Dan Quayle in Drag
McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin to be his VP is pretty risky. Considering how old he is and his health history, Palin’s qualifications to be Commander in Chief are pretty important. But as with most moves in the McCain campaign, the calculation was not picking someone who could step into the Presidency, but rather a polical calculation that they could strip a way the Hillary voters by picking a woman. But this is a woman with a hard right agenda on the issues of a woman’s right to choose and hews to a fundamentalist Christian agenda and believes in teaching creationism! OMG
Social conservatives were relieved and highly pleased. “They’re beyond ecstatic,” said Ralph Reed, the former head of the Christian Coalition. “This is a home run. She is a reformer governor who is solidly pro-life and a person of deep Christian faith. And she is really one of the bright shining new stars in the Republican firmament.”
I don’t believe that most Democratic women would vote for a paleo-conservative, just because of her gender. And by the way, Alaskan’s who want to keep the Grizzly Bear from being hunted into extinction aren’t too happy with Palin, either.
But do ENOUGH Democratic woman want a woman in the White House to make a difference.
She’s already being investigate for ethics violations as a Gov’r. She tried to get her ex brother-i-law fired (he’s mid custody dispute with her sister), and then fired the guy who wouldn’t fire him.
But do ENOUGH Democratic woman want a woman in the White House to make a difference.
She’s already being investigate for ethics violations as a Gov’r. She tried to get her ex brother-i-law fired (he’s mid custody dispute with her sister), and then fired the guy who wouldn’t fire him.
hey zak, you nailed it
hey zak, you nailed it
wind officially sucked out of my sails this morning.
Seth, I’d prefer to be VERY VERY wrong in this case.
wind officially sucked out of my sails this morning.
Seth, I’d prefer to be VERY VERY wrong in this case.
“I was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5…”
“I was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5, was a POW for 5 years, she’s a mother of 5…”
Based on what I read about the convention, the number of PUMAs was in the tens, the hundreds at most. This is NOT a significant percentage of the voting bloc. In addition, I’m with Zak…women who would vote for a anti-choice, creationist-supporting, ex-beauty queen whose previous qualifications for governance included being mayor of the 9th largest city in Alaska. This was a hail mary after being totally shut-down by Obama’s brilliant speech at the DNC.
Based on what I read about the convention, the number of PUMAs was in the tens, the hundreds at most. This is NOT a significant percentage of the voting bloc. In addition, I’m with Zak…women who would vote for a anti-choice, creationist-supporting, ex-beauty queen whose previous qualifications for governance included being mayor of the 9th largest city in Alaska. This was a hail mary after being totally shut-down by Obama’s brilliant speech at the DNC.
I mean, SERIOUS foreign policy chops and heartbeat-away cred. What’s not to love?
Also, this will have all the photo-op appeal of an Anna Nichole marriage.
I mean, SERIOUS foreign policy chops and heartbeat-away cred. What’s not to love?
Also, this will have all the photo-op appeal of an Anna Nichole marriage.
this is actual potentially very dangerous for Obama/Biden. We’ve had a year of sexism in media while Hillary was in the running, which for PUMAS, was attached to the other candidates. Going after Palin’s record and lack of knowledge is going to have to be carefully orchestrated or it’ll be look at the media/Obama ganging up on the woman again.
this is actual potentially very dangerous for Obama/Biden. We’ve had a year of sexism in media while Hillary was in the running, which for PUMAS, was attached to the other candidates. Going after Palin’s record and lack of knowledge is going to have to be carefully orchestrated or it’ll be look at the media/Obama ganging up on the woman again.
Zak-As Hillary always, “if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen”. This woman is auditioning for the second most powerful position in the world. She needs to be able to prove she’s worthy.
Zak-As Hillary always, “if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen”. This woman is auditioning for the second most powerful position in the world. She needs to be able to prove she’s worthy.
Palin’s an excellent choice. Much better than politics-as-usual Joe Biden. With the PUMA vote, McCain/Palin are going to be hard to beat.
Palin’s an excellent choice. Much better than politics-as-usual Joe Biden. With the PUMA vote, McCain/Palin are going to be hard to beat.
my first thought too was “get the disgruntled clinton supporters” but as I read more about her I’m thinking “republicians still haven’t covered their base yet”
I think the number of Clinton supporters that would vote republican because of Palin is significantly less than the number of religious right that wouldn’t show up on a McCain/Romney McCain/Liberman bill, so selecting Palin was to keep those people.
McCain has had to repudiate every advance he made to the evangelicals so this is his last effort to make them show up.
my first thought too was “get the disgruntled clinton supporters” but as I read more about her I’m thinking “republicians still haven’t covered their base yet”
I think the number of Clinton supporters that would vote republican because of Palin is significantly less than the number of religious right that wouldn’t show up on a McCain/Romney McCain/Liberman bill, so selecting Palin was to keep those people.
McCain has had to repudiate every advance he made to the evangelicals so this is his last effort to make them show up.
Steve-You must be smoking that weed Sarah said she didn’t enjoy.
Steve-You must be smoking that weed Sarah said she didn’t enjoy.
I think the number of Clinton supporters that would vote republican because of Palin is significantly less than the number of religious right that wouldn’t show up on a McCain/Romney McCain/Liberman bill, so selecting Palin was to keep those people.
Kevin,
I think you miss the point of the PUMAs. They aren’t looking for a Palin to vote for, they’re PO’d that Hillary was dissed.
You’re right that McCain is not a good fit with the evangelicals (or other social conservatives) and Palin will help him in this regard.
I think the number of Clinton supporters that would vote republican because of Palin is significantly less than the number of religious right that wouldn’t show up on a McCain/Romney McCain/Liberman bill, so selecting Palin was to keep those people.
Kevin,
I think you miss the point of the PUMAs. They aren’t looking for a Palin to vote for, they’re PO’d that Hillary was dissed.
You’re right that McCain is not a good fit with the evangelicals (or other social conservatives) and Palin will help him in this regard.
So is it just me, or do the majority of American voters (even those who are not very religious) expect the president and/or VP to be fundamentalists?
Will Biden and Palin take turns doing lasso tricks for the pleasure of the pope?
So is it just me, or do the majority of American voters (even those who are not very religious) expect the president and/or VP to be fundamentalists?
Will Biden and Palin take turns doing lasso tricks for the pleasure of the pope?
I think you miss the point of the PUMAs. They aren’t looking for a Palin to vote for, they’re PO’d that Hillary was dissed.
…and given that McCain is moderate/lefty Republican, Palin will help to seal his base.
I think you miss the point of the PUMAs. They aren’t looking for a Palin to vote for, they’re PO’d that Hillary was dissed.
…and given that McCain is moderate/lefty Republican, Palin will help to seal his base.
Steve- All your conservative brothers in arms don’t share your enthusiasm for Palin.
http://jtaplin.wordpress.com/2008/08/29/conservatives-are-worried-about-palin/
Steve- All your conservative brothers in arms don’t share your enthusiasm for Palin.
http://jtaplin.wordpress.com/2008/08/29/conservatives-are-worried-about-palin/
So is it just me, or do the majority of American voters (even those who are not very religious) expect the president and/or VP to be fundamentalists?
Dan,
I don’t think so. Thinking back to the Reagan years, Republicans have always done well when they ran as conservatives, and poorly when they run as ‘big tenters’. Remember the ’94 revolution when they swept Congress in a big way? They promptly lost whatever gains they made by moving to the middle. Again, McCain is simply covering his base.
So is it just me, or do the majority of American voters (even those who are not very religious) expect the president and/or VP to be fundamentalists?
Dan,
I don’t think so. Thinking back to the Reagan years, Republicans have always done well when they ran as conservatives, and poorly when they run as ‘big tenters’. Remember the ’94 revolution when they swept Congress in a big way? They promptly lost whatever gains they made by moving to the middle. Again, McCain is simply covering his base.
I’m with you, elvis, this is a total hail Mary play, and strikingly in line with the Rove School’s focus on the evangelical wing of the GOP, to the detriment of all others.
The media’s ‘we can’t hit a girl thing’ is a problem only if you take the absurdly patronizing position that all women are cut from the same meek cloth.
Think about people like Margret Thatcher, Madeline Albright, and Angela Merkel. Would any of them recognize Palin as a peer?
I think not. And I can’t imagine that McCain does either. Or perhaps he does, in which case he’s disqualified himself completely.
I’m with you, elvis, this is a total hail Mary play, and strikingly in line with the Rove School’s focus on the evangelical wing of the GOP, to the detriment of all others.
The media’s ‘we can’t hit a girl thing’ is a problem only if you take the absurdly patronizing position that all women are cut from the same meek cloth.
Think about people like Margret Thatcher, Madeline Albright, and Angela Merkel. Would any of them recognize Palin as a peer?
I think not. And I can’t imagine that McCain does either. Or perhaps he does, in which case he’s disqualified himself completely.
