What does Palin have to hide?

[Bobskunk]

At the risk of being repetitive

At the risk of being repetitive, At the risk of being repetitive, the issue is not whether or not she is hiding, but whether Hollis French has politicized and tainted this process. I would not walk into his kangaroo court willingly either, even if I were totally innocent. His "October Surprise" remark clearly indicates that he has already drawn a conclusion, and is steering the timing to coincide with the election. There is no way that any rational objective person can disagree that he should be removed from the panel.

If you were a devendse attorney interviewing potential jurors, I kind of doubt that you would select a juror who has already made public statements to the press that your client is guilty. How is this different?

If she is guilty, so be it, but let her have a fair hearing.

 

[Jdarg]

You know, I'm taking a Logic class right now, which examines the art of arguing. Your argument commits these fallacies: ad hominen abusive, straw man, missing the point and red herring (both of which are closely related), complex question (do we all watch the View?), and finally, the fallacy of begging the question.

If I were to commit these same fallacies, then my argument against Sarah Palin would go somewhat like this:
She was the mayor of a town with a population smaller than Panama City Beach, with a budget 3/4 the size of the University of Florida's annual STUDENT SENATE budget, and left the town in massive debt (The UF student government typically turns a surplus each year, which means obviously 47 college students who meet once a week can manage a larger budget more effectively then Sarah Palin and team can). As Governor of Alaska for the past two years, she led a state with a population the size of the Memphis area, and with a budget smaller than Manhattan's. She's spoken at a church and alluded to the Iraq War as God's plan, which obviously means she's in the pocket of Big Religion and she's anything but a patriot since the separation of church and state is in the constitution, and she was more than willing to accept lobbyist dollars and was a proponent of the "bridge to nowhere" until it became en vogue to oppose lobbyists and pork.

The above paragraph should enrage everyone-not just because I blatantly exaggerated many claims about Sarah Palin, but because I didn't touch on the issues and let my emotions take control of my argument.

But BeachSteelers, if you can do it, then why can't I?

P.S. I was with you for a while, but once you wrote "corrupt bigoted race card," I just had to respond.

I bet you currently have an "A" in this class.;-)

 

[BeachSteelers]

To retort to your logic.... Obama 20 years member of a church of Rev. Wright's church.Scary! yet she's a zealot? He's never has run a business or introduced any legislation into Congress. He's hiding as much as you all claim Palin is hiding. At least she's Governed something. With an 80 percent approval. Hypocritical to say she's less qualified based on experience because she has more than he. She's not verifiably in the pocket of Mafia members and Fanny Mae crooks like Barack. She's didn't get to office by being a lackey to the Pres. of the llinios Senate. Or a lackey for anyone as far as I know.
And I'm not any rightwing zealot who wants abortion illegal. I'm a realist pure and simple and call it as the truth fits it. Yeah she inhaled too, But she's never said snorting up some blow when you had the money was OK like Barack has admitted too.
Yes were in a religious and philosophical War. No one likes it and We didn't start it but listen folks these crazies will never stop. They believe some kind of God is on their side. We ought to too! This from someone that isn't church going at all.
Sorry but he's a devil as much as the left makes her out to be.
Sour Grapes no Hillary truth be told, that I believe.
And yes they did pressure him to fire that cop why because i think they knew what kind of jerkoff he actually is but that shouldn't matter to the left now should it. Let's keep more unqualified people in a position of public trust.... Hence your reason they love Obama soooo muuuchh.
Your Serve now I can volley forever I took Logic classes too .

 

[MattChrist Live]

I don't know how to respond to this...

Did you read my post? All of it? The point I was trying to make was that you're arguing about the wrong things, and not doing a very good job at it. My post concerning Palin's church affiliation and pork loving policies weren't meant to be taken serious, but serve as an example of a poor argument, i.e., one which doesn't focus on the issues.

To JDarg...I'm pulling a strong A in the class.

 

[Teresa]

*sigh* can we all just agree what this is really about? Last year at this time everyone figured that the Democrat's nominee would be more preoccupied with picking out new china for the White House than actually fighting to get there. Fast forward to today and here is this woman nobody has ever heard of picked as the GOP VP who effectively brings hard core righties into McCain's tent. Her non-nuanced positions are the stuff of leftist nightmares, yet they realize she is making McC competitive, ergo, search and destroy.

This is not unprecedented-Geraldine Ferraro added a jolt to Fritz Mondale's campaign. Their bid fizzled concurrent with persistent GOP questioning about her congressional campaign finance practices.

If the polls were not tight right now, as they never were intended to be, I think that what happened in Alaska would stay in Alaska. But the stakes are too high here-if the Democrats manage to bungle this presidential election they might as well cease to participate in the exercise in four years. Palin must be destroyed in the name of change we can believe in!

sigh. all of the above may be totally on target, my little skunkape. however. it is much more. especially to women who look forward to having a highly qualified woman in office someday. palin is not that woman. anyone who is so extreme in views and unprofessional in actions is not going to be qualified to lead in any way, nor would such a person be a good for the country.

McCain picked a woman as part of his strategy to win the white house. Did he really think that women would be so ecstatic as to overlook the kind of woman he chose? think again.

but you are right. the stakes are too high for democrats. but, do not fool yourself - that has nothing to do with why I pesonally do not nor could ever support having such a person in office.

 

[hnooe]

that's right...She is "no Dick" Cheney!

 

[Teresa]

I don't know how to respond to this...

Did you read my post? All of it? The point I was trying to make was that you're arguing about the wrong things, and not doing a very good job at it. My post concerning Palin's church affiliation and pork loving policies weren't meant to be taken serious, but serve as an example of a poor argument, i.e., one which doesn't focus on the issues.

To JDarg...I'm pulling a strong A in the class.

he did not get your point at all. oh well! some of us appreciated it and learned something from it as well. thank you.

 

[30A Skunkape]

sigh. all of the above may be totally on target, my little skunkape. however. it is much more. especially to women who look forward to having a highly qualified woman in office someday. palin is not that woman. anyone who is so extreme in views and unprofessional in actions is not going to be qualified to lead in any way, nor would such a person be a good for the country.

McCain picked a woman as part of his strategy to win the white house. Did he really think that women would be so ecstatic as to overlook the kind of woman he chose? think again.

but you are right. the stakes are too high for democrats. but, do not fool yourself - that has nothing to do with why I pesonally do not nor could ever support having such a person in office.

Isn't winning the point of the exercise? I don't think women will by default vote for a candidate based on their gonads...I think to some degree he (or his handlers) hoped to get some of the jaded Hillary voters, but she was brought on board to get the hardcore rightwingers on board, who as best as I can recall, were tepid at best in their support until she arrived on the scene.

Of course she is inappropriate. McCain is still a goof in my mind because he was sooo wrong on immigration reform. Obama is marginally more palatable than McCain/Palin to me but I worry to death over people who want to change things just to be changing things (never a cheap prospect).

 

[wrobert]

Of course she is inappropriate. McCain is still a goof in my mind because he was sooo wrong on immigration reform. Obama is marginally more palatable than McCain/Palin to me but I worry to death over people who want to change things just to be changing things (never a cheap prospect).

Obama/Palin would be a hoot to watch govern. Maybe when Will Wright gets through with Spores he can work us up a geopolitical simulation where we can try different combinations and see what happens.

 

[Teresa]

Isn't winning the point of the exercise? I don't think women will by default vote for a candidate based on their gonads...I think to some degree he (or his handlers) hoped to get some of the jaded Hillary voters, but she was brought on board to get the hardcore rightwingers on board, who as best as I can recall, were tepid at best in their support until she arrived on the scene.

Of course she is inappropriate. McCain is still a goof in my mind because he was sooo wrong on immigration reform. Obama is marginally more palatable than McCain/Palin to me but I worry to death over people who want to change things just to be changing things (never a cheap prospect).

agree with you in all this except that I feel Obama is more than marginally palatable than McCain - in all respects. Obama is going to bring us into this century, if we let him. it is time.