I get jacked up when election time comes around and I have been following both candidates closely. Obama gave an awesome speech the other night and the Democratic Convention was one for the ages. I even like Joe Biden...he seems like a tough SOB.
So McCain's picks this chick from Alaska that no one knows. I think it was a bad move...
It shows he is really just trying to steal voters, than really think about the country's best interets.
What a shocker. I hadn't even heard her name come up EVER as a potential running mate. I had heard Meg Whitman of ebay and thought that would be a mistake, but this seems like one, too.
Still trying to figure out why he went that way. She is a polar opposite in every respect to Hillary the only thing they have in common is they both have a vagina and that is about it.
__________________
Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
I just heard her speak for about 1 minute, and I really hate her voice.
Enough to make it really hard for me to listen to anything she has to say.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin, 1759
She is a polar opposite in every respect to Hillary the only thing they have in common is they both have a vagina and that is about it.
Is that some how a bad thing??
__________________
"So many of our dreams at first seem impossible, then they seem improbable, and then, when we summon the will, they soon become inevitable."
- Christopher Reeve
See Marshall Talking Points. The "trooper' firing may catch her in some major public lies. To the point that I woud not be surprised to see this 'nomination' withdrawn before it happens in convention.
Before her meteoric rise to political success as governor, just two short years ago Sarah Palin was the mayor of Wasilla. I had a good chuckle at MSN.com’s claim that she had been the mayor of “Wasilla City”. It is not a city. Just Wasilla. Wasilla is the heart of the Alaska “Bible belt” and Sarah was raised amongst the tribe that believes creationism should be taught in our public schools, homosexuality is a sin, and life begins at conception. She’s a gun-toting, hang ‘em high conservative. Remember…this is where her approval ratings come from. There is no doubt that McCain again is making a strategic choice to appeal to a particular demographic - fundamentalist right-wing gun-owning Christians. And Republican bloggers are already gushing about how she has ‘more executive experience’ than Obama does! Above is a picture of lovely downtown Wasilla, for those of you unfamiliar with the area. Behind the Mug-Shot Saloon (the first bar I visited when I moved to Alaska long ago) is a little strip mall. There are street signs in Wasilla with bullet holes in them. Wasilla has a population of about 5500 people, and 1979 occupied housing units. This is where your potential Vice President was two short years ago. Can you imagine her negotiating a nuclear non-proliferation treaty? Discussing foreign policy? Understanding non-Alaskan issues? Frankly, I don’t even know if she’s ever been out of the country. She may ‘get’ Alaska, but there are only a half a million people here. Don’t get me wrong….I love Alaska with all my heart. I’m just saying.
See Marshall Talking Points. The "trooper' firing may catch her in some major public lies. To the point that I woud not be surprised to see this 'nomination' withdrawn before it happens in convention.
I don't know. Admitting mistakes and reversing decisions based on new events haven't been popular courses of action for the GOP. I don't mean that just as a jab, but based on their well-known dislike for "flip-flopping", "staying the course", and mastery of explaining away all questionable activities.
This one may not be explainable without admitting error.
This one will go down in the history books. McCain will die his second year in office, Palin's mistakes as President will knock the U.S. back terribly, leaving China as the #1 financial and political super-power for the next 50 years. It will be considered the "Dark Age" for the U.S. People will site 9/11 as the catalyst for the downfall, when in reality 9/11 was the catalyst for a series of horrible decisions that lead to the downfall.
This one will go down in the history books. McCain will die his second year in office, Palin's mistakes as President will knock the U.S. back terribly, leaving China as the #1 financial and political super-power for the next 50 years. It will be considered the "Dark Age" for the U.S. People will site 9/11 as the catalyst for the downfall, when in reality 9/11 was the catalyst for a series of horrible decisions that lead to the downfall.
Nah...McCain/Palin won't make it to the gate. Her addition to the ticket confirms the following:
1) McCain is old, and therefore needs to inject youth into his campaign.
2) McCain has bad judgment. How else to explain placing a fundamentalist naif just a heartbeat away from leading the free world?
3) McCain, like GW, will do whatever it takes to win an election, regardless of the consequences to the American people.
To answer the thread title, I sure hope so, especially considering, as others here have mentioned, the regression in scientific study over the past eight years. I'm by no means an Obama supporter, but between the two with a gun held to my head, I'd go D this time.
Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin wants creationism taught in science classes.
In a 2006 gubernatorial debate, the soon-to-be governor of Alaska said of evolution and creation education, "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of education. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both."
(Read about Palin's views on ANWAR and polar bears on our sister blog, Threat Level.)
Asked by the Anchorage Daily News whether she believed in evolution, Palin declined to answer, but said that "I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class."
"I'm not going to pretend I know how all this came to be," she said.
The battle between evolution and creationism -- specifically, Christian creationism -- in U.S. classrooms dates back to the 1925 Scopes trial, when a Tennessee court banned the teaching of evolution. Since then, state and federal courts have repeatedly rejected so-called creation science in public schools, calling it religion rather than science.
The latest courtroom defeat came in the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover case, when the superficially religion-neutral theory of intelligent design was classified as religious creationism. The Supreme Court ruled in 1987 that teaching creationism violated the separation of church and state.
Nevertheless, pro-creationism education initiatives driven by Christian conservatives have flourished, and defenders of evolution -- and, more broadly, scientific integrity -- worry that Palin's pick will give momentum to this church-over-state push.
"It's unfortunate McCain would pick someone who shares those particular anti-science views, but it's not a surprise," said Barbara Forrest, a Southeastern Lousiana University philosophy professor and prominent critic of creationist science. "She's a choice that pleases the religious right. And the religious right has been the chief force against teaching evolution."
In February, Florida's Board of Education narrowly defeated a bill calling for evolution to be balanced by "alternatives." The language is widely regarded as a euphemism for creationism engineered by the pro-intelligent design Discovery Institute, whose "wedge strategy" calls for the gradual dilution of classroom evolution and its eventual replacement by "a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions."
Armed with courtroom-friendly language, Texas is currently considering creationism-friendly revisions to its own curriculum. In June, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal passed the Louisiana Science Education Act, encouraging schools to provide alternative critiques of global warming, human cloning and evolution. Similar initiatives were defeated in South Carolina, Florida, Alabama, Missouri and Michigan.
Palin's statements track with the official Alaska Republican Party platform, which support creation science and intelligent design by name, and says that "evidence disputing the theory should also be presented."
According to Fordham Institute science education expert Lawrence Lerner, Palin's nomination is less worrisome in terms of education than the broad relationship of science and government.
"In the direct sense, vice presidents don't have much to do with what goes on in classrooms. But a person who's a creationist doesn't understand science and technology at all," said Lerner. "It doesn't bode well for science, and doesn't bode well for interaction between science and government."
President Bush has been publicly skeptical of evolution, while Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama has professed support. "I think it's a mistake to try to cloud the teachings of science with theories that frankly don't hold up to scientific inquiry," he said in April.
John McCain's campaign did not respond in time for publication.
When asked about Palin potentially being a step removed from the White House, Forrest responded, "We'd have a creationist as President. But that's not new -- we've already got one."
My favorite line from the above: "a person who's a creationist doesn't understand science and technology at all." Just imagine if a more mainstream outlet picked up on that comment. McCain would be all over the "they [Democrats] think you're stupid" ploy. "They" would be right, in this case, given the population this VP is supposed to attract.
__________________ No Magic Pill (the log)
My Movember page (yes, I'm slacking on pictures)
Let it be known: if you think Creationism is a viable alternative for evolution or anything else that is validated by the scientific method, then you are stupid.
Yeah, I said it.
__________________
Articles | Blog | Pirate my book. "Yeah, but you did your post grad thesis on trolling, so you don't count."
-JP, endorsing how awesome I am
Let it be known: if you think Creationism is a viable alternative for evolution or anything else that is validated by the scientific method, then you are stupid.
Yeah, I said it.
I will second that motion.
__________________
Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
As to her comments that she doesn't know what a VP does, nor has she "focused much on Iraq"... I suspect most people don't, but you'd hope people will recognize that as a problem.
Continuing with what Jazno said this choice does seem to confirm that McCain is a reckless politician in the manner of Bush (think Harriet Miers), and ultimately goes for political points over issues of importance. Every time.
__________________
Working "hard," or the perception of working hard, doesn't really mean anything. Sweating, vomiting, and breathing hard could be a good workout or a tropical disease kicking in.-Dan John
I'm going to be the contrarian. I don't think you're stupid if you believe in biblical creation. You're simply making a choice of a belief system over science in an area that has absolutely nothing to do with your day to day life. As acts of faith go, it's not the same as getting torn apart by lions in the Colosseum.
My reality doesn't change one iota if my next-door neighbor believes in young-earth creationist theory. We can have a perfectly fine coexistence, and talk about sports or the weather or whose dog craps on more lawns. More to the point, my neighbor's existence doesn't change if I don't share his belief system.
So whether I believe in a Big Bang that happened billions of years ago or he believes in the Garden of Eden 6,000 years ago, our realities today are basically the same. We breathe the same air and drive on the same roads.
Granted, if he's right and I'm wrong he gets a ticket to paradise while I'm headed for hell, but that doesn't come into play until I'm dead, and my family still gets my life insurance no matter where I go for all eternity.
It's only an issue if that person's belief system starts to encroach on my life -- if he runs for the school board for the express purpose of imposing his religious views on the rest of us.
That's a problem, but it has nothing to do with intelligence.
Incidentally a person can hold to two views of the world, even a literal biblical view AND a scientific evolutionary view. There is no intellectual or logical reason against seeing two explanations for a phenomena. To some extent most of us, theistic or not, do something of the sort in a variety of situations.
Incidentally a person can hold to two views of the world, even a literal biblical view AND a scientific evolutionary view. There is no intellectual or logical reason against seeing two explanations for a phenomena. To some extent most of us, theistic or not, do something of the sort in a variety of situations.
I'm going to go on record as saying that what you wrote makes absolutely no sense. You either believe the earth is billions of year old, or 6,000. It can't be both.
__________________
Renegade HR: Recruit great people. Inspire them to do amazing things. | http://renegadehr.net
So you are a literalist. Many people see most of what we understand as metaphorical. There was in fact a recent PhD biologist who feels science in science and religion religion. Most of us are not so extreme, but I suspect that there is no one who does not hold at least two paradigms on some aspects of existence - which other people may find makes no sense.
When you start by accounting for all of the unrealities we deal with (human concepts of time, rationality, causation, consciousness) you may also come to the conclusion that what is important is that people use useful and appropriate paradigms.
an example: in a court room you use legal definitions of responsibility, sanity, free will. They often seem to have little to do with the world as I understand it. I have operated in the court room, and abide by those paradigms - just with a little more humility than someone else might.
What is your take on global warming and how is it affecting our country?
A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I'm not one though who would attribute it to being man-made.
Obviously informed by her extensive scientific background - and her husband that works for BP. I suspect we'll be learning all manner of interesting things about her in the near future.
__________________
Working "hard," or the perception of working hard, doesn't really mean anything. Sweating, vomiting, and breathing hard could be a good workout or a tropical disease kicking in.-Dan John
I just can't rationalize someone that looks at two options:
1) Observation and rational description of the universe
2) Some book written 2000 years ago that's obviously meant to be a collection of parables
and then somehow manages to pick the second option as being the more likely way that the world works.
As I said in another thread, if I started to base my beliefs around Thor, people would be calling me a nutjob, not going out of their way to accommodate my personal beliefs.
Since we're not seriously making that point, I hope, it's pretty obvious that the only validity to Option 2 is cultural acceptance of it. People keep taking Option 2 seriously, instead of relegating it to where it belongs.
If we are seriously making that point, then where's the line drawn between belief and civilization? We already are willing to erase that line for education. Do we stop at violence? Murder? Why?
Whether or not an individual that believes in the YEC stuff is intelligent or not doesn't matter to me - because it's clearly impacted his/her decision-making ability. Someone can be an absolute genius, but if he's operating on an ideology that makes him irrational, I still don't trust his judgment.
__________________
Articles | Blog | Pirate my book. "Yeah, but you did your post grad thesis on trolling, so you don't count."
-JP, endorsing how awesome I am
Well, I'm not a social conservative (my views on such matters on on record here), and it's unlikely that Palin and I would share many views on social issues. Add to it that I am of the firm opinion that Creationism/ID belongs in religion classes has no business being discussed in the science classroom. And I disagree with her implication that there's no anthropogenic component to Global Warming. But...
Quote:
Originally Posted by kuri
Obviously informed by her extensive scientific background - and her husband that works for BP.
Ooooooooh, he must be an evil corporate shill! I bet he's paid by BP to tell anyone who'll listen that Global Warming is a hoax, right?
