Gifford (and others) Shooting

IdleRich

IdleRich
I actually spent the afternoon reading that blog and all the comments on it (saw it on Crackerjack's facebook, thanks for that). Great piece, good job that someone can be arsed to do that so that no-one else has to - and totally agree about Palin obviously.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
I realise it should read Giffords obviously.
Also, I should point out that I'm not saying that Palin is responsible for the killings, in fact her target thing probably had no effect on the nutter - but she's evil anyway.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
The fact of her utter unwillingness to engage with criticism on her blog (to the extent of "de-friending" people who don't toe her line) is illustrative of how she is going to be incapable of winning over anyone from the centre. Surely Palin realises that if she is to be president she can't just talk to people who already agree with her - or possibly she doesn't.
 

crackerjack

Well-known member
The fact of her utter unwillingness to engage with criticism on her blog (to the extent of "de-friending" people who don't toe her line) is illustrative of how she is going to be incapable of winning over anyone from the centre. Surely Palin realises that if she is to be president she can't just talk to people who already agree with her - or possibly she doesn't.

Many commentators think she won't run cos
a) she can't win
b) all that policy-learning & reading & preparation really ain't her bag
c) she's doing very nicely as a roving right-wing maniac for hire
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
There's no way she could possibly win. She's thicker than GWB and surely anyone but her die-hard supporters can see that. And as the ObamaLondon blog shows, the fact that

"It's ok. Christina Taylor Green was probably going to end up a left wing bleeding heart liberal anyway. Hey, as 'they' say, what would you do if you had the chance to kill Hitler as a kid? Exactly."

was left up on her facebook page for at least half an hour, while various relatively innocuous (to any sane person) comments were deleted as soon as they appeared, presumably demonstrates that unlike Bush, she doesn't even have clever people around her.
 

mistersloane

heavy heavy monster sound
I just think it's precisely those reasons that will make her a viable candidate and will get her in. It's her not backing down, it's her resistance, if you like, that will see her all the way through. It kindof has to happen.

Aside from the fact that she's the flesh incarnation of Satan and this is her domain and she's here to bring about the end times. Or because of it.
 

zhao

there are no accidents
Sarah Pallin is a true American.

I mean that without a hint of sarcasm.

She is the living embodiment of the qualities, ideas, convictions and faith that the Best Country On Earth was founded and built upon.

In these trying times my prayers go out to all the church going, law abiding citizens of the United States. To all the Good, honest, God fearing Christians with wholesome family values. All the true believers of Democracy, soldiers for Freedom, who would kill a liberal, shoot a queer, fry a commie and lynch a nigger without batting an eyelash.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
She is the living embodiment of the qualities, ideas, convictions and faith that the Best Country On Earth was founded and built upon.

Is she, though? The US Constitution provides for freedom of religion and the separation of church and state. Palin and her crowd want to put a cross, ideologically and literally, in every classroom, courtroom and hospital ward in the country. To do that they'd have to rip up one of the core pieces of the USA's conceptual foundation.

I don't doubt there are plenty of people who really believe she represents 'the convictions the USA was built on', but I would hope plenty of other Americans - people who consider themselves patriots, 'good Americans' - are able to see this gaping contradiction, whatever their own beliefs.
 
Last edited:

mistersloane

heavy heavy monster sound
I would hope plenty of other Americans - people who consider themselves 'good Americans' - are able to see this gaping contradiction, whatever their own beliefs.

But it's the New America, isn't it? In the times of Fox, I think it's exactly her doublethink that will get her ahead, truth doesn't matter in the face of fundamentalism. It's all NLP and bravado.

But I've got toothache and am in a particularly pessimistic mood.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Yeah sure, I can see that (unfortunately). I remember hearing about some survey recently that showed that a huge proportion of Americans had no idea what it actually says in their Constitution and its various Amendments, beyond some vague idea about the right to bear arms.

I'm no expert on American political history, I just get the impression that Jefferson and Washington would not have wholeheartedly approved of Palin, as zhao seems to be saying. For one thing, she basically wants to institute theocracy; for another, the post-deleting antics on her Facebook page and calls for Assange's extra-judicial execution don't show a great regard for freedom of speech.

Edit: thanks STN, I was just thinking of that exact Onion piece.
 
Last edited:

zhao

there are no accidents
The US Constitution provides for freedom of religion and the separation of church and state.

the declaration of independence also includes sentences like "all men are created equal", written by slave owners. anyone with 1 eye can see how consistent these words of law are with reality.

we are talking about cities designed for segregation and urban planning which implements ghettoization.

we are talking about an entire system from the roots up designed for inequality and injustice along class (and to a lesser degree, racial) lines.

it is a country built on injustice at home, and injustice abroad.

a country grown rich by the rape of foreign lands and the enslavement of its own people.

so yes, people like Sarah Pallin are the true Americans.
 
Last edited:

IdleRich

IdleRich
I believe that the separation of church and state thing (or the lines which are commonly taken to mean that) are in the 1st Amendment rather than the original document. Does that make a difference? Also, if you can have amendments to the constitution then surely that's a recognition that it's not a single immutable thing that is always right. Maybe someone American can help me here; what is the status of amendments, are there people who refuse to accept any of them? Are they given more credence if they happened longer ago? How often do amendments occur?
But yeah, I seem to see examples of double-think in US politics all the time - so called Christians calling for the death penalty when one of the Ten Commandments says "don't kill" etc etc And then compounding this by falling back on the literal word of the bible when it happens to say what you like - normally something about homosexuals.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
I'm aware that there have always been inconsistencies. But nonetheless, the Right's attempts to bring explicit religiosity into American politics and law are unconstitutional and also quite a recent development, aren't they? I mean, as far as I'm aware, even hardline Reps from a generation ago didn't have this overarching obsession with rewriting the statute books around the Bible.

Edit: yep point taken Rich, I dunno - the above^ was mainly a reply to zhao but you squeezed in between us like a little gooseberry.
 
Last edited:
Top