Palin Poll: Struggles Among Women, African-Americans, Non-Elderly

[bobbyw24]

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin faces major electoral limitations if she chooses to mount a 2012 bid, despite a slight increase in the country's opinion of her, according to a new public opinion survey.

Public Policy Polling released a study on Thursday revealing that, one year after bursting onto the national scene, Palin still has not made inroads among a variety of key demographic groups. Most significantly, among women the Alaska Republican has only a 37 percent favorable rating compared to a 51 percent unfavorable.

"She has had a reverse gender gap in her numbers since about two weeks since John McCain picked her as her running mate," explained PPP pollster Tom Jensen. "I think that women voters pretty much decided quickly since she went on the national spotlight that they didn't like her much and that hasn't really changed."

It isn't just a gender gap that hampers Palin. Only five percent of African-American voters said they had a favorable rating of the former Alaska Governor. Meanwhile, only 37 percent of Hispanics offered a favorable view -- which would seem small if not for the fact that only 31 percent of Hispanics voted for McCain in 2008.

Indeed, much of Palin's political support comes from constituencies that have been trending Republican for many election cycles. Forty-eight percent of white voters have a favorable view of her as well as 50 percent of voters over the age of 65 (a majority of every other age group had an unfavorable opinion). Among geographical regions, Palin was most popular in the South (48 percent approval) and the Midwest (48 percent) -- as opposed to the Northeast (32 percent) and West (27 percent).

The former governor was viewed favorably by 41 percent of the country, up two percentage points from the last time the firm surveyed potential voters. But the jump, said Jensen, was due primarily to growing dissatisfaction with President Barack Obama and not to any growing popularity among the masses.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/10/palin-poll-struggles-amon_n_387501.html

[klamath]

Palin has peaked. This is about as good as it is going to get for her. I do have to say that it is a joke them bringing hispanic and African american women in as a sign of weakness with women. Actually she is showing greater strength with the hispanics compared with other republicans. Her white women support is where she has a problem.

[bobbyw24]

Yep--and I know Ron paul could poll strongly among all 3 of these demographic groups if his message reaches them.

[TheBlackPeterSchiff]

I wouldn't expect her to garner much support from the Black community. She almost knocked off the first black Pres.

[jmdrake]

I wouldn't expect her to garner much support from the Black community. She almost knocked off the first black Pres.

She almost knocked....oh nevermind. :p

Seriously. Sarah Palin was never a threat to Obama. She was only on the ticket to give conservatives a reason to go out and grudgingly vote for McCain. The sad fact is she's not even conservative. She appointing an abortionist to be an Alaska state judge for crying out loud! And she thought the "bailout" was about "tax cuts, jobs and healthcare". (Actually the healthcare part was partly correct. Once our country gave into socialism in banking, socialism in healthcare was the next logical step.) The only way to guarantee an Obama victory in 2012 would be for the GOP to chose her as a standard bearer. Sure she would rally some of the base (the uninformed part) but she would lose big on independents. Ron Paul would bring independents in by droves. And that's why we're being fed Palin as a false choice.

[parocks]

Palin has peaked. This is about as good as it is going to get for her. I do have to say that it is a joke them bringing hispanic and African american women in as a sign of weakness with women. Actually she is showing greater strength with the hispanics compared with other republicans. Her white women support is where she has a problem.


Palin has very high favorables with Republicans. Republicans are a very important voting bloc in Republican primaries.

Check this, released yesterday from PPP
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_National_1210.pdf

PPP polled Palin vs Obama, Huckabee vs Obama, Romney vs Obama, Pawlenty vs Obama.

Among Republicans -
Palin has 73% favorability
Huckabee - 57%
Romney - 51%
Pawlenty - 16%

Among Conservatives -
Palin has 73% favorability
Huckabee - 59%
Romney - 50%
Pawlenty - 19%

[parocks]

She almost knocked....oh nevermind. :p

Seriously. Sarah Palin was never a threat to Obama. She was only on the ticket to give conservatives a reason to go out and grudgingly vote for McCain. The sad fact is she's not even conservative. She appointing an abortionist to be an Alaska state judge for crying out loud! And she thought the "bailout" was about "tax cuts, jobs and healthcare". (Actually the healthcare part was partly correct. Once our country gave into socialism in banking, socialism in healthcare was the next logical step.) The only way to guarantee an Obama victory in 2012 would be for the GOP to chose her as a standard bearer. Sure she would rally some of the base (the uninformed part) but she would lose big on independents. Ron Paul would bring independents in by droves. And that's why we're being fed Palin as a false choice.

Palin is doing better than anyone with the Conservative, Republican "part" of the base.

[jmdrake]

Palin is doing better than anyone with the Conservative, Republican "part" of the base.

Will she continue to do well once these sheep realize she betrayed them on the abortion issue? Do you think she'd survive a primary without this coming out? If so then this is all a shell game and we shouldn't even participate.

Edit: I note that your "poll" doesn't even include Ron Paul. Don't fall for this tripe! Ron Paul is in the news far more than Pawlenty. The establishment is desperate to prevent a real statesman from taking on Obama.

[Eric Arthur Blair]

She appointing an abortionist to be an Alaska state judge for crying out loud!

er what? :eek:

[BlackTerrel]

Palin has very high favorables with Republicans. Republicans are a very important voting bloc in Republican primaries.

I've been making that point elsewhere. Palin scores very high among people that vote R anyway. But her appeal is zero outside of that. That gives her a good chance of winning the primaries, but zero chance of winning the election.

If her supporters were smart they would go for a lesser of two evils approach and nominate someone who has a chance of winning (IE Ron Paul) in order to prevent another four years of Obama.

[jmdrake]

er what? :eek:

http://www.thealaskastandard.com/?q=node/559

I really don't know why nobody's made an issue about this yet except for the fact that Palin's no longer in office. (Maybe this is why she chose to get out and cash in? Would the Palinbots be lining up to buy her book if they knew the truth?) But we can crush her with this in the primaries. Oh Ron Paul's too nice to go there. That's why he's got us. :D Turn this into a commercial, make a moneybomb to air it, run it non stop in Iowa a month before the caucus and she's sunk.

[klamath]

I've been making that point elsewhere. Palin scores very high among people that vote R anyway. But her appeal is zero outside of that. That gives her a good chance of winning the primaries, but zero chance of winning the election.

If her supporters were smart they would go for a lesser of two evils approach and nominate someone who has a chance of winning (IE Ron Paul) in order to prevent another four years of Obama.

I wouldn't push this as a strategy. Many conservatives were convinced to vote McCain because he could win in the general election. They won't be willing to fall for that sales pitch again.

[parocks]

Will she continue to do well once these sheep realize she betrayed them on the abortion issue? Do you think she'd survive a primary without this coming out? If so then this is all a shell game and we shouldn't even participate.

Edit: I note that your "poll" doesn't even include Ron Paul. Don't fall for this tripe! Ron Paul is in the news far more than Pawlenty. The establishment is desperate to prevent a real statesman from taking on Obama.


My poll is the PPP poll that came out yesterday. It's a poll that has been polling Ron Paul. I guess they put Pawlenty in there instead of Paul this time around. If I was to guess, I'd say that they'd swap someone else in there instead of Pawlenty next time around. Gingrich will be one, I'd guess. Paul will be back in again, Pawlenty again, etc. When people actually announce they're running, they'll ask about those people.

Palin will likely survive whatever story it is about abortion that you're talking about. Huckabee won't survive the pardons, he won't run. Romney has gay marriage in Mass. I guess we'll see in 2011 if this particular story is damaging to Palin.

[BlackTerrel]

I wouldn't push this as a strategy. Many conservatives were convinced to vote McCain because he could win in the general election. They won't be willing to fall for that sales pitch again.

Perhaps. McCain had far broader appeal than Huckabee. The way to win is not say "ok it didn't work last time so this time we're going to go with our man Huckabee". The way to win is to go with someone with even broader appeal (Ron Paul).

I don't think this is the only strategy. Paul should push really hard on the issues, and he will. By 2012 the economy is going to be even worse than it is now, the bailouts will be proven to have caused more harm than good and Paul's sensible economic strategy will be pretty popular. I also think 4 years of an Obama war will suddenly see many Republicans wary of the war and Paul will do well with his anti-war stance as well.

I do, however, think you couple this with the fact that Ron Paul can actually win. I'm not an expert but I think it's obvious to anyone with half a brain that Palin and Huckabee don't track with anyone outside the base. They have a strong group of followers that vote R anyway, but there is no way they are getting 51% (I know it is not decided by popular vote but the point stands for the electoral college as well).

I am very excited about 2012 and I consider myself a realist. I knew there was no chance in 2008 and didn't pretend there was. Things just weren't going to come together.

[jmdrake]

My poll is the PPP poll that came out yesterday. It's a poll that has been polling Ron Paul. I guess they put Pawlenty in there instead of Paul this time around. If I was to guess, I'd say that they'd swap someone else in there instead of Pawlenty next time around. Gingrich will be one, I'd guess. Paul will be back in again, Pawlenty again, etc. When people actually announce they're running, they'll ask about those people.

Palin will likely survive whatever story it is about abortion that you're talking about. Huckabee won't survive the pardons, he won't run. Romney has gay marriage in Mass. I guess we'll see in 2011 if this particular story is damaging to Palin.

If Palin survives appointing an abortionist as a judge then her supporters are too wedded to the "cult of Palin" to consider voting for Paul anyway and should be written off as a lost cause. And here's the story:

http://www.thealaskastandard.com/?q=node/559

Please read it.

[klamath]

Perhaps. McCain had far broader appeal than Huckabee. The way to win is not say "ok it didn't work last time so this time we're going to go with our man Huckabee". The way to win is to go with someone with even broader appeal (Ron Paul).

I don't think this is the only strategy. Paul should push really hard on the issues, and he will. By 2012 the economy is going to be even worse than it is now, the bailouts will be proven to have caused more harm than good and Paul's sensible economic strategy will be pretty popular. I also think 4 years of an Obama war will suddenly see many Republicans wary of the war and Paul will do well with his anti-war stance as well.

I do, however, think you couple this with the fact that Ron Paul can actually win. I'm not an expert but I think it's obvious to anyone with half a brain that Palin and Huckabee don't track with anyone outside the base. They have a strong group of followers that vote R anyway, but there is no way they are getting 51% (I know it is not decided by popular vote but the point stands for the electoral college as well).

I am very excited about 2012 and I consider myself a realist. I knew there was no chance in 2008 and didn't pretend there was. Things just weren't going to come together.
The main thing is the economy has to be on the rocks still for anyone to have a chance against Obama. If the economy is even halfway better than it is now Obama will most likely win a second term barring any other unforseen event.
I remember quit well the 82 elections where the republicans got creamed in congress and then January 83 the GDP grew 10.5%. Two years later Reagan won 49 out of 50 states. Almost every economist was predicting a continued down economy in 82. I never predict the economy. The economy is hugely based on human emotions and that is something almost impossible to predict.

[parocks]

I read it. Abortionist is probably not the right word. An abortionist is someone who personally performs abortions. Perhaps "former Planned Parenthood board member" is more accurate, because that's what the article says.
Planned Parenthood did not perform abortions when she was a board member.

http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/030809/sta_406743982.shtml
"Christen had served on the board of Planned Parenthood in the 1990s before the organization started performing abortions in Alaska in 2003."


There are socons that will be bothered by the appointment, some of those may stop supporting her because of that. I'm not sure exactly how many that would be. Not everyone who supports Palin is a socon.

Palin is primarily popular these days 1) because she's super famous because she was the VP nominee. 2) She does not pull punches. If she feels the need to criticize Obama, or something Obama is doing, she does it. She says what a lot of conservatives believe and she says it in an appealing way. She's the de facto voice of Conservative Republicans.

People like Al Gore feel the need to respond to her. People believe that many Republicans aren't criticizing Obama and his policies enough. Sarah Palin is filling that void. Others might possibly be criticizing Obama, but they're not as famous, their words are not read or heard by as many, they're simply not as relevant.

Picking a Planned Parenthood board member could make her seem less "extreme"
to "moderates" or "independents", but that remains to be seen. Most certainly, there would have to be at least one socon who would choose to vote for someone else based on this. The loss of a socon is a little more concrete than the potential gain of a "moderate" or "independent".

Truth is, she will likely lose some support from her existing supporters as her positions are made known. At the same time, she will likely pick up new supporters as the truth about Palin (as opposed to the media picture) is known.

Nobody knows today in 2009 who the Republican choices will be in 2012. Huckabee's pardon is far worse than what Palin did. Huckabee is considered out by many. Romney's gay marriage (and probably abortion) policies as governor place him to the left of Palin. And for all we know, none of those 3 will run. Dan Quayle could come back, Steve Forbes, who knows. It was 20 years between 1976 when Dole was the VP nominee and 1996 when Dole was the Pres nominee.

Republicans will have a certain number of choices in 2012. We don't know who those choices are. We don't know if Palin is "better" on abortion than other top tier choices. Socons will likely pick someone that they've heard of, and like, and primarily agree with.

But, if Ron Paul runs, and wants socon votes, and Palin runs, yes, Ron Paul would likely be able to get some socon votes from Palin based on that Planned Parenthood thing. How many, I don't know. If some socons don't understand the concept of "blowback" they might could leave Palin and not go to Paul. Some socons might think Ron Paul is too old. Some socons might still find Palin the best choice, depending on all the things the other candidates say and have done in the past.

It's not 2011, no one is running for President, it's 2009, job 1 on the minds of Conservative Republicans is Stop Obama, and Sarah Palin is seen to be on the job and doing a good job. That's why she's popular. It's likely that she'll be more popular in a year, after the Republicans pick up seats, and she plays an important role in helping that happen, than she is right now. 2011 will be a time when she takes shots from her Republican opponents, because she'll be the clear front-runner.



If Palin survives appointing an abortionist as a judge then her supporters are too wedded to the "cult of Palin" to consider voting for Paul anyway and should be written off as a lost cause. And here's the story:

http://www.thealaskastandard.com/?q=node/559

Please read it.

[BlackTerrel]

The main thing is the economy has to be on the rocks still for anyone to have a chance against Obama. If the economy is even halfway better than it is now Obama will most likely win a second term barring any other unforseen event.
I remember quit well the 82 elections where the republicans got creamed in congress and then January 83 the GDP grew 10.5%. Two years later Reagan won 49 out of 50 states. Almost every economist was predicting a continued down economy in 82. I never predict the economy. The economy is hugely based on human emotions and that is something almost impossible to predict.

As someone who has to live in this country I would be very happy if the economy improved. It's not like I'm rooting for it to get worse so that it helps Ron Paul.

But the chances of it getting better are slim to none. I have a pretty decent understanding of economics but you don't have to be a genius on the subject to realize that printing a ton of money, spending it frivolously and diluting our currency is going to make things much much worse.

Ron Paul and Peter Schiff have already been proven right with everything they've said about the economy and monetary policy. By the time 2012 comes around that will be even more obvious.

[klamath]

As someone who has to live in this country I would be very happy if the economy improved. It's not like I'm rooting for it to get worse so that it helps Ron Paul.

But the chances of it getting better are slim to none. I have a pretty decent understanding of economics but you don't have to be a genius on the subject to realize that printing a ton of money, spending it frivolously and diluting our currency is going to make things much much worse.

Ron Paul and Peter Schiff have already been proven right with everything they've said about the economy and monetary policy. By the time 2012 comes around that will be even more obvious.

I agree with you that I really don't want to set around and hope the economy totally tanks so RP can try and pick up the pieces.
I also agree that what is being done about the economy can only hurt in the long run. What I don't think is people can predict exactly when the final breaking point will be. The American people can be real resourceful when pushed into a corner, and can figure out how to survive. This is what could prolong the final collapse and give the economy a boost. There is still a lot of wealth in this country.

[Eric Arthur Blair]

http://www.thealaskastandard.com/?q=node/559

I really don't know why nobody's made an issue about this yet except for the fact that Palin's no longer in office. (Maybe this is why she chose to get out and cash in? Would the Palinbots be lining up to buy her book if they knew the truth?) But we can crush her with this in the primaries. Oh Ron Paul's too nice to go there. That's why he's got us. :D Turn this into a commercial, make a moneybomb to air it, run it non stop in Iowa a month before the caucus and she's sunk.

my God, I knew Palin was a lying POS but this is political dynamite. I can't believe I only heard about this today This story has been covered up big time. As some of the other posters said I don't know if this can be used against her, are her supporters genuinely pro-life? if they are than she is finished.

Any ad that exposes this needs to be from a pro-life perspective so it doesn't look like another lefty attack. That would be the end of her. Even for her pro-choice supporters there is no getting away from the monumental hypocrisy in this.

[parocks]

my God, I knew Palin was a lying POS but this is political dynamite. I can't believe I only heard about this today This story has been covered up big time. As some of the other posters said I don't know if this can be used against her, are her supporters genuinely pro-life? if they are than she is finished.

Any ad that exposes this needs to be from a pro-life perspective so it doesn't look like another lefty attack. That would be the end of her. Even for her pro-choice supporters there is no getting away from the monumental hypocrisy in this.

I'm pretty sure it wasn't covered up, it did make the newspaper up in Juneau this year - March 2009.
And she was Governor at the time, and this was after the VP nomination, so she was in the spotlight.

http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/030809/sta_406743982.shtml

On the other hand, one would think that we would know about it. And we haven't heard about it.

Why?

1) It really isn't a big deal. or
2) It doesn't fit the media's story about Palin (she's a right-wing extremist
who wants to ban abortion in all cases) or
3) The media, who wants Romney or Gingrich or some other RINO, is holding this back, waiting to make this a big story at such a time that it would hurt Palin the most and help the RINO the most.

We'll see.

[parocks]

I was doing a little research on this and it appears that it's closer to #1, with maybe a bit of #3.

Apparently, in Alaska, the Governor picks the Supreme Court from a list that is given to the Governor by the judicial council. The list, this time around, consisted of 2 names, and neither of the people on the list were any good.

So, it's not a big deal. It's possible that a version of #3 might be tried in 2011 or 2012, but it won't be effective. If a campaign used it, it would hurt the campaign.


I'm pretty sure it wasn't covered up, it did make the newspaper up in Juneau this year - March 2009.
And she was Governor at the time, and this was after the VP nomination, so she was in the spotlight.

http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/030809/sta_406743982.shtml

On the other hand, one would think that we would know about it. And we haven't heard about it.

Why?

1) It really isn't a big deal. or
2) It doesn't fit the media's story about Palin (she's a right-wing extremist
who wants to ban abortion in all cases) or
3) The media, who wants Romney or Gingrich or some other RINO, is holding this back, waiting to make this a big story at such a time that it would hurt Palin the most and help the RINO the most.

We'll see.

[BlackTerrel]

I agree with you that I really don't want to set around and hope the economy totally tanks so RP can try and pick up the pieces.
I also agree that what is being done about the economy can only hurt in the long run. What I don't think is people can predict exactly when the final breaking point will be. The American people can be real resourceful when pushed into a corner, and can figure out how to survive. This is what could prolong the final collapse and give the economy a boost. There is still a lot of wealth in this country.

You may be right. We shall see.

[BlackTerrel]

I was doing a little research on this and it appears that it's closer to #1, with maybe a bit of #3.

Apparently, in Alaska, the Governor picks the Supreme Court from a list that is given to the Governor by the judicial council. The list, this time around, consisted of 2 names, and neither of the people on the list were any good.

Interesting. Thanks for posting. Our opponents aren't brain dead imbeciles. Pro-life people are on the Internet, they have their advocates, they do their research, and they have Church email lists that hit a million people at once (I know I'm on one from a Church I attended ages ago).

If Palin really did something to piss them off they would know about it. No way it could be hushed up. I don't care enough about Palin to do the research, but I figured it would be something like you uncovered.

[jmdrake]

I read it. Abortionist is probably not the right word. An abortionist is someone who personally performs abortions. Perhaps "former Planned Parenthood board member" is more accurate, because that's what the article says.
Planned Parenthood did not perform abortions when she was a board member.


:rolleyes: Supporter of abortion then. Doesn't matter. She appointed someone who's job it was to keep the murder of unborn children "safe and legal".



There are socons that will be bothered by the appointment, some of those may stop supporting her because of that. I'm not sure exactly how many that would be. Not everyone who supports Palin is a socon.


Some are just opportunists. Some just like a pretty face. Nobody of substance.




Palin is primarily popular these days 1) because she's super famous because she was the VP nominee. 2) She does not pull punches. If she feels the need to criticize Obama, or something Obama is doing, she does it. She says what a lot of conservatives believe and she says it in an appealing way. She's the de facto voice of Conservative Republicans.


There is no "de facto voice" of conservative republicans. The media is building her up to be that. It's a shame that you've fallen for it.



People like Al Gore feel the need to respond to her. People believe that many Republicans aren't criticizing Obama and his policies enough. Sarah Palin is filling that void. Others might possibly be criticizing Obama, but they're not as famous, their words are not read or heard by as many, they're simply not as relevant.


It's not a void. Ron Paul. Jim Demment. Joe "You Lie" Wilson. Mark Stanford. (Admittedly he's now a victim of his own stupidity). Mike Huckabee. And that's not counting all of the radio pundits. (Rush Limbaugh. Alex Jones. Mike Savage. Phil Valentine. Glen Beck. Literally and endless list.)



Picking a Planned Parenthood board member could make her seem less "extreme"
to "moderates" or "independents", but that remains to be seen. Most certainly, there would have to be at least one socon who would choose to vote for someone else based on this. The loss of a socon is a little more concrete than the potential gain of a "moderate" or "independent".


So she's become more of a John McCain then she already once. I knew she was worthless once she supported the bailout. This abortion thing was just MOTS.



Truth is, she will likely lose some support from her existing supporters as her positions are made known. At the same time, she will likely pick up new supporters as the truth about Palin (as opposed to the media picture) is known.


The media picture of her is actually flattering. The media hasn't harped on her nominating an abortion supporter. The media hasn't pressed her on her support for the bailout since the Katie Couric interview. Many of her supporter don't even realize she supported the bailout. The media has given her a "folksy hockey mom" image. She's a media made maven. Look at how deferential Oprah Winfrey was to her for crying out loud! And the conservative media is bending over backwards to push the false "Palin is a victim" image while promoting their new false savior. I was listening to Phil Valentine read her book and he noted all sorts of literary errors while saying "The left just makes her sound stupid because they don't like her politics". The scary thing is he was being serious! :eek:



Nobody knows today in 2009 who the Republican choices will be in 2012. Huckabee's pardon is far worse than what Palin did. Huckabee is considered out by many.


More proof that the media is actually trying to help Palin. What Palin did is worse than what Huckabee did. At least if you believe abortion is murder (as many of her supporters believe). Huckabee made a mistake that cause 4 murders. Palin made a choice that could lead over time to thousands of murders.



Romney's gay marriage (and probably abortion) policies as governor place him to the left of Palin. And for all we know, none of those 3 will run. Dan Quayle could come back, Steve Forbes, who knows. It was 20 years between 1976 when Dole was the VP nominee and 1996 when Dole was the Pres nominee.

Republicans will have a certain number of choices in 2012. We don't know who those choices are. We don't know if Palin is "better" on abortion than other top tier choices. Socons will likely pick someone that they've heard of, and like, and primarily agree with.


The chief way presidents (and governors for that matter) affect the abortion debate is through judicial nominations. It won't matter if Palin's stated positions are better if her actions have already shown she can't be trusted to move the pro life agenda forward.



But, if Ron Paul runs, and wants socon votes, and Palin runs, yes, Ron Paul would likely be able to get some socon votes from Palin based on that Planned Parenthood thing. How many, I don't know. If some socons don't understand the concept of "blowback" they might could leave Palin and not go to Paul. Some socons might think Ron Paul is too old. Some socons might still find Palin the best choice, depending on all the things the other candidates say and have done in the past.

It's not 2011, no one is running for President, it's 2009, job 1 on the minds of Conservative Republicans is Stop Obama, and Sarah Palin is seen to be on the job and doing a good job. That's why she's popular. It's likely that she'll be more popular in a year, after the Republicans pick up seats, and she plays an important role in helping that happen, than she is right now. 2011 will be a time when she takes shots from her Republican opponents, because she'll be the clear front-runner.

She's popular because she's pretty, airy, and a blank slate that the unlearned masses can project their own hopes one. She's a white female republican version of Obama without the Harvard degree. And if she's the 2012 GOP nominee then that party deserves to go into extinction.

Regards,

John M. Drake

[jmdrake]

I was doing a little research on this and it appears that it's closer to #1, with maybe a bit of #3.

Apparently, in Alaska, the Governor picks the Supreme Court from a list that is given to the Governor by the judicial council. The list, this time around, consisted of 2 names, and neither of the people on the list were any good.

So, it's not a big deal. It's possible that a version of #3 might be tried in 2011 or 2012, but it won't be effective. If a campaign used it, it would hurt the campaign.

So? She had the right to send the list back and demand another one. All of that was mentioned in the initial link I gave you so you didn't find anything new from your "research". Governors send back lists of potential judges all the time. Here in Tennessee the governor sent the list back (http://nashvillecitypaper.com/content/city-news/bredesen-ticked-again-nominating-panel-over-no-black-judges) because there weren't any blacks on it. Palin could have sent the list back because there were no pro life options on it. Palin simply cannot be trusted.

Regards,

John M. Drake

[parocks]

It's not a story. But it's nice to hear that you're so firmly anti-abortion today even though you voted for Gore and Kerry.

Welcome to the Republican Party! Feel free to try to hurt those who are trying to stop Socialism! </s>

To correct a couple of things - There's a difference between "abortionist" and board member of planned parenthood before planned parenthood even performed abortions. You can say it "doesn't matter" - but you're trying to persuade people who don't necessarily agree with you. You're basically saying "Oh, sure, my facts are all wrong, but believe me anyway."

http://www.adn.com/news/government/story/711378.html
Christen's application included her membership in several charitable groups, including some from her past, but did not mention that she was on the board of Planned Parenthood in the mid-1990s. The organization, which didn't provide abortions in Alaska until 2003, is now on the opposite side of a Palin-supported bill to require girls under 17 to get parental consent for an abortion.

This type of thing has happened before. Former Alaska Governor Murkowski asked for more names of judges, and was forced to choose from the original list. Palin really did have to pick from those 2.

"Former Gov. Frank Murkowski once rejected all three nominees sent to him, then, when the council wouldn't send him more names, appointed from the list."

Palin is currently the most popular politician with Republicans and Conservatives.
You can say that nobody of substance likes her. But, you don't like Republicans and Conservatives - you voted for Clinton twice, Gore and Kerry.

Palin is the "de facto voice" of Conservatives. She's listened to more than any others. The people you mention either aren't politicians or aren't well known enough.

De facto: Exercising power or serving a function without being legally or officially established.






:rolleyes: Supporter of abortion then. Doesn't matter. She appointed someone who's job it was to keep the murder of unborn children "safe and legal".



Some are just opportunists. Some just like a pretty face. Nobody of substance.




There is no "de facto voice" of conservative republicans. The media is building her up to be that. It's a shame that you've fallen for it.



It's not a void. Ron Paul. Jim Demment. Joe "You Lie" Wilson. Mark Stanford. (Admittedly he's now a victim of his own stupidity). Mike Huckabee. And that's not counting all of the radio pundits. (Rush Limbaugh. Alex Jones. Mike Savage. Phil Valentine. Glen Beck. Literally and endless list.)



So she's become more of a John McCain then she already once. I knew she was worthless once she supported the bailout. This abortion thing was just MOTS.



The media picture of her is actually flattering. The media hasn't harped on her nominating an abortion supporter. The media hasn't pressed her on her support for the bailout since the Katie Couric interview. Many of her supporter don't even realize she supported the bailout. The media has given her a "folksy hockey mom" image. She's a media made maven. Look at how deferential Oprah Winfrey was to her for crying out loud! And the conservative media is bending over backwards to push the false "Palin is a victim" image while promoting their new false savior. I was listening to Phil Valentine read her book and he noted all sorts of literary errors while saying "The left just makes her sound stupid because they don't like her politics". The scary thing is he was being serious! :eek:



More proof that the media is actually trying to help Palin. What Palin did is worse than what Huckabee did. At least if you believe abortion is murder (as many of her supporters believe). Huckabee made a mistake that cause 4 murders. Palin made a choice that could lead over time to thousands of murders.



The chief way presidents (and governors for that matter) affect the abortion debate is through judicial nominations. It won't matter if Palin's stated positions are better if her actions have already shown she can't be trusted to move the pro life agenda forward.



She's popular because she's pretty, airy, and a blank slate that the unlearned masses can project their own hopes one. She's a white female republican version of Obama without the Harvard degree. And if she's the 2012 GOP nominee then that party deserves to go into extinction.

Regards,

John M. Drake

[parocks]

It doesn't work the way you think it does in Alaska.

http://www.adn.com/news/government/story/711378.html

Former Gov. Frank Murkowski once rejected all three nominees sent to him, then, when the council wouldn't send him more names, appointed from the list.

That's from the Anchorage Daily News, standard MSM.

You still have too much Democrat left in you. Tennessee and Alaska are entirely
different states, with entirely different laws.



So? She had the right to send the list back and demand another one. All of that was mentioned in the initial link I gave you so you didn't find anything new from your "research". Governors send back lists of potential judges all the time. Here in Tennessee the governor sent the list back (http://nashvillecitypaper.com/content/city-news/bredesen-ticked-again-nominating-panel-over-no-black-judges) because there weren't any blacks on it. Palin could have sent the list back because there were no pro life options on it. Palin simply cannot be trusted.

Regards,

John M. Drake

[BlackTerrel]

So? She had the right to send the list back and demand another one. All of that was mentioned in the initial link I gave you so you didn't find anything new from your "research". Governors send back lists of potential judges all the time. Here in Tennessee the governor sent the list back (http://nashvillecitypaper.com/content/city-news/bredesen-ticked-again-nominating-panel-over-no-black-judges) because there weren't any blacks on it. Palin could have sent the list back because there were no pro life options on it. Palin simply cannot be trusted.

Regards,

John M. Drake

Why do you think her supporters aren't annoyed by this? They have the internet, they have email, they have message boards, they have Facebook. If this really was an issue that would upset them how could they possibly not no?

I have no interest in defending Palin, I agree with her on practically nothing. But I do think it's naive to believe that we have this smoking gun that could end her career. Go post your info on a pro-Palin board - see what happens. I doubt it will make a difference but good for you if it does.

[jmdrake]

It's not a story.

:rolleyes: Says you.



But it's nice to hear that you're so firmly anti-abortion today even though you voted for Gore and Kerry.


I was pro choice when I voted for Gore. In flux when I voted for Kerry. I'm more antiwar than anything. One thing I can't stand is hypocrisy and Palin is full of it. Not just on abortion but also on the bailout.



Welcome to the Republican Party! Feel free to try to hurt those who are trying to stop Socialism! </s>


The freedom movement isn't just about stopping socialism. It's about ending the assault on our civil liberties and being against stupid foreign policy no matter where it comes from. Is Palin for repealing the Patriot Act? Because I'm out to hurt those who support the Patriot Act, advocate for bailouts, advocate for American empire or try to expand the role of government in all of its forms. Republican big government is no better than democrat big government.




To correct a couple of things - There's a difference between "abortionist" and board member of planned parenthood before planned parenthood even performed abortions. You can say it "doesn't matter" - but you're trying to persuade people who don't necessarily agree with you.


Oh get over yourself already! I changed the charge to ABORTION SUPPORTER and a member of the board of planned parenthood is AN ABORTION SUPPORTER! Are you on the Palin payroll or something? No honest thinking person who was against abortion would look any differently at a judge who had performed abortions from one who worked for an organization that has been the chief lobbying group for abortion! It's like you're trying to make a difference between Hitler's propagandist and a guard that actually turned on the gas.



You're basically saying "Oh, sure, my facts are all wrong, but believe me anyway."


No. I'm saying that a lobbiest for abortion would not make a more "pro life" judge than someone who performed abortion.



http://www.adn.com/news/government/story/711378.html
Christen's application included her membership in several charitable groups, including some from her past, but did not mention that she was on the board of Planned Parenthood in the mid-1990s. The organization, which didn't provide abortions in Alaska until 2003, is now on the opposite side of a Palin-supported bill to require girls under 17 to get parental consent for an abortion.


From the same article:

Gov. Sarah Palin on Wednesday picked an Anchorage judge to fill the latest vacancy on the Alaska Supreme Court despite efforts by a conservative Christian group to convince her to do otherwise.

Even if Palin missed the info others who didn't urged her not to make the pick and she did it anyway.



Palin is currently the most popular politician with Republicans and Conservatives.
You can say that nobody of substance likes her. But, you don't like Republicans and Conservatives - you voted for Clinton twice, Gore and Kerry.


Everybody makes mistakes. I'm willing to admit mine. You aren't willing to admit yours. And neither is Palin.



Palin is the "de facto voice" of Conservatives. She's listened to more than any others. The people you mention either aren't politicians or aren't well known enough.


:rolleyes: Right. Governor Mike Huckabee isn't a politician. If you're going to go with "Well he's not a governor anymore" for that matter neither is Palin.

Really, what are you doing here? It's clear that you don't care about Ron Paul or the freedom movement. It's clear that someone can butcher the constitution and destroy this country and you're ok as long as that person is considered to be a "conservative" or a "republican". Did you vote for Bush both times? Did you vote for his no good father? Yes I voted for Clinton, but I wouldn't vote for someone like him again. But you're ready to swear allegiance to Palin because...well just because. I bet you waited in line to get her book signed too. Whatever dude. We can always use another troll. Welcome to RPF.

Regards,

John M. Drake

[jmdrake]

Why do you think her supporters aren't annoyed by this? They have the internet, they have email, they have message boards, they have Facebook. If this really was an issue that would upset them how could they possibly not no?


Did you see the video clip where two Palin supporters waiting in line for a book signing didn't know she had supported the bailout? Many of her supporters really are clueless.



I have no interest in defending Palin, I agree with her on practically nothing. But I do think it's naive to believe that we have this smoking gun that could end her career. Go post your info on a pro-Palin board - see what happens. I doubt it will make a difference but good for you if it does.

I'm sure on a pro-Huckabee board you'll see most people defending his granting clemency to the man who would become a cop killer too. There are always the hard core supporters and those are the ones most willing to post on message boards. But the casual "I like her cause I saw her on TV" supporter doesn't know about this. And, like I said earlier, those that are so wed to Palin that this won't affect them are a lost cause anyway. Why worry about them? The only way someone like that would quit supporting Palin is if she showed up in Tiger Woods' harem.

[parocks]

Well, you've been here on this board longer than I have, but we both signed up in 2007. You can look at my posts and see what I was doing in 2007-2008.

What many don't understand is that Ron Paul is a Republican.
If he runs again for President, it will be as a Republican.

And it seems that some here hate most Republicans not named Ron Paul.
How's this sound? "Ron Paul - A Republican for Republicans who hate Republicans"

It sound like a slogan which won't get many votes at all.

I would argue that Republican Big Government is slightly better than Democrat Big Government. Democrat Big Government seems to be as much was as Republican, no more Civil Liberties than Republican Big Government, and 10x as much Socialism
as Republican.

However, there are a lot of Republicans who are tired of Republican Big Goverment, tired of RINOs, and are trying to rid the Republican party of RINOs and replace them with Conservatives. We're some of those Republicans, we're pushing the candidates (mostly Republican) that we like.

About the specific abortion / Christen thing, as long as you don't misrepresent the truth of the matter, I have no quarrel. But when you do misrepresent, I'd quarrel.

You mention Huckabee specifically. Yes, he's in the same ballpark as Palin. Well-known, not merely talkers.

About standing in line, you would lose the bet.

My core argument re: Palin is simple, Job #1 is Stop Obama's Socialism. Palin is the most effective messenger we have to do that. Don't make it difficult for her to do the job that she's doing.

She's not running for President, and it's unlikely that she will announce if she is or not prior to the November elections next year. So, wait until she's a candidate before attacking her, because right now, she's helping the cause.




:rolleyes: Says you.



I was pro choice when I voted for Gore. In flux when I voted for Kerry. I'm more antiwar than anything. One thing I can't stand is hypocrisy and Palin is full of it. Not just on abortion but also on the bailout.



The freedom movement isn't just about stopping socialism. It's about ending the assault on our civil liberties and being against stupid foreign policy no matter where it comes from. Is Palin for repealing the Patriot Act? Because I'm out to hurt those who support the Patriot Act, advocate for bailouts, advocate for American empire or try to expand the role of government in all of its forms. Republican big government is no better than democrat big government.




Oh get over yourself already! I changed the charge to ABORTION SUPPORTER and a member of the board of planned parenthood is AN ABORTION SUPPORTER! Are you on the Palin payroll or something? No honest thinking person who was against abortion would look any differently at a judge who had performed abortions from one who worked for an organization that has been the chief lobbying group for abortion! It's like you're trying to make a difference between Hitler's propagandist and a guard that actually turned on the gas.



No. I'm saying that a lobbiest for abortion would not make a more "pro life" judge than someone who performed abortion.



From the same article:

Gov. Sarah Palin on Wednesday picked an Anchorage judge to fill the latest vacancy on the Alaska Supreme Court despite efforts by a conservative Christian group to convince her to do otherwise.

Even if Palin missed the info others who didn't urged her not to make the pick and she did it anyway.



Everybody makes mistakes. I'm willing to admit mine. You aren't willing to admit yours. And neither is Palin.



:rolleyes: Right. Governor Mike Huckabee isn't a politician. If you're going to go with "Well he's not a governor anymore" for that matter neither is Palin.

Really, what are you doing here? It's clear that you don't care about Ron Paul or the freedom movement. It's clear that someone can butcher the constitution and destroy this country and you're ok as long as that person is considered to be a "conservative" or a "republican". Did you vote for Bush both times? Did you vote for his no good father? Yes I voted for Clinton, but I wouldn't vote for someone like him again. But you're ready to swear allegiance to Palin because...well just because. I bet you waited in line to get her book signed too. Whatever dude. We can always use another troll. Welcome to RPF.

Regards,

John M. Drake

[jmdrake]

Well, you've been here on this board longer than I have, but we both signed up in 2007. You can look at my posts and see what I was doing in 2007-2008.

What many don't understand is that Ron Paul is a Republican.
If he runs again for President, it will be as a Republican.

And it seems that some here hate most Republicans not named Ron Paul.
How's this sound? "Ron Paul - A Republican for Republicans who hate Republicans"

It sound like a slogan which won't get many votes at all.


http://galatiansc4v16.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/strawman2.jpeg

Expecting Republicans to actually be consistent with what they claim to believe is "hating republicans"? You "hate republicans" if you think a governor should reject a list of judicial candidates if the "best one" on the list worked for one of the most vehement pro abortion groups in the country? You "hate republicans" if you think that someone who claimed the 2008 bailout was about "jobs and tax cuts" is either so dishonest or incompetent as to not be fit for the presidency? You "hate republicans" if you hate the patriot act, the department of Homeland inSecurity and the RealID act? You hate republicans if you hate the North American Union or the idea of an Amero or any of the other treasonous acts Bush took? Wow!




I would argue that Republican Big Government is slightly better than Democrat Big Government. Democrat Big Government seems to be as much was as Republican, no more Civil Liberties than Republican Big Government, and 10x as much Socialism
as Republican.


As much as I (now) dislike Clinton, Clinton cut welfare. Bush expanded welfare ENORMOUSLY with his prescription drug benefit. Clinton cut the deficit. Bush expanded it beyond comprehension. Bush set up the housing crises with his socialist expansion of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And yes he had support from democrats in congress in doing all of this. They are one big happy RepubliCrat party.



However, there are a lot of Republicans who are tired of Republican Big Goverment, tired of RINOs, and are trying to rid the Republican party of RINOs and replace them with Conservatives. We're some of those Republicans, we're pushing the candidates (mostly Republican) that we like.


Great! Find candidates that didn't support the bailout and aren't hypocrites on the positions that they take and I'll support them too. I was cautiously optimistic about Doug Hoffman even though he was pretty much a blank slate. I defended him against those who said he was "just like Bush". But Palin supported the bailout. Maybe that's not important to you, but it is HUGE to me. No bailout supporters are worth the time of day. It doesn't matter how pretty or "folksy" or charming they are.



About the specific abortion / Christen thing, as long as you don't misrepresent the truth of the matter, I have no quarrel. But when you do misrepresent, I'd quarrel.


I demurred to your definition of "abortionist" a couple of posts back so it's silly to continue to harp on that. Palin put an abortion supporter on the bench. And she had a choice. She could have rejected the entire list just like Bredesen rejected a list that didn't include any black candidates.



You mention Huckabee specifically. Yes, he's in the same ballpark as Palin. Well-known, not merely talkers.

About standing in line, you would lose the bet.

My core argument re: Palin is simple, Job #1 is Stop Obama's Socialism. Palin is the most effective messenger we have to do that. Don't make it difficult for her to do the job that she's doing.


That's YOUR opinion. I strongly disagree. I believe Ron Paul is the most effective messenger we have to do that. And I'm not just saying that because this is a Ron Paul forum. Palin is good at selling books and drawing crowds of fawning worshipers. That's about it. If I was going to give anybody other than Paul I would (grudgingly) give it to Glen Beck. No he's not a politician but neither is Palin at this point. Beck put together the 9/12 movement which co-opted the tea party movement. Palin is just along for the ride. And she makes the job difficult for those of us reaching out to swing voters because they see right through her phoniness. Again if somebody asks "Why weren't you against the bailout when Bush was president" I can proudly say that I was and so was Ron Paul! Palin is damaged goods on this (and other) fronts.



She's not running for President, and it's unlikely that she will announce if she is or not prior to the November elections next year. So, wait until she's a candidate before attacking her, because right now, she's helping the cause.

She's hurting it too. Still I have to ask, why don't you wait until next year before pumping her up? I don't come out of the blue to attack Sarah Palin. I really think she's irrelevant. She could continue selling her books on her corner of the web and I'd be just peachy. But the continued attempts to portray Palin as the "face" of the "freedom movement" does us damage whether you realize it or not.

Regards,

John M. Drake

[Liberty Star]

Republican party at large has same demographic trend, this is not specific to Palin. During election there were also rumors pushed by some quraters that Palin had allegedly called Obama a "Sambo" off the record at a campaign lunch and a waitress overheard. It's no wonder that Palin's approval rating among Black people is not in double digits.

[jmdrake]

Republican party at large has same demographic trend, this is not specific to Palin. During election there were also rumors pushed by some quraters that Palin had allegedly called Obama a "Sambo" off the record at a campaign lunch and a waitress overheard. It's no wonder that Palin's approval rating among Black people is not in double digits.

Well I never heard the "sambo" comment. The Ron Paul "racist newsletter" story is far more well known. But Ron Paul has the highest approval rating for blacks among republicans. I've met a lot of black people that at least respect McCain. Few (non in person) that respect Palin. She's dismissed as an airhead. Nobody thinks she's racist. And yes, I know the media has been somewhat "unfair". But her saying that the bailout was about tax cuts? :eek: How can anybody defend that?

[Liberty Star]

Well I never heard the "sambo" comment. The Ron Paul "racist newsletter" story is far more well known. But Ron Paul has the highest approval rating for blacks among republicans. I've met a lot of black people that at least respect McCain. Few (non in person) that respect Palin. She's dismissed as an airhead. Nobody thinks she's racist. And yes, I know the media has been somewhat "unfair". But her saying that the bailout was about tax cuts? :eek: How can anybody defend that?

She had also said bailouts have to be all about job creation too LOL

It would be interesting if someone in media asked her if she believes there are some chosen races with more rights than other races and how would she answer it.

I don't remember where I had heard that during election season smears, there are some traces of the alleged rumor on the internet still:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=palin+sambo+video&btnG=Search

[parocks]

1) You don't actually say you don't hate most Republicans.

2) I didn't realize that the Amero and the North American Union were implemented.

3) Bush isn't the President any more. Obama is. Let's focus on Obama.

4) I get it that you don't like Bush.

5) If you have to compare Bush with someone, compare him with Obama. Obama is the current President, by the way.

6) http://www.city-journal.org/html/10_1_the_trillion_dollar.html
"The Clinton administration has turned the Community Reinvestment Act, a once-obscure and lightly enforced banking regulation law, into one of the most powerful mandates shaping American cities—and, as Senate Banking Committee chairman Phil Gramm memorably put it, a vast extortion scheme against the nation's banks. Under its provisions, U.S. banks have committed nearly $1 trillion for inner-city and low-income mortgages and real estate development projects, most of it funneled through a nationwide network of left-wing community groups, intent, in some cases, on teaching their low-income clients that the financial system is their enemy and, implicitly, that government, rather than their own striving, is the key to their well-being."

That Community Reinvestment Act was a big part of the whole "giving loans to people with no money" thing that was a large part of the housing / banking crisis.

7) You don't get that Alaska and Tennessee are different. Ex Alaska Gov. Murkowski asked for more names, he didn't get any, so he had to pick from the original list.

8) Paul's right on the issues, but more people listen to Palin. Beck does a good job with exposing Acorn and things like that, but what about the VAT? Only Beck wants VAT. And Beck doesn't have the official stature.

9) This one is an honest one - when exactly did Palin say she supported the bailout? I don't know the answer here. I suspect that she might have been McCain's running mate at that point. I'm not sure though. If this was before the election in 2008, she really didn't have a choice. She really couldn't say "oh, the Bailout sucks, McCain sucks." That's just my opinion. She probably could've resigned from her VP slot based on the Bailout. Personally, if I was going to determine what Palins true beliefs are, I would throw out everything from mid August 2008 to mid November 2008. Most people (definitely not all) know that
a VP nominees job is to sell the Presidential candidate, not themselves. When the VP nominee is talking, you really have to assume that they're talking about the Presidents ideas.

10) Oh, I don't think Palin is the face / voice of the freedom movement. That's Ron Paul. But the Opposition to Obama is different from the freedom / liberty movement. Palin is the leader of the Opposition to Obama, and the freedom / liberty movement should be united in opposing Obama.



http://galatiansc4v16.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/strawman2.jpeg

Expecting Republicans to actually be consistent with what they claim to believe is "hating republicans"? You "hate republicans" if you think a governor should reject a list of judicial candidates if the "best one" on the list worked for one of the most vehement pro abortion groups in the country? You "hate republicans" if you think that someone who claimed the 2008 bailout was about "jobs and tax cuts" is either so dishonest or incompetent as to not be fit for the presidency? You "hate republicans" if you hate the patriot act, the department of Homeland inSecurity and the RealID act? You hate republicans if you hate the North American Union or the idea of an Amero or any of the other treasonous acts Bush took? Wow!




As much as I (now) dislike Clinton, Clinton cut welfare. Bush expanded welfare ENORMOUSLY with his prescription drug benefit. Clinton cut the deficit. Bush expanded it beyond comprehension. Bush set up the housing crises with his socialist expansion of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And yes he had support from democrats in congress in doing all of this. They are one big happy RepubliCrat party.



Great! Find candidates that didn't support the bailout and aren't hypocrites on the positions that they take and I'll support them too. I was cautiously optimistic about Doug Hoffman even though he was pretty much a blank slate. I defended him against those who said he was "just like Bush". But Palin supported the bailout. Maybe that's not important to you, but it is HUGE to me. No bailout supporters are worth the time of day. It doesn't matter how pretty or "folksy" or charming they are.



I demurred to your definition of "abortionist" a couple of posts back so it's silly to continue to harp on that. Palin put an abortion supporter on the bench. And she had a choice. She could have rejected the entire list just like Bredesen rejected a list that didn't include any black candidates.



That's YOUR opinion. I strongly disagree. I believe Ron Paul is the most effective messenger we have to do that. And I'm not just saying that because this is a Ron Paul forum. Palin is good at selling books and drawing crowds of fawning worshipers. That's about it. If I was going to give anybody other than Paul I would (grudgingly) give it to Glen Beck. No he's not a politician but neither is Palin at this point. Beck put together the 9/12 movement which co-opted the tea party movement. Palin is just along for the ride. And she makes the job difficult for those of us reaching out to swing voters because they see right through her phoniness. Again if somebody asks "Why weren't you against the bailout when Bush was president" I can proudly say that I was and so was Ron Paul! Palin is damaged goods on this (and other) fronts.



She's hurting it too. Still I have to ask, why don't you wait until next year before pumping her up? I don't come out of the blue to attack Sarah Palin. I really think she's irrelevant. She could continue selling her books on her corner of the web and I'd be just peachy. But the continued attempts to portray Palin as the "face" of the "freedom movement" does us damage whether you realize it or not.

Regards,

John M. Drake

[Eric Arthur Blair]

I'm with jmdrake on this one. Palin is a hypocrite and the media is covering for her.

[jmdrake]

1) You don't actually say you don't hate most Republicans.


You don't actually say you don't hate most democrats either. You don't actually say you don't beat your wife. Does everybody have to disclaim everything? :rolleyes:



2) I didn't realize that the Amero and the North American Union were implemented.


Did you watch the video? Bush tried to implement it and he was blocked in part by Hugo Chavez. I never said it had actually been implemented. Obamacare hasn't been implement yet either. Neither has cap and trade.



3) Bush isn't the President any more. Obama is. Let's focus on Obama.


Gee I didn't know that. :rolleyes: You were saying democrats were worse than republicans. I was merely pointing out how both have been pushing the same overall agenda. It's the agenda that I seek to stop. If we simply rearrange chairs on the deck of the Titanic it still sinks.



4) I get it that you don't like Bush.


I don't like Bush or Obama or McCain or Palin. Read my sig.



5) If you have to compare Bush with someone, compare him with Obama. Obama is the current President, by the way.


:rolleyes: Yep. Obama is the current puppet. By why only compare Obama to Bush? Why not compare him to Clinton? Or to Woodrow Wilson? Or to Johnson or FDR? Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. Maybe you don't want to go back more than 1 president, but I think it's important to have a broader view of history. Sorry if that bothers you.



6) http://www.city-journal.org/html/10_1_the_trillion_dollar.html
"The Clinton administration has turned the Community Reinvestment Act


What gives? In one "point" you chastise me for comparing Obama to anybody but Bush because Obama is the "current president". Then you bring up information about Clinton. :confused: Anyway I think I've already made it clear that Clinton helped move the same new world order ball forward that his surrogate father George H.W. Bush got rolling. So you dislike Clinton. We have something in common.



7) You don't get that Alaska and Tennessee are different. Ex Alaska Gov. Murkowski asked for more names, he didn't get any, so he had to pick from the original list.


Ummmm....you didn't read the article I posted or you didn't read it well. Murkowski could have kept fighting the issue and decided not to. Palin could have held her ground and refused to pick from the list. There's nothing different about Tennessee and Alaska in this regard. In the case of Tennessee the people sending up the list budged before Bredesen did. In the case of Alaska Murkowski budged first. In the case of Palin she didn't even try.



8) Paul's right on the issues, but more people listen to Palin. Beck does a good job with exposing Acorn and things like that, but what about the VAT? Only Beck wants VAT. And Beck doesn't have the official stature.


There is a lot that I don't like about Beck. I bring him up in this context because you claim Palin is the "biggest opposition to Obama". That's simply not true. As for the VAT, at least that's an admission that there's something dreadfully wrong with the income tax. Ron Paul has said that the reason he opposes the "fair tax" is because he thinks the government would keep both. A better reason to oppose Beck is that he did initially support the bailout. But he later came out strongly against it. (I don't remember if he did before Obama was elected). I've yet to hear Palin criticize the 2008 bailout.

And Palin has no "official stature" now because she's no longer on "official".



9) This one is an honest one - when exactly did Palin say she supported the bailout? I don't know the answer here. I suspect that she might have been McCain's running mate at that point. I'm not sure though. If this was before the election in 2008, she really didn't have a choice. She really couldn't say "oh, the Bailout sucks, McCain sucks." That's just my opinion. She probably could've resigned from her VP slot based on the Bailout. Personally, if I was going to determine what Palins true beliefs are, I would throw out everything from mid August 2008 to mid November 2008. Most people (definitely not all) know that
a VP nominees job is to sell the Presidential candidate, not themselves. When the VP nominee is talking, you really have to assume that they're talking about the Presidents ideas.


The 2008 bailout was passed during the presidential campaign so of course she was the nominee. And yes she was in a hot spot. But what's the excuse now? Why hasn't she never (to my knowledge) come out and said "You know? Maybe that wasn't a good idea"? Anyway, here's the clip.

YouTube - Sarah Palin Talks Bailout Proposal (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txfqWzGMgmY)



10) Oh, I don't think Palin is the face / voice of the freedom movement. That's Ron Paul. But the Opposition to Obama is different from the freedom / liberty movement. Palin is the leader of the Opposition to Obama, and the freedom / liberty movement should be united in opposing Obama.

I simply disagree. Ron Paul is one of the few that has called Obama out on accepting a peace prize while escalating a war. Ron Paul's "audit the fed" bill strikes at the Obama agenda. On global warming Senator Inhoffe is the leader of the opposition. On health-care it's Joe Wilson. And Palin is riding quite a bit on Becks coattails and he's riding the original tea party itself. That said I'm sure there's nothing to convince you otherwise. You think Palin's the "leader of the Obama opposition" and disregard all evidence to the contrary. Fine. I'm sure she'll sell a lot of books.

Regards,

John M. Drake

[parocks]

1) Bush never actively pushed for the Amero. There was no legislation about it.
Obamacare, Cap & Trade, etc. are all being actively pushed by Obama.

2) I strongly dislike most Democrat politicians. I said it.

3) I'm of the opinion that Wilson might be the worst President ever.
Obama, however is the current President. And no, unlike you, I don't believe
that "Obama is simply a black democratic George Bush"

4) I'm not necessarily going to read closely all your links. Murkowski asked for more names and ended up choosing from the list. Point I'm trying to make here is that your supposedly damaging argument is actually complex, has 2 sides, not clear, and certainly hard to explain simply. I also heard that Christen was technically not a board member of Planned Parenthood, but she was a board member of an organization that was absorbed into Planned Parenthood after she left. I don't have a link to that, so I don't know.

5) Palin would likely help herself by saying that she now thinks the bailouts were a bad idea. Or, draw a clear distinction between the first bailout and later bailouts.

6) Official stature comes from being the VP nominee. "Official stature" is not a term of art.

7) Leader of the Obama Opposition isn't an official title, and when I say that Palin is that, it's an opinion, not a fact that can be proven or disproven. It's my opinion that my case is the strongest case.




You don't actually say you don't hate most democrats either. You don't actually say you don't beat your wife. Does everybody have to disclaim everything? :rolleyes:



Did you watch the video? Bush tried to implement it and he was blocked in part by Hugo Chavez. I never said it had actually been implemented. Obamacare hasn't been implement yet either. Neither has cap and trade.



Gee I didn't know that. :rolleyes: You were saying democrats were worse than republicans. I was merely pointing out how both have been pushing the same overall agenda. It's the agenda that I seek to stop. If we simply rearrange chairs on the deck of the Titanic it still sinks.



I don't like Bush or Obama or McCain or Palin. Read my sig.



:rolleyes: Yep. Obama is the current puppet. By why only compare Obama to Bush? Why not compare him to Clinton? Or to Woodrow Wilson? Or to Johnson or FDR? Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. Maybe you don't want to go back more than 1 president, but I think it's important to have a broader view of history. Sorry if that bothers you.



What gives? In one "point" you chastise me for comparing Obama to anybody but Bush because Obama is the "current president". Then you bring up information about Clinton. :confused: Anyway I think I've already made it clear that Clinton helped move the same new world order ball forward that his surrogate father George H.W. Bush got rolling. So you dislike Clinton. We have something in common.



Ummmm....you didn't read the article I posted or you didn't read it well. Murkowski could have kept fighting the issue and decided not to. Palin could have held her ground and refused to pick from the list. There's nothing different about Tennessee and Alaska in this regard. In the case of Tennessee the people sending up the list budged before Bredesen did. In the case of Alaska Murkowski budged first. In the case of Palin she didn't even try.



There is a lot that I don't like about Beck. I bring him up in this context because you claim Palin is the "biggest opposition to Obama". That's simply not true. As for the VAT, at least that's an admission that there's something dreadfully wrong with the income tax. Ron Paul has said that the reason he opposes the "fair tax" is because he thinks the government would keep both. A better reason to oppose Beck is that he did initially support the bailout. But he later came out strongly against it. (I don't remember if he did before Obama was elected). I've yet to hear Palin criticize the 2008 bailout.

And Palin has no "official stature" now because she's no longer on "official".



The 2008 bailout was passed during the presidential campaign so of course she was the nominee. And yes she was in a hot spot. But what's the excuse now? Why hasn't she never (to my knowledge) come out and said "You know? Maybe that wasn't a good idea"? Anyway, here's the clip.

YouTube - Sarah Palin Talks Bailout Proposal (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txfqWzGMgmY)



I simply disagree. Ron Paul is one of the few that has called Obama out on accepting a peace prize while escalating a war. Ron Paul's "audit the fed" bill strikes at the Obama agenda. On global warming Senator Inhoffe is the leader of the opposition. On health-care it's Joe Wilson. And Palin is riding quite a bit on Becks coattails and he's riding the original tea party itself. That said I'm sure there's nothing to convince you otherwise. You think Palin's the "leader of the Obama opposition" and disregard all evidence to the contrary. Fine. I'm sure she'll sell a lot of books.

Regards,

John M. Drake

[Matt Collins]

YouTube - SA@TAC - What is Sarah Palin? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RgW5tgDIxY&feature=player_embedded)

[jmdrake]

1) Bush never actively pushed for the Amero. There was no legislation about it.
Obamacare, Cap & Trade, etc. are all being actively pushed by Obama.


:rolleyes: Do you realize that most laws are never actually passed through the congress? Most actually get passed by the administrative state (EPA, DEA, OSHA etc). Obama has already said that if cap and trade doesn't pass, carbon will simply be "regulated" through the EPA. Similarly Bush pushed through much of the NAU agenda through SPP.GOV. Judicial watch proved this through their FOIA request. Really you don't know as much as you think. Also I see you've totally ignored Bush passage of the prescription drug benefit. And you've ignored the fact that the only reason Bush didn't go further on the Amero was that he was blocked by foreign opposition! There was no point in pushing Amero legislation if CAFTA wasn't going through anyway thanks to Chavez.



2) I strongly dislike most Democrat politicians. I said it.


That's nice. The point remains that it's silly to expect people to disclaim everything under the sun. My position is clear. I care more about issues than about party. I dislike all who would destroy the constitution in the name of "security" or "global warming" or to "save the economy" or "health-care" or whatever. I don't know how many Republicans still support such an abandonment of the constitution. It's pretty clear that Palin is still willing to gut the constitution. I'm sorry that it bothers you that I won't give her a pass on that.



3) I'm of the opinion that Wilson might be the worst President ever.
Obama, however is the current President. And no, unlike you, I don't believe
that "Obama is simply a black democratic George Bush"


You're entitled to your own opinion as wrong as it is. Your opinion is partly based in the fact that you can't even acknowledge what Bush actually did and you are in denial about what he was attempting to do. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.




4) I'm not necessarily going to read closely all your links. Murkowski asked for more names and ended up choosing from the list. Point I'm trying to make here is that your supposedly damaging argument is actually complex, has 2 sides, not clear, and certainly hard to explain simply. I also heard that Christen was technically not a board member of Planned Parenthood, but she was a board member of an organization that was absorbed into Planned Parenthood after she left. I don't have a link to that, so I don't know.


You have time to endlessly argue yet you don't have time to do your own research? :rolleyes: It's not complex at all. Palin didn't even ask for more names. She didn't even try.



5) Palin would likely help herself by saying that she now thinks the bailouts were a bad idea. Or, draw a clear distinction between the first bailout and later bailouts.


There is no clear distinction between the first bailout and the later ones. If she tried the distinguish the two she would merely dig herself in deeper. I agree that if she said she's now against the 2008 bailout that would help. Like I said earlier. Everyone makes mistakes. It's those who can't admit they made a mistake that's the problem.



6) Official stature comes from being the VP nominee. "Official stature" is not a term of art.


And how many failed VP nominees can you name off the top of your head? Oh I forgot. You don't like looking at history. Goodness, I'd might give you 1/2 a point for Palin being a former governor, but being a former failed VP nominee means absolutely nothing.



7) Leader of the Obama Opposition isn't an official title, and when I say that Palin is that, it's an opinion, not a fact that can be proven or disproven. It's my opinion that my case is the strongest case.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I disagree with it and I don't think you've made much of a case.

Regards,

John M. Drake