Democrats go Home with Note from Mommy

[BigBallinStalin]

Sarah Palin would be far less scary than four more years of Obama, although that is like saying a Toyota Tercel is a performance upgrade from a Yugo. Hopefully we can find a McLaren to win the Republican nomination, not a Tercel.

The media did a pretty good job in ruining her, ala dan quayle. She might be able to come back, but I'm afraid the social programming was far too effective this time.

Howobamagotelected.com

You're right to an extent. However there are some factors in her favor this time around:

1. Thanks to multimedia: the liberal media does not have a monopoly, though they have reached epic levels of subversion, arrogance and unethical operation.

Been hitting the Ann Coulter again, haven't you?

[BigBallinStalin]

Side note: I really like Bobby Eberle and hopefully, one day, perhaps you will hate him as much as you hate Glenn Beck and Sara Palin.

Does the idea of Sarah Palin in charge of this nation seriously not scare the ever-living shit out of you? Honestly? If it doesn't, I'm very disappointed.

No, it does not. I would prefer someone else, but I can't see any reason to be afraid.

Why does it scare the ever-living shit out of you?

There are better bowel clensers on the market, you know.

I can't speak for Woodruff, but for myself, it kinda scares me to have someone like Palin in charge of our nation. Why? Because she comes off as a bimbo nitwit. She seems to be quite ill-suited for politics. The only thing she has going for her is her looks, and she's not even that great-looking. ( Granted, if she ever came up to me and offered it up, I would hit that with the might of nations. )

Sarah Palin? Hitting that isn't even the worth the opportunity cost!

OH!

My first economic joke! OH!

[Woodruff]

Side note: I really like Bobby Eberle and hopefully, one day, perhaps you will hate him as much as you hate Glenn Beck and Sara Palin.

Does the idea of Sarah Palin in charge of this nation seriously not scare the ever-living shit out of you? Honestly? If it doesn't, I'm very disappointed.

I could see how a Marxist would especially want Obama over Palin in 2012.

I'm quite curious as to how you can imagine that I'm a fan of Obama's. Though I will admit I would choose Obama over Palin as of right now, that would certainly be a "lesser evil" choice rather than a choice of real preference.

Sarah Palin would be far less scary than four more years of Obama, although that is like saying a Toyota Tercel is a performance upgrade from a Yugo. Hopefully we can find a McLaren to win the Republican nomination, not a Tercel.

The media did a pretty good job in ruining her, ala dan quayle. She might be able to come back, but I'm afraid the social programming was far too effective this time.

Oh, my ass. She was her own worst enemy. In fact, she's still her own worst enemy.

Side note: I really like Bobby Eberle and hopefully, one day, perhaps you will hate him as much as you hate Glenn Beck and Sara Palin.

Does the idea of Sarah Palin in charge of this nation seriously not scare the ever-living shit out of you? Honestly? If it doesn't, I'm very disappointed.

No, it does not. I would prefer someone else, but I can't see any reason to be afraid.
Why does it scare the ever-living shit out of you?

Her views are excruciatingly toward the Moral Majority, and she has stated that she has no problem putting those views into government. I would consider that one of the worst things we could do as a nation, and yes I am serious about that.

[ViperOverLord]

Side note: I really like Bobby Eberle and hopefully, one day, perhaps you will hate him as much as you hate Glenn Beck and Sara Palin.

Does the idea of Sarah Palin in charge of this nation seriously not scare the ever-living shit out of you? Honestly? If it doesn't, I'm very disappointed.

I could see how a Marxist would especially want Obama over Palin in 2012.

I'm quite curious as to how you can imagine that I'm a fan of Obama's. Though I will admit I would choose Obama over Palin as of right now, that would certainly be a "lesser evil" choice rather than a choice of real preference.

Quite simply, I believe that anybody with common sense and a desire to improve America could do better than Obama.

-- Obama has tripled the deficit from GWB's time.

-- Obama follows the new world order and doesn't give a _________ about national sovereignty and is willing to exploit the illegal immigration issue to build his political base. All's he's done is muddy the waters and create bigger problems.

-- Obama double talks. He loves to sit there and say he's fight illegal immigration and then in the meantime he throws up obstruction. He did that as a Senator as well. And what about Afghanistan (and Iraq)? WTF are we still doing there? I thought he was supposedly going to get us out? Of course his ass kissing press corpse hasn't sought an explanation. But when Bush was in office we got daily death counts.

-- Universal Health Care - He rammed that down the Americans throats. We didn't want it and it's driven up costs.

-- He's a socialist. I don't think anybody should have to pay half of their paycheck to the government. That's b.s.

-- She doesn't have Bill Ayers and Reverend Wright and all sorts of subversive and racist cohorts in her past. She doesn't have a communist grandfather that rubbed of on her and for that matter she doesn't have all types of documents about her hidden.

-- She isn't going to hire about of whack job czars with histories of anti-Americanism.

I could go on for days about his b.s. I don't care if Palin is the sharpest tool in the box or not. She would look for practical solutions to big problems and she wouldn't double talk us the way Obama does.

--Now with that - What makes Obama so much better than Palin and if you come back to me with that arrogant nonsense that she just isn't smart enough then that is lame. She has proven herself as a success in government whereas Obama has proven himself as a failure in govt. So what makes Obama better than Palin?

[Woodruff]

Side note: I really like Bobby Eberle and hopefully, one day, perhaps you will hate him as much as you hate Glenn Beck and Sara Palin.

Does the idea of Sarah Palin in charge of this nation seriously not scare the ever-living shit out of you? Honestly? If it doesn't, I'm very disappointed.

I could see how a Marxist would especially want Obama over Palin in 2012.

I'm quite curious as to how you can imagine that I'm a fan of Obama's. Though I will admit I would choose Obama over Palin as of right now, that would certainly be a "lesser evil" choice rather than a choice of real preference.

Quite simply, I believe that anybody with common sense and a desire to improve America could do better than Obama.

-- Obama has tripled the deficit from GWB's time.

-- Obama follows the new world order and doesn't give a _________ about national sovereignty and is willing to exploit the illegal immigration issue to build his political base. All's he's done is muddy the waters and create bigger problems.

-- Obama double talks. He loves to sit there and say he's fight illegal immigration and then in the meantime he throws up obstruction. He did that as a Senator as well. And what about Afghanistan (and Iraq)? WTF are we still doing there? I thought he was supposedly going to get us out? Of course his ass kissing press corpse hasn't sought an explanation. But when Bush was in office we got daily death counts.

-- Universal Health Care - He rammed that down the Americans throats. We didn't want it and it's driven up costs.

-- He's a socialist. I don't think anybody should have to pay half of their paycheck to the government. That's b.s.

-- She doesn't have Bill Ayers and Reverend Wright and all sorts of subversive and racist cohorts in her past. She doesn't have a communist grandfather that rubbed of on her and for that matter she doesn't have all types of documents about her hidden.

-- She isn't going to hire about of whack job czars with histories of anti-Americanism.

I could go on for days about his b.s. I don't care if Palin is the sharpest tool in the box or not. She would look for practical solutions to big problems and she wouldn't double talk us the way Obama does.

--Now with that - What makes Obama so much better than Palin and if you come back to me with that arrogant nonsense that she just isn't smart enough then that is lame. She has proven herself as a success in government whereas Obama has proven himself as a failure in govt. So what makes Obama better than Palin?

All that and you still manage to avoid showing how you've formed the opinion that I'm such a fan of Obama's.

[tzor]

I can't speak for Woodruff, but for myself, it kinda scares me to have someone like Palin in charge of our nation. Why? Because she comes off as a bimbo nitwit. She seems to be quite ill-suited for politics.

On the first point, I would argue that due to the nature of opposition journalism everyone “comes off as a nitwit.” The conservative media totally rips the President as an idiot who cannot say two words without a teleprompter. I would humbly suggest that both are far more smarter than the opposition would have you think they are. As to the latter; the school of hard knocks is a nasty school and it’s the best school for all politicians. Few famous presidents started out with a stellar start to their career and many people thought them down and out long before they started their presidential run. This includes Richard Nixon, “Well you won’t have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore.” The Nixon / Kennedy debates were another disaster he had to suffer through. As for Palin, only time can tell.

I’ve seen too many “good” potential candidates go to hell in a hand basket. (Alan Keys anyone? He’s still trying to push birther arguments in a California court.) I’ve seen other candidates get better. I’ve seen poor candidates remain so very dismal (John McCain anyone?)

There was an interesting article in NPR yesterday about group intelligence not related to individual intelligence. The study was from CMU! (GO CMU, I almost went to you.) “As she reports in the journal Science, the more females, the higher the group intelligence, although Woolley thinks it's not so much gender as a quality of social sensitivity that women on average have more of than men.”

I’m really going for either Sara Palin or Hillary Clinton although by far neither of them can light a candle to the one person I hold in highest esteem Suzyn Waldman I can’t watch the Yankees when listening to them and Suzyn and John is so much better.

[Juan_Bottom]

But I completely see where you're coming from j9b.

Not sure if serious...

I was serious. We all like to laugh at Sarah Palin. Whenever you meet a new liberal, all you have to say is "man that Sarah Palin is crazy." And that's how you make a new best friend.


'

[Night Strike]

On topic, the Democrats did this same thing last year when going out to health care town halls in August. Why you shouldn't vote for a Democrat: they can only used approved talking points instead of thinking for themselves.

[Timminz]

Why you shouldn't vote for a Democrat or a Republican: they can only used approved talking points instead of thinking for themselves.

This has been the way of American politics for a long time, and I fully agree that it's a disgrace (as is most of the whole one party system masquerading as a two-party system), but you're being completely ridiculous to try to pin the behaviour on "one party" more than "the other".

[tkr4lf]

Why you shouldn't vote for a Democrat or a Republican: they can only used approved talking points instead of thinking for themselves.

This has been the way of American politics for a long time, and I fully agree that it's a disgrace (as is most of the whole one party system masquerading as a two-party system), but you're being completely ridiculous to try to pin the behaviour on "one party" more than "the other".

Yes, I quite agree. It is most definitely both parties that do this. And it is definitely a disgrace to this country. That is why I thnk we need more parties involved. People need to start taking 3rd parties seriously.

[Timminz]

People need to start taking 3rd parties seriously.

Won't happen any time some. The masses are totally complacent, and no 3rd party is ever going to have enough cash behind them to change that.

[ViperOverLord]

Does the idea of Sarah Palin in charge of this nation seriously not scare the ever-living shit out of you? Honestly? If it doesn't, I'm very disappointed.

I could see how a Marxist would especially want Obama over Palin in 2012.

I'm quite curious as to how you can imagine that I'm a fan of Obama's. Though I will admit I would choose Obama over Palin as of right now, that would certainly be a "lesser evil" choice rather than a choice of real preference.

Quite simply, I believe that anybody with common sense and a desire to improve America could do better than Obama.

-- Obama has tripled the deficit from GWB's time.

-- Obama follows the new world order and doesn't give a _________ about national sovereignty and is willing to exploit the illegal immigration issue to build his political base. All's he's done is muddy the waters and create bigger problems.

-- Obama double talks. He loves to sit there and say he's fight illegal immigration and then in the meantime he throws up obstruction. He did that as a Senator as well. And what about Afghanistan (and Iraq)? WTF are we still doing there? I thought he was supposedly going to get us out? Of course his ass kissing press corpse hasn't sought an explanation. But when Bush was in office we got daily death counts.

-- Universal Health Care - He rammed that down the Americans throats. We didn't want it and it's driven up costs.

-- He's a socialist. I don't think anybody should have to pay half of their paycheck to the government. That's b.s.

-- She doesn't have Bill Ayers and Reverend Wright and all sorts of subversive and racist cohorts in her past. She doesn't have a communist grandfather that rubbed of on her and for that matter she doesn't have all types of documents about her hidden.

-- She isn't going to hire about of whack job czars with histories of anti-Americanism.

I could go on for days about his b.s. I don't care if Palin is the sharpest tool in the box or not. She would look for practical solutions to big problems and she wouldn't double talk us the way Obama does.

--Now with that - What makes Obama so much better than Palin and if you come back to me with that arrogant nonsense that she just isn't smart enough then that is lame. She has proven herself as a success in government whereas Obama has proven himself as a failure in govt. So what makes Obama better than Palin?

All that and you still manage to avoid showing how you've formed the opinion that I'm such a fan of Obama's.

I'm not saying you are (or aren't) a 'fan of Obama.' Of course I notice that you defend his actions more often than you criticize him, and you think Palin is just terrible. So please explain why this is so in your mind.

[tkr4lf]

People need to start taking 3rd parties seriously.

Won't happen any time some. The masses are totally complacent, and no 3rd party is ever going to have enough cash behind them to change that.

Exactly. And this needs to change. I have absolutely no hope that it will, but I know it's something that needs to happen.

[Woodruff]

All that and you still manage to avoid showing how you've formed the opinion that I'm such a fan of Obama's.

I'm not saying you are (or aren't) a 'fan of Obama.' Of course I notice that you defend his actions more often than you criticize him

Your reading incomprehension has struck yet again. This seems to be a repeating action on your part. Please locate those issues on which I am defending his actions. You may list them here, since it won't be a very long list.

and you think Palin is just terrible. So please explain why this is so in your mind.

I do think Palin is terrible, and I have outlined why in this thread already. I can't imagine how you may have not read it carefully, of course.

[ViperOverLord]

All that and you still manage to avoid showing how you've formed the opinion that I'm such a fan of Obama's.

I'm not saying you are (or aren't) a 'fan of Obama.' Of course I notice that you defend his actions more often than you criticize him

Your reading incomprehension has struck yet again. This seems to be a repeating action on your part. Please locate those issues on which I am defending his actions. You may list them here, since it won't be a very long list.

and you think Palin is just terrible. So please explain why this is so in your mind.

I do think Palin is terrible, and I have outlined why in this thread already. I can't imagine how you may have not read it carefully, of course.

AGAIN, explain why Palin is so terrible and how Obama is somehow so much better instead of casting your patented
'comprehension' insults in conjunction with your typical maneuver of saying your position is already well chronicled. If you aren't going to explain it then I'll note that you're willfully not answering the request for a response.

[Woodruff]

All that and you still manage to avoid showing how you've formed the opinion that I'm such a fan of Obama's.

I'm not saying you are (or aren't) a 'fan of Obama.' Of course I notice that you defend his actions more often than you criticize him

Your reading incomprehension has struck yet again. This seems to be a repeating action on your part. Please locate those issues on which I am defending his actions. You may list them here, since it won't be a very long list.

and you think Palin is just terrible. So please explain why this is so in your mind.

I do think Palin is terrible, and I have outlined why in this thread already. I can't imagine how you may have not read it carefully, of course.

AGAIN, explain why Palin is so terrible and how Obama is somehow so much better instead of casting your patented
'comprehension' insults in conjunction with your typical maneuver of saying your position is already well chronicled. If you aren't going to explain it then I'll note that you're willfully not answering the request for a response.

Oh, this is rich, coming from a fucking hypocrite like you..."Willfully not answering the request for a response."

You mean like when you called me a Marxist but refused to back it up when I have repeatedly "requested such a response"?

Or when you claimed that I defend so many of the actions of Obama but you refused to back it up when I have repeatedly "requested such a response" from you (in this very thread and in just my last post, no less...the one you're responding to here)?

And finally, THE INFORMATION YOU ARE ASKING ABOUT IS LOCATED IN THIS VERY THREAD IN WHICH YOU ARE POSTING. I know you don't like to read, but if you try just a little bit, you'll find it. I haven't exactly tried to hide it. You say it's my "typical maneuver" of saying my position is already well-chronicled...well it IS and in this very thread, you hypocritical shit.

[Juan_Bottom]

On the Palin talking points thing:

What got her into trouble, I think is the lack of exposure that she got during the election. The Republicans didn't allow her to do many interviews with journalists, or even too much outside of general campaigning. So when she did make a ridiculous mistake, it got a lot more attention because that's about all you saw of her. In contrast, when Obama or Liberman said something painful, there was a lot more interview to water the comment down.

Does anyone else agree with this? This is just a hypothesis that I have.

[rdsrds2120]

Democrats can never speak for themselves! I agree completely! Always requesting teamwork and potential leadership, bah! The horror!

Excuse me though, I'm going to go watch Fox News, or MSNBC, and learn as much, unbiased, think-for-myself news as I can!

[bradleybadly]

Good to see them going away. The real danger now is watching the lame duck session of Pelosi's try to ram through things after they've already lost the House. It's going to be awhile before the Democrats gain political power. They're going to need to reinvent themselves to a new generation of youngsters with a new label to claim that they're not really socialists, but want to "change" America for the better. I'm guessing they'll call themselves Fairnessives, or Equalityists the next time.

[bradleybadly]

Oh, this is rich, coming from a fucking hypocrite like you..."Willfully not answering the request for a response."

You mean like when you called me a Marxist but refused to back it up when I have repeatedly "requested such a response"?

Or when you claimed that I defend so many of the actions of Obama but you refused to back it up when I have repeatedly "requested such a response" from you (in this very thread and in just my last post, no less...the one you're responding to here)?

And finally, THE INFORMATION YOU ARE ASKING ABOUT IS LOCATED IN THIS VERY THREAD IN WHICH YOU ARE POSTING. I know you don't like to read, but if you try just a little bit, you'll find it. I haven't exactly tried to hide it. You say it's my "typical maneuver" of saying my position is already well-chronicled...well it IS and in this very thread, you hypocritical shit.

And this^ Viper, is what happens when you engage someone with a form of a personality disorder. He was just telling me that all he has ever done is ask you to "be honest in your discussions" and that other people have made it "personal" against him. I guess calling someone a "fucking hypocrite" or "hypocritical shit" isn't personal.

I'll give you the same advice as DB - don't engage him. It just gives him a platform to become enraged when he's unsuccessful at provoking the other person, regardless of the subject matter.

[Woodruff]

Oh, this is rich, coming from a fucking hypocrite like you..."Willfully not answering the request for a response."

You mean like when you called me a Marxist but refused to back it up when I have repeatedly "requested such a response"?

Or when you claimed that I defend so many of the actions of Obama but you refused to back it up when I have repeatedly "requested such a response" from you (in this very thread and in just my last post, no less...the one you're responding to here)?

And finally, THE INFORMATION YOU ARE ASKING ABOUT IS LOCATED IN THIS VERY THREAD IN WHICH YOU ARE POSTING. I know you don't like to read, but if you try just a little bit, you'll find it. I haven't exactly tried to hide it. You say it's my "typical maneuver" of saying my position is already well-chronicled...well it IS and in this very thread, you hypocritical shit.

And this^ Viper, is what happens when you engage someone with a form of a personality disorder. He was just telling me that all he has ever done is ask you to "be honest in your discussions" and that other people have made it "personal" against him. I guess calling someone a "fucking hypocrite" or "hypocritical shit" isn't personal.
I'll give you the same advice as DB - don't engage him. It just gives him a platform to become enraged when he's unsuccessful at provoking the other person, regardless of the subject matter.

Or, alternatively, he could stop being a hypocrite. I know, it's not as fun for you to say, because you can't imagine having to actually disagree with someone who is a strong conservative like yourself, but there it is.

[Juan_Bottom]

Just quote him in your sig! =D

[ViperOverLord]

All that and you still manage to avoid showing how you've formed the opinion that I'm such a fan of Obama's.

I'm not saying you are (or aren't) a 'fan of Obama.' Of course I notice that you defend his actions more often than you criticize him

Your reading incomprehension has struck yet again. This seems to be a repeating action on your part. Please locate those issues on which I am defending his actions. You may list them here, since it won't be a very long list.

and you think Palin is just terrible. So please explain why this is so in your mind.

I do think Palin is terrible, and I have outlined why in this thread already. I can't imagine how you may have not read it carefully, of course.

AGAIN, explain why Palin is so terrible and how Obama is somehow so much better instead of casting your patented
'comprehension' insults in conjunction with your typical maneuver of saying your position is already well chronicled. If you aren't going to explain it then I'll note that you're willfully not answering the request for a response.

Oh, this is rich, coming from a fucking hypocrite like you..."Willfully not answering the request for a response."

You mean like when you called me a Marxist but refused to back it up when I have repeatedly "requested such a response"?

Or when you claimed that I defend so many of the actions of Obama but you refused to back it up when I have repeatedly "requested such a response" from you (in this very thread and in just my last post, no less...the one you're responding to here)?

And finally, THE INFORMATION YOU ARE ASKING ABOUT IS LOCATED IN THIS VERY THREAD IN WHICH YOU ARE POSTING. I know you don't like to read, but if you try just a little bit, you'll find it. I haven't exactly tried to hide it. You say it's my "typical maneuver" of saying my position is already well-chronicled...well it IS and in this very thread, you hypocritical shit.

COMPREHENSION - REMEMBER? I said I'd note that you won't answer the question and not that I would make it a matter of condemnation. There is nothing hypocritical about it. BTW - I have stated at various times how you've subscribed to Marxist philosophies. Just because you obnoxiously snap your fingers and expect me to make a case about your Marxism in at any point in any debate and I don't do it, doesn't mean that I think it's a productive thing to open up that inevitable rancor from you.

Now it is you that that brought up how terrible Palin would be IN THIS THREAD and yet you don't want to explain it. So I'll just chalk it up to propaganda.

BTW - That's rich that you're requesting proof that you've defended Obama on many occasions. Yea I'll submit that proof along with the proof on how the sky is blue. I'm not going to go digging through threads to prove something that's painfully obvious. In any event, you twist arguments and ignore items with regularity that it wouldn't be worth my time.

[Woodruff]

COMPREHENSION - REMEMBER? I said I'd note that you won't answer the question and not that I would make it a matter of condemnation. There is nothing hypocritical about it. BTW - I have stated at various times how you've subscribed to Marxist philosophies. Just because you obnoxiously snap your fingers and expect me to make a case about your Marxism in at any point in any debate and I don't do it, doesn't mean that I think it's a productive thing to open up that inevitable rancor from you.

Yes, you have at various times stated that I am a Marxist. You have NOT ONCE supported that accusation with any sort of evidence, however. Not once.

Now it is you that that brought up how terrible Palin would be IN THIS THREAD and yet you don't want to explain it. So I'll just chalk it up to propaganda.

I'll not allow your cowardice to get you off the hook. You first...why am I a Marxist AND in what manner am I supporting Obama's policies? Once you have answered those two questions, then I will bother to point you to the post in this thread where I already answered your question. I suspect you'll either let it drop at this point or you will continue with your hypocritical expectation that others do as you say, but not as you do.

[tzor]

I give you the real reason why everyone thinks Palin is a moron ...

Does anyone remember "57 States?"

This is the extent to which the liberal media will filter the news. You can bet your ass that if had been Palin who had said "57 States" everyone remember it now because it would have been on the news 24/7 for three whole weeks! As it was it only got coverage on Fox News.

As the Vice President said "This is fucking big." (Had a Republican said that he would no longer be in office.)

If you really want to think of a moron, think of the idiot who thought that FDR not only was president when the great stock market crash took place, but that he then went on the Television to calm the voters down in one of his famous fireside chats. Remember, should the current president die, this moron will be given the command codes to the whole fucking nuclear arsenel. If you aren't scared as shit about that thought, you are legally brain dead!

Call me crazy but I prefer a moose hunting hockey mom to that bozo named Biden.

But I do agree that McCain's team screwed her roayaly. They knew their boss was a looser; they needed a fallperson. She was it.