The Forum > Article Comments > Sarah Palin a change? What change? > Comments
Sarah Palin a change? What change? : Comments
By Ruby Hamad, published 5/9/2008Palin may be a woman, but to many feminists and other Clinton supporters she does not speak for women.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 26
- 27
- 28
-
- All
Posted by Cazza, Friday, 5 September 2008 9:54:19 AM
| |
This isn't an article, it's a comment and should have been posted as a comment and not tried to dress up as a new opinion piece. Why didn't you just post a comment to Terpstra's piece. Did you think it would not get enough attention if it was "just a comment" and you wanted to express your angst even more.
What a rant, usually you see this sort of spray and out of context, taking to extremes of every picked apart sentence, in the newspaper blog pages. You obviously feel very strongly about this, you should let go and let us know what you really think. Posted by rpg, Friday, 5 September 2008 10:02:29 AM
| |
Thanks for the article.
Women who would have voted for Hillary Clinton absolutely would not vote for Sarah Palin because Clinton supporters want universal health care, responsible foreign policy, access to abortion, and believe that climate change is happening now. Unfortunately many Americans are single issue voters and the 37.5 million anti-abortion lobby will turn out to vote for Palin. If Huffinton Post report below is s true reflection of her views then the world will not be a better place. "Speaking before the Pentecostal church, Palin painted the current war in Iraq as a messianic affair in which the United States could act out the will of the Lord. "Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God," she exhorted the congregants. "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan." "Religion, however, was not strictly a thread in Palin's foreign policy. It was part of her energy proposals as well. Just prior to discussing Iraq, Alaska's governor asked the audience to pray for another matter -- a $30 billion national gas pipeline project that she wanted built in the state. "I think God's will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that," she said. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/02/palins-church-may-have-sh_n_123205.html Posted by billie, Friday, 5 September 2008 10:15:59 AM
| |
The left-wing feminists come out shrieking over Palin because she, a conservative mother of five, has done something they cannot do. The slack-moraled left feminists have also attacked here daughter for being 17, unmarried and pregant, when they would have made all sorts of excuses for a daughter of the sisterhood.
What a bunch of disgusting hypocrites! And, they didn't even vote for a woman presidential nominee when they had the chance. Posted by Mr. Right, Friday, 5 September 2008 10:40:07 AM
| |
I happened to listen to Giuliani’s speech which preceded Palin's presentation at the Republican convention on SBS yesterday.
Giuliani compared McCain and Palin against Obama. The difference is McCain and Palin have both held positions of authority, where making and living with the consequences of a decision is the job. Obama has not been elected to a position of authority, he has merely been a ‘community worker’ and apparently cannot make up his mind (sounds like Krudd and the ‘committees / talkfests’). I think the Reps might well have pulled this one out the fire. McCain/Palin offers for the republicans what the Obama / Biden seriously lack in the democrats. McCain / Palin present as people who have both operated as leaders and of course balance the maturity / youth dichotomy as well as the male/female issue. With McCain and his wisdom in the chair and Palin and her apparent ability to take on the role, should something happen with McCain, she is in a position to step up to the plate. Being female, she also demonstrates that special something to destroy another lie of the inadequate, the gender based glass ceiling. Obama / Biden offer inexperience supported, not by a female but an older hack. It seems, Obama offers a person who makes a lot of promises for the future (who cares about his running mate). McCain / Palin offer people who do not rely on promises but on their track records as the indicator to the future. As to the rhetoric of the early posts “Palin is essentially George W Bush in a skirt.” Maybe you are part right, from her speech, she spoke like someone who has the “balls” (which I always associated with Margaret Thatcher). And like Margaret said, back in the 1970s “The battle for women's rights has been largely won.” And we have moved on from then. I guess a prospective female VP of USA removes any lingering doubts to the outcome of that battle. Posted by Col Rouge, Friday, 5 September 2008 11:16:32 AM
| |
Who said that feminists represent women. Feminists represent feminists.
But feminists can always form their own political party, and see how many votes they get. It has been tried a number of times in other countries, and very few men or women would vote for them. I would not vote for Palin based on her politics, but I do admire her for being her own woman, and not pandering to the beliefs of those who like to call themselves feminist. Posted by HRS, Friday, 5 September 2008 12:34:46 PM
| |
Good countering argument to Terpstra's earlier article, which had me wondering at the time how such a lightweight ramble could be given the editorial nod. Though once you know its title was an editor's choice, you soon realise that encouraging serious discussion isn't necessarily the priority here.
Thinking women won't be fooled by the Republican's cynical ploy to woo their vote. The more they hear from this woman, especially in her unscripted moments, and the more that surfaces about her past policy decisions and general modus operandi, the less likely they are to view her as a serious contender. Mr. Right "The slack-moraled left feminists have also attacked her daughter for being 17, unmarried and pregnant.." Some evidence to back this claim would be useful. From what I've observed, critics of Palin have been careful to avoid attacks on her family and are quite rightly focusing instead on attacking her wacky views and past policy and governing decisions. Obama himself, to his great credit, made it clear from the time Palin's family circumstances first surfaced that attacks on family issues were off limits. All the Democrats have to do is stay on message about the myriad of substantive problems facing America. As well as going after the religious conservative and female vote, Palin has also been chosen very deliberately as a distraction. Republicans are hoping her novelty value and personable qualities will divert attention from being focused too intensively on the massive failures of the Bush government, and the fact that a McCain/Palin ticket will only offer up more of the same. Hopefully, the Democrats, and thinking voters across the spectrum, will not fall for this trap. Posted by Bronwyn, Friday, 5 September 2008 12:42:45 PM
| |
The author is right. All the said lady represents is more of the same toxic psychosis, but ratcheted up to a larger degree.
Notice she uses the same code "elites"---meaning the left-liberals who supposedly control everything but in fact and reality have very little real power. Real POWER belongs to the captains of industry, the movers and shakers who make the REAL decisions as to who is to live or die or rot away in The Planet of Slums. In my opinion this essay says all that needs to be said about the GOP. Remember that it was written 4 years ago. A lot of rot has occurred since. 1. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7100.htm So what do we have : self serving GODLESS exoteric religiosity combined with frontier capitalism----winner takes all, the war of all against all. And screw the planet too. Yes "creationist" "religion" is at its root fundamentally GODLESS. Posted by Ho Hum, Friday, 5 September 2008 1:51:59 PM
| |
Bronwyn, I like the way you folks pick apart other posts, what fun .. I'll join in then ..
So you haughtily demand of Mr Right "some evidence to back this claim would be useful" when you yourself make this statement "Obama himself, to his great credit, made it clear from the time Palin's family circumstances first surfaced that attacks on family issues were off limits" and don't substantiate it. Did he say it, where? Was that after his attack dogs went after her and he realised it was not a good look, right as the announcement was made she was McCains running mate. (unsubstantiated and I don't really care enough to worry about proving it or not to folks who are just hypocrits anyway) Do you challenge any of the author's statements, just as vague and self righteous. What you forget in your self congratulatory pickiness, is that you yourself might not be so perfect. You're all in such a spin about Sarah Palin, you forget yourselves. This is such a hoot to watch you all going in circles. There should be a word for it. Posted by rpg, Friday, 5 September 2008 2:14:51 PM
| |
rpg haughtily demands evidence Obama "made it clear from the time Palin's family circumstances first surfaced that attacks on family issues were off limits", and asks, "Did he say it, where? Was that after his attack dogs went after her and he realised it was not a good look, right as the announcement was made she was McCains running mate. (unsubstantiated and I don't really care enough to worry about proving it or not to folks who are just hypocrits anyway)".
A pity rpg doesn't care about his words (or spelling). Evidence (audio: http://i.timeinc.net/time/2008/Obama_090108.mp3, transcript: http://thepage.time.com/obama-transcript-from-jay-newton-small/), from the day news emerged: BO: I have heard some of the news on this and so let me be as clear as possible. I have said before and I will repeat again, I think people’s families are off limits, and people’s children are especially off limits. This shouldn’t be part of our politics, it has no relevance to governor Palin’s performance as a governor or her potential performance as a vice president. And so I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories. You know my mother had me when she was 18. And how family deals with issues and teenage children that shouldn’t be the topic of our politics and I hope that anybody who is supporting me understands that is off limits. JZ: an unnamed McCain advisor as reported on Reuters that the despicable rumors have been spread on blogs some even with Barack Obama’s name on them. BO: I am offended by that statement, there is no evidence at all that any of this involved us. I hope I am as clear as I can be. So in case I am not, let me repeat, we don’t go after people’s families, we don’t get them involved in the politics, it is not appropriate and it is not relevant. Our people were not involved in any way in this and they will not be. And if I ever thought it was somebody in the campaign that was involved in something like that they would be fired." Posted by isabelberners, Friday, 5 September 2008 3:20:55 PM
| |
Sarah Palin is a vote for unstable laissez-faire credit houses and those relationships that promote chasing more hypo-capitalism.
US ctizens won’t see Palin make problem-solving attainments. Sarah Palin is not a leader of real change. She is a women of yesterday. As a role model, Sarah Palin will pigeonhole and burden women further into a historical gender based ‘division of labour’ that doubles the social expectations of their performance role in civic daily responsibilities. We won't see a stand for social class equity, mass individual freedom, nor any radical moves toward world peace or diversity from this gal. As a political agent in vogue, perhaps. If you think casting a blockbuster movie demonstrates a women’s noteworthy capacity to employ weapons of war, contribute to the latest in-house-talk on how to shoot fire-arms, and raise a hand-ball call to assume the might of the military forces. Sarah Palin represents the yellow right cronies, whose prayers advocate a conformist policy rule against all forms of regional and urban dystopia, without one look at breakdown of socio-economic, or political cause. This women does not promote a civic crime prevention strategy and I doubt that she could find one modern, outside the 10 commandments. Sarah Palin and all those who support her kind of policies, are out-of-touch with the pressures of everyday life, and are decidedly anti-women. Compared to Ms Clinton, as a female leader, capable of representing men and women from diverse backgrounds towards efforts of their own self-determination, Sarah Palin is no credible match. Women like Sarah Palin operate with a femocratic use of power, a power that can be worse, by degree, on fellow peers, then what we know from men. http://www.miacat.com/ Posted by miacat, Friday, 5 September 2008 3:29:24 PM
| |
RPG. September 1st ABC news senior national correspondent Jack Tapper, asked Barack Obama regarding Sarah Palins 17 year old daughters pregnancy. Barck Obama replied " Families and children are off limits " ect.
Google (thats an information site!) Political Punch Jack Tapper. Col Rouge. Maggie Thatcher destroyed the social infrastructure of the UK, and sold off anything that was owned by the British Taxpayer, to her mates in the top end of town. To save her hide in 1982, she started a war instead of taking the political approach. The cost (not to her), was the loss of many young British and Argentian defence personel. Posted by Kipp, Friday, 5 September 2008 3:44:19 PM
| |
The secularist are comical. We have Eva Cox complaining about not enough women in high places. When they get someone there they tear her to shreds. No doubt the feminist would rather have a homosexual impotent man than a woman who is also not ashamed to be a mother and human being. It just goes to show that many feminist have really little to no real concern about women especially in Islamic nations. They are only concerned about their own warped world view. Unfortunately they have many whimpy men who are to afraid to wear the pants on helping their cause.
Posted by runner, Friday, 5 September 2008 4:38:52 PM
| |
Kipp I lived in UK at the time and voted for Margaret Thatcher government.
“destroyed the social infrastructure of the UK” Rubbish, she gave millions of people the opportunity to own the homes the socialists were only prepared to rent. She promoted and introduced “comprehensive school” system She attacked the parasitic national industries, set up by the socialist swill to feather the nests of their union masters. She negotiated a multi billion dollar rebate from the European Union to recover the exorbitant cost disadvantages which previous socialist governments had coughed up and for which Tony Blair and Gordon Browns government have continued to benefit from. As to “To save her hide in 1982, she started a war instead of taking the political approach.” So, the successful way of dealing with an invading military dictator is found in “the political approach”? This “political approach”, is that what Chamberlain used shortly before and Churchill failed to do immediately preceding WWII? The Falklands were settled predominantly by “Welsh” folk (same to for Argentina’s Patagonia region). These people held historic kinship with UK. The Argentinian dictator, Galtieri, simply invaded the Falklands (and some other islands) to deflect Argentinian public anger away from the incompetence and domestic economic crisis which the military junta had brought onto that country. “The cost (not to her), was the loss of many young British and Argentian defence personel.” that is the fault of Margaret Thatcher and has nothing to do with Galtieri and his military junta? I always thought the torpedoing of the Admiral Belgrano was a particularly worthy action. A capital ship, steaming around with a bunch of military reinforcements aboard and thinking it was impervious to attack? Its sinking was “criminal insanity” on the part of the thugs who ran Argentina. I find it strange for anyone to criticize a democratically elected leader, like Margaret Thatcher, for standing up against an illegal invasion of territory by a military thug and dictator. But as she, herself, said “If my critics saw me walking over the Thames they would say it was because I couldn't swim.” Posted by Col Rouge, Friday, 5 September 2008 4:57:50 PM
| |
Sarah Palin's speech to the Republican convention has to be seen in the context of the US presidential election campaign. The Republicans surely know that they can't win on a rerun of the Bush agenda, so they have set out to do two things: hold on to their base in the South and develop a platform which is likely to appeal to the American lower middle and working classes. Enter Governor Sarah - articulate, attractive, a mother with a son in the armed forces and a child with a disability, a wife with a working class unionist husband and a Governor with a reasonably successful track record in Alaska.
