Former Alaska governor Palin says she will run for president in 2012 "if there is nobody else to do it"

[Jingthing]

I will grant you that the auto bailout/paybacks is a complicated issue that will be resolved over time. However, the bottom line is that for some big car companies, the bailouts were necessary, there is indeed a high probability overall the country will benefit from it, in paid back loans, interest, the national security interest of having a strong vehicle manufacturing sector, and last but not least many thousands of saved auto worker JOBS. The radical right wingers will actually make it much easier for American corps to kill American jobs and send more of them PERMANENTLY overseas. Obama is painted as a left wing ideologue by the right wing extremists when actually he is just a pragmatist. He saved an industry and jobs that needed saving, the same as Bush started. The right thing to do, nothing to do with a rigid ideology.

Edited November 4, 2010 by Jingthing

[chuckd]

I will grant you that the auto bailout/paybacks is a complicated issue that will be resolved over time. However, the bottom line is that for some big car companies, the bailouts were necessary, there is indeed a high probability overall the country will benefit from it, in paid back loans, interest, the national security interest of having a strong vehicle manufacturing sector, and last but not least many thousands of saved auto worker JOBS. The radical right wingers will actually make it much easier for American corps to kill American jobs and send more of them PERMANENTLY overseas. Obama is painted as a left wing ideologue by the right wing extremists when actually he is just a pragmatist. He saved an industry and jobs that needed saving, the same as Bush started. The right thing to do, nothing to do with a rigid ideology.

You are right it is complicated. GM made a huge announcement they had repaid their loan when in fact they actually used TARP money to pay it back and used nothing from their earnings.

The Obama administration appointed CEO even went so far as to announce the payback via a commercial run on national TV, knowing full well it was a blatant lie.

I notice the bailout of Chrysler and GM also protected the jobs, salaries, benefits and retirement funds of the United Auto Workers and the UAW union bosses in the process.

This deal stunk to high Heaven when it began and it still stinks to high Heaven.

The Tea Party Movement had NOTHING to do with this little fiasco.

[Jingthing]

The Tea Party Movement had NOTHING to do with this little fiasco.

Nobody said they did. As of yesterday, they had nobody in power. Now they do.

[Ulysses G.]

You know I am right about the kind of supreme court judge a President Palin would pick, why don't you just admit that?

Because I think that you are wrong. There is a big difference between the brush that politicians are painted with by their opponents and what they actually do it office.

As far as the picture you are trying to paint of most Tea Party activists, why do you think that no one with any common sense believes far-left rhetoric.

[Jingthing]

You know I am right about the kind of supreme court judge a President Palin would pick, why don't you just admit that?

Because I think that you are wrong. There is a big difference between the brush that politicians are painted with by their opponents and what they actually do it office.

As far as the picture you are trying to paint of most Tea Party activists, why do you think that no one with any common sense believes far-left rhetoric.

OK, we disagree then. However, I really don't understand how anyone who is the least bit informed about Palin's positions would think she would pick pro gay rights, pro church/state separation, pro abortion rights judges. I find that really bizarre, but whatever ...

I can only conclude you aren't as informed as you let on.

Of course if Palin wins, elections have consequences, and she would have every right to pick her right wing pro oppression judges. It is the job of sensible, freedom loving Americans to stop that madness! I can tell you one thing, if the R's do run with Palin, it will energize the American left and the American middle (the majority) like you have never seen before to stop her!

Edited November 4, 2010 by Jingthing

[chuckd]

Tell me, Jingthing, do you honestly and truly believe that Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan were eminently qualified to serve on the Supreme Court?

If so, why? What exactly were their own unique qualifications that propelled them to the top of the pile of thousands of qualified jurists that Obama had to choose from?

I would be interested to hear your particular spin on these nominations.

[mca]

I loathe myself when I think of Sarah Palin. Can't stand the woman but I reckon she's a bit of a <deleted>.

[Jingthing]

Tell me, Jingthing, do you honestly and truly believe that Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan were eminently qualified to serve on the Supreme Court?

If so, why? What exactly were their own unique qualifications that propelled them to the top of the pile of thousands of qualified jurists that Obama had to choose from?

I would be interested to hear your particular spin on these nominations.

What an absurd question. I am not a legal scholar so you are asking the wrong person for a detailed analysis. Of course they were qualified. Of course they were judges Obama (who is an expert on constitutional law and has taught the subject) is comfortable with politically. All presidents try to get judges like that on the court, when they can. That is why elections have consequences. Legalized gay marriage is an issue that happens to be important to me, along with abortion rights and separation of church and state. If Obama gets two more picks, we will have federal legal gay marriage, and abortion rights will be safe for 50 to 100 years, and the right wing Christian church won't get their filthy corrupt hands on our SECULAR (which is what the founders wished, not the lies that Beck tells) government.

If Palin is president I am sure she can find judges that are qualified but that also will be more biased towards her social conservative politics. If she gets one or two picks, women can kiss legal abortion bye bye and gay marriage will have to wait another 100 years. It is completely naive to believe any differently.

Edited November 4, 2010 by Jingthing

[chuckd]

Tell me, Jingthing, do you honestly and truly believe that Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan were eminently qualified to serve on the Supreme Court?

If so, why? What exactly were their own unique qualifications that propelled them to the top of the pile of thousands of qualified jurists that Obama had to choose from?

I would be interested to hear your particular spin on these nominations.

What an absurd question. I am not a legal scholar so you are asking the wrong person for a detailed analysis. Of course they were qualified. Of course they were judges Obama (who is an expert on constitutional law and has taught the subject) is comfortable with politically. All presidents try to get judges like that on the court, when they can. That is why elections have consequences. Legalized gay marriage is an issue that happens to be important to me, along with abortion rights and separation of church and state. If Obama gets two more picks, we will have federal legal gay marriage, and abortion rights will be safe for 50 to 100 years, and the right wing Christian church won't get their filthy corrupt hands on our SECULAR (which is what the founders wished, not the lies that Beck tells) government.

While it may have been an absurd question, it certainly stumped you.

You have referred to the possible Supreme Court nominees Palin might pick yet you claim you are not qualified to refer to the nominees Obama has already picked and had confirmed?

It appears you are saying you might be qualified to pontificate on Palin's picks but not Obama's.

PS: Kagan served not one day as a Judge. All her previous experience was either in academia or government service.

[Jingthing]

Tell me, Jingthing, do you honestly and truly believe that Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan were eminently qualified to serve on the Supreme Court?

If so, why? What exactly were their own unique qualifications that propelled them to the top of the pile of thousands of qualified jurists that Obama had to choose from?

I would be interested to hear your particular spin on these nominations.

What an absurd question. I am not a legal scholar so you are asking the wrong person for a detailed analysis. Of course they were qualified. Of course they were judges Obama (who is an expert on constitutional law and has taught the subject) is comfortable with politically. All presidents try to get judges like that on the court, when they can. That is why elections have consequences. Legalized gay marriage is an issue that happens to be important to me, along with abortion rights and separation of church and state. If Obama gets two more picks, we will have federal legal gay marriage, and abortion rights will be safe for 50 to 100 years, and the right wing Christian church won't get their filthy corrupt hands on our SECULAR (which is what the founders wished, not the lies that Beck tells) government.

While it may have been an absurd question, it certainly stumped you.

You have referred to the possible Supreme Court nominees Palin might pick yet you claim you are not qualified to refer to the nominees Obama has already picked and had confirmed?

It appears you are saying you might be qualified to pontificate on Palin's picks but not Obama's.

PS: Kagan served not one day as a Judge. All her previous experience was either in academia or government service.

I was aware of all that, it is not news. However, the senate confirmed her and deemed her qualified. That's good enough for me. You certainly didn't stump me (what is this, a pissing contest to you or perhaps a quiz show?). I just didn't wish to expand on an area that isn't my expertise. I do know about how presidents try to pick judges that will rule in ways they want them to. They don't always succeed (judges have a way of having a mind of their own), but they ALL most certainly try, and voters expect them to do exactly that. Presidents all realize that their court picks are potentially their greatest political legacy, often much more important and lasting than anything they did in office.

Seriously, your question WAS absurd. You want to open up arguments about confirmations that have already happened? What is the point? I still think Justice Thomas is a dim witted pervert, but there he sits on the court. It is senators who confirm or don't confirm. Bork was definitely qualified, but I am certainly happy he wasn't confirmed! I suspect (but like I said this isn't my expertise) that Harriet Miers was not the best pick from a qualifications point of view, but again happily she also wasn't confirmed.

Edited November 4, 2010 by Jingthing

[hanuman1]

Does this absurd hockey-mom-woman have any links with the vanquished neo-con movement, or have we thankfully seen the last of that hateful bunch?

[Englander]

I really don't understand how anyone who is the least bit informed about Palin's positions would think she would pick pro gay rights, pro church/state separation, pro abortion rights judges. I find that really bizarre, but whatever ...

I can only conclude you aren't as informed as you let on.

Your argument is all over the place ... us extremists who would like to see the Tea Party gain power all agree she is a nut.

it was probably the best thing to happen to the Tea Party that the not overly bright O Donnell failed and the Alaskans spoke out possibly against their most famous Tea Partier, shows theyll need to put in people with a little going on between their ears who just dont speak for the sake of it.

[Jingthing]

Does this absurd hockey-mom-woman have any links with the vanquished neo-con movement, or have we thankfully seen the last of that hateful bunch?

Nope, there are links. They tend to be more Islamophobic than average, so figure out what that means if they get their hands on the weapons.

[Jingthing]

I really don't understand how anyone who is the least bit informed about Palin's positions would think she would pick pro gay rights, pro church/state separation, pro abortion rights judges. I find that really bizarre, but whatever ...

I can only conclude you aren't as informed as you let on.

Your argument is all over the place ... us extremists who would like to see the Tea Party gain power all agree she is a nut.

it was probably the best thing to happen to the Tea Party that the not overly bright O Donnell failed and the Alaskans spoke out possibly against their most famous Tea Partier, shows theyll need to put in people with a little going on between their ears who just dont speak for the sake of it.

Sarah Palin is the most popular potential presidential republican candidate among the tea party people and that is a fact. YOU may sympathize with the tea party and think she is a nut, but if that is the case, you are not a typical tea party person.

Perhaps you didn't get this but many of the tea party people, to put this politely, are not the brightest bulbs in the box, thus, they RELATE to people like Sarah Palin. She's one of them! How very charming.

It makes sense really. White wine sipping, global traveling, Volvo driving (well I used to), elite private college educated liberals like me, of course RELATE to super intelligent former Harvard law school graduates like Barack Obama. It's only human.

I don't mean to imply that intelligence and a great education alone translate into a great president. Obama is still growing. I hope he gets the full eight years, unless he wants to pass the baton to Hillary, who is even brighter and would have been ready from day one to be president.

Next ...

Edited November 4, 2010 by Jingthing

[cdnvic]

Removed unreadable post. Type in coherent sentences please.

[Ulysses G.]

.

I can only conclude you aren't as informed as you let on.

That makes two of us. Most of that stale lefty rhetoric about the Tea Party is either dishonest or delusional.

[TAWP]

The tea party is just warmed up Reaganism. They pine for an American era and ideal that never existed. They are heavily racist, heavily homophobic, anti-intellectual (witness many of their current lineup of idiotic candidates including the witch of Delaware), Christian theocratic telling lies about the founders who were solidly anti-theocratic, xenophobic, isolationist, and last but not least followers of insane media whore, Glenn Beck. They are a great danger to America if they ever take real power. They will make gains this midterm election, but I doubt their tea party infected republican nominee in 2012 will win because he or she will just be too extremely right wing. But of course its possible.

They are also total hypocrites. They want to cut but don't agree with any ways to increase revenue such as raising the social security cap or eliminating the mortgage deduction. They don't hate government programs, they just hate poor people and minorities getting too much benefit from them.

Nonsense, you clearly lack any knowledge of the movement or are being intellectually dishonest again.

The movement is no conservative, republican, libertarian etc, it is a protest movement on a very few key points.

There is infact such a wide range if opinions outside the limited set of agreements that local organizers (there is no national coordinated movement) have made it a key point to not go outside these as 'the more planks, the easier to splinter [the movement]'.

Your paranoid hate of the movement and your lack of knowledge about the founding fathers is worrying. Perhaps you need to take the citizenship-test, to make sure you have the basic knowledge about the nation?

And reducing government spending overall has nothing to do with hate for minorities. It is racist to even assume that since it clearly shows your bias in thinking that minorities are the large receivers of the governments founds. They are not.

[Jingthing]

Perhaps you need to take the citizenship-test, to make sure you have the basic knowledge about the nation?

Now I've heard everything. How about Palin/Beck Christ centered re-education camps for unrepentant liberals?

Next ...

[TAWP]

Sarah Palin is the most popular potential presidential republican candidate among the tea party people and that is a fact.

No, it isn't a fact, nor does her presumed popularity say anything about the movement.

You seem to lack the understanding that the overall movement do NOT share her political ideas, outside a few limited set of parameters/keyfrases. One of them being reduced/responsible government spending and the power back to the people.

You seem to not understand that a person 'lending support' to a movement do not mean that the movement in itself is a clone of that person. It only means that the person might like some keypoints the movement has. And/or that the person also want to remain in the lime-light to make sure they are relevant in a later stage of the political debate.

Otherwise I am happy to bring up who Usama gave his 'nod' to in a previous election...and paint everyone in that party as Al-Quida members. That is the level of reasoning you are on.

[TAWP]

Perhaps you need to take the citizenship-test, to make sure you have the basic knowledge about the nation?

Now I've heard everything. How about Palin/Beck Christ centered re-education camps for unrepentant liberals?

Next ...

Well, you clearly lack knowledge about the founding fathers, so...one might wonder where you spent your schooldays.

[Jingthing]

.

I can only conclude you aren't as informed as you let on.

That makes two of us. Most of that stale lefty rhetoric about the Tea Party is either dishonest or delusional.

To remind the readers of the origin of this exchange, so you can decide for yourselves who is correct.

My assertion is that a President Palin would pick supreme court judges with a strong tendency to support her political positions on the court.

Namely --

lack of respect for constitutional church/state separation (a tea party trademark) which is darkly ironic as they parade themselves as lovers of the founder's intentions, and they support the exact opposite

against gay marriage

for overturning Roe v Wade so that abortion would be made illegal again, sending poor women to their deaths at the hands of back alley abortionists

UG feels Palin would pick judges with the opposite positions as stated and/or without regard to their assumed politics on these important issues to her and her core base.

I contend UG's position reflects a deeply uninformed position. UG's position is as absurd as asserting that Obama would pick a judge who he feels will overturn the voter's rights act. End of story.

[TAWP]

With regards the Tea Party, surely an expat who enjoys the benefits of a country with low taxation, that has a govt. which doesnt interfere in every aspect of life would be a hypocrite to belittle it.

Tea partiers and the matching right wing of the republican party are 100% into interfering in your private life. If you are gay? they dont want that. Feel like abit of weed in your house on friday night? they will arrest you for that. Same sex marriage? Doesnt affect them, but they will stop you doing it etc etc.

Nonsense, no keypoint in the tea party movement has EVER mentioned interfering with peoples lifes - most, if the issue has EVER been raised, is on the OPPOSITE side.

Jesus man, atleast lie smaller so it doesn't stink so much.

[TAWP]

lack of respect for constitutional church/state separation (a tea party trademark) which is darkly ironic as they parade themselves as lovers of the founder's intentions, and they support the exact opposite

Where do you get these delusions from? I am just asking, because someone must have feed them to you. I know for a fact that the Tea Party Movement didn't.

