Sarah Palin -- Would you vote for her?

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by thomas_jefferson, Sep 24, 2010.

Loading...
?

Would you for for Sarah Palin for President of the United States?

  1. Hell no!

    35 vote(s)
    52.2%
  2. No, probably not.

    9 vote(s)
    13.4%
  3. Maybe.

    6 vote(s)
    9.0%
  4. Yes, probably.

    7 vote(s)
    10.4%
  5. Hell yes!

    7 vote(s)
    10.4%
  6. Not a US citizen, I don't vote, abstain, other, etc.

    3 vote(s)
    4.5%
  1. airtorn

    airtorn Moderator

    No.

    She is a quitter.
     
  2. Maniac Craniac

    Maniac Craniac Moderator Staff Member

    Speaking on the quality of sound production, I think he is a pretty good speaker, with a nice voice. He always had both a very good personable demeanor and a decent "get down to business" demeanor. I wasn't referring to the ability to put a full sentence together though, which both of them seem to have a problem with.

    Not that they are alone, mind you. During the campaign, Obama's speeches were full of life, captivating, motivating. Now, he spends half of his time saying "uhhhh" and "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand."
     
  3. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    I don't think that Obama and Palin differ a great deal in basic intelligence. Obama has the benefit of his law school education, I guess, which gives him the edge on constitutional law. (His view of it is probably from the left, though.)

    When it comes to wanting to do the right thing for the country, I'm more comfortable with Palin. I sense that she's more of an old-time patriot. I think that the question 'what's in it for the United States' would enter into most of her decisions to a greater or lesser degree. Obama strikes me as something else, a moralizing postwar-European-style post-nationalist, an internationalist who naturally shares the academic-left's tendency to criticize the West and its traditions and to idealize 'liberation' struggles. His belief that he could reach out to and bond with America's enemies (because somewhere in his heart, he sympathizes with them) made him a bit of a babe-in-the-woods on the international scene. We've seen it when he bows to foreign tyrants and when he snubs America's friends like Britain. Unfortunately, the foreign leaders (like Iran's A'jad) who oppose the US and what it stands for just perceive all of this as weakness.

    One thing that I've noticed, and its something that puts me off big-time, is the way that those on the left call anyone who isn't a fellow leftist 'stupid'. It's as inevitable as the sun coming up every morning.

    We see it in San Francisco 'Chronicle' movie reviews. If a movie is patriotic, unabashedly pro-American or cheers for the military, it's 'simplistic'. If the villains in the movie are evil greedy corporations or if it includes CIA conspiracies or something, then it's 'intelligent' and 'thought provoking'. But in real life, both kinds of movie probably have similar levels of cognitive complexity and roughly equal connection to actual reality. (They are fiction, after all.)

    The same things happen in political discourse. (In this day and age, when everything is politicized, everything is political discourse, even entertainment reviews.) The liberal-left opinion media are always patting themselves on the back for their own imagined superior intellect. If an idea is a left-idea, it's 'intelligent' and 'progressive'. If an idea is a right-idea, it's 'ignorant' and 'extreme'. That saves everyone from the annoyance of having to actually think about the idea's plausibility and implications. And it leaves only one political agenda highlighted, the cattle-chute down which voters are supposed to flow. Everyone wants to be thought of as 'intelligent' and not 'stupid', right?

    When Obama spouts inane campaign rhetoric to fire up his base (We are the people that we've been waiting for!), when Obama is annointed, Matrix-like and quasi-Biblically as The One, well, it's simply... brilliant. What else could it possibly be? When conservatives say things equally inane that fire up their own base, that obviously discredits the conservatives forever more. How utterly and totally stupid they all are!

    It's a nice little rhetorical game, but it doesn't take very much intelligence to see through it. Notably, it doesn't seem to be working very successfully with political independents this year.

    There's a more serious point to be made about it --

    Here in the United States, there's a belief, as old as the nation (and ancient Athens, for that matter), that soverignty lies in the People. That's called 'democracy' and it's why we go to the polls for elections and referendums. (Ancient Athenian citizens physically gathered in their Assembly.)

    If we start thinking that the people are simplistic cattle, fit only to be herded by the (supposedly and no doubt self-appointed) more 'intelligent' ones, then we have started down the path towards replacing democracy with oligarchy. Why hold elections at all, when we could simply turn government over to a class of specially-educated/indoctrinated Platonic Guardians. (Or Iranian style Islamic jurists, it's a similar model.) Read Plato's 'Republic', it's one of the Great Books of the Western World and Athens' post-Peloponesian War misgivings about popular democracy remain relevant today.

