View Full Version : Words of Wisdom from Sarah Palin
mark46th
11-15-2010, 23:16
I was watching the promos for the next installment of Sarah Palin's Alaska. She was talking to one of her daughters, telling her-
"Don't retreat. Reload."
I liked it....
She should heed her own advice. Talk is cheep.
She should heed her own advice. Talk is cheep.
Stop with the negative waves Moriarty! I like Sarah. Where else are you going to find a reasonably attractive woman who likes to hunt, fish, shoot guns and expresses a strong conservative patriotism? Otherwise, you end up with Janet Reno and Joy Behar.
"Words of Wisdom from Sarah Palin"
Is that the title for a new SNL episode? ;)
Richard :munchin
Stop with the negative waves Moriarty! I like Sarah. Where else are you going to find a reasonably attractive woman who likes to hunt, fish, shoot guns and expresses a strong conservative patriotism? Otherwise, you end up with Janet Reno and Joy Behar.
You know, in retrospect, Janet Reno seems almost reasonable, given today's crop of fire-breathing hellbitches for comparison.
neecheepure
11-16-2010, 07:42
Contradiction of terms; she may be many things, but wise she is not.
Lets see
The press told us Obama was the smartest man in America.
The press told us Palin was as dumb as a sack of rocks.
Looks like the press is batting 100%.
Lets see
The press told us Obama was the smartest man in America.
The press told us Palin was as dumb as a sack of rocks.
Looks like the press is batting 100%.
I don't know about "smartest man in America", but he can read a teleprompter like nobody's business, and I understand he sings the Muslim call of prayer like a bird.
"Most beautiful sound in the world", he says.
Dozer523
11-16-2010, 08:37
Obama is Gilligan and Sarah is Barbie.
(We can be Skipper but we better not be Ken.)
I'll watch just to see if she can handle a rifle.
Obama is Gilligan and Sarah is Barbie.
(We can be Skipper but we better not be Ken.)
I'll watch just to see if she can handle a rifle.
:D
mark46th
11-16-2010, 10:32
I don't think Sarah Palin should run for president but I do think she was smeared by the press. She is a better manager/administrator than she is given credit for. The press destoyed her chances at proving her leadership at a higher level. Now that her personal life is on display, any chances for higher office are minimal. I would like to have seen her finish her governorship. She should have run for Murkowski's seat. If she had won the Senate seat, then she could have resigned as governor.
I think her main contribution to conservative politics will be as a fundraiser...
dr. mabuse
11-16-2010, 10:53
So far, the people I've met face to face that harshly criticize her for her lack of intelligence haven't particularly struck me as the shiniest pennies in the piggy bank either, regardless of how much "wallpaper" that have hanging up at home.
:D :munchin
So far, the people I've met face to face that harshly criticize her for her lack of intelligence haven't particularly struck me as the shiniest pennies in the piggy bank either, regardless of how much "wallpaper" that have hanging up at home.
Yes, but this discounts the " It takes one to know one." adage. I guess we will see, the majority of Americans elected a flashy speech reader in 2008, why wouldn't these same folks discount the extended advertising of "reality tv", and vote to elect a foxy folksy fool as well?
I'm all for her capitalizing on her 15 minutes as long as she isn't Ross Perot 2012...
mark46th
11-16-2010, 11:45
I wouldn't confuse her lack of sophistication with a lack of intelligence. I think she has a lot on the ball but isn't polished.
GratefulCitizen
11-16-2010, 11:52
Sarah is probably having a great laugh at liberals and all of her detractors.
She doesn't hold public office, can't be voted out, and attacking her just increases her wealth and power.
Yup, that's a dumb one alright.
Watching the liberal gnashing of teeth is a source of great amusement.
Concerning their Palin Derangement Syndrome, I can only say this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo
Yup, that's a dumb one alright.
This is all lovely and capitalistic until it gets to her head and she decides to run as a Tea Party or Independent candidate in 2012, which splits the conservative vote a la Ross Perot 92' and results in 4 more years of Oba-Mao Dim rule...
This is all lovely and capitalistic until it gets to her head and she decides to run as a Tea Party or Independent candidate in 2012, which splits the conservative vote a la Ross Perot 92' and results in 4 more years of Oba-Mao Dim rule...
Which the entrenched Republican Leadership needs to realize. The Tea Party Folks are not in the Republican Party's pocket.
If you want to be invited to the next dance you better be nice to the person that brought you to this one.
It would seem that concept is beyond the R leadership thought process. They seem to be more like - "Oh, well, the elections is over. Time to get back to business as usual."
Palin and the Tea Party bring energy and manpower to the election cycle. The R leadership better figure out how to use it before they lose it.
And on splitting the conservative vote. That's what gave us that dude from the S/W this last election cycle. Mittens and the rest of the crowd split the conservative vote allowing Mr Maverick to carry the torch.
The only thing that kept his campaign out of the toilet was his picking Palin. Even at that a number of conservatives felt "too little, too late". 25,000 of them in NC thought so and pulled the level for Barr giving NC to Obama.
greenberetTFS
11-16-2010, 15:08
Which the entrenched Republican Leadership needs to realize. The Tea Party Folks are not in the Republican Party's pocket.
If you want to be invited to the next dance you better be nice to the person that brought you to this one.
It would seem that concept is beyond the R leadership thought process. They seem to be more like - "Oh, well, the elections is over. Time to get back to business as usual."
Palin and the Tea Party bring energy and manpower to the election cycle. The R leadership better figure out how to use it before they lose it.
And on splitting the conservative vote. That's what gave us that dude from the S/W this last election cycle. Mittens and the rest of the crowd split the conservative vote allowing Mr Maverick to carry the torch.
The only thing that kept his campaign out of the toilet was his picking Palin. Even at that a number of conservatives felt "too little, too late". 25,000 of them in NC thought so and pulled the level for Barr giving NC to Obama.
Can't really disagree,have to agree with Pete,especially on the fact that R leadership better figure out how to use her effectively!..........:rolleyes::eek::cool:
Big Teddy :munchin
I think her main contribution to conservative politics will be as a fundraiser...If only the McCain campaign (or Ms. Palin herself) had had this insight in the fall of 2008.
GratefulCitizen
11-16-2010, 15:42
This is all lovely and capitalistic until it gets to her head and she decides to run as a Tea Party or Independent candidate in 2012, which splits the conservative vote a la Ross Perot 92' and results in 4 more years of Oba-Mao Dim rule...
Communication technology has changed the centers of power since 1992.
Sarah doesn't need to be elected to wield power.
It is likely that she wields more power (domestically, at least) out of office than she would in any office, including the presidency.
Her decision to leave the governor's office did not decrease her influence, it increased it.
Liberals of both the democratic and republican variety are simply enraged at one simple fact:
She is out of range of their political weapons, and they are in range of her political weapons.
dr. mabuse
11-16-2010, 15:57
Yes, but this discounts the " It takes one to know one." adage. I guess we will see, the majority of Americans elected a flashy speech reader in 2008, why wouldn't these same folks discount the extended advertising of "reality tv", and vote to elect a foxy folksy fool as well?
I'm all for her capitalizing on her 15 minutes as long as she isn't Ross Perot 2012...
AKV, not implying she's a Rhodes scholar, I'm just saying. And she is a little easier to look at than Ross. :D
The "takes one to know one" adage should be discounted because it's not true. Too many life examples to list here.
With increased self reflection and age, I'm growing more reluctant to throw the "fool" label around too quickly as well. :o
If nothing else, she could continue to be a rabble-rouser for entertainment value alone. There is value in that she annoys people that I don't particularly care for. :D:D
I don't think Sarah Palin should run for president but I do think she was smeared by the press. She is a better manager/administrator than she is given credit for. The press destoyed her chances at proving her leadership at a higher level. Now that her personal life is on display, any chances for higher office are minimal. I would like to have seen her finish her governorship. She should have run for Murkowski's seat. If she had won the Senate seat, then she could have resigned as governor.
I think her main contribution to conservative politics will be as a fundraiser...
Agree. She's stacking up a long list of "should haves," but she's still someone to watch (er..no pun intended). I wouldn't underestimate Sarah Palin.
Seems the New Oxford American Dictionary (http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/11/palins-refudiate-wins-2010-word-of-the-year.php) has named Palin's "refudiate" as word of the year. If nothing else comes from Sarah, we'll at least have a new word because of her. :D
Susan
Green Light
11-16-2010, 17:14
It's as good as "speechify."
As much as I enjoyed the SNL skits, too many of the blisterhead vote sellers think that Tina Fey's lines were actually said by Palin: how many times was "You can see Russia" repeated as a quote along with a dozen others?
One thing about Progressives: you can tell who they're afraid of. Just look at who they try to destroy. She scares the tar out of them - that's why they continue the smear. Just watch Joyless or Whoopee react when her name is mentioned. :D
dr. mabuse
11-16-2010, 18:13
Nobody kicks a dead dog, as it were. :cool:
I wouldn't confuse her lack of sophistication with a lack of intelligence. I think she has a lot on the ball but isn't polished.I'd also keep an eye on:
Marco Antonio Rubio:lifter
Stay safe.
Nightfall
11-17-2010, 01:27
Well I like her, but not for the reasons most do. I don't think she is the brightest bulb in a certain regard, but in others, she's tight as a drum. Reminds me of an Asimov essay I read on defining intelligence. Essentially the norm is to say give a guy, a mechanic for example, a math test. If he fails does this make him less intelligent than the person who passes? Now, give him a car to fix, and the other, say a math professor the same car, math professor fails miserably, but the mechanic fixes it in minutes. Does that make the math professor less intelligent than the mechanic. My point I suppose, is she is doing quite well for someone projected by the media as dumb as a rock. I've been tested having an IQ in the high 160's, but I'm poor as dirt, and would certainly not even be considered for any sort of public office, definately not on TV selling books and making a bundle preaching common sense to the masses. Intelligence is relative. I like her common sense, her political acumen, her personallty. Do I think she is fit to lead the country? I don't think anyone is "fit" to lead a country. You just do the best you can with what you have to work with. I wouldn't want the job. My hairline is sparse at best with what I have to work with now. Watching the last few POTUS's hair go from nice and neat to grey and withering in their first term should indicate what they have to deal with.
My current favorite quote from her is an old one, "How's that hopey changey thing working out for ya?"
Her one liners are gold.
Dozer523
11-17-2010, 07:05
Well I like her, but not for the reasons most do. . .
Not the brightest bulb in a certain regard, but she's tight as a drum. Her one liners are gold.
That's why I'd date her, not make her president.
No matter how she is packaged and marketed, a Sarah does not a Condi make.
Richard :munchin
No matter how she is packaged and marketed, a Sarah does not a Condi make.
Richard :munchin
Roger that.
I'm 100% positive Palin didn't vote for President Obama.
Can't say the same about Rice.
mark46th
11-17-2010, 10:32
Intelligence is a funny thing. You can have an IQ of 160 but not have the common sense God gave a hat. The world has seen many leaders without a formal education, such as Brazilian President "Lula" Da Silva, who has a fourth grade education...
1stindoor
11-17-2010, 11:21
Roger that.
I'm 100% positive Palin didn't vote for President Obama.
Can't say the same about Rice.
I don't know about that...I would be hard pressed to believe she would have voted for him. This is a woman that speaks several languages and is respected around the world. I think she recognizes all flash and no substance when she sees it.
I don't know about that...I would be hard pressed to believe she would have voted for him. This is a woman that speaks several languages and is respected around the world. I think she recognizes all flash and no substance when she sees it.
