Extra, extra! Sarah Palin is exactly what you thought she was!

[Alex]

They shouldn't want her to run in the same way Democrats shouldn't have wanted Obama to run. They like what she's saying too much and our political system does not allow the individual to actually accomplish what they want to do to a sufficient degree to keep their biggest fans happy.

[Alex]

Haven't read the entire Vanity Fair article yet to form my own opinion but I'm seeing enough sources saying they've been misused and enough credible reports of factual errors and general exaggerations that I don't know how much of it I'm going to take at face value when I read the rest (got through about half).

[innerSpaceman]

I don't see what's so wrong about looking down on people who are selfish, greedy, stupid, bigoted, hateful, and seek to harm others and themselves through their words and actions.

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by flippyshark

That's the impression I've been under for some time - certainly most conservatives in my social or family circle have said that they wouldn't want Palin to run (much less a Palin/Beck ticket).

The problem is that real conservatives haven't been in charge in the Republican Party for quite some time.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by JWBear

The problem is that real conservatives haven't been in charge in the Republican Party for quite some time.

The Religious Right has FAR more control over the Republican Party than I can stand.

[Cynthia]

I do not believe my opinion of Regan was in my post (boils down to "you are kidding right?")
I don't believe in the exsistance of what you call evil, I believe in sad things that make evil seem real like: stupid, greedy, sheep-like. But I much prefer nice things like thinking for yourself.
Nor was my opinion of anyone other than the rabidly religious of a certain type (who BTW do not resemble the man called Jesus one bit). They were just a nasty version of ignorant that came to mind.

As for those who believe differently than I do, they are all the people who are not me. As in everyone is (and perhaps should act like they are) an individual person and not say, a sheep.

So, scaeagels now you know. Do try to comment on what I actually say, you can tell what that might be reading the words that are written.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by Cynthia

I do not believe my opinion of Regan was in my post (boils down to "you are kidding right?")

Well, this may be a matter of interpretation, but I too thought that you were pretty clear on how you felt about Reagan:

Originally Posted by Cynthia

In the 80's
after Regan was elected to office I truly understood why human history is one despot and horrific event after another.

This to me says that:

1. You think Reagan was a despot - I hate pulling out a dictionary definition of a word, but I will admit that I looked up 'despot' to make sure I was understanding the word correctly. Do you believe that Reagan ruled with "absolute power and authority" and that he "exercise[d] power tyrannically?" Personally, I don't. And to me, usage of a term like "despot" certainly has a far less than flattering connotation.
2. You think that the election/term of office of Reagan was a "horrific event" - If you believe this to be true, I have to say that I vehemently disagree with you. I will afford differing viewpoints and do not discredit others for what they believe, but have to passionately disagree with this type of assessment of Reagan's term as President. I think he did a lot of great things for not only this country, but for the world at large. There were mistakes during his term, but there is with just about any modern President (and probably for all presidents). I like to remind supporters of Bill Clinton that the man was impeached for lying under oath while President. None-the-less, while I disagree with many of his policies, I thought he was a pretty effective leader. Sure, I could start ripping apart things that he did in office, but overall, I thought he did a decent job.

If you were not calling Reagan a "despot" and saying that his term was a "horrific event," then I apologize. But that is how your post read to me, and I think that is what scaeagles was commenting on as well.

[scaeagles]

Thanks, Kevy. You said that far better than I ever could.

While I won't go into the details you did, I interpretted there comments -

We who are fortunate to live in more progressive areas forget most of the country is filled with people who believe if one doesn't eat the flesh of the Christ-zombie and follow other variable rules, they will be consigned to the eternal hell created in the wisdom of an omnipotent (and loving) being.

Sounds to me like generic conservative Christian bashing. It sounds as if you are saying that people who live amongst them are unfortunate, which would certainly serve to say that you believe they are lower class than you.

[Disneyphile]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Sounds to me like generic conservative Christian bashing.

I can see that. "Christ zombie" is quite harsh.

Although, I will say that communion is ritualistic cannibalism to me. It honestly creeps me out. I don't see why it's necessary to become bonded with the spirit of Christ. But, then again, I'm Pagan, so I understand the use of ritual tools to help visualize our prayers.

However, if someone made cookies in the shape of Sarah Palin, I'd line up to bite the head off of one.

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by Disneyphile

However, if someone made cookies in the shape of Sarah Palin, I'd line up to bite the head off of one.

Hmmmm... Where can I find a Sarah shaped cookie cutter.....