Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: neviander on November 04, 2008, 11:53:25 PM
-
Ladies and gentlemen, I don't know every issue inside and out, but I've been listening to every voice I could hear for the past year and a half and the potential for damage to this country in the next 4 is seemingly unprecedented.
But as I see the republican presidential candidate lose, and a lot of long standing republican senators and representatives losing, I think of how weak kneed, noodle spined and cowardly the republican party has become.
The republican party is supposedly the "right wing" party, that stands for Christian values. In what way, in the last 8 years or so, has the republican party, as a majority, stood up for Christian values? Not only are the libs completely disillusioned by Barack and all of his cronies, but the republican base itself has a lot to complain about. Conservative standards have been compromised away by greedy, noob/coward republicans for long enough and I believe what has happened tonight is a big fat example of that.
"I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot, I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth." Rev 3:15-16
I know everyone here isn't a Christian, but doesn't the concept apply?
Should this administration bring terrible things, may we see the error of our ways and rebuild, stronger, and better.
-
I remember hearing liberals say the same stuff 4 and 8 years ago.
Guess what. We're still here.
We'll still be here in 8 years.
-
46,843,332 voters or 47.47% of the voting public did not sign on for this trip. Despite the soothing speeches promising bipartisanship, within six months, the long knives will be out, and that 47.47 % will have grown to well over 50%.
Jeff B.
-
6 months sure, but what about the remaining 42 months.
-
I can't really say what I feel right now as it would violate a number of forum regulations as well as possibly open myself up for some sort of investigation.
-
I can't really say what I feel right now as it would violate a number of forum regulations as well as possibly open myself up for some sort of investigation.
The same Probably goes for a great many.
-
In what way, in the last 8 years or so, has the republican party, as a majority, stood up for Christian values?
The Republican party hasn't stood for anything at all.
-
The Republican party hasn't stood for anything at all.
Winner, winner, chicken dinner!
Although I would like to amend that: "The Republican party hasn't stood for anything conservative at all."
We're seeing something you might call "blowback" based on previous actions of the Republican controlled government. It ticked a lot of people off, they remembered that, and they're taking their frustration out on the Republicans in the polls tonight.
-
I agree, I just don't like the shoot-yourself-in-the-foot retort that the conservative base has chosen. Krikey, if it ain't broke, don't fix it, but if it's broke, FIX IT, don't break it more!
-
"Thanks, we needed that."
Maybe that's what we should be saying.
McCain would have bought us some time but he would also have lulled us into more complacency while continuing what is essentially a nation-destroying agenda.
I suggest we take a constructive view of this and realize we need to make a tough, honest appraisal of how we need to re-build a viable party (even if it's not the GOP).
-
I suggest we take a constructive view of this and realize we need to make a tough, honest appraisal of how we need to re-build a viable party (even if it's not the GOP).
I concur with you, and would like to give your idea a nudge forward: to the extent we attempt to breathe new life into the Republican party, we doom our efforts to certain failure.
We need a conservative party. We need to abandon all thought of trying to be the larger of two parties. The Republican party has failed by standing for precisely and exactly nothing.
Sooner or later, it stops making sense to pour money into a car with rust-eaten fenders, rust holes in the floor, cracked glass here and there, an engine that burns a quart of oil every 30 miles, a muffler full of holes, a transmission that works sometimes, seats with split upholstery, and four bald tires and no spare in the trunk. Yes, I know some people continue to pour money into such vehicles, but a.) they're more expensive to keep on the road than new cars, and b.) they still don't even work as basic transportation.
It's time to junk it. It's scrap iron. Just because guys who work in junk yards can salvage some of the parts doesn't mean it's of any value as a car.
Off the top of my head, I'd guess a third of American voters would embrace or largely embrace the principles of a conservative party, but only on two conditions: 1.) it would actually have to have principles, and 2.) it would actually have to live those principles.
Remember the famous "Contract with America?" It turned out to be high-sounding empty rhetoric. We, the people saw it and heard about it, liked it a lot, and embraced it with open arms. It was an amazing success; unfortunately, it only appeared to be real.
To the extent a conservative party attempts to be a large and/or dominant party, it will necessarily fail. Why? Because we have a more than century-old tradition of looterism in the United States. At least a sizeable plurality of Americans have let themselves be turned into wards of the state. Attempting to appeal to those people is moral, intellectual, and political suicide.
A genuine, successful conservative party could, should, and would be the tail that wags the dog: the tail the leftist extremists and semi-independent wards of the state have no choice but to work with. We don't have a multiple-party tradition in the United States. We have an ostensible two-party arrangement under which both parties vie for the purported "center" of the political spectrum while actually advancing leftist so-called "ideas." McCain is no less a looter than Obama: merely a looter with a slightly longer time table. Bush was no less a looter than Gore: merely a looter with a slightly longer time table.
A true conservative party would take a public stand against looterism and actually uphold its stand—live its principles—instead of trying to dress up yet another variety of looterism in slick-sounding new rhetoric. I can be done. It could be done. It should be done.
All that saidâ„¢, I've to confess I doubt it will be done: far, far, far too many of us continue to think in terms of two large parties, and anyway, very few of us are actually willing to live by principles.
-
All that saidâ„¢, I've to confess I doubt it will be done: far, far, far too many of us continue to think in terms of two large parties, and anyway, very few of us are actually willing to live by principles.
Even if it could be done, it would take so long to accomplish that there would be nothing left to save of the nation. It's either convert the Republicans using this defeat, try to have a new party convert the wasteland the US will become while said party grows, or have a revolution. Personally, I'm leaning towards the first option.
-
I agree with Buzz; the only practical solution is for us of a conservative bent to rally behind a conservative leader (Palin?) and bring the GOP back to the unabashedly conservative principles we believe in.
The one thing I fear is the tendency for us to allow ourselves to be branded "Christian Conservatives." Look, I have absolutely nothing against churchgoing Christian people, and I share many values with them. But I do not like wearing Christianity on my sleeve as a badge of honor. Religion should be free and private. It should not be the badge of politicians.
TC
-
The one thing I fear is the tendency for us to allow ourselves to be branded "Christian Conservatives." Look, I have absolutely nothing against churchgoing Christian people, and I share many values with them. But I do not like wearing Christianity on my sleeve as a badge of honor. Religion should be free and private. It should not be the badge of politicians.
Goldwater was quite angry that the Republican party had so entwined itself with that.
-
I agree with Buzz; the only practical solution is for us of a conservative bent to rally behind a conservative leader (Palin?) and bring the GOP back to the unabashedly conservative principles we believe in.
The one thing I fear is the tendency for us to allow ourselves to be branded "Christian Conservatives." Look, I have absolutely nothing against churchgoing Christian people, and I share many values with them. But I do not like wearing Christianity on my sleeve as a badge of honor. Religion should be free and private. It should not be the badge of politicians.
TC
But I do not like wearing Christianity on my sleeve as a badge of honor. Religion should be free and private. It should not be the badge of politicians.
Wow.
Alright, it's been said enough that I can't abide it any longer. Religion should be FREE. I guess I missed the part in the Constitution which said:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof so long as the people keep it to themselves"
I've got a surprise for you. There are a LOT of Christians in this country.
Not only that, there are a lot of Christians who believe that the government that governs best, governs least.
We also believe there is a fight not only for our country, but also for our society (they are two seperate entities).
If you want to throw us under the bus, that is your choice. Keep in mind though, attacking your allies is a bad idea.
I came here to discuss how to get back to conservative principles. Instead, I get- It's all theese FUNDIES FAULT!!!!
Why not blame people who failed to be true to conservative principles: small government and low taxes.
Somehow, I don't think people voted in the Democrats because they were trumpeting how they would give free abortions to all and gay marriage in every house!
The Democrats said they would be FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE and CUT TAXES.
DOESN'T THIS MAKE YOU ANGRY at the Republicans for giving up that issue?
The Democrats knew they couldnt' win on social issues. Yet, you want to give up those issues just like the Republicans gave up economic issues.
Isn't this beyond foolishness?
-
Now that I've slept on it, scrapping the entire system and starting over does sound like a good idea; it's still not going to be fun. Everybody wants to get rid of the cancer, but no one wants to endure the chemo treatment.
-
Just remember if something were to happen to Obama who becomes President. And I think he would be worse. And if something were to happen to both of them before a new VP could be appointed think of who is second in line. And I know we don't want her as President.
-
The republican party is supposedly the "right wing" party, that stands for Christian values. In what way, in the last 8 years or so, has the republican party, as a majority, stood up for Christian values? Not only are the libs completely disillusioned by Barack and all of his cronies, but the republican base itself has a lot to complain about. Conservative standards have been compromised away by greedy, noob/coward republicans for long enough and I believe what has happened tonight is a big fat example of that.
"I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot, I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth." Rev 3:15-16
I know everyone here isn't a Christian, but doesn't the concept apply?
Should this administration bring terrible things, may we see the error of our ways and rebuild, stronger, and better.
As a 51 yr. old white male, IMLHO, the single biggest mistake the Republican Party has ever made has to become seen as the party of "Conservative Christians" and "Christian Values". This has driven away people who are fiscal Conservatives but not religious Conservatives. People who are in fact offended and driven away by the Evangelical fervor of people who want to convert the US into a Theocracy. Ayn Rand was a profound proponent of Freedom and was an Atheist. So religious faith and desire for Freedom do not have to go together.
I see absolutely no difference between a Leftist trying to foist his Socialist Morality down my throat, and Rightist trying to do the same with their Old Testament interpretation (sin, sin, sin, sin and more sin) of the Bible. Both are trying to foist their narrow morality onto me and restrict my freedoms.
The last 30 years have been a marriage of strict convenience between the Fiscal Conservatives and Religious Conservatives. That marriage is now coming to an end and divorce is in high order.
-
I agree with Buzz; the only practical solution is for us of a conservative bent to rally behind a conservative leader (Palin?) and bring the GOP back to the unabashedly conservative principles we believe in.
The one thing I fear is the tendency for us to allow ourselves to be branded "Christian Conservatives." Look, I have absolutely nothing against churchgoing Christian people, and I share many values with them. But I do not like wearing Christianity on my sleeve as a badge of honor. Religion should be free and private. It should not be the badge of politicians.
TC
Palin is an ignorant fool. Show me someone like Goldwater and I'll get behind him or her.
PS: Stop sounding like the Liberals did in 2004. They predicted the end of all civil liberties then, just like many are predicting the end of them now. Liberals learned from their losses, and so will conservatives.
God, I hope so at least. Obama scares me a bit. The thought of someone like Pelosi, Reid, or other of the upper tier democrats in congress and the house scare me a lot more, empowered.
-
I'm keeping my AR-15 until I die. If I end up dying at 86, or 26 for whatever reason. And I'm sure you can imagine what that reason might be. It's mine and it will stay mine until I'm cold.
-
Palin is an ignorant fool. Show me someone like Goldwater and I'll get behind him or her.
I revere the memory of AuH2O.
But, he was a loser. BIG, FREAKING, CAPITAL "L" LOSER. Big enough a loser with enough of a drag on other Reps to help LBJ usher in whole new swaths of socialism into America.
It took a crafty Nixon to activate those stinky fundies to muck together a coalition to wrest the POTUS from the Dems.
Reagan, though not a great church-goer himself, understood that and used his gifts to add even more to the coalition. He managed to blow the Dems outta the water twice and even get his RINO VP GHWB elected.
-
But, he was a loser. BIG, FREAKING, CAPITAL "L" LOSER. Big enough a loser with enough of a drag on other Reps to help LBJ usher in whole new swaths of socialism into America.
Don't forget he was betrayed and backstabbed by a lot of the Republican powerbrokers.
-
But, he was a loser. BIG, FREAKING, CAPITAL "L" LOSER. Big enough a loser with enough of a drag on other Reps to help LBJ usher in whole new swaths of socialism into America.
He lost because the VP of an "popular" assasinated president was seeking reelection. Votes of sympathy.
-
I'm keeping my AR-15 until I die. If I end up dying at 86, or 26 for whatever reason. And I'm sure you can imagine what that reason might be. It's mine and it will stay mine until I'm cold.
Chill out, Taurus.
I'm sure you'll survive the gun confiscation shock troops from the United Nations. :rolleyes:
-
I see absolutely no difference between a Leftist trying to foist his Socialist Morality down my throat, and Rightist trying to do the same with their Old Testament interpretation (sin, sin, sin, sin and more sin) of the Bible. Both are trying to foist their narrow morality onto me and restrict my freedoms.
Any Christian that actually reads their bible does not try to force their point of view on anyone. Disasters such as prohibition was mob rule, not Christianity.
-
I agree with Buzz; the only practical solution is for us of a conservative bent to rally behind a conservative leader (Palin?) and bring the GOP back to the unabashedly conservative principles we believe in.
The one thing I fear is the tendency for us to allow ourselves to be branded "Christian Conservatives." Look, I have absolutely nothing against churchgoing Christian people, and I share many values with them. But I do not like wearing Christianity on my sleeve as a badge of honor. Religion should be free and private. It should not be the badge of politicians.
TC
Palin? In my opinion, she's a sign of what's wrong, not the right way to go. Just how much post-secondary education has she had? What was it, a communication-journalism degree? Come on, that's what football players and beauty queens get. Oh wait...
Kick out the Protestant Fundamentalists and corporate special interests, go back to REALLY being the party of small government and fiscal responsibility and they'll go a long way towards repairing their image and being successful again.
Oh well, I don't see this getting any better. The pendulum isn't slowing down, it's swinging more extreme each time, and what's worse is a bunch of us know it and can't seem to do anything about it.
-
Palin? In my opinion, she's a sign of what's wrong, not the right way to go. Just how much post-secondary education has she had? What was it, a communication-journalism degree? Come on, that's what football players and beauty queens get. Oh wait...
Right, what Washington really needs is more lawyers. ;/
-
Palin? In my opinion, she's a sign of what's wrong, not the right way to go. Just how much post-secondary education has she had? What was it, a communication-journalism degree? Come on, that's what football players and beauty queens get. Oh wait...
Palin is indeed a sign of what's wrong. She's so different, so unusual, that the fact we need someone just like her seems freakish. Make no mistake, though, someone like her is exactly what we need. Another ill-educated Ivy League lawyer from the liberal Northeast establishment will NOT help our country any.
-
Palin is indeed a sign of what's wrong. She's so different, so unusual, that the fact we need someone just like her seems freakish. Make no mistake, though, someone like her is exactly what we need. Another ill-educated Ivy League lawyer from the liberal Northeast establishment will NOT help our country any.
First, who said anything about Ivy League? Plenty of good schools out there teaching practical skills which operate under the radar...
So that being said, how do you feel about Harvard MBAs? :)
Or for that matter Harvard Law grads? We've got one who's Chief Justice, and a few more on the court, including one who wrote the Heller opinion...
I'm a little more partial to the Chicago School myself. Seen too many Harvard MBAs in my work life run things into the ground, it's that whole idea of "you can manage anything if you know how to manage".
Pat
-
First, who said anything about Ivy League? Plenty of good schools out there teaching practical skills which operate under the radar...
So that being said, how do you feel about Harvard MBAs? :)
Or for that matter Harvard Law grads? We've got one who's Chief Justice, and a few more on the court, including one who wrote the Heller opinion...
I'm a little more partial to the Chicago School myself. Seen too many Harvard MBAs in my work life run things into the ground, it's that whole idea of "you can manage anything if you know how to manage".
Pat
Most of the Ivy Leaguers I've known over the years have been far from intelligent or educated. A Harvard degree has become a ticket into the elite echelons of society. That's certainly valuable to the recipients, but it isn't to be confused with an education. The students go there seeking to improve their social pedigree, and they don't learn much of anything besides politically correct liberalism and a sense of smug superiority.
We do not need more of that.
When we have folks looking down on an outsider woman from Alaska because she doesn't have the expected elitist pedigree ("her degree is in communications, well feh, she's just a beauty queen"), that's a major problem. We're now to the point where significant parts of the population are only willing to accept politicians from this narrow and limited set of ill-educated elitists. It's problematical when it happens once or twice, but we much beyond that point now. It's become an establishment, and it's become self-perpetuating.
We need to break that cycle, that establishment. We need someone who is as far removed from that establishment as possible. Palin is ideal. Her distance from that mess is one of her biggest assets.
