Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
As it has been pointed out in other letters, there are many (16% of the populace?) for whom all the things said about Palin in this article could only increase, insofar as it were possible, their desire to vote for her; there's nothing that can be said that would convince them otherwise. They are not the ones that can be reached, but there are many more who can but are now inclined to give Palin the benefit of a doubt.
(Unsurprisingly enough, this is directly analogous to what we must do in the Muslim world: there aren't that many religious fanatics or secularists, but the vast middle range of humanity may be willing to support fanatics, out of frustration, or the vague feeling that they personally are not Godly enough, and so can get points by supporting the more religious.)
That being so, all my (opposing) side's arguments in this really ought to be pitched to the middle---the ones who aren't wackos (to use a rigourously-defined, technical, term), but have learned to be tolerant of their friends and relatives who are wackos but are harmless---which a Vice President or President Palin definitely would not be. They need to be convinced that the President isn't like an extra member of their family or social circle, or the national symbol of what we are---or at least is much more than that: she is a person in control of more power than you can easily imagine, with enormous power for good or evil.
<aside name="pre-emption">
This in fact sounds like old anti-Obama rhetoric, but for me there are a couple of strong differences: exposure, educability, and character. Obama has been on the national stage for a few years, and has done a job of national importance and subject to national scrutiny in that time. Obama seems intensely curious about the world, and doesn't seem like he already knows all he need know. And, finally, Obama's insistence that the suffering of any American should bother all Americans speaks of someone who can call Americans to do more for each other out of simple rachmones.
(McCain, on the other hand, might call on us to help each other out of respect for "unit cohesion", but also might just blame our problems on a lack of State-mandated early-morning group calisthenics in uniform; Palin would be happy to assist the Godly, or even give some thin gruel to the un-Godly if they sit through the sermon---and would back the McCain exercise program, as long as the uniform were sweat-pants, hooded sweat-shirt, and WWJD bracelet....)
</aside>
In any event, I hope the middle will see that this is no-one to trust to behave sanely and decently, regardless of her ideology, and that no-one who would select her for this office should be trusted either.
on 9/11 we were attacked by Islamic fundamentalists and easily survived, only to be concurred by sp called Christian fundamentalists 7 years later. The Christian Taliban which seems to be on his way to taking over the federal government is far more dangerous than the 9/11 fanatics by virtue of having at their disposal tens of thousand of nuclear weapons. Make no mistake about it, our nation is fighting for its survival right now, since there's no way this nation can survive Mcain/Palin.
and Salon gives them a platform. The smell of desperation is overwhelming. You don't have to dig very deep to find someone who will say she's a witch that eats babies.
Palin worships the god of the Old Testament. The god of the New Testament is explicitly anti-war and pro-peace. Maybe her church has done too many sermons based on Old Testament thinking. Here's an idea: how about preaching the Gospels every once in a while? After all, that's the part where Jesus actually explains his teachings. For example, "Love your enemies. Bless those who curse you."
It appears as if there are a handful of posters a little too quick to defend Palin. Contrary to their protests, though, Salon is not the first news source to break this story and Bess is not the only one screaming foul.
The sad, undeniable fact of the matter is that Palin, while mayor of Wasilla, inquired on at least three occasions about banning books from the Wasilla library. Palin's supporters claim they were mere rhetorical, what if, questions. However, after the librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, refused to censor any books, Palin fired her.
Palin has claimed the incidents were not related and that Emmons was fired because she didn't have her "full support." Question for your apologists out there: since when does a mayor need the "full support" of a librarian?
Click on my name for a link to the ABC report on the matter.
After eight years of the "shoot first, ask questions later" diplomacy of George W. Bush, I would think the American people might want someone in office with a bit more finesse. Someone with an understanding of complex issues. In other words, someone who isn't Sarah Palin.
Fundamentalist mindsets, as demonstrated by George W. Bush and Sarah Palin, are a disaster when coupled with political management. Especially on the global scale. This is the mentality of "You're either with us or against us" and "Bring 'em on!" Her answer to the Russia question was Sarah Palin's "Bring 'em on!" moment.
Frightening.
Personal beliefs are one thing. As when someone says, "'Yes, I think I will see Jesus come back to earth in my lifetime.'" It's one thing to believe something, but something else entirely when someone would use their position as Vice President to hasten Armageddon, which could kill billions.
Sarah Palin- just as reckless, stubborn, knee-jerk and hair-trigger as George W. Bush. Maybe even worse.
Guess who was constantly mocking Jesus as he died in agony on the cross? That's right, the Roman soldiers. Funny how they haven't changed much in 2,000 years. Sarcastic, mocking, and hateful, as always. That's why the early Christians debated over whether one can serve in an army and claim to be a Christian at the same time.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
