I can't but help think of a historical parallel. The Nazis were a rather unpleasant bunch; I guess under Palin's doctrine the U.S. would have tortured and gone Gestapo/SS on any Nazi prisoners that happened to have been captured.
She was in charge. Then she quit.
What an attention hooker.
How is Palin supporting herself these days? She's a FOX News correspondent (her boss Roger Ailes once called her "an idiot" and said he hired her because she got ratings) and she makes personal appearances.
How much did the NRA have to pay her to speak at their gathering? I don't know but I bet she didn't come cheap. Previously she charged about $100,000 per appearance. The further away she gets from the 2008 campaign the less compelling she is as a speaker and presumably her fee has gotten smaller, but she still probably commands a hefty tab.
In exchange she has to be well, entertaining. In fact I would argue that is essentially what she has become. An entertainer, Tea Party style!
If you don't have any prisoners, no problem, you can always find domestic traitors and torture them till they tell their secrets.
No secrets? Sucks to be the prisoner then. Collateral damage, eggs/omelets.......
Just a quick look at her Wiki article, she seems fairly centrist. She has that weird pro-life/pro-capital punishment dichotomy. She's against gay marriage, but seems to otherwise be supportive of the gay community.
She will probably draw more flack from the hard core conservatives than from liberals, in general.
"Well, if I were in charge, they would know that waterboarding is how we baptize suspected terrorists."
Just to show how bad first impressions can be (or, alternatively, how wrong I can be):
Please remember that her Wikipedia page looked approximately like this at the time.
Just to show how bad first impressions can be (or, alternatively, how wrong I can be):
Please remember that her Wikipedia page looked approximately like this at the time.
FWIW, this is the thread I was searching for when I found the above quote of mine. If I had a time machine, I would love to link to this thread to that one back in 2008.
Ultimately, this is why "the Anti-Palin Effort Was So Desperate", or should have been.
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
"Well, if I were in charge, they would know that waterboarding is how we baptize suspected terrorists."
In this respect she is not that much different to me than our current and previous administration. They believe instead of a baptism by water a bolt of lighting from above (a drone) is the way to treat suspected terrorists. But with the drones we kill an occasional innocent young Muslim. That will teach them.Fixed that for her.
I'm starting to think all of this is a show. They get the Bachmanns and Palins to go act extreme right nutty to keep the fringe loonies happy and voting republican and then the establishment gop distances themselves from them to get the more moderate republicans and some independents to vote for them.
No worries, we're all slow on the uptake now and then.Just to show how bad first impressions can be (or, alternatively, how wrong I can be)
I suppose the fact that riots have not broken out over her remarks (yet) show that even radical Islamists don't take anything she says seriously.
For anybody who advocates waterboarding prisoners taken in the "war on terror", I'm just curious - if US soldiers are captured by these terrorist groups, would you object if the terrorists waterboarded them as part of their interrogation? And if so, on what basis?
And of course we should aspire to be more like them.Considering that terrorists behead non-military personnel they capture, waterboarding would probably be a cakewalk for any soldiers they capture.