-
Most of the Ivy Leaguers I've known over the years have been far from intelligent or educated. A Harvard degree has become a ticket into the elite echelons of society. That's certainly valuable to the recipients, but it isn't to be confused with an education. The students go there seeking to improve their social pedigree, and they don't learn much of anything besides politically correct liberalism and a sense of smug superiority.
We do not need more of that.
When we have folks looking down on an outsider woman from Alaska because she doesn't have the expected elitist pedigree ("her degree is in communications, well feh, she's just a beauty queen"), that's a major problem. We're now to the point where significant parts of the population are only willing to accept politicians from this narrow and limited set of ill-educated elitists. It's problematical when it happens once or twice, but we much beyond that point now. It's become an establishment, and it's become self-perpetuating.
We need to break that cycle, that establishment. We need someone who is as far removed from that establishment as possible. Palin is ideal. Her distance from that mess is one of her biggest assets.
Fair enough, can't disagree with you on the ill-educated elitists, but don't mistake a lack of education for someone having the qualifications to do the job. And also don't assume that because someone has one they're an elitist.
Palin might make a decent legislator in time, but right now a lot of what I'm hearing is "she's hot!"
Sorry, my friend, but I'm not voting for a pair of tits. That's no different than voting for someone because they belong to an ethnic group...
Pat
-
Voting for an idiot is pretty stupid, whether that idiot has an Ivy League education (George Bush) or not.
Plenty of intelligent people have no degree, and plenty of morons have one.
Railing on intelligent people is attacking the problem backwards, in my opinion.
-
It's all Bush's fault :P
Really, though - it is. :( He started out the millenium with the presidency and both houses of congress, and over the next 8 years managed to screw it all up for everyone. His fellow Republicans bear the blame too, of course - mostly for letting him get away with it.
Now we have a radical black socialist taking over all the extra powers that Bush gained over the last 7 years, in order to fight the terrists. :O One stroke of the pen, and all gun-owners/non-believers will be enemy-combatants.
I'm almost wishing now that Kerry had won in 2004. By now everyone would have been sick of him and maybe a decent Republican would be president-elect... =|
-
If we had a decent, conservative candidate, Obama would NOT have won.
I don't mean a decent republican, I mean a decent conservative.
-
I'm almost wishing now that Kerry had won in 2004. By now everyone would have been sick of him and maybe a decent Republican would be president-elect... =|
We might be fighting a war here if that happened.
-
Palin should continue as governor, but have a higher profile. She'll need to call national attention to what she's doing in Alaska.
She can overcome the small-state stigma by being more visibly involved in Republican politics on the national level, whether it's stumping for other candidates or helping with party platform issues. It will be a delicate balancing act, though, as too much exposure will give the public fatigue.
She's proven that she is a quick study and can talk about issues. She also connects with people in a way that most politicians can only dream of. I'd say she's on a par with Obama and Bill Clinton in that respect.
Tallpine, with the exception of Reagan/Bush, we haven't seen one party hold the White House for more than two terms since FDR. Whether you agree with the Iraq war or not, wars don't make presidents popular.
-
We might be fighting a war here if that happened.
Unfortunately, I fear that we wil soon be fighting a war here anyway - amongst our own people. =|
-
Unfortunately, I fear that we wil soon be fighting a war here anyway - amongst our own people. =|
I doubt it, maybe some heated arguements and some isolated violence.
-
I doubt it, maybe some heated arguements and some isolated violence.
Kinda like Northern Ireland around soccer season...
-
too much exposure will give the public fatigue.
I tend to disagree with that. If someone/something isn't in the spotlight at least once a week, the public forgets about it. We are an increasingly fickle population. I really wonder what Sarah Palin's role will be in 4 years, she's got the initial exposure, but who knows what the political landscape will look like after the dems have their merry way for 4 long years.
-
Fair enough, can't disagree with you on the ill-educated elitists, but don't mistake a lack of education for someone having the qualifications to do the job. And also don't assume that because someone has one they're an elitist.
Palin might make a decent legislator in time, but right now a lot of what I'm hearing is "she's hot!"
Sorry, my friend, but I'm not voting for a pair of tits. That's no different than voting for someone because they belong to an ethnic group...