I think she’s fantastic and a perfect choice.
I think she’s fantastic and a perfect choice.
And Steve, you may be right about the trouble the GOP gets itself into when trying to play to all corners of the tent.
However, they’ve been playing to the evangelical corner non-stop for the better part of a decade now, and the results speak for themselves. When 80% of the nation says we’re on the wrong track, common sense says you pick another corner in the tent, and make your play from there.
Again, this is the Rove school. They’ve so severely pissed off all their former tent-mates, all they have left are the fundamentalists.
And Steve, you may be right about the trouble the GOP gets itself into when trying to play to all corners of the tent.
However, they’ve been playing to the evangelical corner non-stop for the better part of a decade now, and the results speak for themselves. When 80% of the nation says we’re on the wrong track, common sense says you pick another corner in the tent, and make your play from there.
Again, this is the Rove school. They’ve so severely pissed off all their former tent-mates, all they have left are the fundamentalists.
You have enlightened me even more to how horrible this woman is. I didn’t know she was for creationism, too.
Seriously, if she gets anywhere near the presidency, I’m moving to Australia (Canada’s too cold).
You have enlightened me even more to how horrible this woman is. I didn’t know she was for creationism, too.
Seriously, if she gets anywhere near the presidency, I’m moving to Australia (Canada’s too cold).
Alex,
How can someone who has zero national or foreign policy experience be perfect for the VP slot that’s a heart attack away from being president?
Jon,
She should be able to hold her own. But I’m more concerned about the media narrative that’s going to be painted by the esteemed cable news analysts we’ve all been disappointed in this election cycle.
Alex,
How can someone who has zero national or foreign policy experience be perfect for the VP slot that’s a heart attack away from being president?
Jon,
She should be able to hold her own. But I’m more concerned about the media narrative that’s going to be painted by the esteemed cable news analysts we’ve all been disappointed in this election cycle.
How can someone who has zero national or foreign policy experience be perfect for the VP slot that’s a heart attack away from being president?
Or President? A few years in the Senate and Obama’s a pro? Both parties are showing a balance between experience (McCain/Biden) and inexperience (Obama/Palin). I want the lead dog to have the experience.
How can someone who has zero national or foreign policy experience be perfect for the VP slot that’s a heart attack away from being president?
Or President? A few years in the Senate and Obama’s a pro? Both parties are showing a balance between experience (McCain/Biden) and inexperience (Obama/Palin). I want the lead dog to have the experience.
Looks like Tina Fey is in for some very easy laughs … shouldn’t take her long to get a decent Sarah Palin impression together.
Looks like Tina Fey is in for some very easy laughs … shouldn’t take her long to get a decent Sarah Palin impression together.
You want the lead dog to have experience, Steve? Then how do you explain gw?
Fact is, the choice of Palin goes directly to McCain’s cynicism and lack of judgment. What he’s done is pick a Hillary-Huckabee-Cheney clone, all wrapped up into one neat little creationist-spewing package.
Hey, at least she’s good looking! That ought to get a ton of votes from those bitter people who are too stupid to see beyond the obvious.
You want the lead dog to have experience, Steve? Then how do you explain gw?
Fact is, the choice of Palin goes directly to McCain’s cynicism and lack of judgment. What he’s done is pick a Hillary-Huckabee-Cheney clone, all wrapped up into one neat little creationist-spewing package.
Hey, at least she’s good looking! That ought to get a ton of votes from those bitter people who are too stupid to see beyond the obvious.
Taken from one of the sources Mr. Taplin provided…. So she believes in teaching creation “science” (lol science) in public schools , big deal. It’s not like she demand it be the only thing taught. Although it should fall into the realm of history class
As an atheist I could care less if they teach it as a “theory”… Science, in a lot of cases, is just as certain as religion. Stories and guesses taught as fact.
Taken from one of the sources Mr. Taplin provided…. So she believes in teaching creation “science” (lol science) in public schools , big deal. It’s not like she demand it be the only thing taught. Although it should fall into the realm of history class
As an atheist I could care less if they teach it as a “theory”… Science, in a lot of cases, is just as certain as religion. Stories and guesses taught as fact.
MiddleOfDaNile: You’re the first atheist I’ve ever known who’s equated religion with science in any respect. They most certainly are not the same thing. Science is discredited and changed as new facts come to life, while religion is not. Science is based on experience and measurable facts while religion is not.
In a science class, only SCIENCE should be taught. Creationism doesn’t belong in school, teaching our children that religion and science carry the same weight in an argument. They’re going to be rudely awakened when they enter the real world.
