• 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!

Palin stands against abortion during Ind. speech

No...they were simple and straightforward
And less than impressive. Responding to a question regarding how the proximity of her state gives her any insight into Russian actions with "they're our neighbors" and "you can see parts of Russia from Alaska" is not an appropriate answer to give. You can't defend that. She had no good answer. Simple...oh yeah, real simple.

and made a fatal mistake: expecting her detractors to give it some thought and think about the implications rather than turning completely juvenile and deranged with their criticism.
Hardly. When you are running for the number two spot in this nation and you provide answers to questions that make no sense you shouldn't expect any quarter. She deserved criticism over her answers. Just like McCain deserved his, just like Obama deserved his, just like Biden deserved his.

Now, back to this MSM falsifying comments and attributing them to her. If we are going to count OEN, SNL, and DP posters as MSM then let me know. Because I think we all need to form some kind of writers guild here and renegotiate our compensation schedule with the networks.

:mrgreen:
 
The difference is. The others get moved. ;)

I'll give you this one, I have no idea why this is in BN. It would fit more appropriately in Partisan Politics, but I suppose it does actually qualify as BN hence the mods decision to leave it. Who knows.
 
I'll give you this one, I have no idea why this is in BN. It would fit more appropriately in Partisan Politics, but I suppose it does actually qualify as BN hence the mods decision to leave it. Who knows.




:lol: this we agree. I am SOOO not motivated to dig up and respond to your other post though, especially after such a nice dinner, :lol:.... nothing personal, just this really is only an issue that i make light comments on due to its rather insignificant nature.

I heard it repeated ad nauseum, here, in the msm, (the pundits anyway) and elsewhere. ymmv....
 
And less than impressive. Responding to a question regarding how the proximity of her state gives her any insight into Russian actions with "they're our neighbors" and "you can see parts of Russia from Alaska" is not an appropriate answer to give. You can't defend that. She had no good answer. Simple...oh yeah, real simple.


Hardly. When you are running for the number two spot in this nation and you provide answers to questions that make no sense you shouldn't expect any quarter. She deserved criticism over her answers. Just like McCain deserved his, just like Obama deserved his, just like Biden deserved his.

Now, back to this MSM falsifying comments and attributing them to her. If we are going to count OEN, SNL, and DP posters as MSM then let me know. Because I think we all need to form some kind of writers guild here and renegotiate our compensation schedule with the networks.

:mrgreen:



How many states are there, and how does a kid with asthma get bye?


seems some get more of a pass than others. :lol:
 
How many states are there, and how does a kid with asthma get bye?


seems some get more of a pass than others. :lol:

And I'll agree with you. The MSM has does exhibit a favored son with regard to giving Obama much more breathing room on his gaffes. Neither fair nor balanced.

But...we were talking about Palin I think.

;)
 
And I'll agree with you. The MSM has does exhibit a favored son with regard to giving Obama much more breathing room on his gaffes. Neither fair nor balanced.

But...we were talking about Palin I think.

;)

What gaffes? Yeah, the Obama 57 states was a gaffe. Every knew that, so why make a big deal (unless you're a partisan). As if Obama really thought the US had 57 states, so why harp?. :doh

Cue to Palin. As far as I know, she's defended everything she has said, including the Russia comments.

THAT is the difference.
 
What gaffes? Yeah, the Obama 57 states was a gaffe. Every knew that, so why make a big deal (unless you're a partisan). As if Obama really thought the US had 57 states, so why harp?. :doh

Cue to Palin. As far as I know, she's defended everything she has said, including the Russia comments.

THAT is the difference.

The difference with Obama and Palin in this regard is that she just seemed so much like a deer caught in the headlights, unprepared, and not very convincing when she got her do-overs.

Here is some of what I found about Obama gaffes.

Huh? Barack Obama Gaffes.
Obama Gaffes from Michelle Malkin's Website.

