A Special Comment On Sarah Palin

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1673234' date='Oct 9 2008, 03:31 AM']Most conservative commentators purposefully boast of their bias though. e.g. Limbaugh serving humanity just by showing up..[/quote]
"Talent on loan from God" is the best tag line of his.

[inDEED]

[quote name='Lounge Daddy' post='1672807' date='Oct 8 2008, 01:26 PM']It's a major qualification.[/quote]

For me - it's a "non-negotiable" - but not something that makes a candidate "more qualified".

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='inDEED' post='1673608' date='Oct 9 2008, 08:16 PM']For me - it's a "non-negotiable" - but not something that makes a candidate "more qualified".[/quote]

How can it be a non-negotiable but not a major qualification? For you to vote for a candidate you require a condition, that they must be pro-life.

Describing it as you do as a 'non-negotiable' does sound as if you are setting qualifications which much be met.

[b]qualification[/b]
[indent] 1. The act of qualifying or the condition of being qualified.
[b]2. A quality, ability, or accomplishment that makes a person suitable for a particular position or task.[/b]
3. A condition or circumstance that must be met or complied with: fulfilled the qualifications for registering to vote in the presidential election.
4. A restriction or modification: an offer with a number of qualifications.[/indent]

Edited October 10, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[inDEED]

Let me make this perfectly clear.

Alan Keyes is pro-life.
Sarah Palin is pro-life.

Both are eligible for my vote - because both are pro-life.

HOWEVER, despite the fact that both Sarah Palin & Alan Keyes are running for different offices, I believe that Alan Keyes is CLEARLY more qualified than Sarah Palin. And, because he is more qualified, he would get my vote.

Does that clarify my previous statement?

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='inDEED' post='1673984' date='Oct 10 2008, 01:11 AM']Let me make this perfectly clear.

Alan Keyes is pro-life.
Sarah Palin is pro-life.

Both are eligible for my vote - because both are pro-life.

HOWEVER, despite the fact that both Sarah Palin & Alan Keyes are running for different offices, I believe that Alan Keyes is CLEARLY more qualified than Sarah Palin. And, because he is more qualified, he would get my vote.

Does that clarify my previous statement?[/quote]
I agreed with you. A major qualification, but not the only qualifier.
That's perfectly clear.

Although I do disagree with your vote. lol

[kamiller42]

[quote name='inDEED' post='1673984' date='Oct 10 2008, 01:11 AM']HOWEVER, despite the fact that both Sarah Palin & Alan Keyes are running for different offices, I believe that Alan Keyes is CLEARLY more qualified than Sarah Palin. And, because he is more qualified, he would get my vote.[/quote]
Didn't the press say the same about Quayle? If she is as dumb as Quayle and America did not implode, then Palin will be fine. (I don't think Quayle is dumb.)

It really doesn't matter who ran as VP. The left would paint that person as either a) dumb, b) sinister, c) cold, d) cruel, e) greedy, f) stubborn, g) insane, ... z) all the above. Sure, they say "[Candidate X] would have been a better VP pick." The second that person is picked, a rain of hate will come down from the left.

I did not watch Keith's rant because one loses IQ points watching the dolt.

[inDEED]

[quote name='kamiller42' post='1673995' date='Oct 9 2008, 10:24 PM']It really doesn't matter who ran as VP. The left would paint that person as either a) dumb, b) sinister, c) cold, d) cruel, e) greedy, f) stubborn, g) insane, ... z) all the above. Sure, they say "[Candidate X] would have been a better VP pick." The second that person is picked, a rain of hate will come down from the left.[/quote]

See...here's the thing - it does matter to me who the VP will be - especially for a candidate with as many previous health issues such as McCain.

And - my opinion on Palin's intelligence and readiness for the VP role isn't based on the "left". It's simply based on what I've seen - the Couric interview & the debate both did fantastic jobs of showing me how unprepared she truly is.

[inDEED]

[quote name='Lounge Daddy' post='1673993' date='Oct 9 2008, 10:19 PM']I agreed with you. A major qualification, but not the only qualifier.
That's perfectly clear.

Although I do disagree with your vote. lol[/quote]

[kamiller42]

[quote name='inDEED' post='1674379' date='Oct 10 2008, 02:42 PM']See...here's the thing - it does matter to me who the VP will be - especially for a candidate with as many previous health issues such as McCain.[/quote]
Isn't Cheney supposed to be dead right now? They said the same thing about him. Remember?

Most individuals dying in the past few months have been around the age of 50. A friend and I were discussing how odd it has been lately. Maybe we should be worried about Obama. He's in the age range and is a [b]smoker[/b]. Biden as president is horrifying.

[quote]And - my opinion on Palin's intelligence and readiness for the VP role isn't based on the "left". It's simply based on what I've seen - the Couric interview & the debate both did fantastic jobs of showing me how unprepared she truly is.[/quote]
Biden did appear like he had it together. Didn't he? It was impressive. Too bad it was a lot of lies. Last count I saw was 22.

I would rather Palin repeat lines from stump speeches in a debate than lie. Keep in mind that many people have not heard what Palin has been saying on campaign stops, so the debate was a good time to talk to the people.

Could Palin have done better in the Couric interview? Sure. Has she done better in other interviews? Yes. So why does a bad interview cancel out all others? Have you seen how well sure performs in town hall meetings? That deserves credit. Enough credit should cancel out a demerit.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='inDEED' post='1673984' date='Oct 10 2008, 12:11 AM']Let me make this perfectly clear.

Alan Keyes is pro-life.
Sarah Palin is pro-life.

Both are eligible for my vote - because both are pro-life.

HOWEVER, despite the fact that both Sarah Palin & Alan Keyes are running for different offices, I believe that Alan Keyes is CLEARLY more qualified than Sarah Palin. And, because he is more qualified, he would get my vote.

Does that clarify my previous statement?[/quote]

This does have better clarity.

[inDEED]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1674428' date='Oct 10 2008, 01:12 PM']This does have better clarity.[/quote]

I appreciate your validation.

[Saint Therese]

Sarah Palin believes that abortin should be allowed in cases when the mother's life is in danger.

[princessgianna]

[quote name='Saint Therese' post='1674507' date='Oct 10 2008, 04:53 PM']Sarah Palin believes that abortin should be allowed in cases when the mother's life is in danger.[/quote]
i have not heard of that! interesting!
still DO YOU WANT OBAMA who signed FOUR times that if a unwanted child was born and survived a abortion that that CHILD WAS TO BE THROWN INTO (BY LAW) THE CLOSET and forgotten till they took out the trash!?!?!?!?

Edited October 11, 2008 by princessgianna

[princessgianna]

[quote name='inDEED' post='1674379' date='Oct 10 2008, 01:42 PM']See...here's the thing - it does matter to me who the VP will be - especially for a candidate with as many previous health issues such as McCain.[/quote]

his mom is still alive for whatever it is worth!

[Mercy me]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1673111' date='Oct 9 2008, 12:08 AM']He admits he is a conservative. On his radio he constantly claims his coverage is "fair" or "comprehansive" or something (I honestly can't remember at the moment).

I have never heard Keith call his show objective or unbalanced (he very well may have, I don't watch his show often).

I really don't consider either of them honest.

Honestly I don't have a problem with conservatism as it used to be. I have many tendencies that are conservative (I have said before I am a fan of George Will). I cannot stand the American conservative party for their foreign policy (here I mean the neo-con part that seems to have most of the power) and a number of other issues, but pure conservativism I find to be a very interesting body of thought.[/quote]

The difference between a journalist and a commentator is that the journalist abides by journalistic ethics and the commentator is paid to share his own opinions. This si from teh Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics: [quote]Journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.

Journalists should:

— Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible.
— Diligently seek out subjects of news stories to give them the opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing.
— Identify sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources' reliability.
— Always question sources’ motives before promising anonymity. Clarify conditions attached to any promise made in exchange for information. Keep promises.
— Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.[/quote]

For a laugh you can read the whole thing at [url="http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp"]this site.[/url]