| 194 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
11/23/08 12:21:25 PM#41
Originally posted by Zindaihas
Worried about what a formidable candidate she would be, huh?
The Dan Quail of the GOP? Hardly. |
|
|
11/23/08 12:25:22 PM#42
Originally posted by qazyman
The country doesn't have anywhere to go but up. You've certainly got a skewed view if you think things are going great right now.
There's an old saying, "Be content with where you're at. Because there's always a worse saying". And it's so very true. This country isn't going great right now at all. But it'll be viewed that way in four years. This country is going down down down. If you think this is rock bottom, God give your soul strength when you see real adversity.
The sky is falling the sky is falling ........do I hear? Don't bother heard it before when Clinton took office. He was the President that cut spending and reduced the size of government, and who's key appointments are now taking there post in the Obama White house. Maybe ...just Maybe the Republicans will learn something this time. Yeah. Heard the same thing from the Democrats when Dubya took office. "The sky is falling! the sky is...." Wait....the sky DID fall! My bad! :) |
|
|
Zindaihas
 Novice Member
Joined: 5/07/06
'If you put govt in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 yrs there'd be a shortage of sand'~M. Friedman |
Originally posted by keltic1701 The Dan Quail of the GOP? Hardly.
Dan Quayle is in the GOP, so that means he is the Dan Quail (sic) of the GOP. Also, you misspelled his name. You're not Dan Quayle yourself, are you? Dan Quayle never achieved the type of popularity Sarah Palin has and he never got the kind of offers she is getting. He didn't have the charisma she has and he never ran a state. The biggest mistake the Democrats can make is to continue to underestimate her (or as George Bush would say, misunderestimate her). So by all means, keep doing it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tK6YIAX1jg |
|
11/23/08 1:08:38 PM#44
Originally posted by Zindaihas The Dan Quail of the GOP? Hardly.
Dan Quayle is in the GOP, so that means he is the Dan Quail (sic) of the GOP. Also, you misspelled his name. You're not Dan Quayle yourself, are you? Dan Quayle never achieved the type of popularity Sarah Palin has and he never got the kind of offers she is getting. He didn't have the charisma she has and he never ran a state. The biggest mistake the Democrats can make is to continue to underestimate her (or as George Bush would say, misunderestimate her). So by all means, keep doing it.
And you keep believing she's actually achieved something in national politics, besides poll numbers disgraceful to McCain's ticket and a resulting loss. She'd be smart to take up the offer for show business. If she doesn't, by all means, I'd rather see Obama run against her in 2012 rather than a competent Republicans. |
|
|
Vemoi
Novice Member
Joined: 5/14/05
Government always finds a need for whatever money it gets. |
11/23/08 1:12:07 PM#45
Originally posted by Jefferson81
Good example of the Democratic party in one line. "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy. Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." -- Winston Churchill |
|
Zindaihas
Novice Member
Joined: 5/07/06
'If you put govt in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 yrs there'd be a shortage of sand'~M. Friedman |
Originally posted by sepher
It's a deal then. I'll keep touting her if you continue to underestimate her. Agreed? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tK6YIAX1jg |
|
11/23/08 1:25:37 PM#47
Originally posted by Zindaihas
It's a deal then. I'll keep touting her if you continue to underestimate her. Agreed?
That's a four-year commitment, pal. No thanks. |
|
|
11/23/08 1:43:45 PM#48
Originally posted by sepher
That's a four-year commitment, pal. No thanks. Okay, I'll call. Can I place a side bet against you on that? Any amount of money says he still remembers her in twenty weeks time. YOU name the price and the currency. Send a PM of you have the guts to make an actual wager on this. |
|
|
11/23/08 2:13:22 PM#49
Originally posted by Aelfinn
Heck no, I'm just looking for something, anything that indicates he actually will bring some of the administrative changes he promised, and am not finding it.
Maybe you should wait until he actually becomes President? |
|
|
11/23/08 2:22:35 PM#50
Originally posted by Jefferson81
Heck no, I'm just looking for something, anything that indicates he actually will bring some of the administrative changes he promised, and am not finding it.
Maybe you should wait until he actually becomes President?
So everyone should be silent until he takes office? No one should pay attention to his appointments or his behavior until then? Why? |
|
|
11/23/08 2:34:27 PM#51
Originally posted by Fishermage
Maybe you should wait until he actually becomes President?
So everyone should be silent until he takes office? No one should pay attention to his appointments or his behavior until then? Why?
He can't change jack shit until he becomes President. Do you want him to kick out George W. Bush from the Whitehouse as we speak? You people tries to blame Barack Obama for the recession and he isn't even President yet.
|
|
|
11/23/08 3:14:43 PM#52
Originally posted by Jefferson81
Maybe you should wait until he actually becomes President?
So everyone should be silent until he takes office? No one should pay attention to his appointments or his behavior until then? Why?
He can't change jack shit until he becomes President. Do you want him to kick out George W. Bush from the Whitehouse as we speak? You people tries to blame Barack Obama for the recession and he isn't even President yet.
What are you talking about? And how is it relevant to what I said? Nothing you mentioned justifies NOT paying attention to what Obama does during the transition period. These actions may be indicative of what we can find in the future, because the cabinet, or other people Presidents have called to serve intheir early days often give a decent indicatioon of what they wil do in the futyre, because Presidents often pick people THEY feel that can either implement policy; or, be so inclined to the President's liking taht these appointed peole will have near total power over a given area (like HUD for expample). In other words, it's all worth paying attention to discussing what it might mean, and sharing knowledge about the careers of these people and stuff like that. Why shouldn't people discuss such things? |
|
|
11/23/08 3:44:47 PM#53
Originally posted by Fishermage
So everyone should be silent until he takes office? No one should pay attention to his appointments or his behavior until then? Why?
He can't change jack shit until he becomes President. Do you want him to kick out George W. Bush from the Whitehouse as we speak? You people tries to blame Barack Obama for the recession and he isn't even President yet.
What are you talking about? And how is it relevant to what I said? Nothing you mentioned justifies NOT paying attention to what Obama does during the transition period. These actions may be indicative of what we can find in the future, because the cabinet, or other people Presidents have called to serve intheir early days often give a decent indicatioon of what they wil do in the futyre, because Presidents often pick people THEY feel that can either implement policy; or, be so inclined to the President's liking taht these appointed peole will have near total power over a given area (like HUD for expample). In other words, it's all worth paying attention to discussing what it might mean, and sharing knowledge about the careers of these people and stuff like that. Why shouldn't people discuss such things?
Why are you even talking about Barack Obama in a thread thats about Sarah Palin? |
|
|
11/23/08 4:10:53 PM#54
Originally posted by Jefferson81
So everyone should be silent until he takes office? No one should pay attention to his appointments or his behavior until then? Why?
He can't change jack shit until he becomes President. Do you want him to kick out George W. Bush from the Whitehouse as we speak? You people tries to blame Barack Obama for the recession and he isn't even President yet.
What are you talking about? And how is it relevant to what I said? Nothing you mentioned justifies NOT paying attention to what Obama does during the transition period. These actions may be indicative of what we can find in the future, because the cabinet, or other people Presidents have called to serve intheir early days often give a decent indicatioon of what they wil do in the futyre, because Presidents often pick people THEY feel that can either implement policy; or, be so inclined to the President's liking taht these appointed peole will have near total power over a given area (like HUD for expample). In other words, it's all worth paying attention to discussing what it might mean, and sharing knowledge about the careers of these people and stuff like that. Why shouldn't people discuss such things?
Why are you even talking about Barack Obama in a thread thats about Sarah Palin? Why not? It stands to reason that if we are talking about one person on the ticket in the past election that lost, we just MIGHT discuss at least tangentially the one who won, and what he is doing, and how it might effect the future, one element of that future being sarah palin, which is the subject of this thread. Why do you not want to discuss such things? |
|
|
11/23/08 4:29:53 PM#55
Originally posted by Fishermage
That's a four-year commitment, pal. No thanks. Okay, I'll call. Can I place a side bet against you on that? Any amount of money says he still remembers her in twenty weeks time. YOU name the price and the currency. Send a PM of you have the guts to make an actual wager on this.
