Pages:
Author

Topic: Palin (Read 3561 times)

legendary
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1035
February 20, 2014, 05:34:09 PM
#72
Maybe, though I doubt much of her statements and interviews were taken out of context. In my eyes, she proved that she was an idiot by opening her mouth. (In my ears?)

It's likely a lot easier to inflame and smear if someone has a back country accent.  

Seems to be an acceptable form of prejudice, you think?

It wasn't the accent that she said it with, it was what she said. Things about her interests, what books or news she reads, her opinions on things. She's not a very, um, "worldly" person.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
February 19, 2014, 10:37:40 AM
#71
If Palin runs for president and actually gets a substantial number of votes I am hiding in a bunker.

I'd just reserve my passport now, and get ready to hop on a plane with a flashdrive full of BTC

You do realise she'd just start launching nukes everywhere right? Bitcoins won't be of much help to you in a nuclear apocalypse.
She would?  HOW?  I thought Obama was going to use them all up on the likes of Britian, Israel, Texas and other countries that didn't get along with him.
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000
February 17, 2014, 03:11:12 PM
#70
If Palin runs for president and actually gets a substantial number of votes I am hiding in a bunker.

I'd just reserve my passport now, and get ready to hop on a plane with a flashdrive full of BTC

You do realise she'd just start launching nukes everywhere right? Bitcoins won't be of much help to you in a nuclear apocalypse.
sr. member
Activity: 490
Merit: 250
February 17, 2014, 01:44:47 PM
#69
If Palin runs for president and actually gets a substantial number of votes I am hiding in a bunker.

I'd just reserve my passport now, and get ready to hop on a plane with a flashdrive full of BTC
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
February 16, 2014, 04:53:45 PM
#68
....I would NEVER vote for Palin.....Even Obama is better...


Of course nobody ever asked you to Vote for Palin.  They asked you to vote for McCain or Obama. 

I am just curious, if you read my comments about the use of propaganda techniques to smear Palin, do you believe you were immune to them, or influenced somewhat or influenced a lot by them?  


legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1001
February 15, 2014, 07:43:29 PM
#67
I am a "conservative" Christian female that typically votes Republican (although I scored more like a left-wing libertarian on a quiz I took the other day but I digress) and I would NEVER vote for Palin.  The thought seriously scares me!  Even Obama is better and I really don't like Obama much.  I would totally take Hillary Clinton over Palin.

legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
February 15, 2014, 08:24:42 AM
#66
You were basically, instructed to think of her as an idiot.  Boatloads of money were spent to create that effect.  
You followed your instructions.  
Reality does not matter, image does.
Well, that's what I think has gone one with Palin.  Standard Democratic party playbook, of course.

Maybe, though I doubt much of her statements and interviews were taken out of context. In my eyes, she proved that she was an idiot by opening her mouth. (In my ears?)

It's likely a lot easier to inflame and smear if someone has a back country accent.  

Seems to be an acceptable form of prejudice, you think?

Standard propaganda technique.

Stereotype, demonize, ridicule pinpointed oppositional figures.  Heavy repetition desired imagery.  Goal, instill emotional response - not intellectual response - in target audience upon their seeing the cues (persons).

Wake up.  Look at the similarity between the demonization of Bush and Palin.  Bush, the hate was fomented him as "arch villian".  Palin, the stereotype used was "dumb airhead".

But it's some years later now so a lot of the useful idiots have forgot how they were led like puppets on a string on the Bush mantra.  Here'ya go!

One good way to force the Left to confront President Obama's own responsibility for his conduct in office is to compare his abuses of office with the record of President Bush 43, who was reviled by by his opposition as a dictator-wannabe, Constitution-abusing, moronic ogre straddling the line between simian and human. Doug Ross of Director Blue has produced an amusing comic-book approach toward explaining the differences between the two men:

Stuff Bush Didn't DO:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/02/stuff_bush_didnt_do.html

It's Obama that is showing his true colors as a dictator-wannabe, Constitution-abusing, moronic ogre.  Those things when said about Bush were part of a propaganda campaign to polarize opinion and make people angry at hearing or seeing Bush.

See the differences?
legendary
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1035
February 15, 2014, 01:27:03 AM
#65
You were basically, instructed to think of her as an idiot.  Boatloads of money were spent to create that effect.  
You followed your instructions.  
Reality does not matter, image does.
Well, that's what I think has gone one with Palin.  Standard Democratic party playbook, of course.

Maybe, though I doubt much of her statements and interviews were taken out of context. In my eyes, she proved that she was an idiot by opening her mouth. (In my ears?)
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
February 14, 2014, 07:59:31 PM
#64
Haven't you heard?  The first rule of a despot is to keep the enemy warring against itself, inflame it into bitter factions.[/i]

That's really all that smearing Palin is about.  Unfortunately.  That's all it's ever been about, from the very beginning of those campaigns.

Huh... I never actually cared about her political views, and just thought that she was an idiot.
Nowhere did I say or mention "political views".  You were basically, instructed to think of her as an idiot.  Boatloads of money were spent to create that effect. 

You followed your instructions. 

Reality does not matter, image does.

Well, that's what I think has gone one with Palin.  Standard Democratic party playbook, of course.

legendary
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1035
February 14, 2014, 04:58:22 PM
#63
Haven't you heard?  The first rule of a despot is to keep the enemy warring against itself, inflame it into bitter factions.[/i]

That's really all that smearing Palin is about.  Unfortunately.  That's all it's ever been about, from the very beginning of those campaigns.

Huh... I never actually cared about her political views, and just thought that she was an idiot.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
February 14, 2014, 08:00:45 AM
#62
Does not matter where you pidgeonhole anyone.  Since the first two years of Obama, libertarians and liberaltarians have been shoved to the far right by the nuevo Democratic party.

I'd say that Obama has managed to create a wedge between the libertarians and liberaltarians, with the libertarians moving to the far-right.

As I said earlier...


Haven't you heard?  The first rule of a despot is to keep the enemy warring against itself, inflame it into bitter factions.


That's really all that smearing Palin is about.  Unfortunately.  That's all it's ever been about, from the very beginning of those campaigns.

As opposed to, say, having religious right and Palin and Tea Party and moderate conservatives join forces to take over the Republican party and present a fairly unified and cohesive block.

legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1217
February 14, 2014, 05:20:44 AM
#61
Does not matter where you pidgeonhole anyone.  Since the first two years of Obama, libertarians and liberaltarians have been shoved to the far right by the nuevo Democratic party.

I'd say that Obama has managed to create a wedge between the libertarians and liberaltarians, with the libertarians moving to the far-right.
etm
newbie
Activity: 19
Merit: 0
February 14, 2014, 03:46:00 AM
#60
Has she hit the wall yet?
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
February 12, 2014, 07:03:44 PM
#59
Gays are overwhelmingly Democrat... with very sparse representation in the GOP / Libertarian Party.

I actually put Democrats and GOP in the conservative pile, and Libertarians in the liberal. Conservatives don't want any change, and are both bigoted against something. GOP especially. Libertarians are at the opposite end of the spectrum, and are more liberal than Democrats, in the original definition of the word (democrats are still very anti-drug, for example)
Does not matter where you pidgeonhole anyone.  Since the first two years of Obama, libertarians and liberaltarians have been shoved to the far right by the nuevo Democratic party.
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 1001
February 12, 2014, 06:59:41 PM
#58
HOT
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 1001
February 12, 2014, 06:58:25 PM
#57
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 1001
February 12, 2014, 06:55:06 PM
#56
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 1001
February 12, 2014, 06:51:36 PM
#55
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 1001
February 12, 2014, 06:47:56 PM
#54
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
February 12, 2014, 06:38:44 PM
#53
Don't even bother trying to put the GOP / Libertarians together, it was well documented how often Ron Paul supporters got into fights and arguments with neo-conservatives in the last election, it's precisely because Libertarians support gay rights and are against war that they were constantly attacked and the neo-conservatives didn't like the way they were muscling into their territory.

You are about to see a wholesale takeover of the GOP by libertarians Keep your eyes peeled, we aren't going to stand for not having a voice, if we are stuck with the two party system, then we will be one of those parties.

Might happen.  The libertarians would need to understand how to develop and field an army of supporters in various states.  Kind of like what Romney had and the others competing against him in the GOP didn't have.

Gays are overwhelmingly Democrat... with very sparse representation in the GOP / Libertarian Party.

I actually put Democrats and GOP in the conservative pile, and Libertarians in the liberal. Conservatives don't want any change, and are both bigoted against something. GOP especially. Libertarians are at the opposite end of the spectrum, and are more liberal than Democrats, in the original definition of the word (democrats are still very anti-drug, for example)

Democrats aren't VERY anti-drug, they are generally fine with selective non-enforcement of drug laws while against changing the laws themselves
Democrats?  Anti-drug?  You got to be kidding.

Just look at the history of drug enforcement and the dominant politics, you will see little or no correlation.  Democrat judges, juries, cops and lawyers have put away more than their share of harmless drug users.

The reason for this is that most attorneys are Democrat, and most judges are attorneys, past the JP level.  This crowd isn't going to stop the massive money train and low risk of prosecuting drug offenses.
Pages:
Jump to: