Moderator: Andrew

yogi wrote:When did we acquire Alaska????

yogi wrote:What did we trade them??
Were baseball cards around then??
If we traded them more than 3 packs of mint cards( gum included), we got hosed!!



shaka wrote:Palin exceeded expectations. I wouldn't say she won handily but she did well. Biden was ok too but the fact checkers are going to have a field day with him.
Rockwriter wrote:Palin actually did better than I thought she would, but that's not saying much. She DID, however, continue in her tradition of trying to disguise the fact that she can't or won't answer certain questions by simply giving canned boilerplate about McCain being a maverick, no matter what the actual question was. As a journalist myself, that grates on my nerves something fierce. The question was, here are your perceived Achilles heels; do you think that's right or wrong, and what is your REAL Achilles heel? Biden gave a tame answer but at least answered, but Palin . . . she didn't even attempt to answer the question, and instead gave a long scripted commercial as an answer. The whole time she was talking I was thinking, "Did you even listen to the question?" There were points in there where it seemed like you could have asked, "What's two plus two?" and she would have said, "John McCain is a maverick, always taking shots from his own party, as well as obviously the other party, but always willing to get in there and roll up his sleeves and get the work done no metter who gets the credit." That drives me nuts. It's just a smokescreen, and if she were Vice President it would not serve her well at all. She is simply unprepared for this. And her false folksiness is not suitable for the job either. All that "heck" and "gosh" and "darn right" stuff is reminiscent of Naomi Judd. In order to succeed as VP you have to be a serious person capable of sitting across a negotiating table from world leaders. I keep picturing Sarah Palin across from Vladimir Putin saying, "You're darn tootin', Mr. Putin". LOL. That's not exactly what we need. We've already had a woefully inarticulate president for the past eight years.

Zan wrote:Rockwriter wrote:Palin actually did better than I thought she would, but that's not saying much. She DID, however, continue in her tradition of trying to disguise the fact that she can't or won't answer certain questions by simply giving canned boilerplate about McCain being a maverick, no matter what the actual question was. As a journalist myself, that grates on my nerves something fierce. The question was, here are your perceived Achilles heels; do you think that's right or wrong, and what is your REAL Achilles heel? Biden gave a tame answer but at least answered, but Palin . . . she didn't even attempt to answer the question, and instead gave a long scripted commercial as an answer. The whole time she was talking I was thinking, "Did you even listen to the question?" There were points in there where it seemed like you could have asked, "What's two plus two?" and she would have said, "John McCain is a maverick, always taking shots from his own party, as well as obviously the other party, but always willing to get in there and roll up his sleeves and get the work done no metter who gets the credit." That drives me nuts. It's just a smokescreen, and if she were Vice President it would not serve her well at all. She is simply unprepared for this. And her false folksiness is not suitable for the job either. All that "heck" and "gosh" and "darn right" stuff is reminiscent of Naomi Judd. In order to succeed as VP you have to be a serious person capable of sitting across a negotiating table from world leaders. I keep picturing Sarah Palin across from Vladimir Putin saying, "You're darn tootin', Mr. Putin". LOL. That's not exactly what we need. We've already had a woefully inarticulate president for the past eight years.
Sterling, I can honestly say that of all the things I've ever read that you've written, this is my absolute favorite.
She did the same thing when the topic moved to gay rights - tho thankfully didn't go into a Maverick speech again. She just completely ignored the question at hand and started ranting about the sanctity of marriage again. Not the sharpest crayon in the box.
I am also disappointed that her barbaric wolf track record wasn't brought to question.
P.S. I'm not a journalist, and she annoyed the snot out of me.
Of course, I also think she's the anti-christ, but I can still separate the two!

yogi wrote:Here are the choices:
Choice A: We elect a guy who may hate white people, and wants everyone to earn $44,250 per year.
Choice B: One step away from becoming the most powerful person in the free world sits a iamraisingaknockedup teenagermom go to www.iamraisingaknockupteenagermom.com for more details.
Sorry, I meant, one step away from becoming the most powerful person in the free world sits: Hockey Mom. Does she even know what the duties of the President are???
As for Biden and facts??? he wouldnt know a fact if it shot him in the ass. Biden sounds great. The problem is half the shit he spews is 100% fiction. He has ALWAYS done this.
For me the only real choice is McCain, butt..... he is older than Keith Richards & Mick Jager combined, which easily could bring us back to iamraisingaknockedupteenagermom.
We are better than this!!
Then again, we are replacing the worst president in the history of the US.

Zan wrote:Of course, I also think she's the anti-christ, but I can still separate the two![/color][/b]
yogi wrote:When speaking to Zan all of us must move as faaaarrrr to the left as possible.

chowhall wrote:Zan wrote:Of course, I also think she's the anti-christ, but I can still separate the two![/color][/b]
Zan,
How is a woman in her 40's that knows her unborn baby has down syndrome and elects to have that baby the antichrist?
You can dislike Palin all you want, but the antichrist comment is the pot calling the kettle.

Zan wrote:And why am *I* the anti-christ for calling her the same? I don't get it.
She is barbaric and wants to instill HER values on the entire country. Not every politician wants that. Not even McCain. The only reason he chose her was to get the far rightist to feel better about voting for him because she is so extreme.
We can debate the "abortion" principle all day if you want, but you & I both know that *never* gets anywhere when people have differing opinions on what defines "life" in the first place.[/color][/b]
Rockwriter wrote:shaka wrote:Palin exceeded expectations. I wouldn't say she won handily but she did well. Biden was ok too but the fact checkers are going to have a field day with him.
Palin actually did better than I thought she would, but that's not saying much. She DID, however, continue in her tradition of trying to disguise the fact that she can't or won't answer certain questions by simply giving canned boilerplate about McCain being a maverick, no matter what the actual question was. As a journalist myself, that grates on my nerves something fierce. The question was, here are your perceived Achilles heels; do you think that's right or wrong, and what is your REAL Achilles heel? Biden gave a tame answer but at least answered, but Palin . . . she didn't even attempt to answer the question, and instead gave a long scripted commercial as an answer. The whole time she was talking I was thinking, "Did you even listen to the question?" There were points in there where it seemed like you could have asked, "What's two plus two?" and she would have said, "John McCain is a maverick, always taking shots from his own party, as well as obviously the other party, but always willing to get in there and roll up his sleeves and get the work done no metter who gets the credit." That drives me nuts. It's just a smokescreen, and if she were Vice President it would not serve her well at all. She is simply unprepared for this. And her false folksiness is not suitable for the job either. All that "heck" and "gosh" and "darn right" stuff is reminiscent of Naomi Judd. In order to succeed as VP you have to be a serious person capable of sitting across a negotiating table from world leaders. I keep picturing Sarah Palin across from Vladimir Putin saying, "You're darn tootin', Mr. Putin". LOL. That's not exactly what we need. We've already had a woefully inarticulate president for the past eight years.
Just my opinion! I hope all is well.
Sterling
yogi wrote:Here are the choices:
Choice A: We elect a guy who may hate white people, and wants everyone to earn $44,250 per year.
Choice B: One step away from becoming the most powerful person in the free world sits a iamraisingaknockedup teenagermom go to www.iamraisingaknockupteenagermom.com for more details.
Sorry, I meant, one step away from becoming the most powerful person in the free world sits: Hockey Mom. Does she even know what the duties of the President are???
As for Biden and facts??? he wouldnt know a fact if it shot him in the ass. Biden sounds great. The problem is half the shit he spews is 100% fiction. He has ALWAYS done this.
For me the only real choice is McCain, butt..... he is older than Keith Richards & Mick Jager combined, which easily could bring us back to iamraisingaknockedupteenagermom.
We are better than this!!
Then again, we are replacing the worst president in the history of the US.
chowhall wrote:Zan wrote:And why am *I* the anti-christ for calling her the same? I don't get it.
She is barbaric and wants to instill HER values on the entire country. Not every politician wants that. Not even McCain. The only reason he chose her was to get the far rightist to feel better about voting for him because she is so extreme.
We can debate the "abortion" principle all day if you want, but you & I both know that *never* gets anywhere when people have differing opinions on what defines "life" in the first place.[/color][/b]
Poor choice of words on my part for implying the antichrist toward you. I meant as strong a case can be made for Obama being the antichrist as Palin.


elmotano wrote:If you really think the Republicans in power give a rat's ass about abortion you are nuts. This is how they skirt the issues on economics, Iraq, etc.
chowhall wrote:elmotano wrote:If you really think the Republicans in power give a rat's ass about abortion you are nuts. This is how they skirt the issues on economics, Iraq, etc.
Maybe so, but look at their voting record. That's what I did when evaluating Obama.
If you're going to bring up the war and the economic situation, do you really want to vote for someone that is going to pull out of Iraq instantly and leave Iraq like we did in Vietnam? Do you think raising taxes is going to make our economic situation better? Those a**holes in Congress couldn't pass the 700 Billion bailout package without adding their pork packages to keep themselves in office. More of our money is NOT the answer.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests