To everyone trying to understand Sarah Palin, here’s your road map to last night’s debate:
[From Adennak. Via Zoli Erdos and Enterprise Irregulars.]
IT Project Failures
Michael KrigsmanSarah Palin debate flowchart [off-topic]
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
More from “IT Project Failures”
Topics
Michael Krigsman is a recognized authority on the causes and prevention of IT failures.
Disclosure
Michael Krigsman
Michael Krigsman writes and speaks about technology in a manner that most observers consider to be fair and balanced. Michael believes that writing about IT failures, which often have complex causes, creates a unique obligation to be reasonable and accurate in both reporting and analysis.
Michael maintains active personal and professional relationships with enterprise technology buyers, vendors, analyst firms (or individual analysts), consultants, and system integrators. As CEO of Asuret, Michael sells and delivers paid services to members of these same groups.
Vendors regularly reimburse Michael's out-of-pocket travel expenses to attend industry conferences and events. Conference organizers frequently waive entry fees when Michael attends industry events. Michael often speaks at industry conferences and events.
He is a member of the Enterprise Irregulars, a loose association of consultants, investors, industry representatives, analysts, and users of enterprise software.
For daily updates on Michael's activities, follow him on Twitter.
Biography
Michael Krigsman
Michael Krigsman is CEO of Asuret, Inc., a consulting company dedicated to reducing technology implementation failures. Asuret's suite of software tools improve the success rate of enterprise software deployments by quantifying and measuring governance issues that cause most project failures. Michael led the research effort underlying Asuret's model of collective intelligence and its practical application to reducing IT failures in consulting environments. He is a recognized authority on the causes and prevention of IT failures and is frequently quoted in the press on IT project and related CIO issues. He is considered an enterprise software industry "influencer" and provides advice to technology buyers, vendors, and services firms.
Previously, Michael served as CEO of Cambridge Publications, which develops tools and processes for software implementations and related business practice automation projects. Michael has been involved with hundreds of software development projects, for companies ranging from small startups to Fortune 500 organizations. Michael graduated with an M.B.A. from Boston University and a B.A. from Bard College. He is a Board member of the America's Cup Hall of Fame and the Herreshoff Marine Museum in Bristol, RI.
Just In
You ever heard of a joke?
I imagine the reason was to make you laugh.
Just a shame that most people have lost their sense of humor.
I like Sarah Palin, I'd never vote for her, but she makes me laugh unintentionally.
It's not that I wouldn't vote for a women either, she is as a person (gender completely irrelivant) the perfect example of someone who should never be president.
She has been caught in an abuse of power, misuse of funds, and has a severe lack of knowledge about politics (she is quoted as saying the vice president runs the senate).
She could have any combination of chromosomes under this sun and I'd still never vote for her.
I think gender has absolutely nothing to do with reasons to vote for a candidate. As I said in another post on here, I wish women ran everything.
Personally I think the world would be a lot simpler if women were the 'piggish' gender that treated men like sexual objects. Most guys would live happy lives, women would get to have their place in the world (IE running it), and we'd almost all live happily ever after
.
Ok...that's a lie but damn wouldn't it be great? As a guy I wish my GF thought men were inferior and only good for raising kids and making babies. Duuuude...(I've raised a child before so it's not naivity on my part in reference to that).
Just a shame that most people have lost their sense of humor.
I like Sarah Palin, I'd never vote for her, but she makes me laugh unintentionally.
It's not that I wouldn't vote for a women either, she is as a person (gender completely irrelivant) the perfect example of someone who should never be president.
She has been caught in an abuse of power, misuse of funds, and has a severe lack of knowledge about politics (she is quoted as saying the vice president runs the senate).
She could have any combination of chromosomes under this sun and I'd still never vote for her.
I think gender has absolutely nothing to do with reasons to vote for a candidate. As I said in another post on here, I wish women ran everything.
Personally I think the world would be a lot simpler if women were the 'piggish' gender that treated men like sexual objects. Most guys would live happy lives, women would get to have their place in the world (IE running it), and we'd almost all live happily ever after
.Ok...that's a lie but damn wouldn't it be great? As a guy I wish my GF thought men were inferior and only good for raising kids and making babies. Duuuude...(I've raised a child before so it's not naivity on my part in reference to that).
I think that is whole problem with politicians these days. They over exaggerate and they are too complicated in their own minds for their own good. I think Palin is a real down to earth American that can take things on with a focus on the future and not the past. She may not know every little detail about everything, but that is not a problem for me. I don't expect everyone to know everything. Its a matter of sound judgement and decision making. She is just a threat so thats why she gets all this negative attention from people that fear her. I think she is the best candidate of all 4 that are in the race.
Is due to Americans making excuses for her, such her language being "home spun" instead of "unproffessional," or her answers being "down to earth" instead of "dodging the question." Unfortunately with American education, too many will find that Palin is "just like them."
Although I admit she did better than I expected, her performance was still too casual and too devoid of substance. She didn't give voters much of any new information other than the fact that she "sometimes disagrees with McCain" and believes that Americans "want change."
Although I admit she did better than I expected, her performance was still too casual and too devoid of substance. She didn't give voters much of any new information other than the fact that she "sometimes disagrees with McCain" and believes that Americans "want change."
you mean "since the dawn of the human race", then i agree with your first 2 sentences. 
however i can't agree about palin. but this isn't really the place for that sort of debate.
however i can't agree about palin. but this isn't really the place for that sort of debate.
"Down to earth" seems to be the new political catch-phrase for concepts like "stupid," "uninformed," "knee-jerk," "unanalytical" and "dogmatic."
Being president of the U.S. is complicated business, and requires something more than "down to earth" simplistic thought. Have we learned nothing from the last 8 years? I know a lot of down to earth people I enjoy hoisting a beer with, but I don't want them running my IS dept, let alone my country.
Being president of the U.S. is complicated business, and requires something more than "down to earth" simplistic thought. Have we learned nothing from the last 8 years? I know a lot of down to earth people I enjoy hoisting a beer with, but I don't want them running my IS dept, let alone my country.
What do consider smart? I mean I know a ton of people that are book smart, but can't make a common sense desicion to save their life. Just because you are a harvard lawyer doesn't mean you know how to make desicions that could affect us for years to come. Heck I think many lawyers know how to come off as smart, but in reality they are not. People that are down to earth know how to look at the facts and not their emotions to make a good desicion. Every Dem I know gets all emotional and can't hear my facts, why is that? Makes me wonder.
...that it might be the way you present those so-called facts? For instance, "every Dem"? Every single Dem you've ever come across gets emotional? Some? Sure. Every? To me, that indicates that either you're not presenting those facts in a clear, non-partisan manner, or, back to "every", you just tend to overexaggerate. But that's just my impression taken from what you posted.
Maybe I should have been more specific. The ones that do not want to believe the facts that I tell them throw around emotional facts that they somehow came up with. I only use facts that come from legit sources and I know are not made up. I didn't mean it literally that "Every" Dem is that way, but increasingly I am hearing these things and having to correct people as much as I hate having to do that. I do see the Dem party hiding the facts and playing to peoples unwillingness to be educated in this country. Its funny how if most people knew how to be self sufficient and work hard the Dem party would have a tough existence. Here in Ohio they are letting people register and vote in one easy step without any ID to verify that you are who you say you are and guess who is busing homeless and college kids and whoever else that will vote for Obama....."ACORN" A group that is under investigation for voter fraud and where Obama was a lawyer for them. Awesome country we live in now. Let the government do it all, da heck with grassroots community values. Take from me and give to joe "lazy bum". Let the rich pay over 60% of their money to the government, awesome. Let education rot with unions that protect bad teachers, awesome. How is this change going to help a damn thing. Think people.
I couldn't reply to your post because the message level was at the max. But I did want to reply to a couple of your points.
Here in Ohio they are letting people register and vote in one easy step without any ID to verify that you are who you say you are and guess who is busing homeless and college kids and whoever else that will vote for Obama....."ACORN" A group that is under investigation for voter fraud and where Obama was a lawyer for them.
Voter fraud is a serious accusation. Now, you say ACORN is accused of voter fraud, but is anyone claiming that the act of busing in the homeless and college kids is somehow being done fraudulently? In all honesty, even the homeless have a right to vote. Also, there's a huge difference in bringing people IN to vote and keeping people OUT of the voting booth. There have been plenty of instances of voter disenfranchisement in minority communities, where somehow, voters registered as Democrat found their names had disappeared from the rolls, even though they'd voted in a previous election, so they should have still been enrolled.
Also, do you know who was accused on more than one occasion of outright voter intimidation by trying to block blacks from voting? Former Chief Justice William Rehnquist (before he was on the Supreme Court, of course).
Its funny how if most people knew how to be self sufficient and work hard the Dem party would have a tough existence.
Substitute "big business" for "people" and you you'll find that "Republican" easily replaces "Dem" in that sentence.
I only use facts that come from legit sources and I know are not made up.
A good "for instance" would really help drive home your point on this one. I'm all eyes.
The ones that do not want to believe the facts that I tell them throw around emotional facts that they somehow came up with.
I assure you...that happens on both sides of the political divide.
A good example where Biden should have hit back at Palin was when she said, "Joe, you guys were for the war before you were against the war. See? That's why America needs the straight talk that John McCain and I provide." He should have said, "Gov. Palin. Weren't you FOR the brdige before you were AGAINST the bridge? Is THAT the type of straight talk you're offering the American people? And, when you claim that you said, "thanks, but no thanks" to the bridge, didn't you in fact mean "no thanks on the bridge, but thanks for the money that was meant for the bridge but you kept anyway?"
Here in Ohio they are letting people register and vote in one easy step without any ID to verify that you are who you say you are and guess who is busing homeless and college kids and whoever else that will vote for Obama....."ACORN" A group that is under investigation for voter fraud and where Obama was a lawyer for them.
Voter fraud is a serious accusation. Now, you say ACORN is accused of voter fraud, but is anyone claiming that the act of busing in the homeless and college kids is somehow being done fraudulently? In all honesty, even the homeless have a right to vote. Also, there's a huge difference in bringing people IN to vote and keeping people OUT of the voting booth. There have been plenty of instances of voter disenfranchisement in minority communities, where somehow, voters registered as Democrat found their names had disappeared from the rolls, even though they'd voted in a previous election, so they should have still been enrolled.
Also, do you know who was accused on more than one occasion of outright voter intimidation by trying to block blacks from voting? Former Chief Justice William Rehnquist (before he was on the Supreme Court, of course).
Its funny how if most people knew how to be self sufficient and work hard the Dem party would have a tough existence.
Substitute "big business" for "people" and you you'll find that "Republican" easily replaces "Dem" in that sentence.
I only use facts that come from legit sources and I know are not made up.
A good "for instance" would really help drive home your point on this one. I'm all eyes.
The ones that do not want to believe the facts that I tell them throw around emotional facts that they somehow came up with.
I assure you...that happens on both sides of the political divide.
A good example where Biden should have hit back at Palin was when she said, "Joe, you guys were for the war before you were against the war. See? That's why America needs the straight talk that John McCain and I provide." He should have said, "Gov. Palin. Weren't you FOR the brdige before you were AGAINST the bridge? Is THAT the type of straight talk you're offering the American people? And, when you claim that you said, "thanks, but no thanks" to the bridge, didn't you in fact mean "no thanks on the bridge, but thanks for the money that was meant for the bridge but you kept anyway?"
You are never going to have a good conversation with anyone who labels themselves.
Conservative.
Liberal.
Democrat.
Republican.
Anyone you do talk to that labels themselves and is worth talking to you will find don't match up really at all with the party or belief structure they believe they match up with.
In any instance a lack of moderation leads to a serious lack of understanding or reality comprehension.
It's not that democrats are retarded, its that you have to take a pretty big stupid pill to actually 'fully' identify with any of those 4 ideologies.
Hope that helps spread something around.
Also it wasn't that he was a harvard lawyer, it's that he spent 10 years teaching constitutional law that makes him a viable candidate. I would prefer someone who isn't highly experienced in politics because the longer you are in politics the more likely someone has found the thing you want most, once that is discovered you get bribed to hell.
Conservative.
Liberal.
Democrat.
Republican.
Anyone you do talk to that labels themselves and is worth talking to you will find don't match up really at all with the party or belief structure they believe they match up with.
In any instance a lack of moderation leads to a serious lack of understanding or reality comprehension.
It's not that democrats are retarded, its that you have to take a pretty big stupid pill to actually 'fully' identify with any of those 4 ideologies.
Hope that helps spread something around.
Also it wasn't that he was a harvard lawyer, it's that he spent 10 years teaching constitutional law that makes him a viable candidate. I would prefer someone who isn't highly experienced in politics because the longer you are in politics the more likely someone has found the thing you want most, once that is discovered you get bribed to hell.
Go ahead, keep underestimating Palin the way you did Bush.
If you want to see dumb as a post in action, look up the YouTube video where Barry Hussein Obama's teleprompter went out. Ba-de-ba-de-ba-de-ba -- that's all folks. Porky Pig would do a better job.
If the Presidency just involved reading a script, Obama might do alright.
If you want to see dumb as a post in action, look up the YouTube video where Barry Hussein Obama's teleprompter went out. Ba-de-ba-de-ba-de-ba -- that's all folks. Porky Pig would do a better job.
If the Presidency just involved reading a script, Obama might do alright.
You need to be very careful about sarcasm and irony online. I'm absolutely certain, from your content, that you meant your response to be entirely tongue-in-cheek, but believe it or not there are some people - maybe a lot of people - who will think you are serious. I know you don't want that to happen, because what would that imply about your reasoning abilities?
Down to earth?
She went to church once to get demons (or witches) exumed from her.
If that doesn't bother you how about the fact that she made women in Alaska pay for their own post-rape examinations and (I guess youd' call them) care kits.
It basically cost you 300-1200 dollars to get raped in Alaska.
Yeah...down to earth.
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/sarah_palin_rape_kit_wasilla.html
You can find hundreds of articles on it. The general information rarely changes.
She went to church once to get demons (or witches) exumed from her.
If that doesn't bother you how about the fact that she made women in Alaska pay for their own post-rape examinations and (I guess youd' call them) care kits.
It basically cost you 300-1200 dollars to get raped in Alaska.
Yeah...down to earth.
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/sarah_palin_rape_kit_wasilla.html
You can find hundreds of articles on it. The general information rarely changes
. 
Great job explaining the software program she loaded. This is perfect! Engineered with precision! Too bad it is the only software she seems to possess.
Not even close... want to try again? And no... it's not that other chucklehead Obama either...
/* Sarah's playbook */
repeat {
__receive(question);
__if (IMayHaveAClueAbout(question))
__{
____reciteMyScripts();
__}
__else
__{
____winkAtCamera();
____ignore(question);
____printf("... but I'd like to focus on my own topics.");
____dumpIrrelevantAnswers();
__}
}
until (hostLeavesMeOffHook())
repeat {
__receive(question);
__if (IMayHaveAClueAbout(question))
__{
____reciteMyScripts();
__}
__else
__{
____winkAtCamera();
____ignore(question);
____printf("... but I'd like to focus on my own topics.");
____dumpIrrelevantAnswers();
__}
}
until (hostLeavesMeOffHook())
That's why I enjoy hanging around with developers: they cut right to the chase.
Michale Krigsman Blog Process
Do I have anything relevant to say about technology?
--> Yes
--> Wait, really?
--> No
--> Write about politics
--> Go back to day job
Do I have anything relevant to say about technology?
--> Yes
--> Wait, really?
--> No
--> Write about politics
--> Go back to day job
If you live in the US, this is (and should be) top of mind given:
* The failings of the financial markets. Even with the bail out package, every one is saying we'll have a recession (hopefully no depression), and unemployment of 6% (hopefully not 9% = 3MM more people unemployed)
* Climate change
* Whether you believe in the first 5 amendments to the US Constitution
And besides, no $ means less b-2b transactions, which means more pressure on IT projects because, hey, the suits feel IT is not essential. So, in the end, it is relevant if only in a highly tangential way.
* The failings of the financial markets. Even with the bail out package, every one is saying we'll have a recession (hopefully no depression), and unemployment of 6% (hopefully not 9% = 3MM more people unemployed)
* Climate change
* Whether you believe in the first 5 amendments to the US Constitution
And besides, no $ means less b-2b transactions, which means more pressure on IT projects because, hey, the suits feel IT is not essential. So, in the end, it is relevant if only in a highly tangential way.
In the case of Biden he just makes stuff up. Facts never seem to get in the way but he doesn't stall and comes across as authoratitive probably because he actually seems to believe half the stuff he makes up.
I think both parties nominees are extremely disappointing. But given that the lesser of two evils I would choose the candidate who is not a socialist. That above everything - government is not the answer and the sooner people stop thinking about government in some kind of paternal fashion the better.
And also while not being a means to label someone legally guilty I would be very weary of anyone with so many lengthy, close and scary associations.
I think both parties nominees are extremely disappointing. But given that the lesser of two evils I would choose the candidate who is not a socialist. That above everything - government is not the answer and the sooner people stop thinking about government in some kind of paternal fashion the better.
And also while not being a means to label someone legally guilty I would be very weary of anyone with so many lengthy, close and scary associations.
...making things up isn't as bad as being a conservative female. And Obama's associations have no bearing on his judgement, either.
Carl Rapson
Carl Rapson
Hey lets just tell more lies about Biden and Obama, its the Republican way.
"Obama said the surge didn't work"
^ See even Sarah Palin knows how to tell lies that are easily dismissed by fact. (Obama did not support the surge, later he said it worked, however he maintained his non-support of it.)
"Obama said the surge didn't work"
^ See even Sarah Palin knows how to tell lies that are easily dismissed by fact. (Obama did not support the surge, later he said it worked, however he maintained his non-support of it.)
The funny thing about the US is that we have hundreds of different activities that are done daily at the state and federal level that are almost impossible to look at as anything but Socialist.
Even John McCain was accused of having 'socialist' views before because he said that rich people can afford taxes whereas poor people feasibly can't.
The problem lots of people have is they don't see poor people giving all their money to rich people as a socialist system. But they DO see rich people giving some of their money to poor people as socialist.
It's that wierd hypocrisy that seems to elude the common American.
Plus if you like public education, street reconstruction projects, or countless other services you are in support of spreading the wealth. Because that's exactly what those things entail.
There is 'no reason' that healthcare for all US citizens would result in high taxes. Anyone who thinks that is overlooking the fact that we nearly match the entire world's military spending by ourselves. If we cut back on wars (3 Trillion dollars anyone?) and frivolous military spending (building new nuclear weaponry is quite costly, so is sustaining it) we could easily fund healthcare for all citizens, repair schools, and even lower taxes without going into debt.
It's just a matter of standing up to the people stealing your money and not being easily swayed by terms such as "socialist" or "communist". Nobody who is ever got an actual chance at the presidency is going to do anything that causes you to lose half your earnings. If they did they'd end up dead within their first year anyways.
It's just fear, lots of people are easily swayed by terrorism, verbal or physical.
Even John McCain was accused of having 'socialist' views before because he said that rich people can afford taxes whereas poor people feasibly can't.
The problem lots of people have is they don't see poor people giving all their money to rich people as a socialist system. But they DO see rich people giving some of their money to poor people as socialist.
It's that wierd hypocrisy that seems to elude the common American
.Plus if you like public education, street reconstruction projects, or countless other services you are in support of spreading the wealth. Because that's exactly what those things entail.
There is 'no reason' that healthcare for all US citizens would result in high taxes. Anyone who thinks that is overlooking the fact that we nearly match the entire world's military spending by ourselves. If we cut back on wars (3 Trillion dollars anyone?) and frivolous military spending (building new nuclear weaponry is quite costly, so is sustaining it) we could easily fund healthcare for all citizens, repair schools, and even lower taxes without going into debt.
It's just a matter of standing up to the people stealing your money and not being easily swayed by terms such as "socialist" or "communist". Nobody who is ever got an actual chance at the presidency is going to do anything that causes you to lose half your earnings. If they did they'd end up dead within their first year anyways.
It's just fear, lots of people are easily swayed by terrorism, verbal or physical.
"I think both parties nominees are extremely disappointing. But given that the lesser of two evils I would choose the candidate who is not a socialist."
That should be intresting. Neigther candate is a Socialist. I should know, I am one!
Both candate's support a "free" market, and so by definision are capatilists.
That should be intresting. Neigther candate is a Socialist. I should know, I am one!
Both candate's support a "free" market, and so by definision are capatilists.
Is furious at the moment that people are labeling Obama as a socialits. He's apparently quite upset that people are misrepresenting his party.
He was on Colbert Report last night to give a mini-rant on it. He kind of had to think outside the box to even come up with any reason someone would label Obama Socialist (if I recall he failed).
He was on Colbert Report last night to give a mini-rant on it
. He kind of had to think outside the box to even come up with any reason someone would label Obama Socialist (if I recall he failed).
Off-topic certainly (convenient excuse), but what was your reason for this blog? It's not like you'll sway anyone either direction - those opposed to Palin will continue to belittle her (and be the only ones that find this funny) and those who support her will become more entrenched (and have another support for their "MSM is biased" view). In other words, you're preaching to the choir while alienating a large segment of the population.
So just what was the reason for this?
Carl Rapson
So just what was the reason for this?
Carl Rapson
I imagine the reason was to make you laugh.
Just a shame that most people have lost their sense of humor.
I like Sarah Palin, I'd never vote for her, but she makes me laugh unintentionally.
It's not that I wouldn't vote for a women either, she is as a person (gender completely irrelivant) the perfect example of someone who should never be president.
She has been caught in an abuse of power, misuse of funds, and has a severe lack of knowledge about politics (she is quoted as saying the vice president runs the senate).
She could have any combination of chromosomes under this sun and I'd still never vote for her.
I think gender has absolutely nothing to do with reasons to vote for a candidate. As I said in another post on here, I wish women ran everything.
Personally I think the world would be a lot simpler if women were the 'piggish' gender that treated men like sexual objects. Most guys would live happy lives, women would get to have their place in the world (IE running it), and we'd almost all live happily ever after.
Ok...that's a lie but damn wouldn't it be great? As a guy I wish my GF thought men were inferior and only good for raising kids and making babies. Duuuude...(I've raised a child before so it's not naivity on my part in reference to that).
Just a shame that most people have lost their sense of humor.
I like Sarah Palin, I'd never vote for her, but she makes me laugh unintentionally.
It's not that I wouldn't vote for a women either, she is as a person (gender completely irrelivant) the perfect example of someone who should never be president.
She has been caught in an abuse of power, misuse of funds, and has a severe lack of knowledge about politics (she is quoted as saying the vice president runs the senate).
She could have any combination of chromosomes under this sun and I'd still never vote for her.
I think gender has absolutely nothing to do with reasons to vote for a candidate. As I said in another post on here, I wish women ran everything.
Personally I think the world would be a lot simpler if women were the 'piggish' gender that treated men like sexual objects. Most guys would live happy lives, women would get to have their place in the world (IE running it), and we'd almost all live happily ever after
.Ok...that's a lie but damn wouldn't it be great? As a guy I wish my GF thought men were inferior and only good for raising kids and making babies. Duuuude...(I've raised a child before so it's not naivity on my part in reference to that).
...with as saturated as we are with partisan politics in virtually every other media output, I had hoped that I could avoid political commentary here on your IT Failures blog. You know, keeping it professional and all?
You might be able to turn this into a positive for yourself by writing about the failure of leaders in IT to maintain their professionalism in this political season. I'd imagine that would be much more well received.
You might be able to turn this into a positive for yourself by writing about the failure of leaders in IT to maintain their professionalism in this political season. I'd imagine that would be much more well received.
You know, I simply thought it was funny, but obviously not everyone agrees.
Your points are all well-taken, and it's probably the last political post you'll see from me.
Thanks for all the comments and also for reading the blog.
-- Michael
Your points are all well-taken, and it's probably the last political post you'll see from me.
Thanks for all the comments and also for reading the blog.
-- Michael
Thank you for posting it. Its a blog, post what you want. Everyone needs to play and joke a little from time to time. Some people are so damn grumpy...... Maybe if they laughed a little.
How could anyone seriously watch that debate...after 5 minutes I thought watching something as brain dead as Jerry Springer had more intellectual merit.
The woman should stick to smiling and looking pretty like the puppet the Republicans really wanted her to be.
The woman should stick to smiling and looking pretty like the puppet the Republicans really wanted her to be.
Your misogynistic beliefs are inappropriate for this blog. I for one am a little tired of the sexist attacks on Governor Palin. The truth is your flow chart works equally as well for Senator Obama.
her inexperience and weak intellect are her problems, not sexism. what a lame excuse.
She has at least held an ex ecutive position. The same one that Presidents Clinton and Reagan held, governor. Senator Obama is less experienced and he is heading the ticket. It would seem sexism is a very big part of it! You are just to blind to see it!
McCain picked the dumbest female republican he could find, and now the people who call him out on it are the "sexists?"
Get real.
Palin dodged questions, and stuck to the topics that she wanted to talk about. She said plainly that "I may not answer questions the way you want me to" because she wants to "speak to the American people."
This was at a political "debate" where the questions are preselected. Biden, Obama, and McCain all answered their questions, why can't Palin?
A professional politician should not be winking incessantly and saying things like "you betcha," "gosh darnit," and "say it ain't so Joe" at presidential debate. This is the presidency, you are supposed to be serious.
Now she's saying that Katie Couric was unfairly harsh to her for not asking the questions she wanted to answer. Since when do politicians get to decide what kind of challenges they will have to face? If she can't answer the questions now, how is she going to do it when its time to perform in office?
Get real.
Palin dodged questions, and stuck to the topics that she wanted to talk about. She said plainly that "I may not answer questions the way you want me to" because she wants to "speak to the American people."
This was at a political "debate" where the questions are preselected. Biden, Obama, and McCain all answered their questions, why can't Palin?
A professional politician should not be winking incessantly and saying things like "you betcha," "gosh darnit," and "say it ain't so Joe" at presidential debate. This is the presidency, you are supposed to be serious.
Now she's saying that Katie Couric was unfairly harsh to her for not asking the questions she wanted to answer. Since when do politicians get to decide what kind of challenges they will have to face? If she can't answer the questions now, how is she going to do it when its time to perform in office?
... back to the their talking points including senators Obama, McCain and Biden. You only think differently about governor Palin because she is a woman. That is the definition of sexism.
P.S. Any woman or man for that matter that gets elected to governor is not stupid. To suggest such a thing is frankly stupid!
P.S. Any woman or man for that matter that gets elected to governor is not stupid. To suggest such a thing is frankly stupid!
She is the least vetted member of either side in the history of US presidencies (or vice presidencies).
How is bringing that to light sexism?
Frankly she is as anti-women as you can get when it comes to a female candidate. I don't see how you can say you support women and require they pay for their own rape kits (as well as require they keep a child of rape or incest to term).
She even recently got caught spending campaign money on 150k dollars in clothing and spending thousands of Alaskan state dollars on her family for things like: Living in her own house, taking a trip by plane, and staying in a hotel. This money was even relabeled at a later date to make it appear to be legitimate expenses.
Seriously yo...If she had a penis I'd still be all over her ass because of who she is as a person.
Heck, before he became a spineless mud slinger (all of McCains adds have been attack adds...all of them) I actually thought McCain was a pretty nice fellow. But even his friends feel he has changed, it's really unfortunate to see someone with a relatively reasonable track record (as politicians go) soil it in order to breed fear and fight to separate the country (the whole real america fake america nonsense).
It's really unfortunate the lengths people go in order to get into a place of power.
How is bringing that to light sexism?
Frankly she is as anti-women as you can get when it comes to a female candidate. I don't see how you can say you support women and require they pay for their own rape kits (as well as require they keep a child of rape or incest to term).
She even recently got caught spending campaign money on 150k dollars in clothing and spending thousands of Alaskan state dollars on her family for things like: Living in her own house, taking a trip by plane, and staying in a hotel. This money was even relabeled at a later date to make it appear to be legitimate expenses.
Seriously yo...If she had a penis I'd still be all over her ass because of who she is as a person.
Heck, before he became a spineless mud slinger (all of McCains adds have been attack adds...all of them) I actually thought McCain was a pretty nice fellow. But even his friends feel he has changed, it's really unfortunate to see someone with a relatively reasonable track record (as politicians go) soil it in order to breed fear and fight to separate the country (the whole real america fake america nonsense).
It's really unfortunate the lengths people go in order to get into a place of power.
I voted for Hilary. Tell me SHE'S not a strong woman. (Crouches down and prepares for anit-Hilary fire as opposed to replying directly to post.)
I'm a strong supporter of role reversal.
I think men should be the ones treated like sexual objects by women, supported in taking a role at the home, and not being the assumed bread winner.
I had to raise my sisters kid and I have to tell you, between doing that and being the 'bread winner' I would MUCH rather have the former.
Basically if you take everything feminists hate, gave those things to men, and gave everything women want that men have, and gave those to women. We'd have a pretty swanky society overall.
Except for birthing, unfortunately you ladies are stuck with that. I give you extreme levels of admiration for being able to do that sort of thing. I get whiney when I don't have enough fiber in my diet, birthing a child would likely make me homicidal.
I think men should be the ones treated like sexual objects by women, supported in taking a role at the home, and not being the assumed bread winner.
I had to raise my sisters kid and I have to tell you, between doing that and being the 'bread winner' I would MUCH rather have the former.
Basically if you take everything feminists hate, gave those things to men, and gave everything women want that men have, and gave those to women. We'd have a pretty swanky society overall.
Except for birthing, unfortunately you ladies are stuck with that. I give you extreme levels of admiration for being able to do that sort of thing. I get whiney when I don't have enough fiber in my diet, birthing a child would likely make me homicidal.
really make him an expert about everything. A little intellectual snobism will get you far.
A little intellectual snobism will get you far.
Oh, you mean like when McCain said "Senator Obama just doesn't get it..." no less than five times during the debate? Don't worry. I saw right through that. I could smell the desperation right through the TV screen.
Oh, you mean like when McCain said "Senator Obama just doesn't get it..." no less than five times during the debate? Don't worry. I saw right through that. I could smell the desperation right through the TV screen.
Join the conversation!
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
Vendor Showcase
Facebook Activity
Blog Roll
- All About Microsoft
- The Apple Core
- Between the Lines
- Big on Data
- BriefingsDirect
- Collaboration 2.0
- Consumerization: BYOD
- Dev Connection
- Digital Cameras & Camcorders
- DIY-IT
- The Ed Bott Report
- Emerging Tech
- Enterprise Web 2.0
- Five Nines: The Next Gen Datacenter
- Forrester Research
- Friending Facebook
- Gamification
- Googling Google
- GreenTech Pastures
- Hardware 2.0
- Home Theater
- Identity Matters
- iGeneration
- India IT
- Irregular Enterprise
- IT Project Failures
- Laptops & Desktops
- Linux and Open Source
- London Calling
- The Mobile Gadgeteer
- Mobile News
- Networking
- Pulp Tech
- Reference Desk
- SEO Whistleblower
- Service Oriented
- Small Business Matters
- Smartphones and Cell Phones
- Social Business
- Social CRM: The Conversation
- Software & Services Safari
- Software as Services
- Storage Bits
- Tech Broiler
- Tom Foremski: IMHO
- The ToyBox
- View from China
- Virtually Speaking
- ZDNet Education
- ZDNet Government
- ZDNet Health
- Zero Day
Blog Archive
White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
-
Office 365 Migration Guide: Approaches, Techniques and ChallengesNo Headache, No Hassles Microsoft 365 Migration
Your company is ... (Quest Software)Download Now - The Best Ways to Migrate Lotus Notes Applications to SharePoint and Office 365Migrating Notes to SharePoint Online/Microsoft Office ... (Quest Software)Download Now
-
Quest Migration Assessment Tool (QMAT)Get a Free Migration Assessment
Considering a migration? The ... (Quest Software)Download Now
