Bullcrap!
Moderators: Tunnelcat, Jeff250
- Tunnelcat
- DBB Grand Master
- Posts: 13668
- Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 12:32 pm
- Location: Pacific Northwest, U.S.A.
Bullcrap!
Glenn Beck, of all people, actually said it to her face! Palin tried stalling him because she couldn't think of the name of even ONE Founding Father when he asked the question \"Who's your favorite Founder?\" Doh!
Palin the Airhead
Palin the Airhead
Why should we defend her?
1 - She's clearly going after some things to 'cement' her own future ... and it doesn't bode well for a future in politics.
2 - Glen Beck (despite the millions who adore him) makes his living out of trying to show the weaknesses and downfalls of politicians and political efforts (with the intent of trying to help the general public).
... So when he manages to make a public \"hole\" with a currently high profile person ... It's only \"business as usual\".
I give it a \"Meh\"
1 - She's clearly going after some things to 'cement' her own future ... and it doesn't bode well for a future in politics.
2 - Glen Beck (despite the millions who adore him) makes his living out of trying to show the weaknesses and downfalls of politicians and political efforts (with the intent of trying to help the general public).
... So when he manages to make a public \"hole\" with a currently high profile person ... It's only \"business as usual\".
I give it a \"Meh\"
- Will Robinson
- DBB Grand Master
- Posts: 10124
- Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2000 3:01 am
Re:
When you voted for him you gave up your right to it anyway so I guess it's the right thing for all Obama voters to do.Gooberman wrote:Hearing her speak makes me want to give more of my money to Obama. It's like a reflex or somthin' *shrug*
While her reply was disappointing, still we all have momentary lapses. Take away Obama's teleprompter and I suspect you would any number of head scratching replies. Far better in my view point, would be to have someone like Palin in office that may not know every detail of our constitution and who participated in forming it, to someone who knows all the details very well but thinks it is a \"living breathing document\" and formable to any agenda by what ever power block is in office.
- Kilarin
- DBB Fleet Admiral
- Posts: 2403
- Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2002 2:01 am
- Location: South of Ft. Worth Texas
THAT would be a most excellent experiment to pull on ALL politicians.Grendel wrote:Makes me wonder how she would score on the test immigrants have to pass to become citizens..
Imagine, just go up to capitol hill and take the house, the senate, the president, vp, and perhaps even the judicial branch. Sit them all in front of the test, then report the results to the public.
Wow!
Re:
Agree!Will Robinson wrote: When you voted for him you gave up your right to it anyway so I guess it's the right thing for all Obama voters to do.
Also Agree!woodchip wrote:While her reply was disappointing, still we all have momentary lapses. Take away Obama's teleprompter and I suspect you would any number of head scratching replies. Far better in my view point, would be to have someone like Palin in office that may not know every detail of our constitution and who participated in forming it, to someone who knows all the details very well but thinks it is a "living breathing document" and formable to any agenda by what ever power block is in office.
- Tunnelcat
- DBB Grand Master
- Posts: 13668
- Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 12:32 pm
- Location: Pacific Northwest, U.S.A.
Re:
Oh come on! She could have said "George Washington" or even "John Adams" off the top of her head if she'd learned ANYTHING in American History class! All she could sputter was "ALL OF THEM" to try and cover her ignorant butt. Maybe she slept through that class or skipped school that day. Woodchip, she knows absolutely NOTHING about ANYTHING from what I've heard from her! Every speech or interview she's given is a rambling trash heap!woodchip wrote:While her reply was disappointing, still we all have momentary lapses. Take away Obama's teleprompter and I suspect you would any number of head scratching replies. Far better in my view point, would be to have someone like Palin in office that may not know every detail of our constitution and who participated in forming it, to someone who knows all the details very well but thinks it is a "living breathing document" and formable to any agenda by what ever power block is in office.
Yes, Obama uses the teleprompter crutch, I agree there. He obviously has trouble with public speaking. He tends to sprinkle "umms" and "ohhhs' around when he talks off script. But at least he can usually come up with a cogent answer when asked a question. Palin AWAYS tries to bluff her way out of revealing her ignorance instead of just showing some humility when she doesn't KNOW the answer to a question. It's called 'not wanting to tell the truth' to advance her public persona.
Obama is bad enough with his butt kissing favoritism for the special corporate interests lurking around Washington, but Palin as president would be an absolute nightmare. She would toss out the Constitution all together as an inconvenient power restriction to the executive office.
Re: Bullcrap!
I don't quite get what you're talking about. Did you even click on the link you posted? Palin settles fairly quickly on Washington as the central founding father, among the group of "all of them". Arguments can be made for any of Madison, Adams, Jefferson, Franklin or Hamilton, and probably others. As Palin points out, it was Washington that proved to be the provident central character in those early days - hardly an ignorant answer at all.tunnelcat wrote:Glenn Beck, of all people, actually said it to her face! Palin tried stalling him because she couldn't think of the name of even ONE Founding Father when he asked the question "Who's your favorite Founder?" Doh!
You means kind of like Obama and his team are trying to do right now?tunnelcat wrote:She would toss out the Constitution all together as an inconvenient power restriction to the executive office.
I have \"momentary lapses\" everyday too. I don't think she's as \"polished\" as the rest and may be more like me and you than anyone else there. I'm tired of people listening to crap just because it sounds good and it's eloquently put. Answer me this. How many people do you know like Obama and how many do you know like Palin? I would guess more than likely most people you know are more like Palin than Obama is. His speeches are \"ear tickling\" and \"obscured\" by his carefully chosen words. Someone that speaks from the heart may not have an answer immediately but at least you know when they answer they meant what they said. Unlike most that prepare themselves constantly to always have an \"acceptable\" answer. No I think we need \"real\" representatives. People more like me and you. Not people who have learned how to gain a \"following\".
Re:
George Washington was indeed a founding father as he was a constitutional delegate to the Constitutional Convention from the state of Virginia:Dedman wrote:Is George Washington even one of the founding fathers? He was the first POTUS sure, but a founding father? I always viewed the Founders as the guys who wrote and signed the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Maybe I'm wrong, I've never professed to being a history buff.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charte ... thers.html
- Tunnelcat
- DBB Grand Master
- Posts: 13668
- Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 12:32 pm
- Location: Pacific Northwest, U.S.A.
Re: Bullcrap!
Yep, she did mention Washington near the end of the clip, I missed it the first time. I'll admit my mistake, unlike Palin. I do notice that it took her a little bit of jawing to come up with his name, but of course it's the most common name people remember! But it shows that she has the need to BS FIRST as a stalling tactic whenever she can't come up with an answer right away. She could have looked Beck in the eye and said "Let me think for a moment on who I think was the most influential", but instead she had to blurt out "All of them" in an attempt to cover her bases and not come off as complete idiot! If you listen to her whenever she speaks, she fills most of her little pontifications with nonsensical sing-song filler and absolutely no substance. All potatoes and no meat. If the Republicans want to run a woman for president, get someone with half-an-ounce of brains for our country's sake!dissent wrote:I don't quite get what you're talking about. Did you even click on the link you posted? Palin settles fairly quickly on Washington as the central founding father, among the group of "all of them". Arguments can be made for any of Madison, Adams, Jefferson, Franklin or Hamilton, and probably others. As Palin points out, it was Washington that proved to be the provident central character in those early days - hardly an ignorant answer at all.
If you're referring to the 'czars' that he's appointed, Obama's not the first president to use them, he's just doing the same as our last president. I didn't hear the Republicans gripe one wit about the constitutionality of the 35 czars Bush appointed in his 2 terms. So why is it subverting the Constitution when Obama's doing it NOW (38 czars)?dissent wrote:You means kind of like Obama and his team are trying to do right now?tunnelcat wrote:She would toss out the Constitution all together as an inconvenient power restriction to the executive office.
CZARS
The only other thing I can think of is that mandate to buy health insurance in the present health care bill. I DO agree with you that piece of crap proposed law IS a subversion the constitution! It's forcing us to buy EXPENSIVE private-for-profit insurance just in order to LIVE in this country! Please enlighten me if I've missed something else Obama's done that's subverting the Constitution, other than the illegal stuff he's still allowing on his watch that lil' Bushie started originally in the name of anti-terrorism/security.
Re: Bullcrap!
But, but, that would break the tradition .. !tunnelcat wrote:If the Republicans want to run [..] for president, get someone with half-an-ounce of brains for our country's sake!
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
If someone asked me who my favorite founding father was…I would have to take a minute to think, do I even have a favorite founding father, I sure wouldn’t simply blurt one out, just to prove I knew one.
I have a favorite color…ice cream, but I don’t recall having a favorite founding father…
After some thinking, I would have to go with Ben Franklin…but, I had to actually create a favorite to answer the question.
Some people really know how to create a whole lot of something, from a whole lot of nothing.
I have a favorite color…ice cream, but I don’t recall having a favorite founding father…
After some thinking, I would have to go with Ben Franklin…but, I had to actually create a favorite to answer the question.
Some people really know how to create a whole lot of something, from a whole lot of nothing.
Re:
I did think you would drive that one a bit further.Will Robinson wrote: When you voted for him you gave up your right to it anyway so I guess it's the right thing for all Obama voters to do.
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
I didn't find her answer that wrong, off the top of my head I couldn't name a favorite founding father either!
It's the way she speaks, a shotgun blast full of buzz-words, that is just difficult to listen to. Yes, all politicians rely on them -- but with her its pretty much the only thing your hit with.
- CUDA
- DBB Master
- Posts: 6482
- Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2001 2:01 am
- Location: A Conservative Man in the Liberal bastion of the Pacific Northwest. in Oregon City. Oregon
Re: Bullcrap!
actually my first thought was how he stole GM and Chrysler from the stock holders that owned it and gave it to the Unions.tunnelcat wrote:If you're referring to the 'czars' that he's appointed, Obama's not the first president to use them, he's just doing the same as our last president. I didn't hear the Republicans gripe one wit about the constitutionality of the 35 czars Bush appointed in his 2 terms. So why is it subverting the Constitution when Obama's doing it NOW (38 czars)?dissent wrote:You means kind of like Obama and his team are trying to do right now?tunnelcat wrote:She would toss out the Constitution all together as an inconvenient power restriction to the executive office.
CZARS
The only other thing I can think of is that mandate to buy health insurance in the present health care bill. I DO agree with you that piece of crap proposed law IS a subversion the constitution! It's forcing us to buy EXPENSIVE private-for-profit insurance just in order to LIVE in this country! Please enlighten me if I've missed something else Obama's done that's subverting the Constitution, other than the illegal stuff he's still allowing on his watch that lil' Bushie started originally in the name of anti-terrorism/security.
and when he took on his position of chairman of the security council with the UN
and when he appointed Hillary to be SOS immediately after she had voted as a Senator to give the position a pay increase.Section 9 of the Constitution says:
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.
and Sixteen days into his tenure, signed an executive order limiting executive compensation for companies who receive TARP funding from the Treasury Department. a violation ofArticle 1, Section 6 of the U.S. Constitution:
No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time…"
shall I go on????????Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution which reads "No State shall... make any... Law impairing Obligation of Contracts".
- CUDA
- DBB Master
- Posts: 6482
- Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2001 2:01 am
- Location: A Conservative Man in the Liberal bastion of the Pacific Northwest. in Oregon City. Oregon
Re:
that will probably never happen. and since the DNC has complete controll over the government there will never be any form of congressional investigation either.woodchip wrote:Cuda, I'd be interested if anyone takes any of the three items you pointed out to the courts.
but TC said
so these are just 4 quick things I could remember I can look up the constitutional violation of the GM, Chrysler fiasco if you'd like.Please enlighten me if I've missed something else Obama's done that's subverting the Constitution
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
― Theodore Roosevelt
― Theodore Roosevelt
- Will Robinson
- DBB Grand Master
- Posts: 10124
- Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2000 3:01 am
Re:
And she would have been wrong in many peoples eyes since George isn't counted among those who actually authored the documents...and you can bet that distinction would have become gospel to every liberal the minute it could be used to discredit Palin in some way. So, off the top of your head, you and Palin have something in commontunnelcat wrote:Oh come on! She could have said "George Washington"...woodchip wrote:While her reply was disappointing, still we all have momentary lapses. Take away Obama's teleprompter and I suspect you would any number of head scratching replies. Far better in my view point, would be to have someone like Palin in office that may not know every detail of our constitution and who participated in forming it, to someone who knows all the details very well but thinks it is a "living breathing document" and formable to any agenda by what ever power block is in office.
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
Re: Bullcrap!
Defending the indefensible?tunnelcat wrote:
If you're referring to the 'czars' that he's appointed, Obama's not the first president to use them, he's just doing the same as our last president. I didn't hear the Republicans gripe one wit about the constitutionality of the 35 czars Bush appointed in his 2 terms. So why is it subverting the Constitution when Obama's doing it NOW (38 czars)?
[
It's never good to wake up in the shrubs naked, you either got way too drunk, or your azz is a werewolf.
![Image](http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e86/ripwardog/stuff/yaflogo.jpg)
![Image](http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e86/ripwardog/stuff/yaflogo.jpg)