MiddleOfDaNile: You’re the first atheist I’ve ever known who’s equated religion with science in any respect. They most certainly are not the same thing. Science is discredited and changed as new facts come to life, while religion is not. Science is based on experience and measurable facts while religion is not.
In a science class, only SCIENCE should be taught. Creationism doesn’t belong in school, teaching our children that religion and science carry the same weight in an argument. They’re going to be rudely awakened when they enter the real world.
As for the title Jon, “Dan Quale in drag” we still have to see if she too is a bear of little brain, and inarticulate to boot.
I find it hard to believe anyone will ever challenge the Quale in these regards.
As for the title Jon, “Dan Quale in drag” we still have to see if she too is a bear of little brain, and inarticulate to boot.
I find it hard to believe anyone will ever challenge the Quale in these regards.
If you can believe this, his last name is spelled Quayle. How crazy is that?
And although he was considered by some to be somewhat dim, here is one of his quotes, at least, that would seem prophetic.
“People that are really very weird can get into sensitive positions and have a tremendous impact on history.”
Dan Quayle
If you can believe this, his last name is spelled Quayle. How crazy is that?
And although he was considered by some to be somewhat dim, here is one of his quotes, at least, that would seem prophetic.
“People that are really very weird can get into sensitive positions and have a tremendous impact on history.”
Dan Quayle
Middle,
When it comes to science, you are fundementally ignorant, and absolutely wrong. Let me demonstrate:
I’ll start with a definition: Science is the systematic account of observable fact, and the creation of general theory that allows demonstrable fact to be accurately predicted.
It is not a worldview. It is not a system of unsubstantiated belief. It is a method – based entirely on observable phenomena, and limited strictly to what can actually be seen.
People who understand and accept these conditions know that if you observe fact, formulate a theory, make a prediction, and find that your prediction does not mach observable fact, then your theory does not qualify as science. End of story.
These people also understand that if a theory does rise to the level of science, its unqualified acceptance is still conditional upon limits in our powers of observation, which is why no real scientist would ever elevate scientific fact to the level of absolute truth (the proper object of faith).
Moreover, those who practice science are constantly testing their own theories by sharpening their powers of observation, searching for some anomaly that could reveal a flaw in our perceptions, and, consequentially, a limit to any theory accepted as science based on that perception.
In other words, it is not your atheism that makes you so indifferent as to whether or not Creationism is referred to as a scientific theory. Your indifference (not to mention your assessment of science) is the product of your basic ignorance about what science actually is.
If you understood the meaning of the words you use, you’d realize that Creationism does not come remotely close to qualifying as an acceptable (or even debatable) scientific theory. In fact, it’s the very antithesis of science, which is why there is absolutely no debate about it within the scientific community, or even among those who understand the basic meaning of the word ‘science’.
Suggesting otherwise is simply the perpetration of a massive educational fraud. We cannot allow a product of that fraud to be a heart-beat away from the Presidency, nor can we allow a man so close to this fraud to become the President.
As Hillary said, no way, no how, no McCain.
Middle,
When it comes to science, you are fundementally ignorant, and absolutely wrong. Let me demonstrate:
I’ll start with a definition: Science is the systematic account of observable fact, and the creation of general theory that allows demonstrable fact to be accurately predicted.
It is not a worldview. It is not a system of unsubstantiated belief. It is a method – based entirely on observable phenomena, and limited strictly to what can actually be seen.
People who understand and accept these conditions know that if you observe fact, formulate a theory, make a prediction, and find that your prediction does not mach observable fact, then your theory does not qualify as science. End of story.
These people also understand that if a theory does rise to the level of science, its unqualified acceptance is still conditional upon limits in our powers of observation, which is why no real scientist would ever elevate scientific fact to the level of absolute truth (the proper object of faith).
Moreover, those who practice science are constantly testing their own theories by sharpening their powers of observation, searching for some anomaly that could reveal a flaw in our perceptions, and, consequentially, a limit to any theory accepted as science based on that perception.
In other words, it is not your atheism that makes you so indifferent as to whether or not Creationism is referred to as a scientific theory. Your indifference (not to mention your assessment of science) is the product of your basic ignorance about what science actually is.
If you understood the meaning of the words you use, you’d realize that Creationism does not come remotely close to qualifying as an acceptable (or even debatable) scientific theory. In fact, it’s the very antithesis of science, which is why there is absolutely no debate about it within the scientific community, or even among those who understand the basic meaning of the word ‘science’.
Suggesting otherwise is simply the perpetration of a massive educational fraud. We cannot allow a product of that fraud to be a heart-beat away from the Presidency, nor can we allow a man so close to this fraud to become the President.
As Hillary said, no way, no how, no McCain.
We probably should concede that Palin is technically “capable” of serving as the VP — maybe a lot less smart than Millard Fillmore, but probably not much more out of the loop.
So, then, we should concentrate on her politics: She gave a half-billion dollars to the Canadians to build a new Alaska Pipeline; she’s opposed to anything that doesn’t dig up Alaska or mine its resources, including fish; she’s anti-science in education, and many of her policies indicate she doesn’t have the understanding of science that modern Americans need; much of her popularity among Alaskans is due to her stabbing other Republicans in the back (though, heaven knows, some of them deserved it).
On the issues, she’s frequently in the tinfoil hat club. Can we talk about the issues?
We probably should concede that Palin is technically “capable” of serving as the VP — maybe a lot less smart than Millard Fillmore, but probably not much more out of the loop.
So, then, we should concentrate on her politics: She gave a half-billion dollars to the Canadians to build a new Alaska Pipeline; she’s opposed to anything that doesn’t dig up Alaska or mine its resources, including fish; she’s anti-science in education, and many of her policies indicate she doesn’t have the understanding of science that modern Americans need; much of her popularity among Alaskans is due to her stabbing other Republicans in the back (though, heaven knows, some of them deserved it).
On the issues, she’s frequently in the tinfoil hat club. Can we talk about the issues?
Governor Sarah Palin is an excellent choice, and she will give a energy boost to the McCain campaign. It is little wonder she’s already being attacked. She recognizes the right to life of all people (including the unborn). She recognizes the basic right to defend oneself and one’s property (unlike shameless liberals who have distorted the Second Amendment for decades).
Little surprise that certain hypocrites are already babbling about Palin’s experience, or her lack thereof. But they totally ignored (and continue to ignore) Senator Obama’s lack of experience. Left to these liberal hypocrites, it would be best if the rest of the country ignored Obama’s lack of experience, too. Nevermind the fact that Obama merely wants to be President. But experience is suddenly a major issue with regard to Palin, who would be VICE-president.
It’s not only Senator Obama’s experience that is being actively ignored or suppressed.
They’ve ignored Obama’s political beginnings, starting from his revolting associations (Bill “Weatherman” Ayers, Tony “Slumlord” Rezko, Father Michael “Racist Media Whore” Pfleger, Jeremiah “God damn America!” Wright — and those are the ones we KNOW of). When they haven’t ignored these connections, they have actively sought to hide or minimize their importance. (Just ask Stanley Kurtz, who has been given the Stalinist treatment for seeking public documents from U of Illinois on Obama and Ayers.) They have ignored Obama’s consistent refusal to stand up against political corruption in Chicago, despite his self-imposed aura of “reformer.” They have ignored his lackluster record in the Illinois senate (unless you include votes against a bill that would defend the life of babies born and alive outside the womb after a “failed” abortion).
Despite all this, some have the gall to point out the fact that Governor Palin is “being investigated” (as if investigation = mistake or guilt) all while saying NOTHING about the Obama’s laundry list of corrupt connections and lack of record.
Instead, it’s more important to note that McCain is making a “political calculation” (you don’t say?) as if selecting a vice-president was NEVER before “political calculation.” No, it suddenly became a “political calculation” when McCain did the selecting. Is Obama’s selection of Joe Biden NOT a “political calculation”? (Selecting a VP with significantly more experience was an obvious attempt at counterweighing Obama’s lack thereof.) It should be an interesting pick considering Biden’s ability to be a human loose cannon.
But no matter. Obama is (1) a Democrat, (2) a supporter of infanticide, and (3) and he is seeking power, and those are the ONLY issues that have any relevance to some people.
Governor Sarah Palin is an excellent choice, and she will give a energy boost to the McCain campaign. It is little wonder she’s already being attacked. She recognizes the right to life of all people (including the unborn). She recognizes the basic right to defend oneself and one’s property (unlike shameless liberals who have distorted the Second Amendment for decades).
Little surprise that certain hypocrites are already babbling about Palin’s experience, or her lack thereof. But they totally ignored (and continue to ignore) Senator Obama’s lack of experience. Left to these liberal hypocrites, it would be best if the rest of the country ignored Obama’s lack of experience, too. Nevermind the fact that Obama merely wants to be President. But experience is suddenly a major issue with regard to Palin, who would be VICE-president.
It’s not only Senator Obama’s experience that is being actively ignored or suppressed.
They’ve ignored Obama’s political beginnings, starting from his revolting associations (Bill “Weatherman” Ayers, Tony “Slumlord” Rezko, Father Michael “Racist Media Whore” Pfleger, Jeremiah “God damn America!” Wright — and those are the ones we KNOW of). When they haven’t ignored these connections, they have actively sought to hide or minimize their importance. (Just ask Stanley Kurtz, who has been given the Stalinist treatment for seeking public documents from U of Illinois on Obama and Ayers.) They have ignored Obama’s consistent refusal to stand up against political corruption in Chicago, despite his self-imposed aura of “reformer.” They have ignored his lackluster record in the Illinois senate (unless you include votes against a bill that would defend the life of babies born and alive outside the womb after a “failed” abortion).
Despite all this, some have the gall to point out the fact that Governor Palin is “being investigated” (as if investigation = mistake or guilt) all while saying NOTHING about the Obama’s laundry list of corrupt connections and lack of record.
Instead, it’s more important to note that McCain is making a “political calculation” (you don’t say?) as if selecting a vice-president was NEVER before “political calculation.” No, it suddenly became a “political calculation” when McCain did the selecting. Is Obama’s selection of Joe Biden NOT a “political calculation”? (Selecting a VP with significantly more experience was an obvious attempt at counterweighing Obama’s lack thereof.) It should be an interesting pick considering Biden’s ability to be a human loose cannon.
But no matter. Obama is (1) a Democrat, (2) a supporter of infanticide, and (3) and he is seeking power, and those are the ONLY issues that have any relevance to some people.
“..the ONLY issues that have any relevance to some people.”
All that does not seems to come from a place of love or kindness or even strength.
(Surely there is *one* other issue that has relevance for some of those people you cite.)
It is a beautiful world. Keep the faith.
“..the ONLY issues that have any relevance to some people.”
All that does not seems to come from a place of love or kindness or even strength.
(Surely there is *one* other issue that has relevance for some of those people you cite.)
It is a beautiful world. Keep the faith.
Oh, and one other thing. By writing that Barack Obama is a supporter of infanticide, you are breaking one of the Ten Commandments, the one that goes like this:
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
Number Nine.
I have brought this up with our Father, and I am confident that He is going to help you out with this.
Peace
Oh, and one other thing. By writing that Barack Obama is a supporter of infanticide, you are breaking one of the Ten Commandments, the one that goes like this:
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
Number Nine.
I have brought this up with our Father, and I am confident that He is going to help you out with this.
Peace
Thanks for the Dan Quayle reference. As a female and a Democrat, I’m insulted the McCain/Palin camp assumes women like me will vote for them now. Please.
What scares me is there are Americans out there who are that stupid. The Quayle reference nails it since that was why Bush 1 had him on the ticket to begin with, because Bush thought, when all else failed, he was a pretty boy who could tickle the fancy of desperate American women.
Regadless of where Palin lacks or does not lack in experience, she’s a pretty face on a Jurassic Park package. She might have made a difference with the ethics issues in Alaska, and had lots of babies (not to be confused with being a good parent), but as a female, I’m not seeing how she represents issues that are relevant to me and in my best interest.
If anything, McCain’s pick woke up those sleeping along the campaign trail, like me. I’m looking forward to the novelty wearing off.
Thanks for the Dan Quayle reference. As a female and a Democrat, I’m insulted the McCain/Palin camp assumes women like me will vote for them now. Please.
What scares me is there are Americans out there who are that stupid. The Quayle reference nails it since that was why Bush 1 had him on the ticket to begin with, because Bush thought, when all else failed, he was a pretty boy who could tickle the fancy of desperate American women.
Regadless of where Palin lacks or does not lack in experience, she’s a pretty face on a Jurassic Park package. She might have made a difference with the ethics issues in Alaska, and had lots of babies (not to be confused with being a good parent), but as a female, I’m not seeing how she represents issues that are relevant to me and in my best interest.
If anything, McCain’s pick woke up those sleeping along the campaign trail, like me. I’m looking forward to the novelty wearing off.
TWS – Thanks for adding a few calm and kind words. As you point out so graciously, operating from a position of strength simply isn’t enough.
Final thought on Science. Accepting, as so many do, that the world is the creation of God, and accepting (as fewer do) that science is nothing more than the product of our systematic observations about things that are self-evident, it should be clear that science is a clear-eyed, open-minded and deeply humble investigation of life, and the miracle it represents.