Palin is a union member belonging to the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union (United Steelworkers).[4]For 18 years, he worked for BP Oil in the North Slope oil fields of Alaska. In 2007, in order to avoid a conflict of interest, he took a leave[5] from his job as production supervisor when his employer became involved in natural gas pipeline negotiations with his wife's administration.[2]Palin later returned to BP in a non-management position, arguing the lack of a managerial position signified no conflict with his wife's dealings with the Petroleum industry.[5][ He is also a commercial salmonfisherman at Bristol Bay on the Nushugak River.[2]
Chris, it's not exactly unlike you to stretch and twist information to fit your strongly held beliefs, but this is too much. Seriously, the guy's a fucking work-a-day union member, not a corporate suit (his job description is decidedly blue collar-----that's part of his wife's appeal as a VP candidate, i.e., score the blue collar votes in several swing states)
Quote:
I suspect we'll be learning all manner of interesting things about her in the near future.
Perhaps, but where, oh where, is the righteous indignation in regards to Biden's lobbyist son?
I realise that one could probabaly find a post by some random blogger describing why it isn't important (and maybe that's true), but if this were McCain or Palin's son, I can guarantee that you would be seething with rage. In the case at hand, we get deafening silence. I'm not trying to be rude, but just once in a while you need to remove the ideologic blinders.
Powerman - do you think religion is the only major irrationality in the world? Rhetorical question, I imagine you have noticed it is unfortunately common.
Russ, I'm afraid you are seeing something in my post I did not intend. Truth be told I'm quite wary of Democratic ties to corporate lobbying interests as well, but wasn't aware of the need to raise the issue of Biden's son in the present discussion of Palin's beliefs.
I realize that her husband is no lobbyist, and a conservative Republican from Alaska without some ties to oil companies are rarer than an albino penguin. Nevertheless, her and her family's background and connections are relevant points of discussion no?
After eight years of disasterous environmental and energy policy at the hands of oilmen in the White House it is particularly important in my opinion.
Palin goes even further than McCain and Bush in her willingness to open some of the last pristine wilderness areas to drilling, and Jazno has alluded to deeper connections to indicted Sen. Stevens, so this is a topic ripe for discussion.
But if you'd like I'd be happy to discuss Biden's son in another thread.
__________________
Working "hard," or the perception of working hard, doesn't really mean anything. Sweating, vomiting, and breathing hard could be a good workout or a tropical disease kicking in.-Dan John
Russ, I'm afraid you are seeing something in my post I did not intend. Truth be told I'm quite wary of Democratic ties to corporate lobbying interests as well, but wasn't aware of the need to raise the issue of Biden's son in the present discussion of Palin's beliefs.
I realize that her husband is no lobbyist, and a conservative Republican from Alaska without some ties to oil companies are rarer than an albino penguin. Nevertheless, her and her family's background and connections are relevant points of discussion no?
It's really a stretch to make her husband's job on an oil rig (among other jobs he seems to work at) relevant. I brought up Biden's son's ties as a means of underlining how unimportant Palin's husband's connections likely are. Like I said, he seems to be a work-a-day guy and a union man , no less. Reading something more insidious into it seems to me to be searching for scraps rather than important info. I also brought up Biden's son to point out that if we want to look at potentially important family connections, his connection is likely far more relevant than Todd Palin's.
Quote:
After eight years of disasterous environmental and energy policy at the hands of oilmen in the White House it is particularly important in my opinion.
Palin goes even further than McCain and Bush in her willingness to open some of the last pristine wilderness areas to drilling, and Jazno has alluded to deeper connections to indicted Sen. Stevens, so this is a topic ripe for discussion.
It is, but we'll need details, not insinuations, regarding her husband and whatever improprities may exist due to her relationship with Ted Stevens.
Quote:
But if you'd like I'd be happy to discuss Biden's son in another thread.
That line of discussion could likely be opened in several other current threads, I think, including one in which it has been suggested that the choice of Palin as a VP candidate is purely pandering, whereas that of Biden is out of a commitment to good government. I'm a bit surprised that the topic hasn't been raised yet here, as it has been in the news for a few days.
You'll have to forgive me, but I get a bit frustrated seeing such minor connections, as is the case, IMHO, with Todd Palin, being portrayed as evidence of corruption/alterior motives. Anyone following the current cycle realises that there are potentially concerning connections on both tickets, but there is a tendency for it to get swept under the rug or more quietly discussed in regard to one side, and occasionally exaggerated regarding the other side.
Did McCain just hand Obama the Presidency?
Linear Mode
