Palin's future?

"While I was watching I said to myself I bet half those people doing all that cheering pay no income tax."--Sod

So then you admit that Obama's 95% figure is completely bogus?

I would be fine to get rid off the EITC and the additional child tax credit, except that I think they are much better ideas than government spending programs that have high administrative costs. With the EITC, no one has to go to a caseworker, no one has to find ways to cheat the system, etc. You either qualify or you don't, and it doesn't matter who you know or how good you are at filling out paperwork or making appointments.

Don't get me wrong, I say pitch both, but first pitch the one with high fraud and administrative costs.

My point remains that in the end Obama is not going to give me a tax advantage over what I currently have, and I am the one he claims to be speaking for these days.

Well Mike I notice you didnt address the point that Palin was ridiculing people like yourself who get a "rebate" and the crowd she was working was cheering to hi-heaven.

They dont have a clue what they are cheering.

They dont have a clue what they are cheering.

Nor do you. You feel all good and generous about paying your taxes and "bein' part of the deal, man." But I've been telling you for years that taxes are not charity. Charity is voluntary. Taxes are legally considered as debts.

sodbuster wrote:Well Mike I notice you didnt address the point that Palin was ridiculing people like yourself who get a "rebate" and the crowd she was working was cheering to hi-heaven.

They dont have a clue what they are cheering.

No Sherm, I get it just fine. There are poor and working class Republicans? Really? I've never heard you admit that before!

OK Oc if I understand you right then you believe those in Mike's situation should not get their "income re-distriubution".

I, on the other hand, have no problem with it.

I am just confused as to why Mike and Stephanie seem to support Palin's argument that it is wrong to re-distribute my tax money to them.

And I seem to think it is ok?

Like I said it seems both sides are crazy.

They support policies that benefit me at their expense, and I support policies that benefit them at my expense.

sodbuster wrote:I am just confused as to why Mike and Stephanie seem to support Palin's argument that it is wrong to re-distribute my tax money to them.

Perhaps it has something to do with the way that while Palin claims to be against legislative "earmarks", she was essentially the "Earmark Queen" when she was mayor of the meth capital of Alaska.

With double-speak like this, Palin is bound to do well in the GOP hierarchy.

It's a governor's role to bring federal dollars home to their states, just as it should be the role of Congress and the President to tell those Governors "no, you don't need that."

Oh that is rich. An individual with a gun and a badge tasers his 10 y/o stepson and you twist it around to being the mother's fault. I can't even believe my eyes, Terry. Honestly, I expect so much better from you.

Answer the f'ing question, Steph.

Was it bad when the cop first did it? Was it only bad when it came divorce time?

Why did the mother wait so long?

You can, "I expected better of you..." all day long but you should answer my questions, first.

TerryRC wrote:Oh that is rich. An individual with a gun and a badge tasers his 10 y/o stepson and you twist it around to being the mother's fault. I can't even believe my eyes, Terry. Honestly, I expect so much better from you.

Answer the f'ing question, Steph.

Was it bad when the cop first did it? Was it only bad when it came divorce time?

Why did the mother wait so long?

You can, "I expected better of you..." all day long but you should answer my questions, first.

I can't answer your question because I don't know all the details of the incident. I don't know if that mother didn't complain to the authorities who decided to cover up for one of their own. Wouldn't be the first time that has happened, now would it?

I don't know if the fact this lunatic tasered her son wasn't what prompted her to seek a divorce from the SOB. I don't know if the child didn't keep this from his mother until after the sicko was out of the house. I don't know that this woman wasn't terrorized by this "cop" lived in fear for her safety and the safety of her son.

No matter what the answer to these questions and more, you're still blaming the mother for something she did not participate in or condone or anything else. The blame lays with the man with the badge and the gun who has sworn to uphold the law and used a taser on a 10 y/o child.

I'm still expecting better from you, Terry. Honestly I am.

