Is Sarah Palin really this fuckin' stupid?

[followsthewolf]

She didn't do crap for the citizens of Alaska. There was no altruistic motive. She quit because she was offered lots of $$$$$$$$$$$$ for all kinds of second-rate tv shows, tea bagger appearances, Faux news commentary, and a deal to write a POS book.

There are enough doh people who will support her. Most because they dream of hitting that.

[Sandy Eggo]

I would say the left isn't frightened, but amused by her. I personally laugh hysterically when another rightwinger shows how gullible they are by believing and repeating that BS.

If you think about it, talking about someone doesn't imply fear. For example, me likes to bring up Gore outta no where, every chance she gets...is she afraid?

If she's raising money for the party, then it just shows how low their standards really are.

[Palehorse]

I would say the left isn't frightened, but amused by her. I personally laugh hysterically when another rightwinger shows how gullible they are by believing and repeating that BS.

If you think about it, talking about someone doesn't imply fear. For example, me likes to bring up Gore outta no where, every chance she gets...is she afraid?

If she's raising money for the party, then it just shows how low their standards really are.

She's a republican party whore out spreading the disease du jour to the masses! 

[LOsborne]

Like Biden is the cream of the crop......

Straw man, me. Joe Biden's ability or lack or same does not in any way impact the discussion of Palin's political fund raising. This tactic is often seen on the playground, when some snotty ten-year-old who has been reprimanded for a rule infraction whines, "Huh-uh ... he did it too."

So what's your point? That she isn't quite as goofy as Biden (in your opinion,) and therefor we should take her clown act seriously?

[me]

A lot of other people are fund raising too and no one is paying all this attention to them so what's so special about Palin.  If someone has a dinner to raise funds and invites her as a speaker it isn't her doing it it's what ever the organization is that's raising the funds and the people who attend the functions are going to see her. She is just that a "guest speaker" not the "organizer" of the fund raiser.

If someone were to have a fund raiser for the Dems and invited Bill Clinton to speak would he be the guest speaker or the fund raiser(organizer)?  Should he be told how to spend the money he might happen to make at such a function? 

[Palehorse]

A lot of other people are fund raising too and no one is paying all this attention to them so what's so special about Palin.  If someone has a dinner to raise funds and invites her as a speaker it isn't her doing it it's what ever the organization is that's raising the funds and the people who attend the functions are going to see her. She is just that a "guest speaker" not the "organizer" of the fund raiser.

If someone were to have a fund raiser for the Dems and invited Bill Clinton to speak would he be the guest speaker or the fund raiser(organizer)?  Should he be told how to spend the money he might happen to make at such a function?

This posting is a prime example of what I was talking about when I stated people are having a hard time separating the personal and political lives of Pretty Pony Palin.

No one is saying anything about her supposed "private revenue" or begrudging her that, but rather it is the intentional blurring of the two by PPP herself that is feeding it. Her tendency to elevate private matters within the media, while speaking at a political event, just serves to inflame the whole thing.

That she herself cannot seem to keep the two separate is telling as well, and a clear indication that it is very likely she will encounter the same challenge in keeping the two separate financials separate. Just watch, I see a huge financial fiasco in the works there and she'll be right in the middle of it.

This whole PPP thing is nothing more than a political Jerry Springer episode that won't end. And when the rubber hits the road the truth in that statement will be revealed when she fails to anything more than drive voters to place their votes against her. Bad Karma and she's drawing a lot of it her way by her own actions.

Then there's her politics. . .

[me]

NO, that is unequivocally incorrect, (and off topic but since you brought it up); I AM against faceless corporate entities obtaining even more influence in our political process and government, as they have with the SCOTUS decision granting them the ability to BUY the offices of influence within it.

Not that they were not doing it already, but that decision provides them the ability to double dip in the process by affording "gifts" and funding for propaganda campaigns; thereby reducing the PRIVATE individual's vote to nothing short of asswipe. They will BUY political offices for individuals in exchange for favorable legislation that will negatively impact the PRIVATE citizens ability to pursue life, liberty, and happiness.

I don't think I have to tell anyone about how those corporations treat employees like so much human chattel, hiring and firing at will and with little to no consequence. Their actions demonstrate they have little to no regard surrounding quality and quantity of life where their employees are concerned. How can you think it will be any different where the millions of faceless (in their view) PRIVATE citizens are concerned? It won't, and thereby make living within the laws of the land impossible for the average citizen, but a cake walk for corporations.

It's "we the people", not "we the corporations"! 

The "opposition" demonstrates its hypocrisy in supporting this hogwash piece of legislation, as well as when they criticize the present administrations revamping of the tax rates for those making 250k and up to pay for healthcare reform. And the apparently self appointed poster child for all of this is none other than Sarah Palin herself.

I for one find it hard to understand how anyone can support a private individual running around the country diverting millions in potential job creating capital, toward a political war chest that will do nothing toward the stimulation of business, job creation, or the economy; and simultaneously decry the implementation of policies and programs that do all three of these things.

The "validation" I hear most often is that taxation of the high earners is restricting the input of these individuals toward business growth and job creation. Ironic, when you consider the fact that it is this very same sector of the population that  is largely contributing to the "My Pretty Pony Palin" war chest.

So why is it okay in one case and not the other? One is constructive and the other destructive, and it isn't very hard to see which of the two is the best path toward positively impacting the lives of average citizens in an expedited manner. If you take off the blinders and approach it from a neutral perspective that is. Most will not though, because they've already become engaged in the emotional windstorm of propaganda that is being distributed with ever increasing volume.

The problem a lot of people are having is that they don't seem to be able to separate the private citizen from the political one when it comes to Palin. She is purposely blurring that line by sensationalizing public commentary upon aspects of her personal life within political forums. Make no mistake, she's out there flying her flag to promote a political agenda and the funding she is generating can only be legally expended in that pursuit. Moreover, she utilizes private speaking engagements for which she commands $100,000.00+ fees, as opportunities to promote party agendas - and thereby double dipping.

My prediction is that by the time the laundry is done the Pretty Pony Palin is going to find herself being ridden by the Internal Revenue Service and the DOJ for tax and funding violations. Then she'll really have a reason to bray!

Who would you have them hire as speakers? 

Guess she'd be right up there with the dems in congress who keep "forgetting" about properties and can't understand Turbo Tax then huh?

[me]

Um, something just dawned on me.  What large corporations is Palin speaking at?  I thought she was just doing the Tea Party rallies. 

[LOsborne]

Um, something just dawned on me.  What large corporations is Palin speaking at?  I thought she was just doing the Tea Party rallies. 

Where did that come from? Who said she is speaking at corporations (other than you?) Check the hat, me. The shiny side goes out. This is very important since that "meteor" streaked across the sky a couple days ago.

[followsthewolf]

 

[me]

Where did that come from? Who said she is speaking at corporations (other than you?) Check the hat, me. The shiny side goes out. This is very important since that "meteor" streaked across the sky a couple days ago.

Just trying to tie this into it is all.  Can't figure out how she is diverting anything from the economy unless it's the large corporations paying her which it isn't.  She is giving her opinion on the way she feels about things and doesn't happen to agree with the current administration is all.  I just don't understand why it is such a big deal when she is hired to speak and not when someone else is.  I just find this whole thing about bad mouthing Palin absurd since there are others who disagree with the current policies and those who agree with it who are speaking at different functions and getting paid just as much or maybe even more than Palin and no one is bad mouthing them. Why single her out?

Quote from: Palehorse on April 15, 2010, 12:42:21 PM

    NO, that is unequivocally incorrect, (and off topic but since you brought it up); I AM against faceless corporate entities obtaining even more influence in our political process and government, as they have with the SCOTUS decision granting them the ability to BUY the offices of influence within it.

    Not that they were not doing it already, but that decision provides them the ability to double dip in the process by affording "gifts" and funding for propaganda campaigns; thereby reducing the PRIVATE individual's vote to nothing short of asswipe. They will BUY political offices for individuals in exchange for favorable legislation that will negatively impact the PRIVATE citizens ability to pursue life, liberty, and happiness.

    I don't think I have to tell anyone about how those corporations treat employees like so much human chattel, hiring and firing at will and with little to no consequence. Their actions demonstrate they have little to no regard surrounding quality and quantity of life where their employees are concerned. How can you think it will be any different where the millions of faceless (in their view) PRIVATE citizens are concerned? It won't, and thereby make living within the laws of the land impossible for the average citizen, but a cake walk for corporations.

    It's "we the people", not "we the corporations"!

    The "opposition" demonstrates its hypocrisy in supporting this hogwash piece of legislation, as well as when they criticize the present administrations revamping of the tax rates for those making 250k and up to pay for healthcare reform. And the apparently self appointed poster child for all of this is none other than Sarah Palin herself.

    I for one find it hard to understand how anyone can support a private individual running around the country diverting millions in potential job creating capital, toward a political war chest that will do nothing toward the stimulation of business, job creation, or the economy; and simultaneously decry the implementation of policies and programs that do all three of these things.

[Sandy Eggo]

Because she's an idiot. She comes across as an idiot and she continues to put herself out there to be ridiculed. IMO, she's on the same level as the Goselins.

If my child attended a school where thet spent an extraordinary amount of money to hear her speak, I'd seriously consider withdrawing her. Not b/c she's a Republican conservative, but b/c the educational standards of that school can't be too high if they're willing to pay for that.

On the other hand, put an intelligent conservative Republican at the podium, not a reactionary brainless attention-whore and I'd love for my child to hear them speak.

Think about the vast difference between Condi and Sarah and perhaps you'll see my point.

[Henry Hawk]

You know Sandy, I may surprise you, but I am somewhat, at least partially, in agreement with you.

There is something about her that "I" don't particularly like.  It may have simply been that Tina Fey has kind of 'branded" that image into my brain that when I see Sarah speak now, I see Tina Fey!!..  

I disagree that she is an idiot though...even though I understand 'why' you think that.  The woman is a very accomplished woman, who has achieved a great deal by not being an idiot.  I think it is her demeanor...that comes across in an unfashonable way, but again, had Tina Fey never did her take on her, I think many would NOT be as critical on her as they are now....I have a very good friend of mine who has read her book, and has fallen in love with her, and he is NOT a political kind of guy....and based upon HIS views of her that he has shared with me is that she really is a very, very sharp and strong woman.....

just my thoughts...

[Sandy Eggo]

It's not how she says it, but what she says that indicates she's an idiot.

E TV is full of people who have "accomplished alot" simply b/c the American people are enthralled with celebrities who don't offer a lot more than feeding the need for drama. The popularity of reality programming proves that to be true IMO. She's not a step above that.

[followsthewolf]

Try to imagine her in the midst of a meeting of world leaders.......and remember that she would be representing the United States from the perspective that she would have been elected.

Would you feel confident that she is representing you?