or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Why they hate her (Sarah Palin)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why they hate her (Sarah Palin) - Page 3

post #81 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

A GOP senator weighs in on Palin: a "cocky wacko"

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...cocky-wacko/

A "Republican" (former) Senator who's really a Democrat says something bad about Sarah Palin. Film at 11?

post #82 of 626
The smilies are getting tiresome. Though he has left the Borg, his comment still stands: a cocky wacko.

---

Palin is threatening legal action to block subpoenas in Troopergate. I thought she was going to be open about the investigation... So, how does her behavior fit in with the change her campaign, er, I mean John's campaign, is running for?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080911/...j8P.JEV3uyFz4D

---

Camp McCain initially said that Palin's speech at the troop send-off would be closed to the press, something they have no power to say. They think they are gods sometimes. As she is governor, the military OK'ed the speech but have demanded that it not be political. Must have needed a re-write as she has been repeating the same lines for the past week.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080911/...0.5Mfc80Jh24cA

---

According to the former governor of Alaska, when Palin was mayor of Wasilla, rape victims had to pay for their own forensic tests.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0..._n_125711.html

Main link:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/52266.html

Reported ADN

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #83 of 626
Not sure if you folks have already seen this... but...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ALsjhDDdaA

Oh, my gawd.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #84 of 626
She seems to be getting angry at the end there....


She did well enough (*smirk*)...

I am not sure she came off quite as well as a lot of people think... There have been a couple of statements online elsewhere that Gibson was unfair -- which, I can't see, but then again I am not hell bent on finding any reason to vote for HER...

Where is McCain these days? Obama won the day even without politics -- the Clinton meeting got a lot of press... certainly more than McCain's walk to ground zero...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #85 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

She seems to be getting angry at the end there....


She did well enough (*smirk*)...

I am not sure she came off quite as well as a lot of people think... There have been a couple of statements online elsewhere that Gibson was unfair -- which, I can't see, but then again I am not hell bent on finding any reason to vote for HER...

Where is McCain these days? Obama won the day even without politics -- the Clinton meeting got a lot of press... certainly more than McCain's walk to ground zero...

To be fair, she was talking about a response to terrorists. It would probably be more troubling if she didn't get a little angry at the end. We're all angry about what happened at 9/11 and we're all angry that Pakistan hasn't cooperated as well as we would wish to clear out the cells hiding around the border area.

It was a softball interview.
post #86 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Oh yeah, and I'm still waiting for someone, anyone here to list why Ms. Palin is a qualified candidate for Vice President, much less President God's forbid.

Still waiting..........................................

Your wait is over. In sum...

She has the minimal intelligence, executive ability, policy wisdom, and thick skin to be Vice President. If we ignore poicy wisdom as a criteria, I imagine that 90% of the nation's Radio Shack Managers and Greeting Card Humor writers are also qualified to cut ribbons and chair the Senate. Even Obama is qualified to be Vice-President.
post #87 of 626
Quote:
She has the minimal intelligence, executive ability, policy wisdom, and thick skin to be Vice President.

Minimal intelligence... sure.
Executive ability... can you back this up?
Policy wisdom... you really need to back this one up.
Thick skin... YOU SEXIST!
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #88 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by spamsandwich View Post

not sure if you folks have already seen this... But...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3alsjhdddaa

oh, my gawd.


lmao.

And I'm only at the 4 minute mark....LMAO
post #89 of 626
post #90 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

...John McCain earned my vote the day he announced Sarah Palin as his VP.
...McCain really has impressed me over the course of this run is that his campaign organization has sharpened and become more organized. ... The guy has shown he can take weaknesses and turn them into strengths, that he can counter-punch well on the politics. I've really liked how his energy policy has shaped up and while I am hoping for more firm action on the budget front, I'll buy the platitudes there for a while over no claims of balance budgeting at all from the Obama side. McCain also hasn't flinched from certain problematic or unpopular issues like continuing the war in Iraq...still manages to stay in the game and might even win it. It has to say something about your leadership when you manage to stay even with so many structural, position and even straight up physical disadvantages.

Obama has had just as many tired flubs as McCain. (New Pennsylvania is the name of one of the 57 states apparently.) Obama appears to really be wearing down as is Biden. Every interview with Biden especially the guy looks tired and beat. ... There was some post by me earlier this year where I noted I might just stay home. Now I won't. Hell, now I'm ready to donate.

.

Your new found enthusiasm is understandable, and it echos the feelings of many conservatives who were disgusted with the McCain nomination. However, I am not one of them.

Yes, Palin is a breath of fresh air, the race is exciting, and McCain's campaign manager (who touted Palin to McCain after McCain's blunder in sending up trial balloons on Lieberman and Ridge) has pulled a rabbit out of his hat. The ad agency his people hired is doing a bang up job with commercials on Obama's counterfeit 'celebrity' aura. And they are pounding on the POW hero mantra and National Defense as McCain's single most powerful qualification. Good for them.

But I don't measure Presidential aspirants on their campaign tactics, their ad agencies, their third choice VP selections, their speech writers, or their polling position. I measure them primarily on their policy choices, and secondarily on their ability to lead, to be an executive manager, to select the right people, and to make the right calls under pressure.

To be sure, Obama is the worst choice. However, McCain is only marginally better. On 1/2 the major issues he is unwise, he has not shown much in the way of leadership in the Senate or Republican Party (other than as a trouble maker and obstacle), he is ill tempered, stubborn, self-centered, and thoughtless. And in spite of his obsession with 'honor' I have serious doubts as to his ability to live by his overly advertised 'better than thou' character claims.

If Palin were running for President, I might be voting Republican...but she is not. Therefore I am not voting for any Presidential contender. Yes, I know that Obama is worse and that the basic argument is "Well wouldn't voting for a FDR be better than voting for Henry Wallace"? Sorry, I don't chose between the lesser of two fools and collectivists. Politics is a fools game - no more so than this year.

In the meantime...ON PALIN: I agree that it is amusing to see the Democrat's lose it on her nomination - they have over-reacted and found their every attack back firing. Frankly the rabid savaging of her by the democratic party hacks is rather telling about the personality types that run (or support) that kind of politics....VVVVERY interesting.
post #91 of 626
Her "Executive Ability" is an unmitigated failure.

Raised taxes. Rolled up a huge debt. Actively sought earmarks.

How can anyone look at her work in Wasilla and call her tenure a success? And when someone does a job, then fails at that job, it doesn't count much for "experience".

Barack Obama got a fucking hell of a lot more real-world applicable knowledge from his time at Harvard and especially from his work in the Senate.

There's simply no comparison with regard to executive qualification between the two. To say there is is intellectually dishonest and deceitful.
post #92 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilsch View Post

OMFG!!! OMG!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WALIARHHLII

Like... such as... er, uh "nukular"
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #93 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

Minimal intelligence... sure.
Executive ability... can you back this up?

Don't you think she can manage a Radio Shack? Besides, as far as I know, she has a cohesive administration that is not marked by infighting, is popular, and is loyal. She seems to have formulated a team with a direction. Her governor's office is not rumored to be anything like that of some of the lower 48 states (e.g. Gray Davis ) nor do rumors circulate on her executive style with staff.

From what we know, she is minimally gifted to be either a Radio Shack manager or Vice President. She might be gifted beyond that, that is uncertain.

Quote:
Policy wisdom... you really need to back this one up.

She is more conservative than McCain - that is very wise.

Quote:
Thick skin... YOU SEXIST!

Being thick skinned is an important element in political office - not whining all the time, not be outraged at personal comments. So far she has proven to be gracefull under fire - another positive. Obama has not always shown that talent - a negative.
post #94 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Her "Executive Ability" is an unmitigated failure.

Raised taxes. Rolled up a huge debt. Actively sought earmarks.

How can anyone look at her work in Wasilla and call her tenure a success? And when someone does a job, then fails at that job, it doesn't count much for "experience".

Barack Obama got a fucking hell of a lot more real-world applicable knowledge from his time at Harvard and especially from his work in the Senate.

There's simply no comparison with regard to executive qualification between the two. To say there is is intellectually dishonest and deceitful.

You snarl at her executive ability as "an unmitigated failure" but provide me with a list of policy choices (which is a seperate issue), then you add another unsupported claim on her abilty that you cannot call her work as Mayor successful.

So far you have provided no evidence of her being "an unmitigated failure", ior lacking in abiity to manage. Moeover, you ignore that in her "unmitigateed failure" she became so popular she defeated both the incumbent Republican Governor and then her Democratic opponent (and has had very high popularity rating since). So just where's the beef in your complaints?

Moreover, just what prompted this irrelevant defense of Obama's qualifications? Do you see anywhere I questioned Obama's 'real world' knowledge because he obtained in the cloister of Harvard Law School or questioned his exhaustive "real world experience" of the two years in the Senate?

As your reflexive attack on Palin via a defense of Obama's credentials has been the major leitmotif of Democratic operatives and thier assorted 'me hate Republican' Axe grinders, its worth reflecting on. Really, don't you find it a bit strange that the Democratic Presidential nominee is repeatedly comparing himself the the VICE PRESIDENTIAL nominee of the Republicans? The universal cry among Obama supporters has been "Obama is more qualified than Palin" - ummmm, do they know which office each are running for? Does that pot banging not sound a little absurd when Obama is running against John McCain and his very real world experience... is that why they are trying to score by running to the wrong goalpost?

Of course that is one reason they are savaging Palin. The more important reason is that Palin has struck a nerve in the Obama campaign. Obama is no longer "the celebraty' and the 'fresh voice for change' - even if he lacks serious experience to be President. This unknown woman from Alaska is (at the moment) is popular, fresh, attractive, and articulate (with a combative reputation of trying some actual reforming) and she is elbowing aside his image - she is taking HIS corner and sales pitch. Because Obama and his supporters consider Palin a usurper of Obama's aura, they instinctually savage her on the grounds that also make their own nominee look equally superficial an dubious (e.g. his experience and authentic conncetion to everyday American life).

There's only room for one people's Messiah in this election, and Obama's folks aren't going to let this pro-life gal from Alaska out shine him. No sir.

So now we have the absurdity of the Presidential contender attacking his opponent's Vice President on who has more 'experience' - a man whose own record is paper thin in 'the real world'...a mere two years in the US Senate, mostly spent campaigning for President.

LOL...well, it keeps us amused
post #95 of 626
You're right, Max. People (republicans and democrats) need to stop comparing Palin, who btw should be qualified to be president immediately as that is her job, to Obama...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #96 of 626
Before Sarah Palin enterd office, the City of Wasilla had zero debt.
When she left, each citizen owed $3,000, despite most ending up having to pay more taxes.
They got a sports complex. That is losing money. That -- OOPS -- she forgot to secure land rights to before she started the project, costing the city $1.3 million and wasted time.

FAIL. UNMITIGATED. NEXT.

KOS has the truth spelled out very clearly (don't attack the source... you can't argue with the facts presented).

Quote:
The argument the Republicans want to make about Palin's superior executive experience comes down to a quantitative argument: she supposedly has more years of elective executive experience compared to Obama or Biden (or McCain, if they were honest.) However, when we compare Palin's and Obama's (and McCain's) qualitative executive experience, Obama wins hands down. Palin left her small-town in relatively enormous debt after it had been debt free before her tenure. Her mismanagement is similar to the short-sighted and reckless impulsiveness that has characterized McCain's campaign (no wonder he calls her his "soulmate.") McCain's campaign has been one of boom and bust, with one management team after another, one different, contradictory message after another. Obama, on the other hand, has run one of the most organized and tightly run campaigns in modern American political history. His ground game is astounding while McCain's is pretty much non-existent.
post #97 of 626
I got to 1:29 (just after she said she was ready) and had to stop. She has no confidence, period. This girl will be eaten alive on the world stage.

---
Watched some more, but is arduous. If she was actually ready, why did she have to hide (and will still continue to hide) from questions? Her actions defeat her words.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #98 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Before Sarah Palin enterd office, the City of Wasilla had zero debt.
When she left, each citizen owed $3,000, despite most ending up having to pay more taxes.
They got a sports complex. That is losing money.

FAIL. UNMITIGATED. NEXT.

OK... wow, this is low hanging fruit.

Let's see here... creating debt is evidence of failure. Cool.
Citizens having to pay more taxes is evidence of a politician's failure. Outstanding.
Buying things that do not have a good ROI is evidence of failure. Awesome.

I just cannot wait to apply these rules.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #99 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

You're right, Max. People (republicans and democrats) need to stop comparing Palin, who btw should be qualified to be president immediately as that is her job, to Obama...

Yes your right, Obama is running for President and if he wins he will be. Palin is running to be Vice President under John McCain, and if John McCain wins she will be Vice President.

Obama needs to focus on McCains VP to compare himself to, to prove himself the better man. He needs to prove he is more qualified than her, because everyone knows he is really running against the person who IS NOT running for President, and who is a very unlikely possibility that she might be called upon to replace McCain.

While we focusing on non-peer comparisons, you think John McCain ought to be attacking Nancy Pelosi and comparing his record to hers? After all, she is right after Sarah.
post #100 of 626
McCain is a non-entity. Palin is the puppet the controllers on the right want.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #101 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

McCain is a non-entity. Palin is the puppet the controllers on the right want.

Controllers on the right? WTF are you talking about? How exactly does McCain become the nominee if the GOP is run by the "controllers on the right?"

Post after post after post. For a week now. Just whatever comes to mind that might make a new narrative. It's like Palin is kryptonite, or doing some strange Jedi mind trick, making normally well-reasoned people come truly unhinged.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #102 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxParrish View Post

Obama needs to focus on McCains VP to compare himself to, to prove himself the better man. He needs to prove he is more qualified than her, because everyone knows he is really running against the person who IS NOT running for President, and who is a very unlikely possibility that she might be called upon to replace McCain.

I think you lost the plot here. Obama isn't focusing on or running against Palin. In fact, there have been NO ads and only off references to Palin from Obama's campaign since she was nominated. The Republicans are running Palin against Obama because that appears to be the only way they can win since they were clearly losing running McCain against him.

Quote:
While we focusing on non-peer comparisons, you think John McCain ought to be attacking Nancy Pelosi and comparing his record to hers? After all, she is right after Sarah.

I don't see where Obama is attacking Palin...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #103 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

OK... wow, this is low hanging fruit.

Let's see here... creating debt is evidence of failure. Cool.
Citizens having to pay more taxes is evidence of a politician's failure. Outstanding.
Buying things that do not have a good ROI is evidence of failure. Awesome.

I just cannot wait to apply these rules.

Once again, you cannot see the trees for the fruit.

"Let's see here... creating debt is evidence of failure. Cool."
ABSOLUTELY.
"Citizens having to pay more taxes is evidence of a politician's failure. Outstanding."
No. I made that point because Sarah Palin's supporters (or the vast majority thereof) claim to believe this to be true, and I'm pointing out their hypocrisy... and hers.
"Buying things that do not have a good ROI is evidence of failure. Awesome."
True.
We simply differ on what constitutes a good return. I believe it doesn't have to be restricted to financial terms. That doesn't preclude the fact that something that *should* be financially manageable and wasn't managed correctly was not a good investment.
post #104 of 626
Currently, Palin is nothing better than a puppet. Her appearances, interaction with anybody, speeches, are all prepared for her and carefully controlled; Camp McCain has even basically said this. She is good script-reader and follower literally every appearance is the same), but she has yet to really be on her own; even with this interview you could tell where she had been prepped and where not. Until that time when she is allowed to roam independently, she is no better than a puppet. The handlers hope that by playing her right, they can dupe the average American in to voting for the ticket. For now, it seems to be working, but there is a growing criticism of the whole charade.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #105 of 626
We will know when it comes time for the debates. When is the first one? When is the first VP debate? Do you think the "handlers" will allow Sarah to debate at all if the questions are not vetted? Do you think they can find a way out of it?
post #106 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Once again, you cannot see the trees for the fruit.

"Let's see here... creating debt is evidence of failure. Cool."
ABSOLUTELY.
"Citizens having to pay more taxes is evidence of a politician's failure. Outstanding."
No. I made that point because Sarah Palin's supporters (or the vast majority thereof) claim to believe this to be true, and I'm pointin
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

OK... wow, this is low hanging fruit.

Let's see here... creating debt is evidence of failure. Cool.
Citizens having to pay more taxes is evidence of a politician's failure. Outstanding.
Buying things that do not have a good ROI is evidence of failure. Awesome.

I just cannot wait to apply these rules.
g out their hypocrisy... and hers.
"Buying things that do not have a good ROI is evidence of failure. Awesome."
True.
We simply differ on what constitutes a good return. I believe it doesn't have to be restricted to financial terms. That doesn't preclude the fact that something that *should* be financially manageable and wasn't managed correctly was not a good investment.

What undermines all of the contrived hair-pulling over Palin is the obsessive, dishonest, and hysterical attacks on her - the kind of thing usually reserved for the person that is actually running for the Presidency. Not even Dan Quayle (who was dense) or Thomas Eagleton (who was a severe bi-polar that was hospitalized and underwent electroshock treatments) engendered this level of fear and loathing within a few weeks of nomination. I guess one has to write it off to the new kind of politics since 2000 - constantly screaming alarmism and a love of dishonoring all truth or reality to get one's way...very sad to see it repeated.

I am quite open to the truth, and to honor it. I don't have a horse in this race. But using the KOZ as source is pointless when its SOP is character assault on behalf of the church - this time against Palin from the git go. One does not need to object to its article because of its source though - the article's own argument is (in an of itself) disingenuous, uninformed and senseless.

The first six paragraphs repeatedly states that there was no capital debt before she entered office, and repeats it in each paragraph (each time illustrating 'the debt by using percent, then per person, then total, etc.). Although I am sure they hoped to make the reader alarmed by a repetition of reformatted numbers of "the debt", all it really says is that the City chose to acquire capital debt on some capital projects. So far, ho hum.

I can't take this sort of Axe grinding seriously. As a former City budget manager and financial analyst this is typical of all cities - you want a capital project, you sell bonds and cover it with special obligation funds (raised by new taxes, government grants, etc.). Almost ALL cities have capital debt, the only news here is that this little berg did not (which may be good OR bad, depending on what capital needs are unmet). And in my experience, a city with 6.4% on capital debt spending is laughably small; having experienced City work in Oklahoma and California - no wonder this kind of carping by KOS looks like more venom tossed out for eager Palin haters.

And it is not made more convincing by repeatedly (and disingenuously) noting in each paragraph that "Palin signed the budget" or "Palin signed the ordinance". Such signatures are required regardless of whether a Mayor voted for an ordinance or a budget, or not. The City Council passes ordinances and budgets by majority vote - the Mayor having one of those votes. Signing such is meaningless - a detail the writers ignored.

Finally we learn (when they quote a critic) that "(he) has been particularly critical of a $ 5.5 million road and sewer bond passed last year by voters. He says the bond payments could make the city vulnerable should the economy turn down. Palin notes residents approved the bond, which she says was needed for critical road work." [Anchorage Daily News (Alaska), 10/5/99]"

Again, this is scandal? Not only did the City Council see a need for roads and sewers, and a recreation complex, but so did the voters. So the community willingly chose to raise taxes (a paltry 1/2 cent on a minor 2 cent sales tax base) and the Obama axe grinders think they have discovered a female Nero burning Rome to build an imperial palaces and provide bread and circuses on the backs of the oppressed citizens of Wasila? ...gasp!

The only interesting part of this is the KOS claim that "Palin mismanaged the land deal" because she did not sign all the papers. However, the details supporting that claim are left out; i.e. in my experience you sign the paper's the City Attorney has you sign...its routinely done. And the City Attorney, in turn, usually gets those papers from the City staff and perhaps their contract advisors. Mayors are clueless as to what is needed for legal reasons - that is not his/her job. Moreover, your City Manager, not your Mayor, supervises the department heads who assign City staff to manage the project's budget, and authorize the expenditures.

So that was another accusation without supporting evidence.

Finally, the law suits and claims are routine in City business. Very often it is screw ups by City staff and bad internal processes, other times it is merely another vendor or contractor looking to intimidate the City into paying out of court on a dubious claim (so as to avoid publicity). And yet other times it is because the private individual is far more adept at tactical moves and in rent seeking. About the only thing I am sure of in my 20 years of City work is that the Mayor, from the best to the worst, is never in a position to cause these kind of screwups.

This is where Mayor's do matter:

- Cutting Ribbons
- Pushing for Specific programs or capital projects
- Telling City Councilmen when they are out of order at meetings
- Brokering deals with fellow council persons on votes
- making speech's at City sponsored events.
- bitching about staff (or supporting staff)
- collecting campaign funds
- attending useless conferences and state meetings
- lobbying the State and Feds for more money and grants.

So if you find a source that says that she pushed for objectives that people did not want, or duties she was shitty at, or that no conservative should support even on a local level - then you may have something. I would be far more interested in what she, personally, did rather than all oblique and unwarranted inferences of "she signed this".

In the meantime, note that it is equally disingenuous for forum liberals to carp that she is not qualified because you think she is not being conservative (she supported capital projects and raised taxes and sought grant (pork) money). That may be true, but do you think her ACTUAL opponent (Biden) or self assigned oppenent (Obama) is opposed to increasing taxes and new expenditures and giving grants????

And finally, that Obama is more qualified in 'qualitative' executive experience is dubious. Every "community organizer" I met in my work was a supplicant to the City council asking for grants for community groups and demanding a forum to lobby for special favors for racial and special interest groups. In other words, salesmen and talkers.

So ya, get serious folks. Use a modicum of skepticism when reading screeds that don't support their own claims. It's not worth our time to deconstruct...at least not repeatedly.
post #107 of 626
Um... this was a "city" with 6000 residents. I think you exaggerate the extent of City government here. Again, no Vasilla Mayor before Palin had these problems.

You are aware, are you not, that different cities have VASTLY different responsibilities for Mayors, are you not?

If Sarah Palin was responsible for these things, then her failure is telling.

If, as you seem to hint, she was not entirely responsible for these things, and was good for "ribbon cutting" etc. etc. etc., then where is the executive experience!?

This is the point that is being made here. Running a failing city government, or not running it, it doesn't matter. ***She has no applicable executive experience.***


The underlying fact is, you're making excuses for her lack of experience simply because Palin is your "darling" ultra-conservative Christian right candidate who will turn this into her version of "God's Country" (like it or not).
post #108 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

If, as you seem to hint, she was not entirely responsible for these things, and was good for "ribbon cutting" etc. etc. etc., then where is the executive experience!?


Pssst... she's a governor. Of a state. One of fifty executives with such a job in this nation.

The wheels...are coming... off....
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #109 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Pssst... she's a governor. Of a state. One of fifty executives with such a job in this nation.

The wheels...are coming... off....

Come on! You're joking, right? She's been governor for less than 2 years! Palin's "Executive experience" has always included her stint as mayor of Mayberry.

Again, Obama's experience far outweighs anything she's done as Governor in a state that has 1/5 the population of the city Obama served in the State Legislature and 1/18th the population of the State Obama served in the Senate.

And her city "experience", which is the point of all this, would be absolutely laughable if it weren't so sad.
post #110 of 626
Came from a town about the size of Wasilla; actually was born in a town of 130.

The best way to describe it is to say watch Doc Hollywood. Close enough.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #111 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

The underlying fact is, you're making excuses for her lack of experience simply because Palin is your "darling" ultra-conservative Christian right candidate who will turn this into her version of "God's Country" (like it or not).

As opposed to making excuses for Obama's lack of experience because he is your "darling" socialist candidate who will turn this into his version of an Orwellian dystopia, like it or not?

Tonton, you've always been very very up front with me when you thought it was time for me to take a break and wipe the angry spittle from my LCD. I may have to return the favor sometime soon. I'm really concerned about what Palin's introduction has done to a few around here. I'm missing old version of my liberal adversaries, the ones that have been replaced with these aliens who have not yet reached apogee since McCain's pick. It's a little whacky around here. Statements I never thought I'd hear and one liberal argument after another blowing up in their faces. It's time to Leave Sarah Alone. Not for us on the right... but for the sake of what is left of your party. Obama's lead- *poof* - gone. Congressional races nationwide going from 12% Dem advantage to a little over 3%... and falling. McCain grabbing white women's votes in the biggest poll-internal swing that anyone can remember. The part that is so great is that it is not just the pick that is driving people... it's the Obama/Biden/DNC response to the pick. The gift that just keeps on giving, day after day.

I mean, if this person is so unqualified, so terrible, so all-the-things-we've-heard... why worry? The asymmetrical response to such a trailer-park-living-gun-and-Bible-totin' hockey mommy-come-lately is truly lending her loads of legitimacy. Mostly due to the nature of the attacks, not the real substance. The GOP base can smell the fear, and the left is walking right into McCains rope-a-dope. Take a hint from me... let Palin go... McCain is your primary, proceed to target.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #112 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Come on! You're joking, right?

You asked "where's the executive experience." I answered you... and pointed out that you were, shall we just kindly say, "forgetting" or "omitting" that she's also a governor. That's all.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #113 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

You asked "where's the executive experience." I answered you... and pointed out that you were, shall we just kindly say, "forgetting" or "omitting" that she's also a governor. That's all.

Okay. I'll rephrase. Where is the executive experience in her Mayorship of Wasilla (which is what I was talking about)?

Meanwhile...

Palin thinks Iraq was responsible for 9/11.
post #114 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

As opposed to making excuses for Obama's lack of experience because he is your "darling" socialist candidate who will turn this into his version of an Orwellian dystopia, like it or not?

Tonton, you've always been very very up front with me when you thought it was time for me to take a break and wipe the angry spittle from my LCD. I may have to return the favor sometime soon. I'm really concerned about what Palin's introduction has done to a few around here. I'm missing old version of my liberal adversaries, the ones that have been replaced with these aliens who have not yet reached apogee since McCain's pick. It's a little whacky around here. Statements I never thought I'd hear and one liberal argument after another blowing up in their faces. It's time to Leave Sarah Alone. Not for us on the right... but for the sake of what is left of your party. Obama's lead- *poof* - gone. Congressional races nationwide going from 12% Dem advantage to a little over 3%... and falling. McCain grabbing white women's votes in the biggest poll-internal swing that anyone can remember. The part that is so great is that it is not just the pick that is driving people... it's the Obama/Biden/DNC response to the pick. The gift that just keeps on giving, day after day.

I mean, if this person is so unqualified, so terrible, so all-the-things-we've-heard... why worry? The asymmetrical response to such a trailer-park-living-gun-and-Bible-totin' hockey mommy-come-lately is truly lending her loads of legitimacy. Mostly due to the nature of the attacks, not the real substance. The GOP base can smell the fear, and the left is walking right into McCains rope-a-dope. Take a hint from me... let Palin go... McCain is your primary, proceed to target.

How convenient... let Palin go before the truth comes out. Riiiight. We need to keep pushing until every single one of those voters knows how unqualified she is. Some, like you, will choose to ignore those facts (or dismiss them). Others will not.
post #115 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Pssst... she's a governor. Of a state. One of fifty executives with such a job in this nation.

The wheels...are coming... off....

Indeed they are. Come on Jube, let's get real here for crying out loud.

The interview I saw tonight made Dan Quayle look like a genius. If it wasn't obvious she has absolutely no meaningful experience or knowledge of basic foreign relations for example (even after undergoing intense coaching the last couple of weeks), there is zero doubt after tonight. I even felt bad for her at times. Just a little. In between laughs. But not too much.
post #116 of 626
Loose quote: "You can actually see Russia from Alaska."

That should suffice.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #117 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Loose quote: "You can actually see Russia from Alaska."

That should suffice.

Yeah. I almost spilled my drink on that one. Or was that the one where I spat a bite of my pizza?
post #118 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

I think you lost the plot here. Obama isn't focusing on or running against Palin. In fact, there have been NO ads and only off references to Palin from Obama's campaign since she was nominated. The Republicans are running Palin against Obama because that appears to be the only way they can win since they were clearly losing running McCain against him.



I don't see where Obama is attacking Palin...

Only off references to Palin from Obama's campaign? You don't see where he has attacked her? Google it up, the Democratic attack is pretty well acknowledged by the mainstream press - I honestly don't know how you could have missed it.

Sample:

Quote:
Barack Obama and his Democratic allies are intensifying their attacks on Sarah Palin, as her sustained and surprising central role in this race is upending Obamas strategy and often overshadowing McCain.

Democratic Congressman Russ Carnahan on Tuesday introducing Joe Biden at a campaign event ripped into Palins record and punctuated it with this snarky jab. Theres no way you can dress up that record, even with a lot of lipstick, he said. Later in the day, Obama used a variation of the lipstick line...

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13315.html

Off hand I recall biden saying that Palen supports John McCain's policies, so that it is not just wrong, but a backward step for women. Obama complained said she has to go through what he has gone through to be vetted, 'what she has been in this for two days, I have had to do it for two years'. Carol Fowler, the chairman of the South Carolina Democratic Party, said that Palins primary qualification seems to be that she hasnt had an abortion.

Obama has compared his experience in "manageing his campaign" to her experience as Mayor - saying that it shows his ability to manage 'large systems' and execute. (Of course he left out her managing of the State Government of Alaska).

Then he has blasted her on earmarks...etc.
post #119 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxParrish View Post

Only off references to Palin from Obama's campaign? You don't see where he has attacked her? Google it up, the Democratic attack is pretty well acknowledged by the mainstream press - I honestly don't know how you could have missed it.

Sample:



http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13315.html

Off hand I recall biden saying that Palen supports John McCain's policies, so that it is not just wrong, but a backward step for women. Obama complained said she has to go through what he has gone through to be vetted, 'what she has been in this for two days, I have had to do it for two years'. Carol Fowler, the chairman of the South Carolina Democratic Party, said that Palins primary qualification seems to be that she hasnt had an abortion.

Obama has compared his experience in "manageing his campaign" to her experience as Mayor - saying that it shows his ability to manage 'large systems' and execute. (Of course he left out her managing of the State Government of Alaska).

Then he has blasted her on earmarks...etc.

I think you're confusing "Obama" with "anybody".

You can't link Obama to anyone's comments except his own.

And his comments can definitely be called "off references".
post #120 of 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Um... this was a "city" with 6000 residents. I think you exaggerate the extent of City government here. Again, no Vasilla Mayor before Palin had these problems.

You are aware, are you not, that different cities have VASTLY different responsibilities for Mayors, are you not?

If Sarah Palin was responsible for these things, then her failure is telling.

If, as you seem to hint, she was not entirely responsible for these things, and was good for "ribbon cutting" etc. etc. etc., then where is the executive experience!?

This is the point that is being made here. Running a failing city government, or not running it, it doesn't matter. ***She has no applicable executive experience.***

You have drifted off my original point. I never said she had applicable executive experience (i.e. comparable experience to that of being Vice President), I stated that from what we know she has at least the minimal management ability to serve as Vice President...I refered to her record as Govenor.

It was you who claimed her job as Mayor demonstrated her inability to do executive work...i.e. she was "an unmitigated executive failure".

Quote:
The underlying fact is, you're making excuses for her lack of experience simply because Palin is your "darling" ultra-conservative Christian right candidate who will turn this into her version of "God's Country" (like it or not).

As I did not speak to her experience as Mayor PROVING anything (good or bad), need I refute a claim not made?

What I am challenging is your bias. You offered the KOS article as conclusive - beyond the challenge of a critical examination. I showed that it failed to prove your assertion - that it was tainted by unsupported and weak claims regarding events and accusations. All it showed is that the town created a capital budget, that debt was incurred for sewer, roads, and recreation with the approval of the voters, that some political opponent complained, and that the City became mired in a law suit with a sharp developer who bought land the City was trying to acquire. We know the City debt is unusually low, that she remained popular, and used that to bootstrap her way to the governor's office. I also showed that the article intentionally mislead - therefore calling its reliability into serious question.

So for you to claim, on this evidence, it shows "She was an unmitigated failure" is laughable, and I won't insult your intelligence to believe that you actually hold that conviction. You know it is weak, and "well, they never had a problem before" cannot save a mendacious piece (let alone it demands you now show they never had a legal problem in City history before Palin).

You are quite right in noting that Mayor's have different duties, especially in places that elect Mayors as full-time managers. So without knowing the nature of her job, and the specifics relevant to the KOS claims, then its all partisan claptrap. Claiming that she "signed" a budget or "signed an ordinance" or that someone does'nt like her is succor for the fevered - not rational.

Tell you what, provide evidence of her management. Direct evidence. An auditer's finding, a town that hated her by the end of her tenure, repeated articles against the mayor in the town paper, a state report - when you do, I'll read it.

Till then, well...I can't reason someone out of something that they did not reason themselves into.

P.S. As an agnostic I suppose I ought to take your lurid imagery to heart - but I have not caught the paritisan fever yet.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Why they hate her (Sarah Palin)