CriticalBill wrote: If Sarah Palin was just another woman like Geraldine Ferraro who ran for office and then just faded away, there would not be such hatred from the left. Unfortunately for the left, she has stirred up the waters and gotten people interested in politics who never were previously. Sarah Palin will not run for pres. imo, but will continue to push the smaller government message and WILL get more conservatives to the polls. That is why she is hated and feared by the left and I think it's hilarious.
You ever notice how people on the left explain that we do not hate and fear her, yet the right keeps telling us that we do and why we do.
We don't hate her - she's actually amusing. We fear that she might get into power and then really screw up the country, since it is very obvious that she is not even close to the brightest crayon in the box.
Palin will run for President, but will quit early in the campaign, claiming that she can do more good out of the race than in. If she stays in too long, it will remind everyone how incredibly ignorant she is, which will cut into her book and speech profits. A short run for President will actually boost her status.
We fear that she might get into power and then really screw up the country, since it is very obvious that she is not even close to the brightest crayon in the box.
ckm8 wrote: I'm actually dreading it. Our political system was designed to be a meritocracy- to have the best minds from one school of thought challenge the others. Now we have birthers and mama grizzlies. We're doomed.
What dooms us is the current climate in which it is believed that we should spread the wealth around that results from the meritocracy of the private sector. The system was set up for meritocracy, and self government, from the bottom up as well as from the top down.
What was envisioned with the choosing of the president was not what we have today. At the outset we would have seen Obama, Clinton, Edwards, McCain, Huckabee, Paul and others all on the ballot. We wouldn't be having a party ticket that gave us a choice between Obama/Biden and McCain/Palin. We would all be casting a vote for whom we thought would make the best President and the one who came in second in that voting would be the sitting VP and president of the Senate. Yeah, the 1800 election kind of messed that up, but with the changes that have occurred since then that have the members of the EC restricted to voting en masse in most states based upon the results of the direct vote of the people in the states, we could easily do away with the 12th Amendment and go back to the original intent of having two equal votes cast for President by the EC with the President being declared as the one who secured the most votes so long as it was a majority of the votes available. That would be a true meritocracy choice and would open up the field such that either a political party chose a single candidate to run and allowed for a member of a different party to be VP or they allowed multiple members of their party to run in the hopes that the people would choose two of them to occupy the highest offices.
Tell me ckm8, without the 12th Amendment, do you think Obama would be sitting in the Oval Office today or do you think that Clinton would have beaten him had both of them been on the ballot and the people been allowed to choose between the two of them based upon the merit brought forth by both?
We fear that she might get into power and then really screw up the country, since it is very obvious that she is not even close to the brightest crayon in the box.
Compare her to the current POTUS, why don't you?
Can anyone screw up the country more????????????
Yes... He was president from 2001 to 2008... George W. Bush...
We fear that she might get into power and then really screw up the country, since it is very obvious that she is not even close to the brightest crayon in the box.
Compare her to the current POTUS, why don't you?
Can anyone screw up the country more????????????
Golly, I thought this thread was about Sarah Palin, not Barack Obama. But then, when you can't defend your position, it's a common tactic to change the subject.
Tell me, Nmysys, do you really think Palin is competent enough to be President? Do you think she would be a good President?
Please try to answer without invoking the "Oh, yeah? Well, Obama's worse" distraction.
ckm8 wrote: Actually Sarah Palin is a perfect representative of the new GOP. I'm glad you're all so pleased with her as she reflects you utterly. Mediocre, greedy, uninformed, angry, virulent and selfish.
Just like Obama defines the new Democrat party. Marxian Socialist.
No, as a corporatist. Nothing Marxist or Socialist about him. Obviously you are utterly ignorant of the construct of these two schools of political thought, but when you consider your chosen representative your ignorance is not the least bit surprising. Nor is your virulence.
