PDA

View Full Version : Sarah Palin on V.P. Duties?



LogansPapa
10-27-2008, 11:51 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KKyEM-BDJI

Constitutionally Speaking
10-27-2008, 02:28 PM
What part of "presides over" don't YOU understand???

She got it right.

Ree
10-27-2008, 02:30 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KKyEM-BDJI

You're about 10 days behind in your "talking points"...:rolleyes:

LogansPapa
10-27-2008, 02:35 PM
Itís amazing that you guys didnít bring this one up before - as a matter of pride, in as much as your girl knows so much about how the "VP is in charge of the United States Senate."

The woman is a certifiable fucktard, people. :rolleyes:

jinxmchue
10-27-2008, 02:42 PM
I like how the video poster tries to hide the little "Daily Kos" logo in the upper right.

That being said, LogansDumbassSocialistPapa is a certifiable fucktard.

LogansPapa
10-27-2008, 02:55 PM
I like how the video poster tries to hide the little "Daily Kos" logo in the upper right.

In as much as itís on video tape and the RNC has done nothing to counter what Palin said - what possible difference does that make?

That being said, your side is going to lose. :p

Constitutionally Speaking
10-27-2008, 03:13 PM
LP, the Constitution says that the VP is the President of the Senate. As such, it is the VP's job to preside over the Senate.


There was absolutely NOTHING wrong with Palin's response - especially since the answer was directed to a child. Apparently, even THAT went over the libtards heads.

LogansPapa
10-27-2008, 03:29 PM
"VP is in charge of the United States Senate."

That is what she said.

Sonnabend
10-27-2008, 03:31 PM
LP, a second grader would not understand "presides over"...her answer was clear, concise and what I would also say.

Her job would be to help the President in the Senate she votes in case of a tie, she presides over the Senate, and the job of a VP IS to support and work with the Presidents agenda.

Second grader = six or seven year old.

She did it right. You are way off base on this one.


"VP is in charge of the United States Senate."

That is what she said.To a SECOND GRADER. Think about the response, LP, and who she was aiming at. You dont give a politics lesson meant for an adult to a child..they wont understand a word.

A second grader would not understand "preside", they DO understand "in charge". Her reply was appropriate.

It's how we talk to Eyelids..oh wait, he's a first grader...:p

LogansPapa
10-27-2008, 03:33 PM
Second grader = six or seven year old.

She did it right. You are way off base on this one.

May be - but I think Palin actually believes exactly what she said. That's the sad part.

Sonnabend
10-27-2008, 03:36 PM
May be - but I think Palin actually believes exactly what she said. That's the sad part.

And how do you know this? Mate you are slamming a woman on her intelligence and her ability based on a misconception on how she answered a question to a seven year old.

She did the question and the reply right, and that woman has been Governor and Mayor with five children of her own. There is no question of her ability..LP this is petty sniping and IMO its unjustified.

LogansPapa
10-27-2008, 03:47 PM
Sonnabend, Iíve made myself crystal clear that this woman was installed in this slot strictly because of her complete and unquestioned image with the Evangelical base that McCain dumped on in 2000.

She is in way over her head. She was not thoroughly vetted by the RNC and John is sorely regretting it at this very second. The largest mistake heís ever made, politically. This decision will be his undoing.

She may be a very nice mayor and a capable governor for a remote state with more pilot licenses issued than driverís, but residing over a tiny population is a bit different than being one heart-beat away for the most powerful office on the planet.

Sonnabend
10-27-2008, 03:55 PM
Sonnabend, Iíve made myself crystal clear that this woman was installed in this slot strictly because of her complete and unquestioned image with the Evangelical base that McCain dumped on in 2000.

And Obama was handed this on a plate because of his skin colour. Finish the sentence.You may not like it, but it's the truth nonetheless.


She is in way over her head. She was not thoroughly vetted by the RNC and John is sorely regretting it at this very second. The largest mistake heís ever made, politically. This decision will be his undoing.

We disagree, many believe this was a masterstroke. The media have been trying to tear her apart...with a lot of help.


She may be a very nice mayor and a capable governor for a remote state with more pilot licenses issued than driverís, but residing over a tiny population is a bit different than being one heart-beat away for the most powerful office on the planet.

Are we on this again? How is Obama "more qualified"? He has never been a Governor or a Mayor, has spent less than 2 years in the Senate.

Sonnabend
10-27-2008, 03:55 PM
Read this (http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2008/08/30/sarah-palin-vs-barack-obama/)

Constitutionally Speaking
10-27-2008, 04:30 PM
Sonnabend, Iíve made myself crystal clear that this woman was installed in this slot strictly because of her complete and unquestioned image with the Evangelical base that McCain dumped on in 2000.

She is in way over her head. She was not thoroughly vetted by the RNC and John is sorely regretting it at this very second. The largest mistake heís ever made, politically. This decision will be his undoing.

She may be a very nice mayor and a capable governor for a remote state with more pilot licenses issued than driverís, but residing over a tiny population is a bit different than being one heart-beat away for the most powerful office on the planet.



She is FAR more qualified than Obama!!!!!

JB
10-27-2008, 05:40 PM
"VP is in charge of the United States Senate."

That is what she said.Toe-may-toe, toe-mah-toe.

Jeez dude.

LogansPapa
10-27-2008, 05:47 PM
Toe-may-toe, toe-mah-toe.

Jeez dude.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/94/Quayle.jpg

Thank you, JB, a perfect metaphor.

His most famous blunder occurred when he corrected a student's correct spelling of "potato" to "potatoe" at an elementary school spelling bee in Trenton, New Jersey, on June 15, 1992. According to his memoirs, Quayle was uncomfortable with the version he gave, but did so because he decided to trust what he described as incorrect written materials provided by the school. He informed student William Figueroa that he had misspelled the word "potato", when in fact Figueroa had spelled it correctly. Quayle then had Figueroa add an "e", not only making it incorrect, but once again making himself a target with this misspelling. Quayle was widely lambasted for his apparent inability to spell the word "potato". Figueroa was a guest on Late Night with David Letterman and was asked to lead the pledge of allegiance at the 1992 Democratic National Convention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Quayle

Another dolt out of his depth. :rolleyes:

JB
10-27-2008, 05:55 PM
Thank you, JB, a perfect metaphor.Uh, yeah, but not really. :rolleyes:

Besides, it's been five minutes since you've hijacked a thread with "It's the economy stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!" :rolleyes: times two.

Lager
10-27-2008, 06:12 PM
That being said, your side is going to lose. :p

What's sad, is that we're supposed to be on the same side. The side of America. The more I hear you spout these phrases like "certifiable fucktard" that sound like they're funneled in a straight line from DU, the more I realize why you won't get it. It's not so much that you have different political views or a different philosophy, it's the disingenuous way you go about it. Your "side" may win, but you'll then be forced to give up the role your "side" is best at. You do pretty well as a stormcrow by posting all your economic data, or your lib talking points about the po folks in the military, but you never take a definitive stand on anything and defend it. I'm beginning to wonder if you're totally on the level here. It's going to be interesting to see the role you take here if you get the results you're hoping for in this election.

LogansPapa
10-27-2008, 06:34 PM
It's going to be interesting to see the role you take here if you get the results you're hoping for in this election.

Obama will be the most scrutinised president in history. Like no other. Everything he thinks, does and says will be put through two strainers: First by virtue of his party affiliation - Second by virtue of his race. Iím willing to deal with that hyper-critical system - and blast him when he fucks up.

Denounce that if you will - again, itís just our opinions.

Lager
10-27-2008, 06:44 PM
Srutinized by who? The media? They're not doing such a thorough job now, are they?. The only way they'll be after Obama is if he's involved in a scandal such as Clinton, where they can garner higher ratings and make money off of it. Other than that, they'll be silent.

megimoo
10-27-2008, 07:06 PM
She is FAR more qualified than Obama!!!!!
The liberals are out of their minds with fear over this woman.L.P And C.W. never let up on her and how MC Cain made a tremendous mistake selecting her as his running mate.

Most Conservatives are well pleased with his choice and some would actually prefer her in his place to be POTUS but that may happen !She is real and fully a woman of achievement on her own without her husbands help.Suck it up libbers Sarah's the one ,you don't get to decide !

Sarah Palin Better Than Barack Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6-K7JwwV0U&eurl=http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2116839/posts

Cold Warrior
10-27-2008, 07:13 PM
The liberals are out of their minds with fear over this woman.L.P And C.W. never let up on her and how MC Cain made a tremendous mistake selecting her as his running mate.

Most Conservatives are well pleased with his choice and some would actually prefer her in his place to be POTUS but that may happen !She is real and fully a woman of achievement on her own without her husbands help.Suck it up libbers Sarah's the one ,you don't get to decide !

Actually we do, because the whacky-whackies can't on their own. The Palin pick has disaffected establishment Republicans, moderates, and independents. But, after the ticket loses, the right will blame it on (1) McCain's moderate stances and (2) the evil liberal media. Never, ever, ever take responsibility, even though the exit poll demographics will tell the story. Of course, they'll all be lies of the evil liberal pollsters.

All the establishment is against the brave little extremist right-winger freedom fighters. "Red Dawn," much?

megimoo
10-27-2008, 07:30 PM
Actually we do, because the whacky-whackies can't on their own. The Palin pick has disaffected establishment Republicans, moderates, and independents. But, after the ticket loses, the right will blame it on (1) McCain's moderate stances and (2) the evil liberal media. Never, ever, ever take responsibility, even though the exit poll demographics will tell the story. Of course, they'll all be lies of the evil liberal pollsters.

All the establishment is against the brave little extremist right-winger freedom fighters. "Red Dawn," much?Never cared for the it.And I wouldn't count on a win for your critter.Most of the sheeple are starting to figure him out.When they start talking about taking away their 401K's and equalizing the wealth and increasing taxes at their expense they tend to listen.But you can always escape if he wins to some third world wonderland and escape the reign of obama the first.

Cold Warrior
10-27-2008, 07:44 PM
Never cared for the it.And I wouldn't count on a win for your critter.Most of the sheeple are starting to figure him out.When they start talking about taking away their 401K's and equalizing the wealth and increasing taxes at their expense they tend to listen.But you can always escape if he wins to some third world wonderland and escape the reign of obama the first.

As I've repeated said, he's not "my critter." I'll vote for Barr or write in someone, perhaps Feebs! So, the net effect of the Palin pick as regards to me is a 0, rather than a +1 for McCain; not as bad as a -1 if I voted for Obama.

As time goes by, the third world is becoming more and more alluring. Perhaps Kabul in the spring, with the poppies in bloom. :D In addition to the tax benefits, one can always find interesting ways of making money in such places.

Ree
10-27-2008, 07:48 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/94/Quayle.jpg

Thank you, JB, a perfect metaphor.

His most famous blunder occurred when he corrected a student's correct spelling of "potato" to "potatoe" at an elementary school spelling bee in Trenton, New Jersey, on June 15, 1992. According to his memoirs, Quayle was uncomfortable with the version he gave, but did so because he decided to trust what he described as incorrect written materials provided by the school. He informed student William Figueroa that he had misspelled the word "potato", when in fact Figueroa had spelled it correctly. Quayle then had Figueroa add an "e", not only making it incorrect, but once again making himself a target with this misspelling. Quayle was widely lambasted for his apparent inability to spell the word "potato". Figueroa was a guest on Late Night with David Letterman and was asked to lead the pledge of allegiance at the 1992 Democratic National Convention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Quayle

Another dolt out of his depth. :rolleyes:
No more than you are...

LogansPapa
10-27-2008, 08:02 PM
Srutinized by who? The media? They're not doing such a thorough job now, are they?.

Scrutinized by Obama's opposition. Opposition that will undoubtedly feed lampreys like Limbaugh and company - all the other dildos in the supposedly conservative spokes hole fest on television (via FOX) and radio. They and you will look for anything you can to bring the man down, betraying your claimed loyalty and service to who's ever occupying the Oval Office. If you say you're not going to do just that - then you're a God-damned liar.

megimoo
10-27-2008, 08:05 PM
As I've repeated said, he's not "my critter." I'll vote for Barr or write in someone, perhaps Feebs! So, the net effect of the Palin pick as regards to me is a 0, rather than a +1 for McCain; not as bad as a -1 if I voted for Obama.

As time goes by, the third world is becoming more and more alluring. Perhaps Kabul in the spring, with the poppies in bloom. :D In addition to the tax benefits, one can always find interesting ways of making money in such places.Repeat all you care to ,I don't believe you.BTW Sarah's on Fox Now if you hurry !

LogansPapa
10-27-2008, 08:13 PM
ďAny serious Republican has to ask, ĎHow did we get into this mess?í Itís not where we should be, and itís not where we had to be. This was not bad luck.Ē

MrsSmith
10-27-2008, 09:16 PM
Sonnabend, Iíve made myself crystal clear that this woman was installed in this slot strictly because of her complete and unquestioned image with the Evangelical base that McCain dumped on in 2000.

She is in way over her head. She was not thoroughly vetted by the RNC and John is sorely regretting it at this very second. The largest mistake heís ever made, politically. This decision will be his undoing.

She may be a very nice mayor and a capable governor for a remote state with more pilot licenses issued than driverís, but residing over a tiny population is a bit different than being one heart-beat away for the most powerful office on the planet.
The sad part is that she is both smarter and more qualified than the Democratic candidate for President...but the media has seen fit to lie themselves blue in the face. Even journalists are ashamed of their profession by now. It's so sad to see seemingly moderately intelligent posters like yourself so taken in by the BS. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Poor Logan, he deserves a Papa with sense. :(

MrsSmith
10-27-2008, 09:19 PM
Obama will be the most scrutinised president in history. Like no other. Everything he thinks, does and says will be put through two strainers: First by virtue of his party affiliation - Second by virtue of his race. Iím willing to deal with that hyper-critical system - and blast him when he fucks up.

Denounce that if you will - again, itís just our opinions.

ROFL!!! He has already been forgiven for terrorist associations, underhanded dealings, and a total absense of experience...they'll forgive him anything less than just handing us to China, and maybe even that! :D:D

MrsSmith
10-27-2008, 09:22 PM
Actually we do, because the whacky-whackies can't on their own. The Palin pick has disaffected establishment Republicans, moderates, and independents. But, after the ticket loses, the right will blame it on (1) McCain's moderate stances and (2) the evil liberal media. Never, ever, ever take responsibility, even though the exit poll demographics will tell the story. Of course, they'll all be lies of the evil liberal pollsters.

All the establishment is against the brave little extremist right-winger freedom fighters. "Red Dawn," much?
The "Palin pick" has only disaffected those too stupid to see through the media manure. If they're that stupid, they were going to vote for O already. Remember, the "whacky-whacks" are something like 50% of the population...if not more. Actually, far more people would list you as a whacky-whack than believe Palin is one. :D

MrsSmith
10-27-2008, 09:25 PM
Scrutinized by Obama's opposition. Opposition that will undoubtedly feed lampreys like Limbaugh and company - all the other dildos in the supposedly conservative spokes hole fest on television (via FOX) and radio. They and you will look for anything you can to bring the man down, betraying your claimed loyalty and service to who's ever occupying the Oval Office. If you say you're not going to do just that - then you're a God-damned liar.

Tsk, tsk, your liberal beliefs are sticking out all over now, LP.

Ree
10-27-2008, 09:25 PM
The "Palin pick" has only disaffected those too stupid to see through the media manure. If they're that stupid, they were going to vote for O already. Remember, the "whacky-whacks" are something like 50% of the population...if not more. Actually, far more people would list you as a whacky-whack than believe Palin is one. :D
Well said...;)

YupItsMe
10-27-2008, 09:48 PM
Actually we do, because the whacky-whackies can't on their own. The Palin pick has disaffected establishment Republicans, moderates, and independents. But, after the ticket loses, the right will blame it on (1) McCain's moderate stances and (2) the evil liberal media. Never, ever, ever take responsibility, even though the exit poll demographics will tell the story. Of course, they'll all be lies of the evil liberal pollsters.

All the establishment is against the brave little extremist right-winger freedom fighters. "Red Dawn," much?


Every time lefties like you tell Republicans that were disenfranchising the moderates we run a candidate like Bush 41, Bob Dole or McCain and lose the election. When the right wing of the party chooses the candidate we get Electoral College outcomes like Richard Nixon 1972 with 520 electoral votes or Ronald Reagan in 1984 with 525. Stop pretending you're a conservative and leave.

Cold Warrior
10-27-2008, 09:48 PM
The "Palin pick" has only disaffected those too stupid to see through the media manure. If they're that stupid, they were going to vote for O already. Remember, the "whacky-whacks" are something like 50% of the population...if not more. Actually, far more people would list you as a whacky-whack than believe Palin is one. :D

Yeah, those stupid people like George Will, Kathleen Parker, Christopher Buckley, etc. Let's put it this way (whether you agree with the selected issues or not), does Palin support:

1. Overturning Roe v Wade?
2. Federal legislation (of whatever type) making abortion illegal?
3. Federal legislation (of whatever type) making same-sex marriage illegal?
4. Teaching creationism in public schools as part of science courses
5. Promotion of abstinence-only programs over programs that teach "safe sex?"

As regards to her competence:
1. Could Palin name any Supreme Court decision with which she disagreed (probabliy any other decision, in fact) other than Roe v Wade?

2. Did she give the most God-awful rambling answer to a fairly straight-forward question (and it shouldn't have been a surprise question) regarding the economic bailout that rambled from job creation to the precipice?

3. Did she, in her entire life, ever show the interest in foreign cultures to travel abroad, prior to, of course, her ceremonial trip to Iraq?

So, if the whacky-whackies are more than 50% of the population, McCain/'Palin should win easily. Good on you and congratulations. However, I don't think so.

As I said, we'll see what the demographics of the exit polls are. However, I'm sure all the Palinistas will have their excuses in place by then.

SaintLouieWoman
10-27-2008, 09:58 PM
Well said...;)
I'll second that. :D

Cold Warrior
10-27-2008, 10:00 PM
Every time lefties like you tell Republicans that were disenfranchising the moderates we run a candidate like Bush 41, Bob Dole or McCain and lose the election. When the right wing of the party chooses the candidate we get Electoral College outcomes like Richard Nixon 1972 with 520 electoral votes or Ronald Reagan in 1984 with 525. Stop pretending you're a conservative and leave.

Don't tell me that, tell it those lefties Will, Parker, Buckley, etc. Bush 41 lost not because he was too moderate, but because his reason for winning in the first place was no longer part of the campaign. Otherwise, he likely would have lost in 88. Neither Dole nor any Republican stood a chance against Clinton (please, please tell me Clinton didn't get the majority of the popular vote, so that I can remind you of the popular vote for the Idiot Child in 2000).

I notice you chose as your "winning" examples the second terms for each candidate, not the first. It does make a difference, you know. As specifically to Tricky Dick (whom I voted for), he was running against a guy whose VP pick turned out to have spent time in a looney bin, for Christ's sakes.

As for me leaving, I think not. However, you're welcome to invite me to the Dome to discuss it further if you wish to make it personal. Maybe you can show me the ropes there, hot shot.

SaintLouieWoman
10-27-2008, 10:05 PM
Don't tell me that, tell it those lefties Will, Parker, Buckley, etc. Bush 41 lost not because he was too moderate, but because his reason for winning in the first place was no longer part of the campaign. Otherwise, he likely would have lost in 88. Neither Dole nor any Republican stood a chance against Clinton (please, please tell me Clinton didn't get the majority of the popular vote, so that I can remind you of the popular vote for the Idiot Child in 2000).

