August 29, 2008

Are you having trouble understanding Sarah Palin's hairdo?

I hear some of the lefty bloggers are having trouble with it, even daring to mock it. Let me help you we a couple reference photos:



Get it?

When's the last time we had a VP with bangs?

And some cheeky people are typing: VPILF. Oh, no! That's so wrong! But, that said, I don't think it would be so unusual to have a VPILF. Why I dream of Dick Cheney every night! j/k.

ADDED: Sorry, I said "a couple" and then had some internet troubles. Here's another:



AND: Here's Palin:



AND: Where I see Audrey Hepburn, Neo Neocon sees a different movie star.

324 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 324 of 324
mcg said...

Why do you say it is a fact? Could you please provide a link to a news source or the court records showing his conviction?

If you're going to act as if it's a proven fact she acted inappropriately, AL, it's entirely reasonable for Peter to cite as fact the alleged circumstances.

Gavin said...

Superb. If McCain snuffs it then it definitely will be a 3rd consecutive term of Bush in the White House.

If you know what I mean...

John said...

"And, again, you guys don't seem to grasp that using public office this way (for personal gain or benefit) is not ethical."

I guess that is why you were so angry when Hillary fired the travel office and Bill ran Paula Jones out of government when she refused to give him a blowjob. Or what about when he sent Sid Blumenthal out to portray Monica Lewinski as a stalker when he knew that she was telling the truth? Or how about a real oldy but goodey when LBJ wiretapped MLK hoping to blackmail him?

I am sorry but a Democrat whining about the abuse of power for personal purposes doesn't even pass the laugh test.

mcg said...

Heh. Not to add fuel to the UWS Guy fire, but since this is after post 200, what the hell:

Dobson: "I Would Pull That Lever" for McCain-Palin

I'll bet you would, James. :)

Alan said...

Regarding Palin's support for teaching creationism. I'd be all for it if it's taught as "why Intelligent Design isn't a scientific theory." But that's not what she proposes. She proposes to put it on equal footing with actual scientific theory. Which does nothing more than tacitly tell the kids what they learned about scientific theory doesn't really matter.

Roger J. said...

I appreciate Alpha's sentiment about using one's office for personal gain or benefit. Rather than argue about what might have happened, why don't we wait and see what the investigation discloses? and it sounds to me IF the basic story line is that palin used her office to defend her abused sister, net positive for Palin.

neil k. said...

(As a side note, he's less qualified to be President than any living natural-born American citizen over 35, except for Bill Clinton.)

Come again? And again.


According to the Constitution, American-born citizens over 35 are qualified for the Presidency, unless they've already served two terms. Bush and Clinton are the only people alive who fit the first qualification but are excluded by the second. (Ok, I see that you also have to have been a resident of the U.S. for fourteen years, so there are some other citizens who don't make the cut. Sue me.)

Pastor_Jeff said...

Just in terms of getting elected to the office, Obama received over thirty times as many votes in his Senate election as Palin received in her gubernatorial election.

Against Alan Keyes! I could have gotten 70% against Keyes. Obama would probably still be in Springfield if Ryan hadn't imploded.

AlphaLiberal said...

"Let's not overlook the fact that Palin represents the Terry Schiavo wing of the GOP. "

Yes, McCain is going to extremes in desperation. Usually at this point in an election the nominee reaches for someone to bring in independents and people from the other party.

But McCain can't pander enough to the (un)religious right so he has to worry about making them happy. I suspect McCain's been turned down by better candidates who saw the writing on the wall.

Biden will make mincemeat out of her in the debates.

vbspurs said...

Another record for Althouse? 3 threads over 200 in the same day, in just 5 hours?

mcg said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Revenant said...

But I agree, if Obama's plan was to get uninterrupted news coverage of his speech from the close of the convention until election day, it's gone badly awry.

Your sarcasm has convinced me. I'm sure Obama planned for people to listen to his big speech to a huge crowd and then have them spend the next day talking about something completely different. That's how you know a speech really hit home with people -- when they don't even feel the need to talk about it afterwards.

VariableSpin said...

Wow - that Newsweek video is very impressive. Thanks mcg!

Highly recommend it for anyone interested in more than just hair.

Here's the link again.

Lawgiver said...

I would think when someone says they cancel a project, most casual listeners assume that the money is returned to the treasury.

By causal listeners do you men people who don't read the entire article?

vbspurs said...

Neil, gotcha.

Alan wrote:

She proposes to put it on equal footing with actual scientific theory.

She proposes nothing of the sort. It was a debate question parried succesfully by a political candidate.

When she became Governor, the matter was dropped.

John said...

"That's how you know a speech really hit home with people -- when they don't even feel the need to talk about it afterwards."

WTF? Is that some kind of ironic comedy or am I missing something? You can't be serious.

mcg said...

Biden will make mincemeat out of her in the debates.

It is fair to say that is a significant risk. But it is also a known risk and thus one the McCain camp can do a considerable amount of work to mitigate before it happens.

There's also a chance of course that Biden will shoot off at the mouth or do something stupid, and we'll witness another Rick Lazio incident. And we all know that's possible, given Biden.

neil k. said...

NeilJ has demonstrated conclusively that Illinois' population is larger than Alaska's! tell you what NeilJ: the way you compare disparate populations is to use rates. That's normally how you compare two different sized things.

Whoa, what are the goalposts doing all the way over there?

I'm just saying that since Illinois is a much larger state than Alaska, winning statewide office in Illinois is a greater achievement than winning statewide office in Alaska. Similar to how being elected President of the United States is a greater achievement than being elected President of France.

Peter V. Bella said...

AlphaLiberal said...
Peter Bella:
"Fact, the trooper involved beat up his wife."

Why do you say it is a fact? Could you please provide a link to a news source or the court records showing his conviction?




Did you actually read any of the media sources on this or do you only read what is in line with your views? This is like old news. Do not forget the trooper also used a taser on his eleven year old son. That was in TPM- Toilet Paper Mysteries. For that he should have been charged with child abuse or endangerment.

Also, as the chief law enforcement officer, the governor is responsible for the State Police. Now had she done nothing you would b accusing her of some nefarious cover up to protect the family name. You people are disgusting.

mcg said...

By causal listeners do you men people who don't read the entire article?

To add to this argument, anyone who follows the earmark debate knows the bogus defense: "The money is allocated, earmarks just tell the administration where they have to spend it."

Paddy O. said...

I think her pick signals that McCain is going to abandon the experience argument.

How does picking Sarah Palin negate McCain's experience.

Each ticket has a person with not nearly enough experience to be expected out of a president.

Republicans just put that person in the second spot.

And really, who in this world actually has the experience to be president? History shows that an extensive resume isn't enough. Sure there is a Jefferson monument in Washington, but there's also a Lincoln monument.

It's about decision making and character.

Palin has a lot to prove but she also sure is the one candidate that represents what people always say they want: someone who has lived real life and experienced real work, getting into politics later.

Of course, the test of how good a choice comes in the next months on the campaigns and debates. But am I the only one who strongly suspects she is going to wipe the floor with Biden?

mcg said...

I'm just saying that since Illinois is a much larger state than Alaska, winning statewide office in Illinois is a greater achievement than winning statewide office in Alaska. Similar to how being elected President of the United States is a greater achievement than being elected President of France.

I see your point but I'm not fully convinced. I mean, some things scale, some things don't. You have to convince more people to vote for you, and you need to spend more money to do it. But you still have to sway the same percentage of voters, and you have a larger donor pool to work with.

vbspurs said...

Variablespin and mcg, wow thanks!

Everyone should check out the Newsweek video. She talks about her discomfort in being introduced as a Beauty Queen recently.

"Could you say commercial fisherman instead?"

Awesome, thanks guys!

John said...

"There's also a chance of course that Biden will shoot off at the mouth or do something stupid, and we'll witness another Rick Lazio incident. And we all know that's possible, given Biden."

She will kill him with charm. Biden will win on points but come accross as a jerk and she will come accross as geniune and charming. Biden will leave the debate mumbling "how did I lose to her".

Revenant said...

Usually at this point in an election the nominee reaches for someone to bring in independents and people from the other party.

McCain's problem has always been bringing in the people from his own party. That's why he needed a conservative vice presidential pick.

I suspect McCain's been turned down by better candidates who saw the writing on the wall.

The VP slot is a prize for anyone with Presidential ambitions even if the top half of the ticket is doomed. It gives you a good foot in the door for the following Presidential race.

Biden will make mincemeat out of her in the debates.

I hope Biden sees things your way. The spectacle of watching an old man attack the mother of a Down's Syndrome child for being too pro-life would achieve the seemingly impossible goal of surpassing all of Biden's previous political gaffes.

neil k. said...

I'm sure Obama planned for people to listen to his big speech to a huge crowd and then have them spend the next day talking about something completely different.

Well, the Palin announcement didn't do anything to push Obama's speech off the front page of today's newspaper. And as for your own sarcasm, if simply by announcing his VP McCain could completely wipe Obama's speech from the minds of the voters, Obama wouldn't have even bothered to give a speech. (Nobody would've remembered that he didn't give it, anyway...)

AlphaLiberal said...

"I guess that is why you were so angry when Hillary fired the travel office and Bill ran Paula Jones out of government when she refused to give him a blowjob."

Oh, yeah. Let's rehash that!

"Er, hullooo, McFly?" When you take over the White House, you don't have to keep the staff from the previous Administration.

And, Paula Jones? I withheld judgment at the time until she started getting in league with right wing hatchet men at the Rutherford Institute and she tried to become a gadfly, which ended tragically.

While I was critical of Clinton for his loose zipper at the time, there was not evidence, as the court found, of abuse of office.

And it sure didn't warrant impeachment! Bush and Cheney lied to the Congress, the UN and the American people to start a war. That warrants impeachment!

Revenant said...

Did you actually read any of the media sources on this or do you only read what is in line with your views? This is like old news. Do not forget the trooper also used a taser on his eleven year old son.

Interesting. If true, it could explain why the McCain campaign wasn't worried about the scandal potential of the Palin investigation.

If the trooper really was a spouse and child abuser -- if there was even credible *evidence* that he was a spouse and child abuser -- then a lot of voters would view and attempt by Palin to get him fired as a good and understandable thing even if it was illegal. This would be especially true with female voters, I suspect; attacking a woman because she tried to fired a wife-beating thug is not a terribly smart tactic.

That's if the allegations against Palin are actually true, of course.

neil k. said...

How does picking Sarah Palin negate McCain's experience.

It doesn't. It negates Obama's inexperience. If Obama's not ready to be President then Palin certainly isn't.

Catherine said...

Randy - though the state didn't get the bridge, it still got the money.

And... A year ago, presidential candidate Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, said pet projects could have played a role in a Minnesota bridge collapse that killed 13 people earlier this year.

"Maybe if we had done it right, maybe some of that money would have gone to inspect those bridges and other bridges around the country," McCain told a group of people in a town-hall style meeting in Ankeny, Iowa.
--CNN

Looks like Sara's got a little problem...hmmm

Roger J. said...

Neil: no goal posts moved. you honestly dont understand why your post is rather silly in terms of your use of numbers? I don't guess you do, esp when you trotted out the US-France presidential elections as some sort of comparative thing.

Eli Blake said...

Hey, righties enjoy it while you can.

Sarah Palin = Dan Quayle. And the media feeding frenzy is just queuing up over the upcoming scandal:

link here.

mcg said...

catherine: I doubt it. I'll bet McCain is overall happy with Sara Palin's actions on the bridge issue, and both have beefs with how Stevens and Young handled it. I think this one will be water under the bridge real fast. (snicker)

Randy said...

While Illinois Senator Brack Obama didn't have time to visit wounded soldiers while in Germany, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin did.

mcg said...

eli, you're awfully late to the party. That scandal is not gonna be a winner for the Dems for two reasons. For one thing, I think the independent investigations will reveal what they already have up to this point, and that is that Ms. Palin isn't involved. And two, I think people won't have any sympathy for Wooten.

mcg said...

Just saw "Maverick and Barracuda" for the first time. Beats "Smug & Plug" any day of the week.

Revenant said...

Bush and Cheney lied to the Congress, the UN and the American people to start a war. That warrants impeachment!

Lying in Congressional testimony can be illegal. Lying to the UN isn't; neither is lying to the American people, which is why Obama wasn't frog-marched off the stage in handcuffs following his "Middle East oil" line last night.

But the question of whether Bush's behavior merits impeachment is moot. There is zero chance of the Democratic Party growing balls in the next four months and actually trying to impeach the man.

Randy said...

Randy - though the state didn't get the bridge, it still got the money.

Yes Catherine, somewhere upthread I mentioned that Palin made no secret of using the money elsewhere.

Fen said...

UWS guy: She's the GWB of female VPs.

No. She's closer to Reagan than Bush.

we don't need more niggers/rednecks/spics running our foreign policy.

How enlightened.

mcg said...

HEY ANN, WHERE'S THAT NEW THREAD? :-)

John said...

"if Obama's plan was to get uninterrupted news coverage of his speech from the close of the convention until election day, it's gone badly awry."


I think he probably hoped for a little more than two hours before everyone went to bed. Further, according to his sycopants in the media, wasn't it supposed to be the greatest convention speech ever given? A speech that ranks with the I Have a Dream Speech? I know we have a short attention span and all but you would think that the chosen one on his biggest stage could dominate the news cycle for more than two hours.

Revenant said...

It doesn't. It negates Obama's inexperience. If Obama's not ready to be President then Palin certainly isn't.

Fortunately, only one of the two is actually running for President.

But by all means, encourage Obama to use the "neither Palin nor I are qualified for the job only I am running for" attack. Sounds like a winner.

Randy said...

But by all means, encourage Obama to use the "neither Palin nor I are qualified for the job only I am running for" attack. Sounds like a winner.

LOL!!! Guaranteed to be.

AlphaLiberal said...

Regarding the brother-in-law, I found this report from the Anchorage paper, you know, a newspaper. This in addition to the TV news report I previously posted.

They do not report even an allegation of domestic abuse. Though he's full of bluster and bad judgment, apparently. Not a sympathetic character, which must have convinced McCain he can sweep the abuse of power under the rug.

So at this point the accusation that Wooten is a domestic abuser appears to be another right-wing lie. I've asked those (peter bella)throwing out the charge to back it up and you can't.

Paddy O. said...

Obama's not ready to be President then Palin certainly isn't.

So, let's vote for the ticket in which neither one of them will be President.

McCain wins!

former law student said...

Because this post was about Sarah Palin's appearance, I'd like to weigh in:

Although each of these women are attractive, they are all attractive in a different way. Sarah Palin is a cutie pie. Michelle Obama is striking. Cindy McCain is an ice queen.

During the VP debates, Biden will have to walk on eggshells, because no one will want to see him beat up on a cutie pie.

Paddy O. said...

Dobson: "I Would Pull That Lever" for McCain-Palin

So utterly predictable. I said Dobson would start showing enthusiastic support for McCain back on the Saddleback Forum thread. Dobson lost his role as an Evangelical leader this past year and his authority as a power broker was broken.

He made a big leap saying he would absolutely not support McCain... and no one listened. McCain still won the nomination. Then, Rick Warren comes out, has a real honest to goodness national forum with both candidates in which McCain shines.

Dobson sees mene, tekel, peres on his office wall. The Palin announcement gave him a great opportunity to save what little influence he has left, but it's still too late. No one cares. Dobson is a follower now. Evangelicalism has new voices.

mcg said...

Do you even read your own articles, AL?

Troopers eventually investigated 13 issues and found four in which Wooten violated policy or broke the law or both:

• Wooten used a Taser on his stepson.

• He illegally shot a moose.

• He drank beer in his patrol car on one occasion.

• He told others his father-in-law would "eat a f'ing lead bullet" if he helped his daughter get an attorney for the divorce.

Beyond the investigation sparked by the family, trooper commanders saw cause to discipline or give written instructions to correct Wooten seven times since he joined the force, according to Grimes' letter to Wooten.

Peg C. said...

Hairdo is adorable. This woman can't take a bad picture and is incredibly charismatic -- in a good way. (Edwards and Obama being charismatic in a yucky and offputting way.) She's smart and has a good background, she isn't shrill and she doesn't pander. Find a woman in the Dem party to match those. (In fact, find 1 man.)

All the conservatives I know are jazzed and the lefty women are excited, too.

mcg said...

Here's the allegation of domestic abuse you say is not reported:

The troopers' investigation into Wooten began after Chuck Heath -- Wooten's father-in-law and Palin and McCann's dad -- alerted troopers about a domestic violence protective order McCann had obtained against Wooten on April 11, 2005. McCann filed for divorce the same day, according to the court docket.

Is that, or is that not, an allegation of domestic violence?

You really are amazing, AL.

MadisonMan said...

randy, The DoD asked Obama not to visit the wounded -- it would politicize the military. So if candidate Palin now visits wounded soldiers in Germany, and the McCain's campaign makes hay of it, color me ill.

I know, I know, I said I'd be gone, but I had to pop back in and again wish Beth a safe safe weekend. N.O. looks like it might just miss a head-on collision with Gustav, but there's still gonna be some very serious flooding in LA -- just after Bush talks in St. Paul Monday. Gov. Jindal will be in LA as a hurricane approaches (Good thing he's not the VP candidate!!), I guess, rather than with his party in MN.

Peter V. Bella said...

AlphaLiberal said...
Biden will make mincemeat out of her in the debates.


That song is getting old. Palin is bright, intelligent, and strong. I think she can hold her own against Biden. He better renew his membership at hair Club for Men. Get himself a younger, hipper look.

John said...

"Wooten is 35, a state trooper since March 2001 and an Air Force veteran. He's a father of young children who has been married and divorced four times.

