I was about to beat someone up. I should have.
Tu Stultus Es
I think you can manage to teach a general of the religion. People will be offended no matter what you do. I'd guess that by the time this forum is lost at least 8 people will be doing a google search and will end up offended by this post.Jay wrote:
Mostly because there are about a hundred different sects that all believe different variations. Someone will always be offended.Blue Herring wrote:
When I went to school(which was admittedly quite awhile ago), we were taught the history of the Jewish faith, Buddhist faith, a bit on Islam, Egyptian Pantheon, and ancient Greek Mythology, including their gods.AussieReaper wrote:
"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."
See above for retarded comment Sarah Palin.
Creationism.
So why shouldn't Christianity be taught? I mean, hell, what's even wrong with Christianity being taught? As long as you acknowledge what you're teaching is belief of the Christian faith and not scientific doctrine then I don't see the problem. I didn't run home believing some giant snake held the word together by biting it's tail just because I learned about the Ragnarok. I don't remember parents going "woe is me, my child believes a giant serpent holds the world together!" So I don't see the problem at all.
Her idea of "debate" is somewhat silly as that would imply there's anything to debate(you can't debate faith), but I agree that having exposure to many different ideologies is a good thing.
Hahaha... Jealous boyfriend or one of his friends I bet...eleven bravo wrote:
I was about to beat someone up. I should have.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
Creationism =/= Christian
Also 57 states + 1 + Alaska + Hawaii =/= 57 states
Also 57 states + 1 + Alaska + Hawaii =/= 57 states
Last edited by DrunkFace (2011-06-19 10:42:21)
Sorry. Blame my terrible education which withheld knowledge from me.DrunkFace wrote:
Creationism =/= Christian
so bad that I really dont wanna remember it. lets say Ive burned a lot of bridges that night.13rin wrote:
Hahaha... Jealous boyfriend or one of his friends I bet...eleven bravo wrote:
I was about to beat someone up. I should have.
Tu Stultus Es
Because when she says teach both, she means teach both in a biology class. Not a history class.Blue Herring wrote:
When I went to school(which was admittedly quite awhile ago), we were taught the history of the Jewish faith, Buddhist faith, a bit on Islam, Egyptian Pantheon, and ancient Greek Mythology, including their gods.AussieReaper wrote:
"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."
See above for retarded comment Sarah Palin.
Creationism.
So why shouldn't Christianity be taught? I mean, hell, what's even wrong with Christianity being taught? As long as you acknowledge what you're teaching is belief of the Christian faith and not scientific doctrine then I don't see the problem. I didn't run home believing some giant snake held the word together by biting it's tail just because I learned about the Ragnarok. I don't remember parents going "woe is me, my child believes a giant serpent holds the world together!" So I don't see the problem at all.
Her idea of "debate" is somewhat silly as that would imply there's anything to debate(you can't debate faith), but I agree that having exposure to many different ideologies is a good thing.
Well, there is a problem because she thinks "God did it" should be taught hand in hand with scientific fact supported by evidence.Blue Herring wrote:
As long as you acknowledge what you're teaching is belief of the Christian faith and not scientific doctrine then I don't see the problem.
really? link pleaseAussieReaper wrote:
Because when she says teach both, she means teach both in a biology class. Not a history class.Blue Herring wrote:
When I went to school(which was admittedly quite awhile ago), we were taught the history of the Jewish faith, Buddhist faith, a bit on Islam, Egyptian Pantheon, and ancient Greek Mythology, including their gods.AussieReaper wrote:
"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."
See above for retarded comment Sarah Palin.
Creationism.
So why shouldn't Christianity be taught? I mean, hell, what's even wrong with Christianity being taught? As long as you acknowledge what you're teaching is belief of the Christian faith and not scientific doctrine then I don't see the problem. I didn't run home believing some giant snake held the word together by biting it's tail just because I learned about the Ragnarok. I don't remember parents going "woe is me, my child believes a giant serpent holds the world together!" So I don't see the problem at all.
Her idea of "debate" is somewhat silly as that would imply there's anything to debate(you can't debate faith), but I agree that having exposure to many different ideologies is a good thing.Well, there is a problem because she thinks "God did it" should be taught hand in hand with scientific fact supported by evidence.Blue Herring wrote:
As long as you acknowledge what you're teaching is belief of the Christian faith and not scientific doctrine then I don't see the problem.
link on your second paragraph as well please..
Where does she say she wants religion taught as "scientific fact." Because from what I have read, she is in favor of creationism being offered in schools to be taught along side of evolution, not in place of. and certainly not as "scientific fact".
Last edited by lowing (2011-06-19 17:02:07)
"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."lowing wrote:
really? link pleaseAussieReaper wrote:
Because when she says teach both, she means teach both in a biology class. Not a history class.Blue Herring wrote:
When I went to school(which was admittedly quite awhile ago), we were taught the history of the Jewish faith, Buddhist faith, a bit on Islam, Egyptian Pantheon, and ancient Greek Mythology, including their gods.
So why shouldn't Christianity be taught? I mean, hell, what's even wrong with Christianity being taught? As long as you acknowledge what you're teaching is belief of the Christian faith and not scientific doctrine then I don't see the problem. I didn't run home believing some giant snake held the word together by biting it's tail just because I learned about the Ragnarok. I don't remember parents going "woe is me, my child believes a giant serpent holds the world together!" So I don't see the problem at all.
Her idea of "debate" is somewhat silly as that would imply there's anything to debate(you can't debate faith), but I agree that having exposure to many different ideologies is a good thing.Well, there is a problem because she thinks "God did it" should be taught hand in hand with scientific fact supported by evidence.Blue Herring wrote:
As long as you acknowledge what you're teaching is belief of the Christian faith and not scientific doctrine then I don't see the problem.
link on your second paragraph as well please..
Where does she say she wants religion taught as "scientific fact." Because from what I have read, she is in favor of creationism being offered in schools to be taught along side of evolution, not in place of. and certainly not as "scientific fact".
Direct quote from the woman herself. Teach both Creationism and Evolution side by side. "Don't be affraid of information". Please.
If she thinks Evolution and Creationism should be taught together - do you think she means in a hisotry class?
Palin was answering a question from the moderator near the conclusion of Wednesday night's televised debate on KAKM Channel 7 when she said, "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."
Anchorage Daily News.Palin was answering a question from the moderator near the conclusion of Wednesday night's televised debate on KAKM Channel 7 when she said, "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."
http://www.adn.com/2006/10/27/217111/cr … z1Pluqp2LX
http://www.adn.com/2006/10/27/217111/cr … z1PlvaxCmBThe Republican Party of Alaska platform says, in its section on education: "We support giving Creation Science equal representation with other theories of the origin of life. If evolution is taught, it should be presented as only a theory."
lol!
Last edited by AussieReaper (2011-06-19 17:36:47)
When they teach physics, do teachers give a disclaimer and mention that gravity is "only a theory".
lol "teach both", I missed the part where she insists that it be taught as "scientific fact", as opposed to simply teaching the belief that creationism exists as what it is. A belief. I already know the woman believes in creationism. It is also a belief that she is not committed to pushing down the throats of anyone.AussieReaper wrote:
When they teach physics, do teachers give a disclaimer and mention that gravity is "only a theory".
Also, actually yes, the do distinguish between theory and scientific fact in physics.
Last edited by lowing (2011-06-19 17:48:21)
The Republican Party of Alaska platform says, in its section on education: "We support giving Creation Science equal representation with other theories of the origin of life. If evolution is taught, it should be presented as only a theory."lowing wrote:
lol "teach both", I missed the part where she insists that it be taught as "scientific fact", as opposed to simply teaching the belief that creationism exists as what it is. A belief. I already know the woman believes in creationism. It is also a belief that she is not committed to pushing down the throats of anyone.AussieReaper wrote:
When they teach physics, do teachers give a disclaimer and mention that gravity is "only a theory".
You can't teach them both as facts. Can you?
You can't teach one as a fact and then say, oh and there's also this theory you should know about.
I didn't know evolution was a fact either. I mean since every year they seem to come up with different evidence to support or discredit a previously "known" piece of information being taught.AussieReaper wrote:
The Republican Party of Alaska platform says, in its section on education: "We support giving Creation Science equal representation with other theories of the origin of life. If evolution is taught, it should be presented as only a theory."lowing wrote:
lol "teach both", I missed the part where she insists that it be taught as "scientific fact", as opposed to simply teaching the belief that creationism exists as what it is. A belief. I already know the woman believes in creationism. It is also a belief that she is not committed to pushing down the throats of anyone.AussieReaper wrote:
When they teach physics, do teachers give a disclaimer and mention that gravity is "only a theory".
You can't teach them both as facts. Can you?
You can't teach one as a fact and then say, oh and there's also this theory you should know about.
Ya know, prayer used to be in school, one nation under god used to be in our pledge of allegiance, the 10 commandments used to be on the lawns of govt. buildings, Merry Christmas used to be said without offending anyone and there wasn't a problem until some asshole with nothing better to do decided he wanted those things to be the hill he wanted to die on. Personally, I think there are more important issues to tackle rather than combat "in god we trust" on money that has been there since they started printing the dollar.
Last edited by lowing (2011-06-19 17:56:30)
Yeah and I agree that politicians say and do stupid things. That doesn't mean I'm inconsistant when I criticise Palin for her stupidity and don't do the same to Obama. See I consider a belief that humans and dinosaurs coexisted to far outstrip the suggestion that the US has 57 states in terms of stupidity. Why? Because it's wanton stupidity. Correct Obama or give him a map and I guarantee he'd agree there are fifty states. Give Palin hundreds of years of evidence and everything known about fossils, history and dinosaurs and she will still believe that humans and dinosaurs coexisted. Barack Obama has stupid moments no question. Sarah Palin is stupid.lowing wrote:
No I am comparing 2 politicians that have their fair share of goofs and stupidity. You want to cement Palin in hers and grease Obama for his. It is inconsistent based on your loathing of stupid politicians.Ty wrote:
What I wrote
Well of my thirteen points three were religious. I'll go over them so we all understand exactly what I'm bashing. Creationism for starters is bunk. Even the Valican no longer believes in it. Men and women of faith anywhere do not have the requirement to believe in creationism as part of their religion, it's just there. Those who do subscribe to creationism do show a certain amount of stupidity, it is willful ignorance. Now to want to impose this on others, not as general information or trivia but as science is ridiculously fucking stupid and I don't care who I insult by saying that.13rin wrote:
Ty seemed to gather most of the reasons in his post a few pages back. Apparently it is a Christian thing... If she was a Jew, at this point Ty would be anti-Semite. I'm not sure how many of the bullet points he posted are true, (the few I looked at weren't) but it didn't matter as Palin had to spend her time defending herself instead of running.
Faith healing? Well this is probably more of a personal opinion. I think it's fucking stupid. I think the fact that Sarah Palin got herself blessed to be free of witchcraft is fucking stupid. You may not and that's fine but I do.
Lastly the second coming of Jesus thing. I consider this hugely important in terms of politics. How can you trust the future of a country to someone who expects the end of the world to happen soon, not only that but is looking forward to it? This person would have no full appreciation of consequence for their actions, they'd have no real motive to make the best logical decisions for their country's future. Want proof? Look no further than George W Bush, a man who got America involved in two wars with no exit strategy or terms of victory. We all laughed at Harold Camping's crew and their disappointment late last month but we're all happy when our politicians exibit these exact same beliefs? I know I'm not the only one wiling to call these people out on this and call it what it is.
I'll touch on the dinosaur thing again because this can be confused with religion - but it's not. This theory was put forward as a close-minded and utterly clueless induvidials who wanted the world explained in their way. It's not in the Bible or any other religious text and it's utterly ridiculous. The fact that someone like Sarah Palin can believe in this and people are fine with it, even suggesting that she could run the most powerful nation in the world, is deeply concerning.
And you may say I'm Christian bashing but I'm not. I'm an equal opportunity bigot. Most of the crap in the Bible is due to the old testiment anyway which is almost uniform throughout the three major religions. I don't even know what denomination Sarah Palin is but it makes as little difference as what branch of religion she subscribes to. She still believes what she believes and she still says what she says.
Now to the rest of my list which you suggested I was lying about - look I'll retract the Africa and Korea comments beacause they come across more as gaffes and I'm seemingly very forgiving of gaffes. Now I've looked over the rest of it and I can't find any that are false but please, if you have then inform me, I'd be keen to know. I'd welcome evidence to suggest that Sarah Palin wasn't the complete idiot I consider her to be. I just doubt any exists.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
It is part of her religious beliefs, nothing more, and so what? How does that threaten an economy or foreign policy over any other president with faith? Also, do you really think the "57 states" thing is the only thing Obama has said or done that was stupid? HTe man can not think without it being written on a teleprompter, and he still fucks up... DO you really call a guy that can not speak on issues honestly and from the heart and mind, without it being printed for him intelligent?Ty wrote:
Yeah and I agree that politicians say and do stupid things. That doesn't mean I'm inconsistant when I criticise Palin for her stupidity and don't do the same to Obama. See I consider a belief that humans and dinosaurs coexisted to far outstrip the suggestion that the US has 57 states in terms of stupidity. Why? Because it's wanton stupidity. Correct Obama or give him a map and I guarantee he'd agree there are fifty states. Give Palin hundreds of years of evidence and everything known about fossils, history and dinosaurs and she will still believe that humans and dinosaurs coexisted. Barack Obama has stupid moments no question. Sarah Palin is stupid.lowing wrote:
No I am comparing 2 politicians that have their fair share of goofs and stupidity. You want to cement Palin in hers and grease Obama for his. It is inconsistent based on your loathing of stupid politicians.Ty wrote:
What I wrote
Maybe the White House learnt to keep the president on text as much as possible. Look at Bush, he managed to humiliate himself dozens of times when he was off the Teleprompter. He also embarrassed himself by horribly mispronouncing words even when he was on the Teleprompter.lowing wrote:
It is part of her religious beliefs, nothing more, and so what? How does that threaten an economy or foreign policy over any other president with faith? Also, do you really think the "57 states" thing is the only thing Obama has said or done that was stupid? HTe man can not think without it being written on a teleprompter, and he still fucks up... DO you really call a guy that can not speak on issues honestly and from the heart and mind, without it being printed for him intelligent?Ty wrote:
Yeah and I agree that politicians say and do stupid things. That doesn't mean I'm inconsistant when I criticise Palin for her stupidity and don't do the same to Obama. See I consider a belief that humans and dinosaurs coexisted to far outstrip the suggestion that the US has 57 states in terms of stupidity. Why? Because it's wanton stupidity. Correct Obama or give him a map and I guarantee he'd agree there are fifty states. Give Palin hundreds of years of evidence and everything known about fossils, history and dinosaurs and she will still believe that humans and dinosaurs coexisted. Barack Obama has stupid moments no question. Sarah Palin is stupid.lowing wrote:
No I am comparing 2 politicians that have their fair share of goofs and stupidity. You want to cement Palin in hers and grease Obama for his. It is inconsistent based on your loathing of stupid politicians.
You judge Obama because you don't think he can speak honestly off the Teleprompter, I judge Palin because she can't speak intelligently when she is off the Teleprompter. Most people expect politicians to stretch the truth, most people don't expect them to lack a basic understanding of geography, religion, science and economics.
lol, and what has obama done to demonstrate his economic genius. I judge Obama because he does not have an unscripted opinion on anything. He reads the opinion that has been written for him, and yes, he still fucks it up as well. There is not an ounce of sincerity in anything he reads to the people. and you insist he is intelligent.Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
Maybe the White House learnt to keep the president on text as much as possible. Look at Bush, he managed to humiliate himself dozens of times when he was off the Teleprompter. He also embarrassed himself by horribly mispronouncing words even when he was on the Teleprompter.lowing wrote:
It is part of her religious beliefs, nothing more, and so what? How does that threaten an economy or foreign policy over any other president with faith? Also, do you really think the "57 states" thing is the only thing Obama has said or done that was stupid? HTe man can not think without it being written on a teleprompter, and he still fucks up... DO you really call a guy that can not speak on issues honestly and from the heart and mind, without it being printed for him intelligent?Ty wrote:
Yeah and I agree that politicians say and do stupid things. That doesn't mean I'm inconsistant when I criticise Palin for her stupidity and don't do the same to Obama. See I consider a belief that humans and dinosaurs coexisted to far outstrip the suggestion that the US has 57 states in terms of stupidity. Why? Because it's wanton stupidity. Correct Obama or give him a map and I guarantee he'd agree there are fifty states. Give Palin hundreds of years of evidence and everything known about fossils, history and dinosaurs and she will still believe that humans and dinosaurs coexisted. Barack Obama has stupid moments no question. Sarah Palin is stupid.
You judge Obama because you don't think he can speak honestly off the Teleprompter, I judge Palin because she can't speak intelligently when she is off the Teleprompter. Most people expect politicians to stretch the truth, most people don't expect them to lack a basic understanding of geography, religion, science and economics.
Believing in dinosaurs and man coexisting is not a religious belief is is a misconception thought up by religious people in answer to a question that their religion did not answer. Personally I like it more when religion says dinosaur bones are a test of faith from God, at least then they're being consistent. And do you know what I'm sick of the "it's part of their faith" defence. Do you know how idiotic that is? If I believed the moon was an alien spy satellite you'd say I'm crazy, if I said it was part of my religious belief you'd still say I was crazy and you'd be right. Yet Palin is excused from idiocy because "it's part of her faith"? Fuck that, I am not accepting that argument.lowing wrote:
It is part of her religious beliefs, nothing more, and so what? How does that threaten an economy or foreign policy over any other president with faith? Also, do you really think the "57 states" thing is the only thing Obama has said or done that was stupid? HTe man can not think without it being written on a teleprompter, and he still fucks up... DO you really call a guy that can not speak on issues honestly and from the heart and mind, without it being printed for him intelligent?Ty wrote:
Yeah and I agree that politicians say and do stupid things. That doesn't mean I'm inconsistant when I criticise Palin for her stupidity and don't do the same to Obama. See I consider a belief that humans and dinosaurs coexisted to far outstrip the suggestion that the US has 57 states in terms of stupidity. Why? Because it's wanton stupidity. Correct Obama or give him a map and I guarantee he'd agree there are fifty states. Give Palin hundreds of years of evidence and everything known about fossils, history and dinosaurs and she will still believe that humans and dinosaurs coexisted. Barack Obama has stupid moments no question. Sarah Palin is stupid.lowing wrote:
No I am comparing 2 politicians that have their fair share of goofs and stupidity. You want to cement Palin in hers and grease Obama for his. It is inconsistent based on your loathing of stupid politicians.
How does it threaten the economy or foreign policy? You know what the belief alone doesn't. However the person that believes in that? Well that's another story. I explained lower down in that post why I think a belief that the rapture will happen in the next, say, fifty years is detrimental. To say that Palin is the type of person who wouldn't let her faith get in the way of her judgement is incredibly naive, especially when you look at the Bush administration and how much of that rhetoric Palin parrots.
And no the 57 states thing isn't the only thing Obama's said or done that is stupid it's just the one you've been focussing on so its the one I've been addressing. I've been talking about Palin not Obama after all. But since you bring it up I'll say this; nothing Obama has said or done has ever equalled the stupidity of beliving that humans and dinosaurs coexisted or trying to ban books for fear they would be offensive.
You may criticise him for his reliance on writers and teleprompters and to a degree I agree with you. But this doesn't suggest wanton stupidity to me. The fact that Obama mispronounced "corps" doesn't concern me. The fact that Bush and Palin both continue to mispronounce "nuclear" does concern me. See what I'm getting at here?
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
How can someone not have an unscripted opinion on something? Everyone has opinions on everything. Basically you are criticising the president for making well constructed arguments and speeches rather than risking off-the-cuff mistakes. I criticise Palin because when she speaks she says things that are A) Just plain wrong, B) Nonsensical and C) Completely lacking in any political finesse.lowing wrote:
lol, and what has obama done to demonstrate his economic genius. I judge Obama because he does not have an unscripted opinion on anything. He reads the opinion that has been written for him, and yes, he still fucks it up as well. There is not an ounce of sincerity in anything he reads to the people. and you insist he is intelligent.Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
Maybe the White House learnt to keep the president on text as much as possible. Look at Bush, he managed to humiliate himself dozens of times when he was off the Teleprompter. He also embarrassed himself by horribly mispronouncing words even when he was on the Teleprompter.lowing wrote:
It is part of her religious beliefs, nothing more, and so what? How does that threaten an economy or foreign policy over any other president with faith? Also, do you really think the "57 states" thing is the only thing Obama has said or done that was stupid? HTe man can not think without it being written on a teleprompter, and he still fucks up... DO you really call a guy that can not speak on issues honestly and from the heart and mind, without it being printed for him intelligent?
You judge Obama because you don't think he can speak honestly off the Teleprompter, I judge Palin because she can't speak intelligently when she is off the Teleprompter. Most people expect politicians to stretch the truth, most people don't expect them to lack a basic understanding of geography, religion, science and economics.
And you insist she is intelligent.
Oh geez, you really wanna go down this road?lowing wrote:
I didn't know evolution was a fact either.
You really believe that evolution is not a fact? You just went full retard, congrats you're just as retarded as she.
Any reason you don't think evolution is a fact, champ?
Well that's true. Every year since CHarles Darwin wrote "On the Origin of Species" new evidence has been discovere in support of his work. Care to show us anything that has disproven it?lowing wrote:
I mean since every year they seem to come up with different evidence to support or discredit a previously "known" piece of information being taught.
Not sure why you're going off on a tangent here. But good for you. "In God We Trust" is so cute. Did you know that on the Britishlowing wrote:
Ya know, prayer used to be in school, one nation under god used to be in our pledge of allegiance, the 10 commandments used to be on the lawns of govt. buildings, Merry Christmas used to be said without offending anyone and there wasn't a problem until some asshole with nothing better to do decided he wanted those things to be the hill he wanted to die on. Personally, I think there are more important issues to tackle rather than combat "in god we trust" on money that has been there since they started printing the dollar.
I see what you are getting at, and yes you have valid points. My only argument is, there plenty of stupidity to go around between our politicians, and fact is, what Obama has DONE concerns me to a greater extent than what Palin THINKS was the beginning of time.Ty wrote:
Believing in dinosaurs and man coexisting is not a religious belief is is a misconception thought up by religious people in answer to a question that their religion did not answer. Personally I like it more when religion says dinosaur boned are a test of faith from God, at least then they're being consistent. And do you know what I'm sick of the "it's part of their faith" defence. Do you know how idiotic that is? If I believed the moon was an alien spy satellite you'd say I'm crazy, if I said it was part of my religious belief you'd still say I was crazy and you'd be right. Yet Palin is excused from idiocy because "it's part of her faith"? Fuck that, I am not accepting that argument.lowing wrote:
It is part of her religious beliefs, nothing more, and so what? How does that threaten an economy or foreign policy over any other president with faith? Also, do you really think the "57 states" thing is the only thing Obama has said or done that was stupid? HTe man can not think without it being written on a teleprompter, and he still fucks up... DO you really call a guy that can not speak on issues honestly and from the heart and mind, without it being printed for him intelligent?Ty wrote:
Yeah and I agree that politicians say and do stupid things. That doesn't mean I'm inconsistant when I criticise Palin for her stupidity and don't do the same to Obama. See I consider a belief that humans and dinosaurs coexisted to far outstrip the suggestion that the US has 57 states in terms of stupidity. Why? Because it's wanton stupidity. Correct Obama or give him a map and I guarantee he'd agree there are fifty states. Give Palin hundreds of years of evidence and everything known about fossils, history and dinosaurs and she will still believe that humans and dinosaurs coexisted. Barack Obama has stupid moments no question. Sarah Palin is stupid.
How does it threaten economic policy? You know what the belief alone doesn't. However the person that believes in that? Well that's another story. I explained lower down in that post why I think a belief that the rapture will happen in the next, say, fifty years is detrimental. To say that Palin is the type of person who wouldn't let her faith get in the way of her judgement is incredibly naive, especially when you look at the Bush administration and how much of that rhetoric Palin parrots.
And no the 57 states thing isn't the only thing Obama's said or done that is stupid it's just the one you've been focussing on so its the one I've been addressing. I've been talking about Palin not Obama after all. But since you bring it up I'll say this; nothing Obama has said or done has ever equalled the stupidity of beliving that humans and dinosaurs coexisted or trying to ban books for fear they would be offensive.
You may criticise him for his reliance on writers and teleprompters and to a degree I agree with you. But this doesn't suggest wanton stupidity to me. The fact that Obama mispronounced "corps" doesn't concern me. The fact that Bush and Palin both continue to mispronounce "nuclear" does concern me. See what I'm getting at here?
I see no reason to single out Palin as the end all and be all of "retardation" in American politics with so many politicians to cite, including Obama.
I simply do not think Palin is as dangerous for her beliefs on creation as I think Obama is for his action as the POTUS.
Do you see a problem with not being able to ask the POTUS an unscripted question and expect an answer that is honest and sincere and unrehearsed? Do you not think that a man that can not answer a question unrehearsed without reading his answer as kinda sorta limited intellectually?Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
How can someone not have an unscripted opinion on something? Everyone has opinions on everything. Basically you are criticising the president for making well constructed arguments and speeches rather than risking off-the-cuff mistakes. I criticise Palin because when she speaks she says things that are A) Just plain wrong, B) Nonsensical and C) Completely lacking in any political finesse.lowing wrote:
lol, and what has obama done to demonstrate his economic genius. I judge Obama because he does not have an unscripted opinion on anything. He reads the opinion that has been written for him, and yes, he still fucks it up as well. There is not an ounce of sincerity in anything he reads to the people. and you insist he is intelligent.Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
Maybe the White House learnt to keep the president on text as much as possible. Look at Bush, he managed to humiliate himself dozens of times when he was off the Teleprompter. He also embarrassed himself by horribly mispronouncing words even when he was on the Teleprompter.
You judge Obama because you don't think he can speak honestly off the Teleprompter, I judge Palin because she can't speak intelligently when she is off the Teleprompter. Most people expect politicians to stretch the truth, most people don't expect them to lack a basic understanding of geography, religion, science and economics.
And you insist she is intelligent.
Well lets see, it is only relatively recently that the theory of birds are what the dinosaurs evolved into. Also since we are talking about geology, and the origins of man, it is relatively recently that a "new world" was discovered and that the earth was round dispelling the "KNOWN FACT" that we were gunna fall off the damn planet if we sailed too far out into the ocean. Science and their KNOWN FACTS seem to change daily.AussieReaper wrote:
Oh geez, you really wanna go down this road?lowing wrote:
I didn't know evolution was a fact either.
You really believe that evolution is not a fact? You just went full retard, congrats you're just as retarded as she.
Any reason you don't think evolution is a fact, champ?Well that's true. Every year since CHarles Darwin wrote "On the Origin of Species" new evidence has been discovere in support of his work. Care to show us anything that has disproven it?lowing wrote:
I mean since every year they seem to come up with different evidence to support or discredit a previously "known" piece of information being taught.Not sure why you're going off on a tangent here. But good for you. "In God We Trust" is so cute. Did you know that on the Britishlowing wrote:
Ya know, prayer used to be in school, one nation under god used to be in our pledge of allegiance, the 10 commandments used to be on the lawns of govt. buildings, Merry Christmas used to be said without offending anyone and there wasn't a problem until some asshole with nothing better to do decided he wanted those things to be the hill he wanted to die on. Personally, I think there are more important issues to tackle rather than combat "in god we trust" on money that has been there since they started printing the dollar.
Where am I going with this? Well, the fact that people like you cannot find anything better to bitch about Palin except her opinion on mans origins, indicates to me you might have your priorities a little mixed up as to what is relevant and what is not.
lol
Tu Stultus Es
There is a difference between not being able to answer a question off the script, and wanting to prevent unscripted mistakes.lowing wrote:
Do you see a problem with not being able to ask the POTUS an unscripted question and expect an answer that is honest and sincere and unrehearsed? Do you not think that a man that can not answer a question unrehearsed without reading his answer as kinda sorta limited intellectually?Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
How can someone not have an unscripted opinion on something? Everyone has opinions on everything. Basically you are criticising the president for making well constructed arguments and speeches rather than risking off-the-cuff mistakes. I criticise Palin because when she speaks she says things that are A) Just plain wrong, B) Nonsensical and C) Completely lacking in any political finesse.lowing wrote:
lol, and what has obama done to demonstrate his economic genius. I judge Obama because he does not have an unscripted opinion on anything. He reads the opinion that has been written for him, and yes, he still fucks it up as well. There is not an ounce of sincerity in anything he reads to the people. and you insist he is intelligent.
And you insist she is intelligent.
Did you think the same thing about Bush or Palin when they embarrassed themselves attempting to answer questions off the script? You seem to explain away Palin's off the script mistakes by saying it was a simple mistake or it was just "her beliefs", and yet when Obama makes a mistake off the script it is because he is dishonest, unintelligent and therefore unfit to be president.
Seems to be a pretty clear case of the "halo effect". You might say the same thing about me, and you might be right, but you can't deny that is what you are doing.