ADN

Sir Jig-A-Lot wrote:LMAO :laff: Did anyone else see Palin interviewed on teevee earlier? She didn't even know what her party leader's doctrine was. And apparently the only extremists are of the Islamic faith. HA! We have another Dan Quayle on our hands methinks. I also noticed her failure to specify & differentiate between McCain & Dubya's policies. If the Reps get in, I suspect there'll be a similar catchphrase to Quayle Droppings in regards to her thrown around.

Errata by Charlie Gibson.

A. The "Bush Doctrine" is one thing, and only part of it is the "National Security of Strategy of the United States." That is what he should have asked her. When he defines the points he means, Those four points are descriptions of the National Security Strategy of United States main focus. These are Preemption, Military Primacy, New Multilateralism, and the Spread of Democracy. She addressed each of those components in her interview.

------

I didn't feel she was a Quayle. I this she was pretty on the money. She has a decent record, a strong passion, but doesn't know alot of details. Exactly what I thought. I have some criticism though. Her words about Bush were indications of following, not leading.

On Iran: I wish she would have said. "We recognize two things in regards to Iran's energy situation: Their need for energy, and their horrible pollution and unregulation waste disposal. Due to their record of waste disposal and explotation of their own land with oil dumping and no included storage construction with their plans to create nuclear plants.... we have no confidence that the waste will stay out of the hands of those who may attempt to weaponize it. Also, analysis has proven nuclear power is NOT always cost effective. National Hydroelectric in Iranian waters waters made unfishable by irresponsible dumping would be cheaper, safer, and allow for much needed jobs in Iran. Wind farms picking the wind off the straights of Hormuz - One of the most significant tradewinds in the world, would allow for a ready and steady supply of energy, and all this could STILL be accomplished in Iran for 1/26 the price of the nuclear attempts. Their need is not great enough to warrant nuclear plants, which means a great amount of the energy they need would be wasted at first. If they opted for renewable resources, It also would show a STRONG indication of peace, and fulfill their own energy needs, and would grow their country in non-militant ways. By then, there should strong examinations of any country's efforts and means of storage and disposal of all nuclear and spent material. After those regulations are STRICTLY in place, there should be a process for countries to adopt nuclear fuel, according to certain protocols drafted, including a redaction of Kyoto."

Just go ahead and elect me... I swear I can fix more shit that most of the people in office or vying for it.

Ultimately, Palin came across as what I'd figured her to be: She is the McPain camp's SBD (Shiny Bauble of Distraction). She is the latest incarnation of the Paris Hilton Sex Tape or Weapon of Mass Destruction/Iraq War of the GOP.

"Look at this Shiny Hockey Mom-cum-lipstick-politician OVER HERE (Are you distracted yet?!) so those of you in the general public with ADD in regards to politricks don't realize that Olde John's policy or agenda haven't changed one whit since picking her as his running mate.

Yes, she has intelligence but has the naiveté of a virgin before her hymen is ripped asunder on Prom Night in terms of Foreign Relations & Environmental Logistics that more macho fuckers like Vlad Putin would walk all over in a heartbeat. As you said,raum , she's a follower w/out anything of substance to contribute by her addition to McCain's ticket. And we all know the stupor that girls post-Prom Night find themselves walking around in (some of them never wake up)..

Scenario 2 years into McCain's term as prez:

"President Palin, Putin has just vetoed & rejected your proposed <INSERT SUBJECT> at the U.N..What're are you gonna do?"
'I dunno! Did he say anything about my lipstick?..'
"No."
'Let him have his druthers then (As long he doesn't argue my belief that global warming wasn't man-made)'..
"If you're certain,Madame President?!?.."
'I Am. Did you notice Brad Pitt's abs in that Avengers movie? He's gettin' flabby. Somebody fix my lipstick..'
:laff: :laff: :laff:

[quote]'Let him have his druthers then (As long he doesn't argue my belief that global warming wasn't man-made)'..[quote]

But see that is just it: GLOBAL WARMING is man made. It is a MYTH. An assumption what has been proven inaccurate for 14 years, since it was first suggested! The founder of Green Peace who coined the term said we need to realize all the predictions have been off base. But *something* is happening...

There is a change in the percieved stability of the climate. Mass industrialization is likey a factor. Emissions is also one, but probably not the only factor. The biggest factor may be an uncomfortable one. Many changes may have to do with super compressed geothermal heat beign released. As we have more seismic activity, it will release more heat. THIS MIGHT ALSO be manmade.... And our greatest achievements as well as our worst weapons of destruction might all be playing their part.

It is possible our sprawls of civilization are weighing down tectonic plates that affect shifting currents of air in our planets natural seismic "respiratory system." Therefore, the generally gentle shifting doesn't happen until so much pressure builds up that it forces an eruption from the earth into the atmosphere. The most violent of these are earthquakes, which are occurring in unprecedented numbers. The build-up has been showing for a long time and populations grow more and more each year. So cities get bigger, and people get bigger, and farms get bigger and more weight and more weight.... all restricting the tectonic shifting that is part of the vital system ensuring the integrity of the solid module in our liquid planet's composition.

So what we should really ask is "At what point does human growth and nation building present such an impact on our biosphere that we should conserve and regulate it? Are we at that stage yet, and if not, when and how do we act to prevent it." Then we have to ask the hard questions. The questions that might cause entire cities to disperse and spread out population from "desired" areas or countries to cease their borders and start living like humanity really is, a common population on a little rock in a liquid planet. The kinds of questions where not everyone gets to have kids... or we have to export some humans from the planet.

Every engineer and analyst knows the first thing you do with a living space is establish maximum capacity. What is the maximum capacity of the largest living space we all share? Who decides who gets what part?

A myth you say? Nobody told you of the law of cause & effect?. That's just blind denial that our species has had nothing to do with the way the environment is currently. Can you say Industrial Revolution?.

I think its safe to say, without saying anything ugly, is that Sarah's finest moment will not be this 1st interview...

Sir Jig-A-Lot wrote:A myth you say? Nobody told you of the law of cause & effect?. That's just blind denial that our species has had nothing to do with the way the environment is currently. Can you say Industrial Revolution?.

Yes, it is a MYTH to say anything as firm as whether or not climate change of this nature was inevitable, independent of man's action. It is instead more reasonable to say "we have an effect" that "we cause" this condition,.. for which global warming is a Horrible name. what ever it is that is happening, global warming is just a symptom. Also, keep in mind, this is still the ending stages of the ice age, Glaciologically.

http://www.oism.org/pproject/GWReview_OISM600.pdf

http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/

http://www.reason.com/news/show/116471.html

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm
(this one is about an noncorp nonparty nonpolitic australian scientist refuting it)

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... res-movie/
(a scientist who liked the movie, liked most the science, but still doesn't if we could do anything.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7D8A7e4TEY

Nudge nudge ;) ;)

The skit in full.

:laff: :laff: :laff: Click here for The great Tina Fey ripping Sarah Palin a new one on SNL.CDR! :laff: :laff: :laff:

Funnily enough i always felt Palin from the moment i saw her, knocked off Fey's look on 30 Rock. Except Fey actually is prettier.

Fey & Poehler stepped in after Obama cancelled his hosting the show due to wanting to inspect the happenings in Texas.

[center][/center]

She really, I mean, really has Palin down pat, lol...

Sir Jig-A-Lot wrote:Funnily enough i always felt Palin from the moment I saw her, knocked off Fey's look on 30 Rock. Except Fey actually is prettier.

Tina Fey is prime to impersonate Palin. And she is awesome doing it.

That was a GREAT SKIT.

I just say "baby mama" with Fey and Amy whatever.. meh. Fey was hot though.