FORUMS > Gay News & Events Forum Rules

David Brooks writes in the New York Times that Sarah Palin is unqualified:

"In the current Weekly Standard, Steven Hayward argues that the nation's founders wanted uncertified citizens to hold the highest offices in the land. They did not believe in a separate class of professional executives. They wanted rough and rooted people like Palin.

I would have more sympathy for this view if I hadn't just lived through the last eight years. For if the Bush administration was anything, it was the anti-establishment attitude put into executive practice.

And the problem with this attitude is that, especially in his first term, it made Bush inept at governance. It turns out that governance, the creation and execution of policy, is hard. It requires acquired skills. Most of all, it requires prudence.

Sarah Palin has many virtues. If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she'd be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness."

Ross Douthat agrees at the Atlantic:

"Now that we've seen the entirety of the Palin-Gibson tete-a-tete, I concur with Rich Lowry and Rod Dreher. The most that can be said in her defense is that she kept her cool and avoided any brutal gaffes; other than that, she seemed about an inch deep on every issue outside her comfort zone. Yes, the questions were tougher than the ones that a Tim Kaine or Tim Pawlenty probably would have been handed, but they were all questions that a vice-presidential nominee needs to be able to answer. And there's no way to look at her performance as anything save supporting evidence for the non-hysterical critique of her candidacy - that it's just too much, too soon - and a splash of cold water for those of us with high hopes for her future on the national stage."

And in the Washington Post, Richard Cohen goes off on McCain, seizing on the Palin pick as a sign of how far gone the candidate is:

"McCain has turned ugly. His dishonesty would be unacceptable in any politician, but McCain has always set his own bar higher than most. He has contempt for most of his colleagues for that very reason: They lie. He tells the truth. He internalizes the code of the McCains -- his grandfather, his father: both admirals of the shining sea. He serves his country differently, that's all -- but just as honorably. No more, though.

His opportunistic and irresponsible choice of Sarah Palin as his political heir -- the person in whose hands he would leave the country -- is a form of personal treason, a betrayal of all he once stood for. Palin, no matter what her other attributes, is shockingly unprepared to become president. McCain knows that. He means to win, which is all right; he means to win at all costs, which is not."

B787

Brooks (like Frum) is hardly representative. I wish it were true that the conservatives are cracking, but the Standard and National Review show no signs of it. Don't watch Fox, but I have a feeling they aren't coming out against McCain.

More wishful thinking on the increasingly worried (and with good reason) democratic side. OH, November 4th cannot get here soon enough. Even if McCain were to lose, it's just got to end. The longest campaign -- EVER! UGH!

Hmmm, good point, NJ, but to B7's posting...

It seems that more and more journalists from a wider swath of traditional middle-of-the-road or slightly conservative publications ARE calling McCain on the lies/distortions, as well as Palin on her lack of credentials.

I was worried that on sheer momentum alone, Palin may have been able to push enough voters to blindly vote McCain without really thinking things through...

However, based on the stories linked below (and others), I'm starting to feel pleasantly optimistic that the media - and for frak sake the electorate - will truly vett them now.

And won't it be weird to look back and consider - possibly - that the humorous but VERY insightful commentary that Fey/Poehler layered in on SNL helped to "wake up" the country on Palin's cluelessness.

God willing.

CuriousJockAZ saidMore wishful thinking on the increasingly worried (and with good reason) democratic side. OH, November 4th cannot get here soon enough. Even if McCain were to lose, it's just got to end. The longest campaign -- EVER! UGH!

yes... it is "with good reason" not that the dem will lose jsut becasue we want him to win but because it is obvious that the policies we have instituted at this current moment are failing us and J Mac will jsut continue this downward spiral. it is time for a change in policies, in parties, in it all. and did anyone see him on the TODAY show this morning. he was pitiful. Just kept repeating the same things over and over, with no explanation as to how he was going to do it. Yes NOV 4th cant get here soon enuf, the faster it gets here, the faster we can begin down a new path.

CuriousJockAZ saidMore wishful thinking on the increasingly worried (and with good reason) democratic side. OH, November 4th cannot get here soon enough. Even if McCain were to lose, it's just got to end. The longest campaign -- EVER! UGH!

you have got to be kidding yourself.. and the rest of us.. with each and every passing day that gov palin doesnt speak to the press, she is not speaking to a majority of americans, who wont have the opportunity to drink the red kool-aid at one of her performances. and with each and every lie that the mccain campain, your former maverick, that the senator himself will defend, even though they are 100% disprovable.. all the democrats have to do is sit back and watch the typical republican party implode, all the while blaming obama and his campaign of tainting anything and everything.. it is becoming quite hilarious, and this democrat is not worried that george mccain and dick palin will be moving into the whitehouse ever.... but i will say, your defense of the Liars is becoming quite amusing..

hope you are having a great week.


it is time for real change.. not the kind of reform that palin was referrring too..which apparently is only change of gender to the same type of "above the law" attitude that she is portraying today.. hehe. she really is a piece of work.. transparent.. lmao.


and of course true fiscal conservatives dont like the war-mongering neoconservative mccain or the big spending social conservative palin. they dont like big government spending like the billions going into iraq. but they, like most republicans, can never admit when they are wrong even as their party is bankrupting them, so they will continue to "fall in line" without question or thought of how stupid it is making them look...

matte1973 saidHmmm, good point, NJ, but to B7's posting...

It seems that more and more journalists from a wider swath of traditional middle-of-the-road or slightly conservative publications ARE calling McCain on the lies/distortions, as well as Palin on her lack of credentials.

I was worried that on sheer momentum alone, Palin may have been able to push enough voters to blindly vote McCain without really thinking things through...

However, based on the stories linked below (and others), I'm starting to feel pleasantly optimistic that the media - and for frak sake the electorate - will truly vett them now.

And won't it be weird to look back and consider - possibly - that the humorous but VERY insightful commentary that Fey/Poehler layered in on SNL helped to "wake up" the country on Palin's cluelessness.

God willing.

The tides may be turning yet again. There was a great NY Times article on Palin on Sunday (link unhelpfully not provided by me), and with the current economic crisis, Obama certainly has every reason to bash McCain and all supply siders. Did anyone hear McCain eat his words about our "strong economy" this morning on the Today show?

Can the guy really be that out of touch?

Maybe it's hard to touch people from a wheelchair.

[quote]
The tides may be turning yet again. There was a great NY Times article on Palin on Sunday (link unhelpfully not provided by me), and with the current economic crisis, Obama certainly has every reason to bash McCain and all supply siders. Did anyone hear McCain eat his words about our "strong economy" this morning on the Today show?

Can the guy really be that out of touch?[/quote]

Is this the article you are referring to:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?_r=1&em&oref=slogin

No, tell me it isn't true...she hired friends and fired enemies???? Who would do that????

George Bush.

CuriousJockAZ saidNo, tell me it isn't true...she hired friends and fired enemies???? Who would do that????

Well in this case, its important because she hired people unqualified for the jobs that she put them in. Do we really need more of that? I sure don't think so.

Well, then he needs to be impeached. Nobody hires friends and fires enemies...NOBODY! It just makes no sense, and it's so unfair.

Personally i could care less if they hire people who are friends or not, what i care about is them being qualified to do the job that they are put in as opposed to being loyal to the person picking them to do the job. This country is not working and we all deserve a government that works for us instead of against us.

This is the only time I am truly thankful for the Electoral College!!!

What is truly sad is that so many Americans only see the Republican or Democrat label and no matter the candidate, they choose their party. While I would have rather had Clinton, Obama actually represents the best hope for America to start a new path. What those who think that force is the best way to keep America "safe" will never understand, is that uniting rather than alienating is the best way to secure our country and our interests.

I want my President to be erudite. I don't care if he's "one of us" because he won't be coming over for BBQs or joining me for drinks. He is simply a figurehead and as such, needs to be a thinker, not a bruiser. Granted, he has to be tough where our interests and security are concerned, but any time we can avoid armed conflict in favor of diplomacy, I'm all for it. Plus, it's a helluva lot cheaper. We need that money to get us out of the shit hole Bush has put us in!

McCain's choice of Palin was nothing short of an insult to America. It highlights his lack of intelligent decision making skills required to be President. Obama's choice of Biden was excellent. Biden's expertise is foreign policy and god only knows how fragile our relationship with the rest of the world is. It would give Obama the time to concentrate on domestic policy. What exactly would Palin do? What is her expertise? Pitbulls and lipstick? Hair?

Let's keep our fingers crossed.

People will soon discover that the current party in power favors privatizing profits but socializing losses. That doesn't fly.

I hate politics. I want a monarchy. The Brits have it right and with less commercials.

CuriousJockAZ saidWell, then he needs to be impeached. Nobody hires friends and fires enemies...NOBODY! It just makes no sense, and it's so unfair.

