1. Wow, the pick of Palin has got the Dems all stirred up.

    Don’t worry DG, she’s spent years taking out corrupt Republicans in AK.

    How many corrupt Chicago politicos is Obama in bed with?

  2. odinseye2k says:

    Just treating her to the same welcome that Joseph Biden got.

    Of course, a woman that doesn’t understand the basic age of the Earth goes very well with someone who graduated at the very bottom of his class.

  3. Decaturguy says:

    If she’s spend so many so many years taking out corrupt Republicans in AK, particularly as the Mayor of the big city of Wasillia, then why did she turn to the most corrupt Republican of them all, Ted Stevens, to help her get re-elected?

    Does Governor Palin edorse Ted Stevens for re-election? What is her relationship with other corrupt politicians in her party in Alaska?

    What is her position on global warning?

    Giving benefits to homosexual parners of state workers?

    If she is a fiscal conservative, how come the budget she signed includes the most spending in Alaska history?

    Why did she fire the public safety commissioner in Alaska? Will she release all the records she turned over to investigators in that case?

    What is her position on evolution?

    Really, who is Sarah Palin? What do we know about her? How is she qualified to be President of the United States?

  4. Another thing about Stevens endorsing Palin. She still had the good sense to kill his pet project, the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere.” Show me where Obama went against the Chicago machine.

  5. odinseye2k says:

    I’m not talking about touched by gods … I’m talking about someone that has some basic intellectual achievement / development. You know, like you expect from people you ask to run things.

  6. So, if I endorse Obama then go blow up the Bank of Rhine Georgia, will that mean terroists support Obama? Ok, Ted Stevens endorsed her, so what – last time I checked that is not nessecarily a two way street. She nixed his little bridge that was costing a bundle, yet you are going to lump her in the same category?

    That’s almost as insane as saying Biden isn’t a Wahsington-ite. Ok, he takes the train home every night – but he spends half his time in Washington and has been in Office forever and a day – but because he goes home he’s not “one of them”.

    If you are going to have standards like that, stop applying them when it’s conveinant.

  7. Decaturguy says:

    Ok, Ted Stevens endorsed her, so what – last time I checked that is not nessecarily a two way street.

    Just wondering about her “associations” (as Hannity would say about Obama) with corrupt Alaska politicians. Does she still support Stevens? Just asking.

  8. basic intellectual achievement / development

    She’s mentally retarded because she doesn’t think like you? Wow, the arrogance of the Obama/Biden campaign has taken over your brain.

  9. “Does she still support Stevens? ”

    Thats the two way street I was refering to, just because he endorsed her does not mean she endorses him. Which makes the above ad pretty much null in terms of damage.

    Now you find a video where Palin endorses Stevens for Senate, then you have ammunition. Now I can’t speak to their relationship – but she did help get rid of the bridge to nowhere.

    I do know he only endorsed her 3 weeks before the election, and she ousted his good friend. I also know last year she was rather vocal in critizing Ted “Series of Tubes” Stevens.

  10. odinseye2k says:

    “She’s mentally retarded because she doesn’t think like you? Wow, the arrogance of the Obama/Biden campaign has taken over your brain.”

    I refer to the fact, as pointed out above, that she is a Creationist. When it comes to the real world, I tend to expect my leadership to have some basic grasp of how things work. Creationism isn’t about “thinking like” the others, it is about literacy of basic scientific fact.

  11. odinseye2k says:

    Bingo. If you want to be a private citizen, you can have all the beliefs you want. If you want a job that has consequences for other people, you’ve got to deal with what’s real.

  12. Decaturguy says:

    Not all Christians believe in teaching creationism in schools. Some actually believe in science. But you guys have never really accepted religious people who are not fundamentalists as being “real” Christians anyway.

  13. Doug Deal says:


    I got forwarded an email of a Clinton supporter of mine that is from some Obama operative that says that everyone needs to “define” Palin before the Republicans can get a chance to “define” her.

    Basically a call to arms to post on blogs and get on radio stations with pre-packaged talking points. Decaturguy’s post reads nearly line by line.

  14. jsm says:

    ” Creationism isn’t about “thinking like” the others, it is about literacy of basic scientific fact.”

    Cut the BS. There are accomplished scientists on both sides of that argument. Argue about theories all you want. We have more important issues to deal with in this Nation.

  15. So a Muslim can’t be President either, because of their refusal to eat pork despite the fact that it’s not bad for you?

    I thought there was a seperation of Church and State, does that only apply when suitable now or something? I didn’t get the memo.

