyses are above my pay grade. But the fact, I suspect now beyond refute, is that the choice has indeed energized the sleeping evangelical base. Whether it was a sleeping bear or sleeping paper tiger I don't know.

I would also add my guess that no current (plausible) stories, even should they prove true, would dampen the excitement in that community. And I would also add, again, that these observations are purely anecdotal, based on talking to my friends who have talked to their friends, etc.

The one criticism of her that might have some legs among evangelicals is that given all her personal family problems, which is a big part of her appeal, is being VP in the best interest of her family? My guess is that she cannot come up with a slam dunk answer to this, but she'll come up with some answer, and that will be enough.

Bottom line: FTK is not the only one gushing, not by a long-shot.

Point taken, Dave.

I was trying to snarkily suggest that she's adding no new voters (evangelicals were only ever going republican anyway)..

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

Posts: 545
Joined: Sep. 2007

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,09:46

Quote (Albatrossity2 @ Sep. 02 2008,08:42)

� �

Quote (dheddle @ Sep. 02 2008,05:47)

Bottom line: FTK is not the only one gushing, not by a long-shot.

Dheddle, don't you feel just a tad USED by this choice of a VP candidate? McCain made a cynical calculation, and you fell for it. This woman has no substantive experience, and even those who should be her fans have little to say about her governing abilities. I couldn't care less about her personal life, but � � � �

Quote

John Harris, the (REPUBLICAN) speaker of the Alaska House, when asked about her qualifications for Veep, replied with this: "She's old enough. She's a U.S. citizen."

and � � � �

Quote

"She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?" said Lyda Green, the president of the State Senate, a Republican from Palin's hometown of Wasilla. "Look at what she's done to this state. What would she do to the nation?"

Couple that with the investigation into abuse of power vis-a-vis her former brother in law, and the revelations that she wangled $27 million in federal pork for her village of less than 7000 people, and she looks like a typical venal politician, except with even less experience. She may not be Ralph Reed, but she might be Tom DeLay or Bob Ney or Newt Gingrich (without the resumes of any of those guys).

If evangelicals are over the moon about this pick, it really does highlight how they can overlook just about everything else and still support a co-religionist regardless of reality.

That's just sad.

No, I don't feel used. Every VP pick in the history of the Republic was made to shore up support. Every single VP pick in history is an example of pandering to somebody. Obama's choice was to comfort those who are inclined to vote for him but nervous about his lack of National Security creds. Should those people feel "used"? Did Texans feel "used" when JFK chose LBJ?

It may be that when more is revealed about Palin I'll change my mind back to Obama. But the quotes you provided sure won't do it--any more than quotes about Obama's lack of experience influenced me when I was ready to pull the lever for him. If experience was a huge factor, which for me it is not, then I would have been in the McCain camp long before he chose Palin.

--------------
Mysticism is a rational enterprise. Religion is not. The mystic has recognized something about the nature of consciousness prior to thought, and this recognition is susceptible to rational discussion. The mystic has reason for what he believes, and these reasons are empirical. --Sam Harris

jupiter

Posts: 97
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,09:52

dheddle, you're ignoring the corruption/abuse of power issues raised. Don't those give you pause? Or make you even slightly interested in looking into them on your own?

Posts: 545
Joined: Sep. 2007

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,10:14

Quote (jupiter @ Sep. 02 2008,09:52)

dheddle, you're ignoring the corruption/abuse of power issues raised. Don't those give you pause? Or make you even slightly interested in looking into them on your own?

Yes I am more than interested. Excuse me for not taking as gospel the first wave of stories that followed the announcement. I also didn't believe the "Obama is a closet Moslem" stories. If they have legs, if they turn out to point to serious corruption, then it would certainly have an effect on my vote. As for what is mentioned, would $27 million in pork bother me? Hell no, every politician should have a goal of getting back to their state a reasonable fraction of the federal dollars their citizens sent to DC. I don't expect my governor to say--"Oh, let's just let Robert Byrd have all those dollars for WVa." Having her sister-in-law's husband fired without cause? If that turns out to be true that would be disturbing. But a report that it is being investigated is just that--I'll wait until the investigation is completed.

--------------
Mysticism is a rational enterprise. Religion is not. The mystic has recognized something about the nature of consciousness prior to thought, and this recognition is susceptible to rational discussion. The mystic has reason for what he believes, and these reasons are empirical. --Sam Harris

Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,10:29

Just as a side point, if Obama WAS a muslim, would it really matter to you Dave?

