go with the flow. Sarahcuda DIDN'T!! THAT riles both the libtard trolls AND the blue blood country club inside-the-Beltway elites.
-Ray
NRA Life Member
Soli Deo Gloria!!! |
|
"Eugene, wow!
You were so smart to post those links! (Just kidding.)
Snopes is certainly the definitive resource on the validity of documents. (Ha!)
Who owns Snopes?"
Me- Actually, Snopes is very good at debunking the crap that ciruclates around the internet as 'fact'.
"Who paid for the $800,000 and growing legal fees to keep President Obama's long form birth cerificate sealed?
Would you go to those lengths to keep your records private?"
Me- Actually, I would, if I could, and I knew the people out to open those records were against me.
Here's the point, though. You would have us believe that BHO's parents for some reason, flew to Kenya in the middle of the night, had the baby there, then snuck back into the country, bribed hospital and state officials into creating fake documentation with the expecation that he would some day run for President, when at the time he was born, most blacks weren't even allowed to vote. And they had the resources to do this even though they were both college students at the time.
Then flash forward 46 years later, this brilliant conspiracy hatched by two now deceased college students is about to come to fruition. We are expected to beleive that despite all the rumors circulating on the internet, neither Hillary Clinton nor John McCain were clever or ruthless enough to figure out this would be a way to disqualify their opponent.
Seriously, we're talking about Hillary Clinton here, who was happy to throw mud on every "bimbo eruption" that popped up saying Bill pinched her butt. But she can't get the "GOTCHA" on BHO not being a citizen. (She was happy to bring up Rezko, Ayers and Wright, after all.)
Come on, do you see where the logic of your conspiracy is starting to break down here... how many people would have to go against their own self interest to see it work?
|
|
You were so smart to post those links! (Just kidding.)
Snopes is certainly the definitive resource on the validity of documents. (Ha!)
Who owns Snopes?
Who paid for the $800,000 and growing legal fees to keep President Obama's long form birth cerificate sealed?
Would you go to those lengths to keep your records private? |
|
"Our Commader-in-Chief is the biggest phony ever."
He was born in Kenya, you know. |
|
FLAWED!
Here's some restoration, reformation, & revolution that Our Founding Fathers supported:
1) Advertise and Promote the Fact that you are forming a Grand Jury in Blogs, Local Newspapers and Community Organizations.
2) Form the Grand Jury and select a Foreman.
3) Select a Private Attorney General to make Presentments to Grand Jury, if local DA refuses to make presentments.
4) Select a convenient Meeting Place.
5) Communicate with all Citizens who have criminal information to present.
6) Schedule presentments by said Citizens.
7) Subpoena documents from Government Offices and Officials.
8) Schedule presentment of said Documents to Grand Jury by Grand Jury Attorney General.
9) Have Grand Jury Attorney General present said Documents to Grand Jury.
10) After investigation and deliberation is completed, vote and issue a True Bill (Indictment) or No True Bill.
11) Announce all Indictments to the Press.
12) Serve the Indictment on the Judiciary for the Issuance of Arrest Warrants.
http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2009/06/how-to-start-and- lead-citizens-grand.html |
|
Oh, please, not this again.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/citizen.asp
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp |
|
|
|
"isn't it interesting that there are some 50 or more on going lawsuits demanding resolution to the eligibility issue."
He was born in Kenya, you know. |
|
isn't it interesting that there are some 50 or more on going lawsuits demanding resolution to the eligibility issue.
The arrogant dismissal and consequent expenditure of some $800,000 on legal shenanigans to stop any legal procedures demanding proof beyond any doubt that Barack Hussein Obama a.k.a Barry Soetoro is a legally
elected and install POTUS is telling. Article 2, Section 1 lays it out quite clearly in order for anyone to be sworn in as POTUS one of the criteria is that he/she be NATURAL BORN CITIZENS..according to fmr Federal Judge and Sec of HMS, Micheal Chertoff in reply to a question by Sen Leahy April 2, 2008 "My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a Natural Born Citizen" Chr. Leahy "That is mine too. Thank you." (Note: Chertoff didn't say singular
parent,he said plural..that's two parents who are
American citizens)
We want Obama to prove that he fits the criteria,
his mother was a minor, of American birth, his presumed father, a Kenyan fmr. British subject..
whose citizenship is transferred to his children until such children attain their majority. Obama
let his lapse in 1982..he may be Native born if indeed born in Hawaii at some mystery hospital, but he can NEVER be a Natural Born Citizen anymore than my mother being a British subject when her parent immigrated here when she was 8 yrs. old. She was a naturalized American citizen.
|
|
"at this point in our history ( if you have money) and you are not using it to file non-stop lawsuits against this government, YOU are not worth listening to."
Very interesting. |
|
|
what has charles KRAUTHAMMER ever done to stop the shredding of our constitution. not one damn thing. the only thing he does is talk and talk and talk. he has never spent one dime of his money to file suit against the corruption going on in congress and the whitehouse. so i asked again, why does anyone listen to this man? why in the hell is matt lewis even writing a column about him.........pleeeeeez someone answer this question. at this point in our history ( if you have money) and you are not using it to file non-stop lawsuits against this government, YOU are not worth listening to. |
|
|
what has charles KRAUTHAMMER ever done to stop the shredding of our constitution. not one damn thing. the only thing he does is talk and talk and talk. he has never spent one dime of his money to file suit against the corruption going on in congress and the whitehouse. so i asked again, why does anyone listen to this man? why in the hell is matt lewis even writing a column about him.........pleeeeeez someone answer this question. at this point in our history ( if you have money) and you are not using it to file non-stop lawsuits against this government, YOU are not worth listening to. |
|
Disagree with Charles here. My goodness they are fast to put Palin down. When is the next election?
Hasn't learned enough since the last election to make her viable? Come on, give me a break please.
And Charles is the first to point out all the mistakes Obama is making in foreign policy. And he supposedly is so thoughtful. Maybe a commonsense approach would be better than a predetermined path?
Not saying Palin will be ready, but to dismiss her already is ridiculous. The election cycle is too long now, don't suggest it should be 4 years long. |
|
Here's some restoration, reformation, & revolution that Our Founding Fathers supported:
1) Advertise and Promote the Fact that you are forming a Grand Jury in Blogs, Local Newspapers and Community Organizations.
2) Form the Grand Jury and select a Foreman.
3) Select a Private Attorney General to make Presentments to Grand Jury, if local DA refuses to make presentments.
4) Select a convenient Meeting Place.
5) Communicate with all Citizens who have criminal information to present.
6) Schedule presentments by said Citizens.
7) Subpoena documents from Government Offices and Officials.
8) Schedule presentment of said Documents to Grand Jury by Grand Jury Attorney General.
9) Have Grand Jury Attorney General present said Documents to Grand Jury.
10) After investigation and deliberation is completed, vote and issue a True Bill (Indictment) or No True Bill.
11) Announce all Indictments to the Press.
12) Serve the Indictment on the Judiciary for the Issuance of Arrest Warrants.
http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2009/06/how-to-start-and- lead-citizens-grand.html |
|
is that the Republicans could put just about anyone in there and they would win up against Obozo. That's if the citizens of this country haven't marched on DC by then and taken back the White House themselves.
|
|
"Now as to this nonsense about choosing the "next in line" BS. First of all this notion came not from CK but from David Frum. So the GOP in modern history chooses the former #2 person huh? Was Nixon the #2 guy in 1964, before winning in 1968?"
Me- that's because he LOST in 1960, and not by that much. And clearly, when the GOP nominated Goldwater "Deep down, you know he's nuts!" and proceeded to lose 44 states, did Nixon start to look more attractive. And Nixon ONLY won because George Wallace split the Democratic vote.
AC- No. What about George Bush 43? Was George Bush the #2 guy in 1996? Nope. So the whole idea that this is they way it works is simply and factually inaccurate."
Me- Besides the fact that Bush-43 was trading off his father's portfolio, the fact is he LOST in 2000. By about 500,000 votes.
AC- Also, when some so called "next in line" bums are choosen how has this worked out for us? Dole lost in 1996 and McCain in 2008. Now we have socialism in the White House.
Me- Yeah, ain't it great. We actually have a government that gives a crap about working people. What a novel idea. But the fact is that these guys lost because they had nothing to run on. What was Dole's major theme? Clinton was a bad president. Well, no, he got unemployment down from 8% to 5%. What was McCain's theme. "Well, we screwed up the economy and the war, vote for me and Caribou Barbie!"
AC- "but we need a true conservative who is not afraid to take the GOP Washington elite. This person is Sarah Palin."
Me- You guys are making the mistake of thinking that your problem wasn't your record, it was the lack of idealogical purity...
All we need to do is nomination someone who is more in tune with the base, and we can win!
The GOP made this mistake in 1964, the Democrats made this mistake in 1984 and 2004. The result is always a bigger loss, not a smaller one. |
|
"Under Obama, 300 Small Businesses a Day
...are going belly up...along with unemployment numbers. Under Obama, the economy is paralyzed. Everyone is terrified to invest or hire."
Actually, the stock market has recovered a bit since Obama has taken office. All the REAL damage happened under the last year of George W. Stupid.
"Romney, Huckabee, Palin, Thompson or Rudy would have made it clear from the Nov. election they would have kept the Bush tax cuts in place, cut cap gains taxes and payroll taxes."
Me- Right. More tax cuts for rich people, because the poor dears don't have enough.
KG- "Obama is a far worst disaster than any faithfully married Baptist or Mormon you can name. Well, except maybe for Harry Reid."
Lots of big talk, but come back to me in a year. George W. Stupid took 8 years to run this economy into the ground, you expect Obama to fix all his mistakes in six months?
January 2010. Then it's Obama's economy. Until then, it's still Bush's economy. (And incidently, that's exactly the excuse conservatives used to excuse Bush's FIRST recession, blaming it on Clinton. )
|
|
Obama is NOT the only Political FRAUD! Want to LEGALLY remove Obama from POTUS? Start HERE:
There is an ongoing criminal conspiracy among Obama supporters in Nashville to cover up crimes committed by his campaign in 2007, 2008 and 2009. These crimes include, but are not limited to, VOTER FRAUD, IDENTITY THEFT, COMPUTER THEFT, INVASION OF PRIVACY and petty BURGLARIES similar to WATERGATE.
Judge Tom w. Brothers and a Partner in Karl Dean's favorite FIRM, Bass Berry & Sims, were INDICTED once and Tom w. Brothers and Bass Berry and Sims will be INDICTED again and CONVICTED this time.
When Nashville Judge Tom w. Brothers was first INDICTED for Drug Money Laundering Karl Dean was the Public Defender FIXING Cases his Wife's FIRM, Bass, Berry & Sims.
According to an old Law School friend of mine who was working for the DEA when Tom Brothers was INDICTED for DRUG MONEY Laundering, Bass, Berry & Sims was the biggest Drug Money Laundering FIRM in the Southeast.
My DEA Agent Friend's words were similar to what Phil Williams of http://www.NewsChannel5.com wrote about Russell Brothers. According to Phil Williams, Russell Brothers was a "Giant among Giants" in the Drug Smuggling Business.
Somehow the Deans accumulated a "reported" Fortune of $100 Million despite the fact that they both grew up poor. The cover story spun by the Deans is that Ms. Dean's STINGY MISER Uncle gave her the money.
Coincidentally, the Deans' cover story was similar to Tom Brothers' cover story about where the money that he was LAUNDERING for his Convicted FELON Uncle Russell's Drug Money came from.
Tom Brothers testified at his trial that he thought, "Uncle Russell got the millions from selling insurance for CNA."
|
|
the people just want to INDICT ALL THE CROOKS!
Here's some restoration, reformation, & revolution that Our Founding Fathers supported:
1) Advertise and Promote the Fact that you are forming a Grand Jury in Blogs, Local Newspapers and Community Organizations.
2) Form the Grand Jury and select a Foreman.
3) Select a Private Attorney General to make Presentments to Grand Jury, if local DA refuses to make presentments.
4) Select a convenient Meeting Place.
5) Communicate with all Citizens who have criminal information to present.
6) Schedule presentments by said Citizens.
7) Subpoena documents from Government Offices and Officials.
8) Schedule presentment of said Documents to Grand Jury by Grand Jury Attorney General.
9) Have Grand Jury Attorney General present said Documents to Grand Jury.
10) After investigation and deliberation is completed, vote and issue a True Bill (Indictment) or No True Bill.
11) Announce all Indictments to the Press.
12) Serve the Indictment on the Judiciary for the Issuance of Arrest Warrants.
http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2009/06/how-to-start-and- lead-citizens-grand.html |
|
|
CLOWN had it all. mccain was the one who needed FIXIN but his rino advisers didn't realize mccain needed a NEW BRAIN until it was too late to perform an operation on him. |
|
...than both BO and Biden. But both appeared more presidential. Faking it? Probably. But that's what you need to do to instill confidence.
Lilly's analysis is correct. Sure, Palin's personality and mannerisms appeal to a certain segment; but a candidate needs to be universally respected and trusted.
A young, pretty, somewhat small woman has her work cut out for her. IMO she needs to work overtime proving that behind the pretty, spunky exterior is a truly knowledgeable, competitent, trustworthy person. Palin doesn't come across that way. That makes her vulnerable to derision. You never want to play to your stereotype.
She needs coaching to develop her natural talent. The problem with Palin is that she seems to resist coaching.
That is disappointingly arrogant. |
|
F off - take your own advice. The death threats at palin rallies were documented and researched by many columnists right here at town hall. Are you at the right place? and how come you did not know those reporters were exposed for making it up!
Lilly, I have been outside democrat rallies and republican. I have seen and heard those - 60 radicals w/ republican presidents on a noose w/ a rope. I heard the rally crys of "He lied soldiers died" and "death to Bush" The contract with america is a contract on america, republicans want seniors to die, kids to starve w/o school lunches, blah blah
Lilly your a tool. No one wants revenge just follow the rules the founders laid out in at the founding of this country. That is it, and if Palin isn't a pointy head academic who will fire and remove career politicians, then so be it. Sorry it offends you that a person from alaska is could be the answer - any coincidence that alaska is as far from washington as possible? |
|
That would be my dream ticket. Romney's business savvy and expertise would put Americans back to work by using common sense. Romney KNOWS what businesses need in order to prosper, and that's exactly the know-how America needs in the White House. Obama has never run anything of substance, never met a payroll, never made anything. Zero business or economic expertise; look at the economy and try to tell me Obama has a clue what he's doing. The idiot thinks spending more of our as-yet-unearned tax dollars will improve anything. Romeny will have a monumental mess to clean up by 2012, and Obama will sit on him empirical throne only four years.
Palin is by far the most popular governor in America. Alaskans have a very, very high favorability rating of her. She's a smart, honest, hard-working, beautiful woman who happens to have the courage of a pioneer woman. She can stand by her man and shoot as well as he does. She is the epitomy of American conservative womanhood. She'd be wonderful VP, or even POTUS. I trust her judgement and her character.
Bobby Jindall is another of my favorites. The Republican party has quite a few really great people getting ready for 2012, and the next election can't come soon enough for me.
|
|
Gee everyone here can have some decent points but right from the start, Krauthammer is argument is just plain silly and illogical. Is Palin a serious pres. candidate and a possible frontrunner? Reason- she can't, according to Krauthammer, because of her speeches in generalizations and platitudes....and that won't work for 18 months in a campaign. Well duh, the messiah (BO) did for not 18 months but 2 plus years!!! Second point how come no one remembers what this governor walked into. A campaign of incompetence- a campaign of wishy washy mike murphy types. She had (historically speaking) the shortest prep time before being thrust into the debate WHICH SHE WON. Any person w/ debate experience knows it because 1) more truthful 2) made her opponent acknowledge she was correct or he agreed. Especially the day after when the smoke cleared and Biden's exaggerations and lies were noted the day after.
What sarah needs to do is govern for 4 more years in a fiscally responsible fashion, stay ethical in all state business, keep routing out coruption in both parties (from alaska). A real reformer with a solid record backs those platitudes with governing experience - is a plan for success. |
|
Posters, read through this thread and listen to what you see as Palin's strengths: in the words of posters, that she will rip her opponents a new one, that she will tell Washington to f*** off. And every time she appeared in public, what she did best was mock, sneer, and whip up a crowd until it became a rageful mob screaming for the opponent's death. I realize there are some townhall posters who write that all Democrats should be shot or gassed or in some other way murdered, but reasonable people understand that we are a diverse nation, a two-party nation, and that whoever wins has to govern, lead, protect, and direct the entire nation---not kill off half of us in some violent way. Governance is about negotiation, compromise, and enormous study of the issues---not just about telling people to f*** off.
I remember watching on TV when Fidel Castro took over Cuba. About the first thing he did was line up his political opponents and have them shot. Is that what the United States of America is about? And do you want Palin so she will take revenge for you against your opponents? A leader who, finally, will act out your own anger for you? |
|
And a voice coach might help. The high-pitched nasal voice is awful.
But she doesn't seem to take direction. There was a thing on TV tonight about how she got into it with McCain's campaign manager (the bald guy, I don't remember his name) over a minor side issue involving her husband---she was told to forget it but she kept making a federal case out of it and demanding redress.
I read somewhere that when she failed to win the beauty contest, whatever it was, Miss Alaska or something, she came in only runner-up, she told a friend that she had failed to win because she hadn't created enough drama around herself. That stays in my mind. She approaches running for national office that way, as if it's all about creating dramatic PR (and I notice we now have some 1 x week) but she doesn't seem to have the depth even to grasp the enormity of the issues. And nothing about her suggests that she would be president (or VP) of all the people---she speaks only to her base, and we had enough that with GWB. |
|
No, Julie, the winks were seriously bad and here is why. Acting "presidential" or even "vice-presidential" means that you behave with dignity and gravitas. First of all, a formal debate has a formal structure, and you can double this for a TV political debate because both parties have laywers that have spent weeks negotiating every little point from what questions will be asked to how far apart the lecterns will be. Palin just ignored the whole format and announced that she was going to do her own thing. You Palin-lovers may think that's cute, but a president who ignores protocol and acts as if she's down home in Alabama would insult any number of foreign heads of states and make us a laughingstock.
Second, every professional woman knows that she has to look and act professional or she won't be taken seriously. Wearing go-go boots and Big Hair and winking at people make Palin look like a prostitute; mocking and sneering make her look like a shrew. Biden was her senior both in years and in politics, and when she proposed calling him by his first name, rather than Senator Biden, she may have seemed folksy and lovable to you, but she lost a good many voters for the McCain/Palin ticket right in that minute---people who care about form and the way things are done just recoiled when she did that.
Palin never acted as if she was trying to be Vice-President or possibly one day President of the whole country. She always acted as if she was trying to excite her base, so she mocked and sneered and insulted and diminished her opponents, which she was very good at, but nothing in her manner or speech told us that she had any intention of ever being the leader of ALL the people---rather, she signaled us that she would be leader of her base, which is a small and somewhat extremist segment of the American people, and would attack the rest of us. |
|
...the way people hated on Romney the moment he started running. In my opinion, he was heads and shoulders above the rest of the field in 2008, and would have destroyed Obama - he would have had no qualms about going after the Messiah's flaws, inexperience and leftist bent, unlike McCain, who tied his own hands behind his back. Can you imagine how much better off our country would be if it were President Romney pushing back against the Dems instead of President Obama running roughshod over the rule of law with the Dems enabling him?
Of course, I never have understood the Mormon haters, either, and there sure were a lot of them that crawled out of the woodwork during the primaries... |
|
He's right that Palin can't be considered a serious candidate until she has mastered more issues. He's completely wrong about Romney, not about Romney being the front runner, that may be true, but about Romney being competent on the issues.
He wasn't passed up for being a Mormon. Mormonism is only marginally sillier than most religious sects (heck, Eisenhower was a Jehovah's Witness). He was rejected because he could not find a principle to call his own.
The best example is in health care. Romney says that he is for a free market but look at what he did for to deal with health care: He concocted a state run health care program. This tells you more about Romney than anything else. Here's why:
Romney claims that he is pragmatic and that he is anchored to what "works". But without principles he can't tell if something works so to this day he cannot accept that his program was an unmitigated disaster for Massachusetts.
Some people are blinded to reality by their principles, Romney is blinded by his lack of principles.
Palin at least has potential. Romney's full potential was actualized during his governorship of Massachusetts and the state is still reeling from it.
The Republicans ran Alf Landon against Roosevelt in 1936. Landon was Roosevelt-lite (moving to the center is nothing new for the GOP). Landon got massacred.
I hope that the Republicans run this 21st century version of Alf Landon so that the party will be utterly destroyed and we can start all over. |
|
|
I can assure you that Sarah Palin will never run as a VP for Romney and for three reseans. First, she wants the presidency not a VP slot. Second, Romney will never win the GOP primary in 2012. Third, I think she is as sick of RINOS as the rest of the GOP base is. |
|
I think Romney desperately wants to cut waste and corruption in Washington. That is his agenda. Everything else is superfluous. He is not overly driven by social issues. I believe he has very conservative personal values, but they are not his primary objective in seeking the White House.
Democrats have successfully drawn Republicans and Conservatives into battles over social issues time and time again. We lose, not because we are wrong, but the dems are masters at scaring people.
Reagan may have had some social planks in his platform, but his overriding objectives were lowering taxes, cutting government waste and defeating communism.
Romney's goals are virtually identical. Lower taxes, cut spending and protect our borders.
Romney, conservatives and Republicans need to hammer at these three issues repeatedly and not be distracted.
|
|
and I think she has done a very good job as the Governor of Alaska, I also think her very feminine and lady-like character makes her appear more diminutive in political stature than she actually is; but President? No, sorry I don't think she's quite tough enough now, but in a few years I beleive she'll rip 'em a new one.
I love Mike Huckabee but I feel there are too many people in the US who don't want a preacher in the white house, and he does have some baggage that people can't seem to overlook.
Mitt Romney flip flopped on some key issues such Gay rights and abortion which hurt him but you cannot take away from the fact that he is very, very intelligent and could help this economy greatly with his wisdom in that area. The only thing that might (but shouldn't) hurt him is the fact he is a Mormon.
Newt Gingrich has some baggage too, but again you can't take away the fact that he knows teh issues very well plus a whole lot about the way Washington is run, is quite intelligent and is a very good Conservative - which is exactly what this country needs right now.
It's a toss up for me between Newt and Romney, Sarah -as I said, in a few years. |
|
|
No I am not going to "stop it". If you are Reagan Conservative who does not support Sarah Palin, this is your right. However, Sarah Palin is the main choice for not just conservatives but even moderate republicans as well (just look at last week's poll numbers I posted). I am not going to rip on you, but I am going after the GOP elite, who does not want any true conservative in office whther Palin or someone else. |
|
Did you watch the VP debate? Biden "won" on lies. The fact that Palin winked at him has been way overdone. He lied more often than she winked.
I'd rather have a winker than a liar. |
|
Well it is nice to see you admit that you spout off nonsense when you haave no idea what you are talking about!
You wrote:
"no wonder Krauthammer and Frum are highly-respected rightwing pundits."
LOL...Neither are right wing. As I wrote before pay attention BoBo. |
|
"Bobo obviously failed to read either Krauthammer or David Frum because what they are claiming is that the #2 guy in the last GOP PRIMARIES go on to win in the next consecutive GOP PRIMARY."
Ah, you're right; I didn't read that. I assumed that "#2" meant "former VP." It is indeed obviously a stupid idea; no wonder Krauthammer and Frum are highly-respected rightwing pundits. |
|
I am not a "GOP elite." I'm a hardcore uber-conservative small business owner looking for a credible candidate. You make a mistake if you believe people don't find Palin acceptable because she is too conservative or too much like Ronald Reagan.
Oh, that she were like Ronald Reagan who could articulate the conservative cause like none other. Palin comes across as lacking knowledge and cannot put a cogent sentence together. Try to diagram her sentences sometime--when she is not giving a prepared speech.
If Palin supporters cannot get their heads outta the sand, then not only will Palin lose, but the Dems will be in power long after I'm dead. And Palin too. |
|
|
George W. Stupid, was he stupid because he believed in his vows? |
|
|
It seems to me that the GOP elites, (who are really moderates) do not want another conservative like Reagan in the White House. These people vivious attacked Reagan in 1976 and 1980. Since Reagan these moderate GOP elites have since dominated the GOP primaries and chose continuously another moderate to liberal that they could control. This would include Bush 41, Dole, and Bush 43. These people know that they cannot control Sarah Palin and she will not put up with any of their sh*t. So they are backing another moderate to liberal potential 2012 candidate, and Mitt Romney is not and was never a true conservative. They appear to be now backing this lame horse for 2012. |
|
Obama is NOT the only Political FRAUD! Want to LEGALLY remove Obama from POTUS? Start HERE:
There is an ongoing criminal conspiracy among Obama supporters in Nashville to cover up crimes committed by his campaign in 2007, 2008 and 2009. These crimes include, but are not limited to, VOTER FRAUD, IDENTITY THEFT, COMPUTER THEFT, INVASION OF PRIVACY and petty BURGLARIES similar to WATERGATE.
Judge Tom w. Brothers and a Partner in Karl Dean's favorite FIRM, Bass Berry & Sims, were INDICTED once and Tom w. Brothers and Bass Berry and Sims will be INDICTED again and CONVICTED this time.
When Nashville Judge Tom w. Brothers was first INDICTED for Drug Money Laundering Karl Dean was the Public Defender FIXING Cases his Wife's FIRM, Bass, Berry & Sims.
According to an old Law School friend of mine who was working for the DEA when Tom Brothers was INDICTED for DRUG MONEY Laundering, Bass, Berry & Sims was the biggest Drug Money Laundering FIRM in the Southeast.
My DEA Agent Friend's words were similar to what Phil Williams of http://www.NewsChannel5.com wrote about Russell Brothers. According to Phil Williams, Russell Brothers was a "Giant among Giants" in the Drug Smuggling Business.
Somehow the Deans accumulated a "reported" Fortune of $100 Million despite the fact that they both grew up poor. The cover story spun by the Deans is that Ms. Dean's STINGY MISER Uncle gave her the money.
Coincidentally, the Deans' cover story was similar to Tom Brothers' cover story about where the money that he was LAUNDERING for his Convicted FELON Uncle Russell's Drug Money came from.
Tom Brothers testified at his trial that he thought, "Uncle Russell got the millions from selling insurance for CNA."
|
|
Bobo completely misses the point and wrote:
"Nixon was #2 in 1960 and GHWBush was #2 in 1988. Both were nominated and lost. When you lose an election, you're demoted, no longer #2; that's why Nixon wasn't nominated in 1964, Ford wasn't nominated in 1980, and GHWBush wasn't nominated in 1996. Nixon fought his way back to #2 in 1968, Ford and Bush didn't even try.
Bobo obviously failed to read either Krauthammer or David Frum because what they are claiming is that the #2 guy in the last GOP PRIMARIES go on to win in the next consecutive GOP PRIMARY. This is factually inaccurate. Also, Nixon did not come in second in the GOP PRIMARY in 1960, he won the primary you dunce. Second, for Frum and Krauthammer to be accurate Nixon would have had to been #2 in the 1964 GOP PRIMARY and he was not. Also, Bush was not number #2 in the 1996 PRIMARY yet he won in 2000. Krauthammer and Frum are talking about successors in GOP PRIMARIES you idiot and not general elections, and they are both factually wrong, as are you. |
|
...gratuitous, spiteful unfair "ripping" on Palin (which CK did not do) and simply stating the obvious: If Palin wants to run for POTUS she has some work to do.
The worst thing that could happen to the GOP is that her loyal supporters cling to her and no one else...and Palin herself doesn't step up and present a more serious, credible image.
In many quarters she is not respected. It's on her head to earn that respect. Limbaugh is not helpful to a Palin candidacy when he simply dismisses honest criticism. Palin already appears flip and arrogant about some of her at least perceived deficiencies.
If her supporters gloss them over instead of insisting she address them, Palin will be a devisive liability in the conservative movement,... which I would like to see succeed. |
|
"Was Nixon the #2 guy in 1964, before winning in 1968? No. Was George Bush the #2 guy in 1996? Nope."
Nixon was #2 in 1960 and GHWBush was #2 in 1988. Both were nominated and lost. When you lose an election, you're demoted, no longer #2; that's why Nixon wasn't nominated in 1964, Ford wasn't nominated in 1980, and GHWBush wasn't nominated in 1996. Nixon fought his way back to #2 in 1968, Ford and Bush didn't even try.
The only time the #2 rule has been violated was in 2008; Cheney's age and repulsiveness overcame it. Other than 2008, the GOP ALWAYS nominates the next guy in line. |
|
Sarah Palin is the top choice for Republican “moderates”, yeah that’s right Sarah Palin surprises all by being the top choice of GOP “moderates" and not just conservatives in the GOP according to the Public Policy Poll released today.
You can find it here:
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2009/06/palin-moder ate-choice.html
“One interesting fact within our national poll looking at the 2012 Presidential picture last week: Sarah Palin is the most popular potential candidate with moderate Republicans.
61% have a favorable opinion of her to 53% for Mitt Romney, 50% for Mike Huckabee, and 44% for Newt Gingrich.
She's generally thought of as the darling of the conservative wing of the party- and she's the most popular there too as 83% view her positively to 79% for Huckabee, 77% for Gingrich, and 69% for Romney- but it may come as a surprise that she's tops with moderates as well.”
A new Pew Poll also has very good news for Sarah Palin:
http://people-press.org/report/524/republican-favorability
Among Republicans, however, the balance of opinion about Palin is more positive than it is
regarding Romney or other leading GOP figures, Newt Gingrich and Michael Steele. More than seven-in-ten Republicans (73%) express a favorable opinion of Palin while just 17% have an unfavorable opinion. Romney, Gingrich and especially Steele are less familiar figures – among the public overall and Republicans – than is Palin. While comparable percentages of Republicans rate Palin and the other Republicans unfavorably, far more view Palin favorably. And Palin continues to be overwhelmingly popular with key parts of the GOP base – white evangelical Republicans (84% favorable) and conservative Republicans (80% favorable).
|
|
|
|
...are going belly up...along with unemployment numbers. Under Obama, the economy is paralyzed. Everyone is terrified to invest or hire.
Romney, Huckabee, Palin, Thompson or Rudy would have made it clear from the Nov. election they would have kept the Bush tax cuts in place, cut cap gains taxes and payroll taxes.
They would have provided what the markets love: stability and predictability.
Obama would never implement such rational policies. His whole goal is stimulate chaos so they people will buy into his idiotic ideology. He doesn't give a ratz behind about the economy but is only interesting to sucking money into D.C. to pay off all his cronies.
Obama is a far worst disaster than any faithfully married Baptist or Mormon you can name. Well, except maybe for Harry Reid. |
|
Rush Limbaugh stated:
"Don't listen to people on our side who rip Sarah Palin. Don't listen to Republicans who rip Sarah Palin. Listen to Democrats. Listen to liberals. They'll tell you who they're afraid of. They tell you who they're afraid of by trying to destroy them. If they thought Sarah Palin was the easiest slam-dunk defeat they could ever engineer, they would be talking her up, they're scared to death. She can draw 20,000 people, as it was said early today by somebody, reading a cookbook. There's no other Republican candidate that enthused and energized the crowd that way. So just listen to the left. Just listen to the Democrats." |
|
|
You've removed all doubt. |
|
|
|
I like CK when he critiques Demoncrats, but when it comes to what the GOP should do I always turn the volume down. CK is more or less a moderate, and is not a conservative which would explain his dislike for a Reagan Conservative like Sarah Palin and a fondness for a liberal Mitt Romney.
Now as to this nonsense about choosing the "next in line" BS. First of all this notion came not from CK but from David Frum. So the GOP in modern history chooses the former #2 person huh? Was Nixon the #2 guy in 1964, before winning in 1968? No. What about George Bush 43? Was George Bush the #2 guy in 1996? Nope. So the whole idea that this is they way it works is simply and factually inaccurate.
Also, when some so called "next in line" bums are choosen how has this worked out for us? Dole lost in 1996 and McCain in 2008. Now we have socialism in the White House. Sorry CK but not only are you factually wrong, but we need a true conservative who is not afraid to take the GOP Washington elite. This person is Sarah Palin. |
|
KG- Yes, the issues de jour turn on a dime
When McCain got the nom, the issue was Iraq. But by the time the election rolled around, it was the ecnomy[sic] and Romney might have had a chance.
Me- No, Romney never had a chance. Seriously, besides the fact he belongs to a weird cult, you don't a nominate a guy who made his fortune closing factories and putting Americans out of jobs in a time when Americans are really scared of losing their jobs! I mean, seriously, what f**king planet do you live on?
Romney lost the nomination because he was a Mormon. Now, mind you, I have no sympathy for Mormons, but the fact is the GOP sold its soul to the crazy Baptists a long time ago.
KG- "And Krauthammer's not "worrying" about Romney was said in the context of Mark Sanford's nutty, reckless behavior of late. That unlike JFK, Clinton, Ensign, Edward and Sanford, you can depend on Romney to be squeeky clean in his personal life."
Me- Only because we Americans care about that kind of nonsense.
Presidents who were KNOWN Philanderers- FDR, Eisenhower, JFK, oh, yeah, Bill Clinton.
Presidents who never strayed. - Jimmy Carter and George W. Stupid.
Tell me, who is history going to rate higher?
We WANT the guy who is getting the poon-tang on the side. We really do.
|
|
Obama is NOT the only Political FRAUD! Want to LEGALLY remove Obama from POTUS? Start HERE:
There is an ongoing criminal conspiracy among Obama supporters in Nashville to cover up crimes committed by his campaign in 2007, 2008 and 2009. These crimes include, but are not limited to, VOTER FRAUD, IDENTITY THEFT, COMPUTER THEFT, INVASION OF PRIVACY and petty BURGLARIES similar to WATERGATE.
Judge Tom w. Brothers and a Partner in Karl Dean's favorite FIRM, Bass Berry & Sims, were INDICTED once and Tom w. Brothers and Bass Berry and Sims will be INDICTED again and CONVICTED this time.
When Nashville Judge Tom w. Brothers was first INDICTED for Drug Money Laundering Karl Dean was the Public Defender FIXING Cases his Wife's FIRM, Bass, Berry & Sims.
According to an old Law School friend of mine who was working for the DEA when Tom Brothers was INDICTED for DRUG MONEY Laundering, Bass, Berry & Sims was the biggest Drug Money Laundering FIRM in the Southeast.
My DEA Agent Friend's words were similar to what Phil Williams of http://www.NewsChannel5.com wrote about Russell Brothers. According to Phil Williams, Russell Brothers was a "Giant among Giants" in the Drug Smuggling Business.
Somehow the Deans accumulated a "reported" Fortune of $100 Million despite the fact that they both grew up poor. The cover story spun by the Deans is that Ms. Dean's STINGY MISER Uncle gave her the money.
Coincidentally, the Deans' cover story was similar to Tom Brothers' cover story about where the money that he was LAUNDERING for his Convicted FELON Uncle Russell's Drug Money came from.
Tom Brothers testified at his trial that he thought, "Uncle Russell got the millions from selling insurance for CNA
|
|
|
|
|
It's Palin's own Party that "hates" her. |
|
|
but I don't want her to run for President. There's too much baggage from the 2008 election, and, I don't believe, Americans will ever vote for someone who is thought to be inexperienced again. |
|
|
|
|
Please sell Alaska back to Russia.. A Russian Orthodox English-speaking Alaska!!! Am I allowed to dream...Putin and Palin...without apologies.Have mercy and let Alaska out of the the Lower Cesspool.Sarah could win more autonomy from Putin than the chimpleton Obama. |
|
|
... about 35% of what Jeanne Kirkpatrick had. Sarah is just not deep or quick enough to drive the presidential equation. And to be certain a woman candidate will have to sharper than any male candidate. The female will be judged by tighter standards. Just look at what happened to Hillary. Take Bill out of the picture and she had it all over Obama, but Obama prevailed. Sarah has the character, the ethics and maybe even the leadership skills. She does not have the knowledge readily available. She does not possess enough knowledge to think on her feet. She can get there and she needs to get tougher and bite harder. Maybe in 8 or 12 years she'll be plow ready. |
|
"you are off the deep-end."
We'll see. But remember you read it here first.
Here's another prediction: Palin won't be the only one.
Keep pushin' socialism down our throats, and there WILL be a push-back. The form of which is will take is unknown, but it will be an equal and opposite reaction. |
|
|
Dump the stuttering FOOL kraut! |
|
When McCain got the nom, the issue was Iraq. But by the time the election rolled around, it was the ecnomy and Romney might have had a chance.
Who knows what will come down the pike? But a good POTUS needs to be ready for anything. I agree; Romney needs to settle on principles.
However, Palin really, really, really needs to settle down and learn how to speak in complete, coherent sentences. Perhaps it's only when she doesn't know her stuff that she sounds like a Valley Girl.
Right now, Krauthammer's correct. Palin does not inspire confidence. Romney does.
I initally loved Palin, but was disappointed in her ability to make sense off the cuff. I believed her PR; that she would dig in a do her homework. I saw no evidence of that. It appears she's happy to get by on her personality (which tends to wear kinda thin) and her personal story.
I know; I know. She has a laudable record in AK, but the POTUS needs to be a credible communicator.
And Krauthammer's not "worrying" about Romney was said in the context of Mark Sanford's nutty, reckless behavior of late. That unlike JFK, Clinton, Ensign, Edward and Sanford, you can depend on Romney to be squeeky clean in his personal life.
The FOX panel doubted that even tho Palin has a devoted base it's unlikey she can expand it. She would need to grow up and bone up to get me back. |
|
From well before the 2008 election, search YouTube;
Jackie Mason '08 Vlog 52 Sarah Palin
|
|
Nine times out of ten, Krauthammer's dead right. This would be an example of that remaining one out of ten times he's wrong.
The poll numbers determine who's a serious candidate, and who is not - and they put Huckabee, Palin, and Romney as all tied. How Krauthammer asserts that Palin is not a serious candidate and Romney is somehow the frontrunner is beyond me. Fred Barnes was completely correct, and as for Krauthammer's last statements, 1.) Palin is capable but didn't have enough time to synchronize her positions with McCain's, and 2.) Since when was Obama ever able to articulate a coherent bit of policy? Hope, change, and yes we can is not policy. It's vacuous happy-talk.
Regarding Romney, we are not even one full year through the Obama administration. You can bet that the issue du jour will change by the time 2012 rolls around. In 2000, it was about restoring honor to the White House. In 2004, it was about fighting terrorism. In 2008, it was about the economy. Campaign themes change between election cycles.
Furthermore, even if the issue is to remain the economy, as it was in 2008, do not forget that Romney lost the GOP primary in an election cycle where the main concern was his forte. People may not like Obamanomics, but that does not mean they are ready to embrace a fatcat who many considered slick. And Krauthammer's wrong when it comes to not having to worry about Romney. On social issues, and even economic ones (e.g. healthcare reform), Romney has been all over the map. People want to know his principles, and he doesn't seem to have them. |
|
|
you nailed it! With the left it is because she is contrary to their victim mythology, with the good old boy network of the right, she pummeled them in Alaska! But I do agree with Charles K., she needs to study the issues and speak to them, not in platitudes but in facts that way she did and does in Alaska. I really like Romney and I think he can find a way to rescue the nation from Dumbo's lack of economic sense and he does have a better grasp on international politics as well. |
|
|
phew. you are off the deep-end. one thing that's true, though: AK is a non-representative state, probably the state LEAST like the others. |
|
|
|
Most of the conservatives I spoke with wanted Palin to debate Obama. McCain certainly couldn't do it.
BO can't take barely-tough questions from the lapdog press. Palin would eat his lunch in '12, easily; especially considering Obama's $250K line in the sand and his quadrupling the debt. Blaming Bush, Alinsky-style, won't work in four years. |
|
|
both the right and the left. The right big government, old boys network is afraid of her, the left anti values party would hate to see a woman elected from the other party, Sarah has a huge following in the party, I think she will be a force to deal with. |
|
|
but she's not ready for prime time. Give her a few more years... |
|
|
Surprise, surprise, surprise! |
|
|
of the Sovereign Republic of *Alaska*. I like the sound of it. |
|
Alaskans will be ready to tell DC to "f"-off by the end of the year. Palin should assert her Tenth Amendment rights. Timed right, she would be the statists worst nightmare.
I don't want her to be POTUS. She has the potential right now as gov of AK to be much greater than as POTUS in 4 years.
And if played right, she'd have her hands full duties assumed by the state which the Feds USED to perform for AK. |
|
|
Sarah Palin has an enormous opportunity. To take advantage of it she needs to buckle down and study instead of just trying to wink her way through debates. |
|
|
Nominating whatever bozo happens to be next in line has been the bane of the post-Reagan GOP. Bush I? David Souter and a tax hike. Bush II? Iraq and the bailouts. Dole and McCain? Please. We're not gonna take it. |
|
|
|