Her speech - long on patriotism, on standing up to the contemptuous elite, on family, on integrity and on energy independence - was designed to strike a chord in those working class 'swing states' in which Hillary Clinton beat Barack Obama in the Democratic primaries. Is it risky? Yes it is but it does give a coherent strategy, some charisma and a bit of charm to what had previously been a meandering, dull campaign. Whether feminists like Palin or not is monumentally irrelevant. She wasn't talking to them. She was talking to the 'working families' (to quote the Ruddster) of middle and lower middle class America. Posted by Senior Victorian, Friday, 5 September 2008 5:01:55 PM
| |
Senior Victorian,
I have been watching US elections for the past 12 years or so. Fascinating. You are an exception. An Australian analysist who sees things as the Americans do. You are dead right in your analysis ... and Palin will win more male votes than womens votes. Obama's people won't know how to react and will botch their response(s). Watch. McCain and Palin will crucify them. Posted by keith, Friday, 5 September 2008 6:15:56 PM
| |
Col Rouge. I would love to support your belief in Maggie Thatcher, but she played to the common denominator to save herself.
The saddest thing I remember of 1982, was "The Sun" newspaper full front page "GOTCHA", after over three hundred young naval Argentians had been killed and drowned on the Belgrano, and they were'nt even in the no go zone. What did Maggie Thatcher say to the media about this appalling loss of life? "Rejoice". That truely showed up her indifference to the value of human life. To add, her arrogance showed when she made Dennis an hereditory knight, a title which her son Mark now holds, who turns out to be a crook and a mercenary. Your belief in this woman demeans my respect for yourself! Posted by Kipp, Friday, 5 September 2008 7:04:52 PM
| |
Sarah Palin's selection has sure hit a raw nerve, particularly with the Left who seem distressed that Palin has stolen something from them. What's a mother of 5 with a Downs Syndrome baby and a pregnant 17 yr old unmarried daughter doing being a Conservative?!
The author attacks Ms Palin's right to speak for women but oddly, seems to assume that she does. Isn't this glaringly patronising and inconsistent? Palin obviously reflects the values of some women and not others. Its also strange that the author trots out the old line about women being inhibited from higher office when she is doing her best to discredit Sarah Palin from one of the most powerful offices in the world. No, its not about the policies, nor male sexism its about the angry Left who claim to speak for women but only as long as they conform to a Left wing stereotype. Posted by Atman, Friday, 5 September 2008 9:08:28 PM
| |
I wonder what would be the ideal woman so far as the left is concerned.
To be divorced or single, no dependant children (having aborted them all), denigrating males, living off the taxpayer and calling themselves oppressed. Posted by HRS, Friday, 5 September 2008 11:18:48 PM
| |
Certainly not Hillary, Sarah, Cindy, Barbara, Laura nor Bristol but perhaps Michelle after all she is condescending, verbose, sophisticated, black, Ivy League educated, well-wed to and supports a nuanced socialist, supports third trimester abortion and the killing of infants who survive botched abortions, is a leftie Christian who is silent on creatism and hates America.
Posted by keith, Saturday, 6 September 2008 12:51:56 AM
| |
You seem a little stressed, keith. Perhaps you could go sailing, taking HRS/Timkins with you - he could be useful as a sea anchor or something. No need to come back in a hurry.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Saturday, 6 September 2008 9:38:39 AM
| |
AND CJ STRIKES AGAIN. A TELLING BLOW STRUCK FOR JUSTICE AND THE AMERICAN (oops ) AUSTRALIAN WAY.
CJ, Why do you even bother with OLO when all you are interested in is Flaming. You clearly have no interest in the debate so what is the point? Senior Victorian, I too agree completely with your assessment. Palin is clearly going to prove a handful for the so called progressives. KIPP, Britain and Argentina were at war. Argentinian planes sank 6 or 7 British ships with attendant loss of life. Indeed two days after the Belgrano went down, HMAS Sheffield was hit and sunk by an Argentine Air Force launched exocet missile. Further, during wartime, under international law the heading or location of a belligerent naval vessel has no bearing on its status. It is still a legitimate target. In addition, the captain of the Belgrano, Hector Bonzo, has testified that the attack was legitimate. The loss of the Belgrano ended any Argentinian Naval threat to the British task force. It was an important military victory for the British. BTW, The SUNS headline was published before they knew that Belgrano was sunk with 300 lives lost Posted by Paul.L, Saturday, 6 September 2008 10:13:59 AM
| |
The whole issue of the US Presidential Electioneering is about as interesting and intelligent as WWW, WWF, WWE Afterburn and similar rubbish! The difference is that with WWE they tell you that the whole deal is fake, and it costs you less to get in to one of their performances, than it did for the US campaigns!
We all know that the inevitable result will be a McCain victory and so the war machine will grind ever onwards! These people are "toilet cubicle" cunning, egotistical, gun-waving, drum-beating warmonging parasites, preaching to their brain-dead followers, holding a bible in one hand and a gun in the other! We heard the phrase from the old idiot "WE will stay in Afghanistan until we win!....and WE WILL WIN!" That says it all......the ravings of a madman! What is wrong with the mentality of these people? They bought into a civil war in Korea and achieved nothing short of the loss of many lives,...result : stalemate! They bought into a civil war in Vietnam and got severely flogged, again with the loss of many lives! They have painted themselves into a corner in Iraq and Afghanistan, whilst at the same time are incessantly provoking North Korea, Iran and now Moscow, all to keep their mainline industries flourishing with the never-ending manufacture of weaponry!....AND THESE PEOPLE PROFESS TO BE CHRISTIANS! Posted by Cuphandle, Saturday, 6 September 2008 10:50:35 AM
| |
Cuphandle,
Lets just get a little perspective and give the rabid, America-hating bile a rest for just a moment. The US - Bought into WW1 when there was no reason for them to have done so, tipping the scales in favour of the allies. - Bought into WW2 and followed a beat Hitler first strategy which was incredibly unselfish, given that they were only directly attacked by Japan. - Bought into the UN operation to free South Korea from the communist North. The South Koreans have cause to thank them every day for that act of kindness. That you could so blithely dismiss the fact that North Korea is a HELL on earth for a large proportion of its citizens who have been cast into "re-education" (ie. the salt mines) is not surprising. The loony-left have a massive blindspot where REAL oppression is concerned. (As an aside I will relate a little story I saw recently on Aussie doctors restoring sight in North Korea. After having her sight restored one 70 year old lady thanked a photo of her dear leader instead of the doctor who gave her back her sight, promising to work harder in the salt mine. I nearly sh!t.) - Bought into a war in Vietnam to stop the spread of communism across Asia, especially to Thailand and Indonesia. The war itself was lost although they were sabotaged from within by their people right at the point at which they were finally winning. - Bought into Iraq, and it is becoming clearer by the day that they have won an incredible victory there, although it is still fragile. - Bought into Afghanistan when the rulers of that country refused to hand over the terrorist organisation which was responsible for one of the largest incidents of mass murder ever. Having bought into this conflict the US along with its partners is responsible for seeing a return to democracy and reconstruction of that countries infrastructure. The successful delivery of a massive new turbine for the Kajaki Dam Hydro-electric plant will see electricity available for millions of Afghans. Posted by Paul.L, Saturday, 6 September 2008 11:20:16 AM
| |
Simply, I agree with the author. We should be judging Palin on her policies not her gender.
A female politician does not speak for women necessarily nor does a male politician necessarily speak against women. Pity we can't get past gender and just focus on policies and what it is candidates stand for. If you have ever spent any time in America, it is clear that Americans do think very differently as do all other cultures. Would there be any noise made about the huntin' shootin' fishin' gun totin' creationist Palin if she was a male? In the radicalised Christian US they lap this stuff up. Posted by pelican, Saturday, 6 September 2008 11:29:55 AM
| |
Just to add one further, admittedly glib comment on this. If you wanted to summarise the messages in the Republican campaign following Palin and McCain's convention speeches, you might do so as follows:
"Walk softly, speak slowly and carry a big stick" Teddy Roosevelt "we're going to turn you loose to do what you do best" Ronald Reagan "Ask not what your country can do for you; ask rather what you can do for your country" John F Kennedy. I'm not sure who will win this election, but it's going to be great fun from here on in. Posted by Senior Victorian, Saturday, 6 September 2008 11:48:32 AM
| |
I don't blame CJ Morgan for being frustrated. There's very little discussion here, just vein-popping boosterism. You could replace pretty much all of the pro-Palin posts with "U-S-A! U-S-A!" and they wouldn't lose any subtlety.
I particularly like the suggestion that all the female voters sophisticated enough to back Hillary Clinton are now going to say "dat Sarie Pail-in's gonna whoop tha muslim Obama like a big ol' bull moose! She got ma vote fer sure!" Trust me, Sarah Palin doesn't pose any threat to whatever you think the Left is. Sensible people are just annoyed that the conservative commentariat is trying to present Palin as being exactly what they need her to be, rather than what she really is. <<Bought into WW2...>> Up until Pearl Harbour, the US plan was to wait until the dust settled in Europe, and begin trade negotiations with Grand Emperor Hitler. It was only when the US perceived a threat to its own interests that it started militarising. Nations don't act unselfishly. <<Bought into a war in Vietnam...>> That's just fantasy and an attempt to rewrite history. We lost in Vietnam fair and square, and the domino effect is long acknowledged to have been incorrect in theory and practice. I recommend "The Fog of War" in which the architect of the Vietnam war, Robert McNamara, explains how wrong they got it. Continued... Posted by Sancho, Saturday, 6 September 2008 12:21:09 PM
| |
...
<<Bought into Iraq...>> Close. The US bought into Iraq, and now it's bought a fragile ceasefire. As many have noted, the US is now paying Sunnis not to shoot Coalition`soldiers. <<Bought into Afghanistan when the rulers of that country refused to hand over the terrorist organisation...>> Refused to hand over the Saudi leader of a Saudi organisation which organised from Saudi Arabia for Saudis to attack the WTC. Strange that we're spending billions on a war in Afghanistan but haven't invaded Saudi Arabia yet. Do you think the cosy personal relationships the Bush family has there might be relevant? As for "largest incidents of mass murder ever", that's sheer hyperbole. Or is it safe to presume that American lives are worth more than Jewish, Cambodian or African lives, in your view? The US is, overwhelmingly, a force of good in the world, but you can't expect us to buy the notion that its good deeds mean it can't be criticised for the vicious, cynical, outright evil things it does under the same cover of lofty moral righteousness. Posted by Sancho, Saturday, 6 September 2008 12:21:49 PM
| |
Kipp “I would love to support your belief in Maggie Thatcher,”
It will be difficult for you, if your reading source is the “Sun” (and other comics). “full front page "GOTCHA",” Did you ever get past page 3 ? I read the Daily Telegraph, it had a vocabulary far larger than the 300 words which stretched most Sun readers. “after over three hundred young naval Argentineans had been killed and drowned on the Belgrano, and they were'nt even in the no go zone.” I guess any aggressive Argentinean dictator, who ordered the bombing and destruction of British ships and sailors should ponder the precise limits of any “No Go” area. I mentioned Admiral Belgrano because I realized you would not resist bring it up. Sooooooooo predictable “That truely showed up her indifference to the value of human life.” And this little diatribe of yours completely ignores the unprovoked attacks and undeclared invasion by the Argentinean Military Machine and the killing of - British troops on British soil. “To add, her arrogance showed when she made Dennis an hereditory knight, a title which her son Mark now holds, who turns out to be a crook and a mercenary.” What a venal person you are. The Queen decides who she will honour. The tradition of British Prime Minister is to be so honoured, in Margaret’s case, elevated to Baroness (and her partner / husband is, following tradition, elevated with her). As to her son, do you hold the crimes in an African court (hardly the most reliable of judicial systems) against the children must fall back onto the parents or do you support the form of jurisprudence practiced in modern western democracies? “Your belief in this woman demeans my respect for yourself!” Who you choose to respect is up to you and of no concern to me. I respect Margaret’s contribution to improving the quality of life of all British people who valued honesty. Cuphandle, spraying ranting drool! I doubt a single American know who you are and care even less. Live and let live or they might nuke you (please). Posted by Col Rouge, Saturday, 6 September 2008 2:24:00 PM
| |
Ruby Hamad writes:
“Let’s see. Governor Palin is against abortion in all cases except immediate threat to the mother, favours teaching creationism in the science classroom alongside evolution, wants to teach abstinence-only sex education……” Well I agree as a libertarian my own view is strongly “pro-choice. The reality is clear; to get elected into office in America and in Australia it is necessary to play the electorate. I have no doubt that the above opinion is the strongly held but erroneous views of many who will vote for her. Sorry abortion is a secondary issue here, the immediate struggle is to ensure the White House does not fall to lefties, feminists and/or other members of the red/green brigade. Mrs Palin is one strong minded cookie. The republicans are correct in advocating an expansion of nuclear power generation and exploring for oil in the vast tundra of Alaska. I am sure the historical and geological evidence is strongly in support of Palin’s questioning the simplistic proposition, “climate change is man made.” At least with John McCain and Sarah Palin, America will not be embarking on the economically destructive program of carbon trading – a costly solution to a non problem. One other thing Sarah is tough enough to go head to head with Vladimir Putin. Perhaps one day, we will have the pleasure of seeing the pair enjoying a recreational bear hunt. Posted by anti-green, Saturday, 6 September 2008 5:22:26 PM
| |
Hi anti-green. Thanks for reading and commenting on my article.
