INTENSITY²
Politics, Mature and taboo => Political Pundits => Topic started by: Parts on April 30, 2014, 08:35:12 AM
-
Sarah Palin would like all terrorists to know that if she were in charge, waterboarding is how the United States would baptize them. At least that's what the former Alaskan governor and ex-vice presidential nominee told thousands of attendees this weekend at the National Rifle Association's annual convention in Indianapolis.
Link (http://news.yahoo.com/palin-waterboarding-nra-speech-205827272.html)
:GA:
-
She's a real humanitarian. I rather think she'd benefit from a treatment herself. Ten or so minutes under the water should fix it.
-
"If I were president..."
:aff:
-
She's a real humanitarian. I rather think she'd benefit from a treatment herself. Ten or so minutes under the water should fix it.
I'd say a little bit more, just to be sure.
-
If there is an alien race judging us by the media we output, I really hope they get that she's crazy even by earth standards.
-
She's a real humanitarian. I rather think she'd benefit from a treatment herself. Ten or so minutes under the water should fix it.
Nah, training goes out to nearly an hour of waterboarding being broken by not be able to breathe. I do not think ten minutes will do it.
I have a few idea of my own I would like to try.
Watch out for the torture bat ...
:flyingbat:
-
How does being a humanitarian affect her treatment of muslims? paki filth are NOT humans, or people. Ragheads are just trash. Disgusting, subhuman shit-skinned vermin. The only thing wrong with drowning the dirty cunts is potentially contamination of the water table.
Otherwise; all muslims need to be killed, slowly and painfully as is expedient at the time.
-
She's a real humanitarian. I rather think she'd benefit from a treatment herself. Ten or so minutes under the water should fix it.
I'd say a little bit more, just to be sure.
Or multiple times, ten minutes each. :P
-
How does being a humanitarian affect her treatment of muslims? paki filth are NOT humans, or people. Ragheads are just trash. Disgusting, subhuman shit-skinned vermin. The only thing wrong with drowning the dirty cunts is potentially contamination of the water table.
Otherwise; all muslims need to be killed, slowly and painfully as is expedient at the time.
Are you saying that you dislike Pakistani individuals? :tard:
-
How does being a humanitarian affect her treatment of muslims? paki filth are NOT humans, or people. Ragheads are just trash. Disgusting, subhuman shit-skinned vermin. The only thing wrong with drowning the dirty cunts is potentially contamination of the water table.
Otherwise; all muslims need to be killed, slowly and painfully as is expedient at the time.
Are you saying that you dislike Pakistani individuals? :tard:
Lestat, a racist? :o
-
In her defense...she was addressing the NRA.
I don't think "we will incarcerate them in an air conditioned prison, feed them and give them a speedy trail with a fair and impartial jury" is going to win her any votes...although I think "speedy death by firing squad" would have been more popular with at least some volunteers waving their hands.
-
Oh well, I guess it's OK then, since it was the NRA. :P
-
In her defense...she was addressing the NRA.
I don't think "we will incarcerate them in an air conditioned prison, feed them and give them a speedy trail with a fair and impartial jury" is going to win her any votes...although I think "speedy death by firing squad" would have been more popular with at least some volunteers waving their hands.
She is a national embarrassment as are the people cheering what she says, especially those in the NRA which bills it's self as trying to uphold the Constitution in protecting peoples second amendment rights as the other rights are just as important.
-
In her defense...she was addressing the NRA.
I don't think "we will incarcerate them in an air conditioned prison, feed them and give them a speedy trail with a fair and impartial jury" is going to win her any votes...although I think "speedy death by firing squad" would have been more popular with at least some volunteers waving their hands.
She is a national embarrassment as are the people cheering what she says, especially those in the NRA which bills it's self as trying to uphold the Constitution in protecting peoples second amendment rights as the other rights are just as important.
Since the ACLU will protect all amendments except the second, they've got the whole Constitution covered between them. :orly:
-
She is a national embarrassment as are the people cheering what she says, especially those in the NRA which bills it's self as trying to uphold the Constitution in protecting peoples second amendment rights as the other rights are just as important.
-
I think her remark is way over the top and she would have been better off keeping her mouth shut.
But I do have to say if a terrorist intends on coming into the country...killing/injuring maybe 100's or 1,000's of men, women, or children just to make a statement, or for some butt hurt political or racial agenda...I really don't care what they do to them if they're caught.
If someone has basically no regard for my life, the people I love, and the lives of others...what regard "should" I have for theirs?
-
I can certainly sympathise with your position but there's the little matter of proof. Waterboarding and other similar methods are used to produce confessions, but how much is such a confession worth?
Or is Palin saying that once there's a confession, THEN she waterboards terrorists?
-
I think her remark is way over the top and she would have been better off keeping her mouth shut.
But I do have to say if a terrorist intends on coming into the country...killing/injuring maybe 100's or 1,000's of men, women, or children just to make a statement, or for some butt hurt political or racial agenda...I really don't care what they do to them if they're caught.
If someone has basically no regard for my life, the people I love, and the lives of others...what regard "should" I have for theirs?
Now that I analyze it more, I think that it's unusually smart for her to have said this. Going into the midterm elections, Democrats risk being called soft on terrorism if they disagree with her, and her base already supports her statements. The issue is that a lot of Sarah Palin's supporters are single-issue voters in terms of gun rights, and the Democrats have already lost that battle. The question is how her statements would go over with moderates.
-
Or is Palin saying that once there's a confession, THEN she waterboards terrorists?
She's showing she's a good Christian who believes everyone should be baptized.
-
Or is Palin saying that once there's a confession, THEN she waterboards terrorists?
She's showing she's a good Christian who believes everyone should be baptized.
:laugh:
-
I think her remark is way over the top and she would have been better off keeping her mouth shut.
But I do have to say if a terrorist intends on coming into the country...killing/injuring maybe 100's or 1,000's of men, women, or children just to make a statement, or for some butt hurt political or racial agenda...I really don't care what they do to them if they're caught.
If someone has basically no regard for my life, the people I love, and the lives of others...what regard "should" I have for theirs?
Now that I analyze it more, I think that it's unusually smart for her to have said this. Going into the midterm elections, Democrats risk being called soft on terrorism if they disagree with her, and her base already supports her statements. The issue is that a lot of Sarah Palin's supporters are single-issue voters in terms of gun rights, and the Democrats have already lost that battle. The question is how her statements would go over with moderates.
As you say, Democrats have already lost that particular battle, so I think it's fairly safe to disagree with her, soft or not. You are simply disagreeing with a nutjob.
-
Shes made religious people upset over this comment. (I know some of the complainers)
-
I think her remark is way over the top and she would have been better off keeping her mouth shut.
But I do have to say if a terrorist intends on coming into the country...killing/injuring maybe 100's or 1,000's of men, women, or children just to make a statement, or for some butt hurt political or racial agenda...I really don't care what they do to them if they're caught.
If someone has basically no regard for my life, the people I love, and the lives of others...what regard "should" I have for theirs?
Now that I analyze it more, I think that it's unusually smart for her to have said this. Going into the midterm elections, Democrats risk being called soft on terrorism if they disagree with her, and her base already supports her statements. The issue is that a lot of Sarah Palin's supporters are single-issue voters in terms of gun rights, and the Democrats have already lost that battle. The question is how her statements would go over with moderates.
As you say, Democrats have already lost that particular battle, so I think it's fairly safe to disagree with her, soft or not. You are simply disagreeing with a nutjob.
But the Democrats have to come up with some sort of platform going into the midterm elections, and the lack of any major terrorist attacks under the Obama administration is as good as anything else they have, I think. After invading Afghanistan and Iraq under President Bush, Osama bin Laden was finally killed by the command of President Obama.
Democrats can't rely on the economy (which continues to do poorly) for a platform. There haven't been any large labor issues that I'm aware of, because there are no jobs. Obamacare is doing alright, but it's not turning out as well as President Obama implied it would, and it has been a fiasco for everyone.
-
I think her remark is way over the top and she would have been better off keeping her mouth shut.
But I do have to say if a terrorist intends on coming into the country...killing/injuring maybe 100's or 1,000's of men, women, or children just to make a statement, or for some butt hurt political or racial agenda...I really don't care what they do to them if they're caught.
If someone has basically no regard for my life, the people I love, and the lives of others...what regard "should" I have for theirs?
Now that I analyze it more, I think that it's unusually smart for her to have said this. Going into the midterm elections, Democrats risk being called soft on terrorism if they disagree with her, and her base already supports her statements. The issue is that a lot of Sarah Palin's supporters are single-issue voters in terms of gun rights, and the Democrats have already lost that battle. The question is how her statements would go over with moderates.
As you say, Democrats have already lost that particular battle, so I think it's fairly safe to disagree with her, soft or not. You are simply disagreeing with a nutjob.
But the Democrats have to come up with some sort of platform going into the midterm elections, and the lack of any major terrorist attacks under the Obama administration is as good as anything else they have, I think. After invading Afghanistan and Iraq under President Bush, Osama bin Laden was finally killed by the command of President Obama.
Democrats can't rely on the economy (which continues to do poorly) for a platform. There haven't been any large labor issues that I'm aware of, because there are no jobs. Obamacare is doing alright, but it's not turning out as well as President Obama implied it would, and it has been a fiasco for everyone.
/shrugs
Still think disagreeing with Sarah Palin should count as a merit.
-
I think her remark is way over the top and she would have been better off keeping her mouth shut.
But I do have to say if a terrorist intends on coming into the country...killing/injuring maybe 100's or 1,000's of men, women, or children just to make a statement, or for some butt hurt political or racial agenda...I really don't care what they do to them if they're caught.
If someone has basically no regard for my life, the people I love, and the lives of others...what regard "should" I have for theirs?
Now that I analyze it more, I think that it's unusually smart for her to have said this. Going into the midterm elections, Democrats risk being called soft on terrorism if they disagree with her, and her base already supports her statements. The issue is that a lot of Sarah Palin's supporters are single-issue voters in terms of gun rights, and the Democrats have already lost that battle. The question is how her statements would go over with moderates.
As you say, Democrats have already lost that particular battle, so I think it's fairly safe to disagree with her, soft or not. You are simply disagreeing with a nutjob.
But the Democrats have to come up with some sort of platform going into the midterm elections, and the lack of any major terrorist attacks under the Obama administration is as good as anything else they have, I think. After invading Afghanistan and Iraq under President Bush, Osama bin Laden was finally killed by the command of President Obama.
Democrats can't rely on the economy (which continues to do poorly) for a platform. There haven't been any large labor issues that I'm aware of, because there are no jobs. Obamacare is doing alright, but it's not turning out as well as President Obama implied it would, and it has been a fiasco for everyone.
/shrugs
Still think disagreeing with Sarah Palin should count as a merit.
It depends on what she's saying, although her chance of saying something agreeable is much less than that of the average Republican. :zoinks:
-
All she'd have to say is "I'm going to off myself" and I'd not only agree but actively help her.
-
All she'd have to say is "I'm going to off myself" and I'd not only agree but actively help her.
No way in hell I'd ever help someone that wealthy with that kind of endeavor.
-
All she'd have to say is "I'm going to off myself" and I'd not only agree but actively help her.
No way in hell I'd ever help someone that wealthy with that kind of endeavor.
But it would be my pleasure. :P
-
All she'd have to say is "I'm going to off myself" and I'd not only agree but actively help her.
No way in hell I'd ever help someone that wealthy with that kind of endeavor.
But it would be my pleasure. :P
If someone killed Sarah Palin they may be considered a cultural hero, but they'd still go the fuck to jail forever.
-
All she'd have to say is "I'm going to off myself" and I'd not only agree but actively help her.
No way in hell I'd ever help someone that wealthy with that kind of endeavor.
But it would be my pleasure. :P
:arrr:
-
Ick. That cunt needs a couple of rounds in the back of the head.
Sarah palin is a fucking moose. Crazy bitch, batshit as a diarrhea-stuffed sock full of half-starved ferrets, and a face that could cut glass.
-
She is catering to the blatant sieg-heils.
Lots of that going around lately.
-
She is catering to the blatant sieg-heils.
Lots of that going around lately.
:indeed:
Conservatives are doing well in America and Europe.
-
She is catering to the blatant sieg-heils.
Lots of that going around lately.
:indeed:
Conservatives are doing well in America and Europe.
Hopefully not for much longer. :GA:
-
There will always be another Sarah Palin, unfortunately. Today's politics are mostly the cult of the moron.
-
There will always be another Sarah Palin, unfortunately. Today's politics are mostly the cult of the moron.
That would be a good name for a horror movie. :orly:
-
There will always be another Sarah Palin, unfortunately. Today's politics are mostly the cult of the moron.
That would be a good name for a horror movie. :orly:
Sounds more like an HP Lovecraft story, or an episode of the original series of Star Trek.
-
How does being a humanitarian affect her treatment of muslims? paki filth are NOT humans, or people. Ragheads are just trash. Disgusting, subhuman shit-skinned vermin. The only thing wrong with drowning the dirty cunts is potentially contamination of the water table.
Otherwise; all muslims need to be killed, slowly and painfully as is expedient at the time.
I'm sure they think the same about you.
Omg, is this why stupidity happens?
-
There will always be another Sarah Palin, unfortunately. Today's politics are mostly the cult of the moron.
That would be a good name for a horror movie. :orly:
Unfortunately, it's fitting.
-
There will always be another Sarah Palin, unfortunately. Today's politics are mostly the cult of the moron.
That would be a good name for a horror movie. :orly:
pretty sure that is most horror movies.