http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/sarah-palin-politics-president-obama-disingenous-death-panels/story?id=9096647 - http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/sarah-palin-politics-president-obama-disingenous-death-panels/story?id=9096647

 

In an http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/sarah-palin-speaks-barbara-walters/story?id=9077549 - interview with ABC News' Barbara Walters , Palin, whose book, http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/sarah-palin-angers-mccain-aides-rogue/story?id=9090753 - "Going Rogue: An American Life," lands on bookshelves Tuesday, said she would give the president a mere four for his job performance on a scale of one to 10.

"There are a lot of decisions being made that I -- and probably the majority of Americans -- are not impressed with right now," said Palin, the former governor of Alaska. "I think our http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=9067834 - economy is not being put on the right track, because we're strayed too far from, fundamentally, from FreeEnterprise principles that built our country. And I question, too, some of the dithering, and, hesitation, with some of our national security questions that have got to be answered for our country."

Even after last year's http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=6184916 - devastating defeat , Palin remains one of the http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=7486679 - Republican Party's brightest stars. From Alaska, she has been weighing in on issues and influencing policy debate in Washington. She scored a major blow to Obama in August when she wrote on her Facebook page that under Obama's plans, the fate of the elderly and her son Trigg, who has Down syndrome, would be determined by http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/08/palin-renews-false-death-panel-charge.html - "death panels."

Actually I think both are fools to think they're in any way qualified to lead the United States.

 

Not all of us align by party designation, OS...

 

oldsoldier wrote: It is funny that most of you here drank the Obama kool-aid...

 

I did.

 

...and we see the result...

 

Improved standing in the international community?  Hopes of an improved healthcare system?  A serious push towards a more sustainable community?

 

Horrible things, all.

 

You seem to imply that I, as an Obama supporter, should be disillusioned or disappointed by the administration's actions so far.  As it turns out, I am neither.  I think he is doing a pretty good job.  Not as good as I had hoped, but far better than I had feared.

 

... yet immediately throw Palin into I hate you because you are a (R) pile.

 

No, I throw her into the I hate you because you are a (D)unce pile.  Short of Harriet Myers, it is difficult to think of a less qualified candidate put forth for public office in recent history.  And no, Obama was not less qualified than Palin.  Attempts at comparing the two merely highlights the stark differences.

 

... you were told by your 'big brother' that all (R's) are bad...

 

What are you talking about?  Sure, some fools default to thinking that all Republicans are bad, but they are just that - fools.  And even when you add up all the fools, there are a lot more Obama supporters left.

 

... as the country is circling the bowl as we speak.

 

By what conceivable measure are we "circling the bowl?"  Things are stabilizing, good things are starting to happen, and, even in the worst of times we are still lightyears better off then 80% of the planet.

 

Things are actually pretty good here.

 

Obama sold out to the special interests, lobbists and all the people he promised he would not

 

While the lobbyist shutout has not been as complete as I had hoped, Obama still has done a far better job of keeping K Street at bay than any other administration I can recall.  I count this among his victories.

 

... and raised the debt 4X and no-one here want to even discuss a differant approach.

 

To the contrary, different approaches are discussed all the time.  On this board and elsewhere.

 

And you all refuse to believe the the Obama "Cult of Personality" has you.

 

Oh, there is no doubt that there are many irrational Obama groupies - but it does not follow that Obama has no substance, or that all Obama supporters are mere groupies.  I joined the Obama camp late - very late, and I still cross my fingers regularly and pray that he won't screw it up.

 

Believe it or not, smart people can and do support the President for rational reasons.

 

 

I think the issue here perhaps is the question of what exactly it means to be a "true leader" - at least in the context of the Presidency.

 

Clearly Obama is no Reagan.  On the Reagan-scale of leadership, Obama scores very low, while Bush Jr. did reasonably well.  The Reagan-scale might also be called the John Wayne scale, or the Stand Up and Scowl At Your Enemies scale.  This type of leader is kind of the US version of a "strongman."

 

On the other hand, Obama is doing quite well by different measures.  He is encouraging rational discussion at home and abroad, and supporting cooperation over confrontation.  He is demonstrating that the US can be a humble country as well as a strong country.

 

There are many ways to lead.  Different approaches work better in different circumstances.  Judging all leaders by a single measure is a mistake.

 

But with Palin it isn't a matter of leadership but of simply lacking the mental firepower for the job.

 

 

I'm not huge on obama either, so it has nothing to do with that.

 

Well, I can't speak for all of those, but Hillary Clinton is really, really smart.

 

And Pelosi and Waters have not yet run for (Vice) President.  When they do, I will measure them against that standard.  Palin is smart enough to be in Congress, as far as I am concerned, but that isn't a very high standard.

The simple fact checking of official websites

 

Now, let's be straight here.  What happened was that the administration, in an effort to be more computery, has been exploring different ways to get online, and one of the things they have done is to make things more interactive - for instance, in this case, they take feel-good stories of stimulus success from internet submitters, and post those stories on the web site.  This program is just one of many such interactive features of the various administration internet efforts.  Fact-checking everything that gets posted in this manner is not "simple". Yes, it should have been done, but it is no small and easy feat.

 

, and real background checks of ther individuals around him

 

Who do you think uncovered all the shenanigans?  The Obama background-check crew, that's who.  With most administrations, this kind of problem usually comes out too late and at the hand of political opponents.  It is my understanding that Obama's people have a more thorough background check procedure than any other administration in the history of this country.

 

...could of prevented a lot of the presumptions of him being a puppet.

 

Who thinks he is a puppet?  And whose puppet?  I have heard many criticisms of the President, but this is a new one to me.

 

Still sitting on the troops to Afghanistan finger in the wind decesion making process

 

Here I agree that he is dithering.  He needs to make a decision (and the decision needs to be to send the troops).

 

Foriegn service mistakes (bowing to world leaders, something the founders addressed, the US would never bow to a foriegn member of Royalty) are showing the world what Obama truely is made of.

 

Indeed.  And I for one APPLAUD the President for bowing to Saudi and Japanese royalty.  It shows that humility that GW talked about but never displayed; it shows that we are not all Dick; it shows respect; it shows courtesy.

 

Sure, the jingoists are going nuts over it - GOOD.  The jingoists have caused immeasurable damage to this country in the past 8 years, and we need to start fixing things a bit.

 

I don't view these as diplomacy mistakes; I view them as diplomacy genius.

 

I liked Palin from the get go

 

So did I - and then she started talking.

 

 

Obama is not a great speaker, he is a good teleprompter reader of other peoples thoughts (speech writers).

 

I do believe you are giving him very short thrift there.  He didn't always have speechwriters - or teleprompters.

 

ANd to hear him free speak he is not as articulate as many think he is, maybe falls into the same catagory of idiot as many of you place Palin is, only he speaks the kool-aid you want to hear.

 

To the contrary, it is when he is unprompted that he is at his best.  It was the unprompted moments that sold me on him.  Those unprompted moments display his true intelligence, just like those moments display Palin's lack thereof.

 

What ultimately sold me on Obama was specifically that he is really smart.  He is a rational and intelligent human being who is capable of seeing nuance.  He is a thinking man.  Palin, as far as I can tell from her unscripted moments, is the opposite of all of those, and it was her unscripted moments that convinced me of her unsuitability for office.

2008 was a lose/lose election

 

Actually, I thought 2008 gave us two of the strongest candidates for President we have seen in a very long time.  Palin made it easy - until she showed up it was a very tough call on who to support.  2008 was a clear win-win, but for the possibility of President Palin.

 

2010 will start the pendulum swing back past center and to the right, and 2012 unless Obama pulls a miricle will be 1968 (I will not seek, nor accept...)Johnson thrown under the bus and a new Democrat candidate put foward. And the Party will cut his legs out from under him as soon as it realizes they will not win with Obama as candidate in 2012, more than likely if the D's lose the majority in house and Senate Obama is done.

 

You have made this prediction before, and I tell you know - I will take ANY WAGER you care to name - ANY - that Obama will be the Democratic nominee for President in 2012, barring death or incapacitating illness.

 

 

 

So Palin said "I can see Russia from my house"...

 

REALLY?...

 

Wow, no wonder you think that she is dumb.

 

Maybe you should actually listen to Palin, and make your huge assumptions based on HER words instead of a SNL parody of her...

 

 

Naa, Just keep talking about how "dumb" she is... That makes you look Oh, so smart, especially after you demean women as objects with your earlier statements.

 

Many of  you guys have NO class.

 

And no ability to think for yourself, you just buy the media's hype, hook, line, and sinker. (see if you were witty, that would be funny as Palin's husband is a fisherman, but me having to explain it just ruins it...)

 

 

She is the first "politician" that I have seen besides Reagan, that actually cares about more than herself. Obama is a perfect example of this, he cares not for the troops dying while he tries to make up his mind about what to do in afghanistan... He just wants to make the "right" decision... Which in war there often isn't a "right" decision. People die either way, and you waiting to make some decision and sticking to it... is even worse, as it shows how little you care for the soldier on the ground. He might as well bring the troops home now, he will fail with this inability to make a decision... How many troops we lose while he dithers is the sad part. How many kids will lose their parents because of this weak president?

 

The country is weaker since Obama took over, we have now had another terrorist attack on our soil, because of the "new" political correct standards that this administration pushes. Which put us in danger from radical islamic religion, but lets not talk about it, and pretend everything is fine...

 

Palin quit in Alaska, because the liberal attack dogs were going after her daily with new baseless ethics charges, which made it impossible for her to get anything done to help Alaska... So by quitting she let her next in line take over, as he had the same goals for the State.

 

You see that as a failure, I see that as a success for Alaska, which should be the goal of a politician. Not personal gain, but good for the public.

 

 

See the way you can tell if someone is sincere is how they look at the current unemployment figures.

 

If you see the figures as around 10% unemployment, then you side with the current administration.

 

If you see the figures as much higher unemployment, (taking in all the people that have stopped looking for jobs, or taken part time jobs as they were dying on unemployment and a little is better than nothing) Then you are looking at the facts of this recession.

 

The media and administration and most politicians use the 10% figure... I would imagine most on this board also use the 10% figure...

 

 

 

 

Palin uses the higher figures, she said in an interview yesterday it was closer to 17% when you take in the issues I talked about.

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125849607235552637.html - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125849607235552637.html

 

 

 

The other issue, is the liberal media's attack on Palin.

 

The unpartial AP put 11 reporters on the factcheck assignment of her new book.

 

11

 

 

How many did they put on Obama's book?

 

0

 

How many did they put on Bidens book?

 

0

 

How many did they put on Kennedy's book?

 

0

 

 

Nice bias.

 

 

 

Its good to know they can do no wrong in your eyes. But, you have to be careful, as it is telling of your allegences...

 

btw, cnn is good at being "fair" when pulling focus groups too...

 

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lachlan-markay/2009/11/17/cnns-cross-section-america-contains-no-palin-supporters - http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lachlan-markay/2009/11/17/cnns-cross-section-america-contains-no-palin-supporters

 

guess they are "non" biased too...

 

Yeah, there was zero hype for "audacity of hope"... I remember how you didn't hear anything about it before it came out...

 

wait...

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/17/books/17kaku.html - http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/17/books/17kaku.html

 

I won't even go into all the Kennedy fawning...

 

 

 

and besides, CNN just had a sampling and NONE of the people liked palin, and none were going to read her book. They said it was a fair sampling, so what "hype" are you talking about?

 

 

If the AP is that desperate for something to fact check... Why don't they interview the "voice" of global warming...

 

Who just stated that the inside of the earth is MILLIONS of degrees...

 

 

wow...

 

The earth is hotter than the sun... Who knew?

 

We better pass cap and trade soon, before all that heat starts exploding out of the earth...

 

 

Geothermal is new... Maybe here in America, but not new globally.

 

 

 

 

and besides, CNN just had a sampling and NONE of the people liked palin, and none were going to read her book.

And that is annoyingly bad journalism. I'm confused at what you expected me to say there.

 

First off, the AP has never (TMK) fact-checked a late-night talk show appearance.   Quite a leap from a book to Conan.  Thankfully, the internets are full of people that will do the factchecking for us.

 

But I digress...

 

 

Who just stated that the inside of the earth is MILLIONS of degrees...

 

- which is clearly not correct.  This is a correct statement of the temperature of the inside of the sun.  Maybe he was confused, maybe he mixed things up, who knows.  But this is a mistake of no particular substance, unless you are a scientist, which Gore is not.  The difference between 6000 degrees (give or take) and "millions" of degrees is not particularly important for a layman's explanation of geothermal energy.

 

More importantly, of course, is the point that Gore is pretty darn good at getting the science right.  His various presentations are routinely critiqued by scientists, and as far as I can tell he very rarely makes significant errors.

 

 

Geothermal is new... Maybe here in America, but not new globally.

-------------
It's Clobberin' Time!

 

Oh, I listened to her real words.  That was the problem.  I still cringe at the Couric interviews, but her stump speeches were just as scary.

 

Of course, much of the SNL "parody" consisted of Tina Fey quoting Palin VERBATIM, because what Palin actually says pretty much sounds like an SNL parody.

 

 

 

The country is weaker since Obama took over, we have now had another terrorist attack on our soil, because of the "new" political correct standards that this administration pushes.

-------------
It's Clobberin' Time!

 

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/17/ap-turns-heads-devoting-reporters-palin-book-fact-check/ - http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/17/ap-turns-heads-devoting-reporters-palin-book-fact-check/

 

Guess that is why the AP didn't cover the latest acorn video... Must have not had any reporters available...

 

http://biggovernment.com/2009/11/16/acornthe-la-story-part-iii-acorn-employee-of-the-year-felix-d-harris/ - http://biggovernment.com/2009/11/16/acornthe-la-story-part-iii-acorn-employee-of-the-year-felix-d-harris/

 

I'll give you this. I'm really tired of hearin that quote...everyone says something in a loose or joking manner during a campaign, it's silly to hold a comment like that for so long.

 

FreeEnterprise wrote:   Maybe you should actually listen to Palin, and make your huge assumptions based on HER words instead of a SNL parody of her...

 

Unfortunately, FE, we all did. Sarah Palin was shoved down conservatives' throats like a pill to a dog...but let's face it, she was cotton candy. The Republicans used her to try and create a celebrity for the party, and her average every day mom routine, authentic or not, was nausea inducing. It was a blatant attempt at a rock star candidate, and it failed. I'm not attacking her credentials, because I feel she's a very intelligent person. You don't get where she's at being stupid, and I feel from what I've seen she's a successful, upstanding person. But I go back to my cotton candy comment...looks good, tastes good, but dissolves quickly. That run was, at least on Mccain's part, a big Doh! and an epic fail at a campaign.

 

I'm not direspecting her accomplishments, intelligence, or record, but I don't feel as a voter (and yes, I do have an unbiased opinion of my candidates) that she was qualified in any way to run this country. Neither did I feel so about Obama, but damned if you damned if you don't, and I can't stand John Mccain, so that really was a lose/lose election for me.

 

FreeEnterprise wrote:     Naa, Just keep talking about how "dumb" she is... That makes you look Oh, so smart, especially after you demean women as objects with your earlier statements.   Many of  you guys have NO class.

 

Oh get off it man, for real...I'm gonna bet you NEVER EVER EVER EVER said you thought a girl was hot, or man, I'd hit that. And if not good for you...but as for me, I'd totally tap it. This is a paintball forum inhabited by mostly college age guys that are very up front about their sexuality...I recommend NOT getting bent out of shape over some obviously joking comments made about a girl. Sarah Palin is hot...and need I remind you, she knows it. She wasn't parading her ass around in a swim suit in hopes that men would see her and pray more...she's banked on her looks quite a bit, right down to recent times. If anything, it goes back to my aforemention dislike of the strategy used in that campaign.

 

FreeEnterprise wrote:   And no ability to think for yourself, you just buy the media's hype, hook, line, and sinker. (see if you were witty, that would be funny as Palin's husband is a fisherman, but me having to explain it just ruins it...)

 

Comments like this make me imagine you shoving your head up your own anus to enjoy a flatulation (if you were witty and watched South Park you'd get it, but me having to explain it just ruins it really...).

 

While yeah, there are plenty of people on this forum that love jumping on Ben / Susan / I dunno (:P)'s band wagon, there are also those that are intelligent people that just so happen to think along the lines of the liberal media.

 

People with attitudes like you often display on this forum choose sarcasm and arrogance over instruction. You often reference Christ in your posts, and Scripture, but I somehow don't imagine him excercising an air of superiority over the people he spoke to.

 

Got news for you, being conservative doesn't make you right, it makes you right in your own eyes. I once followed your line of thinking as well...them damn liberals always listening to their rhetoric spewing masters...but I've come to understand that you can be conservative and excercise and a progressive, open minded attitude. The first step to overcoming your opposition in politics is respecting it. Here, I see you fail every time you type up a "witty" (read smart ass) response to one of the forumers who generally (and wrongfully) dog you with stupidity at every turn.

 

I recommend an attitude check-you're smarter than your tactics, FE, I'm fairly confident of that.

 

FreeEnterprise wrote:     She is the first "politician" that I have seen besides Reagan, that actually cares about more than herself.

 

I find this quote premature and naive on several levels. Again, I refer you back to the "you're smarter than that" comment above.

 

FreeEnterprise wrote:   The country is weaker since Obama took over, we have now had another terrorist attack on our soil, because of the "new" political correct standards that this administration pushes. Which put us in danger from radical islamic religion, but lets not talk about it, and pretend everything is fine...

 

Hmm, well I'm guessing you're ignoring the fact that this man has been in the military through I believe 4 different administrations, and was being negatively analyzed through the military's ranks through all of them.

 

And I guess you qualify president Bush as a "weak" president as well, since using your logic the worst terrorist attacks occured, and with some frequency, during his administration?

 

This is old, immature political logic. You can't add A+B to get C in politics, sometimes crap just happens. Am I a raging Obama fan? Hell no, I disagree with him at almost every front. But I recognize, especially after dealing with the liberal BS that I dealt with during Bush's terms, that the president doesn't control every evil and good thing that happens.

 

FreeEnterprise wrote:   Palin quit in Alaska, because the liberal attack dogs were going after her daily with new baseless ethics charges, which made it impossible for her to get anything done to help Alaska... So by quitting she let her next in line take over, as he had the same goals for the State.   You see that as a failure, I see that as a success for Alaska, which should be the goal of a politician. Not personal gain, but good for the public.

 

I want to make a point here, completely aside from Palin's political martyrdom in Alaska.

 

STOP PITYING PALIN. Everyone's been jumping to her defense, cries of "stop attacking Sarah's family it's horribly OMG", but Palin threw her family to the same dogs that attack her every day. She ran on family values, used her family as a billboard for her aforementioned school mom status, and it backfired right in her face with her daughter's sex life.

 

It you throw your family into the media, the media will devour them. If you don't want your family in the media, I recommend leaving them at home.

 

Off topic, but a pet annoyance I've mine with fellow conservatives as of late.

 

FreeEnterprise wrote:     See the way you can tell if someone is sincere is how they look at the current unemployment figures.   If you see the figures as around 10% unemployment, then you side with the current administration.   If you see the figures as much higher unemployment, (taking in all the people that have stopped looking for jobs, or taken part time jobs as they were dying on unemployment and a little is better than nothing) Then you are looking at the facts of this recession.   The media and administration and most politicians use the 10% figure... I would imagine most on this board also use the 10% figure...         Palin uses the higher figures, she said in an interview yesterday it was closer to 17% when you take in the issues I talked about.   http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125849607235552637.html - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125849607235552637.html

 

Um, I don't really know what to say to that. Someone is most certainly sincere if they call out the truth on a singular subject?

 

FreeEnterprise wrote:      The other issue, is the liberal media's attack on Palin.   The unpartial AP put 11 reporters on the factcheck assignment of her new book.   11     How many did they put on Obama's book?   0   How many did they put on Bidens book?   0   How many did they put on Kennedy's book?   0     Nice bias.

-------------