Governor Palin is proof the left is wrong

For decades I have heard that the republicans are the party of hate, republicans are religious nuts that want to force religion down everyone’s throats, the Republican Party hates women and women’s rights, the Republican Party are sexist, bigoted, racist, homophobes that only care about the rich.

 

Along comes Governor Palin and the lies told by the left are easier to see, but have been visible for years.

 

Ronald Reagan said of Colin Powel that he was in his mind an Irishman. When General Powel was promoted from President Reagan’s national security advisor, the first black man to have that post, to chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he became the first black man to have that post. When he was promoted to Secretary of State he again was the first black man to have that post. Not all that racist in my point of view.

 

Doctor Condoleezza Rice became the first woman to hold the post of Presidential National Security Advisor, hard to be sexist with that. First Black woman to become Secretary of State, Yup sexist, and racism abounds in the Republican Party.

 

Who was offered an opportunity to be the first black president? General Colin Powel. He turned it down.

 

When President Bush won his reelection to president who was suggested to replace him?  Dr. Condoleezza Rice.

 

Senator McCain was looking for a running mate and chose Governor Palin, not because she was a woman but because she was a conservative and an executive.

 

The difference between republicans and democrats is that the republicans will only choose people that are qualified for the job rather than trying to make a statement, or gain political points.

On the other side of the political coin we have the democrats, they had Shirley Chisholm as the first female black candidate for president.  Once she made her political points she was pushed aside, then we had Jessie Jackson, he made his political points and was pushed aside. Then we had the Reverend Sharpton, he made his mark and was bought off. The party of inclusion is only inclusive during election years.

 

Representative Harold Ford Jr. had the votes to become Speaker of the house. The democrats did not want him so he was pushed aside for Representative Pelosi. Because he let it be known that he was being pushed aside the party refused to fund his reelection. He ran for Senator and they shorted him on funding to ensure he lost.

 

I forget the man’s name that was running for governor of New York but the party wanted a white man in there so they cut off promised funding allowing the republican to win the election.

 

Senator Clinton was running for president and everyone lined up to support her until Senator Obama threw his hat in the ring. The promised support disappeared faster than a fart in a high wind. The chance to make history is more important than putting the best they have forward.

 

The republicans would rather have senator McCain as our representative for president because the voters chose him even though he is a liberal. To counter his liberal leanings he chose a conservative to add balance to his administration. Because he is a Senator he chose an executive to balance his lack of actual leadership. He is doing what is best for his country.

 

The democrats want Senator Obama because he is not Senator Clinton. He chose another senator that has a reputation for plagiarism, out right lying, and saying anything that will get him elected to balance Senator Obama’s lack of actual leadership experience, his actual lack of military experience, his lack of business experience, his misunderstanding of anything needed for the job as president other than that he is black.

 

So we have two balanced tickets that show what each party stands for.

 

One of lies, half truths, bigoted reasoning, racist ideals, sexist agenda, and homophobia.

 

The other party, a desire to improve the nation they serve and doing what is best for the nation even if it is not what may be what is best for the party in the short run.

 

I think the republicans are doing what is best for the nation only because they accepted Governor Palin as the Vice-presidential candidate. It is a balance that will work well for this nation. while at the same time pointing out the lies of their opposition.

 

I think the democrats are doing what is best for themselves, trying to look inclusive while having a history of exclusivity.

 

In nominating Governor Palin it proves the left lied about the republican party. With her wide acceptance it proved that sex is not an issue with republicans.

 

Now look at the response from the inclusive party once they found out she was the choice for VP.

 

Palin is the grandmother, and not the mother, of Trig Palin

 

Palin “Opposes Sex Education”

 

Palin “Wants Creationism Taught in School”

 

Palin Supported a “Nazi Sympathizer”

 

And Palin should be mocked for criticizing anyone's lack of national experience when her's is zero.

 

In no way does her year-and-a-half as governor of Alaska qualify her to be vice president or president of the United States.

 

``She's not qualified, she doesn't have the judgment, to be next in line to the president of the United States,''

 

Kim Gandy of NOW called Palin "a woman who opposes women's rights”

 

And now we learn the 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, is pregnant. She and the father of the child plan to marry. This may be a hard one for the Republican conservative family-values crowd to swallow. Of course, this can happen in any family. But it must certainly raise the question among the evangelical base about whether Sarah Palin has been enough of a hands-on mother.

