McCain's Running mate

[Clodfobble]

I absolutely agree that people's private lives, in general, affect their viability for public office. What I take issue with is your assertion of what this will mean, not for you as a voter, but for other people as voters. This "scandal" is not a scandal to social conservatives, but social liberals wish it were, because they think they see a perverse justice being served.

[Radar]

Her whole career has been spent talking about unrealistic things like abstinence. She's a holy roller trying to shove her Christian morality down everyone else's throats through legislation, and now it turns out, like most zealots, she's got her own problems to worry about.

Matthew 7: 1-5

1"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

3"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

[lookout123]

Originally Posted by Radar

Her whole career has been spent talking about unrealistic things like abstinence.

True, abstinence is just about as unrealistic as say getting even a tenth of the country to believe your views on taxes, national defense, or... really just about any damn thing you've hung your flag on. Completely unrealistic. But here's the thing, I don't consider you a nutjob because I disagree with you. Why is it that she must be a nutjob if she disagrees with you?

[Radar]

Originally Posted by lookout123

True, abstinence is just about as unrealistic as say getting even a tenth of the country to believe your views on taxes, national defense, or... really just about any damn thing you've hung your flag on. Completely unrealistic. But here's the thing, I don't consider you a nutjob because I disagree with you. Why is it that she must be a nutjob if she disagrees with you?

The truth doesn't change based on the number of people who believe in it. I contend that anyone who thinks evolution is false and creationism is true is mentally deficient. It's not a matter of disagreement, it's a matter of having the ability to discern science from fairy tales.

The majority of the world believed the world was flat. The majority of the United States believe income taxes are legal. The majority of America is stupid enough to think the federal government has powers other than those enumerated in the Constitution. They are all equally correct in their beliefs.

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

What I take issue with is your assertion of what this will mean, not for you as a voter, but for other people as voters.

Why not? Should I limit speculation to liberal moderate males of my age. How about if I only speculate about the voting patterns of men born on my exact birth date?

I believe that anyone can be a political pundit and speculate about the voting habits and opinions of any group they want. Otherwise, we'd need an army of correspondents on Fox and MSNBC to represent every possible voting block in the country. And try to find an Albanian-American neocon pre-op transexual when news breaks on a Friday night in the Balkans.

I believe that independents will be rolling their eyes when she answers the 'abstinence only education' question in the debates. Hard core social conservatives may stay with her, but she will probably lose the more pragmatic ones.