Well that tidbit certainly enhances Palin's foreign policy credentials.Originally Posted by Sancho
|
|
Well that tidbit certainly enhances Palin's foreign policy credentials.
The following users like this post: OnlyOneOklahoma
No one suggested it did.
The following users like this post: oucub23
No, the derision of her came from her inability to understand 5th grade Geography. Media saw that and(quite rightfully, thankfully) jumped on it.
An example of that being Russia's proximity to Alaska?
Incorrect. The derision of her arose solely because of the words that flowed from her mouth.
And it was focused far more sharply on her than it was the other candidates.
All other candidates were well-known. Palin was picked from total obscurity and almost no one have ever even heard of her.
Also, she didn't help her cause when she continued to give totally nonsensical responses. If you don't buy that, then you must think my foreign policy credentials were just enhanced, as the Prime Minister of Canada just flew over my house.
She was vetted as a candidate for potus. She wasn't. Joe wasn't vetted in the same way. Nor was Obama.
No, an example would be that she was unaware that Africa is also a continent.
She also did not know which countries entered into NAFTA. In addition, she did not know that there are a North Korea and a South Korea. She though that there is just one country called "Korea." This information is straight from a Fox News reporter on a Youtube clip.
We can do this all day. O doesn't know how many states are in the US, or what Hawaii is part of. Joe doesn't know who the president was when the market crashed. We have a Senator afraid of an island tipping over. Our president doesn't even know how to say Navy Corpsmen.
Palin was treated more harshly than the others.
Even **** Cheney thinks she was pathetic. When even **** isn't there to back you up, you know you're stretching.
When you're using **** to make your case, you're desperate.
would
The following users like this post: Sooner 4 Life
I agree that it was spun but not any worse than Obama's "you didn't build that" was spun.
Now Palin was actually technically correct but as our resident lefty's have pointed out on this thread, it is all part of bigger picture.
Righties are quick to do the same thing about Obama's "you didn't build that." Obama was referring to bridges and roads and it was clear to anyone who was paying attention to what he said. Yet righties indicate that it was part of a bigger picture.
So in the end, half of America thinks that Palin actually said she could see Russia from her house and the other half thinks Obama says that small business owners didn't build their own businesses.
I agree that it was spun but not any worse than Obama's "you didn't build that" was spun.
Now Palin was actually technically correct but as our resident lefty's have pointed out on this thread, it is all part of bigger picture.
Righties are quick to do the same thing about Obama's "you didn't build that." Obama was referring to bridges and roads and it was clear to anyone who was paying attention to what he said. Yet righties indicate that it was part of a bigger picture.
So in the end, half of America thinks that Palin actually said she could see Russia from her house and the other half thinks Obama says that small business owners didn't build their own businesses.
There is a lot of FAIL in your response.
Palin was called stupid when she said things that were factually correct. Obama and Biden are given a p**** when they say things that are false and stupid repeatedly.
And as for the "You didnt build that" quip, you are simply wrong. Obama was referring to businesses. This isn't some obscure reference that was taken out of context, this is a common meme within the Liberal hive mind - that a business is built by society rather than the business owner, designed to justify collectivism and all of the authoritarian policies that go with it.
FIFY
The following users like this post: oucub23
I am happy to point out deficiencies on both sides as I find both of them equally repulsive. You will notice that I never brought up blatant mis-statements by either sides. You're a resident GOP homer so you cant or does not want to see the difference between a mis-statement and an absence of basic understanding of absolutely essential knowledge.
An example of Mis-statement:
Obama: 57 states
**** Cheney: Speaking about Chavez...the people of Peru deserve better
W: Africa is a nation that suffers from incredible disease
Palin(again): New Hampshire is in the Northwest.
An example of missing 5th grade Geography knowledge:
Palin: Africa a continent? Who knew?
Obama: ?????
Nah, you couldn't do this all day.
Resident GOP homer huh? Okay, if that makes it easier for you to dismiss what I'm saying, that's fine.
I've repeatedly said I'm not defending her--I can't defend anyone that supported Newt. I'm talking in a broader sense in how she was attacked by the press. The Africa thing was not what she was savaged about--there were several other things. The Bush Doctrine, which wasn't as clearly defined as Gibson wanted it to be. Her clothing spending--first time I've ever heard a candidate attacked in that way. Seeing Russia from her house is still widely attributed to her. What she reads. Who her favorite Founder was. She was a VP candidate. VP. When has a VP been hit in the way she was? Trumpeting her Africa comment or Russia comment but ignoring Joe's FDR stuff or clean comments is what I'm referencing.
The following users like this post: fdubzou
I haven't counted but you have more than a dozen posts on this thread taking her side. But I guess you arent defending her. Maybe you're defending the party she represented. GOP homerism.
Remember Brad Edwards? http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-250_162-3019277.html and his haircut spending?
He's not a VP candidate in 2012 and yet: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1431337.html
But you dont remember his villification, you know why? GOP homerism.
Palin was a non stop source of mockery throughout her campaign, there's no denying that. However, the reason behind this was her and no one else. She could not formulate a coherent sentence to save her life as evident in hours and hours of Youtube videos. Does media go overboard with poking fun and even exagerrating? Absolutely, but Palin deserved every bit of it just like any other candidate would've had they done the same thing.
This was my point throughout--and that they haven't done the same thing with everyone else. Part of it was that she had her share of gaffes--hers were much more publicized than the other candidates were, simple truth that we both acknowledge. We simply disagree on the why. I've cited different examples of why--you say it's just b/c she sucks. That's fine. I, and others, have tried to show point for point where she was criticized and others weren't--instead, you show a haircut criticism on Edwards. Spank states that Biden is simply lovable in his stupidity, yet Palin's basically a dumb ****. That is the crux of the discussion here. It's all the different criticisms that are thrown here and there at other candidates, all brought to bear on one person. I'm dubbed a GOP homer b/c I recognize this and point it out--am not defending her, yet you see it as such. I'm not a fan of hers. I am, and have been, bothered by the way women are treated in politics--yet you seem comfortable with it? Perhaps you're a misogynist? See, I know you aren't, but that's the spin you're trying to use to make me a homer. Ignore my criticisms of the GOP on several fronts, ignore that I've said several times I'm not a Palin fan, that I don't like taking her side in stuff, and that I wouldn't support her--and simply run with what you 'know' to be true.
The following users like this post: Tundra
Here is the part of the quote that is specific to the issue:
[QUOTE]
Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.
/QUOTE]
What he meant to say was if you've got a business, you didn't build those. It was a gaffe.
Not any different than when Romney said "Coorperations are people." The libs took that one and ran with it even though it was obvious that Romney meant to say "Coorperations are Made up of people".
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...ail&FORM=VIRE1
If you listen to it it is obvious that when he said "you didn't build that.........somebody else did that." that he was referring to the bridges and such.
Since you see everything that Obama says from this same perspective then small wonder you believe tbat he is out to collectivize everything. To those of us that are looking at it from a different perspective it appears Obama is a big believer in public works and education and other liberal stuff. I think also you have to consider that a lot of the stimulus stuff went to infrastructure (roads and bridges) so Obama is going to try and hype that kind of stuff since he spent a boatload of cash on it.
[QUOTE=Yuck Fu;1083326]Here is the part of the quote that is specific to the issue:
If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business—you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen.Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.
/QUOTE]
What he meant to say was if you've got a business, you didn't build those. It was a gaffe.
Not any different than when Romney said "Coorperations are people." The libs took that one and ran with it even though it was obvious that Romney meant to say "Coorperations are Made up of people".
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...ail&FORM=VIRE1
If you listen to it it is obvious that when he said "you didn't build that.........somebody else did that." that he was referring to the bridges and such.
Since you see everything that Obama says from this same perspective then small wonder you believe tbat he is out to collectivize everything. To those of us that are looking at it from a different perspective it appears Obama is a big believer in public works and education and other liberal stuff. I think also you have to consider that a lot of the stimulus stuff went to infrastructure (roads and bridges) so Obama is going to try and hype that kind of stuff since he spent a boatload of cash on it.
There's the whole quote. In context, it appears that he believes business owners wouldn't be successful w/o the government works. That's anathema to conservatives. I, and others, think he's a collectivist for specific reasons. He took over a car company. He is turning health care into a collective system. This doesn't help him either.
I never said that she's a ****. But you have to admit that Biden does a much better job at spinning himself into a Barney Fife, while Palin comes across more like Don King.
Neither one seems very coherent at times, but one is sure more like able than the other. Even Bush got tons of leeway because of his overall demeanor, people still, in general, think of him as a "good guy". Palin never came across that way...she seems to have the intellect of Sheila Jackson Lee AND the steadfastness of Hillary Clinton.
Put it this way...she is still more likable than Coulter, because of her "homegrown" feel.
What was your point? That media has been unfair? They exagerrate? That isnt anything new and I agree with you there. Its just what media does. Clinton is never going to live down his "hound dog" image regardless of how well he treats Hillary and deservedly so. Media saw something that he did and then bit down on it like a rabid dog. The truth is he did cheat on his wife.