    There's a European-style vision of America, in which the middle of America is a violent and dangerous wasteland of rednecks with shotguns in rusty pickup trucks. I still remember a story in the 'Economist' about American populism that started with Sarah Palin and ended up talking about British soccer hooligans. I think that's how a large segment of European-style public opinion perceives the average American - as a drunken beer-swilling lout. And I think that similar opinions about rural 'fly-over country' are shared on the American left. It's only in the larger coastal cities, on the university campuses, that 'people like us' are to be found. Plato's Guardians, if America was truly ruled as it should be.

    My point is that this dismissal of political opponents as 'stupid' isn't just manipulative political rhetoric. When it becomes a broader disdain for the American people in general, it threatens to become an attack on the democratic principle itself.
     
  4. rickyjo

    rickyjo New Member

    For the most part I cautiously agree with you Bill, I think that Obama is employing more emotion than reason in firing up his base, especially during the campaign, this is probably somewhat responsible for the disillusion many of his supporters are having with him now. When you use nebulous terms people fill in the blanks and when those assumptions are wrong people become frustrated. I do want to mention that I don't believe that Obama's policies or decisions necessarily follow the same pattern of emotion over reason. In some avenues he's moved very slowly and carefully in the face of much criticism.

    I hate when politicians and talking heads say or infer that the opposing side is stupid. I believe that's reckless at best! I personally have not seen Obama doing this as much as people like to suggest, but I could be watching the wrong speeches. In my experience it's the conservative talking heads doing it the most. Also, in my personal life it's the conservatives who attack the intelligence of the opposing side. I'm opposed to it either way.
     
  5. BlueMason

    BlueMason Audaces fortuna juvat

    Isn't one of the reasons that McCain lost due to the fact that if he had died while in Office Palin would have run the show? I really would have thought that the US had enough problems with GW Bush's legacy, but to add Palin to that list?

    Her views, actions and comments are downright scary and backward.. I am sorry, but she is the female GW... GW got in and won because of his Dad and Brother, certainly not due to his views and track record! ..if she had GW's connections, then she would have had a shot at it... but thankfully, she didn't.
     
  6. sandraeli

    sandraeli New Member

    When Sarah Palin speaks, she subtracts from the sum total of human knowledge.

    Priceless!
     
  7. b4cz28

    b4cz28 Active Member

    DI is very left leaning to start with; I once posted a question about Obama and got roasted for it. I was called a "nut job" and "crazy" but it showed me by the tons of pro Obama posts, that this site is very much on the left of things. That being said I believe that if she were to run she would lose.

    That and people on the left always imply that right leaning people are lacking in brain power. Look at GW, I doubt the average American could pull the grades he did at the school he went to, yet he was made out by the left to be dumb as a rock. The same thing has been done to SP. I read the comments after a yahoo article about her last week, and there were ton's of comments about her problems in college and her lack of intelligence. Has anyone seen an IQ test on either candidate? Palin has released her grades from school along with all her school records. Obama has released no records for school, along with his dissertation being sealed. How can we say anything either way? Why won’t they let us look at his dissertation?

    Let the ripping me apart start!!! You can't ask any questions about Obama or his school records or lack of them.
     
  8. b4cz28

    b4cz28 Active Member

    Can you tell me why?
     
  9. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

    Against Obama I would absolutely vote for her. But, she is to polarizing to run at this point. I do notice a lot of vitriol pointed in her direction. I do not listen to her, seek her out, or try to find out about her. I just hear all the balanced, truthful and well though out information from liberals.

    American Thinker: The Wilding of Sarah Palin

    When I was in college, I read a book that changed my life. It was Susan Brownmiller's tome, Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape, which explained rape as an act of power instead of just lust. What I found particularly chilling was the chapter on war -- how rape is used to terrorize a population and destroy the enemy's spirit.

    While edifying, the book magnified the vulnerability I already felt as a female. Fear of rape became a constant dread, and I sought a solution that would help shield me from danger.

    The answer: seek safe harbor within the Democratic Party. I even became an activist for feminist causes, including violence against women. Liberalism would protect me from the big, bad conservatives who wished me harm.

    Like for most feminists, it was a no-brainer for me to become a Democrat. Liberal men, not conservatives, were the ones devoted to women's issues. They marched at my side in support of abortion rights. They were enthusiastic about women succeeding in the workplace.

    As time went on, I had many experiences that should have made me rethink my certainty. But I remained nestled in cognitive dissonance -- therapy jargon for not wanting to see what I didn't want to see.

