Sarah Palin, Republican Vice Presidential Candidate

[Elvis]

For the people referencing the 70s as a period of Global Cooling or whatever, keep in mind our technology has improved vastly since.

Ice core technology is the bedrock of these theories. They are able to record the temperature of a particular time period by analyzing the air bubbles trapped in the cores. It's all in Gore's documentary. I only mention that because it's a very accesible way of learning about the tech. Unless there's an outcry over the efficacy of this tech, then I think it's something to take note of.

Also, is Churchill saying that our representatives in Congress were just lazy/bad public servants during the mobilization for the Iraq war? I'm sure that's true to a degree. But for example, the Downing Street memo suggests quite explicitly that the Bush admin. was FRAMING the evidence they found. They were pushing an agenda. No different from when a News station will push for a theme of the day (watch Outfoxed).

I'm sure there were shitty reps who let us down and while we did have agencies reporting to us that we should *not* go into Iraq/etc. you can't deny that the administration was actively pushing for the war. We've done this sort of thing PLENTY of times. Remember? It was the Cold War.

[Beckwin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaSECfQqty8

...Palin is really bush league. honestly, the prospect of her running things is not a comfortable one in the slightest.

[Rhinox]

17,000 scientists have signed onto the idea that global warming isn't man-made. And another 52,000 that were previously in agreement just recently decided there is no consensus or that it wasn't man-made. I would have never guessed you believed in this mumbo jumbo.

http://www.desmogblog.com/500-scient...land-institute

That lists you referenced credibility means dick at the end of the day.

PS.

http://www.ipcc.ch/

These guys love to lie because they have so much to gain.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

http://www.desmogblog.com/500-scient...land-institute

That lists you referenced credibility means dick at the end of the day.

PS.

http://www.ipcc.ch/

These guys love to lie because they have so much to gain.

Did I reference a list with 500 names on it?

Edit: It should be hard to debunk this guy's work. Go. http://www.weatherquestions.com/Roy-...al-warming.htm

[Rhinox]

I'm right, because what I do for a living has a large amount of bearing on that.

You don't need expertise, you need to do your job as a Congressman, which in this situation is learn everything you can about this proposed war in Iraq so that you can do your job and authorize a declaration of war.

If I get a document, and I read through it and it says there is all this evidence of training camps and because in the Gulf War we found nuclear facilities we suspect Iraq is still operating them and has to be distributing weapons to Al Queda because Hussein is Sunni and AQ is Sunni and I'm reading this and I say to myself, "Well gee, doesn't AQ hate Hussein for his atrocities against Muslims and complete avoidance of Sharia?"

I think at that point I'd probably look at the bottom of this document that got handed to me, look at the sources, and ask for those documents so I could do my job as a representative of the people of the United States.

Holy shit. it all makes sense now. Churchill is Jason Bourne. Thanks for gracing us with your presence.

[Rhinox]

Did I reference a list with 500 names on it?

No but it calls to question any lists with names of man made climate change deniers.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

No but it calls to question any lists with names of man made climate change deniers.

You sound like an LSAT question.

The reasoning in Rhinox's argument is flawed because:

A. It presumes, without justification, that all lists are the same.

[Rhinox]

Kinda hard to take any "Scientist" serious when he believes in Creationism. but I'm sure thats were the Similarities to the Conservative movement ends right? Right....?


try again.

[Rhinox]

You sound like an LSAT question.

The reasoning in Rhinox's argument is flawed because:

A. It presumes, without justification, that all lists are the same.

I'm sure blindly accepting lists of names when there has been doubt on previous list of the same type is flawless logic.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

Kinda hard to take any "Scientist" serious when he believes in Creationism. but I'm sure thats were the Similarities to the Conservative movement ends right? Right....?

I don't think global warming has anything to do with creationism.

[Rhinox]

I don't think global warming has anything to do with creationism.

you think? fucking genius you are. You're too much for me man.

way to miss the point.

[Rhinox]

Love watching Mccain squirm around the questions about his VP and others attacking Obama record of being a community organizer.

[geno]

I don't think global warming has anything to do with creationism.

But does a scientist believing in creationism have anything to do with that scientists credibility when it comes to other clearly scientific subject matter? Simple question!

Note: this line of questioning is incredibly convenient for me, because if you say yes, I agree and am happy. If you say no, then I'm equally happy as I have no patience for creationism nor the people who facilitate its rise, which means the argument ends either way. Win/win!

Although I guess that doesn't account for the fact that you might instead divert the question with an answer that isn't yes or no. I'll just count that as a win though as well.

[Churchill]

Grats on your net victories.

[geno]

Love watching Mccain squirm around the questions about his VP and others attacking Obama record of being a community organizer.

When McCain said (and I'm paraphrasing here) that the campaign would have had a much different tone had Obama accepted his invitation for the town halls, I was tremendously curious why there wasn't a follow question as simple as, "so you are saying you would have a run a different campaign had Obama taken you up on your offer?" They didn't even have to call his current campaign negative, just ask if it would have been different. Seems like an almost standard follow up to me. I'm curious how McCain would have defused the question (though I'm sure it would have been well. He actually seemed very well spoken tonight which I liked.)

[Rhinox]

Yeah, But any serious responsible journalism would just make it so the right Screams Media Bias. Sad day

[pohibaba]

I'm curious how McCain would have defused the question (though I'm sure it would have been well. He actually seemed very well spoken tonight which I liked.)

Unlike what some people in this thread would lead you to believe, McCain is actually very quick on his feet most of the time in unscripted interviews.

[Churchill]

The only time I've really seen him falter is early on in the campaign or when discussing something he isn't versed in.

Or when going against someone much smarter than him.

[geno]

Unlike what some people in this thread would lead you to believe, McCain is actually very quick on his feet most of the time in unscripted interviews.

I never thought he wasn't. I'm looking forward to the debates for that reason.

Don't get me wrong though, I think being a good orator with a prepared speech is just as important, even beyond the campaign and into office. In my mind, being able to read a speech well (and maybe just as, if not more importantly, hire strong speech-writers and be able to contribute yourself) is a tremendously under appreciated quality in potential leaders. It may often be rhetoric, but it usually helps the U.S. image abroad and even influences American public support and confidence in their government, which can attribute to any number of positive effects on the country as a whole.

[Beckwin]

Palin flip-flops on man made global warming:

“I believe that man’s activities certainly can be contributing to the issue of global warming… John McCain and I agree that we’ve got to do something about it….”

McCain foreign policy adviser implies that knowing about foreign policy is elitist:

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/ar...is_elitist.php

Robert Kagan, a foreign policy advisor to McCain, derided criticisms of Palin as elitist.

“I don’t take this elite foreign policy view that only this anointed class knows everything about the world,” he said. “I’m not generally impressed that they are better judges of American foreign policy experience than those who have Palin’s experience.”

That's right; people who have studied foreign policy and have done foreign policy work are elitists for thinking they know better than someone who has zero foreign policy experience. Sadly, I think Yglesias is right on this:

Based on the structure of the situation, it’s plausible that Kagan is just being opportunistically dishonest here and trying to say something useful to the Republican ticket. But based on having read Kagan’s work over the years, I think that’s wrong and he’s absolutely being honest. Kagan, like most neoconservatives, thinks that in-depth knowledge of foreign countries and the politics and culture of foreign societies isn’t helpful in thinking about foreign policy questions. Similarly, they believe that in-depth knowledge of theoretical and empirical work in the field of international relations isn’t helpful. Indeed, they think that this kind of in-depth knowledge is actually harmful. They prefer the judgment of people who have little knowledge of the outside world but do possess a degree of gut-level nationalism.

What is wrong with this country?