dude, are you actually a Sarah Palin supporter????? Go rewatch the VP debates...she's a total moran and completely unqualified to be in office
Thanks you and Basso for you asnwers I was curious because she did not come out of the VP race looking good (again not meaning physical). BUt I have to say that while SOME media and McCain's aids might have made her look bad, SHE had a hand in it also. She might be perfect for Alaska politics but D.C. is a differant animal.
Wasn't there only one VP debate? It was the Couric interview that made her look like a moron more then anything. That was horrible. Do we really need 3 Palin threads going right now? She isn't currently important.
Wingnuts think that if they support Palin vocally and throw it around as much as they can (see the numerous basso Palin threads), they can piss off Democrats. This has been the M.O. of a good chunk of the Republican Party for 20+ years now... if it ticks off Democrats, it's good. Doesn't matter if it is good or bad policy, if it makes Dems mad, it is the thing to do. They are like pre-pubescent bullies on the playground. Palin will eventually fade and the wingnuts will then glom onto something else that they think will upset Dems. Sure, there will still be a few dead-ender Palinites, but her irrelevancy will do her in sooner or later... whenever wingnuts don't get the response they want is when the Palin lovefest will come to an end, which is one reason I'm generally staying out of the Palin threads.
A look at Palin's governing style.... COURIC: Why isn’t it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families struggling with health care, housing, gas and groceries? … Instead of helping these big financial institutions that played a role in creating this mess? PALIN: Ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up the economy– Oh, it’s got to be about job creation too. So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions. /thread
i know you're not serious, but why not vote for the better ticket and then go beat off to "nailin' paylin" afterwards. win win right? Spoiler NSFW
Well, we can now count another after-effect of Palin's timely intervention in NY 23, this time with respect to an issue that basso feels very strongly about, in the NY State Senate - possibly the world's most dysfunctional legislative body. Today, he NY Senate Republicans - apparently fearful of more Palin-inspired teabagger ideological jihads that nailed Scozzafazza or whatever her name was- were monolithic, that is 100% opposed, to legalizing gay marriage in the empire state. Combine them with a few of the moronic Senate Democrats who crossed sides and Palinism wins! (would that be the first time ever? ) basso as you have made support for anti-gay measures a litmus test for any candidate who wishes to obtain your considerable online support, I trust you are very happy about this development. Congratulations to you and your fellow Republicans on defeating this measure.
This is the best answer to that question I have seen: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/11/18/142731/58 Incomplete article pasted below: Don't Get Palin's Appeal? Try a Little Harder by Jeffrey Feldman "Elites" Most people who like Sarah Palin have a very strong and well-developed story in their heads about "elites" ruining their lives. These people see the country as being run by powerful, wealthy, Liberals who maintain their power by giving away opportunity and resources for free to lazy people, poor people and foreigners. According to the story in their heads, these people are "hard working" and "normal," but they have not found success or happiness because the rewards they deserve have been given to someone else. When these people with this story in their heads hear Sarah Palin they react positively. When they hear Sarah Palin stumble on her words, botch a policy statement, or otherwise sound unprepared, they do not hear "stupid," they hear "normal." When they hear Sarah Palin complain about being trashed by the elite liberal media, they do not hear complaining, they hear their own story of being defrauded of their success by powerful people. These people see Sarah as the kind of person they want to be--a person who is just normal and trying to succeed. And the more Palin gets attacked, the more they feel she understands them and speaks for them. "Stupid" Most of the people who flock to Sarah Palin view outward signs of education or intelligence from politicians as weapons used to victimize and defraud them. They do not respect or admire well-spoken Senators, Governors or Presidents--they resent them. These kinds of people do not follow, understand, nor are they interested in the kind of complexity or subtlety required to discuss policy issues, either domestic or foreign--but not because they do not care about policy. The issue is simply that these kinds of Americans view well-spoken people as manipulators, tricksters, hucksters. When they hear an intelligent elected official, they feel angry, not assured--they feel judged, not informed. Sarah Palin makes them feel the opposite. When she speaks, she makes them feel included, welcome, accepted. By speaking as an uneducated policy outsider, Sarah Palin reassures these people that speaking with authority on issues is just a gimmick. What matters--what's really important--is that our leaders do not act like they know more or are better than us. "Common Sense" When Sarah Palin says that she believes in "common sense" policy, her supporters hear someone saying that she would do things for the country the way they do things for their family. "Common sense" to these people is code for "like I do it." What they hear is someone who is against the overly complicated, overly intellectualized ways that Liberal elites force on them. To these people, the reason elected leaders sound complicated when they talk is not to explain complex issues, but to hide the truth. What is the truth powerful elites are trying to hide that Sarah Palin reveals? The truth is that powerful elites are against them--normal people who work hard--and they are for lazy people, poor people, and foreigners. When Palin talks "common sense," she is saying that she is form the normal people--the people who see themselves as victimized by elites.
Basso, you just don't give up, do you? You must have some sort of BBS agenda to try and convert people to be Palin supporters. It's not going to happen. You can bold all of the irrelevant content that you want, but you can't change the fact that Palin still has minimal experience and minimal political insight. Why criticize Obama's push for hope? I would argue that people are much more hopeful with ALL of the things Obama is trying to do than waiting on Sarah to run for office with nothing to say. You tried the "Support Palin Because of Her Children" thing last week. What's next? Blame Barack for all of Dubya's mistakes? I bet.
"not only the evangelicals, not only the Jews, not only the Muslims, not only the Catholics, but also the people oppose [same-sex marriage]." -- Rubén Díaz Sr., D- Bronx. you must be so proud of New York City. The Bronx, btw, went 89% for Obama.
btw, could you explain how a post on Facebook having to do with a race for the US house of representatives is relevant to a vote in the NY State Senate? note, in both instances, Democrats hold a clear majority. also, as long as you're at it, could you explain how Obama's, or Biden's, position on this issue is substantively different than Palin's, or any of the idiotic democrats and republicans who voted against this bill? oddly enough, as i typed this, this track came up on my random play playlist: Spoiler <object width="640" height="505"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/C9Ni8TjxhQc&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/C9Ni8TjxhQc&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="505"></embed></object>
FB has explained this on many occasions to you. It's quite obvious that you are either too dense to get it or are ignoring it for some type of political gotcha. The difference is that Obama apposes a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage and Pailn (like the criminal Bush) does not
I guess this photo dissuaded you from blaming it on the blacks this time, your usual MO in this instance? It is very nice that you can pick a few morons from the NY State senate democrats - because I previously stated there are many of them, it is a body full of idiots. Freaking Republican-turned-Democrat/Girlfriend Stabber Hiram Montserrate voted against it - he's a big an idiot as you are. The fact remains that the New York State Republican Party - of which you are both a member and a proud supporter - was monolithic - in its opposition to this. 100 percent. Not a single republican - despite previous hints to the contrary - had the balls to vote for this. Not a single one was brave enough. And this comes in the wake of the anti-gay Palin jihad in NY 23. YOu do the math on that one. Here is the results of the vote: DEMOCRATS FOR Eric Adams, Brooklyn Neil D. Breslin, Albany Martin Malavé Dilan, Brooklyn Thomas Duane, Manhattan Pedro Espada Jr., Bronx Brian X. Foley, Long Island Ruth Hassell-Thompson, Bronx-Westchester Craig M. Johnson, Long Island Jeffrey D. Klein, Bronx-Westchester Liz Krueger, Manhattan Velmanette Montgomery, Brooklyn Suzi Oppenheimer, Westchester Kevin S. Parker, Brooklyn Bill Perkins, Manhattan John L. Sampson, Brooklyn Diane J. Savino, Brooklyn-Staten Island Eric T. Schneiderman, Manhattan-Bronx Jose M. Serrano, Manhattan-Bronx Malcolm A. Smith, Brooklyn-Queens Daniel L. Squadron, Brooklyn-Manhattan Toby Ann Stavisky, Queens Andrea Stewart-Cousins, Westchester Antoine M. Thompson, Buffalo David J. Valesky, Syracuse DEMOCRATS AGAINST Joseph P. Addabbo Jr., Queens Darrel J. Aubertine, Watertown Rubén Díaz Sr., Bronx Shirley L. Huntley, Queens Carl Kruger, Brooklyn Hiram Monserrate, Queens George Onorato, Queens William T. Stachowski, Buffalo REPUBLICANS AGAINST James S. Alesi, Rochester John J. Bonacic, Middletown John A. DeFrancisco, Syracuse Hugh T. Farley, Amsterdam John J. Flanagan, Long Island Charles J. Fuschillo Jr., Long Island Martin J. Golden, Brooklyn Joseph A. Griffo, Utica Kemp Hannon, Long Island Owen H. Johnson, Long Island Andrew J. Lanza, Staten Island William J. Larkin Jr., Orange and Ulster Counties Kenneth P. LaValle, Long Island Vincent L. Leibell, Brewster Tom Libous, Binghamton Elizabeth Little, Glens Falls Carl L. Marcellino, Long Island George D. Maziarz, Niagara, Orleans and Monroe Counties Roy J. McDonald, Troy Thomas P. Morahan, Rockland County Michael F. Nozzolio, Seneca Falls Frank Padavan, Bronx, Queens, Nassau County Michael H. Ranzenhofer, Erie and Genesee Counties Joseph E. Robach, Rochester Stephen M. Saland, Poughkeepsie James L. Seward, Oneonta Dean G. Skelos, Long Island Dale Volker, Erie, Wyoming, Livingston and Ontario Counties George H. Winner Jr., Elmira Catherine Young, Olean Where is the category that says "REPUBLICANS FOR"? Oh and nice call on the Bronx, genius, considering that 5 of the 6 Bronx senators voted for it.
Let me see - Teabaggers and Palin (you are the one who is lauding her influence in NY23 - if you are retreating from this claim, please make it clear) launch ideological jihad in upstate New York, shout down local candidate because she does not pass conservative litmus test due to stance on social issues, bully her into dropping out of race. One month later, NY State Republicans become monolithic in opposition to gay marriage as if they just got religion straight out of Wasilla. You tell me? Is the "NY23 revolution" just a bunch of hot air which had no effect? Are you retracting your earlier post? Please let me know.
