My Lord...

[rivrrat]

So you are looking for honesty from politicians? Good luck with that. Has not been much of that from either POTUS camp.

Have I stated otherwise?

I fully expect any savvy politician to do as Plain did, and have watched many from all across the political spectrum do the same for years. Hence the reason all the hullabaloo about this is much ado about nothing IMO.

"savvy" politicians dodge questions. Gotcha.

Well, that's not savvy IMO. Savvy politicians ANSWER questions.

Perfect illustration of political axe grinding. Thanks.

What axe? Because I think she's an atrocious, embarrassing candidate?

Yeah, that answer would have real smart and would not have garnered any responses from the same crowd, and dare I say…you too. She was dammed if she did or didn’t, and yip I think she took the smart approach. Those trying to spin this into she is dumb are pretty much suffering from the same aliment IMO.

So, lemme see... she's damned no matter what she says, eh? ROFL Now I understand why they try to keep her under wraps.

Yeah there is not really much of any actual merit here to be concerned about at all.

I agree that there is no actual merit where Palin is concerned. No merit whatsoever.

 

[Sir Loin]

Have I stated otherwise?

My question that you responded to was very clear and quite simple. Your apparent answer is that yes you would answer the front loaded question in a nationally televised interview geared to the “gotcha” style. Which is why you are no politician, which is actually a compliment as well as an indicator about how well you would fare in that arena.

"savvy" politicians dodge questions. Gotcha.

Well, that's not savvy IMO. Savvy politicians ANSWER questions.

Not front loaded and as obviously baited a question as this one, no they don’t. Not the savvy ones.

What axe? Because I think she's an atrocious, embarrassing candidate?

So, lemme see... she's damned no matter what she says, eh? ROFL Now I understand why they try to keep her under wraps.

I agree that there is no actual merit where Palin is concerned. No merit whatsoever.

Nah, there is no axe here. Chuckle.:mrgreen:

 

[rivrrat]

My question that you responded to was very clear and quite simple. Your apparent answer is that yes you would answer the front loaded question in a nationally televised interview geared to the “gotcha” style. Which is why you are no politician, which is actually a compliment as well as an indicator about how well you would fare in that arena.

Dude I would LOVE to run for office just to see the reaction. I'd be so goddamn honest, it would blow the minds of everyone in this country and possibly change the way we do politics. I'd be all like... "Yup, I'm a former call girl, drug addict who is into BDSM. You gotta problem with that?" LMFAO

Nah, there is no axe here. Chuckle.:mrgreen:

I do not understand what you mean by 'axe to grind'. I find her views appalling and her ignorance embarrassing. Anyone who doesn't like a candidate has an "axe to grind"? I don't get it

 

[Sir Loin]

Dude I would LOVE to run for office just to see the reaction. I'd be so goddamn honest, it would blow the minds of everyone in this country and possibly change the way we do politics. I'd be all like... "Yup, I'm a former call girl, drug addict who is into BDSM. You gotta problem with that?" LMFAO

Hot kinky BDSM sex? Not a bit.

I do not understand what you mean by 'axe to grind'. I find her views appalling and her ignorance embarrassing. Anyone who doesn't like a candidate has an "axe to grind"? I don't get it

Ya know I asked earlier if you were naive enough to think Plain would not have been attacked for her answers by playing along with the question. Clearly I now have my answer.

I pointed out that trying to spin her choice to avoid Couric's poorly disguised hook into 'Palin is dumb/dishonest/stupid etc' is just that. Palin performed as any savvy politician would in the same circumstances. You're comfortable placing yourself in the aforementioned category. Fine by me.

You want to argue that the reason this trifling matter is being argued is not because it is being foisted to the fore by those with a political axe to grind? And you don't have one, yet you want to make exactly the argument I spoke to? OK fine by me too.:mrgreen:

 

[Dezaad]

She needs to just learn to reject questions.

Any answer she gave would have been jumped on.
Because if she answered the question, whatever she reads would have gained the scrutiny.

I mean whether it is a moose hunter mag, some ultra conservative mailer, or something related to her church that talks about witches and the appocolypse... any answer she gave would have been jumped on.

I would have respected her if she'd said, "I'll name five, The Nation, The National Review, The Wall Street Journal, The International Herald Tribune and The Christian Science Monitor" But, she couldn't, because she hasn't, and probably would have been caught in the lie.

The real reason she couldn't say anything without it being jumped on is because she doesn't read newspapers, and has hinted that she doesn't know enough about the world to even know if Alaska 'is a microcosm'. I wonder if she even knows what I microcosm is.

 

[Panther]

She should have just said the truth. Only the ignorant read the newspaper. News is old by the time the ink hits the paper. Anything important is available quicker, and more accurately via the internet.

 

[aps]

"It is absolutely phenomenal what my sister can learn in a short amount of time. What's happening to Sarah Palin right now is like the worst college exam cram period ever."

-- Palin's big sister Heather Bruce, interviewed in the November issue of Glamour.

Amy Argetsinger and Roxanne Roberts - The Proposal: Gilbert Shares It All With You

It make me feel so confident that a VP nominee has to "cram" in order to prepare herself for a debate. What does that say about her qualifications?

 

[Panther]

It make me feel so confident that a VP nominee has to "cram" in order to prepare herself for a debate. What does that say about her qualifications?

Huh? Are you serious?

Obama, McCain and Biden all crammed for the debate. Obama and Biden both took days to do nothing but prepare.

Only an idiot would go in without preparation.

 

[Sir Loin]

She should have just said the truth. Only the ignorant read the newspaper. News is old by the time the ink hits the paper. Anything important is available quicker, and more accurately via the internet.

More accurately on the internet? Rightttttttt. I read the newspaper several times a week, I happen to enjoy reading one while eating breakfast/lunch/dinner. The idea that reading a newspaper (as versus reading the internet) makes one “ignorant” is fairly silly.:shock:

I would have respected her if she'd said, "I'll name five, The Nation, The National Review, The Wall Street Journal, The International Herald Tribune and The Christian Science Monitor" But, she couldn't, because she hasn't, and probably would have been caught in the lie.

The real reason she couldn't say anything without it being jumped on is because she doesn't read newspapers, and has hinted that she doesn't know enough about the world to even know if Alaska 'is a microcosm'. I wonder if she even knows what I microcosm is.

Wildly rampant speculation. Let me try my hand at it; I sincerely doubt you would actually respect Palin for supplying any answer. Oh that was easy. Chuckle.

 

[Iriemon]

Couric: What newpapers or magazines do you read?

Palin: I read them all.

Couric: Which ones?

Palin: Did you know that Alaska is part of the United States?

Originally Posted by Dezaad
The real reason she couldn't say anything without it being jumped on is because she doesn't read newspapers

Wildly rampant speculation.

LMAO!

 

[Panther]

More accurately on the internet? Rightttttttt. I read the newspaper several times a week, I happen to enjoy reading one while eating breakfast/lunch/dinner. The idea that reading a newspaper (as versus reading the internet) makes one “ignorant” is fairly silly.

I should have said anyone that relies "solely" on newspapers is ignorant. The internet is updated regularly as news happens. That makes it far more accurate. Even if you decide to stick with the sites for the mainstream media outlets, including newspapers' web sites, you'll still be more informed than sticking with the paper.

 

[Sir Loin]

LMAO!

Chuckle. Wildy rampant trollism and certainly not the context my words were used in. No cigar. :roll:

 

[niftydrifty]

After watching the clip, I'd say this "issue" is a stretch at best. I think her reluctance to answer is because depending on what printed media you do read, it will paint you as a big right-winger or a big left-winger(NY Times, Washington Times). Prehaps she reads only printed media that has a conservative leaning to it. Nothing wrong with that, since many people only read printed media that has a leftist leaning to it as well. She's probably being a little too careful here, but its hardly something to go "My Lord" over.

on the one hand, this might not be such a big deal, in this instance ... perhaps she may have just been reluctant to answer, because what she does read most often is "guns and ammo," or "glamour," or freerepublic.com, or who knows what else.

but, IMO, this, along with everything else I've heard from her lately, really is something to say "my lord" over. mainly because this is part of a pattern. over and over I've seen her respond to these questions, by going on and on around the question, as if she didn't have a good idea of what precisely she had just been asked. it's more than a little bit alarming, coming from someone in her position.

the first time I saw this clip, I honestly thought it was a joke, just like middleground. that's bad.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Now you're shifting the goals posts from where Republicans live to where they do well.



Evidence?



Evidence?



I love the not-so-subtle racialist schtick here.

Older established burbs are not by default more diverse.

Besides, if, as you say, "The party that manages to win the "ex-urbs" or what ever they call them is the one that ends up winning the election" is true, then why would the Democrats focus on older, established burbs which are, necessarily, close-in and not exurburbia?

Seems to be a conflict in your statements.

Have you been in a coma for 20 years or something. Both sides must maximize their base, such as established burbs for Dems and Small Towns for Republicans, while trying to also win a slight majority in the exurbs. As to evidence on voting trends all one has to do is look at maps depicting results:

http://mwhodges.home.att.net/usmap-large.gif

Notice how in 2000, Gore did well in urban and suburban areas, and Bush did well everywhere else.

http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/election2004/Election2004textured.gif

The same was true in 2004:

 

[ALiberalModerate]

She should have just said the truth. Only the ignorant read the newspaper. News is old by the time the ink hits the paper. Anything important is available quicker, and more accurately via the internet.

The extent to which right wingers will go to try to polish the turd of stupidity never ceases to amaze me.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Couric: What newpapers or magazines do you read?

Palin: I read them all.

Couric: Which ones?

Palin: Did you know that Alaska is part of the United States?

Originally Posted by Dezaad
The real reason she couldn't say anything without it being jumped on is because she doesn't read newspapers



LMAO!

Thats not just newspapers. She obviously does not read anything.

If Couric would have asked me the same question.

Couric: What newpapers or magazines do you read?

SouthernDemocrat: Well like many Americans, I don't take the paper anymore, and the only magazines we still subscribe too these days are National Geographic and In Fisherman. Just the same, I read Google News all the time, look at articles on the BBC, and various internet news portals, as well as catching NPR Marketplace and BBC World usually on my way home.

See, its not hard if you are even remotely informed as to current events and world affairs.

 

[Doc Howl]

And just when I thought people could not get more petty.

Face facts, Rev...she's a dumbass.

 

[Sir Loin]

The extent to which right wingers will go to try to polish the turd of stupidity never ceases to amaze me.

The stupidity of the giant turds you have laid in this thread are amazing too.:doh

 

[niftydrifty]

See, its not hard if you are even remotely informed as to current events and world affairs.

...or aren't such a chowderhead that you don't seem to ever understand what has just been asked of you.

 

[Sir Loin]

The extent to which right wingers will go to try to polish the turd of stupidity never ceases to amaze me.

The stupidity of the giant turds you have laid in this thread are amazing too. As is the extent you will go to in order to defend them. Pot meet kettle.:doh

 

[StandUpChuck]

The extent to which right wingers will go to try to polish the turd of stupidity never ceases to amaze me.

You shouldn't be so quick to talk about polishing turds with that big old shiney spot bouncing off your forehead, dude.

 

[Sir Loin]

You shouldn't be so quick to talk about polishing turds with that big old shiney spot bouncing off your forehead, dude.

I......just.......can't.....resist...just....can't....resist

BWA HA HA HA HA BWA HA HA​

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Face facts, Rev...she's a dumbass.

right.... awsome argument. I mean, that is such an intelligent observation..... :lol:

 

[Panther]

Have you been in a coma for 20 years or something. Both sides must maximize their base, such as established burbs for Dems and Small Towns for Republicans, while trying to also win a slight majority in the exurbs. As to evidence on voting trends all one has to do is look at maps depicting results:

Here's the 2004 map. Must not be many of your mythical democratic "established suburbs". :

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Here's the 2004 map. Must not be many of your mythical democratic "established suburbs". :

As much as it would seem that you would like to believe that the Republican Party is the party that stands up for "White Rights" and the Democrats are nothing but a party of the projects, thats not the case.