Sarah Palin: Dumb Like Reagan?
In 1976, Ronald Reagan lost the Republican presidential nomination to incumbent Gerald Ford. Yet his message during the primary campaign had so inspired the party’s conservative base that he was allowed to address the Republican National Convention anyway. And as he addressed that convention, speaking of the Democrat-led attack on personal rights and economic liberty, many of those who listened could not help but think they were hearing the man who would be the GOP’s presidential candidate in 1980.
On November 2, 2008, Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and presidential candidate John McCain lost the national election to Barack Obama and Joe Biden. Yet throughout the campaign, Palin’s words, rather than McCain’s, jolted the conservative base of the Republican Party from its slumber. From her speech at the Republican National Convention on September 3, 2008, to the “common sense” solutions she’s prescribing for America’s ills while on her book tour, many of the people listening to Palin think they’re hearing the woman who will be a presidential candidate in 2012.
Reagan had been a Hollywood actor in Westerns before entering politics, and the media never allowed him to escape the stigma of being a “dumb cowboy.” To them he was B actor who became a C president in 1980, pushing a domestic agenda based on shrinking the size of government and a foreign policy that supposedly made America the laughingstock of the world. (Remember how pundits gasped when Reagan called the Soviet Union an “evil empire,” and again when he called “Communism a form of insanity”?)
But a funny thing happened on the way to Reagan’s bid for re-election. To the media’s chagrin, it became obvious that the “dumb cowboy” was deeply beloved by the citizens of this nation. He beat Walter Mondale in the greatest landslide victory in American history by taking every state but one on election night.
Compared to our inept socialist president,Sarah is a genius.Most everyone I know is disgusted with Obama and the democrats.Its a HISTORIC disgust! PALIN2012
During the Presidential campaign Sarah was criticized as being
not qualified to be President, in an emergency by the left.
Then they voted someone in that actually was not qualified.
Can’t wait to see Sarah debate Barack.
Sarah has no need for a teleprompter
“This is not to say Palin could be Reagan’s equal.”
I think a President Palin would be able to slash government in ways that Reagan could only dream of.
I also think if she runs in 2012, she is not just going to win — she is going to clean Obama’s clock.
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
Following the stupid, infantile, inept and destructive Barrack Obama this exceptional country will get the insightful,practical, honest, effective leader Sarah Heath Palin in 2012.
You betcha !!
I adored Ronald Reagan. I am beginning to adore Ms. Palin as well.
We ain’t seen nothin’ yet. Darling Sarah moped the floor with say it ain’t so Joe, that’s a trailer for her KO of Teleprompter Boy.
If Sarah Heath Palin is “dumb,” then I want more “dumb” in public office.
Many of our political difficulties stem from having elevated persons with high intelligence, or at least with a high opinion of their intelligence, to public office. Such persons are prone to imagining themselves above the petty constraints that others must suffer. Even those moved by the best of intentions will transgress their proper bounds, telling themselves as they do so that “it’s for the greater good, but they wouldn’t understand.”
Barack Hussein Obama is a capital case of this syndrome. He thinks himself too gifted to be subject to Constitutional stricture. He ignores the proper limits on the president’s power, secure in the conviction that he won’t even be cited for it verbally, much less be called to account for it before the Senate. The rest, as they say, is an exercise for the reader.
Give me men of sound character, schooled from the Bible and the handle of a broom, who’ll do as their Constitutional job descriptions say they should…and nothing more!
Give me Sarah Heath Palin.
I love Sarah Palin because she drives the liberals crazy. She drives them crazy not only because of what she says and does but also because of who she is. Go Sarah, Go!
Don’t let any of them fool you. The liberals hated Reagan while he was alive.
@ 2 Ron:
She debates him constantly on facebook, doesn’t she? Another sign of the effectiveness of her attack showed up yesterday when politifact decided that the biggest political lie of the year was her ‘death panel’ comment. That would be the comment that was borne out as truth by the removal of exactly the section of legislation that she was referring to but also to set in motion the overwhelming opposition that the legislation has garnered in the past few months.
I liken Palin to the political equivalent to having the Battleship Wisconsin sitting off your shores. It’s big, its loud, its effective (and beautiful, too, if you like that sort of thing). Its purpose can’t be ignored. It harkens back to a more traditional time when questions of right and wrong were not as blurred.
Proclaiming Republicans to be ignorant, stupid, and completely lacking in brain power has been a liberal sport for as long as I can remember. During my lifetime, objects of leftist derision have included Eisenhower, Reagan, both Bushes — and, now, Palin.
It seems the left has long preferred egg heads with impressive academic pedigrees (Woodrow Wilson comes to mind) over people possessed of common sense. And the country has often been the worse for it.
But the pendulum does swing back periodically — as it seems poised to now in reaction to the Dems and their statist, Big Government ways. The country appears on the verge of emphatically rejecting the megalomania of Obama, Pelosi, Reid, et al.
By turning to Sarah Palin — and / or other clear thinkers — in 2010 and 2012, Americans will be signaling their desire for a return to sane governance. But there will be much damage to undo.
Bill Buckley famously said: “I’d rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.”
To paraphrase the erudite conservative: I would rather entrust the government of the United States to a former Alaskan governor with a degree from the University of Idaho and a good deal of common sense than a dedicated socialist constitutional law professor with a Harvard degree who has no appreciation for the goodness of his own country.
“” This is not to say (President-Elect) Palin could be (former president,) Reagan’s, equal. “”
Equal? Absolutely.
But, just as the fascistic traitor, Buraq Hussayn 0zero, the world’s most-dangerous-ever dullard, makes the communist traitor, Carter, look like a bumbling bloody Boy Scout – so does the potential for greatness of United States of America’s President and Armed-Forces Commander-In-Chief-Elect Sarah Louise Heath Ronald Wilson Reagan Palin, cause America’s greatest Modern-Era president, Ronald Wilson Reagan, to pale by comparison.
And that’s no mean feat!
Brian Richard Allen
Lost Angels – Califobambicated 90028
And the Very Far Abroad
I think even Palin is smarter than these comments…
If she is dumb like Reagan, she’s my kinda dumb. For he was dumb enough to able to relate to the people yet understand how to defeat our greatest enemy (at that time), the USSR.
Sarah drives me crazy and I’m a conservative. She is hot and sexy. She doesn’t appear to have much leadership qualities or brains, but does that really matter when you are being told what to do by the puppet masters? she ought to run on as a 3rd party candidate.
Look who’s calling Sarah dumb! The people with the biggest mouths and the smallest I.Q.’s
They’re AFRAID of intelligence and common sense, because it would put them out of a job and require them to obtain tangible skills, rather than simply become self proclaimed tribesmen.
Only with this tribal mentality can they maintain they’re status. And ignoring the history of previous tribes, shall be their demise.
I hope it occurs in my lifetime.
We love her because SHE FIGHTS!
Sarah is hot! You betcha…..
All of our presidents since JFK have been corporate puppet representatives so who cares if there are brains or leadership qualities? She is hot and sexy and nice to look at on TV. I’d vote for her.
I personally prefer George Clooney or Derek Jeter.
Now and Then should be along any minute with his bling anti-Palin bashing. Now and Then is drawn to anything to do with Palin like a bee to Honey.
It’s called Obsession.
My Dad loved Reagan; I was too young to understand at the time – life was a party. Over the years he voted for candidates from either party which presented me with a unique viewpoint of political machinations.
I have come to regard both Democrats and Republicans as ineffectual, corrupt and weak. Where has “and that government of the people, by the people, for the people” gone?
The insufferable attitude of inbred politicians and academicians, and a love-struck media has done absolutely nothing to allay Americans’ tangible distrust and desire to vomit at the very sight of them.
I love Sarah Palin! President Palin in 2012!
Faster please!
The MSM have lost credibility since Reagan. That they should not have had credibility back then is not the point. They had it. Now only those who will not see do not see their bankruptcy. Will they try to pin the dumb label on Sarah? Of course. But with the exception of those already in the establishment fold the public has been inoculated against the party line. Calling Sarah dumb will be heard by most as an admission of establishment panic. And rightly so.
The only real question is whether Sarah can overcome the resistance of establishment Republicans. If she can, if she can win the nomination, the presidency will be hers in a rout.
i am inline with ron spins bulletpoints, but would we not have to stipulate the debate would have to be truthful?
The only group bigger and more more desperate than people telling themselves that Palin’s dumb is the group telling themselves she’s not.
2010 is going to be a very interesting year for Sarah. It will be a great deal of fun watching the liberals squirm as Sarah continues her campaign of Common Sense.
I’m sure that with Sarah’s help the power in Congress will shift back to a more rational approach of government.
Yeah we don’t want any marionette in office. At least we know it’s George Soros pulling Barry’s strings.
Come up with a better argument, Tricky Dicky.
Some of us don’t want another Reagan in any way, shape or form.
lol seriously! people r suffering from Reagan amnesia. “Facts are stupid things” to them.
Hot, sexy and stupid is the perfect international corporate representative for the GOP and a shoe-in for another fake election.
Ever notice that when a declared conservative refers to Palin as “hot” they then proceed with a character assassination?
That is a standard lefty ploy—declare themselves conservatives before shouting slogans.
Logically the storm of character assassination by the left is her best commendation.
Love them or hate them the lefties are adept at recognizing a winner. The more vicious they are, the more commendable their target is…read them in reverse.
I like Sarah, but she is not a viable candidate, whatsoever! Sarah is only marginally more qualified than Obama was to hold the office in 2008. Which is to say, that she is completely unqualified. As much as I admire her good qualities, Palin lacks the experience, intellect and judgment to govern the US.
She did a good job in Alaska, primarily by throwing the corrupt GOP governor out of office and managing the oil proceeds for the benefit of the Alaskans. I applaud her for this. She also did (and continues to do) a fine job at mobilizing Conservatives. This is admirable, but not nearly enough to qualify her for the office of President.
I do not see any way that Palin could handle foreign affairs with any degree of competency. For example, I think that her knowledge of world history and of the current strategic forces at play in the world are close to non-existent. While she has good, common sense instincts with regard to finances, she does not have any background in economic theory and how and why capitalism works and how and when the government must involve itself. This is required to make good calls about where it must and must not be regulated and in what ways.
