Sarah Palin's Speech

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
221

[quote]dhickey wrote:
bald eagle wrote:
rainjack wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
rainjack wrote:
<<< Then I realized that Obama would most likely get to appoint 3 USSC justices in his term. I can’t be a party to that. >>>

This has to be pounded into peoples heads. Be principled another time. The stakes are waaaay too high here. Just think of that grotesquely stacked court.

Sometimes things have to get worse before they get better. 10 or 15 years of misery is a mere blip in the history of this country. Sometimes I think holding my nose while voting is a lot like Greenspan or any other Kaynesian fucking with interest rates and money supply. Maybe it is only delaying and eventually intensifying the pain?

10 or 15 years is being a little optimistic. These are lifetime appointments. O’connor was on the bench for the better part of 25 years.

I don’t want to be too old to enjoy it waiting on the worse to get better.

You are looking at probably 20 years minimum for the next opportunity to load the court. Obama should never have that opportunity.

One can only imagine the shear idiocy that would come out of a Supreme Court with 3 more Ruth Bader Ginsburgs in there. We are talking about rampant liberal social engineering like we can’t imagine. It would take decades to undo something like that.

Let’s not forget the trio we would have:

Pelosi - Reid - Obama

Common, tell me that does not make you pay attention.

The 15 years of misery I spoke of was not a liberal supreme court. The 15 years of misery would be the complete collapse of this country. Bankrupt, 20% unemployment,etc.

Unfortunately we need the masses to give a shit about economics and politics before any significant changes can be made. For this to happen things need to get a lot worse. Most of the people I know begrudgingly give up 40% of salary but would still rather watch Dancing with the stars than take any interest in economics or politics.
[/quote]

Too many are economically illiterate and too many people want something from their gov.

We have 6% unemployment and you would think that the whole country is hurting like never before in our history.

Just what does someone out of work want the President to do for them? WHAT???

222

Dang i was away from the forum for about 16 hours and it grew 5 pages! I feel so far behind now.

I got 2 points after reading through thre latest pages

  1. The USA was founded on christian prinicples. To say otherwise just shows ignornace. Religious pilgrams settles the east coast. Thomas Jefferson may not have believed in the diety of Jesus but he admitted that that was the principles he founded his life on. But by all means believe what you want, don’t let yourself be persuaded with facts and history.

Seems strange that James Madison, one of the Chief founding fathers said this

"James Madison known as the “chief architect of the Constitution,” on June 20, 1785, wrote in regard to the relationship between religion and civil government.

“Religion is the basis and Foundation of Government… We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self government; upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”

The belief in a God All Powerful wise and good, is so essential to the moral order of the World and to the happiness of man, that arguments which enforce it cannot be drawn from too many sources nor adapted with too much solicitude to the different characters and capacities to be impressed with it. "

  1. Sara Palin is covered head to toe in WIN. Strong woman, in both will and intellect. Gritty, tenacious and looks good doing it. A true blue collar working class downhome American mother.
223

[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
Back on topic:

Some truths about that speech:

http://www.adn.com/politics/story/515517.html

and

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080904/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_fact_check;_ylt=AjG9RA67KoDMnxLy9DXEl8gDW7oF

[/quote]

Sadly, I don’t think anyone of the Palin crowd cares for facts.

It’s all about the feel good factor.
As long as she could be your middle class neighbour with an NRA membership and talks christian nonsense ( FARK.com: Fark Video Player (3845739) Video of Sarah Palin talking to her church about our divine mission to invade Iraq, the need for Jesus, the gift of prophecy) , it’s awesome!
God forbid a smart and charismatic leader gets elected.

224

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Iron Dwarf wrote:
Back on topic:

Some truths about that speech:

http://www.adn.com/politics/story/515517.html

and

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080904/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_fact_check;_ylt=AjG9RA67KoDMnxLy9DXEl8gDW7oF

Sadly, I don’t think anyone of the Palin crowd cares for facts.

It’s all about the feel good factor.
As long as she could be your middle class neighbour with an NRA membership and talks christian nonsense ( FARK.com: Fark Video Player (3845739) Video of Sarah Palin talking to her church about our divine mission to invade Iraq, the need for Jesus, the gift of prophecy) , it’s awesome!
God forbid a smart and charismatic leader gets elected.

[/quote]

If you want a massiah, vote for Barry. You do understand that we only have limited number of choices don’t you? You do know how to compare and contrast don’t you? If not, you can always write in Panasea/Pipedream instead of McCain/Palin.

225

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Iron Dwarf wrote:
Back on topic:

Some truths about that speech:

http://www.adn.com/politics/story/515517.html

and

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080904/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_fact_check;_ylt=AjG9RA67KoDMnxLy9DXEl8gDW7oF

Sadly, I don’t think anyone of the Obama crowd cares for facts.

It’s all about the feel good factor.
He can speak to 200k screaming Europeans become an iconic figure in the US after having done nothing except be wonderful speaker. He has invoked the name of God far more than the GOP ticket and speaks of Jesus by name frequently.

God forbid a smart and charismatic leader gets elected.

[/quote]

Fixed it for you.

226

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:

It isn’t even smaller, it is just slower growth (and sometimes it isn’t even that).

[/quote]

And everytime you vote for them you give a thumbs up to the direction the party is going. The above will never change if they can still count on the votes. “Think of the judges!” Like some kind of friggen blackmail against the base they’ve left behind. “We may not be small government conservatives anymore, but it’ll be worse if you don’t vote for us!” It’s insulting, and I refuse to hold my Vick’s Vapor rubbed nose, while wishing someone would cut loose an oderiferous fart to cover the smell of voting Republican.

227

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:

It isn’t even smaller, it is just slower growth (and sometimes it isn’t even that).

And everytime you vote for them you give a thumbs up to the direction the party is going. The above will never change if they can still count on the votes.

“Think of the judges!” Like some kind of friggen blackmail against the base they’ve left behind. “We may not be small government conservatives anymore, but it’ll be worse if you don’t vote for us!”

It’s insulting, and I refuse to hold my Vick’s Vapor rubbed nose, while wishing someone would cut loose an oderiferous fart to cover the smell of voting Republican.[/quote]

That’s a great point, seriously, but like or not, the issue of the court/s IS that important this time.

228

Clarification on the “Book Banning”

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/2008/09/05/palin_book_banning.html

Turns out that it’s much to do about nothing…

What’s really sad is that folks are trying so very hard to come up with a reason to hate this woman.

229

[quote]Sloth wrote:

And everytime you vote for them you give a thumbs up to the direction the party is going. The above will never change if they can still count on the votes. “Think of the judges!” Like some kind of friggen blackmail against the base they’ve left behind. “We may not be small government conservatives anymore, but it’ll be worse if you don’t vote for us!” It’s insulting, and I refuse to hold my Vick’s Vapor rubbed nose, while wishing someone would cut loose an oderiferous fart to cover the smell of voting Republican.[/quote]

Quite true. The main problems being:

  1. If you want to reform the Republican party and so vote Democrat or Third Party to “teach them a lesson”, you end up giving the Democrats control of the Whitehouse and the Congress. This means years and years of Democrat controlled lawmaking and judge appointments that might not ever be undone.

  2. If the Republicans lose, there is no way to guarantee that they will get the “right” message. They’ve already decided that bigger spending and intervention work. If Democrats edge them out in the election, Republicans might just decide to try to be even more like Democrats. They might win that way by forcing the Dems ever farther left, but then we just end up with more of the same. So we’re kinda screwed regardless…

230

[quote]MrRezister wrote:
Sloth wrote:

And everytime you vote for them you give a thumbs up to the direction the party is going. The above will never change if they can still count on the votes. “Think of the judges!” Like some kind of friggen blackmail against the base they’ve left behind. “We may not be small government conservatives anymore, but it’ll be worse if you don’t vote for us!” It’s insulting, and I refuse to hold my Vick’s Vapor rubbed nose, while wishing someone would cut loose an oderiferous fart to cover the smell of voting Republican.

Quite true. The main problems being:

  1. If you want to reform the Republican party and so vote Democrat or Third Party to “teach them a lesson”, you end up giving the Democrats control of the Whitehouse and the Congress. This means years and years of Democrat controlled lawmaking and judge appointments that might not ever be undone.

  2. If the Republicans lose, there is no way to guarantee that they will get the “right” message. They’ve already decided that bigger spending and intervention work. If Democrats edge them out in the election, Republicans might just decide to try to be even more like Democrats. They might win that way by forcing the Dems ever farther left, but then we just end up with more of the same. So we’re kinda screwed regardless…[/quote]

Heh. I’ve decided to vote McCain. Too many warning signs hanging about Obama for me to show my displeasure with the Repubs this time around. His associations just raise way too many red flags for me. Where there’s lots of radical leftist/marxist smoke, there’s usually fire. So, it’s not so much a vote for McCain as it is an anti-Obamessiah vote.

231

At least, if McCain should win and then subsequently die while in office we will have a pretty face to look at while being sold politics as usual.

Her “inexperience” is her most attractive feature – too bad no one else is as inexperienced as she. How long will it be before she accepts her role as a Washington insider like her boy, McCain, or will she?

I only like her because ugly, middle-class, liberal women don’t. At least the intelligent women who dislike her see her for what she is – a political chess piece – checkmate, bitches!

232

[quote]MrRezister wrote:
Sloth wrote:

And everytime you vote for them you give a thumbs up to the direction the party is going. The above will never change if they can still count on the votes. “Think of the judges!” Like some kind of friggen blackmail against the base they’ve left behind. “We may not be small government conservatives anymore, but it’ll be worse if you don’t vote for us!” It’s insulting, and I refuse to hold my Vick’s Vapor rubbed nose, while wishing someone would cut loose an oderiferous fart to cover the smell of voting Republican.

Quite true. The main problems being:

  1. If you want to reform the Republican party and so vote Democrat or Third Party to “teach them a lesson”, you end up giving the Democrats control of the Whitehouse and the Congress. This means years and years of Democrat controlled lawmaking and judge appointments that might not ever be undone.

  2. If the Republicans lose, there is no way to guarantee that they will get the “right” message. They’ve already decided that bigger spending and intervention work. If Democrats edge them out in the election, Republicans might just decide to try to be even more like Democrats. They might win that way by forcing the Dems ever farther left, but then we just end up with more of the same. So we’re kinda screwed regardless…[/quote]

If large numbers of people vote for the Libertarian candidate, the Republicans will know that they have the best chance of getting those votes in the next elections.

I think this can be much more effective at the local/state level. If we start electing true conservatives or even better, Libertarians, these are the people that will move up the ranks to federal gov’t. Local republicas are more likely to take notice of this and hopefully move to the right.

233

It is now thoroughly documented that Sarah Palin supported the $398 million “Bridge to Nowhere” when she ran for Governor in 2006, even though Congress canceled the earmark in 2005.

She only opposed it in September 2007 after her final efforts to get $329 million more from Congress failed. Yet she kept the partial funding from Congress!

So when Palin repeatedly says “I told Congress, ‘Thanks, but no thanks’ on that bridge to nowhere,” she’s lying.

I have the feeling that if she looked like Rosie O’Donnell, you’d all be far less likely to get all hard-up over her as a competent VP choice.

234

[quote]Mental Dwarf wrote:
It is now thoroughly documented that Sarah Palin supported the $398 million “Bridge to Nowhere” when she ran for Governor in 2006, even though Congress canceled the earmark in 2005.

She only opposed it in September 2007 after her final efforts to get $329 million more from Congress failed. Yet she kept the partial funding from Congress!

So when Palin repeatedly says “I told Congress, ‘Thanks, but no thanks’ on that bridge to nowhere,” she’s lying.

I have the feeling that if she looked like Rosie O’Donnell, you’d all be far less likely to get all hard-up over her as a competent VP choice. [/quote]

thoroughly documented yet no sorce? What precedence is there for a Governer refusing pork brought in by a senator?

It wouldn’t suprise me if this is true but you have to look at the body of work. yes, unlike barry, she has a body of work. Alaska has been notorious for pork and breaking that cycle would be tough for a governer. What i am interested in is whether or not she cut overall spending.

Also, when critizing candidates it would helpful if you pointed out who on the ballot is better and why. How much did barry himself bring to il in pork?

235

[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
I have the feeling that if she looked like Rosie O’Donnell, you’d all be far less likely to get all hard-up over her as a competent VP choice. [/quote]

That was the strategy from the beginning.

236

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
Iron Dwarf wrote:
I have the feeling that if she looked like Rosie O’Donnell, you’d all be far less likely to get all hard-up over her as a competent VP choice.

That was the strategy from the beginning.[/quote]

…lipstick on pigs and all…

237

[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
It is now thoroughly documented that Sarah Palin supported the $398 million “Bridge to Nowhere” when she ran for Governor in 2006, even though Congress canceled the earmark in 2005.

She only opposed it in September 2007 after her final efforts to get $329 million more from Congress failed. Yet she kept the partial funding from Congress!

So when Palin repeatedly says “I told Congress, ‘Thanks, but no thanks’ on that bridge to nowhere,” she’s lying.

I have the feeling that if she looked like Rosie O’Donnell, you’d all be far less likely to get all hard-up over her as a competent VP choice. [/quote]

She isn’t Obama.