Politics!

[Hated Milk Machine]

I love how, on the internet, you can call googling for pix "research."

[NFox]

I love how, on the internet, you can call googling for pix "research."

It sure beats microfiche. Same result, different technique.

And to Aaron, my picture was there to refute all the pictures that Daily Kos posted showing her stomach obscured saying "look she's not even showing." Regardless of when she started showing, she showed. There are personal accounts I read (And forgot to bookmark...grrr) of people meeting her while she was pregnant saying she was showing.

They've also misdated at least one of the pictures of Bristol. The one they claim to have been printed on March 9th was originally printed by the Anchorage Daily News in 2006. So when the pictures are reordered sequentially, it shows her stomach shrinking (Not growing). So, maybe the headline should read "Bristol Palin, Did her Mother Cover up her Diet?" It would be just as sensationalist, but probably wouldn't have the same bite as the current story. There goes my career as a leftist blog editor. Maybe the Right will still have me? Nah, my views on the war alone would prevent me from getting that job. Oh well.

This is why I only read either sides blogs when I want a good laugh. Both sides resort to tabloid-esque dirty rotten tricks when they get desperate, and I'd say that examining pictures of a teen girl's stomach classifies as desperate. I think Chris Hansen may want to stop by Daily Kos' headquarters.

-Nick

[Garon]

It just gets better and better:

Asked about Palin's national security experience, Cindy McCain could not come up with anything beyond the fact that, after all, her state is right next to Russia. "You know, the experience that she comes from is, what she has done in government -- and remember that Alaska is the closest part of our continent to Russia."

Wow. So, foreign policy experiences comes from governing a state that's closest to Russia.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-m..._b_122759.html

Keep defending them, please, they need it.

[scamboogah]

It wasn't just Cindy McCain either. Lindsay Graham blurted out the same talking point on Stephanopolous. That is, when he wasn't talking about how Palin is much more fit and experienced to be president than Obama.

I suppose we'll need to find someone from Maine to handle the crisis in Georgia. It is, after all, the closest state.

You would think that Evangelicals would see Gustav hitting land as their convention starts as some sort of 'sign'.

[bao]

Right, but one channel does not shift the bias...the mean bias still favors the left.

The only reason I'm defending the repubs is because it seems no one else here will. And I always did like a challenge.

-Nick

I love this ruse of independence you have going, where you pretend that "independent" and "open-minded" mean the same thing. They don't. You have done your "research" and decided that Bob Barr is the candidate who most matches your ideals and beliefs. At the very least, this makes you an extremely right-leaning independent, as you are supporting a candidate who is much, much further to the right than the Republican candidate. And yet, we're supposed to believe that you are keeping an open mind when studying McCain and Obama. I doubt it. But at least admit it.

Secondly, to argue that there is a left-leaning bias in general in the media is patently absurd. Presumably, they are also being controlled by the Elders of Zion from their stronghold in the Swiss Alps. Was the media left-leaning in 2001-2003, when dissenting voices about the war were all but drown out as the fringe? Did you actually watch any -- ANY -- network coverage of the war? It was obscenely pro-war, pro-Bush, and what's worse, actually engineered by the US government.

If anything the media is biased toward whatever is popular, whatever will get better ratings. It is a business after all. Right now, I'm sure Obama is skewing higher than McCain, thats why he has gotten more favorable coverage. Just like ratings for Fox News jumped during the war, and all other news outlets dragged to the right to compete. The media caters to what will make them money. Its a problem, for sure, but its about fucking time it favors the center-left.

For example, would you classify the mainstream media's coverage of immigration "favors the left"? If you answer yes, you're wrong. 180 degrees wrong.

[bao]

And of course its Bush-league (pun intended) to create a controversy about Palin's daughter. Given her incredible lack of experience and general knowledge about politics, and most clearly geo-politics, I find it hard to imagine that the democrats will have to stoop this low to deconstruct her candidacy.

Regarding John McCain having lost his honor (the argument that John McCain is, and always has been an opportunist) ... I disagree to the extent that I believe that McCain acted as his conscience dictated for many years, and many of his strongest stances were not typically republican stances. He did not tow the party line. Now, he's got the nomination, and from everything I have read, he is genuinely excited, even giddy, about winning the election. And he's willing to do anything to win, including go back on his hardest-fought stances (immigration, torture). Apparently, he sees the nomination as his reward for so many years fighting outside the party flock. Either way, he's still an atrocious candidate.

And if I'm a national-security fuckwit, do I feel really betrayed by McCain's vice presidential selection? Of course. Putting a person with no experience and no apparent knowledge of geo-politics (or much else) as the number two, when its nearly certain McCain will not stay totally healthy for his tenure.

