Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ron on November 13, 2008, 10:03:21 AM
-
Palin not knowing Africa was a continent, Joe the plumber related to Charles Keating, angry calls from the Hilton’s over McCains comments...all lies
Propaganda rules the weak minded here in the states.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/arts/television/13hoax.html?hp
-
Heh. I can't say I'm supprised...
-
Palin not knowing Africa was a continent, Joe the plumber related to Charles Keating, angry calls from the Hilton’s over McCains comments...all lies
Propaganda rules the weak minded here in the states.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/arts/television/13hoax.html?hp
Huge media apology in 3....2..... (dies after holding breath waiting for apology)
-
It may have been a joke but it was a vicious joke. This comes out AFTER the election. They are re-tabulating votes in some of the states where the result was close or challenged. The US needs to figure out a new voting system. Personally, I lean toward the orginal constitutional approach where voting is limted to property owners and age. And as far as internet goes, believe what you want to. Anyone can make any claim they want to about a public figure without concern for litigation or truth. And now we have the Obomination as president elect.
-
I lean toward the orginal constitutional approach where voting is limted to property owners and age.
Where is that found in the Constitution? I assume you refer to the U.S. Constitution?
-
Personally, I lean toward the orginal constitutional approach where voting is limted to property owners and age.
Interesting. Also, no women or blacks, I presume?
We're no longer an agrarian society. Ownership of real property does not, and should not any longer determine the weight given to one's opinions. I certainly don't see the point in tying essential societal functions to owning land. Whole lots of people elect not to own land simply to preserve resources and/or avoid debt. I have a problem with a lot of legislation designed to force people into "environmentalism", but I'm all for people choosing to avoid debt or avoid needless consumption by renting an apartment rather than purchase a single family home.
-
Interesting. Also, no women or blacks, I presume?
We're no longer an agrarian society. Ownership of real property does not, and should not any longer determine the weight given to one's opinions. I certainly don't see the point in tying essential societal functions to owning land. Whole lots of people elect not to own land simply to preserve resources and/or avoid debt. I have a problem with a lot of legislation designed to force people into "environmentalism", but I'm all for people choosing to avoid debt or avoid needless consumption by renting an apartment rather than purchase a single family home.
The property owning qualification back then meant that the people that were voting were contributors to society.
We don't need the property owning qualification idea these days, but how about we don't let people on the public dole vote. I'm for that, even though it would disqualify me...due to my federal loans and scholarships...
If you are a leach on society, you shouldn't get to vote. Particularly if your entire income is welfare. Makes it harder for politicians to buy your vote with promises of seizing other people's money and giving it to you...
-
damn straight. Especially disabled vets. Leeches don't need to vote.
-
I think we should get back on topic
-
A friend tried to tell me that Palin stuff, I asked him what State did Biden rep? He had no clue.
-
Interesting. Also, no women or blacks, I presume?
Interestingly, there were some women who voted back in those days. But of course, that was because they were single women who owned property. =)
-
damn straight. Especially disabled vets. Leeches don't need to vote.
Yup. I agree wholeheartedly. We disabled vets are a terrible drain on society, and my wife tells me I'm an absolute pain in the ass, to boot... =D
-
damn straight. Especially disabled vets. Leeches don't need to vote.
The vets provided a service. The welfare types did not. Veteran disability is a type of payment for services rendered to the nation. Those on welfare have no such claim to having performed a service.
-
damn straight. Especially disabled vets. Leeches don't need to vote.
Did I read this wrong? Disabled vets are "leeches"? That is not what you meant, right?
-
She was being sarcastic.
-
Interestingly, there were some women who voted back in those days. But of course, that was because they were single women who owned property. smiley
I've heard something about this before. Wasn't in New Hampshire or something? Supposed to be the first time in history of women voting?
-
You might have heard it from me. I read about it in a book called Vindicating the Founders by Thomas G. West. There's a chapter on property requirements for voting, with a chart of suffrage requirements in the state constitutions, in the revolutionary/founding era. Some states had property requirements, some awarded suffrage to those who paid taxes, some had neither.
New Jersey was actually the world capitol of female suffrage, if I remember right, but I believe West found female and black voters in other states. Like I said, the women who voted were usually those who had property, but had no husband/father/brother, or other male to manage their affairs. Due to femme covert, women's property was considered to be their . Never mind. I was going to explain it, but I'd probably botch it. Here's a link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Femme_covert
-
Well back on the topic, the damage has been huge.
Right now I'm surrounded by people who still think those news reports were true.
They bought the big lie that somehow mccain was right wing & the same as GW.
They think SP is dumb and BO will stop the war. :mad:
99.99999 people are clueless when it comes to politics.
-
Well back on the topic, the damage has been huge.
Right now I'm surrounded by people who still think those news reports were true.
They bought the big lie that somehow mccain was right wing & the same as GW.
They think SP is dumb and BO will stop the war. :mad:
99.99999 people are clueless when it comes to politics.
The hoax story about SP was released AFTER the election... all the other news items and interviews which indicated a less than spectacular intelligence were true AFAIK.
There was certainly bias present, as always, but I don't see a different media spin on McCain/Palin changing the outcome. 8 years of GWB, a party in disarray, and BHO's superb campaign made for a serious challenge, and McCain/Palin weren't up to the task.
-
The vets provided a service. The welfare types did not. Veteran disability is a type of payment for services rendered to the nation. Those on welfare have no such claim to having performed a service.
Exactly. Far as I am concerned, we should give more to vets, particuarly disabled vets.
But my point is that as far as welfare goes, most of the people on it are leeches who have NEVER contributed to society and never will. Do veterans fall under that? Uh, NO.
-
most of the people on it are leeches who have NEVER contributed to society and never will.
heard that tend to believe it never seen it backed up more than anecdotally
-
most of the people on it are leeches who have NEVER contributed to society and never will.
heard that tend to believe it never seen it backed up more than anecdotally
I grew up around these kind of individuals. "Drawing" (and not the artsy kind) was an ambition for children. Marrying the disabled to get their SS benefits, and having children in order to obtain further benefit wasn't uncommon. I knew a couple of families who were quite open about falsely obtaining benefits.
We learned that it wasn't worth turning them in anymore. The feds didn't want to put any effort into going after them.
-
most of the people on it are leeches who have NEVER contributed to society and never will.
heard that tend to believe it never seen it backed up more than anecdotally
It is one of those study topics that will get you ostracized in academia and end the career in which you sunk 10+ years. There are a very few men & women in the social science field who have the independence (both intellectually and financially) to do such a study. Charles Murray is one such a man, but he already has projects. Just not enough honest & morally tough social science researchers to go around. Most are sorry excuses for "scientists."
-
The hoax story about SP was released AFTER the election... all the other news items and interviews which indicated a less than spectacular intelligence were true AFAIK.
There was certainly bias present, as always, but I don't see a different media spin on McCain/Palin changing the outcome. 8 years of GWB, a party in disarray, and BHO's superb campaign made for a serious challenge, and McCain/Palin weren't up to the task.
The Joe the Plumber/ Keating link was in the news before the election as well as the silliness surrounding the Hilton comments.
Being unable to speak extemporaneously under the harsh media spotlight is not an indication of lack of intelligence. I suspect few of us here would be able to consistently express ourselves coherently especially when being questioned by an adversarial press.
She has graduated college, been mayor of a city and is currently a very popular governor of her state. The vast majority of the folks dismissing her haven't accomplished a fraction of what she has in her life. Instead of following the media meme look at the record...not looking at the record and believing the media meme is one reason we have president elect Obama.
-
They bought the big lie that somehow mccain was right wing & the same as GW.
McCain was not right wing, but he WAS essentially the same as GW, you know.
-
They had to destroy her and any weapon at hand was used, fictional or otherwise.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/a-natural-patton-how-palin-nearly-saved-mccain/?print=1
A Natural Patton: How Palin Nearly Saved McCain
Posted By Kyle-Anne Shiver On November 14, 2008 @ 12:00 am In . Column2 04, . Most Popular 02, . Positioning, Elections 2008, Politics, US News | 176 Comments
“Nobody ever defended anything successfully; there is only attack and attack and attack some more.”
— General George S. Patton
For all the tacky talk in media circles, where folks have extremely over-inflated opinions of themselves, one would think that Sarah Palin was the sole arbiter of Republican defeat this year.
What a pile of preposterous poppycock!
From the beginning of ‘08, the accepted wisdom was that no matter whom the Democrats nominated, they would deliver to the Republicans an ignominious defeat. But this year’s defeat was anything but the complete rout it was supposed to be.
And the person who nearly even saved the day — and the election — for Republicans was Sarah Palin.
This is not a minority opinion. When Rasmussen conducted detailed exit [1] polling among Republicans, they found that a full 69% of respondents thought Sarah Palin helped — not hurt — McCain. Governor Palin has not garnered the status as America’s most highly regarded, most popular governor for nothing.
And how much do Republicans admire Sarah Palin? Far more than anyone else on our side of the aisle, according to more Rasmussen tidbits:
Ninety-one percent (91%) of Republicans have a favorable view of Palin, including 65% who say their view is very favorable. Only eight percent (8%) have an unfavorable view of her, including three percent (3%) very unfavorable.
When asked to choose among some of the GOP’s top names for their choice for the party’s 2012 presidential nominee, 64% say Palin. The next closest contenders are two former governors and unsuccessful challengers for the presidential nomination this year — Mike Huckabee of Arkansas with 12% support and Mitt Romney of Massachusetts with 11%.
And just how was it that the pitbull in lipstick upset the pundits and the prognosticators this year, at least in the matter of degree?
The woman, in my opinion, is a natural Patton. A fighter to the core. Palin seems to instinctively know that when one is hip-deep in a culture war and a fight for the survival of American exceptionalism, then one must do more than defend, defend, defend.
If one is not willing to attack in defense of one’s cause, then he ought to get out of the way at the very least — or consider joining the other side.
At least that’s my paraphrase of one of the Patton doctrines.
Sarah Palin came out [2] fighting on her night in the convention spotlight. In her speech, she relied on the same line of attack that catapulted her from Wasilla mayor to governor of Alaska: plainspoken, honest convictions and a sense of humor.
And she debuted with some of the most memorable lines of this entire campaign:
I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a “community organizer,” except that you have actual responsibilities.
I might add that in small towns, we don’t quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they are listening, and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren’t listening.
We tend to prefer candidates who don’t talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco.
Sarah Palin’s appeal was her willingness to fight — and fight courageously — for the American taxpayers, the ones who actually pay the bills for all that bureaucratic largess and faux generosity.
In this vein, Governor Palin not only brought [3] experience and a track [4] record; she brought conviction to the cause and a willingness to unflinchingly expose her opposition’s “love” for the poor as just another con by just another liberal pandering for votes through the promise of government handouts.
For two months, Sarah Palin traversed the country, town to town, and everywhere the lady went tens of thousands waited hours to hear her speak. When this happened with Barack Obama, he was hailed as a demigod. When it happened to Sarah Palin, she was targeted as a hate monger if anyone there got the least bit excited.
Palin wasn’t hesitant to bring up the voter fraud investigations of ACORN and make certain that her hearers understood the intimate connections between Barack Obama and ACORN [5] shenanigans. Sarah Palin, the mother of an American soldier now in Iraq, wasn’t squeamish about picking holes in Obama’s national defense priorities, even when she was [6] derided in the media for doing so. Sarah Palin wasn’t shy about [7] repeating the very, very late release of Obama’s taped admission that his energy plan would naturally “bankrupt the coal industry.”
Palin never stopped. She fought on until the final tally. Absolutely Patton style.
And the pundits, critics, and insiders can turn themselves every which way and back again, but they will not succeed in tearing this natural leader away from the nearly two-thirds majority of Republican voters who have already hailed her as the next leader in waiting.
It must have been just awful for John McCain to have been upstaged the way he was by Governor Sarah Palin. But McCain’s time is clearly past and Palin’s is just beginning.
This is my own final word on this election.
May it rest in the infamy it deserves.
This election was a triumph not of principle or workable solutions, but of pander to the greed of hosts of those who think Obama will solve their problems and pay their bills from the public trough. From start to finish, Obama ran a campaign more suitable for American Idol than the presidency of the United States, and the mainstream media were his willing enablers in hiding disturbing facts from public view. Obama-Biden outspent McCain-Palin more than four to one and still failed to deliver the knockout punch they and their media lapdogs envisioned.
But Sarah Palin still has a whole state to run, a pipeline to finish, and millions of cubic feet of natural gas to deliver to us in the lower 48.
Godspeed, Governor Palin. Until we meet again. The sooner the better, as far as I’m concerned.
And to Election ‘08, goodbye and goodnight. Thank the Good Lord, it’s finally over.
Article printed from Pajamas Media: http://pajamasmedia.com
URL to article: http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/a-natural-patton-how-palin-nearly-saved-mccain/
URLs in this post:
[1] polling: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2012/69_of_gop_voters_say_palin_hel
ped_mccain
[2] fighting: http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/president/conventions/videos/20080903_PALIN_SPEECH.html
[3] experience: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,288722,00.html
[4] record: http://pajamasmedia.com../../../../../blog/palin-and-pelosi-worlds-apart-in-house-cleaning-methodolo
gy/
[5] shenanigans: http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/stealing_the_presidency_an_oba.html
[6] derided: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_10/015452.php
[7] repeating: http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/11/02/politics/fromtheroad/entry4564043.shtml
-
Interesting. Also, no women or blacks, I presume?
We're no longer an agrarian society. Ownership of real property does not, and should not any longer determine the weight given to one's opinions. I certainly don't see the point in tying essential societal functions to owning land. Whole lots of people elect not to own land simply to preserve resources and/or avoid debt. I have a problem with a lot of legislation designed to force people into "environmentalism", but I'm all for people choosing to avoid debt or avoid needless consumption by renting an apartment rather than purchase a single family home.
At least land and business owners have a lot more to lose than the ACORN parasites we see voting for a handout now.
-
Not all people who receive money from the .gov are leaches. Some people work for it, some people receive it as retirement benies, some people receive it as compensation for having been damaged in service. To compare those people who legitimately receive compensation to the people who's only claim to our tax money is "'cause I ain't got no money of my own" is both absurd and insulting. :mad: