bono_212
Blue Crack Distributor
William Shatner is seriously The Man.
Let me ask something to all you Palin detractors that have posted in here.
If you had to vote for:
A. Sarah Palin or
B. George W Bush
who would you vote for?
Really? Do you have any kind of information to back this up?Most presidents will have ethics complaints filed against them,
I know a great deal of conservatives across the country who hope to God that she runs in 2012, and some who will write her in if she isn't on the ticket (or so they claim).
That's easy. Bush. Yes, he made some bad decisions but he's nothing like Palin. I never got the sense that Bush just liked being on TV and would say and do things just to be on TV.
Palin is a cartoon. I can't believe she's taken seriously by anyone.
CLINTON LEGAL ETHICS TIMELINEReally? Do you have any kind of information to back this up?
September 1998: Independent Counsel Ken Starr releases the IC Report to Congress, detailing multiple instances of presidential and professional misconduct by President Bill Clinton.
September 1998: SLF files a complaint with the Arkansas Supreme Court Committee on Professional Conduct regarding attorney William Jefferson Clinton’s “willful professional misconduct by lying under oath in a court of law.” SLF alleges Clinton’s explicit violations of Arkansas rules of professional conduct governing attorneys, including acts involving “dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.” Arkansas rules further specify that, in the case of attorneys who are elected officials, “[a] lawyer’s abuse of public office can suggest an inability to fulfill the role of attorney.”
November 1998: SLF releases the results of a national non-partisan poll of 1,000 Americans, revealing that 63 percent believe that President Clinton should lose his attorney’s license if he is found guilty of lying under oath. In contrast, the poll reveals that only 13 percent believe he should be impeached.
February 1999: SLF forwards a letter to the Arkansas committee, requesting action on the pending ethics complaint against Clinton.
April 1999: Federal district court Judge Susan Webber Wright, the presiding judge in the Paul Jones case, issues a civil contempt citation for Bill Clinton’s misrepresentations while under oath. The citation states, “It is not acceptable to employ deceptions and falsehoods in an attempt to obstruct the judicial process . . . [n]evertheless, the President’s . . . conduct in this case, coming as it did from a member of the bar and the chief law enforcement officer of this Nation, was without justification and undermined the integrity of the judicial system.” The contempt citation is forwarded to the Arkansas committee, which triggers an automatic formal complaint under state law. No action is taken. Attorneys representing President Clinton fail to appeal Judge Wright’s contempt citation.
December 1999: SLF files a petition for a writ of mandamus with the Arkansas Supreme Court, requesting that the court order the Arkansas committee to fulfill its obligation to pursue a formal complaint against President Clinton, pointing out that the contempt citation alone obligates the issuance of a formal complaint by the committee.
January 2000: The Arkansas Supreme Court grants SLF’s mandamus request, ordering the Committee to proceed with SLF’s complaint “forthwith.”
Of course you would. The "progressive intellect" should consider the paralells this has with Obama's trajectory.I think both of these sentiments are a sad reflection of the conservative intellect these days...
The point I made is that most presidents face false accusations in one form or another.So Clinton = most?
Of course you would. The "progressive intellect" should consider the paralells this has with Obama's trajectory.
I know a great deal of conservatives across the country who hope to God that she runs in 2012, and some who will write her in if she isn't on the ticket (or so they claim).
The point I made is that most presidents face false accusations in one form or another.
I don't think there's much room to dispute that.
Most presidents will have ethics complaints filed against them
face false accusations in one form or another
I can respect that.Before I voted I took a step back and I could understand some of the criticisms thrown at Obama, but at the end of the day he was the best vote I could cast, I do nothing blindly.
The write-in mentality will likely wear off. I do know someone who wrote her in for 2008 because he could not stand John McCain. Another guy who loves Palin and plans to write her in is from the Blue State of California, and feels he has nothing to lose.I think if conservatives took the same step back, an honest step back they would realize this woman is not Presidential material. She's just not an informed or intellectually curious woman. And the whole write in thing is even worse those people are just helpless...
She has been campaigning for conservatives, including Rick Perry, and yes, even some conservative Democrats.But what is she fighting for? Has she clearly articulated her national goals, with specific examples?
Which is what for her? These are not specific examples of national plans and goals.She has been campaigning for conservatives, including Rick Perry, and yes, even some conservative Democrats.
All in all, she IS a fighter. And one for the conservative agenda.
I don't know her itinerary too well other than that at this point, but give it time.
Free markets, lower taxes, domestic drilling, etc.Which is what for her?
As I said, we don't know of all her plans yet. But what she is doing is campaigning to get conservatives elected in 2010.These are not specific examples of national plans and goals.
She JUST resigned. I don't understand why we need to be on the edge of our seats just yet.She was a major party's candidate for vice president. How much more "time" is needed?
Oy vey.Is this the best the conservatives can do? Offer a personality only? One with a healthy persecution complex, but no actual plans or goals?
Really? Who?even some conservative Democrats.
Do you honestly think she does? Seriously?who even admitted that he doesn't understand economic issues.
Time is something she ran out of... Like Martha said she was running for the second highest office... now that she quit her time is up.I don't know her itinerary too well other than that at this point, but give it time.
All in all, she IS a fighter. And one for the conservative agenda.
EXCLUSIVE: Palin to stump for conservative Democrats - Washington TimesReally? Who?
She kept Alaska out of a deficit. That doesn't just happen out of thin air.Do you honestly think she does? Seriously?
I don't see the point.Time is something she ran out of... Like Martha said she was running for the second highest office... now that she quit her time is up.
So, just talk so far?
Do you know anything about Alaska economics? This isn't difficult to do...She kept Alaska out of a deficit. That doesn't just happen out of thin air.
Nixon? Exactly where are the parallels?I don't see the point.
Remember Nixon?
She kept Alaska out of a deficit. That doesn't just happen out of thin air.
"They won't have Nixon to kick around anymore."Nixon? Exactly where are the parallels?
Maybe, maybe, maybe...She is a quitter, plain and simple.
This bullshit about being a lame duck would make sense if she were a term-limited governor. But she is not. So she clearly didn't feel like running again (maybe she has presidential aspirations, maybe she wants to cash in), and got the hell outta there. This is motivated by her self-interest and little else.