Bad punditry = Good romance writing? "Liberals Hate Palin Because She's Beautiful"

[Boxlicker101]

Yep. She thinks God wants her to spread Christianity and Democracy throughout the entire world. I'd go find the quote, but if it came from the Huff Post, you'd question the validity of the quote because of the source, even though sources like the Huff Post aren't allowed to make up fake quotes and attribute them to public figures.

As long as those ideas are not imposed by force, I see nothing wrong with her ambition.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Do you know the source of the term "Jingoism?"

ETA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/By_Jingo

You may notice it expresses a reluctance to fight, but a willingness to do so if necessary.

And it morphed into an extreme and belligerent form of patriotism that can't wait to go out and bring the fight to the "enemy"-- and if there isn't one, we'll make one.

You posted the wrong link, there, licker of boxes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jingoism

As long as those ideas are not imposed by force, I see nothing wrong with her ambition.

How else can they possibly be enforced?

 

[Boxlicker101]

double post

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
Do you know the source of the term "Jingoism?"

ETA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/By_Jingo

You may notice it expresses a reluctance to fight, but a willingness to do so if necessary.

And it morphed into an extreme and belligerent form of patriotism that can't wait to go out and bring the fight to the "enemy"-- and if there isn't one, we'll make one.

You posted the wrong link, there, licker of boxes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jingoism

Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
As long as those ideas are not imposed by force, I see nothing wrong with her ambition.

Originally Posted by Stella_Omega
How else can they possibly be enforced?

I posted the link that did not editorialize.

Well, for the first fifteen hundred or so years, Christianity was spread by word of mouth and preaching, etc. rather than force. People like St. Patrick showed what they considered to be the way.

Democracy was spread by example. In 1820, France and England were monarchies, but by 1900, France was a democracy and the monarch in England was mostly a figurehead. This was not done by American intervention.

 

[DeeZire]

As long as those ideas are not imposed by force, I see nothing wrong with her ambition.

Perhaps so." --Sarah Palin, when asked if we may need to go to war with Russia because of the Georgia crisis, ABC News interview, Sept. 11, 2008

"Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending soldiers out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan." --Sarah Pailn, on the Iraq war, speaking to students at the Wasilla Assembly of God, June 2008

Go look up "religious fanatic" in the dictionary. Chances are, Sarah Palin's picture will be there, right next to GWB.

 

[amicus]

Somewhat akin to religion...one can believe and accept the basic tenets, or one can be a coward and withhold judgment and be an agnostic or an intellectual agnostic, afraid to commit...or one can look to objective reality and use the functions of the mind to perceive reality as it is and go from there.

Granted, Palin is not a first rank intellectual, capable of discerning the function and purpose of human life outside a theological foundation; that doesn't make her all bad, in fact, it puts her in the category of most people everywhere.

The foolishness of placing an agnostic intellectual in the White House is becoming glaringly apparent and the nation woud be far better served with one who had at least a foundation in moral and ethical behavior, as Palin does, rather than a sycophant who parrots an ideology with no foundation.

It will be another century before American voters are fooled by a rhetoritician devoid of practical experience in leadership.

Amicus

 

[DeeZire]

....The foolishness of placing an agnostic intellectual in the White House is becoming glaringly apparent and the nation woud be far better served with one who had at least a foundation in moral and ethical behavior, as Palin does,...

If Sarah Palin's behavior is ethical, you have just invented a new definition for the word.

 

[Boxlicker101]

If Sarah Palin's behavior is ethical, you have just invented a new definition for the word.

She is certainly more ethical than most politicians, which isn't saying much. The Big O is probably less ethical than Sarah Palin is. Of course, that isn't saying much either.

 

[Huckleman2000]

She is certainly more ethical than most politicians, which isn't saying much. The Big O is probably less ethical than Sarah Palin is. Of course, that isn't saying much either.

Well, until he resigns the Presidency 2 years into it to make speeches and sell books, I think Palin's ethics are a level Obama would have to sink to.

 

[amicus]

You may as well expand the degrees of Palin bashing to include Rep. Michele Marie Amble Bachmann (born April 6, 1956), and Gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley, givng you three right wing conservative women politicians to play with instead of just one.

I am curious to learn if you lefties hate all three equally or if you separate and divide them according to some liberal litmus test.

Or is it just successful married women with children that you detest and not necessarily the political bent?

Curious minds want to know...

Amicus

 

[DeeZire]

Curious minds want to know...

Amicus

Well, I guess that leaves you out.

 

[xssve]

Palin is a just the usual amoral opportunist, Bachman, I think, is genuinely insane.

 

[Stella_Omega]

She is certainly more ethical than most politicians, which isn't saying much. eek: The Big O is probably less ethical than Sarah Palin is. Of course, that isn't saying much either.

That's a brand new definition of "ethical."

You should write your very own dictionary, box. It would be so speshul.

 

[Boxlicker101]

That's a brand new definition of "ethical."

You should write your very own dictionary, box. It would be so speshul.

What definition are you referring to?

 

[IrezumiKiss]

What definition are you referring to?

Probably the definition where it's okay for Bristol Palin to have premarital sex and get knocked up under the Palin/conservative party/Christian family values ethics, but not other teenage American girls.

Most especially those welfare-draining "ethnic" girls. You knows how promiscuous they is. *nods and whiffs haughtily*

 

[Carnevil9]

.......She was replying to Carny's trying to be Good Will Hunting cute by having to look up something book-smart she said in Latin that he didn't know about until he Googled it. Your quoting her just mashed the two replies together since the bulletin board system here omits the double imbedded quotes of others one is replying to.

Yes. Good Old Carney must have Googled it, because he's too stupid to have known the correct quote from the git-go. And we know he's stupid because he's a conservative. QED!

Go ahead and think what you want. I certainly don't give a shit. But if any of you were math majors, you'd know that the phrase is as well known as "No blood for oil!" or "Tax Cuts for the Rich!" in certain circles........Carney

 

[Stella_Omega]

What definition are you referring to? confused:

The definition of "ethical" that puts Sarah Palin ahead of Barack Obama. What's so confusing about that?

 

[Boxlicker101]

Probably the definition where it's okay for Bristol Palin to have premarital sex and get knocked up under the Palin/conservative party/Christian family values ethics, but not other teenage American girls.

Most especially those welfare-draining "ethnic" girls. You knows how promiscuous they is. *nods and whiffs haughtily*

I haven't mentioned any of Sarah Palin's daughters, and only mentioned her youngest son in response to somebody else's post. If the young lady you mentioned has non-marital sex, it is her business, certainly not yours or mine. If the child were being supported by the taxpayers, that would be a different matter.

I have always thught of "ethnic" as distinguishing various sub-categories of Caucasian, sudh as Irish, Polish, Italian, etc. I think of promiscuousness as being an individual thing, not related to ethnicity.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
What definition are you referring to? confused:

The definition of "ethical" that puts Sarah Palin ahead of Barack Obama. What's so confusing about that?

That's not a definition.

 

[DeeZire]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
What definition are you referring to? confused:




That's not a definition.

It's your application of the definition. In other words, you're using SP as an example of an ethical person. Get it now?

 

[MzDeviancy]

Paging Dr. Freud...

From Human Events.com, A.W.R. Hawkins pens a thinly-disguised crush letter (bold added):

And here I thought I hated her because she was a moron with the potential to fuck up the state of international affairs worse than Bush. Huh.

 

[Huckleman2000]

And here I thought I hated her because she was a moron with the potential to fuck up the state of international affairs worse than Bush. Huh.

I KNOW! Who'd of thunk it was TEH BEAUTY?

 

[oggbashan]

An aside

...

Democracy was spread by example. In 1820, France and England were monarchies, but by 1900, France was a democracy and the monarch in England was mostly a figurehead. This was not done by American intervention.

In 1789 the French Revolution abolished its dictatorial monarchy. After the First Republic - a democracy - they then got virtual monarchy back under Napoleon Bonaparte as Emperor, then their useless monarchy restored. They had to be defeated in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 before they restored the Republic again.

The Magna Carta set limits on English monarchs. The Civil War and the Glorious Revolution of 1688 made the English monarch effectively a constitutional figurehead of a democracy. It may have been a democracy of limited franchise, but a democracy it was. "No taxation without representation" - a cry of the American War of Independence - was asking to be included in the democracy that already existed in Westminster. The Reform Acts of the 19th Century continually widened the voting base.

Neither country spread democracy by example. The French Revolution inspired other peoples to consider democracy, but the French Revolution was a response to a dictatorial regime that was already losing power. The Reign of Terror was no example to be followed and turned many people who applauded the principles of the French Revolution away from the reality of fraternal executions.

Og

 

[xssve]

Sarah Palin is toxic.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
...

Democracy was spread by example. In 1820, France and England were monarchies, but by 1900, France was a democracy and the monarch in England was mostly a figurehead. This was not done by American intervention.

In 1789 the French Revolution abolished its dictatorial monarchy. After the First Republic - a democracy - they then got virtual monarchy back under Napoleon Bonaparte as Emperor, then their useless monarchy restored. They had to be defeated in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 before they restored the Republic again.

The Magna Carta set limits on English monarchs. The Civil War and the Glorious Revolution of 1688 made the English monarch effectively a constitutional figurehead of a democracy. It may have been a democracy of limited franchise, but a democracy it was. "No taxation without representation" - a cry of the American War of Independence - was asking to be included in the democracy that already existed in Westminster. The Reform Acts of the 19th Century continually widened the voting base.

Neither country spread democracy by example. The French Revolution inspired other peoples to consider democracy, but the French Revolution was a response to a dictatorial regime that was already losing power. The Reign of Terror was no example to be followed and turned many people who applauded the principles of the French Revolution away from the reality of fraternal executions.

Og

I know abut the reign of terror, which was why I used 1820 as a starting date. In both these nations, democracy was instituted by the people of the country, not some outside force. Both these nations and the US have served as an example of what can be accomplished if the people of a country are not excessively fettered by government, whether socialist or fascist.