Sarah Palin at CSU Stanlislaus Paul Losch's Community Blog, posted by Paul Losch, a resident of Palo Alto, on Jul 16, 2010 at 7:45 pm Paul Losch is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
I find Ms. Palin to be cut out of the same cloth of Huey Long, George Wallace, and other such populists who presently call themselves "Tea Partiers." Which means I do not hold her in high regard.
For a fee of $75,000, former Gov. Palin gave a speech at a fundraiser at CSU Stanislaus that according to reports raised $207,000. I know little or nothing about political or higher education fundraising, but this strikes me as a pretty poor return on investment.
She invoked in her address Ronald Reagan, and how he had attended Eureka College in California, which does not exist. The Eureka College Reagan attended is in Illinois. Where are her fact checkers?
Then there is the on again/off again (pardon the double entendre) engagement between her daughter Bristol and Levi Johnston, who share as teenagers a child born out of wedlock, and now are engaged again to be married after a fairly visible and not very pretty breakup and publicity that attended it. Her family has not displayed the ethic of "family values" that typically attend the conservative wing of the Republican Party.
I fail to comprehend why Ms. Palin is such a star attraction on a national scale. She is uninformed, has a family that has out of wedlock children, commands huge sums of money for very limited return.
Is this the sort of leadership and fundraising that the GOP needs? No.
Palin is acting like a rock star, and is taking advantage WHILE she can. For herself. Not the GOP
Good for her. She can build a cabin on the Behring Straits that truly does have a view of the land of Russia.
If she chooses to go again for a national office, she will flame out in no time. There have been many nitwits in such candiciies over the years, and she is several notches down in, knowlesge, compentency and behavior from most of them. Either party.
She has major personal baggage, major incompentcy, and as best as I can tell, no real clear piolicy platform, just a bunch of sound bites.
I am truly staggered that Palin has lasted this long. Tea Party Folks may be looking for a beacon, I perceive Palin as being opportunistic, not a thought leader.
I am reminded of the movie from the 1980's: Being There
Posted by Gary, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jul 16, 2010 at 8:23 pm
Sarah Palin really gets under your skin, Paul.
Let's see here, she was opposing Joe (foot-in-mouth) Biden for VP. She supported the liberation of Iraq, as did Biden, until he didn't then he wanted to split Iraq into three parts, then he opposed the surge which got the job done. Plain consistently supported the liberation. Let's not forget that Biden opposed the liberation of Kuwait from Saddam. She sounds pretty smart to me, Paul. More importantly, she has good sound judgement.
Yes, her daughter has a Clintonesque boyfriend, and so did my sister. It happens in real families. However, her daughter will probably not become POTUS, and so we won't have to talk about biological stains on blue dresses. Speaking of Slick, how much does he get for his vapid speeches?
I get it that you will not vote for Palin, Paul, but why do let her get to you so much? Is it just one of those reflexive Palo Alto things to do?
Posted by Tea Party rhymes with bigotry, a resident of the Adobe-Meadows neighborhood, on Jul 16, 2010 at 9:27 pm
I still remember George Wallace's "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever" speech when he tried to prevent African-American students from attending public schools.
Now the NAACP and other civil rights groups are accusing the Tea Party of resurrecting the overt racism from George Wallace's time. Even Wallace himself renounced and apologized for his racism later in his life. Why can't the Tea Party learn the same lesson? When the Tea Party says they want their country back, do they really mean they want a return to the days when "whites only" signs were common in public buildings?
Posted by Paul Losch, a resident of Palo Alto, on Jul 17, 2010 at 7:57 am Paul Losch is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
I suspect you and I will seldom see "eye to eye" on national political matters, so be it, that's OK by me as long as the discourse has some value.
By choosing in your posting to compare Biden and Palin in the midst of the 2008 campaign, you largely ignored my points about the lady being uninformed and out for herself. Not her party. Not the country.
Biden, as a Senator, was on the other side of many ultimate policy choices. I believe there are 99 others in that chamber who could stand accused of the same thing, depending on the topic. News reports suggest that as VEEP he has advocated positions that Obama ultimately rejected for other options. At least he knows what he is talking about.
My other point is that the GOP can do better than Palin. She is an uncurious, poorly informed, former Governor of an oil state. Been there, done that. Surely the GOP can do better.
Posted by Gary, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jul 17, 2010 at 10:00 am
If Palin was as uninformed as Obama, and demanded a moritorium on oil drilling in The Gulf, then I might agree with you. If she went around the world apologizing for America's liberation efforts in Iraq, and for calling terrorists terrorists, it would make your case even stronger. However, she did just the opposite of Obama, thus she is much better informed than our current president, and her judgement, on the big issues, is far superior to his.
The GOP could do much worse than having Palin as its candidate/spokeswoman. In fact, the Dems will probably stick with the empty suit that they currently have, and that will probably assure a GOP victory.
Posted by Gary as usual, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jul 17, 2010 at 10:09 am
[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.] This is a woman who is out for the money and the spotlight. She walked out on the people that elected her, after she soaked the RNC for outfits, makeup, travel expenses etc. Paul has it right about her. She is enjoying her 15 minutes of fame and soon will be just a trivia question on Jeopardy
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 17, 2010 at 10:24 am Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
I don't know what Palin nets on her speaker fees, but I imagine it is well within the range for such activities. As for the benefit to her party of her appearances, her coattails seem better that Obama's in the primaries just past. Her policy of making more energy available rather than reducing consumption by increasing cost seems well thought out. The biggest shot in Palin's locker, however, is in the rabid denunciation from all quarters of the democrat party. You and yours are scared spitless of the real threat to your control over the mediums of information dissemination.
Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jul 17, 2010 at 10:31 am
Not one for politics really, but I must say that Sarah Palin is getting publicity whether she likes it or not because of the media not because she is newsworthy. The possible exception may be her invitation to speak at the fundraiser, but the secrecy of her fee made this more notable than it would have otherwise and that is possibly nothing to do with her anyway.
No, she has, for the time being anyway, become the new media darling and anything she or her family does will be news for some time. For apart from Hollywood celebrities, this country has no permanent royal family to bash and therefore political families like the Kennedys, Clintons, Bushes and now Palins will take on that role. The fact that she is attractive makes me wonder that if she was a plain Jane would anyone be saying the same thing. I predict it will be sometime before she fades out of sight and this is nothing to do with her political aspirations.
Posted by So sad, a resident of the Greenmeadow neighborhood, on Jul 17, 2010 at 10:35 am
Gotta agree...for someone who is just another private citizen going about her life making money the best she can, not running for anything, not elected to anything, doing no more politickin' than most actors in Hollywood do, backing this proposition or that candidate, there sure is a lot of free wheeling bile flowing around the nation by those who hate her!
Coincidentally in today's Merc, I think it was, there was a piece on Palin's receiving $75,000 for speaking at CSU...but bringing in something like ..was it $250,000?..in scholarships from the price folks paid to see her.
Wow, darn that free-market capitalism that raises money for good causes!
BTW, I have to say, I was fully in the Palin-for-POTUS camp until recently. Unfortunately, I have fallen out of that camp. She has pulled identity politics on me, which I absolutely despise. Whether it is for color, religion, gender, sexual orientation.whatever it is, I despise it.
She backed RINO candidates across this nation on the basis of misplaced past loyalty ( McCain) and identity ( females), dumping out true conseratives like DeVore, or even Poizner who has a much better record politically ( though still wobbly IMO)..and now we have Whitman, who has completely gone over to the dark side, posting editorials in Spanish-only proclaiming she is against AZ's new law. Don't know what she is thinking, given that most Californians even support it! Whitman is McCainizing herself. May still work in CA, where Arnie is considered "conservative" by most folks ( makes me laugh), but as far as I am concerned, I am not sitting this one out..if she wants to turn "progressive" on us, let Jerry Brown win, it will make me laugh as he pulls an Obama on California.
Posted by So sad, a resident of the Meadow Park neighborhood, on Jul 17, 2010 at 10:46 am
OMG, I had to laugh ...she "has a family with out of wedlock children"...as if Democrats who, out of misplaced "compassion", give women financial incentives to have out of wedlock children, think this is bad! I guess it is only bad if the mother doesn't take tax money to raise the kid, like Palin's kid is NOT doing.
