Sarah Palin is improving

[Cappster]

Kaz, come on man, really? Do you really think its irrelevant that someone who is thinking about running for president and on the notion that we need to get back to the "core principles of the founding fathers" blah blah blah, can so easily butcher Paul Revere's famous ride warning Americans the British were coming? And I do believe that it puts a dent in your statement that she has improved, because she is still the same person giving the same idiotic answers.

I care what they want to do in office. Not caring all the time is better then your only caring when it's a Republican. Biden says things like this all the time. Al Gore lives in a fantasy world. John Kerry is a compulsive liar. Obama never shuts up about his ability to solve every problem in the world with common sense, yet he's accomplished nothing in his life, including his almost 2 1/2 years as President. Yet it's only Sarah Palin who bothers you enough to speak up. Why is that exactly?

Make a thread about anyone of those jackasses and I will surely contribute to the conversation. Actually, I will say a little bit about how I feel of those people now:

Biden- A belligerent loud mouth who fills the room with hot air. Most likely a jerk.

Kerry- A big flip flopper who, from what I can tell, has been kind of irrelevant since 2004.

Gore- Environmental hypocrite who goes around talking about conserving energy yet owns big energy consuming houses and vehicles.

Obama- I actually believe the president is intelligent, but do not agree with his cap and trade talk, military action against Libya, and the lame universal healthcare bill to name a few.

[Cappster]

There is voluminous evidence that evolution exists. There is 0 evidence that man sprang from nothing. Genesis was written as an explanation for existence at a time when high tech was a bronze spear head. There was also a belief, at that time, that gold could be devined from lead, Earth was the center of the Universe, infection was the result of evil, and that flies grew from bad air.

Wow...I can't believe we actually agree on something

And funbuncher, how about instead of using the word evolution, try inserting adaptation in place of it. I don't believe you ever addressed why people are white, black, yellow, and brown in addition to speaking different languages. Do you believe in the Bible story of when people trying to build a temple to God and he cast them to the corners of the Earth changing their tongues (and I assume the way they look) so they cannot communicate? Is that truly more plausible than evolving from some different form of being?

[funbuncher]

That also is an opinion, based on scientific theory, being presented by you here as scientific fact.

You seriously think there's no proof that fossils exist? It's only an "opinion" being resented as "scientific fact?"

No man, I did not mean that I don't believe that fossils exist. I can see that I'm being taken about as seriously here as Sarah Palin in a Harvard faculty lounge.

I was referring to the radiometric dating methods and the various assumptions they depend upon if they are to be considered accurate.

I assumed you were referring to the supposed age of the fossils since their mere existence would not disprove anything and you did not elaborate past that.

[funbuncher]

There is 0 evidence that man sprang from nothing.

This is the evolutionist argument in a nutshell. what, you on my side now? I believe evrything sprang from God, which seems like much less of a stretch than everything springing from a one celled organism that itself sprang from ____?) and these changes were made possible due to mutations that actually HELPED the species rather than hurt it, disregard the fact that we can't get that scenario to play out in a lab, it happened so efficiently in fact that... here we are today. Your faith is stronger than you give give yourself credit for.

Genesis was written as an explanation for existence at a time when high tech was a bronze spear head. There was also a belief, at that time, that gold could be devined from lead, Earth was the center of the Universe, infection was the result of evil, and that flies grew from bad air.

We laugh at the scientific knowledge of just a hundred years ago. If the early man you refer to was soley responsible for writing the Bible, you would expect to see many of those humorous type errors contained in it, would you not? But you don't.

Add to this the fact that you see the Bible repeatedly being hundreds and sometimes thousands of years ahead of the science of the various author's day. many scientific principals like the round earth, the water cycle, the countless number of stars, etc... were not discovered by scientists until hundreds of years after the Bible had been written, yet these future discoveries found their way in there because it is the inspired Word of God, not just a book written by a bunch of spear hurling, blood-letting, alchemists.

[KazooSkinsFan]

Make a thread about anyone of those jackasses and I will surely contribute to the conversation

You're contributing to this one by demonstrating the point behind why I started it. Irrational hatred of Palin.

Obama- I actually believe the president is intelligent, but do not agree with his cap and trade talk, military action against Libya, and the lame universal healthcare bill to name a few.

Out of curiosity, what has he said that impressed you? I think he's a moron. He's a fool in an empty suit unable to reason or learn from events as they unfold. He mindlessly drones liberal talking points and can't recognize at all ever when liberalism doesn't work. He just follows the liberal adage that if your prescription isn't working, the only solution to consider is that you're not taking enough of it while pointing fingers that it's anyone's fault his plan didn't work but him. He has no sense of personal responsibility, no ethics, no concern for anyone but himself. What has he said you think demonstrated any insight regarding anything or that made you think of something in a different way?

[Redskin in Canada]

As for that part about fundamentalists all share the common denominator that we can commit any crime, any where, any time in the name of God... and that surely I should recognize the same but opposite kind of fundamentalist... Those are Islamic fundamentalists.

Those are fundamentalists of ANY persuasion.

For example, just a few weeks ago, the World ended. Oh, you did not know?

Yes, people gave up homes, property and many values and hope because the world was going to come to an end AGAIN. Not to worry, it has been postponed AGAIN. We have a new date with the Bible later this year, I guess.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/ma ... -end-world

Worth quoting Voltaire again:

"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."

Is it a crime to scare and move people to act based on an irresponsible, uninformed and flawed interpretation of the Bible or any other religious scriptures? Yes, it is. The problem with fundamentalists of ANY persuasion is their tendency to lack the humility to see virtue and values in OTHER religious or nor-religious views out of their own narrow oversimplified and adversarial view of the world. Their own interpretations of the scriptures are uninformed and manipulated for political and military purposes.

As for your views on homosexuality, you abhor it too, right? Is that the respect you expect to get back from them about your own views? They should respect yours because, in your mind, they are DIVINE but they are wrong because, in your view, they are sinners? And that is NOT intolerance? The very word you used to define yourself?

As for the denial of evolution, I respect your view. There were plenty of people who thought the earth was flat too for a long time. No damage derived from it, as long as they do not wish to make us share the same belief.

To return to te topic of the thread: Palin can count on the blind votes of people like you. people who are susceptible to religious manipulation for political purposes. That does not make any politician any better. It only makes them dangerous to the rest of society.

[Irn-Bru]

There is voluminous evidence that evolution exists. There is 0 evidence that man sprang from nothing. Genesis was written as an explanation for existence at a time when high tech was a bronze spear head. There was also a belief, at that time, that gold could be devined from lead, Earth was the center of the Universe, infection was the result of evil, and that flies grew from bad air.

Well to be fair, the earth is "at the center" of the universe if one prefers to put it that way, and so also does the sun revolve around the earth — again, if we want to put it that way. Current physics supports those ideas 100%.

[funbuncher]

There were plenty of people who thought the earth was flat too for a long time. No damage derived from it, as long as they do not wish to make us share the same belief.

but it's ok for evolutionists to attempt to make our children share the same belief as them by teaching it in schools with our tax money?

like the evolutionists of today, the people who insisted that the earth was flat were the scientific community of the day. eventually the Bible was proven right as science caught up. Scientific fact and Christianity have never once been at odds, and they never will. scientific theory on the other hand has often had to catch up.

As for your views on homosexuality, you abhor it too, right? Is that the respect you expect to get back from them about your own views? They should respect yours because, in your mind, they are DIVINE but they are wrong because, in your view, they are sinners?

not my view, God's view. and no, I certainly do not abhor anyone, and I sincerely hope that is obvious to anyone who has actually READ any of my posts on this topic. If not, then let me restate that I certainly have no problem with gay people or anyone else. I am just as guilty of sin as them. It is not my place or any other Christian's place to judge anyone but ourselves. God is the only judge. He loves everyone, including you, me, and gay people, but he hates sin. If you have a problem with the fact that homosexuality is a sin, then you have a disagreement with the Word of God that I directly quoted before without "manipulation" or "interpretation" (ref Leviticus 20:13). But if you see anyone spewing hatred or intolerance toward gay people, you should know right then that they are outside of the Bible's teaching, and not acting as a fundamentalist Christian.

For example, just a few weeks ago, the World ended. Oh, you did not know? Yes, people gave up homes, property and many values and hope because the world was going to come to an end AGAIN. Not to worry, it has been postponed AGAIN. We have a new date with the Bible later this year, I guess. Is it a crime to scare and move people to act based on an irresponsible, uninformed and flawed interpretation of the Bible or any other religious scriptures? Yes, it is.

this is essentially a non sequitur to our conversation on fundamentalist Christianity and the literal interpretation of the Bible if you know the Bible at all which clearly says...

However, no one knows the day or hour when these things will happen, not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself. Only the Father knows. Matthew 24:36

So this con-man was able to fool quite a few people who either did not take the Bible literally, or just failed to read it for themselves. The Christian Church has been wringing its hands over this guy since he started putting up billboards, because it only serves to fool some people, and further drive away folks like yourself from God who think fools like this represent all Christians.

You seem to blame Christianity for being used as a tool by evil men or politicians. that's the same as blaming guns for killing people instead of the people who pull the trigger. Hitler used Christianity (among other things) to justify the slaughter of 6 million Jews, is that Christianity's fault as well? Islamo-fascists ran an airplane into the twin towers, is it the airplane's fault?

The problem with fundamentalists of ANY persuasion is their tendency to lack the humility to see virtue and values in OTHER religious or nor-religious views out of their own narrow oversimplified and adversarial view of the world. Their own interpretations of the scriptures are uninformed and manipulated for political and military purposes.

As for your views on homosexuality, you abhor it too, right? Is that the respect you expect to get back from them about your own views? They should respect yours because, in your mind, they are DIVINE but they are wrong because, in your view, they are sinners? And that is NOT intolerance? The very word you used to define yourself?

honestly, if I had come on this board professing my gayness would you be telling me the "problem" with my views, and insulting my character by telling me who you think I abhor and calling me intolerant? It appears that you are intolerant of Christianity in particular, but you prefer to veil it by having a problem with "fundamentalists" in general. and much like Cappster who never has an unsolicited sour word for morons who are democrats, but plenty of irrational hatred for Sarah Palin, you focus your examples on the Crusades of 1000 years ago, or some podunk preacher who preyed on some ignorant people. Both were outrageous acts, yes, but acts that were committed by kooks acting outside of the true teachings of fundamental Christianity. Where are your examples of death and destruction caused by Islamic fundamentalists who are actively looking to try to kill as many non-believers as possible and whose holy scriptures include verses like these...

"I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" (Sura 8 verse 12).

"So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them" (Koran 9:5).

Let me break it down for you as best I can. I don't know how familiar you are with the Bible (I am no longer surprised to meet atheists who are very familiar), but what you are doing here is mistaking fundamental Christianity for the Pharisees in the Bible. the Pharisees were the straightest arrows, the most pious, the most ambitious, the most holier than thou, the most intolerant, and the most JUDGMENTAL religious leaders of Jesus' day. All the things that you have labeled me with is exactly what they were. And they had a big problem with Jesus who spent his time with prostitutes, tax collectors, and sinners. When they tried to persecute him for this he responded...

"It is not those who are well who need a physician, but those who are sick. I have come to call not those who think they are righteous, but those who know they are sinners and need to repent." (Luke 5:31, 32)

If you have read nothing I have written to you this past week, please read these words of Jesus' that I copied and pasted from Luke chapter 6...

28"But to you who hear I say, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.
29 To the person who strikes you on one cheek, offer the other one as well, and from the person who takes your cloak, do not withhold even your tunic.
30 Give to everyone who asks of you, and from the one who takes what is yours do not demand it back.
31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.
32 For if you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them.
33 And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do the same.
34 If you lend money to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit (is) that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, and get back the same amount.
35 But rather, love your enemies and do good to them, and lend expecting nothing back; then your reward will be great and you will be children of the Most High, for he himself is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked.
36 Be merciful, just as (also) your Father is merciful.
37 Stop judging and you will not be judged. Stop condemning and you will not be condemned. Forgive and you will be forgiven.

This is fundamental Christianity.

It doesn't appear that I am making any progress here other than angering the atheist majority. probably bout time to go back to talking about football, but sadly there is no football. my goal was to clear up the myth that Christians are out to judge people. Hopefully somebody got that.

Go Skins! wish we had drafted Mallett.

[KazooSkinsFan]

That also is an opinion, based on scientific theory, being presented by you here as scientific fact.

You seriously think there's no proof that fossils exist? It's only an "opinion" being resented as "scientific fact?"

No man, I did not mean that I don't believe that fossils exist. I can see that I'm being taken about as seriously here as Sarah Palin in a Harvard faculty lounge.

I was referring to the radiometric dating methods and the various assumptions they depend upon if they are to be considered accurate.

I assumed you were referring to the supposed age of the fossils since their mere existence would not disprove anything and you did not elaborate past that.

On your last point, I was referring to a somewhat vague point so I did my best as to what you meant. I specifically said "bible Literalists." They think the earth is like 6,000 years old. How would animals entombed in stone be in any way consistent with that even if you don't trust the accuracy of carbon dating? If you're not a literalist, then we're not disagreeing. If you are, I'm not seeing how questioning carbon dating says there could be fossils just because you question the accuracy of carbon dating.

[KazooSkinsFan]

There were plenty of people who thought the earth was flat too for a long time. No damage derived from it, as long as they do not wish to make us share the same belief.

but it's ok for evolutionists to attempt to make our children share the same belief as them by teaching it in schools with our tax money?

Oh for Gosh sakes no. Government money should only be used to enforce Christian morality. Can you imagine people going around doing things with their own bodies Christians disapprove of? Putting drugs in them? Gambling? Prostitution. Oh my God, ABORTIONS! We need politicians to solve that with legislation, government guns to arrest them, taxpayer funded prosecutors to try them, taxpayer courts to convict them and taxpayer jails to house them to stop them from doing non-Christian things with their bodies.

But using taxpayer money to teach things in school based on what is learned in the empirical world but not taught in the bible? I hear you, that must be stopped...

[Redskin in Canada]

but it's ok for evolutionists to attempt to make our children share the same belief as them by teaching it in schools with our tax money?

Yes.

like the evolutionists of today, the people who insisted that the earth was flat were the scientific community of the day.

Not true. the flat earth theory comes from religious fanatics whom ignored the scientific information available at the time and "interpreted the bible" to argue the flat earth theory. I actually wrote an award-winning dissertation on this interesting part of the history of science. So, trust me, you do not wish to argue that "the best scientific community of the day" made this argument.

not my view, God's view.

You see? It is impossible to reason and discuss respect when the name of God is invoked as the single justification for your conduct.

I get it. God and you against the rest of the world.

This is what fundamentalism is about: a narrow, adversarial, selfish, often ill-informed and wrong interpretation of ANY religious scriptures.

this is essentially a non sequitur to our conversation on fundamentalist Christianity and the literal interpretation of the Bible if you know the Bible at all which clearly says...

Why? The views of this man and his following were based on THEIR absolutely and infallible interpretation of the Bible? No? You ask them: they are ABSOLUTELY right and you are WRONG. God said so and you fail to read the Bible correctly.

So this con-man was able to fool quite a few people who either did not take the Bible literally, or just failed to read it for themselves. The Christian Church has been wringing its hands over this guy since he started putting up billboards, because it only serves to fool some people, and further drive away folks like yourself from God who think fools like this represent all Christians.

So, what is the difference between this man and other fundamentalists again?

Using the bible for manipulation and moving the people to act irresponsibly is exactly the argument against fundamentalists. How is this different?

You seem to blame Christianity for being used as a tool by evil men or politicians.

Nothing could be further from the truth. I blame fanatic fundamentalists for USING religion, whatever religion and not only Christianity, as a tool to manipulate people and serve their own power interests.

honestly, if I had come on this board professing my gayness would you be telling me the "problem" with my views, and insulting my character by telling me who you think I abhor and calling me intolerant? It appears that you are intolerant of Christianity in particular, but you prefer to veil it by having a problem with "fundamentalists" in general.

Again, nothing could be further from the truth. I am a Christian. I just hate to see my and other religions which I respect being misused for political and military manipulation.

Where are your examples of death and destruction caused by Islamic fundamentalists who are actively looking to try to kill as many non-believers as possible and whose holy scriptures include verses like these...

My criticism and condemnation for ALL forms of fundamentalism of all religions has been consistent. You seem to be the one arguing that YOUR FORM of fundamentalism is RIGHT because ... it is YOURS (in the name of God and the scriptures as you see them of course).

the Pharisees were the straightest arrows, the most pious, the most ambitious, the most holier than thou, the most intolerant, and the most JUDGMENTAL religious leaders of Jesus' day. All the things that you have labeled me with is exactly what they were.

To be fair, not only you or Christian fundamentalists BUT all fundamentalists of all religions.

If you have read nothing I have written to you this past week, please read these words of Jesus' that I copied and pasted from Luke chapter 6...

What's a good argument without a good thump of the book, eh?

This is fundamental Christianity.

This?


Somebody who manipulated people for wealth and power?

Somebody who would quote the scriptures more often and accurately than you do now?

Please explain to me: What is difference between this Christian fundamentalist attempt to use religion as manipulation tool and others from Christian or any other religion?

It doesn't appear that I am making any progress here other than angering the atheist majority. probably bout time to go back to talking about football, but sadly there is no football. my goal was to clear up the myth that Christians are out to judge people. Hopefully somebody got that.

Definition of an atheist: ANYBODY who does not see the world exactly according to your own narrow and righteous interpretation of the Bible.

Sadly, there are PLENTY of fundamentalists in other religions whom would change the book but not the statement:





For an interesting discussion of Jewish fundamentalism, you can look here:

Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel

I quote some parts that apply to all other forms of fundamentalism:

...Jewish opposition in Israel to Jewish fundamentalism greatly increased after a Jewish, fundamentalist, religious fanatic, Yigal Amir, who insisted that he was acting in accordance with dictates in Judaism, shot and killed Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. That numerous groups of religious Jews after the assassination supported this murder in the name of the "true" Jewish religion aroused interest in Israel in past killings by Jews of other Jews who were alleged to be heretics or sinners. In our book we cite present and past investigations by Israeli scholars documenting that for centuries prior to the rise of the modern nation state, Jews, believing they were acting in accordance with God's word and thus preparing themselves for eternal paradise, punished or killed heretics and/or religious sinners. Contemporary Jewish fundamentalism is an attempt to revive a situation that often existed in Jewish communities before the influence of modernity. The basic principles of Jewish fundamentalism are the same as those found in other religions: restoration and survival of the "pure" and pious religious community that presumably existed in the past.

[Cappster]

Out of curiosity, what has he said that impressed you?

I like his ideology (not policy) of addressing environmental, energy, and medical issues that concern us today. He recognizes something needs to be done about those issues, but I don't believe he has gone about trying to implement policy in the correct manner.

[KazooSkinsFan]

Out of curiosity, what has he said that impressed you?

I like his ideology (not policy) of addressing environmental, energy, and medical issues that concern us today. He recognizes something needs to be done about those issues, but I don't believe he has gone about trying to implement policy in the correct manner.

Environmental. His "ideology" is what?

Energy. His "ideology" is what?"

Medical. I'm going to have to ask the same, his "ideology" is what?

For all those since you're saying he's intelligent I'm not just asking if you/he like the liberal solutions to solving those diseases by killing the patient (most literally in his medical ideology), I'm asking what value he actually brings to any of those discussions.

He doesn't take a position on anything from what I can see. The liberal media has given up on his doing anything and now pumps all the wonderful things he's "considering" or "evaluating" without any actual decision or acting being made. His one huge action as President, Obama Healthcare Destruction was no policy at all but just thousands of pages of transactional government control wherever they could get it. I'm not saying I disagree with his polices on those areas, I'd have to know what they are specifically to do that, and for that he'd need to have one. He just goes from speech to speech saying nothing. I'd love to hear what that nothing actually means.

[Cappster]

Out of curiosity, what has he said that impressed you?

I like his ideology (not policy) of addressing environmental, energy, and medical issues that concern us today. He recognizes something needs to be done about those issues, but I don't believe he has gone about trying to implement policy in the correct manner.

Environmental. His "ideology" is what?

Energy. His "ideology" is what?"

Medical. I'm going to have to ask the same, his "ideology" is what?

For all those since you're saying he's intelligent I'm not just asking if you/he like the liberal solutions to solving those diseases by killing the patient (most literally in his medical ideology), I'm asking what value he actually brings to any of those discussions.

He doesn't take a position on anything from what I can see. The liberal media has given up on his doing anything and now pumps all the wonderful things he's "considering" or "evaluating" without any actual decision or acting being made. His one huge action as President, Obama Healthcare Destruction was no policy at all but just thousands of pages of transactional government control wherever they could get it. I'm not saying I disagree with his polices on those areas, I'd have to know what they are specifically to do that, and for that he'd need to have one. He just goes from speech to speech saying nothing. I'd love to hear what that nothing actually means.

Environmental- Something needs to be done about cleaning up the environment. Cap and trade is not the answer, but something needs to be done before we pollute ourselves into extinction. Trying to direct companies to take a more eco-friendly approach is the right thing to do.

Energy- The need for renewable resources is valuable not only for energy independence, but the oil well and coal mines going to be empty one day. The environment and energy problems are very closely related. Renewable and cleaner burning energy to meet our demands is needed to maintain our current way of life.

Medical- In an ideal world, everyone should have access to medical care. It's human nature to want to live and the poor shouldn't be left behind. Now, the problem with Obamacare, much like anything that comes out of Washington, it has a lot of underlying issues that are not about taking care of people, but filled with other terms and conditions that have nothing to do with health care.

If boys and girls in Washington would put their religious ideologies on the back burner, learn how to share the sandbox, and try to objectively work together minus the greed and search for unruly power, the nation may be able to fix itself that is better for everyone. Unfortunately, there is too much money, power, and influence directing our "representatives" to take care of their buddies, stocks, bank accounts, etc... Obama is no different than the rest of the dodo bird politicians who are out for themselves and not out for "the people."

[KazooSkinsFan]

Environmental- Something needs to be done about cleaning up the environment. Cap and trade is not the answer, but something needs to be done before we pollute ourselves into extinction. Trying to direct companies to take a more eco-friendly approach is the right thing to do.

Energy- The need for renewable resources is valuable not only for energy independence, but the oil well and coal mines going to be empty one day. The environment and energy problems are very closely related. Renewable and cleaner burning energy to meet our demands is needed to maintain our current way of life.

Medical- In an ideal world, everyone should have access to medical care. It's human nature to want to live and the poor shouldn't be left behind. Now, the problem with Obamacare, much like anything that comes out of Washington, it has a lot of underlying issues that are not about taking care of people, but filled with other terms and conditions that have nothing to do with health care

Everyone agrees that in an ideal world we'd have a clean environment, renewable energy and access to medical care. You're saying you don't agree with his policies, but this is apple pie ideology. I understand you said ideology not policy so I'm trying to stay away from policy.

So the question again is you said he's intelligent, I asked what impressed you, you listed these. From an ideology standpoint, how has he advanced any of these areas? What insight has he given? Is it seriously intelligent to say he'd like a clean environment, renewable energy and access to healthcare but has no idea how to accomplish the task with an actual policy? I don't get it.

[The Hogster]

Sarah Palin is improving. She's gone from rich to wealthy. If we consider the vast leap from Retarded to Dum-Witted, she's made some strides there as well.

Seriously, Palin is the average American. Not very intelligent, but not a complete idiot. A little intelligence can be dangerous because the person may confuse other things (power, success, fame) with affirmations of their intelligence. This leads to the over-inflated sense of intellect that gives regular dummies the confidence to speak on things they don't even realize they know nothing about. (See Paul Revere)

Chris Rock once said America is like a classroom. You've got a couple of really smart kids, a couple of really dumb kids, and everyone else is just in the middle. Palin is in the middle but has a timeshare desk with the dumb asses.

[KazooSkinsFan]

Sarah Palin is improving. She's gone from rich to wealthy. If we consider the vast leap from Retarded to Dum-Witted, she's made some strides there as well.

Seriously, Palin is the average American. Not very intelligent, but not a complete idiot. A little intelligence can be dangerous because the person may confuse other things (power, success, fame) with affirmations of their intelligence. This leads to the over-inflated sense of intellect that gives regular dummies the confidence to speak on things they don't even realize they know nothing about. (See Paul Revere)

Chris Rock once said America is like a classroom. You've got a couple of really smart kids, a couple of really dumb kids, and everyone else is just in the middle. Palin is in the middle but has a timeshare desk with the dumb asses.

What's so funny is how you can re-write this by replacing "Palin" with "Obama" or "Biden" or "Kerry" or "Gore" and make the exact same point with a few wording tweaks.

Which was....wait for it....my point....

But she's not liberal and she's a woman, so the vitriol flows one way. Thank you for that demonstration of the theme of this tread, Hogster. I appreciate it. Really.

[The Hogster]

Sarah Palin is improving. She's gone from rich to wealthy. If we consider the vast leap from Retarded to Dum-Witted, she's made some strides there as well.

Seriously, Palin is the average American. Not very intelligent, but not a complete idiot. A little intelligence can be dangerous because the person may confuse other things (power, success, fame) with affirmations of their intelligence. This leads to the over-inflated sense of intellect that gives regular dummies the confidence to speak on things they don't even realize they know nothing about. (See Paul Revere)

Chris Rock once said America is like a classroom. You've got a couple of really smart kids, a couple of really dumb kids, and everyone else is just in the middle. Palin is in the middle but has a timeshare desk with the dumb asses.

What's so funny is how you can re-write this by replacing "Palin" with "Obama" or "Biden" or "Kerry" or "Gore" and make the exact same point with a few wording tweaks.

Which was....wait for it....my point....

But she's not liberal and she's a woman, so the vitriol flows one way. Thank you for that demonstration of the theme of this tread, Hogster. I appreciate it. Really.

You could replace any politician's name with it. But, it fits some more than others. Palin is a mental midget, but she talks like she thinks she's Aristotle. You can say what you want about Obama, but he's intelligent.

Stupid people don't realize when the answer to the question is "I don't know." Instead, stupid people feel the need to fill silence with a voice--usually their own. And, the more they talk, the dumber they sound. There is a such thing called nuance that alludes dummies.

Instead of knowing when to just stop talking, Palin tries to talk her way out of situations and winds up looking much dumber than she probably really is. If you're not going to prepare before a public discussion, know when to shut up or simply state that your research is in progress or the issue is developing.

[Cappster]

Everyone agrees that in an ideal world we'd have a clean environment, renewable energy and access to medical care. You're saying you don't agree with his policies, but this is apple pie ideology. I understand you said ideology not policy so I'm trying to stay away from policy.

So the question again is you said he's intelligent, I asked what impressed you, you listed these. From an ideology standpoint, how has he advanced any of these areas? What insight has he given? Is it seriously intelligent to say he'd like a clean environment, renewable energy and access to healthcare but has no idea how to accomplish the task with an actual policy? I don't get it.

Well, in an non-ideal world, the world in which we live, some people do not see a need for renewable energy and/or believe the hazardous amounts of pollution in our environment is something that scientists are lying about. The president, at least I think he believes, sees a need for corrective action to be taken against these conditions that are going to impact us sooner rather than later.

I don't expect him to know how to "solve" the problem from a technical standpoint, but lead us to a point where most Americans do care about these issues. Much like a project manager who doesn't know the technical aspect of each job, but can bring everyone together to work for a common goal. The difference is that America is divided and wouldn't be able to choose on a style of pizza if its life depended on it.

The two rival gang system...ahem...two party system is severely flawed and keeps getting worse. Instead of getting anything fruitful accomplished, both sides would rather bicker back and forth to try and posture themselves for their own personal gain.

[The Hogster]

Cappster wrote:

The two rival gang system...ahem...two party system is severely flawed and keeps getting worse. Instead of getting anything fruitful accomplished, both sides would rather bicker back and forth to try and posture themselves for their own personal gain.

Agreed. On the energy issue, it all comes down to money. Lobbyist money in particular. Republicans are tied to energy companies probably moreso than any other interest group.

Accordingly, until these energy companies figure out ways to make money off of clean energy technologies, you will continue to see Republicans take assinine positions contrary to settled scientific research on issues such as global warming, and other energy-related initiatives.

Once Exxon Mobil can make money from those energy sources, you'll see Republicans suddenly agree with scientists. Until then, they "don't believe in it." Oh, the magic of money.

[KazooSkinsFan]

Well, in an non-ideal world, the world in which we live, some people do not see a need for renewable energy and/or believe the hazardous amounts of pollution in our environment is something that scientists are lying about. The president, at least I think he believes, sees a need for corrective action to be taken against these conditions that are going to impact us sooner rather than later.

I don't expect him to know how to "solve" the problem from a technical standpoint, but lead us to a point where most Americans do care about these issues. Much like a project manager who doesn't know the technical aspect of each job, but can bring everyone together to work for a common goal. The difference is that America is divided and wouldn't be able to choose on a style of pizza if its life depended on it.

The two rival gang system...ahem...two party system is severely flawed and keeps getting worse. Instead of getting anything fruitful accomplished, both sides would rather bicker back and forth to try and posture themselves for their own personal gain.

I'm confused. Are you saying that Obama is trying to bring us together?

If you are, you're delusional,he's one of the most bitterly partisan Presidents in our history, and I agree that's a high hurdle.

If you are not saying that, so what are you giving him credit for exactly?

I give credit for example to Bono who actually works with Republicans even though he's far left. I don't agree with his cause (the methods, not the objectives), but his objective is obviously his cause. When attacked by Democrats for working with Republicans, he said he'd take help where he can get it.

Al Gore on the other hand uses Global Warming as a hammer for partisan attacks against Republicans. His priority is electing Democrats, not solving global warming.

Obama is clearly in the Gore camp on that. If you're actually saying he's not you need to back that up for anything.

Obama "They (Republicans) can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back."

[HEROHAMO]

I haven't read all the replys in this thread nor do I intend to this is a ten page long thread. I am only stating what I think about Sarah Palin.


I for one happen to like Sarah Palin. Do I think she is perfect no. I just think overall she is a decent person. The problem that most people have with her is that she is not very well spoken. So this might lead people to think she isn't the smartest person in the world. Which may or may not be true.

I just think that overall she is genuine. What I mean is that I take her at her word. Which I cant say for 99 percent of the rest of the politicians. As of late I have totally turned my attention away from politics because it is just an endless cycle of negative news. We need to fix this and we need to fix that over and over again.

Not sexist at all. I just don't believe America is ready to vote a woman into the presidency. I am not sure if she backed the tea party or is just riding the wave. However I am certain her core beliefs reflect most of my own. She is also pretty cute too. LOL!

[KazooSkinsFan]

I haven't read all the replys in this thread nor do I intend to this is a ten page long thread. I am only stating what I think about Sarah Palin.


I for one happen to like Sarah Palin. Do I think she is perfect no. I just think overall she is a decent person. The problem that most people have with her is that she is not very well spoken. So this might lead people to think she isn't the smartest person in the world. Which may or may not be true.

I just think that overall she is genuine. What I mean is that I take her at her word. Which I cant say for 99 percent of the rest of the politicians. As of late I have totally turned my attention away from politics because it is just an endless cycle of negative news. We need to fix this and we need to fix that over and over again.

Not sexist at all. I just don't believe America is ready to vote a woman into the presidency. I am not sure if she backed the tea party or is just riding the wave. However I am certain her core beliefs reflect most of my own. She is also pretty cute too. LOL!

word

[Redskin in Canada]

Interesting and provocative read:

Why U.S. is not a Christian nation

[Cappster]

Very interesting read, RiC. To bad the people who need to understand what the article is stating will refuse to accept it.