The Palin Mistake

Hi WK, Great article, the folks at the Onion are indeed quite prophetic. My favorite of the predictions was...

quote:

---

During the 40-minute speech, Bush also promised to bring an end to the severe war drought that plagued the nation under Clinton, assuring citizens that the U.S. will engage in at least one Gulf War-level armed conflict in the next four years.

​

"You better believe we're going to mix it up with somebody at some point during my administration," said Bush, who plans a 250 percent boost in military spending. "Unlike my predecessor, I am fully committed to putting soldiers in battle situations. Otherwise, what is the point of even having a military?"

---

Hi Huntard, Apparently not. I think you set that one up for a punchline. I think the problem is in assuming that McCain choose her. I think she was chosen for him.
And yes there was clearly a better choice, Romney, who pundits thought would be the obvious choice. Not only for V.P. but for the presidential position too. Shit even Huckabee thought he would be chosen for V.P.. Thats the way the system works, it is important to keep us in the dark and distracted. We are not suppose to fully understand American politics, or politics in general for that matter. The thinking is that we as citizens are too stupid to know whats good for us, and the country, so we are guilded ever so gently like cattle to where they feel we should be.Here's a video I hope you can appreciate,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_uXGCZenwY

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

Hi kuresu, And in 2002. Also, it may be that Biden was using the word deploy in a different manner. Not making excuses for him just giving a different perspective.Take a look,
http://www.pakistanidefenceforum.com/index.php?showtopic=...

quote:

---

Nov 25 2002, 12:53 AM

​

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (FPS) -- Pakistan's military has deployed Ghauri
missiles at various places in Pakistan to protect the country's nuclear
installations and nuclear test facilities in Baluchistan from any air or
missile attack by India.
The Ghauri missiles are now armed with nuclear
and conventional warheads. They were moved out from research
laboratories and aimed at various Indian cities as well as India's
nuclear installations on Wednesday after Pakistani intelligence sources
disclosed that an Indian Air Force, Army, or missile attack against
Pakistan or Azad Kashmir could take place in the near future.

---

Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

Hey Huntard, Unless the objective was to lose. I don't think they said "Oi" my Netherlands friend. Not at all. It should be common knowledge by now. And not just in the US, even Canada has been faulted for keeping citizens in the dark,
Government keeps public in the dark: Critics | The Star

quote:

---

Apr 07, 2008 04:30 AM
Ottawa Bureau

​

OTTAWA-Canadians are increasingly being kept in the dark by the federal government and its agencies on matters ranging from the war in Afghanistan to the most routine information, experts say.

​

Critics are alarmed at the growing trend to deny basic information that Canadians are entitled to, especially in the two years since the Conservative government came to power with a promise to be open and accountable.

​

Suzanne Legault, assistant federal information commissioner, says that government and its institutions have to "move from disclosing information on a need-to-know basis to disclosing information on the right-to-know basis."

​

Legault said the John Manley-led panel report into the Afghanistan mission "hit the nail on the head when it said the government has to understand that Canadians have an interest in what is going on in Afghanistan and various issues that the government is tackling."

​

"The government has to do a better job at disclosing information," she told the Star last week.

​

Former Ontario Liberal MPP Sean Conway, who spent 28 years in politics before leaving in 2003, said the simple truth is that Canadians have a right to know.

​

"It is one of the assumptions of a democratic society that its citizens are going to be provided with timely, relevant and understandable information," said Conway, a former cabinet minister and now special adviser at Queen's University.

​

Conway said when governments frustrate that flow of information "they are doing something quite destructive to one of the key pillars of democratic society."

---

Lets keep that to ourselves. I'll join you, then we'll drink to our success!

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

Hi fallacycop, Cynicism yes, unwarrented why?I believe I even provided a good article, not even from the US, from another country(Canada), where they too have problems with the government keeping them in the dark.If I search well enough I can probably produce many more of these articles. It is a global issue with all political system.

Hi Huntard, Or friend from the Netherlands, which was my original intention, which I obviously screwed up. lol Then put those beers away! I have a better idea! Well, this depends on what the ends are. The ends may justify the means if it truly is done for the publics benefit, maybe, but it does not seem like the 'publics benefit' is what they are after. It seeems like financial gain. Open government? Thats an oxymoron. Perhaps it may give the illusion of honesty but, as long as its a government controled by one class of society it will still only have its own interests in mind, not the peoples. Cheers mate!...now, about that weed?Edited by onifre, : grammer

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

I believe you can answer it yourself.If you had foreign business interests, and the US pretty much guilds the global market, and we currently are viewed as an oppressive nation full of bigots and racists(like Buzsaw ) who want to impose western culture throughout the world, and this type of mass opinion of the US is causing problems with foreign affairs, who would YOU want to be the face of America, Obama or McCain?If you remove the illusion of a 2 party system, and see it as a One Class System, then you may begin to see what the real interests are.

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

I don't think they insist, I think it's inevitable...

All I could find was this,Palin Didn't Know Africa Is A Continent, Says Fox News Reporter (VIDEO) | HuffPost Latest News

quote:

---

However, perhaps one of the most astounding and previously unknown tidbits about Sarah Palin has to do with her already dubious grasp of geography. According to Fox News Chief Political Correspondent Carl Cameron, there was great concern within the McCain campaign that Palin lacked "a degree of knowledgeability necessary to be a running mate, a vice president, a heartbeat away from the presidency," in part because she didn't know which countries were in NAFTA, and she "didn't understand that Africa was a continent, rather than a series, a country just in itself."

---

Well, it's coming from FoxNews so it may still be hard to believe.[abe:]http://blogs.reuters.com/...hanistan-our-neighboring-country

quote:

---

SAN FRANCISCO - Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin called Afghanistan “our neighboring country” on Sunday in a speech that could revive questions over her tendency to stumble into linguistic knots.

​

Three days after a mostly gaffe-free debate performance, the Alaska governor fumbled during a speech in which she praised U.S. soldiers for “fighting terrorism and protecting us and our democratic values”.

​

“They are also building schools for the Afghan children so that there is hope and opportunity in our neighboring country of Afghanistan,” she told several hundred supporters at a fundraising event in San Francisco.

---

Palin adds,

quote:

---

“I was just trying to give Tina Fey more material ” job security for Saturday Night Live,” Palin said.

---

Edited by onifre, : add other source

It's the use of it in a sentence that gives it context. Look at the way it was used in a sentence,

quote:

---

bring into effective action; utilize :they are not always able to deploy this skill

---

Clearly Biden was not using it with this definition. You are forcing ambiguity on it. It is not ambiguous, the statement was clear, and in proper context as per the first definition.

quote:

---

move (troops) into position for military action : forces were deployed at strategic locations.
” [ intrans. ] (of troops) move into position for such action : the air force began to deploy forward.

---

That is because we carried the deployment further, but initially they were deployed to a ready state. Then, they carried out the mission.

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

Being that im a former Marine(I was 18 and and stupid-lol) I can tell you that troops are considered a weapon. So, yes, if troops mobilize you are deploying them, they are a weapon. If tanks are mobilized you are deploying them as well, they are a weapon. If missiles are placed into position you have deployed them, they are all considered weapons. There is no difference between troops, tanks, or missiles, they are considered US government property and weapons for war, and all 3 get deployed.[abe:]
You don't need me to say that the US deployed missiles, Russia has already warned us about it.
http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN2...

quote:

---

Russia warns US of missile deployment
NDTV Correspondent
Thursday, November 06, 2008, (Moscow)

​

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier has said Russia was sending out the 'wrong signal', after Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said that he would deploy missiles in Russia's Baltic Sea territory, in response to US missile defence plans in eastern Europe.

​

Russian President Dmitri A Medvedev in his first state of the nation address on Wednesday, had greeted his future American counterpart president-elect Senator Barack Obama, with a promise to place short-range missiles on Russia's western border if Washington proceeds with its planned missile defense systems in Eastern Europe.

​

In a speech to the federal assembly, Mr Medvedev noted that Russia has 'no inherent conflict with America' and invited the new administration to start afresh with Moscow.

---

I would like to add though, if you notice the beauty of American euphemisms, Russia was going deploy missiles in response to our missile defence plans in eastern Europe. It should read "Russia deploys missiles in reaponse to the US missile deployment in eastern Europe". We didn't want the US to sound like the aggressors though. Edited by onifre, : added russian article

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

It's the exact same thing, only we wear a uniform. Barracks at night are a frat-houses.And in my defence I joined in 94, when Clinton was at the helm, it was safe for us. I would not have joined with GWB in charge. Then again im 33 now so I don't know what the 18 year old me would have done with a GWB admin. I was really gun-ho at 18 so I probably would have joined anways.

I couldn't agree with you more. I too did not vote.Also, anyone who was following the election could clearly see that Obama was going to win. You had to sift through the bs on tv to see it but, it was at least clear to me that he would take the presidency.

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky