We are going to have the good sense to elect her and McCain. that'w where
our "good sense" is.
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 5:43 AM, creusa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> What on earth is WRONG with you all in the US? Have you all lost any
> understanding of moderation and commn sense? Is this how people from
> Planet Belch think?
>
> She is a fundamentalist extremist...and I find it highly amusing (if
> it were not so tragic) that those in this forum who dislike
> fundamental extremism in in other cultures is actually supporting it
> in your own.
>
> Are you going to tell me that someone who objects to abortion even in
> cases of rape or incest is balanced????? That believing that evolution
> doesn't happen is balanced and open minded enough to possibly run the
> country?
>
> And who knows much of anything about her stance on the handling of the
> economy, (kind of important right now...) capital punishment (I'll bet
> I can make a good guess at this one...) or oil exploration? How about
> international diplomacy or her bias concerning other countries?
>
> Where in God's name have you all left your good sense??
>
> creusa
>
>
> On Sep 8, 6:42 am, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Libertarians Voting for the Republican Ticket?!?!?!?!?!?
> >
> > Something tells me Obama is in some serioous trouble now...
> >
> > How long before he dump Biden and BEGS Hillary to be his VP?!?!?!?!?
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > On Sep 7, 9:19 pm, "M.A. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Sarah Palinby Walter Block
> > > No one who has anything nice to say about Ron Paul can be all bad.
> Sarah Palin has said nice things about Ron Paul
> (seehere,here,here,hereandhere). Ergo, therefore, as a result, it cannot be
> denied, it logically follows, Sarah Palin cannot be all bad. That is, she
> cannot be all badno matter what elseshe is guilty of (within reason of
> course.)
> > > So, what are the criticisms of her?
> > > First and foremost, she is accused of not having enough experience. I
> admit it! She does not have enough experience. Enough experience, that is,
> to become emperor of the world. Yes, John McCain, Barack Obama and Joe Biden
> do seek this post of planetary domination, now held by George Bush. That is,
> these three show every evidence of wanting to continue the U.S. role as
> hegemon of the entire globe. Now, it may well be that Palin will in future
> be seduced into this sort of ambition. But, at least as ofright now, there
> is little or no evidence of it (apart from some pro-war sentiment). Of the
> four presidential and vice presidential candidates, her present experience
> shows theleastdesire to rule the world. So, her "lack of experience" is a
> good thing, not a bad one.
> > > Does she have enough "experience" to be president of a country with a
> limited government, and no aspiration to be world dictator? Of course she
> does. And, again, she hasmoreexperience in this regard than either McCain,
> Obama or Biden. She, alone of the four of them, has hadexecutiveexperience
> as the Governor of the great state of Alaska, while the other three have
> been whiling their way in a relatively unimportant institution, in this era
> of presidential power. So, don't talk to me about experience, as a critique
> of this lady.
> > > Second, it is said that with five children, she has too many other
> obligations to take on the role of vice president. Give me a break. She
> can't vote in the senate when there is a tie? C'mon! This charge emanates
> from left-wing feminists, of course. Suppose Hillary were to have had five
> children the ages of Sarah's. Would the legions of her supporters be making
> this case with regard to Mrs. Clinton? To ask this is to answer it. In that
> case, Hillary's ascendency would only serve as evidence that "You can have
> it all." The hypocrisy of these "feminists" stinks to the high heavens. They
> do not support the idea ofwomenbreaking through the so-called glass ceiling.
> Rather, they favorleft-wing socialist femalesbeing given positions of
> authority and responsibility. This is something very different. It is a rare
> occasion that these feminists have been caught with their contradictions so
> much in the public eye. All those sick and tired of these harridans ought to
> thank Sarah for this one boon alone.
> > > Third, a criticism made by some libertarians is that her adherence to
> our principles is only skin deep; she has raised some taxes, considered
> banning some books from libraries, engaged in public-private ventures
> regarding oil pipelines, she is altogether too friendly to US foreign
> aggression. Yes, yes, she is no libertarian, certainly not of the purist
> variety. She is no Ron Paul. But, a little context here, please. Compared to
> McCain, Obama and Biden, she is a veritable Murray N. Rothbard. What about
> matching her up against all the other 49 governors? Well, Bobby Jindal of
> Louisiana is not all bad as far as these things go, and there might be
> another half dozen of this breed, mainly in the poorly populated states west
> of the Mississippi, but surely Sarah Palin fits comfortably into this
> category. According tothis source, tax freedom day arrives earliest in
> Alaska, of all 50 states. Not too shabby, at least in this context. She
> favors drilling in theANWR, and that alone is worth the price of admission.