Although I think the guy HMSFox on Youtube is actually Truth Detector. Just read the info section and you'll see what I'm getting at.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9hZpJp7U3Y"]YouTube - Obama's Gaffes[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap2Cg_FDRy4"]YouTube - Barack Obama - Gaffe Mania I - Dumber than Dumb[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5R6kVry4_c"]YouTube - Barack Obama - Gaffe Mania II - Hero of the Stupid[/ame]
 
Some environmentalists fight against global warming and wish for society damaging actions to be taken to fight against it because mother earth or gaia is a tangible spirit and entity that physically is pained and killed by drilling and other things assossiated with it. Naturally, is there any doubt that all that democrats are pushing Global Warming only because they feel the earth is a god like being that is being damaged and killed by our acts?

And yet that's got absolutely nothing to do with what I said. I don't deny that the majority of environmentalists argue against killing a bunch of chickens from a purely emotional perspective. Do you?

Some people are against abortion due to the religious reasons, others are not. Yes, religious people are trying to push their views on the issue into law. Likewise, non-religious people are wishing their view pushed on.

What bull****. I'm not pushing any one to get an abortion if they don't want one. If anything I do not care about your religious beliefs. Thus why I could care less what you do with them as long as they do not infringe on my life.

You may say "well, its not THEIR body, its not forcing them to do it", however they view it as a human just as the others view it just as a fetus. As such, the wanton killing of a human without cause is a societal issue and does affect others, just as murder does. I hate this idiotic feeling that religious people can't vote their consicious in regards to societal issues and yet anti-religious people can do it without any issue. The consitution states there's no establishing a state religion, I see no where that it states that a citizen can not cast their vote or push for laws based on their beliefs and morals that were created due to religion.

Is an egg a chicken? No. Thanks for answerings. Your argument justifies Jim Crow laws, eugenics etc.

No, YOU did. :roll: I highly doubt she thinks of her beautiful son as a "retard." She's not a scum bag. Ask any DECENT mother of a special needs child if they think their child is perfect, and they will beam and say, "yes." If you think they are less, you would be wrong and no one I would want my child to emulate.

For someone who sees prejudice around every corner, you sure aren't terribly tolerant of those different from you (assuming you're not retarded).

Actually she did :

https://www.cu.edu/siesymposium/abstracts/13_SpritzRabstract.pdf

Down syndrome (DS) is the most frequent form of mental retardation caused by a visible chromosomal aberration, ~97% of cases resulting from trisomy 21. In addition to the classical clinical features, patients with DS also have elevated frequencies of several autoimmune diseases, including autoimmune thyroid disease (DS 37-55%; population freq. ~1.9%), celiac disease (DS 5-43%; population freq. ~0.4%), type 1 diabetes mellitus [IDDM] (DS 1.4-10.6%; population freq. ~0.5%), alopecia areata (DS 6-10%; population frequency ~1.7%, and vitiligo (DS 2%; population freq. ~0.38%).

Do you want to try this again? Down Syndrome is a form of mental retardation. Thus why I asked if she called God a retard(in the image of God).

TD said:
Why do you think it has to be for purely religious beliefs? Perhaps it is based on moral beliefs.

And you buy that her moral moral beliefs do not come from her religion?

TD said:
Why do you think it is okay to argue FOR killing a human being, but bad to argue for their lives? Why is abortion/killing a better option than choosing life?

Actually. I don't care what you do to human beings. Fetuses are not human beings the way acorns are not trees and eggs are not chickens.

I am not religious; I don't attend a church; I am not a member of a church; but I do believe that on demand abortion is an abomination and that there are MUCH better choices for dealing with unwanted pregnancy than aborting a living being.

And because of your opinion which is grounded in your beliefs you believe you should be allowed to tell people what to do. How communist of you ;).

I am hardly surprised to see you laughing and thinking this debate is a BIG joke. Apparently morality and life is something you find amusing and to be mocked. Others take it much more serious and act in a more mature manner when discussing it

I'm about to go smoke weed out of a fetus carcass. Want to join me?
 
Aps, the amnio and other tests (OMG, it's been so long that I forgot what those tests are called) are not just about determining whether or not to terminate. As it was explained to me, my OB urged me to have testing done because if they know of an issue, the appropriate drs will be available during/after delivery. There are no guarantees that certain specialists will be on call at 3 am. One of our tests determined a problem, and we were able to meet with a specialist to determine the best medical course of action before our child was born. She showed up to examine him shortly after he was born. If we had been faced with those surprises after a 34 hour labor, I doubt either of us would have made smart decisions. I know for a fact that specialist would not have been there right after birth.

I felt like you. When presented with the choice of testing, my reaction was, "It doesn't matter because we would never terminate," but I learned that it's also about healing and sometimes life saving.

We are against Abortion, but had the full genetic counseling. Why would one not want to be prepared and have all the information possible?

That makes sense. I hadn't thought of it that way.
 
And less than impressive. Responding to a question regarding how the proximity of her state gives her any insight into Russian actions with "they're our neighbors" and "you can see parts of Russia from Alaska" is not an appropriate answer to give. You can't defend that. She had no good answer. Simple...oh yeah, real simple.


Hardly. When you are running for the number two spot in this nation and you provide answers to questions that make no sense you shouldn't expect any quarter. She deserved criticism over her answers. Just like McCain deserved his, just like Obama deserved his, just like Biden deserved his.

Now, back to this MSM falsifying comments and attributing them to her. If we are going to count OEN, SNL, and DP posters as MSM then let me know. Because I think we all need to form some kind of writers guild here and renegotiate our compensation schedule with the networks.

:mrgreen:

This is EXACTLY what I am talking about. Stop and use that head of yours for something besides a hat rack for a second.

What do you think sharing visual contact across prime fishing waters with our cold war rival means? To me, it goes without saying and I don't need Sarah to spoon feed me the answer to that question. I wonder if its the same for her detractors.
 
That makes sense. I hadn't thought of it that way.

That is one of the things I respect in people; the ability to confess that there is a different view and to acknowledge it respectfully. Kudos to you.
 
This is EXACTLY what I am talking about. Stop and use that head of yours for something besides a hat rack for a second.

What do you think sharing visual contact across prime fishing waters with our cold war rival means? To me, it goes without saying and I don't need Sarah to spoon feed me the answer to that question. I wonder if its the same for her detractors.

Then you and I are in absolute disagreement here. I believe I am a very apt student of political matters, and especially with regard to Cold War and national security topics. And you know what, maybe she needs to spoon feed that stuff to me because she sure as hell didn't enlighten anyone with her responses. Sharing visual contact across prime fishing waters with a foreign nation, for less than 24 months as Governor, is not a national security qualifier and offers very little insight into Russian actions (one of the main topics at that time was the conflict between Russia and Georgia). She was in the national spotlight and given an opportunity to spell out her foreign policy experience and she did a very poor job of it. Those qualifications were being solicited by the media because she was running mate on a presidential ticket.

Maybe you should go ahead and school me on this. How does that translate into her specific qualifications? What did she actually do in regards to participating in the formulation of policy towards Russia or homeland security/national security matters? I've asked this before and never gotten a clear answer.
 
....for less than 24 months as Governor, is not a national security qualifier and offers very little insight into Russian actions (one of the main topics at that time was the conflict between Russia and Georgia). She was in the national spotlight and given an opportunity to spell out her foreign policy experience and she did a very poor job of it. Those qualifications were being solicited by the media because she was running mate on a presidential ticket.

Maybe you should go ahead and school me on this. How does that translate into her specific qualifications? What did she actually do in regards to participating in the formulation of policy towards Russia or homeland security/national security matters? I've asked this before and never gotten a clear answer.

This is quite stunning coming from someone who supported for President a Junior Senator from Illinois and who's main experience was Community Organizer; someone who had LESS experience in running Government than Palin who was only a VP candidate and who's foreign policy is naive at best, dangerous at it's worst.

The irony of such arguments can only be comprehended by those who do not wallow in denial or so willingly suspend their disbelief.
 
Last edited:
Then you and I are in absolute disagreement here. I believe I am a very apt student of political matters, and especially with regard to Cold War and national security topics. And you know what, maybe she needs to spoon feed that stuff to me because she sure as hell didn't enlighten anyone with her responses. Sharing visual contact across prime fishing waters with a foreign nation, for less than 24 months as Governor, is not a national security qualifier and offers very little insight into Russian actions (one of the main topics at that time was the conflict between Russia and Georgia). She was in the national spotlight and given an opportunity to spell out her foreign policy experience and she did a very poor job of it. Those qualifications were being solicited by the media because she was running mate on a presidential ticket.

Maybe you should go ahead and school me on this. How does that translate into her specific qualifications? What did she actually do in regards to participating in the formulation of policy towards Russia or homeland security/national security matters? I've asked this before and never gotten a clear answer.

Well let's start by being in constant vigilance and negotiation over fishing dominance in the area. Then let's talk about needing to have a clear action plan in the event of conflict with Russia because Alaska sits on a good many nuclear missile launch sites. Then let's move on to trade issues with Russia since almost every vessel that sets out from Alaska moves through Russian waters on the way to Japan.

Yeah, the fed takes care of a lot of the particulars on all that, but you can't possibly be so daft as to believe that the GOVERNOR of Alaska isn't privy to and permitted input into all this. :confused:

The question that has burned in the back of my mind all this time is "What foreign policy experience did a junior senator from Illinois who only served 20 something weeks active in the Senate have?" No one has ever answered that question sufficiently to me, either. So spoon feed THAT to me because it escapes my grasp to this day.

Wait, no it doesn't. The way he is going about things now tells me "none" is the answer to that.
 
This is quite stunning coming from someone who supported for President a Junior Senator from Illinois and who's main experience was Community Organizer; someone who had LESS experience in running Government than Palin who was only a VP candidate and who's foreign policy is naive at best, dangerous at it's worst.

The irony of such arguments can only be comprehended by those who do not wallow in denial or so willingly suspend their disbelief.

In other words you can't really address the subject other than to divert, like others have, to Obama. Typical but fair enough. Maybe you should take a lesson from jallman and instead of coming in here and ****ting the conversation up, take up the debate with information you actually use to form an opinion about Sarah Palin.
 
In other words you can't really address the subject other than to divert, like others have, to Obama.

Well, in the context of the presidential election and why would you choose one over the other, Obama is kind of a necessary evil to discuss. :roll:
 
Palin stands against abortion during Ind. speech



Is there any doubt that the social conservatives in the Republican party wish argue against choice do so from a religious stance and do not care about those who do not share their purely religious beliefs?

Bolded : Did she just say that God is a retard? Haha. Funny.
Apparently he made the atheists retards.
 
Well let's start by being in constant vigilance and negotiation over fishing dominance in the area. Then let's talk about needing to have a clear action plan in the event of conflict with Russia because Alaska sits on a good many nuclear missile launch sites. Then let's move on to trade issues with Russia since almost every vessel that sets out from Alaska moves through Russian waters on the way to Japan.
Okay, we'll take them one at a time.

Constant vigilance and negotiation over "fishing dominance" in the area. What did she actually do? I'm not going to sit here and pretend she herself actually maintained that vigilance, but what was it that she did with regard to that "plan for vigilance"? What negotiations did she herself conduct? I know she took the office, but what plans was she instrumental in crafting, or influential with regard to directing to be developed? You don't get experience bestowed upon you because you assume office. You have to actually experience it. She took office in what, December of 2006? The interview with Charles Gibson was in mid-September of 2008. That's nineteen months as governor, a few of which had been part time at best due to her pregnancy and her campaigning with McCain. Realistically speaking, how does this help her at all?
Yeah, the fed takes care of a lot of the particulars on all that, but you can't possibly be so daft as to believe that the GOVERNOR of Alaska isn't privy to and permitted input into all this. :confused:
Jallman, I'm not daft and I think you know this. Nineteen months on the job, some of which have been spent on non-Governor related work. So given this, how much input do you think she could have realistically had? What committees did she sit on? What formalized training did she attend on these issues? What actual negotiations did she participate in? Which foreign leaders did she meet with? Privy to? Fine, privy to. Influential in or responsible for? I'll need convincing. Starting with some citations as to her actual experience would be a good start.

The question that has burned in the back of my mind all this time is "What foreign policy experience did a junior senator from Illinois who only served 20 something weeks active in the Senate have?" No one has ever answered that question sufficiently to me, either. So spoon feed THAT to me because it escapes my grasp to this day.
Why are YOU now diverting this conversation? I sure Obama had very little experience at all with regard to foreign policy if any at all. But that is NOT the topic here. It's about Palin. Why do I have to keep saying this? Look, I voted for Obama despite his lack of experience on many things. It was the totality of the package, and I understand you don't agree with me on who the better candidate was. But let's keep this on Palin. Nothing Obama did or didn't do, knew or didn't know, changes anything about Sarah Palin.

Wait, no it doesn't. The way he is going about things now tells me "none" is the answer to that.
I can agree on certain issues
 
Last edited:
Well, in the context of the presidential election and why would you choose one over the other, Obama is kind of a necessary evil to discuss. :roll:

Well sure if the context were who we were choosing for President. But it's not. The context was about Sarah Palin and what she didn't know. It's morphed, by force it seems, into a discussion about Palin vs. Obama. I'm not really interested in that discussion.

To be honest, I don't even know why I got into this discussion. Sarah Palin is last week. What with Obama bowing to Saudi Kings and giving the Queen of England an iPod I think we have plenty of fodder for non-issue discussion.

:mrgreen:
 
And because of your opinion which is grounded in your beliefs you believe you should be allowed to tell people what to do.

If you think your worldview does not contain the influence of your metaprinciples, ie your views however ill-defined on metaphysics, spirituality and ethics, then you are very much mistaken.
 
Last edited:
And I'll agree with you. The MSM has does exhibit a favored son with regard to giving Obama much more breathing room on his gaffes. Neither fair nor balanced.

But...we were talking about Palin I think.

;)


We are. did you hear the breaking news? she apparently is "pro-life"! :mrgreen:
 
In other words you can't really address the subject other than to divert, like others have, to Obama. Typical but fair enough. Maybe you should take a lesson from jallman and instead of coming in here and ****ting the conversation up, take up the debate with information you actually use to form an opinion about Sarah Palin.

Address the subject about Palin's inexperience? I definitely addressed it; your willful denial of it doesn't change the FACT.

How typical of you to rail about your "perceptions" of Palin but willingly ignore the FACT that you supported a candidate with far less experience and who is weakening this nation daily with his insane economic policies and putting the nation even more at risk from our enemies by releasing CIA memos for purely political purposes.

Carry on! :rofl
 
There is a great editorial in today's Washington Post about Palin's speech. Ruth Marcus points out that Palin's thoughts about terminating her pregnancy on two occasions indicates she is pro-choice. THIS IS EXACTLY HOW I FEEL. I got pregnant unexpectedly, and I did not want to have a baby. However, I just couldn't terminate the pregnancy. It would have haunted me for the rest of my life. I made the SAME choice as Palin, but somehow she is pro-life and I am pro-choice (according to Palin). :confused:

Palin's Personal Choice

By Ruth Marcus
Monday, April 20, 2009


I'd like to thank Sarah Palin for her bravery in explaining the importance of a woman's right to choose. Even braver, the Alaska governor made her eloquent case for choice at a right-to-life fundraising dinner.

That was not, of course, Palin's intention in revealing that she momentarily considered having an abortion. Twice, actually -- once when she discovered she would be a mother at 44, again several weeks later when she discovered that her baby would have Down syndrome.

[She quotes Palin] "So we went through some things a year ago that now lets me understand a woman's, a girl's temptation to maybe try to make it all go away if she has been influenced by society to believe that she's not strong enough or smart enough or equipped enough or convenienced enough to make the choice to let the child live. I do understand what these women, what these girls go through in that thought process."

Except that, of course, if it were up to Palin, women would have no thought process to go through. The "good decision to choose life," as she put it, would be no decision at all, because abortion would not be an option.

This is not a particularly complex point, but it is one toward which Palin seems deliberately obtuse. It came up at the Republican convention last summer, when the Palins issued a statement about their daughter's pregnancy: "We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby." Again, in the world according to Palin, there would be no decision at all. Abortion would be illegal except to save the life of the mother.

Ruth Marcus - Sarah Palin's Personal Choice Not to Have an Abortion
 
There is a great editorial in today's Washington Post about Palin's speech. Ruth Marcus points out that Palin's thoughts about terminating her pregnancy on two occasions indicates she is pro-choice. THIS IS EXACTLY HOW I FEEL. I got pregnant unexpectedly, and I did not want to have a baby. However, I just couldn't terminate the pregnancy. It would have haunted me for the rest of my life. I made the SAME choice as Palin, but somehow she is pro-life and I am pro-choice (according to Palin). :confused:

What I find so fascinating is how the op-ed piece takes the tone that Palin is somehow extreme in her pro-life stance and she's just not. She's pro-life. She believes the fetus has a right to life and that to abort is murder. Lots and lots of people think like she does.
 
Okay, we'll take them one at a time.

Constant vigilance and negotiation over "fishing dominance" in the area. What did she actually do? I'm not going to sit here and pretend she herself actually maintained that vigilance, but what was it that she did with regard to that "plan for vigilance"? What negotiations did she herself conduct? I know she took the office, but what plans was she instrumental in crafting, or influential with regard to directing to be developed? You don't get experience bestowed upon you because you assume office. You have to actually experience it. She took office in what, December of 2006? The interview with Charles Gibson was in mid-September of 2008. That's nineteen months as governor, a few of which had been part time at best due to her pregnancy and her campaigning with McCain. Realistically speaking, how does this help her at all?

Jallman, I'm not daft and I think you know this. Nineteen months on the job, some of which have been spent on non-Governor related work. So given this, how much input do you think she could have realistically had? What committees did she sit on? What formalized training did she attend on these issues? What actual negotiations did she participate in? Which foreign leaders did she meet with? Privy to? Fine, privy to. Influential in or responsible for? I'll need convincing. Starting with some citations as to her actual experience would be a good start.


Why are YOU now diverting this conversation? I sure Obama had very little experience at all with regard to foreign policy if any at all. But that is NOT the topic here. It's about Palin. Why do I have to keep saying this? Look, I voted for Obama despite his lack of experience on many things. It was the totality of the package, and I understand you don't agree with me on who the better candidate was. But let's keep this on Palin. Nothing Obama did or didn't do, knew or didn't know, changes anything about Sarah Palin.


I can agree on certain issues

So wait...you're going to get all twisted over 19 months in an executive position because its Palin, yet you won't acknowledge that your guy had 20 something weeks worth of experience as a junior senator?

Okay, Lerxst, we're just going to have to agree to disagree because I think the whole conversation just took on an air of being ridiculous. I'm not going to sit here and play your game of hunting down the details of everything Palin did as governor while you refuse to do the same for your little community organizer.

You basically hold Palin to a different standard because she has the R after her name and nothing more. It's beyond absurd.
 
Back
Top Bottom