I'm trying to recall what was George H. Bush's response to the Tianamen Massacre?

 

Not enough. Both Bushes were a disapppointment to me and if Jeb were to ever run, I could not vote for him because of the other 2. As far as giving it a rest, Hitler's Brown Shirts said, more or less, the same thing.

bballfamily....do you want President Obama to interfere in the activities of other countries or not? Because while you criticize him for not interfering here, you criticized him for interfering in Honduras.

 

I'm complaining of his inconsisties. He needs to back up those who want freedom. Not dictators like the Iranian clerics or Chavez.

Anything to slam Obama ...

 

I learned this from the best at slamming, liberal Democratic elitists.

I watched them as one of their own Jimmy Carter was bashed, then Reagan, followed by Bork, GHW Bush, Gingrich, Thomas, GW Bush, Lott, Palin and most of all the average American. The elists believe the average American is not capable of taking care of theirselves and Big Brother has to care for all his little siblings. Palin is attacked because she believes in people doing for theirselves, but yet willing to give help who need help to get through tough times, but not a lifetime of welfare if your healthy.

I learned this from the best at slamming, liberal Democratic elitists.

I watched them as one of their own Jimmy Carter was bashed, then Reagan, followed by Bork, GHW Bush, Gingrich, Thomas, GW Bush, Lott, Palin and most of all the average American. The elists believe the average American is not capable of taking care of theirselves and Big Brother has to care for all his little siblings. Palin is attacked because she believes in people doing for theirselves, but yet willing to give help who need help to get through tough times, but not a lifetime of welfare if your healthy.

 

 

And exactly what does your agenda of ranting against Obama incessintly accomplish that is constructive?

I learned this from the best at slamming, liberal Democratic elitists.

I watched them as one of their own Jimmy Carter was bashed, then Reagan, followed by Bork, GHW Bush, Gingrich, Thomas, GW Bush, Lott, Palin and most of all the average American. The elists believe the average American is not capable of taking care of theirselves and Big Brother has to care for all his little siblings. Palin is attacked because she believes in people doing for theirselves, but yet willing to give help who need help to get through tough times, but not a lifetime of welfare if your healthy.

 

Palin certainly is good at doing for herself.

Palin certainly is good at doing for herself.

 

 

Like what?

Like what?

 

I see her recent decision to step down as that of a wolf in sheep's clothing. She is being self serving, but playing it off as being "a different type of politician, one who won't just take lame duck status and receive a check." She's "doing it for the people," but in reality, she's doing it to further her own career. IMO, it'll backfire.

I see her recent decision to step down as that of a wolf in sheep's clothing. She is being self serving, but playing it off as being "a different type of politician, one who won't just take lame duck status and receive a check." She's "doing it for the people," but in reality, she's doing it to further her own career. IMO, it'll backfire.

 

If I'm ever charged with a crime, I hope you aren't on my jury. :irked:

I see her recent decision to step down as that of a wolf in sheep's clothing. She is being self serving, but playing it off as being "a different type of politician, one who won't just take lame duck status and receive a check." She's "doing it for the people," but in reality, she's doing it to further her own career. IMO, it'll backfire.

I'm not approving Palin's decision, but (other than Ron Paul ) I don't know any politicians that act in anything but their own self-interest. So I hope you assume guilty before proven innocent with any politician's move (as I do).

 

FWIW, Palin is essentially a huge gamble, and one which the Republican party takes only when necessary. For example, McCain had little chance of being elected President, as Obama's campaign was dominating. He took a huge chance on Palin, firing up the social conservatives, and for a month and a half it worked- he was beating Obama in the polls at one point (by a small margin). Eventually, it didn't work, because of a combination of the media, her lack of ability to answer questions with substance, and her mixed record as a fiscal conservative.

 

Similarly, by doing the same thing as Governor of Alaska for another year or so, Palin was not going to get elected into the Presidency. She is taking a huge change, assumedly to shore up on the issues and hit the spealing circuit. Personally, I think it won't work either, but I can't blame her either way- she really doesn't have another option if she wants to become a possibility on the national scene.

If I'm ever charged with a crime, I hope you aren't on my jury. :irked:

 

I hope not either, as I dislike jury duty. However, I wasn't aware that the criteria for having an opinion on a politician was on par with serving on a jury. (I know that sounds a bit harsh, though that's not my intent.)

I'm not approving Palin's decision, but (other than Ron Paul ) I don't know any politicians that act in anything but their own self-interest. So I hope you assume guilty before proven innocent with any politician's move (as I do).

 

FWIW, Palin is essentially a huge gamble, and one which the Republican party takes only when necessary. For example, McCain had little chance of being elected President, as Obama's campaign was dominating. He took a huge chance on Palin, firing up the social conservatives, and for a month and a half it worked- he was beating Obama in the polls at one point (by a small margin). Eventually, it didn't work, because of a combination of the media, her lack of ability to answer questions with substance, and her mixed record as a fiscal conservative.

 

Similarly, by doing the same thing as Governor of Alaska for another year or so, Palin was not going to get elected into the Presidency. She is taking a huge change, assumedly to shore up on the issues and hit the spealing circuit. Personally, I think it won't work either, but I can't blame her either way- she really doesn't have another option if she wants to become a possibility on the national scene.

 

You're right. Most politicians are self-serving. However, Palin maverick playing is just over the top and, to me, is like hearing fingernails on a chalkboard.

I hope not either, as I dislike jury duty. However, I wasn't aware that the criteria for having an opinion on a politician was on par with serving on a jury. (I know that sounds a bit harsh, though that's not my intent.)

 

Every opinion on another person, politician or not, should be based on hard facts, not innuendos, guesses, hunches, rumors or what you think may or may not be a person's motivation. You have no way of knowing what her true motivation was for stepping down, yet you assume the worse because you don't like her, as you have admitted. That's wrong and as an educated person, if you seriously thought about it, you'd agree with me.

 

And yes I know that some folks do the same with Obama. They are wrong too.

Every opinion on another person, politician or not, should be based on hard facts, not innuendos, guesses, hunches, rumors or what you think may or may not be a person's motivation. You have no way of knowing what her true motivation was for stepping down, yet you assume the worse because you don't like her, as you have admitted. That's wrong and as an educated person, if you seriously thought about it, you'd agree with me.

 

And yes I know that some folks do the same with Obama. They are wrong too.

 

Am I supposed to look at all things from a criminal court aspect? Do I need to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt or, as small claims goes, more likely than not?

 

You're certainly entitled to that opinion (make judgements only as you would as a juror). However, Palin's actions and words combine to form a quickly emerging picture for me.

 

1) She wants her family out of the spotlight. She announces her resignation, then, she invites FoxNews along on her family vacation. For what purpose? Hmmmmmm.

 

2) She complains about everyone else "playing politics as usual" and "won't be a lame duck and just draw a check" even though she campaigned for VP while on the Alaskan tax payers' buck. She certainly took the RNC's money for the wardrobe, hair stylists and makeup...for her family, too. Some maverick.

 

3) Her resignation speech was open ended and lacked real substance. The resignation itself should be a warning to all of those that would elect her president. Will she serve only 2 years of that term if elected? We wouldn't want her to just draw a check.

 

While running for VP, each rally and speaking engagement was amongst mostly handpicked supporters or in groups of likeminded individuals. As a result, Palin has a false sense connection with "Joe sixpack." At least from the perspective of this working class, pro-2nd amendment, military veteran's daughter, she does.