[TAWP]

I thought we were talking about the tea party being anti-intellectual, not the R party? The tea party IS anti-intellectual. That's a fact.

And ofcourse you are willing to supply the source of this fact.

[Jingthing]

The logic that Bin Laden, an enemy of all Americans mentioned a preference for one candidate over another is in no imaginable way comparable to the clear and obvious LEADERSHIP ROLE Sarah Palin has taken for the tea party people. To suggest there is and then make accusations about my logic, beggars belief. Now clearly the tea party is a grab bag and doesn't, at least yet, have an official leader, Palin is quite obviously a huge favorite of that crowd. There is no doubt about that. I will back off from my assertion that she is the top current favorite of the tea party people for president. Polls will swing on that and right now she may be behind others. But she is well in the running for that title.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/09/23/2010-09-23_sarah_palin_tea_party_favorite_id_run_for_president_in_2012_if_nobody_else_wante.html

[Jingthing]

I thought we were talking about the tea party being anti-intellectual, not the R party? The tea party IS anti-intellectual. That's a fact.

And ofcourse you are willing to supply the source of this fact.

Simply, the rhetoric of their leaders. They openly mock people who have elite educations. There is no danger for them to do that as they will never attract the liberal, Volvo driving, white wine sipping crowd anyway.

Edited November 5, 2010 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

lack of respect for constitutional church/state separation (a tea party trademark) which is darkly ironic as they parade themselves as lovers of the founder's intentions, and they support the exact opposite

Where do you get these delusions from? I am just asking, because someone must have feed them to you. I know for a fact that the Tea Party Movement didn't.

You aren't paying attention. Check the history of tea party darling (and loser) Christine O'Donnell. Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck (who if you are honest you must admit is a key founder of the tea party) have made similar assertions. This crowd is obsessed with the US being a "Christian" nation and they claim constitutional/founder support for their distortions. You are falling for their propaganda that they are a benign force. They are an extremely dangerous, potentially very destructive force. Happily, if they rise, the resistance to their radicalism will be even more energized to fight them.

Edited November 5, 2010 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

against gay marriage

I strongly suspect that this is the issue that you are really worried about and the rest are just red herrings to scare monger.

You are probably correct that they would reject gay marriage, but support domestic partnership with all the same benefits instead. That seems like it would be a real victory for gay rights, but the more radical elements completely reject it and always demand more, more, more.

Edited November 5, 2010 by Ulysses G.

[Jingthing]

With regards the Tea Party, surely an expat who enjoys the benefits of a country with low taxation, that has a govt. which doesnt interfere in every aspect of life would be a hypocrite to belittle it.

Tea partiers and the matching right wing of the republican party are 100% into interfering in your private life. If you are gay? they dont want that. Feel like abit of weed in your house on friday night? they will arrest you for that. Same sex marriage? Doesnt affect them, but they will stop you doing it etc etc.

Nonsense, no keypoint in the tea party movement has EVER mentioned interfering with peoples lifes - most, if the issue has EVER been raised, is on the OPPOSITE side.

Jesus man, atleast lie smaller so it doesn't stink so much.

You aren't being honest. Opposing the equal rights freedom of gay marriage and working to make abortion illegal are indeed impositions into people's private lives. Edited November 5, 2010 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

against gay marriage

I strongly suspect that this is the issue that you are really worried about and the rest are just red herrings to scare monger.

You are probably correct that they would reject gay marriage, but support domestic partnership with all the same benefits instead. That seems like it would be a real victory for gay rights, but the more radical elements completely reject it and always demand more, more, more.

You are wrong that the gay issue is the only thing I care about. That is insulting. Palin is hard core anti-gay marriage (to the right of McCain and that takes some doing). Even if she was OK with civil unions can you imagine such an extreme social conservative being proactive to move the issue forward? Obama isn't doing anything either, except for his court picks, and the supreme court will ultimately decide this.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-502443_162-4531945-502443.html

Edited November 5, 2010 by Jingthing