Palin-Beck Ticket? Sarah Doesn't Rule it Out

"It’s no secret that former GOP vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin and Fox News host Glenn Beck share great respect and admiration â?? so their fans can be forgiven for wondering: Is a “dream ticket” of Palin-Beck ticket completely out of the question?

Perhaps not.

Palin initially chuckled when Newsmax broached the idea. But then she had some serious words of praise for the popular Fox personality."

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/palin_beck_2012_ticket/2009/11/17/287568.html?s=al&promo_code=9173-1

Now that Obama put New York in danger, the Dems should lose NY big time. This makes a big opening for the Republicans to swing everything to them.

And wouldn’t it be great to see Sarah hand Mr. Teleprompter his ass? LOL!

A dream ticket for Moveon.org, Democratic Underground, the Daily Kos-ers, and the Huffington Posters, no doubt.

Not to mention the DNC (though that is being redundant.)

Btw, nice pic, even though (sadly) I suppose it is a photoshop.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
A dream ticket for Moveon.org, Democratic Underground, the Daily Kos-ers, and the Huffington Posters, no doubt.

Not to mention the DNC (though that is being redundant.)[/quote]

Palin could counter all that by asking: “How dumb is it to put a big Bullseye on NY city by having those trials here?”

She gave a couple of bad interviews but Obama is endangering New York – which is more stupid?

We could have a bet, though it’ll be a while before it’s fulfilled, whether the City of New York will vote more than 50% for Obama in 2012. I say they will, regardless of the issue you cite.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
We could have a bet, though it’ll be a while before it’s fulfilled, whether the City of New York will vote more than 50% for Obama in 2012. I say they will, regardless of the issue you cite. [/quote]

Obama could come out and shit on the flag, burn a child to death and say fuck America and more then 50% of New York would vote for him.

A Palin-Beck ticket would not be a 49 state landslide for the other team like a Ron Paul candidacy would have been, but it wouldn’t be much better.

Not a chance.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
A Palin-Beck ticket would not be a 49 state landslide for the other team like a Ron Paul candidacy would have been, but it wouldn’t be much better.[/quote]

If Ron Paul was the candidate he probably would have won.

When he runs again he will win because he is the only person who has been calling the inflation.

[quote]ephrem wrote:
[/quote]

Martha Coakley (D) recently claimed she had the experience to replace Teddy K… because her sister has lived in England. WTF?

[quote]John S. wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
We could have a bet, though it’ll be a while before it’s fulfilled, whether the City of New York will vote more than 50% for Obama in 2012. I say they will, regardless of the issue you cite.

Obama could come out and shit on the flag, burn a child to death and say fuck America and more then 50% of New York would vote for him.[/quote]

Should he do all this, California would still trump NY in voting for him. Liberalism is a plague here, I would prefer locusts.

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
John S. wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
We could have a bet, though it’ll be a while before it’s fulfilled, whether the City of New York will vote more than 50% for Obama in 2012. I say they will, regardless of the issue you cite.

Obama could come out and shit on the flag, burn a child to death and say fuck America and more then 50% of New York would vote for him.

Should he do all this, California would still trump NY in voting for him. Liberalism is a plague here, I would prefer locusts.[/quote]

+1. I’m always wishing for the Central Valley to secede from the rest of the state. We’d have a nice, agriculturally-rich, conservative, mini-Texas here. Let me tell you, people around here are fucking fed up with the idiots in LA and the bay dictating their bullshit to us.

Not a fan of Palin, but boy this stuff cracks me up. What is it with white liberals?

Well, they look like a white crowd to me. Not that there’s anything wrong with it, but it is pretty monochromatic up here. No surprise in terms of the ethnic nature of the people showing up. Nothing wrong with that. But it is a fact. I think there’s a tribal aspect to this thing, in other words, whites versus other people. I think she’s very smart about this.

“Not that there’s anything wrong with it…”

Of course he thinks something is wrong with it, which is why he brought it up. Which is why he called it tribal, and something Palin is very smart about. I’d ask him, so? So what? Does he get bent out of shape over blacks voting Democrat as a “tribe?” Or, that hispanics largely vote democrat? That his ilk panders to them, as he’s doing here? He’s being very smart about it! “Hey blacks and browns, look at that white crowd! They’re so tribal. Scary, huh?!”

Even if she’s subtley pandering to her likely voters, what’s his problem? Should she be pandering to minorities who won’t vote for her? Why the hell would she waste the effort? And, why did he phrase it “whites vs. other people?” How about “other people vs. whites?” Who does he think pays for the bulk of the wealth transfer payments? That “Obama money!” isn’t really his money. I’m getting sick of this.

It’s only fair.

Vividly I remember Chris Matthews’ report on Barack Obama’s church: “Well, they look like a black crowd to me. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. But it’s pretty monochromatic here. No surprise, but it’s a fact. Seems tribal to me. Blacks versus other people. I think Jeremiah Wright and Obama are very smart about this.”

He’s very balanced in his reporting.

[quote]John S. wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
We could have a bet, though it’ll be a while before it’s fulfilled, whether the City of New York will vote more than 50% for Obama in 2012. I say they will, regardless of the issue you cite.

Obama could come out and shit on the flag, burn a child to death and say fuck America and more then 50% of New York would vote for him.[/quote]

Which is another way of saying that a MAJOR crisis point is approaching. Decent hard working and law abiding citizens see little reason to support a system built upon foundations such as you describe. Being continually voted into catastrophes and destruction causes enthusiasm for the country to diminish. How much further do people like Obama, Murtha, Reid, Pelosi think they can push the GOOD people of this country?

“This is the strike of the men of the MIND, Miss Taggart. This is the MIND on strike.”

[quote]John S. wrote:

If Ron Paul was the candidate he probably would have won.[/quote]

I don’t know a nice way to say this: if you actually believe that - objectively, rationally - you are a moron.

Paul couldn’t even win a Senate seat in Texas, and he knows it.

I think a Palin/Beck ticket would be awesome, for us Dems anyway.

I think it’s way too good to be true, but I’ve got my fingers crossed. They could nominate Lou Dobbs SOS.

And Obama/Biden could use the funds they don’t have to waste on campaigning to offset the deficit. So everyone wins.

[quote]tme wrote:
I think a Palin/Beck ticket would be awesome, for us Dems anyway.

I think it’s way too good to be true, but I’ve got my fingers crossed. They could nominate Lou Dobbs SOS.

And Obama/Biden could use the funds they don’t have to waste on campaigning to offset the deficit. So everyone wins.

[/quote]

Seriously. It would be like shooting fish in a barrel.

[quote]ckallander wrote:

Seriously. It would be like shooting fish in a barrel.

[/quote]

Do you mean “shooting fish in a barrel” in a media character assassination kinda way?