Is Sarah Palin qualified to be President of the United States? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 03:54:18 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2008 Elections
  Is Sarah Palin qualified to be President of the United States? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Is Sarah Palin qualified to be President of the United States?
#1
Yes.
 
#2
No.
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 128

Author Topic: Is Sarah Palin qualified to be President of the United States?  (Read 26250 times)
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« on: August 29, 2008, 11:43:06 AM »

I worry a bit about her experience but she is competent and is the one person with executive experience in this race. She's qualified.

The population of Alaska is about the same as the population (a little less, actually) of Austin, TX, my home town. The current mayor has been mayor since 2003, over twice as long as Mrs. Palin. Is he qualified to be President?

Comparing the job of a Mayor with the job of a Governor is ridiculous. Population doesn't mean everything.

Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #1 on: August 29, 2008, 12:05:44 PM »



Why? Just because she's a woman?

Nobody actually knows who she is.

People didn't know Barack or Bill Clinton at the beginning either...
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #2 on: August 29, 2008, 01:45:41 PM »

I like when the secularists get really pissed off about the oh so very important issue of whether or not to teach evolution! The best part? She supports teaching both and they still get pissy.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #3 on: August 29, 2008, 01:46:09 PM »



Get used to it. I'm surprised she hasn't been called a "fake woman" yet by some Obama surrogate.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #4 on: August 29, 2008, 01:49:36 PM »

I like when the secularists get really pissed off about the oh so very important issue of whether or not to teach evolution! The best part? She supports teaching both and they still get pissy.

Well, you decided to scarecrow my point instead of addressing it, so I guess I don't have to respond to this.

And what's your point? Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't you one of those that brush off abortion as a mostly "unimportant issue" but see evolution vs. creationism as a top priority?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Good thing I'm not trying to charm you.  Wink
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #5 on: August 29, 2008, 01:56:44 PM »

And what's your point? Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't you one of those that brush off abortion as a mostly "unimportant issue" but see evolution vs. creationism as a top priority?

I don't brush off abortion as an unimportant issue.  It's probably philosophically the most important issue today.

I don't think creationism vs. evolutionism is a huge, massive deal.  It's just one of the few issues where I think one argument just doesn't make much sense.  That doesn't mean I feel super-passionately about it.  I don't.

Good thing I'm not trying to charm you.  Wink

Of course, you let your exotic accent and classic good looks do that for you Wink

Alcon, Alcon, Alcon. You make it so tough to hate you.


Wink
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #6 on: August 29, 2008, 02:01:38 PM »


And what's your point? Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't you one of those that brush off abortion as a mostly "unimportant issue" but see evolution vs. creationism as a top priority?

It's as if someone strongly supporting teaching in schools that all apples are red. It isn't true and that's well known. So if if someone is seriously pushing for that, they should be vigorously opposed.

Roll Eyes

Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #7 on: August 29, 2008, 02:11:17 PM »


And what's your point? Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't you one of those that brush off abortion as a mostly "unimportant issue" but see evolution vs. creationism as a top priority?

It's as if someone strongly supporting teaching in schools that all apples are red. It isn't true and that's well known. So if if someone is seriously pushing for that, they should be vigorously opposed.

Roll Eyes



It's the same level of absurdity as teaching creationism, or even insisting on parity with evolution. It is known to be false. Hence the example.

Except the idea of creationism is often more complex than just saying, "God just put humans on the planet as humans. The end."

You can't say that the idea of God playing a role in evolution is known to be false.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #8 on: August 29, 2008, 02:18:23 PM »


That's not creationism. Creationsim posits that the earth is around 10,000 years old. This is known to be false. You are referring to intelligent design, a theory which has no evidence and is not scientific. But it is not creationism, to which I was referring.

Ah, yes. I can't keep track of the names these days.

"Intelligent design" might not be purely scientific but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be discussed. I am totally in favor of an education plan that focuses mostly on evolution. Believe it or not, we big, bad, backwards Roman Catholics believe in evolution! Shocking, right?

However, we do believe in God having a role in it. I don't see what is so wrong with informing students that these are mainstream beliefs in how man came to be. Maybe it shouldn't be in "science" class. I guess we have to be even more PC and create another department for it.  Roll Eyes
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #9 on: August 29, 2008, 02:19:50 PM »

Teaching ID in classrooms would be a disservice to science and the kids themselves. You want to teach it in a church or a philosophy class that's fine, but if anyone tries to teach my kids creationism I will get way more "pissy" than I am right now.

Someone needs to chill!

By the way, this attitude is just as annoying as those that could factually claim that evolution is still just a theory and shouldn't be passed off as fact.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #10 on: August 29, 2008, 02:24:29 PM »

Teaching ID in classrooms would be a disservice to science and the kids themselves. You want to teach it in a church or a philosophy class that's fine, but if anyone tries to teach my kids creationism I will get way more "pissy" than I am right now.

Someone needs to chill!

By the way, this attitude is just as annoying as those that could factually claim that evolution is still just a theory and shouldn't be passed off as fact.

Oh I'm straight chillin' dawg don't you worry about it. So the truth is annoying to you? lol.

What truth? Did you even read about my stance on this or are you being your usual self?
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #11 on: August 29, 2008, 02:34:01 PM »

Teaching ID in classrooms would be a disservice to science and the kids themselves. You want to teach it in a church or a philosophy class that's fine, but if anyone tries to teach my kids creationism I will get way more "pissy" than I am right now.

Someone needs to chill!

By the way, this attitude is just as annoying as those that could factually claim that evolution is still just a theory and shouldn't be passed off as fact.

Oh I'm straight chillin' dawg don't you worry about it. So the truth is annoying to you? lol.

What truth? Did you even read about my stance on this or are you being your usual self?

Oh vow you admitted that ID should not be taught in "science" classes. But still kids must be informed somehow that some retards out there won't accept science? Wow a great leap you have made sir. Do you want a cookie?

Dude, you're a massive douche.


Aizen, apologize.  That's a horrible thing to say.  All us Democrats hope she loses.  But she's a classy lady and, evidently, pretty intelligent and compassionate. 

Nice party.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #12 on: August 29, 2008, 02:40:17 PM »



While Republican jackasses make me want to roll up my sleeves and fight, jackasses from my own party make me want to hide.

Jackasses symbolize your party in more ways than one these days.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #13 on: August 29, 2008, 11:18:22 PM »

"Sen. McCain's personal interactions with his new running mate have been sparse. He first met her just six months ago, at the National Governors Association meeting in Washington. They spoke again by phone this past Sunday, the campaign said. Campaign officials would not say if they had any interactions in between."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121993453813079803.html?mod=hps_us_whats_news

At least Obama and Biden saw each other at work everyday, among other interactions...

And McCain has stated that he has followed her career.

I am, of course, waiting to hear, "Yeah, that's just what the old warmonger says..."
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #14 on: August 30, 2008, 05:20:15 PM »

She's especially angry that Palin talked about the glass ceiling and Clinton's work to break it in her speech yesterday, as my mom believes that Clinton is entitled to be the first woman to become president, and thinks that Palin coming along from nowhere with no accomplishments to steal Clinton's spotlight is disgusting.

I'm glad your mother feels confident is telling people who is "entitled" to be the first woman President.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #15 on: August 30, 2008, 07:49:51 PM »

The fact is Gov. Palin would be a much better President then Sen. Clinton.

Hillary Clinton:

--Received 17.5-18 million votes for President in the Democratic Primary.

Apparently, that's a good reason as to why someone would be a better President.

George W. Bush received three million more votes than John Kerry did in 2004. Do you think he has been a better President than Kerry would have been?
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #16 on: August 30, 2008, 09:55:06 PM »

Guys, I have some relieving news: according to Palin's speech just now, she used to be both a hockey mom and a part-time basketball coach. Don't worry; we're in good, experienced hands.

Your commentary on Brian Schweitzer, a rancher by profession, being a possible Obama running mate:



Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #17 on: August 30, 2008, 10:16:45 PM »


And foreign policy experience, too, I bet!
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #18 on: August 30, 2008, 10:20:36 PM »


It's funny, I can pretty much guarantee that if Schweitzer had been picked, people like me would be defending him, while people like you would laugh him off as a hick in a stupid tie who had no clue what he was doing and whose executive experience was a joke.

Actually, probably not (at least on my part). After his speech, I noted that I think he'll be the Democratic frontrunner in 2012 if Obama loses this year. He'd be a strong candidate this year for Vice President.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #19 on: August 31, 2008, 03:12:28 PM »


Do you think Palin is more qualified to be President that Clinton?  I would like to see how long Sarah would last in a Presidential debate with Hillary.

Hillary Clinton has been a U.S. Senator for six years. Do I think she has more experience? Sure. Is it as much as people make it out to be? No.

I would like to see how long she would last, too. I love how much you people underestimate this woman. Keep doing it.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #20 on: August 31, 2008, 03:19:51 PM »
« Edited: August 31, 2008, 03:31:03 PM by Keystone Phil »


Do you think Palin is more qualified to be President that Clinton?  I would like to see how long Sarah would last in a Presidential debate with Hillary.

Hillary Clinton has been a U.S. Senator for six years. Do I think she has more experience? Sure. Is it as much as people make it out to be? No.

I would like to see how long she would last, too. I love how much you people underestimate this woman. Keep doing it.

Hillary Clinton has been a senator for 8 years.  She was elected in 2000.

Technically a Senator for seven and a half years.  Wink

Yeah, it was a typo on my part.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.046 seconds with 16 queries.