Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Why is Sarah Palin still getting air time?

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,839 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #63
    Red Hand
    Registered Users Posts: 4,986 ✭✭✭Red Hand


    Amerika wrote: »
    Yeah, voters elected Wilson in 1916 on his commitment not to go to war. Even at his inaugural address on March 4th, 1917, he said, "We're going to pursue peace and even though we've been injured by the effects of war, we're not going into war." Then just a little more than a month later, on April 13th, 1917, America goes to war. Hmmmmmm!

    Oh crap, you all suckered me back in. Shame on you. I'm banning myself from this thread as punishment for not following my claim. So have at the lies, the coast is now clear.

    "No new taxes"-Bush Mark 1

    "Ah did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinski"-Slick Willy

    "We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so". Dubbya on those tricky WMD.

    Politicians lie. It's what they do. Woody was no different.


  • Options
    #64
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    Nice one, free lies! Thanks Amerika!


  • Options
    #65
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,839 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Amerika wrote: »
    Yeah, voters elected Wilson in 1916 on his commitment not to go to war. Even at his inaugural address on March 4th, 1917, he said, "We're going to pursue peace and even though we've been injured by the effects of war, we're not going into war." Then just a little more than a month later, on April 13th, 1917, America goes to war. Hmmmmmm!
    Because Republicans Never lie! :eek::D:rolleyes::pac:

    I guess when GhWB declared No New Taxes that was just an Enhanced Interrogation Election Technique, and not actually a lie?


  • Options
    #66
    monkeypants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,386 ✭✭✭monkeypants


    Also don't forget: the more they bang on about family values, the gayer they are.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    monkeypants wrote: »
    Also don't forget: the more they bang on about family values, the gayer they are.

    Must see doc: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaTsmXaw5NQ


  • Options
    #68
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Amerika wrote: »
    Yeah, voters elected Wilson in 1916 on his commitment not to go to war. Even at his inaugural address on March 4th, 1917, he said, "We're going to pursue peace and even though we've been injured by the effects of war, we're not going into war." Then just a little more than a month later, on April 13th, 1917, America goes to war. Hmmmmmm!

    I suppose you have never heard of the Zimmerman telegram that pushed America into war. Here is a hint it involved your friend Mexico!


  • Options
    #69
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    On Palin. Well see my Sig. She is an idiot who is only looking after herself.
    She made 15 million last year. Do you really think that she would have chosen to serve her "people" if that kind of money was on offer.

    The cries of blame against the liberal media stating "I cant do my job anymore so.... I have to resign..." but then runs off around the country so that she can whore herself out to every convention, book signing and TV opportunity known. Well thats the American dream and I dint really blame her for that. Fair play to her in fact.

    But then for others and her to state that she is some kind of Newt Gingrich mark II is an insult to Newt Gingrich and the pre 90's GOP party. Name one policy that bears her fingerprint, just one. "Oh kick out them illegals" Yeap, very original there Palin! Have a read of the book 'A race of a lifetime' It is a shocking indictment on Palin who many in the McCain campaign had grave fears for her mental well being. She thought Africa was a country and when told it wasn't she couldn't get her head around it? It took them half an hour to explain that it was a continent....!!

    She is an embodiment of the lack of new ideas of the current right. Have a look at this article from the economist (A center right publication). It pulls no punches when writing about Obama but then castigates the right for lack of ideas and solutions problems.

    http://www.economist.com/node/16321546?story_id=16321546&CFID=143407372&CFTOKEN=66999589

    Some snippets
    As for ideas, the Republicans seem to be reducing themselves into exactly what the Democrats say they are: the nasty party of No. They may well lambast Mr Obama for expanding the federal deficit; but it is less impressive when they are unable to suggest alternatives. Paul Ryan, a bright young congressman from Wisconsin, has a plan to restore the budget to balance; it has sunk without a trace. During the row over health care, the right demanded smaller deficits but refused to countenance any cuts in medical spending on the elderly. Cutting back military spending is denounced as surrender to the enemy. Tax rises of any kind (even allowing the unaffordable Bush tax cuts to expire as scheduled) are evil.
    This lack of coherence extends beyond the deficit. Do Republicans favour state bail-outs for banks or not? If they are against them, as they protest, why are they doing everything they can to sabotage a financial-reform bill that will make them less likely? Is the party of “drill, baby, drill” in favour of tighter regulation of oil companies or not? If not, why is it berating Mr Obama for events a mile beneath the ocean? Many of America’s most prominent business leaders are privately as disappointed by the right as they are by the statist Mr Obama.
    Out of power, a party can get away with such negative ambiguity; the business of an opposition is to oppose. The real problem for the political right may well come if it wins in November. Just as the party found after it seized Congress in 1994, voters expect solutions, not just rage. The electorate jumped back into Bill Clinton’s arms in 1996. Business conservatives are scouting desperately for an efficient centrist governor (or perhaps general) to run against Mr Obama in 2012. But tea-party-driven success in the mid-terms could foster the illusion that the Republicans lost the White House because Mr McCain was insufficiently close to their base. That logic is more likely to lead to Palin-Huckabee in 2012 than, say, Petraeus-Daniels.



    Screaming "Obama is a commie" is not a solution to a problem.
    Screaming "Take our country back" is not a solution to a problem.
    Screaming "Reload" is not a solution to a problem.
    Screaming "End Tyranny" is not a solution to a problem.

    Unfortunately that is the level of discourse we can expect of the right today and you know what I think you can lay a big part of the blame on fox news. They have dumbed down journalism for the right. Gone from "you dont criticize a president in war time, if you do its treason" to "we have tyranny here in our own country, fight back". A complete 180 and sure if you listen to that believe it, well where are the new ideas going to come from?

    There is a serious lack of intellectualism in the right presently. Where is the next Reagan? The next Goldwater? The next McCain (pre -2008)?
    Palin?? You have to be joking. She IS the problem with the right not the solution. As long as the right continue to behave as if politics is like American Idol with balloons and ribbons then they are going nowhere?


  • Options
    #70
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,839 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    The book seems to be known under the title Game Change in the US, and from a bit of googlin, I think im gonna buy it.

    As apocalyptic as the TPM likes to play the Obama administration, I shudder to think of that woman as my VP.


  • Options
    #71
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Overheal wrote: »
    The book seems to be known under the title Game Change in the US, and from a bit of googlin, I think im gonna buy it.

    As apocalyptic as the TPM likes to play the Obama administration, I shudder to think of that woman as my VP.

    Great read! Most of the book is taken up with the Obama vs Clinton battle.
    Man they hated each other but it seems the relationship has ironed itself out. Getting Clinton on board as Secretary of State was huge achievement for Obama. It gave him a free hand in 2012 to have a united front and have her on board front and centre. Some good insights into Palin and McCain too.

    Like this line best! When someone high up in the bush administration (think it was Cheney or maybe it was Rove?) was talking to a reporter off the record about Mitt Romneys chances, his response "Romney!!? He's in a Fcuking cult!"

    I LOL'd

    Hate obama or love him its going to take something special to beat him in 2012

    Any other book I should get, been looking to get a team of rivals about the Lincoln administration but looks intimidating, maybe we should have a sticky!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    kev9100
    Registered Users Posts: 1,271 ✭✭✭kev9100


    Overheal wrote: »
    The book seems to be known under the title Game Change in the US, and from a bit of googlin, I think im gonna buy it.


    I finished reading it a month ago, and you really should buy it. It's an excellent read. Interestingly enough, according to the authors many of Palin's own staffers had given up on her by the end of the campaign.


  • Options
    #73
    kev9100
    Registered Users Posts: 1,271 ✭✭✭kev9100


    jank wrote: »
    Any other book I should get, been looking to get a team of rivals about the Lincoln administration but looks intimidating, maybe we should have a sticky!


    Team of Rivals is good, but I think you really should know a lot of the backstory before you read it. Before reading it, I knew very little about Lincoln and that era and a lot of stuff flew straight over my head at first.


  • Options
    #74
    Mjollnir
    Registered Users Posts: 888 ✭✭✭Mjollnir


    jank wrote: »
    On Palin. Well see my Sig. She is an idiot who is only looking after herself.
    She made 15 million last year. Do you really think that she would have chosen to serve her "people" if that kind of money was on offer.

    The cries of blame against the liberal media stating "I cant do my job anymore so.... I have to resign..." but then runs off around the country so that she can whore herself out to every convention, book signing and TV opportunity known. Well thats the American dream and I dint really blame her for that. Fair play to her in fact.

    But then for others and her to state that she is some kind of Newt Gingrich mark II is an insult to Newt Gingrich and the pre 90's GOP party. Name one policy that bears her fingerprint, just one. "Oh kick out them illegals" Yeap, very original there Palin! Have a read of the book 'A race of a lifetime' It is a shocking indictment on Palin who many in the McCain campaign had grave fears for her mental well being. She thought Africa was a country and when told it wasn't she couldn't get her head around it? It took them half an hour to explain that it was a continent....!!