On a purely political level, there is no way that she could win a national general election and nominating her would be suicidal. However unfair it is, the press in this country would make their slanderous campaign in 2008 look like child’s play. The shear volume and quantity of smears would be sufficient to bury any chance she might have. It sucks, but it’s a fact that cannot be overlooked. Even if she could win, Palin would be unable to govern. Blame whomever you want, but a Palin administration would be constantly be attacked to the point of immobility in a way that would make us yearn for the gentle press that Bush 41 received.
Competently governing this country requires not only the ability to get elected, common sense and good instincts, but also a strong understanding of the theory of geopolitics and economics. I don’t believe that Sarah has nearly enough background to handle the job.
“BC:
Some of us don’t want another Reagan in any way, shape or form.”
That’s because you’re evil and want to destroy America.
How about looking at what Sarah actually says and writes? Obama can read a teleprompter, but he had no management experience except for running the $120 million Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC) and totally wasting the money. As POTUS he is continuing that record of wasting money with negative results only on a bigger scale. People are afraid to criticize a Black President for fear of being called a racist. When people vote in secret, it will be all over for Obama and the “slobbering” main stream media (SMSM) won’t be able to fool the public again. Obama’s positions on almost every issue is wrong and actually dumb. On the other hand, Palin has been exactly right on just about every issue. As a libertarian, I agree with Palin on everything except abortion and religion. In these two areas, people should be free to make their personal choices so Palin seems to be OK with that as far as I can tell.
30. Bohemond:
You’re so right. All of the peace and prosperity stuff is for the birds. Who wants America to stand up to Communists and dictators and petty tyrants? Who wants freedom and liberty for people such as those who were imprisoned behind the Berlin wall? Who wants high employment, low inflation and strong economic growth? All of that stuff is sooooo 1980′s.
Now and then:
Sarah Palin became governor of Alaska on her own dime, against her own party. Only a dimwit would call that dumb. Liberals unfortunately all seem to be overbearing, narcissistic, elitest, morons, who only think they have the answers. How is Obama working out for you? Beginning to believe affirmative action has gone a bridge too far? Speaking of dumb–where are your boy’s college grades, and why no magna cum laudes? Because Obama, while a wonderful orator, is dumb as a rock. Did he ever pass the bar–just asking!!! Don’t disparage Sarah while pushing a real dummy. And if you have a thing agaist women presidents, who do you think is the power in the Obama’s relationship?
I already gave the possible Reagan-Palin parallels yesterday on another Palin thread, but I suppose it’s nice that Mr Hawkins can get some mileage out of it.
It’s the dumbness, stupid!
And the two overriding points would be:
1. She will not be “ready” until 2016.
2. When we get a new President, either the left or the right mumbles, broods, and yowls. The Presidents come across very differently, but just about all the big government basics remain the same, because we will have big government for the foreseeable future. We are a big country in a world of big companies and big issues. It ain’t 1779 any more, and whether it is Reagan, Palin, or Obama,. the Federal Government…and deficits will be huge…except for the occasional and temporary perfect storm of events leading up to the contract with America. Both Clinton and Newtie failed with their own agendas, but between the two forces stumbled over some deficit reduction.
Dumb like Reagan, maybe not. Perhaps she has alzheimer’s like Reagan, which she can then hide for the remainder of her second term, her cognitively deficient finger on a nuclear trigger. Yes, that would be great. Any movement that actually seeks to have ANOTHER person with alzheimer’s running the country, deserves the ridicule it gets.
Right on. This is exactly why the media hates her – she strikes the same chord in the common man that Reagan struck. Go Sarah Go!
So how long have you been working for the dem’s mjb?
Sarah is way better lookin’ than Hillary and far less evil too. I can’t wait for the cat-fight in 2012! Obama is a one term pres. The left in this country is off the scale now.
Dumb is smart in this instance. She is real person to whom real people can relate and more than anything – she loves this country. That’s what makes her like Reagan. He, more than any other until Palin, loved this nation.
Sarah Palin’s eldest child was born, full-term, 8 months after his parents eloped. So not only was Palin’s daughter unable to abstain from premarital sex, her parents were as well. Yet they all rant and rave about the importance of “abstinence.” You really cannot make this stuff, people. Wake up! Unless of course you have some of sick need to be ruled by hypocrites who tell you what to think and how to believe without actually practicing it themselves!
She’s sharp as a tack and she has a good grasp of what matters, along with an ability to communicate it, just like Reagan.
To Bohemond: Try saying that without looking in a mirror.
You all know that Sarah is a member of a seriously warped hyper-religious Jesus-type cult. Check it out on Google. It would be difficult for most of you here to actually do some reading and studying on your own instead of the typical leg-jerk attack reaction falling back on the fake left/right liberal/conservative monologues. She is a religious fruitcake!!
Check this out (I bet none of you actually do) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8fSe27iloU&feature=related
@26. BC: – Some of us don’t want another Reagan…
Your ill-informed, minority view is acknowledged and noted as the standard attitude of any wannabe socialist or marxist, BC.
Those who whine that Palin doesn’t have the right experience or background to ‘govern’ (read: rule) have been so conditioned to accept rule by a political elite that they miss the point of a Republic entirely. Our Republic is intended to be self-governing, and by all accounts based on her actual record of performance in Alaska, that’s the sort of government Palin would insist on.
Those who believe Palin would be attacked into immobility, simply based on the limp-wristed precedents set by the Bushes’ inability to respond to The Left Wing Media, fail to recognize that where they turned out to be RINOs, she is not – at least not by what we’ve seen to date.
Palin can not only win the Presidency – but be successful as President – by adhering to the fundamentals that made America what it was before the socialists began destroying it. If she avoids allowing herself to become embroiled in red herrings like abortion and gay marriage, and defers those issues to the States as the Constitution dictates; if she stresses individual liberty and responsibility, accountable government, the rule of law and an end to the socialist, entitlement mindset that is destroying our country, she could very well turn out to be the most successful and popular U.S. President of the last 100 years. The reason for this is simple: adherence to those tenets and a renewed commitment to the Constitution are the only things that will turn America away from the suicidal path the Democrats and their RINO enablers have set us on.
goy,
who needs experience to be an international corporate representative that does what you are told to do…or else???!!! Sarah would be the perfect corporate hoe.
Actually Sarah Palin went to four colleges: Hawaii Pacific, North Idaho College, University of Idaho, Matanuska-Susitna College (a juco), and then Univeristy of Idaho again.
But don’t let that stop whatever hell your point was about this deeply stupid incurious snowbilly grifter
Please check this out and educate yourselves: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=881TR0a6J6U
In case you’ve forgotten (or never noticed): Ronald Reagan had a LOT of cross-party (or cross-ideological) appeal. Sarah Palin has NONE. She can’t win the White House without it. Period. End of story.
Well- it stands to reason that people want to elect someone just like themselves. Ignorant and stupid. Have fun with that everyone. This is a woman who probably couldn’t locate Iraq on a map. Come to think of it, how many of you can?
It doesn’t matter what anybody here says.
Sarah will defeat Zero in Nov. 2012 and become the first female POTUS.
So let’s stop the typing and start pushing to help the GOP go con and take the House and Senate back in 2010 and then the POTUS in 2012 so that Sarah has a proper legislature to work. Then we repeal Obamacare and pass REAL reform, cut business taxes, cut spending, balance the budget, put more interpretationists on the courts, and become the strong country we know we can be on foreign policy. And, amnesty? Nope. Laws should be respected and obeyed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgALgdaMlkA&feature=related
Sarah Palin would be a PILF for sure.
@47. Richard Milhaus Scurvy Wilson III: – who needs experience to be an international corporate representative…
Based on BHO’s failed, failing and guaranteed-to-continue-to-fail administration, I’d say the answer to that question is ‘nobody’.
Goy. What a laugh. Just when did the Socialists start ruining America. I expect your response to be equally entertaining. Did those socialists come up with slavery? Did they have a civil war? Was it the socialists that drove corporations to such egregious violations of human dignity and rights that it engendered a necessary growth in the government simply to protect people from corporations? Was it the socialists that forced us to invade Cuba, the Phillipines, to get involved in World War 1, Vietnam, Panama? Yes, our problems conveniently all started in some delusional “socialist” back-stabbing age, took a break from 1980 to 1992 and then from 2000 to 2008. Yeah, sure it did. What a dumba##!
Guys & Girls…it’s not worth while debating whether Palin is thicker than a coat of paint.
The real issue (or at least according to this website) is whether Palin is responsible for shooting JR!
http://tinyurl.com/5u2h87v
Thought it might amuse everyone and break the ice. Remember to pass it on.
I do feel guilty, BUT I do enjoy the fear expressed by the trolls every time that on PJM appears an article about Sarah Palin.
Go Sarah !
Just say NO to communism !
29. MJBrutus said:
“I do not see any way that Palin could handle foreign affairs with any degree of competency. For example, I think that her knowledge of world history and of the current strategic forces at play in the world are close to non-existent.”
Exactly how do you know that?? What is it she has said which leads you to that conclusion?? And how would her knowledge compare to the demonstrated ignorance of the moron Obama who called Iran a tiny country and apparently didn’t know that Russia is on the UN Security council??
“On a purely political level, there is no way that she could win a national general election and nominating her would be suicidal. However unfair it is, the press in this country would make their slanderous campaign in 2008 look like child’s play.”
You are missing the point, while Sarah Palin was subjected to the most savage campaign of abuse aimed at any candidate in modern history it really wasn’t about Sarah Palin. Liberals fear her because she has the same star power as Reagan, but they will go after anyone they percieve as a threat. If Palin were not their target it would have been someone else. It’s time we stopped letting the “mainstream” media pick our candidates, we let them in 2008 and were stuck with a weak loser as the presidential nominee.
And even now, a year after the election, Sarah Palin still has more executive experience than the other three candidates at the top of the 2008 ballot combined.
Come 2012, ANYONE will be able to beat Obama.
Sarah Palin? JUST DUMB.
Sarah Palin-Fabio 2012!
Anybody but Obama though. Anybody!!! Obama is going to gut this country like a fish if he continues and it might be too late as it is!! That’s why I voted for McCain…….
Bush was better educated that Palin and wasn’t he a great president.
He was educated at Yale and Harvard and finished with a “C” average.
He didn’t have the SAT scores or GPA to go to those schools so his
father got him in.
It seems like most really intelligent people have no interest in politics.
General David Petraus was supposed to have graduated 11th in his class
at West Point and then got a masters degree in public administration and
Phd in international affairs. He was asked if he would be interested
in running for president and he said he was not.
I read and ad for an eye doctor who had a Phd in laser physics from MIT with
honors and a degree in Medicine from Harvard with honors.
Most M.D.’s probably have more intelligence than the people that run the country.
The world must have plenty of really intelligent people who could do the
job right but the political system works to put mediocre people in the White
House.
42. You do realize that 40 weeks is an average, right? The actual duration of a full term pregnancy can be anywhere from 8-10 months.
She is the perfect candidate for a great president because she has the one quality so many men since Reagan have lacked – backbone. If John McCain had had half her fortitude, even a quarter of it, 2008 could have been different. We desperately need someone like Sarah who will clearly and unapologetically speak for America out of a love for America.
Sarah Palin’s posts on Facebook are more intelligent than anything that has come out of Obama’s mouth his first year as President. But then again, he speaks from the prompter, not the heart.
As the groundswell of support for Sarah rises, I will continue to laugh my ass off at you misogynistic Palin haters.
The Left continues to show just how much they hate women.
And women are starting to taking notice.
Keep it up! Love it!
57. Stevemmn:
I’ll repeat that her experience compares favorably to Obama’s. Unfortunately that is a bar so low that an ant couldn’t crawl under it. We need and we deserve much better!
Agreed that she has Reagan’s star power. However, she lacks Reagan’s substance. While I could certainly imagine, for example, Palin standing up to Iran (and yes, of course that would be an improvement), I couldn’t imagine her being able to anything effectively about them. While I could see her wanting to do the right things about the economy I cannot see here designing a plan or hiring the right people to be able to do it effectively either.
Sorry, but that’s just he way I see it. As I said, I don’t dislike her, in fact I do like her. But she is not Presidential material by a long shot.
@ #55 Mary Steiner
“Just when did the Socialists start ruining America.”
Right about the time FDR got in, and they’ve been sucking the lifeblood out of the country ever since.
Everyone that dismissed Palin is ready to vote for her to have someone–anyone–who will oppose the Pelosi/Reid drive to reshape the US into an overtaxed haven for the indolent. And who won’t bow to foreign leaders.
OH…well I thought every single woman on Earth delivers at exactly 40 weeks.
Reagan’s deep tax cuts? AWR Hawkins proves himself, unfortunately, another victim of the Reagan myth.
In Ronald Reagan’s own words: “We’re not attempting to cut either spending or taxing levels below that which we presently have.”
In addition to not cutting, however, Reagan also upped spending a few notches, thus: the Gross Federal Debt went from 900 billion to 2.7 trillion. Ford and Carter simply doubled it; Reagan tripled it.
Spending habits (which are a better gauge of government size than are taxes) increased under Reagan’s leadership in almost every way. But in any case, Reagan hardly cut taxes: by the end of 1987, government revenues, a good indicator of taxes and tax cuts, were nearly identical to those of Carter.
http://rayharvey.org/index.php/2009/12/ronald-reagan-and-the-myth-of-deregulation/
62. Get to know some Wasillians, Anchorageans or other Alaskans. It’s not a secret that Todd and Sarah P. eloped suddenly due to pregnancy scenario.
at the risk of double-posting, since this stupid site seems to get more brain-dead every week…
@55. Mary Steiner: – Just when did the Socialists start ruining America.
Wilson tried hard, but FDR is the one who really kicked things off downhill in the ’30s. His so-called “New Deal” was largely repealed because it was unconstitutional, but the facets of his socialist boodoggle that remained have created an entitlement mindset that is destroying the country slowly and surely. Read a book.
- Did those socialists come up with slavery?
Are you trying to look ignorant, or does it come naturally? No, the Democrat Party members were the ones who tried to preserve the institution of slavery in America, which was originally inherited from the British and the Dutch. The nasty Republicans fought a war to put an end to it. This was all before socialism became popular, as you’d know if you’d ever studied any history.
The form of slavery created by the socialists came later, in the form of ‘labor’ camps built by the National Socialists in Germany, the gulags run by the Marxist Socialists in Russia and the forced labor orchestrated by the Marxist Socialists in Cambodia, among others.
- Was it the socialists that drove corporations to such egregious violations of human dignity and rights that it engendered a necessary growth in the government simply to protect people from corporations?
This is funny stuff. And assumes facts not in evidence. Is this the party line they’re teaching you children in grade school these days?
- Was it the socialists that forced us to invade Cuba, …
That would have been Democrat President Kennedy, who was admirably but misguidedly, ineptly and rather ham-handedly fighting the spread of communism. IIRC, the invasion was a failure. Either way, invading Cuba hasn’t done much to harm America.
- … to get involved in World War 1, …
That would be the aforementioned fascist/socialist and Democrat, Wilson, and his array of fascist/socialist ilk. IIRC, his words – after the Germans committed an open act of war against the U.S. by sinking a few American merchant ships – were “The world must be made safe for democracy.”
- … Vietnam, …
Uhm… that was Democrat Kennedy, and was escalated by socialist and Democrat, LBJ. RINO Richard Nixon was ultimately responsible for ending our involvement there.
You don’t seem to have much of a handle on U.S. History.
To the media and snippy, petty liberal commentators like Chris Matthews and Maureen Dowd, someone that is “intellectually qualified” for office has to have these traits:
* An Ivy League education — the highest and most grooming in the land like Harvard! All with either the money to pay for a $150,000+ tuition or –even better–scholarships.
* Very strongly rooted in corrupt places like Chicago and DC (preferably both)
* A loyal subscription to the New York Times or Newsweek
* A strong sense of charm and polished image (no grassroot commoner connections necessary)
* And of course, far-left liberal views — on everything. No dissing other liberals either. Look at what happened to Hillary Clinton.
Given the last one, to a liberal, a conservative can *never* be considered “intellectually qualified,” even if they show strong qualities of leadership and charisma despite very human flaws and mistakes. And if the public or ANYONE for that matter sees otherwise, they simply have no taste or brains and need to be more regulated.
And look how quickly commentators, journalists, and even people commenting on this very site will chastise and sneer at her admirers as commoners that are too stupid to know what they want. It goes something like this:
“That’s right, gaze upon the latest bunch of clowns that vote for us. Those middle-class are all just hateful, idiotic bumpkin underlings that would send the country into a tailspin if we don’t elect someone as gifted and enlightened as out liberal selves. Hahahahaha, it’s hilarious. Just look at them. These stupid idiots, waiting for their slutty, empty-headed idol in sleet and snow. Praises to this backwards Alaskan savage foam from their common, slacked jaws and…it must STOP! STOP I SAY! You all can’t be of double-digit intelligence or above if you support a heathen like yourselves! You’re not looking to a liberal as you should! Lord Obama, forgive them for they do not know what they are saying! That’s why we all need Matthews, Olbermann, Dowd and the most internet saavy of our own to enlighten and undermine these conservative dopes with their clearly higher-grounded, intellectual liberal superiority. Yes, the world would be a MUCH better place without those pie-in-in-the-sky peons and their Sarah Palin, and their tea parties, and their townhalls, and their cable TVs…”
That’s just the overall attitude with which some liberals and their commentators like to deride Sarah, her supporters, and conservatives (be they Democrat or Republican) in general. Not that I want them to stop, mind you. It’s a good schadenfreude seeing them twist themselves in knots over the resurgence of conservatism by spewing venom and allowing good, plucky old Sarah cause them so much stress. Their anger, vanity, and humiliation is just music to my ears.
*our
*pie-in-the-sky
*nix the “a” before “good schadenfreude”
Tsk tsk tsk.
Sarah Palin running in 2012? Whoever runs… they will have to first, get the nomination and second.. run a national campaign. Does Palin have any positions on any issues? People will not vote for policies that do not exist. Therefore, the nominee will have to finally say whether or not they have answers concerning the issues like health care, the environment, economy and our wars. So far, the Republicans do not have any policies execpt that they do not support the democrats. And that is not policy. Therefore, the Repbulican party is all question marks. And people do not tend to support question marks. Do they?
#61 Phil writes
I read and ad for an eye doctor who had a Phd in laser physics from MIT with
honors and a degree in Medicine from Harvard with honors.
Most M.D.’s probably have more intelligence than the people that run the country.
The world must have plenty of really intelligent people who could do the
job right but the political system works to put mediocre people in the White
House.
So long as you think that pieces of paper (degrees) can establish intelligence or competence you are in a lot of trouble. And you should of course understand that the very term “intelligence” is a generic description of mental skills, not some absolute measure. Specifics matter a lot. Many people who have superb verbal skills are morons when it comes to mathematics, and many people who are superb at mathematics are highly substandard when it comes to verbal skills. Which is the moron and which is the genius? It all depends upon your perspective and what kind of skills you’re looking for.
That is the problem, along with the criteria in which competence is judged. After all, look at the old movie The Wizard of Oz. All it took for Obama (excuse me, I meant the Scarecrow) to be considered to have a brain was a degree conferred by the Wizard that in actuality meant nothing at all.
The symbol merely mimics reality–it does not confer it.
3. JR Dogman:
“This is not to say Palin could be Reagan’s equal.”
I think a President Palin would be able to slash government in ways that Reagan could only dream of.
I also think if she runs in 2012, she is not just going to win — she is going to clean Obama’s clock.
JR, for what it’s worth, I think it’s going to be Sarah vs. Hillary. Whole different ballgame, for which we must be prepared.
61.Phil: “The world must have plenty of really intelligent people who could do the job right but the political system works to put mediocre people in the White House.”
The job doesn’t require a “really intelligent” person with a PhD. It requires somebody who knows the difference between right & wrong.
You guys a lunatics. Certified lunatics.
Palin as President? Give me a break. That hashish pipe has you completely out of touch with reality.
@ 42:
LOL! Palin should not be president because hers baby came out in 8 months instead of 9… How dumb can moonbats get?? Is there some lowest level for moonbat’s stupidity or do they plan to continue in their free fall still?
Palins dumb,Bidons dumber,& Obamas dumbest.That sums it all up.So in 2012 I hope America chooses dumb over dumbest.However after 2008 and the dumbest choice America made.I sense America really does not care if dumb is better than dumbest.I really do hope things change in 2012.This dumbest guy really is not cutting it at all.
Larsen E Whipsnade:
“The job(White House) doesn’t require a “really intelligent” person with a PhD. It requires somebody who knows the difference between right & wrong.”
And herein lies the problem with conservatives. They have no idea of the complexity of the world and think the best way to govern is to foolow one’s gut.
We tried that. George W. Bush. Never again. Fool me once, shame on you er.. ..me… Fool me twice, shame on… … er, uh, er, you can’t get fooled again.
jharp – Makes more sense than the idiot from harvard.
PILF for sure though.
How dumb can moonbats get??
If they–or any other group of significant numbers–get as dumb as you, I’d say that’s a good time for concern.
Goy, you’re one dumb ignoramus:
No, the Democrat Party members were the ones who tried to preserve the institution of slavery in America, which was originally inherited from the British and the Dutch.
Yeah, the Democrats and Republicans were one party when the constitution was signed, and in fact the Democrats and Republicans broke along geographic lines, not party ones during the civil war. Obviously, they were never socialists. One would really have to be keen on boasting of their stupidity to even suggest such a thing, at a time when feudalism ruled the South.
I’m not surprised at the rest of your asinine post. It really does require a psychotic level of delusion to insist that the Democrats were a viable party in the 18th century, or that they were socialists before the term even existed.
jharp, please explain how Palin could possibly be any worse than Obama. I have yet to see any difficult decision Obama has made right. The only good decision I can recall is letting the commanders on the scene handle the pirate hostage situation.
@85. Mary Steiner: – Yeah, the Democrats and Republicans were one party when the constitution was signed, …
Uhm… you’re the one who brought up slavery and socialism in the same sentence, princess. What part of “This was all before socialism became popular” were you too stupid to understand, eh? Take a history course. Or five.
86. myth buster:
jharp, please explain how Palin could possibly be any worse than Obama.
**************************************************************************
Let’s see. We have a President of the Harvard Law Review and U.S. Senator verses a and 1/2 term Governor of a a backwoods state with less people than a medium sized city. One can’t answer a simple question like “what do you read?”
Good God. Are you that blinded that you can’t see Palin as the ignorant fool that she is. She’s HURTING your cause. She’s nothing but an opportunist cashing in on her popularity with a bunch of ignorant rednecks.
65. MJBrutus:
“Agreed that she has Reagan’s star power. However, she lacks Reagan’s substance. While I could certainly imagine, for example, Palin standing up to Iran (and yes, of course that would be an improvement), I couldn’t imagine her being able to anything effectively about them. ”
I agree that Sarah Palin has some weaknesses and she may not even run at all, but I think it would be a huge mistake to write her off. She did an excellent job as governor of Alaska with the highest approval rating of any governor in the nation. I got the impression in the 2008 campaign that she was like a top baseball prospect who had been plucked out of A league ball and thrown into the big leagues cold in the middle of a pennant race. She had a blazing 98 mph fastball and not much else. She will have plenty of time to gain more experience and mature as a candidate.
When 2012 comes around, I will support whichever candidate has the best chance of beating Obama and stopping his radical leftwing agenda. At the rate he is going even Mickey Mouse could beat him on the ballot but it pays to be sure. What I like about Sarah Palin is that she is the only candidate on the horizon with the b@lls (politically speaking!) to really take on Obama and his radical agenda. I am sick and tired of Republicans nominating squishy professional politicians like Bob Dole and John McCain who let their opponents get away with murder. Sarah Palin is the one candidate now with the guts to really challenge Democrats.
Sarah Palin: Dumb Like Reagan?
*************************************************************************
No, dumb like a doorknob.
Well the Democrats were the party of slavery then segregation, just to take it to the next step. Now socialism really came in through the progressive movement, first through Teddy Roosevelt then Wilson. Now I don’t envy the predicament of any successor to Obama, but she has the conviction and the integrity to pull it off
Hey Mary Steiner. Goy is exactly correct in his original post (#46) and your scornful rebuttal sounds really lame, ill-informed and ideologically compulsive-obsessive to me. I am not a Republican and I did not see Sarah Palin as a viable VP candidate in the 08 election. However if I have to choose between her and Obama for POTUS in 2012 – there will be no hesitation on my part. I think you will be very surprised at how many people feel this way and don’t give a d**m about what party did what to whom in the past. The important thing is to get someone in office who will begin to unravel this slide into full blown socialism (news flash: It doesn’t work for anyone except the ruling class and even they will get overthrown eventually).
I don’t want to be told what to do in every area of my life. I don’t want to pay for a large elite governing class and their bloated staffs and programs. I don’t want to live in a country where a majority has no reason or incentive to produce anything of value. I don’t want to pay for an ineffective education system that is increasingly an indoctrination tool for the political class. I would like to arrange for my own health care. I’ll take my chances with the “evil” corporations – at least they have to convince people to buy whatever they are selling. Go live your life the way you want to but leave me alone.
78. Jharp.
Projecting again?
23. Now and Then.
At least you acknowledge the communist numbers are dwindling.
“We have a President of the Harvard Law Review and U.S. Senator verses a and 1/2 term Governor of a a backwoods state with less people than a medium sized city.”
Interesting how absolutely nothing of note seems to have come out of his Harvard Law Review presidency. We don’t have anything he wrote from that position (furthermore, all his grades are still sealed), and by all accounts it seems to have been little more than ceremonial. And his Senate career? A year or two of doing nothing notable and then it’s off to the campaign trail.
On the other hand, Palin’s executive career actually accomplished things. As mayor, Wasilla thrived. As governor, Alaska thrived. Besides, she thwarts bureaucracy and corruption, regardless of party. I don’t care if it’s her or someone like her that gets the nomination, we *need* someone with those principles in Washington.
“This is not to say Palin could be Reagan’s equal. It is to say that if she’s dumb, I hope she’s dumb like Reagan.”
Dumb is dumb.
The only dumber people than SP are her followers.
She will keep the late night shows well employed for the long run.
Is this a great country or what?
42. Uncle Festering:
Sarah Palin’s eldest child was born, full-term, 8 months after his parents eloped. So not only was Palin’s daughter unable to abstain from premarital sex, her parents were as well. Yet they all rant and rave about the importance of “abstinence.” You really cannot make this stuff, people. Wake up! Unless of course you have some of sick need to be ruled by hypocrites who tell you what to think and how to believe without actually practicing it themselves!
Hypocrites? Oh you mean like all the folks who used private jets to attend Copenhagen? 12,000 Limos brought in to help save the planet. Al Gore lecturing everyone while his house uses 20 times as much electricity as the average home? Those kind of Hypocrites? I agree it would stink if hypocrites like that were in charge of anything.
Gee, I don’t ever recall hearing Sarah Palin preaching abstinence. In fact, now that I think about, I do remember reading in “Going Rogue”, that she believes in birth control. Yes it’s all coming back to me now – It’s killing babies that she’s against, and even then she says that she understands the emotions that lead to a woman to have an abortion, and that she doesn’t think that abortion should be criminalized. Terribly, awfully mainstream views there.
How did her views ever get spun into the type of nonsense that Uncle Festering believes?
This is a comparison that I have been waiting for pundits to make for over a year. 1)Both Reagan and Palin graduated from non Ivy League colleges. 2) Both have been scorned by the Left for being “anti-intellectual” and “dumb”. 3) Both were Governors. 4) Both lost elections/nominations (Reagan in 1976, Palin in 2008) which paved the way for their ascending popularity.
Ronald Reagan was the greatest President of my lifetime, and followed the disasterous presidency of Jimmah Cattah. Sarah Palin can just follow in the great RRs footsteps and follow this disasterous president as well
Mom in Wisconsin
For crying out loud, the next person talking about ‘socialism’ should step back in time, and go try to live in East Berlin (when the wall was up) for a week. Then come back and tell me Obama (or anyone else in US politics) is a socialist. It’s insulting to the people who REALLY had to live (and die) with socialism (like my grandparents and their families in Hungary). Boo hoo- stop crying socialism just because someone has to pay for the crappy excuse of an education system we have, or the crappy excuse of a health care system, or the crumbling bridges and roads across the country, or the lack of decent public transportation in bigger cities.. does the phrase ‘you get what you pay for’ mean anything to anyone?
Remember, capitalism doesn’t only work within the country. We as a country are competing against other countries that have figured out how to provide health care, education, and other high quality life infrastructure to it’s residents. Guess what- we WILL be answering to them someday unless we start investing in ourselves.
Does low taxes and more money = happiness?
@98. Respecting …: – … go try to live in East Berlin (when the wall was up) for a week.
Kind of hard to do that since – thanks to leaders like Thatcher and Reagan – there IS no East Berlin anymore.
But first off, why on earth should anyone respect someone who allowed themselves to be saddled with the yoke of socialism? It’s a socially suicidal system that ignores human nature, has never worked as advertised, and which is universally corrupted by the lazy and exploited by the power-hungry.
The point you’re willfully ignoring is that East German style marxist socialis – communism – which is not precisely the sort that BHO and his elitist ilk are currently pushing for yet – is exactly what we’d like to avoid here in the U.S. That effort begins by resisting BHO’s ‘soft’ socialism of “spreading the wealth around” through unfunded entitlement programs, punitive taxation, suicidal borrowing and inflationary economic policies.
You don’t seem too clear on what the U.S. Constitution specifies. The federal government does in fact have responsibility for funding some aspects of civilized society with taxpayers’ money. Health care and education are explicitly not among those. Neither is managing retirement funds via Social Security or blowing billion$ in taxpayers’ dollars every year on Social Security ‘Disability’. Usurping federal power in these areas is exactly what leads to the sort of socialism experienced in other countries at other times.
To #98: Dude or Madam, Taxes are high and the money is there. It is being wasted. The socialist system destroys responsibility and productivity. Our standard of living is dropping and if we are in danger of “answering” to other countries it is because they are reversing their failed socialism just as we are stupidly embracing it.
And why does the left refuse to accept the lack of accountability, the ineffectiveness and the fraud that characterizes everything that government does. Yeh, raise taxes and pass more regulations. That will do it.
Sorry if we insult you but maybe you can give us a pass since without the existence of America, once a powerful and a free democracy, you would still be behind the wall.
socialsm is like a yeast infection….it creeps up..you wonder..you scratch a little bit..it’s a little irritating, but…you go about your business..it’s creeping along…you scratch, you itch, you think maybe you need a bit of help with meds, but before you can do anything BOOM!!! you’re in full bloom!!!! can’t stop scratching, itching, it’s a cycle..only one way out..penicillin…and then it still takes a few days to “go away”, if you can get to the doctor.
we are in the first stages of the socialist yeast infection…we don’t really know what is going on…we’re just starting to itch.
Dare to dream, people. Thin big. Go for the stars . . . is it possible, oh, be still my leaping heart, is it possible, jusssssssst possible that Sarah Palin is . . .
DUMBER THAN REAGAN?
Oh, Hosannah . . . .lalalala pa soolo sendilah . . . . hashta bashta sorrin caca . . . oopsi doopsie loopsie poo
Jharp: You keep going on about Palin’s intelligence, or lack thereof. Whatever her intelligence is, she is at least twice as smart as you.
jharp is not dumb, he’s got you commenting on his crap.
“if” you were smarter ..or as smart as him/her,
….. you would ignore him/her….
i don’t like his mean sarcastic bs..and i don’t comment, and now don’t read his crap as i know it will be only his opinion, nonsensical statements or outdated stuff from huffpo.
I understand Hawkins’ last assertion that he’s not saying Palin would be Reagan’s equal, but I believe this is the weakest point of his article. I know I’ll be lambasted for this by other people who post – but I believe Palin really could equal Reagan in some ways for the very reason Hawkins so clearly pointed out: she’s loaded with common sense and a deep love for this country.
I would like to nominate Goy and Sarah Palin for President and VP in 2012…either one in either position would be fantastic…a combination of brains, education, and common sense along with integrity and a love of country! This bunch of radical Marxists now destroying our country needs to be completely cut out like the malignant cancer it is….starting in 2010 with mid-term elections. One thing we can thank the “Zero” for is bringing true conservatives together!
All this arguing about her intelligence is simply inane. Sarah Palin is extremely bright. Mensa quality bright. She is supremely competent at everything she attempts. Her history is out there and everybody knows it. Athlete, mother, business owner, executive, community leader, reform candidate against an entrenched good ol’ boy network of corrupt pols within her own party. She has the ethics to look out for her constituents, and is not afraid to take on government corruption at every level. She has a near photographic memory and can speak publicly without the need of a teleprompter. And she is learning the ropes of national politics very quickly. She is clearly the most charismatic politician of her generation, a veritable prodigy who hasn’t come close to realizing the extent of her powers. And she is just getting started. So here is something to chew on: At a time when the Democrats control all of the levers of power in this country; the Presidency, both houses of Congress, the courts, and with the backing of biased news media, the institutions of academia, information and Hollywood; the most powerful politician in the country right now is a mom who holds no office whatsoever.
I like Sarah Palin very, very much, but is she another Ronald Reagan? I don’t think so. Ronald Reagan was a political philosopher who was on the American national scene for 16 years before he won the U.S. Presidency.
107…ditto
Just about everyone thinks there is too much government, plain and simple. That is the one overriding problem with government… there is too much of it. The disagreement is in what parts of government should be reduced and what parts should be expanded. So let me postulate that if we take government spending as a measure of the degree of government we have, an increase in spending is an increase in government, and vice-versa.
Imagine a government chief executive, at any level be it mayor, governor, president, or what have you, who proposes a budget, shepherds it through the legislative body, and signs it into law. And imagine that that budget spends less in non-adjusted dollars than the previous year. That executive would be decreasing the amount of government, no?
Well I know of one chief executive who has done that. There may be others but I haven’t heard of them. And the one I know of has done it, not once, but in three successive years… three times has gotten budgets into law that spend less than the previous year. And that chief executive is Governor Sarah Palin. Which makes her, by the criteria most universally agreed upon, THE most successful chief executive in history.
No can someone explain to me why anyone else in the entire world would be more qualified to be POTUS?
If Sarah Palin wins the GOP ticket I will vote for her. She needs to stay visible, stay in the lower 48, possibly write a news column, and get her message out. She will need funds and if she wins the GOP are the people willing to open their wallets. She is capable, and I would bet that the sane people of this country would vote for Mickey Mouse after the dismanteling of this country we are experiencing.
Palin…successful woman…that explains it all.
She is everything NOW and Brown etc have preached for many years..
You guys are funny, fussing over one of the most successful woman politicians of our generation..of any generation to be exact.. She has the liberals on the ropes and the Rebpulicans can’t handle her popularity and consider her a loose cannon because she actually has some morals and ethics.
sorry…
ment to say
“She is everything NOW and Brown etc have preached
…………’AGAINST’ for many years.”
95. vivo:
“The only dumber people than SP are her followers.”
You liberals make a huge mistake underestimating Sarah Palin. Heck, she wasn’t even the dumbest VP candidate running in 2008. That dubious distinction goes to clueless Joe Biden, the ignoramus who thought FDR spoke to the nation on TV as president in 1929.
112. memememe:
” one of the most successful woman politicians of our generation”
Mayor of Wasilla . . . half term governor of Alaska. Imagine how successful she would be if she were a senator or secretary of state. But hey, she was on Oprah, so, you know.
IF SHE’S SO SMART, WHY DO SO MANY PEOPLE THINK SHE’S SO DUMB?
115
That’s twice as much the experience obama had. He was a jr senator that only voted present, then quit…and got the next job for his skin color.
goy. my god you’re stupid.
@118. Mary Steiner: – my god you’re stupid.
Really?
I’m not your god.
Either way, “you’re stupid” is the sort of infantile response I’ve learned to expect in comebacks scribbled by morally adolescent leftists and apologists for socialism. Like you. Not surprising.
It must be painful to copy and paste your emailed talking points all day, feverishly working far below minimum wage, only to have your silliness ripped to shreds by the first person who happens to be paying attention. You should look up ‘stupid’. Stupid is attempting to defend socialism by deflecting to the subject of slavery in America, like you did. Stupid is deflecting to America’s involvement in a war (WWI) that was ultimately sanctioned by its first openly socialist president. Stupid is deflecting to Viet Nam, a war that was promoted and escalated by another openly socialist president. Clearly, you had no idea.
Also, aside from the fact that the institution of slavery preceded socialism in America by generations, you failed (utterly) to realize that socialism of various forms has implemented its own form of slavery wherever it’s attempted. That slavery can be as seemingly benign as forcing productive taxpayers – at the point of a gun – to support two thirds of the population as an indolent class of federal welfare recipients and entitlement seekers… like we have in America today. Or it can be as blatant as the labor camps and the gulags were. Either way, it’s clear you’re totally ignorant of socialism’s real history. Here’s another good reference for the ultimate failure of socialism. Don’t expect your teachers to discuss those statistics if you ever make it to high school. These days, most of them are as clueless as you.
@116. Now and Then: – … WHY DO SO MANY PEOPLE THINK SHE’S SO DUMB?
Why? The reason is not too difficult to guess.
It’s the same reason so many people think “Bush Lied”; the same reason so many people are ignorant of Nagin’s and Blanco’s culpability in the delayed evacuation of New Orleans and the delayed federal response to Katrina; the same reason so many people are ignorant of why Patrick Fitzgerald spent years on a political fishing expedition after he’d uncovered the object of his investigation very early on; the same reason so many people believed Joe Wilson IV’s innuendo and lies in July, 2003, cheerfully printed by the New York Times; the same reason so many people wanted – and still want – to treat islamist terrorism as a ‘law enforcement’ problem; the same reason so many people have been duped by the AGW scam; the same reason so many people voted for an inexperienced marxist who’d never actually held a real job. The list goes painfully on, but I’m sure you get the idea. Why? Simple: propaganda.
Billy A
Ripcic is right. Sarah’s biggest hurdle will be to overcome the oposition of the liberal elites in her own party – particularly in the Iowa and New Hamshire primaries. They will stop at nothng to stop her and hand the nomination to another non conservative such as a McCain or Bush. If she can get by the elites in these two states (and she can, by doing what she does best – going directly to the people – as Reagan did )she will win both and then it will be all over and they – the elites – will have to accept her. Then it will be a landslide fron there on -the nomination and then the election. She will be another Reagan in that she will govern by common sense and with a constant eye to the constitution which has been trashed by the present admisnistration and many republican elites. As for her being unqualified ? she is more qualified as most of the people holding office in Washington and in the white house becasue she learned how to govern in a state that is definately not one that easlily accepts females in charge. For further information on her qualifications by the doubters, read her book. I dare you!
The only people that “say” Sarah is dumb is the liberal side. The right is afraid of her. She can sway people. She is moral and has ethics. She did not abort a downs symdrome child as some would have. The debate can go on and on. It’s wrong to state that she was a half term governor and not tell the full story.
actually goy makes sense…
117. Anna:
Try to focus . .. the assertion was that Palin was “one of the most successful woman politicians of our generation..of any generation to be exact”
Address that. Here’s a tip: Before you suggest Obama quit something, you might want to remember Palin’s flight from responsibility up in Alaska. And this, “I said thanks but no thanks on that bridge to nowhere.”And the fact that she refuses to show Trig’s birth certificate. Why? If he’s her child she has nothing to hide. (I seem so base and uninformed, don’t I?)
107 has it right. I have run across many folks from previously socialist and communist countries. They typically are either, “I just moved from this crap” meaning socialism and they are very afraid of what zero is up to. Or the other type, that does not think we are at the socialism level yet, because it was so bad where they came from. However, they never really understood how it got that bad. I put them in the same clueless camps as
democrats. As for Vivo and the now and then folks, they know better, but their real purpose is to destroy the US.
No sense arguing with them, we just need to defeat them, period.
120 goy:
All your assertions are either incomplete or manifestly false – the very definition of propaganda. Next you’ll be telling me that her new found wealth is proof of her towering intellect, as so many people here suggest. I got two words for you – Jessica Simpson.
122. stay outta my wallet!!:
“She did not abort a downs symdrome child as some would have.”
Not only did she not abort it. She did not have it.
114. Stevemmn:
“You liberals make a huge mistake underestimating Sarah Palin. Heck, she wasn’t even the dumbest VP candidate running in 2008.”
I didn’t say she was really dumb,
“The only dumber people than SP are her followers.”
124. touche:
“As for Vivo and the now and then folks, they know better, but their real purpose is to destroy the US.”
“Destroy”? You just pick random, demeaning, aggressive words to express your frustration at your own ignorance. Take a walk, eat some ice cream, have some coffee. Helps your stress.
126 vivo -“Destroy”? You just pick random, demeaning, aggressive words to express your frustration at your own ignorance. Take a walk, eat some ice cream, have some coffee. Helps your stress.
That’s rich! Thanks for making my point.
First , YOUR frustration is showing and second so is YOUR ignorance.
Many Americans have traveled way too much of the World, to buy your non-sense.
“Only intellectuals can be so stupid.” Now where have I heard that before??? Someone smart said that quote and fits the liberal crowd to a T.
Nope, I am not frustrated or upset. I just plan on defeating every liberal/socialist/communist supporter I can. Pretty simple really. Palin, by the way has a big advantage of the so called intellectual folks. That my friend is the ability to reason, which is a big problem for liberals.
Look into and maybe you might catch up.
125…
please present your proof.
Not your guess, not your conjecture, not your opinion…
***Present us with your ***proof solid please.
Why would such a thing matter to you anyway? This is a dear child that was born to a loving family. You sould juvenile and wanting to find something morally wrong. If she is not Trig’s mom, so what. What does that matter? If she is protecting a child of hers, I would do the same for any of mine.
Either way, “you’re stupid” is the sort of infantile response I’ve learned to expect in comebacks scribbled by morally adolescent leftists and apologists for socialism.
You seem intent on proving her assertion. She didn’t defend socialism at all, that’s a typical strawman from bloviating idiots like you. You seem like a little man doing his best to seem like he is shouting on the internet. This may cow your wife and your children, but it just makes you seem like a squirreling fool here. This was your initial statement:
Palin can not only win the Presidency – but be successful as President – by adhering to the fundamentals that made America what it was before the socialists began destroying it.
Mary asked you when that Socialist destruction actually began, and asked you then to define when this golden age of America began. She asked you if the socialists were involved with slavery, and she asked you if the socialists made US corporations so abusive that the gvoernment had to step in to protect humans from them. She never defended socialism. Loser.
Palin and REAGAN???
Palin finds a way to reference Ronald Reagan as early as page three in her book– which is supposedly about her childhood – and then mentions him again about a dozen more times before the chapter ends. Even her Grandpa ate jelly beans and looked remarkably like Ronald Regan. And Sarah’s favorite words – patriotic, patriot and patriotism – populate her paragraphs like children conceived out of wedlock populate her family tree.
I always laugh when I hear or see people suggesting Sarah Palin has no knowledge of world history. Who cares? The world needs America, and Sarah knows what America needs.
We still live in the greatest country in the history of the world and some still care what the world thinks of us. As far as I see it, the line coming in is a lot longer than the line going out.
Do you ever notice the comments by the Palin bashers, are always conspicuously adolescent in tone, with the juvenile snickering from the prurient imaginations of children who know next to nothing about how the world really works. No criticisms ever based on merit. Nothing about policy. Just low class gutter minded billingsgate by brats who hurl insults from the anonymity of their email aliases.
@125. Now and Then: – All your assertions are either incomplete or manifestly false …
In your opinion, which doesn’t carry much weight given your penchant for less-than-rational, straw man B.S. and idle, empty threats.
… – the very definition of propaganda.
Not hardly. The very definition of propaganda is “the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person; ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one’s cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect.”
My comment doesn’t fit any of that. But The Left Wing Media’s treatment of Sarah Palin absolutely does. You asked why so many people believe something that is manifestly false. I provided you with one possible answer, including numerous, verifiable examples.
- Next you’ll be telling me…
Spare us your straw man B.S., fake vet.
They are “one” him or “one” her in reference to the trolls here. All rolled up into one, possibly two . Two at the most.
……….the remarks are juvenile.
ALSO!!!….
#130 …we know of one child, What else are you referring to? Names? What difference would Bristol’s child possibly be to you?
133 goy:
“I provided you with one possible answer, including numerous, verifiable examples.”
OK, verify them. I’ll wait. Meanwhile, I’ll give you a two-fer – that lying bitch Katrina (AKA W):
“Four days after Hurricane Katrina hit, President Bush said, “I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees” that gushed deadly flood waters into New Orleans.
But six days of footage and transcripts obtained by the Associated Press show in excruciating detail that federal officials anticipated the tragedy that unfolded in New Orleans and elsewhere along the Gulf Coast, and made those concerns clear to President Bush and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff during an Aug. 29 government-wide briefing.
Bush didn’t ask a single question during the final government-wide briefing the day before Katrina struck on Aug. 29 but assured soon-to-be-battered state officials: “We are fully prepared.”
Federal disaster officials warned Bush and Chertoff before Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees, risk lives in New Orleans’ Superdome and overwhelm rescuers, according to confidential video footage of the briefings.” (democratic underground)
As has been said before so very eloquently, You’re angry. That’s clear. Angry because you’ve been shown to suffer that classic and pervasive conservative weakness – you’re arbitrary.
And let’s not forget Michelle Bachmann, another bastion of conservative principles.
Michele Bachmann has become well known for her anti-government tea-bagger antics, protesting health care reform and every other government “handout” as socialism. What her followers probably don’t know is that Rep. Bachmann is, to use that anti-government slur, something of a welfare queen. That’s right, the anti-government insurrectionist has taken more than a quarter-million dollars in government handouts thanks to corrupt farming subsidies she has been collecting for at least a decade. (truthdig)
But, but, but, but . . . I mean . . . what, what, wha . . . . “Condoms!”
Please, can somebody point me to a single conservative who isn’t a raging hypocrite? Just one. Anybody?
Blanco refused to let Bush in to Louisiana…she said it was her state and she’d decide..and when she decided..it was a little late. Finally the NG was allowed in and there was a mess. The chocolate city boy wanted to run new orleans, and made a fiasco of things, they are still a mess. there were a few hundred buses ready to take people out, but he didn’t want to use them. The people that stayed, 95% of them could have gone, but decided to be stubborn and stay. The superdome was never ment to have people stay in it, it was their idea, not bush’s idea. They were warned off.
The NG was prepared, not allowed to move in..
Blanoc was almost tared and feathered when we realized what had gone on. Also, she did not run again ..so, look at Blanco and chocolate city boy…
The levees were and still are weak, due to the good old boys we have doing the work, levee bosses.
I usually just read and say nothing, but you are too much. secret tapes by sweet bippie.
….136…you only “copied” or read part of the story…
“What do you think about it Thrush? Are you just shoveling Truthdig propaganda.
….Did you notice the data indicates they got money UP UNTIL 2006, the year she was first elected to Congress?”
*****
“Everyone in farming has to do this to stay competitive. My proposal is to eliminate ALL farm subsidy.
That would put everyone on an even basis.
What do you think about it Thrush?
Or are you just shoveling it?
****** Sounds like you didn’t do any homework”
…………………………….
“Bachmann’s family farm received $251,973 in federal subsidies between 1995 and 2006.
The farm had been managed by Bachmann’s recently deceased father-in-law and took in roughly $20,000 in 2006 and $28,000 in 2005, with the bulk of the subsidies going to dairy and corn.
Both dairy and corn are heavily subsidized — or “socialized” — businesses in America (in 2005 alone, Washington spent $4.8 billion propping up corn prices) and are subject to strict government price controls.”
Democrats are the ones that left farm subsidy reform out of the budget…
128. Annie:
***Present us with your ***proof solid please.
No, i don’t have to prove anything. She has to prove she’s Trig’s mother, That’s how it works now. I make an accusation and you have to prove its not true. it’s the conservative way, and I expect, no, I demand that she produce Trig’s birth certificate. Why? Because “some people say” Trig is not her baby.
@135. Now and Then: – “… President Bush said, “I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees” …”
LOL!! And you think this moonbat forum posting from DU – that you blindly copied and pasted – means what, exactly? Do you think it absolves Nagin of his criminal negligence in waiting until the thirteenth hour to call for an evacuation? Does it absolve Blanco of her waffling inability to approve National Guard deployment in a timely fashion? Does it excuse The Left Wing Media’s decision to broadcast unverified reports of shots fired at rescue aircraft? These were the causes of the delay, sport, all of which were pinned on the Bush Administration through… propaganda.
Joe Wilson’s lies are well-documented – in particular, by the first news outlet that published them. HIS hit piece in the NYT was “the very definition of propaganda”.
AGW has been well-known as a scam for years. And, happily, the smoking gun evidence just keeps on flowing. Now that CRU and IPCC efforts to cook the “peer-reviewed” journal process have been exposed, that evidence should actually start making its way to policymakers.
The list goes on, but who are we kidding here: brain-dead, fake vets like you aren’t capable of critical, objective thinking. Or maybe you think BHO actually had some executive experience in a real job that qualified him for the presidency. Heh.
- …You’re angry.
Heh. How can I be angry when your consistent intellectual incontinence is so endlessly entertaining!?
138. Carol b.:
So Bachmann’s principles are relevant only AFTER she ran for congress? Isn’t that the whole problem? And can you say subsidies did NOT go to her after she was elected? You see, Carol, the issue isn’t subsidies, it’s hypocrisy. Bachmann is ethically bankrupt, that’s all I’m saying. It’s a simple statement supported by the facts. And you agree. But you have to deny it because that’s what you’ve been told to think and do. I get it.
you’re just silly. juvenile at best
some on this site say you’re an idoit, prove you’re not
I don’t care if you’re trig’s baby.
I was talking about what I learned from Palin’s “book”! That literary gem that is just so chock full of POLICY…The very first page of the book is a map of the globe as seen from the North Pole – I guess to emphasize the proximity of Alaska to Russia. Honestly honey, when is she going to learn that dog don’t hunt? Her defending us from Russia would be about as effective as Todd Palin’s preferred brand of condoms. Oh yes – Track arrived not quite 8 months after they sprinted to the courthouse to elope. I guess Sarah’s ghost writer didn’t think anyone who reads this book could count.
I learned alot from reading in between the lines, the lines told me nothing except that propaganda and rhetoric you bots seem to love (How many times CAN YOU USE THE WORDS patriot, patriotic, patriotism and praising the pimp & junkie KID ROCK for HIS patrotism…I wanted to wretch).
143..
You sound like the ole gossips at church. eeewww did you hear that they…blahblahblah…hope your hoop skirts blow up
What does it matter when Track arrived? What does that have to do with anything? Never mind, go gossip and count the days with the old gossips.
My first child was born 8 months after we were married. He was early, breech, healthy , c section, incubator,and I wasn’t pg before. My daughter in law had our first grandchild at 8 months exactly. It was an emergency c/section. She almost died due to eclampsia…8 months…it means nothing. Even if it did, people like you and the biddies are the only ones that consider it relevant to a persons life and what they have achieved.
Shame on you. And maybe your dog should learn to hunt. When you assume…the only person you make an ass out of is yourself…
Now and Then.
Goy = Angry, Stupid, Mendacious. Typical teabagging doosh.
140. goy:
Tired, debunked, and delusional talking points. Nothing whatsoever critical in its basis or analysis. Pure propaganda, which is the only thing you come close to understanding. I’m a busy man, you’ll have to do better if you’re to warrant my attention beyond a heartily delivered pimp slap.
@129. Alice Nolin: – She didn’t defend socialism at all, …
Right.
- … that’s a typical strawman from bloviating idiots like you.
Ad hominem.
- You seem like a little man doing his best to seem like he is shouting on the internet.
Ad hominem.
- This may cow your wife and your children,…
Ad hominem.
-… but it just makes you seem like a squirreling fool here.
Ad hominem.
- Mary asked you when that Socialist destruction actually began, …
And I happily responded: “Wilson tried hard, but FDR is the one who really kicked things off downhill in the ’30s.” Either you never bothered to read that response or I used too many words you didn’t understand.
- … and asked you then to define when this golden age of America began.
Get new glasses. Or take some reading comprehension classes. She asked nothing of the sort.
- She asked you if the socialists were involved with slavery…
Heh. Wrong again. She specifically asked, “Did those socialists come up with slavery? [my emph.]” Just a tad different meaning there – at least if you’re reading beyond 4th grade level.
- … she asked you if the socialists made US corporations so abusive that the gvoernment had to step in to protect humans from them.
A ridiculous question, inferring facts not in evidence, as I pointed out.
“Mary” also went on to question whether socialists got us involved invarious military conflicts, among them, WWI and Viet Nam, both of which were pursued by openly socialist administrations.
QED.
- She never defended socialism.
LOL!!
- Loser.
Ad hominem.
Keep ‘em coming.
When most people listen to Palin, they hear somebody who isn’t qualified to be President and who would be a complete and total disaster if elected. Check the polls.
Iran-Contra anyone? Iran-Contra?
This is the site that hired Joe The Plumber, right? As a middle east correspondent, right?
Too f*%king funny.
Palin is no Reagen. Not even close. Reagan could reach out to the other side of the aisle. Palin doesn’t even try. She represents nothing, no ideas, no movement, no cause, other than her own personal gain. She’s suckering all of you. She won’t ever run for elected office again, because it’s too hard for her. She just wants money and adoration like some clueless beauty queen.
For all you gushing fans, did you people even listen to her resignation speech(and she STILL never explained why she resigned)? I mean, really? Did you hear that rambling, incoherent rant?
Oh, boo hoo, the media said mean things about her, oh boo hoo. Well honey, if you cannot stand up to the US press, then how oh how will you stand up to Iran?
But go ahead and keep lavishing praise on her. It’s a very telling sign how bankrupt the right has become in the last ten years.
Get this through your teabag soaked brains – she will NEVER hold elected office ever again. Her own party will kneecap her first.
If you guys want to prove you’re not as dumb as we liberals think, try to avoid all the grammatical errors.
Yes, Sarah is dumb and intellectually lazy, just like GWB. Enjoy her while you can….I think she quit the governorship and cashed in with the book because she knows there’s lots of stuff out there about her just waiting to come out.
She asked you if the socialists were involved with slavery…
Heh. Wrong again. She specifically asked, “Did those socialists come up with slavery? [my emph.]” Just a tad different meaning there – at least if you’re reading beyond 4th grade level.
Actually, this is called a distinction without a difference, and also, as is obvious, has nothing to do with the broader point. You argue like a spoiled little girl. And of course, you don’t understand what ad hominem is, like most of your ilk, who spend most of their time insulting people and then scream like colicky children when the tables are turned. Insulting someone is not ad hominem, look it up you idiot [not ad hominem either]. Or keep using it incorrectly and giving the moderately educated a good laugh. You’re simply you’re really out of your depth here, black knight.
Sarah, Sarah:
Run for the United States Presidency in 2012!!!
President Obama will clean you clock hands down and send you back to Wasilla as Alaska’s national humiliation. Face it, Sarah, you don’t have the intellect to fight yourself out of a wet paper bag, much less make any contribution to intelligent solutions to world problems.
But please, don’t play dead. Just give up to enable the advancement of quality national leadership.
Its a common fallacy that insulting someone in the midst of an argument is ad hominem. It is not. If you’re not sure about the meaning of the word, take a handy tip and don’t use it. Unless, of course, you’re hiding behind it because you have weak counter arguments. Usually, the con artists who misuse this term are relying on encountering a group of relatively uneducated people; judging by the kind of people who react positively to the kind of tripe here, I’m not surprised a liar like Goy would feel perfectly comfortable doing this. For future reference here is a handy primer on ad hominem:
One of the most widely misused terms on the Net is “ad hominem”. It is most often introduced into a discussion by certain delicate types, delicate of personality and mind, whenever their opponents resort to a bit of sarcasm. As soon as the suspicion of an insult appears, they summon the angels of ad hominem to smite down their foes, before ascending to argument heaven in a blaze of sanctimonious glory. They may not have much up top, but by God, they don’t need it when they’ve got ad hominem on their side. It’s the secret weapon that delivers them from any argument unscathed.
In reality, ad hominem is unrelated to sarcasm or personal abuse. Argumentum ad hominem is the logical fallacy of attempting to undermine a speaker’s argument by attacking the speaker instead of addressing the argument. The mere presence of a personal attack does not indicate ad hominem: the attack must be used for the purpose of undermining the argument, or otherwise the logical fallacy isn’t there. It is not a logical fallacy to attack someone; the fallacy comes from assuming that a personal attack is also necessarily an attack on that person’s arguments.
Therefore, if you can’t demonstrate that your opponent is trying to counter your argument by attacking you, you can’t demonstrate that he is resorting to ad hominem. If your opponent’s sarcasm is not an attempt to counter your argument, but merely an attempt to insult you (or amuse the bystanders), then it is not part of an ad hominem argument.
Actual instances of argumentum ad hominem are relatively rare. Ironically, the fallacy is most often committed by those who accuse their opponents of ad hominem, since they try to dismiss the opposition not by engaging with their arguments, but by claiming that they resort to personal attacks. Those who are quick to squeal “ad hominem” are often guilty of several other logical fallacies, including one of the worst of all: the fallacious belief that introducing an impressive-sounding Latin term somehow gives one the decisive edge in an argument.
@146. Now and Then: – … if you’re to warrant my attention …
You’ve deluded yourself into thinking anyone seeks to warrant your attention. Heh. Heheh. Go threaten someone (again), fake vet. It’ll make you feel superior, at least.
.
@153. Alice Nolin: – … this is called a distinction without a difference, …
Ah, so you’re NOT reading above fourth grade level. Thanks for letting us know. Now, about that “golden age of America” B.S., which you just made up out of thin air…
- … has nothing to do with the broader point.
Hey, like I told your little pal, missy: she was the one who brought up slavery and socialism in the same sentence. She was the one who got bit in the heiny by her ignorance of the fact that socialists committed the U.S. to WWI, and promoted/escalated our involvement in Viet Nam. Clearly, you were equally clueless.
- You argue like a spoiled little girl.
Ad hominem. And projection on top of that.
- Insulting someone is not ad hominem, …
Of course it isn’t. But insulting someone with the intent of discrediting them or their position – as you seem unable to keep from doing – is. And since you’re clearly unaware of what you’re doing – to boot – you just admitted that you’re throwing insults just to be insulting (i.e., morally adolescent). Funny how the Palin posts attract all the trolls. Like you.
You’re batting 0.00, “Alice”.
“Silke Stevens”… “Alice Nolin”… “Mary Steiner”…
My hat’s off to whichever OFA honcho is dreaming up the lefty troll names this week. Very creative. BHO is getting his minions’ money’s worth.
Ah yes, the teabagger’s motto: when in trouble, cry like a girl. What an idiot.
Also, about literacy:
It is not a logical fallacy to attack someone; the fallacy comes from assuming that a personal attack is also necessarily an attack on that person’s arguments.
Read up, you need it:
http://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html
I agree with the fact that common sense approach was a big factor in Reagan’s victory; however, I have to note that a big problem with applying common sense approach to Sarah Palin is that she says in 2010 what Reagan said in 1980 and calls it “common sense”. It really isn’t. It’s not clear whether we should, say, increase marginal taxes to lower corporate tax, or introduce outright sales tax (because, under WTO, it’s the only way to get something out of imports), or whether the better way to cut spending is to “fire a bunch of lazy government employees” or to cut the tax deductions and subsidies.
It is even not fair to compare Reagan’s victory in California – the state of the 80es with the Silicon Valley and all the bragging rights that come with it, embodying the very spirit of America’s success in the 80es and 90es – and Palin’s Alaska, which is really an oddball state because it gets all the free revenue when the rest pays through the nose for the oil. And, no, Reagan didn’t quit when there were problems, unlike Palin.
The problem is, since independents understand these things pretty well, and since Reagan’s common sense was aimed first and foremost at independents, Sarah’s success is all but cast in stone.
It’s always useful to check in with the Alternative Universe once in a while.
You know, I never really got the whole Ronald Reagan thing. I always thought he was wildly overrated, and thought the country was just dumb-lucky enough to avoid serious damage while he was (sort of) driving the bus. But even I could begrudgingly concede to my Reaganite friends what they saw in the affable old fellow, and despite his overly simplistic, anecdote-driven view of the world, and his pandering to constituencies that have now come to dominate his once-proud party, there was at his core a kind of elemental consistency that seemed, in an odd sort of way, to tie everything together. A kind of maddeningly admirable politican when all was said and done.
But Sarah Palin? She is, quite simply, the single most insubstantial figure I have ever seen on the national stage in my 50 years of adulthood. As in, “no substance”. None. She is completely ephemeral, a vacuous image, an empty vessel, a celebrity. She doesn’t have – appears, in fact, NEVER to have had – a single profound or illuminating thought or insight into anything of public importance in her entire life in the public sphere. She is, without equal, the most deeply and shockingly unqualified person ever to have been considered for national office. Ever.
So, GOP’ers, PLEASE. PLEASE, I am on my knees begging you: PLEASE nominate her to be your party’s candidate for the President of the United States of America and Leader of the Free World. This strange, odd-ball, quasi-religious cult now known as the Republican Party needs desperately to crash and burn so some adults can come to the rescue and restore the institution to something resembling respectability. Sister Sarah is the surest path to restoration.
What, another emotionally fragile loon tearily crying ad hominem? How our discourse has declined.
Yes, 161, we Republicans will nominate Sarah. Assuming that Obama even makes it to 2012 (which is becoming increasingly unlikely), he will first have to deal with the defection of Hillary, and a bruising primary campaign against her. He won’t waltz through to renomination like he did last time around. Before he campaigned on image alone. Next time he will have to run on his record, which, by 2012 will be so toxic and radioactive that democrats interested in their own survival will abandon him in droves. And that will leave two scenarios. 1: He beats Hillary in the primary and will have to run against a Sarah Palin who will have had three and a half years (counting from her resignation speech in July 2009) to track him down and kill his Presidency. 2: Hillary beats him in the primaries, which means that Sarah will be running against an aging and talentless hack that nobody likes, and has been a proven failure at Secretary of State, Senator, and First Lady. It’s really not about Sarah at all. It’s about Obama and the Democrats’ unconstitutional power grab. They won’t be able to replay 2008. They won’t be able to reconstitute the army of volunteers, the enthusiasm that they had or the godawful Stalinist style poster art that they plastered everywhere. The country, picking through the ruins of the economy that he destroyed, and the defeats that his foreign policy will have engendered, will be out for blood, and the Democrats will pay the price.
Yeah, the Democrats and Republicans were one party when the constitution was signed, and in fact the Democrats and Republicans broke along geographic lines, not party ones during the civil war.
Not quite correct. I believe your confusion arises from the Democrat-Republican party, which eventually became the modern Democrats and the Whigs. They were opposed by the Federalist Party, many of whom became Whigs. The Whigs then split and became the modern Republicans. Many of the ideals/policies of the modern versions would leave the founders aghast at what they’ve become.
163. Immanuel Goldstein:
By all means, nominate Palin. But that will never happen, and it won’t be because of Obama or the Democrats. The Republicans running for president will destroy her long before the Republican convention.
165: Who is going to destroy her? Romney? Huckaby? Powlenty? Three boring, interchangeable, middle aged white guys with no agenda of their own against a true leader. Sarah will be the kingmaker in dozens of races in 2010, and by 2012 will be entrenched as the front runner. The Republican east coast “moderates” may be mostly brain dead, but they won’t try to kill the only winner in the party.
Again, a distinction without a difference, Real Deal. But what I find interesting is that you let Goy get away with his ridiculous assertion that there was a Democratic party in the 19th century. By all means, correct me in that it was the whigs who split off from the Democrats and later became Republicans. The bottom line is that the modern parties have no resemblance to what came before. Only a moron would offer such a theory.
That’s the 18th century, of course.
Really are you going to deny there was no party of Calhoun and Jackson, and their Southern affiliates, before and after the civil war. Into the era of Southern fried apartheid that was Jim Crow. Not to mention the progressive infusion of at the end of the 19th into the beginning of the 20th century
Fools who don’t understand the flexible nature of the ACES tax system, really shouldn’t comment. Now this fellow John is speaking of the Daley machine
mouthpiece currently in the White House, by his own lights
And, of course, as I noted, no I won’t you idiot. I meant to write 18th century, and I’d written it before.
Please, she’s too white trash to be President.
A retarded baby and a grandson of the same age.
She disgusts me. There is a reason abortion exists.
#51
You just stay happy underestimating us. Enjoy it while it lasts.
#171
“there is a reason abortion exists”. Yep. To murder inconvenient people. Same reason euthanasia exists, same reason Stalin starved and murdered 20 million in the 1930′s, same reason Mao did the same thing to 60 million later in the century.
Inconvenient people who disgust men like you, Rick Schwag.
Heil Schwag, dictator of who is disgusting and deserves death.
As Leonidas said, molon labe, you bastard, come and get it.
57…true true
171 = obviously the product of a botched abortion where the brain was sucked out..
No you did not make a shocking statement, just juvenile.
Wow, it is amazing that people can be fooled so. I guess I have to kill 1/2 of my brain to find out what makes people think this piece of opportunistic trash is qualified to be anything!
Facebook? Did you dummies ever think…even for one second, that the reason she uses facebook as her “policy” platform is because she puts her foot in her mouth every time she opens it? Maybe, just maybe, someone else is writing her FB stuff?
She is not even remotely qualified to be Prez – in fact, I know very few people as dumb as she is. You can’t equate being able to survive (by being a Ho, in this case) with intelligence.
GW Bush was 10x as smart as her in EVERY way and he was not qualified to be President. I will weep for our country and world if you crazies decide to put this piece of trash into our top leadership.
171: Be joyful this holiday season. At least your mother chose life.
@167. Alice Nolin: – But what I find interesting is that you let Goy get away with his ridiculous assertion that there was a Democratic party in the [18]th century.
You really, seriously need to get off the Effexor and take a reading comprehension course, sweetie. I never made any such assertion.
Although it’s somewhat amazing that you and “Mary” made exactly the same reading comprehension error on that point. Interesting, that.
Here‘s what I wrote: “Democrat Party members were the ones who tried to preserve the institution of slavery in America” – a reference to the same (19th Century) American Civil War “Mary” lamely referenced in here preceding post.
- … a distinction without a difference …
Stupid phrase, stupidly used.
Here’s your silly, inaccurate quote: “She asked you if the socialists were involved with slavery…”.
If I’m a slave, I am “involved in slavery”. If I work on a plantation where slaves are held, I am “involved in slavery”. If I inherit slaves I am “involved in slavery”. None of that is the same as “Mary’s” original attempt at deflection, when she wrote “Did those socialists come up with slavery?”
You may be incapable of comprehending the difference between being “involved in slavery” and “coming up with slavery”. That won’t make the difference go away, honey.
And again, your “…asked you then to define when this golden age of America began” was complete fantasy. Clearly, you didn’t bother to read what “Mary” wrote very carefully either. Own it.
Is Sarah the one? I really don’t know, but I know she could not have done worse than the crew residing in the White House now. For one thing is she not a megalomaniac, Obama is, as are a number of the people around him. Committed leftists, Maoist and communists wander around the White House grounds freely, something that would NEVER had happened with Palin as President. In that alone, she wins. Socialists with good intentions are usually harmless, but when they act as the “useful idiots” of the far left, they become just as dangerous as any weapon wielded by those who would bring this nation to its knees. Make no mistake a portion of this attack on the U.S. is driven by people who want to cripple our economy, our health and our future. Nothing would suit them better than seeing us weakened to the point we can’t project our will across the globe. Imagine the mischief some would get into when that happens!
Another thing Palin would bring to the White House would be a person willing to admit they don’t know everything and a desire to read/learn/experience until they do. (As you can see she is doing now. If Katie asked her the same questions today, Palin would burn her like a witch on a stake.) Obama isn’t interested in getting smarter or learning history or economics or much of anything. He is convinced HE knows best and so do those around him.
Lastly, and maybe more importantly, Palin is really down to earth. She didn’t spend a lifetime in politics, which will certainly corrupt your worldview and soul. She would not accept at face value “experts” and their political opinions or economists and their convoluted assumptions. Again, something missing in today’s D.C. world. I also think she would not forgive or forget mistakes made by those under her. I think she’d be firing numb-nuts right and left if they screwed stuff up. Unlike GW who tended to stay on the bad horse a bit too long out of loyalty.
It would be a housecleaning for sure and that is the main reason neither party want her around. She would likely shine the light on their crimes and screw up their sweet deal.
I think you put the main focus where it needs to go, Archer, As a private citizen she spearheaded the removal of the oil commisioner and the atty general after she was forced to resign, or break confidentiality rules. She has challenged the oil companies to live up to their contracts, fancy that.
Now whar have a year on entreaties to the Iranians, attempts to empty Gitmo,
dithering on Afganistan,this mishapen stimulus plan earned us, nothing but the contempt of our foes, and the loss of confidence of our would be financiers. Not to mention signing on to a ‘climate change program’ backed by for falsified scienceThis is the intellect many of her detractors prize, for what
The first rule in life is to never miss your attempt if you try to destroy a first class athlete like Palin or…the U.S.A. The second rule is to never,never,never and never apologize for America(and allies)if you are the president.Do both and your out.Period. As a simple exemple of wath will happen to the dems after wath they have done; Going Rogue: An American Life,comming with our Flag on the cover is now after 7 weeks outselling the books of Hillary,Bill,Obama and Ted Kennedy combined,and without shocking revelations!.The crowds during her book tour are only the smalles waves before the tsunami.The fan base of O is down
to 24% and the independants are going back to the center hoping
for pax americana,not socialism…
How about the state of education in this country- 17th in the world? This is the IQ of the idiods out there who THINK they know Palin is the right one- yeah vote for her because of her looks.
Mr. Hawkins,
I would like to know your thoughts and opinions on a female president of the United States. Thanks for this article. Excellent work.
#171 – “yo mama was pro life darlin”