Republicans Against Sarah Palin

D

Dixie - In Memoriam

New member
I keep hearing certain "Republicans" bash on Palin, saying she isn't "qualified" to be president, and lamenting that she will have problems because she quit her job as governor of Alaska, or her church is too fundamentalist for mainstream. But really, when you look at the situation she faced in Alaska as governor, it is clear to see why she stepped down. Had she remained there, the left would have not rested until they buried her. Governor is not a high paying job, relatively speaking, and she faced endless litigation foist upon her by the left, she was going to have to defend herself against bogus ethics charges, and no telling what else they would have dug up. It would have been relentless, because it already was, as thousands of liberal lawyers perused through anything she had touched in Alaska, for anything they could potentially hit her with. No politician in the history of America has ever had to endure such a witch hunt. And you think she should have sat there like a duck, and let them take their best shot? Are you crazy? They were on a mission to destroy Sarah Palin, and when a Political Machine like the Democrat Party goes on a mission to destroy a single individual, they can usually succeed, whether it is warranted or not. Palin knew it was just going to get worse the closer we came to 2012, and she made a move to mitigate the damage early on. Would she have been "smarter" politically, to remain where she was, and be picked apart by the liberal buzzards? Keep in mind, as the official head of state in Alaska, she wouldn't be permitted to continually respond to allegations and charges, the governor has responsibilities to tend to the state's business, not address personal issues. So, while she sat bound and gagged by her office, the liberal witch hunt would have continued, and anyone with half a brain can figure out how that might have ended for Palin. She actually took an action the liberals totally didn't ever expect her to take, by stepping down. It put an immediate end to what they were doing, and afforded Palin the freedom to not only earn the money to defend herself, but also have the platform and time to do so. While it may be perceived as "quitting" and a rather unorthodox move, I think it was a quite brilliant maneuver, and one that became necessary in light of what was happening to her. It takes tremendous courage to do something unorthodox, especially something that most people would consider political suicide. Am I the only republican who thinks she did the right thing?

As for her church and its fundamentalism, I can't recall Palin ever publicly speaking of her church or her personal religious views... EVER! Aside from the normal and routinely obligatory mentions of respect for God, which 95% of mainstream Americans share, she doesn't seem to wear her religious views on her sleeve. She is even less prone to talk religion than George W. Bush, and on the social issues of our time, like abortion and gay marriage, her position seems to be consistent, she advocates these things should be left to communities and states to decide for themselves, and the Federal government should not take a position. Isn't that pretty much the "Libertarian" viewpoint? I mean, I really don't think Republicans are going to nominate an Atheist to run against Obama, do you? I just can't see that happening, so someone who doesn't feel compelled to interject their personal religious views into their political policies, shouldn't really be a problem for most on the right. I think it's the best you can ask for in that regard.

You can say what you like about her experience or 'gravitas' but when you compare her to the Community Organizer-in-Chief, she has more executive experience, more business experience, and a better grasp of reality regarding mainstream average Americans. In fact, I believe she connects with the "average Joe" better than any politician we've seen in decades. About the only "problem" she has, is the continual "drag" being placed on her by elites in the Republican party itself. It's stunning that certain people on the right, are as vehemently opposed to Palin as the leftist socialists. Even with this anchor around her neck, she still polls relatively high as a contender for the GOP nomination, and she hasn't even started actually campaigning yet.

I hear these criticisms of Palin often from the right, and I always like to challenge them to tell me specifically, what do you disagree with that she has said? Tell me the position she has taken on an issue that you find disagreement with? None of them ever can! They stammer and stutter around, and keep reverting back to the LIBERAL talking points which attack her persona and character, her personality, not her message. Is it "sexism" or "elitism" or what? She obviously resounds with a good chunk of mainstream America, she obviously has a strong Conservative message, and I'll tell you what... I'd trust her in a heartbeat, with ANY decision she might have to make as my President.
 
Dixie said:
I keep hearing certain "Republicans" bash on Palin, saying she isn't "qualified" to be president, and lamenting that she will have problems because she quit her job as governor of Alaska, or her church is too fundamentalist for mainstream. But really, when you look at the situation she faced in Alaska as governor, it is clear to see why she stepped down. Had she remained there, the left would have not rested until they buried her. Governor is not a high paying job, relatively speaking, and she faced endless litigation foist upon her by the left, she was going to have to defend herself against bogus ethics charges, and no telling what else they would have dug up. It would have been relentless, because it already was, as thousands of liberal lawyers perused through anything she had touched in Alaska, for anything they could potentially hit her with. No politician in the history of America has ever had to endure such a witch hunt. And you think she should have sat there like a duck, and let them take their best shot? Are you crazy? They were on a mission to destroy Sarah Palin, and when a Political Machine like the Democrat Party goes on a mission to destroy a single individual, they can usually succeed, whether it is warranted or not. Palin knew it was just going to get worse the closer we came to 2012, and she made a move to mitigate the damage early on. Would she have been "smarter" politically, to remain where she was, and be picked apart by the liberal buzzards? Keep in mind, as the official head of state in Alaska, she wouldn't be permitted to continually respond to allegations and charges, the governor has responsibilities to tend to the state's business, not address personal issues. So, while she sat bound and gagged by her office, the liberal witch hunt would have continued, and anyone with half a brain can figure out how that might have ended for Palin. She actually took an action the liberals totally didn't ever expect her to take, by stepping down. It put an immediate end to what they were doing, and afforded Palin the freedom to not only earn the money to defend herself, but also have the platform and time to do so. While it may be perceived as "quitting" and a rather unorthodox move, I think it was a quite brilliant maneuver, and one that became necessary in light of what was happening to her. It takes tremendous courage to do something unorthodox, especially something that most people would consider political suicide. Am I the only republican who thinks she did the right thing?

As for her church and its fundamentalism, I can't recall Palin ever publicly speaking of her church or her personal religious views... EVER! Aside from the normal and routinely obligatory mentions of respect for God, which 95% of mainstream Americans share, she doesn't seem to wear her religious views on her sleeve. She is even less prone to talk religion than George W. Bush, and on the social issues of our time, like abortion and gay marriage, her position seems to be consistent, she advocates these things should be left to communities and states to decide for themselves, and the Federal government should not take a position. Isn't that pretty much the "Libertarian" viewpoint? I mean, I really don't think Republicans are going to nominate an Atheist to run against Obama, do you? I just can't see that happening, so someone who doesn't feel compelled to interject their personal religious views into their political policies, shouldn't really be a problem for most on the right. I think it's the best you can ask for in that regard.

You can say what you like about her experience or 'gravitas' but when you compare her to the Community Organizer-in-Chief, she has more executive experience, more business experience, and a better grasp of reality regarding mainstream average Americans. In fact, I believe she connects with the "average Joe" better than any politician we've seen in decades. About the only "problem" she has, is the continual "drag" being placed on her by elites in the Republican party itself. It's stunning that certain people on the right, are as vehemently opposed to Palin as the leftist socialists. Even with this anchor around her neck, she still polls relatively high as a contender for the GOP nomination, and she hasn't even started actually campaigning yet.

I hear these criticisms of Palin often from the right, and I always like to challenge them to tell me specifically, what do you disagree with that she has said? Tell me the position she has taken on an issue that you find disagreement with? None of them ever can! They stammer and stutter around, and keep reverting back to the LIBERAL talking points which attack her persona and character, her personality, not her message. Is it "sexism" or "elitism" or what? She obviously resounds with a good chunk of mainstream America, she obviously has a strong Conservative message, and I'll tell you what... I'd trust her in a heartbeat, with ANY decision she might have to make as my President.
Click to expand...
If she bails from a little pressure in Alaska, why would you EVER believe she could handle the pressure of President? If they treat her like Clinton or Obama, she will bail in a week! The first time anyone asks about her family, she will quit! The first time someone challenges one of her decisions in court, she will quit! The first time she faces the real heat of the press, she will quit!
She doesn't really have any positions, except the position in front of the teller cage depositing all the money she is taking from her base of suckers!
Tell me what great ideas she has for stimulating the US economy?
Tell her plan for immigration reform?
Tell her plan to fix education?
 
Dixie said:
I keep hearing certain "Republicans" bash on Palin, saying she isn't "qualified" to be president, and lamenting that she will have problems because she quit her job as governor of Alaska, or her church is too fundamentalist for mainstream. But really, when you look at the situation she faced in Alaska as governor, it is clear to see why she stepped down. Had she remained there, the left would have not rested until they buried her. Governor is not a high paying job, relatively speaking, and she faced endless litigation foist upon her by the left, she was going to have to defend herself against bogus ethics charges, and no telling what else they would have dug up. It would have been relentless, because it already was, as thousands of liberal lawyers perused through anything she had touched in Alaska, for anything they could potentially hit her with. No politician in the history of America has ever had to endure such a witch hunt. And you think she should have sat there like a duck, and let them take their best shot? Are you crazy? They were on a mission to destroy Sarah Palin, and when a Political Machine like the Democrat Party goes on a mission to destroy a single individual, they can usually succeed, whether it is warranted or not. Palin knew it was just going to get worse the closer we came to 2012, and she made a move to mitigate the damage early on. Would she have been "smarter" politically, to remain where she was, and be picked apart by the liberal buzzards? Keep in mind, as the official head of state in Alaska, she wouldn't be permitted to continually respond to allegations and charges, the governor has responsibilities to tend to the state's business, not address personal issues. So, while she sat bound and gagged by her office, the liberal witch hunt would have continued, and anyone with half a brain can figure out how that might have ended for Palin. She actually took an action the liberals totally didn't ever expect her to take, by stepping down. It put an immediate end to what they were doing, and afforded Palin the freedom to not only earn the money to defend herself, but also have the platform and time to do so. While it may be perceived as "quitting" and a rather unorthodox move, I think it was a quite brilliant maneuver, and one that became necessary in light of what was happening to her. It takes tremendous courage to do something unorthodox, especially something that most people would consider political suicide. Am I the only republican who thinks she did the right thing?

As for her church and its fundamentalism, I can't recall Palin ever publicly speaking of her church or her personal religious views... EVER! Aside from the normal and routinely obligatory mentions of respect for God, which 95% of mainstream Americans share, she doesn't seem to wear her religious views on her sleeve. She is even less prone to talk religion than George W. Bush, and on the social issues of our time, like abortion and gay marriage, her position seems to be consistent, she advocates these things should be left to communities and states to decide for themselves, and the Federal government should not take a position. Isn't that pretty much the "Libertarian" viewpoint? I mean, I really don't think Republicans are going to nominate an Atheist to run against Obama, do you? I just can't see that happening, so someone who doesn't feel compelled to interject their personal religious views into their political policies, shouldn't really be a problem for most on the right. I think it's the best you can ask for in that regard.

You can say what you like about her experience or 'gravitas' but when you compare her to the Community Organizer-in-Chief, she has more executive experience, more business experience, and a better grasp of reality regarding mainstream average Americans. In fact, I believe she connects with the "average Joe" better than any politician we've seen in decades. About the only "problem" she has, is the continual "drag" being placed on her by elites in the Republican party itself. It's stunning that certain people on the right, are as vehemently opposed to Palin as the leftist socialists. Even with this anchor around her neck, she still polls relatively high as a contender for the GOP nomination, and she hasn't even started actually campaigning yet.

I hear these criticisms of Palin often from the right, and I always like to challenge them to tell me specifically, what do you disagree with that she has said? Tell me the position she has taken on an issue that you find disagreement with? None of them ever can! They stammer and stutter around, and keep reverting back to the LIBERAL talking points which attack her persona and character, her personality, not her message. Is it "sexism" or "elitism" or what? She obviously resounds with a good chunk of mainstream America, she obviously has a strong Conservative message, and I'll tell you what... I'd trust her in a heartbeat, with ANY decision she might have to make as my President.
Click to expand...

Karl Rove being one the of the most vocal.
 
Why don't you liberals shut the fuck up and worry about how you're going to advance your socialist communist agenda, now that you won't have a fucking Congress anymore?
 
Dixie said:
Why don't you liberals shut the fuck up and worry about how you're going to advance your socialist communist agenda, now that you won't have a fucking Congress anymore?
Click to expand...

We've already begun indoctrinating potential incoming "Republicans" on the "proper" way to govern.

Don't be surprised to hear a few Freudian slips of "Marx" or "Uncle Karl" as they take their oaths in January...
 
Dixie said:
I keep hearing certain "Republicans" bash on Palin, saying she isn't "qualified" to be president, and lamenting that she will have problems because she quit her job as governor of Alaska, or her church is too fundamentalist for mainstream. But really, when you look at the situation she faced in Alaska as governor, it is clear to see why she stepped down. Had she remained there, the left would have not rested until they buried her. Governor is not a high paying job, relatively speaking, and she faced endless litigation foist upon her by the left, she was going to have to defend herself against bogus ethics charges, and no telling what else they would have dug up. It would have been relentless, because it already was, as thousands of liberal lawyers perused through anything she had touched in Alaska, for anything they could potentially hit her with. No politician in the history of America has ever had to endure such a witch hunt. And you think she should have sat there like a duck, and let them take their best shot? Are you crazy? They were on a mission to destroy Sarah Palin, and when a Political Machine like the Democrat Party goes on a mission to destroy a single individual, they can usually succeed, whether it is warranted or not. Palin knew it was just going to get worse the closer we came to 2012, and she made a move to mitigate the damage early on. Would she have been "smarter" politically, to remain where she was, and be picked apart by the liberal buzzards? Keep in mind, as the official head of state in Alaska, she wouldn't be permitted to continually respond to allegations and charges, the governor has responsibilities to tend to the state's business, not address personal issues. So, while she sat bound and gagged by her office, the liberal witch hunt would have continued, and anyone with half a brain can figure out how that might have ended for Palin. She actually took an action the liberals totally didn't ever expect her to take, by stepping down. It put an immediate end to what they were doing, and afforded Palin the freedom to not only earn the money to defend herself, but also have the platform and time to do so. While it may be perceived as "quitting" and a rather unorthodox move, I think it was a quite brilliant maneuver, and one that became necessary in light of what was happening to her. It takes tremendous courage to do something unorthodox, especially something that most people would consider political suicide. Am I the only republican who thinks she did the right thing?

As for her church and its fundamentalism, I can't recall Palin ever publicly speaking of her church or her personal religious views... EVER! Aside from the normal and routinely obligatory mentions of respect for God, which 95% of mainstream Americans share, she doesn't seem to wear her religious views on her sleeve. She is even less prone to talk religion than George W. Bush, and on the social issues of our time, like abortion and gay marriage, her position seems to be consistent, she advocates these things should be left to communities and states to decide for themselves, and the Federal government should not take a position. Isn't that pretty much the "Libertarian" viewpoint? I mean, I really don't think Republicans are going to nominate an Atheist to run against Obama, do you? I just can't see that happening, so someone who doesn't feel compelled to interject their personal religious views into their political policies, shouldn't really be a problem for most on the right. I think it's the best you can ask for in that regard.

You can say what you like about her experience or 'gravitas' but when you compare her to the Community Organizer-in-Chief, she has more executive experience, more business experience, and a better grasp of reality regarding mainstream average Americans. In fact, I believe she connects with the "average Joe" better than any politician we've seen in decades. About the only "problem" she has, is the continual "drag" being placed on her by elites in the Republican party itself. It's stunning that certain people on the right, are as vehemently opposed to Palin as the leftist socialists. Even with this anchor around her neck, she still polls relatively high as a contender for the GOP nomination, and she hasn't even started actually campaigning yet.

I hear these criticisms of Palin often from the right, and I always like to challenge them to tell me specifically, what do you disagree with that she has said? Tell me the position she has taken on an issue that you find disagreement with? None of them ever can! They stammer and stutter around, and keep reverting back to the LIBERAL talking points which attack her persona and character, her personality, not her message. Is it "sexism" or "elitism" or what? She obviously resounds with a good chunk of mainstream America, she obviously has a strong Conservative message, and I'll tell you what... I'd trust her in a heartbeat, with ANY decision she might have to make as my President.
Click to expand...
Hey Dixie,

I am against Palin and not for the reasons Liberals state about her intelligence
or lack of foreign policy knowledge or just as you said general hate.
Have you seen her voting record while in office? Nobody ever talks much about it but it was very moderate, she voted for education and health increases and many other government increases, she did also oppose pork, construction projects and made other cuts.

She would be the mistake that Bush was all over again - that is someone who Conservatives can love because she presents herself as this strong Conservative and pisses off the left. But what is she? She's just sort of positioned herself as this centerpoint of outrage, that she can harness the outrage of the majority of Americans like you and I that are very worried about too much government and the growth in government and try and look like she embodies the revolt against it.
But what has she proposed doing about it? Would she slash government and revitalize our country like Thatcher did? Maybe, but her record seems to say possibly not.

