Sarah Palin

[pBills]

You'd take sloppy seconds after Tom?

 

Ewwww

 

 

You are right, nasty... maybe I'll just Tea Party her.

[Alaska Darin]

A community organizer with an undergraduate degree in political science from Columbia University. Someone who also graduated Magna Cum Laude from the Harvard Law School. As compared to Sarah Palin has a bachelor of science degree in communications-journalism. She was an amazing sports reporter.

 

Yeah, that community organizer... if it wasn't for those few great speeches. Man he is not smart at all.

Where did GWB graduate from?

 

Education has never equaled intelligence and it never will. Are you ever going to use an argument that isn't intellectually bankrupt?

[pBills]

Where did GWB graduate from?

 

Education has never equaled intelligence and it never will. Are you ever going to use an argument that isn't intellectually bankrupt?

 

 

 

Oh good lord, it's simple enough even for you. People bash him for being a community organizer yet do not take into account his education. Not a lot of dummies get into Harvard.

[John Adams]

Oh good lord, it's simple enough even for you. People bash him for being a community organizer yet do not take into account his education. Not a lot of dummies get into Harvard.

 

Wow are you wrong.

 

That doesn't mean Palin is smart. (She's not.)

[Alaska Darin]

Oh good lord, it's simple enough even for you. People bash him for being a community organizer yet do not take into account his education. Not a lot of dummies get into Harvard.

I'd wager virtually everything in my possession that you've never set foot on an Ivy League campus. You have absolutely no basis for your opinion other than your ridiculous man crush.

[IDBillzFan]

Not a lot of dummies get into Harvard.

And yet a guy who has never put a single person on his own payroll, or spent one minute running anything that resembles a profitable, innovative company is in charge of leading the US out of "the worst economy since the Great Depression." And I'll be honest...I thought the whole "no executive experience" was a ridiculous argument. The president doesn't need executive experience. He just needs to be smart enough to surround himself with people who do. Any idiot knows that, and yet, here we are with a guy who wasn't even smart enough to figure that out. A guy who's idea of a jobs summit is to invite union leaders. A guy who thinks taking over a car manufacturer shouldn't happen unless you give a larger share of the company to the unions than you do to the people who are actually paying for the company bailout.

 

I'm just curious wonder...which class from those oh, so prestigious schools taught him that spending $800 billion in taxes, to be be paid back by people not even born yet, as a "thank you" to political allies and done immediately to stem unemployment at 8%, is the proper way to fix an ailing economy? Did that idea come from Columbia or Harvard? Cuz that was sheer brilliance. Working like a charm. It was probably the same college that says a dip in unemployment simply because thousands of people stopped looking for work is considered "encouraging news."

 

If that's what they're teaching at Harvard, maybe we should stop letting Harvard grads run for president.

[IDBillzFan]

I had so much hope for this Tea PArty and now they are letting Palin rise to their "leadership." What the hell?

Getting her to speak in Tennessee was a smart idea (Tancredo speaking...not so much). The tea party folks got full press coverage from Thursday through Saturday, culminating with her prime time speech that was covered by everyone. Love her or hate her, what she said in her speech was a lot of what the tea party cares about, and likely what you had hoped for from this group: smaller government, less spending, sticking to the constitution, free market advocacy, etc.

 

That said, most of the country's local tea party groups had nothing to do with this convention, and actually sent emails to their local folks letting them know that they were not associated with it for a variety of reasons I won't bore you with here. But it got a crapload of press, and people recognize that this isn't just an isolated group of "far-right extremist astroturf neaderthal birthers." (Yes, it has some loons, but every party has loons.)

 

I guess what I'm saying is, I wouldn't judge the tea party folks good or bad because they had Palin speak. Judge them on what they do leading up to November, because from what I read, most of this past week's convention was designed to educate these folks on how to "get out the vote," so to speak, as well as targeting key November elections in which to focus their best efforts.

[pBills]

And yet a guy who has never put a single person on his own payroll, or spent one minute running anything that resembles a profitable, innovative company is in charge of leading the US out of "the worst economy since the Great Depression." And I'll be honest...I thought the whole "no executive experience" was a ridiculous argument. The president doesn't need executive experience. He just needs to be smart enough to surround himself with people who do. Any idiot knows that, and yet, here we are with a guy who wasn't even smart enough to figure that out. A guy who's idea of a jobs summit is to invite union leaders. A guy who thinks taking over a car manufacturer shouldn't happen unless you give a larger share of the company to the unions than you do to the people who are actually paying for the company bailout.

 

I'm just curious wonder...which class from those oh, so prestigious schools taught him that spending $800 billion in taxes, to be be paid back by people not even born yet, as a "thank you" to political allies and done immediately to stem unemployment at 8%, is the proper way to fix an ailing economy? Did that idea come from Columbia or Harvard? Cuz that was sheer brilliance. Working like a charm. It was probably the same college that says a dip in unemployment simply because thousands of people stopped looking for work is considered "encouraging news."

 

If that's what they're teaching at Harvard, maybe we should stop letting Harvard grads run for president.

 

 

You are 100% correct. Any and every great leader needs to surround themselves with a great team. I'll be the first to admit it, Bush had a pretty good team around him. Unfortunately, Obama brought to many people in from Bill Clinton's team. Not a very good move in my mind.

 

In regards to the auto industry, all sides should be represented. Management, Suppliers and yes the Union. Spending money on our infrastructure is a good idea as long as it's done correctly. It will create jobs, keep some people employed and get some money in their pockets. Problem is that they are picking projects that do not need to be done. I know in my area they were repaving a major highway. Since I drive on that highway every day, I know that it didn't need to be done. Money could have been spent elsewhere. School renovations, electrical grids, clean energy, etc.

 

Let me ask you this... if he didn't spend a dime do you think people would bash him for that? My answer is of course they would. He is in a damned if he does and damned if he doesn't area. Not saying you or anyone else has to feel bad for him. However, people have to keep in mind the magnitude of this problem. No matter who would have won the Presidency... Obama, McCain, Ron Paul, etc. NONE of them would have dug us out by now or had a major change in the where this country is now. NONE.

[keepthefaith]

I actually pay attention to her because it's scary that she was actually a VP candidate and that people still for whatever reason can't realize she's a dumbass.

 

Obama is living proof that a high intellect does not translate into effective leadership and sound solutions to big issues. I'm still waiting for you and the other libs on this board to defend what Obama and this congress is doing. Tell us why his solutions are good ones.

 

No doubt, the left is under attack for their current policies. It's the policies and decisions that are being attacked. What is so disappointing is that virtually nobody from the left will hear the attacks and respond with a decent defense of the policies and decisions themselves. Instead we hear about Palin writing on her hand. So what? She's attacking liberal policies and the left simply responds about her writing on her hand. It's these responses and a lack of support for the tax and spend policies that will lead to a change to the balance of power in Congress and ultimately the White house. That's where we're headed. If you and your lefty friends don't like that, I strongly suggest you find a way to build real support for your agenda. Sell your agenda on the merits. Don't bother playing that "independent" card. You're not one of them.

[John Adams]

I guess what I'm saying is, I wouldn't judge the tea party folks good or bad because they had Palin speak. Judge them on what they do leading up to November, because from what I read, most of this past week's convention was designed to educate these folks on how to "get out the vote," so to speak, as well as targeting key November elections in which to focus their best efforts.

 

Oh, I'm judging all right. It's early in the Tea Party idea and they don't know if they are just putting up a platform or an actual candidate but here's the Palin problem: She's just a voicebox saying some of the right things. BUT SHE'S NOT SMART.

 

They need to find people who are actual contenders that share their ideals. IF Palin runs as a Tea Party candidate, I will never ever never vote for her even if she can say the right things (if they are written on her palm).

[IDBillzFan]

No matter who would have won the Presidency... Obama, McCain, Ron Paul, etc. NONE of them would have dug us out by now or had a major change in the where this country is now. NONE.

I can only say this so many times so I'll say it one more time, and if you can't grasp it, I'll throw it in a sig and just reference you to it.

 

Fewer people would be critical of Obama's inability to have "dug us out by now" if HIS OFFICE didn't announce that the stimulus bill would stem unemployment. And the answer can't simply be "Well, Bush left us in worse shape than we realized." That's childish at best and unbelievably incompetent at worst. So while it's easy to say "you have to give him time," the reality is he's being criticized for not meeting his own self-imposed goal...and leaving us another trillion in debt in the process. So yes, it's safe to say that McCain and Paul would not not have fared better, but it's also safe to say that neither of them would have been stupid enough to pass a near-trillion-dollar "favors" bill on the back of a scared-crapless nation by telling them that without the bill, unemployment would go over 9.5%.

[pBills]

Obama is living proof that a high intellect does not translate into effective leadership and sound solutions to big issues. I'm still waiting for you and the other libs on this board to defend what Obama and this congress is doing. Tell us why his solutions are good ones.

 

No doubt, the left is under attack for their current policies. It's the policies and decisions that are being attacked. What is so disappointing is that virtually nobody from the left will hear the attacks and respond with a decent defense of the policies and decisions themselves. Instead we hear about Palin writing on her hand. So what? She's attacking liberal policies and the left simply responds about her writing on her hand. It's these responses and a lack of support for the tax and spend policies that will lead to a change to the balance of power in Congress and ultimately the White house. That's where we're headed. If you and your lefty friends don't like that, I strongly suggest you find a way to build real support for your agenda. Sell your agenda on the merits. Don't bother playing that "independent" card. You're not one of them.

 

 

 

I posted about Palin because whether you believe it or not. People will follow her. She will gain more momentum and push her way further into our government. With all of our other problems, we don't need her out there too. Also, anyone who says it is ok for her to read notes from her hand all the while bashing Obama for his use of a teleprompter is a hypocrite. Plus, do you really want her as your spokesperson against policies? I would hope not.

 

Personally, I am glad that things are moving in Washington. With that being said I am not entirely happy with everything that is being pushed forward. I am hoping that BOTH sides can pull the fingers out of their butts and do what is right for the country. Not just for the wealthy and the corporations and not just for the low and middle classes. Everyone. It's funny though, the people that bash the loudest also have nothing to add to the conversation and most likely are out for their own political agenda.

[pBills]

I can only say this so many times so I'll say it one more time, and if you can't grasp it, I'll throw it in a sig and just reference you to it.

 

Fewer people would be critical of Obama's inability to have "dug us out by now" if HIS OFFICE didn't announce that the stimulus bill would stem unemployment. And the answer can't simply be "Well, Bush left us in worse shape than we realized." That's childish at best and unbelievably incompetent at worst. So while it's easy to say "you have to give him time," the reality is he's being criticized for not meeting his own self-imposed goal...and leaving us another trillion in debt in the process. So yes, it's safe to say that McCain and Paul would not not have fared better, but it's also safe to say that neither of them would have been stupid enough to pass a near-trillion-dollar "favors" bill on the back of a scared-crapless nation by telling them that without the bill, unemployment would go over 9.5%.

 

 

You are right. Maybe they shouldn't have said it would turn things around quickly. However, I do believe it slowed down or stopped the decline. You are also right, the answer simply can't bash Bush, however the attacks can't simply blame Obama either. Fact is that the Stimulus actually started under Bush and Obama extended it. BOTH parties are at fault for where we are right now.

 

I am sure that both McCain and Ron Paul would have spent, spent and spent. You simply believe that they would not spent a dime or as much... I'm quite sure that they would have.

[OCinBuffalo]

Cripes! I spend a few weeks away from here....and what a shocker! Yet another Sarah Palin thread....

 

"Alex, I'll take 'Maniacal Obsession for $200' please"....

 

"In 2010 the Democrats failed to live up to even one of their lofty promises, didn't even try to govern, and instead chose to focus all of their attention this political pundit and her cable news employer."

 

"Who is Sarah Palin?"

 

"Correct!" Ding!

 

Go ahead....say Palin/Bush...one more time.

[pBills]

Cripes! I spend a few weeks away from here....and what a shocker! Yet another Sarah Palin thread....

 

"Alex, I'll take 'Maniacal Obsession for $200' please"....

 

"In 2010 the Democrats failed to live up to even one of their lofty promises, didn't even try to govern, and instead chose to focus all of their attention this political pundit and her cable news employer."

 

"Who is Sarah Palin?"

 

"Correct!" Ding!

 

Go ahead....say Palin/Bush...one more time.

 

 

Welcome. You are a bit late though on that witty post.

[IDBillzFan]

You are right. Maybe they shouldn't have said it would turn things around quickly. However, I do believe it slowed down or stopped the decline. You are also right, the answer simply can't bash Bush, however the attacks can't simply blame Obama either. Fact is that the Stimulus actually started under Bush and Obama extended it. BOTH parties are at fault for where we are right now.

 

I am sure that both McCain and Ron Paul would have spent, spent and spent. You simply believe that they would not spent a dime or as much... I'm quite sure that they would have.

I can't speak about Paul, but it was pretty clear that McCain wasn't going to fair much better than Obama. Near the end of the campaign, I stopped seeing McCain as the Republican candidate and more as Obama Lite. The minute he started talking about buying up the bad mortgages, he lost me to the extent that I actually was hoping to see Obama win so a fake Republican like McCain wouldn't bury the GOP further with his moronic thinking. As it turns out, Obama and his staff are absolutely destroying your party's credibility, so the GOP dodged a bullet...though Obama seems to be dead set on doing whatever he wants regardless of what the people, or his party, say.

 

I heard a great comment the other day from someone who heard Obama still wanting to push the Senate's health care bill. To paraphrase, "I know politicians will sometimes beat a dead horse, but I've never see one prop the dead horse up and try to ride it again."

[OCinBuffalo]

I posted about Palin because whether you believe it or not. People will follow her. She will gain more momentum and push her way further into our government. With all of our other problems, we don't need her out there too. Also, anyone who says it is ok for her to read notes from her hand all the while bashing Obama for his use of a teleprompter is a hypocrite. Plus, do you really want her as your spokesperson against policies? I would hope not.

Yawn! When oh when will they ever get it?

 

Do you think the reason Reagan ended up being so very effective, and Jimmy Carter so very ineffective, was due to their "momentum" and the rest of the BS you wrote, or their policies?

 

Sarah Palin could spend her entire Presidency wearing nothing but a thong and a sandwich board...but, if that sandwich board read: Cut spending, Cut taxes, Cut Bureaucracy, Win Wars...she'd have 10 times the chance of the being a better President than ole' Barry....because those policies will haul our asses out of this mess, and Barry's, just like Jimmy's before him, will haul them further in.

Personally, I am glad that things are moving in Washington. With that being said I am not entirely happy with everything that is being pushed forward. I am hoping that BOTH sides can pull the fingers out of their butts and do what is right for the country. Not just for the wealthy and the corporations and not just for the low and middle classes. Everyone. It's funny though, the people that bash the loudest also have nothing to add to the conversation and most likely are out for their own political agenda.

Ahh....it's nice when when a far-left person details in techincolor the entire playbook of the supposedly "anti-war" crowd. Right, so, based on this: it's fair to say that Micheal Moore, Cindy Sheehan, the dopey Europeans and some here....who added very little to that conversation except "BushBad", "SurgeBad", "GitmoBad", but have either been wrong about, or, have provided not one single idea/solution that is superior to the existing policy, are also most likely out for their own political agenda = the Democrats taking Congress in 2006.

 

Glad to see that we have all that cleared up now: yes, opposition to the Iraq war was 90% political, 10% lack of understanding, and 0% based on some sort of moral superiority.

I am sure that both McCain and Ron Paul would have spent, spent and spent. You simply believe that they would not spent a dime or as much... I'm quite sure that they would have.

Come again? John McCain, who has spent every minute he has been on TV that I have ever seen talking about cutting spending.....would have what now? Ron Paul? ARUFKME? '

 

You don't seem to get it: Obama's IDEOLOGY demands that he spend and spend like a drunken sailor....and that's why he won't stop: he's not a Clinton-esque pragmatist. He seems to me, right now anyway, to still be the naive campaign worker who honestly believes what is written on the bumper stickers he is handing out. He doesn't want to deal with the reality and even if he did, he really doesn't know how. Unfortunately for him, a world that doesn't function according to his ideology has never existed, even though it really does. Unfortunately for us, he is finding out much too late that most college professor culture/thinking is spawned in an totally unrealistic setting: um, college.

[blzrul]

My new favorite Palin quote is the one about how Texas and Alaska have a lot in common because they both "love their guns and religion". LOL

[Magox]

I'm not one for hyperbole, but BO has got to be one of the worst possible presidents that this country could have realistically elected. He is an idealogue despite his claims of not being one and the proof is in his cabinet selections. Less than 10% of his cabinet has private sector experience.

 

How in the hell do we expect to successfully get out of this severe downturn on a sustained basis when your cabinet is made up of a bunch of idealogical lawyers who have virtually no experience in running businesses?

 

I'm serious, How the !@#$ can any one in this world rationally explain that? You can't, that's how.

 

When you look at our National Debt problem it is clear as day that the main problem we have is entitlement spending. So what does the president propose? A new huge entitlement program in Health Insurance Reform. Of course the lemmings, who can't think for themselves ignore this fact.

 

The president says, no worries, we will pay for it through new taxes. Genius! Let's mandate all small businesses to offer health insurance for their employees, and lets also impose new taxes, nevermind that we are in a major economic contraction and that the landscape moving forward for small businesses is not a favorable one. While we are at it, let's allow the Bush Tax Cuts to expire (which virtually just about all credible economists believe is a bad idea).

 

Let's not stop there, we have to save the environment or else the Ice caps from the Himalayans will melt soon and all that other envirobullshit will come to fruition. The ONLY way we can save the world is with Cap and Trade. So let's just impose more burdening taxes on not just businesses but consumers as well. Don't worry, never fear, BO will subsidize the cost for lower income earners with those who have, because you know, they owe it to the "American Public".

 

At least BO is proving to be a great leader. He has shown amazing instincts when it comes to terrorism threats .

 

And yes, he has been able to crack the whip to his party members as evidenced through all his great accomplishments this past year. I mean it was such a difficult feat, he had the super majority in both the house and Senate and he was able to accomplish so much this year.

 

The guy is not a leader, he has no clue in how to stimulate the economy all he is an intellectual, charismatic idealogue.

 

Palin definitely isn't my first, second or for that matter third choice, but I'd much rather have her as our president than this idealogue who wants nothing more in life than to retransform this country into something other than what made this country great.

[pBills]

Yawn! When oh when will they ever get it?

 

Do you think the reason Reagan ended up being so very effective, and Jimmy Carter so very ineffective, was due to their "momentum" and the rest of the BS you wrote, or their policies?

 

Sarah Palin could spend her entire Presidency wearing nothing but a thong and a sandwich board...but, if that sandwich board read: Cut spending, Cut taxes, Cut Bureaucracy, Win Wars...she'd have 10 times the chance of the being a better President than ole' Barry....because those policies will haul our asses out of this mess, and Barry's, just like Jimmy's before him, will haul them further in.

 

Ahh....it's nice when when a far-left person details in techincolor the entire playbook of the supposedly "anti-war" crowd. Right, so, based on this: it's fair to say that Micheal Moore, Cindy Sheehan, the dopey Europeans and some here....who added very little to that conversation except "BushBad", "SurgeBad", "GitmoBad", but have either been wrong about, or, have provided not one single idea/solution that is superior to the existing policy, are also most likely out for their own political agenda = the Democrats taking Congress in 2006.

 

Glad to see that we have all that cleared up now: yes, opposition to the Iraq war was 90% political, 10% lack of understanding, and 0% based on some sort of moral superiority.

 

Come again? John McCain, who has spent every minute he has been on TV that I have ever seen talking about cutting spending.....would have what now? Ron Paul? ARUFKME? '

 

You don't seem to get it: Obama's IDEOLOGY demands that he spend and spend like a drunken sailor....and that's why he won't stop: he's not a Clinton-esque pragmatist. He seems to me, right now anyway, to still be the naive campaign worker who honestly believes what is written on the bumper stickers he is handing out. He doesn't want to deal with the reality and even if he did, he really doesn't know how. Unfortunately for him, a world that doesn't function according to his ideology has never existed, even though it really does. Unfortunately for us, he is finding out much too late that most college professor culture/thinking is spawned in an totally unrealistic setting: um, college.

 

 

No Sarah Palin would not be effective, because I believe that the American people would see through her fake ass. And really just like Jimmy? Give me a break on going to back to Reagan and Carter.

 

Also, I am by no means on the far left. And face it. Bush sucked as a President and that was after EIGHT years, not one. Personally, I can not stand Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan.

 

Opposition to the war for many people is as simple as we shouldn't have been there in the first place. Not saying that is something I believe, but for the longest time it has been one mismanaged war. I am so glad you understand and know ALL about the Iraq war though.

 

Just because McCain said it doesn't mean he will do it. What part of politics don't you get? People go after Obama saying he promised this and that and they are not happy those promises aren't coming true yet. You honestly believe McCain would be different?

 

And you don't get it either... Republicans spend like crazy too. Remember the surplus we had before Bush came into office? Probably not. And to say that Obama doesn't want or isn't dealing with reality is just dumb. Everyone on both sides of the aisle are dealing with reality now. BOTH sides can't get over their issues to get things done. Not just one party, both parties.

 

If you are going to be preaching from the soap box, every now and then look to the right in disgust.