• 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: 'Waterboarding Is How We'd Baptize Terrorists' If I Were In Charge

Top Cat said:
Actually the argument isn't whether or not waterboarding is torture, it clearly is under the laws of the Geneva Convention. The question is whether or not terrorists fall under the laws of the GC because they break the laws of war. But let's not let facts get in the way of a good right wing fantasy
Click to expand...

The GC is for uniformed combatants, so no, they don't fall under the GC. And it isn't anyway, so that's a double no-no.

Anyone dumb enough to lay down with Palin gets fleas...
Click to expand...

Wow, look at that! Just proved my point.
 
rocket88 said:
So are you volunteering to be waterboarded then? I mean, it's not like it's torture or anything, right?
Click to expand...

Why, did I say it was some sort of enjoyable activity? Obviously, I didn't. So I guess you think that people should be routinely waterboarded because it's not torture? Are you going to undergo any interrogation procedures for the fun it soon?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: Sarah Palin: 'Waterboarding Is How We'd Baptize Terrorists' If I Were In Charge

Nothing like combining Christian baptism and torture. Hey but im sure it god all the wacko idiots at the NRA convention real fired up. [/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...


while the woman held some interest and, indeed, esteem as a foil for the failing socialist hordes for a time, she is rapidly becoming the proverbial has-been biting the heads off live chickens in a freak-show idea of what politics has become.

The idea of torture as a representative of a religious right is an aberration to the Christian ideal; for a follower of a man who was tortured and crucified for his beliefs, the woman has forgotten the meaning of the cross; perverted it into her own, selfish, ideological ambitions.
 
Top Cat said:
There's no border there. Baptism is sacred.
Click to expand...

You do know that Baptism doesn't just refer to the Christian act, but has instead broadened through the years to include any act of inititation or devotion? That's how Baptism By Fire came into being.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Palin has become a characature of herself. No one really listens to hear except the press. I'm surprised the NRA wanted to have her speak and then again I'm not. Plain is now an act, a hired PR stunt. It is what she does. Palin is to politics as Kardashian is to entertainment.
Click to expand...

Your entire post sounds like you've been listening to her.

It always seems strange to see Liberal males become so hysterical in their hatred of particular Conservative women. Almost from day one, the fact of Sarah Palin's traditional views on home, marriage and family have driven Liberal men crazy with rage. It just seems "Unmanly" for men to attack attractive women. One would think they would be embarrassed.
 
Last edited:
tres borrachos said:
You do know that Baptism doesn't just refer to the Christian act, but has instead broadened through the years to include any act of inititation or devotion? That's how Baptism By Fire came into being.
Click to expand...

Look, I am not the least offended by her comment. I do however think it is important to point out for her to do so violates her own religion. It's especially delicious in that she often uses her religion for political favor. As if somehow Christ himself wold approve of torture?
 
Ray410 said:
Your entire post sounds like you've been listening to her.

It always seems strange to see Liberal males become so hysterical in their hatred of particular Conservative women. Almost from day one, the fact of Sarah Palin's traditional views on home, marriage and family have driven Liberal men crazy with rage. It just seems "Unmanly" for men to attack attractive women. One would think they would be embarrassed.
Click to expand...

One would think you would be embarrassed to support such an mindless loon. No doubt you would have been fine with giving her the codes.
 
Kobie said:
Wrong. The drone program is probably the No. 1 criticism of Obama from "the left."
Click to expand...

Whoa, "probably"? Case. Closed. :roll:
 
Top Cat said:
You do understand it's an old expression? Besides, it seems apropos from the very woman who put lipstick on the pig.
Click to expand...

I always love how those in the party constantly whining about the "war on women" are the same ones how shamelessly display their misogynistic hatred of any woman who has the temerity to be conservative. It's quite similar to the contempt shown by that party's faithful for any black person who has the temerity to be conservative.
 
Top Cat said:
Look, I am not the least offended by her comment. I do however think it is important to point out for her to do so violates her own religion. It's especially delicious in that she often uses her religion for political favor. As if somehow Christ himself wold approve of torture?
Click to expand...

I'm also not offended by her comment being the heathenous non-religious person that I am.;) I also know her brain and mouth don't always move in sync. But in this case, she could have been using the non-religious word. I use "baptism" myself in business and trust me, I'm not talking about that kind of Baptism.

I can criticize her a lot, and have, but on this one, I guess I don't see the big deal.
 
Cardinal said:
To be fair, when the subject of a thread is ultimately unclassy, the discussion is rarely going to go off on a tangent on classical music and the influence of neoclassical art on Western thought.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily fair. I have no problem criticizing Hillary Clinton, as an example, without resorting to commenting on her appearance and/or comparing her to animals. But hey, that's just me.
 
CanadaJohn said:
I always love how those in the party constantly whining about the "war on women" are the same ones how shamelessly display their misogynistic hatred of any woman who has the temerity to be conservative. .
Click to expand...

There are plenty of conservative women that I respect. But I draw the line at religious whack jobs like Palin and Bachmann and hacks like Coulter.

CanadaJohn said:
It's quite similar to the contempt shown by that party's faithful for any black person who has the temerity to be conservative.
Click to expand...

What, did you forget gays too?
 
rocket88 said:
As John McCain said, it isn't about what they do, it's about what we do. He thinks it is torture, BTW.

If you think it's "torturous," then the question is should we be doing it? Are we better than them? Are we better than the Viet Cong that tortured McCain?
Click to expand...

Let me just say that terrorists and others in countries we consider "savage" laugh at our sensibilities when it comes to the handling of those who wish to destroy us. It's somewhat similar to the way that many Americans laugh at Canada's treatment of criminals and suggest it's much better to commit a crime in Canada than the US if you may get caught.

When in defense of country and person, I'm not all that squeamish about the treatment of those who wish to destroy me.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Not necessarily fair. I have no problem criticizing Hillary Clinton, as an example, without resorting to commenting on her appearance and/or comparing her to animals. But hey, that's just me.
Click to expand...

Yes because we know conservatives are always classy when it comes to criticizing liberal women.

Oh wait...

butcher.png


ATT1272826.gif
 
Anthony60 said:
Why, did I say it was some sort of enjoyable activity? Obviously, I didn't. So I guess you think that people should be routinely waterboarded because it's not torture? Are you going to undergo any interrogation procedures for the fun it soon?
Click to expand...

I think it's torture, but since you don't I'm guessing you wouldn't mind being "not tortured."
 
Ray410 said:
Your entire post sounds like you've been listening to her.

It always seems strange to see Liberal males become so hysterical in their hatred of particular Conservative women. Almost from day one, the fact of Sarah Palin's traditional views on home, marriage and family have driven Liberal men crazy with rage. It just seems "Unmanly" for men to attack attractive women. One would think they would be embarrassed.
Click to expand...

Are you embarrassed when someone attacks Pelosi?
 
1750Texan said:
Which "legal" analysis are you refering to?
Click to expand...

I am referring to the opinions done for the White House. As I remember they were applied almost to the word in the handbook for operatives. But please don't ask me to look up the links. They had had to be released and are on the web. But I researched it so long ago that I don't have the computer and it would be too much work to dig up again.
 
Top Cat said:
Yes because we know conservatives are always classy when it comes to criticizing liberal women.

Oh wait...
Click to expand...

You'll note that wasn't me posting those images - that was you - and you had them so readily at hand. Good job.

I can only speak for myself, not all conservatives, and I can only address you and your comments, which I did.

If you have a reference to me posting such material or implying such, I'd be pleased if you'd point it out so that I could apologize.
 
Anthony60 said:
Funny how waterboarding became torture when GW Bush was President. The left just needed something else to vilify Bush over, so they decided it was torture. Sorry, it's not, even if it helps you politically.

Also, notice all those smart, well thought out arguments against Palin. LOL! She's not the one that looks like an idiot from those comments.
Click to expand...

You have it backwards. we determined that water boarding was torture in WW2 and executed Japanese soldiers for torturing US troops. Bush tried to change its name to "enhanced interrogation."
 
CanadaJohn said:
You'll note that wasn't me posting those images - that was you - and you had them so readily at hand. Good job..
Click to expand...

There's this thing called Google... But then you already knew that. But go ahead and dodge the point anyway.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Not necessarily fair. I have no problem criticizing Hillary Clinton, as an example, without resorting to commenting on her appearance and/or comparing her to animals. But hey, that's just me.
Click to expand...

Please...
 
Anthony60 said:
The GC is for uniformed combatants, so no, they don't fall under the GC. And it isn't anyway, so that's a double no-no.



Wow, look at that! Just proved my point.
Click to expand...

I hold America to a standard that doesn't allow for loopholes to bypass basic human rights. "Oh it's ok to torture them because they don't have a uniform!" Doesn't fly in my mind.

Maybe you should hold America to a higher standard than you hold our enemies to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom