Sarah Palin resigns as Governor

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
So, Pat Buchanan recommended on MSNBC this morning that Todd Palin "ought to take Levi down to the creek and hold his head underwater until the thrashing stops."

Now let's see if nationwide frothing at the mouth ensues, demanding Buchanan step down for being a sick monster who advocates the coldblooded murder of teenage boys, etc. etc. :yawn:




hot teenage boys, too.
 
I have to wonder what you think would have happened if we allowed ourselves to lose WWII... :hyper:

I don't think the US would be speaking German. There would be holocaust museums in Dresden and Hiroshima documenting the massacres committed by Britain and the US. Not saying that would be right, but it is the victors that write the history. The Bush family would probably have been as successful in this alternate reality as they were in our universe, given their well documented Nazi connections.
 
hot teenage boys, too.
Hot fuckin' redneck teenage boys who dig hockey, snowboarding, dirt bikes and hangin' with the boys, yafuckwithmeillkickyourass. And cappucino-swilling, Dijon-dipping media elites like Pat just hate that. He's not their kind of working-class white guy.
 
Doesn't matter, he's still a direct counterpoint to the conservative populist agenda for America. As a cold political calculation, I could not be more pleased.

(I'm assuming it's obvious I'm being satirical here)
 
I don't think the US would be speaking German. There would be holocaust museums in Dresden and Hiroshima documenting the massacres committed by Britain and the US. Not saying that would be right, but it is the victors that write the history. The Bush family would probably have been as successful in this alternate reality as they were in our universe, given their well documented Nazi connections.
IT's really a figurative point.

The enemies of the free world would have developed the atomic bomb and used it if we didn't act.
 
I'm sorry but "Alinsky" type answers do not fall into the realm of logical answers. I find them lazy and naive. It just shows me exactly where you get your info and that you don't quite question the info you are spoon fed. I think that anyone that reads the 'Rules for Radicals' and doesn't understand that these are basic tactics used in politics by all sides is naive. :shrug:
Spoonfed what?

I've done my homework.

I'll waste my time again... :sexywink:

Obama acknowledged his association with Frank Marshall Davis. He was only identified as "Frank" throughout Dreams From My Father.

LIE: “But the key role Frank Marshall Davis plays in the autobiography is not to provide Obama with words from his poems as a voice for Obama’s black rage. Instead Davis is the mentor Obama seeks for wisdom and advice, for instance when he has a crisis with his grandmother that was so traumatic Obama still mentions it today.” [p 87]

REALITY: OBAMA MEMOIR CHARACTERIZED FRANK DAVIS MARSHALL AS A FIGURE FROM HIS YOUTH WHO “FELL SHORT” AND WHOSE VIEW OF RACE WAS “INCURABLE”
That is, from Obama's hit piece against "fringe bigot" (in other words, a critic) Jerome Corsi.

For you to distance yourself with Rev. Wright and yet calling him not so extreme is a curious point. You can't have it both ways.

Next point. The Gamaliel Foundation claims to represent a million people all over the world. According to Saul Alinsky, Gamaliel was the first great congregational community organizer - from the Book of Acts. Straight out of Chapter Two of Rules For Radicals, the plank is "the world as it is" versus "the world as it should be," which The Gamaliel Foundation emphasized as a primary talking point. Obama worked for the Gamaliel Foundation.

This is what Michelle Obama said during the campaign:

"Barack stood up that day and spoke words that have stayed with me ever since. He talked about 'The world as it is' and 'The world as it should be...All of us driven by a simple belief that the world as it is just won't do -- that we have an obligation to fight for the world as it should be."

And from Rules For Radicals:

"The means-and-ends moralists, constantly obsessed with the ethics of the means used by the Have-Nots against the Haves, should search themselves as to their real political position. In fact, they are passive -- but real -- allies of the Haves... The most unethical of all means is the non-use of any means... The standards of judgment must be rooted in the whys and wherefores of life as it is lived, the world as it is, not our wished-for fantasy of the world as it should be."

I understand the subject at length is too esoteric for ignorant people.

And what about you?

I still haven't seen an example of how Rush is "extreme."
 
For you to distance yourself with Rev. Wright and yet calling him not so extreme is a curious point. You can't have it both ways.
Why can't I have it both ways? I have to like him if I don't think he's all that extreme? That doesn't make any sense.

When I say he's not that extreme, I really mean that his feelings are held by a lot more people than you think.

I think the reason Wright is such an issue is that the Rush type conservatives "indoctrinate"(to use your word) themselves with this American Exceptionalism belief and that any questioning or criticism of our past is wrong. I think it's an unproductive way to divide us. It's a political tool, a "Rule for Rushies" if you will...:wink:

Next point. The Gamaliel Foundation claims to represent a million people all over the world. According to Saul Alinsky, Gamaliel was the first great congregational community organizer - from the Book of Acts. Straight out of Chapter Two of Rules For Radicals, the plank is "the world as it is" versus "the world as it should be," which The Gamaliel Foundation emphasized as a primary talking point. Obama worked for the Gamaliel Foundation.

This is what Michelle Obama said during the campaign:

"Barack stood up that day and spoke words that have stayed with me ever since. He talked about 'The world as it is' and 'The world as it should be...All of us driven by a simple belief that the world as it is just won't do -- that we have an obligation to fight for the world as it should be."
I'm not quite getting your point here, you think the world is fine the way it is? We were all going to hell according to you in another thread...:huh:

I still haven't seen an example of how Rush is "extreme."
Rush has the luxury of being "extreme" because he doesn't really have to live up to any of his "beliefs". Rush is "extreme" because he want to divdide, his livlihood depends on it. He's even dividing the Republican party. He uses "compromise" as a bad word, which is great if all you are doing is talking, but in reality compromise is needed.
 
Why can't I have it both ways? I have to like him if I don't think he's all that extreme? That doesn't make any sense.

When I say he's not that extreme, I really mean that his feelings are held by a lot more people than you think.
His rage is held by kneejerk anti-Americanists and anti-whites. I'm aware that a fair share of the voting population is sympathetic to it.

But, "US of KKK A", and "Not God bless America, God Damn America!!!" is extreme in the sense that it is over the top.

I think the reason Wright is such an issue is that the Rush type conservatives "indoctrinate"(to use your word) themselves with this American Exceptionalism belief and that any questioning or criticism of our past is wrong.
I don't agree with "American exceptionalism" in an absolute sense. For example, I think it would have been best to stay out of WWI.

I'm not quite getting your point here, you think the world is fine the way it is? We were all going to hell according to you in another thread...:huh:
If you're not getting the point, than you're not allowing yourself to make an obvious connection between Alinsky's rhetoric, the Gamaliel Foundation, and Barack Obama.

Rush has the luxury of being "extreme" because he doesn't really have to live up to any of his "beliefs". Rush is "extreme" because he want to divdide, his livlihood depends on it. He's even dividing the Republican party. He uses "compromise" as a bad word, which is great if all you are doing is talking, but in reality compromise is needed.
That's interesting. You've told others not to compromise what they believe in the past.

I really think Rush is talking about people like John McCain, who pride themselves on "reaching across the aisle," when they become the aisle. I've already gave you the example of Fred Thompson, who has reached across the aisle without becoming the aisle. That's why Rush has no gripes with FDT.
 
If you're not getting the point, than you're not allowing yourself to make an obvious connection between Alinsky's rhetoric, the Gamaliel Foundation, and Barack Obama.
So you don't find any fault with what was actually said, you just find fault in the "connection"?

That's interesting. You've told others not to compromise what they believe in the past.
Well I think compromise in the political realm and the personal realm are two different things. I completely understand that there are things this country may have to do that I don't agree with, there are rights that I will never use, and there may be sacrifices I make for the greater good of the country. What's right for me, doesn't always mean it's right for the country, and I think this is something many conservatives have a problem with...


I really think Rush is talking about people like John McCain, who pride themselves on "reaching across the aisle," when they become the aisle. I've already gave you the example of Fred Thompson, who has reached across the aisle without becoming the aisle. That's why Rush has no gripes with FDT.

Well I think you and Rush will find out sooner than later that McCain was reaching closer to where the majority of America lies and that Fred was stubburnly living in the dark.
 
So you don't find any fault with what was actually said, you just find fault in the "connection"?
It goes back to the literature he read, and the influences that shaped his worldview. At verbatim.

Well I think compromise in the political realm and the personal realm are two different things. I completely understand that there are things this country may have to do that I don't agree with, there are rights that I will never use, and there may be sacrifices I make for the greater good of the country. What's right for me, doesn't always mean it's right for the country, and I think this is something many conservatives have a problem with...
That concept in itself sounds like something I would have said as well.

"Compromise" gave us the 3/5 Compromise. A hard-lined principled stance based on moral conviction gave us the 13th Amendment.

