Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You completely avoided the crux my post and instead orated some crap about her worthiness as president.
You simply offered your opinion about her based on no fact...just opinion.
Obama AS president faced attacks and he whined like a baby. He used his position in an effort to take from the credibility of those that attacked him. But of course, you give him a pass on that. Afterall, he is Obama.
She avoids the press? Why shouldnt she? She is not running for political office. She has no interest in creating more adversity in her life by saying "the newspaper print is black" and having the left talk about how she was politically incorrect and should have said "the newspaper print is African American"
Your continuos UNFOUNDED and childish attacks on her are exactly what your puppeteers expect of you.
They expect you to regurgitate what they say as opposed to applying basic logic and coming up with your own conlcusion...
Which is exactly why your response did not address the facts of why I BELIEVE she likely resigned.
Your comments are merely unfounded opinion and easily dismissed, as most of her America already does.
lol...
Thanks for your opinion.
Always ironic to me that "puppet" and words of the like are tossed around when in reality it is my own opinion. get facts from newspapers of all ilk and from forming my own opinions and watching the actual person i am talking about TALK. That is enough proof of her incompetence.
Your comments are merely unfounded opinion and easily dismissed, as most of her America already does.
lol...
Thanks for your opinion.
Thank you for revealing you know your belief is opinion.
Now if you offer some evidence for your opinion, go for it. But you can't. And that is why most of American is entertained by SP but has no interest in her as our national leader.
Jarhead, you are the one who is supposed to build a case with facts, not give an opinion then ask for facts to rebut it. That is not how it works.
lol...
Thanks for your opinion.
Thank you for revealing you know your belief is opinion.
Now if you offer some evidence for your opinion, go for it. But you can't. And that is why most of American is entertained by SP but has no interest in her as our national leader.
OK...I'll bite....
WHat exactly are you referring to?
Are you asking me to proive that Obama has speech writers?
Are you asking me to prove that Obama attacked Fox News?
Are you asking me to prove that she is not on any official ballot for higher office?
I am not sure what facts you are asking for?
Jump the shark - a television program's history where the plot spins off into absurd storylines or unlikely characterizations.
Can the shark please jump and then EAT Sarah Palin.
I am all for political discourse in this country, but she sooooo needs to just sit down and shut up.
She is not advancing any cause other than her own. Not that of the Tea Party or the Republican or any other party for that matter. Whenever she opens her mouth and swings at every pitch in the dirt she comes off as a sheer dimwit.
She has what can only be called a "limited" political resume and when you take her away from her home nest at Fox, where the questions are soft and congenial at best, she gets shredded. It is not because other media outlets (no matter how small or large and no matter if they are print or television) are "mean", it is just that she is prime example of LIGHTWEIGHT. She cannot even put forth a "non-answer" answer to a question that is out of her range or goes against her ethics or basically has no right answer as most politicians are prone to do and some have become experts at. She takes a swing and comes off as a dim-bulb who tried to make the jump from college to the pros and looks like a dunce.
If there is a God it would be a Palin-Bachmann ticket in 2012, but there is no way that would happen, even in a Republican party still in disarray and with no clear voice/hero/savior/frontrunner or leader. That ticket would be the best free entertainment in the history of politics and that includes Nixon, Quayle and Joe the Plumber. There would not be enough hours in the day to A) smack their resumes around like little bitches ... B) pull up enough past soundbites and clips that make them sound like loons and .... C) bury them alive before they ever got a chance to see the light of day and hit the trail in New Hampshire and Iowa. But what a week it would be.
Intelligent people, even those who have never held a polticial office, should be allowed to debate policy, direction and style. She may have done good things for the folks in Alaska, but was never ready for the poltical stage on a national level. But instead of laying low, getting educated, becoming savvy, surrounding herself with knowledgable political operatives, learning the political landscape, trying to make amends with the "main stream" media and trying to become a member OF her party and not a psuedo-spokesman FOR her party, she has become a characature of her own making. Ironically, the only person who does not see it is Palin.
She has no shame and most likely deep down knows that her career on a national stage is a myth at best. I am not even sure she knows her own role in the Escher painting that is American politics, but i know this for a fact - it is not as someone who will ever shape an argument, someone whose opinion will hold integrity or value and will always be a sheep and not a leader. She will be a bitchy, pretty, degrading and insignificant sheep .... but a sheep none the less.
Any of her supporters care to contradict that .... give it a try !!! I dare you.
Every high profile Republican, when asked if he/she would support a Palin bid for the presidency, dances around the question. It's become an art form for them.
Most if not many GOPers are not convinced she is ready yet.
Is there something wrong with party leaders not knocking a party member while also not supporting them?
Do you not think that every Democratic leader would dance around the question of whether or not Hillary should challange Obama in 2012?
Come on...stop showing partisanship and have an honest debate.
When it comes to Sarah Palin, I can't help but be partisan. And I've honestly said why. I would also suggest that it's impossible for you to have an honest debate without throwing out obvious partisanship against Obama, so don't ask for an "honest" debate until you too play fair.
And as for the lack of vetting and substance BS. -- there was two years worth of it from every corner of the globe and birther meatheads could not dig up their proof and all networks of every shape, stance, size, affiliation, and ownership had their chance and Obama sat with all of them. ALL OF THEM. and he got away with hiding what? got away with not saying what? got away with concealing what? He was laid bare like every other candidate who steps into the slaughterhouse of American politics.
so spare me that line of reasoning on how Obama was elected
Here is the msot recent gem - trying to take a shot at Obama's State of the Union speech -- Palin - "That was another one of those WTF moments, when he so often repeated this Sputnik moment that he would aspire Americans to celebrate. And he needs to remember that what happened back then with the former communist USSR and their victory in that race to space, yes, they won, but they also incurred so much debt at the time that it resulted in the inevitable collapse of the Soviet Union."
it was the arms race that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union and many, many, many other factors the space race NOT being among them. That is the sort of misguided, psuedo-smart and in reality idiotic debate that she is contributing to the discussion. It is like a high school chemistry student trying to have a conversation with an MIT Chemistry major. She will try to play along and guess at a few answers and try to sound like she belongs, but everyone is rolling their eyes and wondering WTF she is trying to prove by staying in the same company and wishing she would come back after she read a book or 20.
Wow. You really ARE a puppet of the left media personalities such as Maddow and Olberman.
I was just playing with you when I said that.
Truth is, the space race became such a fianncial burden on the soviet union in the 60's and into the 70's, that further sacrifices had to be made to support the arms race. If not for the space race, they would have been able to support the arms race with little difficulty.
Seems Maddow and Olberman forgot to mention that to you.
I suggest you read history and not just watch CNBC. They are making some very intelligent people look naive.
Obama has made more than his share of mistakes and not followed thru on everything from basic campaign promises he made in diners all over America to promises he made in his first State of the Union, but what he got done in this past lame duck session alone is more than Bush got done in eight years and he may get more done than Clinton in his two terms.
Not saying it is Roosevelt-like in its impact, but compared to what has been done since the start of the 21st century, it is a leap of Herculean proportions based on the legislative system we have today.
And as for the lack of vetting and substance BS. -- there was two years worth of it from every corner of the globe and birther meatheads could not dig up their proof and all networks of every shape, stance, size, affiliation, and ownership had their chance and Obama sat with all of them. ALL OF THEM. and he got away with hiding what? got away with not saying what? got away with concealing what? He was laid bare like every other candidate who steps into the slaughterhouse of American politics.
so spare me that line of reasoning on how Obama was elected
Bullshit!
Here is the msot recent gem - trying to take a shot at Obama's State of the Union speech -- Palin - "That was another one of those WTF moments, when he so often repeated this Sputnik moment that he would aspire Americans to celebrate. And he needs to remember that what happened back then with the former communist USSR and their victory in that race to space, yes, they won, but they also incurred so much debt at the time that it resulted in the inevitable collapse of the Soviet Union."
it was the arms race that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union and many, many, many other factors the space race NOT being among them. That is the sort of misguided, psuedo-smart and in reality idiotic debate that she is contributing to the discussion. It is like a high school chemistry student trying to have a conversation with an MIT Chemistry major. She will try to play along and guess at a few answers and try to sound like she belongs, but everyone is rolling their eyes and wondering WTF she is trying to prove by staying in the same company and wishing she would come back after she read a book or 20.
Wow. You really ARE a puppet of the left media personalities such as Maddow and Olberman.
I was just playing with you when I said that.
Truth is, the space race became such a fianncial burden on the soviet union in the 60's and into the 70's, that further sacrifices had to be made to support the arms race. If not for the space race, they would have been able to support the arms race with little difficulty.
Seems Maddow and Olberman forgot to mention that to you.
I suggest you read history and not just watch CNBC. They are making some very intelligent people look naive.
There is very little factual information to support that as a debatable point, simply because Russia does not release such information, never has and never will. If they had to make such sacrifices, then how were they then able to catch up so quickly to the point the US now relies on Russian partnership in space endeavors? So I would ask which news figures YOU parrot? Olbermann is now gone because of his opinionating. Rachel Maddow, however, has plenty of facts including video that she offers backing up her opinions.
You opt to assume that with no evidence other than the opinion of some media personnel that lean left.
Others, such as myself, opt to view her resignation as a necessary evil for the betterment of the State of Alaska. This is based on fact. Continuous and unfounded accusations against her as governor cost her and the taxpayer a lot of money to address. Furthermore, she was foerced to spend more time addressing these false and unfounded allegations than she was addressing more pressing state issues...
Now, applying these facts, I have deduced that her decision was difficult but the best decision she could make for the state of Alaska...knowing dam well that it would likely be spun by the left and further damage any chance she has for higher office.
Stop acting like a sheep and start using your brain RW.....
That's parroting what SHE said. The lawsuits were something any normal person would have handled intelligently and wisely. Instead, this was intentionally made a media event for poor Sarah. She stood a very good chance of losing reelection, based on her alienating Alaskan Democrats. Now I know she probably knew that.
Everything she can point to in terms of achievements was done with nearly uniform Democrats votes and just a smattering of Republican votes."
But her vice-presidential candidacy remolded Palin in the eyes of Alaskan Democrats from a moderate willing to reach out across the aisle to a bomb thrower who accused Barack Obama of "palling around with terrorists." As she became more partisan, she lost support in Alaska her favorable poll numbers are now in the mid-50s, down from the 80s before she was tapped for VP. Without the Democrats, her agenda has gone nowhere, and she's now attacked from both the left and the right. "I saw her on the elevator in the beginning of session in January," [Harry]Crawford says. "I said, 'Good afternoon.' She didn't even reply. She was standing there six inches from me, and she didn't say a word. We've hardly seen each other since. This was someone I considered a friend." [Crawford was an Anchorage Democrat.]
Read more: Why Sarah Palin Quit: The Five Best Explanations - TIME
No Maggie...you opt to assume I am parroting what she said.
I am not.
I took what she said into consideration and then I took other factors into consideration...such as the basic logic of her knowing that her chances for higher office would be compromised if she quit...so her doing so was likely something she deemed necessary for the better of her state....and then I came up with my conclusion.
Your line:
The lawsuits were something any normal person would have handled intelligently and wisely. Instead, this was intentionally made a media event for poor Sarah.
Quite pathetic to have to throw that kind of rhetoric in to defend your position. It is a sign of weekness. I suggest you consider backing off such a tactic.
