Gov. Palin Resigns (Quits)

[lostfan]

Between her book deal and the fact that she's free to take as many speaking fees and attend as many fundraisers as she wants, she's pretty much set for life, personally and politically. However, I don't see her ever being anything more than a cash cow (albeit a lucrative one), short of pulling a Hillary and moving to another state and scoring a Senate seat I can't see her being taken seriously as a national figure outside of the GOP base.

[kapkomet]

Between her book deal and the fact that she's free to take as many speaking fees and attend as many fundraisers as she wants, she's pretty much set for life, personally and politically. However, I don't see her ever being anything more than a cash cow (albeit a lucrative one), short of pulling a Hillary and moving to another state and scoring a Senate seat I can't see her being taken seriously as a national figure outside of the GOP base.

And I hope that's exactly the way it stays.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

No thank you.

 

So what's wrong with Palin? I know what my thoughts are, but I'd like to know yours.

 

 

I think her entire persona stupifies the party and its base, making her Bush II. I'm tired of the religious extremists running the party on a platform of pro-life, anti-global warming, anti gay marriage (who cares? seriously? they'll be damned for an eternity of hell if that's how it's supposed to be) and anti-raising taxes (in a time when it's probably necessary).

 

It's too bad McCain ran into the Obamachrist. I think he's the type of conservative (moderate) we, the party, needed.

[DBAHO]

Oddly, I am more annoyed with the Obama coverage than the Palin coverage. I agree that the media is fawning over Obama in a way that is just way over the top. However, in Palin's case, she's basically creating a series of car wrecks and shouting LOOK AT ME, so I can't really blame the media for following it.

Eh if I wanna watch people worshipping Barack's ass, I'll watch CNN.

 

If I want to become 1% dumber in an hour and watch people bashing Obama's ass, I'll watch FOX News.

 

Simple really (well at least down here on basic cable it is).

[CanOfCorn]

Yes, I can understand that point.

 

With Palin, honestly, as I said elsewhere (hi lf) Palin cannot ever win a larger national election in Alaska. She has to spend her time in the lower 48 to even have a chance. You don't get to debate national policy up there, you just don't. You're too far removed. Between this issue and the RNC going to whore her out for all the money she can raise (ohhhh the puns, ), this, IMO, is why she resigned.

 

She didn't do that good of a job when she was in the lower 48.

[kapkomet]

I think her entire persona stupifies the party and its base, making her Bush II. I'm tired of the religious extremists running the party on a platform of pro-life, anti-global warming, anti gay marriage (who cares? seriously? they'll be damned for an eternity of hell if that's how it's supposed to be) and anti-raising taxes (in a time when it's probably necessary).

 

It's too bad McCain ran into the Obamachrist. I think he's the type of conservative (moderate) we, the party, needed.

I think you're wrong. If a moderate was going to win, they would have won by now.

 

The pro-life, anti-global warming part needs to stay that way (although personally I wish the pro-life part would go away...) because real conservative values would dictate that. The gay marriage thing I've been quite clear on it, and most conservatives agree with my stance that it's a state's rights issue (and so is abortion when it comes right down to it).

 

Moderates candidly don't stand for anything. There's just not a Reagan type out there, but if there were, they'd get a lot of traction in this environment of Barackus the Great.

[lostfan]

I think you're wrong. If a moderate was going to win, they would have won by now.

 

The pro-life, anti-global warming part needs to stay that way (although personally I wish the pro-life part would go away...) because real conservative values would dictate that. The gay marriage thing I've been quite clear on it, and most conservatives agree with my stance that it's a state's rights issue (and so is abortion when it comes right down to it).

 

Moderates candidly don't stand for anything. There's just not a Reagan type out there, but if there were, they'd get a lot of traction in this environment of Barackus the Great.

It's not Obama that allows them traction, it's Congressional Democrats. Especially in the Senate (60 seats being seemingly irrelevant), I wonder how Harry Reid manages to stand up straight without having a spine. The only reason the Dems aren't self-destructing again right now is because the Republicans insist on repeatedly setting themselves on fire every time they set foot in public.

[NorthSideSox72]

I think you're wrong. If a moderate was going to win, they would have won by now.

 

The pro-life, anti-global warming part needs to stay that way (although personally I wish the pro-life part would go away...) because real conservative values would dictate that. The gay marriage thing I've been quite clear on it, and most conservatives agree with my stance that it's a state's rights issue (and so is abortion when it comes right down to it).

 

Moderates candidly don't stand for anything. There's just not a Reagan type out there, but if there were, they'd get a lot of traction in this environment of Barackus the Great.

I think you have missed the reality here - a moderate is not needed for the primaries, they are needed for the general election. And in that, I think its right on, that is what the Republicans need in order to win in the generals. The party has just moved too far off center.

 

I also think your thought that moderates don't stand for anything is off base - moderates are not usually in the middle on everything, they have views on both sides that net out to moderation. And those folks make up a huge chunk of the population. They stand for lots of things, and they are the key to winning close elections.

 

[kapkomet]

I think you have missed the reality here - a moderate is not needed for the primaries, they are needed for the general election. And in that, I think its right on, that is what the Republicans need in order to win in the generals. The party has just moved too far off center.

 

I also think your thought that moderates don't stand for anything is off base - moderates are not usually in the middle on everything, they have views on both sides that net out to moderation. And those folks make up a huge chunk of the population. They stand for lots of things, and they are the key to winning close elections.

I think most people are TRUE conservatives, not what the liberals or Rush Limbaugh call conservative.

[lostfan]

I think most people are TRUE conservatives, not what the liberals or Rush Limbaugh call conservative.

I think, truth be told despite the fact that we fight all the time in this forum, you and me are a lot closer philosophically (as far as actual actions) than it looks like. I still wouldn't call myself a conservative though and I'm not liberal enough to be a real liberal. I'm all over the map and I think there's a lot more people like me too. I don't have a baseline that pre-determines my logic on a particular issue like a true liberal or a true conservative would, but I still fall on the side with the libs at something like a 60/40 rate.

[CanOfCorn]

I think, truth be told despite the fact that we fight all the time in this forum, you and me are a lot closer philosophically (as far as actual actions) than it looks like. I still wouldn't call myself a conservative though and I'm not liberal enough to be a real liberal. I'm all over the map and I think there's a lot more people like me too. I don't have a baseline that pre-determines my logic on a particular issue like a true liberal or a true conservative would, but I still fall on the side with the libs at something like a 60/40 rate.

 

I have a couple of friends that are fiscally conservative but socially liberal. They both tend to vote GOP, but aren't always thrilled about it. The problem is the label. If there could be a candidate that could persuade the majority to vote on issues and not on labels, we might have a different system. Unfortunately, Id on't thinkt hat's going to happen in any of our lifetimes.

[kapkomet]

I think, truth be told despite the fact that we fight all the time in this forum, you and me are a lot closer philosophically (as far as actual actions) than it looks like. I still wouldn't call myself a conservative though and I'm not liberal enough to be a real liberal. I'm all over the map and I think there's a lot more people like me too. I don't have a baseline that pre-determines my logic on a particular issue like a true liberal or a true conservative would, but I still fall on the side with the libs at something like a 60/40 rate.

I think you are more conservative then you think you are - throw the common definitions that the idiot liberals and idiot conservatives like to label the other side.

 

I mean real conservative, not neo-con f***tards.

 

[Soxy]

Delightful

[Jenksismyhero]

I think you have missed the reality here - a moderate is not needed for the primaries, they are needed for the general election. And in that, I think its right on, that is what the Republicans need in order to win in the generals. The party has just moved too far off center.

 

I also think your thought that moderates don't stand for anything is off base - moderates are not usually in the middle on everything, they have views on both sides that net out to moderation. And those folks make up a huge chunk of the population. They stand for lots of things, and they are the key to winning close elections.

 

Bingo.

 

 

[Jenksismyhero]

I think you're wrong. If a moderate was going to win, they would have won by now.

 

The pro-life, anti-global warming part needs to stay that way (although personally I wish the pro-life part would go away...) because real conservative values would dictate that. The gay marriage thing I've been quite clear on it, and most conservatives agree with my stance that it's a state's rights issue (and so is abortion when it comes right down to it).

 

Moderates candidly don't stand for anything. There's just not a Reagan type out there, but if there were, they'd get a lot of traction in this environment of Barackus the Great.

 

There's no way anyone associated with the "R," even a moderate, was going to win this election against Obama. The country had pissed on Bush and Republicans for the previous 6-7 years (some deserved, most not), and the country was going into the tank. People wanted to try something entirely different. They bought into the message of change. It remains to be seen if that change is making us any better.

 

Being anti-global warming makes no sense. There's nothing conservative about not backing the fight against crapping in our own water supply.

 

Pro-life/pro-choice issue makes no sense, and as I've repeatedly stated, its the most overrated issue in the history of politics. There's nothing "conservative" about that issue either, unless "conservative" is attached to religious beliefs, which it's not. Ditto with the gay marriage issue.

 

 

[kapkomet]

There's no way anyone associated with the "R," even a moderate, was going to win this election against Obama. The country had pissed on Bush and Republicans for the previous 6-7 years (some deserved, most not), and the country was going into the tank. People wanted to try something entirely different. They bought into the message of change. It remains to be seen if that change is making us any better.

 

Being anti-global warming makes no sense. There's nothing conservative about not backing the fight against crapping in our own water supply.

 

Pro-life/pro-choice issue makes no sense, and as I've repeatedly stated, its the most overrated issue in the history of politics. There's nothing "conservative" about that issue either, unless "conservative" is attached to religious beliefs, which it's not. Ditto with the gay marriage issue.

One has nothing to do with the other. You can be a person that's for cleaning up the environment without being a "global warming" person. CO2 emmissions is one of the most overrated bulls*** topics ever.

[Balta1701]

One has nothing to do with the other. You can be a person that's for cleaning up the environment without being a "global warming" person. CO2 emmissions is one of the most overrated bulls*** topics ever.

And that's a statement made with a large helping of ignorance of reality.

[lostfan]

Delightful

Summary of what she is saying: "We belong in the kitchen making men sandwiches and women who think they belong anywhere else are ruining America."

[Texsox]

I have a couple of friends that are fiscally conservative but socially liberal. They both tend to vote GOP, but aren't always thrilled about it. The problem is the label. If there could be a candidate that could persuade the majority to vote on issues and not on labels, we might have a different system. Unfortunately, Id on't thinkt hat's going to happen in any of our lifetimes.

 

That would be my dream. Once the GOP gave up on reigning in spending (The Reagan Years) we started a slide I don't like.

[lostfan]

I think you are more conservative then you think you are - throw the common definitions that the idiot liberals and idiot conservatives like to label the other side.

 

I mean real conservative, not neo-con f***tards.

In terms of "I don't want the government to be controlling my life and I want them to stay out of the market as much as possible" I'm a conservative. In terms of "I think the government could be the answer to ____" I'm a liberal. Fiscally I'd say I'm conservative but I'm obviously closer to Bill Clinton (his actions, not his intentions) than Ron Paul. Socially, definitely liberal, but you would say libertarian, same thing. On national security and foreign policy I don't really think there is a such thing as "liberal" or "conservative" because this accepts that warmongering is a valid way to conduct foreign policy, and of course that's associated with conservatives now when a true conservative probably wouldn't think much differently from a liberal. Back in the day Democrats could be hawkish, too. Each foreign problem has a certain series of options, and military is just one possible approach, but should be one of the last ones usually. Anyone who automatically jumps to military action as a solution all the time is a f***ing moron, unfortunately that's all neocons do and somehow most Republicans just fall in line when the neocons scream really loud.

[Texsox]

What a huge thread, no wonder she's a GOP front runner. There is just so much attention and buzz around her name. It's electric!

[kapkomet]

First off, 50% of the posts have nothing to do with Sarah Palin (welcome to the filibuster)

 

Second, STOP IT. Seriously. It's f***ing annoying.

 

[StrangeSox]

Summary of what she is saying: "We belong in the kitchen making men sandwiches and women who think they belong anywhere else are ruining America."

 

I read WND like its The Onion because my mind refuses to accept that people say those sorts of things seriously.

[Balta1701]

Snicker.

 

[BearSox]

Got a smile out of me.