I should know you well enough by now to have realized you were doing parody. My bad!

By the way, it’s noticeable to all the way you’ve put your views across forcefully, but respectfully, in this comment thread as compared to others on the Left like Taguba. Disagreement doesn’t require slander, unless of course the intent is simply to get a reaction from people you disagree with, not actually discuss/debate an issue.

As you and I discussed in an earlier posting, there seems to be a tendency on the part of the present day Left to treat every discussion like the Daily Kos or Huffington Post. It’s clear they don’t know how to have a real exchange of ideas, so they substitute invective for analysis. It doesn’t even matter if they’re consistent (in one case the pope is an infallible authority on man made global warming, in another he’s just one of “the clowns wearing the robes” on the subject of abortion [see Comment 21 above, and Comment 1 in “American Papists” --- both made by the same person.])

Like I said before, on the Right we confront and condemn our extremists who would say things like “race matters”, or suggest that there is a “natural hierarchical social order.” But I’ve yet to see anyone on the Left condemn the excesses of a person who calls conservatives “Retardlicans douchbags stinking retarded vermin”.

Indeed my comments were intended to be humorous. The opening paragraph was a quotation from Dr. Kivolt earlier in the discussion.

Under investigation is not under indictment nor convicted. Again, look at all the facts in evidence before jumping to conclusions. What is it Palin is being investigated for, how much of it is due to her and how much due to people connected with her, what is the probability this is political sparring used to damage her, how does it disqualify Palin as candidate for higher office (not all investigations are criminal). MSNBC reports this as an ethical, not a criminal issue; and there is a good deal in their report to make me believe the ethics in question were not hers but are, in some measure, her responsibility (if she knew of it). She says she only found out later that an aide of hers pressured an official in what began as a private dispute with the Department of Public Safety. There are grounds for her complaint the state trooper (her brother-in-law, alleged to have abused her nephew and threatened to shoot her father; plus assorted misbehaviors) at the center of the matter ought to have been dismissed rather than just suspended; explaining why she persisted in the matter. Palin has done some appropriate damage-control and has supported the investigation she expects will clear her. If not, she’ll be subject to a reprimand that, alone, does not disqualify her from high office.

I doubt you can find more than a handful of politicians who haven’t faced an ethics review, allegations of corruption, or an indictment. Politicians have their personal and professional lives turned inside out by every passing busybody (including us) looking for dirt. And, if the busybody has a political axe to grind, it is even worse. Being a politician, thus, means swimming with sharks. Little wonder most of us would rather talk politics than become politicians. Don’t get too excited she’s got some dirt in her closet. Which of us doesn’t? And, if not us, the foibles of close relation serve almost as well. If she’s guilty of more than improper handling, that will be revealed. If not, don’t let this be a distraction.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26458400

Lyda Green may not have been the best argument you could have made against Palin. It is no secret (at least in Alaska) Green has no love for Palin. Palin kept her campaign promise to fight corruption in Alaska, and that came very close to tainting Green. They have been at odds over proposed pipeline contracts in which Green has been seen not only as having been in the wrong, but also having favored VECO – the oil company now charged with bribing a number of state legislators. Palin opened up the bidding to outsiders, including the Canadian company that submitted the winning bid. Green filibustered against Governor Palin’s pipeline plan which is important to the Alaskan economy, rather than see it go to an outsider. There is no argument between them or Green’s coalition-Democrats the pipeline is good for Alaska, the fight is only over who gets to build it. Green has now dropped out of her re-election bid ostensibly because of low poll numbers, but there remains a suspicion among voters regarding possible links to VECO. This is because one of those indicted was former state Rep. Vic Kohring (now serving time), said to have taken money from VECO to not run against Green (twice). VECO may well have bribed Kohring without her knowledge, but it seems unlikely she was completely ignorant of it. Because of this Green is no longer much liked or respected in Alaska, even within her own party. Green is clearly mad at Palin and has made remarks suggesting she is to blame for her fall. So this may well be a case of sour grapes and having made enemies.

Making enemies among the corrupt and tainted ain’t exactly to Palin’s discredit, and I would think liberals, who constantly whine about corrupt Republicans, would appreciate what she did rather than find in it cause for fault. But, of course, you did not realize that what was what you were doing because you never bothered to check into the substance of Green’s complaint. No, you were too busy slapping Palin with anything you could find, no matter how flimsy.

It is no great trick finding a few conservatives critical of Palin. We are not so moronically monolithic we must approve everything our leaders say or do; and we don’t respond to dissent in our ranks by silencing the dissenter. But, we are savvy enough that when someone like Green makes vague criticisms against her party’s choice to find out more before drinking from her cup (you drank the Kool-aid, not us). We don’t elect candidates because they are perfect in every regard (heck, we’re not all that keen about McCain); we elect the candidates most qualified and least corrupt who advance our values and preserve our freedoms. Some of us feel Romney or another is better suited to the role of VP, but that is not to say McCain-Palin is not an acceptable choice better than anything the left has offered, because so far no one has shown us they aren’t. You are going to have to do a lot better than that to convince people McCain-Palin aren’t a whole lot better and safer than Obama-Biden.

(http://alaskareport.com/news/z49999_corrupt_bastards.htm)
(http://www.alaskareport.com/blog/?s=lyda+green)
(http://www.alaskareport.com/blog/2008/06/14/lyda-green-goes-down-in-flames-bs-and-all.htm)
(http://www.adn.com/legislature/story/436198.html)

On the other hand we have a ticket with a former military officer with actual leadership experience and a state governor with actual leadership experience (as long as a governor as Omessiah has been a senator but even with a maternity leave she has attended more days at work).

Then the attacks on qualifications for the VP slot. Lets see a career legislator with no executive experience against a sitting governor with previous executive experience as mayor of a small city and a fishing business. In a debate she will blow the legislator away.

Very strange that Democmarxists take the approach of attacking the experience of someone that dwarfs their candidate’s zero experience. Amazing but they have never let themselves be distracted by facts only feelings.

This makes for great comedy as the campaigns move toward judgement day in November.