BTW, I thought leftists thought France was THE model for our society? Look up "out of wedlock" children in France, where over 50% of all babies are now born to unmarried women. Isn't that just wonderful? They destroyed any incentive for men to commit to women and have babies, so they just "live together". In my family, not one person under the age of 40 got married before having kids. When I ask "why not??", they say "why?". And, in many ways they are correct. If married, they lose financial benefits from tax transfers to them. If married, they gain hassle in divorce. If married, the women have higher risks than if unmarried.Sort of like California's "no fault" divorce, meant to "help" women, has forced women into paying ex husbands alimony because the women were working when their unemployed husbands abandoned them and their children....AND they STILL have to fight to keep their kids. Lovely, progressive, "no-fault" policies of California. France is similar.
In any case, I won't read any more, I just had to comment on his comment about "unmarried motherhood"...given that the left has promoted this through every means possible as the new, brave world thing to do.
Posted by Paul Losch, a resident of Palo Alto, on Jul 17, 2010 at 1:35 pm Paul Losch is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
You have a style that juxtaposes the subject in question (in this case Palin) against someone else (in this case Obama and Biden.) Well known rhetorical technique. Doesn't work for me.
How about keeping the conversation focused on Palin's merits or lack thereof, rather than invoking others on the national scene who have the own flaws and merits?
I want to be clear about one comment I made in my original post. That her teenage daughter had a child out of wedlock is, I agree, a more common occurence than is generally acknowledeged. But for someone supposedly setting an example and standing as a leader, I believe it demonstrates that Palin has a character flaw.
Read today's NYT. One writer cryptically describes her as "all cheer and no leader." Exactly my point. A few years on the City Council in a city of less than 10,000, to governor for less than a term before she resigned. She is playing on her rock star status to make a ton of money for herself, not offering up anything of substance for her party or the country.
Posted by Morgan, a resident of the Greenmeadow neighborhood, on Jul 17, 2010 at 1:54 pm
Like the NYT isn't biased. As if Obama's resume is loaded with experience. It's funny how the Dems just love to pillage on this woman. Maybe because they just can't stand her good looks. As for Paul and his incoherent logic, when he gets as far as Palin has, then maybe I'll pay him some attention.
Posted by Gary, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jul 17, 2010 at 2:17 pm
You stated that Palin is uninformed. Given our current president and vice president, it is only to fair to make a relevant comparison. Palin is both intellectually superior, and more informed, than both of them. I provided examples of egregious errors of informed judgement by the current VP and president. You might call this a rhetorical technique, but I would call it fair assessment, since Palin exists in a political context. If you care to aruge the point, go ahead. However, I suggest that you get your information from better sources than the NYT.
Posted by Gary as usual, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jul 17, 2010 at 4:32 pm
Still have to laugh at Gary's posts. He states:
"thus she is much better informed than our current president, and her judgement, on the big issues, is far superior to his."
"Palin is both intellectually superior, and more informed, than both of them."
Gary has been making these claims for a couple of years now and as Paul pointed out using these threads to bash Obama and Biden.
Lets' see Palin knows more than Biden and Obama--she could not discuss the Bush Doctrine during the 2008 campaign and made up the whole "death panel" issue during the health care debate. She couls not say what papers or magaiznes she read. the list goes on.
What judgements has she made? She walked out as governor of Alaska in order to garb as much money as she could.
And it is always someone else's fault--she blames McCain's ahndlers, she blames the mainstream media (how cute she made a funny using the term lamestream instaed of mainstream--guess all those years at about 5 different colleges has paid off).
Sorry, Palin is a empty pantsuit with lipstick--she had better enjoy her time in the spotlight.
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 17, 2010 at 7:11 pm Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
P/L, this is not one of your better efforts. What next, a critique of her spelling potatoe? A rebuttal of her statement that you can see Russia from Alaska because this is only true on clear days? A slam because her pipeline will not directly serve Palo Alto?
It is my understanding that all politicians hold fund raisers.
And Reagan's college is not in California, but in one of the other 56 states.
Posted by Jon, a resident of the Green Acres neighborhood, on Jul 17, 2010 at 7:58 pm
Must you bring Palin's daughter into all this? It shows how little you are, both in character and your command of the issues you wish candidates or politicians would focus on. It's really hard to take you seriously. Some one had to say it.
Posted by common sense, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 17, 2010 at 10:43 pm
I think your bringing up Palin's daughter is petty and mean spirited. I don't agree with 100% of Palin's views on all issues, but her points of view on deficits, entitlements spending, and national security does resonate. A sign of maturity is willingness to listen to the viewpoints on a subject, not the person. Just because you may not agree with Palin's position on one subject, doesn't invalidate her viewpoints on every subject.
Posted by Perspective, a resident of the Meadow Park neighborhood, on Jul 18, 2010 at 5:56 am
Walter..."in one of the other 56 States"...oh my gosh, I burst out laughing!!!
Your subtle and dry wit is truly a gem. You must be a hardworking and extraordinary "Corpse-man"! I just hope you "made enough money" and then above that "spread the wealth" around for good of the rest of us,..it is only fair, of course. And, how is your bowling score?
Thanks for helping me laugh at the complete and utter...oh well.
Posted by boxed in, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jul 18, 2010 at 10:37 am
The pro/con tussle over Palin is a distraction. Seems to me voters are boxed in. The top candidates are controlled choices, A or B. You want C or D? No way. So Whitman's flip flop on immigration hardly a surprise. And is Fiorina really a conservative the way she carved up HP?
Posted by Perspective, a resident of the Meadow Park neighborhood, on Jul 18, 2010 at 12:08 pm
Well, all I really want is a cosmopolitan person educated in an ivy league school, ( I don't need to know the classes or grades or who paid for it, nor do I even care if he or she has a valid birth certificate), who looks cool and speaks pretty in both American and Austrian ( hee hee...still taking off from Walter's post)
Posted by Gary, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jul 18, 2010 at 12:51 pm
At least Paul chose to pick on Palin's daughter, instead of her Down's Syndrome son, who was supposed to be, accoring to many leftist critics, her grandson (as cover for her daughter). I wonder if Paul understands that he is, unwittingly perhaps, provding the rationale for such vitriolic charges, by pushing the angle that Palin would look like a hypocrit if she doesn't produce the perfect American family?
There are so many ways that Palin is superior to what we currently have in office, yet Paul does not want to discuss such meaty issues. He would rather discuss her occasional gaffs, uncorrected by a teleprompter script. As I said above, Palin gets under his skin, as she does with most people who fear that she is hanging around too long for comfort. Reagan was attacked in similar ways in the mid-70s.
Posted by Gary as usual, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jul 18, 2010 at 1:11 pm
"There are so many ways that Palin is superior to what we currently have in office"
I have yet to see Gary provide any real facts to suggest that Palin is better. What we have is a steady stream of posts denigrating Obama/Biden dating back 2+ years. I mean, Palin couldn't even govern a sparsely populated state like Alaska--she walked out on the people who elected her. She knows nothing about foreign policy, nothing about health care, nothing about much of anything. I will say that she is good at fleecing the masses--she knows that her days are numbered--she is accumulating as much money as possible while she can.
Posted by Gary, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jul 18, 2010 at 2:04 pm
Apparently you forgot to read my post above, where I described Palin's consistent support for the liberation of Iraq (as opposed to Biden's chicken little sky-is-falling act). Obama consistently opposed the liberation, although both he and Biden are now making noises like the success there was due to their efforts (talk about uniformed!). Obama is an empty suit, so I don't expect much from him, but Biden has been around the block, so I am less forgiving of his act. The critical thing is judgement, NOT which newspaper is being read... in fact, as an aside, it is poor judgement to use the NYT as a source of information.
There are many policy issues where Palin is superior to Obama/Biden. She opposes the oil drilling moratorium in the Gulf; she unambiguously supports nuclear power; she opposed the health care fisco bill (and correctly identified the ultimate efficencies as "death panels"); she supports the exploitation of American oil and gas, and despite the recent oil blowout in the Gulf, she is still fully supporting more drilling, especially in Alaska. I could go on and on....
Sarah Palin has the lefties running scared. That is probably why they cannot let go of her! Oh, and let's not forget than many leftist women are insanely jealous of her!
Posted by Gary, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jul 18, 2010 at 2:33 pm
Actually, it probably is about you.
"no real clear piolicy platform" (from your initial post). I then go about providing various substantial planks of her platform, and compare and contrast them with our current leaders. Then you say that is not fair, because, well...um...um this is just about Palin. As if Palin exists in a political vacuum.
You attack her becasue she has a grandchild which was born out of wedlock, and proceed to say, "Palin's family history suggests a role model that I personally find unacceptable. It's that simple." Actually, Paul, it is not that simple. Sarah Palin and her husband both seemed to handle the situation the best they could, including a lot of family love and support of their kids. If she and her husband were to get a divorce, you might be able to make some hay out of it, because divorce is very hard on kids. Personally, I find it distasteful that you invoke her daughter and grandchild, but that was your choice. It says more about you than about Palin.
As I have already said, Paul, Palin is under your skin. This is not one of your better efforts (as Walter has already stated). Discretion is probably the better part of valor in this siuation, Paul...time to cut your losses and move on to another subject.
Posted by Gary as usual, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jul 18, 2010 at 4:30 pm
Gary--as usual you are confusing your opinion with "facts". Of course, Palin cannot really prove that she would be a better leader since she quit her elected position to chase after the money. You are just parroting her opinions ans positions on these issues.
But let's see--you say she consistently supported the liberation of Iraq--really? When did she support it? When she became McCain's running mate? I mean, should could not even explain the Bush Doctrine when questioned. Did she even know where Iraq was?
Now on to health care--why is it a fiasco--oh wait, I know because Obama pushed it through Congress. I am surprised you are still buying her "death panel" comments--even the republicans got on her case about that outright lie.
All of your comments regarding Palin need to be taken with a large grain of salt--you have been parroting the same tired cliches on this forum for about 2 years--"Palin is wonderful, Palin is superior, the lefties are scared, Obama is an empty suit, Biden should know better" and onand on and on and on. Nothing new or original.
Palin is a quitter, she quit at least 4 colleges, she quit her elected position of governor, betraying the trust people placed in her. She is chasing after the money before her 15 minutes of fame are gone. She will soon be working at the Wasilla Wal-Mart
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 19, 2010 at 10:08 am Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
People who condemn Palin for having attended 4 colleges have obviously never worked their way through. People who condemn her for her resignation need to look up barratry. All medical insurance has a death panel, and I am amused that the party of the people would consider working at Wal-Mart to be a put-down.
Posted by Gary as usual, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jul 19, 2010 at 10:37 am
"People who condemn Palin for having attended 4 colleges have obviously never worked their way through."
She attended 4 colleges in a period of 5 years--hard to believe she was "working her way through".
" People who condemn her for her resignation need to look up barratry."
This is the typical response--Palin never did anything wrong--she had to resign because she was being harassed by lawsuits. Nice myth, but Palin still walked out on the people that elected her. But, feel free, walter, to spin it any "way you want
"All medical insurance has a death panel,"
" and I am amused that the party of the people would consider working at Wal-Mart to be a put-down."
No, Walter, you have turned the Wal Mart comments into a putdown. I just said that she would be working in a Wal Mart. Spin, Walter, spin.
Posted by Perspective, a resident of the Meadow Park neighborhood, on Jul 19, 2010 at 1:03 pm
To GAU: So, you think Palin "walked out" on her electorate and despise that? So, what do you say about Obama who walked out on his Senate seat that he was elected to, leaving behind the horrific mess that he did ( I doubt you even followed that one)? He sure as everything didn't leave his seat "for the good of his people".
How dare you denigrate Palin, or anyone else, who plans for the calm and consistent transfer of her job to the next in command to allow her people to continue to get what they voted for. She was being obstructed in her work, punished for being who she is, by thuggish blackmail-by-lawsuit Democrats..GREAT FOR HER FOR PUSHING BACK.
BTW, I admire a hell of a lot more someone doing all she can to pay HER OWN WAY through college than I do someone who STILL won't tell us who paid and how to get him through college...and STILL is too ashamed of his grades and classes to release them.
The hypocrisy continues to take my breath away, even after all these years of seeing it on full display...
Posted by Gary as usual, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jul 19, 2010 at 1:28 pm
"So, you think Palin "walked out" on her electorate and despise that? So, what do you say about Obama who walked out on his Senate seat that he was elected to, leaving behind the horrific mess that he did ( I doubt you even followed that one)? He sure as everything didn't leave his seat "for the good of his people"."
There is walking out on your elected position to make as much money as possible and there is leaving your seat to run for another office, which politicians, both democrat and republican do all the time.
"How dare you denigrate Palin, or anyone else, who plans for the calm and consistent transfer of her job to the next in command to allow her people to continue to get what they voted for."
Well, first of all, it is called the first amendment--that allows me to call into question her actions, just like you call into question Obama's actions. If her people would continue to get what they voted for, she would have stayed in office--she did not--she quit to grab the money.
" She was being obstructed in her work, punished for being who she is, by thuggish blackmail-by-lawsuit Democrats..GREAT FOR HER FOR PUSHING BACK."
That is one explanation. Others see her as abusing her power and disregarding the law.
"BTW, I admire a hell of a lot more someone doing all she can to pay HER OWN WAY through college than I do someone who STILL won't tell us who paid and how to get him through college...and STILL is too ashamed of his grades and classes to release them."
Did Palin pay her own way through college? She did get a scholarship for winning a beauty pagent--does that count? This thread is about Palin--if you feel the need to vent about Obama, please start another thread. BTW, love how you perpetuate discredited myths about Obama and his education now. Do you still want to see his birth certificate?
"The hypocrisy continues to take my breath away, even after all these years of seeing it on full display..."
Posted by Perspective, a resident of the Meadow Park neighborhood, on Jul 19, 2010 at 4:02 pm
umm....there is walking out to allow the State to continue to get their official's time and work, and there is walking out to further one's own political career....
perpetuate myths on BHO's education? Why, I would love it if I could have any data on his classes, grades, writings, who paid for his education..ANYTHING...do you have any? If so, I would recommend you selling your data to the highest bidder, a lot of enquiring minds would love to know what you know.
Yes, earning one's way through college, be it through working in fast food or working in contests, is still earning one's way through college. And yes, I admire hard work, independence, and earning one's own way.
And yes, I still want to see the long form birth certificate that all babies BORN IN HAWAII got in the year he was born...none of us have yet to see it. Why?
Whatever, this thread is about Palin and the apparent sheer hatred of her that we find everywhere. I have my suspicions about WHY she is hated so much, but that is not the point of this thread, is it? The point of any Obama comparisons is not to detract from the thread, but to point out the hypocrisy of constantly beating up on Palin for doing so much more and better than anything the Obama fans can say about their hero.
BTW, she is no hero of mine any more, but only because she has fallen off the philosophical wagon I believed she stood for. I admire everything else about her, from her independence and strength, to her commitment to her family, her work and her faith.
The only reason I post on her in relation to this thread is that I simply can't stand double standards I see applied non-stop to her and to Obama. I have learned very much from reflecting on other people's posts, and I like to "pass it forward" to anyone who has an intellectually honest mind.
Posted by Perspective, a resident of the Meadow Park neighborhood, on Jul 20, 2010 at 9:07 am
Thanks GAU. Always happy to make someone's day brighter. I just wish someone could come up with some of the answers to the questions I, and millions, are asking. If you ever find them, let us know where they are, ok?
"A legislative investigation has concluded that Gov. Sarah Palin abused her power in pushing for the firing of an Alaska state trooper who was once married to her sister, or by failing to prevent her husband Todd from doing so."
Posted by maguro_01, a resident of Mountain View, on Jul 20, 2010 at 6:36 pm
When it comes to foreign policy and the Commander in Chief role former Gov Palin should not even be under consideration. Imagine her across a table from Hu, Putin, or Dr Merkel or Sarkozy (sp)for that matter. Imagine her in final charge of over 5,000 nuclear warheads, or the carrier battle groups, the Army and so on. It's simply chilling. From her interviews and speeches it's fairly clear that she is not writing all that position material on her blogs and it would be nice to know who is. In fact, that's one of the real problems - it's not even partisan.
Posted by maguro_01, a resident of Mountain View, on Jul 21, 2010 at 3:02 am
"... He views his own country as the enemy most of the time."
There are no grounds for this statement. I have heard the claim that Obama goes around apologizing somehow for the US. Nonsense, he has apologized where appropriate for his predecessor. Obama on election probably thought he would have to lead the US into a multipolar world. Now with near-US financial collapse, he has to command a long retreat in some areas without seeming to. Even exclusive of wars, the US military budget is unsustainable and the world knows it.
The national bar tab is nearly tapped out. Recall that Obama's predecessor also took a dive in the economic wars. The low prices lulled the voters and he quietly borrowed the money back to fund wars, tax cuts for his real constituency, and an oddly bloated government.
Posted by Perspective, a resident of the Greenmeadow neighborhood, on Jul 21, 2010 at 6:18 am
GAU, no, an investigation, sheerly coincidentally of course, and nothing to do with the Presidential Election, of course, just coincidentally released a mere week before the Election day ( the very release you link to), accuses her of supposed abuse of power for trying to get her brother in law fired for his unlawful actions.... of course, she was never tried or convicted for any of it, and in fact was exonerated completely.
Try reading even the widipedia account of "troopergate".
Anybody can accuse anyone of anything for political or other gain. The sooner we learn that, the better off we are. Why do you think we developed, in this nation for the first time ever, an assumption of innocent until proven guilty? We KNOW that there is abuse of accusations in humans..unfortunately we fall for it time and again, don't we?
Posted by Perspective, a resident of the Meadow Park neighborhood, on Jul 21, 2010 at 6:32 am
maguro: keep believing what you write, if you wish, but don't get too bummed Nov 5th 2010. The bath is coming. You can "blame Bush and Repubs" all you want, like your hero does, but the bottom line is still that your hero and his party have quadrupled our debt, doubled our unemployment, and declared war on the American people and our States.
I don't think this is going over too well with most folks.
Obama and the Dems got handed full power BECAUSE they perceived that the Repubs had spent too much and blown our economy...not understanding that they were electing the fox to guard the henhouse, and now figuring out the hens are disappearing at an even faster rate.
Agree, though..the Repubs didn't have the spine to stand up to the Dem policies that were destroying our economy, which is what got us here. We still have a few Repubs who always vote with Dems ( I could always count on Snowe, Collins and McCain to sell out our principles, and now Brown, and a couple others)... but for the moment they aren't the majority.
Whatever, I just remembered this is about Palin, not other stuff. So, back to Palin..I wonder if she would have sold us out also, given now that I see who it is she has backed and continues to back in Senate, Congressional and Governorship races. She is NOT backing conservatives...
But, neither here nor there, suffice it to say that we agree, she is not the right person to lead our country. That doesn't make it ok for scurrilous or false attacks on her and her family. "Politics of personal destruction" is passe.
Posted by DT, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 21, 2010 at 9:11 am
"your hero and his party have quadrupled our debt, doubled our unemployment, and declared war on the American people and our States."
Well, to be fair, no, that's all wrong. Debt and unemployment have skyrocketed during Obama's time in office, but he is obviously not to blame. The fault falls squarely with Bush and the republicans, who handed Obama a crumbling nation. Don't forget the republicans took a surplus and created a huge deficit.
Obama has heroically reduced unemployment and stopped the economy from achieving republican-level meltdown. Let's hope he can get another stimulus through, cut public compensation, and kill private health insurance.
Posted by Perspective, a resident of the Meadow Park neighborhood, on Jul 27, 2010 at 5:29 am
GAU: Palin has not been the "darling of conservatives" for a long time..see my post above. She has shown she is not, in fact, as much of a libertarian as we had hoped ( keep government the heck out of our way).
DT, the "surplus" was an eggshell game. There was no "surplus".
However, you are almost correct in your statement..each Admin since FDR has handed on to the next one a crumbling nation in debt load, as our government AND entitlements ( liabilities) far outpaced our ability to pay for them with every passing year.
Regardless of which party has been in charge fully of the Admin, the debt has gotten worse..period.
However, gotta hand it to you guys who don't want to see reality; even Carter and an all Dem Congress, the prior "historic" debt creators, didn't hold a candle to the level of debt creation and economic destruction of this all Dem Congress and White House.
Historic Admin..YES! Historic in debt creation and economic destruction. Historic in setting us back in race relations faster than any time in my lifetime ( imagine Bush "apologizing" to a racist like Sherrod, who purposefully withheld govt work for folks on the basis of their color, then offering her another job in the govt). Historic in government attacks on private individuals and businesses( imagine if anyone in the Bush Admin had called anyone out for boycotting and/or "name calling", like Obama has done to many individuals , or set up government sponsored boycotts of private individuals or enterprise, like 4 of this Cabinet have done..), historic loss of Constitutional division between Feds, States and individuals, historic power grab, unlike any since FDR ( that hero of the left who still don't see how FDR's Admin worsened and lengthened our Great Depression), historic abuse of government power ( imagine..OUR PRESIDENT thinks he has the right to shut down entire industries!, imagine, OUR PRESIDENT thinks that it is fine to set up a website on the WhiteHouse dot gov site to report folks who disagree with him), and a historic lawsuit against a STATE for God's sake..first time in my lifetime, if not since the Civil War. At least in the Civil War a State was going AGAINST Fed law, this time the Feds are suing a State for FOLLOWING Fed law!
So, why isn't this same Admin filing lawsuits against Cities and/or States that ARE breaking Fed Law..like "Sanctuary Cities"???? Because..it has nothing to do with following the law, and everything to do with open borders/race ( you know, because the ONLY illegals we have in this country, according to the liberal template, are those of color..which cracks me up....so far from true!!)
Yes we can ( destroy this nation!)
History has been made in all areas, none of it good for our nation, and none of it good for future race relations between any "colors" in this country.
No, I am no fan of Palin, and especially not of McCain ( politically speaking..I greatly admire his personal life in many ways), but either one of them would have made much wiser Cabinet picks, and would have not surrounded themselves with this knee-jerk Castro/Chavez/Krugman/Mao/BlackPanther like attitude that has fully alienated the now vast majority of Americans.
The only good news is that the Dem party has been on full display now for all Americans to see and know, and the race card has been torn up, for most of us anyway ( the far left still tries to throw it, but it now falls in the trash)...perhaps now we can get back to a real 2 party system, right versus left, conservative versus liberal..instead of left and further left, as we had drifted into. European style, for the last 20 years. ( Bush and elite Repubs were NOT conservative/libertarians at all, contrary to whatever you may believe. They were far too far to the left for libertarians/conservatives.
Well, you guys get the last word in your echo chamber.. I am done. I think it is getting repetitive.
Posted by Perspective, a resident of the Meadow Park neighborhood, on Jul 27, 2010 at 5:39 am
I lied..I wanted to comment on the suggestion that , "Palin's family history suggests a role model that I personally find unacceptable. It's that simple."
Then, if one believes Palin's family history suggests a role model that is unacceptable, what do those who say this think about Obama's family 'role model"? One would think, for consistency, that Obama's upbringing would suggest an "unacceptable" role model to such a person ( I, personally, am appalled at the role model our President grew up with.. being abandoned by first father that he never knew, then shipped off to grandma to finish being raised, abandoned by mom and second dad, without any male role models left in his formative years to learn from. Somehow that is a good role model? At least the Palin family doesn't abandon their kids, and stands by even the father of their grandchild when he returns to try to finally do the right thing by his child, even after doing all he could to destroy the Palin family)
Had to point out this humongous hypocrisy, the script that was written with blinders on to the "life story" of the left's hero.