Well I think you and Rush will find out sooner than later that McCain was reaching closer to where the majority of America lies and that Fred was stubburnly living in the dark.
McCain becoming the aisle also represents a long history of flip-flops and a lack of firm conviction. The majority of Americans oppose amnesty on illegal immigration. McCain, Kennedy, and Specter are the poster boys of it. The last few attempts to grant amnesty did not fail because of the men and women in Congress. They failed because they weren't given the consent of the governed. That was perhaps McCain's biggest problem.

As Barry Goldwater recalled in his own writings (read Pure Goldwater), McCain has no loyalty to the conservative movement, very little to his country, and a lot in his own self-interests.

Thompson is not "living in the dark." His politics are quite similar to Sarah Palin's. Palin continues to speak for those who are concerned about Obama's policies. Palin proved to be more popular than McCain in the presidential race.
 
It goes back to the literature he read, and the influences that shaped his worldview. At verbatim.

He's also read the Bible, Oh My! We have a well read President, what are we going to do?

That concept in itself sounds like something I would have said as well.

"Compromise" gave us the 3/5 Compromise. A hard-lined principled stance based on moral conviction gave us the 13th Amendment.
I never said compromise was always the answer, but without it how long would it have taken? I mean we were told we were all equal, but those were just words, it took lots of people who believed in that principle and lots of compromise from the opposition, who by the way were the social conservatives of the time to get where we are... and we still aren't living up to those words.


McCain becoming the aisle also represents a long history of flip-flops and a lack of firm conviction. The majority of Americans oppose amnesty on illegal immigration. McCain, Kennedy, and Specter are the poster boys of it. The last few attempts to grant amnesty did not fail because of the men and women in Congress. They failed because they weren't given the consent of the governed. That was perhaps McCain's biggest problem.

As Barry Goldwater recalled in his own writings (read Pure Goldwater), McCain has no loyalty to the conservative movement, very little to his country, and a lot in his own self-interests.

I agree that he started to let go of a lot of his convictions, but immigration is another topic for another day...


Thompson is not "living in the dark." His politics are quite similar to Sarah Palin's. Palin continues to speak for those who are concerned about Obama's policies. Palin proved to be more popular than McCain in the presidential race.

They are both living in the dark. Palin has an excuse she's from Alaska, they have loooong nights. :wink:
 
just back from a cruise to alaska (inside passage). Best news was when we were in Juneau and saw the gov' mansion....then told that she quit :)

Of course sure she's going to run for prez, but she won't make it past the primary round. Unless she's using the next 3 1/2 years to study anything remotely close to world history and current events.

but then she does need all that time to read "all" news publications.
 
Hot fuckin' redneck teenage boys who dig hockey, snowboarding, dirt bikes and hangin' with the boys, yafuckwithmeillkickyourass. And cappucino-swilling, Dijon-dipping media elites like Pat just hate that. He's not their kind of working-class white guy.




and cappuccino-swilling, Dijon-dipping, gay (and sometimes closeted) media elites often find hot fuckin' redneck teenage boys who dig hockey, snowboarding, dirt bikes and hangin' with the boys really fuckin' attractive. :drool:




if straight men get to drool over Britney circa 1999, then i'm allowed my Levi.
 
Rush has the luxury of being "extreme" because he doesn't really have to live up to any of his "beliefs". Rush is "extreme" because he want to divdide, his livlihood depends on it. He's even dividing the Republican party. He uses "compromise" as a bad word, which is great if all you are doing is talking, but in reality compromise is needed.

I wish the left would compromise on cap and trade. The economy could use a break. It would also be nice if they compromised on the budget and actually aim to balance it first before increasing entitlement spending. That way they would have to clearly raise taxes so the public would understand clearly that social programs aren't primarily from borrowing money on future generations but to pay for what you ask for. The right has compromised too much on economics with Bush's domestic policies. It's time for the left to compromise if they really believe in "change".

Can we have a compromise on world government?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKKG-Xw2sFE
 
wow. in the WaPo no less.

The 'Cap And Tax' Dead End
By Sarah Palin
Tuesday, July 14, 2009

There is no shortage of threats to our economy. America's unemployment rate recently hit its highest mark in more than 25 years and is expected to continue climbing. Worries are widespread that even when the economy finally rebounds, the recovery won't bring jobs. Our nation's debt is unsustainable, and the federal government's reach into the private sector is unprecedented.

Unfortunately, many in the national media would rather focus on the personality-driven political gossip of the day than on the gravity of these challenges. So, at risk of disappointing the chattering class, let me make clear what is foremost on my mind and where my focus will be:

I am deeply concerned about President Obama's cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.

