fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
There is no possible way you could know this for a fact. Don't they teach "assumes facts not in evidence" in law school?
McCain pick - Sarah Palin merged thread?????
- Thread starter MonsterMark
- Start date
so, you are expecting her to have absolute control over her daughter? But the argument for sex education is that you can't have absolute control over your children, and kids are gonna have sex, so educate them and give them birth control....
Can you say double standard? Is seems clear who is being disengenuously hypocritical here...
Now back to the real world...
she can only do so much, her daughter the responsibility here, not Sarah Palin.
Let me be clear; no action on Sarah Palin's part in any way countered her views on family values. Therefore, there is no way that you can LOGICALLY conclude that she is in any way being hypocritical. Only by impling that she in some way has full culpability for her daughter's actions can you conclude hypocracy.
Besides, the fact that her daughter go pregnant out of wedlock says nothing about Sarah Palin's accuracy in presenting herself as strong on family values...
You also don't know what she did or didn't teach her daughter with regards to sex, birth control, abstenence, etc... You don't have all the facts and you are drawing conclusions that the known facts do not support.
There is no possible way you could know this for a fact. Don't they teach "assumes facts not in evidence" in law school?
Why does her campaign portray her as an abstinence only mother? Come on.
She opened herself to the public and portrayed herself as an abstinence only mother. That's how she presented herself. Those are the facts.
...and how can you draw a conclusion of hypocracy from that? You can make some conclusions about the effectiveness of her absinence stance, her effectiveness as a parent, whatever. But you cannot logically conclude that she is a hyprocrite from the given "facts" you cite...
Let me repeat...
no action on Sarah Palin's part in any way countered her views on family values. Therefore, there is no way that you can LOGICALLY conclude that she is in any way being hypocritical.
In order to logically claim hypocracy, you have to show some action on Palin's part that counter's her claim; not an action on her daughter's part.
Even then, you would still need to show how that "hypocracy" is relevant to her as a potential VP...
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Link and quote please.
And if the daughter situation disqualifies her from the VP slot as the Left says it should, what does that say about Gore when his son was also busted again in 2002 for drunk driving?
Busted again in 2003 for drug possession.
Busted again in 2006 and charged with two felony counts of possession of a controlled substance, two misdemeanor counts of possessing a controlled substance without a prescription, one misdemeanor count of possession of marijuana and driving 100mph in a Prius.
Given the standard that the Left has set, are they willing to say that Gore is no longer qualified to run for the presidency and that he needs to stay home and be with his son who obviously needs guidance and support?
Hmm? What's that? Oh, Gore didn't advocate abstaining from illegal drugs and DUI, so he's not a hypocrite, and PRESTO! He's qualified!
Link and quote please.
And if the daughter situation disqualifies her from the VP slot as the Left says it should, what does that say about Gore when his son was also busted again in 2002 for drunk driving?
Busted again in 2003 for drug possession.
Busted again in 2006 and charged with two felony counts of possession of a controlled substance, two misdemeanor counts of possessing a controlled substance without a prescription, one misdemeanor count of possession of marijuana and driving 100mph in a Prius.
Given the standard that the Left has set, are they willing to say that Gore is no longer qualified to run for the presidency and that he needs to stay home and be with his son who obviously needs guidance and support?
Hmm? What's that? Oh, Gore didn't advocate abstaining from illegal drugs and DUI, so he's not a hypocrite, and PRESTO! He's qualified!
Quit dodging the issue. The issue is Sarah Palin. I don't care about Gore, I don't care about Clinton, I don't care about Nader. This woman has held herself out as superwoman and she's not. She's an empty suit, a religious fruitcake, and holds a mediocre education at best. This is a freakin joke. We have a woman squirrled away in Alaska as governor for two years. She hasn't traveled outside the country (just admitted by her campaign spokespeople on MSNBC). She hasn't dealt with a federal legislature. She doesn't know what a vice president does. I have serious doubts as to whether she knows the Constitution - yes, I expect my elected officials to know the document inside and out, forwards and backwards. The should be able to quote it in their sleep. I'm a veteran who served my country honorably overseas and I am an attorney who regularly practices in state and federal court. I expect my president and vice president to be at least as educated as I am - at the minimum, hold a master's degree. If someone doesn't like it, that's tough. I was active in Republican party politics and ran as their candidate for State Senate twice. I'm a Democrat now, but I would have at least respected Senator McCain if he selected Mitt Romney or Rudolph Giuliani as his running mate. These people have the kind of experience that you doesn't come with being the Governor of the least densely populated state 500 miles away from the closest mainland ground. He picked an empty candidate. I get a sense that deep down, many in the Republican party wished he had gone with a more credible candidate for the job.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Your ad hominems obliterate any point you might have made. Your self-important rant obliterates any credibility you had left.
Buh-bye, troll.
Perhaps you've been following her career long than the rest of this, I've never seen any indication of this.
The executive officer of one of the fifty states, one that has aggressively combated statewide corruption, congressional corruption oil companies, and negotiated with other countries.
She was also a mayor for ten years and a city council member before that.
And while she's running for vice-president with that record, you're comparing it to a Presidential candidate who spent his career as a "Community Organizer" and a one term junior senator from Illinois.
And his running mate has served in the congress with 1972, at the age of 29.
Do you really think you're a strong position to argue anything here?
Again, quick note, we're talking about the VP right now, not the head of the ticket. With that said, Obama, the other guy running for President, has an admitted record of abusing drugs, before being the Democrat show-pony in congress, his foreign travels were limited to a trip to Pakistan after college.
Of course not... she operated at the state level. So do you think executive experience working with a state legislature and state judiciary is better experience to be VP, or do you think being a one term member of the congress, passing no significant legislation, is?
If you answer this question honestly, you'll continue to see how all of your attacks on this woman are undermining your own candidate.
And you're you making this claim based on what?
Strictly speaking, the VP is simply president of the Senate, and next in line for the Presidency. Anything else is specific to the administration. Dick Cheney's job was much different than Al Gore's.
yet, I have no doubt that you're a hostile, left-wing, fanatic.
That lawyer part is a strike, but I won't hold it against you.
So you're an elitist... you think that education can only be obtained in the halls of a university, under the careful indoctrination of a professor. A professor who has spent their entire adult lives within the University system and continues to propagate the group think that thrives there.
I disagree.
Two guys who went to law school.
On second thought, we should hold that elitist lawyer attitude against you.
Do you get that experience being a "community organizer" in Chicago, aligning yourself with the corrupt power players in that leftist community, and then being the unaccomplished junior senator from a Midwestern state.
He did no such thing. However, the Democrat party DID select an empty suit. I know, he's a lawyer, so that must cause you to nurse a semi, but he lacks accomplishments. Until he began campaigning, he had virtually no overseas traveling experience, no executive experience, he's never won a contested campaign, and he's aligned himself with some of the ugliest figures on the left wing of American politics.
But he's a lawyer, so honor among thieves....more lawyers who think they are special. If I hear another pathetic, over educated lawyer tell me about the virtue of their education, about how they are "taught to think," I might just smack them.
By the way, one of my best friends had Obama as a professor at University of Chicago, he had nothing good to say about him as a person. Pretentious, scripted, melodramatic, and arrogant were words used.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Yeah that's some serious *owned* going on there.
Perhaps you've been following her career long than the rest of this, I've never seen any indication of this.
I follow the careers of people vying for the most powerful job in the world.
The executive officer of one of the fifty states, one that has aggressively combated statewide corruption, congressional corruption oil companies, and negotiated with other countries.
She's the governor of Aggressive campaigning against statewide corruption? You mean with that bridge to nowhere she supported?[/B]
She was also a mayor for ten years and a city council member before that.
Oh whooopie let's all jump on the bandwagon there. City council member in Alaska! Woohoo. Ridiculous to the point of being shameful.
And while she's running for vice-president with that record, you're comparing it to a Presidential candidate who spent his career as a "Community Organizer" and a one term junior senator from Illinois.
Community organizer, civil rights attorney,
Do you really think you're a strong position to argue anything here?
Yeah, you bet I am. Senators with experience in Washington, worked with large constituencies. Constitutional law professors. Biden has extensive foreign policy experience.