I’m sure it’s safe to say that God doesn’t take offense at our coming to understand, appreciate, and live more harmoniously within what He has made.
On the other hand, people who have made unfounded (and unverifiable) assumptions about the world we live in, spun these assumptions into myths and legends that are at odds with God-given reality, while placing coercive and self-aggrandizing political structures on top of these myths, have a lot to fear from science.
Whether it’s from the slow erosion of a flock, emerging from the thrall of groundless superstition, or the more direct assault on authority claimed without any justifiable basis, the effects of scientific inquiry can have a very destabilizing effect on the social constructions of those who have, in their pride, turned away from God’s reality, favoring their own, derivitave image of reality instead, and all the self-enrichment that comes with it.
Making this choice seems awfully risky in light of the 4th Commandment; the prohibition against idolatry, and the acceptance of false deities.
I’m beginning to realize that it’s not simply a warning against following pagan religion, but a caution against misguided thinking about the cultural byproducts of the Christian religion.
It’s really a question of object and representation. It seems that the diversity of religious cultures, and their dazzling array of images, can guide people closer to, or further away from God, depending on the attitudes held by those who stand before them. In other words, it’s not necessarily religions that are pagan in their treatment of idols, it’s people. And those people can exist quite happily in Christian churches, idolizing forms and strictures that their neighbors may simply view as iconic – helpful as guides, and beautiful as expressions of faith, but devoid of any actual power, subject to greater or lesser degrees respect, disposable when they’ve outlived their value, and incapable of making any absolute claims to one’s fealty.
I’m sure this difference in outlook between members of the same faith can be found within any religion, major or minor. And each religion, to a greater or lesser degree, presents opportunities for true worship or misguided idolatry. Each establishment also presents its leaders with the opportunity to enlighten those struggling with the distinction between objects and representations, or compound those errors in an effort to coerce and deceive.
Recognizing the same possibility acknowledged by God in the 4th Commandment, I wonder if science couldn’t be regarded as kind of spiritual 4th estate; a natural check against people who would encourage idolatry for the sake the profit and position that can be gained from misguided expenditures of spiritual energy, and action inspired by faith.
This may explain the sense of total moral recoil I feel around those who take Palin’s attitude towards evolution. ‘Teach both theories” she casually advocates, before adding the patronizing line that “people shouldn’t be afraid of information.”
The problem isn’t information, per se. It’s that one theory is scientific, the other is manifestly not. Teaching them as equally valid requires a fundamental act of deception, and, ironically enough, the suppression of information – specifically, the very definition of science. No successful effort to present both theories as comparable can take place without first abandoning the concept of science in its entirety, then reshaping what’s left into something that is devoid of any meaningful information.
Consider, for example, how badly you’d have to misrepresent the nature of algebra before you could claim that it was commensurate with astrology. And imagine how corrupt your intentions would have to be if you responded to charges of intellectual vandalism with the retort that you’ll defer the matter to students – offering them a choice between a crippled version of the truth, and an elaborate hoax, then asking them to decide ‘for themselves’, as though this had any bearing on what you’d actually done.
The cynicism is gut-wrenching. The level of corruption is staggering. My own feeling about Palin is not that she’s more a victim of this fraud than an knowing agent. But this lack of sophistication and healthy skepticism on her part – not to mention the dangerous levels of malleability it represents – only reinforces the verdict that she is absolutely unfit to be anywhere near the office of the President.
The leader of the free world is somebody who needs to be able to think for herself, and trust her own judgment when it really matters. Palin hardly inspires. After all, when People Magazine asked if she were ready to lead her answer was “Absolutely. Yup, yup. Especially with a good team around us.”
And what happens, Gov. Palin, on that day when you discover that it’s actually quite lonely at the top?
TWS – Thanks for adding a few calm and kind words. As you point out so graciously, operating from a position of strength simply isn’t enough.
Final thought on Science. Accepting, as so many do, that the world is the creation of God, and accepting (as fewer do) that science is nothing more than the product of our systematic observations about things that are self-evident, it should be clear that science is a clear-eyed, open-minded and deeply humble investigation of life, and the miracle it represents.
I’m sure it’s safe to say that God doesn’t take offense at our coming to understand, appreciate, and live more harmoniously within what He has made.
On the other hand, people who have made unfounded (and unverifiable) assumptions about the world we live in, spun these assumptions into myths and legends that are at odds with God-given reality, while placing coercive and self-aggrandizing political structures on top of these myths, have a lot to fear from science.
