Sarah Palin

[Magox]

I will eat my vote again. Her on McCain's ticket steered me off McCain. I certainly couldn't vote for her outright. She's dumb and basks in the glow of her own stupidity.

That's up to you. I hope that she doesn't win the primaries, but if it comes down to it, I'll take just about any fiscally conservative administration over the present one, and just going by the limited experience out of both of them that I have seen, she's had more tangible success in governing than BO. And it's not even close.

[IDBillzFan]

That's up to you. I hope that she doesn't win the primaries, but if it comes down to it, I'll take just about any fiscally conservative administration over the present one, and just going by the limited experience out of both of them that I have seen, she's had more tangible success in governing than BO. And it's not even close.

A lot can happen between now and 2012, and if one of those happenings is a terror attack that kills Americans on American soil (say, the next Panty Bomber gets it right and blows up a plane over a city like Detroit), we'll all be voting for Dick Cheney in 2012. (And the icing on the liberal gutspill would be if he picked his daughter Liz to be his running mate. )

[Alaska Darin]

That's up to you. I hope that she doesn't win the primaries, but if it comes down to it, I'll take just about any fiscally conservative administration over the present one

Let me know when there is one because I've never seen it.

, and just going by the limited experience out of both of them that I have seen, she's had more tangible success in governing than BO. And it's not even close.

Bull. About the only success she's really had was an appointed office. Her "governorship" was noteworthy only in that she quit in a very strange way.

[Magox]

Let me know when there is one because I've never seen it.

 

Bull. About the only success she's really had was an appointed office. Her "governorship" was noteworthy only in that she quit in a very strange way.

Ok, what are BO's accomplishments? And to your first point, me neither. However just about anything is better than BO, and I'm dead serious when I say that.

[Gary M]

Ok, what are BO's accomplishments?

 

He has managed to piss off almost everyone that voted for him!!!!

[DC Tom]

Ok, what are BO's accomplishments? And to your first point, me neither. However just about anything is better than BO, and I'm dead serious when I say that.

 

Although if you were being completely accurate, it's not Obama you're against as much as Obama-Pelosi-Reid.

[Magox]

Although if you were being completely accurate, it's not Obama you're against as much as Obama-Pelosi-Reid.

I can't completely dispute what you just said, but afterall it is his agenda, he pushed for an overreaching comprehensive health insurance reform, cap and trade, the stimulus bill, and he is responsible for appointing all those cabinet members that have virtually no experience in the business world. He also needs to be held accountable for !@#$ing over the GM bondholders and trying to cut out a deal with the Unions in the health reform bill. ****, I could go on and on, but yes when you combine all of them together it is as if we are up against the Progressive three headed monster.

[IDBillzFan]

Although if you were being completely accurate, it's not Obama you're against as much as Obama-Pelosi-Reid.

Reid is toast. A recent Rasmussen poll has him losing his November election by 73% when the model had him running against a toilet plunger. It's a long way to November, but still...

[DC Tom]

Reid is toast. A recent Rasmussen poll has him losing his November election by 73% when the model had him running against a toilet plunger. It's a long way to November, but still...

 

Against a Republican, though, I'll bet it's a close race...

[IDBillzFan]

Against a Republican, though, I'll bet it's a close race...

Awesome.

[OCinBuffalo]

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.

You REEEAAALLLLYYYY aren't getting it are you? Let's try again: every single sorry-assed argument you are making about Palin was made, if not doubly so, about Reagan.

 

You are forcing the comparison, because I know I have heard this all before...from the people who constantly criticized Reagan. That's right....stop doing the same exact thing to Palin that you did to Reagan, and the comparison goes away. This should be a relatively simple concept to grasp. An objective observer should be able to see what is happening here. Are you looking at this objectively?

 

Look, I am not the one who can't keep myself from starting Palin threads. You do realize that this obsession you have will only serve to immunize her, just like it did Reagan, and, make Democrats look even more impotent, just like Carter, right?

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.

Fair enough, I am betting at least 50% of Democrats feel the same way. But, that doesn't mean that they didn't use the far-left ridiculousness to gain power.....4 years ago, not 1. I notice you conveniently left out the fact that Democrats have had control of Congress for 4 years. I guarantee that has as much to do with this, if not more, than Obama's consistent screw-ups.

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.

I know plenty about it, and certainly I know more about it than you do. I think the most FAIR way to look at it is: Bush was given a no-win situation. Either he chooses war, and is wrong, or, chooses no war, looks weak, empowers Saddam and the rest of the tin-horn dictators out there, and sets an unhealthy precedent that Europe, and not us, controls what we do with our military.

 

If anything, I blame Bush's NSC for Iraq...they put him in that situation, and, rather than cowering in the corner, or, leaving it to Congress(ahem, Obama), Bush stepped up and made the call. It was the wrong call, and Bush paid for it, sort of. But, even as a supposed "blatant idiot, and a great liar" , at the same time, he beat the Democrats and got re-elected. By and large Americans understood that he did what he thought was right, given the information he had. Making decisions, even bad ones, is always better than making no decisions.

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?

Yes, I honestly believe that it would be different...because...McCain would be promising and delivering things that work and that he could actually do, based on the real world and based on his experience.

 

Again, you are missing the point: it's not so much the person as it is the policies and/or the ideological blinders. Look at Obama, and look at Bush: both refuse to remove their blinders. In contrast, McCain has been criticized by Republicans for years. Why? Because he doesn't wear the same blinders that people like Bush/Obama wear. And, the fact is that Obama's "spend your way out of the recession" policies simply don't work. We know this, because Jimmy Carter already tried them once, and failed. Obama, and the rest of the far-left doesn't seem to want to learn from history. Instead, they want to drive their agenda for as long as they can...and are therefore doomed. Again.

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.

Fair enough. I thought this thread was about Palin....and now we are talking about Bush/the Republican Congress? Well, yeah, there's no way we can afford the Medicare prescription drug program. In fact, we had an opportunity to save all of the LBJ/FDR programs, but that window is all but closed. We should have raised taxes to pay for the Iraq war, and done it with a REAL occupying Army that could secure captured territory, protect its communication lines, and secure the borders of the country.

 

In all cases, there is little doubt that we have seen a lot of screw ups from the Republicans...but none of that justifies even more screw ups from Democrats, especially ones that are based on ideology, and not common sense: one-sided health care reform with exactly 0 real, cost-cutting provisions, Global Horseschit, closing GITMO, or treating terrorist like criminals.

 

People aren't pissed at Obama because of who he is, or his earnest commitment to do as well as he can, and we all know he got dealt a schitty hand. People are pissed because instead of putting aside the nonsense ideology, denying himself, and especially his team, the ability to make excuses by blaming Bush, and getting real problems really solved, he is flailing around in a sea of nonsense and most importantly ignoring 80% of the American people in favor of his little 20% crew of ball-washers. EDIT: and no, that 20% is nowhere near "smarter" than the rest of us.

[Nanker]

Today's WSJ - Cheney's Revenge

The Administration has tried to break from its predecessors on several big antiterror issues, and it is on those that it is suffering the humiliation of having to walk back from its own righteous declarations. This is Dick Cheney's revenge.

 

Begin with Mr. Obama's executive order, two days after his inauguration, to shut the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay within one year. The President issued this command before undertaking a study to determine how or even whether his goal was feasible.

 

The Administration similarly has been backing away from its intention, announced in November, to try 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other enemy combatants in civilian court a few blocks from Ground Zero.

The Administration seems to have thought no more deeply about the potential legal pitfalls of civilian trials than about the security and logistical problems.

Mr. Obama himself responded to criticism by suggesting that what he had in mind was a series of show trials, in which the verdict and punishment were foreordained.

There is a real possibility, too, that convictions would be overturned on technicalities. KSM and other prospective defendants were subjected to interrogation techniques that, while justifiable in irregular war, would be forbidden in an ordinary criminal investigation. When Senator Herb Kohl, a Wisconsin Democrat, asked Attorney General Eric Holder what the Administration would do if a conviction were thrown out, Mr. Holder said: "Failure is not an option." A judge may not feel the same way, and the Administration is derelict if it is as unprepared for the contingency as Mr. Holder indicated.

A third policy under increasing criticism is the Administration's approach to interrogation. In August, Mr. Holder announced that he had appointed a special prosecutor to investigate—or rather re-investigate—allegations of abuse by CIA interrogators. Then came the attempted Christmas bombing and the revelation that the new interrogation group is not fully operational and won't be for months. Not that it would have had a chance to question Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. On Mr. Holder's order, investigators immediately classified him as a criminal defendant. After interrogating him for just 50 minutes, they advised him of his right to remain silent, which he promptly exercised.

Oh yes. Bring on the brains, you know - the really, truly very smartest, brightest and most rooster-sure-they're-right kind of intellectuals. 1600 on their SATs and they still don't know how to cross the street properly. Yeah, we need more of them telling us how to live. They're so much smarter than we peons.

[pBills]

You REEEAAALLLLYYYY aren't getting it are you? Let's try again: every single sorry-assed argument you are making about Palin was made, if not doubly so, about Reagan.

 

You are forcing the comparison, because I know I have heard this all before...from the people who constantly criticized Reagan. That's right....stop doing the same exact thing to Palin that you did to Reagan, and the comparison goes away. This should be a relatively simple concept to grasp. An objective observer should be able to see what is happening here. Are you looking at this objectively?

 

Look, I am not the one who can't keep myself from starting Palin threads. You do realize that this obsession you have will only serve to immunize her, just like it did Reagan, and, make Democrats look even more impotent, just like Carter, right?

 

Fair enough, I am betting at least 50% of Democrats feel the same way. But, that doesn't mean that they didn't use the far-left ridiculousness to gain power.....4 years ago, not 1. I notice you conveniently left out the fact that Democrats have had control of Congress for 4 years. I guarantee that has as much to do with this, if not more, than Obama's consistent screw-ups.

 

I know plenty about it, and certainly I know more about it than you do. I think the most FAIR way to look at it is: Bush was given a no-win situation. Either he chooses war, and is wrong, or, chooses no war, looks weak, empowers Saddam and the rest of the tin-horn dictators out there, and sets an unhealthy precedent that Europe, and not us, controls what we do with our military.

 

If anything, I blame Bush's NSC for Iraq...they put him in that situation, and, rather than cowering in the corner, or, leaving it to Congress(ahem, Obama), Bush stepped up and made the call. It was the wrong call, and Bush paid for it, sort of. But, even as a supposed "blatant idiot, and a great liar" , at the same time, he beat the Democrats and got re-elected. By and large Americans understood that he did what he thought was right, given the information he had. Making decisions, even bad ones, is always better than making no decisions.

 

Yes, I honestly believe that it would be different...because...McCain would be promising and delivering things that work and that he could actually do, based on the real world and based on his experience.

 

Again, you are missing the point: it's not so much the person as it is the policies and/or the ideological blinders. Look at Obama, and look at Bush: both refuse to remove their blinders. In contrast, McCain has been criticized by Republicans for years. Why? Because he doesn't wear the same blinders that people like Bush/Obama wear. And, the fact is that Obama's "spend your way out of the recession" policies simply don't work. We know this, because Jimmy Carter already tried them once, and failed. Obama, and the rest of the far-left doesn't seem to want to learn from history. Instead, they want to drive their agenda for as long as they can...and are therefore doomed. Again.

 

Fair enough. I thought this thread was about Palin....and now we are talking about Bush/the Republican Congress? Well, yeah, there's no way we can afford the Medicare prescription drug program. In fact, we had an opportunity to save all of the LBJ/FDR programs, but that window is all but closed. We should have raised taxes to pay for the Iraq war, and done it with a REAL occupying Army that could secure captured territory, protect its communication lines, and secure the borders of the country.

 

In all cases, there is little doubt that we have seen a lot of screw ups from the Republicans...but none of that justifies even more screw ups from Democrats, especially ones that are based on ideology, and not common sense: one-sided health care reform with exactly 0 real, cost-cutting provisions, Global Horseschit, closing GITMO, or treating terrorist like criminals.

 

People aren't pissed at Obama because of who he is, or his earnest commitment to do as well as he can, and we all know he got dealt a schitty hand. People are pissed because instead of putting aside the nonsense ideology, denying himself, and especially his team, the ability to make excuses by blaming Bush, and getting real problems really solved, he is flailing around in a sea of nonsense and most importantly ignoring 80% of the American people in favor of his little 20% crew of ball-washers. EDIT: and no, that 20% is nowhere near "smarter" than the rest of us.

 

 

I got up to your comment about Reagan... sorry I wasn't forcing anything. I was responding. Tool.

[KD in CA]

Are you ever going to use an argument that isn't intellectually bankrupt?

 

An intellectually bankrupt argument would be a step up for pBills.

 

It's a comfort for him to stretch his legs in a Sarah Palin thread after he accidentally wandered into a couple of economy related discussions and embarrassed himself again.

[pBills]

An intellectually bankrupt argument would be a step up for pBills.

 

It's a comfort for him to stretch his legs in a Sarah Palin thread after he accidentally wandered into a couple of economy related discussions and embarrassed himself again.

 

 

Wow, typical douche response. Attack those who aren't even talking to you. Let me guess I embarassed myself because I didn't go back to discuss reagan and carter. Wow, I feel shamed.

[pBills]

I'm going to make my life easier here... and mimic a lot of people. It's pretty easy after all.

 

Obama = Bad

Dems = Bad

 

Everyone on the right = Good

 

[Alaska Darin]

I'm going to make my life easier here... and mimic a lot of people. It's pretty easy after all.

 

Obama = Bad

Dems = Bad

 

Everyone on the right = Good

 

Good thing for you, Midol is an OTC drug.

[Simon]

If I may directly quote Stephen Colbert who actually said the following on the air the other day:

"Sarah Palin is a fvcking retard!-)"

[pBills]

Good thing for you, Midol is an OTC drug.

 

 

WOW, again. So witty. Did you use a coupon to get that joke?

[murra]

I'm going to make my life easier here... and mimic a lot of people. It's pretty easy after all.

 

Obama = Bad

Dems = Bad

 

Everyone on the right = Good

 

 

You know what I don't understand? Why you always try and simplify everything. It only shows you have no understanding of how the real world works, and how you only comprehend the basic talking points.

 

In all honesty, if you start a thread where you joyfully mock Sarah Palin and if at some point pages later in that same thread make a post like you just did you should be banned for pure hypocrisy. There is no need for you to continually bring absolutely nothing to the discussion.