But what you seem to be missing that others and I are suggesting to you as well is that Palin got her bell rung about her stupidity not because she's a woman, not because she's a Republican, not because she's a soccer mom but because she's stupid. Plain and simple(also notice how I didnt call her a dumb ****). There is a distinct difference in a gaffe and astounding stupidity or in Palin's case, low IQ as pointed out to you by me in post#118. But you ignore that as well. The truth here is that just like Clinton was an adulterer and media lynches him for that every chance they get, they did the same to Palin for her stupidity.
You seem to keep fighting an invisible cause(the unfair treatment of Sarah Palin) that does not exist. You said you've never seen media go after a candidate like they did after Palin, then as an example you pointed out their "attack" on her about the expense of her clothes. Well, I cited an example about media criticizing John Edwards a guy nonetheless $1250 haircut in 2008 and then again in 2012 far far removed from being a VP candidate(thankfully). You have an easier time accepting this and moving on because this is not the party that you support and hence my reference to you being a GOP homer.
Last edited by URNotserious; 02-13-2013 at 08:41 PM. Reason: Palin brain
It wasn't simply the clothing thing. It was all of the attacks--some warranted, some not, while others stupid comments and actions were ignored. We don't agree. That's fine. We'll agree to disagree. You contend she was treated fairly, I disagree. Neither of us are fans of her, so at least we agree there.
Thoughts on this? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/ar...nted=1&_r=2&hp
Also to......couldn't agree more.
I edited after you responded, so I'll put this here. Thoughts?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/ar...nted=1&_r=2&hp
Looks like 2 young Entrepreneurs just trying to make it. Also looks like they have no reason to doubt the story and Fox news stands by the story as well. I truly hope however that it is a hoax as it will restore a semblance of respect for the GOP. Not that it matters as the Democrats seem to be on track to win the next 6 elections to come with the pro immigration bill and Obamacare.
FML.
False. Exhibit #1, which is straight from Palin's mouth:
So let me get this straight... to prove that "someone" said the fact that "it is 2.4 miles from Alaska to Russia (soil to soil) enhances Palin's foreign policy credentials."You posted a video in which nobody says that and commented "straight from Palin's mouth" ?
Is that how you think words work?
Her point is that Alaska's proximity to Russia enhances her foreign policy experience. I'm certain you heard her say that if you watched the video. Her follow-on point was that she and her state keep an eye on Putin as he flies over Alaska, and that also is part of the reason her foreign policy credentials are enhanced. Do you think those two points are valid?
___ Yes
___ No
So you agree then that no one in the video said what you claimed they said?
[QUOTE=oucub23;1083404]I don't disagree with your ****essment here. Obama goes for the "it takes a village" approach. I was just pointing out that both sides take the soundbites and run with them and take them out of context. I don't share your view that he is a collectivist in the truest sense of the word, just a liberal who is doing what liberals do.
Although maybe you could give her a p**** on the proximity point, the comment on Putin's flights demonstrates a fundamental lack of knowledge concerning geography.Her point is that Alaska's proximity to Russia enhances her foreign policy experience. I'm certain you heard her say that if you watched the video. Her follow-on point was that she and her state keep an eye on Putin as he flies over Alaska, and that also is part of the reason her foreign policy credentials are enhanced. Do you think those two points are valid?
Yeah her and W right ?
I can't believe this thread has made it to 3 pages.
The following users like this post: brokebacksooner
How about your opinion?
To be honest, I think the thing that hurts Palin most is her voice. I think it hurts her credibility kind of like Barney Franks' voice hurt him.
My opinion is who gives a **** about her. For a woman that you all seem to think is the dumbest **** on the planet, you all spend a lot of ****ing time discussing about her. I don't get what the obsession is with her, especially from the left, when she is basically irrelevant.
I have this issue in court sometimes and when I have presented in front of legislative committees. I can purposely lower my voice to sound less girlish, but I don't think it sounds natural, and I feel like if it sounds fake, it's lessens my credibility. Of course being knowledgeable on the subject about which you are speaking is a plus (ahem), and offering less visual distraction helps, but my voice does not carry the power I wish it did.
She was going to be attacked because she was a Republican since she was a Female Republican it was even worse.
If your a Female or minority your not allowed off the democrat plantation without getting whipped.
Compare it to the complete p**** obama and crazy uncle Joe if iam not saying something stupid i am telling a lie biden received.
The following users like this post: fdubzou
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