Whether it’s from the slow erosion of a flock, emerging from the thrall of groundless superstition, or the more direct assault on authority claimed without any justifiable basis, the effects of scientific inquiry can have a very destabilizing effect on the social constructions of those who have, in their pride, turned away from God’s reality, favoring their own, derivitave image of reality instead, and all the self-enrichment that comes with it.
Making this choice seems awfully risky in light of the 4th Commandment; the prohibition against idolatry, and the acceptance of false deities.
I’m beginning to realize that it’s not simply a warning against following pagan religion, but a caution against misguided thinking about the cultural byproducts of the Christian religion.
It’s really a question of object and representation. It seems that the diversity of religious cultures, and their dazzling array of images, can guide people closer to, or further away from God, depending on the attitudes held by those who stand before them. In other words, it’s not necessarily religions that are pagan in their treatment of idols, it’s people. And those people can exist quite happily in Christian churches, idolizing forms and strictures that their neighbors may simply view as iconic – helpful as guides, and beautiful as expressions of faith, but devoid of any actual power, subject to greater or lesser degrees respect, disposable when they’ve outlived their value, and incapable of making any absolute claims to one’s fealty.
I’m sure this difference in outlook between members of the same faith can be found within any religion, major or minor. And each religion, to a greater or lesser degree, presents opportunities for true worship or misguided idolatry. Each establishment also presents its leaders with the opportunity to enlighten those struggling with the distinction between objects and representations, or compound those errors in an effort to coerce and deceive.
Recognizing the same possibility acknowledged by God in the 4th Commandment, I wonder if science couldn’t be regarded as kind of spiritual 4th estate; a natural check against people who would encourage idolatry for the sake the profit and position that can be gained from misguided expenditures of spiritual energy, and action inspired by faith.
This may explain the sense of total moral recoil I feel around those who take Palin’s attitude towards evolution. ‘Teach both theories” she casually advocates, before adding the patronizing line that “people shouldn’t be afraid of information.”
The problem isn’t information, per se. It’s that one theory is scientific, the other is manifestly not. Teaching them as equally valid requires a fundamental act of deception, and, ironically enough, the suppression of information – specifically, the very definition of science. No successful effort to present both theories as comparable can take place without first abandoning the concept of science in its entirety, then reshaping what’s left into something that is devoid of any meaningful information.
Consider, for example, how badly you’d have to misrepresent the nature of algebra before you could claim that it was commensurate with astrology. And imagine how corrupt your intentions would have to be if you responded to charges of intellectual vandalism with the retort that you’ll defer the matter to students – offering them a choice between a crippled version of the truth, and an elaborate hoax, then asking them to decide ‘for themselves’, as though this had any bearing on what you’d actually done.
The cynicism is gut-wrenching. The level of corruption is staggering. My own feeling about Palin is not that she’s more a victim of this fraud than an knowing agent. But this lack of sophistication and healthy skepticism on her part – not to mention the dangerous levels of malleability it represents – only reinforces the verdict that she is absolutely unfit to be anywhere near the office of the President.
The leader of the free world is somebody who needs to be able to think for herself, and trust her own judgment when it really matters. Palin hardly inspires. After all, when People Magazine asked if she were ready to lead her answer was “Absolutely. Yup, yup. Especially with a good team around us.”
And what happens, Gov. Palin, on that day when you discover that it’s actually quite lonely at the top?
Alex Bowles
Science as a spiritual 4th estate is a brilliant thought. I will join you in pressing it forward. Great post.
All the best
TWS
Alex Bowles
Science as a spiritual 4th estate is a brilliant thought. I will join you in pressing it forward. Great post.
All the best
TWS
Postscript
This is an idolatrous era in the fundamentalist church.
Postscript
This is an idolatrous era in the fundamentalist church.
TWS,
I’d say that once any religion starts viewing itself as the one and only true religion, the line has been crossed.
TWS,
I’d say that once any religion starts viewing itself as the one and only true religion, the line has been crossed.
Alex,
That only works if you deny objective truth. If there is such a thing, and a religion claims to hold that truth, then it’s possible that they are correct. Obviously all religions cannot be true, and if one (presumably Christianity) is true, then it’s illogical to equate all religions. The only ‘line that has been crossed’ is your own personal belief structure.
Alex,
That only works if you deny objective truth. If there is such a thing, and a religion claims to hold that truth, then it’s possible that they are correct. Obviously all religions cannot be true, and if one (presumably Christianity) is true, then it’s illogical to equate all religions. The only ‘line that has been crossed’ is your own personal belief structure.