[DiscoInferiorityComplex]

Well, it turns out her daughter would have been one month pregnant at the time, so it looks like that potentially embarrassing scandal has no merit...

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...hter-pregnant/

[GodHatesFlags]

I like that this lady is against pot because it "sends the wrong message to kids" but she was in a BEAAAAAUUUUUTTTTYYYY PAGEANT...

that's funny to me even if the correlation is weak.

if Barack wins and nothing really changes, then can we all agree it's time to disband the two party system once and for all?

[mezmorized]

Palin’s 17-Year-Old Daughter Is Pregnant

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2...r-is-pregnant/

ST. PAUL — The 17-year-old daughter of Gov. Sarah Palin, John McCain’s running mate, is five months pregnant, Senator McCain’s campaign advisers announced today.

The daughter, Bristol, plans to marry the father, the campaign said.

I'm not completely sure what the rumors and questions are surrounding Palin's pregnancy or her daughter's, but maybe this article can help and maybe someone can explain to me why this matters, beyond her religious stance on abortion?

[mezmorized]

I like that this lady is against pot because it "sends the wrong message to kids" but she was in a BEAAAAAUUUUUTTTTYYYY PAGEANT...

http://www.time.com/time/specials/pa...837534,00.html

In 2003, the Alaska Court of Appeals legalized the possession of small amounts — four ounces or less — of marijuana in the home, making it the only state in America to allow it. In 2006, then-governor Frank Murkowski outlawed the ruling; the Superior Court, in turn, struck down some of his restrictions (now Alaskans can possess only one ounce). The battle over marijuana became a minor issue during the 2006 Alaska gubernatorial race (which Palin won), with Murkowski claiming he had never smoked pot and Palin admitting that she had tried it. "I can't claim a Bill Clinton and say that I never inhaled," she said at the time.

[Berliner]

Well, it turns out her daughter would have been one month pregnant at the time, so it looks like that potentially embarrassing scandal has no merit...

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...hter-pregnant/

I don't care, I still think she's a Muslim.

[ChrisCubasATX]

ST. PAUL, Minnesota (CNN) -- Bristol Palin, the 17-year-old daughter of Sarah Palin, is pregnant and will keep the baby and marry the father, a senior aide to Sen. John McCain confirmed to CNN Tuesday.


Chalk up another win for "abstinence only" sex education!

[ericluxury]

When even the "mainstream" media is going negative on her, you know there is trouble afoot for McCain.

I don't naturally understand evangelicals, they have a very strange logic to me, but I don't think this matters. Conservative Christians appear to have a lot of paranoia towards the secular society which is where they place mainstream media. So when one of their own gets attacked, it doesn't necessarily mean what it means to liberals (though the hard-core of any party has that same paranoia). The RNC is going to be interesting. They also have to reach for the middle while appealing to the base and I am curious at what their strategy is for that.

[NFox]

I love this ruse of independence you have going, where you pretend that "independent" and "open-minded" mean the same thing.

Well, I guess I should consult with you from now on, since you seem to have such a firm grasp on my political ideology. I considered both mainstream candidates thoroughly before deciding that they weren't for me (very open-minded of me, no?) and as I've already said, Bob Barr does not match my ideals 100%, but he comes the closest of all of the candidates.

Honestly, if you were to chart my ideologies, I would probably fall on the border between libertarian and anarchist (You try finding a candidate that fits that)...so keep assuming you know where my alliances lay, but when either side starts resorting to muckraking I will do research in order to determine its veracity.

So, go on, believe what you want about me, but please, just don't resort to these stupid, presumptuous ad hominem attacks.

-Nick

PS: You take the internet waaay too seriously.

[smartbunny]

Palin supports abstinence-only education in schools, and all of the usual right-wing Family Values stuff, which I am sure does not include being preggers out of wedlock. But not everything works in neat little packages. Life is unpredictable and messy, and we need progressive ideas to help people that make mistakes and everyone deserves equal rights. She should learn from this and we liberals should take the high road and not talk smack about a 17-year old kid who screwed up. We should merely say, "See, sometimes things happen. Our best wishes to you, and remember this when others need help or compassion."

[bao]

Honestly, if you were to chart my ideologies, I would probably fall on the border between libertarian and anarchist (You try finding a candidate that fits that)...so keep assuming you know where my alliances lay, but when either side starts resorting to muckraking I will do research in order to determine its veracity.

So, go on, believe what you want about me, but please, just don't resort to these stupid, presumptuous ad hominem attacks.

-Nick

PS: You take the internet waaay too seriously.

... says the guy who's posted about 15 times and 3,000 words in this thread in the last week. Nice ploy, though.

By the way, what does that even mean, that I take the internet "waaaay too seriously"?

Also, you should look up the definition of ad hominem, I think. For example, in my "ad hominem" attack, I pretty clearly critiqued the exact substance of what you were arguing -- that the mainstream media is biased to the left -- thereby making it not ad hominem. Though in your response, you conveniently ignored that part of my post. Probably because what you were arguing was clearly absurd.

Also, libertarianism is usually a hodgepodge of left and right-leaning beliefs, which are held together by a loose skeleton of "libertarian" ideals. In your posts, the right side has been clear, but the left side has yet to make an appearance. Which is ok, but please stop implying that us idiots who support one of the "mainstream" candidates are doing so because we are not smart enough to open-mindedly weigh our options, unless they are spoon fed to us by a slanted media.

[scamboogah]

Honestly, if you were to chart my ideologies, I would probably fall on the border between libertarian and anarchist

That's the most nonsensical thing I've ever read.

You can't fall on the border between anarchist and anything. That's the point! It's like saying you fall on the border between no helmet laws and destroying all motorcycles.


As for Palin, at this point I don't think it even matters. Even if she wasn't a woefully underqualified tool with as much qualification to be president as your average Jiffy Lube manager (He's got executive experience!), I think she's just got too much going on to even come close to being able to focus on the job that is needed.

If I wanted a president with a newborn special needs kid, 4 other kids to take care of, and an underage daughter with another on the way, I'd vote for Lynne Spears.

[NFox]

...please stop implying that us idiots who support one of the "mainstream" candidates are doing so because we are not smart enough to open-mindedly weigh our options, unless they are spoon fed to us by a slanted media.

I don't remember making that implication, but if I did, I'm sorry. As I believe I said earlier in this thread, and if I haven't allow me to say it now, vote for whomever you feel would best represent your beliefs. I don't care who that is, hell, I don't even care if you write in your uncle's name simply because he best represents your political ideology. Who you vote for is not as important as why you vote for them.

My ad hominem tag was applied mainly to the beginning of your post (Post one of two) where you took the time to bash my choice and try to insult my current position on who I would vote for. Who I am voting for is not an issue that is up for debate, and attacking me for it is an ad hominem attack, by trying to weaken what you perceived my stance to be first by attacking me. That is all I meant when I said you take the internet way too seriously.

...And this is why I never actually debate issue online. I have consisentently refused to post my own beliefs simply because they are not the issue here, the candidates are. So, rip them a new asshole, let's just try to leave the personal attacks out of it, okay?

And on that note, I'm out of here (This thread). This thread started out light-hearted enough (Read my signature), but has just gotten way too aggressive for my tastes.

Peace out.

EDIT: Okay, I'll just hang around long enough to address this:

That's the most nonsensical thing I've ever read.

Anarchy as a political ideology (Not as it is commonly understood) is an extreme form of Libertarianism, it makes perfect sense. Where a Libertarian might believe in small government and free trade, an anarchist believes in little to no government and pure capitalism. Unfortunately, most people understand anarchy as a social movement rather than political one. Anarchy is not about rebellion and destruction, it is about believing that we are capable of governing ourselves without government, hence an (without) archy (rule/leadership). That's it in a nutshell, I really don't feel like charting every single belief, but trust me, it makes perfect sense. And now, I'm really leaving this thread.

-Nick

[chapina]

Bringing this back a little closer to the topic, one of the things I've been curious about is I get how Palin's stances are appealing to evangelicals but I don't get how this supposedly conservative/traditional group is OK with a woman with 5 children (one with Downs) taking on such a demanding role in government. Don't they still think women should stay in the home?

Hey, I think I can do it all, but I'd have serious reservations about doing my job now if I had a baby with Downs.

With this news about her daughter, I wonder if they'll turn on her because of PERCEIVED bad mothering = bad family values. By their own standards, she stinks. I don't get it.

[isoS]

I also liked this thread better when it was a bit more lighthearted and respectful. Let's talk about politics, not each other's beliefs. If the latter gets in the way of the former, maybe take a time-out.

I do want to briefly address the idea of voting for the candidate that best represents your beliefs. It's a nice idea that will never ever make any difference in the actual world we live in. As a lazy American with more important things than government and politics to focus on full-time (for example, the Project Runway thread on AST), I appreciate that the process boils things down to two seemingly opposite choices. Makes my life easy. I don't have to research much to decide who to vote for, because it's readily obvious that one of them will incrementally push the country in the direction I would like it to go, and one will incrementally push it the other way. That's the part we as citizens get to play in this game. If you think you should have more influence, then it probably means you should get into politics.