Pat
Palin has far more experience in an executive position, and far more success as an administrator, than the current President-elect. She has spent far more time living in the real world than Obama and Biden combined. She can speak as well as Obama and Bill Clinton can. When she says she can relate to real Americans she isn't lying. She's more real than any prominent national politician I think I've ever seen. She's at least somewhat conservative. She doesn't tolerate corruption regardless of which side of the aisle she finds it on. She doesn't squander public funds (that alone makes her supremely qualified). She isn't part of your same old elitist establishment. She seems to know the difference between right and wrong. She can stir up a crowd, and build up excitement and support as well as any politician. She'll take on her own people when they're in the wrong.
But hey, if all you see is her tits and her beauty queen degree, then I can understand why you don't realize she's qualified. Don't feel bad, though. The rest of the establishment doesn't get it, either.
Welcome to APS.
-
Palin wasn't as polished initially. However, if Obama or Biden had received even half the scrutiny for their mistakes as she did (let alone the creative editing) there would be no comparison.
-
Palin has far more experience in an executive position, and far more success as an administrator, than the current President-elect. She has spent far more time living in the real world than Obama and Biden combined. She can speak as well as Obama and Bill Clinton can. When she says she can relate to real Americans she isn't lying. She's more real than any prominent national politician I think I've ever seen. She's at least somewhat conservative. She doesn't tolerate corruption regardless of which side of the aisle she finds it on. She doesn't squander public funds (that alone makes her supremely qualified). She isn't part of your same old elitist establishment. She seems to know the difference between right and wrong. She can stir up a crowd, and build up excitement and support as well as any politician. She'll take on her own people when they're in the wrong.
I just don't think she would have been ready if McCain had keeled over. Hell, she didn't even know what the VP's job with regards to the Senate is. Maybe worrying about things like that make me part of the establishment, but I'm OK with that.
But hey, if all you see is her tits and her beauty queen degree, then I can understand why you don't realize she's qualified. Don't feel bad, though. The rest of the establishment doesn't get it, either.
Naw, that was more of a general comment on all of the "she's hot" meme that's been all over the place. I swear I was (and still am) as fed up with that as I am with our President Elect's groupies swooning.
Welcome to APS.
Thanks! Smack me if I get out of hand...
Pat
-
Palin is less than the unwashed. She has not ever nor will ever be initiate in the grave yard.
Skull and Bones is not for girls.
-
I'm curious to see what will be discussed at CPAC 2009.
-
One stroke of the pen, and all gun-owners/non-believers will be enemy-combatants.
If all it is going to take to nullify the Second Amendment is that, it's time to move to Tasmania, methinks.
-
Standing Wolf said,
The Republican party hasn't stood for anything at all.
Sure they have. They have stood for a SLOWER advance of Socialism than the Socialist/Democrats.
The program continues.
PR
-
But hey, if all you see is her tits and her beauty queen degree, then I can understand why you don't realize she's qualified. Don't feel bad, though. The rest of the establishment doesn't get it, either.
I dunno about that. She might actually be an uninformed idiot. A clip from Bill O'Reiley's show: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWZHTJsR4Bc
Apparently she thinks Africa is a country and doesn't know what countries are in NAFTA.
*shrug*
-
I dunno about that. She might actually be an uninformed idiot. A clip from Bill O'Reiley's show: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWZHTJsR4Bc
Apparently she thinks Africa is a country and doesn't know what countries are in NAFTA.
*shrug*
Yeah but what's that got to do with her potential as a president? =)
I would estimate that 99 percent of the people who rag on ivy league educations wouldn't be able to perform academically at any of them, regardless of whether they are in a bonehead course or not.
-
Hell, she didn't even know what the VP's job with regards to the Senate is. Maybe worrying about things like that make me part of the establishment, but I'm OK with that.
Actually, she was correct about the VP's job with regard to the Senate. Unfortunately, our recently elected VP does not.
-
I would estimate that 99 percent of the people who rag on ivy league educations wouldn't be able to perform academically at any of them, regardless of whether they are in a bonehead course or not.
Well, I don't put much stock in degrees and such as I've seen plenty of idiots stumble their way through Masters courses only to fail in the professional world. I worked with a phD from MIT on a software project for 2 years, and while he was certainly competent he didn't exactly blow me away. That surprised me a bit.
But I do think a VP should be able to sail right on through an episode of "Are you smarter than a 5th grader?"
-
GigaBuist, I watched O'Reilly. The stories about Palin not knowing that Africa is a continent and not a country are not only implausible, but come from "unnamed sources" within the campaign. Sounds to me like some staffers who want to have jobs in future campaigns might be trying to cover up their mistakes, or perhaps the "unnamed sources" are the New York Times.
-
Actually, she was correct about the VP's job with regard to the Senate. Unfortunately, our recently elected VP does not.
Article 1, section 3 of the Constitution says:
The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.
So, other than casting the tie breaking vote, what exactly does the VP do?
-
Article 1, section 3 of the Constitution says:
The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.
So, other than casting the tie breaking vote, what exactly does the VP do?
I saw the debate live.
She was correct in her assessment (or at least more correct than Biden was).
To paraphrase her answer, the VP has the executive role as replacement POTUS & whatever executive authority the POTUS wishes to cede and the VP has the role of Pres of Senate and whatever authority the Senate wishes to cede.
Biden, OTOH, got the substance wrong. The difference is, Biden can spout utter bullsh!t and do so with an air of confidence, "Mark my words...Let me repeat (the same bullsh!t I said earlier)..."
Oh, well, you are not the first person not persuadable by fact after getting the MSM spin-worm embedded in your brain.
-
Yeah but what's that got to do with her potential as a president? =)
I would estimate that 99 percent of the people who rag on ivy league educations wouldn't be able to perform academically at any of them, regardless of whether they are in a bonehead course or not.
Your assertion may have held water prior to 1970. IL ed is not what it once was. I would have no trouble wagering that a (successful) hard science major from any randomly-selected cow college would do well in not only core curriculum courses, but in IL hard science courses.
Recall, that Brooke Shields received an IL education. She majored in one or two of the "-studies" wastes of time.
One can get a perfectly worthless education at an IL school, now that they have so adulterated their core curriculum.
Toss in the effects of affirmative-action picks and the courses required to cater to them so they do not wash out their first year, and what was once an indisputably steep academic slope is now much more accommodating.
Affirmative action picks also demonstrate that a cohort of significantly less academically talented folks can be admitted and graduate, although at a lesser successful proportion than the non-AA chohort, and with less-useful/rigorous degrees.
-
I saw the debate live.
She was correct in her assessment (or at least more correct than Biden was).
True. I would be willing to cut Palin some slack, since she probably doesn't have an extensive background in Con Law, but Biden has no excuse. He took Con Law in law school and has taught Con Law. The fact that he doesn't know the Constitution backwards and forwards inexcusable.
-
Recall, that Brooke Shields received an IL education. She majored in one or two of the "-studies" wastes of time.
No, she graduated from Princeton. She has a literature degree.
-
No, she graduated from Princeton. She has a literature degree.
Isn't Princeton an IL school?
-
Yes. Princeton is an Ivy League school.
-
Isn't Princeton an IL school?
New Jersey.
-
Yes, there are a lot of Christian Conservatives.
There are also a lot of secular ones. You need us, we need you.
-
Yes. Princeton is an Ivy League school.
Ah, I am an idiot. I thought he meant the state.
-
No, she graduated from Princeton. She has a literature degree.
She can READ?... ???
She hides it well... :rolleyes:
-
Hell, she didn't even know what the VP's job with regards to the Senate is. Maybe worrying about things like that make me part of the establishment, but I'm OK with that.
Well, Blushing Bride Biden wants to be right there on Obama's arm for all those meetings with enemy leaders. Isn't the VP's job to be as far away from the President as possible when dangerous things are happening, to make sure nobody can easily get both of them?
-
Ivy League Schools:
* Brown University
* Columbia University
* Cornell University
* Dartmouth College
* Harvard University
* University of Pennsylvania
* Princeton University
* Yale University
-
Yes. Princeton is an Ivy League school.
Nice campus, too. The buildings are High Gothic, all stone with gargoyles, leaded-glass windows and stuff. It could stand in for Hogwart's.