  16. Decaturguy says:

    Sorry to disappoint you, Doug, but I haven’t read any talking points. If you knew anything about me you would know better than that.

    If you want to listen to pre-packaged talking points, listen to WSB radio today from 4 to 7.

  17. Hey if the Obama campaign wants to make Creationism a central issue of this campaign let him. There are lots of bitter people who cling to their religion as he’s previously stated.

  18. odinseye2k says:

    I doubt the Obama campaign does, Buzz. Problem is that Creationism is another symptom of the pay-no-heed, head-up-the-ass style of thought that the GOP has exercised in the office of President for the past eight years.

    And we see the results in a trashed economy, and an unnecessary occupation based on an evidence trail that was faulty at best and possibly even falsified. Not to mention industrial nations around the world out to eat our lunch because they are capable of long-term planning and we currently are not.

  19. Doug Deal says:


    I will take you at your word, but your points are very similar to the laundry list sent out by Obama op.

    In any event, a number of my friends are Democrats, because I do not use politics to filter my friends, and I can say that a large number of the ones that backed Hillary are not so into Obama. It is anecdotal, so your results may vary.

  20. I thought the common thought was that Bush had the Iraq evidence falsified. But if he is really such a simpleton who has his head up his butt, how did he fool all of us – including most of the Democrats in Congress?

  21. Doug Deal says:


    I am very harsh on creationist when they debate against evolution, but I do not criticize people based on their religion. At their very core, pretty much every religion has some element of hokeyness to everyone but the people who follow that religion (even atheism, which requires one to take on faith that we know everything about the universe, as opposed to agnosticism that recognizes the doubt).

    Without religious tolerance, one is nothing but a bigoted a-hole.

  22. odinseye2k says:


    I’m totally down with a wide variety of religions. But again, my requirement for those in public trust is that when push comes to shove, science and analysis must be able to win out. Maybe not immediately or easily, because there is a lot of ideology out there, but it has to be possible. As soon as you get the “it can only be this way because this one book says so,” we’ve got ourselves a breakdown in any kind of exchange that can lead to productive solutions.

    There are a lot of areas in which the contradiction between science and religion are not so obvious, and in that area, hey, flip a coin.

    As for the Bush evidence, there was a desired outcome, and evidence filtered to reach that particular outcome. Secrecy of the source information, sign-off by what should have been neutral parties, and a political environment where no answer was acceptable except “bomb the hell out of them” gave us a pretty nasty railroad effect.

    There were also quite a few Democrats that called BS on the whole thing, and I think they did quite well in doing so.

  23. heroV says:

    creationism is not equal to “Christian” or “Christianity”, but creationism in schools does equal “stupid”

    railing against someone who wants to teach creationism in public schools is not an attack on Christianity, it is an attack on teaching our kids BS instead of actual science. I’m sure other religions (with which I am not very familiar) have some creationism elements as well.

  24. jkga says:

    Odinseye- I think I remember one of those Democrats who called BS, good-looking guy from Illinois with a funny name…

  25. Buzz, you know that the Bridge to Nowhere is really Don Young’s pet project, not Ted Stevens. And Palin supported her Lt. Gov in a primary against Young, which Young won.

    So what does that tell you about Palin? She is this “popular” governor of Alaska who can’t even get her Lt. Gov elected in a primary against a guy who is under federal investigation and is favored to lose re-election in November.

    Dare I suggest that she may be as ineffective as our Sonny in her own state? All talk, takes a great picture in a high school uniform (Palin while in high school, Sonny at present age) but can’t really deliver much of anything?

  26. I guess I fail to see how Bush can both be a manical warlord, and a complete ninny who just somehow mnaged to trick us all while having a much lower IQ than everyone.

    But it detracts from this thread I suppose.

    I was taught Pluto was a planet in school, I demand to be retaught because they figured out they were in fact wrong. Just because someone supports creationism does not negate their ability to be analytical and intelligent. To indicate such is closeminded and futile.

    As for as it being taught in shcool, I always heard that the more concepts students were exposed to the better. Did that go out the window with Pluto?

  27. heroV says:

    Ronald, fine, but only if they also teach my theory that we are descendants from alien beings brought to the earth by Xenu on a DC-9 aircraft over 75 million years ago, because that’s also another concept to expose students to.

