Comments | devifemme: Palin Pushes Religion Test for Presidents!

devifemme

Palin Pushes Religion Test for Presidents!

Dec 05, 2010 16:29

The Post today has an important op-ed by Bobby Kennedy's "politico" daughter Kathleen Kennedy Townsend. In it, she contradicts Sarah Palin in the latter's book "America by Heart" (*gags*). Palin revisits JFK's famous speech, during his 1960 campaign, to a Houston religious group. He said he wasn't the "Catholic candidate" but rather the "Democratic ( Read more... )

religion, palin, politics

Leave a comment

Back to all threads

izuko December 5 2010, 21:45:57 UTC

I don't see a problem with what Palin wrote, or how her expressing her views on how presidents should deal with the dichotomy between religious and public life constitutes a "religious test." KKT, being a product of the left, does not seem to have a filter between "we think people should" and "we think people should be forced to" and thus projects that upon Palin.

Many times, Palin has struck a "I don't agree with it, but it's not the government's place to say" position. Of course, that aspect never gets reported, just KOSsac questions as to whether her husband slept with his daughter.

Hell, I'm surprised KKT didn't dredge them up for this.

The more the left smears Sarah, the more I like her.

Manipulative bitch! devifemme December 5 2010, 22:29:04 UTC

I DON'T see the left doing anything to your darling. SHE's the one who sneered at JFK -- or, rather, her ghost-writer did. In fact, I cannot imagine she has the least clue what Kennedy thought about religion and public life. Instead, she mouths someone's siren song to lure more of the religious right into bed with her. Miserable bitch! She's actually enjoying being imposed on the American people by Fox News and their ilk.

Re: Manipulative bitch! izuko December 5 2010, 23:23:51 UTC

The suggestion is that she's jeopardizing the no-religious-test clause of the constitution. How is she doing that? What about it threatens you?

Re: Manipulative bitch! devifemme December 6 2010, 01:46:55 UTC

Simple -- it is a blatant appeal to the religous nut-cases that comprise a not-insignificant share of the rightist base! Kennedy wasn't pitching for Catholic votes -- not in talking to a bunch of "heartland" ministers, as he was. La Palin is shamelessly sucking up to fundamentalist know-nothings. (Ordinarily, they might not vote, but her McCain-in-pushup-bra appeal could propel their asses into voting booths.)

How about she just shut up about religion? There is that church/state thing, you know...

And are you ducking the "ghostwriter" angle I raised in the last comment?

Hugz, J

Re: Manipulative bitch! izuko December 6 2010, 02:00:44 UTC

Sucking up to them? I thought she was the chief of all right-wing nutjobs. Y'all really got to decide on a narrative. Again, where is the threat? What action is she calling for that will bring the constitution crashing down on all of our heads?

And why should she shut up about religion? It's clearly something important to her. Seems she has every right to speak on religion.

As for your church/state thing, such a thing does not exist. I'm sure you're aware of that. There's prohibition on establishing a state religion and prohibition on religious tests. However, there is no prohibition, explicit or implicit, on political figures speaking of religion, and certainly none against a private citizen, which Palin is, doing so.

As for the ghostwriter angle, I didn't duck it, I simply didn't feel it merited comment.

Re: Manipulated (sic!) bitch! devifemme December 6 2010, 16:07:50 UTC

Nope, no one I've encountered claims Palin is in charge of her own political direction. (She's a hustling little bitch, but she'd probably opt for money/fame -- shit, politics is hard work! Right, Governor?)

I do see the far right manipulating her, setting her up either to run in serious or to be a lightning rod for their True Champion.

And I'm glad you agree the book was ghosted. (See "hard work" above.)

Hugz, J

Re: Manipulated (sic!) bitch! izuko December 6 2010, 21:06:27 UTC

You say no one you've encountered claims that Palin is in charge of her own political direction. Makes me wonder who you've encountered. Also makes me wonder how many of them are in any position to know. What special insight do they have?

Or is it just the left going off again?

As for the issue of a ghostwriter, the book credits two authors. Unless you have some special insight into how the labor was divided, it's unreasonable to assume that it was ghost written. Someone who has a ghostwriter usually won't tell you (ie, William Ayers writing Obama's books).

As a complete aside, why does Firefox's spell checker still not recognize Obama's name?

Re: Manipulated (sic!) bitch! devifemme December 7 2010, 06:07:48 UTC

You don't suppose NewsCorp also owns FireFOX, do you? But -- JUST a coincidence?? Hmmmm...

As for her ghost, I admit I wasn't aware the book credited two authors -- I guarantee 90% of the putative readers know that, either! But, indeed, I do think the OTHER person did almost ALL of the work -- and one presumes he/she brought some heavy right-wing influence into the project. Honestly, Ken, Palin NEVER read JFK's religion speech -- NOT a line of it! Palin is a fucking flyweight, intellectually (indeed, it makes my TEETH ache just to put the word "intellect" ANYWHERE in her vicinity!).

Seriously, Ken, you aren't letting yourself be fooled by that woman, are you? C'mon, admit it, you're just playing gadfly -- just kidding me?

Re: Manipulated (sic!) bitch! izuko December 7 2010, 10:21:52 UTC

I look at this and all I see is unsupported accusations. Lots of "I think" and "one presumes." There's the suggestion that she's never read JFK's religion speech, but nothing to support that.

What I see here is that you and the left have created an image of Palin in your minds that is unbased in anything she says or does. Her subsequent actions are then adjusted to fit that image. It's kind of like the "party like it's 1773" incident.

The woman is no Bill Buckley, but she's hardly an idiot. Unless she also has Camille Paglia fooled.

(wait, Paglia is fine, but Obama is misspelled??? Oh, and wikipedia says that Mozilla foundation has no shareholders, so I doubt NewsCorp is involved)

Re: Manipulated (sic!) bitch! devifemme December 7 2010, 15:29:09 UTC

Sorry, Ken, but it's you who 1*,(4 to believe in that silly twit! Against all reasoninh --

WHY did she quit as governor?

1:) does she suck up to the media? (Bristol's stupid dance thing; all the fucking Twitter nonsense, etc. Ad absurdum!)

WHAT about her frequent mis-statements, where there's no "leftist" intermediation between her mouth and our ears?

I'm genuinely disappointed, Ken, that you are SO missing the evident failings in this pathetic excuse for a leader!!

Re: Manipulated (sic!) bitch! izuko December 7 2010, 23:22:50 UTC

Why did she quit as governor? The readily-available explanation is that she couldn't afford to be governor anymore. Alaska law requires her to pay her own legal costs for the sundry ethics trials (none of which have gone anywhere, but have cost her and her family a great deal of money to defend against). So, what do you think she should have done? Kept going to the tune of another half million ( ... )

JUST QUIT ANNOYING US ! devifemme December 8 2010, 04:31:53 UTC

KEN -- IT'S ALL BULLSHIT, OKAY77 I WILL NEVER CONCEDE YOU ANYTHING RE PALIN!

REPUBLICANS ARE THE FUCKING "PARTY OF NO" -- ANDTHEY NEVER GAVE OBAMA A CHANCE IN THE PAST TWO FUCKING YEARS! AND NOW, GIVING HUNDRES OF BILLIONS TO THE FUCKING GAZILLIONAIRES IS SO ASININE AND HYPOCRITICAL -- AND COWING OBAMA TO ACCOMPLISH IT IS NOTHING BUT A SAD FARCE!

THIS "DIALOGUE" HAS GONE BEYOND ANNOYING! I SUGGEST YOU STOP FURTHER POSTING HERE.

GOODBYE !

Re: JUST QUIT ANNOYING US ! izuko December 8 2010, 10:26:37 UTC

I'm sorry you feel that way. I had thought you were the type who could disagree without being disagreeable. But, if that's the case, I'll not bother you anymore.

Back to all threads