Sarah Palin: Thoughts?

[hypatias mom]

Sorry, Mike, I guess I avoid the liberal media so much that the comments made, while basically fairly innocent in themselves, just seem part of the overall attack from the other side on any potential candidates in opposition to them.

[Bayen]

You should watch the liberal media just as much as the liberals should watch more conservative news. Watch both with a grain of salt and realize they're all slanting towards their side. Foreign news is usually good, too...

[hypatias mom]

I do watch both sides, but I often am surprised and annoyed at the conclusions reached by some news readers. It is as if all their commentary is sllanting left I much prefer to hear news I don't have to translate from the bias into straightforward reporting.

[Jonas]

Erm, I don't like her ideas about not protecting certain animals. Why killing animals, living in the wild, when you have plenty of food in your fridge?

[Chrimigules]

People will breed. You can't stop them. Humans have a psychological need to breed. It's basic to being human. We are sexual creatures. That simple. Maybe not in the way Freud would argue it, but we are. Like many other primates.. sex is what we do best. That and use tools. (or sometimes both at the same time... ). You will never stop teens, who are programmed even more so for it, from not wanting to get it on. Once again.. Religion gets in the way of life.

Reminds me of the Nutrigrain Ad... BABIES EVERYWHERE

[Scott of Hyperborea]

Just reading the online response to Sarah Palin's convention speech. I haven't seen it, but the summary is that she talked a lot about her success cutting Alaskan government by selling some plane on eBay, and then attacked Barack Obama for a while, saying how she was being a governor doing executive governor-y stuff while he was just being a lowly community organizer which is a stupid job for people who don't like real work.

The online response was:
- one guy with a blog who investigated and found that, in fact, she didn't sell the plane on eBay. She tried, failed, and then sold it at a major loss through a plane-selling company.
- another guy who said "Pontius Pilate was a governor. Jesus was a community organizer."

[Bayen]

I'm not advocating or defending Palin when I say this, but:

Scott, if you're going to criticize, at least listen to the speech.

That said, I did listen to her speech, and it had hints of that type of thing, but not as blatant and rude as people keep saying... (The big thing for me is that I still don't agree with most of her policies, which should be the deciding factor, eh?)

[Noemi_Vassiliais]

Personally... I'm completely against Palin. If McCain becomes president... there's no doubt that he's going to croak and then Palin will be president... and some how... I just get a bad vibe from her. I'm not 100% sure why I get that vibe though... she, to me, just doesn't seem very trust worthy. She's against my rights as a human being. She's too much of a fundie. She's WORSE than McCain. I did not listen to her speech... (I was asleep) all that I know about her is from what I've heard through word of mouth, read or learned in Honors US History. From what I've gathered though... she seems to contradict herself. Particularly on drilling... from what I heard from one guy in the class who did watch the whole thing, he said that she stated something about being for bringing in more pipe lines.. but that we should get away from using oil. Apparently my history teacher fell asleep during Palin's speech and didn't hear this part of it. I'll probably have to look into her more though. But the way I look at it... America's screwed no matter who we get as a president at this point. Hilary would have been better than Obama. I know that the GLBT community may dislike Obama... but we hate McCain... so, he's simply one of the lesser evils...

After all... McCain's completely against Same-sex marriage... but wants to lower taxes... keep us in the war a little longer... and "stay out of our lives a little more" but at the same time... he's opposing something that affects the lives of many people. While Obama wishes to raise taxes, take money from the rich and give it to the poor... reaching for a more socialistic way of going through with things when the best way is to lower taxes and create more jobs. He wants to make gas prices higher... all that's going to do is make America go bankrupt... Biden... I have yet to hear any thing about.

Also... from what I've gathered, Palin apparently said somethings that if Obama or Hilary would have said they would have been treated with anger... I've also heard that Palin wishes to repeal Roe vs Wade... which... although I'm against abortion... it shouldn't become illegal. It would only lead to deaths of mothers... unsanitary abortions with clothes hangers and other things... If a woman wants it out... she'd probably do it. Yet... at the same time... it's a little odd that she's pro-abstinence and yet her 17 year old daughter... some one not too much older than myself... is pregnant... if she can't be a good parent and raise her family "right" then what makes us think that she can "raise" a country? Also, I don't know if this is a rumor or not.. but I've heard that she wants to get rid of birth control.

[Jonas]

all that I know about her is from what I've heard through word of mouth,

I heard you are a witch. Do I need to burn you? Never trust what you hear, everyone can say what he or she wants.

Hate McCain? My good impression about America is now gone forever. You can't hate someone who you don't know!

keep us in the war a little longer...

You need to clean up the mess you made. It's America's own fault that it invaded Iraq. Are you really thinking you can invade a nation, bring chaos and when you have to much loses you just can leave?
The people in those areas are also human beings, their lifes are disturbed by the Americans and after your brave politicians pull the soldiers back those people can't leave. Typical American behaviour, just the same as Vietnam. All in name of Democracy.
In history Democrats aren't too peaceful either, look to Kennedy who almost gave us a third world war.

all that's going to do is make America go bankrupt...

Don't forget that the USA has a giant national debt, and America will eventually go bankrupt when the next president(s) doesn't make the budget a little bit more positive.

And the election campanes aren't making the US any richer...

it's a little odd that she's pro-abstinence and yet her 17 year old daughter... some one not too much older than myself... is pregnant... if she can't be a good parent and raise her family "right" then what makes us think that she can "raise" a country?

Mostly that kind of people govern a country better. Btw, it isn't because her daughter is pregnant that Palin isn't a good parent. I have the impression you don't know how hard it is to be parent (okay, I'm not a parent but I can see how hard it can be sometimes), daughters on that age don't listen to you.
I think Palin would be a good vicepresident, with McCain as President. I have a better feeling about them (or better: about McCain, I don't really know yet about Palin*) than that I have with Obama.

I'm not an American, but I can tell you one thing:
1. just two large parties with president candidates is the worst system ever, you don't have much chose and it really divides people. Like you said: you hate McCain. One thing, don't think our system is much better (we don't have presidential elections ) but I can't get how people are willing to chose between two persons.
2. DON'T BELEAVE IN RUMORS when it are ELECTIONS!


*: what doesn't make my opinion negative.

[Scott of Hyperborea]

I heard you are a witch. Do I need to burn you? Never trust what you hear, everyone can say what he or she wants.
Hate McCain? My good impression about America is now gone forever. You can't hate someone who you don't know!

There's (and this is addressed to Bayen too) a difference between hearing something from Old Man Johnson down the street and hearing it from CNN (though Bayen's right, I really should watch the speech.) The news networks might have their slants and biases, but I still trust them not to report any simple fact that's provably untrue. For now, at least. They're not just rumors. I've never met Stalin. All I know about him, I know from what famous historians have told me. But I can still be pretty sure I don't like him.

You need to clean up the mess you made. It's America's own fault that it invaded Iraq. Are you really thinking you can invade a nation, bring chaos and when you have to much loses you just can leave? The people in those areas are also human beings, their lifes are disturbed by the Americans and after your brave politicians pull the soldiers back those people can't leave. Typical American behaviour, just the same as Vietnam. All in name of Democracy.

I'd agree with you except that I think something like 80% of Iraqis want us out. We're not doing them any favors by staying.

Just two large parties with president candidates is the worst system ever, you don't have much chose and it really divides people.

That's completely true.

[Jonas]

There's (and this is addressed to Bayen too) a difference between hearing something from Old Man Johnson down the street and hearing it from CNN

I don't know where she got her information, but even if it's from CNN you need to pay attention they don't spread rumors. I know we can trust CNN in most cases, but you never know.

I'd agree with you except that I think something like 80% of Iraqis want us out. We're not doing them any favors by staying.

Because they think the explosions and danger will disapear when you guys are gone. But I'm not sure that will happen, except when the Iraqi governement falls and rebels take it over.

[Scott of Hyperborea]

I don't know where she got her information, but even if it's from CNN you need to pay attention they don't spread rumors. I know we can trust CNN in most cases, but you never know.

Can't that lead to extreme skepticism? I mean, the only way I even know Sarah Palin exists is because she's been on the news a lot. If I'm allowed to doubt the news when it says there's proof that her teenage daughter is pregnant, why shouldn't I doubt them when they say she exists?

One needs to acquire the ability to determine fact from rumor. But this isn't all that hard. When a news channel says "Unidentified sources claim..." it's a rumor. When they show a video clip of it happening, it's a fact, unless society's much more messed up than I think. Most of the scandals surrounding Palin have been pretty well-supported.

Because they think the explosions and danger will disapear when you guys are gone. But I'm not sure that will happen, except when the Iraqi governement falls and rebels take it over.

You're right, of course, and I agree with you that Iraq will be better off if we stay, but does America have the right to make that decision? If we can say "Well, the Iraqis want us out, but they're wrong about that. It'll really be better off for them if we stay.", why can't we also say "Well, the Iranians don't want us to invade now, but they're wrong about that. They'd really be better off if we did."

This is a tough issue for me, and I don't think there's an easy solution, but i don't think completely dismissing the views of the people in the country involved is the right track.

[Bayen]

On Iraq:

I agree with Scott. We're trying to promote democracy. The point isn't to "do what's best for the people", but to do what the people want/vote for. 80% is a pretty strong majority, let's give them what we want.

On sources:

For little things, it's fine to get news from CNN, etc. But if it's some sort of scandal or anything important, at least check your facts on a few different news providers (I like Google News for this reason - it has links to the same story from a bunch of different qualified websites instead of just one.)

When you first hear about a scandal, it's good to give the person the benefit of the doubt until you check it out more, because of how damaging it can be. I heard some statistic that a noticeable percentage of Republicans* believe that Barack Obama is BOTH a Muslim and has problems with his (Christian) pastor... check your facts, people!

* - not a huge percentage... I'm not saying all Republicans lack deductive ability. But it wasn't like less than 1%, either... I can't remember the exact number, though**

** - Remember, people, don't take me seriously on this until you've checked it yourself!!

[Jonas]

On Iraq:

I agree with Scott. We're trying to promote democracy. The point isn't to "do what's best for the people", but to do what the people want/vote for. 80% is a pretty strong majority, let's give them what we want.

Most politicians in Iraq are scared to say something because if they do they will get blowed up, you don't help democracy when you leave a nation when they really need you . And this is just the beginning of chaos.

Children don't want to go to school, but it's necessairy. It's the same with Iraq.

Luckely I'm living in a country as large as a post stamp, you guys can't complain as much about my country like I can about yours.

[Bayen]

So you're saying the people in Iraq are all children and Mommy America has to tell them what to do?

[Jonas]

So you're saying the people in Iraq are all children and Mommy America has to tell them what to do?

No, that you need to ignore what they say if it's safer and better for them. You don't need to interfer in intern policies of a country (but I'm affraid that's a bit late...).

If the Americans leave the unstable Iraq now, you get the same situation as in Germany. It was democratic, but with a lot of chaos. I don't need to mention that there was a Hitler that took the power...
Now I'm thinking about it...Wilhelm II = Sadam

[Hesam Jayatar]

I can't take this. I need to go speak to someone else who's country can run a secular, honest election. I've never really spoken to people who would be voting in an American election before, and I have to say I'm fucking astonished. There really is no equivalent anywhere else.

Media liberal bias? Newspapers are out to MAKE MONEY. Not to give you honest journalism. I'd figure at least in an internet community like this one people would realize that. I can't believe americans place so much trust in their media. Fox news doesn't give a shit if you're conservative, all it cares about is appealing to a conservative market. CNN plays to anyone who'll watch, and MSNBC plays to Hybrid loving yuppies.

Conservative: Do any of you understand just how far right the republican party is in comparison to other conservative parties in the western world? Do you have any idea of the huge civil infractions that have taken place over the past 8 years? Some of the lead members of the current administration should be in jail right now for the shit they've pulled. Election fraud, defamation, intimidation, threads, gross incompetence. Rove, Cheney, the lobbyists, the shills, the lies. Conservatives used "people of faith" and other demographics of the right wing to trick people into voting for Bush. Really, WHAT THE FUCK DID YOU GET OUT OF IT????? They're emptying your pockets and you don't even give a shit, just because they were crucifixes around their necks when they do it. Does anyone honestly believe that Bush is a fucking Christian?

Liberal: Most of the democratic party are assholes. Al Gore is also a huge douche. Where the conservatives (from time to time) will at least admit they're taking away your right to free speech (free speech zones) or emptying your wallet, Democrats love telling you that its good for you. Hiding behind a nice veil of environmentalism, unions, new leftism, etc, trying get the moral upper-hand on oily conservatives. The Democrats are equally as corrupt and self-indulgent. But they have the audacity to say they're doing it for the good of the nation. These people will be anti-corporate even when they own corporations. But, Obama is a good candidate as far as I can tell. Vote for him, and you're country might not sink into the ocean on a wave of idiotic debates about the nature of jesus in America.


For fucks sake, this is a modern western country. Leave religion out of politics. LEAVE RELIGION OUT OF POLITICS. It's NOT on. It sets a standard that one religion is better than another, when none are better than any others because they're all bullshit. Does it matter if the President believes in a 2000 year old dead carpenter from Nazareth? Should America as a whole be much more concerned with the absolutely pathetic standard of living that some of your citizens are forced to live in? Shouldn't the election be more about becoming the single world superpower again? Or the highest standard of living?

So:

To sum up, both parties thing they know a better way to run you life for you. Both parties have their own agendas and neither of them are in the best interest of the general public. I like Obama, but his party is as shitty as the Reps. Realizing you have to choose the lesser of two evils (god forbid a THIRD choice were to come around), but vote for practical issues. Not ideology.

[Bayen]

So much for trying to have a civil political discussion. We were doing so well... I for one actually have learned a few things, which never really happens when people start yelling and cursing. You may be right, Hesam, (I agree with a lot of the points you brought up), but at least state your arguments calmly, and more important, respectfully... You have the advantage of being able to think before you speak because this is the internet, but apparently it's not helping.

If the Americans leave the unstable Iraq now, you get the same situation as in Germany. It was democratic, but with a lot of chaos. I don't need to mention that there was a Hitler that took the power...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

[Hesam Jayatar]

I thought I was stating them calmly, but fair enough.

Regarding Iraq, I'd like to have a say.

Despite the fact that I believe the war right, but the reasoning was bullshit, I think the coalition forces should stay in Iraq. The US needed to invade Iraq for the benefit of its foreign policy. Saddam Hussein was no longer useful as a counter to Iran's power. Israel also required the invasion of Iraq as a protection for its own status. The methods in which the war were carried out where for the most part sound. War is war, and Gulf War II cannot be compared to Gulf War I due to the fact that there was very little land force movement. No cities were invaded and there was not an asymmetric war following it. The current status of Iraq is improving (despite what I thought) and that is an important step toward stabilization.

Yes, the US invaded, and yes it imposed its will on a sovereign state. But the issue is done and there isn't much that can be solved by debating it. Right now, the war is highly political. When people say "insurgents" as a blanket statement, it over simplifies the issue. Iran has taken advantage of anti-American sentiment and has pumped millions of dollars of politically motivated aid, equipment, weapons, propaganda and bribes into Iraq. Everything from explosives to "train the trainer" indoctrination where leaders of different groups are brought to Tehran to receive all sorts of "aid". If the US were to pull out now, the Iraqi government would crumble. Iran would have huge swaths of the countries north, while the rest would be subject to local leaders fighting each other for power. But Iraq as a state would cease to exist. Eventually, these groups would become dangerous and no doubt eventually attempt revenge against the US and its coalition allies.

The problem is that its difficult to just "pull out". US forces and US government representatives are trying to train Iraqi officials and officers at an astounding rate. They're having a great deal of success as well (remember Iraq used to be a highly developed country). But there are not enough forces to train people in the time they're given. There is also the issue of fighting the tide when it comes to corruption within the government.

If its "democracy" the US forces are there to instil I'd like to point out a few things. First, you cannot FORCE democracy on someone. Second, I'd be just as concerned about democracy in the past 8 years within the US as I would about democracy in Iraq. Third, if you're going to promote democracy, you have to realize that they may choose someone you don't like. Then what? You say they did it wrong? I think it would be best to drop the farce that the US is in Iraq to install democracy, since that's not even a practical argument. Much more nobly, the Coalition is in Iraq with the current aim of establishing security and stability, which is a more pragmatic and virtuous approach.

[b3n|<3r|\|]

Yes, the US invaded, and yes it imposed its will on a sovereign state. But the issue is done and there isn't much that can be solved by debating it. Right now, the war is highly political. When people say "insurgents" as a blanket statement, it over simplifies the issue. Iran has taken advantage of anti-American sentiment and has pumped millions of dollars of politically motivated aid, equipment, weapons, propaganda and bribes into Iraq. Everything from explosives to "train the trainer" indoctrination where leaders of different groups are brought to Tehran to receive all sorts of "aid". If the US were to pull out now, the Iraqi government would crumble. Iran would have huge swaths of the countries north, while the rest would be subject to local leaders fighting each other for power. But Iraq as a state would cease to exist. Eventually, these groups would become dangerous and no doubt eventually attempt revenge against the US and its coalition allies.

Then why are we still in there? Pull out, and then begin the attempts to promote liberalism and democracy in Iran! (First step - for god's sake let the Iranians develop nuclear power and fund pro-democracy movements wherever possible) Let our enemies grow in strength and number, then crumble into friendly dust a few generations down the line.

[Hesam Jayatar]

Because it would be impossible to promote democracy in Iran right now. The only reason we are in the position to "promote" it in Iraq is because the US invaded. Strategically, consider the fact that 20 years ago, Iran was surrounded by countries hostile to the US, it no longer is. That should give a clear picture of the future.

But there is also the issue of the current democratic movement in Iran. While it exists, its members are imprisoned regularly, and so there is not much direct action against the state. To send aid etc.. would be useless as it would likely expose the key organizers and destroy the movement itself. This is why I say the public motives were wrong for the Iraq war, but the war itself is just. the different ethnicities of rural Iran are by and large, either indifferent, or support the current state. While the majority of the population of Tehran has more in common politically with the population of a major European city. Invading Iran or attempting to import democracy would be just as disastrous. And this is where altruism and selfishness part ways. To allow Iran to reform on its own with the will of the people is the only right solution. Self-determination is akin to democracy and therefore cannot be enforced. To attempt to do so would be for selfish reasons. At the point where the US makes its choice on what to do with Iran, it will either become clear that they are letting Iranians decide for themselves and therefore are taking the altruistic root, or they will invade for selfish reasons. Right now, Iran needs time and patience.

[Jonas]

So much for trying to have a civil political discussion. We were doing so well... I for one actually have learned a few things, which never really happens when people start yelling and cursing.

I LIKE THE PART IN WHICH WE YEL TO EACH OTHER!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

I think that law is stupid, Hitler is the best example. Everyone knows what he did so I don't need to explain, is there a same law about Stalin or can I give my name to it?

[Scott of Hyperborea]

Hesam - am I misunderstanding your rant, or is it the standard "I am libertarian and you are not so clearly you are incredibly naive and with a few short sentences I will now liberate you from your mental slavery" spiel? If it is, give it a rest. Seriously, if I ever meet someone who isn't aware that politicians are often corrupt, or who doesn't realize that government regulation can be interpreted as paternalism, I will let you know.

But I am curious: why is Al Gore a douche?

PS: I think you're mostly right about Iraq.

[hypatias mom]

Back to basics, here. I am going to stay totally out of the new direction of the Sarah Palin thread, because it has already lost it civil tone. Now, about assessing someone: if you would critize or condemn someone just by relying on word-of-mouth, the gossip-mongers will have won again. All the Repubtlican National Convention speeches are available online, without editorializing, at cspan.org. If you don't know how thorough and reliable your source is, how do you know to form your opinions about someone based just on hearsay? Just listen to what these speakers say, without the editorial filter of a commerntator, and make up your own mind.

And yelling at each other just polarizes those on both sides of any argument, while persuading none, and perhaps perpetuating any errors intoduced by ill-informed partisans.

[Noemi_Vassiliais]

*sigh* Ok, simply put, I can't vote yet. I wont be able to vote for a while now. Thus, it's not as important (well... still important to know who's going to screw me over for 4 years... but still) for me to watch people throw slanders and tell lies. Most of what politicians do is try to appeal to other people and half-heartedly take a stand for something they don't believe in to get votes. Obama's trying to appeal to GLBTs, the black community and the white community. While McCain's trying to appeal to the Hilary supporters as well as bible-thumpers who think that a single marriage between people who are devoted to each other will ruin the sanctity of other's marriage.

Also, we shouldn't have even BEEN in Iraq. I've had multiple families fight in this war, I have friends in the army, and have had an uncle die from a road side bomb last summer. There were a group of people PROTESTING the WAR at his FUNERAL. I may not be too thrilled with this war, but I support our troops, just not the war. I was also POed at these people who had the nerve to stand there and protest a war that my uncle enjoyed fighting for. A week before he died we had gotten a letter saying how he enjoys what he's doing... and that he's been helping the people of Iraq. However, we need to fix the problems in our own country rather than working fixing the government of a different country and introducing to them a system that isn't working all that well. My dad criticizes the Liberals for trying to DIVIDE the country when he's the one who wants to divide equality and say "you can't marry them because the bible says so... and it's unnatural... but you can have this instead". Yes, I will eventually read and/or watch Palin's speech. I just stated the fact that most of what I had heard about her was from either the media or word of mouth.

Also, Al Gore's movie was a hoax... but even so, it did raise some things. I don't believe in Global Warming... though I'm in Ecology club. (oh yes, what an Oxymoron I am...) I realize that half of what I say is probably naive and/or coming from the fact that I know little about some of these candidates but, I do pay more attention to it than a good portion of people my age.

[Chrimigules]

One issue of Sarah Palin is her corruption. The Republican Party says that she's been fighting corruption, but what is now starting to be referred to as Troopergate, where she attempted to coerce the Public Safety Commissioner into firing a State Trooper who happened to be her sister's ex-husband at the time that the custody battle over their children was starting to get nasty. The Commissioner refused and she fired him in retaliation. That's the story.

You would think that if it were false, Sarah Palin would be allowing a government investigation, as the Alaska legislature wants to do, to clear her. In fact, she could use it in her campaign, saying that "they" would do anything possible to spread lies about her. Instead, she is fighting a proper investigation tooth and nail.

What I find the real icing on the cake is the convergence of two things.

Firstly, the McCain/Palin Campaign touts itself as being of the maverick type, willing to go against the wishes of the Republican Party.

Secondly, that Alaska State Legislature, which is attempting to investigate whether Sarah Palin fired the Public Safety Commissioner for personal rather than professional reasons, is Republican-dominated.

This puts a fresh spin on the whole Maverick thing. Yes, Sarah Palin is willing to fight against the Republican establishment... when she's trying to cover up her own corruption.

[Hesam Jayatar]

Scott,

I think you're actually misunderstanding me, but if you could give me the points which you're referring to, I'd be happy to explain.

[Jonas]

Also, we shouldn't have even BEEN in Iraq. I've had multiple families fight in this war, I have friends in the army, and have had an uncle die from a road side bomb last summer. There were a group of people PROTESTING the WAR at his FUNERAL. I may not be too thrilled with this war, but I support our troops, just not the war.

I don't support war either, every death is one to much. And in a war you get deaths.
Our (Belgian) army was never very active in countries like Afghanistan, now with a new minister of Defence Pieter de Crem our army will help fighting.
The newspapers told how the Dutch look to our army (they laugh with us, because we don't send troops), but I don't really care what they think about us. We didn't had as much casualties as they did UNTIL now.
I wouldn't be surprised that we get more deaths the next months.


Back to Palin...

This puts a fresh spin on the whole Maverick thing. Yes, Sarah Palin is willing to fight against the Republican establishment... when she's trying to cover up her own corruption.

IF there is corruption. It isn't proved yet. I thought you weren't guilty until someone proved otherwise?
Even if she was corrupt, do you really think that the other party isn't?

[Scott of Hyperborea]

Right. I just read through the transcripts of the RNC speeches online. They were about what I expected. Surprisingly, when five or six major news networks all agreed on what was in them, they weren't all lying. Funny how that happens. Now can we stop with the "But it's all a rumor!" stuff and start talking about the content of the speeches? Like how both McCain and Palin kept going on about how Obama was plotting to raise your taxes even though everyone agrees most people will pay less under Obama's plan than McCain's?

I think you're actually misunderstanding me, but if you could give me the points which you're referring to, I'd be happy to explain.

Okay...

Both parties thing they know a better way to run you life for you.

Is this the standard "I am libertarian and you are not so clearly you are incredibly naive and with a few short sentences I will now liberate you from your mental slavery" spiel?

The Democrats are equally as corrupt and self-indulgent.

Seriously, if I ever meet someone who isn't aware that politicians are often corrupt...

Where the conservatives (from time to time) will at least admit they're taking away your right to free speech (free speech zones) or emptying your wallet, Democrats love telling you that its good for you.

...or who doesn't realize that government regulation can be interpreted as paternalism, I'll let you know.

Al Gore is also a huge douche.

Why is Al Gore a douche?

[Malliki]

reaching for a more socialistic way of going through with things when the best way is to lower taxes and create more jobs.

Job "creation" is more reliant on economic growth or decline than taxes. The Swedish government have lowered taxes here, but not "created" jobs to the same degree. I also dispute that a government can just "create" jobs by just tweaking one of the economic dials. You can make it easier for companies to hire people, but jobs are created by the companies, not the government. Here, the unemployment rate have gone down since the election 2 years ago, but that is mostly due to a good period of economic growth.