> > > Another critique emanating from this quarter is that even if Sarah
> isn't all that bad in terms of libertarianism, at least compared to her
> peers, as soon as she goes to Washington D.C. as Vice President, she will
> "grow in office" and become more acceptable to socialists such as those who
> plague theNew York Times,Newsweek, NBC and the other major media outlets.
> Well, yes, I suppose, this could happen. But, again, let us not lose sight
> of context. This hasalreadytaken place for the likes of McCain, Obama and
> Biden, who have been located in the beltway for many, many years. And, yes,
> there are indeed "libertarian" think tanks now located inside the beltway
> whose adherence to this philosophy has, sadly, deteriorated in the last
> little while. But there is nonecessitythat this disease will afflict Sarah.
> Indeed, there are groups, organizations and people who serve as
> counterexamples, and illustrate the concept of free will. Exhibit "A" is of
> course Ron Paul. He has been a denizen of Washington D.C. for decades now,
> and shows no signs of yielding to this affliction. George Ayittey is as
> strong a supporter of the free society as he was when he first became a
> professor of economics at American University many years ago. Tom DiLorenzo
> is located near the beltway in Baltimore, and is second to none in his
> adherence of libertarianism. Then, too, there are a whole host of
> libertarians on the faculty of nearby George Mason University. The Mises
> Institute itself, bastion of liberty and world headquarters of the
> Austro-libertarian movement, was for a time located in the DC environs. They
> departed, but not at all out of fear of compromising with the principles of
> freedom.
> > > Now that we have dealt with the spurious criticisms, what are the
> benefits of the Palin candidacy?
> > > First and foremost, just sit back and relax for a moment, and consider
> this scenario. The McCain (ugh!) – Palin (whoop-di-do) ticket is elected in
> November. The duffer kicks the bucket after a heart attack in early 2009,
> and our girl is now President of these here United States. Who does she
> choose as Vice President? Why, a certain Congressman from Texas. I'm not at
> liberty to reveal his name at the present time, but I'll give you a hint: he
> is widely known by both friends and enemies as "Dr. No." Double whoop-di-do,
> say I. No, quadruple. Unlikely? Yes. But politicallyimpossible? No.
> > > Did you notice how Sarah is widely referred to, when in formal mode?
> Yes, asMrs.Palin, notMs.Palin. Isn't that wonderful? Doesn't that really
> stick it to the socialist feminists? Yes, indeedy do. And, there is no group
> that more deserves such a come-uppance than they. They have long striven to
> stuff this horrid bit of nomenclature (seehere) down our collective throats,
> and, on all too many occasions have succeeded. It is time, it is long past
> time, that we jettison this insufferable politically correct attack on
> traditional gender distinction.
> > > She delivers a hugely deserved kick in the teeth to those limousine
> liberals who infest both east and west coasts of our country. I'm talking
> about the intellectual-academic-cultural "elites" who dismiss the rest of
> the populace as inhabiting "fly over" country. Here is a rifle toting, moose
> killing, basketball playing, beauty contest winning, charismatic and
> eloquent long happily married conservative hockey mom who has made something
> of herself in a very competitive field, who has not gone to finishing school
> at Harvard, Yale or Princeton. She does not revere the mainstream media; far
> from it. She is a breath of fresh air blowing in from our northernmost
> state. God bless her.
> > > Sarah has almost entirelypushedObama off television, and newspaper
> headlines. The timing of McCain's announcement of her candidacy as Vice
> President could not have been better. It took focus off Obama's windy,
> insufferable, socialist but, yes, eloquent, acceptance speech like no other
> announcement could have done. If that, alone, was Sarah's only
> accomplishment, it would have almost been worth it.
> > > True confession time. Before Palin (BP), I was leaning toward Obama. I
> thought he was marginally less likely to drop a nuclear bomb on some hapless
> third world country than mad bomber McCain. I regarded, and still do,
> foreign policy as more important than domestic, given that "war is the
> health of the state." And, there was very little to choose between the
> Republocrats and the Demopublicans on economics. Socialism from both
> quarters (although I admit it, the prospect of Alan Dershowitz on the
> Supreme Court did give me pause for thought). But now, after Palin (AP), I
> am shifting my allegiance to the Republicans. Go, Sarah, go! But what about
> the libertarians? Don't speak to me about the libertarians! The Barr-Root
> ticket is arguably less libertarian than Sarah Palin. Barr in particular has
> been a gigantic disappointment (seehereandhere). ...
> >
> > > read more »- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
> >
>
--
*~@):~{>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