The question I suppose I am asking is "Is the single issue of a candidate's specific religious/non-religious stance sufficiently important to you to vote/not vote for them?". Which immediately springs the follow-on question of "Would you excuse a member of your own sect for unpleasantness X and not excuse a member of another sect/non-religious candidate for unpleasantness X?".

Louis

--------------
Bye.

Posts: 545
Joined: Sep. 2007

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,10:39

Quote (Louis @ Sep. 02 2008,10:29)

Just as a side point, if Obama WAS a muslim, would it really matter to you Dave?

The question I suppose I am asking is "Is the single issue of a candidate's specific religious/non-religious stance sufficiently important to you to vote/not vote for them?". Which immediately springs the follow-on question of "Would you excuse a member of your own sect for unpleasantness X and not excuse a member of another sect/non-religious candidate for unpleasantness X?".

Louis

It might, I don't know for sure, but it might. Maybe I'm alone in this, but I tend to vote for people in part because they are like me. Part of Obama's appeal to me includes that he is a Christian, part of the appeal is the history making aspect of an African-American president, and part of the appeal is that he is smart. I am so "not a Moslem" that I don't honestly know if I would vote for one. I think I could, but that is purely hypothetical.

So that answers the first question--somebody being "like me" in their biography is absolutely appealing. I have a lot in common with Palin: lower middle class upbringing, handicapped child, evangelical Christian. There is no doubt that I find that commonality appealing.

As for the second question, I would not excuse a member of my own "sect." If Palin is corrupt, I will not vote for her. �On the other hand, I don't expect her to be a saint, either.

--------------
Mysticism is a rational enterprise. Religion is not. The mystic has recognized something about the nature of consciousness prior to thought, and this recognition is susceptible to rational discussion. The mystic has reason for what he believes, and these reasons are empirical. --Sam Harris

Posts: 2780
Joined: Mar. 2007

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,10:45

Quote (dheddle @ Sep. 02 2008,10:14)

Quote (jupiter @ Sep. 02 2008,09:52)

dheddle, you're ignoring the corruption/abuse of power issues raised. Don't those give you pause? Or make you even slightly interested in looking into them on your own?

Yes I am more than interested. Excuse me for not taking as gospel the first wave of stories that followed the announcement. I also didn't believe the "Obama is a closet Moslem" stories. If they have legs, if they turn out to point to serious corruption, then it would certainly have an effect on my vote. As for what is mentioned, would $27 million in pork bother me? Hell no, every politician should have a goal of getting back to their state a reasonable fraction of the federal dollars their citizens sent to DC. I don't expect my governor to say--"Oh, let's just let Robert Byrd have all those dollars for WVa." Having her sister-in-law's husband fired without cause? If that turns out to be true that would be disturbing. But a report that it is being investigated is just that--I'll wait until the investigation is completed.

Re your previous post, yes, politicians have always picked VP candidates who complemented their strengths. Biden's foreign policy creds, as you mentioned, are a good example. But this choice was identity politics at its worst. She fills no gap in McCain's policy portfolio, she merely makes evangelicals feel better about him. To me, at least, that is a different thing than picking someone for their policy experience, or even if they can deliver a key swing state. The Repubs have been railing at the Dems for decades about the evils of identity politics. What happened here?

Re this post, the issue is NOT to determine who is the biggest porker. The issue is the hypocrisy of running as an anti-porker when you have bellied up to that trough for many millions of dollars. Does hypocrisy bother you?

As for the report on the investigation, you probably won't get it until after the election. It was originally slated to come out in late October or early November. Her recent hiring of a lawyer in this investigation means that there will almost certainly be delays.

So good luck making up your mind.

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
� � � � � � � � � � � � - Pattiann Rogers

Posts: 545
Joined: Sep. 2007

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,10:58

Albatrossity2,

You see no possible gradations here? All porkers are equal, everyone is a Robert Byrd? I don't. I can easily see being an anti-porker and yet receiving some pork. Politics is messy. If everyone fed just a bit at the trough, the question of pork barrel politics would go away. It's those who are gluttons who worry me.

Your comment about the trooper-gate probe seems to be cynical--the results won't be out until after the election. If so, and if she wins, and if they results show illegal activity, then I'll have to hold that against her after the election. The world is not perfect, and the alternative is holding to an investigation as proof of a misdeed. I wouldn't take that approach with anyone.

--------------
Mysticism is a rational enterprise. Religion is not. The mystic has recognized something about the nature of consciousness prior to thought, and this recognition is susceptible to rational discussion. The mystic has reason for what he believes, and these reasons are empirical. --Sam Harris

Posts: 2780
Joined: Mar. 2007

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,11:05

Quote (dheddle @ Sep. 02 2008,10:58)

You see no possible gradations here? All porkers are equal, everyone is a Robert Byrd? I don't. I can easily see being an anti-porker and yet receiving some pork. Politics is messy. If everyone fed just a bit at the trough, the question of pork barrel politics would go away. It's those who are gluttons who worry me.

Sure there are gradations. Don't put words in my mouth; read that I wrote instead. Gluttony and hypocrisy are both sins, as I recall. I notice you paid not a bit of attention to the main point of that argument.
�

Quote

Your comment about the trooper-gate probe seems to be cynical--the results won't be out until after the election. If so, and if she wins, and if they results show illegal activity, then I'll have to hold that against her after the election. The world is not perfect, and the alternative is holding to an investigation as proof of a misdeed. I wouldn't take that approach with anyone.

Yes, I am cynical. Furthermore I think that McCain's choice for VP is evidence of profound cynicism on his side.

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
� � � � � � � � � � � � - Pattiann Rogers

Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,11:10

Quote (dheddle @ Sep. 02 2008,16:39)

Quote (Louis @ Sep. 02 2008,10:29)

Just as a side point, if Obama WAS a muslim, would it really matter to you Dave?

The question I suppose I am asking is "Is the single issue of a candidate's specific religious/non-religious stance sufficiently important to you to vote/not vote for them?". Which immediately springs the follow-on question of "Would you excuse a member of your own sect for unpleasantness X and not excuse a member of another sect/non-religious candidate for unpleasantness X?".

Louis

It might, I don't know for sure, but it might. Maybe I'm alone in this, but I tend to vote for people in part because they are like me. Part of Obama's appeal to me includes that he is a Christian, part of the appeal is the history making aspect of an African-American president, and part of the appeal is that he is smart. I am so "not a Moslem" that I don't honestly know if I would vote for one. I think I could, but that is purely hypothetical.

So that answers the first question--somebody being "like me" in their biography is absolutely appealing. I have a lot in common with Palin: lower middle class upbringing, handicapped child, evangelical Christian. There is no doubt that I find that commonality appealing.

As for the second question, I would not excuse a member of my own "sect." If Palin is corrupt, I will not vote for her. �On the other hand, I don't expect her to be a saint, either.

Thanks for being honest.

I have to say that for me, I practise what I preach (ha ha ha), I think religion is a private, personal matter, and that it shouldn't be involved in politics (as far as is practicable, I understand how individuals might be influenced etc), hence I don't care if the candidate is a christian, muslim, sikh, cargo cultist, whatever. And I think it's safe to say I am at least as "not a muslim" as you are! ;-) In fact I'd go further, I'm even more "not a muslim" than you, given how I am also "not a jew" and "not a christian"!

I tend to vote for people whose ideas I think are good (by which I mean based on the available evidence). It's all about the ideas/issues for me, and agreement doesn't always feature. I have voted for people I vehemently disagree with on (perhaps minor) issue A because I think they are going to do a good job on issue B (which I may or may not agree with them on). Oy, such a headfuck! I don't have to like them, in fact in many cases I can guarantee I DON'T like them, or that they have to be like me. I also really, really don't expect candidates to be saints.

So to follow-on the follow-on, would you have any choosing between two otherwise identical (hypothetical) candidates one of whom is black (and thus presumably unlike you) and one of whom is white (and thus presumably like you)?

Louis

--------------
Bye.

Posts: 545
Joined: Sep. 2007

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,11:23

Louis,

Could you rephrase this question:

�

Quote

So to follow-on the follow-on, would you have any choosing between two otherwise identical (hypothetical) candidates one of whom is black (and thus presumably unlike you) and one of whom is white (and thus presumably like you)?

I think there is a word missing, and I don't want to assume that I know what it is.

Albatrossity2,

What main point did I miss? I thought I was pretty clear that I do not view her being anti-pork and her going after some pork as evidence of hypocrisy. I thought I was clear that it is every politician's fiduciary responsibility to go after some pork, to try to retrieve some of the tax dollars the state sends to DC.

Note: I have to get ready to teach my Astronomy class, so any reply will be delayed.

--------------
Mysticism is a rational enterprise. Religion is not. The mystic has recognized something about the nature of consciousness prior to thought, and this recognition is susceptible to rational discussion. The mystic has reason for what he believes, and these reasons are empirical. --Sam Harris

Posts: 2780
Joined: Mar. 2007

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,11:31

Quote (dheddle @ Sep. 02 2008,11:23)

Albatrossity2,

What main point did I miss? I thought I was pretty clear that I do not view her being anti-pork and her going after some pork as evidence of hypocrisy. I thought I was clear that it is every politician's fiduciary responsibility to go after some pork, to try to retrieve some of the tax dollars the state sends to DC.

My definition - Hypocrisy = saying one thing (vehemently, in Palin's case) and doing another.

Dheddle's definition - "her being anti-pork and her going after some pork" = not evidence of hypocrisy

We seem to have different definitions of hypocrisy.

I'll stick with mine, thanks.

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
� � � � � � � � � � � � - Pattiann Rogers

Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,11:42

Quote (dheddle @ Sep. 02 2008,17:23)

Louis,

Could you rephrase this question:

� �

Quote

So to follow-on the follow-on, would you have any choosing between two otherwise identical (hypothetical) candidates one of whom is black (and thus presumably unlike you) and one of whom is white (and thus presumably like you)?

I think there is a word missing, and I don't want to assume that I know what it is.

[SNIP]

Not a problem. TYPO the Gdo of clerical errors has smitten me once more 'twould seem.

Quote

So to follow-on the follow-on, would you have any trouble choosing between two otherwise identical (hypothetical) candidates one of whom is black (and thus presumably unlike you) and one of whom is white (and thus presumably like you)?

I don't think you would tbh, but I am trying to assess the borders of this "vote for people like me" idea you have.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

JAM

Posts: 517
Joined: July 2007

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,12:45

Quote (dheddle @ Sep. 02 2008,10:14)

Hell no, every politician should have a goal of getting back to their state a reasonable fraction of the federal dollars their citizens sent to DC.

Is 1.8 a reasonable fraction, Heddle? That's for the state as a whole, and I suspect that the "fraction" for Wasilla after the lobbying was done was closer to 5.

Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,13:04

Quote (dheddle @ Sep. 02 2008,11:23)

Note: I have to get ready to teach my Astrology class, so any reply will be delayed.

fixed that for you!

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

Posts: 545
Joined: Sep. 2007

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,15:20

Quote (Louis @ Sep. 02 2008,11:42)

So to follow-on the follow-on, would you have any trouble choosing between two otherwise identical (hypothetical) candidates one of whom is black (and thus presumably unlike you) and one of whom is white (and thus presumably like you)?

Well, the way it is worded I would have one problem, that of the hungry mule halfway between two equally delicious buckets, one of oats and one of corn. I'd starve from frozen indecision since there is no way to choose. But I think you are asking if I would take race into account, and the answer is no. There are more important factors beyond race that would permit me to identify with one over the other, such as demeanor--For example I am immediately drawn to down-to-earth types as opposed to scholarly-acting types.

--------------
Mysticism is a rational enterprise. Religion is not. The mystic has recognized something about the nature of consciousness prior to thought, and this recognition is susceptible to rational discussion. The mystic has reason for what he believes, and these reasons are empirical. --Sam Harris

khan

Posts: 1554
Joined: May 2007

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,16:13

Has anyone asked the current Mrs. McCain what she thinks of the choice of Mrs. Palin to be traveling with Mr. McCain?

--------------
"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

Frequency is just the plural of wavelength...
-JoeG

Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Sep. 02 2008,16:19

uh-oh:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/156679

Quote

Except for the national spotlight, Wasilla Bible Church resembles thousands of conservative evangelical churches across the country. Its statement of faith says its members believe that the Bible is the "inspired, inerrant word of God."

Quote

This past Sunday, worship at the Assembly of God fellowship in Wasilla was as euphoric as the Bible Church was staid. The congregation of about 100 was on its feet, shouting and clapping. Some members on another Sunday might murmur and keen in low voices, the sound of speaking in tongues.

Yay, church of gibberish. Perfect for Republicans!

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006