Again, quick note, we're talking about the VP right now, not the head of the ticket.
You don't have a leg to stand on. The Vice President is a candidate for the presidency.
Of course not... she operated at the state level. So do you think executive experience working with a state legislature and state judiciary is better experience to be VP, or do you think being a one term member of the congress, passing no significant legislation, is?
I would pick a Senator with extensive experience teaching our Constitution at the law school level any day of the week over the Governor of Alaska.
If you answer this question honestly, you'll continue to see how all of your attacks on this woman are undermining your own candidate.
This woman is an empty suit. No meaningful education, governor of alaska
yet, I have no doubt that you're a hostile, left-wing, fanatic.
Yeah and I have no doubt you are a warmongering neocon nut. :eyeroll: Get over yourself. This is about Palin.
That lawyer part is a strike
Good for you
So you're an elitist... you think that education can only be obtained in the halls of a university, under the careful indoctrination of a professor.
If you think some rube from timbuktu is qualified to be president that's your problem. The presidency/vice presidency is a professional office. It requires a professional education. You had attorneys, you had a physician. Mike Huckabee had at least an honorary doctorate, although that's more of a certificate than anything. But at least even Huckabee made an effort to pursue a postgraduate education.
over educated lawyer tell me about the virtue of their education, about how they are "taught to think," I might just smack them.
Oh aren't you brave!
You know your girl's days are numbered but you probably never expected a backlash of any sort against your candidate.
I follow the careers of people vying for the most powerful job in the world.
The executive officer of one of the fifty states, one that has aggressively combated statewide corruption, congressional corruption oil companies, and negotiated with other countries.
She's the governor of Aggressive campaigning against statewide corruption? You mean with that bridge to nowhere she supported?[/B]
She was also a mayor for ten years and a city council member before that.
Oh whooopie let's all jump on the bandwagon there. City council member in Alaska! Woohoo. Ridiculous to the point of being shameful.
And while she's running for vice-president with that record, you're comparing it to a Presidential candidate who spent his career as a "Community Organizer" and a one term junior senator from Illinois.
Community organizer, civil rights attorney,
Do you really think you're a strong position to argue anything here?
Yeah, you bet I am. Senators with experience in Washington, worked with large constituencies. Constitutional law professors. Biden has extensive foreign policy experience.
Again, quick note, we're talking about the VP right now, not the head of the ticket.
You don't have a leg to stand on. The Vice President is a candidate for the presidency.
Of course not... she operated at the state level. So do you think executive experience working with a state legislature and state judiciary is better experience to be VP, or do you think being a one term member of the congress, passing no significant legislation, is?
I would pick a Senator with extensive experience teaching our Constitution at the law school level any day of the week over the Governor of Alaska.
If you answer this question honestly, you'll continue to see how all of your attacks on this woman are undermining your own candidate.
This woman is an empty suit. No meaningful education, governor of alaska
yet, I have no doubt that you're a hostile, left-wing, fanatic.
Yeah and I have no doubt you are a warmongering neocon nut. :eyeroll: Get over yourself. This is about Palin.
That lawyer part is a strike
Good for you
So you're an elitist... you think that education can only be obtained in the halls of a university, under the careful indoctrination of a professor.
If you think some rube from timbuktu is qualified to be president that's your problem. The presidency/vice presidency is a professional office. It requires a professional education. You had attorneys, you had a physician. Mike Huckabee had at least an honorary doctorate, although that's more of a certificate than anything. But at least even Huckabee made an effort to pursue a postgraduate education.
over educated lawyer tell me about the virtue of their education, about how they are "taught to think," I might just smack them.
Oh aren't you brave!
You know your girl's days are numbered but you probably never expected a backlash of any sort against your candidate.
Actually, no. Only attempts to smear her mischaracterize her as holding herself out as a "superwoman". Can you say "Straw man"?
However, these same people characterize Obama as quazi-superhuman, at times...
Now on to the nature of your posts:
Most of your posts bounces between ad hominem attacks, appeals to ridicule, straw man mischaracterizations and moving the goalposts.
