Palin Goes Rogue on Vegans

I will not do her on a train
I will not do her in the rain :blush:

I would not do her on a boat
I would not do her with a goat :eek:

I will not do her, Sam I am
Sarah Palin, I will not slam

There once was a redneck named Palin
Whose presidential campaign sure was ailin'

I've started; I'll let someone else finish..I've got poet's block.
 
Besides AGW (which is not a closed case) and the role of evolution in Christianity (which ideally should not enter into the public sphere at all), I don't see her as willfully ignorant of or damaging towards science.

She's a superstitious twit, as witness the ties with a Kenyan cult leader who is battling "witches."

To a certain extent, her speaking problems were a function of the leash McCain's handlers kept on her.

It is to laugh. The reason they kept a leash on her was that every time she opened her mouth, something stupid came out of it.

I used to believe otherwise, but seeing her speak and write after the campaign has changed my mind.

She hasn't written squat. She hired somebody to write her blather down in an intelligible form.
 
She's a superstitious twit, as witness the ties with a Kenyan cult leader who is battling "witches."

Raychill Maddow is also superstitious. Libs have no problem with her.

Superstitions: "Tons. A handkerchief can never be put in another pocket after it has been in one pocket. I don’t walk under ladders. I have items of clothing that are lucky for me. That rotates, but I am luck-oriented. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/19/magazine/19wwln-domains-t.html


It is to laugh. The reason they kept a leash on her was that every time she opened her mouth, something stupid came out of it.

Yeah, like when she said there were 57 states in the United States.....Oh wait, that was candidate Obama.


She hasn't written squat. She hired somebody to write her blather down in an intelligible form.

JFK actually got a Pulitzer Prize for a book that Ted Sorenson wrote. How can Palin possibly beat that?
 
Raychill Maddow is also superstitious. Libs have no problem with her.

Superstitions:<snip>


Piddly stuff, compared the belief in the presence of malicious witches.

Yeah, like when she said there were 57 states in the United States.....Oh wait, that was candidate Obama.

He visited some states more than once and was dog-tired. Count each take-off and landing as a visit to another stae and it is easy to come up with a figure like 57.




JFK actually got a Pulitzer Prize for a book that Ted Sorenson wrote. How can Palin possibly beat that?

Link?
 
“If any vegans came over for dinner, I could whip them up a salad, then explain my philosophy on being a carnivore,” she wrote. “If God had not intended for us to eat animals, how come He made them out of meat?”

did she really say this???

It's a very humorous statement. Why are people feigning incredulity over it?
 
There once was a redneck named Palin
Whose presidential campaign sure was ailin'

.

Redneck? Are you guys serious? I can't consider her anything but a sexy blip on the radar. I don't give her much more thought than that. Redneck seems much more invovled.
 
Piddly stuff, compared the belief in the presence of malicious witches.

Where is Palin quoted as believing in witches? This is from the dopey article "Jesus and Witches," where Newsweek Religion Editor Lisa Miller desperately tried to convinve her readers that Palin believes in witchcraft by citing the 2005 video clip. Maddow actually states her superstitions. Do you have Palin doing the same?


He visited some states more than once and was dog-tired. Count each take-off and landing as a visit to another stae and it is easy to come up with a figure like 57.

Funny how jet lag and weariness can increase the number of states from 50 to 57. Maybe that is why John Maddon never flies. He was paranoid that he might say 57 states during a MNF game.



Please. This is the first time you have heard this? Come on. You have corns older than this news.
 
For starters, Science, Politics, and Foreign Relations.

Science. I will state that anybody who adheres to the brand of religion that she does is willfully ignorant of science. The mindset of those more extreme religions is that they do not want to learn about science because they see it as a challenge to thier faith. She has publicly declared her faith as in line with that and so has declered herself as proudly and willfully ignorant of science.

Politics. Her numerous gaffes during the campaign show a lack of knowledge of political reality on a national stage. To win on the national stage, you have to have a much wider appeal than just your base. To succesfully govern once elected, you have to be able to work with the opposition. Her polarizing political stances make it more difficult to get elected, and will make it impossible for her to effectively govern if she does manage to win an election.

Foreign Relations. This can be summed up with her claim that she knows about Russia becasue she lives in the state geographically closest to Russia. This is clearly a statement from ignorance about what even her own views on foreign policy are. At the time she was asked this question, she clearly had not bothered to form any ideas regarding foreign policy (she didn't even bother to parrot those of McCain). This level of ignorance regarding foreign policy may be ok for you and me (we do not have to make any decisions regarding it) but is completely unacceptable for a VP candidate. Even if she didn't have her own opinion, she could have at least parroted the campaign or party line. Her comments showed she didn't even bother to learn what those were.

In short, if she wants to portray herself as a folksy down-to-earth person who is just like you or me, that is fine. But neither you nor I are remotely qualified to be VP of this country and if she is just like you and me, then she is not qualified either.


Exactly. There are plenty of Conservatives who are well informed on these topics. But the Palin Followers seem to hate them just slightly less then the evil liberals.
 
Now, I could be wrong - I don't remember any particular nuggets that issued from Palin's mouth during the election - but I don't remember her playing up anti-elitism unless it was about her vs. the Beltway establishment.
I took her statements about "real" Americans to be a jab at those big-city, slick libs. Yes, including the Beltway but just as importantly elsewhere.
 
Back to the "would I do her" stuff:


I would have said "no", but I accidentally watched a video of Oprah Winfrey's farewell speech, and got so un-turned on, that it shifted my perspective, and Sarah P.'s stock went up, inadvertently.

And, frankly, I'm getting bored with Martha Stewart as a sex-object.
 
Besides AGW (which is not a closed case) and the role of evolution in Christianity (which ideally should not enter into the public sphere at all), I don't see her as willfully ignorant of or damaging towards science.

That's a couple of pretty huge things to put aside when trying to evaluate her attitude toward science!

I would also add her position on sex education to that list. She clearly puts religious values ahead of science, since there's loads of evidence that abstinence only programs don't work as well as comprehensive sex ed at preventing pregnancy and STDs in young people.

I mean, besides those games the Rams lost, they've got a perfect winning record this season. :)
 
That's a couple of pretty huge things to put aside when trying to evaluate her attitude toward science!

The truth is that evolution's role is a hot-button issue that serves little other purpose than to spark controversy and employ Richard Dawkins. Whether a pol believes in the full monty or simply "microevolution" has little effect on their other policies towards science. Besides, she's not exactly hot on altering the current public school curricula.

As for AGW, yes, it is potentially a huge issue. But it's not a closed case yet.

I would also add her position on sex education to that list. She clearly puts religious values ahead of science, since there's loads of evidence that abstinence only programs don't work as well as comprehensive sex ed at preventing pregnancy and STDs in young people.

I don't count sociology as "science" in this context. But you're right, that would be something she would need to reexamine.
 
I don't count sociology as "science" in this context. But you're right, that would be something she would need to reexamine.

I don't think the science being referred to was sociology As we are dealing with pregnancy and spread of STD's, I think the reference was to things like Biology, Immunology and a few other subclasses of Medicine that deal with the spread of infectious disseases.

The one putting sociology over those sciences is Palin herself. She is more concerned with the social implications of moral values than she is in the science of how disseases actually spread.
 

Back
Top Bottom