You'd remember the money more than you'd remember Palin. |
|
|
11/23/08 4:35:05 PM#56
Originally posted by sepher Okay, I'll call. Can I place a side bet against you on that? Any amount of money says he still remembers her in twenty weeks time. YOU name the price and the currency. Send a PM of you have the guts to make an actual wager on this.
You'd remember the money more than you'd remember Palin. Sorry that's just plain false. I take it however that you wouldn't make a bet on any of this, which was my point. |
|
|
Zindaihas
Novice Member
Joined: 5/07/06
'If you put govt in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 yrs there'd be a shortage of sand'~M. Friedman |
Originally posted by Fishermage Okay, I'll call. Can I place a side bet against you on that? Any amount of money says he still remembers her in twenty weeks time. YOU name the price and the currency. Send a PM of you have the guts to make an actual wager on this.
He'd never actually take that bet, Fisher. I'm sure he knows that Palin is not going to forgotten any time soon, particularly by me. If she were a flash in the pan, she would have been dropped by the media and ignored by all the people that now want to get their hands on her (figuratively speaking) as soon as the election ended. I mean the most of the mainstream media don't even like her, but they still have to cover her because she's too big. Just so you know, Sepher, she's made an indelible impression on me, so there's no way I'll be forgetting her any time soon. Right now, there's only one person I can think of who I might support in a race against Palin, and that is Bobby Jindal. If he decides to run for President in 2012, I'll be taking a long hard look at both of them. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tK6YIAX1jg |
|
11/23/08 5:30:00 PM#58
Originally posted by Zindaihas
He'd never actually take that bet, Fisher. I'm sure he knows that Palin is not going to forgotten any time soon, particularly by me. If she were a flash in the pan, she would have been dropped by the media and ignored by all the people that now want to get their hands on her (figuratively speaking) as soon as the election ended. I mean the most of the mainstream media don't even like her, but they still have to cover her because she's too big. Just so you know, Sepher, she's made an indelible impression on me, so there's no way I'll be forgetting her any time soon. Right now, there's only one person I can think of who I might support in a race against Palin, and that is Bobby Jindal. If he decides to run for President in 2012, I'll be taking a long hard look at both of them. Zin may remember her in 2012 but I would wager that the rest of the voting population will have as much memory of Sarah Palin as the 2004 runner-up on American Idol. |
|
|
Vemoi
Novice Member
Joined: 5/14/05
Government always finds a need for whatever money it gets. |
11/23/08 9:51:19 PM#59
Originally posted by Zindaihas
He'd never actually take that bet, Fisher. I'm sure he knows that Palin is not going to forgotten any time soon, particularly by me. If she were a flash in the pan, she would have been dropped by the media and ignored by all the people that now want to get their hands on her (figuratively speaking) as soon as the election ended. I mean the most of the mainstream media don't even like her, but they still have to cover her because she's too big. Just so you know, Sepher, she's made an indelible impression on me, so there's no way I'll be forgetting her any time soon. Right now, there's only one person I can think of who I might support in a race against Palin, and that is Bobby Jindal. If he decides to run for President in 2012, I'll be taking a long hard look at both of them.
Biden is VP and we have already forgotten about him. When Hillery becomes SoS, Biden will have no job. Palin/Jindal or Jindal/Palin would be hard for the dems to have anyone to compete. I would like to see some of the prior military up and comers start moving up the ladder too. "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy. Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." -- Winston Churchill |
|
11/23/08 10:57:31 PM#60
Originally posted by Fishermage Okay, I'll call. Can I place a side bet against you on that? Any amount of money says he still remembers her in twenty weeks time. YOU name the price and the currency. Send a PM of you have the guts to make an actual wager on this.
You'd remember the money more than you'd remember Palin. Sorry that's just plain false. I take it however that you wouldn't make a bet on any of this, which was my point.
It's easy to remember money, so I have no doubt you'd remember the bet. |
|
