PALIN TO OBAMA: 'YOU LIE', 'DO YOUR JOB'

[Bailey]

Yes, yes! We must have those "abortion rights"! And anybody that tries to stop the killing of 1,000,000+ babies a year in the United States has to be viciously attacked and slandered ad infinitum because we certainly don't want those unborn babies to have the right to life. That would be unProgressive!!!!!!

(The words that I have for "abortion rights" people will be left unsaid or I will most certainly get the ban hammer for 'attacking' CU's 'resonable' libtard and, FWIW, there is absolutely nothing 'resonable' about killing the unborn. Nothing.)

Liberals want to ban Semi-automatic rifle that kill less then 500 people a year but abortion kills FAR more but that "right" is sacrosanct. They hypocrisy is stunning

[noonwitch]

That can be said, with a slight edit, for 0blamer, also: Communists like him, the rest of the US can't stand him.

In November of 2012, not even 6 monthds ago, over 50% voted for him. Do you think that Sarah could get over 50% of the vote? Against Hillary?

I don't. Only if she is running against Biden, and maybe not even then.

[Bailey]

In November of 2012, not even 6 monthds ago, over 50% voted for him. Do you think that Sarah could get over 50% of the vote? Against Hillary?

I don't. Only if she is running against Biden, and maybe not even then.

With the help of the MSM? sure I agree. Just off the top of my head the way she handled the Libya fiasco should shoot down her prospects, but with the help of the MSM no way in hell would anyone find out about it.

[Starbuck]

........But still, I want the GOP to run Sarah Palin as the candidate for President in 2016 ..........

Yeah. I remember when we conservatives celebrated when Obama was nominated. Clinton, too. On Clinton, we were nearly right. He never got 50% of the vote. Just like Woodrow Wilson.

No matter. Palin is not a candidate.

And Hillary does real well when no one is running against her. But that's the only time she does well. As a candidate she would have an awful lot to answer for. And she will not be able to say, "What does it matter?", and then disappear.
She's done.

[txradioguy]

In November of 2012, not even 6 monthds ago, over 50% voted for him. Do you think that Sarah could get over 50% of the vote? Against Hillary?

Yes. And it wouldn't be by a measly 2.4% margin like 44's win against Romney. Let's not forget that 4 million Republicans/Conservatives stayed home this last election because they didn't want to vote..again...for a RINO.

Sarah Palin would wipe the floor with the likes of Hillary Clinton.

And you know it and it scares the ever loving shit outta you.

Less people voted for Obama in his second election than his first...THAT has never happened before.

Reagan won TWO landslides talking the same plain spoken common sense way that Palin does. And he didn't have ANY conservative media outlets save for National Review.

People don't want another Clinton presidency anymore than they want another Bush in the WH.

I don't. Only if she is running against Biden, and maybe not even then.

That's because you're a brainwashed Libtard that can't imagine why anyone would vote for a Republican ever...no matter who it was.

[Bailey]

Yes. And it wouldn't be by a measly 2.4% margin like 44's win against Romney. Let's not forget that 4 million Republicans/Conservatives stayed home this last election because they didn't want to vote..again...for a RINO.

Sarah Palin would wipe the floor with the likes of Hillary Clinton.

And you know it and it scares the ever loving shit outta you.

Less people voted for Obama in his second election than his first...THAT has never happened before.

Reagan won TWO landslides talking the same plain spoken common sense way that Palin does. And he didn't have ANY conservative media outlets save for National Review.

People don't want another Clinton presidency anymore than they want another Bush in the WH.



That's because you're a brainwashed Libtard that can't imagine why anyone would vote for a Republican ever...no matter who it was.

The only problem with Palin is that she has to be gaff free(like anyone can do that)with a hostile MSM to deal with. In a just world some scumbag like hillary would get shot down due to her own foul-ups.

[Odysseus]

No one on the left is afraid of Sarah Palin. We want you to nominate her for President on your ticket in 2016. She's a weak candidate, who couldn't even finish out one term as Governor of Alaska before quitting.

The media and the left are terrified of Palin, hence the incredibly vitriolic and over the top attacks on her during the 2008 election, which continued until she announced that she wasn't running. And, let's not forget that AP assigned 11 reporters to fact check her book a year after the election had ended (wonder if they'll ever get around to fact-checking Obama's?).

Rogue’s Eleven By Mark Steyn November 14, 2009 7:19 A.M. If you wonder why American newspapering is dying, consider this sign-off: AP writers Matt Apuzzo, Sharon Theimer, Tom Raum, Rita Beamish, Beth Fouhy, H. Josef Hebert, Justin D. Pritchard, Garance Burke, Dan Joling and Lewis Shaine contributed to this report. Wow. That’s ten “AP writers” plus Calvin Woodward, the AP writer whose twinkling pen honed the above contributions into the turgid sludge of the actual report. That’s eleven writers for a 695-word report. What on? Obamacare? The Iranian nuke program? The upcoming trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed? No, the Associated Press assigned eleven writers to “fact-check” Sarah Palin’s new book, and in return the eleven fact-checkers triumphantly unearthed six errors. That’s 1.8333333 writers for each error. What earth-shattering misstatements did they uncover for this impressive investment? Stand well back: PALIN: Says she made frugality a point when traveling on state business as Alaska governor, asking “only” for reasonably priced rooms and not “often” going for the “high-end, robe-and-slippers” hotels. THE FACTS: Although she usually opted for less-pricey hotels while governor, Palin and daughter Bristol stayed five days and four nights at the $707.29-per-night Essex House luxury hotel (robes and slippers come standard) . . . That looks like AP paid 1.8333333 fact-checkers to agree with Mrs. Palin: She says she didn’t “often” go for “high-end” hotels; they say she “usually opted for less-pricey hotels.” That’s gonna make one must-see edition of Point/Counterpoint. Or is AP arguing “four nights” counts as “often”? Is that the point? AP assigned eleven reporters to demonstrate that four is a large number? Over at Powerline, John Hinderaker and his vast team of researchers (17 Minneapolis-area Somali jihadists, 29 ACORN-accredited child-sex slaves, and 43 unemployed Columbia School of Journalism graduates) fact-check AP’s fact-checkers. Coming next: PALIN: How many AP fact-checkers does it take to change a lightbulb? FACT: Palin has gone seriously “rogue” in her facts here. AP fact-checkers are prevented per union regulations from changing lightbulbs. AP writers Matt Apuzzo, Sharon Theimer, Tom Raum, Rita Beamish, Beth Fouhy, H. Josef Hebert, Justin D. Pritchard, Garance Burke, Dan Joling and Lewis Shaine contributed to this joke. We’ll be here all week. Permalink

© National Review Online 2013. All Rights Reserved.

Keep it up. I don't speak for the media or the Democratic party, but I suspect part of the reason they give her so much attention is because they want the GOP to nominate her for President because she would be easy to beat. Conservatives like her, the rest of the US can't stand her.

If your main defense of Sarah is an attack on Obama, well, that doesn't say very much about Sarah, does it?

Our main defense of Sarah is that she was an extremely effective governor, who worked her way through college while still managing to raise a large family. The only reason that she has become a weak candidate is the unrelenting negative press that your media lapdogs heaped upon her. Her interviews were edited selectively in order to make her appear less informed, and comments made by Tina Fey during her parody of Palin were repeatedly attributed to Palin. Mainstream media outlets repeated insane conspiracy theories about who the mother of her child was. The media's hatchet job was astonishing in its scope and viciousness. It would have been shameful, if anyone on the left was capable of feeling shame.

In November of 2012, not even 6 monthds ago, over 50% voted for him. Do you think that Sarah could get over 50% of the vote? Against Hillary?

I don't. Only if she is running against Biden, and maybe not even then.

If the media didn't stick their thumbs on the scales, certainly. Let's have an honest debate in which the moderators don't take sides with the Democrat. Let's have reporting that actually covers what was said and done, rather than what the media wants to pretend was said and done. For example, let's talk about Hillary's accomplishments. We can start with her record as an attorney (if we can find her billing records). Exactly what made her worthy of the fast-track to partnership in the Rose Law Firm, besides her husband having been elected as the Attorney General of Arkansas? How did her health care task force work out? Does she still believe that the Lewinsky scandal was the result of a VRWC? And if so, exactly how did the VRWC get Bill's penis into the intern? Her election to the senate came about as a result of name-recognition and carpet-bagging. Would she have been elected if she hadn't been Bill's wife? Can you name one piece of legislation that bears her stamp? Has she ever balanced a budget? Run any organization successfully?

Hillary has never accomplished anything that didn't entail riding Bill's coattails, and for women to consider her a role model is laughable. I thought that the whole point of feminism was making women independent, not making them into desperate clingers to dysfunctional marriages in return for power-sharing arrangements.

As for Biden, he's dimmer than a 10-watt bulb in a brown-out. He could lose a debate to a cheese grater and still be lauded by the media and the left, because the one thing that isn't a requirement for membership in either clique is integrity.

[noonwitch]

Yes. And it wouldn't be by a measly 2.4% margin like 44's win against Romney. Let's not forget that 4 million Republicans/Conservatives stayed home this last election because they didn't want to vote..again...for a RINO.

Sarah Palin would wipe the floor with the likes of Hillary Clinton.

And you know it and it scares the ever loving shit outta you.

Less people voted for Obama in his second election than his first...THAT has never happened before.

Reagan won TWO landslides talking the same plain spoken common sense way that Palin does. And he didn't have ANY conservative media outlets save for National Review.

People don't want another Clinton presidency anymore than they want another Bush in the WH.



That's because you're a brainwashed Libtard that can't imagine why anyone would vote for a Republican ever...no matter who it was.

I don't know how many ways to say it, but I am truly not afraid of Sarah Palin running for President. She will lose.

I think you do not understand how Palin is seen by the majority of voters-she is seen as the caricature of her that Tina Fey hilariously portrayed. Or stupid and arrogant, the way Julianne Moore portrayed her in Game Change on HBO.

And, if she runs and your party is stupid enough to nominate her, she will cost you yet another presidential election. But go ahead, that's what I want you to do.

But it makes you happy to think that liberals fear her, keep on living in your dream world so that we can have 4 more years of a liberal democrat in the White House.

[LukeEDay]

Keep it up. I don't speak for the media or the Democratic party, but I suspect part of the reason they give her so much attention is because they want the GOP to nominate her for President because she would be easy to beat. Conservatives like her, the rest of the US can't stand her.

If your main defense of Sarah is an attack on Obama, well, that doesn't say very much about Sarah, does it?

My main defense was the fact that obama is a moron, liberals are stupid, and the MSM is a rectum cleaner for obama ..

I'm a liberal who votes for liberals. Duh. I don't expect slavish loyalty to the federal government, but I vote for candidates who support abortion rights and gay marriage.


I have no problem with having conservatives for friends, coworkers, superiors, and neighbors. I just don't vote for them for office. I like the hygenist at the periodontist office who tells me all her conservative views during my cleanings. I can't really respond, nor do I want to when she's sticking pointy things in my mouth.

But still, I want the GOP to run Sarah Palin as the candidate for President in 2016 because I want the democrats to win.

Kill those innocent babies, but keep a convicted murderer alive. Great LOGIC!

The only reason you want Palin to be front runner is because MSNBC told you to. You watch way too much of the station. You have to be careful, that station makes you stupid.

In November of 2012, not even 6 monthds ago, over 50% voted for him. Do you think that Sarah could get over 50% of the vote? Against Hillary?

I don't. Only if she is running against Biden, and maybe not even then.

You forgot to add that 49% of them were welfare bums who refuse to get off their butts and get a job. The ones who have a lifestyle of sponging off the tax payers, the one who are generation welfare bums .. Yeah... Of course they would vote for obama. He promised them more free stuff (Cell phone, etc...). They saw Santa Claus in obama ... Although Santa Claus actually cared about 'PEOPLE' and not himself ..

Palin won't be running in 2016. She doesn't want to be President. I have no idea who the front runner will be in 2016. But for the Dems it will either be 'Crazy' Joe Biden or Hillary 'Socialist' Clinton... Get a good conservative candidate, and neither one will win.

[Bailey]

I don't know how many ways to say it, but I am truly not afraid of Sarah Palin running for President. She will lose.

I think you do not understand how Palin is seen by the majority of voters-she is seen as the caricature of her that Tina Fey hilariously portrayed. Or stupid and arrogant, the way Julianne Moore portrayed her in Game Change on HBO.

And, if she runs and your party is stupid enough to nominate her, she will cost you yet another presidential election. But go ahead, that's what I want you to do.

But it makes you happy to think that liberals fear her, keep on living in your dream world so that we can have 4 more years of a liberal democrat in the White House.

I know you are a liberal so I will make it easy for you, nearly 4 million conservatives didn't come out to vote due to Romney, THEY WILL more then likely come out to vote for PALIN. Get it? Hillary can't beat any good candidate, she hasn't to date. Now I know its going to be hard for any conservative due to the MSM being behind the dem candidate but that's just reality.