The accusations are detailed in two thick binders, the result of a nearly yearlong investigation by troopers. When the investigation appeared to stall, Palin -- more than a year before she was elected governor, and about two months before launching her campaign -- pushed trooper commanders to take action against Wooten. At one point, Palin and her husband, Todd, hired a private investigator.

Wooten recently gave his union permission to release the entire investigative file, all 482 pages and hours of recorded interviews.

"The record clearly indicates a serious and concentrated pattern of unacceptable and at times, illegal activity occurring over a lengthy period, which establishes a course of conduct totally at odds with the ethics of our profession," Col. Julia Grimes, then head of Alaska State Troopers, wrote in March 1, 2006, letter suspending Wooten for 10 days. After the union protested it, the suspension was reduced to five days."

From the article Alphaliberal linked. Basically the guy was a terrible cop being protected by the Union. I would think that liberals would want exectutives to go after abusive and incompetant cops.

OldGrouchy said...

Palin certainly knows what the VP job entails:
1. That job thingy as described in
that very old piece of parchment paper.
2. Whatever else the President whats the VP to do, or, in lieu of that direction, classify old useless buckets of stuff from time to time.
3. Sit around and wait til the Guy upstairs replaces the front office wonk.

BTW: That link to vpilf.com is fascinating and the link name is apt.

Revenant said...

Regarding the brother-in-law, I found this report from the Anchorage paper, you know, a newspaper. [...] They do not report even an allegation of domestic abuse. [...]
So at this point the accusation that Wooten is a domestic abuser appears to be another right-wing lie.


Thanks for your hard-hitting research technique of reading exactly one news article and then assuming and anything not mentioned in it never happened, Alpha.

Meanwhile, back here in reality, an official state trooper investigation found that Wooten:

- Used a taser on his stepson
- Drank beer in his patrol car
- Shot a moose without a license
- Told people that his father-in-law would be killed if he helped Wooten's wife get a divorce lawyer.

All of this is mentioned in yet another article from yet another newspaper.

So far, the closest thing there is to a smoking gun is an aide saying that Palin wondered why Wooten still had a job. I'm wondering that myself. :)

Fen said...

The talking points being cranked out by team Obama are simply ridiculous and by this rate they will have used them all up by 9 AM tomorrow.

They are just throwing trial balloons at the wall and hoping one sticks. Its a psychological need. Saw them do the same thing after they discovered Clinton had been lying to them about fiddling with the intern. Give them a few hours, they'll settle on a meme and begin spinning myth into conventional "wisdom".

Its fun to watch, isn't it.

Paddy O. said...

I'm a little unconvinced by the "Vice president needs to be ready from day one to step up" argument. Is anyone else?

Seems like the VP is a lot more like an executive officer of a ship. Yes, if the captain dies then that person has to step up with authority. However, the role itself is really the ideal training place. It's a step, a way in which someone who doesn't have the necessary experience can get hands on training.

Has Palin shown herself able to quickly learn and quickly make hard decisions. Yes. She has. So, she has enough experience to be a Vice President.

For that matter, so does Obama. He would have made a great, great vice president, gaining experience as the second in charge for the next step.

Only this election has Palin in the right role, and Obama not so much.

Peter V. Bella said...

And it sure didn't warrant impeachment! Bush and Cheney lied to the Congress, the UN and the American people to start a war. That warrants impeachment!


Can you prove it? Where are your links? Demonstrate how whatever they did warrants impeachment. Cite the specific high crimes and misdemeanors. This I want to see.

If in fact they did lie, as you keep stating with no credible proof, it is not impeachable- read n-o-t i-m-p-e-a-c-h-a-b-l-e. Now had they lied under oath, like Clinton did, that would be impeachable.

Anonymous said...

Sarah Palin played the flute!!

That was part of the now-famous "beauty contest," where the contestants had to demonstrate a talent.

I wonder if there are any videos of her playing the flute? Nothing on a cursory Google search. Does she still play? Did she play a Japanese flute (boo hiss), or a high-quality Boston instrument, or one of the good, solid student flutes made in Elkhart, IN?

Enquiring flutemakers want to know.

mcg said...

Hillary's statement:

TWe should all be proud of Governor Sarah Palin’s historic nomination, and I congratulate her and Senator McCain. While their policies would take America in the wrong direction, Governor Palin will add an important new voice to the debate.

h/t contentions, which adds this proposed final sentence:

And if the Just Words guy had put me on the ticket, this never would have happened.

Methadras said...

And so the leftist pond-scum come out to play. Leftists are the dumbest people on earth and as evidenced by the lefty simpletons that slither through this blog.

Pastor_Jeff said...

Over 1,000 Palin comments across four threads. Amazing!

former law student said...

The VP slot ... gives you a good foot in the door for the following Presidential race.

Yeah, sort of:

1960: Nixon lost
1968: Humphrey lost
1988: GHW Bush won
2000: Gore lost

You're better off if the President dies or resigns.

downtownlad said...

Barack Obama said the word "gay" yesterday in a speech, which is already an infinite as many times as George Bush has used the word in a speech. That's right - Bush has NEVER said the word "gay" in a speech. Because he thinks gay people don't exist. He just thinks they are sick heterosexuals waiting to be cured (like Dr. Helen).

Fen said...

Has Palin shown herself able to quickly learn and quickly make hard decisions. Yes. She has. So, she has enough experience to be a Vice President.

For that matter, so does Obama. He would have made a great, great vice president, gaining experience as the second in charge for the next step.


Agreed. He would have been better as a VP choice, not a frontrunner.

I think that's the focus Palin's nom brings. And the reason why the Left is hysterical about it and flailing here so wildly.

*passes popcorn*

UWS guy said...

The Republican Party of Alaska platform says, in its section on education: "We support giving Creation Science equal representation with other theories of the origin of life. If evolution is taught, it should be presented as only a theory."

chuck b. said...

"He'd even lose a chunk of the black vote, since blacks are on average even more anti-gay-marriage than other Americans."

That assumes a future opponent bringing things to the table that Obama does not--things they value more than they oppose gay marriage. What would those things be, and who would bring them, I wonder.

mcg said...

That's right - Bush has NEVER said the word "gay" in a speech. Because he thinks gay people don't exist.

That's interesting, because I've never been fully convinced you exist.

UWS guy said...

she "doesn't have an opinion on the Iraq war..."

deep thinker that one...

Fen said...

Biden will make mincemeat out of her in the debates.

Like Gore did to Bush? uh okay...

Methadras said...

downtownlad said...

Barack Obama said the word "gay" yesterday in a speech,


And you are already on your knees waiting to unzip Mr. Barely's pants to thank him for the slightest mention that he validates your pathetic existence. Did you have to push that narcissistic bitch Ms. Sullivan out of the way to get at the fruits of your savior yet?

which is already an infinite as many times as George Bush has used the word in a speech. That's right - Bush has NEVER said the word "gay" in a speech. Because he thinks gay people don't exist. He just thinks they are sick heterosexuals waiting to be cured (like Dr. Helen)

Don't you understand that you are shameful to the homosexual community? Don't you get it yet that your malignant narcissism is always geared towards having people lavish the attention on you? That is the brunt of your pathetic existence has a homosexual at this point. Do you wake up from a dream yelling, "me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me" all the time, because honestly that has been the major gist of your time here on Althouse. It's always about you, and it's always never good.

You do understand that you are a pathetic fool, right? Your homocentric ideology has gone nowhere and has gotten you anything of value. Drop the pretense once and for all and join the rest of the world in a rational discussion about the issues, not your hypersensitive bleatings of about how you are constantly offended at people who don't like you because you are a homosexual. I just don't like you because you are fucking nut who just happens to be a homosexual. It's not my fault you've chosen the path of insanity now is it?

Cedarford said...

The average mother, regardless of her views on abortion, is well aware just how courageous Palin's decision to keep that child and not abort it was. At the same time, about 80% in the same position do not make the same choice. With that in mind, very few can fail to admire her for what she chose to do given the lifelong responsibility that comes with it. Were I a partisan Democrat, I'd stay as far away from this subject as possible.

The issue women may have with Palin is her wish that the law on abortion be such that every woman is forced to make Palin's choice - with no abortions allowed for serious fetal defects.
Palin is also against allowing abortion for cases of rape and incest.
Someone also added in comments she was a Terri Schiavo "Right to Life" fan - though I can't find any confirmation she supported the Republican's Schiavo Fiasco.

=============
Superb. If McCain snuffs it then it definitely will be a 3rd consecutive term of Bush in the White House.
If you know what I mean...


Not if it is shaved Alaskan beaver..

If you know what I mean.

========================
RogerJ - And it sounds to me IF the basic story line is that palin used her office to defend her abused sister, net positive for Palin.

Troubled marriages sometimes have both parties sometimes phyically hitting one another, throwing and hitting the spouse with objects. (refer to Hillary, the books and lamp she threw and hit Bubba with..)
It doesn't mean the woman is automatically the abused party.

Even if she was, you have the Senior Executive of the state attempting to act outside the courts or an internal investigation by the state employer, to fire a state employee, if the charges are true.

Then firing the top State public safety official who said he wouldn't fire her sister's husband without an investigation or court decree.

That doesn't sound like a positive, if the charge Palin's staff tried to fire the cop, then did fire the top official for refusing to do what was outside the law and employee policies as Palin wanted for her sister benefit - is true. Then it is pure and simple abuse of power for nepotic ends.

Maybe voters would be more forgiving if Palin sought to bypass laws to help some beat-up everywoman she wasn't related to by getting her husband fired so he wouldn't get joint custody - but not a special deal of flouting law for special favors for her family's sake.

And McCain goes down over a cheapshit stunt by a not-well-vetted VP, as he will well deserve to if the investigation pins Palin with the blame.
================
Paddy O - History shows that an extensive resume isn't enough. Sure there is a Jefferson monument in Washington, but there's also a Lincoln monument.

Anyone who argues that Lincoln was not a seasoned executive never read a Lincoln biography or did, but is an Obamabot claiming that Obama did more things showing his leadership than Lincoln did.

Lincoln guided railroad interests west of the Alleghenies and dealt with state legislatures on the million-dollar high tech of it's day shipping infrastucture that integrated rail, canal, river and land transportation networks. Lincoln was a big part of that - a modern system that in large part is still in use today.
He was also a 25-year militia member. A leader of a new party.
And he argued 100 more cases in Illinois Supreme Court and 2880 more in trial court than Obama (Zero) did.
=================
Meanwhile, Hillary and Romney can only marvel at the clusterfuck identity politics has created. She is out because she won every ethnic and racial group except for blacks that voted 9-1 against her on racial lines. Romney, one of the few truly brilliant executive leaders who has run for President in the last century is out because he once was pro-choice, was too sucessful and would embarass McCain with too many houses, and was from a religious minority Fundies hate. And unavailable to buttress the ticket against charges that Republicans running have no experience or clue on the terrible economic issues now beginning to hit America hard...

At best, in her secret heart, Hillary is hoping Obama loses so she has a shot in 2012.
At his worse, in his secret heart, Mitt Romney likely also hopes that Mccain-Palin goes down....because voters did not select the person best qualified to start fixing issues McCain, Biden and others kicked down the road for 30 years.

Methadras said...

UWS guy said...

The Republican Party of Alaska platform says, in its section on education: "We support giving Creation Science equal representation with other theories of the origin of life. If evolution is taught, it should be presented as only a theory."


Because that's what it is. It isn't called the fact of evolution nor is it called the Law of Evolution. It's called the Theory of Evolution because there has been no observable data as to it's actual mechanism or workings. We know that carbon-based life has evolved, we just don't know under what conditions nor what the actual workings or precursors of those evolutions are. Hence, Theory of Evolution. Can you please stop now.

UWS guy said...

Wow...I agree with most everything cederford said...

UWS guy said...

"theory" doesn't mean what you think it means.

learn science nomencalture before making a fool of yourself methandass.

UWS guy said...

If Sara and her husband end up as POTUS and first husband...

then the movie "idiocracy" just came true. What does she have? A bachelors degree in journalism from some teacher's college?

LOL they can park their trucks on the White House lawn...

Roger J. said...

hey Alpha--ya think maybe a restraining order consitutes some evidence? as I suggested--lets wait until the investigation is complete, shall we?

Palladian said...

Downtownlad voted for George W. Bush in 2000:

"I voted for Bush last time, but can't bring myself to vote for Kerry. I'm going to vote Libertarian (Badnarik).

Downtown Lad"

He actually used to seem like a reasonable and likable commenter. That was before.... the accident.

Alan said...

Cedarford, I was the one who brought up Terry Schiavo. A more honest assessment is she's fired up the Terry Schiavo wing of the GOP. I wish I could find her position on that fiasco.

Peter V. Bella said...

AlphaLiberal- Part of the rising wave of modern, fighting liberalism.

Revenant said...

1960: Nixon lost
1968: Humphrey lost
1988: GHW Bush won
2000: Gore lost

You're forgetting Nixon's win in '68 and Mondale's loss in '84.

You're also overlooking the point that all of the above men actually got to run for President; that's what I meant by improving their chances. Had they not first been the VP they would not have gotten the nomination at all.

You're better off if the President dies or resigns.

That's a tautology, since the VP becomes President automatically when that happens.

Revenant said...

If Sara and her husband end up as POTUS and first husband...

then the movie "idiocracy" just came true. What does she have? A bachelors degree in journalism from some teacher's college?

Now there's a winning argument: claim that everyone who doesn't have a college degree from a sufficiently prestigious college is an idiot. That's around 70% of the electorate and and even higher percentage of the Democratic Party.

At first I thought the local lefties were testing out talking points here. Now I'm starting to think you're testing out which foot you'd rather shoot yourselves in. "Do we want to use the 'their VP candidate is as inexperienced as our Presidential candidate' line, or the 'everyone who didn't go to Harvard is a moron' line?".

OldGrouchy said...

Rev: sounds like the Dhmmi's are shooting at both feet; Must make it harder to stand upright at closing time!

Maguro said...

the 'everyone who didn't go to Harvard is a moron' line?"

Yeah..where's "Harvard" when you need him?

Revenant said...

Because that's what it is. It isn't called the fact of evolution nor is it called the Law of Evolution.

Sigh. No.

A theory is an explanation for a set of facts. The theory of gravity, for example, is not a theory about whether or not gravity exists; it is a theory (a set of theories, actually) about WHY gravity happens.

That evolution happens is a fact. The "theory of evolution" is a theory about why evolution happens, not a theory about if evolution happens. It is short for the longer term, "theory of evolution by natural selection" -- i.e., the theory is that the observed fact that species change over time and/or branch off into new species is explained as being the result of natural selection.

It's called the Theory of Evolution because there has been no observable data as to it's actual mechanism or workings.

In the sense that there has been no observable data that the Earth revolves around the Sun -- something which is, by the way, *also* a theory. :)

UWS guy said...

We know for a fact that Obama needed to have read the Constitution front to back for his Law Degree and in prep. to teach his classes.

Sara Palin may have never read the document that founded our country.

Methadras said...

UWS guy said...

"theory" doesn't mean what you think it means.

learn science nomencalture before making a fool of yourself methandass.


Oh, your name mocking hurts me so. I fully understand what the word means in scientific and in mathematical contexts. In this case, if you actually read the content and understood the context of what I said, you would have understood that as a 'theory' evolution is a well known generality of comprehensive sets of observations and data that is comprised to form a base of knowledge of what evolution is. At this point there isn't a whole lot on the fundamental mechanical underpinnings of how actual evolution works, why it works, and what causes it to work. Therefore, it is still a general working theory.

If you want to split hairs, then lets, shall we. For example, if you actually did understand the nature of the word theory and how it works in the phrase of Theory of Evolution you would truly understand why it is still called a Theory and not a Law. We don't understand it's complete nature, however we do understand the complete nature of the Laws of Mechanics or the Laws of Thermodynamics. One is a law because we know nearly if not everything about it. One is a theory in it's current form because we don't know everything about it, but we do know that it is there and works.

Let's play again sometime shall we. It looks like you need a break.

Fen said...

UWS: Sara Palin may have never read the document that founded our country.

Thats your move? Are you sure? Really?

Maguro said...

We know for a fact that Obama needed to have read the Constitution front to back for his Law Degree and in prep. to teach his classes.

Sara Palin may have never read the document that founded our country.


This is your argument? That Palin is not a law professor like Obama was? Wow...I guess he should have picked Althouse or maybe Antonin Scalia.

Revenant said...

We know for a fact that Obama needed to have read the Constitution front to back

Wow, me too. Can I be President now?

Peter V. Bella said...

Revenant,

Do you ever get the feeling that you are talking to the wall sometimes when dealing with a few of the people her?

Anonymous said...

"randy, The DoD asked Obama not to visit the wounded -- it would politicize the military."

That's false, madisonman. The military asked Obama not to bring his entire entourage including a horde of photographers and turn the visit into a media circus. He then declined to visit at all. What does that tell you about your boy?

Maguro said...

I believe the deal was that Obama could bring along his Senate staff, but not campaign staff. The DoD did not bar Obama by any means.

Revenant said...

At this point there isn't a whole lot on the fundamental mechanical underpinnings of how actual evolution works

Mutation introduces new genetic traits, natural selection selects among existing genetic traits.

why it works,

Basic iterative probability. When X is more likely to produce viable children than Y, over successive generations you get more X and less Y.

and what causes it to work.

The same thing that causes 0.9*0.9*0.9 > 0.8*0.8*0.8. There's no deep mystery here; creatures more likely to survive, survive more often than creatures which are less likely to survive.

(snip)

however we do understand the complete nature of the Laws of Mechanics or the Laws of Thermodynamics.

Oh? Explain and experimentally prove the fundamental mechanical underpinnings of conservation of momentum. You'll win a Nobel Prize in record time, because nobody knows what they are. Conservation of momentum is a law because it always holds true, not because we understand why it works.

Eh, bored now. I'm only deigning to respond to this nonsense out of fear that folks might think left-wingers are the only scientifically literate people in the world.

UWS guy said...

No, you've proven that in spades. Bravo Revenant I couldn't have come close to your explanation.


....but, Liberals vote for scientifically literate candidates....

UWS guy said...

I apologize for calling Methandras methandass though :<

Revenant said...

....but, Liberals vote for scientifically literate candidates....

Depends on the issue. Most of the hysteria about genetically modified food comes from the left, for example, and there are an awful lot of lefties who think it is physically possible for non-space-based solar power to meet our energy needs. And if economics and game theory count as sciences, well, let's just say that neither is welcome at the party when it comes time to discuss which utopian government scheme can best improve the economy through central planning.

On the topic of evolution there's also the fact that most of the left only favors a "neck-down" approach to evolution; even *speculation* that there might be inherent biological differences in the brain processes of populations of humans separated for hundreds or thousands of generations is met with, to put it mildly... well, "batshit screaming wig-outs" is the best description.

Richard said...

Gotta hand it to ya, Ann. No matter what the topic, we can count on you to find something air-headed and stupid to stay about it.

Legally blonde ...

Methadras said...

Revenant said ...

At this point there isn't a whole lot on the fundamental mechanical underpinnings of how actual evolution works

Mutation introduces new genetic traits, natural selection selects among existing genetic traits.


That is the effect, not the cause.

why it works,

Basic iterative probability. When X is more likely to produce viable children than Y, over successive generations you get more X and less Y.


That is not a why, that is another effect that mutation has on the iterative probability of selective traits and it isn't linear, it's dynamic.

and what causes it to work.

The same thing that causes 0.9*0.9*0.9 > 0.8*0.8*0.8. There's no deep mystery here; creatures more likely to survive, survive more often than creatures which are less likely to survive


blah blah blah. Again, that is an effect of mutation. A favorable trait in a species as it reacts to it's ecology will give it an advantage over other species if it can capitalize on it and successfully pass those traits. You've said the same thing 3 times, that mutation is the mechanism for evolution. It's the result, it's the effect, not the actual fundamental cause. Mutations cause these effects, but what causes the mutations?

I'm a Mechanical Engineer. I understand the Laws of Mechanics quit well. The Law of Conservation of Momentum is a law of physics that states that an object in motion will stay in motion until acted upon by an outside force and that an object at rest will remain at rest until acted upon by an outside force. The fundamental underpinnings are relegated at the quantum level. That is not my pervue. However, we know what the Law of Conservation of Momentum does and is a effect of homogeneity. Even if you could divulge it's actual fundamental workings you can't do anything with them anyway since you would be changing the fundamental laws of physics.

However, if you know what the actual underpinnings of evolution are, there may be a way to actually change them, work with them in other ways. You can't change the laws of physics or mechanics, but evolution is a much higher order function and therefore is subject to much deeper scrutiny of it's actual fundamentals and in doing so can be manipulated or changed.

You might be bored with this and that's fine. But you've not really accomplished in saying anything of relevance or useful. Instead you would rather state the obvious by trying to do this little I know more than you do dance and have accomplished nothing outside of playing semantics. That's unproductive and doesn't elevate your intellect. I know you are a smart man, but this accomplishes nothing.

Words must have the right meanings in order to have the right values. The only nonsense you are deigning to respond to is your own for your own ego gratification. I'm a right-wing conservative that is quite smart and intelligent. I don't need to break my arm patting myself on the back at that only to have you idiotically disclaim that "folks might think left-wingers are the only scientifically literate people in the world."

And prove that point in spade. Just knock it off already.

Methadras said...

UWS guy said...

I apologize for calling Methandras methandass though :<


Apology accepted, but you still spelled my name wrong. :D

Methadras said...

UWS guy said...

....but, Liberals vote for scientifically literate candidates..


So do conservatives and how is that relevant to your initial charge that Palin wants to introduce intelligent design to be taught alongside evolution? Look, I know that in it's current form intelligent design is creationism. Intelligent design, to me means something completely different. In the marketplace of ideas, in order for this idea to fail it needs to be put to the test and then be shown as a failure and then become abandoned. In it's fervor, the left as legitimized it due to their opposition from it, not from an academic point of view, but from a philosophical and legal point of view.

It shouldn't get anywhere near a school in my opinion, but the cat is out of the bag now isn't it?

Methadras said...

UWS guy said...

We know for a fact that Obama needed to have read the Constitution front to back for his Law Degree and in prep. to teach his classes.


What is your point? I knew the US Constitution from beginning to end by the time I was 7 and that was because I was helping my mom and dad in their studies at night school to get their citizenship. I still have the "blue book" that describes the Constitution in detail up until the last amendment. Based on your statement alone that should easily qualify me for getting a law degree and being able to teach law. Right? [wink]

Come on man, you are really stretching things out to here with this stuff.

Revenant said...

"At this point there isn't a whole lot on the fundamental mechanical underpinnings of how actual evolution works"

That is the effect, not the cause.

Evolution is the shift in allele frequencies over time. That's the effect, and its existence is an objective fact. Mutation and natural selection are the cause of that effect. Would you like to know what causes mutation? I already explained that natural selection is nothing more than simple mathematics at work.

That is not a why

You're mistaken. Maybe you ought to explain what sort of "why" you're grasping after, since the actual physical explanation for why evolution happens doesn't seem to satisfy you.

it isn't linear, it's dynamic.

Not when looking at the survival value of a trait for a species over a single generation; you can take an average. It is dynamic across multiple generations of the species.

The Law of Conservation of Momentum is [snip]

Yes, we know what it is. You claimed the underlying mechanics of it were understood. But, as it turns out...

The fundamental underpinnings are relegated at the quantum level. That is not my pervue.

... you don't know enough to support that claim. If you did, indeed, have a somewhat better understanding of quantum mechanics you'd know that the actual physical mechanisms of conservation of momentum -- the "why", if you will -- is still speculative. Conservation of momentum is considered a law because we have never once, across uncountable observations, observed it failing to hold true. But we still don't know WHY it always holds true.

