| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/07/2008 08:29:44 PM · #1351 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Wasn't she gov of the whole state? |
Is the implication that because she was governor of Alaska, which is closer to Russia than any other part of the US, she has greater knowledge of Russia than others? If so, then I wonder why Mike Huckabee thought that Canada had a "national igloo" that needed preserving? Surely his proximity to Canada would have precluded him from making such an embarrassing blunder? For that matter, why did Obama think that Canada had a president as opposed to a Prime Minister? Surely being in Chicago, so close to Canada, he would know such a thing.
Maybe proximity means squat after all. |
No, the implication was that she was Gov of the whole state and parts of it are much closer then 680 miles. Do you want to argue if she was Gov of the whole state, or if there are areas of Alaska closer to russia then 680 miles? You guys are really good at turning things into arguments.
And who was talking about Canada, Huckabee or Obama? Why bring that up? |
Just trying to point out how dumb it all is. If, after everything she's said and all that's happened, and the dissection of her knowledge by her own party and others, you still think she's the perfect candidate for wherever she happens to pop up next, more power to you. |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 08:33:35 PM · #1352 |
Originally posted by RonB:
Ahhemm yourself. |
So? What does that prove? That you can see Russia from Alaska. Does its proximity say anything about her insight into Russian actions? Her answer to Gibson indicates to me that she thinks that's all she needs, or, that she doesn't have an answer to a pointed question. |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 08:38:38 PM · #1353 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Wasn't she gov of the whole state? |
Is the implication that because she was governor of Alaska, which is closer to Russia than any other part of the US, she has greater knowledge of Russia than others? If so, then I wonder why Mike Huckabee thought that Canada had a "national igloo" that needed preserving? Surely his proximity to Canada would have precluded him from making such an embarrassing blunder? For that matter, why did Obama think that Canada had a president as opposed to a Prime Minister? Surely being in Chicago, so close to Canada, he would know such a thing.
Maybe proximity means squat after all. |
No, the implication was that she was Gov of the whole state and parts of it are much closer then 680 miles. Do you want to argue if she was Gov of the whole state, or if there are areas of Alaska closer to russia then 680 miles? You guys are really good at turning things into arguments.
And who was talking about Canada, Huckabee or Obama? Why bring that up? |
Just trying to point out how dumb it all is. If, after everything she's said and all that's happened, and the dissection of her knowledge by her own party and others, you still think she's the perfect candidate for wherever she happens to pop up next, more power to you. |
I never said she was the perfect candidate. If it makes you feel better making assumptions about me, more power to you. Just don't post them here please.
Great arguing style you have though. I love how you assume the other person's position and then argue against your own assumption. |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 08:39:27 PM · #1354 |
Jeese lighten up Ron!!!!
It is the sound byte that they got the joke from that's all...Gosh!
ETA: I think she is an 1D10T anyway and if she is the future of the GOP then I feel so very sorry them...
Message edited by author 2008-11-07 20:42:15. |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 08:43:49 PM · #1355 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by RonB:
Ahhemm yourself. |
So? What does that prove? That you can see Russia from Alaska. Does its proximity say anything about her insight into Russian actions? Her answer to Gibson indicates to me that she thinks that's all she needs, or, that she doesn't have an answer to a pointed question. |
I used to live within sight of the Mexican border and I've seen Canada across the Detroit River. I guess that make me an expert on NAFTA. WOOT! |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 08:49:09 PM · #1356 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Wasn't she gov of the whole state? |
Is the implication that because she was governor of Alaska, which is closer to Russia than any other part of the US, she has greater knowledge of Russia than others? If so, then I wonder why Mike Huckabee thought that Canada had a "national igloo" that needed preserving? Surely his proximity to Canada would have precluded him from making such an embarrassing blunder? For that matter, why did Obama think that Canada had a president as opposed to a Prime Minister? Surely being in Chicago, so close to Canada, he would know such a thing.
Maybe proximity means squat after all. |
No, the implication was that she was Gov of the whole state and parts of it are much closer then 680 miles. Do you want to argue if she was Gov of the whole state, or if there are areas of Alaska closer to russia then 680 miles? You guys are really good at turning things into arguments.
And who was talking about Canada, Huckabee or Obama? Why bring that up? |
Just trying to point out how dumb it all is. If, after everything she's said and all that's happened, and the dissection of her knowledge by her own party and others, you still think she's the perfect candidate for wherever she happens to pop up next, more power to you. |
I never said she was the perfect candidate. If it makes you feel better making assumptions about me, more power to you. Just don't post them here please.
Great arguing style you have though. I love how you assume the other person's position and then argue against your own assumption. |
Oh, sorry, I thought your unusual defense of what was an obvious gaffe indicated some kind of support. My bad. I guess. (?) Nice passive aggressive hostility, btw. |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 08:54:18 PM · #1357 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by RonB:
Ahhemm yourself. |
So? What does that prove? That you can see Russia from Alaska. Does its proximity say anything about her insight into Russian actions? Her answer to Gibson indicates to me that she thinks that's all she needs, or, that she doesn't have an answer to a pointed question. |
Just so you are not confused, I'm not defending palin or her knowledge of russia. I'm just discussing the proximity discussion.
Do you think the Gov of Arizona knows more about Mexico then the Gov of Wisconsin?
Do you think the Gov of Washington state knows more about Canada then the Gov of say Alabama?
Do you think the Gov of Florida knows more about Cuba then the Gov of North Dakota?
As Gov I'm guessing it's your job to be familiar with the issues around you? I can easily see the proximity argument, but that's just me.
There is plenty to pick on Palin about, you probably have a list. But this one is a stupid and petty argument |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 08:57:07 PM · #1358 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by RonB:
Ahhemm yourself. |
So? What does that prove? That you can see Russia from Alaska. Does its proximity say anything about her insight into Russian actions? |
Nope. And I did not argue that it did.
I DID point out that, in my experience, proximity to an unfriendly nation CAN provide SOME insight into their foreign relations policies, but did not say that such proximity was any guarantee.
Originally posted by Louis:
Her answer to Gibson indicates to me that she thinks that's all she needs, or, that she doesn't have an answer to a pointed question. |
You may INFER all you'd like. But that doesn't make what GeneralE said true. Nor does it make the link that thegrandwazoo pointed at support what GeneralE said.
And I was ONLY arguing that GeneralE was implying things that were not true. |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 09:00:42 PM · #1359 |
Originally posted by RonB:
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by RonB:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by RonB:
When did Sarah Palin ever say that she could "see Russia from my house"? |
Can you prove she hasn't? ;-) |
Yep. Proof positive.
If she HAD said it, someone would have posted a link proving that she did.
Ergo, a lack of proof that she DID is proof that she DIDN'T.
:-) |
That's only proof she never said it in public in fron of anyone who could record or recount the event and would be willing and able to post it someplace crawled by Google. That doesn't prove she's never said it. |
Ahhemm
:-)) |
Ahhemm???? Ahhemm WHAT?
In the video you linked to Palin does NOT say that she can "see Russia from my house", she says that "you can actually see Russia from LAND HERE IN ALASKA", which is 100% true:
Ahhemm yourself. |
Ron, Sorry, but I have to post this from the same article you pointed us to:
"We were curious if Sarah Palin has ever visited this island. According to the natives, the answer is no.
As a matter of fact, no Alaska governor in the state̢۪s nearly 50 year history has ever visited the remote outpost that still has little running water. We were curious what the Little Diomeders thought about Palin̢۪s claim of foreign policy experience because of the proximity of Siberia. Interestingly, many of these Alaskans had no idea who Sarah Palin was! It turns out they have no TV on the island, and therefore, many don̢۪t follow the news.
The island̢۪s mayor has heard of her though. No American mayor resides in a city closer to Russia than Andrew Milligrock, and he says being two miles from Russia doesn̢۪t give him any foreign policy expertise."
ETA: I do believe that it is to no avail if we pick and discuss small details about Sara Palin, since now she is not in the row to become the (Vice) President.. at least not this term.
Message edited by author 2008-11-07 21:02:53.
|
|
|
|
11/07/2008 09:03:32 PM · #1360 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Wasn't she gov of the whole state? |
Is the implication that because she was governor of Alaska, which is closer to Russia than any other part of the US, she has greater knowledge of Russia than others? If so, then I wonder why Mike Huckabee thought that Canada had a "national igloo" that needed preserving? Surely his proximity to Canada would have precluded him from making such an embarrassing blunder? For that matter, why did Obama think that Canada had a president as opposed to a Prime Minister? Surely being in Chicago, so close to Canada, he would know such a thing.
Maybe proximity means squat after all. |
No, the implication was that she was Gov of the whole state and parts of it are much closer then 680 miles. Do you want to argue if she was Gov of the whole state, or if there are areas of Alaska closer to russia then 680 miles? You guys are really good at turning things into arguments.
And who was talking about Canada, Huckabee or Obama? Why bring that up? |
Just trying to point out how dumb it all is. If, after everything she's said and all that's happened, and the dissection of her knowledge by her own party and others, you still think she's the perfect candidate for wherever she happens to pop up next, more power to you. |
I never said she was the perfect candidate. If it makes you feel better making assumptions about me, more power to you. Just don't post them here please.
Great arguing style you have though. I love how you assume the other person's position and then argue against your own assumption. |
Oh, sorry, I thought your unusual defense of what was an obvious gaffe indicated some kind of support. My bad. I guess. (?) Nice passive aggressive hostility, btw. |
What was an obvious gaffe? Thinking people would actually understand that a Gov in close proximity to another country may actually know something about that country? Maybe she does, maybe she doesn't. But I'd hope as Gov of Alaska she'd know a little about her neighbor.
|
|
|
|
11/07/2008 09:16:06 PM · #1361 |
Originally posted by RonB:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by RonB:
Ahhemm yourself. |
So? What does that prove? That you can see Russia from Alaska. Does its proximity say anything about her insight into Russian actions? |
Nope. And I did not argue that it did.
I DID point out that, in my experience, proximity to an unfriendly nation CAN provide SOME insight into their foreign relations policies, but did not say that such proximity was any guarantee.
Originally posted by Louis:
Her answer to Gibson indicates to me that she thinks that's all she needs, or, that she doesn't have an answer to a pointed question. |
You may INFER all you'd like. But that doesn't make what GeneralE said true. Nor does it make the link that thegrandwazoo pointed at support what GeneralE said.
And I was ONLY arguing that GeneralE was implying things that were not true. |
I see, so we're "inferring" when we challenge your apparent defense of her seemingly bottomless ignorance. You're simply showing us the error of our ways when you deem we are making undue implications. And this has nothing to do with your personal politics, demonstrated for all to see lo these many years, right here in these forums. And it's all just you pointing stuff out that should be obvious, and you will argue the same point over and over again with no end in sight for... what reason, exactly?
|
|
|
|
11/07/2008 09:22:30 PM · #1362 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by yanko:
I agree but he also argued about the taxes on small businesses, married people and individuals making around 250k. Granted those aren't poor people but they do have an affect on the economy and last I checked that's in the shitter. Why not spare all working people (i.e. those subject to income taxes) and the poor from paying more taxes when you can increase taxes on the wealthy whom on a percentage basis pay so little? We could make the capital gains tax progressive like the income tax. We could make tax free shelters based on net worth and not how much is actually put into the shelters. |
Huh, more taxes? He's only raising taxes on those making $603K+ (and even then, people making $250K are still getting the current tax cut). Capital gains are also essentially a progressive tax by nature since the vast majority are claimed by the upper classes. |
According to that chart Obama will raise income taxes. I said don't raise income taxes, period. That's not the way to tax the wealthy. Warren Buffet is able to pay just 17.7% because most of his money is not subject to income taxes to begin with. Raising the rate on him is like me saying I will charge you a fee for every brown ribbon you win. It would be pointless. |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 09:25:02 PM · #1363 |
//seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008174647_palinrussia12m0.html
Note the article is critical of Palin not working enough with Russia, but I think it makes it pretty clear that the Gov of Alaska should know about and work with Russia, and historically has. Thus, the only "Obvious Gaffe" was Palin thinking people would understand that the Alaskan Government actually works with Russia.
edit to correct stupid drinking too much typo
Message edited by author 2008-11-07 21:26:53. |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 09:34:24 PM · #1364 |
Originally posted by yanko:
It would be pointless. |
Speaking of pointless... :-/ |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 09:35:12 PM · #1365 |
Originally posted by Louis:
I see, so we're "inferring" when we challenge your apparent defense of her seemingly bottomless ignorance. |
Where did I defend her ignorance, "seemingly bottomless" or otherwise? Where did I even IMPLY that I defended her ignorance, "seemingly bottomless" or otherwise?
So, yes, when you "infer" that I apparently defend her "seemingly bottomless" ignorance, you infer that which is not implied.
Originally posted by Louis:
You're simply showing us the error of our ways when you deem we are making undue implications. |
Not just "undue" implications, but unTRUE implications.
Originally posted by Louis:
And this has nothing to do with your personal politics, demonstrated for all to see lo these many years, right here in these forums. |
Uh, actually there may be a LITTLE bit having to do with my political leaning, but the reality is that I would "stick up" for Obama or Biden as well, if no one else did. The reason I defend conservatives against defamation for the most part is because their defenders are outnumbered by about 20 to 1 in these threads. I don't feel it necessary to defend liberals, since they have enough defenders here.
Originally posted by Louis:
And it's all just you pointing stuff out that should be obvious, and you will argue the same point over and over again with no end in sight for... what reason, exactly? |
Why to point out the sheer hypocrisy of those who rant against politicians who say things that are not true, then do the very thing that they rant against, of course.
Message edited by author 2008-11-07 21:36:23. |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 10:03:05 PM · #1366 |
| congrats on this month's mostest silliest discussion. There should be some award, on both sides, for continuing. |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 10:08:31 PM · #1367 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by yanko:
It would be pointless. |
Speaking of pointless... :-/ |
? |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 10:29:16 PM · #1368 |
| We get HBO in Canada now (called "HBO Canada" oddly enough). "Real Time with Bill Maher" is something I'd never seen before. I never generally liked him, but was entertained by Religulous. The Real Time show just before the election was pretty f-in' good, and his ending monologue, featuring a Palin skewering, was frankly hilarious. They don't have episodes online, but seek it out for its entertainment value, should it happen to be repeated. |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 10:33:27 PM · #1369 |
Originally posted by Louis:
We get HBO in Canada now (called "HBO Canada" oddly enough). "Real Time with Bill Maher" is something I'd never seen before. I never generally liked him, but was entertained by Religulous. The Real Time show just before the election was pretty f-in' good, and his ending monologue, featuring a Palin skewering, was frankly hilarious. They don't have episodes online, but seek it out for its entertainment value, should it happen to be repeated. |
I only have basic cable. TV isn't a strong priority for me (and basic cable is only for hockey! lol).
I have to admit, however, that I freaking love Bill Maher. Now I wish I could get HBO Canada. |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 10:35:48 PM · #1370 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
congrats on this month's mostest silliest discussion. There should be some award, on both sides, for continuing. |
:-)) |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 10:36:49 PM · #1371 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Originally posted by Gordon:
congrats on this month's mostest silliest discussion. There should be some award, on both sides, for continuing. |
:-)) |
hahahaha |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 10:36:50 PM · #1372 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Originally posted by Gordon:
congrats on this month's mostest silliest discussion. There should be some award, on both sides, for continuing. |
:-)) |
hahahaha |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 10:41:37 PM · #1373 |
Originally posted by Louis:
We get HBO in Canada now (called "HBO Canada" oddly enough). "Real Time with Bill Maher" is something I'd never seen before. I never generally liked him, but was entertained by Religulous. The Real Time show just before the election was pretty f-in' good, and his ending monologue, featuring a Palin skewering, was frankly hilarious. They don't have episodes online, but seek it out for its entertainment value, should it happen to be repeated. |
I'm a big fan of Bill Maher as well. I watch him on comedy central at night along with the Colbert Report. Both very similar shows and both hilarious!! |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 10:43:36 PM · #1374 |
Originally posted by cynthiann:
Originally posted by Louis:
We get HBO in Canada now (called "HBO Canada" oddly enough). "Real Time with Bill Maher" is something I'd never seen before. I never generally liked him, but was entertained by Religulous. The Real Time show just before the election was pretty f-in' good, and his ending monologue, featuring a Palin skewering, was frankly hilarious. They don't have episodes online, but seek it out for its entertainment value, should it happen to be repeated. |
I'm a big fan of Bill Maher as well. I watch him on comedy central at night along with the Colbert Report. Both very similar shows and both hilarious!! |
Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher back in the day was one of the best shows to ever grace U.S. Television. Then it was forced off the air, because it was on Network TV. I was very sad. |
|
|
|
11/07/2008 11:59:19 PM · #1375 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by RonB:
Ahhemm yourself. |
So? What does that prove? That you can see Russia from Alaska. Does its proximity say anything about her insight into Russian actions? Her answer to Gibson indicates to me that she thinks that's all she needs, or, that she doesn't have an answer to a pointed question. |
Just so you are not confused, I'm not defending palin or her knowledge of russia. I'm just discussing the proximity discussion.
Do you think the Gov of Arizona knows more about Mexico then the Gov of Wisconsin?
Do you think the Gov of Washington state knows more about Canada then the Gov of say Alabama?
Do you think the Gov of Florida knows more about Cuba then the Gov of North Dakota?
As Gov I'm guessing it's your job to be familiar with the issues around you? I can easily see the proximity argument, but that's just me.
There is plenty to pick on Palin about, you probably have a list. But this one is a stupid and petty argument |
Does proximity encourage understanding?
No, not if those two locations are each vast, icy, and watery wastelands without the infrastructure to allow traffic of either the vehicular or intellectual kind. I doubt there's really anything you could call a cultural exchange up yonder, at least not of the sort you see at the Mexican border, which sustains a daily cross-pollination almost infinitely more active than some dude in a seal skin canoe occasionally getting swamped by the wake of a Russian spy sub.
Do you know more about Mercury than you do Saturn? It's a hell of a lot closer.
While I don't disagree with any of your examples, I think they're a bit cherry-picked.
Message edited by author 2008-11-08 00:32:37. |
|