  28. odinseye2k says:

    Actually, Ronald, I would very much like to see creationism and the various tactics creationists use taught in school. It would have the potential to show just how quality research and inference is conducted in comparison to a combination of sloppy and wishful thinking … including the misapplication of the Law of the Excluded Middle to scientific theories (falsity of evolution does *not* lead logically to special creationism). I think the creationism story is an excellent tool for the instruction of the scientific method, which is not very well taught in public schools. Maybe some practical applications of philosophy could be tossed in there.

    Also, Pluto as a planet was a taxonomic issue, not a factual one. Our knowledge of Pluto did not change, simply the context of the solar system within which it existed. It was a choice between grandfathering Pluto in and promoting many objects to planet status.

    The resolution was actually pretty elegant and insightful. The idea of “planetness” coming from being the dominant mass within a given orbit was quite a good one.

    Also, “the more concepts the better” is a false canard. There is only a limited time in the curriculum. And I must remind *yet again* that we are in intellectual competition with many foreign nations, which is a competition that will partly determine the standing and wealth of our nation.

    At some point, you must scope your curriculum. And to include spurious concepts (except to explain both why they initially had some credibility, and then why they were subsequently tossed aside) is a waste of time and resources.

    Also, for every known concept and theory, there were multiple alternatives … which do we consider closed and which to we then open? And which of the alternatives do we teach?

  29. I won’t refute what you’ve said odin, as I was not personally advocating for the inclusion of specific theories. Just merely pointing out that just because someone choses to believe something as a fact does not immediately discredit their ability to cogitate prodigiously.

  30. odinseye2k says:

    I only have anecdotal evidence, but about every creationist I’ve dealt with has proven to me otherwise.

    They start by attempting to demonstrate that they have the “scientific facts,” get crushed in that domain, retreat to “teach the controversy,” get beaten around the ears on that one, and then just go to “agree to disagree.”

    In other words, not confidence instilling.

  31. heroV says:

    Ronald, if you believe that teaching something like creationism in a SCIENCE class is a good idea, then it absolutely discredits your ability to cogitate prodigiously.

  32. I do not recall ever advocating it be taught in a science course. In a school? Maybe. Specifically a science class? Never said that. In a philosphy class it fits, in a class on religions of the world it fits, speaking of it in a Civics class when you cover the Scopes-Monkey trial and that issue; why not? The only science class I could see it being mentioned in would be earth science/geology, wherein it could be covered in a paragraph as an alternative theory.

    You know if you want to try and make a sly jab at me feel free too, but at least read what I’m writing in full first. I’m honestly not advocating for creationism to be taught.

  33. CHelf says:

    Wow. Talk about desperate. We’ve turned this into a creation vs. evolution debate. Of all the issues to make of this campaign libs are turning to Palin’s views on the origins of the universe. Let’s just say it’s above her paygrade and call it a day.

  34. odinseye2k says:

    Naw, it’s just a particular itch I like to scratch.

    Campaign-wise, we’ve got her neutralizing the attacks on Obama for “inexperience” and some potential ethics problems (the level to which they will matter to the electorate as yet unknown). Overall, I like her as a running mate for McCain.

  35. CHelf says:

    She has FAR more experience than Barry. If HER inexperience as a VP would be a problem, what does it say for Barry’s inexperience as PRES? I’d be happier with “inexperience” in the second spot rather than the first.

  36. heroV says:

    Ronald, note my postscript, where I clarified I was not taking a jab you personally, but that I meant “you” in the general sense.

  37. CHelf says:

    Executive and legislative. Running a state. Small business. Family business. Obama says McCain is out of touch with average Americans and HE is more in touch. Please tell me how Obama is more in touch with average Americans than Palin. Going to Harvard, living in Hyde Park, teaching at UofChicago and a state senator is not exactly relating to the “bitter” average American is it now?

    Dems are quite upset the gender card along with the “in touch” card is now in the hands of the GOP. Their efforts to appeal to the average American voter have taken a huge hit. Attacking a successful woman may come back to haunt them as well.

  38. Decaturguy says:

    Affirmative action is alive and well in the Republican Party. Do you really believe that Clarence Thomas would be on the Supreme Court if he was not black? Many more qualified white judges were passed over for Thomas. Would Palin be McCain’s VP if she were not a woman? Many more qualified men (Mitt Romney) were passed over for this woman.

    Say what you will about Obama, he was not selected because of the color of his skin or his sex. He earned it.

  39. nast says:

    That’s the second comment where I’ve seen you allude to Obama living in Hyde Park as somehow putting him out of touch. What do you know about it? Have you ever even been there?

  40. How is Romney any more experienced to bring reform? He ran a few companies, made a profit, and was Gov. for awhile. No real Foreign Policy cred.