    One clue: the miscreants who were brutalizing me didn't exactly look Reagan-esque. In middle and high schools, they were minority kids enraged about forced busing. On the streets of New York City and Berkeley, they were derelicts and hoodlums.

    Another red flag: while liberal men did indeed hold up those picket signs, they didn't do anything else to protect me. In fact, their social programs enabled bad behavior and bred chaos in urban America. And when I was accosted by thugs, those leftist men were missing in action.

    What else should have tipped me off? Perhaps the fact that so many men in ultra-left Berkeley are sleazebags. Rarely a week goes by that I don't hear stories from my young female clients about middle-aged men preying on them. With the rationale of moral relativism, these creeps feel they can do anything they please.

    What finally woke me up were the utterances of "bitch," "witch," and "monster" toward Hillary Clinton and her supporters early last year. I was shocked into reality: the trash-talk wasn't coming from conservatives, but from male and female liberals.

    I finally beheld what my eyes had refused to see: that leftists are Mr. and Ms. Misogyny. Neither the males nor the females care a whit about women.

    Women are continually sacrificed on the altar of political correctness. If under radical Islam women are enshrouded and stoned and beheaded, so be it.

    My other epiphanies: those ponytailed guys were marching for abortion rights not because they cherished women's reproductive freedom, but to keep women available for free and easy sex.

    And the eagerness for women to make good money? If women work hard, leftist men don't have to.

    Then along came Sarah, and the attacks became particularly heinous. And I realized something even more chilling about the Left. Leftists not only sacrifice and disrespect women, but it's far worse: many are perpetuators.

    The Left's behavior towards Palin is not politics as usual. By their laser-focus on her body and her sexuality, leftists are defiling her.

    They are wilding her. And they do this with the full knowledge and complicity of the White House.

    The Left has declared war on Palin because she threatens their existence. Liberals need women dependent and scared so that women, like blacks, will vote Democrat.


    A strong, self-sufficient woman, Palin eschews liberal protection. Drop her off in the Alaskan bush and she'll survive just fine, thank you very much. Palin doesn't need or want anything from liberals -- not hate crimes legislation that coddles her, and not abortion, which she abhors.

    Palin is a woman of deep and abiding faith. She takes no marching orders from messiah-like wannabes like Obama.

    And so the Left must try to destroy her. And they are doing this in the most malicious of ways: by symbolically raping her.

    Just like a perpetuator, they dehumanize her by objectifying her body. They undress her with their eyes.

    They turn her into a piece of ass.

    Liberals do this by calling her a c__t, ogling her legs, demeaning her with names like "slutty flight attendant" and "Trailer Park Barbie," and exposing her flesh on the cover of Newsweek.


    Nothing is off-limits, not actress Sandra Bernhard's wish that Palin be gang-raped or the sexualization of Palin's daughters.

    As every woman knows, leering looks, lurid words, and veiled threats are intended to evoke terror. Sexual violence is a form of terrorism.

    The American Left has a long history of defiling people to control and break them. The hard core '60s leftists were masters of guerrilla warfare, like the Symbionese Liberation Army repeatedly raping Patty Hearst. Huey P. Newton sent a male Black Panther to the hospital, bloodied and damaged from a punishment of sodomy.

    The extreme Left still consider themselves warriors, righteous soldiers for their Marxist cause. With Palin, they use sexual violence as part of their military arsenal.

    Palin is not the only intended victim. As Against Our Will described, the brutality is also aimed at men. By forcing men to witness Palin's violation, the Left tries to emasculate conservative men and render them powerless.

    The wilding of any woman is reprehensible. But defiling a mother of five with a babe in her arms, and a grandmother to boot, is particularly obscene. It is, of course, Palin's unapologetic motherhood that fuels the leftist fire.

    Because as a mother and a fertile woman, Palin is as close to the sacred as a person gets. She is not just politically pro-life. Her whole being emanates life, which is a stark contrast to the darkness of the Left, the life-despoilers.

    These "progressives" are so alienated from the sacred that they perceive nothing as sacred. And they will destroy anyone whose goodness shines a mirror on their pathology. The spiritually barren must annihilate the vital and the fertile.

    It has been almost two years since I woke up and broke up with liberalism. During these many months, I've discovered that everything I believed was wrong.

    But the biggest shock of all has been realizing that the Democratic Party is hardly an oasis for women. Now that it has been infiltrated by the hard Left, it's a dangerous place for women, children, and other living things.

    In the wilding of Sarah Palin, the Left shows its true colors. Rather than sheild the vulnerable, leftists will mow down any man, woman, or child who gets in their way. Instead of a movement of hope and change, it is a cauldron of hate.

    From Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

    Hatred paralyzes life; love releases it. Hatred confuses life; love harmonizes it. Hatred darkens life; love illuminates it.
     
  10. b4cz28

    b4cz28 Active Member

    At least she can speak without a prompter....I don't like her BS act but I feel calling people stupid based off of no evidence other than their political affiliation is wrong and makes you look stupid. Obama does not write his own speeches, he speaks from a teleprompter no matter where goes. His speech writing staff has tripled from the time he took office. So by him reading other peoples words in a smooth manor (unlike GW’s stumbling rambles) make him smarter?

    Check this out...

    YouTube - Obama's Prompter Problem

    YouTube - Barack Obama Uses Teleprompter to speak to 6th Grade Class

    After you watch the one below you will never want to say anything about Palin.......

    YouTube - Obama, a complete idiot.
     
  11. b4cz28

    b4cz28 Active Member

    Wow! Great post....it was an eye opener.
     
  12. djacks24

    djacks24 New Member

    I spent a lot of time at Community College during my academic career. I suppose I'm as unqualified to vote as she is to run for president.

    I feel the same way. I wasn't for Barry in the first place because I'm conservative and had my thoughts of what a disaster he would be for this country. However, I really had hoped for our countries sake that my thinking would have been proven wrong. He is completely out of touch (just like most leftist I've encountered) and has already shown he is willing to destroy the fabric of this country for his agenda rather than work towards the will of the people. All the while just like a mudslinging political candidate blaming his shortcomings on our republican predecessors that "got us into this mess".
     
  13. james_lankford

    james_lankford New Member

    dude, you are so clueless

    did you not see him speak at the republican retreat ?

    no teleprompter

    then he did a Q&A with them; took questions and kicked their butt, made them look and sound stupid

    he did such a good job that FOX news actually cut away in the middle !

    imagine that
    fair and balanced, yet they cut away in the middle of a live Q&A session where the president of the US was taking any and all questions from republican congressmen

    if the republicans were doing a good job of making him look foolish and stumping him with their questions, do you really thing fox would have cut away ?

    Palin is an idiot
    anyone that would vote for her in a race against Obama is crazy

    if it comes down to Obama and Palin, then vote for a 3rd party candidate

    if you don't like Obama, fine, but stop making up lies

    oh, you do remember Palin had to write notes on her hand don't you ?

    and people aren't calling her stupid because of her political affiliation. They're calling her stupid because she is stupid.
     
  14. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

    What an insightful post Jimmy. What's next? Neener-neener-neener?

    Your post has retarded this entire board, we are now all staring at our screens like a cow staring at a fence post.

    Bravo.
     
  15. Chip

    Chip Administrator

    It is really frightening to me that there are 13 people who post on degreeinfo who would actually seriously consider voting for Sarah Palin. It would be akin, both in intelligence and in political leanings, to having Archie Bunker as our president.

    But then... 20% of the US population apparently believes that aliens from Mars are living among us, so I suppose anything is possible.
     
  16. james_lankford

    james_lankford New Member

    thank you, I'm glad to have enlightened you
    maybe now you can help enlighten others
    whenever anyone thinks the left, liberal, democrats are attacking her because she's republican, please inform them that we are not

    tell them we would be happy to vote for an intelligent republican, one who really believed in small, limited government, one who was actually fiscally conservative, one who actually has a detailed plan, one who is not driven by "christianity"

    Palin is not that person
     
  17. rickyjo

    rickyjo New Member

    You know, it seems to me like both sides are equally guilty of unfairly attacking the other side and misrepresenting their own side. After having read the long post by 03310151 it occurred to me that anybody is likely to feel that way no matter what groups they associate with. Religious groups are hopelessly inadequate to shine a good light on their own cause 99% of the time, and in that same vein so are political parties. Pointing out that a political base is stupid, ignorant, intolerant, or hypocritical has no real meaning. People as a whole are stupid, ignorant, intolerant, and hypocritical most of the time. Case in point: this thread. I'm sorry, but this is why politics doesn't work. The only way to drive out the vote is to convince your constituency that everyone else is stupid and the country is doomed if they don't respond.

    I find this thread extremely upsetting.
     
  18. Maniac Craniac

    Maniac Craniac Moderator Staff Member

    Wait a minute, what?! 80% of Americans think that Martians invaders aren't real?! :eek:
     
  19. b4cz28

    b4cz28 Active Member

    Best post today!
     
  20. Ike

    Ike New Member

    No way. Hell no. I'd rather vote for Bristol. She who does not know and knows that she does not know is a wiser person and that's Bristol.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 13, 2010

Share This Page