No matter what the answer to these questions and more, you're still blaming the mother for something she did not participate in or condone or anything else. The blame lays with the man with the badge and the gun who has sworn to uphold the law and used a taser on a 10 y/o child.

I'm still expecting better from you, Terry. Honestly I am.

Expect away, then.

Go look up the details. They are all over the place. Or you can just avoid the question.

Like I said, divorce is ugly. This woman saved up that little incident like an IOU.

You are all over the cop. Obviously the mom either had trouble of her own (two failed marriages) or a history of picking losers.

Ah the hell with it. Let's give her a pass. Poor woman.

Now back to Sarah Palin:

Palin also apologized Tuesday for any misunderstanding caused when she referred last week to the patriotic values of "the real America" and "pro-America areas of this great nation." (link clicky)

So close to the implication by some here that liberal=terrorist.

I'm from a town of 4,000. I'm a "real American".

Palin is a divisive biatch.

Terry,

While I wait for this page to load (9.6kps this morning) let me remind you I am not voting for McCain/Palin. I don't waste my time with my lightening fast connection looking up dirt on Sarah Palin, or Joe Biden (although somebody did send me a whopper about him last night). The COP tasered the KID. I don't care who he is, or what the mom knew and when, a LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER TASERED A TEN YEAR OLD CHILD! Anybody who tasers a child as an "experiment", shouldn't have a gun and a badge.

Is this the statement your criticizing her for now?

"We believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hard-working, very patriotic, very pro-America areas of this great nation," she told the crowd.

OK Oc if I understand you right...

Clearly you do not. I'd really appreciate it if you would refrain from rephrasing anything I say.

I never said you were voting for McCain/Palin.

It is irrelevant.

Didn't we just agree to give the poor, suffering mom a pass? Seeing as how you don't want to know any more about the incident.

As to Palin's statement, you don't find that divisive, the implication that some of us Americans AREN'T hard-working, patriotic or pro-American?

Why do you keep defending this woman? Are you defending her words?

Is it just that I don't play fair? Am I being too harsh on this poor woman, also?

I don't think so:

Palin charged state for children's travel, later amended expense reports (link click)

My fave:

The charges included costs for hotel and commercial flights for three daughters to join Palin to watch their father in a snowmobile race, and a trip to New York, where the governor attended a five-hour conference and stayed with 17-year-old Bristol for five days and four nights in a luxury hotel.

TerryRC wrote:I never said you were voting for McCain/Palin.

It is irrelevant.

Didn't we just agree to give the poor, suffering mom a pass? Seeing as how you don't want to know any more about the incident.

As to Palin's statement, you don't find that divisive, the implication that some of us Americans AREN'T hard-working, patriotic or pro-American?

Why do you keep defending this woman? Are you defending her words?

Is it just that I don't play fair? Am I being too harsh on this poor woman, also?

I don't think so:

Palin charged state for children's travel, later amended expense reports (link click)

My fave:

The charges included costs for hotel and commercial flights for three daughters to join Palin to watch their father in a snowmobile race, and a trip to New York, where the governor attended a five-hour conference and stayed with 17-year-old Bristol for five days and four nights in a luxury hotel.

"We believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hard-working, very patriotic, very pro-America areas of this great nation," she told the crowd.

I don't see what's offensive about what she said there. There are lots of Americans who aren't patriotic or pro-American. There are millions of Americans who flat out refuse to support themselves. They want public housing and food stamps and heating assistance and their medical card and vouchers for school clothes and free toys at Christmas.

She's wrong if she thinks none of them live in small towns. I got one living next door to me.

I defend Sarah Palin because I know she is under constant attack by the LWL's in this country who will stop and nothing to elect the socialist known as Barack Obama. I defend her because so many lies are told about her.

Yesterday another homeschooling mom sent me a link to lessons plans at factcheck.org. What was on that page yesterday isn't there, I'm looking for it. It was all about the lies the media is perpetuating about Sarah Palin. The list of fallicies included the one about her cutting funding for special needs students. Factcheck called that a lie. I can't remember all the others. I'm looking for the list...

Ah, here it is:

http://www.factchecked.org/LessonPlanDetails.aspx?myId=32

I don't see what's offensive about what she said there. There are lots of Americans who aren't patriotic or pro-American. There are millions of Americans who flat out refuse to support themselves. They want public housing and food stamps and heating assistance and their medical card and vouchers for school clothes and free toys at Christmas.

Whatever. The hubris of deciding who and who isn't a "real America". You have it, also.

"Nuff said.

So how about her misusing state funds to take her kids on trips with her, trips that were ridiculous (five days for a five hour meeting)? That would get me fired, don't cha know.

Do you have any idea how long it takes an AP link to open?

I'm waiting.....

and waiting....

Are you denying there are Americans who are not Patriotic? Are you denying there are Americans who don't put global interests over American interests? We have some in this forum, that is not what I would call "pro-American". The pursuit of happiness is American. Waiting for a government handout is not. Call that hubris, call it whatever you like, I don't care.

Now I can see it is Newsweek.

OMG it's 7 pages long. Now I'm waiting for page 2 to load.

I'll get back to you on that.

Are you denying there are Americans who are not Patriotic? Are you denying there are Americans who don't put global interests over American interests? We have some in this forum, that is not what I would call "pro-American". The pursuit of happiness is American. Waiting for a government handout is not. Call that hubris, call it whatever you like, I don't care.

Would you dare to point at me and call me unAmerican? Right to my face? Would you do it to sodbuster? How about ziggy? Would you dare to name the names of which forum members are unAmerican?

I can't wait. I'm glad you don't get to define "American" for all of us.

Regardless, that isn't what she was talking about and you damn well know that. She was attacking "liberals".

The idea that democrats are "socialists" (never mind that the highest federal spending to tax ratios are red states) and unAmerican is where she is going.

Hell, she has said it more than once.

It is a breath away from Sam's equation of liberal=terrorist.

So does this mean that you expect elected officials to either always pay for the expenses of family members who travel with them or leave them at home? Does this apply to everyone? Will it apply to Barack Obama when he is President?

Why didn't it apply to the Clintons, like when Hillary took Chelsea with her on that dangerous mission where they had to "dodge bullets" and what have you?

You see, Sarah Palin just can't win. She has young children and is a politician so she's a bad mother for not spending adequate time with them. She takes them with her when she travels and she's a crook for having the state pay their expenses.

You see, Sarah Palin just can't win. She has young children and is a politician so she's a bad mother for not spending adequate time with them. She takes them with her when she travels and she's a crook for having the state pay their expenses.

She had the state pay for her and her daughter to stay FIVE days in a luxury hotel for a FIVE HOUR meeting.

She took her kids to see a snowmobile race that their dad was in. Fine, but not on the taxpayer's money.

Why do you bring Obama and Clinton into this? Can't find an argument to defend Palin so you just try and spread the sin around?

I can take my family to meetings but I MUST pay their expenses. I expect every public employee to do the same.

Yes. This woman IS a crook for having the state pay for her family's expenses.

If it was anyone else, you would be screaming "corruption".

TerryRC wrote:Are you denying there are Americans who are not Patriotic? Are you denying there are Americans who don't put global interests over American interests? We have some in this forum, that is not what I would call "pro-American". The pursuit of happiness is American. Waiting for a government handout is not. Call that hubris, call it whatever you like, I don't care.

Would you dare to point at me and call me unAmerican? Right to my face? Would you do it to sodbuster? How about ziggy? Would you dare to name the names of which forum members are unAmerican?

I can't wait. I'm glad you don't get to define "American" for all of us.

Regardless, that isn't what she was talking about and you damn well know that. She was attacking "liberals".

The idea that democrats are "socialists" (never mind that the highest federal spending to tax ratios are red states) and unAmerican is where she is going.

Hell, she has said it more than once.

It is a breath away from Sam's equation of liberal=terrorist.

I don't think all Democrats are socialist. Some are, Barack Obama & Hillary Clinton clearly are.

Ziggy knows I consider him a friend, but he is a socialist. So is Sherm, but you are not. Socialism is un-American. America is a capitalist country. That's not the same as being anti-American. Sadly, in this country we have a number of citizens who are anti-American. I suspect we have an anti-American member.....however that is quite a charge to make against a person and I'm not 100% certain. If I become certain, I'll be sure and give you a holler.

Yes, I would tell Sherm, Ziggy, bmd, and any other socialist to their face they are un-American. I'm a bit relieved you're not, Terry. You sound like you might take a poke at me. LOL

My son has been sick (nasty cold) and slept in this morning. He's up now and I have take care of him.

Ziggy knows I consider him a friend, but he is a socialist. So is Sherm, but you are not. Socialism is un-American. America is a capitalist country. That's not the same as being anti-American. Sadly, in this country we have a number of citizens who are anti-American. I suspect we have an anti-American member.....however that is quite a charge to make against a person and I'm not 100% certain. If I become certain, I'll be sure and give you a holler.

Sounds like "America is a christian nation"... makes me shiver. There are plenty that think me unAmerican because I profess no faith in god.

Anyway, capitalism will have to answer for itself. It has been seen palling around with people like China. Now I'm not saying that capitalism is unAmerican, but those rights-tromping, commie Chinese... ?

What is socialism, Steph? How about the corporate socialism going on? Are people that approved of the bailout unAmerican? They are supporting a CLASSIC definition of socialism.

I believe that ziggy and sherm LOVE this country. I think you are out of line to even suggest that they are unAmerican.

I would never hit a lady, btw. Nor am I likely to come to blows over words. Hope your son gets to feeling better.

Here's my frustration. Elected officials (and government employees) have been misusing public funds (this does not excuse Palin) or at best excessively using public funds for decades.

Just now the AP cares about it.

TerryRC wrote:
You see, Sarah Palin just can't win. She has young children and is a politician so she's a bad mother for not spending adequate time with them. She takes them with her when she travels and she's a crook for having the state pay their expenses.

She had the state pay for her and her daughter to stay FIVE days in a luxury hotel for a FIVE HOUR meeting.

She took her kids to see a snowmobile race that their dad was in. Fine, but not on the taxpayer's money.

Why do you bring Obama and Clinton into this? Can't find an argument to defend Palin so you just try and spread the sin around?

I can take my family to meetings but I MUST pay their expenses. I expect every public employee to do the same.

Yes. This woman IS a crook for having the state pay for her family's expenses.

If it was anyone else, you would be screaming "corruption".

Can the President's family travel on Air Force One?

(I'm not excusing Palin for one second--I'm looking for a standard here that can apply to EVERY elected official and public employee).

I should like to in this case have a standard that we all agree on and on which we are willing to apply evenly, just as I seek a standard by which the US goes to war or does not go to war. Issues like these transcend partisanship--how far should public support go to the families of legislators and executives?

The Governor's families typically live in mansions. If those mansions have chefs, should the family members not eat? Should there even be chefs? Should the White House have a pastry chef (whose last name I shared, but never got any pastries)?

SheikBen wrote:Can the President's family travel on Air Force One?

(I'm not excusing Palin for one second--I'm looking for a standard here that can apply to EVERY elected official and public employee).

I should like to in this case have a standard that we all agree on and on which we are willing to apply evenly, just as I seek a standard by which the US goes to war or does not go to war. Issues like these transcend partisanship--how far should public support go to the families of legislators and executives?

The Governor's families typically live in mansions. If those mansions have chefs, should the family members not eat? Should there even be chefs? Should the White House have a pastry chef (whose last name I shared, but never got any pastries)?

Nice spin. Ever think about applying for a job at the RNC?

So a single standard uniformly applied is now "Republican spin?"