    Same with Pawlenty, Huckabee, etc. By your statement Decatur, he sould have picked Joe Liberman.

  41. CHelf says:

    Actually yes I have. Have you? Are you saying that his house valuing over $1 million somehow relates to the average voter? Especially the ones losing their homes? If Obama argues real estate value is a valid unit of measure of being in or out of touch, please tell me how his neighborhood relates to average Americans.

  42. Buzz,

    I thought the line about clinging to “guns and religion” were Obama’s talking points…after all, they’re from his speech. Will you get off Obama’s talking points and get back to the GOP ones that were sent out?


  43. nast says:

    Yeah, I lived there for four years. If you’ve been there then you know that the houses range from multi-million dollar mansions to million dollar homes to modest condos to Section 8 slums. And you would know the people in the community range in income levels to match those houses. The neighborhood is full of average Americans.

  44. CHelf says:

    You are telling me where Obama lives is “average”? I know gated communities around trailer parks. Those in the gated communities are in no way comparable to those in trailers. Don’t tell me that Obama’s street compares to the Section 8 slums. Those in Section 8 housing would love to live like Obama. Maybe he could set the example of being his brother’s keeper and open his house to his “next door neighbors”?

  45. Bill Simon says:

    “All talk, takes a great picture in a high school uniform (Palin while in high school, Sonny at present age) but can’t really deliver much of anything?”

    Just like you HardCore…what can you deliver to the district you are running in? Other than pizza I mean?

  46. nast says:

    Hyde Park median household income: $44,142
    US median household income: $50,233

    It’s not exact, but yeah, I’d say that where Obama lives is pretty close to average. What’s your definition?

  47. SouthFultonGuy says:

    No matter what you think of McCain/Palins, that’s the ticket.

    Vote against them like for Bob Barr to “send a message”????

    Folks, we cannot afford Barack Obama — not in taxes, not in security, not for Supreme Court appointments…

  48. Howard Roark says:


    I must admit I only scanned the responses to your post so what I am about to say may have been buried in another post somewhere.

    William Ayers

    I have probably said enough to make my point.

  49. atlantaman says:

    I think it’s going to be problematic for Obama to keep focusing on her inexperience. Those comments are going to come back like a boom-a-rang.

    Let’s be honest, neither one of them have any real experience. But a lot of folks are going to be scratching their heads wondering where they would rather have the inexperience.

    At least in the VP slot you can put a bright reformer who would obviously be learning the ropes very quickly under an experienced President.

  50. Icarus says:

    Let’s start changing the word “experience” for the word “accomplishments”. What are Obama’s accomplishments? They are getting elected to the next higher office. Period.

    Palin has accomplished so much more in the same few years of experience (i.e. government reforms, taking on her own party’s majority on their home turf, etc) than Obama (talks nice, votes “present”).

  51. DMZDave says:

    Arguably she has more executive experience than either Barack Obama or Joe Biden. Those who say she knows nothing about foreign policy need to get a map. The state she governs shares a significant border with a foreign country and she deals with issues every day related to the US-Canadian relationship. She brings a wealth of life experience in addition to her experience as an elected official. I agree that this was an odd pick but the comments from women-hating democrats on this blog demonstrates pretty clearly why this may have been an inspired decision by John McCain.

    Many Democrats, as they demonstrated with Hillary, will make the kinds of stupid over -the-top comments you see by Decaturguy and other Democrats here on this blog that will likely have the impact of driving a lot of women to vote for McCain – Palin out of anger and frustration. Don’t let me down guys. Keep up the stupid sexist comments.

  52. bowersville says:

    Ted Steven’s a problem for Palin? Are you kidding?

    Stevens, unlike William Ayers the terrorist pr*ck that bombed the Pentagon, Ted Stevens is indicted and on his way to prison.

    But what about Ayers, well he has Obama and Ayer’s is free on on his way to good standing with the Obamamaniacs.

  53. bowersville says:

    I’m tired of waiting on Decatur Guy to jump on Palin. DG, if there is anything to you, jump on Palin and give it your best shot.

  54. Harry says:

    Keep in mind that Obama had his legislative district reconfigured after 2000 to encompass a much larger proportion of wine and cheese lakeside liberals. It remained just barely majority black. He was thus given free rein to develop his story to fit the statewide and national Democratic fanbase. And Ayers’ Annenburg committee funding was the grease. Obama was given the job of divvying up the money – on Ayers’ orders, of course. It appears some of that money may have found its way back into Obama’s campaign fund.

Comments are closed.