• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Palin agrees to interview

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Perknose
No other interviews are scheduled. It will be the first TV interview for Palin since she was named 10 days ago as running mate to John McCain.

Color me highly unimpressed so far. Time will tell how this all shakes out, though.

Boy, it's such a surprise to hear you(or any other leftist) say that. As if you'd be impressed no matter what she did. WAHHH.... she won't talk to the media.... WAHHHH... it'll just be softballs.... WAHH......

So, if Obama came out for legalizing crack tomorrow, any criticism you posted could be negated by saying "Boy, it's such a surprise to hear you say that".

That's a non-argument, a throwaway personal comment as if stating he's not in favor of Palin means his reasons are not worth discussing. You are sure good at political chat.

But you go downhill from there - the "WAHHH" "WAHH" 'argument', now that really answers his point.

"WAHHH" can have a place in pointing our whining, *if* the fact there's whining is proven. You can't and you don't. You just whine. WAAAHHHHH.



:roll: Hello - the whole f'n point is that it wouldn't matter what she did - he wouldn't be impressed so it's stupid for him to post that since it's obvious. Now if he had actually had something to say about the topic it'd have been different but "unimpressed" is just lame commentary given his politics. It'd be like me saying I was "unimpressed" with BHO's future scheduled whatever.

Excuse me, MR. "whole f'n point" but finally agreeing to one softball interview 10 days later IS unimpressive, a point that is totally supported by the facts.

If you can show any other VP or Pres. candidate in modern American history gave NO interviews whatsoever for the first 10 days of their candidacy, then you would begin to have a point.

But you can't. Your whole position against me in this thread is bankrupt.


In any event, AS I SAID, time will tell how this whole shakes out and if she will subsequently be shielded like a Quayle tard or if she will take her rightful place in the give and take and free flow of information during our election process.

Let me remind you, that I DID HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT THE TOPIC and it was supportable by the known facts, whereas your contribution was nothing but a red faced ad hom based on your arrogant imaginary belief that YOU can somehow know that nothing Gov. Palin could ever do would impress me.

What a valuable contribution to the thread on your part, a BS ad hom. What an utter and complete bullshit peddler you once again showed yourself to be. :|

Here's something Gov. Palin could do that would impress me. She could state that she will in no way let her fundamentalist religious beliefs ever dictate her public policy decisions.



:roll: Can you not read? (must be a BDS/lib thing) 4 out of the 9 days were convention days. So really it's only been since Friday that she's had a "chance" to do interviews. So while you rabid leftist try to make an issue about elite media interviews - rational Americans understand the time will come for one on one interviews and don't expect them to happen immediately after she appears as the VP candidate. Really it's only the elite "media" and you rabid leftist making an issue of this non-issue. ...not that you'd be impressed if she'd have shown up on the bobblehead circuit immediately....
 
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
[ If you were honest, you'd just admit you overplayed it...but you won't.

You're lying in your attack, and as a result we're done. You crossed a line.

Oh and now you're just going to claim "done". 😛 Sure, I crossed a line...the line that people cross when they call out your BS. You over played it and got called, I'm sorry you can't handle that but I'm not surprised you can't.

The line where you make a baseless, offensive attack that's dishonest, period.

That's the reason, not your lying here to try to say it's something else. Shoo, pest.

The only discussion now after your wrong (since you lack the character to apologize) will be a repetition of your saying BS, and my either not responding or repeating this post.

it's only "baseless" in your bds world. Again, I'm not surprised you won't admit you overplayed it...it seems to be beyond your capabilities to do so. So meh... whatever you can be done if you wish...as it's usually a good idea to stop digging when you're in a hole... 😀
 
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Perknose
No other interviews are scheduled. It will be the first TV interview for Palin since she was named 10 days ago as running mate to John McCain.

Color me highly unimpressed so far. Time will tell how this all shakes out, though.

Boy, it's such a surprise to hear you(or any other leftist) say that. As if you'd be impressed no matter what she did. WAHHH.... she won't talk to the media.... WAHHHH... it'll just be softballs.... WAHH......

So, if Obama came out for legalizing crack tomorrow, any criticism you posted could be negated by saying "Boy, it's such a surprise to hear you say that".

That's a non-argument, a throwaway personal comment as if stating he's not in favor of Palin means his reasons are not worth discussing. You are sure good at political chat.