Unfortunately, you lost me at "as a libertarian...". Ruby Posted by RubySoho, Saturday, 6 September 2008 6:40:28 PM
| |
Thanks Sancho - and well said indeed. Glad to see I got up Paul.L's nose though.
I wonder what added dimensions he thought keith's and Timkins pathetic comments, to which I responded, brought to this excuse for a 'debate'. Posted by CJ Morgan, Saturday, 6 September 2008 6:51:42 PM
| |
Altman says:
"No, its not about the policies, nor male sexism its about the angry Left who claim to speak for women but only as long as they conform to a Left wing stereotype". I do not want Palin or any other woman to conform to any stereotype. The problem with Palin and other similarly conservative women is that they actively attempt to make other women conform to theirs. Abstinence-only sex education, limiting birth control and attempting to ban abortion in virtually ALL circumstances is nothing short of forcing other women to live by your own view of the world. If women are deprived of the right to control when and if they have children, then they are never truly in control of their own lives. I do not begrudge Palin's decision to have all five of her children. In fact I heartily commend her. But, for some reason I will never understand, she not only begrudges millions of women their decision not to, but is attempting to take their right to make that decision away from them. Ruby Posted by RubySoho, Saturday, 6 September 2008 6:55:54 PM
| |
Palin is the USA's version of Pauline Hanson, thick as two planks, but can speak under wet cement about what she believes in but has no understanding / cannot articulate the finer details of policy or history of the policies of her own party.
The republicans have attacked the Democrats for being sexist but insist on branding Palin as the "Pit-bull with Lipstick". Reality TV may give Palin some populist traction but at the end of the day this US election is much bigger than this, indeed for perhaps the first time this US election is about the future of the planet. Palin will be hard pressed to respond and articulate the bigger picture. No doubt Hillary Clinton will step in soon and do the deed (after she finishes laughing her guts out) PS. Isn't it sad (pathetic?) to see disgruntled Howard/Bush supporters posting here - still trying to convince us they are relevant! Move on guys, move on, you're embarrassing yourselves. Posted by Rainier, Saturday, 6 September 2008 7:14:38 PM
| |
*indeed for perhaps the first time this US election is about the future of the planet.*
That is indeed the issue, for US politics in the end, affects all of us. Making decisions about changing kids nappies, or as mayor deciding about sewerage pipes etc, is quite a different game to issues of global significance, which require wisdom and good judgement. I for one, do not believe that Sarah Palin has either of those, to have her finger on the nuclear button, as she may well have one day. We don't need pullbit terriers with their fingers on the button, but incredible judgement. Obama so far is the only character that stands out as having that, in the US elections. Posted by Yabby, Saturday, 6 September 2008 10:19:12 PM
| |
Hi Rainier
This election is about change. The issue isn't policy but about how the economy is managed. Voters think the economy is ok. Overall the way the economy is organised has served them well. What's perceived to be wrong is the way it's manipulated by the 'special interests','the elites' and the 'lobbyests'. That's Obama's problem. He's campaigned on change. But with the selection of Biden, his oration and the way he's 'circulated' he's now seen as part of the Washington elites and their practises. He's also supporting, not new policy, but the traditional democrat policy. Not new at all and certainly no change or not the change the voters want. McCain with his selection of Palin and his 'maverick' status simply highlight the difference. He'll maintain the way the economy operates but is set to destroy the influence and manipulation of the 'special interests', the 'Washington elites', and the way the operate. That's what Palin did in Alaska. That's the crux of the election. And it's the only change the 'swinging' electors are interested in. Obama and his advisors won't identify their problem and won't address the issue in the voters minds. They'll cling to hope Bush's hopeless economic record is the issue and run on that. And of course McCain will run on the issue Obama has spent millions promoting ... change in Washington. Hillary's finished even though mention has been made of a move to dump Biden. It's too late the horse has bolted. I think distancing himself from the Clintons Obama thought he would have distanced himself from the Washington elites. Major error. Clinton was the best economic manager the US ever had and he rejected many of the 'pet' economic policies of the Democrats. Obama distanced himself from his best weapon... Clinton's economic management. Watch the polls Tuesday and Wednesday that'll tell the impact of McCains now obvious strategy. Noone can point the racist finger at Palin ... Her husband and children are part Inuit. That prevents the left from painting her typical Redneck. Must be bloody frustrating eh? Posted by keith, Saturday, 6 September 2008 11:20:29 PM
| |
Paul.L,
You again... Can't you stop your nonsense and do something useful? Go and find yourself a hobby, man, there's certainly more to life than talking rubbish and believing in it... Stan Posted by stan_nesta, Sunday, 7 September 2008 12:22:47 AM
| |
Heh, I'd like to ask Governer Palin if she still believes teaching abstinence is an effective form of birth control :)
By the way, can we all try and stop the personal insults and focus on the policies. I'd like to debate the concrete issues facing the candidates, not mindless slogans demanding change, with little real substance. My biggest problem with both tickets is that they play to the lowest common denominator, rather than showing strong leadership. Both parties resort to mindless nationalistic slogans, but this is especially true of the republicans. "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel" Samuel Johnson Posted by gw, Sunday, 7 September 2008 7:43:05 AM
| |
Ruby thank you for your note. Let me explain the decision to abort or not involves two or three players depending on circumstances. There is the woman herself, her medical advisor plus /minus interested family members.
The role of government is solely to ensure the procedure is performed by appropriately qualified medical practitioners operating in an approved environment. One other thing Government has a duty to preserve internal law and order. We all know that any attempt to over replace Roe v Wade the 1973 American Supreme Court decision or equivalent would give rise to mass protests leading to riots and law breaking on a massive scale. This would clearly violate the maintenance of law and order principle. Further if successful Government would be denied its supervision role over this aspect of medical practice. Once the hype of elections is over, the wise politician knows it is best “to let sleeping dogs lie.” Posted by anti-green, Sunday, 7 September 2008 10:25:09 AM
| |
Someone posted this link on leftwrites to a piece by someone who knows Palin, apologies if someone has already posted it here.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2008/09/_meanwhile_back_at_the.html I think there is a lot to concern Amerian voters about Palin regardless of whether she is male or female. If I was a straying Democrat, I'd be galloping back to the fold which her being selected as a possible VP. Posted by JL Deland, Sunday, 7 September 2008 10:26:20 AM
| |
'Heh, I'd like to ask Governer Palin if she still believes teaching abstinence is an effective form of birth control :)
By the way, can we all try and stop the personal insults and focus on the policies.' Isn't this a bit rich? Posted by keith, Sunday, 7 September 2008 11:35:42 AM
| |
Sancho,
Thats funny. I feel like you could replace most of the anti-palin posts with the standard anti-US slogans of the loony left. You say >> “ .. all the female voters sophisticated enough to back Hillary Clinton are now going to say "dat Sarie Pail-in's ... " Sorry what? Sophisticated enough? You must be joking. Your derisive rant would be considered racist if you used another accent to emphasise the supposed lack of intelligence of the native speakers. Just replace the southern accent with an aboriginal one, or a muslim one and see. You say >> “ ... the US plan was to wait until the dust settled in Europe ..." BS. The US played an important role in keeping Britain in the war in the early stages. There were initially some US leaders who felt the war was a European one. However that changed fairly rapidly as events unfolded. How was a beat Hitler first strategy to America’s benefit, when it was the Japanese that were attacking them. you say >> “We lost in Vietnam fair and square,” NO. Vietnam was lost in the corridors of power in Washington by a weak administration. So badly were they shaken that they even refused to pay for the bullets that the South Vietnamese were using to defend themselves. I recommend you read “ A Better War: The Unexamined Victories and Final Tragedy of America's Last Years in Vietnam” by Lewis Sorley or “ Lost Victory” by Ambassador to Vietnam William Colby. I wonder if you are suggesting that the Khmer Rouge victory in Cambodia and the Pathet Lao victory in Laos were entirely independent events. You say >> "Close. The US bought into Iraq, and now it's bought a fragile ceasefire" The Sunni awakening is FAR more complicated than just the development money that went to those tribes.They were sick and tired of foreign AlQaeda using their homes as launching points for attacks on the US and Iraqi gov’t. They have realised that there is a future for them which does not involve much bloodshed TBC Posted by Paul.L, Sunday, 7 September 2008 11:43:27 AM
| |
Cont,
You say >> “Refused to hand over the Saudi leader of a Saudi organisation ... ” In case you forgot, the Saudis exiled Bin Laden. AlQaeda’s main organisational/logistic and military forces were in Afghanistan. The Taliban refused to hand them over. And the Saudi security forces are at war with AlQaeda and hunt them down wherever they are hiding. But to suggest that somehow Saudi Arabia was the place to do most damage to operational AlQaeda is total BS. The 9/11 attacks were without doubt among the largest mass murders in a single day. I don’t think that devalues, in any sense at all, the massacres of Jews, Africans or others and it is a petty point to even bring up. The total lack of understanding of military issues by loony-lefters like cuphandle leads to frequent problems. He doesn’t understand why McCain would say we will stay in Afghanistan until we win. Well put yourself in the shoes of a soldier in Afghanistan. How can you maintain morale and do the things you need to do if your leaders are constantly talking about pulling out. Who wants to risk getting hurt in a conflict your leaders aren’t even sure they will see through? And from the enemies perspective, how easy is it to continue fighting when you hear the US/Coalition leaders talk about giving up? I am glad that you realise that the US is an overwhelming force for good. I agree that this should not make them immune from criticism. For example I totally accept that the aftermath of the war in Iraq was handled badly. However they have really turned it around and the coalition may well leave Iraq in 1-2 years time, a democracy. Which is a MASSIVE victory. But to then go on and suggest “EVIL” acts perpetrated under the cover of “moral righteousness” is totally contradictory. Yes they make mistakes which should be pointed out. But this conspiracy theory nonsense that the US administration is waging war for the purposes of enriching themselves and their cronies is just intellectually vacuous. Posted by Paul.L, Sunday, 7 September 2008 11:47:53 AM
| |
Jl Deland, many thanks for that interesting URL. The reader comment
from the woman in her town, kind of explains how Sarah Palin's mind works. That's the worry, that a woman with that kind of mind, could land up with her finger on the nuclear button. Americans may well be gullible and stupid enough to elect her. From Cheney to Palin, from the frying pan into the fire! Posted by Yabby, Sunday, 7 September 2008 1:53:32 PM
| |
Keith, Millions of Americans live in poverty. So I don't know how you are separating the economy from policy, pray tell?
Obama has committed to spending $6 billion to fight the problem of urban poverty in America. The republicans believe inequality will be solved by market forces (Code for leave the corporations who run the economy alone) Posted by Rainier, Sunday, 7 September 2008 2:08:03 PM
| |
I see rainier is his usual venal and irreverent self
“Palin will be hard pressed to respond and articulate the bigger picture.” Talking the talk is one thing, promises are cheap, inexperience is a real risk and being a "social worker", employed to do as one is told, differs from being a mayor or governor , making decisions or 4 time elected senator. But in Obamas case, no experience of managing anything remains no experience of managing anything and on that single point, both McCain and Palin are streets ahead. “No doubt Hillary Clinton will step in soon and do the deed (after she finishes laughing her guts out)” One would observe, dear Hilary is suffering a problem which sounds as if it is more often associated with males. In her dealings of negotiations with Obama, she prematurely ejected herself. I am sure the American people will elect the right choice for the American people and when I look at McCain and Palin versus Obama and Biden, the combination older and experienced presidential nominee, younger vice presidential nominee, combined with the embrace of both genders on the one ticket, makes for a better offering than the alternative of a mono-gender, inexperienced and untested leader on the ticket. “still trying to convince us they are relevant” I am still trying to remember when rainier was ever relevant… maybe he could prompt us. Either way, what the white house needs, if it is to remain the centre of world political power is strong characters, not limp wristed wannabes with no experience. Palin has the character to standup as a new Iron lady on the world stage and the last one we had like that was instrumental in achieving much not only for her own country but, as a tag-team with Reagan, brought us the last twenty years of relative peace, out from under the cloud of soviet intimidation. rainier “Millions of Americans live in poverty.” And the millions more queuing up to get in, would prefer to accept poverty in USA than the riches of their homelands. Explain that rainier Posted by Col Rouge, Sunday, 7 September 2008 3:34:20 PM
| |
Col Rouge You have the audacity to post " And there are millions queing up to to get in". What an insulting comment, Yet you left your country. Was it for economical reasons, or you where looking for a better life?
Mate. Before you question others look at yourself first! Posted by Kipp, Sunday, 7 September 2008 7:13:22 PM
| |
Kipp “Col Rouge You have the audacity to post " And there are millions queing up to to get in". What an insulting comment, Yet you left your country. Was it for economical reasons, or you where looking for a better life?”
Anyway, I am not being audacious. I applied to migrate and got accepted. One chosen, from among many rejected, because I have scarce skills, valued in Australia. What you are whimping on about is people who want to migrate to USA, exactly the same as me coming here. Btw, I also lived in USA for a few years, green card, the lot but the marriage did not work out so I came back here. Not that it has anything to do with you, the reason I moved here was for a better life for my daughters and family, as well as myself. The reason I moved to USA was for marriage but it did not work out, cost me $200K (about $10K / month) but not to worry, easy come, easy go. Just one of those learning experiences. The emotional reasoning is probably well above your understanding, because you needed to ask if was for “economic reasons”. Reality is “economics” is merely an enabling process and not what “lifestyle” is, which is the goal. As dearest Margaret said “Economics are the method; the object is to change the soul.” Now all you have to do is find a soul. “Mate. Before you question others look at yourself first!” Firstly, I am not your ‘mate’. Just think of me as a flying fish, the sort that does not mix with bottom feeders. I questioned no one, I stated FACT. When anyone asks me that question I have to ask of them… So, did you get chosen or did you just happen to be spawned here (in a night of likely terror for both participants)? I wonder, did they know each others names? Posted by Col Rouge, Sunday, 7 September 2008 8:26:13 PM
| |
COL.. a recent newscast had a very funny coverage of the Sarah Palin deal....
As they were speaking about her, in the background was playing "Sarah..Saaaarah.. I'll never find another girl like you" :) Ohhhh I loved that.. she kind of fits the image.. and I'd think about naming any daughter I had "Sarah" so that I could play that song at her 21st :) Unnnnfortunately, any daughter I now produced would be a rather clear admission of being naughty as my wifes tubes are well and truly tied. Hmm my daughter does have a 2 syllable name though, so I could still replace it and use the song... not a bad thought. Hows things? I had a great time at "The Library" the other week.. (Tale of 2 Sikh's) Don't forget 'Yum Cha' :) On Topic.. Palin gives some 'balls' (cough) to the McCain campaign..he is toooo much of a post-use-by-date cuddly teddy bear with nice sentiments. I just cannot see him as El Presidente... Obama ? yep..I can see him as a statesman, but not sure if his policies would be good in the long run. Posted by Polycarp, Monday, 8 September 2008 7:26:49 AM
| |
Rainier,
Only about 50% of Americans vote. Very few of those come from the massive number of poor and disadvantaged. It appears traditionally the voters are mostly middle class or rich. The poor state of the economy doesn't have the same impact on these disparate groups so it sadly is realistic to divorce the worst effects of any downturn from voting intentions. If poor or disadvantaged voted they would not vote for either Republican or Democrat ... they'd probably vote for socialist or further left wing candidates... who would truely represent them. But sadly such groups , even if Christ himself was their chief candidate, just would receive such terrible press and be labelled with so poor a repute they wouldn't get a 'look in'. The great fallacy of course is that the Democrats are left wing. They are but in our terms they are probably further right wing than John Howard. I think Obama would probably do a good job in their interests but he's now too caught up in 'whitey' middle class liberal interests to appeal to the vast majority of poor and disadvantaged. They would see him not as their champion but just another rich man trying to pretend to be poor or disadvantaged... Posted by keith, Monday, 8 September 2008 12:46:00 PM
| |
The latest polls from the weekend are starting to confirm McCains strategy. He's ahead by 4-5%. The clearest indication will come Tuesday or Wednesday US time. At this stage in Bush\Kerry, Kerry led by 7 points. It might just have been a McCain master stroke and if accurate it is impossible for Obama to come back.
He's spend millions on promoting change and I'd say the voters have accepted McCain and Palin represent the change they want. It might just be all over in the first week and unlikely to change in the next eight. Welcome President McCain. And no-one will be able to claim he's cheated. Posted by keith, Monday, 8 September 2008 12:55:53 PM
| |
Palin's gender is irrelevant. A neanderthal is a neanderthal. Her ignorance and her hypocrisy is befitting of one who remains in the dark ages - typical of the God-botherers, not least the anti-abortionists in the US, who have already been charged with 7 murders, 41 bombings, 619 bomb threats and 3 kidnappings and the list of other atrocities is endless.
Her "bomb and destroy" neo-con mentality is not restricted to the anti-abortion movement but extends to the environment. A truer eco-vandal one would be hard pressed to find. Her penchant for slaughtering non-humans and her pig ignorance over the fragility of Alaska's eco-systems is difficult to comprehend. One wonders if George Bush's crime of blowing up frogs with fire-crackers had any bearing on his eco-vandalism. This cabal is fraught with ravenous predators who believe the planet and all other species are available for their exploitation. And typical of Palin's politics, power and wisdom are not in the same hands. Body-guards of tyranny are also born from a democracy therefore, I trust the American people choose wisely for they will get only what they deserve. And for some, the following footage will speak a thousand words: http://www.grizzlybay.org/SarahPalinInfoPage.htm Posted by dickie, Monday, 8 September 2008 3:01:05 PM
| |
Dickie's response is very predictable. Earth worshipers are genarally comfortable with saving the animals whilst murdering the unborn. He/she refers to god botherers while showing himself a god hater/denier. I would suggest it is the baby killers who have a dark age mentality rather than those who want to protect the most innocent. The 7 murders that Dickie refers to (over however many decades) is minute compared to the hundreds of thousands of children murdered by abortionist.
Posted by runner, Monday, 8 September 2008 3:18:08 PM
| |
Col. I lived for thirty years in London, and to make your day, I read the Guardian!
As to The Sun and page 3, you appear to know more about it than me. You mentioned the Admiral Belgrano because you realised I would not resist binging it up. Really Col a bit of self ego there on your part. The Queen honours people in ceremony, on the recommendation of the prime Minister. Name one good thing Maggie Thatcher did, for the "Honest" people of the industrial areas of the UK. I know many Americans were I lived and worked, Dear! dear!! Col, and you call me venal! Posted by Kipp, Monday, 8 September 2008 3:19:10 PM
| |
Col Rouge, you auld right wing sad sack. You lost John Howard and now you hanker after a gun toting redneck like yourself. Sarah Palin simply confirms that the canditate aint who will be running the show.
Posted by Hegehog returns, Monday, 8 September 2008 4:20:41 PM
| |
"The 7 murders that Dickie refers to (over however many decades)"
So it's OK to kill is it Runner, provided it's "over many decades?" So what's with your God's sixth commandment: "Thou shalt not kill?" Do you only adhere to that commandment when it suits your agenda? And let's not forget the Iraqi women whose embryos were murdered by Dubya's propensity for dispensing depleted uranium dust over Iraq where pregnant civilians have given birth to foetuses maimed and disfigured. Same goes for the horribly mutilated Vietnamese children (unlucky enough to survive the birth process) whose ancestors were exposed to Agent Orange. Guess these issues are trivial - a mere "bagatel" for the "bomb and destroy" Palin eh? Of couse Palin endorses McCain's promise to solve environmental issues too, by adding to the Nuclear energy consortium - the lazy man's weapon to quench energy needs and prevent environmental "degradation" even though the US already have 104 nuclear reactors (more than any other country) and remain the biggest polluters on the planet. Does it matter that nuclear power plants are susceptible to droughts since large amounts of water are needed for cooling where droughts can force nuclear plants to shut down? Not according to the avaricious big end of town! And reports this year state that nuclear reactors across the Southeast of the US could be forced to throttle back or temporarily shut down later this year because drought is drying up the rivers and lakes that supply power plants with the massive amounts of cooling water they need to operate. I reiterate: Power and wisdom are not in the same hands. Palin remains an ignoramus and remember Runner, you cannot make a silk purse from a pig's ear. Posted by dickie, Monday, 8 September 2008 4:24:41 PM
| |
Dickie
Are all lefties as deceitful as you? When have I endorsed anyone being murdered even after murdering their children. Your portrayal of those who oppose abortion as being violent as opposed to the peace loving pro murder lobby is totally dishonest. You are certainly one bitter or mixed up cookie. At least show a little integrity in presenting the the word of God that you pretend not to believe in. Posted by runner, Monday, 8 September 2008 5:02:46 PM
| |
Col Rouge, (aka Parexocoetus brachypterus)
How you are old chappy maaaate? Far from being loyal to your Right Wing ideological weirdness - McCain and Palin, an old man on the cusp of power with a younger woman by his side – must bring those bitter memories of that women who dumped you unceremoniously back in the good old USA. Did she find someone with more money and class? Alas, instead of being a well known captain of industry you lurk around this forum, bombastically sniping at anyone and everyone like a demented old fool, reminiscing about your highly questionable triumphs - pausing here and there to quote the obscure utterances of that old rusting bucket Thatcher. (Please stop it before you go blind) Is this is as good as it gets Mr High Flying Fish? Posted by Rainier, Monday, 8 September 2008 5:08:13 PM
| |
ColRouge:
With reference to your "Cuphandle: spraying ranting drool!", I must aplogise to you for having the temerity to offer an opinion on YOUR Forum!...I say YOUR Forum because it appears that seem to think that you are a major player in EVERY issue that is discussed! In light of your very rude response to "Kipp" regarding his parentage, I think it is time someone told you that although you might consider yourself to be God`s gift to the world of literacy, you are in fact nothing but a rude, one-eyed purveyor of verbal Equine Manure, very adept at putting down anyone who holds an opinion contrary to yourself. You stated that you are a "flying fish and do not feed with the bottom dwellers",...I would offer the opinion that even a flying could not feed with it`s head up it`s anus, as yours obviously is! You talk about "fact", the "fact" that you embrace is the radical war-monging doctrine that has poured forth from the US since the Mayflower "ran aground" there! If you love Yanks so much why did you leave and come back to live here, when you could obviously have gone back to Blighty to be close to your beloved Maggie Thatcher and her Poll Tax etc! No, I am afraid you have lost me with your venal rhetoric and I can understand why so many people cease contributing to these one-sided, so-called discussions, when virtually every second contribution is dominated by you and your arrogance! Get a life, you Prima Donna! Posted by Cuphandle, Monday, 8 September 2008 5:44:33 PM
| |
Polycarp YumCha in a couple of weeks in new month…. Would suit…
As for the “Sarah’s” I have a Sara (first born) and she is as realistic and savvy as Mrs Palin, Since I had a vasectomy, I guess if my partner were to become pregnant she too would have quite a lot of explaining to do. Obama has yet to be blooded / finish his apprenticeship. I see dickie has come off her medication… “And typical of Palin's politics, power and wisdom are not in the same hands. “ Sounds like dickie is acclaiming Mrs Palin’s ambidextrousness. Kipp “I read the Guardian!” Affectionately known as “the Grauniad” because of all the spelling mistakes which seemed never to be noticed by its readers, Enough said…. “Dear! dear!! Col, and you call me venal!” I suggest you phone someone who cares Hegehog returns (is that supposed to read “Hedgehog returns”) sounds like you are another who needs to focus on writing real words instead of slinging together spelling mistakes and pretending you are qualified to criticize me. At least you made the ‘redneck’ connection (not that it was difficult, of course) “Sarah Palin simply confirms that the canditate aint who will be running the show.” More spelling errors combined with degenerate grammar, Blame it on the drool, collecting in your keyboard. Come back when you can write in English (instead of “Demented”) Rainier.” Did she find someone with more money and class” Not at all, better off without her, a foolish romantic whim on my part. I am sooooo much better off now… But if you like, I will send you her email address, I am sure you would upgrade by fondling my cast offs . “you lurk around this forum, bombastically sniping at anyone . . . blah blah blah” Some of us multitask, why not watch and learn… Cuphandle “I would offer the opinion that even a flying could not feed” When you are ranting, it helps to include all the words or you just sound like a retarded "hegehog"… Have a right “righteous” day, you all… Posted by Col Rouge, Monday, 8 September 2008 10:04:52 PM
| |
Oh boredom, you visit me again, this time dressed as a Flying Fish.
Yawn. Posted by Rainier, Tuesday, 9 September 2008 7:46:04 AM
| |
ColRouge:
You see what I mean? It is so easy to make a simple error in text or spelling when one is battling against time on a "Dial-up connection" which is prone to dropping out at regular intervals, however your "nasty" character has once again asserted itself by the strength of your predictable responses to contributors on this Forum! Why don`t you go away and have a holiday, release your pent-up frustrations and give everyone a rest from incessant tirades of self-righteousness! Posted by Cuphandle, Tuesday, 9 September 2008 7:48:01 AM
| |
Some facts about Palin:
1. Despite problems at home, Sarah Palin does not believe in giving teenagers information about sex. Like John McCain, Palin's approach to the problems of teen pregnancy and STI transmission is abstinence-only education. 2. Sarah Palin believes the U.S.-Army-is-on-a-mission-from-God. "Our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God," she told them. "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that plan is God's plan." 3. Sarah Palin believes in punishing rape victims. Palin thinks that rape victims should be forced to bear the child of their rapist. 4. Who's really not in favor of clean water? Palin said, "Let me take my governor's hat off just for a minute here and tell you, personally, Prop. 4 -- I vote no on that." And what is that? A state initiative that would have banned metal mines from discharging pollution into salmon streams. 5. Sarah Palin calls herself a reformer, but on earmarks and the "Bridge to Nowhere," she is a hypocrite. You'd think that $27 mil in taxpayers' funds would be enough scratch for a town with a population of 8,000, but you'd be wrong. According to Politico, Palin then "racked up nearly $20 million in long-term debt as mayor of the tiny town of Wasilla -- that amounts to $3,000 per resident." 6. Sarah Palin believes creationism-should-be-taught-in-schools. When Palin ran for governor, part of her platform called for teaching schoolchildren creationism alongside evolution. 7. Sarah Palin supports offshore drilling everywhere, even if it doesn't solve our energy problems. Palin is in favor of offshore drilling and drilling in the ecologically sensitive Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. 8. Sarah Palin loves oil and nuclear power. 9. Sarah Palin doesn't think much of community activism; she'd much rather play insider political games. Scores of press accounts of her early years as mayor of Wasilla omit any mention of such work. Instead, they note as mayor, and in the intervening years before running for governor, Palin gravitated to those with power, money or influence. Source-http://littlurl.com/x96p4 Posted by Fractelle, Tuesday, 9 September 2008 8:04:17 AM
| |
I see McCain has recently increased his popularity, and now leads by 4%.
