• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sarah Palin: Paul Revere's Ride to Protect the Second Amendment

Bodhisattva said:
ahhhh... well, I take back all of my statements then and apologize. I was not intending to be rude either, to be honest... just to make a point which is now moot. Your English is MUCH better than my Spanish, though Spanish is my third language.

Hopefully, Mrs. Palin will never be even considered a serious contender for President.
Click to expand...

No, it's okay. I understand. My family is from Portugal we speak Portuguese and Spanish.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Why? Seriously...
Click to expand...

This article proves SheWolf's point... not.

Why Some Women Hate Sarah Palin - TIME
Women are weapons-grade haters. Hillary Clinton knows it. Palin knows it too. When women get their hate on, they don't just dislike, or find disfavor with, or sort of not really appreciate. They loathe — deeply, richly, sustainingly. I do not say this to disparage my gender; women also love in more or less the same way.
Click to expand...
Note that it was written by a woman.
 
Whovian said:
perhaps you need to actually read my posts.

Palin was 'generally' correct... I stated a few times she BADLY ****ed up the story.

The issue here is that SheWolf BADLY ****ED UP a point, and did exactly what she accused Palin of doing...trying to find every way she could to NOT be wrong.
Click to expand...
But they both did the same thing ... Palin said Revere rang bells when others likely did and shewolf said Bissell did when it was also likely others did ... seems the same to me. Either they're both right or they're both wrong.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Glad life is good for you... that is the most important part. Wow. How does he throw you out though? If you are married, the house is both of yours, right?

I don't know if you wanting to fight to save the marriage is a good thing or not. Sounds crazy to me and makes you that much more attractive! J/K... crazy ex was enough. It has been 3 years a month or two ago for us, coincidentally enough.
Click to expand...

He said "get out." I called my sister, and she said I was welcome in her home. He actually thought she should come and get me. She sorta went off, lol. We were renters, so that doesn't matter. I think when somebody says "I don't like you anymore, and I don't want you around" if you have any self-esteem remaining - you go. So I went.

I can't lie, I was completely blindsided. We were seriously one of those couples like The Notebook. .... yeah. Anyway, he met some woman in Second Life, and that was the end of that. This month I'm more aware of him than usual, because the 23rd is our 16th wedding anniversary. He never filed for divorce. When I have saved enough to do so, I will and then just ask that he pay the court costs in the papers. I don't intend to ever date again, so it's not that. I just am tired of 'my' husband living with someone else. I need to de-slime.
 
Whovian said:
Doesn't work that way...You have to show me one that proves what you said, 'Revere didn't fire a shot or ring bells, Israel Bissell did'. YOU made the claim, and utterly refuse to back it up. You are therefore a liar.
Click to expand...

I did... and I'll do it again...

"Bissell is an unsung hero of the Revolutionary War who, independent of Paul Revere, had been sent to warn the colonists that the war had begun. Bissell accomplished his mission by riding into towns, ringing the church bell and firing his musket to get the attention of the residents so that he could pass along his message."

The Policy Page - Forbes

Now it's your turn.

You mean like the evidence you provided to support your claim, 'Revere didn't fire a shot or ring bells, Israel Bissell did'? Oh wait... you refuse to provide evidence to back up your claim. You're breaking your own rule. Gee, what a surprise.
Click to expand...

I did... and I'll do it again... and again, and again, and again

:roll:

"Bissell is an unsung hero of the Revolutionary War who, independent of Paul Revere, had been sent to warn the colonists that the war had begun. Bissell accomplished his mission by riding into towns, ringing the church bell and firing his musket to get the attention of the residents so that he could pass along his message."

The Policy Page - Forbes

Now it's your turn.

But that wasn't the claim you made, now was it????
Click to expand...

Reality bomb in coming. I have retracted some of my statements, because I haven't found substantial evidence by back up my entire initial state.

Reality bomb in coming... I am not denying that I have retracted part of my initial statement.

I am being intellectually honest and fair.

Your turn. Show me a site... that substantially proves me wrong. I am ready to admit I am wrong, when I am logically proven to be entirely and 100% incorrect, so far you haven't done that.

We're not discussing 'belief' here. We're discussing a factually inaccurate statement YOU made. You only recanted when you realized after frantically searching for days that you have ZERO EVIDENCE to back your claim up.
Click to expand...

:roll:

If you are so damn sure I am entirely incorrect, then why can't you find something that proves it so... I have posted something that says I was correct. I admit I have been searching, and I will keep searching... WTF have you searched... WTF have you posted?

Be honest about this discussion. I can admit I am wrong when I am wrong, but first it takes proving me that I am wrong. I swear I don't have my ego tied up in this, nor would I be embarrassed to be wrong on the internet. I am not that pathetic.

1: Not how it works. You are supposed to find evidence you were right.
2: Thus your recanting well after the fact.
3: Sure you were. If you had thought about it, you would not have made the statement as fact, without having the evidence to back it up.
4: But dear, that is what you've been doing since I called you on your factual error. You tried very hard to make it LOOK like you were not wrong, then you tried very hard to get me to prove you were wrong, when it goes the other direction. You eventually, it would seem, came to your senses and admitted you were in error. Kudos for that final realization.
Click to expand...

1. I have to find evidence that I am right, but you don't.. :lamo :lamo ... that's pathetic

2. I'll repeat myself as often as I can. Yes, I'll recant myself, and I am doing so. I am recanting myself because I am being intellectually honest and admitting there may have been some error on my part. I am not ashamed to admit that. I am not embarrassed to admit that. I am willing to admit I am 100% when I am PROVEN I am 100% wrong, and so far, you haven't done that.

I am not entirely recanting myself because I am not entirely convinced I am wrong. I will admit I was 100% wrong, when proven so.

3. I can back up other people thinking the very same thing... :shrug:

4. I have never had an issue with admitting I am wrong. I have said all of these things the entire time. You're just imaging ****.

1: Yes, I have. As you already admitted above.
2: Really? You were so sure of your facts early on in the thread... but they appear to have been myth all along.
Click to expand...

1. You haven't proven anything. I am the one doing the honest and intellectual research. You're the one appealing to ignorance and sitting back and acting immature with your pwned memes like I give a ****. You honestly don't seem to understand what is going on in this exchange.

2. You haven't proven anything as a myth. I have done all the damn research and have been honest with it. All you have done is appeal to ignorance with one damn wiki article.

1: It's not a matter of what I think or do not think. It's a matter of waht you claimed initially as fact.
2: Hardly. Wiki is a good starting point. That's about it.
Click to expand...

Do you know what "appeal to ignorance means?"
 
Last edited:
Sorry for the big ass off-topic, all y'all.
 
This thread just makes want to sing and dance

 
SheWolf said:
I did... and I'll do it again...

"Bissell is an unsung hero of the Revolutionary War who, independent of Paul Revere, had been sent to warn the colonists that the war had begun. Bissell accomplished his mission by riding into towns, ringing the church bell and firing his musket to get the attention of the residents so that he could pass along his message."

The Policy Page - Forbes

Now it's your turn.



I did... and I'll do it again... and again, and again, and again

:roll:

"Bissell is an unsung hero of the Revolutionary War who, independent of Paul Revere, had been sent to warn the colonists that the war had begun. Bissell accomplished his mission by riding into towns, ringing the church bell and firing his musket to get the attention of the residents so that he could pass along his message."

The Policy Page - Forbes

Now it's your turn.



Reality bomb in coming. I have retracted some of my statements, because I haven't found substantial evidence by back up my entire initial state.

Reality bomb in coming... I am not denying that I have retracted part of my initial statement.

I am being intellectually honest and fair.

Your turn. Show me a site... that substantially proves me wrong. I am ready to admit I am wrong, when I am logically proven to be entirely and 100% incorrect, so far you haven't done that.



:roll:

If you are so damn sure I am entirely incorrect, then why can't you find something that proves it so... I have posted something that says I was correct. I admit I have been searching, and I will keep searching... WTF have you searched... WTF have you posted?

Be honest about this discussion. I can admit I am wrong when I am wrong, but first it takes proving me that I am wrong. I swear I don't have my ego tied up in this, nor would I be embarrassed to be wrong on the internet. I am not that pathetic.



1. I have to find evidence that I am right, but you don't.. :lamo :lamo ... that's pathetic

2. I'll repeat myself as often as I can. Yes, I'll recant myself, and I am doing so. I am recanting myself because I am being intellectually honest and admitting there may have been some error on my part. I am not ashamed to admit that. I am not embarrassed to admit that. I am willing to admit I am 100% when I am PROVEN I am 100% wrong, and so far, you haven't done that.

I am not entirely recanting myself because I am not entirely convinced I am wrong. I will admit I was 100% wrong, when proven so.

3. I can back up other people thinking the very same thing... :shrug:

4. I have never had an issue with admitting I am wrong. I have said all of these things the entire time. You're just imaging ****.



1. You haven't proven anything. I am the one doing the honest and intellectual research. You're the one appealing to ignorance and sitting back and acting immature with your pwned memes like I give a ****. You honestly don't seem to understand what is going on in this exchange.

2. You haven't proven anything as a myth. I have done all the damn research and have been honest with it. All you have done is appeal to ignorance with one damn wiki article.



Do you know what "appeal to ignorance means?"
Click to expand...

If I posted a blog... the word of some completely unknown and un-nammed source, as proof of a statement I made, EVERY poster in here would be on my ass about it. And rightly so.

You seem to lack the ability to understand what you did. I've tried quite patiently to explain to you that it is not up to us to prove you wrong, it is up to you to prove you're right. Sorry sister, but a blog entry doesn't cut it. No more that the WIKI piece would if I posted something a Palin supported edited in her historical favor.

You can deflect, dance, spin, lie, anything you wish. Doesn't change the fact that you made a mistake, and it took you a few days of pretending to be Palin for you to come to terms with your mistake.

I congratulate you on your eventual honesty in finally admitting your error.
 
Whovian said:
Yes, because no woman could EVER hate another woman, right? Just men do that. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Women can be sexist, and men can be feminist... But seeing a man who is not a feminist and is not concerned with gender issues... or who is only concerned with reverse sexism, calling a woman a woman hater is ****ing ridiculous and being an opportunist. She didn't generalize women or judge women, she only judged Palin... therefore, he is being an opportunist.

Do men want to hear women lecture them on what "being a real man" means? No... and if they do, then there is an issue. I don't want to see Conservative men use Palin like she is some kind of victim of sexism every time she gets criticized, and criticized by other women. You guys aren't women, have never been women, don't think or act like women, have never been treated like women, have never felt sexism as a woman, so unless you are a feminist or concerned with all forms of sexism, you are no damn position to judge our views as women and call any of us woman haters.
 
Last edited:
SheWolf said:
Women can be sexist, and men can be feminist... But seeing a man who is not a feminist and is not concerned with gender issues... or who is only concerned with reverse sexism, calling a woman a woman hater is ****ing ridiculous and being an opportunist. She didn't generalize women or judge women, she only judged Palin... therefore, he is being an opportunist.

Do men want to hear women lecture them on what "being a real man" means? No... and if they do, then there is an issue. I don't want to see Conservative men use Palin like she is some kind of victim of sexism everything she gets criticized, and criticized by other women. You guys aren't women, have never been women, don't think or act like women, so unless you are a feminist or concerned with all forms of sexism, you are no damn position to judge our views as women and call any of us woman haters.
Click to expand...

So... if I were to post a peice written by a woman... expressing hatred for another woman... I'm just an opportunist? That's a rather silly argument.
 
Whovian said:
If I posted a blog... the word of some completely unknown and un-nammed source, as proof of a statement I made, EVERY poster in here would be on my ass about it. And rightly so.

You seem to lack the ability to understand what you did. I've tried quite patiently to explain to you that it is not up to us to prove you wrong, it is up to you to prove you're right. Sorry sister, but a blog entry doesn't cut it. No more that the WIKI piece would if I posted something a Palin supported edited in her historical favor.

You can deflect, dance, spin, lie, anything you wish. Doesn't change the fact that you made a mistake, and it took you a few days of pretending to be Palin for you to come to terms with your mistake.

I congratulate you on your eventual honesty in finally admitting your error.
Click to expand...

LOL... I am being honest, but you are not. You keep claiming to prove me wrong, and you are setting the rules of this debate in a manner that only leans in your favor. You have been extremely unfair and biased towards your position, not willing to meet me half way in any sense. I have admitted to plenty, though you have admitted to nothing and none of the above.

You're not being honest or honestly judging my actions. I do not stand 100% wrong. I am have taken more steps to research this than you, and share those findings as honestly as I can. I haven't found anything substantial, and have said that for pages and pages, whilst you arrogantly pounded your chest and declared victory and pwnage... yet there has been nothing that says you're 100% correct, so now the question is, can you admit you haven't been shown to be 100% correct?
 
Whovian said:
So... if I were to post a peice written by a woman... expressing hatred for another woman... I'm just an opportunist? That's a rather silly argument.
Click to expand...

You are not acknowledging my entire comment.
 
SheWolf said:
LOL... I am being honest, but you are not. You keep claiming to prove me wrong, and you are setting the rules of this debate in a manner that only leans in your favor.
I didn't set the rules. It's simply the way it has always been. Here, or ant debate board. If you make a statement, it is your responsibility to provide evidence to back it up. It's not everyone else's responsibility to prove you wrong. That would be pulling a David Axlerod.

You have been extremely unfair and biased towards your position, not willing to meet me half way in any sense. I have admitted to plenty, though you have admitted to nothing and none of the above.
What exactly would you like me to admit? That you did not make a factual error? You did. That you did NOT require me to prove you were wrong, instead of following proper procedure and proving yourself right? Again, doesn't work that way.

You're not being honest or honestly judging my actions.
I have been nothing but honest. You, on the other hand... only recently began to do so.
I do not stand 100% wrong. I am have taken more steps to research this than you, and share those findings as honestly as I can. I haven't found anything substantial, and have said that for pages and pages, whilst you arrogantly pounded your chest and declared victory and pwnage... yet there has been nothing that says you're 100% correct, so now the question is, can you admit you haven't been shown to be 100% correct?
When there is ZERO evidence to prove something, it is safe to say it's incorrect. You have ZERO evidence, other than a blog entry from some nobody. I already explained why that is ZERO evidence. Do you need a refresher?
Click to expand...

Your problem appears to be that..

A... you don't like it when you're proven wrong
B... you especially don't like it when I prove you wrong
C... it takes you a considerable amount of time to finally admit any error
D... even after admitting error, you whine about how and why you came to that admission

None of which are my fault, or problem.
 
Bodhisattva said:
That attitude just helps perpetuate sexism...



I expect more from all politicians regardless of gender, race or sexual orientation... I have never heard anybody attack her for being female, only for saying some stupid things from time to time and for some of her more hard core conservative ideas.
Click to expand...

That attitude is the result of sexism, not the causation of sexism. Perpetrating sexism occurs when a woman fails and is made an example out of by the sexist people in society... see women aren't fit to do xyz. It's the same with racism. We want to see women succeed and women who outperform the men in "men's work" or "men's things" are iconic (Annie Oakley, Amelia Earheart, Joan of Arc, etc) because that makes the sexist stfu.
 
Whovian said:
So... if I were to post a piece written by a woman... expressing hatred for another woman... I'm just an opportunist? That's a rather silly argument.
Click to expand...

SheWolf said:
You are not acknowledging my entire comment.
Click to expand...

Do men want to hear women lecture them on what "being a real man" means? No... and if they do, then there is an issue. I don't want to see Conservative men use Palin like she is some kind of victim of sexism everything she gets criticized, and criticized by other women. You guys aren't women, have never been women, don't think or act like women, so unless you are a feminist or concerned with all forms of sexism, you are no damn position to judge our views as women and call any of us woman haters.
Click to expand...
Your argument seems to center around our gender. If we are not women, then we do not have the right to sall any woman a woman hater... regardless of what we see, hear, read, witness, etc.

Seems pretty sexist.
 
Whovian said:
Your problem appears to be that..

A... you don't like it when you're proven wrong
B... you especially don't like it when I prove you wrong
C... it takes you a considerable amount of time to finally admit any error
D... even after admitting error, you whine about how and why you came to that admission

None of which are my fault, or problem.
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with being wrong. ****ing hell. How many times do I have to repeat myself? You ****ing won't acknowledge the reality of where this conversation has led.
 
I just did a quick GOOGLE search on 'women who hate sarah palin'.

The first 10 or so pieces I looked at, were all written by women.

Since I agree with what was in those pieces, does that make me an opportunist if I say so? Or, do I simply have no right to express that opinion because I have testicles?
 
Whovian said:
Your argument seems to center around our gender. If we are not women, then we do not have the right to sall any woman a woman hater... regardless of what we see, hear, read, witness, etc.

Seems pretty sexist.
Click to expand...

Again, you're not acknowledging my entire comment. That seems to be a pattern with you.

Men can be feminist... but I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't understand what male feminism is.

If a man is a feminist or is concerned with sexism in all areas, then he is fair to judge a woman of sexism and men of sexism (because sexism is about gender equality). If a man is not concerned with sexism as a whole or only concerned when it suits him (political reasons), then he shouldn't be taken seriously when he calls a woman a woman hater.
 
Whovian said:
I just did a quick GOOGLE search on 'women who hate sarah palin'.

The first 10 or so pieces I looked at, were all written by women.

Since I agree with what was in those pieces, does that make me an opportunist if I say so? Or, do I simply have no right to express that opinion because I have testicles?
Click to expand...

You really need to drop the non sequitur ****. I have noticed that you constantly reach conclusions about me, and I keep correcting you and repeating myself over and over again... and it never goes through your head.
 
SheWolf said:
Again, you're not acknowledging my entire comment. That seems to be a pattern with you.

Men can be feminist... but I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't understand what male feminism is.

If a man is a feminist or is concerned with sexism in all areas, then he is fair to judge a woman of sexism and men of sexism (because sexism is about gender equality). If a man is not concerned with sexism as a whole or only concerned when it suits him (political reasons), then he shouldn't be taken seriously when he calls a woman a woman hater.
Click to expand...

and who gets to determine if the man is concerned with sexism. YOU? Please :rolleyes:
 
Whovian said:
and who gets to determine if the man is concerned with sexism. YOU? Please :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

:roll:

If he is a feminist and is honestly concerned with gender equality and acknowledges sexism when it happens to both genders and not just one gender, it's obvious.
 
PoliticalMama said:
Sarah Palin is smart how? She doesn't know what magazines she reads, or about the Bush Doctrine. I do not hate anyone in the GOP so therefore that doesn't make sense. Just because someone doesn't like Palin doesn't mean they dislike the GOP. I have voted for Republicans before. Try again though.

Now my husband is very liberal but I am not.
Click to expand...

Yet I bet not knowing what year it is in your mind is smart
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom