Ahh the myth of the media babying Obama. It hasn't been true. http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3612 I wonder why Obama received all the negative media coverage over insignificant ties with Ayers, yet McCain and his connections which were actually stronger with various other questionable characters including racists didn't receive as much.
Giving her the David Letterman treatment, casting her as a sex object, only makes her detractors look juvenille, and only strengthens her support. I urge you to continue this thoughtful line of attack. The only tools her opponents have in their toolbox are ignoring her and ridiculing her. The former is impossible (they can't help themselves), and the latter isn't working and is therefore only getting more shrill and nasty. It just makes her critics look small. As for her accomplishments, start with her actions as chairwoman of the Alaska Oil and Natural Gas commision. As part of that job she was required to sign a pledge to make known any conflict of interest that herself or any other member of the commission might have. She resigned her position, a six figure salary, because she thought other members were unethical, and blew the whistle on another comission member, the chairman of the Alaska GOP, her own party, forcing him to resign and pay a fine. Alaska and Chicago are two of the most corrupt political machines in the country. Palin challenged it, Obama latched himself to it and used it for advancement. There is no instance of Obama ever challenging any corruption. Can you imagine him blowing the whistle on Tony Rezco or Bill Daley? To the contrary, they are his friends. Also, her decision to have her baby with Downs Syndrome, when 90% of them are aborted, endears her to me. Those are two instances that demonstrate true character and courage, and I know of nothing Obama has done that compares. As for achievements as an executive, there are a few of those as well, which I'll post about later.
Does abusing power count as corruption? Palin was guilty of that while she was Gov of Alaska. The bi-partisan investigative panel concluded this. I would think abuse of power is the very definition of corruption. Obama has never been found to be guilty of that.
She's a rock star alright. There must be 10's of people there, possibly even over 100, or by Glenn Beck numbers 200,000.
Looks like the number of *friends* coming out and saying she is a liar is increasing... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoffrey-dunn/more-palin-lies-the-troop_b_371293.html Wooten now joins an ever-growing array of figures from John McCain on down who have challenged the veracity of Palin's memoirs. The list also includes McCain senior advisers Steve Schmidt and Nicolle Wallace, Palin's former legislative director John Bitney, her former political ally Andree McLeod, and former Alaska gubernatorial candidate Andrew Halcro. All Republicans. Wooten identifies himself as a "conservative" as well. I thought this part from the Wooten thing was particularly interesting... In Going Rogue, Palin mentions none of Wooten's military record, but cites many charges that were brought against Wooten that were subsequently dismissed. She contends that there were "ten different" citizen complaints field against Wooten--without acknowledging that all of them were filed by members of her family or close friends. "They filed every stinking one of the charges," Wooten contends. "But it's been more like two dozen." In an interview conducted in Alaska this past summer, John Cyr, the former Alaska Public Safety Employees Association Executive Director, confirmed Wooten's charges: Not one complaint has ever been made about Mike Wooten's professional performance from any member of the public other than the Palin/Heath family and their closest friends. The troopers that I've talked to that have worked with Mike tell me Mike is the kind of guy they'd go through a door with. That he does his work. He's a professional. You know, just no complaints out there about Mike's work.
I have really grown to love Sarah Palin. Like Michael Steele or Michele Bachmann, she is an endless font of entertainment. And her fans are even more hilarious than she is. I hope she never goes away.
She has an agenda? At this point, I thought it was merely disorganized "hey everybody look at me" stuff.
so when asked if she was intellectual, articulate and so on to be president...her reasoning is that she could be president because she has common sense and thinks liek the average american...so basically anyone is qualified to be the president of one of the most influential countries in the world in her opinion?
The problem with democracy. It's logical to have computer experts to run our computer systems. You'd want a professional doctor to treat your illnesses. Our roads and buildings are built by brilliant engineers. Yet, for some inexplicable reason, this sort of thinking almost never matters when it comes to voting for the president.
It does to me. I was sincerely astonished to see the American people elect Barack Obama, someone who for all practical purposes has no meaningful experience or accomplishments, as President of the United States. And you guys need to understand that playing up his university education as some sort of big deal speaks volumes about his lack of truly relevant experience or accomplishments relating to the job of President. Once again, the talk of Sarah Palin being the Republican nominee for President in 2012 is very largely a phenomenon begin discussed by the left and the MSM. Conservatives generally like Sarah Palin, and they like what she represents. But there are not many conservatives who regard her as an essential candidate in 2012, or who expect her to run for president in 2012. If she runs in 2012, the chances of her wining the Republican nomination are not very high. This is an idea that exists primarily in the minds of you and your ideological comrades, and not in many other places.
First off one to say that people shouldn't have voted for him based on him not having accomplished anything meaningful as President is a logical fallacy as he wasn't President before he was elected. Voters couldn't look into the future and we would have no way of knowing whether Obama, McCain or anyone else at this point in their presidency would've accomplished anything. Secondly, I disagree with not accomplishing anything meaningful. Whether you agree with them or not the Admin. has accomplished a lot of meaningful things, the Stimulus bill, bailout of automakers, the ongoing closing of Gitmo. Again don't mistake whether you agree or think they are the right things to do that doesn't mean for better or worse they don't have historical signifigance. Third, the reason why I asked you about experience is that it is very ironic to argue for experience in a thread about Sarah Palin. Palin's experience in public office is less than Obama's. Leaving aside any qualitatitve argument Palin has 6 years as mayor of Wasilla and 3 years as Governor of Alaska. Obama had 8 years as state Senator, 4 years as US Senator. I haven't played up his education, although I think its important, but if we are talking experience. Obama has had 12 year experience in elected office with 4 of those at the national level representing a state with a population of 13 million. Also FYI for the record as a reluctant Obama supporter in the general and someone who didn't support him in the primaries, experience was one of my main concerns. I'm certainly not going to consider someone with even less experience than Obama as being more qualified. If even most Republicans think it is unlikely for her to run for President then what is the point of trumpeting her popularity?