Politically speaking, having Palin on his side has been an asset. Perhaps Palin represents a backlash to the extremes of feminism, complete with its Ritalin programs and the dumbing down of boys, its demonisation of fathers, its belief in the destruction of family, its denigration of males, its belief in the mass killing of the unborn and artifical reproduction, and its belief in a welfare state (but only for women). Posted by HRS, Tuesday, 9 September 2008 9:49:09 AM
| |
Why oh why do men believe so fervently that women choose or ought to choose a political candidate when that politician has the same genitals as she has? Women are probably more capable of looking past the boobs or the crotch and listen to what is being said than men are. Regardless which camp is supported.
Sarah Palin, just by reading the posters here, will rake in the MALE voters based on her pretty face and nice figure. Don't you love the way she does her hair? Long and feminine and she dresses nicely too. (Note: I'm being sarcastic here) McCain is not a spring chicken. It is quite possible that this woman needs to step up to the plate and become The Supreme Commander. What I find strange is that nobody in the conservative and traditional American family camp questions her rather breath taking arrogance that she can take on such an enormous responsibility when she has such a young family. Self belief is a God given American right, but still... I must point out to you conservatives, that 'Immoral left wing feminists', to quote an eloquant poster, have no problems with her having a young family or a sexually active unmarried teenage daughter AND a career. But, isn't Sarah Palin's life exactly what conservative God fearing people want to prevent left wing feminists from 'forcing' on all women? I'm so confused. Why is Palin and her family OK for the right wing conservatives, but other ambitious working mothers, whose children are also looked after by others and who support their daughters sexual choices are accused of causing moral decay to society and driving up real estate prices? Could the likes, of say HRS and Mr Right, explain the above dilemma for me. Posted by Anansi, Tuesday, 9 September 2008 10:16:12 AM
| |
Ouch, Col. It was meant to be Hedgehog, not Hegehog. My arguements clearly damaged and weaker by that silly error. Thankfully Howard, Thatcher still finished and Palin will never be. Col,wasnt the Bennelong result just fabulous? Obama '08, bit like Kevin '07. Have a good day Col, and try to be nice to somebody.
Posted by Hegehog returns, Tuesday, 9 September 2008 10:28:50 AM
| |
Anasi,
I’ll help you understand the current situation. One poll in the US found that 80% of women would not call themselves a feminist, and 50% would regard it as an insult if they were called a feminist. Calling yourself a feminist when running for federal government in the US would not be an asset. In the US fatherhood is also becoming fashionable once again, after the demonisation of fatherhood by the feminist movement, with a number of books, TV shows and movies being produced with fathers prominent in them. Many Americans are also fed up with the high divorce rate and the destruction of family which is a part of Marxist/feminist belief systems. I also think there is a growing resurgence of national pride in the US, after so many US companies have become fed up with the current situation in the US and moved to other countries, (the latest being Microsoft). That and many other things lead to Palin. Personally I think Palin represents a bouncing from one extreme to another, and that is a danger, but so is Marxist/feminism. Posted by HRS, Tuesday, 9 September 2008 11:32:45 AM
| |
Timkins, have you ever considered emigrating to Alaska?
Posted by CJ Morgan, Tuesday, 9 September 2008 12:53:53 PM
| |
In fact Sarah Palin would be HRS' wet dream come true, but for one single flaw.
Sarah Palin is employed full-time and, therefore, not at home being full-time mother as nature intended. Oh the conundrum this must be for Timkins. Poor little petal. Posted by Fractelle, Tuesday, 9 September 2008 2:30:59 PM
| |
HRS, you haven't explained my dilemma at all.
Why is it OK for married Sarah Palin to have big full time career ambitions, running the US no less, have her children reared by others and support her underage daughter's sexual choices? Doesn't her life perfectly reflect the life the likes of you acuse what immoral men hating feminists say women want? Lucky the father of her children has no say or ambitions. He is expected to meekly go along on her ride. Sarah Palin is a full blown uber-feminist. She wants it all. Whatever a man can do, she can do better. You guys have heard her roar and you're lapping it up. Posted by Anansi, Tuesday, 9 September 2008 6:01:19 PM
| |
I’m not sure where HRS’s poll figures come from. However, polls in the US or anywhere else tend to show a majority of women don’t identify as feminists, while still believing in gender equality.
This is by no means a rejection of feminism – more a distancing from the constant propaganda that demonises the word ‘feminist’ as man-hating, confrontational and socially unacceptable. Also, most people prefer not to politicize themselves or their beliefs. For example, many people believe in social equality but don’t perceive themselves as socialists and many people believe in free enterprise but don’t identify as capitalists. By contrast, a Global Poll of 16 countries earlier this year showed that 97% of Americans believed gender equality was important (second highest country polled) and 83% believed that the government should do more to prevent discrimination against women.[http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/btjusticehuman_rightsra/453.php?lb=bthr&pnt=453&nid=&id=] Since the 1970s, US polls have consistently shown that the majority of Americans support the Equal Rights Amendment – while successive governments have canned it. Also, most US polls show an average 60% support for abortion – and this has been steadily climbing. As with so many issues involving women, US governments remain stubbornly out of step with the general population. Posted by SJF, Tuesday, 9 September 2008 6:15:58 PM
| |
Here's an anlysis of polls conducted on Sunday (US time).
It's from the Washington Post... which is notoriously left wing. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/08/AR2008090801825.html?wpisrc=newsletter Stunning really Posted by keith, Tuesday, 9 September 2008 8:15:59 PM
| |
Keith. The Washington Post is regarded among the leading daily newspapers of the USA. The Wall Street Journal is part of the company, and its former editor Marcus Brauchi the new editor of the Washington Post.
"Watergate" comes to mind! So why the paranoia about "Leftwing"!! Posted by Kipp, Wednesday, 10 September 2008 9:33:41 AM
| |
Cuphandle “battling against time on a "Dial-up connection"”
We can all make excuses To holidays, come around, I have 2 ½ hours of video we could go through from my last cruise, earlier this year (if that don’t shut you up, nothing will) and if you want a rest so much, try phoning someone, then you will not be in a position to “dial up” and bore us here. Fractelle 1 We are each responsible for bringing up our children in the manner we see fit. 2 Who are you to criticize how someone you have never met should manage their family and parenting matters? 3 You certainly lack knowledge of the role of “God” in the American culture, otherwise you would not need to make such banal comments and certainly, when I recall the Godless swill who raped the Soviet Union for 70 years, I can only feel a comfort from the fact that USA holds itself to a higher standard than the dogmatic atheists. 4 She and I would disagree on rape victims, so what, it is not something which is going to influence Australian / US relations.. where does Obama stand on the matter? 5 and 6 Reads like the silly dross of some anti-republican conspiracy website (put together by a prepubescent geek with pimples). 7 we need to get oil from somewhere, no where is more “special” than anywhere else, except in the minds of those driven by emotional subjectivity. 8 somehow, I can see no one having an “emotional bond” to a hydro-carbon and getting up close to a nuclear reactor is not good for pregnant women… more plain silliness 9 Being a US Mayor means a real responsibility for the whole municipal process. A "community activist" is like a grain of sand, which infiltrates a machine bearing, causing excessive wear and squeaking. The Mayor, for the municipality, then employs a mechanic to strip down the bearing and replace the sand contaminated grease with new grease. Hegehog (darn incompetence, I need to switch off the spell check), whatever… talk to the hand Posted by Col Rouge, Wednesday, 10 September 2008 9:51:43 AM
| |
Col, how does one talk to the hand? I seek your expert advice on this matter. Where you nice to somebody yesterday? Imagine the global situation post November. Rudd, Obama and Brown. not a redneck in sight.
Posted by Hegehog returns, Wednesday, 10 September 2008 10:03:28 AM
| |
Anasi, SJF
I don’t think many males vote for politicians based on their gender (or their physical appearance). But does Palin believe in Ritalin programs and the dumbing down of boys, the demonisation of fathers, the destruction of family, the denigration of males, the mass killing of the unborn and artificial reproduction, and in a welfare state (but only for women). Seemingly not at this stage, and I think Palin will bring in a lot of male votes. A Marxist/feminist wouldn’t. Posted by HRS, Wednesday, 10 September 2008 10:24:51 AM
| |
ColRouge:
It never stops does it? You carry on an argument (criticism) similar to a woman scorned!....You have to have the last word regardless of how pathetic it really is! Who would want to view a 2.5 hour video of a cruise with you? I think it would be more interesting watching the grass grow! Man, you must be bored excreteless to spend all your time tapping away at the keys all day! I suppose it takes all types to make this world and we certainly have our share of weird ones like you! Posted by Cuphandle, Wednesday, 10 September 2008 11:21:32 AM
| |
Rainier
Is that one way air-ticket to the Old Dart, for the Parexocoetus brachypterus, still on offer? I would be delighted to share the costs with you. Runner You state: "Are all lefties as deceitful as you?" You should refrain from debating by deception Runner for I am not left, not right but forward. You and your medieval God should consider likewise. Posted by dickie, Wednesday, 10 September 2008 12:36:32 PM
| |
Dickie,
Perhaps we should just wrap him up and post him, save our dollars to then buy some celebratory beers! Posted by Rainier, Wednesday, 10 September 2008 12:40:23 PM
| |
"Perhaps we should just wrap him up and post him,"
Good thinking Rainier but according to the Centre for the Biological Control of Parasites and Pathogens, Customs will seize any toxic compound dispatched by post to the UK. Mind you Rainier, they may find his hairy palms intriguing. Posted by dickie, Wednesday, 10 September 2008 12:59:30 PM
| |
Col
I kindly suggest you ease off the Viagra - your brain is being starved of oxygen. I was replying to HRS in my last post. He has always denigrated women who want to participate in the workplace equally to men. Sarah Palin clearly believes that she has the same rights as any man to choose a career over full-time motherhood. Maybe you have missed all the posts where HRS has promoted motherhood and marriage over careers for women. In case you have never had the intellect to decipher my thoughts on feminism, I will explain them clearly for you now: I believe men and women have the right and should have the choice whether to follow careers and participate in parenting or a combination of both. How this is decided is up to the men and women concerned. I do not believe that biology is destiny. I do not believe that women or men should be forced to be parents against their will. But HRS does believe women should be the primary care givers to young children, yet he professes to find Palin an exemplary example of womanhood. An irony I find very amusing. As for you objecting my right to criticise Palin, I HAVE EVERY RIGHT and so do you. Suggest some Gingko Baloba - good for the brain. Capiche? Posted by Fractelle, Wednesday, 10 September 2008 1:03:13 PM
| |
Fractelle,
I’ve never said the mother should be the primary carer. You probably have your feminist brainwashing and feminist propaganda mixed up with reality. The author would make a fine representative of a feminist. “Palin may be a woman, but to many feminists and other Clinton supporters she does not speak for women.” She didn’t say “Palin may be a woman, but to many feminists and other Clinton supporters she does not speak for women or men”. Perhaps the author is too bigoted, biased, prejudiced, sexist, discriminatory and feminist to think along those lines. Next feminists will be saying they believe in equality. Posted by HRS, Wednesday, 10 September 2008 4:27:34 PM
| |
Cuphandle, why don't you find a life instead of giving an impression of a jet aircraft landing (big whine)
Fractelle “I was replying to HRS in my last post.” You post, I respond to posts, I do respond specifically because you do or do not expect a response and nor do I care that my posting seems to offend you. If you are that sensitive, do us all and yourself a favour and don’t bother to post in future. “In case you have never had the intellect to decipher my thoughts on feminism” I have the intellect but not the inclination. So don’t bother. “As for you objecting my right to criticise Palin, I HAVE EVERY RIGHT and so do you.” I made no objection to you posting your view of Mrs Palin, lets face it your views are so marginal as to not matter, so 'objecting' to it would be a wasted effort. I did find the reference source that your 'creatively' cut-and-pasted your post from of terribly low quality, dubious veracity and observed the degradation which can be acquired from referencing a useless source parallels laying down with dogs and acquiring fleas.. So when you use web references make sure you don't gain someone elses words at the price of whatever might be left of your credibility. But I believe in freedom of speech anyway… so as we can now read, through freedom of speech, you exercise your right and demonstrate the inadequacies of your view. I see rainier and dickie are trying to present an image of a comedy duo, Someone should tell them, they collectively don't measure up to half a solo act. Posted by Col Rouge, Wednesday, 10 September 2008 8:10:35 PM
| |
ColRouge:
Why can`t you get it through your thick head that nobody wants to listen to your continuous droning-on, over and over, saying the same old thing that is simply a very boring repetition of your original very one-eyed statement! You are a very frustrated, self-centered egotist, exhibiting a need for either some form of peer group attention, or, and I am more inclined to think, the urgent attention of the services of a psychotherapist. Whichever way it seems that you are just some sort of sad sack of crap that enjoys putting down everyone else except yourself! With the psychological problems that you appear to exhibit, ....your ex-wife should only be too pleased to be rid of you! Posted by Cuphandle, Thursday, 11 September 2008 8:55:52 AM
| |
COL
Warning! Warning! The post below includes link to news-article and (worse) a You-tube Video. I understand you have difficulty with research and your PC doesn't support You-tube vids. Shame really. Although, if internet searches are not your forte, I suggest your local library can help you to find evidence (if there is any) that supports your self-serving misanthropic world view. HRS I am so pleased to know that you agree with equally shared parental responsibilities. Therefore, Sarah Palin must represent your image of womanly perfection. Clearly Sarah and hubby have shared equaling in their parenting responsibilites, given that her 17 year old daughter is pregnant. Who'd've thought that abstinence wouldn't work? You will also be pleased to know that not even Palin's close friends would vote for her. That is because they are pro-choice, which in HRS-Speak means 'evil feminists intent on world domination.' But then I agree with the author of the following article that one's best friends do not necessarily have what it takes to be President of the USA. >>>"As it turns out, Palin's pals are a perfectly lovely quartet of women who hang out and exercise and eat chocolate, but the video is burning up the blogosphere because some of them are avowedly pro-choice -- in opposition to Palin -- and three of the four won't even say they're supporting her ticket.<<<" http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/09/abc-interviews-palins-clo_n_125062.html Posted by Fractelle, Thursday, 11 September 2008 9:56:00 AM
| |
Col,
How does one "talk to the hand"? I await your expert advice. Is it a fun activity? Posted by Hegehog returns, Thursday, 11 September 2008 10:17:14 AM
| |
white lower class british trash pretending to be something he is not.
