wow, so her relgioyus perspective overides her logic or law, and the evidence to back this up please?




...yea whatever.

__________________

"The captain has turned off the `No Dubbing' sign. You are free to speak any language you choose."

And like Obama she should seek to publicly distance herself from these teachings that she spent so much time listening to.

The thing is though, one of the major reasons she was picked as McCains running mate was to shore up the evangelical support for McCain. If she distances herself herself from that history (which i believe would be a lie, as it surely was with Obama). If she distances herself from the extreme views of those who want to support her, her only usefulness as McCains running mate vanishes. I can't imagine she has any other qualities that would make her a politically strategic choice.

Andrew

__________________
“...corporations and those who run them cannot stop exploiting resources and amassing wealth until they have... .I cannot finish this sentence, because the truth is that can never stop; like cancer, they can only continue to expand until they kill the host.”

-- Derrick Jensen

I'm saying there is no scenario. From your ad hominem attack and repeated inability to say anything specific or concrete, I'll have to assume that you can't think of anything to say that wouldn't make you look stupid, so are putting up this weird fear mongering response instead.

Just admit it, dude. You can't think of anything. You have a bad argument.

__________________
Obama Low Effort Wealth Spread. I can't believe it's not earned!

It calls into question her trustworthiness and credibility, absolutely.


Andrew

__________________
“...corporations and those who run them cannot stop exploiting resources and amassing wealth until they have... .I cannot finish this sentence, because the truth is that can never stop; like cancer, they can only continue to expand until they kill the host.”

-- Derrick Jensen

Maybe you could actually outline what the concrete fear is here. So far all I'm getting is crickets. What could she enact that would harm the country.

__________________
Obama Low Effort Wealth Spread. I can't believe it's not earned!

Perhaps my writing hasn't been clear. I know the type. I know the background. I know the propensities. I back some of my opinions on experience.

Maybe you don't. That might explain the discrepancy.Again, you can smirk or laugh. That's fine.

I know the signs. I know the tipoffs. You, apparently, either don't, or don't care.

yea...whatever.

__________________
All things serve The Beam

Que the time machine to the year 2001. "I'm saying there's no scenario".

I haven't made an ad hominem attack. I harbor certain suspicions, based on conctrete data I have already made clear. This, coupled with my personal experience, leads me to a certain conclusion.

If you're unable to see why that might be important, that's your issue. I'm not saying she will do anything nuts. I'm saying I have ample reason to distrust her, and I've backed it up.Just admit it dude, you can't think.

__________________
All things serve The Beam

Mmm. You might actually have a point here. Let's look at Obama. He's black. Black people committ murder seven times more often than white people do. I'd better assume Obama is gonna kill someone then. All the classic tipoffs are there. Why would anyone vote for a black man with this evidence?

__________________
Obama Low Effort Wealth Spread. I can't believe it's not earned!

No, of course you're not making an ad hominem attack. Lol.

I'm not the one who can't come up with a scenario. Still. You can't even prove that we invaded Iraq solely based on Bush's religion.

Suspicions of WHAT? WHAT could she actually enact that would harm the country based on her religious beliefs?

You just can't answer. It's just amusing now to watch you flop around.

__________________
Obama Low Effort Wealth Spread. I can't believe it's not earned!

As someone who deals with that all the time:

A. your attempt at irony fails
B. I find your grasp of statistics and rhetoric like 'A', above.
C. your assumptions are the worst of all.

I have presented a case on what I know, and what has shown me, historically, to be the most likely case.

You have presented, uh, something.

__________________
All things serve The Beam

I'm mocking your prejudice, actually, and the stat is from the DoJ.

And what I've most clearly presented is that you think her beliefs are "bad" and "dangerous" with absolutely no possible scenario that can play out.

Just give me one. One thing that could be enacted that could harm the country. Come on, genius.

__________________
Obama Low Effort Wealth Spread. I can't believe it's not earned!

Look, no matter how much you ask, I'm not holding your hand.

A religious fanatic led us into an unnecessary war, and said, plainly, god told him to do so. Google is your friend here. If Sarah Palin were president, your blinkard way of thinking wouldn't believe she could, and our troops could be on the ground before you knew what happened.

If you have to keep asking WHAT, you're not thinking.

That's not amusing. That's worthy of pity.

__________________
All things serve The Beam

I'll offer an example of a worst case scenario of what she could do as both VP or POTUS. She could go after Iran by lying to the american people about the danger iran actually poses in order to pursue her faith based agenda of america's role in the end times. There is already a very recent precedence of a president and VP engaging in this sort of behavior, so its not absurd to consider it. Im not claiming GWB and Cheney are end-timers, but they lied to go to war for a neoconservative agenda. She could likewise lie for war to achieve her own twisted agenda.

McCain is a hawk on Iran (of a secular nature), and Palin could be used to garner support in the religious right for any adventures he might have planned in that region.

Another example: She could use her position to avoid tackling the enormous environmental problems the world faces because her theology of dominion necessarily places human wants and desires above that of the environment and other animals. Dominionism offers an extreme anthropocentric view of our place in the cosmos.

There are plenty more examples in the realm of abortion rights, stem cell research, creationism. She might not be able to ever pass laws on these issues, but she could waste at least 4 years giving respect to them as important issues.

There are plenty of books and internet sources on this topic. I don't really need to hold you hand if you want to learn about it. I'm sure you can read about it and figure it out for yourself. Your apparent ignorance on the subject seems more feigned than genuine anyway.

Andrew

__________________
“...corporations and those who run them cannot stop exploiting resources and amassing wealth until they have... .I cannot finish this sentence, because the truth is that can never stop; like cancer, they can only continue to expand until they kill the host.”

-- Derrick Jensen

A religious fanatic didn't lead us into an unnecessary war. The Senate voted on it.

I'd never want you to hold my hand, because you can't.

I'm thinking plenty, you just don't have the conviction in your belief or any imagination to give an example.

I think I've pretty much proved that you're a prejudiced fear monger with no concrete scenario to back up what will surely by BAD.

Whatever it is.

__________________
Obama Low Effort Wealth Spread. I can't believe it's not earned!

Who sent it there, genius?Uh. Ok. That was meant metaphorically.Unless you can't read, I just gave you one. If you choose to ignore it, that's your business.You've proven nothing, and I have posited nothing concrete. I am addressing possibilities, and you fiddle while Rome burns, whistling past the graveyard.

Good luck with that.

__________________
All things serve The Beam