Party @ the Moontower Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 What's this sort of thing called again? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Oprah probably just can't stomach the idea of spending an hour with her. And, so what? Aren't we entitled to know what she thinks?Sure. She should be the next guess on Meet the Press. But that would interfere with the GOP's Bandit-to-McCain's-Cledus strategy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 News HoundsWe watch FOX so you don't have to. Is Fox Starting A War On Oprah?Reported by Priscilla - September 9, 2008 - 110 comments On yesterday Quote Link to post Share on other sites
John Smith Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Is Oprah part of the conspiracy? Serious - the GOP would be crazy to let the press at her uncontrolled. The GOP would have to be crazy to select a VP candidate who is not prepared to meet the press. If she can't stand up to CNN how will she ever stand up to AlQueda? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 The GOP would have to be crazy to select a VP candidate who is not prepared to meet the press. If she can't stand up to CNN how will she ever stand up to AlQueda?Clearly, you have not grokked my "Sarah Palin is to John McCain as the Bandit was to Cledus" thing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Party @ the Moontower Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 The GOP would have to be crazy to select a VP candidate who is not prepared to meet the press. If she can't stand up to CNN how will she ever stand up to AlQueda? She has God on her side. Besides, she's said she doesn't follow the Iraq War closely, so I'm sure they won't invlove her. Alaska Business Monthly: We've lost a lot of Alaska's military members to the war in Iraq. How do you feel about sending more troops into battle, as President Bush is suggesting? Palin: I've been so focused on state government, I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq. http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_...-surge-wha.html Quote Link to post Share on other sites
John Smith Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Clearly, you have not grokked my "Sarah Palin is to John McCain as the Bandit was to Cledus" thing. Surely you have not caught on to my rehashing a golden oldie fromt he republican phrase book. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
austrya Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 How can Sarah Palin honestly say that she hasn't followed the war in Iraq when her son is about to deploy there? Wouldn't you kind of want to know what's going on if one of your kids were going there? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Party @ the Moontower Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 She's doing a quick study on it right now Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 If God says it is His Task, then what else does she need to know? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
austrya Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 If God says it is His Task, then what else does she need to know? Wasn't Bin Laden pissed because he said it was a holy war? Didn't we come back and say religion had nothing to do with it? Is she really trying to piss them all off? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
John Smith Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 How can Sarah Palin honestly say that she hasn't followed the war in Iraq when her son is about to deploy there? Wouldn't you kind of want to know what's going on if one of your kids were going there? You would think that as commander in chief of the Alaska NG and by the notion that she is apparently equiping them and sending them off to combat, that she would be concerned about all of the troops going there, concerned enough to maybe know something about where she is sending them, and what she is sending them there for? Oh my god, she really is a clone of Bush. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
austrya Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 You would think that as commander in chief of the Alaska NG and by the notion that she is apparently equiping them and sending them off to combat, that she would be concerned about all of the troops going there, concerned enough to maybe know something about where she is sending them, and what she is sending them there for? Oh my god, she really is a clone of Bush. I'd be mighty pissed if I was a resident of Alaska and a parent or spouse of a person who was deployed there. That's a very insensitive thing for her to say. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Party @ the Moontower Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 I agree. She sorta chalked it up to, working hard on the Alaska homefront issues. Well, parents, spouses, grandparents, sisters, brothers, and kids of these soliders are in Alsaka waiting for their loved ones to come home. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Doug C Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Wonder twin powers, activate! Sorry. That popped into my head and I had to say it.The whole Palin choice is such a perfect example of politics. If the Dems. had picked a VP candidate with the exact same political experience and family issues, the Repubs. would be making so much hay that you could build the Bridge to Nowhere with the bales. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Define successful. Every choice either side makes hurts some and helps others. Sure, I define it as meeting the stated goals of the policy proposal. Can you answer my question about lies? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 So both sides policy positions are always equally likely to be successful? And perhaps there's no such thing as "universal truth" but is there such a thing as a flat out lie? I wasn't talking about facts when I said universal truth, I was talking about morals, political philosophy and other things of an intangible nature. Of course a fact can be a lie, but a moral? A philosophy? Never. And that's where I think a lot of people step over their bounds. Look at it like this: Barry Bonds has hit the most home runs than anyone in major league baseball's history. This is indisputable fact.Barry Bonds is a bad person because he cheated to hit those home runs. This is an opinion, or an example of morality. This can be neither right nor wrong, just like there is no right or wrong answer for almost every political issue out there. If there was, there wouldn't be as much divisiveness as there is. I'm not sure if that answers your question, but then I'm not sure what your question was asking, since it kind of didn't have anything to do with what I was talking about. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 I wasn't talking about facts when I said universal truth, I was talking about morals, political philosophy and other things of an intangible nature. Of course a fact can be a lie, but a moral? A philosophy? Never. And that's where I think a lot of people step over their bounds. Look at it like this: Barry Bonds has hit the most home runs than anyone in major league baseball's history. This is indisputable fact.Barry Bonds is a bad person because he cheated to hit those home runs. This is an opinion, or an example of morality. This can be neither right nor wrong, just like there is no right or wrong answer for almost every political issue out there. If there was, there wouldn't be as much divisiveness as there is. I'm not sure if that answers your question, but then I'm not sure what your question was asking, since it kind of didn't have anything to do with what I was talking about.I dunno man. The morals and philosophy of the National Socialist German Workers Party were lies, no? Some things are bullshit and some things are not. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 We've had this discussion before, and people always use an extreme situation like that to try and disprove my thoughts on the subject. I'll have to step lightly here, of course... The way I look at it, morality cannot, by definition, be wrong, but they used false facts to justify their morals. Or something. Invoking the nazis is kind of a lazy way to win this argument, because if I answer the question, it's going to piss some people off. Point for you, I guess. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 We've had this discussion before, and people always use an extreme situation like that to try and disprove my thoughts on the subject. I'll have to step lightly here, of course... The way I look at it, morality cannot, by definition, be wrong, but they used false facts to justify their morals. Or something. Invoking the nazis is kind of a lazy way to win this argument, because if I answer the question, it's going to piss some people off. Point for you, I guess.Dude, I am not looking to score a point. I am warning you to the dangers of moral relativism taken too far. I understand you are suspicious of people's opinions and are tempted to dismiss them all at times, but, my friend, some things are right and some things are wrong. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 I think it is fair to judge others based on your own moral code, but it is dangerous to say someone else's morals are flat out wrong. You can disagree on them, sure. But I'll never be able to bring myself to say that the way someone percieves the world around them is wrong because, maybe, with their eyes, and their brain, and their experiences, it is right to them? How many millions of people have been killed because one person disagrees with another's morals and philosophies? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 I think it is fair to judge others based on your own moral code, but it is dangerous to say someone else's morals are wrong. How many millions of people have been killed because one person disagrees with another's morals and philosophies?Dangerous, yes, but millions have been killed when people have failed to disagree strongly enough with another's morals and philosophies. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 So, in essence, neither view is right? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 So, in essence, neither view is right?The completely correct view has not been found yet, despite a good 3,000 years or so of nonstop philosophizing, of which the debate on this board is a small part. Did you ever read Milton's Areopagitica? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 There's a lot of grey area in a lot of matters, but sometimes one side is just wrong. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.