PBS Palin qualified for VP Poll

[mtrycrafts]

The author had this to say:

"Why would God give Sarah Palin a job she isn't ready for? He wouldn't."

That's usually about all it takes for me to stop reading. I don't presume to know what God is up to and I can't stand it when someone else does.

Sarah know his plans; just listen to her on tapes at her church

 

[Alex2507]

Sarah know his plans; just listen to her on tapes at her church

I just can't. You're not helping either.

And while I'm at it let me just say that in my country life begins when I start yanking her drawers off.

 

[mtrycrafts]

.. If the featus can kick, it has thought, and therefore life.

SheepStar

You think it thinks? Or, just an impulsive reaction to something? Similar when even a grownup makes a twitch, a firing of nerves on its own, no thinking required and at times it get annoying
More questions to ask of those in the real know

 

[Rickster71]

You mean that writer has these words all messed up, and they are false?

Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

Or, is the article in whole unreliable and biased, but that article 8 is correct?

Not at all.
My post speaks to my surprise. You are usually fair and logical. Though when it come to politics, not so much.

Many see Arianna Huffington as the Left's equivalent to Rush Limbaugh.
Neither one is wrong all the time; though they are so biased, one doesn't know when to believe or ignore.

 

[Rickster71]

Oh, glad that I am still a friend

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

 

[Davemcc]

Sarah know his plans; just listen to her on tapes at her church

Now that's just plain out-of-context and deliberately misleading, as discussed in the fallout from Charles Gibson's attempt to sandbag her with that video tape. Here is her actual reply, where the passage that's attributed to her and taken so out-of-context to make her sound radical is actually a direct quote from Abraham Lincoln.

GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, "Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God." Are we fighting a holy war?

PALIN: You know, I don't know if that was my exact quote.

GIBSON: Exact words.

PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln's words when he said -- first, he suggested never presume to know what God's will is, and I would never presume to know God's will or to speak God's words.

But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that's a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God's side.

That's what that comment was all about, Charlie.

GIBSON: I take your point about Lincoln's words, but you went on and said, "There is a plan and it is God's plan."

PALIN: I believe that there is a plan for this world and that plan for this world is for good. I believe that there is great hope and great potential for every country to be able to live and be protected with inalienable rights that I believe are God-given, Charlie, and I believe that those are the rights to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

That, in my world view, is a grand -- the grand plan.

GIBSON: But then are you sending your son on a task that is from God?

PALIN: I don't know if the task is from God, Charlie. What I know is that my son has made a decision. I am so proud of his independent and strong decision he has made, what he decided to do and serving for the right reasons and serving something greater than himself and not choosing a real easy path where he could be more comfortable and certainly safer.

As far as I'm concerned, Gibson's "interview" was an affront to journalistic integrity. This was a deliberate attempt to sandbag her and catch her off guard. To her credit, she recognized and responded appropriately. Obama's never been asked by any interviewer the types of questions that McCain and Palin are routinely asked. Even though Obama himself has actually spoken in public about God's will, he's never been called onto the carpet over that the way Palin has and it seems awfully hypocritical for the Democrats to attack Palin for being a devout Christian, while Obama himself also professes to be a devout Christian (although of a much more radical and offensive nature of Christian, at that). It really seems sad that this election may be decided by people with the blindness and bias of the women of "The View".

 

[jinjuku]

The author had this to say:

"Why would God give Sarah Palin a job she isn't ready for? He wouldn't."

That's usually about all it takes for me to stop reading. I don't presume to know what God is up to and I can't stand it when someone else does.

You have to read between the lines on that one...

 

[bandphan]

My feelings on Palin are summarized here:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/160080/page/1

... though the author does not spend enough time talking about how hot she is.

Did you see one of newsweeks editors on O Factor last night?

 

[MinusTheBear]

Settle down guys....religion, politics and abortion now.... be careful, if you add any more topics to this discusion you will shoot one in your pants

 

[mtrycrafts]

Now that's just plain out-of-context and deliberately misleading, as discussed in the fallout from Charles Gibson's attempt to sandbag her with that video tape. Here is her actual reply, where the passage that's attributed to her and taken so out-of-context to make her sound radical is actually a direct quote from Abraham Lincoln.

GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, "Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God." Are we fighting a holy war?

PALIN: You know, I don't know if that was my exact quote.

GIBSON: Exact words.

PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln's words when he said -- first, he suggested never presume to know what God's will is, and I would never presume to know God's will or to speak God's words.

But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that's a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God's side.

That's what that comment was all about, Charlie.

GIBSON: I take your point about Lincoln's words, but you went on and said, "There is a plan and it is God's plan."

PALIN: I believe that there is a plan for this world and that plan for this world is for good. I believe that there is great hope and great potential for every country to be able to live and be protected with inalienable rights that I believe are God-given, Charlie, and I believe that those are the rights to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

That, in my world view, is a grand -- the grand plan.

GIBSON: But then are you sending your son on a task that is from God?

PALIN: I don't know if the task is from God, Charlie. What I know is that my son has made a decision. I am so proud of his independent and strong decision he has made, what he decided to do and serving for the right reasons and serving something greater than himself and not choosing a real easy path where he could be more comfortable and certainly safer.

As far as I'm concerned, Gibson's "interview" was an affront to journalistic integrity. This was a deliberate attempt to sandbag her and catch her off guard. To her credit, she recognized and responded appropriately. Obama's never been asked by any interviewer the types of questions that McCain and Palin are routinely asked. Even though Obama himself has actually spoken in public about God's will, he's never been called onto the carpet over that the way Palin has and it seems awfully hypocritical for the Democrats to attack Palin for being a devout Christian, while Obama himself also professes to be a devout Christian (although of a much more radical and offensive nature of Christian, at that). It really seems sad that this election may be decided by people with the blindness and bias of the women of "The View".

Yes, that is her new explanation what she now means by what she said. One can still see the whole video and see the full context.
Doesn't sound good at all, so now, that she is on the national stage, it needs retelling her new-found meaning. Interesting, that is all.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Not at all.
My post speaks to my surprise. You are usually fair and logical. Though when it come to politics, not so much.

.

Politics is not hard science based, it floats, interpretable anyway on wishes, hard to test it. Don't think it can be adjudicated by logic

 

[Rickster71]

Politics is not hard science based, it floats, interpretable anyway on wishes, hard to test it. Don't think it can be adjudicated by logic

I don't think it takes 'Hard Science' to see, or hear if an interviewer has a bias.
It doesn't take much to know that most members of the media are registered Democrats, and the way they gush over Obama is grossly unprofessional.

It doesn't take Hard Science to be fair. Just as it doesn't take science to see that Arianna Huffington, and Rush Limbaugh aren't fair.

 

[majorloser]

We go from politics to rights of US citizens, to religion, to abortion, to whether Palin is hot, to double blind tests, to Liberalism, to conservatism, to Supreme Court cases, to Sheep's insanity, to Matt's wife's belly, etc.

All we need is for a few posts about homosexuality so Mazer can throw in his pictures of "The Hoff" and this thread will be complete.

 

[majorloser]

Oh and just for Rickster:

"Not that there's anything wrong with that"

 

[Rickster71]

Oh and just for Rickster:

"Not that there's anything wrong with that"

I'm just too slow.
I may have to hire an assistant.

 

[Rickster71]

We go from politics to rights of US citizens, to religion, to abortion, to whether Palin is hot, to double blind tests, to Liberalism, to conservatism, to Supreme Court cases, to Sheep's insanity, to Matt's wife's belly, etc.

All we need is for a few posts about homosexuality so Mazer can throw in his pictures of "The Hoff" and this thread will be complete.

Everyone is so well behaved.
I thought I accidentally logged into the steam vent of the crocheting forum I belong to.

 

[itschris]

Everyone is so well behaved.
I thought I accidentally logged into the steam vent of the crocheting forum I belong to.

I think at some point everyone just gets tired of aruging about the same old thing over and over and over and over and over and over....

I think when a lot of people discuss stuff, there's this hope that you're gonna get them to see it "your way." That rarely happens. Most people are too lazy, too stupid, or too stubborn to take in, process, and determine validity of something new.

I used to do some speech writing after college and I remember reading a study where they showed people a dubious set of facts that the researchers knew the study group would be agreeable with. They then provided true fact which completely proved the original premise false. If I remember right, less than 10% would even consider the alternative.

To be fair, I rarely change my mind, but at the same time, I'm only committed to things that I've already given a ton of thought and deliberation too. I'm always open (and hoping actually) someone could in fact change my mind because it would be new knowledge. It would mean that I didn't think things through carefully enough or that I did not have all the info so my process was incomplete. I'm all for that. I actually used to be a liberal and even part of a group called Hand Gun Control Inc. when I was a frosh in college. Then, my friends fiance nearly got raped, but she carried a handgun (her fiance' was a corrections officer) and thwarted the crime. The guy was actually picked up 2 nights later after raping and beating another woman in a parkling lot after the mall closed.

After that, I really had to rethink everything that I thought I was 100% absolutely sure about. My immovable position on handguns was suddenly very weak and no longer sturdy. After that, I started looking into all the things that brought me to that original position, the liberal way of thinking, if you will, and suddenly I began poking holes in many of the methodologies that I used to rely on. Before long, I found myself dramatically expanding my reading and listening and just found that after taking in all sides and understanding them, I typically found myself agreeing with the more conservative views. The more educated I became, the more experience I earned, the stronger certain truths became evident.

When I post here, it's not to start a fight or insult anyone. Clearly, the majority of the posters in these political threads are semmingly liberal based on the thoughts and sometimes, rhetoric, that's repeated. I read with interest through most of it and do find myself having honest questions because I simply cannot understand where a certain view may have come from. The economy, finance, and politics are areas I know very well. It's what I do for a living so I'm fairly well versed in why I believe in what I do. I won't ever talk or press an issue that I'm not 100% confident of why I feel the way I do for MY OWN reasons and not just blurting out what someone else told me, what I read, or what I feel is the cool or hip thing to be angry or flippant about.

I'm always anxious to hear well thought out, educated respoonses. I'm always on the lookout, hoping someone will change my mind. If they do, I know then that I've really learned something valuable. How can you argue with that?

 

[mtrycrafts]

We go from politics to rights of US citizens, to religion, to abortion, to whether Palin is hot, to double blind tests, to Liberalism, to conservatism, to Supreme Court cases, to Sheep's insanity, to Matt's wife's belly, etc.

All we need is for a few posts about homosexuality so Mazer can throw in his pictures of "The Hoff" and this thread will be complete.

Hey, we have broad points of interests
With this thread, it covers them all, no need for new ones

 

[mtrycrafts]

I don't think it takes 'Hard Science' to see, or hear if an interviewer has a bias.
It doesn't take much to know that most members of the media are registered Democrats, and the way they gush over Obama is grossly unprofessional.

It doesn't take Hard Science to be fair. Just as it doesn't take science to see that Arianna Huffington, and Rush Limbaugh aren't fair.

Shows you people are biased, including me, on some things.
But, I didn't see anything wrong with that article even though it was at her site, especially when most of the news finally talked about that part. If Rush happened to point it out and happened to pull up his site on a google, I'd probably used that link

 

[Davemcc]

I'm always open (and hoping actually) someone could in fact change my mind because it would be new knowledge. It would mean that I didn't think things through carefully enough or that I did not have all the info so my process was incomplete. I'm all for that...

I'm always anxious to hear well thought out, educated respoonses. I'm always on the lookout, hoping someone will change my mind. If they do, I know then that I've really learned something valuable. How can you argue with that?

You make great posts, Chris. Like you, one of the reasons I participate in debates is to find challenges to my own position. It forces me to research and defend my position on rational terms and in the end, my case will stand or fail on it's own merits. I have changed my mind on major issues over the years because somebody presented me with a more rational argument than I had been using. Doesn't look like that will happen here, though.