A thought regarding Palin

Rose1963 wrote:

Thank you for your reply. First - "Question Authority" is a complete PETA term. I feel I was respectful and NOT "rude" and " dismissive." I certainly don't think I'm a victim -and am trying to be an adult. YOU are the one "spinning." Explain why you dislike Sarah Palin (whom is not the Presidential candidate) and then also explain why you feel that Obama is the best choice. I'm open to reconsider (although I doubt my opinion will change). To me, Obama is nothing but words. McCain puts Palin to the microphone and lets her do his talking. Both canidates suck. In my personal opinion however - Obama sucks worse. The upcoming debates will speak for themselves. And for the "Victim Remark" - Go FY!

My user name, QuestionAuthority has nothing to do with PETA. It has to do with exactly what is says.. questioning authority. I have no idea why it is you declared it to be a PETA term.

I think everyone who has responded to you in this thread, which you declared that you did not read, has shown why they dislike Sarah Palin.
What I find amazing is from your profile you declare yourself an animal rights advocate, a PETA member.. yet you support someone who totally opposes what seems to be a passion of yours. Tell me.. what does PETA think of Palin's stance on shooting wolves from helicopters? What does PETA think of the huge dead bear she has draped proudly over her couch in the governor's office?

Rose1963 wrote:

Thank you for your reply. First - "Question Authority" is a complete PETA term. I feel I was respectful and NOT "rude" and " dismissive." I certainly don't think I'm a victim -and am trying to be an adult. YOU are the one "spinning." Explain why you dislike Sarah Palin (whom is not the Presidential candidate) and then also explain why you feel that Obama is the best choice. I'm open to reconsider (although I doubt my opinion will change). To me, Obama is nothing but words. McCain puts Palin to the microphone and lets her do his talking. Both canidates suck. In my personal opinion however - Obama sucks worse. The upcoming debates will speak for themselves. And for the "Victim Remark" - Go FY!

"This email is for you as well as Di-gest...or however that person spells it.

I realized that I put myself "out there" by replying to this thread. ONE WILL NO DOUBT BE PERSONALLY ATTACKED BY THOSE WHOM DISUADE FROM THE MAJORITY (of this websight). It's a matter of choice. And I choose to use the word "discust" when I think of voting for Obama. I will NEVER vote for OBAMA!!!! And I don't have to explain it to anybody. Thanks for asking me to however. I don't want to debate this. It is what it is. Period....the end. But much love to you in your decison(s)."

I capitalized the section where you declared that you would be and were being 'personally attacked'. I'd be perfectly willing to explain where I disagree with Sarah Palin on the issues, but yet you are pressuring me to answer questions whereas you haven't answered one of mine, questions I once again were asked in a very respectful manner. Once again, you said good things about Palin and didn't mention one issue. I asked what issues attracted you to her. I then asked what disgusted you about Obama. I'm repeating myself here, but if you do not want to answer, fine. But again, do not be rude towards me by pretending that I 'attacked' you in any way, shape or form, when looking at my posts it is clearly not the case.

And since in my first reply, I gave you a detailed reasoning for why I chose Obama, but you didn't go to the thread, here it is. Would you be willing to answer one of my questions now?....

---

"I'm voting for Obama.

"For one, I strongly believe the country may be irrevocably damaged if we have another President similar to George W. Bush. This is not a swipe against McCain; I'm sure he'd be more competent. But nevertheless the policies are remarkably similar, and we can have no more of it. Obama's background I find very appealing as a presidental candidate. As a community organizer he would've learned (as I am doing now) the necessity of building bipartisan coalitions and compromising to achieve objectives. This also shows me that he's actually spent time with people less well-off in our nation, working directly with them to solve problems. He's a constitutional law expert, which I think would be a lovely change of pace.

On the issues we seem to agree mightily; I agree with him that health care should be made affordable by the U.S. Government, and there should be a plan for everyone to buy into, but that you should not force people to change from their private coverage if you don't want to. I agree with him on the two main Homeland Security issues, that our ports need to be radically overhauled to be able to detect dangerous material, and that the most dangerous thing we have to work towards preventing is the acqusition of a nuclear/biological weapon on the black market by a terrorist group who then uses it in the U.S. I agree with him that there needs to be more focus on Afghanistan and less on Iraq, and it should not be discounted that he was entirely right about what was going to happen in Iraq in the following five years when most people, including some experts in the highest level of government, were dead wrong. On the biggest foreign policy decision of our time, Obama nailed it, and our sitting president did not.

In terms of energy, which is going to probably be one of the biggest issues, if not the biggest issue facing our country, Obama again gets it right. Energy is connected to everything, foreign policy, economics, etc. Simply opening offshore drilling stations here in America is not the answer; there won't be enough oil, it will take too long to have a positive impact on the price and we won't adjust our economy quick enough. And this is the only time I'll be negative; I just simply don't believe John McCain when he says we'll invest equally in offshore drilling and alternative energy. His record doesn't show it. Obama's record does, and he's right in that we need a new New Deal, one framed upon the basic tenet that our economy needs to afford us leverage when dealing with fundamentalist dictatorships in the Middle East and needs to protect ourselves and our planet. He's got the plans.

Finally, he's inspiring as a leader. This is often dismissed by his critics, but isn't one of the most important things a leader has to do is inspire his or her citizens? I believe that national service will improve drastically under his watch, our reputation in the world will be restored after a dark eight years, and we will be better equipped and better allied in military and diplomatic conflicts with our enemies."

brandon10 wrote:

I wasn't. Sorry, I couldn't help myself. You can read through that racism a mile away. And it disgusts me.

sickens me. the maximum of hatred for a minimum of reason.

unsung wrote:

Consider the source that you quoted, he is known for tossing out the racism card often. I was accused of it as well by him because I support strengthening our border to keep illegal aliens out, as one of the things to do to fix that problem..

I just called it as i saw it unsung.

unsung wrote:

I also called him out for being one of this boards internet tough guys who likes to call people names that he doesn't agree with. I always considered Pearl Jam fans a little more refined, he is proof that even neanderthals like the music.

I'm sorry, but i find that incredibly funny. Singling one person out as the 'internet tough guy' is really unfair. Have you ever visited the 'porch' when posters and concert tickets have been on sale? Refined is hardly the word i would use to describe some of the people there . It's like too many freaks and not enough circuses. Unbelievable.

Ok, so you have been rather vocal about brandon10, and as the starter of this thread, i'm sure you are keen for it to continue. Would you agree that Rose1963 was unreasonable from the very beginning, she/he came into the thread with a giant chip on their shoulder and was never interested in debating to start off with?

polaris wrote:

it's interesting ... in Canada we are having an election ... on the news everyday, the leaders and their key members are having press conferences, doing radio interviews, basically - they want to talk to anyone who would listen and are open to all questions ... well, the conservatives are less open but still harper is definitely out answering questions ...

yet - we have sarah palin not doing a press conference nor answering reporters questions for 4 weeks since her nomination to be VP of the United States ...

don't you guys get it? ... she's in waaaaaaaaaay over her head!!

Yes, but what I am really interested in is what flavor ice cream she ordered at Cold Stone Cremery. See, because if she ordered strawberry, she's just like me!

unsung wrote:

I call it as I see it as well. I've been called a racist by this person twice. He commonly calls others names when he doesn't agree with them, and often times racist is the word that is used. I don't care if the thread continues, but I felt the original post was a valid thought and would provoke meaningful discussion. Some of it was, some was not. I'll admit I did not read every page so I cannot comment on Rose's replies.

And no I don't visit the porch, there are too many idol worshippers and I'm tired of reading about newbies complaining about their fan club ticket seatings based on senority. Guess what, when I first joined I was in the nosebleeds too. Now that I've stuck around, showed loyalty, paid my dues, I want the chance to enjoy some excellent seats. We deserve to have loyalty shown back to us. But the newbies whine and cry because mommy and daddy never told them no and always gave them what they wanted to shut them up. Spoiled brats they are.

If I called you a racist, I likely had good reason. And I don't remember the exact conversation about illegals, but I do remember some here acting like Bill O'Reilly. And he my friend, is a racist asshole.

Sarah Pinocchio is in the same category as Britney Spears and Paris Hilton and all the rest of the tabloid, media created celebs. Her 15 minutes of fame is coming to a close and the country is now getting back to reality, which is in a very bad way right now because of ignorant, greedy, ultra right wing hypocrites like her.
She represents everything that is wrong with this country right now, with her smug, self serving attitude and her lies about her past and her sick vision of the future.
This argument over executive experience is such a load of crap. George Bush has 8 years experience as President and he STILL isn't qualified for the office.
Barack Obama is a young, brilliant, and visionary candidate who is just as qualified to be in the oval office as anyone on the political scene today. He will carry out the JFK paradigm of getting the best and the brightest to surround him in the White House to bring new and innovative ideas to the table instead of the same tired politics as usual we have had.

brandon10 wrote:

EXACTLY

And he will surround himself with the best and brightest wether or not he agrees with them. Because unlike this admin, he wants to be challenged to make sure he makes the most informed decision possible.

Sounds like a common sense approach for once!!!!!

Are you sure about that...his voting record would indicate he's a "yes" man.

I'd like to think he will, but I still think it's only a 50-50 shot at best that he does.