It is rather obvious you are a lawyer, because your arguments are based more on being clever and psychologically convincing then it is based on reason and intellecual integrety...
The professor of one of my law classes said (and I am paraphrasing) that in law, there is no right or wrong, it is all about the most convincing arguement.
That doesn't mean the most reasonable, logical or honest argument. In fact, it often times means the opposite.
IMO, law school seems to mostly teach someone to be clever (in regards to how it teaches someone to think). That usually works against intellectual honesty and wisdom. It is about spinning the facts to fit your point of view, and not letting reality and the facts dictate your point of view.
Just keep in mind, this isn't a court room. I would bet that most of the people you encounter here are going to be much wiser then your average juror.
In addition, your talk of needing a high degree of university education is downright offensive and insulting! All the college level education in the world doesn't say a damn thing about your intellectual level, let alone your wisdom or intellectual integrety.
And with colleges today, it hardly says much about your ability to "think critically". Most colleges are more about indoctrination then about teaching someone to think critically.
If you are a fool, college only makes you a well educated fool. If you are a genius, then college makes you a well educated genius. College does not turn a fool into a genius.
Sentor's are also people who are not held accountable for their decisions, and are experts at shifting the blame around when things go wrong, and at taking credit when things go right. That kind of job fosters a sense of non-responsibility.
Executives are held accountable for their decisions and are in a position where they are expected to lead.
Leadership and responsibility are much more important qualities then academic knowledge when it comes to the presidency, but you are gonna stick with academic knowledge, even if it means no leadership experience or sense of responsibility, eh?
Of course you would. It would serve to stroke your over-inflated, elitist ego...
Wanna look at that fact in the context of the current race? Serving as a City council member alone gives her more executive experience then Obama or Biden.
How about you try looking at the facts in context and not in a disingenuous attempt to smear...
So you won't have any problem telling us where she's "held herself out as a superwoman" then, will you?
You are completely incorrect. Palin DID NOT support the "bridge to nowhere."
She directed the DOT to find a more fiscally responsible solution and refused to accept the funding for the nearly $400 million bridge. She instead proposed that they just build a ferry system to the island.
You're a condescending, elitist, windbag.
City council, a decade as a mayor, and then the governship.
In addition to the titles, what distinguishes her are the actions she took and the leadership and principles she exhibited will serving the community.
A stinkin' lawyer and a poverty pimp?
So you think the mere fact someone went to law school means they are better qualified to be the President than anyone else? You put far too much value in your JD degree.
What exactly did he get done during his tenure as a "community organizer?" Any difficult decision he made and found himself held accountable for? Other than an autobiography where he made evident his history of drug abuse and contempt for white people, and his ability to write and read in public, what exactly had he ever done?
Clearly, we aren't going to agree. You seem think that lawyers should be the ruling class in this country. You're not alone, most other lawyers I've met wreak of a similar scent of elitism.
How does Senate experience necessarily translate to Presidential preparation?
What do the two positions have in common?
And a few of us here have been to college and studied specifically these subjects, so be careful not to condescend.
And you still don't have a leg to stand on. The head of the Democrat ticket is less qualified for the position than the Republican VP candidate that you are so critical of.
Because Alaska doesn't count?
Because it's population base isn't as large most of the other states, it's somehow easier or less significant? They don't have budgets, a national guard, extensive federal interactive, it doesn't border two countries, they aren't at the front line of the energy problems facing the country, and her whistleblowing and integrity don't matter because she's not in New York of California.
Demonstrate this. You're a lawyer, construct an argument, stop just making baseless claims and vague, condescending implications.
Well, one of us is right.
And as is so often the case, the condescending lawyer is wrong.
No, Timbuktu is in Africa. You're the guy supporting a candidate with a Kenyan family. But I do think that there is greatness, decency, ethics, principles, leadership, and intelligence on display all over our great country. And I also think you're infinitely more likely to find those qualities in Alaska than you are at a law school.
You over value formal education. Some of the dumbest people I've ever met have graduated from the best Universities in this country with honors.
Perhaps I should sue them?
A backlash, from who? Bitter, partisan liberals? North Eastern, liberal snobs?You know your girl's days are numbered but you probably never expected a backlash of any sort against your candidate.
Face it, you nominated the worst candidate of the bunch. A community organizer who has yet to win a single contested election. A man who has accomplished NOTHING of any significance. He accomplished nothing while in the state legislator. He has accomplished nothing in the U.S. senate. He has terrible judgment, and this is also reflected by the list his list of terrifying political associations.
He has no background in international relations. No understanding of economics. He's never been responsible for any decision he's made while in office. He's a lawyer that's gifted with the pen- and even then, it's only when he's talking about himself.
Biden isn't any better. A man who spent three years practicing law, then immediately went into the legislator. A career politician with no accomplishments. He's repeatedly run for the Presidency, never to win the nomination. Him, and his son, have both been caught plagiarizing on several occasions. Biden also is unable to give a speech without spending the majority of it talking about himself.
Legislative experience is not the same as executive experience. Being on a deliberative body of 100, or 435, doesn't even resemble the responsibility of being Commander in Chief and Head of State.
Palin has exhibited executive skill, character and integrity EVEN when it was not politically advantageous for her. These are traits Obama and Biden have NOT exhibited.
Palin is MORE experienced than Obama, yet she's running for the VP slot. You guys have picked that inexperienced novelty act, Obama, to head your ticket. I have low regard for Biden, but you're argument might not be so pathetic and laughable if Biden were at least at the head of the ticket and Obama were the number 2.
You guys didn't nominate Richardson, you picked Obama.
By the way, what did you think of Howard Dean in '04?
And yet I remember some of you clamouring for Fred Thompson to run for President... You know, the Senator? Oh, by the way, lest we forget... McCain has never been an "executive" either.
SO lets not get on this kick that senators arent capable of being a good president.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Joey...scroll up, you're missing the irony. Shag is illustrating the absurdity of Max' claim that Obama, who served a grand total of 143 days in his current job before running for president, is somehow more qualified than Palin, who is a governor of an actual state. The comparison is between Palin and Obama/Biden, not between Thompson and anyone else. I believe what you're doing is raising a red herring.
As far as Biden's foreign policy experience, what good does all that experience do him when all of it is wrong?
It reminds me of Bill Clinton, who lately has been giving speeches on monogamy.
ROFL! Ok, now that is funny
In general, Governors make better presidents then senators. This is due to the fact that they have executive experience. There is a reason the last Senator elected to the presidency was in 1960.
McCain has leadership experience (and effective executive experience) from his time in the military. It isn't quite the same as having formal experience in an executive office, but it is much better then no executive experience (like Obama or Biden).
Still, in this election, we have to make the best with the choices we are given. I would much prefer that we were choosing between governors instead of senators, but that isn't an option. So in this election, a little executive experience goes a long way...
As to the Fred Thompson thing...did I (or any other conservative on this forum) ever tout his experience as a lawyer and Senator as a positive over executive experience, like Maxb49 is doing? No, we didn't. In fact, we were supporting him in spite, of that fact, because we thought it was a negative, compared to executive experience.
Also, was there ever a realistic candidate for the nomination on the democratic side that wasn't a Senator? FYI; Richardson never had a chance...
You are comparing apples to oranges here. It serves as nothing more then a red herring here...
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Heck, Shag, Max isn't even doing that...he's touting Obama's education as a lawyer as a positive over executive experience, as Calabrio so effectively pointed out. That's even worse.
Um, What executive experience do you think McCain had in the military?
He flew 23 missions. At the Naval Academy, McCain graduated almost bottom of his class. He was 790th out of 795. To my knowlege, he was never in charge of other pilots or anything. SO what exec experience are you talking about?
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
I have a question…Did John Edwards take the Abstinence Only Sex Ed Course or the Contraceptive one? Didn't he also lie to the entire country about his actions?
And what do his actions say about John and his family?
Was he really fully vetted?
Was he really capable enough to run for office?
Just asking.
Fair enough. 13 months in charge of a training unit.
But - wasnt Obama in charge of the Harvard Law Review? I guess you could also count the last year and a half running a 100 million+, 500+ employee organization (his campaign)
Fact is - NONE of the Pres or VP candidates have any significant executive experience.