But you go downhill from there - the "WAHHH" "WAHH" 'argument', now that really answers his point.

"WAHHH" can have a place in pointing our whining, *if* the fact there's whining is proven. You can't and you don't. You just whine. WAAAHHHHH.



:roll: Hello - the whole f'n point is that it wouldn't matter what she did - he wouldn't be impressed so it's stupid for him to post that since it's obvious. Now if he had actually had something to say about the topic it'd have been different but "unimpressed" is just lame commentary given his politics. It'd be like me saying I was "unimpressed" with BHO's future scheduled whatever.

Excuse me, MR. "whole f'n point" but finally agreeing to one softball interview 10 days later IS unimpressive, a point that is totally supported by the facts.

If you can show any other VP or Pres. candidate in modern American history gave NO interviews whatsoever for the first 10 days of their candidacy, then you would begin to have a point.

But you can't. Your whole position against me in this thread is bankrupt.


In any event, AS I SAID, time will tell how this whole shakes out and if she will subsequently be shielded like a Quayle tard or if she will take her rightful place in the give and take and free flow of information during our election process.

Let me remind you, that I DID HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT THE TOPIC and it was supportable by the known facts, whereas your contribution was nothing but a red faced ad hom based on your arrogant imaginary belief that YOU can somehow know that nothing Gov. Palin could ever do would impress me.

What a valuable contribution to the thread on your part, a BS ad hom. What an utter and complete bullshit peddler you once again showed yourself to be. :|

Here's something Gov. Palin could do that would impress me. She could state that she will in no way let her fundamentalist religious beliefs ever dictate her public policy decisions.



:roll: Can you not read? (must be a BDS/lib thing) 4 out of the 9 days were convention days. So really it's only been since Friday that she's had a "chance" to do interviews. So while you rabid leftist try to make an issue about elite media interviews - rational Americans understand the time will come for one on one interviews and don't expect them to happen immediately after she appears as the VP candidate. Really it's only the elite "media" and you rabid leftist making an issue of this non-issue. ...not that you'd be impressed if she'd have shown up on the bobblehead circuit immediately....

AGAIN, can you name even ONE modern American VP or Pres. candidate who did not give even ONE interview in any of the first FIVE days after their convention ended.

Even one?

Ever?

Go ahead, respond and name just ONE, I'll be waiting right here, CAD.

Hell, I'll make it even easier for you. Name ONE who gave NO interviews in any of the first 4 days after their convention.

Too hard?

Ok, name even ONE modern American candidate who gave NO interviews in any of the first 3 days after their convention.

What's that? You can't? Don't mumble, SPEAK UP.

How about in any of the first 2 days after their convention?

Anyone?

And yet YOU do your big, bloviating ad hom jig when I say I'm unimpressed.

You've been a hack so long, you no longer smell your own BS.

 
Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Perknose
No other interviews are scheduled. It will be the first TV interview for Palin since she was named 10 days ago as running mate to John McCain.

Color me highly unimpressed so far. Time will tell how this all shakes out, though.

Boy, it's such a surprise to hear you(or any other leftist) say that. As if you'd be impressed no matter what she did. WAHHH.... she won't talk to the media.... WAHHHH... it'll just be softballs.... WAHH......

So, if Obama came out for legalizing crack tomorrow, any criticism you posted could be negated by saying "Boy, it's such a surprise to hear you say that".

That's a non-argument, a throwaway personal comment as if stating he's not in favor of Palin means his reasons are not worth discussing. You are sure good at political chat.

But you go downhill from there - the "WAHHH" "WAHH" 'argument', now that really answers his point.

"WAHHH" can have a place in pointing our whining, *if* the fact there's whining is proven. You can't and you don't. You just whine. WAAAHHHHH.



:roll: Hello - the whole f'n point is that it wouldn't matter what she did - he wouldn't be impressed so it's stupid for him to post that since it's obvious. Now if he had actually had something to say about the topic it'd have been different but "unimpressed" is just lame commentary given his politics. It'd be like me saying I was "unimpressed" with BHO's future scheduled whatever.

Excuse me, MR. "whole f'n point" but finally agreeing to one softball interview 10 days later IS unimpressive, a point that is totally supported by the facts.

If you can show any other VP or Pres. candidate in modern American history gave NO interviews whatsoever for the first 10 days of their candidacy, then you would begin to have a point.

But you can't. Your whole position against me in this thread is bankrupt.


In any event, AS I SAID, time will tell how this whole shakes out and if she will subsequently be shielded like a Quayle tard or if she will take her rightful place in the give and take and free flow of information during our election process.

Let me remind you, that I DID HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT THE TOPIC and it was supportable by the known facts, whereas your contribution was nothing but a red faced ad hom based on your arrogant imaginary belief that YOU can somehow know that nothing Gov. Palin could ever do would impress me.

What a valuable contribution to the thread on your part, a BS ad hom. What an utter and complete bullshit peddler you once again showed yourself to be. :|

Here's something Gov. Palin could do that would impress me. She could state that she will in no way let her fundamentalist religious beliefs ever dictate her public policy decisions.



:roll: Can you not read? (must be a BDS/lib thing) 4 out of the 9 days were convention days. So really it's only been since Friday that she's had a "chance" to do interviews. So while you rabid leftist try to make an issue about elite media interviews - rational Americans understand the time will come for one on one interviews and don't expect them to happen immediately after she appears as the VP candidate. Really it's only the elite "media" and you rabid leftist making an issue of this non-issue. ...not that you'd be impressed if she'd have shown up on the bobblehead circuit immediately....

AGAIN, can you name even ONE modern American VP or Pres. candidate who did not give even ONE interview in any of the first FIVE days after their convention ended.

Even one?

Ever?

Go ahead, respond and name just ONE, I'll be waiting right here, CAD.

Hell, I'll make it even easier for you. Name ONE who gave NO interviews in any of the first 4 days after their convention.

Too hard?

Ok, name even ONE modern American candidate who gave NO interviews in any of the first 3 days after their convention.

What's that? You can't? Don't mumble, SPEAK UP.

How about in any of the first 2 days after their convention?

Anyone?

And yet YOU do your big, bloviating ad hom jig when I say I'm unimpressed.

You've been a hack so long, you no longer smell your own BS.

OMG!!!! OH TEH NOESSS!!!!! SHE DIDN'T DO WHAT OTHERS DID? WAHH!!!!!!!! WAHH!!!!!!!


:roll: So? I never said she shouldn't do interviews. I've stated that I expect she will do them - and guess what - she is. Just because it isn't on YOUR timeline or the timeline of the bobbleheads doesn't mean anything except you and them(the bobbleheads) think too highly of yourselves. 😛

 
Well if this guy here can handle an interview like this and still become President I don't see what Governor Palin's handlers are so afraid of.

Governor Clinton's Interview with Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes



Kroft: Who is Gennifer Flowers? Do you know her?

Bill Clinton: Oh, yes.

Kroft: How do you know her? How would you describe your relationship?

Bill Clinton: Very limited, but until this, you know, friendly but limited . . . .

Kroft: Was she a friend, an acquaintance? Does your wife know her?

Hillary Clinton: Oh, sure.

Bill Clinton: Yes. She was an acquaintance, I would say a friendly acquaintance . . . .

Kroft: She is alleging and has described in some detail in the supermarket tabloid what she calls a 12-year affair with you.

Bill Clinton: That allegation is false.

Hillary Clinton: When this woman first got caught up in these charges, I felt as I've felt about all of these women: that they . . . had just been minding their own business and they got hit by a meteor . . . . I felt terrible about what was happening to them. Bill talked to this woman every time she called, distraught, saying her life was going to be ruined, and . . . he'd get off the phone and tell me that she said sort of wacky things, which we thought were attributable to the fact that she was terrified.

Bill Clinton: It was only when money came out, when the tabloid went down there offering people money to say that they had been involved with me, that she changed her story. There's a recession on.

Kroft: I'm assuming from your answer that you're categorically denying that you ever had an affair with Gennifer Flowers.

Bill Clinton: I said that before. And so has she.

Kroft: You've said that your marriage has had problems, that you've had difficulties. What do you mean by that? What does that mean? Is that some kind of ? help us break the code. I mean, does that mean that you were separated? Does that mean that you had communication problems? Does that mean you contemplated divorce? Does it mean adultery?

Bill Clinton: I think the American people, at least people that have been married for a long time, know what it means and know the whole range of things it can mean.

Kroft: You've been saying all week that you've got to put this issue behind you. Are you prepared tonight to say that you've never had an extramarital affair?

Bill Clinton: I'm not prepared tonight to say that any married couple should ever discuss that with anyone but themselves. I'm not prepared to say that about anybody. I think that the . . . .

Kroft: . . . That's what you've been saying essentially for the last couple of months.

Bill Clinton: . . . You go back and listen to what I've said. You know, I have acknowledged wrongdoing. I have acknowledged causing pain in my marriage. I have said things to you tonight and to the American people from the beginning that no American politician ever has.

I think most Americans who are watching this tonight, they'll know what we're saying; they'll get it, and they'll feel that we have been more candid. And I think what the press has to decide is: Are we going to engage in a game of "gotcha"? . . . I can remember a time when a divorced person couldn't run for president, and that time, thank goodness, has passed. Nobody's prejudiced against anybody because they're divorced. Are we going to take the reverse position now that if people have problems in their marriage and there are things in their past which they don't want to discuss which are painful to them, that they can't run?

Kroft: You're trying to put this issue behind you, and the problem with the answer is it's not a denial. And people are sitting out there -- voters ? and they're saying, "Look, it's really pretty simple. If he's never had an extramarital affair, why doesn't {he} say so?"

Bill Clinton: That may be what they're saying. You know what I think they're saying? I think they're saying, "Here's a guy who's leveling with us." . . . I've told the American {people} more than any other candidate for president. The result of that has been everybody going to my state and spending more time trying to play "gotcha."

Hillary Clinton: There isn't a person watching this who would feel comfortable sitting on this couch detailing everything that ever went on in their life or their marriage. And I think it's real dangerous in this country if we don't have some zone of privacy for everybody . . . .

Kroft: . . . I agree with you that everyone wants to put this behind you. And the reason the problem has not gone away is because your answer is not a denial . . . .

Bill Clinton: Of course it's not. And let's take it from your point of view, that won't make it go away. I mean if you deny, then you have a whole other horde of people going down there offering more money and trying to prove that you lied. And if you say yes, then you have just what I have already said by being open and telling you that we have had problems. You have, "Oh good, now we can go play 'gotcha' and find out who it is."

Now, no matter what I say, to pretend that the press will then let this die, then we are kidding ourselves. I mean, you know, this has become a virtual cottage industry. The only way to put it behind us, I think, is for all of us to agree that this guy has told us about all we need to know. Anybody who is listening gets the drift of it and let's go on and get back to the real problems of this country . . . .

Kroft: . . . {The} question of marital infidelity is an issue with a sizable portion of the electorate. According to the latest CBS News poll . . . 14 percent of the registered voters in America wouldn't vote for a candidate who's had an extramarital affair.

Bill Clinton: I know it's an issue, but what does that mean? That means that 86 percent of the American people either don't think it's relevant to presidential performance or look at whether a person, looking at all the facts, is the best to serve.

Kroft: I think most Americans would agree that it's very admirable that you've stayed together ? that you've worked your problems out and that you've seemed to reach some sort of understanding and arrangement.

Bill Clinton: Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. You're looking at two people who love each other. This is not an arrangement or an understanding. This is a marriage. That's a very different thing.

Hillary Clinton: You know, I'm not sitting here ? some little woman standing by my man like Tammy Wynette. I'm sitting here because I love him, and I respect him, and I honor what he's been through and what we've been through together. And you know, if that's not enough for people, then heck, don't vote for him.

Kroft: . . . One of your campaign advisers told us the other day, "Bill Clinton has got to level with the American people tonight, otherwise his candidacy is dead." You feel like you've leveled with the American people?

Bill Clinton: I have absolutely leveled with the American people.

Kroft: . . . You came here tonight to try to put it behind you . . . . Do you think you've succeeded?

Bill Clinton: That's up to the American people and to some extent up to the press. This will test the character of the press. It is not only my character that has been tested.
 
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
it's only "baseless" in your bds world. Again, I'm not surprised you won't admit you overplayed it...it seems to be beyond your capabilities to do so. So meh... whatever you can be done if you wish...as it's usually a good idea to stop digging when you're in a hole... 😀

The issue of whether I "overplayed" the issue, and your baseless, dishonest attack, are not the same issue.

We aren't going to discuss the former because of your bad behavior. The rest of your post is ironic - you are hardly admitting your wrong and it's clearly 'beyond your capabilities to do so'. You keep on digging your own hole deeper and deeper by continuing to post nonsense when te topic is done.
 
Originally posted by: Stoneburner
She's going to go on every softball show she can.

