Jump to content

RNC - My Favorite quotes so far


Recommended Posts

Guest American Woman
The part I like is how Tuesday it was your favorite quote and a clever zinger and shows how he is not afraid of the "Palin is a victim" crowd, but by Wednesday it was something completely different.

Really? It's something completely different now? Because as far as I know, it's still my favorite quote, which I clearly said.

It was only "courageous" up until he got into hot water for it... then he wasn't actually standing up to anybody, he was being misrepresented and smeared. :lol:

I also have to point out the irony in the Obama crowd complaining that their opponents are playing the victim card.

<_<

Really? Perhaps you'd be so kind as to direct me to the multiple threads where people are whining about Obama being victimized. What quotes are we supposed to stay away from? What past experiences? What's been said that we've all cried a river over?

The only *fact* is the words he used. The *interpretation* of the words he used is highly subjective. The best proof of that is the way you and the audience reacted Tuesday night.

The "fact" isn't so much in the words he used; the "fact" is that the words are a "saying," a saying that's been used by McCain and Lynne Cheney also. Obama was referring to policies, same as everyone else who's used the phrase. I reacted the way I did because of your post. I never for one minute thought he was calling Palin a pig, any more than he was calling her smelly old garbage. Clearly he was talking about policies. Again, the same as everyone else who's used it. Unless you think McCain was calling Hillary a pig and just don't see fit to be outraged about that.

"Zing! Yessss!! Hahaha, extreme burnage! He is not cowed by the Palin-as-victim crowd! rah-rah! w-w-w-wait, he was obviously just referencing a common metaphor! Trying to make it about Palin is obviously totally distorting what he said! I CALL DO-OVER!!! DO-OVER!!!"

Obviously you -- with your list as proof -- thought he shouldn't have used the saying. But he did. So he's not being cowed by y'all. Getting it yet?

I provided my interpretation (which incidently is the same as the reaction of the Democrat supporters in the crowd, and was also the same as your *first* interpretation, which you posted Tuesday night before you'd received the party line on his comments.) I provided my analysis, which is that it wasn't smart (and the mere fact that this controversy exists demonstrates why it wasn't smart.) I provided the clip of Obama's comments so that people could decide for themselves.

My "interpretation" hasn't changed one bit. I repeat. I never, ever for a moment thought he was calling Palin a pig -- or smelly garbage. I thought it was funny that it brought the moronic "pitbull in lipstick" comment to mind, and I still do.

I don't think I've criticized him without hesitation

I think you have.

I don't think I'm "in overdrive"

I think you are, and it's apparent to me that I'm not the only one who does.

and when I've taken issue with people criticizing Palin it has been for specific issues or comments, not some kind of generalized victim reaction.

Sure it is, because the "specific issues" and "comments" you've had an issue with are ludicrous. You even made a list of why Obama shouldn't have used a saying he's used pre-Palin; a saying that McCain himself has used in regards to Hillary.

If you feel otherwise, you have a right to your opinion. My opinion is that your attempt to paint me as such makes you look like the kind of person who just doesn't actually read very well and is only capable of viewing things in a simplistic "You're either with us or against us " mentality.

Sounds to me as if you're the "simplistic" one with your 'people will believe what they want so he shouldn't have said it' line of thought. It's all about sexism in your mind, Palin is a victim when people criticize her, people should watch what they say so as not to offend her/her supporters, while you most definitely criticize Obama (just exactly whose views do you agree with??), and again, you've stated that "...regardless how hard you, or Obama bloggers, or the Democrat campaign try to shape the perception of the comment, people will form their own opinions. They'll either think it was a deliberate crack at Palin, or they won't." But if you think that's deep thinking, keep it up.

As a side note, the "you're either for us or against us" comment was really lame. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We may be beating a dead horse here or apparently making a mountain out of a molehill but I don't think so. If Obama loses this election, people will point to this event as the turning point. I think that would be mistaken because, IMHO, something like this was inevitable even if McCain had chosen a different running mate.

Obama may be popular with Hollywood movie stars and east coast journalists but he's not typical of or popular with mainstream America.

My "interpretation" hasn't changed one bit. I repeat. I never, ever for a moment thought he was calling Palin a pig -- or smelly garbage. I thought it was funny that it brought the moronic "pitbull in lipstick" comment to mind, and I still do.

....

You even made a list of why Obama shouldn't have used a saying he's used pre-Palin; a saying that McCain himself has used in regards to Hillary.

Context is everything in this case. A few days after Palin made a major speech in which she made a reference to an animal and lipstick, Obama throws out a figure of speech involving an animal and lipstick.

Indeed, take a look at the clip again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPd4yk0x-eg

You'll notice that Obama raises his hand to his head as if to hesitate and think, "I don't care. I'm going to say it anyway." He knew precisely what he was saying and it was clearly directed at Palin. It was a jab.

Underneath it, Obama doesn't like people like Palin. It irks him that she can pull this stunt of pretending to be an ordinary mom.

Most Americans are overweight and most Americans like Walt Disney World. Most Americans are ordinary. Palin respects these people and Obama fundamentally doesn't.

As you put it, AW, you found her comment about pit bulls "moronic". Well, that puts you on the losing side in a democracy.

Edited by August1991
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman
We may be beating a dead horse here or apparently making a mountain out of a molehill but I don't think so.

It's making Mt. Everest out of a molehill.

If Obama loses this election, people will point to this event as the turning point.

Only the idiots.

Obama may be popular with Hollywood movie stars and east coast journalists but he's not typical of or popular with mainstream America.

Believe that if you will, but I know you'll be surprised to see the results come election day. My state is "mainstream America," it isn't made up of "Hollywood movie stars" or "East Coast Journalists," and it's just one of the many "Obama states" that aren't what you describe. You must either think there are one helluva lot of Hollywood movie stars and east coast journalists in the U.S. or be totally unaware of the numbers Obama has supporting him.

Context is everything in this case. A few days after Palin made a major speech in which she made a reference to an animal and lipstick, Obama throws out a figure of speech involving an animal and lipstick.

I guess he didn't get the memo that whatever Palin says must dictate what he does or doesn't say. Evidently he didn't know that saying is now off limits. I guess he didn't realize that anyone who ever uses that saying again is calling Palin a pig. :rolleyes: a thousand times over.

Indeed, take a look at the clip again.

No need.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPd4yk0x-eg

You'll notice that Obama raises his hand to his head as if to hesitate and think, "I don't care. I'm going to say it anyway." He knew precisely what he was saying and it was clearly directed at Palin. It was a jab.

Good for him. If he had hesitated and NOT used a saying he had planned on using, one that he's used in the past, that others have used in the past, I'd think he was being "cowed" by the Paliln-is-a-victim/criticize-her-and-you're-a-sexist-pig crowd who are trying to dictate what we can or can't say; trying to muzzle anyone who dares to criticize her as the criticism and insults directed at Obama fly. I'd be PO'd if he'd backed down because of that. If Palin can't handle his comment, she can't handle the job. Simple as that.

Underneath it, Obama doesn't like people like Palin. It irks him that she can pull this stunt of pretending to be an ordinary mom.

"Pretending?" So you don't think she's "an ordinary mom?" What do you think she is, Super Mom? The World's Worst Mom?

And I have no idea whether Obama "likes" Palin or not, but so what if he doesn't like her? He's not obligated to like her. You think she wants to be his BFF? You think McCain "likes" Obama and Hillary? I don't "like" Palin. I didn't "like" Clinton when I voted for him. But then I wasn't voting for the title of Most Popular or Prom King; I was voting for POTUS.

Most Americans are overweight and most Americans like Walt Disney World. Most Americans are ordinary. Palin respects these people and Obama fundamentally doesn't.

That's a real nice picture of America and a really stupid comment. Are you saying McCain and Palin are overweight? Are you saying they like Walt Disney World and Obama doesn't? Are you saying all the people who support McCain/Palin are fat and the Obama supporters aren't? Where you get off saying that Obama doesn't respect "these people" is beyond me. It tells me you're totally off the wall in your judgement.

As you put it, AW, you found her comment about pit bulls "moronic". Well, that puts you on the losing side in a democracy.

Really? It does that, does it? What I just said in the previous paragraph .......... <_<

Edited by American Woman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You Palin haters are the Mohammad Atta's of threads. this is suppose to be reserved for favourite RNC quotes. Go hate on her in another thread, there's already plenty of them you've spread your filth in.

True, but in 40 years of US federal election gazing, I can't recall a more rabid response from panicked critics to a vice presidential candidate. So much foaming from the mouth is bound to spill over into other threads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, but in 40 years of US federal election gazing, I can't recall a more rabid response from panicked critics to a vice presidential candidate. So much foaming from the mouth is bound to spill over into other threads.

You're so right. Is there such thing as Palin Derangement Syndrome yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, but in 40 years of US federal election gazing, I can't recall a more rabid response from panicked critics to a vice presidential candidate. So much foaming from the mouth is bound to spill over into other threads.

Similarly, I have a hard time recalling a more enthusiastic reception for a VP candidate, particularly one as lightweight as Palin. So it seems everyone is going overboard on this.

You're so right. Is there such thing as Palin Derangement Syndrome yet?

Sure, it's rampant among G.O.P partisans who are deluded into thinking Palin is something other than a prop, the human equivalent of Obama's much derided Styrofoam pillars.

Edited by Black Dog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, but in 40 years of US federal election gazing, I can't recall a more rabid response from panicked critics to a vice presidential candidate. So much foaming from the mouth is bound to spill over into other threads.
Spiro Agnew's nomination was met with a stunned "Spiro who?" There was an ugly feeding frenzy around Tom Eagleton. Geraldine Ferraro was accepted at first but then the press got her husband mixed up in it and it was downhill from there.

But the worst by far was Richard Nixon in 1952. He was accused of having a secret slush fund set up by a private clique of wealthy donors. (i.e. the implication was that he was bought and owned by some people.) Eisenhower's reaction? "He better be cleaner than a hound's tooth." IOW, Eisenhower left Nixon out to dry by himself. Nixon went on TV and gave the famous Checkers speech inviting people to send telegrams to the RNC confirming his place on the ticket.

Palin is not out of the woods yet but she seems to have a peculiar Reagan-style teflon coating. Obama & the Dems have to find a way to oppose her without making it look like their insulting white women. Ferraro didn't get the same free pass. Curious.

Edited by August1991
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Similarly, I have a hard time recalling a more enthusiastic reception for a VP candidate, particularly one as lightweight as Palin. So it seems everyone is going overboard on this.

I agree, I can't recall a more enthusiastic reception for a VP candidate. However, I do recall the same type of enthusiasm for an even lighterweight candidate, for President. His name is Barack Obama.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds to me as if you're the "simplistic" one with your 'people will believe what they want so he shouldn't have said it' line of thought.

Argh, are you really this dense or are you just pulling my leg?

I didn't say he "shouldn't" have said it, I said it wasn't a smart thing to say.

Obama can say anything he wants, and it doesn't matter whether Palin's feelings are hurt or not. It doesn't matter whether I personally like it or not. The only "should" and "shouldn't" are what helps him win. He "should" say things that help him win, and he "shouldn't" say things that hurt his chances of winning.

It is smart for him to say things that help him win, and not smart for him to say thing things that hurt his chances of winning.

The "lipstick" zinger wasn't smart, and it has nothing to do with whether it was "mean" to Sarah Palin.

It wasn't smart because it left people wondering whether he called her a pig.

It wasn't smart because it meant that they spend a whole day denying that he called her a pig.

It wasn't smart because it distracts attention and news coverage from issues that help them win.

It's all about sexism in your mind, Palin is a victim when people criticize her, people should watch what they say so as not to offend her/her supporters,

Obama, and his campaign, and his supporters, can say anything they want. I've never said otherwise.

However, when you're free to say whatever you want, you have the opportunity to lose votes as well as win them.

I can almost guarantee you that Republican strategists are hoping that Obama keeps on saying things like that, and I can almost guarantee you that Democrat strategists are hoping that Obama stops saying things like that.

while you most definitely criticize Obama

I'll give you some Kimmy points if you can show me where I've criticized him unfairly.

(just exactly whose views do you agree with??), and again, you've stated that "...regardless how hard you, or Obama bloggers, or the Democrat campaign try to shape the perception of the comment, people will form their own opinions. They'll either think it was a deliberate crack at Palin, or they won't." But if you think that's deep thinking, keep it up.

It's not necessarily "deep", but it's so fundamental to this whole process.

And yet, the concept seems to be lost on a huge number of people.

Think about the first few days after Palin was announced. All the Obama bloggers and media put all this stuff out there, but people formed their own opinions... and the opinions they formed were by and large very different from what the Obama bloggers had hoped. You can deliver the message, but you can't control the response.

And as simple as that sounds, it seems lost on a lot of people. I honestly don't think the DailyKos types understand how much damage they've done to the Democrat campaign. And it's the same reason it's not smart to give people something like the "lipstick" thing. People might not interpret the way the way you hope.

As a side note, the "you're either for us or against us" comment was really lame. :P

Maybe, but it honestly seems like you're not capable of grasping things beyond a "Obama good, Palin bad!/Palin good, Obama bad!" level. It seems like you can't process the concept that somebody might think Palin is a heck of a woman while not thinking she'd be a good President, or that somebody might criticize Obama without thinking badly of the man.

-k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spiro Agnew's nomination was met with a stunned "Spiro who?" There was an ugly feeding frenzy around Tom Eagleton. Geraldine Ferraro was accepted at first but then the press got her husband mixed up in it and it was downhill from there.

Eagleton purposely concealed medical history from McGovern and invited his own demise. Ferraro had tax troubles..."You people who are married to Italian men, you know what it's like." Cue Sopranos theme song.

Palin is not out of the woods yet but she seems to have a peculiar Reagan-style teflon coating. Obama & the Dems have to find a way to oppose her without making it look like their insulting white women. Ferraro didn't get the same free pass. Curious.

I have spoken with several women this week, and they are jazzed about Palin...regardless of party loyalty. I guess ovaries are ovaries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman
Argh, are you really this dense or are you just pulling my leg?

I didn't say he "shouldn't" have said it, I said it wasn't a smart thing to say.

Are you pulling my leg, or are you really that dense?

I'm not getting into a semantics game with you. Whether you said he shouldn't say it or that it wasn't a smart thing to say, my point remains the same. He shouldn't pre-think what he says/planned on saying because of overly-sensative Palin supporters who think anything and everything is a personal insult to Palin. That has been my take and my point all along. Hence the 'I hope it shows he isn't cowed by them' comment. Got it now?

QUOTE=American Woman: while you most definitely criticize Obama

I'll give you some Kimmy points if you can show me where I've criticized him unfairly.

My point is that you criticize Obama, defend McCain, go into overdrive defending Palin, yet you "hate Palin's views," so I can't imagine that you love McCain's, yet you are all over criticizing Obama. You've even, yes, "unfairly" criticized Obama-- in defense of McCain, no less. You can keep your "kimmy points," thanks just the same, but here you go:

QUOTE=Drea

Hint: he has to have a good looking woman on this right arm. He is simply a playboy and nothing more. He has never worked a day in his life,

You have him confused with Barack Obama.

You call that "fair criticism?" Obama has worked hard his whole life (and if you don't realize that, you know nothing about him), he's a loving parent, he isn't/hasn't been a womanizer, and he hasn't cheated on his wife. Can't say the same about McCain, yet you defended McCain by insulting Obama when he hasn't done one thing to deserve it.

....it honestly seems like you're not capable of grasping things beyond a "Obama good, Palin bad!/Palin good, Obama bad!" level.

Right. You make comments like the one I just quoted but I'm the one who can't "grasp" things beyond a "Obama good, Palin bad!/Palin good, Obama bad!" level. Get real. :rolleyes:

And I've explained this to you already, but I'll explain it one more time in hopes that you are finally able to "grasp" it this time.

I'm looking at Palin as a possible POTUS, therefore I don't care about "liking" her. I'm not voting for Class President, Most Popular, Prom Queen, or Miss Congeniality. So yes, when it comes down to who would be best for my country, in my mind it's Obama. I think Palin would be bad for it. But I'm not criticizing her beyond the issues and I have no desire to spend the time to get to know her enough to decide if I "like" or "dislike" her as a person. It's about the issues. And I repeat. While you are all over the board criticizing Obama, I have NOT see you (beyond your "love the woman, hate the views") criticize her once. I see that as a decided lack of depth of thought on your part, especially in light of the fact that you "hate her views." So why aren't you criticizing her views? Why aren't you criticizing McCain's views? Why are you criticizing Obama?

It seems like you can't process the concept that somebody might think Palin is a heck of a woman while not thinking she'd be a good President, or that somebody might criticize Obama without thinking badly of the man.

-k

Your comment about Obama tells me exactly what you think of him, and it says that you think "badly of him." Your constant "Palin is a heck of a woman" posts, as you don't discuss/criticize her views when she's in the limelight BECAUSE she might be president some day, shows me that you can't process the fact that in the end, it's her political stands that matter, not her "likability."

So yeah, I'm perfectly capable of "processing the concept that "somebody might think Palin is a heck of a woman while not thinking she'd be a good President, or that somebody might criticize Obama without thinking badly of the man"--when it applies. However, it doesn't apply to you. Capice?

As a side note, I find your "heck of a woman" feelings about Palin to be par with adolescent movie star adoration. I say that because you "loved the woman" from the moment she came on the scene. I noticed that you said you didn't care for Hillary. Was that a snap judgment too?-- or was she on the political scene for awhile before you formed an opinion of her?

You don't have to actually answer that. It's a rhetorical question that your past posts have already answered for me.

So keep up with your Palin cheerleading. I know where you stand. You "like" her but you apparently aren't interested in discussing/criticizing her issues, and since it's ultimately her stand on the issues that matter, I'll leave you to carry on .....

Edited by American Woman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So keep up with your Palin cheerleading. I know where you stand. You "like" her but you apparently aren't interested in discussing/criticizing her issues, and since it's ultimately her stand on the issues that matter

Wow, it would be great if the discussion was centered on the issues, and not her teenage daughter, or Downs' son, or her mothering capabilities. Unfortunately, you were one of the many who dove head first in the fray. Methinks thou doth protest too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, it would be great if the discussion was centered on the issues, and not her teenage daughter, or Downs' son, or her mothering capabilities.

Those issues were front and centre only so the media would be distracted from her political corruption and bold-faced lies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman
Wow, it would be great if the discussion was centered on the issues, and not her teenage daughter, or Downs' son, or her mothering capabilities. Unfortunately, you were one of the many who dove head first in the fray. Methinks thou doth protest too much.

I never said one thing about her teenage daughter, I defended her choice to get pregnant at 43, and I said all babies are beautiful, and pointed out that many Downs babies are happier and better adjusted than some classically 'beautiful/perfect' babies. So methinks you are totally clueless because I never said anything you accused me of, much less "dove head first into the fray." On the other hand, I have been critical of her regarding the issues. And in that light ....

.... it would indeed be great if the discussion were centered around the issues rather than what a great mom she is and what a "heck of a woman" she is and how anyone who doesn't agree with you is posting "filth" .... and general 'crying' over the fact that people don't all agree with you, support her, or stay away from any topics you all think should be off limits.

Now as I said, barring the ability to discuss the issues, you all can carry on ......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not getting into a semantics game with you. Whether you said he shouldn't say it or that it wasn't a smart thing to say, my point remains the same. He shouldn't pre-think what he says/planned on saying because of overly-sensative Palin supporters who think anything and everything is a personal insult to Palin. That has been my take and my point all along. Hence the 'I hope it shows he isn't cowed by them' comment. Got it now?

He can say what he wants to. People will react the way they react, whether their reaction is justified or overly sensitive.

The "lipstick" comment led off several American newscasts that I watched that day, and was probably seen by tens of millions of people. The rationalizations, justifications, and explanations that followed, they've been seen by a lot less people. It's simply not as interesting to the average viewer.

And wasting a campaign day trying to explain to people that you weren't making a personal crack at an opponent, that's a foolish waste of time.

So, go! Go, Barack! Don't be cowed!

But be brave in a way that's not going to blow up in your face.

My point is that you criticize Obama, defend McCain, go into overdrive defending Palin, yet you "hate Palin's views," so I can't imagine that you love McCain's, yet you are all over criticizing Obama. You've even, yes, "unfairly" criticized Obama-- in defense of McCain, no less. You can keep your "kimmy points," thanks just the same, but here you go:

You call that "fair criticism?" Obama has worked hard his whole life (and if you don't realize that, you know nothing about him), he's a loving parent, he isn't/hasn't been a womanizer, and he hasn't cheated on his wife. Can't say the same about McCain, yet you defended McCain by insulting Obama when he hasn't done one thing to deserve it.

Right. You make comments like the one I just quoted but I'm the one who can't "grasp" things beyond a "Obama good, Palin bad!/Palin good, Obama bad!" level. Get real. :rolleyes:

I replied to a dumb criticism of McCain by flipping it on its head. Perhaps it was insulting to Obama, but whatever. I don't think many people would disagree that Michelle Obama is a good looking woman, and I think a lot of people are still skeptical that "community organizer" is a real job.

And I've explained this to you already, but I'll explain it one more time in hopes that you are finally able to "grasp" it this time.

I'm looking at Palin as a possible POTUS, therefore I don't care about "liking" her. I'm not voting for Class President, Most Popular, Prom Queen, or Miss Congeniality. So yes, when it comes down to who would be best for my country, in my mind it's Obama. I think Palin would be bad for it. But I'm not criticizing her beyond the issues and I have no desire to spend the time to get to know her enough to decide if I "like" or "dislike" her as a person. It's about the issues. And I repeat. While you are all over the board criticizing Obama, I have NOT see you (beyond your "love the woman, hate the views") criticize her once. I see that as a decided lack of depth of thought on your part, especially in light of the fact that you "hate her views." So why aren't you criticizing her views? Why aren't you criticizing McCain's views? Why are you criticizing Obama?

I'm not fighting for any candidate to win. There's nothing to be gained by me arguing with Drea and Bubber about the merits of one candidate over the other. Nobody changes their mind, and neither me nor Drea nor Bubber even have votes anyway. I have my views, but there's nothing really to be gained by attempting to wage a US Presidential Election Campaign here on our little Canadian message board with just a few dozen regular members and only a handful of people who get to actually vote.

What I'm primarily interested in during the US election is not the actual politics, but in the way the campaign is being fought. There are so many factors at work.

(If you would like my views on the choices: I do not find the social conservatism of McCain/Palin appealing. With Obama I am worried about trade protectionism and enviroweenyism and what direction US foreign policy will take. Ultimately, I think my hope would be that McCain wins, and lives a long and healthy life.

I have supported Canada's socially conservative party for quite a long time. And it's not because I'm a social conservative. It's just my views on a lot of other issues are closer to the Conservative party than the alternatives. And further, a social conservative government doesn't actually make much difference because a government has so little ability to actually promote social conservatism.)

Your comment about Obama tells me exactly what you think of him, and it says that you think "badly of him." Your constant "Palin is a heck of a woman" posts, as you don't discuss/criticize her views when she's in the limelight BECAUSE she might be president some day, shows me that you can't process the fact that in the end, it's her political stands that matter, not her "likability."

To repeat: I've never criticized anybody for providing legitimate criticism of her views or policies or record. I've taken issue when people crossed the line, and when people have repeated rumors that have already been debunked. I've challenged Rue to explain how killing moose and opposing abortion are contradictory, or to explain how she is a "Stepford Wife" (which you also found clever, as I recall.)

So yeah, I'm perfectly capable of "processing the concept that "somebody might think Palin is a heck of a woman while not thinking she'd be a good President, or that somebody might criticize Obama without thinking badly of the man"--when it applies. However, it doesn't apply to you. Capice?

You're a meathead.

As a side note, I find your "heck of a woman" feelings about Palin to be par with adolescent movie star adoration.
There's no shortage of people who feel the same about Obama, or even Hilary.

I did the courtesy of laying my bias right there on the table. Not everybody is as forthright.

I am thankful that Palin has had the impact that she has had. Win or lose. A woman who isn't some academic in a lime-green pantsuit. Hilary might be a great politician and a very qualified leader... but does anybody actually relate to her? Other career-women with closets full of oddly-colored pantsuits, perhaps. In Palin, you have somebody that people can relate to as being a lot like the women they know. I think in the long term it will change politics for the better.

I say that because you "loved the woman" from the moment she came on the scene. I noticed that you said you didn't care for Hillary. Was that a snap judgment too?-- or was she on the political scene for awhile before you formed an opinion of her?

You don't have to actually answer that. It's a rhetorical question that your past posts have already answered for me.

Hilary has been on the political scene since I was in elementary school... so I think it's about as far from a "snap judgment" as you can get.

Snap judgments work both ways. Consider the firestorm directed at Palin in the first couple of days after she was announced, and tell me that the furious bloggers of Obama Nation didn't make snap judgments.

So keep up with your Palin cheerleading. I know where you stand. You "like" her but you apparently aren't interested in discussing/criticizing her issues, and since it's ultimately her stand on the issues that matter, I'll leave you to carry on .....

I absolutely support discussion of real issues. If she's ultimately judged too inexperienced or too conservative or if it's found that her track record in office is out of sync with what she promises to bring to Washington, that is completely fine with me.

I will continue to point out when people cross the line, or apply a different standard.

-k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman
I replied to a dumb criticism of McCain by flipping it on its head. Perhaps it was insulting to Obama, but whatever.

Yeah, "perhaps." But "whatever." So what if you insulted Obama. No big deal, eh?

Like I said earlier, carry on .......... I've read enough to know better than to waste any more of my time ............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,766
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    CouchPotato
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...