Re: Is she the one to break the glass ceiling???

by Cato Mon Jun 13, 2011 7:45 am

Stephanie wrote:Sam,

Recently I was watching Palin give an interview and I thought to myself, "wow, she really has gotten better at this!"

A couple of days later she told us all Paul Revere road to warn the British.

For the most part I like Sarah Palin. I truly do. I think there's a lot to admire. She's not going to be the nominee either. That doesn't mean I don't find her preferable to most of the currently announced candidates not to mention most of the names being batted around as possible candidates. I just don't think with the kind of blunders she makes winning the White House is possible.

I just looked up what Sarah Palin said. You might want to take a look at also. The actual comment she made is not what you stated. You didn't post the complete comment. If you had her comment makes sence.

by **Stephanie** Mon Jun 13, 2011 8:44 am

I saw the clip. I also saw and heard her try to rewrite history on one of the Sunday morning news shows last week by claiming Revere warned the British the colonists would not give up without a fight. Her supporters tried to rewrite history on Wikipedia. The whole thing is ridiculous. She should have just admitted she had a momentary memory lapse. It happens to me all the time. I'm sitting here writing this to you wondering if I said Revere "road" instead of Revere "rode" in my initial comments on this. I have to go check because I think I did and it will drive me nuts to leave it out there like that.

by **Stephanie** Mon Jun 13, 2011 8:45 am

ack! Cato, you quoted my spelling mistake! LOL

by Aaron Mon Jun 13, 2011 9:11 am

No one has to defame Palin. She does a wonderful job of it herself. No one wants her nominated more then the Obama camp.

by Cato Mon Jun 13, 2011 9:21 am

Stephanie wrote:ack! Cato, you quoted my spelling mistake! LOL

I do try!! LOL

I really wish people would be just people when they ran for office. When they goof just admit it laugh about and go on. No one is perfect, everyone makes mistakes, so just admit it and go on.

by Cato Mon Jun 13, 2011 9:29 am

Aaron wrote:No one has to defame Palin. She does a wonderful job of it herself. No one wants her nominated more then the Obama camp.

A few months ago I might have agreed with you, but not anymore. I'm running to a number of people that actually like her and would vote for her. I know this much, she has one vote, mine. Of Course I'd vote for about anyone over the "community organizing marxist bum" presently occupying the whitehouse.

by Aaron Mon Jun 13, 2011 9:46 am

She would be crucified in a debate on not only her past statements but her record as well. We've elected one person with no experience to the Presidency. I don't think Independents will make that mistake again. She's simply not qualified and that fact that when it got just a little tough on her in Alaska she fled the state like rats off a sinking ship magnifies that.

by Cato Mon Jun 13, 2011 10:18 am

Aaron wrote:She would be crucified in a debate on not only her past statements but her record as well. We've elected one person with no experience to the Presidency. I don't think Independents will make that mistake again. She's simply not qualified and that fact that when it got just a little tough on her in Alaska she fled the state like rats off a sinking ship magnifies that.

I have never seen her debate, but it would be interesting to see.

We keep talking about people with experience and people with no experience. Both Bushes and Clinton had experience and all three were failures at economics. Additionally, integrety also plays a large role. Obama, both Bushes, and Clinton sorely lacked in that area.

by SamCogar Mon Jun 13, 2011 10:45 am

by claiming Revere warned the British the colonists would not give up without a fight.

Aw geeeze, I've been warning the Democrats that you and Ron Paul will not give up without a fight.

Have I been doing something wrong? Razz

.

.

.

.

I'd better go to the garage n' get a beer n' behave myself.

by SamCogar Mon Jun 13, 2011 10:55 am

and that fact that when it got just a little tough on her in Alaska she fled the state like rats off a sinking ship magnifies that.

YUP, you are absolutely right about that.

I agree, it's perfectly all right for a real "he man" to quit his job and flee the state, ....... but not a female.

by Aaron Mon Jun 13, 2011 11:03 am

Cato wrote:
Aaron wrote:She would be crucified in a debate on not only her past statements but her record as well. We've elected one person with no experience to the Presidency. I don't think Independents will make that mistake again. She's simply not qualified and that fact that when it got just a little tough on her in Alaska she fled the state like rats off a sinking ship magnifies that.

I have never seen her debate, but it would be interesting to see.

We keep talking about people with experience and people with no experience. Both Bushes and Clinton had experience and all three were failures at economics. Additionally, integrety also plays a large role. Obama, both Bushes, and Clinton sorely lacked in that area.

With Obama, I think it would be a train wreck.

And do you really think that both Bush's and Clinton sucked at economics?

by Aaron Mon Jun 13, 2011 11:06 am

SamCogar wrote:
and that fact that when it got just a little tough on her in Alaska she fled the state like rats off a sinking ship magnifies that.

YUP, you are absolutely right about that.

I agree, it's perfectly all right for a real "he man" to quit his job and flee the state, ....... but not a female.

I see you got your panties in a wad again. Sorry Sammie old chap but you can't change history.

by Aaron Mon Jun 13, 2011 11:07 am

SamCogar wrote:
by claiming Revere warned the British the colonists would not give up without a fight.

Aw geeeze, I've been warning the Democrats that you and Ron Paul will not give up without a fight.

Have I been doing something wrong?

I'd better go to the garage n' get a beer n' behave myself.

Last time I checked, they don't bottle intelligence but even if they did, if you don't believe Palin didn't totally screw the pooch on her statement about Revere, you need tanker loads of it.

by SamCogar Tue Jun 14, 2011 3:48 am

Last time I checked, they don't bottle intelligence

DUH, ...... it made Bud wiser, ........ didn't it?

by Cato Tue Jun 14, 2011 6:23 am

Aaron wrote:
Cato wrote:
Aaron wrote:She would be crucified in a debate on not only her past statements but her record as well. We've elected one person with no experience to the Presidency. I don't think Independents will make that mistake again. She's simply not qualified and that fact that when it got just a little tough on her in Alaska she fled the state like rats off a sinking ship magnifies that.

I have never seen her debate, but it would be interesting to see.

We keep talking about people with experience and people with no experience. Both Bushes and Clinton had experience and all three were failures at economics. Additionally, integrety also plays a large role. Obama, both Bushes, and Clinton sorely lacked in that area.

With Obama, I think it would be a train wreck.

And do you really think that both Bush's and Clinton sucked at economics?

Yes I do, all three men embraced Keynesian economics, which eventually succeeded in causing the dot. com bubble and the housing bubble. I'm no book learned expert at all the theories of economics but I am smart enough to know that when the government interferes and plays with interest rates and money supply bad things happen. I've seen it happen too many times. Bush the first blessed us with Alan Greenspan and Bush the second blessed us the Bernenke along the economic messes their meddling have caused.

by Cato Tue Jun 14, 2011 6:27 am

Aaron wrote:
With Obama, I think it would be a train wreck.

you keep saying it would be a train wreak, I'd curious, why do you think that?

by Aaron Tue Jun 14, 2011 6:40 am

I watched the debates last night and I saw no one that impressed me enough to verbally match the President in the type of debate that he would be willing to agree to.

by SamCogar Tue Jun 14, 2011 6:59 am

Keynesian economics ....... which eventually succeeded in causing the dot. com bubble

DUH???????????????????????????????

Then it musta, justa hadta been Keynesian economics ....... which eventually succeeded in causing the electronic data processing bubble.

AW GEEEZE, ..... and here all these past years I wasa thunking is was caused by the tremendous decrease in the costs of electronic components.

Just shows to go ya that you are never too old to learn the truth. lol!

by Cato Tue Jun 14, 2011 9:55 am

Aaron wrote:I watched the debates last night and I saw no one that impressed me enough to verbally match the President in the type of debate that he would be willing to agree to.

Seems to me you are giving Obama a lot of credit where it isn't due, but that is you choice I guess.

by Aaron Tue Jun 14, 2011 11:51 am

Seems to me I'm telling it like it is. Who among the debaters last night do you thing would fare well and why? Keep in mind that there were no tough questions, accusations directed at any of the debaters or confrotations. Pawlenty had the best chance and he backpedaled faster then a garage drunk can pop a top on a can of Budwieser.

by Cato Tue Jun 14, 2011 12:15 pm

Aaron wrote:Seems to me I'm telling it like it is. Who among the debaters last night do you thing would fare well and why? Keep in mind that there were no tough questions, accusations directed at any of the debaters or confrotations. Pawlenty had the best chance and he backpedaled faster then a garage drunk can pop a top on a can of Budwieser.

I didn't watch. As far as telling it like it is maybe so. So far as Pawlenty goes what the world did you expect?

So far as Palin taking on Obama in a debate, I still think you are giving Obama far more credit than he deserves.

by Aaron Tue Jun 14, 2011 1:18 pm

Cato wrote:
Aaron wrote:Seems to me I'm telling it like it is. Who among the debaters last night do you thing would fare well and why? Keep in mind that there were no tough questions, accusations directed at any of the debaters or confrotations. Pawlenty had the best chance and he backpedaled faster then a garage drunk can pop a top on a can of Budwieser.

I didn't watch. As far as telling it like it is maybe so. So far as Pawlenty goes what the world did you expect?

So far as Palin taking on Obama in a debate, I still think you are giving Obama far more credit than he deserves.

The teleprompter versus the great blunderer. One has the gift of tongue and one screws up about every other statement.

If anything I'm giving Palin too much credit.

by SamCogar Wed Jun 15, 2011 6:25 am

Aaron wrote:
Cato wrote:So far as Palin taking on Obama in a debate,
The teleprompter versus the great blunderer.

One has the gift of tongue and one screws up about every other statement.

.

And ya wonder why I drink.

by Aaron Wed Jun 15, 2011 9:34 am

SamCogar wrote:
And ya wonder why I drink.

because you're an alcoholic!!!.

by Cato Wed Jun 15, 2011 10:18 am

Aaron wrote:
Cato wrote:
Aaron wrote:Seems to me I'm telling it like it is. Who among the debaters last night do you thing would fare well and why? Keep in mind that there were no tough questions, accusations directed at any of the debaters or confrotations. Pawlenty had the best chance and he backpedaled faster then a garage drunk can pop a top on a can of Budwieser.

I didn't watch. As far as telling it like it is maybe so. So far as Pawlenty goes what the world did you expect?

So far as Palin taking on Obama in a debate, I still think you are giving Obama far more credit than he deserves.

The teleprompter versus the great blunderer. One has the gift of tongue and one screws up about every other statement.

If anything I'm giving Palin too much credit.

In your opinion.

You have yet to explain why you feel the way you do about Palin. I'm not saying she is perfect, she is human, and she like all human beings, even you, makes mistakes. What has she said or what stances has she taken that causes you to feel the way you do?

by Sponsored content