Hannity, "Governor, if I weren't gay and madly in love with the corpse of Ronald Reagan, I would totally hit that. How do you explain you being so hawt and Obama being such an ugly muslim negro terrorist?"

I lawled.
 
<Crickets>

Now watch, folks, because CAD can' help himself and he has NEVER, EVER, admitted he was wrong.

He will come here with a reply chock full of baseless attacks and shameless diversions, without even once admitting that he can't name even one cadidate who has given no interveiws after THE END of their convention . . .

Not for 5 days

Not for 4 days

Not for 3 days.

Not one, not ever. But he won't even mention that. Just watch.
 
Originally posted by: Perknose
<Crickets>

Now watch, folks, because CAD can' help himself and he has NEVER, EVER, admitted he was wrong.

He will come here with a reply chock full of baseless attacks and shameless diversions, without even once admitting that he can't name even one cadidate who has given no interveiws after THE END of their convention . . .

Not for 5 days

Not for 4 days

Not for 3 days.

Not one, not ever. But he won't even mention that. Just watch.

What am I wrong about? Uhh... nothing. I didn't make claims that others didn't do interviews so your bleating is nothing but a strawman.
 
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
I never said she shouldn't do interviews.

Strawman digression. No one ever said you didn't, or that she wouldn't ever, you WEASEL.

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
I've stated that I expect she will do them - and guess what - she is.

Yet ANOTHER patented BS CAD diversion from the subject. What you STATED was that my not being impressed that she FINALLY agreed to one, denying any interviews for the longest time of any VP or PRES candidate in our modern history!!!!!!


Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Just because it isn't on YOUR timeline or the timeline of the bobbleheads doesn't mean anything except you and them(the bobbleheads) think too highly of yourselves. 😛

It's NOT my timeline, that's a deliberate misstatement on your part.

It's the timeline of our complete modern American political history
. . . unless you can prove otherwise . . . which we all know you can't, troll.

 
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Perknose
<Crickets>

Now watch, folks, because CAD can' help himself and he has NEVER, EVER, admitted he was wrong.

He will come here with a reply chock full of baseless attacks and shameless diversions, without even once admitting that he can't name even one cadidate who has given no interveiws after THE END of their convention . . .

Not for 5 days

Not for 4 days

Not for 3 days.

Not one, not ever. But he won't even mention that. Just watch.

What am I wrong about? Uhh... nothing. I didn't make claims that others didn't do interviews so your bleating is nothing but a strawman.

What did I tell you, folks? CAD the weasel troll. He'll never fail to live down to your expectations, no matter how low you set them.

 
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
OMG!!!! OH TEH NOESSS!!!!! SHE DIDN'T DO WHAT OTHERS DID? WAHH!!!!!!!! WAHH!!!!!!!


:roll: So? I never said she shouldn't do interviews. I've stated that I expect she will do them - and guess what - she is. Just because it isn't on YOUR timeline or the timeline of the bobbleheads doesn't mean anything except you and them(the bobbleheads) think too highly of yourselves. 😛

Christ you are dumb as a fucking stump. :laugh: It's not about doing an interview within the "kooky leftist timelines", it's about doing an interview as soon as is reasonably possible. Fact is she isn't doing one quickly enough. The likely reason; she needs as much time as possible to be coached on the issues.
 
Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
The likely reason; she needs as much time as possible to be coached on the issues.

That is true because they GOP does not want he saying things such as:
http://www.iht.com/articles/20...rica/church.php?page=1

Bible is Palin's professional guide, friends and pastors say
By Kirk Johnson and Kim Severson
Sunday, September 7, 2008

WASILLA, Alaska: Shortly after taking office as governor in 2006, Sarah Palin sent an e-mail message to Paul Riley, her former pastor in the Assembly of God Church, which her family began attending when she was a youth. She needed spiritual advice in how to do her new job, said Riley, who is 78 and retired from the church.

"She asked for a biblical example of people who were great leaders and what was the secret of their leadership," Riley said.

He wrote back that she should read again from the Old Testament the story of Esther, a beauty queen who became a real one, gaining the king's ear to avert the slaughter of the Jews and vanquish their enemies. When Esther is called to serve, God grants her a strength she never knew she had.

Riley said he thought that Palin had lived out the advice as governor and would do so again as the Republican Party's vice presidential nominee.

"God has given her the opportunity to serve," he said. "And God has given her the strength to carry out her goals."

