borisp wrote:
Quote:

Let me remind you the first statement made by Palin:

"...[Revere] warned the British that they wont going to be taking away our arms..."

Do you admit that this statement is true?

Okay, here goes. You are either really stupid or something is getting lost in translation. Perhaps if you are Russian then it is the latter. You are now desperately trying to put "lipstick on a pig" and you are failing miserably. Your attempts at gotcha with my statements are the funniest reach I've seen in a long time as you seem to have zero reading comprehension. I would suggest we all sit back and watch your screams of protest from a distance. It's getting sad really. I can see you now hopping up and down in front of your computer. "I'M RIGHT!!! I'M RIGHT!!!"

brewster wrote:

V, give it up. There's simply no reasoning with a clown who's willing to say ""Earth revolves around the Sun" is only true in the system of reference tied to the Sun. In the system of reference tied to the Earth, it is the other way around."

Vigilante wrote:

Let me make it simple for you boris so you understand.

Vigilante wrote:
Palin quoted from Foxnews today:

"Part of his ride was to warn the British that were already there. That, hey, you're not going to succeed. You're not going to take American arms. You are not going to beat our own well-armed persons, individual, private militia that we have," she added. "He did warn the British."


Wow, she even messed up the GOP designed defense of her original f**k up!!

GrovePath wrote:
Hey Boris -- did you write a song about Sarah Palin?

Vigilante wrote:
Which is more difficult, shaping a sculpture out of poop or twisting Palin's words into something that makes sense? I know, you know and the world knows that she had no idea what she was talking about. Valiant effort at damage control but it's probably time to just walk away.

Boris - what is the attraction with Palin? Is it that she can see Russia from her porch? What with you being Russian and all...

I'll bet you are loads of fun at a party. (Now I'll sit back and wait for you to tell me how much fun you are at a party and that when the earth tilts at certain angles on May 17 and November 23 you can, indeed, see Russia from Wasilla, AK.)

brewster wrote:
Boris, you've outdone yourself! again you have earned my WOW!

I can't say what leaves me more speechless, the attack on the relevance of common scientific literacy or the tortured defense of Palin's flub. Both reek of the Bolshevik habit of claiming "the truth is whatever WE say it is, not what you think you know."

BTW, I don't believe I'm smarter than the American masses, but I do believe I know more, at least about most things but sports. Calling an ignorant person dumb is like calling a car with an empty tank slow, it may well be but you'll never know until you fill it.

Vigilante wrote:
Quote:

borisp wrote:

Funny. So, it turns out that Palin was 100% correct, and that Paul Revere DID warn the British that colonists will not allow to take their guns.

Turns out that all the people who were talking how stupid Palin was, - learned history from some sort of Cliff Notes, that dedicated no more than 2 lines to the whole story.

Now... what would a cliff-note-educated intellectual do, when it was reveled how wrong he was? Apologize? NO! NO WAY! They will defend their feeling of intellectual superiority!

And the best part? Look at HOW they defend it! Look the amazing IDEA of this defense.

"Since we never learned more than a 4th grade story - this version must be considered the truth and the whole truth!"


Pathetic.

My God what a reach. That is truly pathetic. Lick your wounds and go home.

GrovePath wrote:

==============================

The Sad Defense of Sarah Palin?s Botched History

E.D. Kain/AMERICAN TIMES
Forbes
Jun. 4 2011

Sutherland wrote:
Borisp,

There have been too many interviews and reports of from republican staff members and consultants from the McCain Palin team who have come out and said she lacked the intellectual heft for the role, for you to be successfully defending her capabilities. But he have at it.

Beachguy wrote:


That being said, anyone who would consider electing someone who believes that Paul Revere's ride was to alert the British, when the average student is taught about Paul Revere in 4th grade history, is even more ignorant than Governor Palin.

brewster wrote:

Do you really think people who don't know the Earth revolves around the sun once a year can even begin to try and understand how our economy ran off the rails and what to do about it?

brewster wrote:
Quote:

borisp wrote:
If you can't find no common ground with the views upon which this country was founded, - I guess your position is truly tragic. When I found myself in a similar situation, I emigrated.

This country was founded in large part on genocide, slavery, theft, and hypocrisy, are those the ideals that you're referring to?

sinik wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:

Why? do you think Bush was really any brighter or informed? The only real challenge is to stay on script, and she's now arguably better than he was at the same stage.

Well his academic record was a bit more impressive than Palin's.

If Obama says there are 57 states or signs and dates the visitors book in Westminster Abbey last month with a date in 2008 it's just brain fart but if Palin or Bush had done either of those things it would be because they are stupid, innit?

brewster wrote:
Again Boris, Wow. I'm no commie, I own 2 small businesses, but since you seem to be either a hardcore Libertarian or Objectivist, there's really no common ground on which to have a rational discussion.

Most western societies decided that Dickensian social Darwinism and capitalism unfettered by humanity or environmental responsibility wasn't what we wanted. Good luck with that.

brewster wrote:

Wow B, You've really got a thing here on a misused word! I've got to get to sleep so I can't give your post too much time, but you've got no room for nuance in your world.

Socialism=communism=authoritarianism and dictated economy. Period.

What about the many European nations who've had a pretty successful 70 years of fairly loose capitalism buffered by socialism providing a strong safety net?

Of course it's not been perfect but hundreds of millions of people have been pretty happy with national medicine and strong social benefits. Too strong, too costly? Perhaps so

But truly, it hasn't killed tens of millions like Stalin or Mao. Socialism didn't kill them, Communism may have, but the arrogance of men grabbing too much power surely did.

brewster wrote:
[quote]"communism" is a perfect ideal, just as "democracy" is. They no more had communism than we have a real democracy, as opposed to a republic.

What they had was simply autocracy no different than the Czars over the serfs, except the oligarchs were the Party rather than the aristocracy.

Get over the "socialism" boogieman. Americans have loved their socialism since the New Deal. The only ones who want to cut them are either wealthy or clueless.

T-Bird wrote:
Quote:

CSURugbyHooker wrote:

Youbetcha! Considering she wore the Star of David in Israel and now when touring NYC, I'd say she's (hopelessly) pandering to:
1. The large Jewish population of the city.
2. Evangelical Christians.
Solidarity with Israel is all the rage these days.

Which is really weird, given the "blood libel" she and other conservatives suffered at the hands of the media after the Gabrielle Gifford shooting.

?The blood libel is something anti-Semites have historically used in Europe as an excuse to murder Jews ? the comparison is stupid. Jews and rational people will find it objectionable,? said Hank Sheinkopf, a New York-based Democratic political consultant and devout Jew. ?This will forever link her to the events in Tucson. It deepens the hole she?s already dug for herself. ? It?s absolutely inappropriate.? (see: The Arena: Palin's 'blood libel' defense fair?)

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47477.html#ixzz1O8V4AyoP

CSURugbyHooker wrote:
Quote:

borisp wrote:
However, would you care to give an example of said "pandering and exploitative ideology"?

Youbetcha! Considering she wore the Star of David in Israel and now when touring NYC, I'd say she's (hopelessly) pandering to:
1. The large Jewish population of the city.
2. Evangelical Christians.
Solidarity with Israel is all the rage these days.

brewster wrote:
[quote]Hitler and Putin socialists!! Good grief!! National Socialism was just another Big Lie like i was talking about!

Putin is the same centuries old Russian despotism and corruption with the 70 year veneer of Bolshevism ripped off. It's always all about power, money, and oligarchy.

Seriously? The seniors who thought they were supporting fiscal responsibility are fleeing the movement when someone actually proposes cutting SS or medicare.

According to this Marist poll 70% of tea bagger oppose cuts to Medicare & Medicaid.

brewster wrote:
Ummm, there's plenty of demagogues and despots who fit that category, from Hitler to Putin.

She's incapable of actual interactive dialog, the interviews & debates made that clear, she can only regurgitate talking points, usually unrelated to the question asked.

They tell people they can cut government spending but not touch entitlements or the military.

These are all Palin's people, the ones who believe in fairies, the rapture, the birther myth, that Saddam was behind 9/11

sepecat wrote:
What's with all the photoshops?

Vigilante wrote:
Some people try to sell her as a down home, simple truths, Mr Smith Goes to Washington type when in reality she is the Beverly Hillbillies try to fly a 747 type.

brewster wrote:
Much as I despise Limbaugh, she could never do what he does, hold forth every day with relatively coherent and informed monologues

She has nothing to temper her profound ignorance but a scripted, pandering and exploitative ideology aimed directly at our citizens as ignorant as she.

T-Bird wrote:
1a. She quit so the "frivolous ethics claims" would stop. Her words.

1b. She has no "achievements" other than to become a cultural icon. She has no policy nor meaningful political achievements. Not sure what you can't understand about that.

2. I suspect you are being willfully obtuse here - you cannot deny she was put forth as a candidate because she was a woman. There were easily a dozen male Republicans with vastly greater qualifications - some of them just as conservative as Palin.

3. People get paid money for all sorts of things - doesn't mean it is earned. Farmers get paid to not grow crops.

I'm not saying she doesn't have a following and I recognize she generates some level of ratings - again, that is a reflection of her status as a popular figure. You can't honestly tell me you listen to her as a political figure/leader

4. You couldn't be more wrong - maybe two and a half years ago, but she's a stale punchline at this point.

5. I can't understand a word of this.

T-Bird wrote:
No - she wasn't forced to resign. Worse, she played the victim - a Palin hallmark. She claimed she was quitting because she had to spend too much time defending herself against "frivolous ethics claims". Clinton, Bush and Obama all dealt with this on a level probably ten to a thousand times greater, all the while running the country - a task considerably greater than running Alaska. So on what terms do we measure her "success"? Is she successful compared to other PTA presidents and town council members of 9,000 people municipalities? Sure. Is she successful compared to people on both sides of the political divide who have real accomplishments and lengthy experience at the national level? Are you really going to make that claim?

I wasn't defining her as a woman nor making any claims about her qualifications that she herself didn't make. Hockey Mom and Pit bull with lipstick were how she chose to introduce herself to the country. She could have talked about her past accomplishments, her education, her commitment to certain issues. No, she talked about her uterus.

And again with the money. Oliver Perez is making $12 million this year, even though he was cut by the Mets and is currently out of baseball. He didn't steal that money either. Is he successful? Bill Swanson of Merrillville, Indiana won $74 million last month in Powerball. Is he successful? Leona Helmsley's dog, Trouble, inherited $12 million. Is s/he successful?

My opinion of her views has nothing to do with defining her success. There are plenty on the left who I feel similarly about - Al Sharpton comes readily to mind. But you are seriously out of touch if you think liberals fear Sarah Palin. I traffic with liberals and can tell you that everyone I know salivates at the idea of Sarah Palin as the republican nominee for President. I don't really see the hateful reaction you talk about - I mostly see/hear laughter.

Let's be honest - whatever her qualifications, and I'm happy to agree to disagree on those, she is far too thin-skinned to run for President, let alone actually hold the job.

mrasg1 wrote:
She appeals to the lazy-don't know the facts crowd, the racists crowd, the dumbed down crowd.... you know...the Republicans! And she's made millions off it. What a country.