Palin quit because ....

Palin quit because ....


  • Total voters
    0
I think the reaction she gets, both from the left and from those on the right that have the cajones to admit they don't think she's remotely qualified, is that we are all just dumbfounded that anyone ever really thought she could win.

i didn't know she was running for president. so Biden won? I just thought that Obama won and Biden is just a tag along type of deal.
 
I think the reaction she gets, both from the left and from those on the right that have the cajones to admit they don't think she's remotely qualified, is that we are all just dumbfounded that anyone ever really thought she could win.

who gives a crap about the vice president? this was about mccain. the fact that biden didn't hurt obama is example enough.
 
who gives a crap about the vice president? this was about mccain. the fact that biden didn't hurt obama is example enough.


Whoa, whoa, whoa. When Palin was first selected by McCain and on the scene, the Republican machine went into overdrive with excitement that she was going to put McCain over the top, that she was going to turn it all around for him, that she was drawing bigger crowds than McCain.

And then when she fumbled everything she was given as though she were a UT running back approaching the goal line, suddenly it was just about McCain?
 
Whoa, whoa, whoa. When Palin was first selected by McCain and on the scene, the Republican machine went into overdrive with excitement that she was going to put McCain over the top, that she was going to turn it all around for him, that she was drawing bigger crowds than McCain.

And then when she fumbled everything she was given as though she were a UT running back approaching the goal line, suddenly it was just about McCain?

she ended up having zero effect as do 99% of all vice presidential nominations. the exit polls proved this. the people who hated palin never considered mccain in the first place.
 
she ended up having zero effect as do 99% of all vice presidential nominations. the exit polls proved this. the people who hated palin never considered mccain in the first place.


That's no doubt correct, but I think it is also safe to say that those that were initially rather bored by McCain and who were suddenly energized by her just as quickly found themselves back in the bored column once we found out she had gone to about 8 colleges and seemed to barely have her GED.
 
I think the reaction she gets, both from the left and from those on the right that have the cajones to admit they don't think she's remotely qualified, is that we are all just dumbfounded that anyone ever really thought she could win.

I think it is obvious that Palin was divisive, at the same time it is also obvious that she energized McCain's campaign.

I think it kind of ironic that the left campaigned on change, of which we have seen none, to the contrary we have only been given the same out of control government we as a nation decried Bush for. It is really telling that a true "change" VP candidate (despite all her faults and shortcomings), for small government and responsibility is laughed at and mocked by the very people that bought Obama's "change" mantra hook, line and sinker!
 
Whoa, whoa, whoa. When Palin was first selected by McCain and on the scene, the Republican machine went into overdrive with excitement that she was going to put McCain over the top, that she was going to turn it all around for him, that she was drawing bigger crowds than McCain.

And then when she fumbled everything she was given as though she were a UT running back approaching the goal line, suddenly it was just about McCain?

Is that not their job? What are they going to say, this was a stupid pick???

And what did Biden do? They tried to keep him off the field as much as possible because he was wrong so many times.
 
she ended up having zero effect as do 99% of all vice presidential nominations. the exit polls proved this. the people who hated palin never considered mccain in the first place.

I wouldn't say she had zero effect. She did breathe some life into a campaign that was asleep at the wheel. No matter who McCain selected he was never going to win this election, so in that respect I agree that Palin had little to no effect.
 
Warren Buffet posed this same question. He wanted somebody to explain the fairness of his secretary getting paid $60,000/year being taxed at a higher rate than he was, being one of the richest men in the world.

I am not making a judgement here, just reciting what Warren Buffet thinks (or did think at one time).

i'd be more than happy to pay higher taxes if you handed me $30 billion. currently i'm getting killed by being considered a rich person and living in a high cost area.
 
Hey LG, this is from your insightful leader. Today regarding the funeral of MJ:

“You know, this is part of American culture,” Obama told Tapper. “Michael Jackson, like Elvis, like Sinatra, when somebody whose captivated the imagination of the country for that long passes away, people pay attention. And I assume at some point people will start focusing again on things like nuclear weapons.”​

This is your beacon of Hope? This is Mr. Insightful? Yea, those MJ followers are taking a break from worrying about nuclear weapons to mourn MJ. LOL. No teleprompter in sight I imagine.
 
Hey LG, this is from your insightful leader. Today regarding the funeral of MJ:



This is your beacon of Hope? This is Mr. Insightful? Yea, those MJ followers are taking a break from worrying about nuclear weapons to mourn MJ. LOL. No teleprompter in sight I imagine.

for the love of god
 
Your high wealth clients -- do they get taxed on income, or on the basis of what's accumulated? I assume its on income for the year.

What our progressive system theoretically recognizes is that ability to pay ought to have something to do with the taxation system. That is, if there are three people earning $50,000, $500,000, and $50 million respectively, and if we need $1 million in revenue, then we can't take it in equal amounts from each person. Nor would it make sense to tax at the same rate for each person because the effect on the lower income earner is magnified given the basic costs of existing in our economy.

Having said that, I completely agree with the premise that the tax code system is a complete mess and out of control. We give tax breaks and incentives supposedly to encourage spending and investment in areas we deem "good," but it ends up just being a giant shell game. I would agree that needs to end.

But if you want to scrap the progressive income tax system for something like Neil Boortz' flat tax based on consumption, people need to think long and hard about what that will do to spending and the placement of dollars in the world economy.

Based on this example, if everyone of these were taxed at 8%, the one making 50,000 pays 4000, 500000 pays 40000, and 50000000 pays 4 million in taxes, so with a flat rate, not only do we have our million needed, but a surplus. Why do we need progressive taxes? Get rid of all loopholes and tax everyone a flat rate regardless of anything on their income.
 
Hey LG, this is from your insightful leader. Today regarding the funeral of MJ:


This is your beacon of Hope? This is Mr. Insightful? Yea, those MJ followers are taking a break from worrying about nuclear weapons to mourn MJ. LOL. No teleprompter in sight I imagine.


Link? I'd like to see the quote and the context. Thanks.
 
Ahhhhh..... Well, I'll conceded it was a wierd quip, but really allvol you ought to have placed it in full context:

ABC's Jake Tapper writes that Obama "joked that he’d have to discuss Michael Jackson in order to get media coverage of the U.S.-Russian summit."
“You know, this is part of American culture,” Obama told Tapper. “Michael Jackson, like Elvis, like Sinatra, when somebody whose captivated the imagination of the country for that long passes away, people pay attention. And I assume at some point people will start focusing again on things like nuclear weapons.”


I do think the context matters here.
 
Ahhhhh..... Well, I'll conceded it was a wierd quip, but really allvol you ought to have placed it in full context:

ABC's Jake Tapper writes that Obama "joked that he’d have to discuss Michael Jackson in order to get media coverage of the U.S.-Russian summit."
“You know, this is part of American culture,” Obama told Tapper. “Michael Jackson, like Elvis, like Sinatra, when somebody whose captivated the imagination of the country for that long passes away, people pay attention. And I assume at some point people will start focusing again on things like nuclear weapons.”


I do think the context matters here.

I pasted the same piece that ABC played on the radio at the top of the hour news. No more, no less. Context does help but it is a dopy quote.
 
I pasted the same piece that ABC played on the radio at the top of the hour news. No more, no less. Context does help but it is a dopy quote.

I agree it was kind of dopey, but his point -- that the world is oddly focused on the funeral for this entertainer when US and Russia are working on a nuke weapons agreement -- is pretty accurate.
 
I agree it was kind of dopey, but his point -- that the world is oddly focused on the funeral for this entertainer when US and Russia are working on a nuke weapons agreement -- is pretty accurate.

What I find funny here is that they aren't even in agreement on what was agreed upon!
 
I agree it was kind of dopey, but his point -- that the world is oddly focused on the funeral for this entertainer when US and Russia are working on a nuke weapons agreement -- is pretty accurate.

He, of all people, should not find it odd that the masses can get fixated on an individual that in no way is worthy of the adoration they are receiving.
 

Talk about exaggeration!

that his approach to foreign affairs was already bearing modest fruit in efforts to disarm Iran and North Korea.

Mr. Obama said that Iran’s “governing elites… are going through a struggle that has been mirrored painfully and powerfully on the streets.” He said that “the fact that we have both said we are willing to work with Iran -- at the same time as we have been very clear about our grave deep concerns with respect to not just the violence, not just the detentions that have taken place -- has created a space where the international community can potentially join and pressure Iran more effectively than they have in the past.”

Huh? :blink: How on earth can he take any credit for what's going on in Iran? The international community and Iran itself were way ahead of him on this one.
 
Was Palin really running on that much of a religious platform?

Where were you during the campaign? Hell, yes she was!




You are confusing her religious beliefs with a religious platform. Her campaign as VP was not built on a religious platform. It was built on energy independence, being a "maverick" and changing politics as usual in Washington (being an outsider).

The fact that she herself was strongly religious doesn't mean that was her platform.
 
law, you have no place to down Palin's religion. especially since your boy has attended a racist church for 20+ years. he only quit because he felt it was politically expediant do so. this guy still believes that racist pastor's teachings.
 

VN Store



Back
Top