Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 36 to 56 of 56

Thread: Why all the hate for Sarah Palin

  1. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    860
    Anyone care to bet that she'll wind up on Fox with her own show following Mike Huckabee, giving us more of that "fair and balanced" reporting I've come to expect?

  2. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    687
    Quote Originally Posted by casey73 View Post
    I guess it's all a matter of perspective. I believe her instant popularity with republicans scared the shit out of the left and the state media has been given orders to grind away until she is vapor.
    Her popularity within the party scared the shit out of many REPUBLICANS, who were, frankly, embarrassed by her.

  3. #38
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    93
    Quote Originally Posted by Sweetfinger View Post
    Her popularity within the party scared the shit out of many REPUBLICANS, who were, frankly, embarrassed by her.
    They should be embarrassed by her.

  4. #39
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    93
    Quote Originally Posted by hasserl View Post

    Palin somehow brings out the partisanship angst that so many on either side thrive on, and what is so ruinous to this country.
    And yet, you engage in in the same sort of one-sided partisanship you decry. Being anti-democratic makes you partisan, pal. You can call it what you want but the truth only smiles.

  5. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Southwest U.S.A.
    Posts
    235

    Fair and balanced

    Quote Originally Posted by Diablo View Post
    Anyone care to bet that she'll wind up on Fox with her own show following Mike Huckabee, giving us more of that "fair and balanced" reporting I've come to expect?
    For the sake of argument, lets say that FOX leans heavily to the right. They do pull in opposing views on some of their talk shows, more so than the other cable news shows and certainly more than the old networks. But when CNN's token gay Anderson Cooper came out with his "teabagging" comment, it destroyed what little credibility CNN had, and their ratings reflect that.

    Having said that, do you really believe that NBC or MSNBC even pretend to provide objective news? I tune in to Olbermann now and then and he reminds me of the angry student council president from my high school. His MO was to say something shocking to piss off the administration. In the late 60's that was pretty standard in many student body governments. It was sophomoric and it is no different than what Olbermann and his ilk are now. I'm embarrassed for Keith every time he opens his mouth, but his intense hatred for anything or anyone conservative stops me from feeling sorry for him.

    As for Palin. Her unreleased book has set a new record for sales on Amazon. There will be a renewed series of attacks from all the MSM outlets just prior to and immediately following the release of that book. Count on it.

    The coming attack says more about the extreme left's (AKA the Obama administration) obsession with destroying anyone who voices and opposing point of view, and their reluctance to actually engage in debate of any kind. The white house's attack on talk radio and now FOX news has only pushed FOX's already record ratings up even more. It is, like Olbermann, sophomoric.

  6. #41
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    93
    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uF2rEm_9KO4"]YouTube - PALINSPEAK: The Complete Collection, Sarah Palin Gibberish[/ame]

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

  7. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Southwest U.S.A.
    Posts
    235

    That's the best you can do?

    Tele-cat,

    Instead of youtube tit for tat, how about a substantive contribution. You know, something that requires thought and maybe a little insight. I can find foolish Pelosi, Biden, Reid, Barney Frank, and even stuttering Obama clips and post them all day. That doesn't require much in the way of critical thinking skills.

  8. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    123
    I don't think number of books sold can be equated with qualification to be president. Since leaving her elected position of governing the state of Alaska to pursue her personal goals, her replacement, Sean Parnell, has systematically been overturning many of her policies and decisions. Now that she has joined the ranks of Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck, She will be richly rewarded for her hillbilly rhetoric on all the hot button issues.

  9. #44
    Supporting Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    492
    I think you're right about the ability to sell books having nothing to do with the knowlege required to be president, billyz. Seems the current resident @ 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. sold a couple of books, and he's just about bankrupted the country.

  10. #45
    Senior Member hasserl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    978
    Quote Originally Posted by Tele-Cat View Post
    And yet, you engage in in the same sort of one-sided partisanship you decry. Being anti-democratic makes you partisan, pal. You can call it what you want but the truth only smiles.
    Partisanship implies support of a party, unflinching staunch support no matter what they say or do. Partisan's are able to rationalize anything their party does as good and anything the opponents do as bad. That is not accurate about me. I am not a staunch supporter of any political party, I'll freely criticize them when & where it's justified. It just so happens that criticism of Dem's is much more prevalent. Dem's tend to epitomize the worst about politics and politicians. Think about those things that a government can do to destroy individual liberty and freedom, and to drive a country to fiscal ruin, and Dem's are currently hard at work trying to do exactly that.
    Last edited by hasserl; 10-21-2009 at 12:42 AM.

  11. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Moore View Post
    I think you're right about the ability to sell books having nothing to do with the knowlege required to be president, billyz. Seems the current resident @ 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. sold a couple of books, and he's just about bankrupted the country.
    Regarding bankrupting the country. Wasn't it President Bush who signed the Tarp Bailout ? I also find it interesting that all the people lining up for their flu shots are so against Health Care reform. Most of those shots are being given out by government public health programs. Now I read that the country can save money by offer a Public option, yet the insurance lobby is so against that plan they are spending hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars to buy votes to protect their greed. How can a country " one nation under God, with liberty and Justice for all" not feel the need to take care of their fellow American.
    My point being, the bankrupting of this country is and has been going on for too long by greedy and powerful corporations who wield the power to buy the government they deem most likely to continue funneling the wealth into their coffers.

  12. #47
    Senior Member hasserl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    978
    Billy please, you're just repeating Dem talking points that make absolutely no sense. Please, try to get beyond the partisan crap and think clearly and rationally about the situation.

    Re: flue shots. Any flu shot I've ever received was paid for, it wasn't given out by any govm't plan. It was given by a private, for profit company; and paid for by a private, for profit company I've only had two or three of the shots in my life, all paid for by the company I worked for. They would rather pay for a shot for everyone rather than take the chance on lost productivity if the employees were to get sick. But it was private money paid to a private company, no govm't services involved. And I would venture a guess that is the case for the overwhelming vast majority of cases.

    Re: Public option saving money. Give me a break. Do you actualy believe that? Where did you hear it from? Can you name any kind of government project of this size that did not end up costing many times more than the estimated cost?

    By the way, can you please show me where the federal govm't is given the responsiblity or power to do this? Particularly the part where every person would be required to buy health insurance. Remember that the powers of the fed govm't are ENUMERATED in the Constitution, all powers not specifically enumerated are retained to the States and to the People. So, show me the part in the Constitution where the fed's are empowered to do this. Please. If it's not there, it's not Constitutional. Period. DOesn't matter how nice you might think it would be, or how much money you think it would save. If it's not specifically enumerated in the Constitution than it's not their place to do it.

  13. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    93
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Moore View Post
    The media will continue to demonize Sarah in the hopes of destroying her before the next election...If real conservatives run next time, the socialists don't have a chance, after demonstrating their agenda to the electorate.
    If real conservatives run, abortion will be legal, we won't get involved in illegal wars and gay people will be able to marry. If theocratic idiots run, we socialists will kick your asses yet again.

    Personally, I think the red states should secede and make their own country. They'd find out real quick what it's like to be a third-world armpit.

  14. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by hasserl View Post
    Billy please, you're just repeating Dem talking points that make absolutely no sense. Please, try to get beyond the partisan crap and think clearly and rationally about the situation.
    I stand by my statements which are based Not on the "Talking Points" Laid out and paid for by the Insurance Lobby, But by my own personal experience and research on the matter.

    It is still a free country and everyone is entitled to their opinion and may freely speak their mind.

    There are many socialized programs in this country and very few who want them removed or reduced in anyway.

    Most large businesses in this country are subsidized by the government, either directly or thru laws passed to limit their liability and or protect their monopoly. The consequences of many business activities are passed on to the Public via taxes and or illness, poverty, reduced opportunity. They are externalities, and Big Business make a fortune on them at the Public's expense. I don't believe our founding Fathers meant for the constitution to protect those practices. The extreme cost of Health care in this country is one , if not the biggest one and I support a Reform . Only the Federal Government in conjunction with the States government can effectively deal with the Gargantuan Insurance Industries and the power they now wield over the American People.

    you may think you have health insurance, but just wait until you really need it. like getting diagnosed with MS or some other long term illness. Or you are a private contractor and you fall and permanently injure your back or become para or quadriplegic. Or heaven forbid a son or daughter becomes ill or disabled. I pray you never know these things.

  15. #50
    Supporting Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    492
    I haven't met anybody who's against health care reform, but what's being bandied about in DC is not reform, but the destruction of our system.
    Reform would be allowing me to buy insurance from whomever I want to, right now we are locked into state by state coverage,(and prices). If the federal goverment gets into the mix, think USPS, or any other agency with no motive to be productive.
    Tort reform, I have customers who are doctors, a couple are gynecologists, you would not believe what they have to pay for liability insurance.
    Make the feds pay the bills sent in by medicade/medicare, if I go to our local hospital or my doctors clinic, they take 60% off the bill because I have a high deductable. They charge that 60% to the insurance companies to help pay for the bills the feds deny, or for the illegals, and uninsured they have to treat.
    And lastly, we should remember the words of one of the founding fathers, he felt the country would be just fine until the citizens figured out that they could vote themselves money from the public funds, then he doubted that the republic could survive, it may not!

  16. #51
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    93
    Oh PLEASE. Alan Grayson has it exactly right.

    The republican health care plan is:

    Don't get sick. If you get sick, die quickly.

    I have heard NOTHING from ANY republican saying anything other than the system we have now is fine. That's a crock if there ever was one.

    No one should have to die because they can't afford insurance and no one should have to go bankrupt if they get sick.

    Your side has all kinds of compassion for the unborn, but as soon as the kid is born it's "up yours, kid, go get a job at McDonalds. Oh by the way, we're moving to a global wage scale so get used to ramen and turkey hot dogs as the staples of your diet. Oh, gee, look at the time, I've got to go, kid, I'm having prime rib and Louis XIII at the country club. Oh, by the way kid, if you get sick, just go ahead and die. You can be replaced, kid."

    In other words, the cradle-to-grave minimum wage program. That's what republicans are about these days.

  17. #52
    Senior Member hasserl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    978
    That's odd, I don't recall any Republ,ican making statements like that. However, there is this:

    Back in March of 1984, then-Colorado Gov. Richard D. Lamm, was ahead of the liberal curve in asserting elderly people who are terminally ill have a ”duty to die and get out of the way” instead of trying to prolong their lives by artificial means. People who die without having life artificially extended are similar to “leaves falling off a tree and forming humus for the other plants to grow up,” Lamm said.

    This lovely word picture was painted 25 years ago by an elected Democrat and reported in the New York Times.

    Former Democrat Sen. Tom Daschle, Obama’s scandal plagued onetime pick for Health and Human Services Secretary, praised the European nationalized health care [video link] “duty to die” model which “contained” health care costs.

    The government imposed health care overhaul being currently pushed by Democrats includes “appropriate information to help guide medical decisions at the time and place of care,” and authorizes “penalties” to be assessed to physicians who “spend too much time” on individual patients. We are facing a federal agency that eventually will, by force of law, determine which persons will be eligible for health care, and what treatment they can receive.
    You're stuck in partisanship and hatred. You're not thinking rationally. You're not getting your facts straight or doing your research. Try to get beyond the partisanship, because until we do we're doomed to be lead by these idiots in DC that have only their own personal profiteering and that of the special interests that prop them up in mind.

    I can't speak for Republicans, and it's too bad they haven't been more vocal in presenting real market based reforms, such as what Bill posted above about opening up the insurance industry to competition. There are other market based reforms they could do that would be effective in improving access to health insurance for everyone and reducing the costs. But none of those things are being proposed by anyone right now.

    BTW, I'm still waiting for someone to show what part of the Constitution grants the fed's the right to require everyone to purchase insurance, or the right to provide a "public option". As far as I know, there is no provision for socialist health care. The powers are enumerated, which one, or combination of, enumerated powers grants them this power? Please show me.

  18. #53
    Senior Member hasserl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    978
    No one should have to die because they can't afford insurance and no one should have to go bankrupt if they get sick.
    No one has any right to have anyone else provide anything to them. We all are granted equal opportunity, not equal outcomes. You may think that no one should have to die or go bankrupt, but then you are free to do all you can to provide for everyone else as much as you want to. What you are not free to do is require everyone else to do that. We live in a FREE society, where people are FREE to contribute to others, or not, as they desire. If you use the power of government to require people to give of their own personal property in order to gather that and distribute it to others, than you are repealing freedom to do that. If a person is nor free to NOT contribute, his freedoms are reduced or restrained. That is NOT what this country is based on. It is based on maximum individual freedom and liberty. You can't require perople to contribute to a cause without restricting their freedom. And at the most basic level that is what is wrong with socialized medicine. Secondary to that is the fed government has no legitimate right to do so, as the power to do so has not been granted to them.

    BTW, how much of your own money have you contributed to others? What organizations do you belong to that have raised money for charity? Just curious, it sometimes seems that those that are the loudest about spending other people's money, and about how other people are greedy and uncaring for others, tend to give the least amount of their own. I'm wondering if that's the case in this situation.

  19. #54
    Senior Member hasserl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    978
    In other words, the cradle-to-grave minimum wage program. That's what republicans are about these days.
    And how many jobs have you created? Of course you paid exceptionally well and above market average to all those employees, right?

  20. #55
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    93
    Even the conservatives at The Economist get it.

    Lexington: Ship of fools

    Nov 13th 2008
    Political parties die from the head down

    JOHN STUART MILL once dismissed the British Conservative Party as the stupid party. Today the Conservative Party is run by Oxford-educated high-fliers who have been busy reinventing conservatism for a new era. As Lexington sees it, the title of the “stupid party” now belongs to the Tories’ transatlantic cousins, the Republicans.

    There are any number of reasons for the Republican Party’s defeat on November 4th. But high on the list is the fact that the party lost the battle for brains. Barack Obama won college graduates by two points, a group that George Bush won by six points four years ago. He won voters with postgraduate degrees by 18 points. And he won voters with a household income of more than $200,000—many of whom will get thumped by his tax increases—by six points. John McCain did best among uneducated voters in Appalachia and the South.

    The Republicans lost the battle of ideas even more comprehensively than they lost the battle for educated votes, marching into the election armed with nothing more than slogans. Energy? Just drill, baby, drill. Global warming? Crack a joke about Ozone Al. Immigration? Send the bums home. Torture and Guantánamo? Wear a T-shirt saying you would rather be water-boarding. Ha ha. During the primary debates, three out of ten Republican candidates admitted that they did not believe in evolution.

    The Republican Party’s divorce from the intelligentsia has been a while in the making. The born-again Mr Bush preferred listening to his “heart” rather than his “head”. He also filled the government with incompetent toadies like Michael “heck-of-a-job” Brown, who bungled the response to Hurricane Katrina. Mr McCain, once the chattering classes’ favourite Republican, refused to grapple with the intricacies of the financial meltdown, preferring instead to look for cartoonish villains. And in a desperate attempt to serve boob bait to Bubba, he appointed Sarah Palin to his ticket, a woman who took five years to get a degree in journalism, and who was apparently unaware of some of the most rudimentary facts about international politics.

    Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future. The party’s electoral success from 1980 onwards was driven by its ability to link brains with brawn. The conservative intelligentsia not only helped to craft a message that resonated with working-class Democrats, a message that emphasised entrepreneurialism, law and order, and American pride. It also provided the party with a sweeping policy agenda. The party’s loss of brains leaves it rudderless, without a compelling agenda.

    The Republican Party’s current “redneck strategy” will leave it appealing to a shrinking and backward-looking portion of the electorate.

    Why is this happening? One reason is that conservative brawn has lost patience with brains of all kinds, conservative or liberal. Many conservatives—particularly lower-income ones—are consumed with elemental fury about everything from immigration to liberal do-gooders. They take their opinions from talk-radio hosts such as Rush Limbaugh and the deeply unsubtle Sean Hannity. And they regard Mrs Palin’s apparent ignorance not as a problem but as a badge of honour.

    Another reason is the degeneracy of the conservative intelligentsia itself, a modern-day version of the 1970s liberals it arose to do battle with: trapped in an ideological cocoon, defined by its outer fringes, ruled by dynasties and incapable of adjusting to a changed world. The movement has little to say about today’s pressing problems, such as global warming and the debacle in Iraq, and expends too much of its energy on xenophobia, homophobia and opposing stem-cell research.

    Conservative intellectuals are also engaged in their own version of what Julian Benda dubbed la trahison des clercs, the treason of the learned. They have fallen into constructing cartoon images of “real Americans”, with their “volkish” wisdom and charming habit of dropping their “g”s. Mrs Palin was invented as a national political force by Beltway journalists from the Weekly Standard and the National Review who met her when they were on luxury cruises around Alaska, and then noisily championed her cause.

    How likely is it that the Republican Party will come to its senses? There are glimmers of hope. Business conservatives worry that the party has lost the business vote. Moderates complain that the Republicans are becoming the party of “white-trash pride”. Anonymous McCain aides complain that Mrs Palin was a campaign-destroying “whack job”. One of the most encouraging signs is the support for giving the chairmanship of the Republican Party to John Sununu, a sensible and clever man who has the added advantage of coming from the north-east (he lost his New Hampshire Senate seat on November 4th).

    But the odds in favour of an imminent renaissance look long. Many conservatives continue to think they lost because they were not conservative or populist enough—Mr McCain, after all, was an amnesty-loving green who refused to make an issue out of Mr Obama’s associations with Jeremiah Wright. Richard Weaver, one of the founders of modern conservatism, once wrote a book entitled “Ideas have Consequences”; unfortunately, too many Republicans are still refusing to acknowledge that idiocy has consequences, too.
    Last edited by Tele-Cat; 10-23-2009 at 03:37 AM.

  21. #56
    DMW
    DMW is offline
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    10
    I didn't catch her name (really I don't remember as it was 3:00AM or so) but while I had insomnia the other night I turned on the boob toob to C-Span. A doctor who teaches at Harvard Medical School and is a resident phyisian at a hospital revealed that the first draft of the "Baucus Bill" was drafted by Wellpoint Healthcare, the number one health insurer in the USA. I believe that both partisan sides of this debate are big liars. Hannity and others of his ilk are telling us that we won't have the benefit of private insurance companies if Obama gets his way. The truth is that the oppposite might happen and the private insurers are going to rake us over the coals even more.

    My wife and I pay over $700 a month for health insurance after her employer's contribution. I can't stand much more of this. I may be in the next round of people who get kicked to the curb. Private insurance companies are already rationing healthcare, but I rarely hear anyone talking about it. Most of the people on TV and radio who talk about this are wealthy employees of major networks or young people who don't have health concerns. I have actually spoken with Canadian people whom I know personally and they have no complaints. They say that they pay a fair amount of taxes but they get something for what they pay in. Canadians have a life expectancy two years longer than those of us in the USA. They have a better success rate in cancer survival, too. You can't believe everything your favorite TV spin doctor has to say.

    Am I a Democrat? No. I used to be. When I was a kid I belonged to the Teen Dems organization. I later switched to the Republicans. Now I am registered Indpendent and plan to stay there. Both the Dems and the Repubs are not worthy of our trust anymore. Did you know an Independent guy is running for Governor in New Jersey and he is gaining a lot of steam. He may win. I think that the people of Jersey are no different than most other Americans. We're tired of stalemate politics. A U.S. Senator from my home state gets the largest donations from Healtcare concerns of all in the Congress or Senate. Humana is his treasure chest.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Alnico 3 Love or Hate
    By voodoochild in forum Pickup Makers
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-09-2009, 01:49 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •