Jump to content

US Presidential Elections


Gorth

Recommended Posts

Remember folks, this is just rumors that fly around the net. My preliminary sources are This (Scroll down to a post by a fellow named 'Christian') and the corresponding links that can be found there.

 

3073504041standaloneprozj1.jpg

- This is Governor Sarah Palin at 6 and a half months "pregnant." Another photo of her SIX WEEKS PRIOR TO BIRTH. - The daughter was out of school for 8 months with 'mono'.

- Palin returned to work three days later.

 

8153504039highlightproduk3.jpg

Daughter on right. Six months into her mother's pregnancy.

 

http://gov.state.ak.us/photos/PalinFamily_Outside_v01.jpg

 

Here's a much larger version of the first family pic...

 

687-3504039.standalone.prod_affiliate.7.jpg

 

Well, I can see why the rumour is there - and it makes sense... :lol:

Edited by Deadly_Nightshade

"A little inaccuracy sometimes saves a ton of explanation."
-H. H. Munro

 

"Geez. It's like we lost some sort of bet and ended up saddled with a bunch of terrible new posters on this forum."

-Hurlshot

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lolcat80326128007375um2.jpg

 

Sarah Palin: Addicted To Children

---------

by The Ruthless Team

 

Congratulations, Mrs. Palin. You have become the first female contender for either end of the Presidential ticket since Dukakis. We especially want to congratulate you on your success considering your youth, and the usually debilitating affliction of being as dumb as a ****ing stump.

 

We here at the Ruthless offices are especially glad to see you rise to the national stage; a lovely all-American woman with impeccable social and moral credentials that can bring our country out of the moral quagmire and back into God's light. There will be no Jaimie Lynn Spears on your watch, right, Governor?

 

We do want to touch on something that other sites may not want to touch, and we want to do so to cast off the question of sexism, which so deeply hurt contenders Hillary Clinton and Ron Paul this election cycle. That is, we want to say how happy we are that someone so damn attractive and physically fit will finally step into the world's most powerful office. Your dynamism and physical presence will have a doubtlessly positive impact on the way we perceive ourselves, and how the world perceives us in turn.

 

It is absolutely marvelous that you, while five months pregnant, managed to look as amazing as this:

 

lolcat9347519jl6.jpg

 

By marvelous, we mean, total horse****.

 

This magical child is no more yours than it is Larry Craig's child. Let us examine the umbilical cord connecting the baby of bull**** to the tasty placenta of reality:

 

1. Nobody knew you were pregnant, not even the fundamental laws of biology.

 

Nobody on your staff knew you were pregnant until you announced it, one month and one week prior to the child's early birth. An incredible achievement for anybody, and one that would make Houdini proud. You are the inverse of the sweaty Colorado KFC worker who tried stuff her accidental baby into the toilet. You merely punched into the hospital timesheet and punched out again, kicking off an energy summit three days after producing a child with one of the world's most time-demanding congenital defects.

 

Gosh darn it, yer just so darned unshakable, darn it!

 

may15energyrelief01largts0.jpg

 

This lovely photo of you standing before traditional wood-carved Alaskan Powerpoint slides shows you at 27 weeks pregnant. Its remarkable how you managed to keep the fetus tucked away out of sight for so long. Black is really slimming, but this top must be positively stygian.

 

Its especially impressive onsidering that other women tend to, you know, keep their babies on the front of their abdomens at 27 weeks:

 

0127kna6.jpg

 

2. Your lovely daughter Bristol, suffering what must be the world's most wild case of mono, 'took seven months out of vital high school learning to recuperate from a medieval disease.' LINK NEEDED

 

We know things are bad up in Alaska, but we're pretty sure you have 'a' doctor, or access to WebMD when the sun appears to power the light sails above the governor's manor. While I'm sure seven months of Alaskan high school can probably be covered by catching up on a week's worth of Passions, your poor daughter probably suffered one of those rare cases of immaculately-conceiving mono, the Gabriel stain, where a screaming human thing emerges from the lower body at the culmination of a long period of eating and moodiness.

 

3. Bristol Palin is not fat, or ever would be in any conception of the term, and we say this as the guardians of the lowest standards possible for calling underage girls heifers.

 

She is, however, pregnant as **** in this photo, six months into your fifth 'pregnancy.'

 

6873504039standaloneprocx6.jpg

 

In the above charming family portrait, you are without child and daughter is with child. If this image is taken six months into a 'pregnancy', then a new possibility opens up. The same brain that believes that evolution should be taught alongside the facts in public schools may simply believe that the baby is hers, even if its inside another body. Sarah Palin may believe that any time a baby appears around her, it belongs to her. She may be like one of those mourning penguins that tries to steal the young of the women around her.

 

4. Your super weird decision to fly from Texas to Alaska to give birth.

 

You broke water in Texas, which nobody noticed, got on a plane and didn't seem to be in any form of distress, or in fact, pregnant at all:

 

"A little inaccuracy sometimes saves a ton of explanation."
-H. H. Munro

 

"Geez. It's like we lost some sort of bet and ended up saddled with a bunch of terrible new posters on this forum."

-Hurlshot

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Palin's Wikipedia Entry Gets Overhaul

by Yuki Noguchi

All Things Considered, August 29, 2008

Edited by Deadly_Nightshade

"A little inaccuracy sometimes saves a ton of explanation."
-H. H. Munro

 

"Geez. It's like we lost some sort of bet and ended up saddled with a bunch of terrible new posters on this forum."

-Hurlshot

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ouch

 

pwned

How can it be a no ob build. It has PROVEN effective. I dare you to show your builds and I will tear you apart in an arugment about how these builds will won them.

- OverPowered Godzilla (OPG)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, if this stuff is true, it's going to hit the fan rather quickly. Somebody will step with information eventually. There is big money in it now.

 

Unless someone at the hospital speaks out, which is ofcourse near her hometown in the middle of nowhere(you know, where everyone knows each other and keep outlanders out), there's little chance of anything happening.

"Some men see things as they are and say why?"
"I dream things that never were and say why not?"
- George Bernard Shaw

"Hope in reality is the worst of all evils because it prolongs the torments of man."
- Friedrich Nietzsche

 

"The amount of energy necessary to refute bull**** is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."

- Some guy 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You like anti-stemcell research, Pro-life, pro-creationism

from what i understand, not anti stem-cell research, but anti fetal stem-cell research. big difference.

 

nutjobs?! :lol:

while i don't agree with he positions on these issues, it hardly makes her a nutjob.

 

taks

 

I'd say advocating the teaching at the same time of creationism and evolution in schools should make her seem like a bit of a nutjob. Except in America, of course. :)

"My hovercraft is full of eels!" - Hungarian tourist
I am Dan Quayle of the Romans.
I want to tattoo a map of the Netherlands on my nether lands.
Heja Sverige!!
Everyone should cuffawkle more.
The wrench is your friend. :bat:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes I take a step back and look at the American political system and become quite disturbed.

 

The people who have their minds emphatically made up already puzzle me especially. Citizens and pundits get very emotional about their candidates. Is it so hard to imagine that there may be occasions and circumstances where either one of the candidates might be better or worse than the other? Aren't both sides equally disturbing in their parade of inconsistencies, non-stop spin, pandering, and mudslinging? Isn't the fake-issue kabuki play of the campaign infuriating no matter which side you're on?

 

The reasons that people use to decide where to cast their vote are, on the whole, amazingly silly and far too often driven by fear. ("All Democrats are socialists who want to take all your money and give it to abortion doctors!" "All Republicans are corrupt bastards in the pocket of Big Business!") I'll be the first to admit that I really don't have a reliable rational basis for picking one candidate over another. The problem is that there are probably only a few hundred people in the country who do enough information to do so, and people like me have no real incentive to seek out this information. (Sure it matters in how I cast my vote, but what is the likelihood that my vote controls the outcome of the election? Based on this likelihood, how much effort should I put into my decision?)

 

Were I truly motivated to inform myself about the candidates, though, this is the kind of information I would go out and find: Who is in the candidate's inner circle of advisors likely to occupy the top 30 or so policy-making positions in the new administration? Are they competent? What are the long-term policy goals they have espoused in the past? The people who seek these jobs have usually spent the last several decades as advocates of certain policy hobby-horses. Once in power, they're going to try to enact these policies. (For example, Cheney and Rumsfeld pretty much laid out what became Bush's foreign policy and military policy in stuff they published in the '70s.) A minority of voters might have this kind of information on 1 or 2 policy areas. Almost nobody has it on both candidates in all the big issues. What little I know tells me that there are good and bad people on both sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I find amazing is how many pundits say that voters are looking for a candidate they can 'have a drink with in a bar', or words to that effect, as if they're interviewing for a social club not President. I don't know if this truly reflects how voters make up their minds, but it shouldn't. I don't want the next US President to be someone I could sit and chat to happily over a beer. I want it to be someone so highly-educated, well-informed, intelligent and in control that I would be extremely intimidated to be sitting with them in a bar.

"An electric puddle is not what I need right now." (Nina Kalenkov)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Enoch

You have no idea how insane parts of your presidential elections can look to a european where things are still quite different.

 

The whole cult of personality around the candidates look extremely strange in my eyes since I tend to view politicians as nasty necessary beings.

 

Still, much of what you're saying can easily be found in all campaigns even here in europe where we sometimes scoff at the american way of doing things.

sporegif20080614235048aq1.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Creationism is religious dogma, not science. It should stick to being taught in churches an out of the public school system. It makes sense for it to be taught in parochial private schools, but for public schools run by the state, no. Church and State, gotta keep them separated.

"Your Job is not to die for your country, but set a man on fire, and take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd totally echo Enoch if I were voting, up to the point where he says a single vote doesn't count. I thuoght you chaps had Florida swing on a couple thousand votes, and decide the whole election. If true I'd say get your ass voting!

 

As an aside, on Palin, I love how the papers are painting this business with her relatives. Sure the guy tasered someone, and ate his father in law's moose or something, but I've been to Alaska a fair bit, have friends there, and in my experience that's just what they do. That's why I love it so much I'd move there if I could get any work.

"It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"."

             -Elwood Blues

 

tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yay! Republican bull****! Somehow, if they're ready to lie for something this small, then how can you POSSIBLY trust them with presidency?

"Alright, I've been thinking. When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade - make life take the lemons back! Get mad! I don't want your damn lemons, what am I supposed to do with these? Demand to see life's manager. Make life rue the day it thought it could give Cave Johnson lemons. Do you know who I am? I'm the man who's gonna burn your house down! With the lemons. I'm going to to get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that burns your house down!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I find amazing is how many pundits say that voters are looking for a candidate they can 'have a drink with in a bar', or words to that effect, as if they're interviewing for a social club not President. I don't know if this truly reflects how voters make up their minds, but it shouldn't. I don't want the next US President to be someone I could sit and chat to happily over a beer. I want it to be someone so highly-educated, well-informed, intelligent and in control that I would be extremely intimidated to be sitting with them in a bar.

Winston Churchill said that the best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter. It's really true. We can squawk all we want about policy but aware and politically minded people won't decide this election. They haven't decided anything since about 1960. Truth is, McCain has a good shot at the Presidency. He's a safe bet. It's the people who aren't really that into politics and only get involved when an election comes around (and only mildly involved then) who will make the swing that will win it for either candidate. The lazy and the retarded will win this election, and the Republican party will always have the lazy / retard voter bloc locked up. It's a sizable part of their base, and decades of practice have made them masters of herding. Why do you think the news media talks so much about "patriotism", even now, even when any intelligent person doesn't really think patriotism is an issue, and wouldn't be even if you could measure it somehow? Conservative politicos have made a science of creating straw men and shadow puppets and getting their dim-witted constituents worried about them. I think there's about a 90% chance that when the chips are down, as a candidate's melanin count increases his "looks like a Commander In Chief" count will approach 0, and appearance counts for a lot.

 

McCain is promising more of the same that we've gotten the last 8 years. Most voters don't really like the way the country's been going, but a candidate who promises lots of change like Obama is still going to be intimidating to Dumb**** Q. Voter. It's not a rational thing. People will go with the devil they know, even if it happens to be the most unpopular devil in the history of the United States of America.

 

Also, weeeeeee

obidensaddlesnw8.jpg

Edited by Pop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Winston Churchill said that the best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter. It's really true. We can squawk all we want about policy but aware and politically minded people won't decide this election. They haven't decided anything since about 1960.

 

1960? When a failry unqualified but good looking JFK barely edged out the ruthlessy effective Nixon?

 

The only good thing that came out of 1960 was LBJ got to serve 5 years and pass a gigantic amount of legislation while pushing the civil rights movement farther forward than anyone since Lincoln.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's forget about the democrats and republicans and their respective and potential scandals for a while. Let's focus on the little men now, for example:

 

- Bob Barr, Liberterian party link

- Ralph Nader, Green Party link

- Chuck Baldwin, Constitution party link

 

Thoughts? ideas? Critizisms?

"Some men see things as they are and say why?"
"I dream things that never were and say why not?"
- George Bernard Shaw

"Hope in reality is the worst of all evils because it prolongs the torments of man."
- Friedrich Nietzsche

 

"The amount of energy necessary to refute bull**** is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."

- Some guy 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lazy and the retarded will win this election, and the Republican party will always have the lazy / retard voter bloc locked up. It's a sizable part of their base, and decades of practice have made them masters of herding.

that's a pretty ill-informed statement. look at the demographics and you'll see two things that stand out: 1) the democratic party base is "labor," which generally implies uneducated and 2) the republican base has traditionally been the upper 20% income bracket, which generally implies educated.

 

pretty standard demographics.

 

taks

comrade taks... just because.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- Bob Barr, Liberterian party link

from what i understand, the guy largely responsible for the absolutely ridiculous federal drug laws (now apparently conceding that they were perhaps a mistake).

 

- Ralph Nader, Green Party link

one of these days somebody will figure out that this guy is not electable.

 

- Chuck Baldwin, Constitution party link

never heard of him till today.

 

taks

comrade taks... just because.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lazy and the retarded will win this election, and the Republican party will always have the lazy / retard voter bloc locked up. It's a sizable part of their base, and decades of practice have made them masters of herding.

that's a pretty ill-informed statement. look at the demographics and you'll see two things that stand out: 1) the democratic party base is "labor," which generally implies uneducated and 2) the republican base has traditionally been the upper 20% income bracket, which generally implies educated.

 

pretty standard demographics.

 

taks

50 years ago, those demographics might have been correct. But, seriously, if the GOP base were really the top 20% income wise, they'd never win any elections. The same with the "labor" base for the Dems-- it's a rapidly diminishing demographic (about 12% of the population and falling). With its post-Nixon "Southern Strategy," the GOP has left its original power bases in the pro-business northeast, by appealing to cultural conservatives in the South and Midwest (i.e., Hicks). The modern party is essentially an alliance between the remaining pro-business wing and the more rural voters it won originally with its opposition to Civil Rights and kept with its strong support of Christian "values" issues.

 

The Democrats, in turn, have expanded beyond their working-class roots, with strong support from minorities and women of all economic classes, and growing support among younger white-collar men who aren't in-tune with the GOP's social policy positions. If I recall correctly, analyzed independent of income, higher levels of education actually correlate with liberal voting patterns in the U.S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...