PDA

View Full Version : Hope From the West: The Sarah Palin Story




tron paul
07-09-2009, 09:50 PM
This was posted a couple years ago. Back when Palin was a popular choice for Ron's VP.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,288722,00.html

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

By Fred Barnes

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin

JUNEAU, Alaska — The wipeout in the 2006 election left Republicans in such a state of dejection that they've overlooked the one shining victory in which a Republican star was born.

The triumph came in Alaska where Sarah Palin, a politician of eye-popping integrity, was elected governor. She is now the most popular governor in America, with an approval rating in the 90s, and probably the most popular public official in any state.

Her rise is a great (and rare) story of how adherence to principle--especially to transparency and accountability in government--can produce political success. And by the way, Palin is a conservative who only last month vetoed 13 percent of the state's proposed budget for capital projects. The cuts, the Anchorage Daily News said, "may be the biggest single-year line-item veto total in state history."

As recently as last year, Palin (pronounced pale-in) was a political outcast. She resigned in January 2004 as head of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission after complaining to the office of Governor Frank Murkowski and to state Attorney General Gregg Renkes about ethical violations by another commissioner, Randy Ruedrich, who was also Republican state chairman.

State law barred Palin from speaking out publicly about ethical violations and corruption. But she was vindicated later in 2004 when Ruedrich, who'd been reconfirmed as state chairman, agreed to pay a $12,000 fine for breaking state ethics laws. She became a hero in the eyes of the public and the press, and the bane of Republican leaders.

In 2005, she continued to take on the Republican establishment by joining Eric Croft, a Democrat, in lodging an ethics complaint against Renkes, who was not only attorney general but also a long-time adviser and campaign manager for Murkowski. The governor reprimanded Renkes and said the case was closed. It wasn't. Renkes resigned a few weeks later, and Palin was again hailed as a hero.

Palin, 43, the mother of four, passed up a chance to challenge Republican senator Lisa Murkowski, the then-governor's daughter, in 2004. She endorsed another candidate in the primary, but Murkowski won and was reelected. Palin said then that her 14-year-old son talked her out of running, though it's doubtful that was the sole reason.

In 2006, she didn't hesitate. She ran against Gov. Murkowski, who was seeking a second term despite sagging poll ratings, in the Republican primary. In a three-way race, Palin captured 51 percent and won in a landslide. She defeated former Democratic governor Tony Knowles in the general election, 49 percent to 41 percent. She was one of the few Republicans anywhere in the country to perform above expectations in 2006, an overwhelmingly Democratic year. Palin is unabashedly pro life.

With her emphasis on ethics and openness in government, "it turned out Palin caught the temper of the times perfectly," wrote Tom Kizzia of the Anchorage Daily News. She was also lucky. News broke of an FBI investigation of corruption by legislators between the primary and general elections. So far, three legislators have been indicted.

In the roughly three years since she quit as the state's chief regulator of the oil industry, Palin has crushed the Republican hierarchy (virtually all male) and nearly every other foe or critic. Political analysts in Alaska refer to the "body count" of Palin's rivals.

"The landscape is littered with the bodies of those who crossed Sarah," says pollster Dave Dittman, who worked for her gubernatorial campaign. It includes Ruedrich, Renkes, Murkowski, gubernatorial contenders John Binkley and Andrew Halcro, the three big oil companies in Alaska, and a section of the Daily News called "Voice of the Times," which was highly critical of Palin and is now defunct.

One of her first acts as governor was to fire the Alaska Board of Agriculture. Her ultimate target was the state Creamery Board, which has been marketing the products of Alaska dairy farmers for 71 years and wanted to close down after receiving $600,000 from the state. "You don't just close your doors and walk away," Palin told me. She discovered she lacked the power to fire the Creamery Board. Only the board of agriculture had that authority. So Palin replaced the agriculture board, which appointed a new creamery board, which has rescinded the plan to shut down.

In preserving support for dairy farmers, Palin exhibited a kind of Alaskan chauvinism. She came to the state as an infant, making her practically a native. And she is eager to keep Alaska free from domination by oil companies or from reliance on cruise lines whose ships bring thousands of tourists to the state.

"She's as Alaskan as you can get," says Dan Fagan, an Anchorage radio talk show host. "She's a hockey mom, she lives on a lake, she ice fishes, she snowmobiles, she hunts, she's an NRA member, she has a float plane, and her husband works for BP on the North Slope," Fagan says. Todd Palin, her high school sweetheart, is a three-time winner of the 2,000-mile Iron Dog snowmobile race from Wasilla to Nome to Fairbanks. It's the world's longest snowmobile race.

Gov. Palin grew up in Wasilla, where as star of her high school basketball team she got the nickname "Sarah Barracuda" for her fierce competitiveness. She led her underdog team to the state basketball championship. Palin also won the Miss Wasilla beauty contest, in which she was named Miss Congeniality, and went on to compete in the Miss Alaska pageant.

At 32, she was elected mayor of Wasilla, a burgeoning bedroom community outside Anchorage. Though Alaskans tend to be ferociously anti-tax, she persuaded Wasilla voters to increase the local sales tax to pay for an indoor arena and convention center. The tax referendum won by 20 votes.

In 2002, Palin entered statewide politics, running for lieutenant governor. She finished a strong second in the Republican primary. That fall, she dutifully campaigned for Murkowski, who'd given up his Senate seat to run for governor. Afterwards, she turned down several job offers from Murkowski, finally accepting the oil and gas post. When she quit 11 months later, "that was her defining moment" in politics, says Fagan.

Her campaign for governor was bumpy. She missed enough campaign appearances to be tagged "No Show Sarah" by her opponents. She was criticized for being vague on issues. But she sold voters on the one product that mattered: herself.

Her Christian faith--Palin grew up attending nondenominational Bible churches--was a minor issue in the race. She told me her faith affects her politics this way: "I believe everything happens for a purpose. In my own personal life, if I dedicated back to my Creator what I'm trying to create for the good . . . everything will turn out fine." That same concept applies to her political career, she suggested.

The biggest issue in the campaign was the proposed natural gas pipeline from the North Slope that's crucial to the state's economy. Murkowski had made a deal with the three big oil companies--Exxon, BP, ConocoPhillips--which own the gas reserves to build the pipeline. But the legislature turned it down and Palin promised to create competition for the pipeline contract.

She made three other promises: to end corruption in state government, cut spending, and provide accountability. She's now redeeming those promises.

Palin describes herself as "pro-business and pro-development." She doesn't want the oil companies to sit on their energy reserves or environmental groups to block development of the state's resources. "I get frustrated with folks from outside Alaska who come up and say you shouldn't develop your resources," she says. Alaska needs to be self-sufficient, she says, instead of relying heavily on "federal dollars," as the state does today.

Her first major achievement as governor was lopsided passage by the legislature of the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act, which is designed to attract pipeline proposals this summer. The state is offering $500 million in incentives, but the developer must meet strict requirements. The oil companies have said they won't join the competition.

Palin's tough spending cuts drew criticism from Republican legislators whose pet projects were vetoed. But her popularity doesn't appear threatened. "It's not just that she's pretty and young," says Dittman. "She's really smart. And there's no guile. She says her favorite meal is moose stew or mooseburgers. It wouldn't shock people if that were true."

Fred Barnes is executive editor of THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

tron paul
07-09-2009, 09:53 PM
The facts don't support the thesis she is a Bush-McCain-Neocon. She chews them up and spits them out.

So, can we start criticizing Sarah on the facts, and leave the personal attacks to the collectivists?

Liberty Star
07-09-2009, 09:56 PM
Does she still believe that Iraq war was a "task from God"?

jmdrake
07-09-2009, 10:02 PM
Does she still believe that Iraq war was a "task from God"?

And does she still think the bailout somehow cuts taxes?

bunklocoempire
07-10-2009, 04:31 AM
Has she ever mentioned the word tyranny with regards to the 2nd Amendment or while mentioning her NRA membership?:confused: Being 'outdoorsy' has nothing to do with our RKBA.

Bunkloco

speciallyblend
07-10-2009, 09:27 AM
if ron paul had picked palin. then ron paul would of lost my vote!! period! i am beginning to think the gop is like the dog chasing its own tail. has this freaking forum been taking over by right-wing religious/neo-con nuts?? it seems so. what i notice in this forum is alot of christians are hypocrites! they only believe in the us constitution if it fits in with their own christian beliefs! this only applies to those it applies to!

they want to pick and choose.

pcosmar
07-10-2009, 09:34 AM
Does anyone have a Quote or a clip of Ron Paul saying he was considering Palin?

I have never seen anything remotely connecting them. Other than some unfounded rumors with NO proof to back them up.

Show me PROOF or drop the dumb shit.

tron paul
07-15-2009, 12:55 AM
Does anyone have a Quote or a clip of Ron Paul saying he was considering Palin?

I have never seen anything remotely connecting them. Other than some unfounded rumors with NO proof to back them up.

Show me PROOF or drop the dumb shit.

"Dumb shit" is a good way to describe one who can't tell the diff. between "popular choice for Ron's VP" and "Ron Paul saying he was considering Palin."

I used the search function to find old threads, from before McCain graciously gave her a national platform and mass exposure.

The convergence of support for both Palin and Paul in Alaska, as well as Palin declaring herself a fan of Dr. Paul, is what I offered in my initial post.

I claimed both are from the western state tradition of individualism, overlapping supporters, rebellion agains GOP bigwings, etc. RTFA for details.

With one exception, nobody has acknowledged this claim of mine, much less offered a rebuttal.

Such a result feeds my other hypothesis: Palin Derangement Syndrome is a form of vestigial Bush Derangement Syndrome.

In this age of Obama, that's not helpful.

tron paul
07-15-2009, 01:03 AM
if ron paul had picked palin. then ron paul would of lost my vote!! period! i am beginning to think the gop is like the dog chasing its own tail. has this freaking forum been taking over by right-wing religious/neo-con nuts?? it seems so. what i notice in this forum is alot of christians are hypocrites! they only believe in the us constitution if it fits in with their own christian beliefs! this only applies to those it applies to!

they want to pick and choose.

You are the one creating an iron link between Palin, social conservatives, and neocons.

If you do your research and look at sites like FreeRepublic, you will find that there is currently a GOP civil war raging between the bicoastal elite neocons and the socons in flyover country. The neocons hate Palin.

Rather than spew hate at the radicalized Socons, why not welcome them to the Ron Paul Army?

I've spend years shaping the battlefield, preparing in anticipation of these reinforcements. I knew the SoCons would eventually break away from their NeoCon slave masters and start waking up, smelling the RP coffee brewing.

If you can't get along with Christians and forgive their occasional bit of hypocrisy, you have no future in politics because you've relegated yourself to the intolerant hard-left fringe.

Ron Paul is a Christian I can support. There are a hundred million others I can put to work in Ron Paul's Army.

Aratus
07-15-2009, 10:19 AM
tron paul is correct about ms. palin and many of the older threads...

acptulsa
07-15-2009, 10:42 AM
Rather than spew hate at the radicalized Socons, why not welcome them to the Ron Paul Army?

I've spend years shaping the battlefield, preparing in anticipation of these reinforcements. I knew the SoCons would eventually break away from their NeoCon slave masters and start waking up, smelling the RP coffee brewing.

That's true. And I'm trying, too. But as much as you decry people for not standing and saluting the fact that some people here voted for her in a popularity poll before most even knew who she was, you have an equal facility for ignoring our real and well-founded misgivings about her. And that doesn't help the cause, either. Does it?

Are we tron paul or palin bot?

angelatc
07-15-2009, 11:00 AM
Look at her record in Alaska. She grew government and increased spending.

The end.

libertarian4321
07-15-2009, 01:31 PM
This was posted a couple years ago. Back when Palin was a popular choice for Ron's VP.



Dude, this is about your 10th thread trying to convince us to support Palin.

We've got it, you love her.

Most of us, however, see her for what she really is.

Why don't you just stare at your life sized Palin poster, rub one out, and move on already?

Kraig
07-15-2009, 02:29 PM
No one would even be talking about Palin if she didn't attempt to ride the coattails of McCain. To me that says more than enough, she hasn't done anything to warrant nation-wide name recognition outside of running with someone who is the definition of neo-con.

tron paul
07-16-2009, 04:22 AM
tron paul is correct about ms. palin and many of the older threads...

Amazing how Palin can go from hero to villain on RPFs of all places, because of a massive, sustained slimejob by the MSM.

Ron Paul was the victim of the same treatment by the shamelessly pro-Obama media.

He was rabidly attacked by the Wonkette left and same GOP RINO that hate Palin.

The slurs against Palin have the same tone, being mostly absent of content and instead using Alinsky style appeals to emotion (ie hate).

tron paul
07-16-2009, 04:27 AM
That's true. And I'm trying, too. But as much as you decry people for not standing and saluting the fact that some people here voted for her in a popularity poll before most even knew who she was, you have an equal facility for ignoring our real and well-founded misgivings about her. And that doesn't help the cause, either. Does it?

Are we tron paul or palin bot?

I don't think it's fair to assume people voted for her in a poll without knowing who she is.

Sorry being too zealous, I'll address all concerns forthwith.

Bringing your concerns to the floor was my intention. I'd like to know why my peers don't support Palin and test my own positive opinion for validity.

What should I make of all the Idiocracy style responses? Are people are hiding their real issues with her in sarcasm?

LittleLightShining
07-16-2009, 04:31 AM
Amazing how Palin can go from hero to villain on RPFs of all places, because of a massive, sustained slimejob by the MSM.

Ron Paul was the victim of the same treatment by the shamelessly pro-Obama media.

He was rabidly attacked by the Wonkette left and same GOP RINO that hate Palin.

The slurs against Palin have the same tone, being mostly absent of content and instead using Alinsky style appeals to emotion (ie hate).This is why I'm still giving her the benefit of the doubt. I know I don't agree with her on foreign policy and in that way she scares me. I'm not sure if I could ever really support her because of that but if she changes her tune I may change mine.

tron paul
07-16-2009, 04:35 AM
Look at her record in Alaska. She grew government and increased spending.

The end.

Give me a cite to work with if you want to make a specific claim.

Alaska is a growing state, so the budget would grow accordingly. Sarah Palin is a fiscal conservative. She's also a RP Republican. That's why the McCain zombie dimly sensed he should move towards her. She's full of LIFE.

This is only the beginning of the beginning.

tron paul
07-16-2009, 04:43 AM
Dude, this is about your 10th thread trying to convince us to support Palin.

We've got it, you love her.



Sarah is now the spearhead of the RP Revolution.

Schiff, Kokesh, etc are very important. But I don't get why everyone isn't thrilled that a fan of Ron Paul is set to become America's first female president.

You hate her and feel free to say nasty things to those that want to use her to take out Obama. We get it.

You hate the GOP and want it dead. I completely understand.

But I also like the idea of trying to remake it in Ron Paul's image.

I did my time in the LP and give still them my vote. But I don't go on pro-LP threads and attack people. So get out of our way, bro.

LittleLightShining
07-16-2009, 05:18 AM
Sarah is now the spearhead of the RP Revolution.

Schiff, Kokesh, etc are very important. But I don't get why everyone isn't thrilled that a fan of Ron Paul is set to become America's first female president.

Ummm... no. She isn't. She has potential-- maybe-- but she's not the spearhead. And she's not set to become America's first female president, either.

tron paul
07-16-2009, 06:30 AM
Ummm... no. She isn't. She has potential-- maybe-- but she's not the spearhead. And she's not set to become America's first female president, either.

You're right, she is potentially our spearhead.

We don't know for certain how much of an RPR she is or isn't. If she is, it would be beyond huge. Galactic!

Indications look very positive in my view.

Maybe we'll find out on Aug 8th, from her speech at the Reagan Library.

acptulsa
07-16-2009, 06:39 AM
Sarah is now the spearhead of the RP Revolution.

Schiff, Kokesh, etc are very important. But I don't get why everyone isn't thrilled that a fan of Ron Paul is set to become America's first female president.

You hate her and feel free to say nasty things to those that want to use her to take out Obama. We get it.

You hate the GOP and want it dead. I completely understand.

But I also like the idea of trying to remake it in Ron Paul's image.

I did my time in the LP and give still them my vote. But I don't go on pro-LP threads and attack people. So get out of our way, bro.

I'll be in your way, too. And I'm not moving.

She's as trustworthy as Ronald Wilson Reagan. And I'm not working for her advancement, I'm not even considering endorsing her, and if she wants my trust after her past performance she's going to be at least a decade in earning it.

I think these people are using her charisma to sell libertarians a bill of goods. And until you stop your cheerleading and address substantive concerns about her, you aren't doing a damned thing to help. And I honestly don't think you can address those substantive concerns, thus I think you're only fooling yourself.

I can't afford to fool myself. My nation hangs in the balance. And I'm not entrusting it to some necon just because you want in her pants. What part of not happening do you not understand?

Now, will you find a way to actually further this conversation, or will you merely repeat yourself like a bot?

tron paul
07-16-2009, 07:06 AM
address substantive concerns about her

Name them.

acptulsa
07-16-2009, 07:08 AM
Name them.

Start with war.

moostraks
07-16-2009, 07:21 AM
Amazing how Palin can go from hero to villain on RPFs of all places, because of a massive, sustained slimejob by the MSM.

Ron Paul was the victim of the same treatment by the shamelessly pro-Obama media.

He was rabidly attacked by the Wonkette left and same GOP RINO that hate Palin.

The slurs against Palin have the same tone, being mostly absent of content and instead using Alinsky style appeals to emotion (ie hate).

This is about discernment, something which seems to be lacking in your rabid support of this individual. RP supporters learned to see through the smear tactics to support RP because it was garbage. Likewise, we (those who dismissed her) likely used the same tactics in judging Palin and based upon a sum total of information available found her grievously lacking in the qualities of one seeking to run for a position of this magnitude.

Just because the media casts disparaging remarks should not be a reason to endorse a candidate. They must display strength of character and a history which validates their dedication to the cause of individual liberty. Furthermore, by aligning herself with McCain she endorsed his stances on the issues and will remain a non-starter for many based on this fact alone.

I would not have had any respect for RP if he would have stumped for any of the media darlings for President, much less so were he to have chosen the position of VP. It is a matter of standing up for what one believes is important. Without that strength of character which Palin clearly lacks,imo, you have another person willing to sell out their beliefs for name recognition and power.

moostraks
07-16-2009, 07:31 AM
Name them.

Aligning with McCain...

moostraks
07-16-2009, 07:32 AM
Name them.

dropping out midterm...

silverhandorder
07-16-2009, 07:32 AM
if ron paul had picked palin. then ron paul would of lost my vote!! period! i am beginning to think the gop is like the dog chasing its own tail. has this freaking forum been taking over by right-wing religious/neo-con nuts?? it seems so. what i notice in this forum is alot of christians are hypocrites! they only believe in the us constitution if it fits in with their own christian beliefs! this only applies to those it applies to!

they want to pick and choose.

In a recent poll she got only one vote. I doubt this forum is being taken over.

tron paul
07-16-2009, 07:36 AM
Start with war.

What's the best "Palin is a WARMONGER" article you've got? I need claims to dispute!

Palin has a son serving AFAIK. I've seen that situation change my ZioCon stepmom into a RP fan.

At worst, she might be a hawk, but she's not a chicken hawk whose kids don't serve.

Even if she hates Muslims and wants Armageddon, Rapture, and Judgment, having a kid on the line makes me respect her right to hold that view. But I don't think she does.

I think Palin supports the Constitution and only went along with McTurd for the election.

The "God's will" quote made me cringe. But I'm not religious.

After I thought about it for a second, any Christian will only support things they feel are God's will. It's circular.

Painting her as a Crusader without proof isn't fair.

I don't think she's Chimpy McBush HitlerCheney the Second. Regardless of what the Obama fawning Kossettes imagine in their silly online story-go-rounds.

acptulsa
07-16-2009, 07:44 AM
I don't think she's Chimpy McBush HitlerCheney the Second. Regardless of what the Obama fawning Kossettes imagine in their silly online story-go-rounds.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=5782924&page=1

Krugerrand
07-16-2009, 08:06 AM
I haven't written Palin off. At the same time I'm highly suspicious of anybody willing to be McCain's running mate. I think she has some self-redeeming to do before I could vote for her. Perhaps she could run for the House/Senate... establish a record I can believe. Then, I'd be willing to reconsider.

I'm not super concerned about what she did with the state budget in Alaska. My bigger concern is shrinking the Federal Gov.

(side note: I probably would have enjoyed Ron Paul as McCain's running mate. The debates would have been fun to watch. I can hear repeated lines like "yeah, McCain's idea is stupid. I'm trying to change his mind on that.")

tron paul
07-16-2009, 08:13 AM
blah blah personal attack, self-congratulation, blah blah... we (those who dismissed her) likely used the same tactics in judging Palin and based upon a sum total of information available found her grievously lacking in the qualities of one seeking to run for a position of this magnitude.

All hail your omniscient sum total of information. How magnificent is its inscrutably pompous nebulosity!

Presenting even one key, informative shard of this cosmic crystal would be an insult to the SUM. (Hail the SUM.)

That's why I don't see anything I don't like on her Wikipedia page. All the damaging info about her record has collapsed into your side's singularity of wisdom, beyond the horizon of knowledge. And thus failing Wikipedia's requirement for verifiability.



Just because the media casts disparaging remarks should not be a reason to endorse a candidate.

I retract the claim where I said that media insults are a good reason to endorse.

Oh wait, I never said that. I said the media SP/RP insults have the same tone.
But I do think getting flak means both are over their targets, and a point in Palin's favor.


They must display strength of character and a history which validates their dedication to the cause of individual liberty. Furthermore, by aligning herself with McCain she endorsed his stances on the issues and will remain a non-starter for many based on this fact alone.

Did Poppy Bush align himself with Reagan by running with him? No. Of course not.

Forget the unforgiving negativity sources, we don't need them. Palin has millions to replace them.

Sarah will have to finish proving herself and paying dues over the next couple years.
I hope she does it. Do you wish her to fail?


I would not have had any respect for RP if he would have stumped for any of the media darlings for President, much less so were he to have chosen the position of VP. It is a matter of standing up for what one believes is important. Without that strength of character which Palin clearly lacks,imo, you have another person willing to sell out their beliefs for name recognition and power.

I perceive that Palin believes in winning, so that she can advance her values.

Darn these yucky gray areas. One man's selling out is another's tactical strategy.

Maybe politics isn't the place for black-and-white type moral absolute people that can't compromise for the sake of advancing a longer term goal. Many say that's what holds the Libertarians back - being full of prickly, hyper-philosophical, uptight crybabies that take their ball and go home at the first sign of disagreement.

Even Nolan, the founder, had enough of it. Statesmen know when to stand up for their values and when to compromise. They also know getting elected isn't about 'winning' an argument to your own satisfaction. It's about connecting with people, which Palin can do like nobody since Obama.

acptulsa
07-16-2009, 08:19 AM
I perceive that Palin believes in winning, so that she can advance her values.

Darn these yucky gray areas. One man's selling out is another's tactical strategy.

Maybe politics isn't the place for black-and-white type moral absolute people that can't compromise for the sake of advancing a longer term goal.

Fine. So we trade our values and our goals for a victory, and close our eyes to what we have done, and cherish our pyrrhic victory as though it were the real thing. And spend another half century wondering where conservatism--and our liberties--went while we enjoy getting robbed, inflated to death, and cheering our troops on to victory in a nation that none of us have currently ever even heard of. Yay.

What you propose is called 'business as usual'. And most of us are here because we're sick of the stuff.

LibertyEagle
07-16-2009, 08:29 AM
Look at her record in Alaska. She grew government and increased spending.

The end.

lol.

Clear and concise. :)

tron paul
07-16-2009, 08:32 AM
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=5782924&page=1

Ah excellent, thank you.

The point of this article is demonstrating Palin is not qualified to run The Empire.

It assumes only Ivy Leaguers can handle running a trillion dollar Leviathan at the center of the world economy.

I reject this premise.

The job of the President is to enforce the Constitution, not run the world.

Palin is perfectly qualified as a former mayor and governor to run a Constitutional government.

Obama is too good at running the State, it's a threat to our liberty. Sometimes less is more.

LibertyEagle
07-16-2009, 08:36 AM
tronpaul,

I'd be interested to know if Gingrich is one of the ones encouraging Palin. Because I'm betting that he is. Palin may not personally be as bad as the neocons, but I also do not think she is intelligent enough to know when she is being used. I'll bet you money that she is being used as a front man, because she still has some appeal to traditional conservatives. But, it is nothing but an attempted end run around the true libertarian-conservatism that Ron Paul and others like him, offer.

EDIT: lol. Look who wrote this glowing article in the first post. Fred Barnes from The Weekly Standard. That's Bill Kristol's magazine. As you recall, it was his father, Irving, who coined the term "neoconservative" to describe the movement he helped design.

I'll bet you money that this is nothing but an attempt at controlling the opposition.

acptulsa
07-16-2009, 08:39 AM
The point of this article is demonstrating Palin is not qualified to run The Empire.

Who cares what Charlie Gibson was trying to accomplish? The point is Palin, not Gibson's intent. Surely you see much in what she said that many here would disagree with. You don't need me to hold your hand. Stop the silly attempt at misdirection and tell us how her stance on imperialism is something you support if you want to win us over.

This is a place of substance over spam. Got substance?

tron paul
07-16-2009, 08:42 AM
Clear and concise. :)

More like glib.

When people presume to tell me "The End" as in end of discussion, I wonder what it is they don't know that other people interested in a discussion do know.

If Palin spends like a drunken sailor Republican, I don't understand why Alaskans (who are also huge RP supporters) didn't treat her like the rest of the GOP scoundrels who got thrown out of office in 2008.

The worst I've heard is that she increased the state's debt, with the reasoning that Alaska is a growing state.

Wasilla went from one hardware store to a Lowe's and Home Depot, for example.

Those exploding suburbs need infrastructure. Better a state build it than Washington DC.

acptulsa
07-16-2009, 08:47 AM
Wasilla went from one hardware store to a Lowe's and Home Depot, for example.

I can't believe you even mentioned that name, considering her apparent favoritism toward her own town is another glaring black mark on her gubernatorial record.

But I'm helping you digress. War? In your opinion she was pretending to be an imperialist so McCain would put her name on his bumper stickers? Do I have that right? Or have you an explanation that's a bit more glib?

LibertyEagle
07-16-2009, 08:50 AM
Tron, we've got to look at who is behind Palin. She's not doing this by herself. Find out who is directing her and then we'll be able to name that tune.

tron paul
07-16-2009, 09:15 AM
tronpaul,

I'd be interested to know if Gingrich is one of the ones encouraging Palin. Because I'm betting that he is. Palin may not personally be as bad as the neocons, but I also do not think she is intelligent enough to know when she is being used. I'll bet you money that she is being used as a front man, because she still has some appeal to traditional conservatives. But, it is nothing but an attempted end run around the true libertarian-conservatism that Ron Paul and others like him, offer.

EDIT: lol. Look who wrote this glowing article in the first post. Fred Barnes from The Weekly Standard. That's Bill Kristol's magazine. As you recall, it was his father, Irving, who coined the term "neoconservative" to describe the movement he helped design.

Wow. Took long enough for the predictable complaint about the author. That alone tells me how little rigor the other detractors are applying. I thought that "Barnes is a Neocon" would be posted straight away. Anway, that's easily addressed: McCain was the neocon's darling so of course they were also supporting Palin.

Most no longer do, Kristol being an exception. I think Kristol is smart enough to know he wants to hitch his agenda to the Palin Train, not stand in front of it complaining about "dumb as rocks" and "quitter." Krauthammer would be the first counterexample of an anti-Palin neocon I'd mention, then Goldberg and Noonan.

Palin's base is white-hot. You're kidding yourself to downplay it as "some appeal to traditional conservatives."

Look at the Facebook stats; she's no Fred Thompson. And she hasn't even started yet.

I'm not buying the "flanking maneuver" meme. It was designed and is being pushed by Obama supporters to stop Sarah Palin's already staggering, yet still growing, popularity among the Tea Party conservatives and others in the newly radicalized political center.

Sarah is flanking Obama and Mitt Romney, not us individualists. I believe she is one of us. She isn't meeting the GOP poobahs as a supplicant. She has all the power; they are nothing without her. She must know it. Nobody is that stupid. Only the cartoon version of Palin is a Gingrich puppet. Mitt & Obama wish dearly that was reality. Too bad!

McTurd desperately needed the support of the only vital part the the GOP, ie us RP supporters.

McTurd brought Palin on board as VP for the exact reason that I support her: she seems to be a RPR. Of course it ended in tears. Palin, a pro-life culture warror like Coulter, doesn't get along with abortionist, neocon nancy-boys like Krauthammer and especially Jonah Goldberg.

They hate traditional paleo conservatives like Palin. She's Buchanan-lite in their view, an inbred, hick populist that doesn't know enough about critical theory to discuss Foucault over cocktails on Park Ave. The horror! They find Palin shocking, beyond the Pale.

tron paul
07-16-2009, 09:29 AM
I can't believe you even mentioned that name, considering her apparent favoritism toward her own town is another glaring black mark on her gubernatorial record.

But I'm helping you digress. War? In your opinion she was pretending to be an imperialist so McCain would put her name on his bumper stickers? Do I have that right? Or have you an explanation that's a bit more glib?

Did the state of Alaska grow enough to justify Palin's budget increases?

I don't know; it's a fair question. I'm not going to avoid mentioning WASILLA, because all the Daily Kos stories about Palin's alleged malfeasance have yet to go anywhere but the trash.

The spurious ethics charges paralyzed her office as Governor, and forced her to step down. None have stuck. So I will mention WASILLA , with pride, until you have a better reason than slander and your emotional snits to offer in rebuttal.
WASILLA WASILLA WASILLA

And yes, Veep candidates shut their traps and defer to the Pres candidate.

That's how it works these days. Palin has seen up close and personally how far McTurd's warmongering and Guiliani's fearmongering got them in 2008. I don't think she was impressed.

She also saw the glorious march of Ron Paul's Army, raising millions and changing the debate. I think she noticed.

LibertyEagle
07-16-2009, 09:36 AM
Tron,

People know something is wrong with our country. They are ripe for a true libertarian-conservative message and figurehead. They know about Palin, so of course many are flocking to her, because they have been told that she is a traditional conservative by the media. However, her record does not show that. That's where the rubber really meets the road, doesn't it?

"Palin's base" is not red-hot. Libertarian-conservative principles are what is "red hot". Unfortunately, the media has been told that she is the figurehead of that.

I am a traditional conservative, Tron, and she doesn't represent my views. I gave her the benefit of the doubt. I think she probably means well, but I honestly think she is being used. Again, let's keep a close watch and follow the money. That will lead us to the truth of the matter.

Note: How you can so easily discount William Kristol is absolutely fascinating. He is one of, if not the most powerful, neoconservative in existence and has been for quite a long time.

acptulsa
07-16-2009, 09:42 AM
I believe she is one of us. She isn't meeting the GOP poobahs as a supplicant. She has all the power; they are nothing without her. She must know it. Nobody is that stupid. Only the cartoon version of Palin is a Gingrich puppet.

That's quite a pile of opinion. Give her the most powerful position in the free will because I think she's just pretending to be who she appears to be. Very reassuring.

And as for charges of malfeasance not sticking--who's about to cease to be the governor of Alaska? A real enough outcome, imo.

moostraks
07-16-2009, 09:49 AM
All hail your omniscient sum total of information. How magnificent is its inscrutably pompous nebulosity!

Presenting even one key, informative shard of this cosmic crystal would be an insult to the SUM. (Hail the SUM.)

That's why I don't see anything I don't like on her Wikipedia page. All the damaging info about her record has collapsed into your side's singularity of wisdom, beyond the horizon of knowledge. And thus failing Wikipedia's requirement for verifiability.




I retract the claim where I said that media insults are a good reason to endorse.

Oh wait, I never said that. I said the media SP/RP insults have the same tone.
But I do think getting flak means both are over their targets, and a point in Palin's favor.



Did Poppy Bush align himself with Reagan by running with him? No. Of course not.

Forget the unforgiving negativity sources, we don't need them. Palin has millions to replace them.

Sarah will have to finish proving herself and paying dues over the next couple years.
I hope she does it. Do you wish her to fail?



I perceive that Palin believes in winning, so that she can advance her values.

Darn these yucky gray areas. One man's selling out is another's tactical strategy.

Maybe politics isn't the place for black-and-white type moral absolute people that can't compromise for the sake of advancing a longer term goal. Many say that's what holds the Libertarians back - being full of prickly, hyper-philosophical, uptight crybabies that take their ball and go home at the first sign of disagreement.

Even Nolan, the founder, had enough of it. Statesmen know when to stand up for their values and when to compromise. They also know getting elected isn't about 'winning' an argument to your own satisfaction. It's about connecting with people, which Palin can do like nobody since Obama.

Your capacity for discussion is at the level of a third grader when you change anothers words without acknowledgement. If you want to win folks over to your stance you need to polish your execution. Degradation of another who is trying to enlighten you as to why you are not going to gain traction with some folks really only reinforces your lack of substance that one perceives underlying the visciousness of your attacks.

Utilizing a tactic of promoting the ideals of the opposition in order to gain publicity weakens the message by condoning unacceptable behavior, and raises questions regarding the veracity of what one speaks.

It isn't about winning a battle but the war. Learning to speak in terms that cut to the heart of what individuals are really after which is the right of acceptance and capacity to live in the manner they see fit. This is not done by promoting a world through domination and force as the only ones who win are those in power. Palin and those who I have seen who support her seem to promise more of the same legislation of the tyrants in victory by any means possible even if it includes deception and fraud. Your responses have only served to validate this perception for me.

I have yet to witness any "informative shards" from the Palin camp. Another issue that will need some time and distance for her to be a consideration would be the lack of authority she has been able to maintain within the confines of her own home. If you can't have your rules respected by your family members, then what does that say about your leadership capabilities?

Within a family characterizing such disarray, she would have been more sympathetic if she would have respectfully refused to carry forward with her own needs when she clearly had so many pressing needs by those who were closest to her. She showed once again a lack of character I would not endorse by being concerned with her own agenda at the expense to even those she should have given the most fondest consideration to under any circumstance. Much the same as I venture a guess some liberals feel regarding Edwards' stance with his choices last year. Knowing the appropriate battle to wage is necessary skill for potus.

tron paul
07-16-2009, 10:09 AM
many are flocking to her, because they have been told that she is a traditional conservative by the media.

The media never said anything nice like that, they hate Palin. She's pro-life.

Sarah's popularity grew by word of mouth as she took out layer upon layer of corrupt Alaskan GOP deadwood. This story is from Wikipedia.

Then, her speech at the GOP Convention electrified and greatly enlarged her base.

The only way the media has helped Palin is by attacking her so in such ugly ways, without mercy, that sympathy and anti-media sentiment come into play.

I did love watching Letterman, then Kos, then HuffPo have to issue apologies to Sarah after the blowback from their nastiness got too hot for their professional handlers to handle.


However, her record does not show that. That's where the rubber really meets the road, doesn't it?

I'd love to discuss her record. I've been attempting it, but so much ugly noise gets thrown out instead of facts, anything of substance is diluted.


"Palin's base" is not red-hot. Libertarian-conservative principles are what is "red hot". Unfortunately, the media has been told that she is the figurehead of that.

The two are not mutually exclusive. They overlap. Why not give Palin supporters credit for being smart enough to make their own decisions, instead of uncharitably ascribing their innocent, childlike support of Palin to brainwashing by the media and misplaced individualist principles?

In any case, you are in deep, deep denial if you think Palin's base is not white-hot.
It's not just individualism being back in style, it's much more. Beyond anti-Obamaism even. Palin is an icon of post-Hillary feminism. She has it all, and looks good having it, etc. It's not her principles of limited government that make her glasses the hot frames to have, in other words.



I am a traditional conservative, Tron, and she doesn't represent my views. I gave her the benefit of the doubt. I think she probably means well, but I honestly think she is being used. Again, let's keep a close watch and follow the money. That will lead us to the truth of the matter.

I hear this point from a lot of people on the net. She definitely has to step up and demonstrate that she is her own person, not a tool of the GOP we rejected, to counter this widespread concern.

Let's wait and see. We'll know much more after she's out of office.



Note: How you can so easily discount William Kristol is absolutely fascinating. He is one of, if not the most powerful, neoconservative in existence and has been for quite a long time.

Again, I know all about Kristol. Like Barnes, he was pushing McCain and therefore also pushing McCain's running mate. I also explained that Kristol is cunning enough to know better than to step in front of the Palin Train, and would rather hitch his caboose to it. How you can so easily discount the venom of Krauthammer, Goldberg, and Noonan (plus all the other anti-Palin neocons)? You know who they are.

acptulsa
07-16-2009, 10:14 AM
I'd love to discuss her record. I've been attempting it, but so much ugly noise gets thrown out instead of facts, anything of substance is diluted.

Got me all excited, then (after saying how happy you are at the opportunity) you changed the subject. Tease.


Let's wait and see. We'll know much more after she's out of office.

Well, sorry, but I consider that just silly. We know more about them by listening to their promises than we do by looking at their voting records? Come on, now...

tron paul
07-16-2009, 10:20 AM
That's quite a pile of opinion. Give her the most powerful position in the free will because I think she's just pretending to be who she appears to be. Very reassuring.

And as for charges of malfeasance not sticking--who's about to cease to be the governor of Alaska? A real enough outcome, imo.

It was a mix of fact and opinion. Do you think that Newt Gingrich and his wing of the GOP are anything without Sarah Palin? Do you think Sarah is meeting with GOP poobahs as a supplicant?

I've already explained the ethics charges have all been found to be baseless.

If you can't distinguish between charges found to be valid, and those that interfered with administration of the office of governor despite having no basis, get help.

Did you believe the fake, libelous Dan Rather Texas Air National Guard memos were real too, just because you hated Bush so much and wanted so desperately to "get" him?

tron paul
07-16-2009, 10:23 AM
you changed the subject. Tease.

We know more about them by listening to their promises than we do by looking at their voting records? Come on, now...

Which aspect of her voting record would you like to discuss?

Theocrat
07-16-2009, 10:28 AM
YouTube - Sarah Palin on Ron Paul and Republican partisanship (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YglP4clX0A)

acptulsa
07-16-2009, 10:28 AM
It was a mix of fact and opinion. Do you think that Newt Gingrich and his wing of the GOP are anything without Sarah Palin?

No, but I don't think he amounts to anything with her, either.


Which aspect of her voting record would you like to discuss?

My dear Tron, we're all so sick of you changing the subject and/or substituting you 'feelings' and 'theories' and 'instincts' for fact that we're quite prepared to let you start wherever you like. :rolleyes:

pcosmar
07-16-2009, 10:34 AM
I see.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3552/3381703721_b2f69229a0.jpg

http://www.friends.org.uk/news/images/blind03b.jpg

http://s3.images.com/huge.65.328820.JPG

tron paul
07-16-2009, 10:37 AM
Moos, You characterized my posts as "rabid" and congratulated your own intelligence for an interminable period. My paraphrasing was both both accurate and amusing. And you seemed like just the type that would wring your hands over such an awful offense, betraying to all your hide's lack of depth in an entertaining manner.

You call me rabid, then a third-grader, after which you criticize degradation as a means of persuasion. Perhaps you are teaching me a lesson in Zen paradoxes?

So Palin lost you when her daughter became pregnant. OK, that's a good data point.

Thanks!

dannno
07-16-2009, 10:37 AM
So she still thinks the Iraq war is a task from God?

LibertyEagle
07-16-2009, 10:38 AM
Tron,

You keep saying you want to tell us about her record.

Ok, so go on and do it.

tron paul
07-16-2009, 10:45 AM
No, but I don't think he amounts to anything with her, either.

My dear Tron, we're all so sick of you changing the subject and/or substituting you 'feelings' and 'theories' and 'instincts' for fact that we're quite prepared to let you start wherever you like. :rolleyes:

How many times are you going to accuse me of changing the subject, or stating opinion as fact?

Ahem. I believe you were telling me how Palin's resignation is the result of an ethics charge, as is the rumor (now under litigation for libel) posted on DailyKos.

Then I responded to this accusation, and you dropped it like a hot skillet. Probably because you were losing that (rehashed, old) debate over the spurious ethics charges, and badly.

Hey, I know, let's change the subject to how I always am changing the subject.

tron paul
07-16-2009, 10:52 AM
You keep saying you want to tell us about her record.

I said I want to discuss her record, since that's what people think determines whether or not she is a Ron Paul Repubican.



Ok, so go on and do it.

I already did. It was the first post. Anyone care to discuss the content of the Barnes article?

We've been over the fact that Barnes wrote it. Now what else in it do we agree or disagree with?

I read the Wiki page on Palin, and Barnes hasn't distorted anything factual using his evil neocon powers.

If the Barnes article is correct, then Sarah Palin is a Ron Paul Republican.

That would also explain why McCain brought her on board as the best way to co-opt the rEVOLution.

moostraks
07-16-2009, 11:15 AM
Moos, You characterized my posts as "rabid" and congratulated your own intelligence for an interminable period. My paraphrasing was both both accurate and amusing. And you seemed like just the type that would wring your hands over such an awful offense, betraying to all your hide's lack of depth in an entertaining manner.

You call me rabid, then a third-grader, after which you criticize degradation as a means of persuasion. Perhaps you are teaching me a lesson in Zen paradoxes?

So Palin lost you when her daughter became pregnant. OK, that's a good data point.

Thanks!

no...I stated your tactic was immature. I try to be very specific and I merely reflected upon the fact that your manner is abrasive. Take it or leave it. Since you are pushing Palin, I would gladly have you continue to turn people off of your favored candidate by your manner of speaking.

There was a manner to handle humor which you don't seem to grasp judging by your response. I don't appreciate someone posting something as if stated in direct quotes. It is misleading and disingenuous. Done out of quotes is fair game,imo. I see you have no problem putting words in other people's mouths whilst lamenting msm doing it to your beloved sarah. Maybe you need to slough off their commentary as humor, eh??? It seems to be your type of dark comedy.

I do not believe I have a sense of inflated ego as you seem to care to reflect upon me. Do you feel so insecure with a conversation that is challenging your stance that you must portray your opponent in a degrading manner as opposed to offering substantive information on your position? Your posts are filled with vitriol and anger towards anyone( in a personnal fashion) who dares to be of an opposing opinion, and this qualifies as rabid,imo.Rabid as defined is:"fanatic: marked by excessive enthusiasm for and intense devotion to a cause or idea; 'rabid isolationist' " Argue with the dictionary not me. I don't think the portrayal is unfair.

Palin lost favor with with me on the sum total of a collision of ethical decisions I feel she made poorly.The issue was not as simplistic as you wish to make the matter. Your rebuttal has been mighty slim as to why this should not be challenged and instead you seem to be okay with a continual pattern of politics through force and disingenuousness. Why do we need more of the same of what we already have?

Where is the substance to your argument??? Why should her dismissing her family's needs be overlooked? Why should we tolerate her promoting preemptive wars? Start there...Persuade through reason and facts not through force and humiliation of your opponent.

moostraks
07-16-2009, 11:22 AM
Tron,

How do you rationalize a midterm quit? It seems that you don't believe it is ethics related, so what do you think it was? I have scanned over your posts but I can't seem to see your response. (I haven't an opinion one way or the other as to why(re:ethics) but I do think it displays yet another poor choice on her part as a failure to follow through with her commitment)

acptulsa
07-16-2009, 11:50 AM
I said I want to discuss her record, since that's what people think determines whether or not she is a Ron Paul Repubican.

I already did. It was the first post. Anyone care to discuss the content of the Barnes article?

Love to. All it says about her voting record is she vetoed a budget (about which it gives no details), she pushed through a convention center in her little town, and she pushed through a state program to build a pipeline that private enterprise could have handled, and which (now it deserves the quotes) "private" enterprise will almost certainly benefit from the most.

Oh, and are we supposed to not notice that you changed the subject to your tendency to change the subject?

tron paul
07-16-2009, 11:54 AM
no...I stated your tactic was immature. I try to be very specific and I merely reflected upon the fact that your manner is abrasive.

Yes, your being so overly specific was what told me you would backtrack and split hairs if I responded in kind. The dermatological demonstration continues.


I don't appreciate someone posting something as if stated in direct quotes. It is misleading and disingenuous. Done out of quotes is fair game,imo. I see you have no problem putting words in other people's mouths whilst lamenting msm doing it to your beloved sarah. Maybe you need to slough off their commentary as humor, eh??? It seems to be your type of dark comedy.

Yes, you're easily offended, we get it. Most also get that "blah blah" indicates humorous paraphrasing.

Besides, you never contested that the paraphrasing was so accurate as to be functionally equivalent.

Maybe it was a little misleading, but not disingenuous.
Or disingenuous, but not misleading. Oh wait, you just used the same idea in two different words to pump up your rhetoric and falsely multiply the charges you can levy against me.



I do not believe I have a sense of inflated ego as you seem to care to reflect upon me. Do you feel so insecure with a conversation that is challenging your stance that you must portray your opponent in a degrading manner as opposed to offering substantive information on your position? Your posts are filled with vitriol and anger towards anyone( in a personnal fashion) who dares to be of an opposing opinion, and this qualifies as rabid,imo.Rabid as defined is:"fanatic: marked by excessive enthusiasm for and intense devotion to a cause or idea; 'rabid isolationist' " Argue with the dictionary not me. I don't think the portrayal is unfair.

You can't show me one post where I have ever jumped on anybody that didn't 'do unto others' first. I follow the Golden Rule, but don't usually turn the other cheek.

Characterize me as rabid, praise yourself as better informed, and you probably will get slammed until you understand you are not addressing an inferior.

I give what I get. To nice people, I am very nice. Check my history for proof.


Palin lost favor with with me on the sum total of a collision of ethical decisions I feel she made poorly.The issue was not as simplistic as you wish to make the matter. Your rebuttal has been mighty slim as to why this should not be challenged and instead you seem to be okay with a continual pattern of politics through force and disingenuousness. Why do we need more of the same of what we already have?

Where is the substance to your argument??? Why should her dismissing her family's needs be overlooked? Why should we tolerate her promoting preemptive wars? Start there...Persuade through reason and facts not through force and humiliation of your opponent.

The phrase, lampooned earlier as (intentionally) inscrutably pompous and nebulous, "sum total" doesn't tell me much.

I had to read between the lines, using what I've read from others that seem to have similar problems the the Palins' pregnant daughter, family priorities, etc, to catch your meaning.

I'm not here to rebut stuff and defend Palin's family so much as take a survey to gauge the impact Palin and the Tea Partys will have on the rEVOLution.

You'll vote for who you want. I just want to know why.

It's not my right to know, maybe not even my business.

But I'm curious and only want the info to help plan the next steps in our rEVOLution.

Thanks for your patience, advice, and honest opinions.

tron paul
07-16-2009, 11:57 AM
Tron,

How do you rationalize a midterm quit? It seems that you don't believe it is ethics related, so what do you think it was? I have scanned over your posts but I can't seem to see your response. (I haven't an opinion one way or the other as to why(re:ethics) but I do think it displays yet another poor choice on her part as a failure to follow through with her commitment)

Until I have reason not to, I'm taking Gov Palin at her word, unfiltered by the media: http://gov.state.ak.us/



Political operatives descended on Alaska last August, digging for dirt. The ethics law I championed became their weapon of choice. Over the past nine months I've been accused of all sorts of frivolous ethics violations – such as holding a fish in a photograph, wearing a jacket with a logo on it, and answering reporters’ questions.

Every one – all 15 of the ethics complaints have been dismissed. We’ve won! But it hasn't been cheap - the State has wasted thousands of hours of your time and shelled out some two million of your dollars to respond to “opposition research” – that’s money not going to fund teachers or troopers – or safer roads. And this political absurdity, the “politics of personal destruction” … Todd and I are looking at more than half a million dollars in legal bills in order to set the record straight. And what about the people who offer up these silly accusations? It doesn’t cost them a dime so they’re not going to stop draining public resources – spending other peoples’ money in their game.

It’s pretty insane – my staff and I spend most of our day dealing with this instead of progressing our state now. I know I promised no more “politics as usual,” but this isn’t what anyone had in mind for Alaska.

tron paul
07-16-2009, 12:01 PM
Love to. All it says about her voting record is she vetoed a budget (about which it gives no details), she pushed through a convention center in her little town, and she pushed through a state program to build a pipeline that private enterprise could have handled, and which (now it deserves the quotes) "private" enterprise will almost certainly benefit from the most.

Oh, and are we supposed to not notice that you changed the subject to your tendency to change the subject?

Again, I defer to the lady herself to present the record:
http://www.gov.state.ak.us/exec-column.php



Here’s some of the things we’ve done:

We created a petroleum integrity office to oversee safe development. We held the line for Alaskans on Point Thomson – and finally for the first time in decades – they’re drilling for oil and gas.

We have AGIA, the gasline project – a massive bi-partisan victory (the vote was 58 to 1!) – also succeeding as intended - protecting Alaskans as our clean natural gas will flow to energize us, and America, through a competitive, pro-private sector project. This is the largest private sector energy project, ever. This is energy independence.

And ACES – another bipartisan effort – is working as intended and industry is publicly acknowledging its success. Our new oil and gas “clear and equitable formula” is so Alaskans will no longer be taken advantage of. ACES incentivizes new exploration and development and jobs that were previously not going to happen with a monopolized North Slope oil basin.

We cleaned up previously accepted unethical actions; we ushered in bi-partisan Ethics Reform.

We also slowed the rate of government growth, we worked with the Legislature to save billions of dollars for the future, and I made no lobbyist friends with my hundreds of millions of dollars in budget vetoes... but living beyond our means today is irresponsible for tomorrow.

We took government out of the dairy business and put it back into private-sector hands – where it should be.

We provided unprecedented support for education initiatives, and with the right leadership, finally filled long-vacant public safety positions. We built a sub-Cabinet on Climate Change and took heat from Outside special interests for our biologically-sound wildlife management for abundance.

We broke ground on the new prison.

And we made common sense conservative choices to eliminate personal luxuries like the jet, the chef, the junkets... the entourage.

And the Lt. Governor and I said "no" to our pay raises.

So much success in this first term – and with this success I am proud to take credit... for hiring the right people! Our goal was to achieve a gasline project, more fair oil and gas valuation, and ethics reform in four years. We did it in two.

acptulsa
07-16-2009, 12:10 PM
We created a new bureaucracy, 'incentivized' stuff, appointed more people, expanded my cabinet and are building a new prison because we have so many non-violent 'offenders' we can't hold the violent ones.

Yay.

moostraks
07-16-2009, 01:39 PM
Yes, your being so overly specific was what told me you would backtrack and split hairs if I responded in kind. The dermatological demonstration continues.



Yes, you're easily offended, we get it. Most also get that "blah blah" indicates humorous paraphrasing.

This is ridiculous. You are rambling. I clarified my point because you are misrepresenting my words and I dislike being misquoted. Nuff said. I find you abrasive and lacking in any substance regarding your stance. You have been overly emotional and misdirecting and incapable of offering significant facts to improve your stance or alter my opinion on Palin. Good luck persuading anyone with your logic displayed so far and sparkling personality.


Besides, you never contested that the paraphrasing was so accurate as to be functionally equivalent.

Don't need to,it is asinine. I disregarded it immediately excepting to note that you complain about dear sarah being misportrayed but stoop to an equally juvenile tactic of misquotation. Bravo...


Maybe it was a little misleading, but not disingenuous.
Or disingenuous, but not misleading. Oh wait, you just used the same idea in two different words to pump up your rhetoric and falsely multiply the charges you can levy against me.

:rolleyes: Define disingenuous-not straightforward or candid; giving a false appearance of frankness; "an ambitious, disingenuous, philistine, and hypocritical operator, ...
misleading-Deceptive or tending to mislead or create a false impression

I did this for specificity not superfluousness. So as not to need to clarify. Obviously this is lost on you.:D





You can't show me one post where I have ever jumped on anybody that didn't 'do unto others' first. I follow the Golden Rule, but don't usually turn the other cheek.

You were primed when I came in to flame me and came out both barrels blazing because I dared to question your discernment due to your very obvious biasness to Palin. Define discernment-discretion: the trait of judging wisely and objectively; "a man of discernment". THis was not attacking it was my opinion based upon what I feel to be some glaring character flaws in Palin.

I already explained to you what I meant by rabid and now you want to say I am backtracking. NO- I am being perfectly clear and specific. I have learned that unless I strive to be as specific as possible people misconstrue my intentions and I get really disgusted with having to reason with why I made a statement.As someone who should clearly be sympathetic to her, I wanted to like her as other folks here had seemed interested in her for RP. You don't want to discuss this matter you want to rage on the opposition and act disparaging. This is pointless.


Characterize me as rabid, praise yourself as better informed, and you probably will get slammed until you understand you are not addressing an inferior.:rolleyes: I already clarified I feel no self-importance. Your enthusiasm is clouding your vision,imo. You have also failed to directly address that which bothers those of us who mistrust Palin.


I give what I get. To nice people, I am very nice. Check my history for proof.
Give a donkey enough rope he hangs himself. I believe that adage holds true to your recent behavior. So far you have been incredibly charming.




The phrase, lampooned earlier as (intentionally) inscrutably pompous and nebulous, "sum total" doesn't tell me much.

I had to read between the lines, using what I've read from others that seem to have similar problems the the Palins' pregnant daughter, family priorities, etc, to catch your meaning.

What it should have told you was that there is a general sense of not a specific detail but numerous small factors which collaborated to give the specific voter a sense of distrust. It wasn't meant to be nebulous but brief. Your problem is in reading between the lines. You summarily dismiss everyone due to your rationalization of what you believe any one of us holds forth as the problem. Furthermore, you aren't offering any significant responses to what is causing these misgivings when we do elucidate them. Convince through reasoning why she should be given a consideration for a leadership role.


I'm not here to rebut stuff and defend Palin's family so much as take a survey to gauge the impact Palin and the Tea Partys will have on the rEVOLution.

You'll vote for who you want. I just want to know why.

Really? I must have misinterpreted your mission when you state she is "the spearhead of the RP revolution" and agree to address substantive concerns regarding her by stating for them to be named.


It's not my right to know, maybe not even my business.

But I'm curious and only want the info to help plan the next steps in our rEVOLution.

Thanks for your patience, advice, and honest opinions.

Count me out from anything associated with Palin and her ilk. If this is the new face of RP republicans I will take my enthusiasm and my vote elsewhere. Sorry I bothered with responding since it appears you were merely trolling for your own mission to appoint another same old same old candidate. You last line is contradicted by your previous behavior as you have no interest in our opinions to the contrary as you have made so abundantly clear.

One last note regarding responding in kind. First be clear that you are being attacked before flaming someone who disagrees with you. You went a long way to further my distaste for this candidate. Also persuading likeminded people is the easiest task you could have, but if a candidate has the necessary qualities to be worthy of supporting then a clearly presented case of the facts to even the most unpleasant opposition should be capable of at least quieting their response. Never is an opinion changed by stooping to personal attacks or putting words in another's mouth.

LibertyEagle
07-16-2009, 01:44 PM
Tron,


"We also slowed the rate of government growth"

Can you see the problem with this? Slowing the rate of government growth means that government was still increased. If one believes that government is way too large, then you need to do one hell of a lot more than to slow the rate of increase. You need to have NO increase and in fact a healthy net decrease of government.

tron paul
07-16-2009, 01:46 PM
The Legislature is in charge of making laws and setting prison terms.

The Executive branch only enforces those laws. (BS administrative 'courts' notwithstanding.)

Not much a Governor can do, short of pardoning non-violent offenders, like Dr Paul promised.

But that actually might be career ending. (Only Palin can destroy Palin, like God's too-hot burrito.)

acptulsa
07-16-2009, 01:49 PM
I give. I do believe it was easier to get a straight answer out of Nixon.

'She wasn't actually responsible for all those things she bragged about'. How very reassuring.

LibertyEagle
07-16-2009, 01:51 PM
The Legislature is in charge of making laws and setting prison terms.

She has a VETO pen; does she not?

tron paul
07-16-2009, 02:10 PM
She has a VETO pen; does she not?

Good point, I'll have to try finding something I disagree with she failed to veto to make sure I can support her. Trust but verify.

But I don't think I'll succeed where previous world class opposition research has failed.

If she was a big spender it would have been made an issue and the voters of Alaska wouldn't have elected her.

Speaking of Alaska voters, many of them support both RP and SP.

They wanted the expensive airplane the previous RINO Gov bought gone.

He was a jerk from a GOP poobah clan. Appointed his daughter over Palin.

The voters sorted that mess out. Both are listed in the Palin body count now.

Palin SOLD the plane. And fired the entourage.

True story bro!

tron paul
07-16-2009, 02:20 PM
I give. I do believe it was easier to get a straight answer out of Nixon.

'She wasn't actually responsible for all those things she bragged about'. How very reassuring.

Trickier than Tricky Dick? Oh stop with the flattery. *blushes*

Gov Palin giving full credit and gushing praise to her staff and State personnel is a very Ron Paul thing to do.

Ron would claim somebody else was responsible for HR1207 becoming popular enough to pass, if you accused him of a such a thing. He'd blame Bernanke for it, or the Campaign For Liberty, rEVOLution, etc.

He'd say "I just forwarded a couple emails. It's a mystery to me how it got going."

acptulsa
07-16-2009, 02:23 PM
Gov Palin giving full credit and gushing praise to her staff and State personnel is a very Ron Paul thing to do.

:rolleyes: You were saying the legislature was responsible for this and that, not her, yet she bragged on accomplishing some of the same things.

Oops. Didn't mean to spoil your spin, there... :cool:

tron paul
07-16-2009, 03:35 PM
...incapable of offering significant facts to improve your stance or alter my opinion on Palin.

My thesis is: If Fred's article, or the even her Wikipedia page are accurate, then SP is an RPR that we should support.

I'm trying to understand all the ramifications of this. Persuasion is not a goal.

I haven't finished persuading myself. RPF, being full of people like me, is a trove of political wisdom, so here I am.




Don't need to,it is asinine. I disregarded it immediately excepting to note that you complain about dear sarah being misportrayed but stoop to an equally juvenile tactic of misquotation. Bravo...

Misquotation implies I intended third parties would read my condensed version thinking it was your words. Lacking context, and including the blah blah signpost, no reasonable observer could even parse the meaning of my scathing paraphrase without referencing the previous messages, much less reach any conclusion regarding their meaning. More likely is that you were annoyed by an adroit parody of your huff.:D


:rolleyes: Define disingenuous-not straightforward or candid; giving a false appearance of frankness; "an ambitious, disingenuous, philistine, and hypocritical operator, ...
misleading-Deceptive or tending to mislead or create a false impression

I did this for specificity not superfluousness. So as not to need to clarify. Obviously this is lost on you.:D

Oh Mr Clinton, thank you so much. I'd never thought to contemplate the difference between a false appearance and a false impression.

Turns out an appearance is physical in connotation, while impressions are psychological. As in "Salience of Physical Appearance in Impression Formation." That's deep man.


You were primed when I came in to flame me and came out both barrels blazing because I dared to question your discernment due to your very obvious biasness to Palin. Define discernment-discretion: the trait of judging wisely and objectively; "a man of discernment". THis was not attacking it was my opinion based upon what I feel to be some glaring character flaws in Palin.

You got huffy, then got out huffed. Simple. But I'd never use both barrels on RPF, I love you guys. That was just a brotherly noogie because you were being cranky.:rolleyes:


I already explained to you what I meant by rabid and now you want to say I am backtracking. NO- I am being perfectly clear and specific. I have learned that unless I strive to be as specific as possible people misconstrue my intentions and I get really disgusted with having to reason with why I made a statement.As someone who should clearly be sympathetic to her, I wanted to like her as other folks here had seemed interested in her for RP. You don't want to discuss this matter you want to rage on the opposition and act disparaging. This is pointless.

Your meaning was clear in the original post where you characterized me as rabid,
despite your later, tardy protests to be allowed to renegotiate under color of clarification. I knew you would do it too; the bait was obvious in your poor trap. I sprung it just so you'd have to reset it. As you admit, your backtracking is as meaningless as the extended puffery I mercifully shortened to 'self-congratulation blah blah.'


:rolleyes: I already clarified I feel no self-importance. Your enthusiasm is clouding your vision,imo. You have also failed to directly address that which bothers those of us who mistrust Palin.
Give a donkey enough rope he hangs himself. I believe that adage holds true to your recent behavior. So far you have been incredibly charming.

Of course. You lack of self-importance has filled volumes on this thread alone.
No one is questioning that. I've tried to address every concern raised about Sarah, if I've missed some I'd be thankful to have the questions repeated.



What it should have told you was that there is a general sense of not a specific detail but numerous small factors which collaborated to give the specific voter a sense of distrust. It wasn't meant to be nebulous but brief. Your problem is in reading between the lines. You summarily dismiss everyone due to your rationalization of what you believe any one of us holds forth as the problem. Furthermore, you aren't offering any significant responses to what is causing these misgivings when we do elucidate them. Convince through reasoning why she should be given a consideration for a leadership role.

That's actually helpful and informative despite all the amateur pedantry. It confirms my Sarah Fnord! Palin theory. Palin haters feel an vague sense of unease, as if the MSM had somehow hypnotized them into feeling icky whenever they see Palin.

No matter how many specifics I get into, I'm accused of dismissiveness. I guess some can't see those posts because the Fnords make you unconsciously avert your eyes.



Really? I must have misinterpreted your mission when you state she is "the spearhead of the RP revolution" and agree to address substantive concerns regarding her by stating for them to be named.

If Palin is part of the RPR, then she is the spearhead. That's what I'm investigating.

Actually she's more like Jean Gray to Ron Paul's Prof. X. When McTurd choose Palin to run with him, Palin was obliterated and replaced with the Phoenix power.

We must control this power or it will destroy us. Xavier's psychic influence is tenuous at best. She still thinks he's cool, but has also met with a lot of Neocons from the Hellfire Club. Mastermind could have implanted some illusion...


Count me out from anything associated with Palin and her ilk. If this is the new face of RP republicans I will take my enthusiasm and my vote elsewhere. Sorry I bothered with responding since it appears you were merely trolling for your own mission to appoint another same old same old candidate. You last line is contradicted by your previous behavior as you have no interest in our opinions to the contrary as you have made so abundantly clear.

New face? Hardly, we've both 2007 vintage. Most of your mercurial enthusiasm seems to be of the negative kind, how's that helpful? Some negative charge from the internet could never persuade me to abandon the RPRs or even RPF.


One last note regarding responding in kind. First be clear that you are being attacked before flaming someone who disagrees with you. You went a long way to further my distaste for this candidate. Also persuading likeminded people is the easiest task you could have, but if a candidate has the necessary qualities to be worthy of supporting then a clearly presented case of the facts to even the most unpleasant opposition should be capable of at least quieting their response. Never is an opinion changed by stooping to personal attacks or putting words in another's mouth.

I'm under no illusion that you were a potential supporter. It's not about agreement, it's about respect. I'll be nice longer to someone that disagrees without rancor than to someone that agrees with me but gets huffy. Then I'm the King of Huff and Lord of Pedantia.

Usually that pops their bubble and we all have a chuckle.

tron paul
07-16-2009, 03:43 PM
:rolleyes: You were saying the legislature was responsible for this and that, not her, yet she bragged on accomplishing some of the same things.


How could I forget? A Governor is responsible for all the bad things that happen during their term, but may not take credit for positive developments.

Besides, that wasn't spin. This is spin:

Do you have stock in Israel Aircraft Industries or something? You sure seem bitter that Palin sold Murkowski's taxpayer funded luxury jet.:cool:

someperson
07-16-2009, 03:45 PM
What the neoconservative foreign policy advocate is this? This country doesn't need any more elected officials who "seem nice" or "looks like a great person to have a bbq with" or "a person I could share a drink with." I would think an individual who would come to a forum such as this in earnest would have long past moved beyond personality and onto policy. Quite frankly, her policy choices are abominable. Supporting unconstitutional war is unacceptable for any reason. Indirectly defining an illegal, unconstitutional, and fraudulent war as a holy war in order to evoke mindless support is reprehensible. If she was in the cabinet at the time, Ron Paul would have listed her along with the rest in that old speech defining the neoconservatives and their making-the-world-safe-for-de............ force-the-world-to-govern-themselves-as-we-pretend-to policy.

YouTube - Sarah Palin: War in Iraq is "God's Plan" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9H-btXPfhGs)

This is what we want the (collectivist) label "Ron Paul Republican" equated with? Really? As far as running with McCain, it is possible to refuse a nomination, and she should have. Ron Paul specifically stated during the campaign that he would be unable to serve as Vice President with any of the neoconservatives he was running against for both moral and logical reasons.

LibertyEagle
07-16-2009, 04:13 PM
Good point, I'll have to try finding something I disagree with she failed to veto to make sure I can support her. Trust but verify.

But I don't think I'll succeed where previous world class opposition research has failed.

If she was a big spender it would have been made an issue and the voters of Alaska wouldn't have elected her.

Speaking of Alaska voters, many of them support both RP and SP.

They wanted the expensive airplane the previous RINO Gov bought gone.

He was a jerk from a GOP poobah clan. Appointed his daughter over Palin.

The voters sorted that mess out. Both are listed in the Palin body count now.

Palin SOLD the plane. And fired the entourage.

True story bro!

SHE INCREASED THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT.

First, you tried to blame it on the legislature. Then, when I pointed out to you that she could have vetoed such legislation, you changed directions.

I'm not arguing with you that she did one or two things that were good, but the bottom line is that she is not the small-government conservative that she purports herself to be. That is abundantly clear.

pcosmar
07-16-2009, 04:21 PM
Can this be moved to the Palin Fan Forum?

What a waste of time. :(

tron paul
07-16-2009, 04:26 PM
Thanks for making me get to the bottom of this, the "God's War" Canard.

As expected, it is a pile of bull manure. Not even based on a kernel of truth, rather a tissue of lies.

The video, 19 seconds long, omits the context of the offending quote.

No matter, even what is on the clip proves that Gibson was not correct when he claimed to know Palin's own words better than her.

I've transcribed them my self. It took about one minute, so no excuse of laziness for the rats that push this meme is valid.

ACTUAL QUOTE:

...pray that our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure we're praying for, that there is a plan and that plan is God's plan.
So bless them with your prayers, your prayers of protection over our soldeirs. Speaking of Trakk...

MALICIOUS GIBSON DISTORTION:

Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God.

Palin even expanded on what she meant for the benefit of non-Christians. Not that the 'I hate Palin cause it's cool and fear social castigation crowd' would notice, or care:


the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln's words when he said -- first, he suggested never presume to know what God's will is, and I would never presume to know God's will or to speak God's words. But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that's a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God's side. That's what that comment was all about



Here's how another commenter that independently noticed the same lie puts it:


Palin's quote from the church was "and we have to keep praying that there is a plan, and it is God’s plan." Watch it on youtube. Gibson botched it (leaving out the prefatory "we have to keep praying that", and now people are suggesting her quote was that "there is a plan, and it is God's plan" (i.e., that Palin knows what God's plan is, ala Obama being "the One"). What Palin was telling the Church was just what she told Gibson: we don't know what God's plan is, but we have to pray the war is part of that plan and that we are on God's side. We have to pray that our war in Iraq is part of God's plan for the good.


What the neoconservative foreign policy advocate is this? This country doesn't need any more elected officials who "seem nice" or "looks like a great person to have a bbq with" or "a person I could share a drink with." I would think an individual who would come to a forum such as this in earnest would have long past moved beyond personality and onto policy. Quite frankly, her policy choices are abominable. Supporting unconstitutional war is unacceptable for any reason. Indirectly defining an illegal, unconstitutional, and fraudulent war as a holy war in order to evoke mindless support is reprehensible.


She never said it, much less supported unconditional war. Be reasonable. You know the MSM lies and smears and destroys. They did it to Ron Paul the same way. The Neocon Media LIES, right to your face. Maybe they hate Palin for being pro-life, a populist, or a paleocon. All these thing anger neocons greatly.

You mind is clouded with anger. The Palin quote is fake, doctored, a set-up to support the 'Palin is a Krazy Krusader JUST LIKE HITLERBUSHHITLERCHENEY!!!1OMGZ1!' canard.

Nirvikalpa
07-16-2009, 04:26 PM
'hope,' 'change.' where have I heard all of this before?

Oh, right...

someperson
07-16-2009, 04:41 PM
I didn't say unconditional war, I said illegal, unconstitutional, fraudulent war. I have no anger, as I don't expend energy thinking about such individuals; I simply study their policy positions and I'm done. If she wanted to disavow supporting unconstitutional war, she should have rejected the Vice Presidential nomination with McCain. One who takes a stand for one's principles is to be commended; one who lays them down for convenience is ...well, business as usual in politics.

As for her quote, the rationalization provided by the commenter, "we don't know what God's plan is, but we have to pray the war is part of that plan and that we are on God's side. We have to pray that our war in Iraq is part of God's plan for the good;" this is just as despicable an ideology. Yes, let's commit glorified mass murder, and invoke God to make it seem right. I would hope a religious person would never commit murder, or as politicians do with soldiers, hire hitmen to do it for you, and then pray to anything to make it seem just and right.

If that individual is religious, they might as well pray for forgiveness for the utter devastation they are supporting... how utterly conceited one must be to believe the destructive actions one takes must be the will of some god. I would hope her god would never condone such a fraudulent, unconscionable action as the war being conducted in Iraq; something tells me she knows that, too, so her statement quoting Lincoln, who was also a destroyer, is irrelevant. It can not be any more obvious why a political figure would invoke God in a speech like that. I shall not take the time to explain it. If Ms. Palin believes this, she obviously doesn't understand the concept of personal responsibility for one's actions; a principle that Dr. Paul espouses whenever he gets the chance. Sounds like she's an individual with a good moral compass... oh wait.

We all have our reasons for supporting, or not supporting, any given individual. The war policy is simply one of the reasons I cannot support Ms. Palin; there are other policy reasons. The god quote isn't even relevant to my position about her foreign policy; it just makes her support of unconstitutional war more absurd. I'm sure you have your reasons for supporting Ms. Palin in good faith and I respect your decision. Please reciprocate.

someperson
07-16-2009, 05:39 PM
Incidentally, I may as well list some of the other issues with her foreign policy, ignoring the rest of her problematic policy issues.

She believes we should not leave Iraq, as that's "defeat" (that mentality worked great for the soldiers of the Vietnam era). She believes we can leave when Iraq has a fully functional government, likely modeled after the one we pretend we have, with a national security force powerful and capable enough of stifling internal dissent to our imposed vision. Sounds great.

She believes in Obama's policy that more troops are required in Afghanistan. She thought a surge in Afghanistan would be a good thing; surge is, of course, code for send more individuals to die, be maimed, or become murderers with PTSD for life.

She believes Iran, cosigner of the NPT, which I believe hasn't initiated war with anyone in hundreds of years, should not be able to develop nuclear energy fearing the weapons, even though there are plenty of nuclear weapons that remain unaccounted for from the USSR, and Pakistan, a country we seem intent on further destabilizing, already has them.

Q: Do you think Georgia would be worth it to the US to go to war if Russia were to invade?
A: Smaller democratic countries that are invaded by a larger power is something for us to be vigilant against. We've got to be cognizant of what the consequences are if a larger power is able to take over smaller democratic countries. And we have got to be vigilant. We have got to show the support, in this case, for Georgia. The support that we can show is economic sanctions perhaps against Russia, if this is wha it leads to. It doesn't have to lead to war and it doesn't have to lead to a Cold War, but economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, counting on our allies to help us do that in this mission of keeping our eye on Russia and Putin and some of his desire to control and to control much more than smaller democratic countries. His mission, if it is to control energy supplies coming from and through Russia, that's a dangerous position for our world to be in, if we were to allow that to happen.

That sounds like a great position for a non-interventionist Ron Paul Republ----- neoconservative. We have to make the world safe for democracy like good old Woodrow Wilson. As Ron Paul suggested, a nation is less likely to war with those it trades with, more likely to war with those it sanctions. This nation needs to stay out of the internal affairs of other nations.

She believes we need to do as Obama has done, and invade Pakistan to stop "the terrorists," whoever they are, this time. Is it still the taliban? who knows? As long as the propaganda still works in convincing the populace that they're evil and "out to get us" from thousands of miles away, give or take an ocean, it doesn't matter, right?

I could go on, but there's too many.

What can be derived about her foreign policy from all this?
It advocates nation building.
It advocates sanctions.
It advocates meddling in the internal affairs of other nations.
It advocates maintaining allies over neutrality.
It advocates war to bring about peace and stability.

If it's not a perfect match, it's close enough for me. This is neoconservative foreign policy.
If one knowingly chooses to accept and support such an ideology, well...

Throw god and prayers into the mix in order to subdue those religious individuals of conscience into becoming mindless supporters, and wow... you just have to be in awe of the audacity of this hope.

moostraks
07-16-2009, 06:42 PM
That's actually helpful and informative despite all the amateur pedantry. It confirms my Sarah Fnord! Palin theory. Palin haters feel an vague sense of unease, as if the MSM had somehow hypnotized them into feeling icky whenever they see Palin.

No matter how many specifics I get into, I'm accused of dismissiveness. I guess some can't see those posts because the Fnords make you unconsciously avert your eyes.

If Palin is part of the RPR, then she is the spearhead. That's what I'm investigating.

The beginning of this post was more nonsense I am tired of wasting energy addressing. You seem to have a case of inflated ego and a deep desire to berate and twist my words. I have not backed down from anything I stated, merely clarified my words and I choose my words carefully most of the time because of hair splitting individuals like you who go on circuitous discussions trying to malign a persons character.

A spearhead implys support. She is not my leader and it seems that many feel similarly. She does not resemble the core ethics that drew many to rp, of having a sense of your beliefs and how to respect them while still catering to the sport of politics. Case in point Paul's play with earmarks for his constituents. That was well played, imo, and acceptable. Aligning oneself in a vp spot and stumping for someone you now supposedly have deep core differences is a poor choice.

Let me clarify, again, what you seem to not be capable of hearing- it was a number of issues I felt her being deceptive, arrogant, unthoughtful, or just plain poor in her decision making skills. You are okay with her poor choice with McCain, her stance on pre-emptive war, her choice to not respect her family's needs above her own self interests, to name but a few of my misgivings, and I am not. I have already illuminated several problems I have with her. The latest includes her failure to remain in office to the end of her commitment. THis is deeper than one issue hence the sum total. It does not mean vague sense of misgiving but that the conclusion one draws is that the person is being deceptive or not trustworthy, take your pick as both could apply.

This was not an msm smear resonating as my own personal choice, I don't like her and I am entitled to my own well thought decision. If for no other reason than her ability to dump and run when her infants were born. It shows a lack of character from a person who seems to be escaping from familial responsibilites. It appears that she uses her children as props and it is clear from the disfunctional nature of her household she has some serious problems that would be troublesome for any working parent much less baggage that should be dealt with by a POTUS or VP.

As for dismissiveness I stated not one but two issues regarding her lack of leadership capacity at home and her decision to carry forward with her own needs at the expense to those who should be her priority. This you waved off as being because her daughter got pregnant. That is dismissive without accounting for the fact that these are two very telling matters for someone who wants to run a country. You lack an effective counter response as of yet to these two issues. I also made a statement regarding her failure to follow through with her commitment (quitting midterm). For this I get a speech, but we both agree she panders when it is politically expedient and why should her motives not be questioned regarding this matter?


New face? Hardly, we've both 2007 vintage. Most of your mercurial enthusiasm seems to be of the negative kind, how's that helpful? Some negative charge from the internet could never persuade me to abandon the RPRs or even RPF.

Palin as the new face. Stop being so self absorbed. The rest of this is tripe because you misunderstood my response. Re-read if necessary.


I'm under no illusion that you were a potential supporter. It's not about agreement, it's about respect. I'll be nice longer to someone that disagrees without rancor than to someone that agrees with me but gets huffy. Then I'm the King of Huff and Lord of Pedantia.

Usually that pops their bubble and we all have a chuckle.

Would love to be amused but your manner is abrasive and obnoxious. I was under the impression you were trying to convince folks to concede to the need for Palin as the spearhead. Funny, you didn't want to parse that? Specifically when Acptulsa called you out on the matter and you requested the "substantive concerns" be named (this after agreeing to test your own positive opinion by addressing other's concerns) Silly me, you were just trolling, duly noted.

I agree with pcosmar, move this to the palin fan forum...what a waste of time!!! :(