Sarah Palin, too weird.

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

And that makes Palin knowledgeable about foreign affairs? ROFL
It's not so much that Advocate is a one-trick pony, but that you're about as ignorant as they come. You still don't get it about Palin; the conservative miracle that doesn't have a clue on most issues - including our Constitution.

If she got elected as the VP, she thinks she would have been in charge of the Senate. LOL

Any grade school kid knows more!

CI, do you ever tire of non-sequitors?

Finn: Palin supports Israel more than any liberal
CI: And that makes her knowledgeable about foreign affairs?

Uh...not necessarily, and BTW I didn't offer that comment to prove her expertise in foreign affairs.

One of these days I'm going to have to sue you for giving me whiplash.

I guess you didn't go to grade school.

The VP is president of the Senate and gets to cast the deciding vote when there is a tie. I don't profess to be a parlimentarian, but I bet the VP has a few more power tricks up his or her sleeve.

Does this mean the VP is "in charge of the Senate?" Of course not but Palin never asserted this was the case.

I'm not sure why I respond to your assanine posts. I know I shouldn't, but then I probably also shouldn't take drugs or lust after women half my age.

It's a guilty pleasure I suppose.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

CI, do you ever tire of non-sequitors?
Where's the non sequitor?

Finn: Palin supports Israel more than any liberal
CI: And that makes her knowledgeable about foreign affairs?

Uh...not necessarily, and BTW I didn't offer that comment to prove her expertise in foreign affairs.
No, you didn't, but you should know as well as anybody else that's a useless statement to support anything about Palin.

One of these days I'm going to have to sue you for giving me whiplash.
Give it your best shot.

I guess you didn't go to grade school.
YOu guess wrong.

The VP is president of the Senate and gets to cast the deciding vote when there is a tie. I don't profess to be a parlimentarian, but I bet the VP has a few more power tricks up his or her sleeve.
Not according to the Constitution. Are you sure you went to grade school?

Does this mean the VP is "in charge of the Senate?" Of course not but Palin never asserted this was the case.

Quote:

Think Progress:

Yesterday, Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) sat for an interview with KUSA, an NBC affiliate in Colorado. In response to a question sent to the network by a third grader at a local elementary school about what the Vice President does, Palin erroneously argued that the Vice President is "in charge of the United States Senate":

Q: Brandon Garcia wants to know, "What does the Vice President do?"

PALIN: That's something that Piper would ask me! ... [T]hey're in charge of the U.S. Senate so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom.

When did "you" go to grade school?

I'm not sure why I respond to your assanine posts. I know I shouldn't, but then I probably also shouldn't take drugs or lust after women half my age.
Why do you bother when you're always wrong (as evidenced above). I'll give you one on your list though; I also enjoy a nice looking women at my age of 74. I'll probably do that as long as I'm alive.

It's a guilty pleasure I suppose.
Pleasure is all there is that we all look forward to - even at my age. Some are masochists, and love to bring pain to themselves.

1 Reply

@engineer,

Fair question.

She certainly has made enough public statements to suggest she is and prove she is not a detractor. Are you going to insist that I cite them all?

Interestingly enough, the supposed "gotcha" question posed by Charlie Gibson in the infamous ABC interview resulted in a Palin answer very much like a recent comment by the current VP - Joe Biden: We can't tell Israel what to do to ensure their security.

Palin in giving this answer was savaged by the Left, but then again so was Biden so there apparently is a modicum of cosmic balance in American politics.

Interesting that either of them was criticized though.
One would think that someone who is in favor of bowing to national sovereignty would apply this principle to all nations throughout the world.
And yet, the Left that suggests we restrain our hubris when it comes to Cuba, Venezuela, and Iran, is all in favor of our flexing our muscle when it comes to Israel, Sudan and Honduras.
Is consistency no longer a virtue?
I might recognize such a virtue among the Left if it existed beyond being consistent with whatever superficial ideological talking point made it to the top of the list.
Will anyone seriously argue that Cuba is not ruled by a dictator, and opposition voices are, at the least, jailed?
Will anyone seriously argue that Chavez is a democratic hero who only wants to advance the will of the people?
Will anyone seriously argue that elections in Iran are not a travesty?
Will anyone seriously argue that Israel is not an oasis of Democracy in the Middle East?
Will anyone seriously argue that Zelaya was not trying to emulate his mentor Hugo Chavez and become Honduras’ president for life?
Back to Israel: Here is a country that wants to live in peace with its neighbors, and yet it finds itself in the middle of a region where a significant number, if not most, of its neighbors want to eradicate it from the face of the earth. Admittedly Israel wants a peace that favors its interests ---OMG! What a crime! --- but it still, fundamentally, is focused on co-habitation rather than conquest. Typically, the Left gives Israel no credit for resisting the urge, as it is capable of, to conquer the region. Instead the Left insists on focusing on the plight of individual Palestinians in a way that it would never insist as respects Cuba or Venezuela.
And so, unfortunately, it really isn’t a matter of whether or not Palin is a supporter of Israel (although she is) but the matter is that the Left currently frowns on Israel and therefore anyone who might be perceived as a supporter is to be savaged.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

CI, do you ever tire of non-sequitors?
Where's the non sequitor?

Gosh, do I really have to draw a map for you?

Non sequitor: It does not follow

It doesn't follow from an assertion that Palin supports Israel that Palin is knowledgeable about foreign affairs.

Do I really need to explain this further?

Finn: Palin supports Israel more than any liberal
CI: And that makes her knowledgeable about foreign affairs?

Uh...not necessarily, and BTW I didn't offer that comment to prove her expertise in foreign affairs.
No, you didn't, but you should know as well as anybody else that's a useless statement to support anything about Palin.

This isn't a non-sequitor, its nonsense. Can anyone control the whirlwind that is your mind?

One of these days I'm going to have to sue you for giving me whiplash.
Give it your best shot.

Isn't it ironic that a Lefty responds in such a macho manner?

I guess you didn't go to grade school.
YOu guess wrong.

Again, do you need to be schooled on sarcasm?

The VP is president of the Senate and gets to cast the deciding vote when there is a tie. I don't profess to be a parliamentarian, but I bet the VP has a few more power tricks up his or her sleeve.
Not according to the Constitution. Are you sure you went to grade school?

So, for the last 200+ years we have been violating the Constitution by allowing the VP to preside over the senate and cast the deciding vote in the case of a tie?

Does this mean the VP is "in charge of the Senate?" Of course not but Palin never asserted this was the case.

Quote:
Think Progress:

Yesterday, Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) sat for an interview with KUSA, an NBC affiliate in Colorado. In response to a question sent to the network by a third grader at a local elementary school about what the Vice President does, Palin erroneously argued that the Vice President is "in charge of the United States Senate":

Q: Brandon Garcia wants to know, "What does the Vice President do?"

PALIN: That's something that Piper would ask me! ... [T]hey're in charge of the U.S. Senate so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom.

When did "you" go to grade school?

Not surprising that you would base your argument on a comment she made to a third-grader. I know you don't understand why this doesn't prove your point, but try and understand that adults sometimes neglect the technical to make a point with children.

I'm not sure why I respond to your asinine posts. I know I shouldn't, but then I probably also shouldn't take drugs or lust after women half my age.
Why do you bother when you're always wrong (as evidenced above). I'll give you one on your list though; I also enjoy a nice looking women at my age of 74. I'll probably do that as long as I'm alive.

CI if you are 74, then I am 136, or you are the epitome of arrested development.

It's a guilty pleasure I suppose.
Pleasure is all there is that we all look forward to - even at my age. Some are masochists, and love to bring pain to themselves.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Let's go over it again:

Quote:

Finn: Palin supports Israel more than any liberal
CI: And that makes her knowledgeable about foreign affairs?

Uh...not necessarily, and BTW I didn't offer that comment to prove her expertise in foreign affairs.
No, you didn't, but you should know as well as anybody else that's a useless statement to support anything about Palin.

That you mention that Palin's support for Israel more than any liberal - as a candidate for VP, suggests that her knowledge about Israel is greater than any liberal.

