Tea Party Questions

Do you see the latter as her motivation for the former?Might she support the cancellation restriction but felt compelled to oppose Obamacare in its aggregate?She is still a nutjob, but still ... is this really her motivation in this case?

I'm getting myself on the wrong side of this thing, but that is where this is leading so I do not have much in the way of choice.You and I both disagree, quite pointedly, with Palin's politics. But she is a human being. And, frankly, one does not get to be successful in any endeavour let alone politics without having some intellectual skills even if they are on the "wrong" side of the political spectrum.I imagine she is well aware of her political motivations even if we are not. Just because we see her on the nutjob side of the body politic does not mean that she is any less aware, any less motivated or any less human than are we. If this is true then there is a reason for this. I just do not happen to know what it is. And I suspect neither do you.Demonizing ones opponents as sub-human incapable of feelings and reason, especially political opponents, is a longstanding inanity with this species.Edited by AZPaul3, : title

Is this the incident you speak of? Palin in Boston I hope not.

Best evidence, Nuggin. Where is the attribution on this statement?

I did. Which is why I asked you if the story I found was the one you referred to, and asked for your source on her further statement.But here is the main point of this exercise:You relayed the story. It is up to you to provide the citations.Just because this thread deals in politics and not science or religion does not mean the rules of evidence are suspended. As we are so fond of telling the creationists here, it is not up to me to go looking for your missing citations. It is incumbent upon you to provide them up front. Worse than that.Except for the fact that Palin turned out to be substantially correct in her Revere story, she did later, after the blow-up with an apparently equally clueless media, refer to the "Boston" question as a "gotcha." Which is surprising since it was not a "gotcha" question and she answered it well enough. I think she got confused after the inane media blow-up about her answer.Frankly, if she can become that confused over something this plain then this is another indicator that she is well outside her league.But, in the end, you have made your point, finally, with evidence, and I accept that.I hope I have made mine.Now to continue: I think you are going to have a hard time showing this one.Any question? As each and every question anyone would ask of her? Really?Prove it. Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

I wanted to respond to Nuggin first. Hope you don't mind. Indeed it does. And with someone like Sarah it fits. But that wasn't the point. Was it, in fact, correct?Like religion and evolution, politics is fraught with emotion to the point where people will take anything that fits their negative view of an opponent as fact whether it is or not.After some nugging ... eh ... nudging, Nuggin provided the required evidence. Good for him.

Excellent. Then I have made my point.

Palin In Boston

quote:

---

NPR Reporter Mellisa Block: So you think basically, on the whole, Sarah Palin got her history right.

​

Prof. Robert Allison: Well, yeah, she did. And remember, she is a politician. She's not an historian ...

---

The rest of the interview gives answers to your other questions.I do not know Prof. Allison's political stance but I would think the chair of the history department at Suffolk University in Boston would know the real history and would be qualified to make such a judgement. I defer to the Professor's view.But, please, it was not my intent to defend Sarah Palin. My point was that, when asked, as you did, for sources, they should be given ... regardless of how "well known" someone might think they are.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Yeah, that's all I got. I'm not an historian and I haven't the time nor the motivation to go find anything else.If you, frog, Theo, Nuggin and others have other better authorities to share then fine, I can accept those.I'm not here to shill for Palin. I'm thinking this whole effort is getting lost in the emotional tangents. I knew I was starting out on the wrong side of a highly charged political lightning rod. See my Message 95.We all know Palin is not the sharpest tack in the box. And we all know her politics are heavy to the right and her intellect is heavy to the south. But what I have seen is the kind of needless demonization of an enemy we say we all deplore in American politics. I guess calling it to attention without being stained by the demon myself was too much to hope for.Edited by AZPaul3, : Proper syntax, please Paul.
Yes, Mom.