    She is an embodiment of the lack of new ideas of the current right. Have a look at this article from the economist (A center right publication). It pulls no punches when writing about Obama but then castigates the right for lack of ideas and solutions problems.

    http://www.economist.com/node/16321546?story_id=16321546&CFID=143407372&CFTOKEN=66999589

    Some snippets









    Screaming "Obama is a commie" is not a solution to a problem.
    Screaming "Take our country back" is not a solution to a problem.
    Screaming "Reload" is not a solution to a problem.
    Screaming "End Tyranny" is not a solution to a problem.

    Unfortunately that is the level of discourse we can expect of the right today and you know what I think you can lay a big part of the blame on fox news. They have dumbed down journalism for the right. Gone from "you dont criticize a president in war time, if you do its treason" to "we have tyranny here in our own country, fight back". A complete 180 and sure if you listen to that believe it, well where are the new ideas going to come from?

    There is a serious lack of intellectualism in the right presently. Where is the next Reagan? The next Goldwater? The next McCain (pre -2008)?
    Palin?? You have to be joking. She IS the problem with the right not the solution. As long as the right continue to behave as if politics is like American Idol with balloons and ribbons then they are going nowhere?

    Hate to break it to you, but your sig is actually from Homer Simpson.

    Or do you already know that?

    Only other nitpick is that don't ever need another Reagan, Pre 2008 McCain was an unindicted co-conspirator in a huge financial scandal, and Barry Goldwater, may he RIP, weeps for our nation from somewhere. He was a better man than either of those two clowns.


  • Options
    #75
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Mjollnir wrote: »
    Hate to break it to you, but your sig is actually from Homer Simpson.

    Or do you already know that?
    .

    Well if that is the case then she is even more stupid than I thought as it is a quote directly from her book 'Going Rogue'. Taking a quote unkowningly or knowingly from a carton character speaks volumes.

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/11/palins-book-sparks-republican-war-on-vegetarians.html

    Mjollnir wrote: »


    Only other nitpick is that don't ever need another Reagan, Pre 2008 McCain was an unindicted co-conspirator in a huge financial scandal, and Barry Goldwater, may he RIP, weeps for our nation from somewhere. He was a better man than either of those two clowns.

    I meant the 2000 McCain. He would have stood up to the neo-cons that bush was not able to.

    Reagan had his faults but looks like FDR or Lincoln compared to Palin or any of the new right. At least he had new ideas, most of them I didnt agree with but you have to give me dues especially about the cold war. Talk to any eastern european who grew up under the iron curtain and they love him.

    And yes you are nit-picking!


  • Options
    #76
    Bog Warrior
    Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭Bog Warrior


    argosy2006 wrote: »

    Her eyes are like those of a zombie robot drone
    looks like she's trying to psyche me out


  • Options
    #77
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,839 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    jank wrote: »
    Well if that is the case then she is even more stupid than I thought as it is a quote directly from her book 'Going Rogue'. Taking a quote unkowningly or knowingly from a carton character speaks volumes.

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/11/palins-book-sparks-republican-war-on-vegetarians.html
    im tempted to search this forum for "palin derangement syndrome" and say we told them so


  • Options
    #78
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    The Bristol Palin deal is rather sad, she is obviously pregnant and needed to get back to your man lest lose her gig with the abstinence groups.


  • Options
    #79
    PopeUrbanII
    Closed Accounts Posts: 108 ✭✭PopeUrbanII


    While Sara isn't presidential, she's great. Liberalism doesn't automatically equate to intelligence. In fact, I argue the opposite.


  • Options
    #80
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    PopeUrbanII wrote: »
    While Sara isn't presidential, she's great. Liberalism doesn't automatically equate to intelligence. In fact, I argue the opposite.

    While there are scienfic studies which prove differently. For example a lot of Republicans dont know what Marxism actually entails.


  • Options
    #81
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    PopeUrbanII wrote: »
    While Sara isn't presidential, she's great. Liberalism doesn't automatically equate to intelligence. In fact, I argue the opposite.

    Liberalism doesn't equate to intelligence as there and have been very many intelligent American conservatives. Sarah Palin is not one of them, and you are the most intelligent Liberal to ever grace the internetz, what with your rip roaring parodies of the right. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,839 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    If you wish to pen a blog article about a correlation between intelligence and political persuasion, I would be very glad to read it.


  • Options
    #83
    FatherTed
    Registered Users Posts: 2,684 ✭✭✭FatherTed


    I used to think she was a nut job but she is actually pretty smart. She is saying the right things to get the nut jobs to vote for her. I mean the same people who voted twice for GWB will vote for her too and I won't be too surprised if she is elected president in 12 or 16.


  • Options
    #84
    Kepti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 426 ✭✭Kepti


    FatherTed wrote: »
    I used to think she was a nut job but she is actually pretty smart. She is saying the right things to get the nut jobs to vote for her. I mean the same people who voted twice for GWB will vote for her too and I won't be too surprised if she is elected president in 12 or 16.

    I agree with you, but I can't bring myself to say that she's smart. She does seem to have a knack for manipulating a certain demographic. Take a look at this article I was reading yesterday, it basically echoes what you said.

    You really think she'll ever be elected president? I think you're overestimating her popularity due to the loudness of her supporters. As far as I'm concerned, she was completely rejected as even VP on the McCain ticket, as most sensible people could see the danger of her being one heart attack away from the presidency.


  • Options
    #85
    FatherTed
    Registered Users Posts: 2,684 ✭✭✭FatherTed


    Kepti wrote: »
    I agree with you, but I can't bring myself to say that she's smart. She does seem to have a knack for manipulating a certain demographic. Take a look at this article I was reading yesterday, it basically echoes what you said.

    You really think she'll ever be elected president? I think you're overestimating her popularity due to the loudness of her supporters. As far as I'm concerned, she was completely rejected as even VP on the McCain ticket, as most sensible people could see the danger of her being one heart attack away from the presidency.

    I think it was more of an overwhelming love for Obama more than anything that got him elected. Now that he is in there, the Obama reality is not as good looking as it once was so 2012 could be in play. As I said, the number of nut jobs just could beat the number of Obama loyalists.


  • Options
    #86
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    FatherTed wrote: »
    ...the number of nut jobs just could beat the number of Obama loyalists.
    I thought the terms were one in the same. ;)


  • Options
    #87
    transylman
    Registered Users Posts: 599 ✭✭✭transylman


    Palin engages with an unhappy Alaskan.



  • Options
    #88
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    transylman wrote: »
    Palin engages with an unhappy Alaskan.
    The story behind that video is pretty disturbing.


  • Options
    #89
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    The story behind that video is pretty disturbing.

    IMO... I notice nothing was reported regarding how this teacher feels about the numerous ridiculous ethics lawsuits filed against Palin while trying to act as governor after the November 2008 election, when she confronted Palin with her "WORST GOVERNOR EVER" banner. Funny how nothing is ever reported that these numerous lawsuits made it near impossible for Palin to effectively function as governor. The frivolous lawsuits were brought about with the intent to make the Governor spend her personal money and bankrupt her in the process. Reportedly Palin had already personally spent more than $500,000 at the time of her resignation (as the use of public funds probably violates state law… bringing even more lawsuits) on legal fees fighting the completely politically motivated partisan ethical lawsuits. Ten ethics complaints filed against her by my last count. An example of one of the lawsuits is an ethics complaint filed against her claims a conflict of interest because she wore an Arctic Cat logo gear during the Iron Dog snowmobile race that her husband participates in (wooooooo gather the pitchforks and torches folks and storm the governor mansion). Gee, maybe it was just cold out there.

    But it’s Palin, and PDS is a vile disease which attacks and rots the brains of the Left, so the truth matters not as there is no know cure at the current time. :rolleyes:

    And of curious note is in this bloggers link oscarBravo provided:
    On the public dock, private security patted down private citizens. The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable search and seizure from their government. Private security searching private citizens in a public place, doesn’t fall under that category. It’s a bit more hinky.

    Whether it was TLC or the Palins who contracted security, under what authority did they operate in a public location? Were they looking for weapons? Well, now there’s a Second Amendment issue.

    This is Alaska, we carry guns. You can open-carry or acquire a concealed weapons permit from the state. If you are a law abiding citizen, you don’t even need a permit.

    I have one and only one question of this blogger… Would you be bitching about security searches in a public place if it were Barack Obama or Bill Clinton visiting Homer? (Rhetorical question, I think we all know the answer)


  • Options
    #90
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Amerika wrote: »
    I have one and only one question of this blogger… Would you be bitching about security searches in a public place if it were Barack Obama or Bill Clinton visiting Homer? (Rhetorical question, I think we all know the answer)
    So you're OK with private security searching private citizens in a public place without probably cause?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    So you're OK with private security searching private citizens in a public place without probably cause?

    Oh come on… this teacher was not at the event to cut bait. She was there to protest the former governor, former vice presidential candidate, and a top current political figure who has had numerous threats of violence against her.

    Do you think it would be wrong that I would be checked out by a security detail if I were to protest at an event, being in close proximity, to private citizen Bill Clinton?

    And yes, if I were to protest in close proximity to Bill Clinton, it would be just fine with me and I would even hope and expect to be checked out by his security detail.


Advertisement