Palin: pretty, charming, and 1/4" deep

[Vylo]

First off, I can't imagine that scenario being the only option. Second, our soldiers aren't equipped as suicide bombers. Moot point

Whatever it takes means whatever it takes. No matter how unlikely the scenario.

Would you billing willing to order that soldier?

 

[JoshuaW]

Here is the link to the full ABC interview with Palin. Isn't that a nice seaplane she has tied up to her dock, next to her lake, beneath the mountains?

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=5793131

 

[MachZer0]

Whatever it takes means whatever it takes. No matter how unlikely the scenario.

Would you billing willing to order that soldier?

Sorry, but it's an irrational scenario. I don't recall Palin saying she'd be willing toconsider irrational scenarios

 

[Cabal]

Sorry, but it's an irrational scenario. I don't recall Palin saying she'd be willing toconsider irrational scenarios

Where'd the goalposts get to?

So, guess both sides are unwilling to do "whatever it takes" then.

 

[JoshuaW]

Sorry, but it's an irrational scenario. I don't recall Palin saying she'd be willing toconsider irrational scenarios

Mach, "whatever it takes" means "by any means necessary".

 

[Donkeytron]

Mach, "whatever it takes" means "by any means necessary". "Irrational scenario" is the excuse of crybabies who do not possess the will to achieve victory.

Sounds familiar to the "we need to torture the poo poo out of whoever we want because what if someday there was a ticking clock scenario, a la 24?" I seem to remember that as a commonly given (hell, the only) justification for violating the constitution.

 

[christalee4]

Sarah Palin is clearly out of her league, in terms of international politics. And with the new Wall Street earthquake, even more so. The constant barrage that this economy is "fundamentally strong", is so false, and so not believed by our populace, yet echoed by the administration and candidate who back her,, makes her very candidacy a JOKE.

The American people do not want another echo-er and backer of the same poor policies that have raped this economy for the last 8 years.

 

[MachZer0]

Where'd the goalposts get to?

So, guess both sides are unwilling to do "whatever it takes" then.

Goalposts? Can anyone present a rational scenario whereby requiring a US soldier to become a suicide bomber would be "whatever it takes"?

 

[Cabal]

Goalposts? Can anyone present a rational scenario whereby requiring a US soldier to become a suicide bomber would be "whatever it takes"?

Just try the usual definitions of the words "whatever it takes."

Y'know. In English. Pretty sure rational and irrational are subsets of "whatever."

But it's ok, we know that this was all soundbite talk from Palin in the first place. We won't judge.

 

[MachZer0]

Just try the usual definitions of the words "whatever it takes."

Y'know. In English. Pretty sure rational and irrational are subsets of "whatever."

But it's ok, we know that this was all soundbite talk from Palin in the first place. We won't judge.

I'm not certain you actually followed the discussion. If you had, you could have provided a scenario, a rational scenario, whereby the only thing that could be done to kill a group of terrorists would be for an American soldier to become a suicde bomber. If you come up with one, please, PLEASE give it to us.

 

[Cabal]

I'm not certain you actually followed the discussion. If you had, you could have provided a scenario, a rational scenario, whereby the only thing that could be done to kill a group of terrorists would be for an American soldier to become a suicde bomber. If you come up with one, please, PLEASE give it to us.

Any mission classified as a "suicide mission"?

I'm not certain you can even follow your own VP candidate's terrible rhetoric. All scenarios are covered in the statement "whatever it takes," both rational and irrational. One of those scenarios was given to you and you immediately started redefining left and right to avoid dealing with it.

But hey, you carry right on with this line of thought, it just makes your words look all the more hollow when you criticise the opposition for being "guilty" of the exact same thing you are. Of course, it would be so much easier to admit it was a terrible answer of Palin's in the first place....but I guess that's asking too much of you.

 

[MachZer0]

Any mission classified as a "suicide mission"?

I'm not certain you can even follow your own VP candidate's terrible rhetoric. All scenarios are covered in the statement "whatever it takes," both rational and irrational. One of those scenarios was given to you and you immediately started redefining left and right to avoid dealing with it.

But hey, you carry right on with this line of thought, it just makes your words look all the more hollow when you criticise the opposition for being "guilty" of the exact same thing you are. Of course, it would be so much easier to admit it was a terrible answer of Palin's in the first place....but I guess that's asking too much of you.

Then please provide a scenario whereby "whatever it takes" would require a suicide mission by a US soldier. I'd love to hear it

 

[JoshuaW]

Then please provide a scenario whereby "whatever it takes" would require a suicide mission by a US soldier. I'd love to hear it

If you have an opinion about Sarah Palin, we'd love to hear it. Otherwise this thread is not about suicide missions by US soldiers. Thank you for sharing. Buhbye.

 

[Cabal]

Then please provide a scenario whereby "whatever it takes" would require a suicide mission by a US soldier. I'd love to hear it

Why bother? Most adminstrations, regardless of party in power, have got a fair few each under their belt. Seems to be standard operating procedure.

That being said, this is but one scenario in the myriad of "whatever it takes", and you sure as heck aren't going to bluff your way out of all them.

Maybe you could ask Sarah Palin about the practical limits of this rhetoric? I guarantee you'll be disappointed.

 

[Dworkin]

Don't let him derail the thread.

Sarah Palin is not qualified for such a high office. Her past actions makes her questionable.

 

[MachZer0]

Why bother? Most adminstrations, regardless of party in power, have got a fair few each under their belt. Seems to be standard operating procedure.

That being said, this is but one scenario in the myriad of "whatever it takes", and you sure as heck aren't going to bluff your way out of all them.

Maybe you could ask Sarah Palin about the practical limits of this rhetoric? I guarantee you'll be disappointed.

I guess no such scenario exists. Nuff said on that

 

[Cabal]

I guess no such scenario exists. Nuff said on that

Not my impractical rhetoric, bud. Given Palin's inexperience, I'm sure you're far from nuff said from her and it's gonna be painful reaching that point. Enjoy. And good luck with the English/goalposts.

 

[Ampoliros]

How about Susan Collins? She's a uniter and pretty well on the side of republicans when it comes to issue.

Collins wouldn't bring any balance to the ticket, wouldn't energize the republican base, and is in general a pretty bad and unenthusiastic public speaker (I know, I met her ). She'd be easy to align with the attacks Obama has been making towards McCain of 'more of the same', considering she votes with the Republicans quite often as well.

I think the big issue is that it puts more Republican Senate seats at risk - if McCain crashes and burns, he'd probably burn Collins with him, meaning the Democrats might seriously get up to 60+ seats. Bad for the Republicans.

Which part of "whatever it takes" seems to be vague to you?

"Whatever it takes" is a cover for saying "I have no idea, but I'll make a decision when I have to"

 

[TheNewWorldMan]

Let's face it: anytime either Democrats or Republicans try and make their candidates look good, it's lipstick on a pig. They're following the two-party system right off a cliff.

 

[TheNewWorldMan]

A very salient picture: