The Palin Disaster: Prominent Con Writer Calls on Palin to Step Down

Discussion in 'Congress' started by Red Dawn, Sep 26, 2008.

  1. Red Dawn
    Offline

    Red Dawn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Messages:
    3,224
    Thanks Received:
    456
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Liberal Socialist Paradise
    Ratings:
    +456
    Two disasters: With charlie gibson, and Katie couric.

    Some cons are freaking out.

    This is a conservative writer at the lead conservative Web site. This is a woman who was a fan of Sarah Palin, and now thinks Palin is wholly unqualified to be president of the United States. There is so much import to this article.

    First off, the writer is a real conservative, not some liberal. (She's been called "an Ann Coulter wannabe," and Media Matters even recently sent out an alert about her.") Second, she's a woman. Third, she was a Palin fan. Fourth, she's willing to say publicly that Palin needs to leave the race. You don't do that to your own nominee unless it's panic time and you feel you have no choice. This article gives cover to anyone in the future who criticizes Palin. She was declared unfit for combat by a lead female conservative. Also, there are probably even more conservatives fretting in the wings. This also means that Sarah Palin has not rallied Republicans. She's rallied SOME Republicans. She's freaked out others, just as she's freaked out all of us.




    Palin Problem by Kathleen Parker on National Review Online



    americablog.com
     
  2. Article 15
    Offline

    Article 15 Dr. House slayer

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Messages:
    24,673
    Thanks Received:
    4,832
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Ratings:
    +4,859
    Amazingly, I think that dropping Palin would actually be worse for the ticket ...

    Sucks to be them ...
     
  3. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    81,332
    Thanks Received:
    12,695
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +29,778
    Yep, because that will make them look sexist.

    :lol:

    Republicans are a constant source of amusement, I'll give them that.
     
  4. Silence
    Offline

    Silence wanna lick?

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    3,820
    Thanks Received:
    456
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    FL
    Ratings:
    +457
    :lol:

    yep they are fucked either way...
     
  5. Chris
    Offline

    Chris Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    23,154
    Thanks Received:
    1,958
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +2,089
    I think when Palin is recommended for indictment, they will drop Palin and pick up Romney.

    McCain's goal is to create "a headline a day" and try to stay close until election day.
     
  6. Jennifer.Bush
    Offline

    Jennifer.Bush Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    Messages:
    446
    Thanks Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +27
    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
     
  7. frazzledgear
    Offline

    frazzledgear Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    1,479
    Thanks Received:
    541
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +541
    Wow -indicted for what? You under the impression she is being "investigated" for a crime of some kind? ROFL -which one would that be? Maybe you think a highly partisan legislative panel has the power to indict and charge a governor with a crime -but guess again.

    Now its a "crime" if a governor doesn't keep her own political appointee when his own emails proved he tried to sabotage her, sneak funds into projects she aleady vetoed and held secret meetings behind her back? Or just if its a Republican one? This guy wasn't even her own political appointee in the first place, the previous governor appointed this guy. She could have immediately removed him from office once inaugurated -or she can removed him at any time and replace him and then turn around and replace THAT person too. Do you people even understand what is meant by "serves at the pleasure of the governor"? It means a governor doesn't have to any reason at all or any justification to remove a person from that office and put in someone else instead. It doesn't matter what this panel concludes -this guy is not getting his job back because the governor gets to decide who holds that office. Not the legislature.

    Good to know what gets liberals in an uproar though and who they believe is worthy of their "outrage". Clearly you must think this commissioner was ONLY fired for not removing this trooper. He wasn't and there is lots of proof he wasn't -but let's pretend he was. (Actually he was offered another position but turned it down and just left.) That must mean you think it is INAPPROPRIATE for a governor to ask the Commissioner of Public Safety to remove a state trooper AFTER an internal investigation of which she was no part - found him guilty of drinking and driving in a patrol car while on duty, guilty of what is actually felony child abuse by tazing a 13 yr. old kid and guilty of issuing death threats against former family members.

    But which would actually be an abuse of power here? Asking to have this guy removed after he was found guilty of abusing his authority and even criminal offenses by an internal investigation? Or trying to use her position as governor to PREVENT this guy from getting fired after doing these things? I have no problem answering that one. How about you? He should have been fired -and in my state WOULD have been. The fact he was once her brother-in-law doesn't mean he gets to commit crimes any other trooper would and should be fired for -but apparently some liberals think it does.

    The real problem for those who think she had no other reason to fire this commissioner - if she only fired the commissioner for refusing to remove this trooper, then once she replaced him, why didn't she ask the new guy to remove the trooper -not even once? If that is why she did it -then it makes no sense (surely not even to a liberal moonbat) that she didn't ever ask to have him removed again, does it?
     
  8. AllieBaba
    Offline

    AllieBaba BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    33,778
    Thanks Received:
    3,648
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +3,650
    Look, a stupid thread that went nowhere because it has no substance.

    Imagine that.
     
  9. Missourian
    Offline

    Missourian Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    16,281
    Thanks Received:
    4,799
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Missouri
    Ratings:
    +8,124
    Plus you left out the best part of the article (imagine that):


     
  10. GamTrak
    Offline

    GamTrak Google it and see

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2008
    Messages:
    18
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    Actually that would be typical "Maverick" McCain! He is full of irrational ideas these days! He ended him campaign (supposidly because ads were running and folks were working) for no other reason then to grand stand.

    Tossing Palin to the side because more and more of the GOP (male and female) is coming out with there true feelings about his pick is not above him.

    He could replace her in a heartbeat and move on to the next stunt, therefore keeping the spotlight on his antics until the election is over. Then godforbid a terrist event happen and scare the public into voting for him because they know that he will drag the US into another mis-guided war that will bankrupt the US.
     
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2008

Share This Page