American prosperity has always been driven by the steady supply of abundant, affordable energy. Particularly in Alaska, we understand the inherent link between energy and prosperity, energy and opportunity, and energy and security. Consequently, many of us in this huge, energy-rich state recognize that the president's cap-and-trade energy tax would adversely affect every aspect of the U.S. economy.

There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn't lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive! Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy.

Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs.

In addition to immediately increasing unemployment in the energy sector, even more American jobs will be threatened by the rising cost of doing business under the cap-and-tax plan. For example, the cost of farming will certainly increase, driving down farm incomes while driving up grocery prices. The costs of manufacturing, warehousing and transportation will also increase.

The ironic beauty in this plan? Soon, even the most ardent liberal will understand supply-side economics.

The Americans hit hardest will be those already struggling to make ends meet. As the president eloquently puts it, their electricity bills will "necessarily skyrocket." So much for not raising taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 a year.

Even Warren Buffett, an ardent Obama supporter, admitted that under the cap-and-tax scheme, "poor people are going to pay a lot more for electricity."

We must move in a new direction. We are ripe for economic growth and energy independence if we responsibly tap the resources that God created right underfoot on American soil. Just as important, we have more desire and ability to protect the environment than any foreign nation from which we purchase energy today.

In Alaska, we are progressing on the largest private-sector energy project in history. Our 3,000-mile natural gas pipeline will transport hundreds of trillions of cubic feet of our clean natural gas to hungry markets across America. We can safely drill for U.S. oil offshore and in a tiny, 2,000-acre corner of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge if ever given the go-ahead by Washington bureaucrats.

Of course, Alaska is not the sole source of American energy. Many states have abundant coal, whose technology is continuously making it into a cleaner energy source. Westerners literally sit on mountains of oil and gas, and every state can consider the possibility of nuclear energy.

We have an important choice to make. Do we want to control our energy supply and its environmental impact? Or, do we want to outsource it to China, Russia and Saudi Arabia? Make no mistake: President Obama's plan will result in the latter.

For so many reasons, we can't afford to kill responsible domestic energy production or clobber every American consumer with higher prices.

Can America produce more of its own energy through strategic investments that protect the environment, revive our economy and secure our nation?

Yes, we can. Just not with Barack Obama's energy cap-and-tax plan.

The writer, a Republican, is governor of Alaska



a new Palin classic?
 
You think she had a ghost writer? :lol:



nah. she's well known for being a quick study on the complexities of national policy, and her defense of allowing unregulated pollution and "God's energy" to destroy the planet reflects said abilities.
 
He's also read the Bible, Oh My! We have a well read President, what are we going to do?
Haha, well read. Certainly.

I never said compromise was always the answer, but without it how long would it have taken? I mean we were told we were all equal, but those were just words, it took lots of people who believed in that principle and lots of compromise from the opposition, who by the way were the social conservatives of the time to get where we are... and we still aren't living up to those words.
I know the one-issue you're getting at, and I don't buy it.

You want certain people to pay a heavier rate in taxes than everyone else. Is that equal?

Nah.

I agree that he started to let go of a lot of his convictions, but immigration is another topic for another day...
Okay.

I would also say that it didn't help that Rick Davis, his political consultant, was a lobbyist for Fannie and Freddie.

That, along with speculating that he would duck the first Presidential Debate to "save the economy overnight", showed a lack of judgement and leadership.

They are both living in the dark. Palin has an excuse she's from Alaska, they have loooong nights. :wink:
Cute.

NEXT FIRST LADY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:

Jeri_thompson.jpg


:rockon::drool:
 
I know the one-issue you're getting at, and I don't buy it.
Yes because there's only one. And yes we all know how informed you are on that subject.


You want certain people to pay a heavier rate in taxes than everyone else. Is that equal?

Nah.
But making those that can't afford it pay the same or give cuts to the rich makes sense? Oh the world we live in...
 
Ok, so I just figured out who this is... :lol: what a joke.

Fred was living in the dark thinking he was ever going to get anywhere in that race. He's notoriously lazy, and for an actor he lacks any kind of personality.
Check her out.

He doesn't live in the dark, but I'd say he has every excuse to do so. As long as he's not alone :wink:
 
If they want decent wages without bureaucratic constraints that deprive job openings, then yes.
Uh, yeah... Keep telling yourself there's a level playing field and that the poor don't stay poor and the rich don't keep getting richer.


Fred was drafted, basically, because the GOP didn't offer much without him.

This reflects the sad state the GOP is in if Fred and Palin are the best they could come up with...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom