Palin was by far the best candidate out of the four (Obama, Biden, and McCain are all weaker on almost every issue). It's not even close. She has a very bright future in politics.
If Palin is the next bright, rising star in politics then this country is in serious trouble.
You are right when you say that this country is in serious trouble. But not because Palin is a rising star in politics. No, it's far more imminent than that. It's because Barack Obama has aleady been elected to be the next President. That by itself would be cause for concern. But compounding the problem is that he is going to have a Congress that will to try to rubber stamp every change he attempts to make.
Palin Following Bush......That sound like pretty serious trouble to me (and most Americans BTW). Maybe we could have Joe the Plumber as Secretary of State. I think this whole thread overlooks the point that the Republicans have to groom a whole new generation of contenders and leaders. Will Palin be apart of that it's hard to say, but she will have to move to the middle if she wants to survive what the RNC has to do.
Actually, Bush and McCain were moves to the middle. Epic fail. Bush spent like the most liberal of democrats, the base turned against him, and he became the most unpopular president in history. McCain was never even close to being a conservative.
If they RNC continues to cater to the middle, they will continue to lose.
Closer to the truth, If the DNC caters to the left the RNC might win.
Palin was by far the best candidate out of the four (Obama, Biden, and McCain are all weaker on almost every issue). It's not even close. She has a very bright future in politics.
If Palin is the next bright, rising star in politics then this country is in serious trouble.
You are right when you say that this country is in serious trouble. But not because Palin is a rising star in politics. No, it's far more imminent than that. It's because Barack Obama has aleady been elected to be the next President. That by itself would be cause for concern. But compounding the problem is that he is going to have a Congress that will to try to rubber stamp every change he attempts to make.
Palin Following Bush......That sound like pretty serious trouble to me (and most Americans BTW). Maybe we could have Joe the Plumber as Secretary of State. I think this whole thread overlooks the point that the Republicans have to groom a whole new generation of contenders and leaders. Will Palin be apart of that it's hard to say, but she will have to move to the middle if she wants to survive what the RNC has to do.
Actually, Bush and McCain were moves to the middle. Epic fail. Bush spent like the most liberal of democrats, the base turned against him, and he became the most unpopular president in history. McCain was never even close to being a conservative.
If they RNC continues to cater to the middle, they will continue to lose.
Closer to the truth, If the DNC caters to the left the RNC might win.
Actually, when Democrats are successful at hiding what they are; they win. When Republicans are what they are, they win.
A liberal who admits to being a liberal is dead; a conservative who says what he is and acts like one wins every time.
I myself am neither a conservative nor a liberal, but I know how my country thinks and operates.
Palin Following Bush......That sound like pretty serious trouble to me (and most Americans BTW). Maybe we could have Joe the Plumber as Secretary of State. I think this whole thread overlooks the point that the Republicans have to groom a whole new generation of contenders and leaders. Will Palin be apart of that it's hard to say, but she will have to move to the middle if she wants to survive what the RNC has to do.
I don't think it would be in the best interest of Sarah Palin or any Republican to take the advice of someone who has no desire to see them win elections.
Palin Following Bush......That sound like pretty serious trouble to me (and most Americans BTW). Maybe we could have Joe the Plumber as Secretary of State. I think this whole thread overlooks the point that the Republicans have to groom a whole new generation of contenders and leaders. Will Palin be apart of that it's hard to say, but she will have to move to the middle if she wants to survive what the RNC has to do.
I don't think it would be in the best interest of Sarah Palin or any Republican to take the advice of someone who has no desire to see them win elections.
If your talking about me, I assure you I have no problem with Republicans. My problem is with a party that was hijacked by the far-right. Simplistic black and white issues like gun control, abortion, and immigration, while emotionally satisfying only serve to divide our country and divert attention from the real problems we face.
Palin Following Bush......That sound like pretty serious trouble to me (and most Americans BTW). Maybe we could have Joe the Plumber as Secretary of State. I think this whole thread overlooks the point that the Republicans have to groom a whole new generation of contenders and leaders. Will Palin be apart of that it's hard to say, but she will have to move to the middle if she wants to survive what the RNC has to do.
I don't think it would be in the best interest of Sarah Palin or any Republican to take the advice of someone who has no desire to see them win elections.
If your talking about me, I assure you I have no problem with Republicans. My problem is with a party that was hijacked by the far-right. Simplistic black and white issues like gun control, abortion, and immigration, while emotionally satisfying only serve to divide our country and divert attention from the real problems we face.
The party was hijacked by big government big spenders; hardly the far right.
Palin Following Bush......That sound like pretty serious trouble to me (and most Americans BTW). Maybe we could have Joe the Plumber as Secretary of State. I think this whole thread overlooks the point that the Republicans have to groom a whole new generation of contenders and leaders. Will Palin be apart of that it's hard to say, but she will have to move to the middle if she wants to survive what the RNC has to do.
I don't think it would be in the best interest of Sarah Palin or any Republican to take the advice of someone who has no desire to see them win elections.
If your talking about me, I assure you I have no problem with Republicans. My problem is with a party that was hijacked by the far-right. Simplistic black and white issues like gun control, abortion, and immigration, while emotionally satisfying only serve to divide our country and divert attention from the real problems we face.
The party was hijacked by big government big spenders; hardly the far right.
Be honest here, can you imagine her answering questions about:
the economy
the Iraq war
Sunni/Shia
Iran's nuclear program
Russia/Georgia, Israel/Palestine, Pakistan/India
national security
free trade
health care
On some of those issues, I could have seen her doing just fine. I'm sure I could have held my own on some of those myself. And she's a governor, so she's got to have at least a basic knowledge herself.
That's just it, she doesn't HAVE TO have a basic knowledge of any of this. She didn't, in fact, and that's the reason she was sequestered. You have said before, and I agree, that she is brimming with confidence. She was also incredibly popular following the RNC. So, why else would they keep her tethered? Because her lack of knowledge on national and global issues was a liability, that's why.
But part of the problem I think is that they got her wound up too tightly going into those interviews. It was obvious she was on the defensive from the start. In fact, the long delay in withholding her from the media gave them a chance to really prepare those tough questions. It's quite possible that if they had put her out there right from the start when she was a complete unknown, the press would have been more interested in learning about her background.
She was on the defensive because she had every reason to be. You can see why from her answers, it was apparent from the start. It seems that you're trying to say her answers were mind boggling because she was uncomfortable, while I'm saying she was uncomfortable because the questions boggled her mind. For a politician as popular and confident as she was following the RNC, I think my theory is far more likely.
Let's say, for example, I scheduled an interview with you to discuss the assembly of a diesel engine. Let's say you had no prior knowledge of diesel engine operation a week before the interview. How comfortable would you be going into that interview? Even if you had spent the entire week studying the subject? You know what a week of study gives you? The awareness of all the things you still don't understand.
That's the reason the interviews went so poorly. Her answers were a steady stream of talking points, that represented absolutely no understanding of the issues. The campaign staff did all they could do in such little time. Again, I'm not saying that if she truly is interested in a national office that she can't learn these things. I'm only saying that you can't wrap your head around these things in a week, no matter who you are.
Sarah Palin hadn't shown an interest in world issues prior to being selected for the ticket. Therefore, she wasn't prepared for a national campaign. I think holding her back was their only option. I can't even imagine what her answers would have been if they hadn't planted 6 talking points on her before she opened her mouth. It would have been comedy gold, yet sad, all at the same time.
In the end though, you accepted the reasons the campaign offered. She was attacked, it's liberal elite media, gotcha journalism, irrelevant questions. The McCain camp built the best statue they possibly could, considering the early deadline and the clay they were offered.
Plus there are things you can do to diffuse the media. Have the interview conducted on your terms, not theirs. The Gibson and Couric interviews were held in very formal settings. Sitting a chairs, face to face, almost as if they were interrogations. Contrast that with the Greta Van Sustren interview she did in Palin's home. If the McCain campaign had granted the press access to Palin, but done it on their terms, my guess is things would have gone smoother.
Yea. She delivers a good line. If only the McCain camp had submitted the questions they wanted to answer, she'd have done great. This isn't to determine who wins the game of tiddly winks. It's a run for the most powerful offices in the free world.
Will she be ready in 4 years? Doubtful. However, she'll be much farther along than she was this year, which was square one.
Palin Following Bush......That sound like pretty serious trouble to me (and most Americans BTW). Maybe we could have Joe the Plumber as Secretary of State. I think this whole thread overlooks the point that the Republicans have to groom a whole new generation of contenders and leaders. Will Palin be apart of that it's hard to say, but she will have to move to the middle if she wants to survive what the RNC has to do.
I don't think it would be in the best interest of Sarah Palin or any Republican to take the advice of someone who has no desire to see them win elections.
If your talking about me, I assure you I have no problem with Republicans. My problem is with a party that was hijacked by the far-right. Simplistic black and white issues like gun control, abortion, and immigration, while emotionally satisfying only serve to divide our country and divert attention from the real problems we face.
The party was hijacked by big government big spenders; hardly the far right.
But how were they able to do it? Church anyone!
They were able to do it because the big money on both sides wants bigger government, because the more socialism we have, the more society is frozen, keeping the top on top and the bottom on the bottom.
It's sad to see a great politician like this be reduced to this because of corruption. Ted Stevens did great things for Alaska and the country, and all he will be remembered for is his "series of tubes" speech, bridge to nowhere, and his seven counts of corruption. Statehood, Pipeline, ANCSA? Ring a bell? Ted Stevens worked tirelessly for his constituents and I believe that we can at least see him off with some dignity. For those of you that believe that he will be pardoned he has asked that he not be. I voted for Ted Stevens this election in the hopes that he would be replaced after the election by another republican, The people of this great state choose Mark Begich however and I think that he will do well for the state. So before you open your mouth to regurgitate sound bites please research some of the issues.
You know he can always run again in a few years. It's not like they drag you out into the street and shoot you if you lose an election.
He is 85...
"I used to think the worst thing in life was to be all alone. It's not. The worst thing in life is to end up with people who make you feel all alone." Robin Williams
You know he can always run again in a few years. It's not like they drag you out into the street and shoot you if you lose an election.
He is 85...
What was it? 60 Something years of work will do that to you ;p
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude; greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. Samuel Adams
Breaking news! A witness in the Stevens trial has admitted to perjuring himself on the witness stand. This could potentially change the outcome of the verdict on appeal. Not saying it will, but if it does, just think about how one witness might possibly have cost Stevens his seat that could (we still have to wait on two more races) potentially lead to a super majority in the US Senate.
The verdict is in! GUILTY on all 7 counts! Congrats Senator elect Mark Begich. This may very well be the seat the democrats needed for their philibuster proof majority.
Really? I was just reading an article on an error the prosecution made in the indictment, stating Stevens had answered "No" on a disclosure form when he really answered 'Yes", and whether that would have a detrimental effect on the government's case.
Interesting.
I assume he will appeal on the grounds the indictment was in error.
Thought I'd bring this thread back from the dead, considering how the US Attorney General has asked the court to overturn Stevens conviction due to prosecutorial misconduct by attorneys in the US Justice Department.
I am extremely pleased Justice has prevailed. Not only have I met Ted Stevens, I know him personally. I had a very hard time believing he did what he was accused of, that is, intentionally not disclosing gifts. There was never any rhyme or reason he would not have disclosed them, as taking them is not against the law at all.
Oh, I'm pretty sure he is guilty. I also believe they could make the charges stick if they truely wanted to. However, I think they want to avoid further smearing of such a long term Senator for breaking laws where no one really got hurt. He's retired now, and he should be left alone to finish out his life.
Of course a lot of the Republican chatter is about this meaning he is innocent or that the evidence was always flimsy and he was just smeared to help the Democrats in the 08 elections. What they fail to consider is that all this took place under the Bush Administration with a Bush Justice Department. Personally, due to his long service and the fact that he is 85 years old, I'm glad to see this dropped. I see it as almost a sort of Presidential pardon from Obama, and I think it is good for the country that this is ended.
They dropped the charges. Go read up on that little clause. So quick to damn a person even after a lifting of charges and highly ironic since you got that big ol "Co Exist bumber sticker" on your sig
People who have to create conspiracy and hate threads to further a cause lacks in intellectual comprehension of diversity.
He is guilty, even the news article indicates the charges are being dropped out of respect for his service and more to set precedent than anything else. Lastly, his legal woes aren't breaking news. I have known about this for a long while now and am not jumping to conclusions here. I also believe that his crimes don't warrant further prosecution.
Thought I'd bring this thread back from the dead, considering how the US Attorney General has asked the court to overturn Stevens conviction due to prosecutorial misconduct by attorneys in the US Justice Department. I am extremely pleased Justice has prevailed. Not only have I met Ted Stevens, I know him personally. I had a very hard time believing he did what he was accused of, that is, intentionally not disclosing gifts. There was never any rhyme or reason he would not have disclosed them, as taking them is not against the law at all.
No wonder I couldn't find this thread, you already bumped it back up to the top. I was looking for it earlier to mention the very same thing. What a sad story. The prosecutors politicized this whole thing just to get Stevens removed from office. There seems to be no limit to the depths some people will sink to for political purposes. These people are supposed to uphold the law and they are engaging in misconduct themselves. And they fooled us all. I was in favor of Stevens resigning after his conviction. Now it turns out it was a tainted verdict. Not only is it an injustice to Stevens, but it fools the public as well. Whoever the prosecutors were on this case, they should be fired!
Comments
If Palin is the next bright, rising star in politics then this country is in serious trouble.
You are right when you say that this country is in serious trouble. But not because Palin is a rising star in politics. No, it's far more imminent than that. It's because Barack Obama has aleady been elected to be the next President. That by itself would be cause for concern. But compounding the problem is that he is going to have a Congress that will to try to rubber stamp every change he attempts to make.
Palin Following Bush......That sound like pretty serious trouble to me (and most Americans BTW). Maybe we could have Joe the Plumber as Secretary of State. I think this whole thread overlooks the point that the Republicans have to groom a whole new generation of contenders and leaders. Will Palin be apart of that it's hard to say, but she will have to move to the middle if she wants to survive what the RNC has to do.
Actually, Bush and McCain were moves to the middle. Epic fail. Bush spent like the most liberal of democrats, the base turned against him, and he became the most unpopular president in history. McCain was never even close to being a conservative.
If they RNC continues to cater to the middle, they will continue to lose.
Closer to the truth, If the DNC caters to the left the RNC might win.
If Palin is the next bright, rising star in politics then this country is in serious trouble.
You are right when you say that this country is in serious trouble. But not because Palin is a rising star in politics. No, it's far more imminent than that. It's because Barack Obama has aleady been elected to be the next President. That by itself would be cause for concern. But compounding the problem is that he is going to have a Congress that will to try to rubber stamp every change he attempts to make.
Palin Following Bush......That sound like pretty serious trouble to me (and most Americans BTW). Maybe we could have Joe the Plumber as Secretary of State. I think this whole thread overlooks the point that the Republicans have to groom a whole new generation of contenders and leaders. Will Palin be apart of that it's hard to say, but she will have to move to the middle if she wants to survive what the RNC has to do.
Actually, Bush and McCain were moves to the middle. Epic fail. Bush spent like the most liberal of democrats, the base turned against him, and he became the most unpopular president in history. McCain was never even close to being a conservative.
If they RNC continues to cater to the middle, they will continue to lose.
Closer to the truth, If the DNC caters to the left the RNC might win.
Actually, when Democrats are successful at hiding what they are; they win. When Republicans are what they are, they win.
A liberal who admits to being a liberal is dead; a conservative who says what he is and acts like one wins every time.
I myself am neither a conservative nor a liberal, but I know how my country thinks and operates.
fishermage.blogspot.com
I don't think it would be in the best interest of Sarah Palin or any Republican to take the advice of someone who has no desire to see them win elections.
I don't think it would be in the best interest of Sarah Palin or any Republican to take the advice of someone who has no desire to see them win elections.
If your talking about me, I assure you I have no problem with Republicans. My problem is with a party that was hijacked by the far-right. Simplistic black and white issues like gun control, abortion, and immigration, while emotionally satisfying only serve to divide our country and divert attention from the real problems we face.
I don't think it would be in the best interest of Sarah Palin or any Republican to take the advice of someone who has no desire to see them win elections.
If your talking about me, I assure you I have no problem with Republicans. My problem is with a party that was hijacked by the far-right. Simplistic black and white issues like gun control, abortion, and immigration, while emotionally satisfying only serve to divide our country and divert attention from the real problems we face.
The party was hijacked by big government big spenders; hardly the far right.
fishermage.blogspot.com
I don't think it would be in the best interest of Sarah Palin or any Republican to take the advice of someone who has no desire to see them win elections.
If your talking about me, I assure you I have no problem with Republicans. My problem is with a party that was hijacked by the far-right. Simplistic black and white issues like gun control, abortion, and immigration, while emotionally satisfying only serve to divide our country and divert attention from the real problems we face.
The party was hijacked by big government big spenders; hardly the far right.
But how were they able to do it? Church anyone!
On some of those issues, I could have seen her doing just fine. I'm sure I could have held my own on some of those myself. And she's a governor, so she's got to have at least a basic knowledge herself.
That's just it, she doesn't HAVE TO have a basic knowledge of any of this. She didn't, in fact, and that's the reason she was sequestered. You have said before, and I agree, that she is brimming with confidence. She was also incredibly popular following the RNC. So, why else would they keep her tethered? Because her lack of knowledge on national and global issues was a liability, that's why.
But part of the problem I think is that they got her wound up too tightly going into those interviews. It was obvious she was on the defensive from the start. In fact, the long delay in withholding her from the media gave them a chance to really prepare those tough questions. It's quite possible that if they had put her out there right from the start when she was a complete unknown, the press would have been more interested in learning about her background.
She was on the defensive because she had every reason to be. You can see why from her answers, it was apparent from the start. It seems that you're trying to say her answers were mind boggling because she was uncomfortable, while I'm saying she was uncomfortable because the questions boggled her mind. For a politician as popular and confident as she was following the RNC, I think my theory is far more likely.
Let's say, for example, I scheduled an interview with you to discuss the assembly of a diesel engine. Let's say you had no prior knowledge of diesel engine operation a week before the interview. How comfortable would you be going into that interview? Even if you had spent the entire week studying the subject? You know what a week of study gives you? The awareness of all the things you still don't understand.
That's the reason the interviews went so poorly. Her answers were a steady stream of talking points, that represented absolutely no understanding of the issues. The campaign staff did all they could do in such little time. Again, I'm not saying that if she truly is interested in a national office that she can't learn these things. I'm only saying that you can't wrap your head around these things in a week, no matter who you are.
Sarah Palin hadn't shown an interest in world issues prior to being selected for the ticket. Therefore, she wasn't prepared for a national campaign. I think holding her back was their only option. I can't even imagine what her answers would have been if they hadn't planted 6 talking points on her before she opened her mouth. It would have been comedy gold, yet sad, all at the same time.
In the end though, you accepted the reasons the campaign offered. She was attacked, it's liberal elite media, gotcha journalism, irrelevant questions. The McCain camp built the best statue they possibly could, considering the early deadline and the clay they were offered.
Plus there are things you can do to diffuse the media. Have the interview conducted on your terms, not theirs. The Gibson and Couric interviews were held in very formal settings. Sitting a chairs, face to face, almost as if they were interrogations. Contrast that with the Greta Van Sustren interview she did in Palin's home. If the McCain campaign had granted the press access to Palin, but done it on their terms, my guess is things would have gone smoother.
Yea. She delivers a good line. If only the McCain camp had submitted the questions they wanted to answer, she'd have done great. This isn't to determine who wins the game of tiddly winks. It's a run for the most powerful offices in the free world.
Will she be ready in 4 years? Doubtful. However, she'll be much farther along than she was this year, which was square one.
I don't think it would be in the best interest of Sarah Palin or any Republican to take the advice of someone who has no desire to see them win elections.
If your talking about me, I assure you I have no problem with Republicans. My problem is with a party that was hijacked by the far-right. Simplistic black and white issues like gun control, abortion, and immigration, while emotionally satisfying only serve to divide our country and divert attention from the real problems we face.
The party was hijacked by big government big spenders; hardly the far right.
But how were they able to do it? Church anyone!
They were able to do it because the big money on both sides wants bigger government, because the more socialism we have, the more society is frozen, keeping the top on top and the bottom on the bottom.
fishermage.blogspot.com
It's sad to see a great politician like this be reduced to this because of corruption. Ted Stevens did great things for Alaska and the country, and all he will be remembered for is his "series of tubes" speech, bridge to nowhere, and his seven counts of corruption. Statehood, Pipeline, ANCSA? Ring a bell? Ted Stevens worked tirelessly for his constituents and I believe that we can at least see him off with some dignity. For those of you that believe that he will be pardoned he has asked that he not be. I voted for Ted Stevens this election in the hopes that he would be replaced after the election by another republican, The people of this great state choose Mark Begich however and I think that he will do well for the state. So before you open your mouth to regurgitate sound bites please research some of the issues.
'To hell with politics, just do what's right for Alaska.' Ted Stevens Last Speach http://voices.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2008/11/_history_of_alaska_fisheries.html?hpid=news-col-blogs
Uncle Ted you wil be missed.
-for the overmind.
He is 85...
He is 85...
What was it? 60 Something years of work will do that to you ;p
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude; greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
Samuel Adams
Breaking news! A witness in the Stevens trial has admitted to perjuring himself on the witness stand. This could potentially change the outcome of the verdict on appeal. Not saying it will, but if it does, just think about how one witness might possibly have cost Stevens his seat that could (we still have to wait on two more races) potentially lead to a super majority in the US Senate.
Really? I was just reading an article on an error the prosecution made in the indictment, stating Stevens had answered "No" on a disclosure form when he really answered 'Yes", and whether that would have a detrimental effect on the government's case.
Interesting.
I assume he will appeal on the grounds the indictment was in error.
Thought I'd bring this thread back from the dead, considering how the US Attorney General has asked the court to overturn Stevens conviction due to prosecutorial misconduct by attorneys in the US Justice Department.
I am extremely pleased Justice has prevailed. Not only have I met Ted Stevens, I know him personally. I had a very hard time believing he did what he was accused of, that is, intentionally not disclosing gifts. There was never any rhyme or reason he would not have disclosed them, as taking them is not against the law at all.
Oh, I'm pretty sure he is guilty. I also believe they could make the charges stick if they truely wanted to. However, I think they want to avoid further smearing of such a long term Senator for breaking laws where no one really got hurt. He's retired now, and he should be left alone to finish out his life.
Of course a lot of the Republican chatter is about this meaning he is innocent or that the evidence was always flimsy and he was just smeared to help the Democrats in the 08 elections. What they fail to consider is that all this took place under the Bush Administration with a Bush Justice Department. Personally, due to his long service and the fact that he is 85 years old, I'm glad to see this dropped. I see it as almost a sort of Presidential pardon from Obama, and I think it is good for the country that this is ended.
They dropped the charges. Go read up on that little clause. So quick to damn a person even after a lifting of charges and highly ironic since you got that big ol "Co Exist bumber sticker" on your sig
People who have to create conspiracy and hate threads to further a cause lacks in intellectual comprehension of diversity.
On my car too.
He is guilty, even the news article indicates the charges are being dropped out of respect for his service and more to set precedent than anything else. Lastly, his legal woes aren't breaking news. I have known about this for a long while now and am not jumping to conclusions here. I also believe that his crimes don't warrant further prosecution.
No wonder I couldn't find this thread, you already bumped it back up to the top. I was looking for it earlier to mention the very same thing. What a sad story. The prosecutors politicized this whole thing just to get Stevens removed from office. There seems to be no limit to the depths some people will sink to for political purposes. These people are supposed to uphold the law and they are engaging in misconduct themselves. And they fooled us all. I was in favor of Stevens resigning after his conviction. Now it turns out it was a tainted verdict. Not only is it an injustice to Stevens, but it fools the public as well. Whoever the prosecutors were on this case, they should be fired!