Cynical Nation

Obama does not need to do anything about Palin. Just ignore her. Palin will self-destruct when the National Enquirer story about an affair with her husband business partner will come out (and that is why the McCain campaign has been threatening to sue the National enquirer). That will hurt her with many conservative right-wing voters, especially women. Of course the problem is that if that story is true that may improve her standing among male voters :-)

Anyway, I dont think Palin is a real threat to Obama. There is no need for Obama to (over) react.

Wow. Here it goes:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/5/123217/9370/955/587898

Things are moving too fast.

Sadly, the Daily Kos (as you know) has ZERO credibility since the idiotic "Bristol Palin is Trig's real mother" story sprung from there.

Come on, BW!

People criticize ME, when I link to blogs, or even the NRO, but ALL my sources are far more credible than the D-Kos!

Sadly, the Daily Kos (as you know) has ZERO credibility since the idiotic "Bristol Palin is Trig's real mother" story sprung from there.

If you follow the links posted there, it links to the state of alaska government. What is posted as a fact there appears to be a fact. The interpretation is another matter. Will find out soon I guess.

I'm using the fact that the D-Kos engaged in the most deliberately fallacious smear I've ever seen - the "Bristol is Trig's REAL Mom" story.

The D-Kos is a hate site...and NOT just because socialism itself is an ideology rooted in misanthropic hate (it IS), but because the site was designed and set up to encourage hatred from the mouth-breathing class.

Now, Sarah Palin may have had an affair, BUT, if since Bill Clinton's and John Edwards' affairs to Liberals were "no big deal," they should then leave this story be.

LOOK, bottomline, and I'll explain this slowly because I know you're somewhat limited, the "Character Issue" does NOT impact Conservative and Evangelicals in how they VOTE!

Here's why; " I'm a Conservative. I oppose teen pregnancy and explicit (how to) sex ed and I oppose affairs, and "whore-mongering," etc.

BUT, I'd NEVER vote character over ideology and neither would the vast majority of Conservatives, even those Religious Conservatives you hope will.

Mother Theresa could be running on a Marxist platform against Newt Gingrich (who had an affair while Married, then dumped his wife on her sickbed) and I'd vote for Newt in a heartbeat and without reservation. In fact, I'd, at this moment, vote for Newt Gingrich over ANYONE on the American political scene. He's that good and he has the right ideology (no pun intended).

Maybe it's that secular non-religious people just don't understand those religious and "family values" folks...and how and why even THEY tend to vote for character-flawed Conservatives over apparently squeaky clean Liberals.

I DO know them. I know a fair number of evangelicals and "born agains". In fact a number of firemen I've worked with became "born-agains" (insufferable bastards on social issues - extremely judgmental) BUT, I've caught some of them looking at porn and doing "less than honorable things" and their response is universally - "Im already fogiven."

One guy I know beat his wife pretty severely and still sees himself as a good Christian and of course, one who is "already forgiven."

You mistakenly believe that folks like that judge harshly.

They judge YOU and I harshly.

For themselves and the rest of "the saved"/the believers, they look on themselves as "already forgiven."

JMK,
1.Daily Kos is a cool site. No matter what you think.

2. I dont care if Sarah Palin had an affair. If it is true, good for her and I hope she enjoyed it.

But the moment she wants to force her pseudo-moralism and extreme religious fundamentalism to others, that is fair game in the election. Sarah Palin believes in abstinence before marriage and she argues that women should have no choice. She also believes that there should be no sex education. If she does not live up to her standards, she is obviously very hypocritical and dishonest. Or you disagree with that?

"1.Daily Kos is a cool site. No matter what you think." (BW)


That opinion says a lot about you, not much of it very good.

It's indeed a hate site and you're free to think it's "cool."

Lots of people think Stormfront is a "cool site," and that's their right to do so, as well, but that doesn't make either one any less of a hate site.




"I dont care if Sarah Palin had an affair. If it is true, good for her and I hope she enjoyed it."


Actually, it's not at all germaine to the political process, whether she had an affair or not.

As I said, I consider myself somewhat of a "values voter," BUT I'd readilly vote for Newt Gingrich (despite his pecadillos) over just about ANYONE else on the political scene today.

Religious zealots and Evengelicals would say "He's trying, the fact that he's made a few mis-steps isn't important, it's that he's trying, and so long as he's a believer, he's already forgiven."

Me, I'd say, "I'll ALWAYS vote for the more Conservative candidate because Conservative ideals are right and just and necessary for a decent and orderly society."




But the moment she wants to force her pseudo-moralism and extreme religious fundamentalism to others, that is fair game in the election. Sarah Palin believes in abstinence before marriage and she argues that women should have no choice. She also believes that there should be no sex education." (BW)


Yes, she believe in abstinence before Marriage, as do the vast majority of Americans, even those who engage in pre-Marital sex.

She opposes abortion, which is her right and her expressing and advocating her viewpoint neither threatens nor harms anyone else.

NOTHING the Executive branch of government does can eliminate abortion. Even the outright overturning of Roe would do that.

Sarah Palin BELIEVES IN sex education, but opposes "explicit" ("how to") sex-ed that teaches things like "promiscuity is natural" (it isn't) and "homosexuality is a healthy, alternative lifestyle" (it is NOT, it is a deviant form of sexuality, akin to other sexual deviancies like necrophilia, bestiality, group sex, etc. and homosexuals life expectancy in the U.S. is over 20 years less than that of non-homosexuals)...I tend to agree that sex education should be handled in the home or between kids playing "doctor."

People don't HAVE to "live up to their beliefs," that is NOT a prerequisite for either having or advocating those beliefs.

So, YEAH, apparently I do disagree with that.

TYPO: Even the outright overturning of Roe would NOT do that.

Yes, she believe in abstinence before Marriage, as do the vast majority of Americans,

LOL. Good luck. You sound like a religious fundamentalist yourself.

The fact that I acknowledge that the vast majority of Americans claim to support abstinence before Marriage isn't a religious view at all. It's simply stating an observation.

Like most Americans, Liberal, or Conservative, I agree that "the worst thing that ever happened to women was "free sex" or sexual freedom." It was deviswed to allow profligate men to avoid their natural and necessary responsibilities to that child.

I call those responsibilities, "naturals and necessaries."

In many states, in fact an increasing number, DNA is being used to prove paternity (even when neither parent wants to cooperate) and force profligate men to "pay up."

THAT'S freedom - self-ownership and the full personal responsibility that comes with that.

To guys who'd father kids out of wedlock, all I say is what any decent person would say, "OWN it, and now deal with your naturals and necessaries."

Like most Americans, Liberal, or Conservative, I agree that "the worst thing that ever happened to women was "free sex" or sexual freedom."

After that comment, I think that Barry should consider banning you forever from this site.
Barry, please :-)

BW, I really hope you don't endorse or apporve of careless, reckless, promiscuity.

Seriously.

Even in places like Liberal old New York City, the courts via law enforcement are feverishly hunting down these legions of deadbeat fahters (a/k/a "men who think casual, reckless sex, or 'free love' is cool") down via DNA and garnishing their wages OR putting them in jail.

I've supported that for years and I believe that the the vast majority of Americans do as well...it's called freedom.

FREEDOM = self-ownership and that makes "freedom" ALL ABOUT responsibilities and not too much about rights.

Come on now, repeat after me, "We don't think reckless, casual sex is OK."

Come on, BW, it's not that hard. All it requires is a modicum of respect for women.