OMG. Palin has no brain.
Find a Conversation
OMG. Palin has no brain.
| Wed, 10-01-2008 - 8:09pm |
Never - ever - have I heard more a vacuous, vapid response to a question from a major candidate for public office:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/01/eveningnews/main4493062.shtml
Please, people. Please. You cannot put this bimbo in the White House.

Pages
"On the issue of Bin Laden...apparently he's in Pakistan beyond our reach. We might get him someday, but he's pretty much a figurehead. I'm sure these issues are very important to you pertaining to US "credibility"...but personally, I don't really care what foreigners think about the US...and they certainly aren't going out of their way to make themselves more appealing to me."
It is not foreigners on message boards you need to worry about. But for the sake of deterrence, some credibility would help you.
>>> It is not foreigners on message boards you need to worry about.
I haven't found much at all on message boards to worry about...except as it might be a somewhat true representation of the inner-workings of the liberal mind...but...er...thanks.
>>> But for the sake of deterrence, some credibility would help you.
As it would you...but it's nice to know hypocrisy isn't a hindrance for you.
"Neocon" does not refer to the most conservative. It refers to being newly conservative, thus the "neo." They got this name because many of them came from a leftist background, really leftist like communists not polite liberals like Obama, and joined the Reagan revolution. In fact, neoconservatives tend not to be very conservative in the classic sense. They have no big problem with social programs, for example, and tend not to mind big government all that much. Neoconservatives believe in reordering the world and in the revolutionary potential of the right wing, what one of them has called "creative destruction." That is, in fact, antithetical to classic conservatism (to state the obvious).
BTW, if the post about "tangential" did not make any sense to you, may I suggest that you read it again.
">>> But for the sake of deterrence, some credibility would help you.
As it would you...but it's nice to know hypocrisy isn't a hindrance for you."
Not sure what your point is here. The US set out to shock and awe the barefoot camel drivers into submission. The failure to capture bin Laden has seriously hindered the reaching of that objective.
Edited 10/6/2008 2:14 am ET by sild
Haven't you heard? He is a stealth Muslim, carefully groomed for a lifetime by the Saudis to take over the US on behalf of the international communist-jihad alliance.
It is a pity really that the lunatic fringe has fixed on this, since there is a serious question of how the west will meet Islam.
>>> Not sure what your point is here.
Oh...nothing...just shining a light on calls for credibility from incredible sources.
>>> The US set out to shock and awe the barefoot camel drivers into submission.
Actually, I think they were aiming at Hussein and the Iraq army.
>>> The failure to capture bin Laden has seriously hindered the reaching of that objective.
Not really. The deaths of so many Al Qaeda leaders and the dismantling of their organization have dealt them a significant, if not debilitating, blow.
"Actually, I think they were aiming at Hussein and the Iraq army."
Not only. The idea was to make a show of US might, in Afghanistan as well as in Iraq. The effort has failed especially spectacularly in Afghanistan. I imagine you caught the comments made a few days ago by the British commander there.
"Not really. The deaths of so many Al Qaeda leaders and the dismantling of their organization have dealt them a significant, if not debilitating, blow."
That is where I think you are completely wrong. The US efforts are causing massive radicalization and recruitment for al-Qaeda. Killing a few leaders here and there is not convincing as the action of a superpower.
You are incorrect!! Obama is NOT and NEVER WAS part of the Chicago machine. Anyone who thinks he is, doesn't understand, or know the inner workings of the machine.
I am so tired of every conservative bringing up Ayers as a convicted terrorist! First of all, Ayers was NEVER convicted, Second, Obama was nine years old when Ayers was active, Third, Ayers is a respected professor at the University of Illinois Circle Campus. Fourth, Obama and Ayers haven't spoken in over three years. They served on EDUCATIONAL committee's together.
Why don't conservatives mention his friendship with Bobby Rush?! Could it be because he's a respected congressman now? In case no one remembers, he belonged to the Black Panthers, and served time in prison for it!
As for Rezko, they are neighbor's. Rezko contributed $30,000 to Obama's campaign which Obama RETURNED to him! Rezko never gave him millions, never bought his house for him. ENOUGH of the unwarrented smears from the conservatives!!!
Rose
Pages