Commentary: Palin is brilliant, but risky, VP choice

[zrinkill]

By Ed Rollins
CNN Contributor

NEW YORK (CNN) -- John McCain's brilliant but risky "Hail Mary pass" choice for vice president, Alaska Gov. Sarah "Barracuda" Palin, has the political world saying first: Who? And then: Why?


The "who" is a young, articulate, smart, tough, pro-life woman who is the governor of our northernmost state. She is conservative and a mother of five, including a son in the Army who is set to be deployed to Iraq on September 11. Her youngest child has Down syndrome.


The "Barracuda" nickname came from her aggressive basketball play on the state championship basketball team. She is a hunter, pilot and lifetime member of the NRA.


She is blunt, outspoken and charming. And don't assume she can't stand toe-to-toe with Joe Biden. She is a great debater. And she was runner-up for the Miss Alaska title, won Miss Congeniality in that contest and plays the flute.


She also has a compelling story and is a most interesting choice. She will be known by all in 24 to 48 hours in this instant media world, and I am betting she will be well-liked.

The "why" is she is a governor and outside the Beltway. Conservatives love her, and she shares John McCain's value system. She is also known for taking on the establishment and ethics is her forte.


She defeated the longtime senator and Republican governor in a primary and then went on and defeated the former Democratic governor.


I don't believe people vote for vice president but only for president. That said, I think she is every bit as good a choice as Biden. Alaska has three electoral votes, and so does Delaware, so that part ends up being a wash.


I think the potential for her to attract women voters is immense. And I am betting, win or lose or draw, she is a future star of a party in desperate need of young people and women role models.

And by the end of this campaign, she too will be a celebrity, and her life will never be the same again. I hope that's all for the good.


Speaking of celebrities, Barack Obama proved why he is one at Invesco Field, home of the Denver Broncos, last night before 85,000 crying, cheering adoring fans. And what's wrong with that? He is a real talent, and he excites and inspires his supporters.


Those of us who are not supporters need to step back and quit watching in awe and prepare for battle. Obama's natural and developed speaking style is unchallengeable.


I've been in politics for 40 years. I had the privilege of serving Ronald Reagan as his White House political director and campaign manager, and during those years, I heard him give hundreds of speeches.


And no one was ever better. His words enlightened, gave comfort, inspired and made Americans feel good about themselves again. He also had a core of beliefs developed over a long period of time that led to a very effective agenda.


The Democrats now have their own version of an RR orator. And, like Reagan, Obama's speeches are his own words. Whether he will be elected president or will have the accomplishments RR did, only time will tell. But his gifts of speech and ability to inspire his supporters are impressive and should not be underestimated.


Saying all that, and putting the emotion of "mile-high Denver" euphoria aside, Ronald Reagan became a great president because of his many other skills. He knew where he wanted to take our country and had the courage to stick to his beliefs.

We still don't know what Obama and the Democrats want, other than George Bush back in Crawford Texas, and their party controlling both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.


We now know the tickets: Obama-Biden, McCain-Palin.


Biden is an asset as a foreign policy adviser. Palin will be an asset on domestic and energy issues. All have compelling stories. But ultimately, this race is about McCain's experience and world view and Obama's ability to excite his base.


We have one more exciting convention (now with a new player in Gov. Palin) and then 60-plus days to go at full speed. The winner gets the toughest job in the world, with the most difficult agenda we as a nation have faced in decades.




http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/29/rollins.palin/?iref=mpstoryview






.
.

[Ben_n_austin]

I can already hear the arguments from pity. Vote for me, my son is a hero. Vote for me, my child is disabled. Vote for me, I'm a mom like you who knows how tough it is for you poor women struggling to make ends meet.

It's funny when you break it down it's the core argument that conservatives hate to vote on other than pro life. It's clever, but I don't think it'll work in the end. I don't put much stock into the VP and I think this selection will end up shining the light on just how old McCain is in the end.

[Aikbach]

I can already hear the arguments from pity. Vote for me, my son is a hero. Vote for me, my child is disabled. Vote for me, I'm a mom like you who knows how tough it is for you poor women struggling to make ends meet.

It's funny when you break it down it's the core argument that conservatives hate to vote on other than pro life. It's clever, but I don't think it'll work in the end. I don't put much stock into the VP and I think this selection will end up shining the light on just how old McCain is in the end.You have behaved like a jerk with that last comment.

Vote for me I have ethics, integrity and compassion for the most fragile among us and have raised a family with a sense of honor and duty would be a more accurate portrayal.

[Ben_n_austin]

You have behaved like a jerk with that last comment.

Vote for me I have ethics, integrity and compassion for the most fragile among us and have raised a family with a sense of honor and duty would be a more accurate portrayal.

Hey, those aren't my thoughts exactly. In fact I have a unique interest in how society writes of the old and decrepit. I'm just saying that's how the public will see it. And, of course, as political correctness will have it; That will be a mere insinuation. Of course, no one will come out and actually say it. That'd be too bold either way. But both camps are playing a discriminatory card... It'll come down to race, age, gender, foreign policy.... all the while the economic home front will be lost in the smoke screen.

You watch.

And I make apologies if I seem a little rough around the edges. I don't always write with enough restraint. I'm sort of a naturalist, if you will.

I'll work on it for ya, though. :)

[yeahyeah]

I can already hear the arguments from pity. Vote for me, my son is a hero. Vote for me, my child is disabled. Vote for me, I'm a mom like you who knows how tough it is for you poor women struggling to make ends meet.

It's funny when you break it down it's the core argument that conservatives hate to vote on other than pro life. It's clever, but I don't think it'll work in the end. I don't put much stock into the VP and I think this selection will end up shining the light on just how old McCain is in the end.

Once again I totally agree Ben..I think Methuselah put her on the ticket because she is what the Dem DONT have on theirs(ovaries)..not because she has any substance.
This has gimmick written allll over it.
Do we want a gimmick one heart beat away from the presidency?

[Ben_n_austin]

Once again I totally agree Ben..I think Methuselah put her on the ticket because she is what the Dem DONT have on theirs(ovaries)..not because she has any substance.
This has gimmick written allll over it.
Do we want a gimmick one heart beat away from the presidency?

Kind of a chess move that....sucked.

[Ben_n_austin]

Let's not overlook her oil ties.... she's corrupted. Bet on it. This wreaks of a corrupted agenda and oil company/lobbyist loyalties....

[zrinkill]

See ...... this is what we can expect.

Silly comparisons and unfounded accusations.

Make fun of her son who is in the military, mock her child born disabled, make sexist remarks about her ability, hint at ridiculous corruption claims ...... all the while trying to play the race card and promising "Change"

Palin is Change for the Better ...... and the fear and outrageousness the Libs have shown today proves it.

I love it.

[Ben_n_austin]

See ...... this is what we can expect.

Silly comparisons and unfounded accusations.

Make fun of her son who is in the military, mock her child born disabled, make sexist remarks about her ability, hint at ridiculous corruption claims ...... all the while trying to play the race card and promising "Change"

Palin is Change for the Better ...... and the fear and outrageousness the Libs have shown today proves it.

I love it.

I was just pointing out the line of thinking you'd take if she were on the (D) side of the argument. She doesn't strike me as conservative, Republican yes. But I've seen no reason to believe she's a real conservative.

[Ben_n_austin]

Perfect analysis ..... the fear that has been exposed by the selection of the freaking vice presidential candidate tells a lot.

When Biden was chosen it was like .... ... ehhh .....

When Palin is chosen ..... the libs go into full attack mode, making wild accusations and bigoted remarks.

Lets me know that McCain made the right choice.

:umm: Instantly a hot chick wins the approval of millions of conservatives. Who would have thought the right to be engaged in such immoral behavior to think of such a fine, outstanding woman as "hot" and so forth....

I've never seen a sexy VP, and I don't think that's what the job requirements are. I also think her ties from Alaska will hurt her in the long run.

[zrinkill]

You have behaved like a jerk with that last comment.

Vote for me I have ethics, integrity and compassion for the most fragile among us and have raised a family with a sense of honor and duty would be a more accurate portrayal.

Perfect analysis ..... the fear that has been exposed by the selection of the freaking vice presidential candidate tells a lot.

When Biden was chosen it was like .... ... ehhh .....

When Palin is chosen ..... the libs go into full attack mode, making wild accusations and bigoted remarks.

Lets me know that McCain made the right choice.

[Ben_n_austin]

Perfect analysis ..... the fear that has been exposed by the selection of the freaking vice presidential candidate tells a lot.

When Biden was chosen it was like .... ... ehhh .....

When Palin is chosen ..... the libs go into full attack mode, making wild accusations and bigoted remarks.

Lets me know that McCain made the right choice.

We have a presidential candidate we're backing. You're flipping your lid over a vice presidential appointee.

Knock, knock.

[zrinkill]

Silly comparisons and unfounded accusations.

Change!

[iceberg]

I can already hear the arguments from pity. Vote for me, my son is a hero. Vote for me, my child is disabled. Vote for me, I'm a mom like you who knows how tough it is for you poor women struggling to make ends meet.

It's funny when you break it down it's the core argument that conservatives hate to vote on other than pro life. It's clever, but I don't think it'll work in the end. I don't put much stock into the VP and I think this selection will end up shining the light on just how old McCain is in the end.

ben, stop being deliberately stupid.

what are we going to break down on obama - change?

you give leeway to your side but get nasty on the other. are you even trying to be unbiased or just a good little liberal soldier?

[punchnjudy]

Selecting a VP whose qualifications are dwarfed by her competitors for the job as some token to appeal to female voters hardly signifies change. Change would have been selecting the best qualified candidate, regardless of political reaction. This move simply signifies the win at all costs approach to politics that Americans are all too familiar with.

Regarding Obama's inexperience, his selection was made by millions of Americans through a democratic process apparently because they believe his political abilities (he is an amazing political talent) compensate for his inexperience; whatever their basis, he wasn't selected as a figurehead by one person who barely met with him, and one selection doesn't justify the other.

Furthermore, anyone who actually believes Palin will be influencing McCain's decisions on serious policy issues has clearly consumed a diet heavy in Kool-Aid. Her influence in Washington will only begin if McCain should meet his end - a catastrophe that our enemies abroad may be tempted to bring about. Until then, make no mistake - Maverick McCain will be directing this country and the only change we'll see will be whatever change he brings about.

It is true that Americans will be voting on the entire ticket, so, in a sense, they will determine whether this selection is suitable. However, there will be many conservatives, particularly older conservatives, who will turned off enough by this selection to either refrain from voting or voting for a candidate of little significance. Everyone isn't going to just gleefully agree to elect a former beauty queen they've never heard of as the second in command during a time of tremendous international turbulance. It remains to be seen whether this move was even wise politically.

It is also true that the only other viable option presented by our wonderful two party system also has little foreign policy experience at the top of the ticket. However, the single most challenging foreign policy task has always been "coalition building," or selling other nations on your ideas. In a time of great economic interdependence, this ability is crucial. Despite his inexperience, Obama is very popular and well respected abroad, and could conceivably be quite effective at promoting America's agenda in international circles. Palin has no such stature internationally - until now she was barely even recognized in this country - and if she should become Commander in Chief this country's international influence will simply plummet. Putin is probably licking his chops as we speak.

[Ben_n_austin]

ben, stop being deliberately stupid.

what are we going to break down on obama - change?

you give leeway to your side but get nasty on the other. are you even trying to be unbiased or just a good little liberal soldier?

Obama is the one; she is "the chosen one". . . .

[Cajuncowboy]

Once again I totally agree Ben..I think Methuselah put her on the ticket because she is what the Dem DONT have on theirs(ovaries)..not because she has any substance.
This has gimmick written allll over it.
Do we want a gimmick one heart beat away from the presidency?

OMG this is great. The left exposed again.

The party of diversity, of change calls the VP on the other ticket "Ovaries".

This is why you people will keep being looked at as nothing more than a pestilence in the political world.

Parasitic and trite describe your positions not to mention your hypocrisy.

[Ben_n_austin]

OMG this is great. The left exposed again.

OMG **lipsmack**lipstick**EXPOSED! :laugh2:

The party of diversity, of change calls the VP on the other ticket "Ovaries".

This is why you people will keep being looked at as nothing more than a pestilence in the political world.

Parasitic and trite describe your positions not to mention your hypocrisy.

The harsh reality is that the VP nomination is often times... pageantry. I think that's what he's saying. If you don't think this pick was largely due to the fact she is female, you're pay less attention than I thought. Sure, it's not the most eloquent way of saying it. But it cuts pretty hard to the part of the argument that makes her a "good pick".

[Cajuncowboy]

OMG **lipsmack**lipstick**EXPOSED! :laugh2:



The harsh reality is that the VP nomination is often times... pageantry. I think that's what he's saying. If you don't think this pick was largely due to the fact she is female, you're pay less attention than I thought. Sure, it's not the most eloquent way of saying it. But it cuts pretty hard to the part of the argument that makes her a "good pick".

Let's try to focus here.

He called her "Ovaries".

Change, tolerance and diversity.

You guys are nothing but hot air.


You guys are all bags of

[iceberg]

Obama is the one; she is "the chosen one". . . .

oh silly me. it's all so clear now.

you can't be the class clown one minute and try to be taken seriously the next ben.

[Ben_n_austin]

oh silly me. it's all so clear now.

you can't be the class clown one minute and try to be taken seriously the next ben.

Which goes to show, you truly don't listen to the other side....

[Ben_n_austin]

Let's try to focus here.

He called her "Ovaries".

Change, tolerance and diversity.

You guys are nothing but hot air.


You guys are all bags of

....bunch of?

I sense the momentum fading. LOL

[iceberg]

Which goes to show, you truly don't listen to the other side....

dude, i spent many of my years the class clown.

i don't listen to the other side when it's "my way or nothing". when i see you're clearly wearing a uniform and pom poms no, i don't listen.

stop being a freaking cheerleader for libs and maybe i'd listen more. stop taking haha digs at any chance you get at "the other side" and maybe i'll listen more. but if listening to the other side can only mean "gosh ben you're right!" then you're right, i'm not listening - i'm looking for the middle ground.

you just wanna play in your own yard.

[Cajuncowboy]

....bunch of?

I sense the momentum fading. LOL

Keep wishing Little Puddin'.

[peplaw06]

OMG **lipsmack**lipstick**EXPOSED! :laugh2:



The harsh reality is that the VP nomination is often times... pageantry. I think that's what he's saying. If you don't think this pick was largely due to the fact she is female, you're pay less attention than I thought. Sure, it's not the most eloquent way of saying it. But it cuts pretty hard to the part of the argument that makes her a "good pick".Hos summed it up perfectly.

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2222188&postcount=5

[Angus]

Selecting a VP whose qualifications are dwarfed by her competitors for the job as some token to appeal to female voters hardly signifies change. Change would have been selecting the best qualified candidate, regardless of political reaction. This move simply signifies the win at all costs approach to politics that Americans are all too familiar with.

Regarding Obama's inexperience, his selection was made by millions of Americans through a democratic process apparently because they believe his political abilities (he is an amazing political talent) compensate for his inexperience; whatever their basis, he wasn't selected as a figurehead by one person who barely met with him, and one selection doesn't justify the other.

Furthermore, anyone who actually believes Palin will be influencing McCain's decisions on serious policy issues has clearly consumed a diet heavy in Kool-Aid. Her influence in Washington will only begin if McCain should meet his end - a catastrophe that our enemies abroad may be tempted to bring about. Until then, make no mistake - Maverick McCain will be directing this country and the only change we'll see will be whatever change he brings about.

It is true that Americans will be voting on the entire ticket, so, in a sense, they will determine whether this selection is suitable. However, there will be many conservatives, particularly older conservatives, who will turned off enough by this selection to either refrain from voting or voting for a candidate of little significance. Everyone isn't going to just gleefully agree to elect a former beauty queen they've never heard of as the second in command during a time of tremendous international turbulance. It remains to be seen whether this move was even wise politically.

It is also true that the only other viable option presented by our wonderful two party system also has little foreign policy experience at the top of the ticket. However, the single most challenging foreign policy task has always been "coalition building," or selling other nations on your ideas. In a time of great economic interdependence, this ability is crucial. Despite his inexperience, Obama is very popular and well respected abroad, and could conceivably be quite effective at promoting America's agenda in international circles. Palin has no such stature internationally - until now she was barely even recognized in this country - and if she should become Commander in Chief this country's international influence will simply plummet. Putin is probably licking his chops as we speak.

All good arguments deserving of consideration. Comments from grownups are appreciated even if considered ill advised in the end.

I think Sarah Palin's selection will have a great influence on the race, but the greatest one may be its energizing the conservative base.

For independents, the arguments about experience won't concentrate on either of the VPs, except to the extent of weighing a VP's lack of certain kinds of experience against the lack of that experience by the candidate for POTUS.

In some ways Sarah Palin may be more qualified to be POTUS than any of the others, including McCain, because she has been a chief executive charged with making important, people-affecting decisions that must be carried out, and has done it very well. Ordinary senators talk and argue and their votes are important, but they never individually make decisions that others must carry out and live with, for good or ill.

The investigation of Mrs. Palin in Alaska about her decision to change the direction of the state by replacing a subordinate state official is illustrative. Whether she did it for the right or wrong reason is an important consideration but not as important as the fact that she could and did make it, with whatever courage that action took. She exercised executive power.

In a football context, she has been making decisions as the head coach of a team, surrounded by knowledgeable assistant coaches, of course, whose success she has individually had to answer for, win or lose, and now she wants to take that expetise of leadership to a higher conference. The others have always been assistant coaches in higher conferences who claim they can be successful head coaches, too, but haven't demonstrated it yet. They have always been auxilliaries, never the one in command. She has been.

I think the comparison is not one the Democrats should really want to make.

:)

[Ben_n_austin]

Hos summed it up perfectly.

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2222188&postcount=5


Stop to think Palin makes me puke yet?

[peplaw06]

Stop to think Palin makes me puke yet?You made that decision the same day that she was announced as the VP choice.

Then 12 hours ago you started a thread that was titled "this woman is completely nuts." In that OP, you stated that she was from Alaska, which is near Canada (yay for geography class!) and is a Marxist Socialist Russian (which I would think would appeal to you given your choice for President).

I'm sure you gave it careful consideration. :rolleyes:

Stop to think you're credibility on this forum is nill? Embarrassing.

[yeahyeah]

Keep wishing Little Puddin'.

LITTLE PUDDIN!!!!:laugh2: :laugh2:

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44971000/jpg/_44971765_0f4a5115-3b95-499d-bd6a-19eb0035c31f.jpg

:starspin METHUZELAH-TOKEN '08 :starspin

[Ben_n_austin]

LITTLE PUDDIN!!!!:laugh2: :laugh2:

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44971000/jpg/_44971765_0f4a5115-3b95-499d-bd6a-19eb0035c31f.jpg

:starspin METHUZELAH-OVARIES '08 :starspin


I'll take little pudding over being a tale telling cabrito chiquito... :laugh2:

[Cajuncowboy]

LITTLE PUDDIN!!!!:laugh2: :laugh2:

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44971000/jpg/_44971765_0f4a5115-3b95-499d-bd6a-19eb0035c31f.jpg

:starspin METHUZELAH-OVARIES '08 :starspin

Real Cowboy fans would understand the Puddin' remark.

And the pic and title is offensive and should be to any woman reading this forum.

[yeahyeah]

Real Cowboy fans would understand the Puddin' remark.

And the pic and title is offensive and should be to any woman reading this forum.


Ovaries? Offensive? So when they talk about Ovarian cancer on tv are you offended? its a medical term...are "eyes" or "arms" offensive to you as well?

But ok preacher I will respect you.

[zrinkill]

So now she is just a token woman?

She has not earned anything with her many many accomplishments in in her short career?

If you guys say so.

I think she is great ..... I wish she was running at the head of the ticket.

[AtlCB]

LITTLE PUDDIN!!!!:laugh2: :laugh2:

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44971000/jpg/_44971765_0f4a5115-3b95-499d-bd6a-19eb0035c31f.jpg

:starspin METHUZELAH-TOKEN '08 :starspin That is really low class.

[iceberg]

Ovaries? Offensive? So when they talk about Ovarian cancer on tv are you offended? its a medical term...are "eyes" or "arms" offensive to you as well?

But ok preacher I will respect you.

what if i said i was going to shove used ovaries up your nostrils. is it still ok because "medically speaking" i'm using correct terms?

i'm pretty sure you don't know what respect it, yeah.

[Cajuncowboy]

Ovaries? Offensive? So when they talk about Ovarian cancer on tv are you offended? its a medical term...are "eyes" or "arms" offensive to you as well?

But ok preacher I will respect you.

You really think you just made some kind of point?

You are simply saying she is nothing more than ovaries. People aren't stupid enough to believe that retort.

[Danny White]

You really think you just made some kind of point?

You are simply saying she is nothing more than ovaries. People aren't stupid enough to believe that retort.

It's not even worth arguing about.

If you nicknamed Obama "melanin" and then tried to say, what's offensive about "melanin" it's a biological term, you'd be dismissed as a total tool.

And that's what's happening here. Everyone realizes this yeahyeah guy is an irrelevant tool who has no interest in contributing anything of substance, and no one is paying attention to the tripe he's posting.

[burmafrd]

I know benny got banned because he lost control, but why not dump that one as well? He is just about as offensive and his posts are pretty pathetic.

[iceberg]

I know benny got banned because he lost control, but why not dump that one as well? He is just about as offensive and his posts are pretty pathetic.

who knows where that line is. but why let someone else tell me what it is vs me just look at the stupid and move on?

i don't deny yeahyeah and some others take stupidity to a whole new level. but if i think i'm smart, intelligent, can spell potato better than any given vp - why do i argue with them?

why do i validate their stupidity by telling them that's what it is. if they can't figure it out my telling them that won't change it. i get it from a mental aspect, i really do. but from a how to stop it standpoint, we gotta just give him space to be stupid and walk around the doo doo pile.

[Bach]

This has gimmick written allll over it.
Do we want a gimmick one heart beat away from the presidency?

I don't want a gimmick as President, which is another reason I'm not supporting Obama.

[theogt]

Once again I totally agree Ben..I think Methuselah put her on the ticket because she is what the Dem DONT have on theirs(ovaries)..not because she has any substance.
This has gimmick written allll over it.
Do we want a gimmick one heart beat away from the presidency?Could you be more sexist?

[ThaBigP]

Like I've said before, to the hard extreme left, sexism and racism is a tool in their toolbox to break out when convenient. If you don't support a Marxist minority and/or female candidate, you are racist/sexist. However, no amount of support of minority/female conservative candidates for office will wash the stink of racism/sexism off of you from their point of view. After all, *those* candidates "don't count" (or perhaps they would argue they should only count as 3/5 of a person....something I read about before somewhere....oh yeah, history). See my lengthly list of images of prominent conservatives who are not white males. None of them "count" in the hard left's eyes. I also posted a Wikipedia definition of the Orwellian term "unperson" - this is precisely the tactics they're using. Straight outta Goebel's playbook....or Stalin's....et al.

[VietCowboy]

Like I've said before, to the hard extreme left, sexism and racism is a tool in their toolbox to break out when convenient. If you don't support a Marxist minority and/or female candidate, you are racist/sexist. However, no amount of support of minority/female conservative candidates for office will wash the stink of racism/sexism off of you from their point of view. After all, *those* candidates "don't count" (or perhaps they would argue they should only count as 3/5 of a person....something I read about before somewhere....oh yeah, history). See my lengthly list of images of prominent conservatives who are not white males. None of them "count" in the hard left's eyes. I also posted a Wikipedia definition of the Orwellian term "unperson" - this is precisely the tactics they're using. Straight outta Goebel's playbook....or Stalin's....et al.

what???why would someone who's "hard extreme left" ever want to support a conservative? And why would they be less of a person because they are conservative? who are you talking about?

[Cajuncowboy]

what???why would someone who's "hard extreme left" ever want to support a conservative? And why would they be less of a person because they are conservative? who are you talking about?

He's referring to neophytes like yeahyeah who calls Palin "Ovaries". Meaning that's all there is to her. Meaning "less of a person". That's the way it is with the extreme left. They pay lip service to their so called "ideals" but they only put them in practice when it serves their agenda.

[VietCowboy]

He's referring to neophytes like yeahyeah who calls Palin "Ovaries". Meaning that's all there is to her. Meaning "less of a person". That's the way it is with the extreme left. They pay lip service to their so called "ideals" but they only put them in practice when it serves their agenda.

On this board, I would probably be considered extreme left. I'm sure I don't agree with that "that's the way it is" from a couple of examples. I don't like Palin, but I certainly don't see her less of a person, just someone I disagree with on many issues, abortion, creationism, energy sustainability, etc.

[Cajuncowboy]

On this board, I would probably be considered extreme left. I'm sure I don't agree with that "that's the way it is" from a couple of examples. I don't like Palin, but I certainly don't see her less of a person, just someone I disagree with on many issues, abortion, creationism, energy sustainability, etc.

I haven't seen anything from her on religion at all.

[VietCowboy]

I haven't seen anything from her on religion at all.

feel free to go look it up. She supports teaching creationism in school. Might as well tell all non-Christian kids in school that their religious belief, or lack there of, is wrong and that on the school supply list is the Holy Bible. Next thing we know, anything with no empirical support behind it will be taught. Oh wait, that's already happening....

[yeahyeah]

He's referring to neophytes like yeahyeah who calls Palin "Ovaries". Meaning that's all there is to her. Meaning "less of a person". That's the way it is with the extreme left. They pay lip service to their so called "ideals" but they only put them in practice when it serves their agenda.

Cajun you completely miss my point with the reference to ovaries. I strongly believe that this is one of the main reasons that Mccain chose Palin...to grab the white female vote. The Hillary vote. She is nothing more than a surrogate for what he cannot get, Hillary. He sees the tensions between Obama and Clinton..you think he is not trying to exploit that? If you think not then you are simply lying to yourself.
This is what makes me sick about the Big two...they would rather resort to putting a person with nearly NO practical big government experience, potentially at the detriment of the populace, than lose.
please...GIMMICK

[Cajuncowboy]

feel free to go look it up. She supports teaching creationism in school. Might as well tell all non-Christian kids in school that their religious belief, or lack there of, is wrong and that on the school supply list is the Holy Bible. Next thing we know, anything with no empirical support behind it will be taught. Oh wait, that's already happening....

Like Global Warming????? Hmmmmm?

[Cajuncowboy]

Cajun you completely miss my point with the reference to ovaries. I strongly believe that this is one of the main reasons that Mccain chose Palin...to grab the white female vote. The Hillary vote. She is nothing more than a surrogate for what he cannot get, Hillary. He sees the tensions between Obama and Clinton..you think he is not trying to exploit that? If you think not then you are simply lying to yourself.
This is what makes me sick about the Big two...they would rather resort to putting a person with nearly NO practical big government experience, potentially at the detriment of the populace, than lose.
please...GIMMICK

And yet, you still call her "Ovaries".

:rolleyes:

[VietCowboy]

Cajun you completely miss my point with the reference to ovaries. I strongly believe that this is one of the main reasons that Mccain chose Palin...to grab the white female vote. The Hillary vote. She is nothing more than a surrogate for what he cannot get, Hillary. He sees the tensions between Obama and Clinton..you think he is not trying to exploit that? If you think not then you are simply lying to yourself.
This is what makes me sick about the Big two...they would rather resort to putting a person with nearly NO practical big government experience, potentially at the detriment of the populace, than lose.
please...GIMMICK

i'm all for more than a two-party system (that's dominant any). I think some european nations like France are multi-party system.

[VietCowboy]

Like Global Warming????? Hmmmmm?

can you stop with that? Just because there are MANY MANY studies out there that both support and refute GW, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Like I said in my other thread, we may not have fully achieved an instrument so precise as to fully end the debate...hence the fact that it continues to be a debate. But you obviously did not understand my analogy or else you would know that. Choosing to ignore all evidence that are contrary to your beliefs on the subject does not make them go away.

What I mean is, like I've stated several times, is something like Abstinence Only Sex ed, that have been proven ineffective, full of false information, and the amount of money given to sustain this program is utterly ridiculous. I can give you MANY citations if you wish to discuss this futher.

[iceberg]

Cajun you completely miss my point with the reference to ovaries. I strongly believe that this is one of the main reasons that Mccain chose Palin...to grab the white female vote. The Hillary vote. She is nothing more than a surrogate for what he cannot get, Hillary. He sees the tensions between Obama and Clinton..you think he is not trying to exploit that? If you think not then you are simply lying to yourself.
This is what makes me sick about the Big two...they would rather resort to putting a person with nearly NO practical big government experience, potentially at the detriment of the populace, than lose.
please...GIMMICK

and obama has "practical big government" experience?

this is what gets so frustrating about the liberals - their faults you must be blind to while they rail the rest for the very same faults.

and if you think you're not, yeahyeah, you're lying to yourself.

[bbgun]

Dunlap and Jackie in rare form.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=-W5IAPK0hbU

[iceberg]

feel free to go look it up. She supports teaching creationism in school. Might as well tell all non-Christian kids in school that their religious belief, or lack there of, is wrong and that on the school supply list is the Holy Bible. Next thing we know, anything with no empirical support behind it will be taught. Oh wait, that's already happening....

why do you equate teaching creationism as saying someone's religion is wrong? it's just one method. as long as she doesn't "hush" the other theories, fine. teach the kids ALL sides and let them decide for themselves vs. handing down YOUR faith from generation to generation.

[VietCowboy]

why do you equate teaching creationism as saying someone's religion is wrong? it's just one method. as long as she doesn't "hush" the other theories, fine. teach the kids ALL sides and let them decide for themselves vs. handing down YOUR faith from generation to generation.

So you are saying anything the teacher teaches in class is up for debate?

Will Buddhism ideals of Nirvana also be on the curriculum by any chance?

[yeahyeah]

i'm all for more than a two-party system (that's dominant any). I think some european nations like France are multi-party system.

No viet...im sorry but you are incorrect..the canadians, and most of the EU have multiple party systems. Even the knesset has multiple parties.


http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/RefArticle.aspx?refid=761580668

[VietCowboy]

No viet...im sorry but you are incorrect..the canadians, and most of the EU have multiple party systems. Even the knesset has multiple parties.


http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/RefArticle.aspx?refid=761580668

isn't that what I said??

[Cajuncowboy]

can you stop with that? Just because there are MANY MANY studies out there that both support and refute GW, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Like I said in my other thread, we may not have fully achieved an instrument so precise as to fully end the debate...hence the fact that it continues to be a debate. But you obviously did not understand my analogy or else you would know that. Choosing to ignore all evidence that are contrary to your beliefs on the subject does not make them go away.

What I mean is, like I've stated several times, is something like Abstinence Only Sex ed, that have been proven ineffective, full of false information, and the amount of money given to sustain this program is utterly ridiculous. I can give you MANY citations if you wish to discuss this futher.

No, I won't stop that. The nerve. You want to be able to spout all you want but want me to be quiet on an equally polarizing subject? Get real! The educational system teaches GW as if it is fact and that man is causing it. When in fact, there is as much if not more evidence that is not the case.

But as long as THAT religion is being presented, it's ok.

As for abstinence, it has been proven to be 100% perfect in preventing pregnancy and STDs.

[VietCowboy]

No, I won't stop that. The nerve. You want to be able to spout all you want but want me to be quiet on an equally polarizing subject? Get real! The educational system teaches GW as if it is fact and that man is causing it. When in fact, there is as much if not more evidence that is not the case.

But as long as THAT religion is being presented, it's ok.

As for abstinence, it has been proven to be 100% perfect in preventing pregnancy and STDs.

I certainly don't ever remember learning about GW in school? Which class was that again? I learned it in the media, not in school. Feel free to cite it since it's been a couple years since I was in high school and under.

No one is debating abstinence is the BEST method against pregnancy and STD. However not telling kids ways to protect themselves if they DECIDE to engage in sex (since isn't that you said, that they should make up their minds about things, what if they make up their minds they want to have sex) is not helping them.

I would gladly like to direct you to the way Sweden teaches teach sex education. TOTAL 180. Pretty interesting the Swedish people.

[yeahyeah]

isn't that what I said??
no, you said some..I am telling its most

[Cajuncowboy]

I certainly don't ever remember learning about GW? Which class was that again?

MAn, I was in HS in the early 80's and they were telling us how to save the planet. Plastics were bad, put a brick in your toilet tank to save the water in the oceans because they were gonna dry up, bike, rather than take a car to save the Ozone.

The message is always the same. And it hasn't changed.

[yeahyeah]

and obama has "practical big government" experience?

this is what gets so frustrating about the liberals - their faults you must be blind to while they rail the rest for the very same faults.

and if you think you're not, yeahyeah, you're lying to yourself.
Palin was picked by the candidate and Obama was chosen by the people. There is a huge difference. Obama had to run the gauntlet..be critiqued..debated...examined
Palin had to undergo NONE of that, and she is a hares breath away from the presidency.

[VietCowboy]

no, you said some..I am telling its most

I say some because while most have a multi-party system, SOME really only have 2 dominant party.

[VietCowboy]

MAn, I was in HS in the early 80's and they were telling us how to save the planet. Plastics were bad, put a brick in your toilet tank to save the water in the oceans because they were gonna dry up, bike, rather than take a car to save the Ozone.

The message is always the same. And it hasn't changed.

I was in school in the 90's and early 2000's. Sorry can't help you about the 80's, Reagan was in power.

What about the D.A.R.E. program? It's proven ineffective but people still love it to death these days.

[Cajuncowboy]

Palin was picked by the candidate and Obama was chosen by the people. There is a huge difference. Obama had to run the gauntlet..be critiqued..debated...examined
Palin had to undergo NONE of that, and she is a hares breath away from the presidency.

Ummm, you make it sound like this fool was chosen by all the people. He was chosen by the leftists and the fooled. And then he was only chosen to run on their ticket.

I know he's YOUR messiah, but he sure as heck ain't mine. And he will not be POTUS either.

[yeahyeah]

I say some because while most have a multi-party system, SOME really only have 2 dominant party.
I am sorry i misunderstood viet

[yeahyeah]

Ummm, you make it sound like this fool was chosen by all the people. He was chosen by the leftists and the fooled. And then he was only chosen to run on their ticket.

I know he's YOUR messiah, but he sure as heck ain't mine. And he will not be POTUS either.
Regardless of your opinion sir he was still chosen in a democratic system..cant say that about Palin.

[zrinkill]

Regardless of your opinion sir he was still chosen in a democratic system..cant say that about Palin.

Palin did not win elections just like Obama?

[VietCowboy]

I am sorry i misunderstood viet

I know what you mean though. I hate the word "some" actually. In science, when it is used, its a really bad theory since it's hardly ever falsifiable.

[Cajuncowboy]

I was in school in the 90's and early 2000's. Sorry can't help you about the 80's, Reagan was in power.

What about the D.A.R.E. program? It's proven ineffective but people still love it to death these days.

Academia has pushed this bilge for decades. you ain't singin' a new tune.

But because the forum guidelines doesn't allow the discussion of religion here, All you need to know about teen pregnancy is go back to 1962 and look at the stark difference in pregnancy rates before that and compare them to afterwards.

Say what you want but that's the way it is.

[Cajuncowboy]

Palin did not win elections just like Obama?

Nope. The Gubernatorial fairy flew over Alaska and dropped her in the office.

[VietCowboy]

Academia has pushed this bilge for decades. you ain't singin' a new tune.

But because the forum guidelines doesn't allow the discussion of religion here, All you need to know about teen pregnancy is go back to 1962 and look at the stark difference in pregnancy rates before that and compare them to afterwards.

Say what you want but that's the way it is.

Go ahead and look at teen pregnancy and abortion in countries like Sweden. I would say teen pregnancy has gone up because of the failure of Abstinency only sex ed. The end.

[Cajuncowboy]

Go ahead and look at teen pregnancy and abortion in countries like Sweden. I would say teen pregnancy has gone up because of the failure of Abstinency only sex ed. The end.

Uh, we ain't in Sweden Lucy!

[VietCowboy]

Uh, we ain't in Sweden Lucy!

Your point?

So a quick question if you may....

Fact: IQ scores have steadily gone up since it was first being recorded and have to be recalibrated every 15 years.

Theory: is it because we are now smarter than we were 50 years ago?

Yes or No?

[zrinkill]

Go ahead and look at teen pregnancy and abortion in countries like Sweden. I would say teen pregnancy has gone up because of the failure of Abstinency only sex ed. The end.

I would say its because of the growing disdain of human life that the left does not consider "up to their standards"

The left has done a good job of convincing teens that an unborn child is only a "cluster of cells"

Too bad that the heart starts to beat 21 days after conception .....

that just gets in the way of the fact that they think if they do not want the baby .... they should be allowed to kill it.

"The End" .....

[zrinkill]

Your point?

So a quick question if you may....

Fact: IQ scores have steadily gone up since it was first being recorded and have to be recalibrated every 15 years.

Theory: is it because we are now smarter than we were 50 years ago?

Yes or No?

The standards on these tests have been watered down ..... because everyone likes to think their kids are "gifted"

[Cajuncowboy]

Your point?

The point is that we ain't in Sweden Lucy.

Abstinence works. Teaching kids to get around the consequences of bad actions is not the best message we can send. Somehow, teaching them to put a condom on a cucumber is supposed to solve all the ills?

How come we have such a huge teen pregnancy problem? Ya'll have been in charge of the schools for so long. And yet drugs are rampant, kids are more violent and they are having sex in the class room.

Yep, ya'll have done a great job.

[yeahyeah]

The point is that we ain't in Sweden Lucy.

Abstinence works. Teaching kids to get around the consequences of bad actions is not the best message we can send. Somehow, teaching them to put a condom on a cucumber is supposed to solve all the ills?

How come we have such a huge teen pregnancy problem? Ya'll have been in charge of the schools for so long. And yet drugs are rampant, kids are more violent and they are having sex in the class room.

Yep, ya'll have done a great job.

Yes just like the Catholic churches' abstinence effort in Africa has worked on HIV rates.

[Cajuncowboy]

Your point?

So a quick question if you may....

Fact: IQ scores have steadily gone up since it was first being recorded and have to be recalibrated every 15 years.

Theory: is it because we are now smarter than we were 50 years ago?

Yes or No?

No. You really don't believe this do you???

[Cajuncowboy]

Yes just like the Catholic churches' abstinence effort in Africa has worked on HIV rates.

Didn't say they would all listen. Just saying to remove the consequences from bad behavior will only beget bad behavior.

If there were no penalty for stealing, the place would be a zoo. If there were no penalty for yelling fire in a crowded theater, it would be chaos. So now, by taking away the so called consequences (Using abortions for one) you have more of the problem you are trying to prevent.

PLUS, you didn't answer the post. Why not????

[zrinkill]

Yes just like the Catholic churches' abstinence effort in Africa has worked on HIV rates.


So in what other way would you use to keep them from getting HIV?

They will not wear condoms ..... they will not stop having sex with multiple partners ..... they will not stop having babies when they are already infected.

You think giving them free abortions will help? You are talking about quickening their extinction.

[VietCowboy]

The point is that we ain't in Sweden Lucy.

Abstinence works. Teaching kids to get around the consequences of bad actions is not the best message we can send. Somehow, teaching them to put a condom on a cucumber is supposed to solve all the ills?

How come we have such a huge teen pregnancy problem? Ya'll have been in charge of the schools for so long. And yet drugs are rampant, kids are more violent and they are having sex in the class room.

Yep, ya'll have done a great job.

So because Sweden has an effective sex education program and we don't we just disregard them and continue on our own merry way because we aren't them?

Teens haven't finished developing their prefrontal cortex. They'll do the deed before they think of the consequence. Why shouldn't we give them the tools to best prepare them.

If you want, I can send you the sex ed curriculum that I was researching and you'll see that while the emphasis is on abstinence, there's so much information in there...

putting kids in the scenerios and role play to get them to see that once is all it takes to get an STD or preggers.

showing kids how to go look for condoms, gels, etc, what store, when is the store open, how much, how do you get there. What happens when a condom fails, etc. Condoms fail to work because people don't store it correctly or use it correctly. Start a discussion with your parents about sex, give them facts and ask them their preconceptions on sex (i.e. a girl can't get pregnant when she's on her period can she?)

There was a study done in Europe not too long ago that looked at couples where one had HIV and the other didn't. One group consistently practiced safe sex and the other one didn't. NO partner from the group that consistently practiced safe sex got HIV, think the number was 7 in the inconsistent group got HIV.

[yeahyeah]

The point is that we ain't in Sweden Lucy.

Abstinence works. 1) Teaching kids to get around the consequences of bad actions is not the best message we can send. Somehow, teaching them to put a condom on a cucumber is supposed to solve all the ills?

How come we have such a huge teen pregnancy problem? 2) Ya'll have been in charge of the schools for so long. And yet drugs are rampant, kids are more violent and they are having sex in the class room.

Yep, ya'll have done a great job.

Please forgive me preacher.
!) as far as i can recollect abstinence IS taught in school. HOWEVER they tell the kids not to have sex and dont hand out condoms in full knowledge that they DO...thus my comment on the catholic church in africa.
You can tell people not to fornicate all day long but nature dictates otherwise......THATS why you hand out contraceptives,,however im sure you are against REAL prevention

2) actually first time drug use and recidivism rates have remained constant over the past 20 years despite a 300% increase in prison populace and an ever increasing DEA...but thats another debate preacher.

[Cajuncowboy]

So because Sweden has an effective sex education program and we don't we just disregard them and continue on our own merry way because we aren't them?

Teens haven't finished developing their prefrontal cortex. They'll do the deed before they think of the consequence. Why shouldn't we give them the tools to best prepare them.

If you want, I can send you the sex ed curriculum that I was researching and you'll see that while the emphasis is on abstinence, there's so much information in there...

putting kids in the scenerios and role play to get them to see that once is all it takes to get an STD or preggers.

showing kids how to go look for condoms, gels, etc, what store, when is the store open, how much, how do you get there. What happens when a condom fails, etc. Condoms fail to work because people don't store it correctly or use it correctly. Start a discussion with your parents about sex, give them facts and ask them their preconceptions on sex (i.e. a girl can't get pregnant when she's on her period can she?)

There was a study done in Europe not too long ago that looked at couples where one had HIV and the other didn't. One group consistently practiced safe sex and the other one didn't. NO partner from the group that consistently practiced safe sex got HIV.

No partner who ever practiced abstinence ever got pregnant or HIV through sex.

And keep your sex ed curriculum, thank you.

[zrinkill]

Wow .... these people know nothing about the effort in Africa.

Its unbelievable.

[VietCowboy]

[/b]

No partner who ever practiced abstinence ever got pregnant or HIV through sex.

And keep your sex ed curriculum, thank you.

no one is arguing with you about that, but you think when someone has sex, that they shouldn't have knowledge of safe sex?

So in your world, people shouldn't have sex. period???

[Cajuncowboy]

Please forgive me preacher.
!) as far as i can recollect abstinence IS taught in school. HOWEVER they tell the kids not to have sex and dont hand out condoms in full knowledge that they DO...thus my comment on the catholic church in africa.
You can tell people not to fornicate all day long but nature dictates otherwise......THATS why you hand out contraceptives,,however im sure you are against REAL prevention

2) actually first time drug use and recidivism rates have remained constant over the past 20 years despite a 300% increase in prison populace and an ever increasing DEA...but thats another debate preacher.

This is an argument supporting your position? You can call me preacher all you want in a condescending nature all you want, just like you minimize a woman by calling her "ovaries", but that doesn't make you any more intelligent to anyone.

You hand out condoms and you hand out permission. You take the consequences out it for the child. Why do you think it is illegal to provide booze to minors. According to your line of thinking, we should just give them the bottle and let them drink at home. As long we keep them safe off the road, we can call it safe drinking.

Would that work for you???

Or How about clean needles. We could call it safe drug usage.

[yeahyeah]

Wow .... these people know nothing about the effort in Africa.

Its unbelievable.

oh please enlighten me on the catholic churches policies on contraceptives...please

[VietCowboy]

and what is your definition of abstinence...no touching? oral sex okay? dry humping? kissing? holding hands?

88% of kids who sign abstinence pledge or pledge to wait until marriage to have sex break that promise. How about that?

[Cajuncowboy]

no one is arguing with you about that, but you think when someone has sex, that they shouldn't have knowledge of safe sex?

So in your world, people shouldn't have sex. period???

In my world. people shouldn't have sex outside of marriage. And for sure if they are school age children.

If you want to teach it in school, then do it in college.

[Cajuncowboy]

and what is your definition of abstinence...no touching? oral sex okay? dry humping? kissing? holding hands?

88% of kids who sign abstinence pledge or pledge to wait until marriage to have sex break that promise. How about that?

Unreal. You want to use the Bill Clinton definition of sex? Gee since the word sex is used to describe it, I guess oral sex would be out as well, right???

And could you provide me with a link to the 88% so it could be verified as a credible number???

And even if it is true which I doubt, it goes to the real commitment made by the individual. Again, personal responsibility. I know that's a hard thing for the left to handle but still....

[VietCowboy]

Unreal. You want to use the Bill Clinton definition of sex? Gee since the word sex is used to describe it, I guess oral sex would be out as well, right???

And could you provide me with a link to the 88% so it could be verified as a credible number???

And even if it is true which I doubt, it goes to the real commitment made by the individual. Again, personal responsibility. I know that's a hard thing for the left to handle but still....

my pleasure:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=940DE5D8143EF933A25750C0A9629C8B63

Of the 12,000 teenagers included in the federal study, 88 percent of those who pledged chastity reported having had sexual intercourse before they married, Dr. Bearman said at a scientific meeting in Philadelphia on preventing sexually transmitted diseases.

[Cajuncowboy]

my pleasure:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=940DE5D8143EF933A25750C0A9629C8B63

Of the 12,000 teenagers included in the federal study, 88 percent of those who pledged chastity reported having had sexual intercourse before they married, Dr. Bearman said at a scientific meeting in Philadelphia on preventing sexually transmitted diseases.

I would certainly question the findings but there was also this in the same article.


But a pledge to refrain from premarital sex, the researchers found, did tend to delay the start of sexual intercourse by 18 months. The adolescents who took virginity pledges also married earlier and had fewer sexual partners than the other teenagers surveyed, said Dr. Peter Bearman, the chairman of the sociology department at Columbia University and the lead author of the study.

And in the end, isn't that what you want? Lower STDs?

[iceberg]

Palin was picked by the candidate and Obama was chosen by the people. There is a huge difference. Obama had to run the gauntlet..be critiqued..debated...examined
Palin had to undergo NONE of that, and she is a hares breath away from the presidency.

this is your excuse? chosen "by the people"?

there is no difference. experience is the same, is it not? how they got there doesn't add to or take away from their overall experience. but yet as usual you go find some excuse-monkey to dance behind so your choice is fine and you can continue to shout CHANGE while you belittle people for your sides very own problems as well.

you just excuse those away with whatever is handy.

[iceberg]

Regardless of your opinion sir he was still chosen in a democratic system..cant say that about Palin.

so we now must remove biden from the experience factor since he wasn't chosen "by the people".

geez - you're about as dense as they come.

[VietCowboy]

I would certainly question the findings but there was also this in the same article.


But a pledge to refrain from premarital sex, the researchers found, did tend to delay the start of sexual intercourse by 18 months. The adolescents who took virginity pledges also married earlier and had fewer sexual partners than the other teenagers surveyed, said Dr. Peter Bearman, the chairman of the sociology department at Columbia University and the lead author of the study.

And in the end, isn't that what you want? Lower STDs?

That's the point of comprehensive sex ed. The point of Abstinence Only Sex is to not have sex. Which is why it is a failure.

Furthermore, those that don't pledge are at a much higher risk for pregnancy and STDs, and teaching them Abstinence Only Sex Ed doesn't help them out at all.

[zrinkill]

oh please enlighten me on the catholic churches policies on contraceptives...please

Being that I am not Catholic in the least I cannot do that.

Do you think thats the only ones over their?

Many of my ex ROTC kids have joined the cause over there, in missionary's or the peace corp.

Its frustrating for them because nothing is working.

They will not use Condoms.

They will not stop having sex.

They will not stop having babies.

They will not even get tested.

When a 12 year old girl gets a clean bill of health over their the volunteers beg her not to have unprotected sex.

A few months later she comes back pregnant and HIV positive.

People on the Left and the Right are at their wits ends over their.

You and your silly assumptions do not know anything about what is really going on.

Pathetic.

[iceberg]

Being that I am not Catholic in the least I cannot do that.

born and raised roman catholic. alter boy for many years and read scriptures during church summer camp to the congregation.

they don't like 'em.

now why does that really matter again or is this another side step into stupidity to avoid the actual topic at hand?

[zrinkill]

now why does that really matter again or is this another side step into stupidity to avoid the actual topic at hand?

Of course it is ..... leftist play book .... all else fails blame Religion.

[zrinkill]

The sad part is the situation in Africa has nothing to do with the Right or Left ..... Dems or Repubs ......

An entire Nation of people are dieing off ..... and noone can think of anything to do too stop it.

We can only hope that by some miracle, or act of evolution, that the African people will develop an immunity from the disease.

Then the Right and Left can waste time arguing who is at fault.

:banghead:

[yeahyeah]

Being that I am not Catholic in the least I cannot do that.

Do you think thats the only ones over their?

Many of my ex ROTC kids have joined the cause over there, in missionary's or the peace corp.

Its frustrating for them because nothing is working.

They will not use Condoms.

They will not stop having sex.

They will not stop having babies.

They will not even get tested.

When a 12 year old girl gets a clean bill of health over their the volunteers beg her not to have unprotected sex.

A few months later she comes back pregnant and HIV positive.

People on the Left and the Right are at their wits ends over their.

You and your silly assumptions do not know anything about what is really going on.

Pathetic.

Oh WOW....lets go to school Z


In 1968, Pope Paul VI issued his landmark encyclical letter Humanae Vitae (Latin, "Human Life"), which reemphasized the Church’s constant teaching that it is always intrinsically wrong to use contraception to prevent new human beings from coming into existence.

Contraception is "any action which, either in anticipation of the conjugal act [sexual intercourse], or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" (Humanae Vitae 14). This includes sterilization, condoms and other barrier methods, spermicides, coitus interruptus (withdrawal method), the Pill, and all other such methods.


http://www.catholic.com/library/Birth_Control.asp

When you have a battle against a disease and approximately 30% of a continent told not to use contraception.
It is not realistic..it is absurd. Abstinence does not work..and preaching it is fine but not giving contraception is stupid, dangerous and it KILLS people. The Catholic church is responsible for literally millions of deaths from HIV due to their policy....oh sorry...the bibles' laws

[zrinkill]

Oh WOW....lets go to school Z


In 1968, Pope Paul VI issued his landmark encyclical letter Humanae Vitae (Latin, "Human Life"), which reemphasized the Church’s constant teaching that it is always intrinsically wrong to use contraception to prevent new human beings from coming into existence.

Contraception is "any action which, either in anticipation of the conjugal act [sexual intercourse], or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" (Humanae Vitae 14). This includes sterilization, condoms and other barrier methods, spermicides, coitus interruptus (withdrawal method), the Pill, and all other such methods.


http://www.catholic.com/library/Birth_Control.asp

When you have a battle against a disease and approximately 30% of a continent told not to use contraception.
It is not realistic..it is absurd. Abstinence does not work..and preaching it is fine but not giving contraception is stupid, dangerous and it KILLS people. The Catholic church is responsible for literally millions of deaths from HIV due to their policy....oh sorry...the bibles' laws

What the heck are you talking about?

Do you think the Catholic church is the only one over there?

I never said anything about abstinence .... I think you are arguing with the wrong person.

I said that EVERYTHING is being tried and NOTHING is working ...... can you not get that through you silly ben-like head?

You can continue to bash other peoples religions all you want, if you think that is making your point.

Bringing up crap from 40 years ago really has a lot to do with todays efforts ay?

again pathetic.

[zrinkill]

Oh WOW....lets go to school Z

:lmao:

Someone needs to stay there ......

[VietCowboy]

One of the biggest problems (in Africa and other non-Westernized country) is the lack of OUR understanding of their CULTURE.

When Catholic Missionaries came into Africa many many years ago, they brought their own beliefs and sought out to say the other's beliefs were wrong.

In Africa back then, women who were nursing DO NOT have sex. This had to do with their cultural beliefs (some good, some bad). The Catholic missionaries said their belief was not true, and thus, the husbands would press their wives to have sex after the birth, and instead of having a kid every 2-3 years like before, they were now starting to have kids every 9 months.

[yeahyeah]

What the heck are you talking about?

Do you think the Catholic church is the only one over there?

I never said anything about abstinence .... I think you are arguing with the wrong person.

I said that EVERYTHING is being tried and NOTHING is working ...... can you not get that through you silly ben-like head?

You can continue to bash other peoples religions all you want, if you think that is making your point.

Bringing up crap from 40 years ago really has a lot to do with todays efforts ay?

again pathetic.

wow...some people are REALLY REALLY REALLY SLOOOOOOOOW

ok..my original quote...post #79

"Yes just like the Catholic churches' abstinence effort in Africa has worked on HIV rates."

I AM TALKING ABOUT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IN AFRICA...IF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE THEN DONT RESPOND...THANKYOU.

YOU RESPONDED TO ME.


WOW!

[zrinkill]

wow...some people are REALLY REALLY REALLY SLOOOOOOOOW

ok..my original quote...post #79

"Yes just like the Catholic churches' abstinence effort in Africa has worked on HIV rates."

I AM TALKING ABOUT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IN AFRICA...IF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE THEN DONT RESPOND...THANKYOU.

YOU RESPONDED TO ME.


WOW!

Bold printing help gets your weak responses over I guess.

...... So in other words you are talking about something that has nothing to do with the fight nowadays.

You just want to bash Catholics.

:banghead:

I should have known.

[yeahyeah]

Bold ...... So in other words you are talking about something that has nothing to do with the fight nowadays.

You just want to bash Catholics.

:banghead:

I should have known.

I made a comment about the CATHOLIC church in africa to which YOU responded

" So in what other way would you use to keep them from getting HIV?

They will not wear condoms ..... they will not stop having sex with multiple partners ..... they will not stop having babies when they are already infected.

You think giving them free abortions will help? You are talking about quickening their extinction."

To which i responded

oh please enlighten me on the catholic churches policies on contraceptives...please

to which you responded

Being that I am not Catholic in the least I cannot do that.


To which I responded by GIVING YOU the policy and you say im BASHING?
You wont even mount an argument? I AM BASHING?
You are not educated on the situation enough to tell me anything..just that you have some friends who say they wont use contraception and I am bashing?...GRRREAT..thanks
I give you the facts...the policy and I am bashing?

hahahaha wow

[iceberg]

It is not realistic..it is absurd. Abstinence does not work..and preaching it is fine but not giving contraception is stupid, dangerous and it KILLS people. The Catholic church is responsible for literally millions of deaths from HIV due to their policy....oh sorry...the bibles' laws

no. the people who choose to get that rigid in their beliefs are. you're the one who seems to think one size fits all when it comes to what you hate but you sure won't wear the same hat in return.

by the people. ha.

[zrinkill]

In actuality you realized you could not win this silly argument ..... so you changed what your "point" was supposed to be.


Well done ... no one is falling for it.

[iceberg]

Bold printing help gets your weak responses over I guess.

...... So in other words you are talking about something that has nothing to do with the fight nowadays.

You just want to bash Catholics.

:banghead:

I should have known.

this catholic just ignores him. i gave up religion for lent anyway.

[VietCowboy]

this catholic just ignores him. i gave up religion for lent anyway.

it's not lent.

[zrinkill]

this catholic just ignores him. i gave up religion for lent anyway.

here


http://typo.coffeehaus.com/archives/Lent.gif

:D

[yeahyeah]

no. the people who choose to get that rigid in their beliefs are. you're the one who seems to think one size fits all when it comes to what you hate but you sure won't wear the same hat in return.

by the people. ha.

NO...NO! Big SURPRISE the rest of the world is not the lower 48...I know its hard to grasp but this is a world of 6 billion and 3 billion are incredibly uneducated and impoverished.
When you are in Sub-Saharan Africa living on less than a dollar a day do you think you would have the ability let alone the means to pop down to the corner store for condoms?
Then you have the Catholic church telling you its a sin to wear one...and you blame the Africans? You blame the people who rely on the church for their guidance in life and it aids in their demise through antiquated policy?

[zrinkill]

NO...NO! Big SURPRISE the rest of the world is not the lower 48...I know its hard to grasp but this is a world of 6 billion and 3 billion are incredibly uneducated and impoverished.
When you are in Sub-Saharan Africa living on less than a dollar a day do you think you would have the ability let alone the means to pop down to the corner store for condoms?
Then you have the Catholic church telling you its a sin to wear one...and you blame the Africans? You blame the people who rely on the church for their guidance in life and it aids in their demise through antiquated policy?


Ohhh so this is a conspiracy by the Catholic church to kill off an entire continent of people.

Now that makes perfect sense ..... I totally see your side now.

[VietCowboy]

NO...NO! Big SURPRISE the rest of the world is not the lower 48...I know its hard to grasp but this is a world of 6 billion and 3 billion are incredibly uneducated and impoverished.
When you are in Sub-Saharan Africa living on less than a dollar a day do you think you would have the ability let alone the means to pop down to the corner store for condoms?
Then you have the Catholic church telling you its a sin to wear one...and you blame the Africans? You blame the people who rely on the church for their guidance in life and it aids in their demise through antiquated policy?

part of the reason is many African men love having dry sex (women will go to lengths to decrease lubrication) so that definitely increases transmission.

[zrinkill]

part of the reason is many African men love having dry sex (women will go to lengths to decrease lubrication) so that definitely increases transmission.

Circumcision is another tool against the disease. Some think it could reduce contraction by over 25%.

But its hard to convince them of that as well.

[Cajuncowboy]

That's the point of comprehensive sex ed. The point of Abstinence Only Sex is to not have sex. Which is why it is a failure.

Furthermore, those that don't pledge are at a much higher risk for pregnancy and STDs, and teaching them Abstinence Only Sex Ed doesn't help them out at all.

No. The point is you teach what is right. You don't give kids a clean needle and say, "Just i case you shoot up, at least you will be safe."

Your whole premise is based on taking the personal responsibility and consequences out of it.

[iceberg]

it's not lent.

didn't say it was. i said i gave up religion for lent but i never said which one.

geez people love to assume. : )

[iceberg]

NO...NO! Big SURPRISE the rest of the world is not the lower 48...I know its hard to grasp but this is a world of 6 billion and 3 billion are incredibly uneducated and impoverished.
When you are in Sub-Saharan Africa living on less than a dollar a day do you think you would have the ability let alone the means to pop down to the corner store for condoms?
Then you have the Catholic church telling you its a sin to wear one...and you blame the Africans? You blame the people who rely on the church for their guidance in life and it aids in their demise through antiquated policy?

this is a deep dive into stupidity i just don't feel like following.

all i said was the catholic policy on condoms was they don't like 'em. i followed it up with it's still a personal choice to follow or not. i'm sure it's a huge surprise to you to find out people don't blindly follow their faith 100%. if we did that we'd never have so many now would we?

how you got sin from catholics blaming africa is way beyond me, but then again most of what you blither is.

[VietCowboy]

No. The point is you teach what is right. You don't give kids a clean needle and say, "Just i case you shoot up, at least you will be safe."

Your whole premise is based on taking the personal responsibility and consequences out of it.

so you are saying a teenager who wants to have sex isn't engaging in personal responsibility by discussing sex with his partner, going together to the doctor for the girl to get birth control, going to the store to get a condom and spermicide, waiting a month for the birth control to become effective, meanwhile continue having discussions with the partner about sex, and learning how to effectively use a condom? That to me is showing this teen is EXTREMELY well-versed and prepared, and shows a lot of maturity and has thought about this through and the consequences.


Your definition of personal responsibility is different from mine.

[VietCowboy]

didn't say it was. i said i gave up religion for lent but i never said which one.

geez people love to assume. : )

you said you're catholic, lent has passed, therefore giving up anything for lent is moot now...

[zrinkill]

so you are saying a teenager who wants to have sex isn't engaging in personal responsibility by discussing sex with his partner, going together to the doctor for the girl to get birth control, going to the store to get a condom and spermicide, waiting a month for the birth control to become effective, meanwhile continue having discussions with the partner about sex, and learning how to effectively use a condom? That to me is showing this teen is EXTREMELY well-versed and prepared, and shows a lot of maturity and has thought about this through and the consequences.


Your definition of personal responsibility is different from mine.

I understand that ..... and completly agree .....

But this is not gonna help the people of Africa.

Their society is not even close to be ready to give the girls that type of choices yet.

No amount of education will be able to take effect in time to save them from this because their society (the older members) will not allow it too.

The fathers will still be giving their 12 year old daughters to older men and demand that they start having babies immediately.

I really cannot think of anyway to help them before this disease wipes them out ..... its horrible.

[Cajuncowboy]

so you are saying a teenager who wants to have sex isn't engaging in personal responsibility by discussing sex with his partner, going together to the doctor for the girl to get birth control, going to the store to get a condom and spermicide, waiting a month for the birth control to become effective, meanwhile continue having discussions with the partner about sex, and learning how to effectively use a condom? That to me is showing this teen is EXTREMELY well-versed and prepared, and shows a lot of maturity and has thought about this through and the consequences.


Your definition of personal responsibility is different from mine.

It sure is. Figuring out how to do what's wrong without getting caught, or keeping yourself out of trouble sure is different. And you know why the teenagers decides to do these things? Because they were taught in school how to do them.

So answer the question...
Want to give out clean needles just in case as well?

[VietCowboy]

[/b]

It sure is. Figuring out how to do what's wrong without getting caught, or keeping yourself out of trouble sure is different. And you know why the teenagers decides to do these things? Because they were taught in school how to do them.

So answer the question...
Want to give out clean needles just in case as well?

hey a quacky prof of mine in college use to tell his kids they can only have sex at home where it is safer. So you and me, we just grew up differently with differing values. To you, sex is bad unless you are married. To me, as long as you are responsible, educated about it, it's fine. I'll tell them all the risks they are taking by engaging in sex at an early age (i.e. girls increase their risk of ovarian cancer by having multiple parters before age 25) but it is their body, their life, their choice.

p.s. sex is not illegal. drugs are. So I don't see why they would be the same.

[Cajuncowboy]

hey a quacky prof of mine in college use to tell his kids they can only have sex at home where it is safer. So you and me, we just grew up differently with differing values. To you, sex is bad unless you are married. To me, as long as you are responsible, educated about it, it's fine. I'll tell them all the risks they are taking by engaging in sex at an early age (i.e. girls increase their risk of ovarian cancer by having multiple parters before age 25) but it is their body, their life, their choice.

p.s. sex is not illegal. drugs are. So I don't see why they would be the same.

It's NOT their choice until they are of age. If that was the case, then a 15 year old could consent to sex with an adult. And that is called statutory rape.

So you are wrong. It's NOT their choice to do that.

And it IS illegal.

[yeahyeah]

Ohhh so this is a conspiracy by the Catholic church to kill off an entire continent of people.

Now that makes perfect sense ..... I totally see your side now.

Well then let me ask you this.
If the government told you not to wear condoms with full knowledge that they prevented a deadly diseases would it be a crime? Could they be sued? Would it be wrong?
Dont defend evil...even if it does come from "god"

[Cajuncowboy]

Well then let me ask you this.
If the government told you not to wear condoms with full knowledge that they prevented a deadly diseases would it be a crime? Could they be sued? Would it be wrong?
Dont defend evil...even if it does come from "god"

OK, I'm sold.

It's Ben. :lmao:

[VietCowboy]

It's NOT their choice until they are of age. If that was the case, then a 15 year old could consent to sex with an adult. And that is called statutory rape.

So you are wrong. It's NOT their choice to do that.

depends on the state and how old the adult is, so that shows people can't decide when too young is too young. If a 15 year old is married, she could certainly have sex with her partner, no matter how old. How is she different from her cohorts? The divorce rates for teens is extremely high, you want high schoolers getting married just so they can sex?

p.s. most teens have sex with other teens and those their age, and most states have laws that allow that.

p.p.s the teens usually aren't the ones that get in trouble for engaging with the much older adult

[yeahyeah]

OK, I'm sold.

It's Ben. :lmao:

Well come on preacher, answer the question.

[Cajuncowboy]

depends on the state and how old the adult is, so that shows people can't decide when too young is too young. If a 15 year old is married, she could certainly have sex with her partner, no matter how old. How is she different from her cohorts? The divorce rates for teens is extremely high, you want high schoolers getting married just so they can sex?

p.s. most teens have sex with other teens and those their age, and most states have laws that allow that.

No. I don't want kids having sex period. Why anyone would advocate them having sex is beyond me. And this is whee we will never agree. When you encourage it, it will happen.

[Cajuncowboy]

Well come on preacher, answer the question.

What question is that ben?

[zrinkill]

Well then let me ask you this.
If the government told you not to wear condoms with full knowledge that they prevented a deadly diseases would it be a crime? Could they be sued? Would it be wrong?
Dont defend evil...even if it does come from "god"

Not defending anything ..... I just realized what you're stake is in all this.

To you this has nothing to do with the Africans and their problems .... this is only a chance for you to lash out at Religion.

[VietCowboy]

No. I don't want kids having sex period. Why anyone would advocate them having sex is beyond me. And this is whee we will never agree. When you encourage it, it will happen.

Isn't that what I said earlier? It's not about encouraging it, it is about education. And yes, it will happen, but I'd rather it happen and they know how to protect themselves, than tell them not do it (because how many teens do you know listen to everything their parents say) and if they do it, don't know how to protect themselves.

Until we live in your utopian society where everyone believes sex within the sanctity of marriage and after 18 years old, I will always advocate education.

[Cajuncowboy]

Isn't that what I said earlier? It's not about encouraging it, it is about education. And yes, it will happen, but I'd rather it happen and they know how to protect themselves, than tell them not do it (because how many teens do you know listen to everything their parents say) and if they do it, don't know how to protect themselves.

Until we live in your utopian society where everyone believes sex within the sanctity of marriage and after 18 years old, I will always advocate education.

No. you will always advocate encouragement. You didn't answer the question about the drug needle. Why? It's just as dangerous. Disease. Long term consequences. Why?

Because you have a double standard?

[iceberg]

you said you're catholic, lent has passed, therefore giving up anything for lent is moot now...

ah - i see your point. only i'm no quitter. once i give something non-alcoholic up, i give it up!

[iceberg]

OK, I'm sold.

It's Ben. :lmao:

he did say he had 1000 pc's didn't he?

[VietCowboy]

ah - i see your point. only i'm no quitter. once i give something non-alcoholic up, i give it up!

I've pretty much given up on alcohol. No matter how many times I try it, I can't get over how bad it takes, even when masked by the fruitest thing.

[Cajuncowboy]

he did say he had 1000 pc's didn't he?

Yeah Yeah, He did.

[VietCowboy]

No. you will always advocate encouragement. You didn't answer the question about the drug needle. Why? It's just as dangerous. Disease. Long term consequences. Why?

Because you have a double standard?

Sex = natural; if engaging in safe sex, isn't harmful, and in fact, may be beneficial with releasing good hormones, let you know if the person you are with is a compatible sexual partner (one of the bigger reasons for divorce is sexual incompatibility), reduces risks of heart disease, exercise, reduce endometrious, menstrual cramps

Drugs = induces unnatural levels of hormones/neurotransmitter, can irrevocably change brain chemistry, cause addictions, reduces inhibition which increases risk-taking behaviors...

A lot of things are dangerous...I don't know why you keep equating sex with taking drugs. Doing cocaine at any age is extremely dangerous regardless if you use a clean or dirty needle. can you say the same for sex?

[yeahyeah]

Not defending anything ..... I just realized what you're stake is in all this.

To you this has nothing to do with the Africans and their problems .... this is only a chance for you to lash out at Religion.

pinned..thanks

[VietCowboy]

The standards on these tests have been watered down ..... because everyone likes to think their kids are "gifted"

actually it's the Flynn effect...we've gotten better at taking tests.

anyway, I totally forgot I ask this, and I forgot why I asked it.

And actually, the tests aren't water'd down when they are recalibrated every 15 years. supposedly, 50% of people score before 100, 50% score above, the SD is 15. Same with all IQ tests, achievement tests.

If a kid's really smart they'll ace the Stanford-Binet 5. Half of the verbal stuff on there, even I don't know.

and by the way, I don't think we've butt heads yet or anger me. I'm liberal. in case you were still wondering. and, I love people who play devil's advocate because it forces people think about what they believe in and why.

[zrinkill]

and by the way, I don't think we've butt heads yet or anger me. I'm liberal. in case you were still wondering. and, I love people who play devil's advocate because it forces people think about what they believe in and why.

I do not think we will .... you seem like a down to earth person and I like that.

I am liberal on the legalization of pot, the drinking age, and gay marriage.

I am conservative on climate change, abortion issues, and military issues.

I will easily admit that I am mostly conservative ..... but I will get into it with the extremist on both sides.

I will defend Obama from stupidity the same way I defend McCain or Palin.

Always have.