That being said, I haven't seen anyone else really exciting but there is time and we can do better, we need to do better. The last thing we want is to have another fake Conservative that allows more government and acts like a socialist with enlarging government yet still when all is done leaves people with the impression that that is what a Conservative is.
It would do a lot of damage to undo that reputation, coming right off Bush being exactly the same thing.

We desperately need to reverse the unaffordable and damaging trend of constantly more government in healthcare.
 
KingCondanomation said:
Hey Dixie,

I am against Palin and not for the reasons Liberals state about her intelligence
or lack of foreign policy knowledge or just as you said general hate.
Have you seen her voting record while in office? Nobody ever talks much about it but it was very moderate, she voted for education and health increases and many other government increases, she did also oppose pork, construction projects and made other cuts.

She would be the mistake that Bush was all over again - that is someone who Conservatives can love because she presents herself as this strong Conservative and pisses off the left. But what is she? She's just sort of positioned herself as this centerpoint of outrage, that she can harness the outrage of the majority of Americans like you and I that are very worried about too much government and the growth in government and try and look like she embodies the revolt against it.
But what has she proposed doing about it? Would she slash government and revitalize our country like Thatcher did? Maybe, but her record seems to say possibly not.

That being said, I haven't seen anyone else really exciting but there is time and we can do better, we need to do better. The last thing we want is to have another fake Conservative that allows more government and acts like a socialist with enlarging government yet still when all is done leaves people with the impression that that is what a Conservative is.
It would do a lot of damage to undo that reputation, coming right off Bush being exactly the same thing.

We desperately need to reverse the unaffordable and damaging trend of constantly more government in healthcare.
Click to expand...

Well, in Alaska, with the oil windfalls she lobbied to get, they can afford to spend on education, health and stuff. One thing I keep hearing from some conservatives, is this notion that whoever we elect, is going to be able to "slash" this and "cut" that... how are they going to do that? Unless they bring a moose gun to Congress, I don't see it happening. It's all good and well to have the ideology that we need to cut spending, and I wholeheartedly agree, but you and I are not Congress! These grandiose dreams we might have, aren't realistic in a two-party, three-branch system of government. We're going to have to pick and choose our battles, and make these cuts and slashes in increments. I think Palin is more apt to look at what the people who elected her want her to do. If she can balance the budget and cut discretionary spending, I'll be happy with that. If she can eliminate just a few of the bloated government bureaucracies, I'll be elated. But you have to realize, whoever is elected President, doesn't get to just arbitrarily decide what course to take, there is a Congress and a Supreme Court to contend with, and they will have a say as well. It's not going to be as easy as some may think, to make these dramatic cuts across the board, as much as you and I might LOVE to see that happen. That's just reality.
 
Dixie said:
Well, in Alaska, with the oil windfalls she lobbied to get, they can afford to spend on education, health and stuff. One thing I keep hearing from some conservatives, is this notion that whoever we elect, is going to be able to "slash" this and "cut" that... how are they going to do that? Unless they bring a moose gun to Congress, I don't see it happening. It's all good and well to have the ideology that we need to cut spending, and I wholeheartedly agree, but you and I are not Congress! These grandiose dreams we might have, aren't realistic in a two-party, three-branch system of government. We're going to have to pick and choose our battles, and make these cuts and slashes in increments. I think Palin is more apt to look at what the people who elected her want her to do. If she can balance the budget and cut discretionary spending, I'll be happy with that. If she can eliminate just a few of the bloated government bureaucracies, I'll be elated. But you have to realize, whoever is elected President, doesn't get to just arbitrarily decide what course to take, there is a Congress and a Supreme Court to contend with, and they will have a say as well. It's not going to be as easy as some may think, to make these dramatic cuts across the board, as much as you and I might LOVE to see that happen. That's just reality.
Click to expand...
What a bunch of crap, she didn't do shit, it was already in place, she made claims that weren't in any true, nor was she responsible for them! What a load of road apples you guys get from your news sources! She spent like a drunken sailor when she was mayor of Wasilla, look at her record! There really is a sucker born every minute!
 
Dixie said:
I keep hearing certain "Republicans" bash on Palin, saying she isn't "qualified" to be president, and lamenting that she will have problems because she quit her job as governor of Alaska, or her church is too fundamentalist for mainstream. But really, when you look at the situation she faced in Alaska as governor, it is clear to see why she stepped down. Had she remained there, the left would have not rested until they buried her. Governor is not a high paying job, relatively speaking, and she faced endless litigation foist upon her by the left, she was going to have to defend herself against bogus ethics charges, and no telling what else they would have dug up. It would have been relentless, because it already was, as thousands of liberal lawyers perused through anything she had touched in Alaska, for anything they could potentially hit her with.
Click to expand...

The RNC already has paid over $125K of her legal expenses, and committed to another big payment, making the total they're covering over $257K. So dry your tears, she's not going to be on the streets picking up cans or returning pop bottles to help cover her expenses.

No politician in the history of America has ever had to endure such a witch hunt.
Click to expand...

Are you crazy? What about the Clinton witch hunt and the millions in legal fees he incurred, close to ten times the Palin amount? You were probably one of the conservatives who criticized him for taking speaking fees and doing book tours to get the money for his bills.

And you think she should have sat there like a duck, and let them take their best shot? Are you crazy? They were on a mission to destroy Sarah Palin, and when a Political Machine like the Democrat Party goes on a mission to destroy a single individual, they can usually succeed, whether it is warranted or not.
Click to expand...

Hyperbole. Nobody gave a crap about her after the election. Why would we want to "destroy" someone who did us the huge favor of losing? Mission accomplished!

Palin knew it was just going to get worse the closer we came to 2012, and she made a move to mitigate the damage early on. Would she have been "smarter" politically, to remain where she was, and be picked apart by the liberal buzzards?
Click to expand...

Nobody made her stay in the public eye; it was her choice, and being praised or criticized is the price you have to pay for choosing that path.

Keep in mind, as the official head of state in Alaska, she wouldn't be permitted to continually respond to allegations and charges, the governor has responsibilities to tend to the state's business, not address personal issues. So, while she sat bound and gagged by her office, the liberal witch hunt would have continued, and anyone with half a brain can figure out how that might have ended for Palin.
Click to expand...

Baloney. She was a nine days' wonder. So she might have to undergo the same scrutiny Al Gore's put up with since 2000. Big whoop.

She actually took an action the liberals totally didn't ever expect her to take, by stepping down.
Click to expand...

Ha, an action conservatives totally didn't ever expect her to take, either! Be honest.

It put an immediate end to what they were doing, and afforded Palin the freedom to not only earn the money to defend herself, but also have the platform and time to do so. While it may be perceived as "quitting" and a rather unorthodox move, I think it was a quite brilliant maneuver, and one that became necessary in light of what was happening to her.
Click to expand...

The bulk of what happened to her is what she brought on herself in her own state, not what happened while she was a candidate. Do the words "ethics complaint" or "Troopergate" ring a bell? The nation's liberals had nothing to do with her actions in Alaska, zero, zip, nada.

It takes tremendous courage to do something unorthodox, especially something that most people would consider political suicide. Am I the only republican who thinks she did the right thing?

As for her church and its fundamentalism, I can't recall Palin ever publicly speaking of her church or her personal religious views... EVER! Aside from the normal and routinely obligatory mentions of respect for God, which 95% of mainstream Americans share, she doesn't seem to wear her religious views on her sleeve.
Click to expand...

Obama didn't wear his religious views on his sleeve either, but it didn't stop conservatives from trashing them and outright lying.

She is even less prone to talk religion than George W. Bush, and on the social issues of our time, like abortion and gay marriage, her position seems to be consistent, she advocates these things should be left to communities and states to decide for themselves, and the Federal government should not take a position. Isn't that pretty much the "Libertarian" viewpoint? I mean, I really don't think Republicans are going to nominate an Atheist to run against Obama, do you? I just can't see that happening, so someone who doesn't feel compelled to interject their personal religious views into their political policies, shouldn't really be a problem for most on the right. I think it's the best you can ask for in that regard.
Click to expand...

You can say what you like about her experience or 'gravitas' but when you compare her to the Community Organizer-in-Chief, she has more executive experience, more business experience, and a better grasp of reality regarding mainstream average Americans.
Click to expand...

If you call "executive experience" the turning over to an administrator most of the actual work of running a city of 5K, and being required to do it after she was facing recall for some of her hijinks, go for it.

In fact, I believe she connects with the "average Joe" better than any politician we've seen in decades. About the only "problem" she has, is the continual "drag" being placed on her by elites in the Republican party itself. It's stunning that certain people on the right, are as vehemently opposed to Palin as the leftist socialists. Even with this anchor around her neck, she still polls relatively high as a contender for the GOP nomination, and she hasn't even started actually campaigning yet.
Click to expand...

Yeah, she connects with the "average Joe". The very average Joe. The Joe who's influenced by Faux News, sound bites, and slogans. The Joe who thinks he couldn't afford an extra $800/year in taxes if he buys a business worth $250K.

I hear these criticisms of Palin often from the right, and I always like to challenge them to tell me specifically, what do you disagree with that she has said? Tell me the position she has taken on an issue that you find disagreement with? None of them ever can! They stammer and stutter around, and keep reverting back to the LIBERAL talking points which attack her persona and character, her personality, not her message. Is it "sexism" or "elitism" or what? She obviously resounds with a good chunk of mainstream America, she obviously has a strong Conservative message, and I'll tell you what... I'd trust her in a heartbeat, with ANY decision she might have to make as my President.
Click to expand...

Maybe you need to spend more time on sites that will spell it out for you exactly. At least 2/3 of Americans polled think she would not be an effective president, so the info is out there for one who is willing to look.
 
If there's anyone who rivals Obama in the narcissism department, it's Sarah Palin. The difference is, Obama is actually intelligent.

Sarah Palin is a mere opportunist. Besides that, she is not electable. Nominate Palin only if you want to see a repeat of Delaware on a national scale. She will lose by a landslide... even factoring in the likelihood that Obama will be very unpopular by November, 2012.

Mitt is our man.
 
Voltaire said:
If there's anyone who rivals Obama in the narcissism department, it's Sarah Palin. The difference is, Obama is actually intelligent.

Sarah Palin is a mere opportunist. Besides that, she is not electable. Nominate Palin only if you want to see a repeat of Delaware on a national scale. She will lose by a landslide... even factoring in the likelihood that Obama will be very unpopular by November, 2012.

Mitt is our man.
Click to expand...

She has 17% approval. A serial killer would be a better candidate. She is more of an entertainer than anything else. In the Republican primary polls she's behind Romney, Huckabee, and Gingrich. It's like things just get worse and worse for her the more time goes on.
 
christiefan915 said:
The RNC already has paid over $125K of her legal expenses, and committed to another big payment, making the total they're covering over $257K. So dry your tears, she's not going to be on the streets picking up cans or returning pop bottles to help cover her expenses.



Are you crazy? What about the Clinton witch hunt and the millions in legal fees he incurred, close to ten times the Palin amount? You were probably one of the conservatives who criticized him for taking speaking fees and doing book tours to get the money for his bills.



Hyperbole. Nobody gave a crap about her after the election. Why would we want to "destroy" someone who did us the huge favor of losing? Mission accomplished!



Nobody made her stay in the public eye; it was her choice, and being praised or criticized is the price you have to pay for choosing that path.



Baloney. She was a nine days' wonder. So she might have to undergo the same scrutiny Al Gore's put up with since 2000. Big whoop.



Ha, an action conservatives totally didn't ever expect her to take, either! Be honest.



The bulk of what happened to her is what she brought on herself in her own state, not what happened while she was a candidate. Do the words "ethics complaint" or "Troopergate" ring a bell? The nation's liberals had nothing to do with her actions in Alaska, zero, zip, nada.



Obama didn't wear his religious views on his sleeve either, but it didn't stop conservatives from trashing them and outright lying.





If you call "executive experience" the turning over to an administrator most of the actual work of running a city of 5K, and being required to do it after she was facing recall for some of her hijinks, go for it.



Yeah, she connects with the "average Joe". The very average Joe. The Joe who's influenced by Faux News, sound bites, and slogans. The Joe who thinks he couldn't afford an extra $800/year in taxes if he buys a business worth $250K.



Maybe you need to spend more time on sites that will spell it out for you exactly. At least 2/3 of Americans polled think she would not be an effective president, so the info is out there for one who is willing to look.
Click to expand...
Christie, excellent play by play!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top