Wow. Does the media ever hate Palin

#176
#176
DinkinFlicka said:
You shouldn't fear idiots when they find themselves in a position of power?

Shouldn't you at least fear what they can do?
Click to expand...

DinkinFlicka said:
Ch'yeah, and it's worked out well so far.

Defending Palin by attacking Obama is silly because the current admin sucks. Your satire backfired because of that. Everything you said here is totally legit!

So, barring your semi-sarcasm... you did a great job. you get a +1 and a "have a nice day!"

Also, about Obama being smart or dumb... who cares? He's in already and we've got another year and a half of this crap. Palin is a new threat. Why vote another failure in?
Click to expand...

let's see if I understand you correctly here:

You firmly believe that Palin is an idiot, therefore she is dangerous.

You're not really sure if Obama is smart or not, despite evidence that he really isn't all that bright, but is immune from criticism because he's already in the Oval Office and will remain there for another year and a half.

In the current environment, Palin has to be compared to Obama because he is the President and she is a potential (though unlikely) candidate to replace him. It's the same reason why Romney, Huntsman, Bachmann, and so on are compared to him as well.
 
#177
#177
DinkinFlicka said:
Ch'yeah, and it's worked out well so far.

Defending Palin by attacking Obama is silly because the current admin sucks. Your satire backfired because of that. Everything you said here is totally legit!

So, barring your semi-sarcasm... you did a great job. you get a +1 and a "have a nice day!"

Also, about Obama being smart or dumb... who cares? He's in already and we've got another year and a half of this crap. Palin is a new threat. Why vote another failure in?
Click to expand...

No matter how many times I ask why the only defense of Palin is Obama - people still use it. She sucks! Why vote her in?
 
#178
#178
MG1968 said:
let's see if I understand you correctly here:

You firmly believe that Palin is an idiot, therefore she is dangerous.

You're not really sure if Obama is smart or not, despite evidence that he really isn't all that bright, but is immune from criticism because he's already in the Oval Office and will remain there for another year and a half.

In the current environment, Palin has to be compared to Obama because he is the President and she is a potential (though unlikely) candidate to replace him. It's the same reason why Romney, Huntsman, Bachmann, and so on are compared to him as well.
Click to expand...

You aren't fully understanding. The defense people use is "obama is also stupid". We get it. For what ungodly reason would you want to replace someone stupid with a female version?
 
#179
#179
KiffinKiller said:
You aren't fully understanding. The defense people use is "obama is also stupid". We get it. For what ungodly reason would you want to replace someone stupid with a female version?
Click to expand...

I'm waiting for the "Palin is stupid" crowd to actually back up their assertion. Bringing up urban legends about her believing the earth is only 6000 years old, or outright lies regarding her stance on banning books in libraries doesn't count.

Sure, she's said some dumb things, all politicians do. What has she actually done, whether through legislation while mayor and governor, or as a high profile public citizen, that you believe makes her a dangerous idiot?

Remember, I'm asking for actions, not words.
 
#180
#180
MG1968 said:
I'm waiting for the "Palin is stupid" crowd to actually back up their assertion. Bringing up urban legends about her believing the earth is only 6000 years old, or outright lies regarding her stance on banning books in libraries doesn't count.

Sure, she's said some dumb things, all politicians do. What has she actually done, whether through legislation while mayor and governor, or as a high profile public citizen, that you believe makes her a dangerous idiot?

Remember, I'm asking for actions, not words.
Click to expand...

What actions has she performed that prove otherwise?

You say no one has backed up their criticisms of Palin's stupidity, but all I've seen you do is say "She's not stupid" and attack Obama.

We're in a circular argument. It's foolish at this point.
 
#181
#181
MG1968 said:
let's see if I understand you correctly here:

You firmly believe that Palin is an idiot, therefore she is dangerous.

You're not really sure if Obama is smart or not, despite evidence that he really isn't all that bright, but is immune from criticism because he's already in the Oval Office and will remain there for another year and a half.

In the current environment, Palin has to be compared to Obama because he is the President and she is a potential (though unlikely) candidate to replace him. It's the same reason why Romney, Huntsman, Bachmann, and so on are compared to him as well.
Click to expand...

I'm saying we, as Americans have screwed the pooch by voting him in. Why IN THE HELL would we vote her in?

When in the heck did I say he's immune from criticism?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/pointless

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/immune

They. Are. Not. The. Same.
 
#182
#182
DinkinFlicka said:
I'm saying we, as Americans have screwed the pooch by voting him in. Why IN THE HELL would we vote her in?
Click to expand...

for one thing, her record as governor and mayor would indicate that, as an executive, she would be a better leader. There is nothing (other than quitting as governor) that would indicate her perceived lack of intellect hindered her or led her to make stupid decisions. There is also no evidence that her faith led her to make decisions that could run afoul of the ACLU.

However, her executive experience isn't as impressive as Romney's, Perry's, Pawlenty's, or Christie's.

She isn't running, so there's no need to fear her ever occupying the Oval Office.

edit: You keep telling us that you don't want Palin compared to Obama when we defend your silly attacks against her intellect. I'd say you're granting him defacto immunity by barring him from direct comparison.
 
#183
#183
KiffinKiller said:
And....there's a post about defending Palin without bringing up Obama. What does gs respond with? A collage of anti-obama propaganda. Success!
Click to expand...

Someone has to do it, the media sure won't.

As the thread header suggests, the media hates
Palin with a passion.

061911.jpg


patience.jpg


rushmore_small.jpg


nutty-debbie-shultz.jpg
 
#184
#184
IPorange said:
So... How does that refute the earlier analysis of Palin? They're both dummies.
Click to expand...

I don't think either gets at how intelligent one is. These get more to what ideology drives each one. That was my point.

They both suck but I'm not convinced either is dumb (intelligence-wise).
 
#185
#185
MG1968 said:
for one thing, her record as governor and mayor would indicate that, as an executive, she would be a better leader. There is nothing (other than quitting as governor) that would indicate her perceived lack of intellect hindered her or led her to make stupid decisions. There is also no evidence that her faith led her to make decisions that could run afoul of the ACLU.

However, her executive experience isn't as impressive as Romney's, Perry's, Pawlenty's, or Christie's.

She isn't running, so there's no need to fear her ever occupying the Oval Office.

edit: You keep telling us that you don't want Palin compared to Obama when we defend your silly attacks against her intellect. I'd say you're granting him defacto immunity by barring him from direct comparison.
Click to expand...

Dude, she wasn't governor for very long. Your defense of her intellect holds no more credibility than my attacks. Don't be so quick to forget that.

As for the emboldened pile of stink... that's just too presumptuous to take seriously. It's quite imaginative. We can compare them all we want, but when it's your only, piddling defense against the claim that Sarah Palin is no smarter than your momma and unfit to run a country (despite her fabulous 2 year run as governor of the most sparsely populated state in the country), that's taking it too far to be considered valid by most.
 
#186
#186
DinkinFlicka said:
Dude, she wasn't governor for very long. Your defense of her intellect holds no more credibility than my attacks. Don't be so quick to forget that.

As for the emboldened pile of stink... that's just too presumptuous to take seriously. It's quite imaginative. We can compare them all we want, but when it's your only, piddling defense against the claim that Sarah Palin is no smarter than your momma and unfit to run a country (despite her fabulous 2 year run as governor of the most sparsely populated state in the country), that's taking it too far to be considered valid by most.
Click to expand...

did you really have to go there?
 
#191
#191
MG1968 said:
well, bud, I'm still waiting for you to give some concrete examples of her lack of intellect.
Click to expand...

Someone's undergarments are bunched up. I'll do so when you can defend her without talking about your favorite POTUS.

'til then... I'm gonna go swim in the fort. Be easy.

Your current avatar is my favorite, by the way.
 
#192
#192
DinkinFlicka said:
Someone's undergarments are bunched up. I'll do so when you can defend her without talking about your favorite POTUS.

'til then... I'm gonna go swim in the fort. Be easy.
Click to expand...

I've already done that, you apparently have reading comprehension problems. I did what you asked, defended Palin without comparing her to Obama and that wasn't good enough for you.

again I'll ask, is that you kicker33?
 
#196
#196
I'm still trying to figure this whole Palin and Revere thing out. How is what she said, given her explanation on Sunday morning news programming, correct? It's not a huge deal, I'm just confused as to how the statement/explanation hold up given my understanding of the historical context.
 
#198
#198
sjt18 said:
Yes. What she said was actually correct.
Click to expand...
Would it kill you to admit that she slipped up just that once? It's perfectly fine. She's human, she's allowed to slip up on the facts.

TennTradition said:
I'm still trying to figure this whole Palin and Revere thing out. How is what she said, given her explanation on Sunday morning news programming, correct? It's not a huge deal, I'm just confused as to how the statement/explanation hold up given my understanding of the historical context.
Click to expand...

This is where it got people -- if she had the sense to be on TV and just say "I was a bit scatterbrained at the moment and slipped up" then we could all move on. Instead she had to insist she was right, then we had a wave of idiots swarming Wikipedia trying to edit the Paul Revere entry to reflect what she said.

This has been a strange episode, all-around. Just another reflection of the conflict framework through which damn near everybody views politics these days. Imperfection is not allowed, and everything is viewed as "Here are the two sides of the debate, who is the winner?!" The way politics and politicians are analyzed in this country is stupid, counterproductive and well beyond retarded.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top