 

So now we have a woman nominated for the Office of the Vice President of the United States who happens to be a mom. And what's our response?  "Yes, but how will you handle your job and your family?"

This news gave way to a new set of attacks, namely that Palin is a bad parent and hypocrite because of her Christian views and support of abstinence education.

 

Yet for years we were told by the left that women can do it all, have children, be married, and have a job and this was what was best for women. Now one is running for vice-president for the opposition we find out that the lies told to us about republicans was really the thoughts and projections of the left of themselves.

13,357 views 38 replies
Reply #1 Top

They lie and lie and we are tired of it. The truth is that republicans are people that love family, country and God. What is the problem with that?

Reply #2 Top

Quoting Paladin77, reply 1
They lie and lie and we are tired of it. The truth is that republicans are people that love family, country and God. What is the problem with that?
End of Paladin77's quote

 

Some people don't want a family, some people have an agenda against religion for whatever reason, and some (surprisingly many) young people dislike their country and as opposed to helping it, want to attack it.

These people generally find a haven in the Democrat party. Go figure! ;)

Reply #3 Top

Yeah, it seems to be a home for hate.

Reply #4 Top

Yes and all Democrats hate their family, country and God.  You're just a little bit biased.  I won't even get into your many factual inaccuracies.  You are so sure you are right that there's no point.

Reply #5 Top

Yes and all Democrats hate their family, country and God. You're just a little bit biased. I won't even get into your many factual inaccuracies. You are so sure you are right that there's no point.
End of quote

As a former democrat i disagree with you. But since you are so sure you are right, prove me wrong.

Reply #6 Top

Quoting Boudica, reply 4
Yes and all Democrats hate their family, country and God.  You're just a little bit biased.  I won't even get into your many factual inaccuracies.  You are so sure you are right that there's no point.
End of Boudica's quote

It's called a tongue in cheek comment, dear ;)

 

Many of the people I highlighted do join the Democrats, though.

Reply #7 Top

The left occasionally lies. They don't have "moral values" compared to conservatives, and they do whatever they want. The right makes one mistake in their life, and they get slammed for it like they were murderers, cannibals, and slaughtered babies.

Reply #8 Top

I forget the man’s name that was running for governor of New York
End of quote

McCall

 

Reply #9 Top

Thanks! It is hard to keep track of the losers.

Reply #10 Top

The left occasionally lies.
End of quote
And the right all the time? :beer:

Reply #11 Top

The reason for the choice of Palin is clear: she IS a conservative and thus pleases the right which has difficulty accepting Mc Cain. The rash assertions you quote is not necessarily the standard views of the Dems which in the main legitimately questions McCain's motives for the choice. :cylon:   

Reply #12 Top

I am a Democrat...thanks for making me aware of what I should hate. :D

Appreciate it. :)

~Zoo

Reply #13 Top

Palin “Opposes Sex Education” Palin “Wants Creationism Taught in School”
End of quote

Yes, we know...it's kind of pathetic isn't it? :)

Reply #14 Top

The chance to make history is more important than putting the best they have forward.
End of quote

I agree with most of what you said, but I think you were a little off the mark on this one.  In my view, Obama has more experience than Clinton.  I don't feel either one has enough experience to be at the top of the ticket, but nonetheless, Obama has more experience than Clinton.  Yes Clinton was a U.S. Senator a little longer than Obama, but before the U.S. senate Obama had served in the Illinois state senat for years, Clinton was simply married to a president.  That doesn't spell experience for me.  Since they both ran on almost the exact same platform, it really came down to who was more likeable.  Easily Obama is more likeable than Shrillary.

Reply #15 Top

Palin “Opposes Sex Education” Palin “Wants Creationism Taught in School”
End of quote

You should really research this stuff a bit more before casually making such claims.  I believe it was Mooseplow who defined a 'lie' as anything intended to mislead.  Let's hear chapter & verse, whadday say?

Reply #16 Top

which in the main legitimately questions McCain's motives for the choice.
End of quote

And what are those motives according to you?

Reply #17 Top

I am a Democrat...thanks for making me aware of what I should hate.

Appreciate it.
End of quote

It's my pleasure, next time you need to know what to think and say just go to the left wing blogs. I only posted the quotes from them and their leadership. :grin:

Reply #18 Top

I agree with most of what you said, but I think you were a little off the mark on this one. In my view, Obama has more experience than Clinton. I don't feel either one has enough experience to be at the top of the ticket, but nonetheless, Obama has more experience than Clinton. Yes Clinton was a U.S. Senator a little longer than Obama, but before the U.S. senate Obama had served in the Illinois state senat for years, Clinton was simply married to a president. That doesn't spell experience for me. Since they both ran on almost the exact same platform, it really came down to who was more likeable. Easily Obama is more likeable than Shrillary.
End of quote

Okay, maybe I was unclear. Allow me to be clearer. The two choices the democrats were given were Senator Clinton, and Senator Obama. The others were old white guys and nut cases. The best person for the job on their side would have been Senator Lieberman, or one or two others that actually have substance. Instead the party is looking to make history by choosing between a white woman married to the first black president with no serious credentials, and a black man with no serious credentials. The last time a senator was elected president was President Kennedy and look at the mess he made. The second highest elected office in America is Governor at least Senator McCain chose one for his running mate.

Reply #19 Top

You should really research this stuff a bit more before casually making such claims. I believe it was Mooseplow who defined a 'lie' as anything intended to mislead. Let's hear chapter & verse, whadday say?
End of quote

I don’t understand what you mean here, please explain.

What was being said was she wanted to get rid of evolution and replace it with creationism. This was not what she said, she would rather creationism taught in schools along with evolution, but is following the established law of the land.

 

Reply #20 Top

The best person for the job on their side would have been Senator Lieberman
End of quote

Now that is laughable :rofl:

I just LOL'd a bit.  Hilary was a wonderful candidate and would have been a great leading lady.  When it comes to down to her views and Obama's there were subtle differences that made me lean to Barack, but it was never an issue of "woman or black guy".

The last time a senator was elected president was President Kennedy and look at the mess he made.
End of quote

Yea, because troubling times in office have to do entirely on your previous position in government...  Wait, I can play this game too.  The last governor elected president was George W. Bush and look at the mess he made.  At least McCain chose another one for his running mate ;)

 

Reply #21 Top

which in the main legitimately questions McCain's motives for the choice. And what are those motives according to you?
End of quote

Quite easily, he chose Gov. Palin...obviously the vote for a woman is needed since Hillary is not on the Democrats ticket!  Now there's a well-thought out meditative choice if there was ever one!  No one will admit it, but it is what it is!

Reply #22 Top

When it comes to down to her views and Obama's there were subtle differences that made me lean to Barack, but it was never an issue of "woman or black guy".
End of quote

To you maybe but the political party it boiled down to a woman no one liked and an unknown. They went with the devil they didn’t know.

Reply #23 Top

Yea, because troubling times in office have to do entirely on your previous position in government... Wait, I can play this game too. The last governor elected president was George W. Bush and look at the mess he made. At least McCain chose another one for his running mate
End of quote

I see you cheerfully missed my point. It was not the party it was the position they held. A senator has no experience in running things of import while a governor does. Senator Dole lost to Governor Clinton. The only way America will vote a senator into office is if the choice is between two senators. To counter that Senator McCain chose Governor Palin as his running mate.

Reply #24 Top

Quite easily, he chose Gov. Palin...obviously the vote for a woman is needed since Hillary is not on the Democrats ticket! Now there's a well-thought out meditative choice if there was ever one! No one will admit it, but it is what it is!
End of quote

I disagree with you here. He could have chosen any number of well known female republicans to try to get the woman vote. He chose Governor Palin, I believe, because she was a governor and a staunch conservative to counter his liberalism. My girlfriend was on the fence as was I about who to vote for. It was the choice of this governor that got her and me off the fence. Had he chosen Senator Snow I would have stayed home on Election Day for the first time since I started voting 30 years ago. My girlfriend is a liberal and after seeing the governor is leaning conservative because she is a closet conservative. Her only complaint was that conservatives are against abortion until I pointed out that this is not true.

Reply #25 Top

A senator has no experience in running things of import while a governor does.
End of quote

This is true, but it does not mean that a senator does not recognize the means to facilitate such a position.  Presidential races, I believe, cannot be summed up and determined based on whether or not there are senators or governers running for positions.  Experience in an executive position does carry some degree of credibility, and people see that.  However, there is quite a bit of discrediting that occurs when congressional members run due to voting records and that stigma of inexperience.  I don't personally believe that a senator will be second best if a governor is running against him/her.  I know you probably don't consider that as a fact either, but it is the public eye that matters.  Unfortunately the public places that "years experienced in a similar position" box on the application for president, when it is really on a whole other level even compared to a governor standpoint.