Law School Discussion

SARAH PALIN in an actual debate....WARNING...this may scare some democrats...

! B L U E WAR R I O R..!

  • *****
  • 7267
  • "make a friend who was once a stranger" br.war.
    • View Profile

CTL

  • ****
  • 1185
    • View Profile
LOL.  I have executive experience - read 'I was the lead promoter of the 2007 Sigma Alpa Epsilon wet t-shirt contest."

naturallybeyoutiful

  • ****
  • 1203
  • Everything is everything
    • View Profile
This should not "scare" anyone.  If anything, we can all breathe a sigh of relief that (heretofore) Sarah Palin's reach hadn't always exceeded her grasp.  As for her demeanor and clarity on the issues in this debate, it's refreshing to see.  It's a pity she didn't bring such class and confidence to the RNC or to any of the handful of real, substantive interviews that the GOP has deigned to permit.  Had she done so, I wouldn't have to sit here and wonder which Palin face is the real one and which is the "game face." 

I eagerly await tomorrow's VP debate.  I want to see Sarah Palin redeem herself and show me how in the world she rose to the highest level in Alaska state government.  That said, I also don't want to give her a championship trophy for (what can at most be) a 1-4 season either.  I am unimpressed that she's spent the past 3 days cramming knowledge and experience that she should've been acquiring over the past 2 decades.  All of us who have ever been students know that you can cram a bunch of information into your head just to perform well on an exam.  Ask us the *same* questions the next day, the next month, or worse yet - when you really need to apply the info -- and you have no idea where to begin.  I've outgrown this kind of sophomoric approach, and it is not one befitting a world leader a heartbeat away from the presidency.

If Palin debates well tomorrow, I'll give credit where it is due.  (I agree with Ms. P here that the bar is set quite low though.)  Yet based on the large negative balance of her account right now, the best she could do is raise her credibility level to zero and restore my confidence that she could return to Alaska and finish her gubernatorial term with her remaining ounce of dignity.  ymmv

CTL

  • ****
  • 1185
    • View Profile
I agree that the bar is set low as well, but I think that's what the problem is.  The bar is set so low if she says one thing that a reasonably well-educated person could say, it will make her look amazing.  On the other hand, Joe Biden and Barack Obama are held to such a high degree of scrutiny, if they don't have some fool-proof strategy for fixing the economy, solving the Iraq problem, and protecting the country from some idiot with a bomb, it will look like they're inexperienced or 'soft' on terrorism. 

Why does the American public seem to give the benefit of the doubt to GOP candidates, while it holds the dems to a ridiculous standard?  Maybe I'm just betraying my own political biases here, but I see it all the time. 

! B L U E WAR R I O R..!

  • *****
  • 7267
  • "make a friend who was once a stranger" br.war.
    • View Profile
WOW!

what to post about madame sarah palin?

well she won the game...

she beat the spread...

hell...she changed the game...


for the eggheads...the democrats...the ad=libs...and the leftwingnutz...

ya just got beat..bad...

change is a comin' ta washington.....




let me point to the bard to show you how she did it...and how she just won over pennsylvania...ohio...and florida...not to mention how people out west understood her...colorado...nevada...and new mexico...a game changer, for sure.

something like this...

feel free to substitute the word "obama" for "drink"...


here is the question:

Q:  What three things does drink especially pro-voke? 


A:  Marry, sir, nose-painting, sleep, and urine.  Lechery, sir, it provokes, and unprovokes; it provokes the desire, but it takes away the performance.  Therefore, much drink may be said to be an equivocator with lechery:  it makes him, and it mars him; it sets him on, and it takes him off; it persuades him, and disheartens him; makes him stand to, and not stand to;

in conclusion, equivocates him in a sleep, and, giving him the lie, leaves him.



obama didn't just lose votes...sarah palin just won votes.



Palin was great and if you managed to escape CNN's ridiculous commentary afterward, it would be tough to argue otherwise.

Palin proved to be smart and accessible.  The pundits and media on the left decided she was an idiot and have been working nonstop to try and make this a reality.  Showing who she really is, she definitely changed the game.

Even CNN's polling data showed some interesting data at a time when politician is a dirty word.
70% said that Biden came off as more of a 'politician' than Palin.

I was pleasantly surprised to see that Gwen Ifill was a fair moderator, especially in light of her not so inconspicuous book "Breakthough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama" and it's ridiculous release date - Inauguration Day.  If you don't see this as a conflict of interest and highly suspect, I would ask that you consider if the moderator was a conservative with a book coming out on Inauguration Day called "Breakthrough: Politics in the Age of McCain".  Again- I thought she was fair and balanced and didn't see any apparent partisanship.

Personally, I can't wait for the fact checkers to find the lies told by Biden in the heat of the moment.  I respect Biden even though I disagree with him, but he was dead wrong on a few of his points about McCain (the vote on the authorization of force could not have been construed as anything but and Senator Fred Thompson flat out stated that McCain talked him into supporting action in Kosovo personally, amongst others).  Biden is a spin peddler and has a tendency to say things that sound nice in the moment, but are ridiculous.

Palin did a good job, even though I detected a little bit of evasiveness, and if people can put aside irrational hatred should have had their eyes open - this is no empty suit know nothing, but a serious, passionate woman with good intentions and leadership qualities.

Of course, I fully expect a negative reaction from the partisan left-wingers out there and more disrespectful untruths and lies about her, but that's how it works when you are a woman in politics that isn't a democrat.

People expected Palin to lose and big and she may have saved the McCain campaign.

Many say that McCain has been too harsh, but most conservatives I speak with find his campaign to be way too civil.  Expect to see stronger stances and tougher talk.  I'm still waiting for the McCain ad to come out consisting of Biden saying that Obama isn't "ready to be President" and that this "is no time for on the job training" from his pre-primary debates, followed by "I'm John McCain and I approve this message."

The MSM was hoping this debate would end the race.  Instead, it just got interesting.

CTL

  • ****
  • 1185
    • View Profile
What is the MSM? 

I admit that Palin often sounded better than Biden.  However, IMO Biden did a much better job addressing the actual questions and managing to throw a couple punches at McCain and Palin (although I don't think any landed too well).  It's unfortunate that our politics relies so heavily on HOW things sound, rather than WHAT substance underlies the message (and the probability of the candidate actually bringing said message to fruition).  But since that is what drives our politics, I must admit - Palin may have just turned the tide.

She did well; but as naturally noted above, this rather brings Palin's score back to 0 than bring it up into positive numbers. I was surprised to hear that before last night 25% of potential voters thought she had the ability to run the country--25%?? Who are these people? Last night's performance showed me she's clearly not as incompetent as she has heretofore appeared to be--but that does not mean she is competent to lead the country.

Don't get me wrong, I respect her. I thought her RNC speech was impressive, articulate, sharp in just the right ways, and effective. And I continue to marvel at her general poise and ability to maintain composure under pressure (usually). jeffislouie says she has "good intentions and leadership qualities"--maybe so, but neither of those are enough. People look for "leadership qualities" when hiring a kid out of high school to head a youth group. It is simply not sufficient in a VP or, god forbid, a president.

I do see passion, I do see poise and a commitment to her beliefs, and I respect her for all of those things. But she has still failed to convince me that she is even marginally capable of performing in the executive capacity.

On a slightly different note: Palin and Biden both stated quite clearly that they are opposed to gay marriage. I wasn't surprised to hear it from Palin; but both of them? I think that was the only moment of the debate that really gave me pause; not to reconsider my opinions of the better candidate, but to consider why it is people can reasonably believe it's not in the best interests of our country to acknowledge a broader and more inclusive understanding of marriage. What about Loving v. VA.? How is this any different?


What is the MSM? 

I admit that Palin often sounded better than Biden.  However, IMO Biden did a much better job addressing the actual questions and managing to throw a couple punches at McCain and Palin (although I don't think any landed too well).  It's unfortunate that our politics relies so heavily on HOW things sound, rather than WHAT substance underlies the message (and the probability of the candidate actually bringing said message to fruition).  But since that is what drives our politics, I must admit - Palin may have just turned the tide.

The MSM is the Main Stream Media.

The New York Times, Chicago Tribune, CNN, NBC, CBS etc.

Glad to see you have an open mind about Palin - it is genuinely refreshing.

She did well; but as naturally noted above, this rather brings Palin's score back to 0 than bring it up into positive numbers. I was surprised to hear that before last night 25% of potential voters thought she had the ability to run the country--25%?? Who are these people? Last night's performance showed me she's clearly not as incompetent as she has heretofore appeared to be--but that does not mean she is competent to lead the country.

Don't get me wrong, I respect her. I thought her RNC speech was impressive, articulate, sharp in just the right ways, and effective. And I continue to marvel at her general poise and ability to maintain composure under pressure (usually). jeffislouie says she has "good intentions and leadership qualities"--maybe so, but neither of those are enough. People look for "leadership qualities" when hiring a kid out of high school to head a youth group. It is simply not sufficient in a VP or, god forbid, a president.

I do see passion, I do see poise and a commitment to her beliefs, and I respect her for all of those things. But she has still failed to convince me that she is even marginally capable of performing in the executive capacity.

On a slightly different note: Palin and Biden both stated quite clearly that they are opposed to gay marriage. I wasn't surprised to hear it from Palin; but both of them? I think that was the only moment of the debate that really gave me pause; not to reconsider my opinions of the better candidate, but to consider why it is people can reasonably believe it's not in the best interests of our country to acknowledge a broader and more inclusive understanding of marriage. What about Loving v. VA.? How is this any different?



The Democrats dirty little secret - they aren't really for gay rights per se, even though they tend to pander to that community.

Back when Kerry was running for President he made all kinds of promises to the gay community.  The girl I was dating at the time had a lesbian sister who was so pro-Kerry and anti-Bush based solely on this issue alone - so much so that she slammed her fists on the table when she found out that her own parents supported Bush (I didn't - I voted for Kerry).

So, let's look at what Kerry did to follow up on those promises with the power he retained even though he lost....
Answer?  Nothing.  He continues to 'support' gay rights but has failed to follow through on a single promise he made to homosexuals during his campaign.  I guess the only way to make legislative change is by becoming President - oh wait, he's a senator and has that power now.

I've always said that marriage is defined as between a man and a woman.  It is a religious notion and isn't likely to change anytime soon.  That said, I think gay people should be allowed to have the same committed relationship heterosexuals have, but they need to find a new term for it. 

Don't be surprised that both platforms refuse to support gay marriage.  An issue like that is too polarizing and would likely lose them the election.  Most Americans don't support the notion and most American's wouldn't support a candidate who supports the notion either.