- Joined
- Jul 21, 2005
- Messages
- 51,713
- Reaction score
- 35,493
- Location
- Washington, DC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
What did she do exactly? I think she seemed her normal self... lol
Missing from the proceedings were two possible entrants. Former Gov. Jon M. Huntsman Jr. of Utah, who recently returned from China as Mr. Obama’s ambassador, is expected to get into the race as soon as next week, but he declined an invitation to participate in the debate. And one week after she visited the state, former Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, whose decision seems to be more up in the air, also declined.
I haven't actually watched a lot of her, but every time I do she bugs me. It just continued tonight. In large part, more than any others, she just screamed "CAMPAIGNING" to me. Everything seemed like a rehearsed, practiced, planned answer to the point where if she didn't like the question she'd immediately go into that and just say to hell with it. I disliked the CONSTANT reminder of her kids and adopted kids. She just came off as phony, full of herself, and hollow. Really didn't like her.
I haven't actually watched a lot of her, but every time I do she bugs me. It just continued tonight. In large part, more than any others, she just screamed "CAMPAIGNING" to me. Everything seemed like a rehearsed, practiced, planned answer to the point where if she didn't like the question she'd immediately go into that and just say to hell with it. I disliked the CONSTANT reminder of her kids and adopted kids. She just came off as phony, full of herself, and hollow. Really didn't like her.
Why does every female politician, on either side of the aisle, do that? Seriously, how does having a bazillion kids make you a qualified politician? I get so, so, sick of hearing women politicians skirting around whatever they're trying to wiggle out of answering by lowing about their kids.
Why do they script her? Easy. So she doesn't accidentally do things like attribute the beginning of the Revolution to the wrong state, or randomly break into prayer to help the misguided gays. She's a liability when she speaks for herself, basically.
To be honest, I believe Bachman is a mirror for talking points and barely has any free thinking thoughts or ideas (although I feel the same way about Obama). Given the choice between her and Obama, I would chose her. Although, there are much better choices for a presidential candidate besides Bachman.
I haven't seen many other women politicians do that.... it's mostly Conservative women, because it's code for "I am pro life." That's how the religious right expects women to be. If you're vagina is a clown car, you're presidential material... and they love Palin even more because she had a special needs child.
In fact, a Palin fan eluded to Palin being "more of a woman" than me a few minutes ago... I have seen Rush and other talking heads make similar points.
Really digs? I think your under evaluating Obama.
I think Obama really isn't all that intelligent. His advisers and appointees run the show and he is the charismatic face for their ideals. My personal opinion is that Obama is similar to Bachman. Nothing but talking points and largely devoid of individual intelligent thoughts or ideas.
I wonder how Sarah Palin feels about this news...
I disagree completely. Obama is more than just a charismatic face, and is more intelligent than Bachmann. Obama has been a mediocre president, while Bachmann would be a train wreck, and turn this country into the ground. And it is not because she is a conservative, but because she is not smart enough for the job.
I disagree completely. Obama is more than just a charismatic face, and is more intelligent than Bachmann. Obama has been a mediocre president, while Bachmann would be a train wreck, and turn this country into the ground. And it is not because she is a conservative, but because she is not smart enough for the job.
I disagree completely. Obama is more than just a charismatic face, and is more intelligent than Bachmann. Obama has been a mediocre president, while Bachmann would be a train wreck, and turn this country into the ground. And it is not because she is a conservative, but because she is not smart enough for the job.
I see in Obama's public image the same thing I see in Carter's, or Ken Livingston's (former mayor of London - I was around for his last term).
I think all three of them are extremely intelligent, consistently clear-headed, and often right. But none of them are especially well-liked. Obama is charismatic, but only for the duration of the time he's speaking. And all of them had a problem of trying to figure out how to get into the right conversations with their fellow politicians.
I think what all three of them have in common, and what has lended each of them a similar public opinion, is that they are long-term thinkers. They did things that are intended to benefit us down the line, more than right this second.
That is not a popular thing in modern politics. It makes it harder for them to be effective, and it makes it harder for them to get the public on board. People want to see it now - and if it all goes to hell 10 year down the line, they really don't care. As long as they get results now.
I think it's a failing of the public's thinking, more than a failing of those particular politicians.
How does killing jobs benefit us in the long term?
To blame this on Obama, when the majority of it economic efforts have been blocked by the GOP, is a bit of a laugh.
I see in Obama's public image the same thing I see in Carter's, or Ken Livingston's (former mayor of London - I was around for his last term).
I think all three of them are extremely intelligent, consistently clear-headed, and often right. But none of them are especially well-liked. Obama is charismatic, but only for the duration of the time he's speaking. And all of them had a problem of trying to figure out how to get into the right conversations with their fellow politicians.
I think what all three of them have in common, and what has lended each of them a similar public opinion, is that they are long-term thinkers. They did things that are intended to benefit us down the line, more than right this second.
That is not a popular thing in modern politics. It makes it harder for them to be effective, and it makes it harder for them to get the public on board. People want to see it now - and if it all goes to hell 10 year down the line, they really don't care. As long as they get results now.
I think it's a failing of the public's thinking, more than a failing of those particular politicians.
Which economic efforts were blocked by the GOP?
The public's failure to live up to the expectations of that triumvirate of great thinkers, Obama, Carter and Livingstone, must be frustrating. They are all so brilliant that their policies, and successes, are virtually interchangeable,
To blame this on Obama, when the majority of it economic efforts have been blocked by the GOP, is a bit of a laugh.
Didn't, until early this year, the Dems control the Senate and House as well as the Presidency? Which economic initiatives do you feel the GOP blocked that would have led to greater national prosperity?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?