On the other hand, we do know why evolution happens -- mutation and natural selection. We know why mutation happens (usually replication error or alteration of genes by viruses or radiation); we know why natural selection happens (basic probability). Etc, etc.

Even if you could divulge it's actual fundamental workings you can't do anything with them anyway since you would be changing the fundamental laws of physics.

That sentence sounded rational to you, did it? Stating what the fundamental workings of conservation of momentum are would change the laws of physics? That sounds like the plot of an HP Lovecraft short story.

However, if you know what the actual underpinnings of evolution are, there may be a way to actually change them, work with them in other ways.

We achieve evolution through means other than mutation and natural selection all the time. Farmers and domestic animal breeders have been doing it for thousands of years. That's why chihuahuas look pretty much nothing like wolves anymore.

Instead you would rather state the obvious by trying to do this little I know more than you do dance and have accomplished nothing outside of playing semantics.

If you want to dismiss an accurate and rational explanation of the causes of evolution as "semantics", fine. It is an objective fact that I know more about this subject than you do, though, which is why I corrected your mistakes.

I'm a right-wing conservative that is quite smart and intelligent.

Smart AND intelligent? Gee, that IS impressive.

You might be intelligent enough in your own way, although you've certainly never given evidence of it. The problem is, Meth, your claims regarding evolutionary theory are every bit as hopelessly ignorant as the 9/11 Truther claims that fires can't possibly have caused the Towers to collapse. That's why you're an embarrassment to Republicans who actually understand a thing or two about biology, and that's why I spoke up.

It isn't because I care about proving I'm smarter than you. I'm pretty sure everyone here knew that already.

former law student said...

rev:

The VP slot is a prize for anyone with Presidential ambitions even if the top half of the ticket is doomed. It gives you a good foot in the door for the following Presidential race.

You're forgetting Nixon's win in '68 and Mondale's loss in '84.


If you had said being VP makes you more likely to be named a Presidential candidate at some future date I would have bought it. But getting your foot in the door to me implies a more positive result than getting the door slammed on it.

former law student said...

Now there's a winning argument: claim that everyone who doesn't have a college degree from a sufficiently prestigious college is an idiot.

I agree with rev. I think the graduates of these three schools:

Southwest Texas State Teachers College

Whittier College

Eureka College

did as well as the Harvard, Michigan, and Yale grads. Not to mention Harry Truman, who never went to college (although he attended law school)

Fen said...

Well, its not like Georgetown, Oxford and Yale prepared the Rhodes Scholar to resist the temptation of a few blow jobs while Al Queda was plotting to kill 3,000 Americans.

MadisonMan said...

I'm a right-wing conservative that is quite smart and intelligent.

Then why do you write sentences with grammatical errors? Unless you are inanimate, in which case never mind.

Patm said...

No, she's not a creationist...that's just the left taking her out of context. She just said that if a kid brings it up in school, they should be allowed to talk it out. She's not interested in a creationist curriculum.

OldGrouchy said...

This posting about gov. Sarah Palin is fascinating, especially the different tangents commenters have taken regarding peace, war, science, physiology, anatomy, biology, and the origin of the species.

Prof. Althouse has outdone herself this time and hit the right note, although I fear she hit the tenor in the gonads!

My contribution to this all is to say: PBUH!

Patm said...

Kind of sad how quickly folks are willing to just swallow the creationist thing, whole, though, without even checking it out.

I mean, haven't we figured out by now that the press lies?

Patm said...

"If Sara and her husband end up as POTUS and first husband...

then the movie "idiocracy" just came true. What does she have? A bachelors degree in journalism from some teacher's college?If Sara and her husband end up as POTUS and first husband...


Well, first of all you misspelled Sarah. Secondly, Harry Truman didn't go to an Ivy League college, either...but Jimmy Carter went to Annapolis, and he damn near destroyed the country in 4 years.

Anonymous said...

You can tell when things have ground to a halt when the regulars are debating metaphysics.

On another thread I'm talking Rioja wines and the possibility that Palin's really a 'droid.

Everything's slowly returning to normal.

vbspurs said...

313!

I just wanted to say that officially, because I think this is the longest Althouse thread, no?

Revenant said...

I mean, haven't we figured out by now that the press lies?

It isn't so much that the press lies. It is that the press is for the most part comprised of the same sorts of people who immediately swallowed the creationism story.

MadisonMan said...

Victoria, not even close. There was a 500-comment thread that grew out of the interny picture.

Isabelle said...

VP with scrunci/clip in hair? Speaks volumes. It says "Kids get the the table" not "I've just met with the president of Russia."

It was in the back of her hairdo when she was at McCains side.

OldGrouchy said...

Yeah, having a woman VP bad. Why, as the Argentine President was quoted as saying as he approved the invasion of the Malvinas: "Look, those damned Brits will roll over. After all, their PM is a woman! Victory is ours!"

Of course, since others will consider Palin simply to be a "Bitch," she'll just snowball them before she cracks their thick skulls!

Ever wonder why women can't stand other women advancing and gaining positions of power? Nope, must be the nature of the female beasty!

tbabu said...

cindy get ready for next divorce...he started cheating

Alex said...

I am not having trouble understanding Sarah Palin's hair do but I am having trouble with Biden's hair do. Have you not noticed his hair plugs? Why is Sarah Palin's hair more interesting than Biden's plugs??? And he only got the plugs in the front of his head and then grows that part out really long to cover the bald head.
There is NOTHING wrong with Sarah Palin's hair - I see women with longer hair pull it up in that fashion (for work) all the time.
Let's get real - the interesting hair story here is Biden's OR Obama's changing color of his hair.

Deezer said...

This may seem dumb but what does SPILF (ILF) stand for?

Anonymous said...

I was going to address this in my Bouffant Blog.

Chus said...

This is what I think: Sarah Palin's E-Mail Hacked

Chus said...

Funny!: Sarah Palin Baby Name Generator

Anonymous said...

аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно
аудиокниги скачать бесплатно

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 324 of 324   Newer› Newest»