To much to quote right know..so I'll answer by paragraph and in order.
QueenNanami,
did you answer the question that was posted at you? Yes, I treat what you have said as WRONG.
Point being calling this the real world? Who here sees things differently? Also do not those who do such an thing GET branded? Feeling sympathy for others is an part of being human and on that you have an contradiction. You say won't fight battles for other people, but will defend your family and friends. That said this is not about her personal life but people who have unjustly and unfairly went after her.
This relates to the above in that it is an contradiction. If you say you won't fight battles for others then you must also say you won't do it for other women. Point is there are SAYING things about her because SHE is an women! Tell me one man that would get the same treatment.
"Just as you wouldn't do for Obama. The way you talk about him you can tell you dislike him. Im not going to call you out on it and tell you something that isnt true. Im not going to shove words in your mouth."
Those are your words. Contrast that to what you are saying now. NOT an excused, to call yourself lazy.
Are we playing word games now? Petty. Look up both dif. and tell me that I couldn't use the word in the context of the sentence and have someone not know what I'm talking about. No I did not. You never said what she says you only made the generalizing that she makes women into "jokes". That also stands true for "women who can handle herself". Now these two are in conflict with each other because only one can be true. What you are looking for is that she is not an good public speaker, not an generalized wording.
Symantics, Saying she makes women look like an joke is also saying she is an joke of an women, because you know she is an woman! Your point, I don't get, for the very reason that other politicians usually don't give strait answers.
What? You seriously put an drug addicted person above the value of an child. You don't get it. It's not about the mothers right but the child! Short answer yes. Long answer it's not just your life and how are to put the blame on an child for the reason of it's existence? That said I would want it to be illegal to abort the child, not force you that is an huge difference. Point also to add you don't have to raise the child.
Care to challenge it? Think more of why I said that.
Do you need the definition of an joke? Seriously calling someone an joke implies that they are not worthy to be considered, what more do you use the word for? No I'm not trying to get you to say anything, I just point out.
we agree on this point, so no further comment is needed.
Look are you going to answer the question or beat around the bush?
Serology? again how does that even constitute an answer?
Barone1551 ,
Works both ways. Also read my post, I said you would "reserve the right of people".
Danger to society point still stands.
So you say shes game, right? Regardless of that legally she is an child, psychological is still an child (unless you provide evidence contrary). SO I would be correct in calling her an child.
It's not about what you would do. Would you say stealing is wrong, would you say lying is wrong, and would you say murder is wrong? there is an connection between those. No, because there is an general consent about this. AND on that, you want to attack someone you better expect to be challenged on it. Hence what is happening here.
Don't have the time is not an excuse. Telling me to go look it up is NOT an excuse. Hearsay is no an excuse.
Even looking at the title of that made me cringe. After reading WoW, what an lie ( I had to say it, the bias was clawing at my eyes). Can I ask you how many times that he referred to "right wing bloggers"? I seriously laughed when I read "authoritarian right". I point this to you, if Sarah Palin base is conservatives why does the author continually make the mark that this is an conspiracy by the right? When this is about comments made by Lettermen? It also tries to say "right-wing" bloggers blatantly told an lie that it was about Willow. Here's the problem Willow was the one at the game.
Indeed interesting, But I ask you how much stock do you place in such writing? In seriousness I was taken back by the tone of the article.
Tsuwabuki,
Ok after coming back and reading some things again I noticed that in the first posting I completely misread the bush part. My huge fault and sorry for that.
What are you trying to say with that first comment?
Ok, where can you provide that I question your loyalty? Good goal on calling me Neoconservative, shall we continue with the labeling? Thinking that it WAS an simple question to be answered. So I never made that claim.
I gave reasoning being that the CIA Memos does offer evidence of polices by the BUSH administration, that lead one to believe he did protect the country. It is no way an respect issue to which you want to make it into. One gives credit when there is evidence do they not?
Not an issue about what the national community thinks about us. This is about wither the CIA Memos give Bush credit that his polices protected the country. (Bradbury May 10, Bradbury May 10 long, Bradbury May 30, and byee).
In context of what I posted No, because one can read one can come to the conclusion. Evidence being the topic here, wither you believe it was right worked we had threats they where stopped. Like the wording there. Nothing more needs to be taken when in was in context of the CIA Memos.
Point being in pointing that out?
The memos also refer to policies put in place by the Bush administration.
I'll keep my comment short as I addressed that in the above. One does not need knowledge of said subject to read of results.
can't comment anymore.
Life story again. Self serving also. Statement is in response to the posting of ones accomplishments to support ones argument. I'm not arguing against your life. Your life also does not validate what you can freely say.
Depending on your point of view that is argumentative.
Same as with Bush.
Maybe what I'm trying to say is both had goal's and did not care about popularity contest. Maybe both had there faults but got down and dirty on there goals.
Really, when I made these types of statements throughout this thread?
How can I say he was worst when Bush had an MUCH lower approval rating when he left office! (around the 20s). Like the wording here too.
Completely missed the point. You did say failure in the one I quoted above that. That though was not what I was aiming at. I wanted you to look at what you said about Carter and apply it to Bush.
Obama does continue a lot of his policies does he not?
9.5 percent unemployment. Did he not say it would not go about 8.0 percent? Joe is on record as saying they misread how bad the economy is. When did I say there are equal? I said that they still are negatives that is all.
Stimulus spending finally starts to trickle down - USATODAY.com
Labor Leaders Push Obama for Second Stimulus Package - Political Punch
On Health Care, Obama Has Stern Words For Critics - ABC News
Read these.
Articles of Impeachment
Andrew Johnson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Historical rankings of United States Presidents - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You said MOST. Arguably I don't think you can discount Nixon.
This is about Bush, in any way I don't not think Sarah Palin name is Bush.
Ayers And Obama: What Is Their Relationship?
Read that about Ayers. Point being that if your going to do the same for the right do the same for the left.
WoW, did not think you would do something like that. Way to bash the protestants (that really doesn't belong here for it is incredibly off topic and will spiral in something that will go against the rules of this site). Really OFFER EVIDENCE to support that line of thinking. That said I do believe you should replace the wording "far right" with REPUBLICANS in general. I really don't like the Republicans right now.
Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving?
Yeah keep calling her radical right, that really works without proof. McCain was an moderate and a pretender the reason why he lost.
QueenNanami,
Really again?
FactCheck.org: Did Sarah Palin make rape victims pay for their own rape kits?
You really can't say either way, and no if you did look it up you would know about this.
I do hope I got everything that was posted while I was gone. I ask if I messed anything point it out. (Note My grammar and spelling may still not be up to task, so forgive me on that part).