Gov. Palin's Speech- Impressions?

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear
Former news anchor Karen Keith SHOULD be good at it.

She's barren, right?

Had a career instead of a child?

All those wasted eggs........

That is it, friendly bear.

You don't deserve any more space on this forum. Between that tasteless comment and you  talking about cripples yesterday you have crossed a line that should have never been crossed.

Administrators...please ban him from this forum.

Got another nitroglycerine pill handy?

I'm still here because I have not broken any Forum Rules.

While I am frequently derided by your fellow MetroTulsaChamberPot wannabees, and your clique gets away with MURDER hereabouts using endless ad hominem attacks, I've broken no Forum Rules.

I thought the huevos diablo comment was right on:

KKKeith is a feminist with a career instead of a child.

Did I mention I'm voting straight GOP Nov. 4?

[USRufnex]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear
Former news anchor Karen Keith SHOULD be good at it.

She's barren, right?

Had a career instead of a child?

All those wasted eggs........

That is it, friendly bear.

You don't deserve any more space on this forum. Between that tasteless comment and you  talking about cripples yesterday you have crossed a line that should have never been crossed.

Administrators...please ban him from this forum.

Got another nitroglycerine pill handy?

I'm still here because I have not broken any Forum Rules.

While I am frequently derided by your fellow MetroTulsaChamberPot wannabees, and your clique gets away with MURDER hereabouts using endless ad hominem attacks, I've broken no Forum Rules.

I thought the huevos diablo comment was right on:

KKKeith is a feminist with a career instead of a child.

Did I mention I'm voting straight GOP Nov. 4?

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

quote:Originally posted by CoffeeBean

Conan -

In response to Palin's charge that Obama has never authored significant legislation:

quote:You can go look at Obama's State Senate legislative record here. And his US Senate record here. At last count, sponsorship of 820 laws in Illinois, and authorship of 152 bills and co-sponsorship of 427 in Washington. The 2007 Ethics Reform bill alone cannot be dismissed as simply non-existent.

Full post here

Yes, Palin made a good appearance, but dig a little and her facts come up short.  Not unlike her claim that she was against the "Bridge to Nowhere."  More correctly stated, she was for the "Bridge" until it became a symbol of pork barrel politics and the feds cut off funding.  With the money gone, she was against it.  That's like telling your boss that he can't fire you because you quit.  

But truth-telling is not what the speech was about.  It was about mobilizing the fundamentalist Christians.  I am afraid the GOP has turned the corner towards becoming a full-fledged evangelical Christianist movement.  And that may be great for a great many people, but I don't want religion driving my politics.

BRAVO CB!

Many today have told me they'd leave the country if she gets that close to the oval office. That may just be the intent of the evangelical party formerly referred to as the GOP.

'bye.

You won't be missed.  Take as many with you as you can fit in the Volvo.

Heard a good one today:  

The Dims and their MSM surrogates are asking if Governor Palin is ready if McCain dies his first day in office.

Wonder if Obama is ready if Biden dies HIS first day in office?

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by CoffeeBean

Conan -

In response to Palin's charge that Obama has never authored significant legislation:

quote:You can go look at Obama's State Senate legislative record here. And his US Senate record here. At last count, sponsorship of 820 laws in Illinois, and authorship of 152 bills and co-sponsorship of 427 in Washington. The 2007 Ethics Reform bill alone cannot be dismissed as simply non-existent.

Full post here

Yes, Palin made a good appearance, but dig a little and her facts come up short.  Not unlike her claim that she was against the "Bridge to Nowhere."  More correctly stated, she was for the "Bridge" until it became a symbol of pork barrel politics and the feds cut off funding.  With the money gone, she was against it.  That's like telling your boss that he can't fire you because you quit.  

But truth-telling is not what the speech was about.  It was about mobilizing the fundamentalist Christians.  I am afraid the GOP has turned the corner towards becoming a full-fledged evangelical Christianist movement.  And that may be great for a great many people, but I don't want religion driving my politics.

Factual error.  While the Bridge to Nowhere wasn't built, the state STILL received the earmarked funds, to spend elsewhere on transportation projects.

[CoffeeBean]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear


Factual error.  While the Bridge to Nowhere wasn't built, the state STILL received the earmarked funds, to spend elsewhere on transportation projects.

You make my point.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by CoffeeBean

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear


Factual error.  While the Bridge to Nowhere wasn't built, the state STILL received the earmarked funds, to spend elsewhere on transportation projects.

You make my point.

What do you think the widening of I-44 is?

A $300 million earmark, courtesy of Senator Jim Inhofe.

And, if you've spent much time PARKED on I-44 between Riverside and Yale Ave. during rush hour, then you'll know that was a GOOD earmark.

That stretch has been inadequate for 25 years.

There are GOOD earmarks, and there are BAD earmarks.  They are not all the same.

I-44 earmark:  Good.

Boston Big Dig:  BAD earmark.

[FOTD]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by CoffeeBean

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear


Factual error.  While the Bridge to Nowhere wasn't built, the state STILL received the earmarked funds, to spend elsewhere on transportation projects.

You make my point.

What do you think the widening of I-44 is?

A $300 million earmark, courtesy of Senator Jim Inhofe.

And, if you've spent much time PARKED on I-44 between Riverside and Yale Ave. during rush hour, then you'll know that was a GOOD earmark.

That stretch has been inadequate for 25 years.

There are GOOD earmarks, and there are BAD earmarks.  They are not all the same.

I-44 earmark:  Good.

Boston Big Dig:  BAD earmark.

A powerful senator would have procured this money many years before now. The repiglican Oklahoma Repug delegation pales in comparrison to the days Democrats like Edmondson, Kerr, and Albert enabled huge Washington funding. It's not just Inhofe that needs to go but the entire bunch of flacid representatives from our great state. We deserve better.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by CoffeeBean

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear


Factual error.  While the Bridge to Nowhere wasn't built, the state STILL received the earmarked funds, to spend elsewhere on transportation projects.

You make my point.

What do you think the widening of I-44 is?

A $300 million earmark, courtesy of Senator Jim Inhofe.

And, if you've spent much time PARKED on I-44 between Riverside and Yale Ave. during rush hour, then you'll know that was a GOOD earmark.

That stretch has been inadequate for 25 years.

There are GOOD earmarks, and there are BAD earmarks.  They are not all the same.

I-44 earmark:  Good.

Boston Big Dig:  BAD earmark.

A powerful senator would have procured this money many years before now. The repiglican Oklahoma Repug delegation pales in comparrison to the days Democrats like Edmondson, Kerr, and Albert enabled huge Washington funding. It's not just Inhofe that needs to go but the entire bunch of flacid representatives from our great state. We deserve better.

Since statehood, Oklahoma U.S. Representatives and Senators, from both parties, have served two core constituencies:

Oil & Gas Industry.

Agriculture Industry.

Meaning, tax breaks and subsidies up the Wazoo for the Ag and Oil & Gas industry, by trading favors with politicians who want something for THEIR OWN constituencies, like Federal Jobs in West Virginia.

So, West Virginia gets the Bureau of the Public Debt and JOBS, and Oklahoma gets tax breaks and price supports for Oil & Gas and Ag industries, respectfully.

Until Senator Inhofe became chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee, Oklahoma had always been a Donor state with our Federal Fuel Tax.  Donor meaning we sent more the Washington than we got back in roadbuilding funds.

He finally got Oklahoma some Federal road money.
Too little; too late. But, something nonetheless.  

We've also got BEAUCOUP of turnpikes, which means the folly of NO FEDERAL matching funds.
Another reason why our state transportation system is inadequate.

[akupetsky]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by akupetsky

quote:Originally posted by jiminy

It was the perfect introduction to her.  She is smart and engaging, and will be a formidable opponent in the debates.  I'd like to see a Palin/Obama debate, cause I think she would eat him up.

Maybe ... that is, until someone brings up the facts:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080904/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_fact_check;_ylt=Aj.Mj4OD2Hx77etiXkSWsoBh24cA
She is a good speaker, but reminded me of a semi-skilled high school debater who can argue a point nicely but only on the basis of a dubious premise.  Almost everything good she said about herself and everything negative she said about Obama was not accurate.  Examples:  She said "no thanks" to the "bridge to nowhere" (after first supporting it), but then kept the money.  She said that Obama is using "hope" to advance his career, while McCain is using his career to advance hope - when in fact I don't know what she means about McCain and Obama is clearly a patriot and seeks to improve the country as much as McCain is/does. She claimed that Obama is going to raise taxes, when he is going to reduce them (including capital gains taxes) on 95% of Americans.  She claimed that Obama has never said what he would do as President, when he has clearly laid it out many times.  I could go on...  This may have excited the Republican masses, but when the day is done, this will be shown as nothing more than the recycled falsehoods that we've been seeing all summer and the speech of a well-spoken and tough individual who is reckless with the facts.

I posed a question asking specifics about what Obama has actually done and it's nothing but crickets.

The op-ed piece posing as an article of "facts" managed to chirp out this little piece of irrelevance:

"THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. "

"He worked with Republicans..."

It didn't refute Palin's point at all that Obama has not authored legislation of his own.  

I wish Brinkley was still around so we could hear him say of Obama:

"(he) has not a creative bone in his body. Therefore, he's a bore and will always be a bore." Just after President Clinton's victory speech, Brinkley, who thought he was off the air, bemoaned having to look forward "to four years of wonderful, inspiring speeches full of wit, poetry, music, love and affection. More goddamn nonsense."

Here is the list:
http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Legislative_Experience_Senator_Barack_Obama_D_IL

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

I watched the speech with two republicans and two democrats.

The republicans were wowed the second she walked on stage. The democrats kept asking why she was making weird facial expressions when she emphasized her talking points. The demos thought her voice was nasal, the republicans thought her smile was great...

I kept thinking to myself...what makes her worthy of this great office? What was she doing that would be different from what Karen Keith could do?

Karen Keith kinda looks like her...She can read a teleprompter...

Karen Keith for vice president!

Karen Keith has more experience READING a teleprompter.

About 20 years of experience reading a teleprompter.

Former news anchor Karen Keith SHOULD be good at it.

She's barren, right?

Had a career instead of a child?

All those wasted eggs........

You're one of the scarier people I've met on the internet.

I hope you don't leave your basement too often.

BOO!

I'm practicing for Halloween.

Did I mention I'm going as Barach Hussein Obama.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by akupetsky

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by akupetsky

quote:Originally posted by jiminy

It was the perfect introduction to her.  She is smart and engaging, and will be a formidable opponent in the debates.  I'd like to see a Palin/Obama debate, cause I think she would eat him up.

Maybe ... that is, until someone brings up the facts:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080904/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_fact_check;_ylt=Aj.Mj4OD2Hx77etiXkSWsoBh24cA
She is a good speaker, but reminded me of a semi-skilled high school debater who can argue a point nicely but only on the basis of a dubious premise.  Almost everything good she said about herself and everything negative she said about Obama was not accurate.  Examples:  She said "no thanks" to the "bridge to nowhere" (after first supporting it), but then kept the money.  She said that Obama is using "hope" to advance his career, while McCain is using his career to advance hope - when in fact I don't know what she means about McCain and Obama is clearly a patriot and seeks to improve the country as much as McCain is/does. She claimed that Obama is going to raise taxes, when he is going to reduce them (including capital gains taxes) on 95% of Americans.  She claimed that Obama has never said what he would do as President, when he has clearly laid it out many times.  I could go on...  This may have excited the Republican masses, but when the day is done, this will be shown as nothing more than the recycled falsehoods that we've been seeing all summer and the speech of a well-spoken and tough individual who is reckless with the facts.

I posed a question asking specifics about what Obama has actually done and it's nothing but crickets.

The op-ed piece posing as an article of "facts" managed to chirp out this little piece of irrelevance:

"THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. "

"He worked with Republicans..."

It didn't refute Palin's point at all that Obama has not authored legislation of his own.  

I wish Brinkley was still around so we could hear him say of Obama:

"(he) has not a creative bone in his body. Therefore, he's a bore and will always be a bore." Just after President Clinton's victory speech, Brinkley, who thought he was off the air, bemoaned having to look forward "to four years of wonderful, inspiring speeches full of wit, poetry, music, love and affection. More goddamn nonsense."

Here is the list:
http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Legislative_Experience_Senator_Barack_Obama_D_IL

Um, I've seen the list of bills he's sponsored, co-sponsored, passed, and voted for.  Where's the legislation he's authored?  I still can't pull up the legislation authored while in the Illinois Senate via the Thomas or LOC site.

You are aware there is a difference between sponsoring or co-sponsoring a bill than their is being an author of legislation?  Sponsoring or co-sponsoring is essentially saying you approve of the bill and are willing to endorse it.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by USRufnex

My impression:  Palin is going to be a strange combination of John Ashcroft and Randi Miller... it's a ploy to the Mike Huckabee constituency without actually having Mike Huckabee on the ticket.

Palin can get away with her sarcastic insults toward Obama cuz nobody can use the "b" word in the media these days... if a man had said that, he'd be an a**hole, but when Palin comes up with this crap... crickets.

Here's Hillary's version:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1ckrEeHDRY

This is a craven political move by a flip-flopping McCain... yet predictibly, the republicans see this as something courageous... you see, Episcopalians have about as much in common with the Assemblies of God as FB has with Barack Obama...

This takes Missouri out of the "toss up" catagory and into "solid McCain."

Note to President Jimmy Carter:

Please monitor the St. Louis County elections to prevent a repeat of another shameless 107% of registered voter turn-out in 2004.

[Ttowndad]

quote:Originally posted by Gaspar

quote:Originally posted by highroadtaker

Don't Republicans dislike mean, agressive women politicians?  I thought that was why so many dislike Hillary Clinton.  Palin's speech was very mean spirited and cynical.

No.  We dislike Hillary because she is deceptive, cunning, and dishonest.

Aggressive is good.

Do you think she is mean because she fired corrupt officials?  Well than ok, we like that too!

Couldn't have said it better so I won't.  Kudos.  No-Bama 08'