The never-ending "Sarah Palin should STFU" thread

[mook]

I was watching Bill Gates last night on Charlie Rose. He said at some point America needs to decide if a surgery to prolong the life of a 78 year old by a year is worth the price of firing two school teachers. The default answer right now is, "Yes." Because it's the old people who vote.

Most of the major costly decisions we are making now are for the short-term benefit of the elderly and at the long-term cost of the young, and nobody is really discussing that. The current dialog is all about "death panels" and anti- vs pro- government.

I think it's kind of sad and short-sighted that the term "death panel" even came about. It's made it that much harder to even have this discussion. If we really do want to reduce or eliminate the deficit, we simply have to address this issue.

 

[maxiep]

I was watching Bill Gates last night on Charlie Rose. He said at some point America needs to decide if a surgery to prolong the life of a 78 year old by a year is worth the price of firing two school teachers. The default answer right now is, "Yes." Because it's the old people who vote.

Most of the major costly decisions we are making now are for the short-term benefit of the elderly and at the long-term cost of the young, and nobody is really discussing that. The current dialog is all about "death panels" and anti- vs pro- government.

I think it's kind of sad and short-sighted that the term "death panel" even came about. It's made it that much harder to even have this discussion. If we really do want to reduce or eliminate the deficit, we simply have to address this issue.

It's a false choice. Ask yourself why teachers have to cost so much. Next, ask why costs for health care have to be so high. Both can be substantially lower.

Health care only has to be rationed when the government runs it. The three largest employers in the world are the Chinese Army, the Indian Railway and the British NHS. The first two serve over a billion people each. The third serves 60 million people. Of course there is going to be rationing of health care when so much has to go to administration.

Health care is a personal choice. It's none of the government's business.

 

[agoo]

I'm dating a teacher making 20k a year at a private school. She has a Masters and certification in this state to teach special ed. She's only at a private school because her education level prices her out of public schools. Her job doesn't provide health insurance.

Exactly how much less do you propose they could be making? There's already a negative consequence to adding to your qualifications.

If you want to discuss tenure and pension plans and such, I'll listen. Lowering their current compensation is ridiculous.

 

[maxiep]

I'm dating a teacher making 20k a year at a private school. She has a Masters and certification in this state to teach special ed. She's only at a private school because her education level prices her out of public schools. Her job doesn't provide health insurance.

Exactly how much less do you propose they could be making? If you want to discuss tenure and pension plans and such, I'll listen. Lowering their current compensation is ridiculous.

She has chosen her profession and her specific job. She could have passed on that job if she would have wished. Clearly she's getting a psychic benefit from being a teacher at a private school.

 

[PapaG]

Where am I? Who are these people? What happened to Sarah Palin's comments on Egypt?

 

[Denny Crane]

Bill O'Reilly comes off terribly in that video. I understand his "In any private concern, you're out" comment, but the rest of it just makes me feel sorry for Frank for even having to endure that "interview".

No, O'Reilly comes across like EVERY honorable reporter should. Frank basically killed the housing market while in charge of it, and told people Fannie and Freddie were in solid shape going forward. They're still getting bailed out, FWIW.

Frank is like, "no blood, no foul" and not accountable to anyone but the few idiots (compared to the whole country) who keep voting for him.

 

[agoo]

She has chosen her profession and her specific job. She could have passed on that job if she would have wished. Clearly she's getting a psychic benefit from being a teacher at a private school.

After not hearing from about 150 applications, she took the first offer she got. Actually the second offer, since the first was at a Halloween costume shop.

 

[chris_in_pdx]

After not hearing from about 150 applications, she took the first offer she got. Actually the second offer, since the first was at a Halloween costume shop.

Forget it, agoo. Some people think that teachers are just glorified babysitters and that the job of teaching young people is easy. That they work 6 hours a day, 5 days a week (not taking into account the INSANE AMOUNT of holidays/days off that teachers get) for 9 months out of the year. That they are lazy hacks who couldn't work in the REAL WORLD, so they just stand in front of classes of disinterested children who fail... but their failure isn't because the kids won't learn, it's because the teacher is incompetent. And making 20k a year with no benefits is about what minimum wage babysitters make, so that's about right.

Did I miss anything? Or maybe these people have no clue what it takes to teach a child, especially when 80% of the kids have no help or support when they go home. I guess I'm just a filthy commie pinko Lib Union-cheerleader for thinking that.

 

[PapaG]

Forget it, agoo. Some people think that teachers are just glorified babysitters and that the job of teaching young people is easy. That they work 6 hours a day, 5 days a week (not taking into account the INSANE AMOUNT of holidays/days off that teachers get) for 9 months out of the year. That they are lazy hacks who couldn't work in the REAL WORLD, so they just stand in front of classes of disinterested children who fail... but their failure isn't because the kids won't learn, it's because the teacher is incompetent. And making 20k a year with no benefits is about what minimum wage babysitters make, so that's about right.

Did I miss anything? Or maybe these people have no clue what it takes to teach a child, especially when 80% of the kids have no help or support when they go home. I guess I'm just a filthy commie pinko Lib Union-cheerleader for thinking that.

Hey Chris, since you popped back into your thread, would you mind telling me what Palin said about Egypt that had you so upset?

Watch the Feinstein video from this morninging that I posted prior to answering my question.

 

[PapaG]

I'm dating a teacher making 20k a year at a private school. She has a Masters and certification in this state to teach special ed. She's only at a private school because her education level prices her out of public schools. Her job doesn't provide health insurance.

Exactly how much less do you propose they could be making? There's already a negative consequence to adding to your qualifications.

If you want to discuss tenure and pension plans and such, I'll listen. Lowering their current compensation is ridiculous.

Perhaps if school voucher programs weren't despised by the Democrats (a successful program in DC, for example, was discontinued by the current President), your girlfriend would have more students able to attend her school, and her wages would increase with the enrollment?

 

[chris_in_pdx]

Perhaps if school voucher programs weren't despised by the Democrats (a successful program in DC, for example, was discontinued by the current President), your girlfriend would have more students able to attend her school, and her wages would increase with the enrollment?

That may be the biggest strawman argument leap I've ever read. Bravo!

 

[chris_in_pdx]

Hey Chris, since you popped back into your thread, would you mind telling me what Palin said about Egypt that had you so upset?

I don't need to watch any video. In my opinion, "celebrity faux politicians" have no fucking business questioning the motives or actions of any governmental official, let alone the President of the United States, ESPECIALLY when it comes to foreign policy matters.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I don't need to watch any video. In my opinion, "celebrity faux politicians" have no fucking business questioning the motives or actions of any governmental official, let alone the President of the United States, ESPECIALLY when it comes to foreign policy matters.

Who, pray tell, is permitted to question the actions of government officials?

 

[PapaG]

I don't need to watch any video. In my opinion, "celebrity faux politicians" have no fucking business questioning the motives or actions of any governmental official, let alone the President of the United States, ESPECIALLY when it comes to foreign policy matters.

So, in other words, it's a personal issue with Palin. She was the GOP candidate for VP, and is mentioned as a potential presidential contender.

If Palin isn't allowed to question "any government official", who is?

What a stupid fucking post, Chris. Really.

 

[PapaG]

That may be the biggest strawman argument leap I've ever read. Bravo!

More students = more $$$ = higher wages.

You do realize how a private school works compared to a public school, right?

 

[chris_in_pdx]

More students = more $$$ = higher wages.

You do realize how a private school works compared to a public school, right?

What in God's name does that have anything to do with agoo's post? Nothing. It's just you deflecting the conversation to something that promotes your viewpoints.

 

[chris_in_pdx]

So, in other words, it's a personal issue with Palin. She was the GOP candidate for VP, and is mentioned as a potential presidential contender.

If Palin isn't allowed to question "any government official", who is?

What a stupid fucking post, Chris. Really.

Her opinion means as much to me as yours, Papa, at least on political matters: nothing. However, when either of you spout off a viewpoint born of ignorance and portray it as fact, I'm gonna call it what it is.

 

[chris_in_pdx]

Who, pray tell, is permitted to question the actions of government officials?

Someone with an inkling of what's actually going on.

 

[PapaG]

What in God's name does that have anything to do with agoo's post? Nothing. It's just you deflecting the conversation to something that promotes your viewpoints.

He was stating that his girlfriend only makes $20k w/out health benefits. Increasing the pool of potential students would bring more money to that school. It's simple economics. What do you have against less-fortunate students having the opportunity, via vouchers, to go to private schools, with an ancillary benefit being more tuition money to filter to the staff?

 

[PapaG]

Her opinion means as much to me as yours, Papa, at least on political matters: nothing. However, when either of you spout off a viewpoint born of ignorance and portray it as fact, I'm gonna call it what it is.

You're yet to actually address the substance of her words, which the Diane Feinstein video basically parrots. I can only assume that yours is the viewpoint born of ignorance, since you won't adress Palin's questions, and you won't watch the short video of Feinstein stating some of the same concerns.

I get it. Whatever she says is irrelevant to you because you don't like her. That doesn't mean that a less-rabid partisan can't read through their own bias and realize that she has some legitimate concerns.

 

[PapaG]

Someone with an inkling of what's actually going on.

Such as ... ?

If not the most recent GOP VP candidate, and a person who may run in the GOP primaries, then who can ask questions of the Obama administration.

Also, how old are you, Chris? I'm curious.

 

[maxiep]

Someone with an inkling of what's actually going on.

Who decides who has "an inkling of what's actually going on"? It look to me as if you think all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others. I think the First Amendment should hold sway, there should be vigorous debate and the best ideas should win. We'll agree to disagree.

 

[chris_in_pdx]

Who decides who has "an inkling of what's actually going on"? It look to me as if you think all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others. I think the First Amendment should hold sway, there should be vigorous debate and the best ideas should win. We'll agree to disagree.

Agreeing to disagree is all fine and dandy, however, it seems to be the style into todays 24/7 news machines for talking heads (which I equate Palin to) to bleat out semi-outrageous claims based on nothing more than ignorance and intended to "reframe the discussion" in a manner that intelligence and common sense takes a back seat to fear and emotion. And as someone who feels that, if left unchallenged and unchecked, that line of action will lead this country and this world to what Mike Judge described (tounge-in-cheek) in his movie "Idiocracy", I am less inclined to let it slide. If that makes me a "hater" or an opponant of the First Amendment in your worldview, then so be it.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

in a manner that intelligence and common sense takes a back seat to fear and emotion.

Claiming that Palin is "dumb as a bag of rocks" and should "STFU" without addressing the content of her comments seems to me very much like letting common sense take a back seat to emotion. Why is it OK for you but not for her? Because she has influence and you don't?

 

[chris_in_pdx]

Claiming that Palin is "dumb as a bag of rocks" and should "STFU" without addressing the content of her comments seems to me very much like letting common sense take a back seat to emotion. Why is it OK for you but not for her? Because she has influence and you don't?

You are absolutely correct, and I admit that I am not some role-model when it comes to such behavior. However, no one shoves a microphone in my face at every opportunity and asks my opinion about everything and broadcasts it to millions of people who use my opinions as the basis of their own out of laziness or disinteretst. Such people in my mind have a responsibility to measure their remarks and opinions in the realm of facts and learned opinions, rather than kneejerk statements based on faulty or biased assumptions. Fairly old-school and naiive of me, I agree.

 

[PapaG]

You are absolutely correct, and I admit that I am not some role-model when it comes to such behavior. However, no one shoves a microphone in my face at every opportunity and asks my opinion about everything and broadcasts it to millions of people who use my opinions as the basis of their own out of laziness or disinteretst. Such people in my mind have a responsibility to measure their remarks and opinions in the realm of facts and learned opinions, rather than kneejerk statements based on faulty or biased assumptions. Fairly old-school and naiive of me, I agree.

Are you going to address Palin's comments, or are you just going to continue with this emotional hissy fit? It seems to me that this would be a great opportunity to illustrate how Palin's concerns about the transfer of leadership in Egypt are "dangerous", yet Diane Feinstein's words are not.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Such people in my mind have a responsibility to measure their remarks and opinions in the realm of facts and learned opinions, rather than kneejerk statements based on faulty or biased assumptions. Fairly old-school and naiive of me, I agree.

But if you simply dismiss all comments she makes because of the source, how can you know whether or not her remarks are measured "in the realm of facts and learned opinions"? Similarly, you say that anyone "with an inkling of what's going on" has business questioning the elected officials, but if you don't analyze what she actually says, how can you state with such certainty that she doesn't meet your criterion?

 

[chris_in_pdx]

Are you going to address Palin's comments, or are you just going to continue with this emotional hissy fit? It seems to me that this would be a great opportunity to illustrate how Palin's concerns about the transfer of leadership in Egypt are "dangerous", yet Diane Feinstein's words are not.

Feinstein is the Senate Intelligence Committee chair, and she has a right to voice a learned opinion on the matter, which she did, voicing legitimate concerns of minority radical Islamic factions using the crisis to seize control, and that the US had an interest in making sure that didn't happen.

She didn't use the crisis to score political points against a potential future election opponant by making accusations that the White House was "asleep at the wheel" and "avoiding informing the American people" about the Egyptian situation, which was about as far away from the truth as humanly possible. But for the millions of idiots that think Palin's opinions means more than a pile of shit, her words become their gospel. And that's what's dangerous.

 

[chris_in_pdx]

But if you simply dismiss all comments she makes because of the source, how can you know whether or not her remarks are measured "in the realm of facts and learned opinions"?

How many times does an idiot have to make idiotic statements before you decide that they are an idiot and view anything they say in such a light?

And if you reply with "every time I read one of your posts", I'll rep you as correct

 

[PapaG]

But if you simply dismiss all comments she makes because of the source, how can you know whether or not her remarks are measured "in the realm of facts and learned opinions"?

Chris seems to be unwilling to actually address anything substantive. I'm not sure if the reason why he won't is an example cognitive dissonance, wilful ignorance, or is merely 100% emotional.

If it's the latter, he should probably start a thread each time Sarah Palin comments on anything, to be consistent. If it's the first or second, I wonder why that is the case.