You sound like Al Gonzales.

Point is, we want our government to have INTEGRITY.

CRONYISM is thought of as a bad thing.

And this is even true in the PRIVATE SECTOR, where many, many firms have PERSONNEL PROCEDURES and ANTINEPOTISM POLICIES.

CuriousJockAZ saidWell, then he needs to be impeached. Nobody hires friends and fires enemies...NOBODY! It just makes no sense, and it's so unfair.

It's astonishing you say this. Ever heard the word "cronyism"??

Whoops NNJ made me redundant.

obscenewish said

CuriousJockAZ saidWell, then he needs to be impeached. Nobody hires friends and fires enemies...NOBODY! It just makes no sense, and it's so unfair.

It's astonishing you say this. Ever heard the word "cronyism"??

I did. See 1 above yours, OW. ;)

Let's not forget about Romney's take on McLame's tactics.

All:

No matter how the stories shake out... Troopergate, cronyism, record cash grabs from the Congress, lack of foreign policy knowledge, etc... I KNOW that Biden will eviscerate Palin in their debate...

The only thing I wonder about there, is if, just like with George W., expectations are set sooooo low that all she has to do is show up and wink, and she "wins" it. What I really want to see is her waffle on her stupid northern colloquialisms.

We shall see....

During the debates, if they (Obama/Biden) are smart, they will let them open their mouths and let the ignorance fly out. But I'm actually hoping Biden and Obama let them have it just to watch McLame and that Palin woman (just for you Kansas) explode on live television. I hear they both have horrible tempers.

I don't know about Palin's temper...but I do know about McCain's temper.

Each day, his cloest aides decide what "color" it is. And that color is determined by his mood and frame of mind and/or temper. Apparently, McCain has a vicious and nasty temper. He frequently flies off the handle as well.

Just what you want in the Oval Office, eh?

B787 said
I don't know about Palin's temper...but I do know about McCain's temper.

Each day, his cloest aides decide what "color" it is. And that color is determined by his mood and frame of mind and/or temper. Apparently, McCain has a vicious and nasty temper. He frequently flies off the handle as well.

Just what you want in the Oval Office, eh?

PTSD and the shiny red button.

Nice combo.

Ugh.

CuriousJockAZ saidNo, tell me it isn't true...she hired friends and fired enemies???? Who would do that????

When it's "agin" the LAW

That's when you don't do it
Now Sarah Palin is takin a page right out of the Bush White House's playbook and not cooperating with the investigation
She stating that the investigation is being orchestrated by the Obama Campaign
Like what's she been smokin'?
Like the Obama campaign can go to the REPUBLICAN run Alaska legislature and say...
Hey Dudes! Whaddya think if we get a commission together to investigate your Ex Governor?
Great idea Huh?

I don't know which was more delightful on the TODAY show ...

John McCain eating his words about "the fundamentals of the economy are strong".

- or -

Joe Biden fighting back pow Pow POW against the usual corporate news claptrap from Mereidth Veira (whom I usually love). It's so great to see someone with backbone just saying, "No, that's not true."

John McCain has descended into the worst kind of pandering. When asked what he meant about "the fundamentals of the economy" he went on with dreck about "the American worker". No substance, no plan, just the same old "I'm with you" crap that politicans have been doling out since the dawn of the media age.

George Bush could pull this stuff off. God help us if voters buy it from a much less skilled huckster.

Again, the saddest part about all of this is that John McCain was a semi-honorable Republican back in 2000.

B787, just what hardhips have you had to endure these last 7 years of the Bush administration? Your photo indicates that you don't miss meals. You have access to a computer. No one is throwing you in jail because you use a computer to criticize the president or the government. So, whattayabitchinabout?

The bottom line is, nothing will work out if ya don't get elected. John McCain
will do great things for this country, but he can't if he isn't elected. I agree that there are more qualified candidates for the Republican VP but they won't matter if John isn't elected. I'm dissapointed in the negative ads, but I can accept them so that John gets elected. Negative ads work, and work quite well.

So, the choice for Sarah Palin and the negative ads helps John get elected and that says more about the people of this country than it does about the candidate.

mplsjock_writer saidI don't know which was more delightful on the TODAY show ...

John McCain eating his words about "the fundamentals of the economy are strong".

- or -

Joe Biden fighting back pow Pow POW against the usual corporate news claptrap from Mereidth Veira (whom I usually love). It's so great to see someone with backbone just saying, "No, that's not true."

John McCain has descended into the worst kind of pandering. When asked what he meant about "the fundamentals of the economy" he went on with dreck about "the American worker". No substance, no plan, just the same old "I'm with you" crap that politicans have been doling out since the dawn of the media age.

George Bush could pull this stuff off. God help us if voters buy it from a much less skilled huckster.

Again, the saddest part about all of this is that John McCain was a semi-honorable Republican back in 2000.

Loves It!

Add one more Republican turning on McCain/Palin: my Mom

I called her today. She's 76 and has ALWAYS voted Republican, while my Dad has ALWAYS voted for the Democrat. At first I was joking that McCain had her "old folk" vote locked in, but she said Palin worries her so much she's actually probably going to vote for Obama-Biden.

SCORE!

John43620 saidB787, just what hardhips have you had to endure these last 7 years of the Bush administration? Your photo indicates that you don't miss meals. You have access to a computer. No one is throwing you in jail because you use a computer to criticize the president or the government. So, whattayabitchinabout?

The bottom line is, nothing will work out if ya don't get elected. John McCain
will do great things for this country, but he can't if he isn't elected. I agree that there are more qualified candidates for the Republican VP but they won't matter if John isn't elected. I'm dissapointed in the negative ads, but I can accept them so that John gets elected. Negative ads work, and work quite well.

So, the choice for Sarah Palin and the negative ads helps John get elected and that says more about the people of this country than it does about the candidate.

you can accept blatant lies.. wow.. that is funny and sad at the same time

and since you bring up "no one throwing you in jail because you use a computer to criticize the president or the government" just reeks of a slam agains communism and socialism... guess you dont have anything that says "made in china" in your house, nor do you support the diversion to the real war on terror that we kindly call the "war in iraq" which is paid for by billions from china,, the evil communists.. that we will be paying back with interest for generations.... republicans slam communism, but yet are more than willing to fund communism with american tax dollars..(hypocritical, you think?).. thus enabling activities like those that you mentioned to continue.


g.

John43620 saidB787, just what hardhips have you had to endure these last 7 years of the Bush administration? Your photo indicates that you don't miss meals. You have access to a computer. No one is throwing you in jail because you use a computer to criticize the president or the government. So, whattayabitchinabout?

The bottom line is, nothing will work out if ya don't get elected. John McCain
will do great things for this country, but he can't if he isn't elected. I agree that there are more qualified candidates for the Republican VP but they won't matter if John isn't elected. I'm dissapointed in the negative ads, but I can accept them so that John gets elected. Negative ads work, and work quite well.

So, the choice for Sarah Palin and the negative ads helps John get elected and that says more about the people of this country than it does about the candidate.

and please tell me, exactly what can he do for this country? u outline none of that in ur writing above.

John? I'll handle it from here. You just rest your little head.

Even Karl Rove said that McCain's ads have gone too far. Karl Rove.

"In case anyone was still wondering whether John McCain is running the sleaziest, most dishonest campaign in history, today Karl Rove - the man who held the previous record - said McCain's ads have gone too far," said Obama campaign spokesman Tommy Vietor.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/14/karl-rove-mccains-ads-hav_n_126280.html

McGay saidJohn? I'll handle it from here. You just rest your little head.

McGay ... where did you find that? That's gotta go on my car.

A friend showed me a bumper sticker for sale that says:

"My special needs child would vote for McCain/Palin."

I already ordered one so I can cross out the MCain/Palin and put a big ol' Obama sticker over it.

My autistic son is 8 and even he sees through the Third Time Around Bull-----.

1969er saidAdd one more Republican turning on McCain/Palin: my Mom

I called her today. She's 76 and has ALWAYS voted Republican, while my Dad has ALWAYS voted for the Democrat. At first I was joking that McCain had her "old folk" vote locked in, but she said Palin worries her so much she's actually probably going to vote for Obama-Biden.

SCORE!

Hey Paul, good deal. Was it McCain, the Palin woman or the combination?

HndsmKansan said

1969er saidAdd one more Republican turning on McCain/Palin: my Mom

I called her today. She's 76 and has ALWAYS voted Republican, while my Dad has ALWAYS voted for the Democrat. At first I was joking that McCain had her "old folk" vote locked in, but she said Palin worries her so much she's actually probably going to vote for Obama-Biden.

SCORE!

Hey Paul, good deal. Was it McCain, the Palin woman or the combination?

I hope her decision doesnt have repercussions...

...

XRuggerATX saidPeople will soon discover that the current party in power favors privatizing profits but socializing losses. That doesn't fly.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Do I have your permission to use this statement of yours !!!!! Damn Rugger !!!!!! This is hitting the nail on the head for sure !!!!! GOOD ONE !!!!

John43620 saidB787, just what hardhips have you had to endure these last 7 years of the Bush administration? Your photo indicates that you don't miss meals. You have access to a computer. No one is throwing you in jail because you use a computer to criticize the president or the government. So, whattayabitchinabout?

The bottom line is, nothing will work out if ya don't get elected. John McCain
will do great things for this country, but he can't if he isn't elected. I agree that there are more qualified candidates for the Republican VP but they won't matter if John isn't elected. I'm dissapointed in the negative ads, but I can accept them so that John gets elected. Negative ads work, and work quite well.

So, the choice for Sarah Palin and the negative ads helps John get elected and that says more about the people of this country than it does about the candidate.

Little man, this is the best you got? Equating my food intake and computer access to political relevance?

Please, trying to politically challenge me is futile -- your neophyte political mindset combined with an apparent brainwashed political education boarders on kindergarten at best.

I'm sure you're a lovely guy. But, when it comes to the political ebb and flow of the country and its role in the political fabric of the world - you're politically ignorant.

That said, and comprehend this as best as possible: unless you're willing to pull your politically inept brain out of the ground and are ready for the true reality of what this current administration has done (and what the Republican presidential nominee will do) to this country and the world - please stay in your cave.

Politically, what I've already forgotten, you'll never know . . . and what you think you know is either a lie or half truth though wrapped up in a shiney box w/ a read ribbon around it labeled truth. Sadly, you're misguided and I feel sorry for you and others like you.

1969er saidAdd one more Republican turning on McCain/Palin: my Mom

I called her today. She's 76 and has ALWAYS voted Republican, while my Dad has ALWAYS voted for the Democrat. At first I was joking that McCain had her "old folk" vote locked in, but she said Palin worries her so much she's actually probably going to vote for Obama-Biden.

SCORE!

Two more, well sort of. My evangelical minister sister and her evangelical minister husband. After months of me telling them that McCain was an vile fornicating adulterer and that his original position on Roe v.s. Wade wasn't as pro-life friendly as it is now that he needs to cozy up to conservatives, they actually did the research themselves. My sister informed me today that they will be abstaining from the electoral process this time around. Oh, and they were in love with Palin for a a couple weeks, but think she's an annoying twat now. Well, they wouldn't say annoying twat, it's not very Jesus-like, but I know they really want to so I'm saying it for them.

John43620 saidB787, just what hardhips have you had to endure these last 7 years of the Bush administration? Your photo indicates that you don't miss meals. You have access to a computer. No one is throwing you in jail because you use a computer to criticize the president or the government. So, whattayabitchinabout?

If that's all that matters to you, I think you've made your point.

"Hey, you have food and a computer....what are you complaining about? Let me invade your privacy, take away your civil rights, make unjust war on 3rd world countries, destory the economy for my benefit and make greater the gap between rich and poor."



LOL

John43620 said
The bottom line is, nothing will work out if ya don't get elected. John McCain
will do great things for this country, but he can't if he isn't elected. I agree that there are more qualified candidates for the Republican VP but they won't matter if John isn't elected. I'm dissapointed in the negative ads, but I can accept them so that John gets elected. Negative ads work, and work quite well.

I agree with you here.....well, part of it. He definitely WILL NOT do great things for this country in my opinion, but you are right that negative ads work, whether they are factual or not (which in his campaign they are not). But if you tell people a lie enough times people will believe it (i.e. RUNNING FOR CHANGE!!!!). NOBODY will remember the negative ads after __________ gets elected, so be as dirty and scoundral-y as you can so you get into office. Forget integrity and honesty, lets do everything we can to win!

John43620 said

So, the choice for Sarah Palin and the negative ads helps John get elected and that says more about the people of this country than it does about the candidate.

That they are effin 'tards who believe that a good candidate bases his decisons on a book written 2000 years ago. A time when people were even dumber than the dumbest people are today.




Now I'd like to hear about how LIBERAL the media is, another of my favorite JOKES.....

So, when do the debates start?

I am very suspicious of this. If the ultra right wing conservatives are turning on McCain it just might be that they are looking ahead at the long term. Afterall, they have made bundles of cash from the duped American taxpayer for the war in Iraq and they will continue to do so under Obama with his policy towards Afganistan. I would suspect that if they now want to dump McCain, it is because they want to turn the failed economy that they have created with all its future problems over to the Democrats so that in a couple of years they will take back both houses of Congress and only leave Obama with a paltry veto power like they did to Clinton and then take back the house that is painted white in 2012.

HndsmKansan said

1969er saidAdd one more Republican turning on McCain/Palin: my Mom

I called her today. She's 76 and has ALWAYS voted Republican, while my Dad has ALWAYS voted for the Democrat. At first I was joking that McCain had her "old folk" vote locked in, but she said Palin worries her so much she's actually probably going to vote for Obama-Biden.

SCORE!

Hey Paul, good deal. Was it McCain, the Palin woman or the combination?

It was mainly that Palin woman.

lilmaninsc saidSo, when do the debates start?

http://www.youdecide2008.com/2008/08/21/official-2008-obama-mccain-presidential-debate-schedule/
Here is a break down of what each debate will consist of:

1. First Presidential Debate: – Date: September 26 – Site: University of Mississippi – Topic: Domestic and Economic policy – Moderator: Jim Lehrer – Staging: Podium debate – Answer Format: The debate will be broken into nine, 9-minute segments. The moderator will introduce a topic and allow each candidate 2 minutes to comment. After these initial answers, the moderator will facilitate an open discussion of the topic for the remaining 5 minutes, ensuring that both candidates receive an equal amount of time to comment

2. Vice Presidential Debate – Date: October 2nd – Site: Washington University (St. Louis) – Moderator: Gwen Ifill – Staging/Answer Format: To be resolved after both parties’ Vice Presidential nominees are selected.

3. Second Presidential Debate – Date: October 7 – Site: Belmont University – Moderator: Tom Brokaw – Staging: Town Hall debate – Format: The moderator will call on members of the audience (and draw questions from the internet). Each candidate will have 2 minutes to respond to each question. Following those initial answers, the moderator will invite the candidates to respond to the previous answers, for a total of 1 minute, ensuring that both candidates receive an equal amount of time to comment. In the spirit of the Town Hall, all questions will come from the audience (or internet), and not the moderator.

4. Third Presidential Debate – Date: October 15 – Site: Hofstra University – Topic: Foreign Policy & National Security – Moderator: Bob Schieffer – Staging: Candidates will be seated at a table – Answer Format: Same as First Presidential Debate – Closing Statements: At the end of this debate (only) each candidate shall have the opportunity for a 90 second closing statement.

realifedad said

XRuggerATX saidPeople will soon discover that the current party in power favors privatizing profits but socializing losses. That doesn't fly.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Do I have your permission to use this statement of yours !!!!! Damn Rugger !!!!!! This is hitting the nail on the head for sure !!!!! GOOD ONE !!!!

Use it freely. Everyone. The current party's supporters can twist logic and lean on shaky principles, but this statement is obvious, illuminating, and maddening.

Once again, Rugs makes total sense.Can I be president of your campaign? For whatever in the hell you want to run for.

XRuggerATX said

realifedad said

XRuggerATX saidPeople will soon discover that the current party in power favors privatizing profits but socializing losses. That doesn't fly.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Do I have your permission to use this statement of yours !!!!! Damn Rugger !!!!!! This is hitting the nail on the head for sure !!!!! GOOD ONE !!!!

Use it freely. Everyone. The current party's supporters can twist logic and lean on shaky principles, but this statement is obvious, illuminating, and maddening.

I'm not a financial genius. But let's say that Bush (and McCain, who supported it) was able to pass legislation to privatize Social Security. Would those investments have been at risk or reduced?

1969er said

XRuggerATX said

realifedad said

XRuggerATX saidPeople will soon discover that the current party in power favors privatizing profits but socializing losses. That doesn't fly.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Do I have your permission to use this statement of yours !!!!! Damn Rugger !!!!!! This is hitting the nail on the head for sure !!!!! GOOD ONE !!!!

Use it freely. Everyone. The current party's supporters can twist logic and lean on shaky principles, but this statement is obvious, illuminating, and maddening.

I'm not a financial genius. But let's say that Bush (and McCain, who supported it) was able to pass legislation to privatize Social Security. Would those investments have been at risk or reduced?

Yeah. It's like throwing grandma in a shark tank.

I thought pricks like these modern day republicans only existed as villains in movies.

Gay GOPers...step up and return your party to its respectable past, please, or stop giving them your vote.

true fiscal conservatives vote libertarian... barr '08



felt like giving a shout out to my former congressman
















Obama/Biden '08