I notice you chose as your "winning" examples the second terms for each candidate, not the first. It does make a difference, you know. As specifically to Tricky Dick (whom I voted for), he was running against a guy whose VP pick turned out to have spent time in a looney bin, for Christ's sakes.

As for me leaving, I think not. However, you're welcome to invite me to the Dome to discuss it further if you wish to make it personal. Maybe you can show me the ropes there, hot shot.

My, my, that isn't politically correct.

Feeling a bit full of yourself tonight, eh? It's so nice of you to invite the mighty one to "show me the ropes". :rolleyes:

Cold Warrior
10-27-2008, 10:11 PM
My, my, that isn't politically correct.

Feeling a bit full of yourself tonight, eh? It's so nice of you to invite the mighty one to "show me the ropes". :rolleyes:

This was the statement the poster made to me:


Stop pretending you're a conservative and leave.

I felt my response was measured and polite, but tempered with just the right amount of firmness. After all, whatever his name is might be able to "show me the ropes" in the Dome for all we know. Isn't that true?

BTW, who's "the mighty one?"

On edit: The reason I had not posted in this thread, btw, prior to being called out by megs, is that I feel this is a stupid issue. I actually agree with JB on that point. There are so many obvious things to call Palin on, that this sort of thing is a bit ridiculous and trivial. Sort of like trying to prove Obama is from Iceland.

Sonnabend
10-28-2008, 06:16 AM
Sort of like trying to prove Obama is from Iceland.

Kenya.

Curious why the Hawaii Governor has the birth certificate locked away.

LogansPapa
10-28-2008, 09:39 AM
It's so sad to see seemingly moderately intelligent posters like yourself so taken in by the BS. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Poor Logan, he deserves a Papa with sense. :(

No, what is sad is that there's a huge voting block that supports Sarah strictly because of their religion.

wineslob
10-28-2008, 01:05 PM
Yeah, those stupid people like George Will, Kathleen Parker, Christopher Buckley, etc. Let's put it this way (whether you agree with the selected issues or not), does Palin support:


1. Overturning Roe v Wade?
I certainly hope so.


2. Federal legislation (of whatever type) making abortion illegal?

See #1

3. Federal legislation (of whatever type) making same-sex marriage illegal?

Yes. BTW, Biden feels the same way.

4. Teaching creationism in public schools as part of science courses

Very doubtful

5. Promotion of abstinence-only programs over programs that teach "safe sex?"

And this woulden't be safe.........................??? How???

As regards to her competence:
1. Could Palin name any Supreme Court decision with which she disagreed (probabliy any other decision, in fact) other than Roe v Wade?

2. Did she give the most God-awful rambling answer to a fairly straight-forward question (and it shouldn't have been a surprise question) regarding the economic bailout that rambled from job creation to the precipice?

3. Did she, in her entire life, ever show the interest in foreign cultures to travel abroad, prior to, of course, her ceremonial trip to Iraq?

Obama's trip wasen't? Oh, BTW, Sarkozy thinks Obama's pretty "qualified" :

Well, according to Israel's Ha'aretz, France's Nicolas Sarkozy views Barack Obama's political stance toward Iran "utterly immature" and made up of "formulations empty of all content." ... Obama visited Paris in July, and the Iranian issue was at the heart of his meeting with Sarkozy. At a joint press conference afterward, Obama urged Iran to accept the West's proposal on its nuclear program, saying that Iran was creating a serious situation that endangered both Israel and the West. According to the reports reaching Israel, Sarkozy told Obama at that meeting that if the new American president elected in November changed his country's policy toward Iran, that would be "very problematic." [...]

So, if the whacky-whackies are more than 50% of the population, McCain/'Palin should win easily. Good on you and congratulations. However, I don't think so.


As I said, we'll see what the demographics of the exit polls are. However, I'm sure all the Palinistas will have their excuses in place by then.

Tell me, why do Demwits continue to flog the dead horse that is exit polls..............:rolleyes:

Cold Warrior
10-28-2008, 02:00 PM
Tell me, why do Demwits continue to flog the dead horse that is exit polls..............:rolleyes:

The exit polls are pretty good for demographics. Of course, that will be the Palinista's line of attack:

1. Exit poll demographics are wrong
2. Lost because McCain was too moderate
3. Lost because of the evil liberal media

See how simple that is?

YupItsMe
10-28-2008, 04:10 PM
This was the statement the poster made to me:



I felt my response was measured and polite, but tempered with just the right amount of firmness. After all, whatever his name is might be able to "show me the ropes" in the Dome for all we know. Isn't that true?

BTW, who's "the mighty one?"

On edit: The reason I had not posted in this thread, btw, prior to being called out by megs, is that I feel this is a stupid issue. I actually agree with JB on that point. There are so many obvious things to call Palin on, that this sort of thing is a bit ridiculous and trivial. Sort of like trying to prove Obama is from Iceland.

Sorry CW I had no right to ask you to leave. I'm just getting frustrated with everyone blasting Palin. People don't seem to understand, she wasn't chosen to appeal to the middle or the libertarians, John McCain's already courted that group for a decade. She was chosen to appeal to the far right. We could argue all day ifit was a wise choice, but we'll never know because there's only one election. At this point it's going to be McCain/Palin. What I know is that all conservatives I hang out with are thrilled about the choice. People I hang out with are conservative on social issues as well as fiscal issues. Most people I know tell people they're voting for Palin, not McCain. I'm guessing most of your group are not as conservative on the social issues, so you hear a different view of Palin. I firmly believe she will help Republican turnout, but it probably won't be enough. I'm not sure if any running mate with McCain would.

Cold Warrior
10-28-2008, 04:44 PM
Sorry CW I had no right to ask you to leave. I'm just getting frustrated with everyone blasting Palin. People don't seem to understand, she wasn't chosen to appeal to the middle or the libertarians, John McCain's already courted that group for a decade. She was chosen to appeal to the far right. We could argue all day ifit was a wise choice, but we'll never know because there's only one election. At this point it's going to be McCain/Palin. What I know is that all conservatives I hang out with are thrilled about the choice. People I hang out with are conservative on social issues as well as fiscal issues. Most people I know tell people they're voting for Palin, not McCain. I'm guessing most of your group are not as conservative on the social issues, so you hear a different view of Palin. I firmly believe she will help Republican turnout, but it probably won't be enough. I'm not sure if any running mate with McCain would.

Fair enough. I understand (I think) exactly why she was picked -- McCain had lukewarm appeal to what is now called "the base of the Republican party" and she was selected to raise that appeal. A couple of things here, one personal opinion, one pretty demonstratable fact. My personal opinion is that McCain was forced into this decision, as he would have preferred to pick Lieberman, Guiliani, or Ridge (or possibly Hutchison). The demonstrable fact is that the Palin pick has alienated many establishment conservativesw and moderates. Election day will tell us if the swap was worth it. I suspect, that McCain will poll less among women than the Idiot Child and Darth (and that's saying something).

Cold Warrior
10-28-2008, 04:59 PM
Sort of like trying to prove Obama is from Iceland.
Kenya.

Curious why the Hawaii Governor has the birth certificate locked away.

God, you are humorless, aren't you? Can't you spot Obama's Icelandic roots?

BTW, I noticed in another thread you told Feebs that since he did not intend to vote, his opinion didn't matter. Fair enough. However, since you can't vote, why does your opinion matter?

Lager
10-28-2008, 07:41 PM
How well do you think McCain would have fared with Lieberman, honestly?

Cold Warrior
10-28-2008, 07:46 PM
How well do you think McCain would have fared with Lieberman, honestly?

My honest guess? He'd have garnered a lot of support from the center, showing his "maverick" qualities by being bipartisan. However, he'd have still lost, as the FFA (is that the right acronym?) would have run like rabbits from a social liberal like Lieberman. That's why I said earlier, he was between a rock and a hard place.

However, by picking Lieberman (or the equiivalent), he would have at least maintained some aspect of dignity.

MrsSmith
10-28-2008, 09:05 PM
Yeah, those stupid people like George Will, Kathleen Parker, Christopher Buckley, etc. Let's put it this way (whether you agree with the selected issues or not), does Palin support:

1. Overturning Roe v Wade?
2. Federal legislation (of whatever type) making abortion illegal?

She said that it should be a state issue. :D

3. Federal legislation (of whatever type) making same-sex marriage illegal?

One of those whacky-whack issues that 75% of the public agree upon? :D


4. Teaching creationism in public schools as part of science courses

She said it was permissible to discuss it.


5. Promotion of abstinence-only programs over programs that teach "safe sex?"
No, she is in favor of contraception, but does not favor explicit sex education.



As regards to her competence:
1. Could Palin name any Supreme Court decision with which she disagreed (probabliy any other decision, in fact) other than Roe v Wade?

Thankfully, she is NOT a lawyer, she is an experienced executive. That is one of her best features.


2. Did she give the most God-awful rambling answer to a fairly straight-forward question (and it shouldn't have been a surprise question) regarding the economic bailout that rambled from job creation to the precipice? You keep forgetting Obama's far more ridiculous attempts, captured on YouTube... at least until he silences them.


3. Did she, in her entire life, ever show the interest in foreign cultures to travel abroad, prior to, of course, her ceremonial trip to Iraq?
Yawn. :rolleyes: Only whacky-whacks care if she missed her World Tour.


So, if the whacky-whackies are more than 50% of the population, McCain/'Palin should win easily. Good on you and congratulations. However, I don't think so.

As I said, we'll see what the demographics of the exit polls are. However, I'm sure all the Palinistas will have their excuses in place by then.


We are more than half the population...which is one reason the polls are so close, when they bother to call a balance mix of people.

MrsSmith
10-28-2008, 09:09 PM
No, what is sad is that there's a huge voting block that supports Sarah strictly because of their religion.

97% of African-Americans are voting on the basis of race, and you whine because, despite the constant barrage of hate and sexism from the media, many Christians see our values reflected more by Palin than Obama. That's so ironic, it's hilarious. :D

Sonnabend
10-29-2008, 02:45 AM
BTW, I noticed in another thread you told Feebs that since he did not intend to vote, his opinion didn't matter. Fair enough. However, since you can't vote, why does your opinion matter?

Aside from the reason I make thirty times more sense than you ever have?

marinejcksn
10-29-2008, 04:01 AM
My honest guess? He'd have garnered a lot of support from the center, showing his "maverick" qualities by being bipartisan. However, he'd have still lost, as the FFA (is that the right acronym?) would have run like rabbits from a social liberal like Lieberman. That's why I said earlier, he was between a rock and a hard place.

However, by picking Lieberman (or the equiivalent), he would have at least maintained some aspect of dignity.

I thought for the longest time that he'd pick Lieberman, he really suprised me with Palin. Personally I think it was the smartest choice he could've made, he was in a real tough spot with the choice. I would've rather had a Romney/Palin ticket or a Thompson/Palin choice but McCain is who we ended up with. I will say this:

I believe McCain will win the election by a razor-thin margin and liberals craniums will rupture worldwide on November 5th. I haven't lost faith in the people of my county not being able to see through Obama. If he wins, I'll eat crow and admit I was wrong.

Regardless, this will be the defining election in my lifetime, that I'm sure of. Obama's policies will give us FDR style calamities that'll bankrupt the nation, wait & see just how bad things can get. Those of us who study history know how bad Wilson and FDR were, but I fear we haven't seen anything yet.

AmPat
10-29-2008, 04:41 AM
In as much as itís on video tape and the RNC has done nothing to counter what Palin said - what possible difference does that make?

That being said, your side is going to lose. :p

One does not "counter" a stupid point like this if it is better to ignore. I can't view the video but if it is the one she answered from a third grader, she answered as most adults would answer an 8 year old. I'm certain that S.P. knows what a V.P. does. I'm also certain that like Mrs. Palin, I would have not used the word "presided' to explain to a third grader the duties of the office.

Cold Warrior
10-29-2008, 06:35 AM
BTW, I noticed in another thread you told Feebs that since he did not intend to vote, his opinion didn't matter. Fair enough. However, since you can't vote, why does your opinion matter?
Aside from the reason I make thirty times more sense than you ever have?

In the context of the question, I'm not sure your answer makes any sense. You criticize Feebs for expressing opinions regarding the candidates not for his specific criticisms (in this case, at least), but rather for the fact that such cricicism is irrelevant in that he will not be voting. While I'm not saying that this is a valid argument, I am asking if it applies to Feebs, shouldn't it apply equally to you?

Sonnabend
10-29-2008, 06:51 AM
While I'm not saying that this is a valid argument, I am asking if it applies to Feebs, shouldn't it apply equally to you?

Nope.Anything else?

Cold Warrior
10-29-2008, 07:03 AM
Nope.Anything else?

Why yes, since you asked, thank you. Since you seem to think that the exact same argument you make against others doesn't apply to you, how do you logically justify that? This seems to be approaching the old MrBackoftheBux axiom, "When we do it, it's right, when they do it, it's wrong." While he was applying that to conservatives vs liberals, and I'm by no means suggesting Feebs is a liberal, the logic (or lack thereof) seems to be the same? Is this your (il)logical justification for your position?

Sonnabend
10-29-2008, 07:18 AM
Why yes, since you asked, thank you. Since you seem to think that the exact same argument you make against others doesn't apply to you, how do you logically justify that?

I have no intention of justifying anything to you.


This seems to be approaching the old MrBackoftheBux axiom, "When we do it, it's right, when they do it, it's wrong.

Nope. Wrong again.


" While he was applying that to conservatives vs liberals, and I'm by no means suggesting Feebs is a liberal, the logic (or lack thereof) seems to be the same? Is this your (il)logical justification for your position?

I have no need to justify myself to you, nor do I intend to. I don't answer to you.

You're not a conservative, you're a smug, superior, condescending knowitall who bruits about his womanising and his extensive travelling, then uses said travelling to excuse his constant belittling of anyone who isn't as "urbane and sophisticated".

My discussions with Feeb are between him and me.

Mind thine own business

Cold Warrior
10-29-2008, 07:24 AM
I have no intention of justifying anything to you.

Nope. Wrong again.

I have no need to justify myself to you, nor do I intend to. I don't answer to you.

You're not a conservative, you're a smug, superior, condescending knowitall who bruits about his womanising and his extensive travelling, then uses said travelling to excuse his constant belittling of anyone who isn't as "urbane and sophisticated".

My discussions with Feeb are between him and me.

Mind thine own business

Yeah,, right. Just like you do.

Sonnabend
10-29-2008, 07:32 AM
Yeah,, right. Just like you do.

Oh I do, frequently.

Incidentally, CW , your "parochial" and other cracks are a good illustration of that overinflated ego of yours. I don't pretend to be anything else other than who I am.

You on the other hand?...your dismissive attitude and condescending manner do you no credit, and me no harm.

Cold Warrior
10-29-2008, 07:37 AM
Oh I do, frequently.

Incidentally, CW , your "parochial" and other cracks are a good illustration of that overinflated ego of yours. I don't pretend to be anything else other than who I am.

You on the other hand?...your dismissive attitude and condescending manner do you no credit, and me no harm.

I really hope you're not self-delusional enough to believe that statement. Nevertheless, I've proven my point here, so I'm quite satisfied with the outcome.

Sonnabend
10-29-2008, 08:54 AM
Yeah..you've proven that the only thing bigger than Obama's plane is your ego. :rolleyes:

crockspot
10-29-2008, 09:39 AM
I had to straighten a libtard who has not ever read the constitution before on this one.

President of the Senate is the ONLY official duty of the VPOTUS, aside from waiting forthe POTUS to keel over.

When the POTUS gives a SOTU address, why do you think the VP and the Speaker of the House are both sitting right behind the POTUS? It aint because they are the VP, it's because they are the Top Ranking Person in the senate, sitting right next to the Top Ranking Person in the HOR.

For as much as liberals bitch and moan about how Chimpy has shreaded the Constitution, you would think more of these fucking morons would actually read the document. It's only a few pages long. Take ten minutes out of your pathetic life and read the damn thing, so you dont have to go thru the rest of your life being a retard.

wineslob
10-29-2008, 09:39 AM
The exit polls are pretty good for demographics. Of course, that will be the Palinista's line of attack:

1. Exit poll demographics were wrong
2. Lost because Obama was too moderate
3. Lost because of the evil RW media

See how simple that is?

Very. Fixed to reflect the LAST election Libtards still have their panties in a bunch about.

LogansPapa
10-29-2008, 09:41 AM
One does not "counter" a stupid point like this if it is better to ignore.

I think - like when asked which publications she reads on a regular basis - she just didn't know. :p

Cold Warrior
10-29-2008, 09:41 AM
Very. Fixed to reflect the LAST election Libtards still have their panties in a bunch about.

Exactly!!! You make my point for me! Extreme Left = Extreme Right. Big government with differing agendas.

Thanks.

crockspot
10-29-2008, 09:47 AM
I think - like when asked which publications she reads on a regular basis - she just didn't know. :p

I'd rather have someone who did not know, than someone like Obama, who tries to explain that the tape of him expressing a desire for a redistribution of wealth is not what it sounds like, because we are too stupid to understand his high falootin' academic speak. Perhaps you prefer a condescending elitist over a real human being, but I do not.

Cold Warrior
10-29-2008, 09:50 AM
I'd rather have someone who did not know, than someone like Obama, who tries to explain that the tape of him expressing a desire for a redistribution of wealth is not what it sounds like, because we are too stupid to understand his high falootin' academic speak. Perhaps you prefer a condescending elitist over a real human being, but I do not.

This is certainly not an endorsement of Obama, but in answer to your question, I certainly know I do. Those "condescending elitists" generally don't try to talk about "real Americans" as opposed, presumably those "faux Americans."

crockspot
10-29-2008, 09:54 AM
This is certainly not an endorsement of Obama, but in answer to your question, I certainly know I do. Those "condescending elitists" generally don't try to talk about "real Americans" as opposed, presumably those "faux Americans."

So you prefer someone who will lie and make some shit up, no matter how transparent that lie is, than someone who will just admit that they do not know something?

I know I haven't been around very much lately, but I really don't remember you being such an idiot. Did something happen in the last six months to cause you to lose brain cells, or is my memory just faulty?

Cold Warrior
10-29-2008, 10:07 AM
So you prefer someone who will lie and make some shit up, no matter how transparent that lie is, than someone who will just admit that they do not know something?

I know I haven't been around very much lately, but I really don't remember you being such an idiot. Did something happen in the last six months to cause you to lose brain cells, or is my memory just faulty?

All politicians lie. It's part of the standard cost of doing business. Again, however, I was not endorsing Obama, what he said to "Joltin' Joe from Kokomo," or his response afterwards. I'm merely pointing out that at times it's better to pretend to be a condescening elitist than one of the boys (or girls) and if I'm selecting a President and had no other criteria with which to make the decision, I'd probably pick the former.

As to your second question, I probably haven't changed much. Since I've been here, I've always been a moderate libertarian without allegiance to either the D's or the R's. In order to illustrate those tendencies, I would point to a number of previous threads, including a great one on selling sex toys in Alabama, but they're sadly gone now. Too bad, as they were classics.

However, McCain's capitulation to the worst elements in the R party have certainly caused me to be more vocal about it. "The maverick" fell prey to the worst tendencies of pure politics and chose a running mate completely unqualified to be president, presumabliy thinking that since Obama was equally unqualified he'd be shielded from those charges while at the same time appealing to moderates himself and making the whackies happy. Interesting bet, that may still work. However, it doesn't appear so, as indicated by the large number of moderate R's and independents who are running in the other direction as fast as they can.

megimoo
10-29-2008, 10:36 AM
All politicians lie. It's part of the standard cost of doing business. Again, however, I was not endorsing Obama, what he said to "Joltin' Joe from Kokomo," or his response afterwards. I'm merely pointing out that at times it's better to pretend to be a condescening elitist than one of the boys (or girls) and if I'm selecting a President and had no other criteria with which to make the decision, I'd probably pick the former.

As to your second question, I probably haven't changed much. Since I've been here, I've always been a moderate libertarian without allegiance to either the D's or the R's. In order to illustrate those tendencies, I would point to a number of previous threads, including a great one on selling sex toys in Alabama, but they're sadly gone now. Too bad, as they were classics.

However, McCain's capitulation to the worst elements in the R party have certainly caused me to be more vocal about it. "The maverick" fell prey to the worst tendencies of pure politics and chose a running mate completely unqualified to be president, presumabliy thinking that since Obama was equally unqualified he'd be shielded from those charges while at the same time appealing to moderates himself and making the whackies happy. Interesting bet, that may still work. However, it doesn't appear so, as indicated by the large number of moderate R's and independents who are running in the other direction as fast as they can.
"Since I've been here, I've always been a moderate libertarian without allegiance to either the D's or the R's."

The joke of the day.Are you sure that you haven't changed a mite?You are full bore Progressive/Maoist/Liberal hiding behind the Democrat party's skirts and so far into the bag for ObamaSan that you hate all things Conservative especially Sarah Paulin .

Your fears of that woman are fully spread all over these pages.Your quasi intellectual arrogance oozes out of every pore and you shape shift on every issue.Your venomous attacks on MC Cain and Paulin are second only to those of the intellectual giants EyePuss and L.P,libertarian my butt .

Cold Warrior
10-29-2008, 10:50 AM
"Since I've been here, I've always been a moderate libertarian without allegiance to either the D's or the R's."

The joke of the day.Are you sure that you haven't changed a mite?You are full bore Progressive/Maoist/
Liberal hiding behind the Democrat party's skirts and so far into the bag for ObamaSan that you hate all things Conservative especially Sarah Paulin .

Your fears of that woman are fully spread all over these pages.Your quasi intellectual arrogance oozes out of every pore and you shape shift on every issue.Your venomous attacks on MC Cain and Paulin are second only to those of the intellectual giants EyePuss and L.P,libertarian my butt .

Again, you mistake me. I am certainly no supporter of Obama and will be voting for neither D nor R. As to the term "moderate libertarian" I would consider combination of the following viewpoints to equate to that categorization:

1. Economics: Low taxes, free market principles with rational government regulation
2. Defense: A strong, international, even interventionist defense posture that succeeds through the projection of force
3. Social Issues: Government (at all levels) non-intervention in people's private lives, including drugs, relationships, and control of their own bodies. This implies support for legalizaiton of drugs, prostitution, and same-sex marriage as well as the continued legalization of abortion
4. Civili Liberties: Preservation of individual liberties as this is what distinquishes our country from many others I've been in and to sacrifice these in the name of security is possibly the worst thing we could do

Most of those views seem pretty "moderate" and "libertarian" to me?

megimoo
10-29-2008, 11:42 AM
Again, you mistake me. I am certainly no supporter of Obama and will be voting for neither D nor R. As to the term "moderate libertarian" I would consider combination of the following viewpoints to equate to that categorization:

1. Economics: Low taxes, free market principles with rational government regulation
2. Defense: A strong, international, even interventionist defense posture that succeeds through the projection of force
3. Social Issues: Government (at all levels) non-intervention in people's private lives, including drugs, relationships, and control of their own bodies. This implies support for legalizaiton of drugs, prostitution, and same-sex marriage as well as the continued legalization of abortion
4. Civili Liberties: Preservation of individual liberties as this is what distinquishes our country from many others I've been in and to sacrifice these in the name of security is possibly the worst thing we could do

Most of those views seem pretty "moderate" and "libertarian" to me?
Are you really much interested in my opinion of you ? Be it Constitutional libertarian or full bore Communist at least be honest and above board ! I too hold strong Constitutional bonds and a love for my/our country and a firm belief in the innate goodness of the American people or at least as they used to be .Perhaps I have lived too long and have become deluded, my America long dead and gone ?

AmPat
10-29-2008, 09:04 PM
I think - like when asked which publications she reads on a regular basis - she just didn't know. :p

1. Do you know? My point is it is inconceivable to think that somebody as accomplished as S.P. does not know what she reads on a regular basis. Perhaps she had one of those mopments where she was trying to imagine the next line of attacks the liberals would make on her and wanted to preclude a gift to the DIMocRATS.

2. She is not as stupid as the lefty media and the Uhh-Bama campaign frame her. Just because she isn't from an urbane, sofisticated east coast/west coast diseased metropolitan area, oh, and a LIBERAL, is no reason to attack her.:cool:

marinejcksn
10-30-2008, 03:44 AM
Again, you mistake me. I am certainly no supporter of Obama and will be voting for neither D nor R. As to the term "moderate libertarian" I would consider combination of the following viewpoints to equate to that categorization:

1. Economics: Low taxes, free market principles with rational government regulation
2. Defense: A strong, international, even interventionist defense posture that succeeds through the projection of force
3. Social Issues: Government (at all levels) non-intervention in people's private lives, including drugs, relationships, and control of their own bodies. This implies support for legalizaiton of drugs, prostitution, and same-sex marriage as well as the continued legalization of abortion
4. Civili Liberties: Preservation of individual liberties as this is what distinquishes our country from many others I've been in and to sacrifice these in the name of security is possibly the worst thing we could do

Most of those views seem pretty "moderate" and "libertarian" to me?

1, 3 and 4...yes.

2. Not very Libertarian. (although I tend to agree) :p

Cold Warrior
10-30-2008, 06:24 AM
1, 3 and 4...yes.

2. Not very Libertarian. (although I tend to agree) :p

(2) and a little bit of (1) is what makes it "moderate." And (2) is why I could not support Ron Paul, who was, in most other areas, the perfect candidate for me.

LogansPapa
10-30-2008, 10:08 AM
1. Do you know? My point is it is inconceivable to think that somebody as accomplished as S.P. does not know what she reads on a regular basis. Perhaps she had one of those mopments where she was trying to imagine the next line of attacks the liberals would make on her and wanted to preclude a gift to the DIMocRATS.

Of course I know - and so do you. That is a silly question.

The one posed by the reporter wasnít a gotícha quiz - it was to tell the voters something they didnít know about Ms. Palin. Shit - she could have said ĎField & Streamí and it would have sounded more intelligent than silence.

Come on, for Christís sake - donít complicate this any more than it needs to be.

McCain simply made a mistake. The girlís real good about issues like grisly bears getting into the local city dump, but thatís where her supposed expertise ends. Sheís there for the ĎChurch Ladiesí (ref. SNL) across this fine land of ours, and as arm candy for John. Thatís it - it has no more depth than that.

jinxmchue
10-30-2008, 10:26 AM
Of course I know - and so do you. That is a silly question.

The one posed by the reporter wasnít a gotícha quiz - it was to tell the voters something they didnít know about Ms. Palin. Shit - she could have said ĎField & Streamí and it would have sounded more intelligent than silence.

Come on, for Christís sake - donít complicate this any more than it needs to be.

McCain simply made a mistake. The girlís real good about issues like grisly bears getting into the local city dump, but thatís where her supposed expertise ends. Sheís there for the ĎChurch Ladiesí (ref. SNL) across this fine land of ours, and as arm candy for John. Thatís it - it has no more depth than that.

It must really suck to be you to know your side is going to lose so badly next week that you have to resort to cognitive dissonance to try to save face.

marinejcksn
10-30-2008, 11:30 AM
(2) and a little bit of (1) is what makes it "moderate." And (2) is why I could not support Ron Paul, who was, in most other areas, the perfect candidate for me.

See, I like Paul's stance on foreign matters. He comes off to me not as an isolationist but a non-interventionalist, and I can relate heavily to that (although it would limit my choice of duty stations if it were ever seriously implemented). :p

I see myself as a Conservative-leaning Libertarian. Basically I just want government as small as possible without falling into anarchy, maximum civil liberties for all, a strong military, border control and an end to our debt. The libertarian issues like ending the war on drugs would be great too.

MrsSmith
10-30-2008, 05:36 PM
Of course I know - and so do you. That is a silly question.

The one posed by the reporter wasn’t a got’cha quiz - it was to tell the voters something they didn’t know about Ms. Palin. Shit - she could have said ‘Field & Stream’ and it would have sounded more intelligent than silence.

Come on, for Christ’s sake - don’t complicate this any more than it needs to be.

McCain simply made a mistake. The girl’s real good about issues like grisly bears getting into the local city dump, but that’s where her supposed expertise ends. She’s there for the ‘Church Ladies’ (ref. SNL) across this fine land of ours, and as arm candy for John. That’s it - it has no more depth than that.

The girl? :D Sheesh, Pappy, I supose you'd call blinky, "Boy" wouldn't you? I thought you were maybe my age, I had no clue you were in your dotage. Second childhood? Maybe a little senile by now?? :D:D I guess that really does explain a lot of your half-baked posts.

LogansPapa
10-30-2008, 06:02 PM
Second childhood? Maybe a little senile by now?? :D:D I guess that really does explain a lot of your half-baked posts.

HEY! I'm not sen.............zzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

http://rootsofeasternmedicine.com/articles/grandpa_simpson_snoring1205264386.jpg

hampshirebrit
10-30-2008, 06:49 PM
I see myself as a Conservative-leaning Libertarian. Basically I just want government as small as possible without falling into anarchy, maximum civil liberties for all, a strong military, border control and an end to our debt. The libertarian issues like ending the war on drugs would be great too.



Fuckin A, well said.

This sums up my political position to a tee, especially government as small as possible and maximum civil liberties.

Hey, if you ship out through England, let me know, I'll buy you a beer.

Goldwater
10-30-2008, 07:42 PM
I'm liking the libertarian love thats coming through this thread.

AmPat
10-31-2008, 09:08 AM
Of course I know - and so do you. That is a silly question. The one posed by the reporter wasnít a gotícha quiz - it was to tell the voters something they didnít know about Ms. Palin. Shit - she could have said ĎField & Streamí and it would have sounded more intelligent than silence.

Come on, for Christís sake - donít complicate this any more than it needs to be.

McCain simply made a mistake. The girlís real good about issues like grisly bears getting into the local city dump, but thatís where her supposed expertise ends. Sheís there for the ĎChurch Ladiesí (ref. SNL) across this fine land of ours, and as arm candy for John. Thatís it - it has no more depth than that.

I disagree, it is a good question. You and I have NEVER. Let me say it again, NEVER had the weight of a hostile media attacking us like Sarah Palin. EVERY little thing she does is scrutinized and then held up by the left as another example of how dumb/unprepared etc. They have even waffled on her being such a backwoods yokel to being a phoney because she has such expensive clothes.

I would probably have hesitated to answer simple questions myself. You may be right in your low opinion of her. If so, your'e somehow more intuitive than 80% of Alaskans who think she is a great Governor. She must have more on the ball than the average DUmmy because she has accomplished much with little.

LogansPapa
10-31-2008, 09:15 AM
If so, your'e somehow more intuitive than 80% of Alaskans who think she is a great Governor. She must have more on the ball than the average DUmmy because she has accomplished much with little.

And that is where she should stay - less the RNC lose the 2012 election too.:cool:

AmPat
10-31-2008, 09:33 AM
And that is where she should stay - less the RNC lose the 2012 election too.:cool:
Why? Because you don't like her or you're scared S---less she might spark the base? I think Uh-bama shoulod go away. The only reason he is running is his own hubris. Even he knows he brings nothing to the table.:cool:

LogansPapa
10-31-2008, 08:13 PM
Ken Nails Palin :p:p:p:p

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9ImySRVdO4

AmPat
10-31-2008, 10:31 PM
Ken Nails Palin :p:p

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9ImySRVdO4

I couldn't help but notice; MSNBC, Daily KOS, and NY Times all on the same link.:rolleyes:

LogansPapa
10-31-2008, 10:49 PM
I couldn't help but notice; MSNBC, Daily KOS, and NY Times all on the same link.:rolleyes:


Does that make the man's words any less accurate?:confused:

AmPat
11-01-2008, 06:41 AM
Does that make the man's words any less accurate?:confused:
Fair question. His words are OPINION not FACT. My opinion is I believe she can handle the office. Sure there are better qualified but they aren't running.

The argument is weaker on the Uhbama side. He is totally unsuited for the job as well as less prepared than Sarah Palin. He however gets a pass by Liberals who attack Mrs. Palin even though he is the top of the DIM-LIB ticket. Why no outrage regarding his lesser experience? :cool:

megimoo
11-01-2008, 12:22 PM
I'm liking the libertarian love thats coming through this thread.

Much better than Liberal/Progressive spunk !