RE: Sarah Palin

Sagarin wrote:

That's what I'm saying. Is she really attractive? I mean, compared to Hillary Clinton, or any other politician for that matter, maybe I can see it, but really? Attractive?

It's all in the company you keep I guess. I mean Olympia Snowe's a great politician in my book, but have seen her? Thankfully her constituency overlooks it!

That Blanche Lincoln person is actually better-looking than Sarah Palin with a lot less effort and contrivance and makeup.

uncleB wrote:

You make the claim that "Obama continues to ram through policies and make decisions to cater to the far-left, decisions which most polls show the majority of Americans oppose" and when asked to provide a few examples reply "Do your own digging"?

You can't give any examples to support your claim? Really?

Epic fail.

Read it and weep.

Anyone else seen Palin's Runners World pics:

http://www.runnersworld.com/photo/sarahpalin/slide1.html

Forgive me if this has already been posted, but how on earth can she claim this is sexist when she posed herself. Also a miny controversy as Newsweek used the photo without RW's permission...

http://www.milforddailynews.com/opinion/x511160405/Holmes-Sarah-Palin-Politician-or-celebrity

I already referred to Zogby and provided Rasmussen links. But you can go just about anywhere. The majority of Americans disapprove of the healthcare "reform" bill, vehemently when it includes a public option, the majority (by a slimmer margin to be sure) do not think it a good idea to try Khalid Sheik-Mohammed and co-conspirators in NYC and confer them taxpayer subsidized protections and publicity when they plotted and were apprehended in Pakistan, and there is a growing uneasiness about this administration's foreign policy, the vacillating over Afghanistan, getting the bird flipped to it from China at the APEC meeting on climate and currency matters, and Russia backpedaling and stalling on "concessions." Not to mention the growing chorus of concerns about heaping more debt upon an already insolvent country and implementing more boondoggles when unemployment is rising and households are still deleveraging. It's why the approval rating has fallen below 50 in several polls and is in negative territory on Rasmussen's diffusion index.

YOU DELETE ALL THE OTHER POLITICAL THREADS, SO WHY THE F*** IS THIS ONE STILL HERE????

Not too popular overseas either, despite the rhetoric about the U.S. Being "more respected", "more loved" or whatever BS the left contrives. Here's a nice piece from Der Speigel.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,662822,00.html

Really? I'm mean really? What a disaster!

Admittedly, I don't know enough about Obama's education. However, black or not, graduating from Harvard Law as well as TEACHING at UC law would indicate that he is a very intelligent man.

However, I don't believe that SAT scores and the like are as important as everyone here is making them out to be. I suppose it comes down to what you think a President is.

In my opinion, the President of the United States does not have to be the most intelligent candidate. I think that the President's job is to be a leader through whom the country can unite. The details of policies and issues can be simplified and passed on by aides and members of the cabinet, but to think that the requirement for a president to be an expert on everything is absurd. A president needs to appear confident to the eyes of the American people. He/she need to be intelligent enough to no to be manipulated, but the president is our leader, not our decision maker.

Al Sharpton wrote:

YOU DELETE ALL THE OTHER POLITICAL THREADS, SO WHY THE F*** IS THIS ONE STILL HERE????

I don't delete anything. But I'd tend to agree, why is thread still here and how did it make nine pages and growing?

Sagarin wrote:

Al Sharpton wrote:

YOU DELETE ALL THE OTHER POLITICAL THREADS, SO WHY THE F*** IS THIS ONE STILL HERE????

I don't delete anything. But I'd tend to agree, why is thread still here and how did it make nine pages and growing?

Maybe they consider this to be a _relatively_ reasonable discussion of the topic, aside from the idiots who keep posting sexual remarks about SP.

Sarah Palin is hot. She makes my sticker peck out!

Do you seriously need those records to indentify when someone is intelligent? If you take the time to read his books, you'll see intelligence.

It doesn't take academic records to know that Palin is a f-ing idiot.

Sagarin wrote:

I already referred to Zogby and provided Rasmussen links. But you can go just about anywhere. The majority of Americans disapprove of the healthcare "reform" bill, vehemently when it includes a public option

BULLSHIT, BULLSHIT, BULLSHIT.

This is from less than a week ago. And don't give me any nonsense about CNN not conducting scientific polls. This shows STEADY and SIGNIFICANT support of a public option by large margin.

" Now thinking specifically about the health insurance plans available to most Americans, would you favor or oppose creating a public health insurance option administered by the federal government that would compete with plans offered by private health insurance companies?

Nov. 13-15 Oct. 30-Nov. 1 Oct. 16-18 Aug. 28-31

Favor 56% 55% 61% 55%

Oppose 42% 44% 38% 41%

No opinion 2% 1% 1% 4% "

And this is from your own goddamned link:

The first question finds that 46% favor Thirty-seven percent (37%) are opposed.

There you go. So you take THOSE #'s and conclude that the american public is VEHEMENTLY opposed to healthcare reform WHEN it includes the public option??? Wrong. You are being purposely blind to reality support you own beliefs.

And if you look further inside the #'s, you will see that "Roughly one in five Americans who oppose the House health care bill do so because it is not liberal enough," said CNN polling director Keating Holland. '

So many oppose it NOT because it is socialized medicine, goes against free market principles, and has a public option, but quite on the contrary, they are against it "because it is not liberal enough."

So stop making shit up. Look, neither one of us thinks very highly of the american public's opinion (for different reasons), so maybe neither one of us should quote polls about how they feel about something when trying to make a point. But at least when I do, I don't try to cherry pick some #'s or distort them to make that point. The bottom line reality is, the american public strongly support the creation of a government-sponsored non-profit health insurance option that people could choose instead of a private health insurance plan. They may be unsure about what effects it will have, may have fears about it, but as it stands now, as they currently understand it, THEY SUPPORT IT.

Now step up and be a man and say: you're right.

I cut instead of copied. This should read...

Sir Lance-alot wrote:

And this is from your own goddamned link:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/october_2009/fear_of_losing_private_health_insurance_trumps_public_option

The first question finds that 46% favor "the creation of a government-sponsored non-profit health insurance option that people could choose instead of a private health insurance plan." Thirty-seven percent (37%) are opposed.

.

I dunno. She and Biden seem to be quite equal in the IQ department.

Unbelievable your level of preoccupation with me. But it's worth it just the same to make you invest the time. Here's Rasmussen again, and remember, he polls LIKELY voters, not just random samples, so it's more accurate. It's all in HOW you ask. Here's a snippet but read the WHOLE Goddamn link, all of you, and you'll get the gist:

"Just 38% of voters now favor the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That’s the lowest level of support measured for the plan in nearly two dozen tracking polls conducted since June.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 56% now oppose the plan."

-- AND --

"While Senate Democrats this weekend assembled enough votes to begin debate on the plan, many challenges remain. All Republican Senators and several Democrats, for example, have expressed opposition to the so-called “public option.” Sixty-three percent (63%) of voters nationwide say guaranteeing that no one is forced to change their health insurance coverage is a higher priority than giving consumers the choice of a "public option" government-run health insurance company. Most liberal voters say giving people the choice of a "public option" is more important. But most moderates take the opposite view and say guaranteeing that no one is forced to change their health insurance is the top priority.

Overall, 46% favor the creation of a government-sponsored non-profit health insurance option that people could choose instead of a private health insurance plan. However, if the plan encouraged companies to drop private health insurance coverage for their workers, support for the public option falls to 29%, and opposition rises to 58%."

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

gamecock wrote: He is the least-prepared US president in a century, yet we're told over and over that it's OK because he's so brilliant. But it's entirely possible that he is actually a guy who, while smart, has benefitted from a great deal of luck and good political sense.

I thought about this for a while, and while I don't want to dig up an old discussion I think you are off in one respect.

Looking back, he's a white Obama with more connections and richer parents. Carter, Clinton, and Bush II weren't really much ahead of the curve either.

I wouldn't vote for Palin in my lifetime but I think she is incredibly good looking. It is hard to takew my eyes off her.

Look, I am not preoccupied with you (not nearly as preoccupied as you are with Obama and this messageboard). I WILL give you that I respond to your posts more than most. Why?

a) you are on virtually every thread I take a look at, how can I avoid you! (meaning you are all over this board, and also that we have some similar interests, albeit different opinions on those subjects)

b) we disagree on a lot, so of course I will attempt to refute things you say I don't agree with

Ok, since you don't want to yet admit that you were wrong on this particular debate, let's take this point by point and stop screwing around.

I was specifically attacking your following comment with a real focus on the 2nd part of that comment ...

Now while there is some evidence that to support your first contention that "the majority of Americans disapprove of the healthcare reform bill" , you make it far too assuredly. Recent CNN polling data shows an EVEN split on healthcare reform. And as I already pointed out, many disapprove of the bill because it is not LIBERAL enough! ( "That may indicate that a majority opposes the details in the bill, but also that a majority may approve of the overall approach taken by House Democrats and President Obama."

49% disapprove 46% approve, within margin of error.

)

So americans are more split on the overall gist of the bill than you state.

More importantly, I was particularly challenging your second statement that this possible disapproval becomes "VEHEMENT" when a public option is included in the bill. This is just FLAT-OUT wrong. As the CNN poll shows, and even your own Rasmussen poll shows (quoted again below), a significant majority of americans support the public option. Yes, if you throw in scare tactics to the question by saying: "do you support a public option if... nightmare scenario a, b, or c occurs ?" , then of course people will show less support. But since PART of the bill is requiring businesses to offer health coverage for their workers, it is silly to include that in the question:

Again, bottom line is: the majority of americans, as evidenced by both Rasmussen AND CNN polls, support a public insurance option minus any scare tactic addendums to the question. And the inclusion of this public option to the healthcare bill does NOT, as you stated, strongly increase disapproval of the bill. On the contrary, it appears to be increase the popularity of the bill.

Those are the facts from Rasmussen and CNN. Do you agree with this, or are you going to try and spin it some other way?