Is the left stretching trying to paint Palin as an extremist/Religious Nut/etc?

[JUSA]

Seems to me like they are. An example in these forums is someone making a thread listing 100 or so books Palin had banned while Mayor in Alaska.

After it was proven untrue, instead of removing the thread or even saying they were wrong - they said, "well she talked about the possibility of it to a librarian.". WTF? What does that mean? We don't know what the hell she was thinking? Don't act like you do, either.

I just hear the most extreme language when describing her. "gun nut", "far right", "religious nut" and so on.

I think at this point it says more about the people saying this **** than it does about Palin. From what I see, she comes off as very middle-American typical person. For some people to be offended or outraged over that kind of tells me how out of touch they are.

[Cramerica]

Well, I'll tell you this...they are certainly buying into the whole smear of her. Creationism being taught in class, books being banned, etc.

[tenthirtytwo]

She asked a librarian about the "policy" behind book bans in response to what amounted to an angry mob. Do you consider that ethical behavior?

[Thinman]

It will interesting to see what she says in the interview tonight. I'm sure questions about her beliefs will be asked.

[JUSA]

She asked a librarian about the "policy" behind book bans in response to what amounted to an angry mob. Do you consider that ethical behavior?

Take the bull**** propaganda to another thread, chico.

From what I understand, she simply asked a librarian about the prospect of it and how, both of them living in a very Christian area, she might deal with the prospect of protesters. You know, those guys who you love when they're anarchists and left-wing Nazis causing public destruction but hate when they're Christians peacefully protesting.

Was she trying to get books banned? Was she simply being proactive in a highly Christian area with no personal interest in banning any book? Neither of us know, so STFU with your theories and slander.

[tenthirtytwo]

Take the bull**** propaganda to another thread, chico.

From what I understand, she simply asked a librarian about the prospect of it and how, both of them living in a very Christian area, she might deal with the prospect of protesters. You know, those guys who you love when they're anarchists and left-wing Nazis causing public destruction but hate when they're Christians peacefully protesting.

I'll ask you the same thing I put forth in the other thread, which was unanswered:

If an angry mob came to her demanding that homosexuals be put to death, would it be ethical of her to contact a lawyer and check on the legal precedent for it? Or to contact an executioner?

Or maybe we need to take it one step back: do you believe that books should be banned from a public library because they offend popular opinion?

If she didn't agree with book banning, she shouldn't have asked the librarian about anything. She should have told the people to stick it where the sun don't shine, because book banning is wrong.

[revkins]

Seems to me like they are. An example in these forums is someone making a thread listing 100 or so books Palin had banned while Mayor in Alaska.

After it was proven untrue, instead of removing the thread or even saying they were wrong - they said, "well she talked about the possibility of it to a librarian.". WTF? What does that mean? We don't know what the hell she was thinking? Don't act like you do, either.

I just hear the most extreme language when describing her. "gun nut", "far right", "religious nut" and so on.

I think at this point it says more about the people saying this **** than it does about Palin. From what I see, she comes off as very middle-American typical person. For some people to be offended or outraged over that kind of tells me how out of touch they are.

Don't blame liberals for trying to smear Palin. They've learned from the republicans that propaganda and lies are very effective tools for winning elections.

[JUSA]

If an angry mob came to her demanding that homosexuals be put to death, would it be ethical of her to contact a lawyer and check on the legal precedent for it? Or to contact an executioner?

Wow, how stupid of you to compare the idea of banning some books as ethically/morally anything remotely close to murdering people.

First, things get banned. I don't personally care much for it but there are times when activists from either the left or right mobilize and flex their muscles and get some song or book or tv show banned. The precedent is there. It happens and it's not uncommon.

Were I a mayor of an area that does this kind of stuff or is likely to do it, I'd be proactive about it too. Was she being proactive? Was she trying to get books banned?

Neither of us know.

All I know is she didn't do anything about it and that is what in the end is the only important thing.

Or maybe we need to take it one step back: do you believe that books should be banned from a public library because they offend popular opinion?

Not personally, but I also understand that you can't read Huckleberry Finn or other books in the past because PC Nazis didn't like the liberal use of the word ******, too. **** happens. If I was mayor of Austin I'd be ready for protesters and PC nazis to get upset about something, it wouldn't mean I agreed with them, though.

If she didn't agree with book banning, she shouldn't have asked the librarian about anything. She should have told the people to stick it where the sun don't shine, because book banning is wrong.

Why? At the local level, if the community gets irate or riled up about an issue it'd be part of her job to deal with it, it's not like she can vote "present" and move on.

Bottom line: She didn't do jack **** and you aren't a mind reader so STFU already and stop trying to slander/smear this woman you know little about.

[Organichu]

Seems to me like they are. An example in these forums is someone making a thread listing 100 or so books Palin had banned while Mayor in Alaska.

After it was proven untrue, instead of removing the thread or even saying they were wrong - they said, "well she talked about the possibility of it to a librarian.". WTF? What does that mean? We don't know what the hell she was thinking? Don't act like you do, either.

I just hear the most extreme language when describing her. "gun nut", "far right", "religious nut" and so on.

I think at this point it says more about the people saying this **** than it does about Palin. From what I see, she comes off as very middle-American typical person. For some people to be offended or outraged over that kind of tells me how out of touch they are.

I don't think it's a stretch. I think she's a wacko.

[JUSA]

Don't blame liberals for trying to smear Palin. They've learned from the republicans that propaganda and lies are very effective tools for winning elections.

Well, I have personally given a Obama a pass over the Wright thing and explained why I didn't think it should be used against him so from where I sit in this thread watching the same people who gave Obama as pass as I did earlier now hold Palin to a different standard, it kind of irks me.

You see, unlike you, I'm not just a partisan clown dancing to whatever beat some party demands of me and I can think for myself.

[1devil]

I don't think it's a stretch. I think she's a wacko.

x2.

[Daegus]

She's come out and said the invasion of Iraq was a mission from god.
What about her ideas of teaching creationism in public schools. Not fringe?

I question her character and religious leanings, but those two things say a lot about her. I would put her closer to looneys from Kansas than the average christian conversative.

[ElMariachi]

It will interesting to see what she says in the interview tonight. I'm sure questions about her beliefs will be asked.

She'll handle them the way she did in the debate in 2006 and she'll come off as ultra-sympathetic, and personal attacks against her will become even less effective. As much as the media wants to hammer this woman, that interview will draw massive ratings and once she clarifies some of her positions, could bring even more people over to the McCain side.


I have never seen the media act like this, like a pack of angry dogs, taking any information, no matter how little credibility it has, and using it to attack her. I never imagined that you could see an unsourced story show up on the DailyKOS and then 3 hours later be on national news.

[Thinman]

She'll handle them the way she did in the debate in 2006 and she'll come off as ultra-sympathetic, and personal attacks against her will become even less effective. As much as the media wants to hammer this woman, that interview will draw massive ratings and once she clarifies some of her positions, could bring even more people over to the McCain side.


I have never seen the media act like this, like a pack of angry dogs, taking any information, no matter how little credibility it has, and using it to attack her. I never imagined that you could see an unsourced story show up on the DailyKOS and then 3 hours later be on national news.

She doesn't help her cause by ducking interviews either.

[ElMariachi]

She's come out and said the invasion of Iraq was a mission from god.
What about her ideas of teaching creationism in public schools. Not fringe?

I question her leaning and how far they truly going, but those two things say a lot about her. I would put her near the looneys from Kansas.

Actually she was completely taken out of context. She was saying that military service was a call from God and that they were being called upon to complete a mission.



Its pretty common, especially with evangelicals. Many of the pastors in the Army referred to the same thing, talking about how public service is a calling and it can come in a number of forms.


But I love how people have gone off on this hilarious tangent "OH NOES, she's a 666 evangelical destined to bring about the end of the world."

[Cramerica]

She doesn't help her cause by ducking interviews either.

She's doing one tonight and tomorrow and night and more to come.

Obama ducked O'Reilly for the longest time until he really needed him. And even then it was only for 30 minutes.

[leafs43]

She doesn't help her cause by ducking interviews either.

Why we should do interviews?

The less the media knows about her and throws her out there, the more the debates are anticipated. This pulls more people into wanting to watch the debates.

So when people turn in and see her destroy Biden you'll see why the GOP wanted to draw people into the debate.

I am sure Biden will try and talk loud, but he is nothing but a bumbling turd monkey.

[ElMariachi]

She doesn't help her cause by ducking interviews either.

Who has she ducked? The same rabid media that repeatedly has been slandering her, over and over. Give me a break. In terms of campaign strategy, keeping her out of the limelight and letting the Democrat self-destruct by continually attacking her in absentia has been pretty darn effective, Larry Sabato even touched on this.

Yesterday a Democrat politician from South Carolina said that Palin was only chosen "because she didn't want to have an abortion."



You give them enough rope........

[Daegus]

Actually she was completely taken out of context. She was saying that military service was a call from God and that they were being called upon to complete a mission.

Basically the same thing.

But I love how people have gone off on this hilarious tangent "OH NOES, she's a 666 evangelical destined to bring about the end of the world."

I wouldn't go that far.

[Cramerica]

Who has she ducked? The same rabid media that repeatedly has been slandering her, over and over. Give me a break. In terms of campaign strategy, keeping her out of the limelight and letting the Democrat self-destruct by continually attacking her in absentia has been pretty darn effective, Larry Sabato even touched on this.

Newt actually made a point a couple of months ago that Obama should stay out of the limelight because when he was on vacation, his pol numbers went up. LOL

That strategy should be considered as of right now for him as well.

[ElMariachi]

I wouldn't go that far.

Others have been trying to. Repeatedly.

[1devil]

Actually she was completely taken out of context. She was saying that military service was a call from God and that they were being called upon to complete a mission.



Its pretty common, especially with evangelicals. Many of the pastors in the Army referred to the same thing, talking about how public service is a calling and it can come in a number of forms.


But I love how people have gone off on this hilarious tangent "OH NOES, she's a 666 evangelical destined to bring about the end of the world."

Eh?????? The notion of millitary service being a call from God is just weird. I can see it being a reflection of your patriotism etc.......but a call from God?? I thought the crusades were over. This lady gives me the creeps.

[ElMariachi]

Eh?????? The notion of millitary service being a call from God is just weird. I can see it being a reflection of your patriotism etc.......but a call from God?? I thought the crusades were over. This lady gives me the creeps.

Not at all weird. Military service, politics, charity, public health work, firefighting, police....etc, all those jobs involving serving the public as a whole. I've heard this comparison used so many times that it surprises me that anyone thinks it is unusual.

[solstice]

... If it's true that she's a member of an Assemblies of God church, then yes- she's an extremist religious nut.

Seems to me like they are. An example in these forums is someone making a thread listing 100 or so books Palin had banned while Mayor in Alaska.

After it was proven untrue, instead of removing the thread or even saying they were wrong - they said, "well she talked about the possibility of it to a librarian.". WTF? What does that mean? We don't know what the hell she was thinking? Don't act like you do, either.

I just hear the most extreme language when describing her. "gun nut", "far right", "religious nut" and so on.

I think at this point it says more about the people saying this **** than it does about Palin. From what I see, she comes off as very middle-American typical person. For some people to be offended or outraged over that kind of tells me how out of touch they are.

[1devil]

Not at all weird. Military service, politics, charity, public health work, firefighting, police....etc, all those jobs involving serving the public as a whole. I've heard this comparison used so many times that it surprises me that anyone thinks it is unusual.

I'm not trying to tell you you are wrong. I'm just saying that I and many others find the notion of millitary service being a religious mission to be odd and disturbing. Don't forget that Islamic terrorists view their 'millitary actions" as mandates from God.

[ElMariachi]

I'm not trying to tell you you are wrong. I'm just saying that I and many others find the notion of millitary service being a religious mission to be odd and disturbing. Don't forget that Islamic terrorists view their 'millitary actions" as mandates from God.

Yeah but it isn't seen in the same context. It is not a mission from God because you are out of kill the infidels, it is a Mission from God because of the public service aspect, it is a job that needs to be filled and not everyone is willing to do it, but those that do, in essence, are protecting everyone else.

[1devil]

Yeah but it isn't seen in the same context. It is not a mission from God because you are out of kill the infidels, it is a Mission from God because of the public service aspect, it is a job that needs to be filled and not everyone is willing to do it, but those that do, in essence, are protecting everyone else.

It's no different than missionary work. They may view themselves as doing everyone else a favor. The problem is that they often end up feeling the need to "share" their beliefs with everyone else. In a millitary context this is disturbing.

[J-Bol]

Of course they are. But honestly, I see nothing wrong with her and to me she's just a typical American citizen. They will take things out of context such as:

Palin, Oct. 25, 2006: Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And you know, I say this too as the daughter of a science teacher. Growing up with being so privileged and blessed to be given a lot of information on, on both sides of the subject – creationism and evolution. It's been a healthy foundation for me. But don't be afraid of information and let kids debate both sides.

and then they only see:

Palin, Oct. 25, 2006: Teach.....the subject-creationism. It's been a healthy foundation......Don't be afraid of information...

Obviously ignoring the whole context of what she said.

[ajn]

i don't have a problem with her Christianity at all

but she just seems like one of the typical older-generation Christians that don't know how to adapt their views in the modern world.

for example, Obama is a Christian, but he understands that just because Christianity is against gay marriage, doesn't mean he should ban gay marriage for everyone else. he knows that not everyone shares his beliefs.

whereas Palin is one of those slightly crazy Christians that thinks you have to fight the "world" on every issue, by rolling over people to push your agenda.

a typical example is the Creationism thing. Palin doesn't understand that Creationism cannot be a scientific theory, because it is faith-based. you just can't teach something like that in science class, because it isn't a scientific theory. no, you cannot teach "both". in science class, you can only teach science. if parents want to teach their children a different angle to the story, let them do that at home or at church.

[Cramerica]

a typical example is the Creationism thing. Palin doesn't understand that Creationism cannot be a scientific theory, because it is faith-based. you just can't teach something like that in science class, because it isn't a scientific theory. no, you cannot teach "both". in science class, you can only teach science. if parents want to teach their children a different angle to the story, let them do that at home or at church.

Is that why she's not forcing anyone to teach creationism in school?