how sad and pathetic. Posted by Rainier, Thursday, 11 September 2008 10:19:42 AM
| |
Rainier,
Sorry, how exactly has Col's whiteness got ANYTHING to do with ANYTHING. Or his class for that matter? I suggest you substitute the word black for white in that sentence, then read it out aloud and see if its offensive. I think you'll find it is. Racism is ugly NO MATTER where it comes from, or who its aimed at. You are a BIGOT. Shame on YOU. Posted by Paul.L, Thursday, 11 September 2008 10:48:03 AM
| |
Fractelle,
I’ve never meet Sarah Palin, and have only glimpsed her once when walking past a TV set. But I have read the policies of Obama, and he does seem similar to the sexist and feminist author of this article. He has a policy for women, but nothing for men. While the black man in the US is probably at the bottom of the heap, Obama panders to the feminists and has a policy for women, and nothing for men. Maybe he should look at himself in the mirror. Posted by HRS, Thursday, 11 September 2008 11:11:48 AM
| |
Cuphandle, the ability to drone is all yours…
did I say you are boring? Rainier “white lower class british trash pretending to be something he is not.” I assume rainier is referring to me but like most of what he posts, he is obscure, vague, imprecise, inaccurate, wooly. If he is referring to me, I would observe ‘class’ has never been something I have measured myself against, sure my grandparents were working class (grand pa’s being tool maker on one side, shipyard driller on other). My Dad worked for the railways for most of his life. That, I suppose makes me “working class”, Except, on the scale of socio economic categories with accreditations to two professional bodies and a couple of directorships I generally tick box “A1” Not that it matters. So “lower class” compared to what? Nothing wrong with “working” I can think of many things which would classify people ‘lower’ than ‘working class’ Like gold digging, academic bludgers who sit in ivory towers and look down on real people who work for a living, And those who suckle off the public teat, the token beneficiary of some misplaced exercise in ”affirmative action”. ‘British trash’, it seems to me, someone who bandies around terms like that should be made aware of the many terms which I cannot use here because Mr Young, in his wisdom, has blocked their deployment at the editing stage. As for being something I am not, WYSIWYG. I make no claims to anything which I have not done or am not accredited to and since rainier and I have never met - how does rainier prove his claim that I am “pretending to be something he is not”? He cannot, he has no basis for his ad hominines, he is merely jealous because where I got to be who I am (whatever that is) by honest efforts and ethical practices, he only got where he did by unfair manipulation of events and playing the "pity" card. PaulL rainier has special dispensation, his demand, to deploy xenophobic racist vilification, is included in his “land rights” claim. Posted by Col Rouge, Thursday, 11 September 2008 12:49:58 PM
| |
Thanks Col. Great example of talking to the hand. I shall practice. Thanks again.
Posted by Hegehog returns, Thursday, 11 September 2008 1:39:22 PM
| |
HRM said:
"But I have read the policies of Obama, and he does seem similar to the sexist and feminist author of this article. He has a policy for women, but nothing for men". I am a sexist? This is news to me. In what way am I a sexist? Is feminism the new sexism? Where was I when this earth shattering announcement was made? Also, it would do you well to consider that men do not need "policies" because the world is geared towards their interests as it is. It is still a man's world HRM. Posted by RubySoho, Friday, 12 September 2008 1:09:24 AM
| |
Touche RubySoho
Clearly HRS hasn't heard of the glass ceiling. Not that the glass ceiling would deter that ball-crushing neanderthal, Sarah Palin! Cheers Posted by dickie, Friday, 12 September 2008 1:54:21 AM
| |
RubyShow,
I have heard your beliefs before, that males have everything. It came from a number of sexist feminist teachers at a school. That school had no interest in the boy students whatsoever, and the boys were getting well below national level in marks. You are a sexist feminist if you believe there should be a policy for women, and nothing for men. And you are a sexist feminist if you believe that Sarah Palin does not speak for women or men. Posted by HRS, Friday, 12 September 2008 1:58:17 PM
| |
Actually HRS, I happen to think that Palin speaks for men very well.
For women...not so much. HRS, men needing "policies" is like white people needing affirmative action. The whole point of affirmative action and women's policies is to try and achieve some equilibrium in society, by counteracting the disadvantages of certain members of society. Men have not been systematically oppressed, repressed and discriminated against. When that happens, then come to me and I will gladly help you draw up a "men's policy". Until then, may I suggest a crash course in Feminism 101? You surely need it. -Ruby Posted by RubySoho, Friday, 12 September 2008 4:25:24 PM
| |
The problem with Hurricane Sarah is that she shows as little good
judgement as Dubya shows. She is only the nominee VP and is already talking about war with the Soviet Union. In other words, being Governor of a State is not enough to teach people good judgement, or people skills, or all the things needed to be a world leader. George was Govenor of Texas, it certainly has not given him good judgement skills. The pitt-bull strategy as used by George and Sarah, has been an abject failure for the US. The country is nearly bankrupt, owes trillions of $ and only survives due to Chinese loans. Posted by Yabby, Friday, 12 September 2008 10:45:00 PM
| |
Ruby Soho,
Have you ever been in SoHo? The ironical part about it, the more abuse aware and loving feminists have laid on Sarah Palin, the more free publicity it has given Sarah Palin. Feminists have put Sarah Palin on the map, and the republicans are now Palin and McCain. Few people have heard of Joe Biden, and Barak Obama has become a one man show. He has very little chance of becoming the next US President. My daughter had experience with feminism 101. She is now one more female who will not call herself a feminist. What happened, her sexist feminist teacher was continuously making sexist comments about males during the class. One day the daughter questioned the sexist feminist teacher about one of those comments, and shortly after that, the sexist feminist teacher told the daughter to rewrite her latest assignment. The assignment had taken the daughter a week to write, and she was told to rewrite it for no good reason. The daughter was being punished for asking the sexist feminist teacher a question. Being daddy’s little angel, the daughter basically does whatever she wants, but she has never called herself a feminist. After her experience with the sexist feminist teacher and feminism 101, I don’t think she ever will call herself a feminist in the future, or any other type of “ist”. This means that the daughter has a brain of her own. That makes Daddy very proud. Posted by HRS, Saturday, 13 September 2008 1:31:07 PM
| |
Obama
- As Director at the age of 24, grew annual budget of church-based Developing Communities Project in Chicago from $70,000 to $400,000, leveraging resources to launch college prep program, tenants' rights program, and job training program in economically distressed area - Became first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review based on high grades and writing skills - Graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School - Authored two critically acclaimed books - Directed Illinois Project Vote team to register 150,000 voters - Taught Constitutional Law at University of Chicago Law School for 12 years - Civil rights lawyer for 11 years - Founding member of Public Allies - Served on boards of several community service-oriented non-profits, each of which made numerous contributions to improved quality of life in Chicago and Illinois - Served as Illinois state senator, sponsoring legislation to lower taxes for low-income workers and forming bi-partisan coalitions to reform ethics and health care laws; supported Governor Ryan in cracking down on predatory lending to reduce home foreclosures. - As U.S. senator, sponsored legislation to increase nuclear safety and to increase transparency in awarding of federal contracts. - Defeated one of most powerful political machines in the United States (the Clinton machine) with grassroots campaign to gain Democratic Party nomination for the presidency. Palin, Eats moose and wears lipstick. Posted by Rainier, Saturday, 13 September 2008 1:55:28 PM
| |
And apparently appeals more to the average Joe and Josephine Blow.
Posted by keith, Saturday, 13 September 2008 2:12:08 PM
| |
Awwww......HRS - lighten up man. You're off topic.
Here we go - somethin' to cheer ya up! http://keysnews.com/node/5571 Posted by dickie, Saturday, 13 September 2008 2:16:46 PM
| |
Rainier Re Obama, Palin and their respective qualities
And your previous post: “white lower class british trash pretending to be something he is not. how sad and pathetic. Posted by Rainier, Thursday, 11 September 2008 10:19:42 AM” Please advise us all, from your position of self appointed ethnic eletist and snob, which class each is keith “And apparently appeals more to the average Joe and Josephine Blow.” Ah but, Keith, you shouild realise, in rainiers eyes they are only some of the “lower class trash” and thus, their “poor white” votes are "pretend” and don’t count, on balance to his exulted position and authority, as an observer. Posted by Col Rouge, Saturday, 13 September 2008 3:57:12 PM
| |
Rainier
Drat - I thought you were going to the post office. I say Col Rouge - Master of English, Economics Laureate and all that stuff. What is an "eletist?" And have I been remiss in my spelling of "ad hominines?" Oh I see now. You turned off your spell check. Sorry about that! Naughty Dickie! Posted by dickie, Saturday, 13 September 2008 4:34:30 PM
| |
I see today that the Palin clan are being investigated - Again! Not a good sign of a potential VP family, would you say.
Posted by Kipp, Saturday, 13 September 2008 5:25:21 PM
| |
Col Rouge:
Thought you had taken the hint and "gone to ground", but NO!...like a dripping tap....drip. drip, drip! Why don`t you get down off your high horse ( rocking horse ) and take your marbles and see if you can find some kids to play with,...that is if you are smart enough to understand the difference between one-eyed politics and kids Marbles! Posted by Cuphandle, Saturday, 13 September 2008 5:30:54 PM
| |
I think I was on topic,
I was attempting to explain to Madam Soho, that no matter how hard they try, they will not be able to force or brainwash all girls into calling themselves a feminist Also, no matter how hard they try, they will not be able to force or brainwash women such as Sarah Palin to kill their own children and destroy their own family. Posted by HRS, Saturday, 13 September 2008 7:58:35 PM
| |
Yes Kipp the Palins are being investigated over their abuse of a bloke who used his police issue taser to discipline his 10 nyear old stepson ... their nephew.
And of course guess who is conducting the investigation! A couple of Alaskan senators and note they are Democrats. Now exactly how much credence will you give to the 'unbiased' media and this 'impartial' investigation during an election campaign. Jeeez I wish you'd actually do some research before you sprout the usual 'leftie' bs. Posted by keith, Sunday, 14 September 2008 11:33:25 AM
| |
Regardless of whether Sarah Palin calls herself a feminist or not, is there nobody else who listens to what she has to say, looks at her very young family and wonders how is she going to handle being the VP of the USA, still the most powerful nation in the world?
G Bush Jr. has recklessly squandered much of the moral standing of the US in much of the world. Whilst easy to brush that off as 'anti-American sentiment' it will not alter that fact. Part of being a Leader is also selling your team, especially when you put your team out to bat, as in Iraq. Bush has shown huge contempt for other nations. He could do this because the USA militarily and economically still has no equal, but it did nothing to maintain the high regard that the US has generally always enjoyed. Statemenship on a global level, being a world leader, is not Bush's forte, to make an understatement. McCain seemed to be a little bit better, but to choose Sarah Palin is frightful, she should stick to local politics. It is monumentally scary to think that she could ever be required to step up as President. She had no qualms accepting the nomination as VP, she'll have no qualms believing in her own judgments and decisions to be correct and guided by her God. She's even more arrogant and ignorant than Bush ever was. Posted by Anansi, Sunday, 14 September 2008 2:28:13 PM
| |
Cuphandle “Col Rouge:
Thought you had taken the hint and "gone to ground", but NO!...like a dripping tap....drip. drip, drip! Why don`t you get down off your high horse ( rocking horse ) and take your marbles and see if you can find some kids to play with,...that is if you are smart enough to understand the difference between one-eyed politics and kids Marbles!” Please show me, in the OLO rules, where either of us is required to comply with the commands or edicts of the other. One is tempted to ask… which eye are you using, your opinion seems monocular and your rhetoric likewise to the point Your remain extremely boring and equally pointless, maybe a length of rope attached between your neck and a very heavy object, before it was dropped in the water would help your swimming style, it would certainly improve your posting style. Actually I figure you might be the “handle” but the “cup” is definitely CRACKED “I see today that the Palin clan are being investigated - Again! Not a good sign of a potential VP family, would you say.” I thought that was standard for anyone aspiring to the higher echelons of public life… and a good thing too. Actually I recall (Democrat) Jimmy Carters brother was the source of some financial scandals and of course, (Democrat) Kennedy's Dad was a boot-legger. Maybe they should have been "investigated" before being nominated too. (now wait for the leftie vomit to trawl, desperate to find mud on Republican Presidents, which I am sure they will). Keith “Jeeez I wish you'd actually do some research before you sprout the usual 'leftie' bs.” “Research” and “lefties” is an oxymoron, They never let the truth get in the way of half-backed, jaundiced, crass opinion and enfeebled rhetoric. So, dickie is salivating over a few typos. Hey dickie, have you found where I supported and promoted the interests of cartels yet ? or are you leaving that slander with the rest of your “research” (clue see my comment to keith’s observation of your value processes and systems, immediately above). Posted by Col Rouge, Sunday, 14 September 2008 3:06:17 PM
| |
I reckon its a toxic mix or cheap tawney port, 20 cent cigars and an overdose of those little pink pills. The pages of his Thatcher biography must surely be super glued together now - which adds to his frustration.
What to do? Posted by Rainier, Sunday, 14 September 2008 3:25:32 PM
| |
Rainier:
The answer to your quandry is simply to treat him with the contempt he deserves and he might just go away!...(but I doubt it!) I would bet that he is a little man with the little man`s usual problem of a massive "superiority complex"! I think that maybe because of his stunted past rejection problems he has secretly fallen in love with Sarah Palin!, as she is a tad younger than his old flame....Maggie "the Poll" Thatcher! He is a totally boring yobbo! Posted by Cuphandle, Sunday, 14 September 2008 5:07:59 PM
| |
But seriously cuphandle what do you think of his opinions?
Posted by keith, Sunday, 14 September 2008 7:48:51 PM
| |
keith, ever tried to put lipstick on a pig?
Posted by Rainier, Sunday, 14 September 2008 8:15:57 PM
| |
"keith, ever tried to put lipstick on a pig?"
No but Col Rouge has - and a nightie too! Posted by dickie, Sunday, 14 September 2008 8:25:22 PM
| |
Dickie “"keith, ever tried to put lipstick on a pig?"
No but Col Rouge has - and a nightie too!” So, stand behind what you have written and show us all when and where I put lipstick and a nightie on a pig, dickie Or is that just another of your slanderous lies, like the claim that I support cartels? You really are the most defaming and odious of the lower order of creatures. You make half a matched set with rainer, someone else who is all ad hominines and no worthwhile critical opinion. I realize why. It is because you do not have an independent thought or reasoning capacity within you. You exist to pounce on and drink the spittle of others, like a bizarre parasite. No real contribution other than the debased. Keith “But seriously cuphandle what do you think of his opinions?” I too, look forward to cuphandle’s response to that …. But fear, in asking for an objective response, you are setting the bar far too high Posted by Col Rouge, Sunday, 14 September 2008 8:46:31 PM
| |
Rainer,
I have a relative about to go to a university, but hasn't decided which university to enroll in (or whether indeed she should go to a university). Could I ask what university you teach in? Dickie, Could I ask if you also teach in a university, and which one? Posted by HRS, Monday, 15 September 2008 10:28:42 AM
| |
Curious.
What does HRS' query have to do with topic? Would I trust HRS with personal information? Posted by Fractelle, Monday, 15 September 2008 10:53:46 AM
| |
Fractelle,
With so much abuse, crude language and hatred being directed towards a Sarah Palin by university academics, (or those recently enrolled in a university), I think the relative would be better not to enroll in a university, and would be better to enroll in a TAFE college, where she can learn some useable skills, and is less likely to be exposed to abuse, crude language and hatred. I care for the relative, but it definitely appears that so many university academics only care for university academics, and abuse, crude language and hatred. I hope that answers your enquiry. Posted by HRS, Monday, 15 September 2008 2:39:35 PM
| |
No Rainer ... but I know of one that used cigars for a purpose they were definitedly not intended.
Posted by keith, Monday, 15 September 2008 4:11:36 PM
| |
You crack me up dickie! LOL
Hey Col, hows this for a babe! http://www.adpunch.org/images/freschello-pig_25.jpg Posted by Rainier, Monday, 15 September 2008 4:11:50 PM
| |
rainier "Hey Col, hows this for a babe! http://www.adpunch.org/images/freschello-pig_25.jpg"
oooh rainier, you do sound so excited, is it one of your family members or just someone who knocked you back? I see dickie has scurried off, like a snake in the grass, unable to stand behind her claims.. so where is the evidence dickie show us all when and where I put lipstick and a nightie on a pig, dickie you cannot be incapable of standing behind what you say, surely not. Because if you are incapable, it would make you no better than the coagulated slime which collects in the u-bend of a sewer pipe, you know, the sort of stuff which gravitates to the lowest point. Maybe thats where you meet up with rainier? Posted by Col Rouge, Monday, 15 September 2008 4:55:03 PM
| |
Dear Col Rouge
My hearty congratulations on your recent nuptials to Porkabell - truly a vision of loveliness and what a pity she resisted the proscuito and asparagus canapes - truly delicious! And I believe Margaret dearest was unable to attend the festivities due to the fact she's lost her marbles. Nevertheless, I'm sure she has you in her heart just like she has her other dear friend, mass murderer, kidnapper and fraudster, Mr Pinochet! Please now take heed of Porkabell's good advice and keep both hands on the keyboard - there's a good fella! Posted by dickie, Monday, 15 September 2008 7:42:38 PM
| |
Are you guys f@cking serious? Grow up. You sound like prepubescent girls
Posted by Paul.L, Tuesday, 16 September 2008 1:47:06 PM
| |
Oh, don't spoil it now, Paul.L. I want to see if either combatant can top the "coagulated slime" comment.
OLO should have a forum just for this. Posted by Sancho, Tuesday, 16 September 2008 1:55:43 PM
| |
dickie, Is Paul Col's Rent boy? He's being awfully defensive for someone not even invited into this discussion!
Oh, and I managed to track down a snap of the wedding night - lipstick being carefully inserted! http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc186/quadgod72/PigFucker.jpg Posted by Rainier, Tuesday, 16 September 2008 2:02:24 PM
| |
Rainier “someone not even invited into this discussion!”
I did not realize we had to have invite or is that just your view, where some Australians have to wait for the invite and others are allowed to gate crash as they see fit? So come on in PaulL, I am one of those who waited in the queue for my full-residency invitation, rainier is here as an accident of birth, so he knows no better. And rainier, more pictures from your family album? Someone must have saved up their dole cheques to get underwear which co-ordinates. Posted by Col Rouge, Tuesday, 16 September 2008 9:54:07 PM
| |
"So come on in PaulL"
Disgusting! I feel its only fair to OLO users that you both find a private chat room elsewhere. I don't think for a moment that Dear Margaret would approve of these licentious shenanigans Col. Big hole in her marble bag or not, I'm sure she would be ashamed of you. Pull yourself together old chap! (no, not that! Posted by Rainier, Tuesday, 16 September 2008 10:31:02 PM
| |
Keith:
You asked me what I thought of "Col babie"s comments: As I have said before, I seriously think that he is a tad unstable, - NO, make that very unstable! To cut to the chase: he is a tacky, whacky, (Father forgive him for he knows not what he does, ot thinks!) sad sack of introverted crap! He has exhibited by his rantings that he is well past his use-by date, and should be treated the same way,...thrown out on the rubbish tip! He indicates, by reading between the lines of his ravings, that he is indeed desperately seeking some form of love or attention to assuage his obvious crazed desire for drop-kicks like Maggie or Sarah!...maybe he was rejected by his Mummy and had to spend lots of time sitting in the corner sucking his thumb and then as he grew older he obviously developed another naughty habit that sent him partially blind and VERY one-eyed! He is definitely NOT going to change his attitude towards posters on these threads, because he believes he is so right, and will, like a woman spurned, insist on having the very last word ( until the final moments in his Bunker!) Yad-da-da, Yad-da-da, Yad-da-da! Posted by Cuphandle, Wednesday, 17 September 2008 7:27:52 AM
| |
Thanks for that, Rainier. I've wondered from time to time what Col looks like - in my mind's eye I had him as a kind of cross between Alf Garnett and Victor Meldrew, but I think your picture is probably far more accurate.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Wednesday, 17 September 2008 7:45:53 AM
| |
Cuphandle” You asked me what I thought of "Col babie"s comments:”
Actually keith asked you what you thought of my “opinions”, which, will challenge you because it requires you to interpret my comments for the intent behind them to distill my “opinion” on anything. So keith, you have set the bar too high. When it comes to rising to an occasion and commenting on someones “opinion”, cuphandle is better off limbo dancing. But the underlying reality of cuphandles response is, in her opinion, I should not be allowed to express mine. Pure and simple, because I dare challenge the machinations of her stagnant mind I am going to be up for anything she can manage to string together. Not that it bothers me in the least. CJ I have nothing to help me understands what you may look like. But it is understandable from reflecting on the sum of your posts You are completely vacuous, devoid of any substance and therefore, completely incapable of reflecting light, necessary to produce any image. Posted by Col Rouge, Wednesday, 17 September 2008 1:30:57 PM
| |
<<I've wondered from time to time what Col looks like - in my mind's eye I had him as a kind of cross between Alf Garnett and Victor Meldrew>>
I always picture him as stocky and bald, with a thick mo, and perpetually angry. I think it's because his descriptions of the way he deals with his children put me in mind of that Austrian bloke who had his kids in the cellar. Posted by Sancho, Wednesday, 17 September 2008 3:00:14 PM
| |
The Rouge:
This self-styled God`s gift to the world of literacy has the audacity to criticize other contributors offerings!....just have a look at the mess he makes of his latest stumblings and bumblings in his frantic rush to have the final say in a lost argument, and he says it is hard to make mistakes in composition?.....I rest my case your Honour! Suggest that you go to bed Dorrie and sleep on it,...but wear boxing gloves, whilst you dream of your beloved Maggie and Sarah! Confucius say "Man who go to sleep with problem on mind, sure to wake up with solution in hand!" Posted by Cuphandle, Wednesday, 17 September 2008 5:36:18 PM
| |
Col
Wakey wakey - hands off snakey - eggs and bakey. Oink oink! Posted by dickie, Friday, 19 September 2008 10:23:27 PM
| |
Sancho, well I guess with that description of me in mind, I will leave you to spot me in a crowd,
And when you do, I promise to pay you $1,000,000. As for the Austrian bloke and the girls locked in the cellar. My daughters suggested you were probably projection your own darker side And I agree with them. Cuphandle “This self-styled God`s gift to the world of literacy” from “This self-styled God`s gift to the world of broken crockery,” Cuphandle (lacking the cup) Come on trickie, slickie, dickie Stop sliding around (in the mud), making up rhyming ad hominines But I see, from your posts, you “oink” like a pig, Your brassiere arrangements would have challenged even the late Howard Hughes (look it up on google). Maybe it was your picture which rainier posted. But you have not time for these diversions You are supposed to be finding the source of where I support cartels and other past lies you have posted here. I leave you with that signal of eternal devotion (unus digitus) Posted by Col Rouge, Saturday, 20 September 2008 10:19:00 AM
| |
Hyacinth Rouge, your upper-class pretentions, sexual confusions and insecurities and proclivity towards acts of bestiality (innocent hogs or swine) are out in the open.
I realize it must be difficult for you to be exposed so openly but this is the way of the world old man. PS. How much for your youngest daughter? Is credit card ok for you? Posted by Rainier, Saturday, 20 September 2008 12:46:25 PM
| |
rainier "PS. How much for your youngest daughter? Is credit card ok for you?"
as we have seen from the family photos you have posted here and now confirm with that very question, the only women (and Ewes) you can get are the ones you buy and to answer you directly, it has never been the practice in my family, at least, to sell women, but it is a technical point, because she is "valued" as an individual, accountable to herself and completely beyond anything which the likes of you will ever be able to afford. Posted by Col Rouge, Saturday, 20 September 2008 2:11:44 PM
| |
Seriously, how much? 20 dollar, 30?
Posted by Rainier, Saturday, 20 September 2008 2:14:02 PM
| |
Hey Rainier!
I must be getting "our Col" somewhat sexually excited, as for some strange reason, (if one can call "reason", the disease that resides somewhere in this strange, tormented, twisted brain of his), he has in his, what appears to be a permanent condition of being "on heat", suddenly re-created me as a female ( by referring to me as "her" and "she") this observation being attributable to one of his recent rants on this Forum. I am somewhat gratified to think that this could indicate that his "sexual preference" is for the female gender, although his recent self-flagellation of himself by his indications of his ethereal love affairs with Maggie and Sarah, both subjects of whom could be questionable as to their Testacular content, does pose some slight element of doubt as to his "real" gender preference? It is somewhat disquieting to think that this rabid ratbag, who displays the literary eloquence of a retarded potato, should be now visualising himself as having the ability to alter a literary opponent`s physical attributes, to sate his own perverted sexual and mental desires. Boy oh Boy!....we have a real problem here....Enough to keep a Psychotherapist fully employed for a lifetime! Posted by Cuphandle, Sunday, 21 September 2008 8:49:55 AM
| |
rainier and Cuphandle
we all know you have lost all credibility and what the Chinese call "face", its just you refuse accept it. Strange really, I am sure the experiences of your lives have brought you both, repeatedly into similar losing situations. Now, I am happy to continue to service you both in the manner appropriate to the way you keep trying to enflame me; I leave it up to you Posted by Col Rouge, Sunday, 21 September 2008 3:39:17 PM
| |
Col-onoscopy,
You must agree that my most learned colleague Cuphandle has done a magnificent job attempting to fathom your psycho social tendencies - which are both complex and simple, but mostly pathetic. I agree with Cuphandle that you clearly have a penchant (albeit confused) for androgynous 'blokey' women. Scene in front of Number 10 Downing, July 1986. ---Col: Lying prostrate on the ground: "Slap me harder Margaret, call me your biitch, I love you Margaret, better than anyone and especially more than that pooofy Dennis" ---Margaret: “Get up off the ground you despicable man. Someone have him removed. “ Unfortunately, they sent him here to us. Perhaps it was that brutal cross dressing father of yours that has driven you to this end? Did he beat you? If not, why on earth not? PS. My last offer, 35 dollar. Very good price for the quality of the merchandise Posted by Rainier, Sunday, 21 September 2008 5:32:45 PM
| |
Ummm ...to bring this back on topic.
Col dear, You are misguided ... in so, so many ways. What has happened to your neo-con capitalism crap now? Who do think is paying for it? Palin is GWB in drag wearing pink lipstick. Posted by Q&A, Sunday, 21 September 2008 8:03:46 PM
| |
Col "Dog Butcher" Rouge: << we all know you have lost all credibility and what the Chinese call "face" >>
No, old boy - it's not Cuphandle or Rainier who've lost all credibility here. You should pull your head in before you lose your face completely. Posted by CJ Morgan, Monday, 22 September 2008 8:22:15 AM
| |
So the dogs come in for a pack attack,
Q&A sniffing an opportunity, sidles up to nip at my heels. Q&A you have been quiet for a long time, recovering from getting yourself spayed (I know that’s what happens to female dogs but let’s face it, there is not much of the male about you)? Tell me are you still almost an emeritus professor …. Which basically means when you termed it originally like that, you are a EP wannabe Myself, I never say what I might become, only who I am. Rainier who seems happy to trade peoples bodies for money, and you call yourself an academic, what do you teach Advanced Pimping? I can imagine, rainier in his big (Harlem style) fake purple fur hat, ready to pour battery acid down the throat of his sister if she refuses his advances to train her for street walking. Cuphandle, nothing about you excites me in the least, although you probably do a good impression of a corpse… right down to the maggots Ah CJ always there to snip … but really the Cheshire cat of OLO… the one who is so vacuous you slowly disappear as we watch. Keep it up scummies… I do this sort of stuff for sport and am only just getting warmed up. Posted by Col Rouge, Monday, 22 September 2008 10:29:44 AM
| |
Repeating and to bring this back on topic.
Col dear, What has happened to your neo-con capitalism crap now? Who do you think is paying for it? Palin is GWB in drag wearing pink lipstick. Rouge typically refuses to address the issues and prefers his own rose coloured glasses in vomiting "Col's Guide to the Universe". Posted by Q&A, Monday, 22 September 2008 1:32:55 PM
| |
You drive a hard bargain Colonoscopy,
20 cents, my last and final offer. Take it you fool! Posted by Rainier, Monday, 22 September 2008 4:28:16 PM
| |
Little Rouge Riding Hood - (Sitting in corner sucking thumb!):
Mummy, Mummy,...Look, they are all picking on me! They keep trying to pinch my knickers and they keep laughing at the colour of my dress!...Please Mummy, tell them that I am the only one who is right and they are ALL wrong! Mummy, I think the whole world is picking me and they are all just a big bunch of nasty, nasty people who keep calling me names and cannot understand that I am "different" from them, but YOU DO KNOW, and Maggie and Sarah KNOW too, so that`s all that matters! Mummy, if they will not stop laughing at me, ...can I please go to another school, preferably a Girls school, where there will be none of those nasty boys to keep lifting up my dress, and pulling my pig-tails and laughing at me, and making me cry! Posted by Cuphandle, Tuesday, 23 September 2008 8:25:48 AM
| |
In the one corner:
CJ Morgan, Cuphandle, rainier, dickie, Q&A in the other corner Col Rouge. but this is such an uneven fight. Even on a bad day, Col Rouge is more than twice the person the swill are or will ever amount to. So go find some fellow wingers and whiners and half witted apologies for human beings, bring them back here and you might start to balance the sides. btw I have never relied on the opinion of others, either positive or negative, to determine what to believe in or to do. Posted by Col Rouge, Tuesday, 23 September 2008 9:06:15 AM
| |
Rougie:
By the looks of the composition and spelling of your latest "dummy spit", you are obviously starting to get rattled! Mummy run away with the Milkman? Running out of room on your little island of "lost dreams"? Can`t find a "shrink" who is prepared to waste his/her time listening to your insane babblings? To realize that you had the rudeness to criticize myself over a simple error of missing a single word, and after witnessing some of your later utterances of emerging dementia, I therefor feel rather vindicated in ALL of my previous condemnations of your petty literal postulations and poutings! Even too much sucking the thumb can have severe physical and psychological effects on an individual exhibiting emerging delusions of grandeur!...and thumb-sucking is no beneficial replacement for what Mummy can provide for you! Posted by Cuphandle, Tuesday, 23 September 2008 9:53:07 AM
| |
See Rougie Red Lips
That's what you get for playing with pigstails. Poor Porkabell - got a sore bottom sweetie? Swine! Now Rougie's got the porcine plague. Thart'll larn 'im! Posted by dickie, Wednesday, 24 September 2008 1:29:51 AM
| |
My fellow ‘scummies’,
I’ve tried to bring Col’s 'swill' back on topic ... asked him twice now to comment on the fall-out from the Bush/McCain/Palin neo-con ideology and its obvious global ramifications. It seems pink pigs really do fly or he can’t defend/answer the problems humanity is facing because of his rosy-coloured neo-con new-world-order blinkered-view of the world. Here’s a piece doing the World Wide Web ... who do you think we can identify as the old man? A little boy goes to his dad and asks, "What is politics?" Dad says, "Well son, let me try to explain it this way: I'm the breadwinner of the family, so let's call me capitalism. Your Mom, she's the administrator of the money, so we'll call her the Government. We're here to take care of your needs, so we'll call you the people. The nanny, we'll consider her the Working Class. And your baby brother, we'll call him the Future. Now, think about that and see if that makes sense," So the little boy goes off to bed thinking about what dad had said. Later that night, he hears his baby brother crying, so he gets up to check on him. He finds that the baby has severely soiled his nappy. So the little boy goes to his parents' room and finds his mother sound asleep. Not wanting to wake her, he goes to the nanny's room. Finding the door locked, he peeks in the keyhole and sees his father in bed with the nanny. He gives up and goes back to bed. The next morning, the little boy says to his father, "Dad, I think I understand the concept of politics now." The father says, "Good son, tell me in your own words what you think politics is all about." The little boy replies, "Well, while Capitalism is 'screwing' the Working Class, the Government is sound asleep, the People are being ignored and the Future is in deep uno-what." Btw Col, if you’re still there ... leave your “socialism by stealth” mantra where it belongs, in your warped and misguided mind. Posted by Q&A, Wednesday, 24 September 2008 9:07:13 AM
| |
Hilarious, Q&A
Certainly sums up the current situation in USA, where the taxpayers (workers) are being screwed to cover for Wall Street greed. I find Col's one-eyed support of Palin extremely suspect considering the stand he takes on women's reproductive rights on abortion discussions. This is why I have called Col a hypocrite and will continue to do so. Posted by Fractelle, Wednesday, 24 September 2008 10:10:30 AM
| |
Have you seen this news story?
Anyone you know Col? Woman is held captive by pony-sized pig By Kathy Marks in Sydney Wednesday, 24 September 2008 A rouge pig the size of a Shetland pony held an Australian woman hostage in her home yesterday after barging into her bedroom at 4am. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/woman-is-held-captive-by-ponysized-pig-940328.htm Posted by Rainier, Wednesday, 24 September 2008 10:24:26 AM
| |
Gosh... Bedlam (in its original form and glory).
So, I assume I get to keep what I charge for letting people watch you lot? Posted by Col Rouge, Wednesday, 24 September 2008 11:06:41 AM
| |
"Dear Pig, are you willing to sell for one shilling your ring?" asked
Rasping Rougie. Said Porkabell,"I will." "I want a pig 'n a poke!!" said Rasping Rougie. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which. Posted by dickie, Wednesday, 24 September 2008 10:33:47 PM
| |
what happens when you add psychotropic substances to the swill?
dickie and rainier, of course, that explains it! Posted by Col Rouge, Thursday, 25 September 2008 12:03:22 PM
| |
I can not understand the feelings of hate some people have for Sarah Palin. I percieve her as an honest, sincere,intelligent, hardworking, godly,as well as attractive woman. If every woman could be like her, then this world of ours would be more peaceful. I think most crimes and wars are caused or influenced by bitter,hating frustrated women. I like Sarah Palin. She is surely very inspirational. I must admit anyone who meets her for the first time will feel so intimidated because she really comes too strong. BULAGA
Posted by bulaga, Wednesday, 1 October 2008 7:36:32 PM
| |
How sweet!
But she knows nothing about geography, world politics or ecconomics. She'd make a womderful pre-school teacher - but Vice President Posted by Rainier, Thursday, 2 October 2008 8:32:37 AM
| |
Bulaga
As you say Sarah does come across a little "strong" for a good christian woman. This got me thinking, Sarah has 5 children, one a pregnant teenager, another a helpless little Downs Syndrome child, aren't you at all concerned that this godly woman would have to neglect her children in order to fulfill the demanding work that being a Vice President entails? In fact if she had remained at home a little more, like a good woman should, perhaps her teenage daughter wouldn't have wound up in her current embarrassing predicament. All that flying in helicopters, shooting moose and sacking librarians leaves insufficient time for the family you know. Posted by Fractelle, Thursday, 2 October 2008 8:58:35 AM
| |
Now doing the rounds...
* Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable. * Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded. * If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, sponsor 131 bills and serve on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience. * If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive. * If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian. * If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian. * If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society. * If , while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant , you're very responsible. * If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America's. * If you're husband is nicknamed "First Dude", with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable. OK, much clearer now.!! Posted by bennie, Thursday, 2 October 2008 9:05:32 AM
| |
HOW TEXANS EXPLAIN SARAH PALIN (AND GWB)
While suturing a cut on the hand of a 75-year old Texas rancher whose hand was caught in a gate while working cattle, the doctor struck up a conversation with the old man. Eventually the topic got around to Sarah Palin and her bid to be a heartbeat away from being President . The old rancher said, 'Well, ya know, Palin is a post turtle.' Not being familiar with the term, the doctor asked him what a post turtle was. The old rancher said, 'When you're driving down a country road and you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a post turtle.' The old rancher saw a puzzled look on the doctor's face, so he continued to explain. 'You know she didn't get up there by herself, she doesn't belong up there, she doesn't know what to do while she is up there, and you just wonder what kind of dumb ass put her up there to begin with.' Posted by Rainier, Thursday, 2 October 2008 2:48:53 PM
| |
How I would vote if I am a US Citizen! Now, lets see...it's a choice between a candidate circled by shady characters and a candidate circled or connected to most hated characters.If I choose the first one, there's a chance I could get eliminated from this world. If I choose the second one, at least I could bully them and have fun. I'll choose the second one...hehhe!!
Posted by bulaga, Saturday, 11 October 2008 2:27:37 PM
| |
She's hated because she's exceptionally so,so natural and rare to find now a days! She'll be good for change in Washington. She'll shine among the sands because she got natural glitters! bulaga
Posted by bulaga, Saturday, 11 October 2008 2:36:40 PM
| |
How funny to read the posts of the Sarah Palin supporters who see her as a godly, honest woman bringing peace to Earth in the light of the findings of her interference and pressure to get an ex brother in law sacked.
Better not have any other thoughts, opinions or views to this Godly, loving hockey mom. Humility, respect and honesty are not qualities that come to mind when listening to this woman. All values that Christians rate highly. Her arrogance and ignorance is breathtaking and would be funny if she were not the VP nominee to a doddering old codger aspiring for presidency whom the Republicans themselves find hard to trust. Sarah Palin is not a breath of fresh air, she is utterly ignorant of the task ahead she so blightely accepted. What on Earth was McCain thinking? Posted by Anansi, Saturday, 11 October 2008 3:55:10 PM
| |
now, I know why there's so much commotions about Sarah Palin! Because Obama, compared to MCcain in achievements, experiences, character & personality, roots & background, performances in Washington, Obama will never measure up to MCcain. So what if MCcain is 73 yr old? Don't you know that if life begins at 40... wisdom starts at 70? Obama's life is still at baby's stage.Of course I am sure he is much wiser now compared to 15 yrs ago, when his choice of associations was something he himself would want to forget and erase. So therefore, Obama's groups divert these truths by focusing people's attention to Sarah Palin. Unfortunately, Sarah Palin's record performances are still above Obama's.Perhaps two presidential elections after this 2008 election, Obama will be more ready.
Posted by bulaga, Sunday, 26 October 2008 5:04:38 AM
|
Palin is essentially George W Bush in a skirt. She has the same social and religious conservative credentials, the same total lack of interest and understanding of international affairs, and her supporters are using the same arguments they used in favour of Bush: that he is a simpler person with an obvious appeal to Middle America.
Do these people never learn?