Palin's religious life - what she believes and how her beliefs intersect or not with her life in public office in Alaska - has become a topic of intense interest and scrutiny across the political spectrum as she has risen from relative obscurity to become Senator John McCain's running mate.

Interviews with the two pastors she has been most closely associated with in her hometown - she now attends the Wasilla Bible Church, though she keeps in touch with Riley and recently spoke at an event at his former church - and with friends and acquaintances who have worshiped with her point to a firm conclusion: Her foundation and source of guidance is the Bible, and with it has come a conviction to be God's servant.

"Just be amazed at the umbrella of this church here, where God is going to send you from this church," Palin told the gathering in June of young graduates of a ministry program at the Assembly of God Church, a video of which has been posted on YouTube.

"Believe me," she said, "I know what I am saying - where God has sent me, from underneath the umbrella of this church, throughout the state."

Janet Kincaid, who has known Palin for about 15 years and worked with her on some Wasilla town boards and commissions when Palin was the mayor, said Palin's spiritual path, from the Assembly of God to Wasilla Bible, has had a consistent theme.

"The churches that Sarah has attended all believe in a literal translation of the Bible," Kincaid said. "Her principal ethical and moral beliefs stem from this."

Prayer, and belief in its power, is another constant theme, Kincaid said, in what she has witnessed in Palin. "Her beliefs are firm in the power of prayer - let's put it that way," she said.

Maria Comella, a spokeswoman for the McCain-Palin campaign, said Palin had been baptized Roman Catholic as an infant, but she declined to comment further. "We're not going to get into discussing her religion," she said.

In the address at the Assembly of God Church in Wasilla, Palin's ease in talking about the intersection of faith and public life was clear. Among other things, she encouraged the group of young church leaders to pray that "God's will" be done in bringing about the construction of a big pipeline in the state, and she suggested her work as governor would be hampered "if the people of Alaska's heart isn't right with God."

She also told the group that her eldest child, Track, would soon be deployed by the U.S. Army to Iraq and that they should pray "that our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God - that's what we have to make sure we are praying for, that there is a plan, and that plan is God's plan."

Larry Kroon, who has been the presiding pastor at Wasilla Bible for the last 30 years, declined to describe Palin's beliefs or the role she plays in the church, but he suggested that she is more of a backbencher than a leading light. "Todd and Sarah come in as Todd and Sarah - they're very discreet about it," he said, referring to Palin's husband.

One of the musical directors at the church, Adele Morgan, who has known Palin since the third grade, said the Palins moved to the nondenominational Wasilla Bible Church in 2002, in part because its ministry is less "extreme" than Pentecostal churches like the Assemblies of God, which practice speaking in tongues and miraculous healings.

"A lot of churches are about music and media and having a big profile," Morgan said. "We are against that. That is why it is so attractive to politicians because they can just sit there and be safe."

Kroon said he was convinced that the Bible was the word of God, and that the task of believers was to ponder and analyze the book for meaning - including scrutiny, he said, for errors and mistranslations over the centuries that may have obscured the original intent.

It is that analysis, he believes, not anything he preaches, that makes most people in his church socially conservative, he said.

"I trust my people can go out with that and they can deal with an issue such as abortion - any issue out there - whether it's in the public arena, or in the hospital room with their relative dying of cancer, because they will be equipped with a biblical perspective that will enable them to react in that situation," said Kroon, who described himself as "pro-life."

"Our congregation would tend to be conservative, and it's not because I've told them to be," he said.

Some Jewish groups have raised concerns since the announcement of Palin's selection to the Republican ticket that discussions in the Wasilla Bible Church might go beyond conservatism. Last month, a leader in the group Jews for Jesus, which advocates converting Jews to Christianity - but which has been accused by some Jews of anti-Semitism - spoke at the church. The speaker, David Brickner, spoke enthusiastically about the "miracle" of conversions in Israel by the group's missionaries.

The church has also come under fire among some gay advocacy groups for promoting an upcoming Focus on the Family conference in Anchorage dealing with the so-called curing of homosexuality.



 
Originally posted by: GroundedSailor
Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
The likely reason; she needs as much time as possible to be coached on the issues.

That is true because they GOP does not want he saying things such as:
http://www.iht.com/articles/20...rica/church.php?page=1

Bible is Palin's professional guide, friends and pastors say
By Kirk Johnson and Kim Severson
Sunday, September 7, 2008

[...]

"Just be amazed at the umbrella of this church here, where God is going to send you from this church,"

[...]

Among other things, she encouraged the group of young church leaders to pray that "God's will" be done in bringing about the construction of a big pipeline in the state, and she suggested her work as governor would be hampered "if the people of Alaska's heart isn't right with God."

She also told the group that her eldest child, Track, would soon be deployed by the U.S. Army to Iraq and that they should pray "that our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God - that's what we have to make sure we are praying for, that there is a plan, and that plan is God's plan."

Evan, it does seem as if even the people who chose her believe her to have been "not ready for prime time", in a way and to an extent heretofore not seen regarding any national candidate in our modern American political history.

Whether she subsequently proves herself, we shall all see.

------

GS, in all fairness, I think they WILL want her saying these things to their Fundy base. What will be interesting is to what extent and with what vehemence and in which speeches and interviews she does so.

I know I will be watching her first interview with great eagerness, and that it WILL engender 30 subsequent threads here . . . which would happen no matter if she were R or D, btw . . . since she is relatively new and largely unknown to the national political scene, and yet will now be a candidate to be elected to the office one heartbeat away from the Presidency of our great Republic.

 
Originally posted by: GroundedSailor
Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
The likely reason; she needs as much time as possible to be coached on the issues.

That is true because they GOP does not want he saying things such as:
http://www.iht.com/articles/20...rica/church.php?page=1
You do understand that most of the Christians in the country will read that transcript or see that video and have no problem with it at all.

You guys want to act like she is some looney Church wacko when most of her beliefs are not much different from most evangelical Christians.

And do you really want to get into a debate about which candidates and their churches they attend??

I'll put these Sarah Palin clips up against a Rev Wright clip any day of the week.
 
I'd like to thank you guys for ruining what I thought would be a perfectly normal thread about Palin's first interview.
 
Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
OMG!!!! OH TEH NOESSS!!!!! SHE DIDN'T DO WHAT OTHERS DID? WAHH!!!!!!!! WAHH!!!!!!!


:roll: So? I never said she shouldn't do interviews. I've stated that I expect she will do them - and guess what - she is. Just because it isn't on YOUR timeline or the timeline of the bobbleheads doesn't mean anything except you and them(the bobbleheads) think too highly of yourselves. 😛
Christ you are dumb as a fucking stump. :laugh: It's not about doing an interview within the "kooky leftist timelines", it's about doing an interview as soon as is reasonably possible. Fact is she isn't doing one quickly enough. The likely reason; she needs as much time as possible to be coached on the issues.
Your comment is offensive to stumps. 😉
 
wow at this rate we might get to see her interview what...5 times??

Biden can be in front of cameras and reporters all day long day after day. THe same goes for McCain and Obama


why is she getting this special treatment? Why was she not out in front of the press this weekend?

Its like she is Michael Jackson or something....mysterious persona complete with an insane cult following.
 
I assume they are coaching her and getting her up to speed.

Last thing they want is for her to get caught up in some stupid "name the president of..." type question.
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I assume they are coaching her and getting her up to speed.

Last thing they want is for her to get caught up in some stupid "name the president of..." type question.

I still dont get then why she was picked if she wasnt up to speed

Biden was ready from the word "go"

How many of you are old enough to remember when Michael Jackson performed at half time for one of the super bowls ohh about maybe 15 years ago?

He stood there for 10 minutes straight, stiff as a stone, no moving, no singing, he just stood there.

and the crowd went wild...for about 10 minutes straight, just cheering him...while he just stood there.

At least Obama speaks and THEN the crowds cheer, not the other way around.
 
Originally posted by: quest55720
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: Wreckem
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
"about time"???

It's been all of a 9 days? Sheesh...

Also the "news" article is BS as it's premise is that she was to be "shielded" - which was never the case. If you people would read the other thread, I posted the interview which some(the left and the media) got the twisted idea that she was going to be "shielded". It certainly wasn't what they twisted it into.

What I find funny is everyone is bitching about her being shielded.

WTF? It is the job of the communications director to shield their politician in office or running for election from negative press.

Bottom line is, politicians dont just let the media come to them at their own will. Every politician(atleast good one) is always prepped for any interview they do.

Thank you disciple wreckem for your completely predictable arguing for whatever the right-wing does, including this rationalization of avoiding media interaction.

Blame the Obama/Pelosi attack arm AKA MSM. Maybe if the did not drag her minor daughter through the mud she would be more receptive to inverviews. I don't see Obama going on Hannity or Rush shows and for good reason. The MSM has been mean spirited and hostile towards the Palin family.

Tough shit? This woman could potentially be a President of the United States.

I don't think questions about her personal life and her family should be on the table, but ANYTHING else should be completely fair game. She can't avoid interviews just because she's worried about getting her feelings hurt. If she wants people to believe in her she needs to be an open book.

There are almost certainly rules in place for interviews beforehand, she can stipulate that they avoid the family/daughter issue. It's not a legitimate excuse to hide in the shadows.
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I'd like to thank you guys for ruining what I thought would be a perfectly normal thread about Palin's first interview.

You're welcome, for ruining your attempt to try to portray her behavior as acceptable, rather than scandalously insulting to voters and indicative of her significant weaknesses.
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: GroundedSailor
Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
The likely reason; she needs as much time as possible to be coached on the issues.

That is true because they GOP does not want he saying things such as:
http://www.iht.com/articles/20...rica/church.php?page=1
You do understand that most of the Christians in the country will read that transcript or see that video and have no problem with it at all.

You guys want to act like she is some looney Church wacko when most of her beliefs are not much different from most evangelical Christians.

And do you really want to get into a debate about which candidates and their churches they attend??

I'll put these Sarah Palin clips up against a Rev Wright clip any day of the week.

And you'll lose with the rational voters, and win with the irrational, and you're fine with that. Politically, I think you have a reasonable point. Morally, of course, is another thing.
 
Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

:roll: Hello - the whole f'n point is that it wouldn't matter what she did - he wouldn't be impressed so it's stupid for him to post that since it's obvious. Now if he had actually had something to say about the topic it'd have been different but "unimpressed" is just lame commentary given his politics. It'd be like me saying I was "unimpressed" with BHO's future scheduled whatever.

Excuse me, MR. "whole f'n point" but finally agreeing to one softball interview 10 days later IS unimpressive, a point that is totally supported by the facts.

And, AS I SAID, time will tell how this whole shakes out. If you can show any other VP or Pres. candidate in modern American history gave NO interviews whatsoever for the first 10 days of their candidacy, then you would begin to have a point.

But you can't. Your whole position against me in this thread is bankrupt.

I DID HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT THE TOPIC and it was supportable by the known facts, whereas your contribution was nothing but a red faced ad hom based on your arrogant imaginary belief that YOU can somehow know that nothing Gov. Palin could ever do would impress me.

That was your valuable contribution to this thread. What an utter and complete bullshit peddler you just showed yourself to be. :|

I have to disagree with you that he "just' did that.
Here's something Gov. Palin could do that would impress me. She could state that she will in no way let her fundamentalist religious beliefs ever dictate her public policy decisions.[/quote]

People are going to follow their religious beliefs, pretty much.

It's understandable to want people with other beliefs not to, but ain't gonna happen.

After all, don't we each largely do that - for people who are atheists, they follow their own moral views; for people who are religious 'moderates', they follow their moral views, but their moral views have a 'core' influence from religion, but they don't make too much of it, hence their being moderates'; and the 'strongly' religious are more closely tied to religious instruction for their own positions, rather than having more independant morals.

Asking a dunfamentalist not to follow the bible too much is like asking a moderate to follow the bible closely - it rubs each the wrong way.

The solution isn't to ask them not to, but rather to notice the views they have and vote accordingly.

The fact is, if enough voters are in agreement, whether they're moderate Christians, fundamentalist Christians, or Wahabi Muslims, they'll win the election.

So the problem is expecting a fundamentalist like Palin to act moderately, and vote for her because she stragecially downplays the issue in the campaign.
 
Craig, since you're so quick to call everyone a liar and demand apologies, I was wondering when you were going to apologize for your lie?

Originally posted by: Craig234


No, she hid her daughter's pregnancy, it got exposed, it's done. You are making dishonest excuses for her not facing the media. If it's such an issue she has to hide, she can resign.

Imagine Obama or Biden going into hiding because one (true) story about their personal life was printed.

And then you admit that Alaska already knew..


Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: loki8481
hid it? practically everyone knew in Alaska.

It was news to 49 states, the rest of the world, and part of Alaska. Your side tries to lie that reporting the facts is a terrible personal attack, as a political attack.


 
Back
Top