Palin resigns

grmblfjx wrote:

Why does everything always have to be about hate, and lack of soul, and lack of heart, and blah blah blah? I mean, it can't ever be normal people doing tasteless things, it has to be evil. And every poor internet idiot who's ever laughed about something tasteless is bound for hell.

This wailing about SICK and SOULLESS and HEARTLESS and EVIL and ANTICHRIST and OMG DOOMED DOOMED DOOMED that seems to flood all media whenever anything political happens, I just can't respect that. At all.

Because some people can't wrap their heads around the fact that other people like stupid and tasteless humor. If it's not funny to them, then by god, IT'S NOT FUNNY! I happen to like tasteless humor because, well, I don't know why. Shock value, maybe? I'm not evil; I'm just willfully stupid now and again.

I know Pundit Kitchen had quite a few photoshopped images of Sarah Palin and even some of her youngest daughter.
This is nothing new. SNL and MadTV both did parodies of Chelsea Clinton making fun of her looks.
I don't remember much being said about the Bush twins after that time they got busted for underage drinking. So far Obama's daughters have been okay, but they're still pretty young. Just wait until they hit their teen years.
But seriously, leave the kids alone. They didn't pick their parents or choose to be in the spotlight themselves.

Something I just wanted to point out (though I'll probably get dogpiled on for) is that Senator Palin, at least in the early stages of her run for VP, CHOSE to put her family in the spotlight. Honestly, you'd be hard pressed to find a picture of her from that period that didn't have all the kids (which the exception maybe of Trig) lined up in a neat little row, well-dressed and smiling.

This doesn't necessarily excuse a lot of what's been said, but one has to wonder if she asked the kids if they wanted to be thrust into the spotlight like that, or if she just did it because she knew it would help her image.

Compare this to President Obama and his wife, who, except on rare occasions, make a definite effort to keep their kids out of the spotlight as much as possible. It's possible for a politician to have kids and not turn their existence into a three-ring circus. In Palin's case, she seemed to have no trouble when she was running for VP using her kids as proof of how dedicated a mother she was and how she cared about the family. It was only later, when Bristol was pregnant (despite abistence-only education) and the kerfluffle with Bristol's ex-boyfrend came up that she started bawing about how people were violating the sanctity of her family.

Rabid Badger wrote:

Something I just wanted to point out (though I'll probably get dogpiled on for) is that Senator Palin, at least in the early stages of her run for VP, CHOSE to put her family in the spotlight. Honestly, you'd be hard pressed to find a picture of her from that period that didn't have all the kids (which the exception maybe of Trig) lined up in a neat little row, well-dressed and smiling.

This doesn't necessarily excuse a lot of what's been said, but one has to wonder if she asked the kids if they wanted to be thrust into the spotlight like that, or if she just did it because she knew it would help her image.

Compare this to President Obama and his wife, who, except on rare occasions, make a definite effort to keep their kids out of the spotlight as much as possible. It's possible for a politician to have kids and not turn their existence into a three-ring circus. In Palin's case, she seemed to have no trouble when she was running for VP using her kids as proof of how dedicated a mother she was and how she cared about the family. It was only later, when Bristol was pregnant (despite abistence-only education) and the kerfluffle with Bristol's ex-boyfrend came up that she started bawing about how people were violating the sanctity of her family.

THANK YOU
And when you you run on a platform of family values, you're damn right I'm going to scrutinize your family.

The only things I ever thought about Palin's kids:

1. Your teenage daughter got pregnant. Welcome to reality.
2. Why do all of your kids have such stupid names?

Mafiosa wrote:

Rabid Badger wrote:

Something I just wanted to point out (though I'll probably get dogpiled on for) is that Senator Palin, at least in the early stages of her run for VP, CHOSE to put her family in the spotlight. Honestly, you'd be hard pressed to find a picture of her from that period that didn't have all the kids (which the exception maybe of Trig) lined up in a neat little row, well-dressed and smiling.

This doesn't necessarily excuse a lot of what's been said, but one has to wonder if she asked the kids if they wanted to be thrust into the spotlight like that, or if she just did it because she knew it would help her image.

Compare this to President Obama and his wife, who, except on rare occasions, make a definite effort to keep their kids out of the spotlight as much as possible. It's possible for a politician to have kids and not turn their existence into a three-ring circus. In Palin's case, she seemed to have no trouble when she was running for VP using her kids as proof of how dedicated a mother she was and how she cared about the family. It was only later, when Bristol was pregnant (despite abistence-only education) and the kerfluffle with Bristol's ex-boyfrend came up that she started bawing about how people were violating the sanctity of her family.

THANK YOU
And when you you run on a platform of family values, you're damn right I'm going to scrutinize your family.

YES, both of you. I actually came in to say more or less the same thing, but you two together said it more or less better than I probably could have.

DarthDarthington wrote:

Mafiosa wrote:

Rabid Badger wrote:

Something I just wanted to point out (though I'll probably get dogpiled on for) is that Senator Palin, at least in the early stages of her run for VP, CHOSE to put her family in the spotlight. Honestly, you'd be hard pressed to find a picture of her from that period that didn't have all the kids (which the exception maybe of Trig) lined up in a neat little row, well-dressed and smiling.

This doesn't necessarily excuse a lot of what's been said, but one has to wonder if she asked the kids if they wanted to be thrust into the spotlight like that, or if she just did it because she knew it would help her image.

Compare this to President Obama and his wife, who, except on rare occasions, make a definite effort to keep their kids out of the spotlight as much as possible. It's possible for a politician to have kids and not turn their existence into a three-ring circus. In Palin's case, she seemed to have no trouble when she was running for VP using her kids as proof of how dedicated a mother she was and how she cared about the family. It was only later, when Bristol was pregnant (despite abistence-only education) and the kerfluffle with Bristol's ex-boyfrend came up that she started bawing about how people were violating the sanctity of her family.

THANK YOU
And when you you run on a platform of family values, you're damn right I'm going to scrutinize your family.

YES, both of you. I actually came in to say more or less the same thing, but you two together said it more or less better than I probably could have.

Circle jerks tiem nao!

Spotts1701 wrote:

KelinciHutan wrote:

I like you, but this kind of smug, self-satisfied attitude amongst the Democrats right now is exactly why conservatives and Republicans alike have laughed when Democrats start throwing around the word "bipartisan." They don't really mean it.

Neither do Republicans. Since 2001 "bipartisan" has become code in the GOP for "give us everything we want, and we might vote for it".

This whole "compromise" and "bipartisan" bullshit have to go out the window. It's crap when EITHER party says it. You don't agree with an idiot just to be agreeable. This doesn't mean you can't be open to other opinions, but don't go doing something you know/believe is stupid just to please a stupid person.

Quote :

t is to this I objected, not to Ceres' statement
that the Republicans are a bit lost. They kind of are. Her declaration
about exactly how they shall be rewarded for promising to conform to
some nebulous set of standards, along with the opener of "What matters,
among other things, is how you behave to achieve your goals" which
implies there's a set of guidelines under which people are allowed to
disagree with her, is where I take issue.

Well, then it's my fault for not defining those standards. How about 'respect the Constitution', 'stop torturing people in secret', 'don't get into wars under false pretenses', 'don't get into wars under false pretenses AND that you know you can't win', 'help the environment', 'help the environment and reduce dependence on foreign oils while you're at it', and so on and so forth.

If I were to simplify it, I'd say 'behave like you have some modicum of decency, at least'. Just choosing Palin for VP in the first place blows the last one out of the water.

And what I meant to way with "What matters,
among other things, is how you behave to achieve your goals" is that victories are kinda hollow if you behaved like a douchebag, stole and blew stuff up, and nobody likes you in the end. "For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?" and all that jazz.

And, you know, the GOP did have the world in its hands and look where it got them ---corrupted to the core and ran by complete imbeciles, after forcing the USA to carry 'kick me' sign for 8 long years all over the world.

Now, while it's easy to point and laugh, and god knows I've done my share of it, it's actually dangerous in the long run. The Democratic Party is in danger of becoming the last refuge of the non-crazy. Some people would vote for them, just to avoid voting for the batshit righties. That's further complicated by the fact the the US is a two-party system and all other contenders are a joke.

So no, I find no need to apologize for having standards for behavior. And frankly, I have pretty low standards---if you can't do something as simple as 'don't start wars you can't win' (I find that even more insulting than starting a war with lies, because the former is just proof that they just didn't care)--- then damn right I won't take you seriously.

It's not like I'm asking for the Nile here. Come on.

Ceres wrote:

Well, then it's my fault for not defining those standards. How about 'respect the Constitution', 'stop torturing people in secret', 'don't get into wars under false pretenses', 'don't get into wars under false pretenses AND that you know you can't win', 'help the environment', 'help the environment and reduce dependence on foreign oils while you're at it', and so on and so forth.

Forget anything? How about "achieve world peace," "hugs for all," and "invent Star Trek replicator technology to get rid of scarcity and if you don't do this you're evil evil EVIL!"

I love how you just pull out this list of bitches, moans, and complaints and declare them to be your "decency standards" which everyone should abide by or be frozen out of the political process. I could go on at length about how the Democrats do none of this as well (their take on "respecting the Constitution" is. . . creative, to say the least) but really, there's no point, so here's the short version:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Politics is a filthy fucking business, and your attempts to apply standards to it is either gross naivete or a partisan hatchet-job ("all decent people should do this list of things, which oh so conveniently matches up to a list accusations leveled against the Republican party. But I'm not biased! REALLY!")

Ceres wrote:

If I were to simplify it, I'd say 'behave like you have some modicum of decency, at least'. Just choosing Palin for VP in the first place blows the last one out of the water.

Decency by whose standards? Not yours, obviously, since those are tailored to freeze out anyone you don't like. As Keli said, "that's not how difference of ideas works."

Ceres wrote:

And what I meant to way with "What matters,
among other things, is how you behave to achieve your goals" is that victories are kinda hollow if you behaved like a douchebag, stole and blew stuff up, and nobody likes you in the end. "For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?" and all that jazz.

Well, it will profit him one whole world, for starters.

gaijinguy wrote:

Forget anything? How about "achieve world peace," "hugs for all," and "invent Star Trek replicator technology to get rid of scarcity and if you don't do this you're evil evil EVIL!"

Not torturing people is beautiful and elusive. Like the mystical phoenix.

Quote :

I love how you just pull out this list of bitches, moans, and complaints and declare them to be your "decency standards" which everyone should abide by or be frozen out of the political process.

Technically, at least two of those things she listed are illegal, and one of them is incredibly stupid. I like how you stand up for the rights of stupid criminals. It makes you progressive! But it's also stupid, like an overused image macro.

Quote :

I love how you just pull out this list of bitches, moans, and
complaints and declare them to be your "decency standards" which
everyone should abide by or be frozen out of the political process.

So, under this assumption, it's acceptable that, say, a serial rapist runs for office. Or someone who cheats on the taxes or anyone who has an IQ of 5 run for president. You sure schooled me, Gaijinguy. I am officially schooled.

Is it a crime, really, to believe that idiots should not run for Congress? Does it make me a bad person to hope for a senator that, at the very least, knows how to read and write? Am I a naive child for wanting my DVD player to work, my Doctor Who to be awesome, and to have personal moral lines that I would never cross?

Quote :

Politics is a filthy fucking business, and your
attempts to apply standards to it is either gross naivete or a partisan
hatchet-job

Of course politics is a dirty business. Guess what? Sky is blue, water
is wet. But that doesn't mean politicians shouldn't be held
accountable. If they suck, they should be voted out of office. It's not
that hard a concept.

In short, you are by now well acquainted with my standards, even though you might disagree with them. The Democratic party, fucked up as it might be, seems a better bet any day of the week. What about yours? Do you have any standards at all? I know you have them, because everyone does, even if they don't know it or can't quite articulate it.

I'm intrigued, however, by your use of 'frozen out of the political process'. Should retards not run for office? I believe they shouldn't. In fact, I'm willing to bet lots of people agree with me. And if they run, don't be surprised when most people vote for the other guy.

Lysander wrote:

Yet moar party 101 bullshit

Technically, at least two of those things she listed are illegal, and one of them is incredibly stupid. I like how you stand up for the rights of stupid criminals.

I like how you don't, and your progressivism is dropped like a bad habit the second you have something to gain from it. Real nice on the not looking like a hypocritical- oh, wait, never mind.

I've now officially pushed Lysander's button. Do we want to take bets on the equivocating, tu quoque bullshit his next butthurt post will contain?

Ceres wrote:

So, under this assumption, it's acceptable that, say, a serial rapist runs for office. Or someone who cheats on the taxes or anyone who has an IQ of 5 run for president. You sure schooled me, Gaijinguy. I am officially schooled.

Don't say that, I'm not qualified to teach special needs.

Quote :

Is it a crime, really, to believe that idiots should not run for Congress? Does it make me a bad person to hope for a senator that, at the very least, knows how to read and write? Am I a naive child for wanting my DVD player to work, my Doctor Who to be awesome, and to have personal moral lines that I would never cross?

In theory, no. In practice, your standard of idiocy make a diagnosis for sluggish schizophrenia look like a hard science.

Quote :

Of course politics is a dirty business. Guess what? Sky is blue, water
is wet. But that doesn't mean politicians shouldn't be held
accountable. If they suck, they should be voted out of office. It's not
that hard a concept.

Ooh, they "suck." There's a clear standard that people of every stripe can agree to.

Quote :

In short, you are by now well acquainted with my standards, even though you might disagree with them. The Democratic party, fucked up as it might be, seems a better bet any day of the week. What about yours? Do you have any standards at all? I know you have them, because everyone does, even if they don't know it or can't quite articulate it.

"I'm a little fuzzy on the whole good/bad thing." I do have a standard ("win," being a big part of it) but really, this isn't about me. It's about the you-being-full-of-shit. Placing yourself on this pedistal of decency not to rise above the crowd, but because the higher vantage point makes it easy for you to piss on people you don't like.

gaijinguy wrote:

I like how you don't, and your progressivism

I want to know what you think that word means.

Lysander wrote:

gaijinguy wrote:

I like how you don't, and your progressivism

I want to know what you think that word means.

That's it? Your entire post?

Damn, lampshading your habits sure shut you the fuck up. I should do it more often. (Now I know what game we're going to play. "How long until he gets snooty about the TVtropes link, in nanoseconds?")

Quote :

"I'm a little fuzzy on the whole good/bad
thing." I do have a standard ("win," being a big part of it) but
really, this isn't about me. It's about the you-being-full-of-shit.
Placing yourself on this pedistal of decency not to rise above the
crowd, but because the higher vantage point makes it easy for you to
piss on people you don't like.

Wait, so it's all about me? Why? I'm an username in an obscure internet board. You don't know who I am, you have no idea what makes me tick, and the material you can use to make an assessment of my personality is what I bother write here, which frankly, is not much.

I find it flattering that you immediately presume I'm superior to you in every which way, (harhar see what I did there?), but like a homophobe that's secretly gay himself, you're probably just mad at whatever aspect of your life you don't like and I just happen to 'represent' or whatever.

(That's right! You secretly fear that the Democrats are right and you're wrong and that they're making fun of you for your hillbilly ways! AT LAST! MY DEGREE IN INTERNET PSYCHOLOGY IS COMPLETE! TOMORROW, TEH WORLD!11!)

This is why George Washington warned the country about getting caught up in political parties.
We don't know why Palin resigned. She probably doesn't have a clear grasp on why, either. But her politcal career is most likey dead.
It's not worth fighting about.

gaijinguy wrote:

Lysander wrote:

gaijinguy wrote:

I like how you don't, and your progressivism

I want to know what you think that word means.

That's it? Your entire post?

It's a question a sixth grader should be able to answer.

You should try answering it.

And you're just mad that I lampshaded your behavior first, and better. :hmm:

gaijinguy wrote:

ur dumb and im not

C'mon, man at least put effort into this. :redangry:

YOU USED TO BE COOL

Lysander wrote:

gaijinguy wrote:

Lysander wrote:

gaijinguy wrote:

I like how you don't, and your progressivism

I want to know what you think that word means.

That's it? Your entire post?

It's a question a sixth grader should be able to answer.

You should try answering it.

And you're just mad that I lampshaded your behavior first, and better. :hmm:

Are you two flirting? This thread needs more man-sex!

Uh, don't mind me. :teach:

Shisaiga wrote:

Are you two flirting?

Being snarky, condescending, and assholish is your idea of flirting? How the shit do you get people to like you?

Lysander wrote:

How the shit do you get people to like you?

What are you assuming, here?

Lysander wrote:

Shisaiga wrote:

Are you two flirting?

Being snarky, condescending, and assholish is your idea of flirting? How the shit do you get people to like you?

Hey, worked on me.

Anyway, I'm officially betting that Palin ends up with a show on Fox News, which will be hilarious.

Lysander wrote:

Anyway, I'm officially betting that Palin ends up with a show on Fox News, which will be hilarious.

Kind of like Mike Huckabee's talk show, which made me lose any sort of respect I had for the man? If that happens, my levels of disrespect for Palin would skyrocket. That would be awesome!