I'd be in complete agreement with you had I not seen the following clip. I extrapolate from it that her pride in her race may have overcome her ability to recognize the flash and lack of substance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhSjuduQGN4
I'd be in complete agreement with you had I not seen the following clip. I extrapolate from it that her pride in her race may have overcome her ability to recognize the flash and lack of substance.
I disagree - her remarks in that clip were obviously making reference to her feelings of pride about America's on-going ability to step up to the plate in striving to achieve its professed ideals - not about the seemingly inate ability of its electorate to continue to be flimflammed by political hucksters or her personal thoughts on the newly elected POTUS.
And so it goes...
Richard's $.02 :munchin
I'd be in complete agreement with you had I not seen the following clip. I extrapolate from it that her pride in her race may have overcome her ability to recognize the flash and lack of substance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhSjuduQGN4Dustmeister--
FWIW, my own take on Secretary Rice's personal aside is that her comments were as ambivalent as they were emotional: I never thought this would happen in my lifetime, if ever. Yet, does it have to be THIS guy of all guys? Does he understand what he absolutely must do as America's first black president?
(MOO, the president never had, nor currently has, anything resembling a clue to how to answer the third question. I sincerely hope that he has a long career as elder statesman--beginning in 2012--to figure out the difference between making history and exploiting the past. Yeah, I'm bitter.)
I extrapolate from it that her pride in her race may have overcome her ability to recognize the flash and lack of substance.
This type of math would help explain the mysteries of Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, and Nancy Pelosi
This type of math would help explain the mysteries of Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, and Nancy Pelosi
Well, I very well could be totally wrong; it's happened before. Twice.
:D
I'm saying that I went from someone who would have been tickled to death to have Condoleeza Rice for a POTUS to having major doubts based on that statement and others.
Same disillusionment I experienced when Col. Powell endorsed Obama. In my mind, race played a major role in that decision as well.
I'm with you, Sigaba.
GratefulCitizen
11-17-2010, 12:54
I don't buy the whole intelligence/education/credential issue when it comes to presidents.
They only need to be smart enough.
Beyond that, demonstrated judgement would seem more important.
Wilson, Nixon, and Carter were all very intelligent and well educated.
Carter and Obama both received Nobel prizes.
Truman had only a high school education.
Reagan was a "C" student.
Washington was self-educated.
Thanks, but no-thanks, ruling class.
I have no interest in more "philospher-kings".
Same disillusionment I experienced when Col. Powell endorsed Obama. In my mind, race played a major role in that decision as well.
In my mind - Powell's 'lukewarm' endorsement of BHO was less about race and had more to do with his personal disillusionment in the administration at that time based on his personal experiences as SecState with GWB, Chaney, Rumsfeld, and Rove and the prevailing NeoCon worldview - combined with his disillusionment in the Republican Party's selection of Senator McCain as their candidate for President, again based on his personal experiences with the man.
However, YMMV...and so it goes...
Richard's $.02 :munchin
In my mind - Powell's 'lukewarm' endorsement of [the Democratic candidate] was less about race and had more to do with his personal disillusionment in the administration at that time based on his personal experiences as SecState with GWB, Chaney, Rumsfeld, and Rove and the prevailing NeoCon worldview - combined with his disillusionment in the Republican Party's selection of Senator McCain as their candidate for President, again based on his personal experiences with the man.QP Richard--
FWIW, I agree.
I also think GEN Powell might have done a better job of anticipating the backlash and the counter argument that his POV and endorsement were motivated primarily by the intertwined issues of personal identity, racial politics, and electoral politics. It may well have been the case that his best option would have been to say loudly but evasively, "I look forward to casting my vote on election day, and I encourage ALL of my fellow Americans to go to the polls and vote their conscience."
More generally, I think until American conservatism finds a more productive way to talk about race, it will continue to alienate a cohort that is, IMO, a natural constituency.
My $0.02.
Green Light
11-17-2010, 15:06
In my mind - Powell's 'lukewarm' endorsement of BHO was less about race and had more to do with his personal disillusionment in the administration at that time based on his personal experiences as SecState with GWB, Chaney, Rumsfeld, and Rove and the prevailing NeoCon worldview - combined with his disillusionment in the Republican Party's selection of Senator McCain as their candidate for President, again based on his personal experiences with the man.
However, YMMV...and so it goes...
Richard's $.02 :munchin
I have to agree. Bad intel turned his Adelai Stevenson moment at the UN Iraq briefing into a personal and professional humiliation. Gen Powell was one of the most respected men in the world; he put his personal reputation of unblemished integrity on the line when he was convincing the Security Council that the intel photos of the chem/bio mobile labs were a reality. They were obviously mistaken. His integrity, something I believe he valued, was tarnished. I can't blame him for bitterly turning his back on the Repogues.
Well, I very well could be totally wrong; it's happened before. Twice.
I certainly would agree having my doubts about those who endorse Obama.
Richard put it well in my mind, America stepped up to the plate and walked the walk about achieving her professed ideals. IMHO it has nothing to do with Obama who is a zero, there is a silver lining to this cloud however, it is immense pride that our country, in such a short time, lived up to the ideals that so many countries simply preach about.
greenberetTFS
11-17-2010, 16:37
I have to agree. Bad intel turned his Adelai Stevenson moment at the UN Iraq briefing into a personal and professional humiliation. Gen Powell was one of the most respected men in the world; he put his personal reputation of unblemished integrity on the line when he was convincing the Security Council that the intel photos of the chem/bio mobile labs were a reality. They were obviously mistaken. His integrity, something I believe he valued, was tarnished. I can't blame him for bitterly turning his back on the Repogues.
Very well said GL,completely agree with you...............:)
Big Teddy :munchin
....... there is a silver lining to this cloud however, it is immense pride that our country, in such a short time, lived up to the ideals that so many countries simply preach about.
I almost disagree - sort of.
I've said it before - the left - and some moderates - and a few conservatives here and there - got so wrapped up in what he was that they didn't care who he was.
Obama as the first Black President has done a disservice to all Blacks who try and follow in his footsteps.
Those who follow will get the "Been there, done that, don't need to do it again" from many, many voters reguardless of their qualifications.
Dozer523
11-17-2010, 16:52
No matter how she is packaged and marketed, a Sarah does not a Condi make.
Richard :munchin
Okay, she does have THAT goin' for her.:p
ZonieDiver
11-17-2010, 20:37
One thing on this, but did that really tarnish his integrity? I mean I think it would be obvious to most people in the world that he wasn't lying, he was just mistaken at the end, due to faulty intelligence.
I am relatively certain that HE thinks it did!
Education has little to do with it - to me, Sarah Palin sounds great...until she opens her mouth and speaks.
Richard :munchin
If you attended Wasilla U, but can launch into an in-depth discussion on how to handle Russia, Afghanistan, repair the economy, healthcare, energy, etc...that is what will count.
An in-depth discussion? So if Sarah Palin (or anyone else) got on television and discussed flow rates in Gwahar, the effect of nitrogen injection on the Cantarell field, the implications of peak oil as presented in the JOE2010 report and Hirsch's 2005 report to the DOE the public would pay attention to the hour(s) of material?
And the economy? We're going to go into a comparison of Keynesian economics and the Austrian school and the relative merits of each, coupled with an examination of demographic changes in the U.S. and elsewhere, and coupled with an analysis of the interaction of high levels of debt as well as the costs of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, along with the relative merits of free trade versus alternative approaches?
Perhaps such a Renaissance person who is facile in all these areas exists, but I doubt the public would sit still for such things. Not when they elected a President based on little more than a slogan promising hope and change.
dr. mabuse
11-17-2010, 22:53
Perhaps such a Renaissance person who is facile in all these areas exists, but I doubt the public would sit still for such things. Not when they elected a President based on little more than a slogan promising hope and change.
+1.
The average American would in all likelihood not know how to "process" such an individual let alone appreciate what they could bring to the table.
This "Renaissance person" wouldn't fit into the fast food, short sitcom, latte-buzzed mentality and just make their head hurt methinks. :(
I agree with you there, the problem is that when/if you are such a person, you will be held to a standard. If someone like Palin runs for office, and people say, "She has nothing comparable to Barack Obama in the way of formal education," and others say, "That is a very elitist statement," well yes, to some degree, but someone like Palin will then have to be able to debate and discuss the issues in-depth.
If you can do that, I do not think the American people will give a damn where you went to school ultimately, because anyone criticizing you over that will look very elitist, because obviously you know what you're talking about. If you attended Wasilla U, but can launch into an in-depth discussion on how to handle Russia, Afghanistan, repair the economy, healthcare, energy, etc...that is what will count.
Reagan was a C student, but remember Reagan went and sparred with the media, appearing on various shows to debate before he ran for President. He also was governor of America's largest state economy-wise for two terms.
Did BOH ever discuss anything "in-depth?" In most of the speeches I have heard from him he trotted around the edges of the issues yelling "Yes we can." He let Nancy stand up and say "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what was in it." I always thought of, and still think of, these two as what my father calls "educated idiots."
"Don't retreat. Reload."
Sarah may be practicing what she preaches, telling Barbara Walters that she believes she could defeat Obama in the next Presidential election. Interesting set of stats at the end of the article...
WASHINGTON — Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said she believes she could beat President Obama in the 2012 presidential election and is considering whether to run.
Palin said in an ABC News interview with Barbara Walters that she's "looking at the lay of the land" for a possible presidential bid and "trying to figure that out, if it's a good thing for the country, for the discourse, for my family."
When asked whether she could beat Obama, Palin, the 2008 Republican vice-presidential nominee, replied: "I believe so."
Her comments came after confirming in a New York Times Magazine article to be published Sunday that she is considering a run for president.
In the magazine interview, when asked by Robert Draper whether she is considering running for president, she said, "I am."
She added, "I'm engaged in the internal deliberations candidly, and having that discussion with my family, because my family is the most important consideration here."
The exchange with Walters was included in an interview that ran in part on ABC's "World News Tonight" on Wednesday and will run in full Dec. 9 as part of Walters' "10 Most Fascinating People of 2010" special.
Palin was picked by Republican Sen. John McCain to be his running mate in 2008.
She endorsed more than 80 candidates in the 2010 midterm elections, and at least 50 of them won, The New York Times reported. She also raised more than $10 million for Republican candidates and the party, the newspaper said.
An Associated Press-GfK poll this month found Palin the most polarizing of the potential 2012 Republican presidential candidates. The poll says 46 percent of Americans view her favorably, 49 percent unfavorably, and 5 percent don't know enough about her to form an opinion. Yet among adults who identify themselves as Republicans or GOP-leaning independents, 79 percent view her favorably.
[URL="WASHINGTON — Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said she believes she could beat President Obama in the 2012 presidential election and is considering whether to run. Palin said in an ABC News interview with Barbara Walters that she's "looking at the lay of the land" for a possible presidential bid and "trying to figure that out, if it's a good thing for the country, for the discourse, for my family."
When asked whether she could beat Obama, Palin, the 2008 Republican vice-presidential nominee, replied: "I believe so."
Her comments came after confirming in a New York Times Magazine article to be published Sunday that she is considering a run for president.
In the magazine interview, when asked by Robert Draper whether she is considering running for president, she said, "I am."
She added, "I'm engaged in the internal deliberations candidly, and having that discussion with my family, because my family is the most important consideration here."
The exchange with Walters was included in an interview that ran in part on ABC's "World News Tonight" on Wednesday and will run in full Dec. 9 as part of Walters' "10 Most Fascinating People of 2010" special.
Palin was picked by Republican Sen. John McCain to be his running mate in 2008.
She endorsed more than 80 candidates in the 2010 midterm elections, and at least 50 of them won, The New York Times reported. She also raised more than $10 million for Republican candidates and the party, the newspaper said.
An Associated Press-GfK poll this month found Palin the most polarizing of the potential 2012 Republican presidential candidates. The poll says 46 percent of Americans view her favorably, 49 percent unfavorably, and 5 percent don't know enough about her to form an opinion. Yet among adults who identify themselves as Republicans or GOP-leaning independents, 79 percent view her favorably."
Source: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2013461246_palin18.html (Sorry, couldn't get the link to work.)
+1.
The average American would in all likelihood not know how to "process" such an individual let alone appreciate what they could bring to the table.
This "Renaissance person" wouldn't fit into the fast food, short sitcom, latte-buzzed mentality and just make their head hurt methinks. :(
Here's the fast food most of the Country wants: lower taxes and less government.
You could put Howdy Doody in the Oval Office and that tack would work.
GratefulCitizen
11-18-2010, 12:01
<snip>
but someone like Palin will then have to be able to debate and discuss the issues in-depth.
<snip>
Reagan was a C student, but remember Reagan went and sparred with the media, appearing on various shows to debate before he ran for President.
The game has changed.
It would be entirely plausible (though not advisable) that Sarah could make a run for the presidency without ever having to directly debate with her opponents nor having to deal with antagonistic media.
She has already demonstrated this capability in her methods of protesting obamacare.
Liberal candidates have gotten free passes by the media for years.
Sarah is using modern technology to bypass them.
She is refusing to play by their rules, and they are fuming over it.
[The current president] as the first Black President has done a disservice to all Blacks who try and follow in his footsteps.
Those who follow will get the "Been there, done that, don't need to do it again" from many, many voters regardless of their qualifications.IMO, the current president has done a disservice to all Americans.
He has turned what might have been a cathartic experience in world history into farce. Rather than America having an opportunity for reflection about a broad range of issues arcing across our history, he has contributed to the cynicism that has gripped American politics for too long.
To be clear, I am of the belief that the first African American president had an obligation to be nothing less than one of the greatest presidents since 1896. And by "great" I mean so good at every aspect of the job that even the president's most determined and articulate critics would have begrudging respect.
IMO, the current president has done a disservice to all Americans.
He has turned what might have been a cathartic experience in world history into farce. Rather than America having an opportunity for reflection about a broad range of issues arcing across our history, he has contributed to the cynicism that has gripped American politics for too long.
To be clear, I am of the belief that the first African American president had an obligation to be nothing less than one of the greatest presidents since 1896. And by "great" I mean so good at every aspect of the job that even the president's most determined and articulate critics would have begrudging respect.
The Country turned a blind eye to his lack of experience, immersion in "black liberation theology", and near-complete absence of historical record and reference. How could he be good at a job he couldn't even fathom, Bro?
He's good at stirring up trouble, and nothing else.
I read "Dreams of My Father". It's an Obama Owner's manual, and it should have scared the public away from the guy.
You can thank women, liberal extremists, the entitlement set, and Soros for the last couple years of national ruin.
Marxism never works for long.
You people give the average American voter to much credit. They ain't that bright yaalll.
It will be the Democrat until they fail. Republicans will take over like they are doing now, they will fail. When I mean fail. I mean the corruption won't change.
Our entire political system is based on bribes. It takes 35 million to run for president. People who pay for that will come calling. Until they make running for Office feel like a service and not a Golden ticket to financial freedom. Nothing will change.
A third part rising after the fall of the next party that takes office might be something really changing our society. But who am I to say. I believe anyone who doesn't contribute to society should have no rights, State and Federal.
You people give the average American voter to much credit. They ain't that bright yaalll.
It will be the Democrat until they fail. Republicans will take over like they are doing now, they will fail. When I mean fail. I mean the corruption won't change.
Our entire political system is based on bribes. It takes 35 million to run for president. People who pay for that will come calling. Until they make running for Office feel like a service and not a Golden ticket to financial freedom. Nothing will change.
A third part rising after the fall of the next party that takes office might be something really changing our society. But who am I to say. I believe anyone who doesn't contribute to society should have no rights, State and Federal.
If you can prove Sarah Palin took a bribe, I'll kiss your ass at the GB Club, if it's still there.
If you can prove Sarah Palin took a bribe, I'll kiss your ass at the GB Club, if it's still there.
It is still at Ft Bragg. Good cheeseburgers and fries - and the beer is cold.
mark46th
11-18-2010, 18:09
"He has turned what might have been a cathartic experience in world history into farce. Rather than America having an opportunity for reflection about a broad range of issues arcing across our history, he has contributed to the cynicism that has gripped American politics for too long."
Sigaba- Obama was and still is an empty suit with the gift of gab. Not one of his speeches had any detail, only feel good generalities. The only thing he cares about is if the world likes him or not...
Sigaba- [The president] was and still is an empty suit with the gift of gab. Not one of his speeches had any detail, only feel good generalities. The only thing he cares about is if the world likes him or not...QP Mark46th--
Please don't get me started. It's dinner time out at the White House. It would be too traumatic for the president's daughters were they to see fire shooting out of their dad's ears.
http://www.wral.com/news/political/story/8650043/
As was stated before, you can tell who the Libs are afraid of. The are so afraid of Palin and her general appeal to the majority of Americans that they are throwing their conspiracy theories into the "Dancing Bristol" debate. I can honestly say I have never watched this show but it amuses me greatly how much controversy there is over it.
The 20-year-old Palin's improbable run to next week's finals — championed by websites like DuJan's Hillbuzz.org — has led to such an uproar that conspiracy theories are floating, some fans are insisting they'll never watch again, and a Wisconsin man actually shot up his television, apparently in disgust over Palin's dancing.
"There's been more angst over this than over the 2000 election," quips media industry analyst Shari Anne Brill, only slightly kidding.
The next morning, "Dancing" fan Kimberly Fishman arrived at her job at a northern California bank. She was furious at the result, and so were co-workers. "People were saying it's the tea party voting, that all of Alaska voted," says Fishman, 42. "It's all politics."
Fishman, who identifies herself as a liberal, has resolved not to watch next week. "I'm done," she says. "No one could say Bristol is the better dancer." And yet, she adds, she herself didn't vote.
"Think of all the things they've said about Bristol," he said. "This would never be allowed to happen to Chelsea Clinton, or the Gore daughters, or God forbid the Obama daughters. Support for her is real."
"Honestly, this is just people who don't like Sarah Palin, and all this stuff gets carried over into the show," Meader says. "If you look at websites on the right, you'd think she's the greatest dancer since sliced bread. If you look at the left-leaning sites, she couldn't dance if she was on a pedestal that was spinning by itself."
If Palin does actually run in 2012, the Libs will be in overdrive hyper mode. Maybe so much so that all of the muck you KNOW they will throw out will turn so many people off that they simply go the other way.
Palin doesn't need to go that in-depth, but she needs to be able to discuss issues beyond talking points. The media, like it or not, are going to ask her tough questions. They will treat her roughly in ways and ask her questions that they would never ask a Democrat. She needs to be able to convince the American public that she is competent enough for the job.
Well....let's consider one issue, the health care bill. LINK (http://docs.house.gov/rules/health/111_ahcaa.pdf)
It has 1990 pages. One can see a CBS summary HERE (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20000846-503544.html)
They state cost numbers, numbers to be covered, and so forth.
So...Palin gets up and says "Cost: $940 billion over ten years" (deftly lifted from CBS!)
OK, so based on what assumptions? What if it costs more? How did someone come up with that number? And so on, and so forth.
To give deep answers requires some degree of understanding, right? And who really grasps the single issue of the health care bill? Not me, certainly! And notice I'm just barely going beyond the limits of talking points.
IMO, people want someone who can lead - someone who can tell them that life will get better, show them a vision to that effect, and work with people inside and outside our government to make that happen. They may not want an ignoramus - but they won't care for all the turgid details, either.
Is Palin the best choice? I don't know. But, honestly, I don't think the intellectual lightweight argument will carry much weight. (awful pun intended!)