This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

RNC Discussion Thread

124»

Comments

  • edited September 2008
    Let me ask you point blank. Do you believe,content aside, that the speech itself was poor? I'm talking about her delivery, not her message.
    Joe, three responses from you and still no answer to my question.
    1. We were onto a different topic.
    2. You are not my boss. I do not have to report to you.
    3. I told you what I thought of the style of her speech a few comments ago. She can read from a teleprompter . . . yawn.

    I will admit that she did better than McCain . . . but anyone who is awake could have done better than McCain.
    The bottom line is that I've got more important things to worry about than her support for a form of animal population control.
    You sure spent a lot of time writing for someone who has more important things to worry about.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • Interesting.Roughly 40 millionpeople watched Palin's speech - just slightly fewer than the number of people who watched Obama's DNC speech. 24 million watched Biden. I'm not sure what it means as far as votes are concerned, but she definitely got some exposure.
    What would be interesting is to see how many americans watched both speeches... Because that means those people have no lives :-p
  • Interesting.Roughly 40 millionpeople watched Palin's speech - just slightly fewer than the number of people who watched Obama's DNC speech. 24 million watched Biden. I'm not sure what it means as far as votes are concerned, but she definitely got some exposure.
    Well then you also have to consider that the night of Palin's speech the Republicans made $1 million. However, the Democrats made $8 million. I'm not sure what it means as far as votes are concerned, but she definitely got people opening their wallets.
  • [S]he definitely got people opening their wallets.
    . . . for the other side.
  • You sure spent a lot of time writing for someone who has more important things to worry about.
    And the ad hominems roll on and on...
  • edited September 2008
    She can read from a teleprompter . . . yawn.
    So you yawn when Obama speaks?
    Post edited by Kilarney on
  • edited September 2008
    She can read from a teleprompter . . . yawn.
    So you yawn when Obama speaks?
    No. His speech was more substantive, he actually wrote it, and he didn't lie all the way through it.
    You sure spent a lot of time writing for someone who has more important things to worry about.
    And the ad hominems roll on and on...
    Here's an ad hominem for you: You're kind of like Rudy Guiliani with the ad hominems. Whereas Rudy's sentences usually follow the template of "Noun verb 9/11", you pretty much follow the template of "I'm right, if you disagree with me you're wrong and you're using an ad hominem". Not everything is an ad hominem.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • edited September 2008
    No. His speech was more substantive, he actually wrote it, and he didn't lie all the way through it.
    Then why didn't you say that instead of making a swipe at her using a teleprompter? I don't get it. For the record, I give Obama mad props for writing his own speech.

    As for being truthful... Woops! He and Palin fight to a draw. (Or perhaps even a slight edge to Palin.)

    Another rock in the glass teleprompter house.
    Post edited by Kilarney on
  • . . . for the other side.
    Yeah...that was the joke.
  • edited September 2008
    . . . for the other side.
    Yeah...that was the joke.

    image
    Post edited by Kilarney on
  • edited September 2008

    Besides... ever seen a slaughterhouse, egg farm or feedlot? Unless you're a vegetarian, it's darned near hypocritical to condemn even this form of hunting. Animals in feedlots live a pathetic existence, yet we turn a blind eye.
    We've also selectively bred animals in ways that are absolutely contrary to a happy and long life.
    Oh, I agree with you. Modern Factory farming is very cruel and bad.

    But just because there are horrible things going on in the meat industry, this does not make doing dickish things to wolves right. There are always worse things going on everywhere, and that kind of argument is pointless. You could say, forget about the animals, help these people, no, help these starving children, no, it must be these tortured orphans! The point is not "are there worse problems?" but "Is this practice bad?" And in my opinion yes, yes it is. The thing is, people are not hunting wolves for food, Kilarney, they are hunting them to get rid of the competition. This "bounty on a wolf" thing is the reason why wolves once faced extinction in the continental US, and the reason they are very rare. Anyway, I think aerial hunting is akin to shining a spotlight from your truck into the woods to blind the deer, while you have a shotgun ready, or throwing a stick of dynamite into a lake to get the fish. Stupid and lame thing to do.
    Post edited by gomidog on
  • edited September 2008
    Stupid and lame thing to do.
    . . . and reflects very negatively on the character of the people who participate in, condone, or seek to extend the practice of the activity.
    Another rock in the glass teleprompter house.
    That video is old, highly edited, and very lame.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • @ kilarny: Why does the style of a speech matter when the content of it is abhorrent, false, or meaningless?
  • @ kilarny: Why does the style of a speech matter when the content of it is abhorrent, false, or meaningless?
    My score sheet has more than one column.
  • @ kilarny: Why does the style of a speech matter when the content of it is abhorrent, false, or meaningless?
    My score sheet has more than one column.
    Okay, but do you allow each column an equal number of points. Anyone can have style (speech writers, stylist, make-up artists, set designers, and public speaking coaches), it is the content of what a candidate does and says that matters far more than the style. Anyone that finds style equal or greater than content in politics is crow that is simply attracted to a shiny piece of tin-foil.
Sign In or Register to comment.