Palin on the Rise; Obama Is Old News

[oreo]

It scared the Democrats alright. Scared them into winning the seat for the first time in 150 years

As for republicans, it scared them into holding positions that can't win in moderate districts. Looks like another butt-kicking for the once Grand, now Old Party

Geez you liberals get more hillarious every day. You got your asses kicked in regular time--in New Jersey--the bluest of blue states--then the 1st time ever in Virgina--no democrat was left standing--even in local & court elections.

Yet--you stand firm--on the Hoffman incident. A female liberal that stuck an R behind her name & was picked by 7 people as the republican candidate in the back of a pizza parlor. Palin noticed this woman's liberal voting record after this liberal female had received 900K for campaigning--called her out on it--installed Hoffman in the last two weeks.

What is amazing is that Hoffman got so close.

Yup - the 09 election was a huge momentum change toward conservative America.

2010 is gonna prove even more so...

Do you liberals ever pay attention to history--

1994 when Republicans won in a land-slide in congress with a popular- President-- Bill Clinton & a good economy--

Now do you really believe that democrats have got a snow-balls chance in hell of surviving 2010--with all of this government spending--soaring deficits & with this economy showing over 10% unemployment?-

Democrats are going to get massacred in 2010--in both houses of congress & Barack Obama will be a 1 term President.

 

[frazzledgear]

The next book that I want to read is Newt's, I beleive it's titled " God in America." Newt is an historian and with so many on the left claiming that our founders were not Christian he and his wife have gone back and researched that statement. First, it's totally untrue and they have proof of that. This country was founded on Christian Judeo principles. So that's my next book.

reading books that fit your bias.... you are quite the adventurer and scholar.

Fit his bias? WTF are you talking about? Any idea how many founders there really were as opposed to the number you were told about in public school? Any question about why that was? Do you REALLY believe that the founders were generally atheistic or deist or anything other than devout Christians or something? Did you know that in those days different branches of Christianity were considered to be totally different religions -and that among most Christians TODAY -they still are? Just ask a Baptist if he thinks Catholicism is a Christian religion. Ask a Catholic and a Baptist if they think Mormonism is a Christian religion. ROFL Does knowing our REAL history bother you or something?

Gingrich's book is a biography of the OTHER founders without whom there would be no Declaration of Independence or US Constitution. Since our independence and the US Constitution would never have happened without these OTHER people besides the handful you happened to have been informed about in public school -do you THINK knowing our FULL history is a bad thing or something? Think it might benefit us to know about the others ones and what roles they played in all this? Or do you think we are better off pretending it was entirely the work of just 3 or 4 people when it was not?

Gingrich is a noted US historian and his newest book is the documented and annotated BIOGRAPHIES of the OTHER founders that have been overlooked in this country. If you can find ANY evidence he just made it up, please inform his publisher and your local newspaper -good luck finding that evidence though. His other history books have gotten excellent reviews because his work is meticulous and completely documented -relying on known historical documents. Do you actually think only left wing radicals are capable of documenting HISTORY? OMG -talk about letting bias rule YOUR reading habits.

 

[Rinata]

typical response from you, you stupid fuck. the one good thing about Palin winning would be you assholes getting your just desserts after begging for her to be nominated.

Oh, you sure know how to cuss good. How mature. Sorry I touched a nerve.

Sometimes when people act as stupid as you, it touches a nerve. and you're not sorry, asshole.

Look, I told you a long time ago that I don't want to exchange posts with you. So why did you even respond tonight to a post I did to someone else?? Can you not take a hint?? I don't like you. Your language is disgusting and all you contribute is to call people names and cuss at them. I am not going to deal with that. Got it??

You want to waste your time with me?? Go ahead. But I won't be reading anymore of your posts to me.

 

[rightwinger]

Palin is red hot right now. After all, she was on the Tonight Show and her Facebook page is really neat.

All Obama did was announce a major new initiative in Afghanistan and receive a Nobel Peace Prize

 

[Zoom-boing]

Oh, you sure know how to cuss good. How mature. Sorry I touched a nerve.

Sometimes when people act as stupid as you, it touches a nerve. and you're not sorry, asshole.

Look, I told you a long time ago that I don't want to exchange posts with you. So why did you even respond tonight to a post I did to someone else?? Can you not take a hint?? I don't like you. Your language is disgusting and all you contribute is to call people names and cuss at them. I am not going to deal with that. Got it??

You want to waste your time with me?? Go ahead. But I won't be reading anymore of your posts to me.

Because that is the nature of a message board. Duh.

 

[Claudette]

I would love for Sarah Palin to be the Republican nominee. Someone would win in a landslide.

None of Sarah Palin's "followers" can say what she stands for or what her "policies" are. Unless her policies are "drill baby drill" and "no bridge to nowhere".

What are her "strategies" on nuclear arms, foreign policy, health-care, and the economy?

Can she even spell most of those words? Can the right even spell most of those words?

For her to be the nominee, all the stories about infidelity, secession-ism, her pastor weaving magical spells of protection against witchcraft, her viewpoint on science, all those things would come back to haunt her. For her base, so what? They don't care about stupid things like reality, they only care about ideology. Or "idiotology".

I could tell you what her policies are -but then I've actually made an effort to find out. Just like I did with Obama even before he won the Democrat nomination -which probably explains why his choices for all those self-declared communist revolutionaries/radical czars were no surprise to me. And I made a point of finding out what her positions on different issues were to find out whether she was just a McCain-lite or not when he chose her as VP. It really wasn't difficult to find out her own positions on just about any issue at that time. But in light of the fact that just in the last few months she has given numerous TV interviews discussing her OWN positions instead of McCain's and they are spelled out in her book -it should be even easier even for lazy people to find out her positions. If they really wanted to know. If you didn't, it is much easier to just pretend you just can't figure out where to find that kind of information, isn't it?

Whatever his reasons for picking her, it was NOT because she shared his political views on most issues. But as a VP candidate, the campaign was never about where SHE stood on the issues -it was at all times about McCain's. Once chosen as VP, that person's job is to help explain and push the Presidential candidate's positions. Not their own. So if you didn't know what HER positions on anything were before she was even picked and still didn't know while she was a VP candidate -it is because she actually did her job. If you STILL don't know NOW -it is due to your own sheer laziness.

Since the woman isn't running for any office, your "concern" about where she stands on each and every issue must really be because you suspect she MIGHT run for an elected office again at some point in the future. If that should actually happen, only THEN is she obligated to make it as easy as possible for you to use the minimal energy to find out her positions. But ONLY if you would actually be a constituent who would be voting on that office. If you can't vote for the office she MIGHT be running for someday -the fact YOU don't know her positions is irrelevant. But since she isn't running for anything right now and has declared NO interest in running for any office -complaining you don't know where she stands on all issues - and given the fact you probably refused to watch any of her interviews and refused to read her book -your ignorance is actually something you CHOSE and I have no sympathy for you on that. Since it is a chosen ignorance and the cure for it is readily available - the entire thrust of your post just sounds like a really weird obsession.

Great effin' post...

I second that. Great post. Palin IS NOT RUNNING for anything so I really don't see why everyone is so concerned with her at all. Jeeze. Cann't anyone find anyone else to talk about??? I guess not.

 

[rightwinger]

I second that. Great post. Palin IS NOT RUNNING for anything so I really don't see why everyone is so concerned with her at all. Jeeze. Cann't anyone find anyone else to talk about??? I guess not.

thats the problem with the GOP, there is nobody worth talking about

 

[NYcarbineer]

I would love for Sarah Palin to be the Republican nominee. Someone would win in a landslide.

None of Sarah Palin's "followers" can say what she stands for or what her "policies" are. Unless her policies are "drill baby drill" and "no bridge to nowhere".

What are her "strategies" on nuclear arms, foreign policy, health-care, and the economy?

Can she even spell most of those words? Can the right even spell most of those words?

For her to be the nominee, all the stories about infidelity, secession-ism, her pastor weaving magical spells of protection against witchcraft, her viewpoint on science, all those things would come back to haunt her. For her base, so what? They don't care about stupid things like reality, they only care about ideology. Or "idiotology".

I could tell you what her policies are -but then I've actually made an effort to find out. Just like I did with Obama even before he won the Democrat nomination -which probably explains why his choices for all those self-declared communist revolutionaries/radical czars were no surprise to me. And I made a point of finding out what her positions on different issues were to find out whether she was just a McCain-lite or not when he chose her as VP. It really wasn't difficult to find out her own positions on just about any issue at that time. But in light of the fact that just in the last few months she has given numerous TV interviews discussing her OWN positions instead of McCain's and they are spelled out in her book -it should be even easier even for lazy people to find out her positions. If they really wanted to know. If you didn't, it is much easier to just pretend you just can't figure out where to find that kind of information, isn't it?

Whatever his reasons for picking her, it was NOT because she shared his political views on most issues. But as a VP candidate, the campaign was never about where SHE stood on the issues -it was at all times about McCain's. Once chosen as VP, that person's job is to help explain and push the Presidential candidate's positions. Not their own. So if you didn't know what HER positions on anything were before she was even picked and still didn't know while she was a VP candidate -it is because she actually did her job. If you STILL don't know NOW -it is due to your own sheer laziness.

Since the woman isn't running for any office, your "concern" about where she stands on each and every issue must really be because you suspect she MIGHT run for an elected office again at some point in the future. If that should actually happen, only THEN is she obligated to make it as easy as possible for you to use the minimal energy to find out her positions. But ONLY if you would actually be a constituent who would be voting on that office. If you can't vote for the office she MIGHT be running for someday -the fact YOU don't know her positions is irrelevant. But since she isn't running for anything right now and has declared NO interest in running for any office -complaining you don't know where she stands on all issues - and given the fact you probably refused to watch any of her interviews and refused to read her book -your ignorance is actually something you CHOSE and I have no sympathy for you on that. Since it is a chosen ignorance and the cure for it is readily available - the entire thrust of your post just sounds like a really weird obsession.

Great effin' post...

From the guy who's started more Palin threads than anyone here...

 

[NYcarbineer]

NY23 was not a loss - it was a message that struck fear in both spineless Republicans and liberal Democrats.

It scared the Democrats alright. Scared them into winning the seat for the first time in 150 years

As for republicans, it scared them into holding positions that can't win in moderate districts. Looks like another butt-kicking for the once Grand, now Old Party

Geez you liberals get more hillarious every day. You got your asses kicked in regular time--in New Jersey--the bluest of blue states--then the 1st time ever in Virgina--no democrat was left standing--even in local & court elections.

Yet--you stand firm--on the Hoffman incident. A female liberal that stuck an R behind her name & was picked by 7 people as the republican candidate in the back of a pizza parlor. Palin noticed this woman's liberal voting record after this liberal female had received 900K for campaigning--called her out on it--installed Hoffman in the last two weeks.

What is amazing is that Hoffman got so close.

Owens will vote more with the Democrats than Scozzafava would have. It's as simple as grade school math - Palin, Freedomworks, et al cost the Republicans votes in the house.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Geez you liberals get more hillarious every day. You got your asses kicked in regular time--in New Jersey--the bluest of blue states--then the 1st time ever in Virgina--no democrat was left standing--even in local & court elections.

Yet--you stand firm--on the Hoffman incident. A female liberal that stuck an R behind her name & was picked by 7 people as the republican candidate in the back of a pizza parlor. Palin noticed this woman's liberal voting record after this liberal female had received 900K for campaigning--called her out on it--installed Hoffman in the last two weeks.

What is amazing is that Hoffman got so close.

Yup - the 09 election was a huge momentum change toward conservative America.

2010 is gonna prove even more so...

Do you liberals ever pay attention to history--

1994 when Republicans won in a land-slide in congress with a popular- President-- Bill Clinton & a good economy--

Now do you really believe that democrats have got a snow-balls chance in hell of surviving 2010--with all of this government spending--soaring deficits & with this economy showing over 10% unemployment?-

Democrats are going to get massacred in 2010--in both houses of congress & Barack Obama will be a 1 term President.

Clinton's popularity was in the 30's in 1994. Yes, I know history.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[I could tell you what her policies are -but then I've actually made an effort to find out. .

Link us to one interview where Sarah Palin talks at length, substantively, in detail, with knowledge, on any major national issue. Preferably a foreign policy issue, but any will do.

 

[Rinata]

Sometimes when people act as stupid as you, it touches a nerve. and you're not sorry, asshole.

Look, I told you a long time ago that I don't want to exchange posts with you. So why did you even respond tonight to a post I did to someone else?? Can you not take a hint?? I don't like you. Your language is disgusting and all you contribute is to call people names and cuss at them. I am not going to deal with that. Got it??

You want to waste your time with me?? Go ahead. But I won't be reading anymore of your posts to me.

Because that is the nature of a message board. Duh.

Yes, it is. Therefore, I can say what I want, right? So mind your business and buzz off.

 

[beowolfe]

December 13, 2009

Palin on the Rise; Obama is Old News

By Jack Kelly

Excerpts:

The object of Mr. Gibbs' scorn was Gallup's tracking poll for the day before, which showed only 47 percent of respondents approve of the job President Barack Obama is doing, with 46 percent disapproving.

Perhaps Mr. Gibbs' skin was thin because this was the lowest ranking for a president at this point in his presidency since Gallup began conducting presidential approval polls in 1938.

Meanwhile, a CNN/Opinion Research Poll also released Monday indicated 46 percent of respondents have a favorable impression of Sarah Palin, while 46 percent have an unfavorable one.

The polls were not quite the same. Gallup asked people what they thought of the job Mr. Obama was doing, not whether or not they liked him.

Even with that caveat, though, the convergence between Mr. Obama and Ms. Palin is remarkable. There is no statistical difference between the one and the other.

This represents a substantial gain in public esteem for Ms. Palin since she resigned as governor of Alaska in July, and a substantial decline for Mr. Obama over the same period.

..."Going Rogue" received savage reviews from most liberals, like that from Ana Marie Cox in The Washington Post, who acknowledged she hadn't actually read the book.

Those who did have a different opinion. Stanley Fish, writing for The New York Times, described it as "compelling and very well done."

The reaction of liberals to Sarah Palin -- which is like that of vampires to garlic -- indicate she is the Republican they fear most. With good reason, Mr. Fish thinks.

"Perseverance, the ability to absorb defeat without falling into defeatism, is the key to Palin's character," he wrote. "Her political opponents, especially those who dismissed Ronald Reagan before he was elected, should take note."
___


Full article here:


RealClearPolitics - Palin on the Rise; Obama is Old News

____

Still a remarkable rise in national approval for Palin, and equally remarkable decline for Obama.

And those who actually understand politics, should not focus exclusively on Palin regarding this trending, but rather how it notes the overall public mood.

Obama is going against the wishes of most Americans, and this will play out in 2010 during the Congressional races. From there - who knows...

,,,

I don't agree. For Obama to have an approval rating in the high 40's after the campaign that has been waged against him by the wingnuts is remarkable. It shows that some
Americans still have sense.

 

[beowolfe]

Geez you liberals get more hillarious every day. You got your asses kicked in regular time--in New Jersey--the bluest of blue states--then the 1st time ever in Virgina--no democrat was left standing--even in local & court elections.

Yet--you stand firm--on the Hoffman incident. A female liberal that stuck an R behind her name & was picked by 7 people as the republican candidate in the back of a pizza parlor. Palin noticed this woman's liberal voting record after this liberal female had received 900K for campaigning--called her out on it--installed Hoffman in the last two weeks.

What is amazing is that Hoffman got so close.

Yup - the 09 election was a huge momentum change toward conservative America.

2010 is gonna prove even more so...

Do you liberals ever pay attention to history--

1994 when Republicans won in a land-slide in congress with a popular- President-- Bill Clinton & a good economy--

Now do you really believe that democrats have got a snow-balls chance in hell of surviving 2010--with all of this government spending--soaring deficits & with this economy showing over 10% unemployment?-

Democrats are going to get massacred in 2010--in both houses of congress & Barack Obama will be a 1 term President.

Since you're harkening back to 1994, wouldn't history prove you wrong about the POTUS. If my memory is correct, Clinton wasn't a one term president. Besides, I wouldn't exactly call 15 years 'history'.

 

[Maple]

____

Still a remarkable rise in national approval for Palin, and equally remarkable decline for Obama.

And those who actually understand politics, should not focus exclusively on Palin regarding this trending, but rather how it notes the overall public mood.

Obama is going against the wishes of most Americans, and this will play out in 2010 during the Congressional races. From there - who knows...

,,,

I don't agree. For Obama to have an approval rating in the high 40's after the campaign that has been waged against him by the wingnuts is remarkable. It shows that some
Americans still have sense.

No campaign has been waged other than the one he has waged. 787 Billion dollar stimulus bill, that is not creating any private sector jobs, passing this legislation without anyone reading it. Where is the TRANSPERENCY he promised? Stating that unemployment would not go above 8% because of this Stimulus bill, it's over 10% now. 410 billion dollar Omnibus bill with 9,000 earmarks, after he PROMISED that he would not sign anything with earmarks in it. Lately another Ommibus bill over 1 trillion dollars with another 5,000 earmarks in it. Stating at least 4 different times during the campaign that the negotiations on health care would be broadcast on CSPAN, with drug companies, doctors, insurers, hospitals etc. That has not happened, it's been in the back room with a minority of people writing this monstrosity. Where is the TRANSPERENCY he promised?
Now Cap and Trade which will tax EVERY American family app 1,500 to 3,000 dollars a year in higher utility costs??

No one needs to mount a campaign against him he is doing a great job of that all by himself.

" Never interupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." Napoleon Bonaparte

 

[KMAN]

I would love for Sarah Palin to be the Republican nominee. Someone would win in a landslide.

None of Sarah Palin's "followers" can say what she stands for or what her "policies" are. Unless her policies are "drill baby drill" and "no bridge to nowhere".

What are her "strategies" on nuclear arms, foreign policy, health-care, and the economy?

Can she even spell most of those words? Can the right even spell most of those words?

For her to be the nominee, all the stories about infidelity, secession-ism, her pastor weaving magical spells of protection against witchcraft, her viewpoint on science, all those things would come back to haunt her. For her base, so what? They don't care about stupid things like reality, they only care about ideology. Or "idiotology".

Yet you don't know what her policies are and are totally against her.... WTF?

 

[JakeStarkey]

KMAN, you have not a clue, do you? She will get 30% of the vote and return the GOP to the cold storage locker for the next three decades. So, let's not run her as a candidate, OK?

 

[geauxtohell]

She does not have a penis, but she's got the balls and the backbone to get the job done and they know it.

People with balls and backbone don't quit.

 

[geauxtohell]

The next book that I want to read is Newt's, I beleive it's titled " God in America." Newt is an historian and with so many on the left claiming that our founders were not Christian he and his wife have gone back and researched that statement. First, it's totally untrue and they have proof of that. This country was founded on Christian Judeo principles. So that's my next book.

Amend to say:

"he and his third wife have gone back and researched that statement........This country was founded on Christian Judeo principles."

Newts current wife better hope she never gets cancer so she can be served papers on a hospital bed. Like his first wife.

Of course, when you start out as a mistress, caveat emptor.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[I could tell you what her policies are -but then I've actually made an effort to find out. .

Link us to one interview where Sarah Palin talks at length, substantively, in detail, with knowledge, on any major national issue. Preferably a foreign policy issue, but any will do.

Anyone? Anyone got a link to any of the above?