Sarah Palin Resigns

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

I haven’t read anything from a source which I know to be trustworthy, but there is a scuttle that her resignation is due to a possible embezzlement scandal regarding the building of her house in Wasilla. Allegedly, she was instrumental in getting her friends a $12+ million contract to construct the Wasilla sports complex and ice rink while at the exact same time her house gets built of identical materials. Also she passed a bylaw right before the construction of her house that no longer required contractors to be listed on Wasilla building permits.

Again, this is alleged.

82

[quote]anonym wrote:
Slayers wrote:
all I want to know is playboy next?

I’d “settle” for an episode on Milf Hunter.[/quote]

Finally we agree on something!
Though pornstar Lisa Ann did a good job…

83

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
ZEB wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
You can keep saying it. But it doesn’t make it true. They made her look WORSE than she would have if they ran the entire interview unedited. That’s it. As to your earlier post,

How do you know this?

she didn’t just make gaffes. She demonstrated a fundamental lack of understanding of the issues facing this country that any politicaion should possess.

Name one.

Some very smart, very serious people spent a lot of time trying to defend their ongoing romance with Palin. And I’m not sure why. Quite simply, Palin is weak on foreign policy, domestic policy, energy policy, financial policy, the economy in general, the fundamental workings of the state and federal government, geography, rhetoric, history and basic grammar.

Give examples.

Now, Governor Palin is likeable. In many ways. Sure. But her likeability has blinded her supporters who mistake charisma for intellect.

Tell me who has a higher IQ Obama or Bush (jr.)?

I’ve already GIVEN examples in this very thread that you selectively ignored and failed to quote. NAFTA for one. The inability to name a single significant Supreme Court case for another. But that is besides the point. In numerous past thread, innumerable examples have been given. Many by myself. Feel free to dig them up. I don’t want to go through Palin’s lack of qualifcations one MORE time after going through it it detail dozens of times. If you want to idolize Palin that’s your perogative. I don’t care. I don’t think she’s a cunt. But I for one am VERY happy she’s exiting the national stage. And hope she stays gone. [/quote]

So you’re saying that Palin made a couple of mistakes, kay, now name one politician who hasn’t? How about VP Biden? He seems to make at least one per week.

[quote]I’d be downright SHOCKED in Bush Jr. has a higher IQ than Obama though I don’t think he’s stupid the way liberals paint him out to be.
[/quote]

Then be SHOCKED. GW Bush has a higher IQ than Obama.

How can that be the media painted GW as an idiot? It could be that as President he was a poor communicator, or it could be that the press being biased liberals that they are wanted to dump on him.

As long as we’re on the topic when is the last time a Republican running on the national ticket actually got a fair shake from the MSM?

84

[quote]jsbrook wrote:

I oppose Palin because of ludicrous policies she would push[/quote]

Such as national health care, cap and trade tripling the national debt and discouraging small business with threatened tax hikes?

No, wait those are Obama’s ideas.

85

[quote]ZEB wrote:
jsbrook wrote:

I oppose Palin because of ludicrous policies she would push

Such as national health care, cap and trade tripling the national debt and discouraging small business with threatened tax hikes?

No, wait those are Obama’s ideas.

[/quote]

Would you like some cheese with your whine? I don’t agree with all of Obama’s policies either. Some are as bad as Palin’s ideas. But Obama’s policies have nothing to do with this conversation.

86

[quote]borrek wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Liberals are the most vicious, hateful, miserable and pitiful people I’ve ever heard of.

People are people no matter where you look, and liberals certainly don’t have a monopoly on idiots.[/quote]

Agree.

Placing only admirable qualities on a group of people because they may profess to hold a certain set of political ideals approaches the short-sidedness of placing superiority on a particular race.

Back to Palin.

I think the very qualities that many admire in Palin are EXACTLY why she was out of her element. I think that the IS the “real deal”. I think she is honest; hard working; fiercely loyal to her friends and family.

How the hell did she think she was going to fit in Washington?

Mufasa

88

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
jsbrook wrote:

Most who can’t stand Palin don’t wish for her death. Anymore than twisted, venomous, and perverted Mick is representative of most conservatives.

I call the act of homosexuality twisted and perverted so therefore you say that I’m twisted and perverted…Another 20 something PC boy who has it ass backwards.

[/quote]

I am not talking about your belief system. I am talking about the venom and vitriol (and sometimes unsubstantiated bullshit) you spew on these forums. Or maybe I’m talking about another Mick entirely.

90

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
jsbrook wrote:

Most who can’t stand Palin don’t wish for her death. Anymore than twisted, venomous, and perverted Mick is representative of most conservatives.

I call the act of homosexuality twisted and perverted so therefore you say that I’m twisted and perverted…Another 20 something PC boy who has it ass backwards.

I am not talking about your belief system. I am talking about the venon and vitriol (and somteimes unsubtantiated bullshit) you spew on these forums. Or maybe I’m talking about another Mick entirely.

Since you attacked me with no reason on a thread that I wasn’t even taking part in…and you seem hell bent on taking this thread off course…why don’t you tell me about all of the alleged unsubstantiated bullshit…give me a few examples…or shut up PC boy.
[/quote]

You mean like whining for weeks about examples about how harmful and dangerous polygamy is in most situations? And then utterly failing to response because your foot is stuck in your mouth when I provide many? You’re not worth it. It’s your entire hateful posting style. You wouldn’t understand. I’m out to celebrate the 4th. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

91

[quote]borrek wrote:
I haven’t read anything from a source which I know to be trustworthy, but there is a scuttle that her resignation is due to a possible embezzlement scandal regarding the building of her house in Wasilla. Allegedly, she was instrumental in getting her friends a $12+ million contract to construct the Wasilla sports complex and ice rink while at the exact same time her house gets built of identical materials. Also she passed a bylaw right before the construction of her house that no longer required contractors to be listed on Wasilla building permits.

Again, this is alleged.[/quote]

Too bad she’s not a Dem. Funding for a committee to investigate these things would be blocked, as with Nancy Pelosi and the CIA ‘lying’ to her.

92

She lost the election for McCain. He actually would have had a reasonable shot at office had she not been put into the picture. She made her side look like the Bush administration all over again, and let’s face it - America was tired for the same shit.

From an international standpoint, she eclipsed the main candidate and pretty much pushed him to the side, whereas Obama was the main representation for the Democrats. I don’t think it was even until after people started realizing that the woman was plain retarded that the conservatives went after Biden.

At least, that’s what I got from an international perspective, and no doubt I’ll get angry, sad & tired responses from a lot of the people defending her (a lot, but not all).

93

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
<<< Placing only admirable qualities on a group of people because they may profess to hold a certain set of political ideals approaches the short-sidedness of placing superiority on a particular race. >>>[/quote]

No person or group of people possesses only admirable qualities. Nobody said or implied that. We’re talking about a specific state of mind that consistently wishes violence and ill on the persons and families of their political opposition.

The left is one thousand times guiltier of this than the right. There is like no denying that.

94

[quote]Makavali wrote:
She lost the election for McCain. He actually would have had a reasonable shot at office had she not been put into the picture. She made her side look like the Bush administration all over again, and let’s face it - America was tired for the same shit.

From an international standpoint, she eclipsed the main candidate and pretty much pushed him to the side, whereas Obama was the main representation for the Democrats. I don’t think it was even until after people started realizing that the woman was plain retarded that the conservatives went after Biden.

At least, that’s what I got from an international perspective, and no doubt I’ll get angry, sad & tired responses from a lot of the people defending her (a lot, but not all).[/quote]

McCain was never more than a longshot, but he was toast when he didn’t deep-six the TARP bill last October. It wouldn’t have mattered if Jesus Christ was his running-mate.

The left was enamored with Obama, the middle-road voter was leaning Democrat, and the right was never more than luke-warm on McCain. McCain needed to fire up right-wing voters to have any shot, and he did the exact opposite when he voted for the TARP bill. It was all over after that.

95

I don’t know, Mak…

We talked about this during the election; she galvanized a Religious base that was EXTREMELY luke-warm about McCain. Many of them felt that he was a Conservative in name only.

Yeah…they gave a lot of lip service to his service and sacrifice to the Country; but he just did not inspire them; nor was he considered a galvanizing influence to get the Religious Right to the Polls.

Palin did that; and she got on the stump and “worked it”…

I feel like she gave a sinking campaign just the momentum it needed; MUCH more than a McCain/Libermann (it makes me shutter just to type that!) ticket ever could have.

As an aside:

You guys may have forgotten; but SC Governor Mark Sanford was on a short list of possible running mates for McCain. I wonder if when vetting him they found out that he was dipping the 'ole musket in some Venezuelan Brown Sugar?

Just a thought.

Mufasa

96

[quote]Makavali wrote:
From an international standpoint, she eclipsed the main candidate and pretty much pushed him to the side, whereas Obama was the main representation for the Democrats. I don’t think it was even until after people started realizing that the woman was plain retarded that the conservatives went after Biden.[/quote]

I agree - I think Palin lost McCain a significant portion of the international vote.

I think there are many reasons McCain lost the election, and many of them just plain old political problems - but any problematic “Palin Effect” would have been significantly mitigated had the press even done a pass/fail job on vetting Obama. In fact, had the media done its job, you likely wouldn’t have heard about Palin’s every flaw.

That doesn’t mean I think Palin wasn’t a flawed candidate regardless of media coverage - but the media amplified Palin’s flaws to the exclusion of any decent coverage of Obama’s, and you can’t fairly assess her without accounting for the difference in standards.

Had the media covered Obama with the same intensity that they covered Palin, would McCain have won? No idea, and Obama may have won anyway - but Palin-haters only get to mouth off at nuclear levels because they know their candidate had an amazing amount of cover, and had the media done its job, we wouldn’t be hearing this hubristic shrieking about Palin.

EDIT: typo fixed.

97

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
<<< Placing only admirable qualities on a group of people because they may profess to hold a certain set of political ideals approaches the short-sidedness of placing superiority on a particular race. >>>

No person or group of people possesses only admirable qualities. Nobody said or implied that. We’re talking about a specific state of mind that consistently wishes violence and ill on the persons and families of their political opposition.

The left is one thousand times guiltier of this than the right. There is like no denying that.[/quote]

It’s more than just implied, Tiribulus; you just stated it!

Just because you may not travel in Conservative circles where the wish of violence and death against Obama is not commonplace and even preached, doesn’t all of sudden mean it doesn’t exist.

Mufasa

99

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
<<< but Palin-haters only get to mouth off at nuclear levels because they know their candidate had an amazing amount of cover, >>>[/quote]

While there’s no denying the thrust of your post, I’m not so sure they know that. I really think most of them are lacking entirely the discernment to recognize a liberal media blitz when it kisses them in the face, rotting breath and all, even when some of the players admit afterward that’s what it was.

100

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
<<< Placing only admirable qualities on a group of people because they may profess to hold a certain set of political ideals approaches the short-sidedness of placing superiority on a particular race. >>>

No person or group of people possesses only admirable qualities. Nobody said or implied that. We’re talking about a specific state of mind that consistently wishes violence and ill on the persons and families of their political opposition.

The left is one thousand times guiltier of this than the right. There is like no denying that.

It’s more than just implied, Tiribulus; you just stated it!

Just because you may not travel in Conservative circles where the wish of violence and death against Obama is not commonplace and even preached, doesn’t all of sudden mean it doesn’t exist.

Mufasa

[/quote]

Show me where I placed “only admirable qualities” on anybody.