Drawing it to the rational conclusion, we must assume you mean her knowledge about foreign affairs is greater - than any liberal.

Otherwise, why would you even bring up her support of Israel as something more knowledgeable than any liberal? If it isn't, what's your point?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Let's go over it again:

Quote:
Finn: Palin supports Israel more than any liberal
CI: And that makes her knowledgeable about foreign affairs?

Uh...not necessarily, and BTW I didn't offer that comment to prove her expertise in foreign affairs.
No, you didn't, but you should know as well as anybody else that's a useless statement to support anything about Palin.

That you mention that Palin's support for Israel more than any liberal - as a candidate for VP, suggests that her knowledge about Israel is greater than any liberal.

Drawing it to the rational conclusion, we must assume you mean her knowledge about foreign affairs is greater - than any liberal.

Otherwise, why would you even bring up her support of Israel as something more knowledgeable than any liberal? If it isn't, what's your point?

And still you argue!

Your conclusion was not rational (What a surprise?)

Whether she is a foreign policy genius or an absolute moron is immaterial to her suport for Israel being greater than that of most liberals.

Is this really so hard for you to understand?

Advocate tends to veer left when Israel is not involved; when it is he veers right. You, of all people, should appreciate this fact as he has, rightly or wrongly, targeted you as an anti-semite.

My comment to him was in keeping with this dynamic. Considering that by even the most superficial assessment Palin is a friend of Israel, it's a surprise that Advocate is so idiotically against her --"She's a danger to America."

You, not so surprisingly, took this argument as an assertion that Palin was an expert on foreign policy. Let me repeat myself: Non sequitor.

Sometimes you are right and sometimes you are wrong - like the rest of us - but you need to be able to discern whenyou are wrong and shut the hell up.

You are wrong - shut the hell up.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn, You are not only an ignoramus, but you can't shut me up!

Please prove to us why Palin's support of Israel is greater than all the liberals? Not your personal opinion, but from a reliable source. You do understand the question, don't you?

Let me draw a picture for you; Palin's support of Israel, an apartheid state, tells me she's a racial bigot of the worst kind. It is not a democracy as most would have us believe; Israel restricts land ownership by Palestinians, and even steals their land to expand their settlements. Anyone's support of Israel also supports their policy of stealing lands, and keeping most of the Palestinians in prison - with cement and barbed wire fences - with armed guards.

That probably includes you!

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

The first thing you have to do is spell "non-sequitur" correctly.

The left obsesses over Palin because she is the leader of her party. She polls higher than any other Republican, and Pat Buchanan says she has the nomination for the asking.

2 Replies

@Advocate,

No, Finn, the first thing you must learn to do is understand the concept being communicated. Spelling is a minor issue except to people like you who thinks trivia is more important.

It only shows how small your mind really is!

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Finn, You are not only an ignoramus, but you can't shut me up!

Please prove to us why Palin's support of Israel is greater than all the liberals? Not your personal opinion, but from a reliable source. You do understand the question, don't you?

Let me draw a picture for you; Palin's support of Israel, an apartheid state, tells me she's a racial bigot of the worst kind. It is not a democracy as most would have us believe; Israel restricts land ownership by Palestinians, and even steals their land to expand their settlements. Anyone's support of Israel also supports their policy of stealing lands, and keeping most of the Palestinians in prison - with cement and barbed wire fences - with armed guards.

That probably includes you!

Now you have changed your argument.

Recognizing that an assertion that Palin is more supportive of Israel than liberals is in no way an assertion that she is a foreign policy expert, you've cast aside that silly argument and latched on to another; just as silly.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe you consider your own opinions to be drastically distinct from those considered "liberal" or "progressive."

Your own opinion is that Israel is an apartheid state, not a democracy, and is stealing land from its neighbors. Even if she is as vapid as you and others would argue, and her opinion about Israel was limited to: "It's cool because Jesus was there once," she would easily be classified as supporting Israel more than you and your fellow liberals.

Your insistance that I prove something which you already know to be true (Palin supports Israel more than most liberals) is clearly indicative of the sort of belligerance that leads you to calling a fellow poster an ignoramus.

Believe me, I understand that I can not shut you up.

I can audaciously hope though.

0 Replies

@Advocate,

Advocate wrote:

The first thing you have to do is spell "non-sequitur" correctly.

Why?

You weren't able to grasp my point because I used an "O" instead of a "U?"

Interestingly enough I'm able to grasp your point, feeble as it may be, notwithstanding the fact that Non sequitur is not hyphenated.

Advocate wrote:

The left obsesses over Palin because she is the leader of her party. She polls higher than any other Republican, and Pat Buchanan says she has the nomination for the asking.

At least you recognize that the Left obsesses over Palin.

She's really not the leader of her party. Currently, there is no leader of the GOP. She doesn't poll higher than any other Republican (Romney does) and who the hell cares what Buchanan says?

However, although you are inaccurate, you seem to appreciate that the Left is attacking Palin because she is a force to be reckoned with.

Anyone that runs against Obama in 2012 is a force to be reckoned with. The Left may dismiss such an individual out of hand, but I assure you Obama's political team will not.

I don't think Palin will be the GOP nominee in 2012, but clearly there is a possibility that she might be, and this, as you have suggested, is precisely why the Left obsesses over her.

Somehow I suspect that your snarky and self-ridiculing criticism of my spelling has nothing to do with my assertion that the Left fears Palin. Instead, I apparently hit home with my suggestion that your ideology is overwhelmingly framed by your interest in Israel.

My guess is that you are Jewish. Maybe not, and it's not all that important a premise. Whether you are a Jew, or not, it is clear to anyone who frequently visits A2K that you are a huge supporter of Israel.

Absolutely nothing wrong with that; I am too.

But you can see from CI's post, the Left's opinion of Israel.

Of course CI's rabid opinion is not necessarily representative of the thinking of all liberals, but whether or not it is, I'm betting you recognize it as stupidly rabid.

And yet you voice an equally stupid and rabid criticism of Palin: "She is a danger to America!"

I sympathize with the dual personality with which you must be struggling, but you are wrong to view these issues in isolation.

If the Left can be so wrong about Israel (and it is), how can you buy that it is right about Palin?

You need not adopt a conservative philosophy simply because conservatives support Israel far more than liberals, but you should realize that the Left's rabid criticism of Israel is not a one off anomaly, and the Rights support of Israel is not a lone connection with intelligence.

I'm sure liberal Jews in America are going through some tough times. So many of the people with whom they might otherwise agree on any number of major issues, hate Israel.

"Hate" is not too strong a term. Read CI's post. Does it strike you as a sympathetic admonition for reform to a friend?

There is a reason the Left hates Israel, and it is in keeping with its general philosophy; and not simply an unfortunate misstep.

In any case, my misspelling of Non sequitur is far more inconsequential than your misappropriation of a hyphen. Why? Because you chose to adopt a pedagogical mien in gratuitously criticizing my spelling that was, at least, ironic considering your own error.

Dismiss me if you will, but you need to take a long hard look at what you believe and what is important to you.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn, "Rabid" is an ad hominem; it's not a very good response to challenge what I have said. At the very least, you should explain why you disagree with my posts. Ad hominems and straw man statements does absolutely nothing to encourage intelligent discussion on any subject.

0 Replies

@Advocate,

Quote:

In Iraq, it was fighting for Iraq's oil.

Spoken by someone that has never been there, and who probably didnt have the nerve to ever serve.

If the war was about oil, WHERE IS IT?????

Why hasnt all of the Iraqi oil come to the US?
Is it being hidden in secret underground storage tanks?
Is it being hidden offshore somewhere?
Or maybe its actually being hidden aboard the Space Station!!

If you really want to make claims about Iraq, perhaps you should first go there and find out for yourself what is going on.

3 Replies

@mysteryman,

Quote:

who probably didnt have the nerve to ever serve.

irresponsible speculation. Sorry MM but that's over the top.

1 Reply

@mysteryman,

mysteryman wrote:

Quote:
In Iraq, it was fighting for Iraq's oil.

Spoken by someone that has never been there, and who probably didnt have the nerve to ever serve.

If the war was about oil, WHERE IS IT?????

Why hasnt all of the Iraqi oil come to the US?
Is it being hidden in secret underground storage tanks?
Is it being hidden offshore somewhere?
Or maybe its actually being hidden aboard the Space Station!!

If you really want to make claims about Iraq, perhaps you should first go there and find out for yourself what is going on.

U r ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, MM :
"If the war was about oil, WHERE IS IT?????"

I 've been saying that for several years.
If we took a different philosophy of it
(as I think we shoud have) many oil tankers
woud have shown up here with cheap oil from the wells of Iraq,
and I wonder whether the King of Kuwait thinks our services
were worth anything ??

In my opinion, W owed it to us to demand reparations from Iraq
which we take from Iraq 's oil wells; not ALL of it, but enuf
to be reasonable compensation.

The war was Saddam 's fault.
We had to defend ourselves from his menace.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

David, That's one of many problems. When it was shown that Iraq had $50 billion saved up, we still gave them $50 billion for their reconstruction.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

non se·qui·tur (nŏn sěk'wĭ-tər, -tŏŏr')
n.
An inference or conclusion that does not follow from the premises or evidence.
A statement that does not follow logically from what preceded it.

[Latin nōn sequitur, it does not follow : nōn, not + sequitur, third person sing. present tense of sequī, to follow.]

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2009 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Cite This Source

I normally do not comment on bad spelling. However, you repeated it so many times that it became a bit distracting. Believe it or not, I thought you might appreciate the correction. Incidentally, note from the above that a hyphen is not in order.

I believe that the left, as well as everyone else, should take Palin very seriously. The Reps have been very successful in electing certified morons and lunatics to high office, including the presidency. Consider, for example, the Bushes, Reagan, Quayle, Agnew, Nixon, Hastert, et al, all of whom have, in my opinion, gravely damaged the country. Should Palin be advanced to high office, a distinct possibility, one should expect her to further damage the country, perhaps irreparably.

Consider also, that Palin has never shown restraint in attacking Dems, especially Obama, usually with false and demogogic charges. Thus, she is fair game for the left and the media.

I might mention that Palin has not shown any intellectual depth or curiosity. She had to attend five colleges to finally get a degree, assuming one was finally secured. Despite this, she is a leading potential nominee of the Republicans.

Regarding Israel, I felt compelled to point out the falsity of almost all the attacks on Israel. E. g., even though Hamas shoots over 8,000 rockets and shells at civilian targets in Israel over a number of years, C. I. and the other bigots criticize Israel for its very restrained and humane invasion to stop those attacks. Over and over again George and others say Israel started the '67 war, despite their knowing that the Arab's blockade of the Gulf of Aqaba was the first act of war in that conflict. Etc., etc.!

I disagree with you that the vast majority of those on the left are anti-Israel. I have not seen a poll on this, but I do note many, many, writers and leaders on the left who generally agree with me relative to Israel.

I do find you relatively dismissable because you are almost always wrong.

1 Reply

@mysteryman,

Check Judicial Watch and The Sierra Club for Bush's maps dividing Iraqi oil between the U. S. oil companies.

What happened is that, early on, the Bush people found that, due to the resistance of the militants, it was impossible to secure the oil. E. g., it was impossible to guard the hundreds of miles of pipelines.

Let me know if you want further proof of my contention.

1 Reply

@Advocate,

Advocate, Rather than just say something negative about us, please address what you disagree with all the posts where we have included articles from BBC, Reuters, and other major media which supports most of what we say.

Israel's creation and continued expansion of settlements as they steal Palestinian lands will never bring peace to Israel. NEVER. You fail to acknowledge how you would react in a similar situation as the Palestinians.

Those 8000 missiles you talk about doesn't come close to the innocent Palestinians that have been killed by the IDF. We have also included evidence of where they have purposely targeted children.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

...Israel's creation and continued expansion of settlements as they steal Palestinian lands will never bring peace to Israel. NEVER...

i wonder if israel would continue being so boldly arrogant if they didn't have the u.s. standing behind them with a big stick?

0 Replies

Sarah Palin, too weird.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know