[quote]TheTick42 wrote:
I can understand being a small government conservative. I have no problem reducing the size of the Federal Government. What I can’t see is voting for people who are completely unqualified for the job. Palin doesn’t have the training, education, experience to lead anything, much less the entire U.S of A. Teasing aside how can you possibly consider voting for someone this ignorant?[/quote]
Surprise it looks like YOU are the one who is ignorant. Palin had far more executive experience than Obama did before he was elected President. Obama began running for President after only two years as a sitting US Senator. As you know Palin was the Governor of Alaska. But you don’t like Palin and you do like Obama so you lie, or you are ignorant as I suggested, which is it?
Obama has done more since he was elected than Bush did in all 8 years. Well…ok. He’s done more GOOD. [/quote]
Actually, he’s not done very much. He’s outsourced most big legislation to Congress (when it was Democrat-controlled) and did not take leading roles in getting anything passed.
And, if you want to pin it all on Obama - well, congratulations: Obama is presiding over what amounts to a modern phase of stagflation. Galloping inflation in core prices (including food and gas) along with high unemployment, with deficits as far as the eye can see. Capitalizing GOOD doesn’t make it true.
I don’t care for Palin, but anyone who thought Obama was “qualified” for the presidency that now complains that Palin was/is not isn’t being intellectually honest. Palin served as governor of a state, perhaps the best “qualification” a person can have for the Oval Office, generally speaking. Obama was an undistinguished state senator, and hadn’t even finished serving a term as a United States Senator prior to getting elected (and it shows).
Again, Palin doesn’t impress me, but as an Obama supporter, the charge of “unqualified” rings hollow.
Obama, as I said, represented more people in his district than live in all of Alaska.
Obama - Columbia and Harvard Law. Palin - In 1984, Palin won the Miss Wasilla beauty contest and 5 schools, in 5 years, barely getting a B.S. from one of the lowest ranked Unis in the USA.
Come on. Obama might not be your politics but he’s sharp and doing a good job…based on LIBERAL POLITICS. Palin isn’t even a good Conservative.
Fwiw - Obama as a State Senator represented more Americans than Palin did as Governor. I’m not sure he was the ideal candidate but compared to any of the Conservatives, especially McCain/Palin, he was a brilliant choice. [/quote]
It isn’t about volume of people represented - it’s about experience in a different government branch.
Obama, as I said, represented more people in his district than live in all of Alaska.[/quote]
Number is irrelevant.
Not particularly relevant, especially since Obama did nothing of note (no real publications). Beyond that in his private sector life, he was an undistinguished lawyer. As a professor, he was an adjunct, and didn’t publish.
Really? I hear liberals carping over his military/security policy all the time. And no, he isn’t doing a good job - unless you think modern stagflation is awesome and being snickered at in the international community as impressive.
[quote]TheTick42 wrote:
Fwiw - Obama as a State Senator represented more Americans than Palin did as Governor. I’m not sure he was the ideal candidate but compared to any of the Conservatives, especially McCain/Palin, he was a brilliant choice. [/quote]
He was so brilliant that he refused to allow anyone to see his grades, both undergraduate and graduate grades are on lock down. Later when pushed he admitted “I wasn’t the best student”. Funny it didn’t get much press by the MSLM.
One more point of information for you. As Governor of Alaska Palin had far more executive experience than Obama. And as history has shown us Governors get elected to the Presidency at a far, far more frequent rate than do Senator’s. So apparently the American people also value executive leadership.
Fwiw - Obama as a State Senator represented more Americans than Palin did as Governor. I’m not sure he was the ideal candidate but compared to any of the Conservatives, especially McCain/Palin, he was a brilliant choice. [/quote]
It isn’t about volume of people represented - it’s about experience in a different government branch.
[/quote]
Yes, it is. We are dealing with complexity. The Alaskan Governor is in no way analogous to President. Give me the Mayor of New York over the Governor of Alaska.
Yes, it is. We are dealing with complexity. The Alaskan Governor is in no way analogous to President. Give me the Mayor of New York over the Governor of Alaska. [/quote]
Horsesehit - the governor of any state in the union is analagous (if anything is) to the Oval Office. The governor of Alaska has to deal with Canada to the south (border management, trade issues, energy issues), has to make garden-variety executive decisions (submit budgets, exercise veto power) and market the state (try to encourage business to locate there).
May of New York is not bad either - but just because you no likey Palin isn’t justfication to say inaccurate things about a governorship of Alaska, which certainly is more analagous to the Oval Office than a chin-pulling senator (which is why so few get elected historically).
Huntsman - I’d like to hear more about this guy. I wasn’t really aware of him at all. I liked the few clips I could find. He sure as hell beats Palin or Bachman.
Try and pull up American Republic, I do understand your point , but in America we call our selves a Democracy.
If absolutely necessary I will read your article and section , but I believe we are back to being a democracy and if the Majority of Americans would want a Government Run Health care system are you telling me the Constitution would forbid this [/quote]
You’re going to come to PWI have never read the Constitution? That’s the problem. Idiots like you don’t understand the difference between a democracy and a republic, so you think we can just vote in whatever policy the majority approves of. The law be damned.[/quote]
I read the constitution , just recently as a matter of fact. But I must admit I did not memorize it.
I found the constitution placed limitations on what Government could do , I did not see that it could thwart the will of the people , I asked if the people wanted public health care , where does the constitution forbid it ?
[/quote]
Tenth Amendment.[/quote]
The way I read it , is that it is all about state rights , how far are you going back to right all the wrongs , while you are correct in a technical sense you are incorrect de facto
Try and pull up American Republic, I do understand your point , but in America we call our selves a Democracy.
If absolutely necessary I will read your article and section , but I believe we are back to being a democracy and if the Majority of Americans would want a Government Run Health care system are you telling me the Constitution would forbid this [/quote]
You’re going to come to PWI have never read the Constitution? That’s the problem. Idiots like you don’t understand the difference between a democracy and a republic, so you think we can just vote in whatever policy the majority approves of. The law be damned.[/quote]
I read the constitution , just recently as a matter of fact. But I must admit I did not memorize it.
I found the constitution placed limitations on what Government could do , I did not see that it could thwart the will of the people , I asked if the people wanted public health care , where does the constitution forbid it ?
[/quote]
Tenth Amendment.[/quote]
The way I read it , is that it is all about state rights , how far are you going back to right all the wrongs , while you are correct in a technical sense you are incorrect de facto[/quote]
What is this buffonery, the federal government has enumerated powers.
Either show me the public health care clause or at least post tits.
Try and pull up American Republic, I do understand your point , but in America we call our selves a Democracy.
If absolutely necessary I will read your article and section , but I believe we are back to being a democracy and if the Majority of Americans would want a Government Run Health care system are you telling me the Constitution would forbid this [/quote]
You’re going to come to PWI have never read the Constitution? That’s the problem. Idiots like you don’t understand the difference between a democracy and a republic, so you think we can just vote in whatever policy the majority approves of. The law be damned.[/quote]
I read the constitution , just recently as a matter of fact. But I must admit I did not memorize it.
I found the constitution placed limitations on what Government could do , I did not see that it could thwart the will of the people , I asked if the people wanted public health care , where does the constitution forbid it ?
[/quote]
Tenth Amendment.[/quote]
The way I read it , is that it is all about state rights , how far are you going back to right all the wrongs , while you are correct in a technical sense you are incorrect de facto[/quote]
What is this buffonery, the federal government has enumerated powers.
Either show me the public health care clause or at least post tits.
[/quote]
I would not think I would have to explain de facto to you, The Federal Gov. has been over stepping
it’s powers all my life , but for some reason now it can no longer.
Try and pull up American Republic, I do understand your point , but in America we call our selves a Democracy.
If absolutely necessary I will read your article and section , but I believe we are back to being a democracy and if the Majority of Americans would want a Government Run Health care system are you telling me the Constitution would forbid this [/quote]
You’re going to come to PWI have never read the Constitution? That’s the problem. Idiots like you don’t understand the difference between a democracy and a republic, so you think we can just vote in whatever policy the majority approves of. The law be damned.[/quote]
I read the constitution , just recently as a matter of fact. But I must admit I did not memorize it.
I found the constitution placed limitations on what Government could do , I did not see that it could thwart the will of the people , I asked if the people wanted public health care , where does the constitution forbid it ?
[/quote]
Tenth Amendment.[/quote]
The way I read it , is that it is all about state rights , how far are you going back to right all the wrongs , while you are correct in a technical sense you are incorrect de facto[/quote]
What is this buffonery, the federal government has enumerated powers.
Either show me the public health care clause or at least post tits.
[/quote]
I would not think I would have to explain de facto to you, The Federal Gov. has been over stepping
it’s powers all my life , but for some reason now it can no longer.
Please explain this buffonery to me :)[/quote]
So you’ve been screwing your sister for the last ten years, should you now stop or just keep on banging? Ater all, that’s the way it’s been for the last decade…
Try and pull up American Republic, I do understand your point , but in America we call our selves a Democracy.
If absolutely necessary I will read your article and section , but I believe we are back to being a democracy and if the Majority of Americans would want a Government Run Health care system are you telling me the Constitution would forbid this [/quote]
You’re going to come to PWI have never read the Constitution? That’s the problem. Idiots like you don’t understand the difference between a democracy and a republic, so you think we can just vote in whatever policy the majority approves of. The law be damned.[/quote]
I read the constitution , just recently as a matter of fact. But I must admit I did not memorize it.
I found the constitution placed limitations on what Government could do , I did not see that it could thwart the will of the people , I asked if the people wanted public health care , where does the constitution forbid it ?
[/quote]
Tenth Amendment.[/quote]
The way I read it , is that it is all about state rights , how far are you going back to right all the wrongs , while you are correct in a technical sense you are incorrect de facto[/quote]
What is this buffonery, the federal government has enumerated powers.
Either show me the public health care clause or at least post tits.
[/quote]
I would not think I would have to explain de facto to you, The Federal Gov. has been over stepping
it’s powers all my life , but for some reason now it can no longer.
Please explain this buffonery to me :)[/quote]
So you’ve been screwing your sister for the last ten years, should you now stop or just keep on banging? Ater all, that’s the way it’s been for the last decade…[/quote]
If you feel like a conversation let me know , I am not wasting energy on posts like this
And I don’t have a sister and I was banging your mother
Try and pull up American Republic, I do understand your point , but in America we call our selves a Democracy.
If absolutely necessary I will read your article and section , but I believe we are back to being a democracy and if the Majority of Americans would want a Government Run Health care system are you telling me the Constitution would forbid this [/quote]
You’re going to come to PWI have never read the Constitution? That’s the problem. Idiots like you don’t understand the difference between a democracy and a republic, so you think we can just vote in whatever policy the majority approves of. The law be damned.[/quote]
I read the constitution , just recently as a matter of fact. But I must admit I did not memorize it.
I found the constitution placed limitations on what Government could do , I did not see that it could thwart the will of the people , I asked if the people wanted public health care , where does the constitution forbid it ?
[/quote]
Tenth Amendment.[/quote]
The way I read it , is that it is all about state rights , how far are you going back to right all the wrongs , while you are correct in a technical sense you are incorrect de facto[/quote]
What is this buffonery, the federal government has enumerated powers.
Either show me the public health care clause or at least post tits.
[/quote]
I would not think I would have to explain de facto to you, The Federal Gov. has been over stepping
it’s powers all my life , but for some reason now it can no longer.
Please explain this buffonery to me :)[/quote]
So you’ve been screwing your sister for the last ten years, should you now stop or just keep on banging? Ater all, that’s the way it’s been for the last decade…[/quote]
If you feel like a conversation let me know , I am not wasting energy on posts like this
And I don’t have a sister and I was banging your mother :)[/quote]
LOL. Good one. Except you don’t see the analogy. The gov’t been doing something illegal and morally reprehensible for decades. Why stop now? Except that it’s the legal and moral thing to do.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Speculation seems to be increasing almost daily that Palin is “in”.
We will just have to wait and she when (or if) she makes its official.
Mufasa[/quote]
I wonder who really cares? She has no chance of beating Obama and only a tad better chance of actually getting the nomination. Did you take a look at her negative poll numbers? The press has done such a number on her (and granted she’s not helped herself on occasion) that she really has no chance.
