Sarah Palin is an evil idiot

[jason_c]

No. It's mainly a magnitude thing. I am talking about Sarah Palin's oathbreaking because that's what counts in so far as her suitability to run for public office. I do not care about her personal relationship failings because they are IRRELEVANT. But America seems to feel that what occurs in the bedroom is more relevant to a person's candidacy than what they do with their office and their professional behavior.

You want to get into Sarah Palin's personal evil? One could ask why she agreed to the nomination knowing it would put her unwed, underage, accidentally pregnant daughter in the spotlight and under the glare of all those lights. Unlike when Edwards ran for office, she had prior knowledge that there was a pregnancy bomb waiting to go off. Especially when she knew she'd be standing up there preaching abstinence only sex education with her daughter as a glaring example of that policy failure for all to point at. At least with Edwards there is absolutely no public policy concerned with extramarital affairs he'd be required to stand up and give a hypocritical speech about. Palin actually lectured on abstinence only education, despite a personal glaring failure of that policy. She knew going in what doing so would mean. I don't believe her daughter should have been brought into it, but everyone knew it was going to happen with Palin up there preaching abstinence only. Does her choosing to run over the well-being of her daughter mean she is unsuitable to be President? No. It says nothing about her professionally (except perhaps it's hard to believe anyone that clueless could be a good president) though it says loads about her as a mother.

If you want to talk about her professional evil, there's a lot more, but once again, it comes down to magnitude: Trying to fire a trooper who was engaged in a custody dispute with her sister shows how she uses her office for personal gain. Trying to fire a librarian for refusing to ban books shows she's a petty tyrant. There are numerous examples of her using her office for personal gain, which is not unusual, in and of itself but shows the kind of grasping, self-absorbed person that she is.

But there is a flat bottom line that sets her apart from all the other grasping politicians: She chucked her oath and her responsibilities when a better opportunity presented.

She abandoned the highest office in her state for more money and more fame, and people want to reward her for that with the highest office in the country. Anyone who actually believes this woman deserves the highest power in our land, seeing how she tossed aside the highest office in her state, has absolutely no fingers to point when it comes to holding people accountable for their actions.

This quote is where I drop out. Your clearly unhinged on the subject of Sarah Palin.

[Ally]

True enough however unlike Palinites, there's no one on here bitching about how he's wrongly perceived as being a dirtbag.

Palin is just as much a scumbag as Rangel and I suppose there will always be those groups who really don't care what a person has done, it's all about who they are.

And again, I do notice you aren't able to defend a single thing Palin has actually done, just continue to drag in anyone else who's ever done wrong to try and deflect.

Which means, you know she's a piece of pathetic slime and there is no real defense of her possible.

[jason_c]

She used her political office to try get her sisters ex fired. I don't care if he is guilty of cold-blooded murder, one abuse of power does not excuse another. First of all the kid asked to be tased to see what it felt like. Was it stupid on the dad's part, yes beyond doubt. But it was hardly a cold blooded act of evil. She fired the head of the police for refusing to fire her brother in law. She is a skank. IF the guy had actually done something illegal and that wrong, he would have been fired. He clearly didn't.

Palin has also used campaign contributions illegally. I understand you want to keep pointing at Edwards, because he's about all you got, but notice, no democrat considers him a candidate any more. Maybe democrats hold people to higher ethics than Republicans do, despite all that Republican preaching about values.

Charles Rangel suggests otherwise.

[Ally]

She used her political office to try get her sisters ex fired. I don't care if he is guilty of cold-blooded murder, one abuse of power does not excuse another. First of all the kid asked to be tased to see what it felt like. Was it stupid on the dad's part, yes beyond doubt. But it was hardly a cold blooded act of evil. She fired the head of the police for refusing to fire her brother in law. She is a skank. IF the guy had actually done something illegal and that wrong, he would have been fired. He clearly didn't.

Palin has also used campaign contributions illegally. I understand you want to keep pointing at Edwards, because he's about all you got, but notice, no democrat considers him a candidate any more. Maybe democrats hold people to higher ethics than Republicans do, despite all that Republican preaching about values.

[jason_c]

No. It's mainly a magnitude thing. I am talking about Sarah Palin's oathbreaking because that's what counts in so far as her suitability to run for public office. I do not care about her personal relationship failings because they are IRRELEVANT. But America seems to feel that what occurs in the bedroom is more relevant to a person's candidacy than what they do with their office and their professional behavior.

You want to get into Sarah Palin's personal evil? One could ask why she agreed to the nomination knowing it would put her unwed, underage, accidentally pregnant daughter in the spotlight and under the glare of all those lights. Unlike when Edwards ran for office, she had prior knowledge that there was a pregnancy bomb waiting to go off. Especially when she knew she'd be standing up there preaching abstinence only sex education with her daughter as a glaring example of that policy failure for all to point at. At least with Edwards there is absolutely no public policy concerned with extramarital affairs he'd be required to stand up and give a hypocritical speech about. Palin actually lectured on abstinence only education, despite a personal glaring failure of that policy. She knew going in what doing so would mean. I don't believe her daughter should have been brought into it, but everyone knew it was going to happen with Palin up there preaching abstinence only. Does her choosing to run over the well-being of her daughter mean she is unsuitable to be President? No. It says nothing about her professionally (except perhaps it's hard to believe anyone that clueless could be a good president) though it says loads about her as a mother.

If you want to talk about her professional evil, there's a lot more, but once again, it comes down to magnitude: Trying to fire a trooper who was engaged in a custody dispute with her sister shows how she uses her office for personal gain. Trying to fire a librarian for refusing to ban books shows she's a petty tyrant. There are numerous examples of her using her office for personal gain, which is not unusual, in and of itself but shows the kind of grasping, self-absorbed person that she is.

But there is a flat bottom line that sets her apart from all the other grasping politicians: She chucked her oath and her responsibilities when a better opportunity presented.

She abandoned the highest office in her state for more money and more fame, and people want to reward her for that with the highest office in the country. Anyone who actually believes this woman deserves the highest power in our land, seeing how she tossed aside the highest office in her state, has absolutely no fingers to point when it comes to holding people accountable for their actions.

Illegaly using campaign contributions to finance his lovers lifesyle.


This officer she tried to fire tasered an 11 year old boy. But yeah, she's the evil one.

[protohistorian]

Seems like Simple Sarah fits all three definitions, regardless of how often Ally uses the word.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/evil

[Ally]

No. It's mainly a magnitude thing. I am talking about Sarah Palin's oathbreaking because that's what counts in so far as her suitability to run for public office. I do not care about her personal relationship failings because they are IRRELEVANT. But America seems to feel that what occurs in the bedroom is more relevant to a person's candidacy than what they do with their office and their professional behavior.

You want to get into Sarah Palin's personal evil? One could ask why she agreed to the nomination knowing it would put her unwed, underage, accidentally pregnant daughter in the spotlight and under the glare of all those lights. Unlike when Edwards ran for office, she had prior knowledge that there was a pregnancy bomb waiting to go off. Especially when she knew she'd be standing up there preaching abstinence only sex education with her daughter as a glaring example of that policy failure for all to point at. At least with Edwards there is absolutely no public policy concerned with extramarital affairs he'd be required to stand up and give a hypocritical speech about. Palin actually lectured on abstinence only education, despite a personal glaring failure of that policy. She knew going in what doing so would mean. I don't believe her daughter should have been brought into it, but everyone knew it was going to happen with Palin up there preaching abstinence only. Does her choosing to run over the well-being of her daughter mean she is unsuitable to be President? No. It says nothing about her professionally (except perhaps it's hard to believe anyone that clueless could be a good president) though it says loads about her as a mother.

If you want to talk about her professional evil, there's a lot more, but once again, it comes down to magnitude: Trying to fire a trooper who was engaged in a custody dispute with her sister shows how she uses her office for personal gain. Trying to fire a librarian for refusing to ban books shows she's a petty tyrant. There are numerous examples of her using her office for personal gain, which is not unusual, in and of itself but shows the kind of grasping, self-absorbed person that she is.

But there is a flat bottom line that sets her apart from all the other grasping politicians: She chucked her oath and her responsibilities when a better opportunity presented.

She abandoned the highest office in her state for more money and more fame, and people want to reward her for that with the highest office in the country. Anyone who actually believes this woman deserves the highest power in our land, seeing how she tossed aside the highest office in her state, has absolutely no fingers to point when it comes to holding people accountable for their actions.

[jason_c]

Ally, my main arguement is not aimed at avoiding a Palin discussion, or throwing mud at others. Im simply trying to establish how often you throw around the word evil.

Evil seems to be mainly an oath thing.

[Ally]

Now you are on less shaky ground, however it's still a yawn. Even if Edwards did that, which we don't know if he did, after all, the person making those claims is attempting to sell a book-- and if Young agreed to do it, his ethics and honesty aren't exactly above reproach and question either-- it still involves a private matter that is, at the base none of our business.

However, though I realize you are trying to get as far away from Sarah Palin violating her oath of office as you can possibly get by slinging mud on every one else in the hopes you can get it to stick and distract from what a skanky piece of crap she is:

When Edwards began running for president, he did not have a pregnant mistress or an illegitimate baby. Period. So he didn't go into it with false pretenses. A situation arose in the midst of his campaign, and he dealt with it, though very badly. And no one considers Edwards a serious candidate for president anymore. Unlike moronic Palin supporters. So it's moot.

Sarah Palin made a considered choice, not in the heat of the moment, but a cold-blooded decision to toss away her oath of office, her elected position, to whore herself on Real Housewives of Alaska.

No matter how much dirt you attempt to sling on everyone else (Bush is a coke head drunk, Reagan was an imbecile suffering mental disease in his last years, he didn't step down, Clinton was a sex fiend, blah blah) it does not change the fact that out of all of them: She quit when she didn't find the elected position she had campaigned for to be sufficiently entertaining or ambitious for her grasping little needs.

She tossed away her oath of office once, and anyone who votes for her again is a fool.

[jason_c]

We've had presidents with illegitimate children before. It is not a requirement to being president to have no illegitimate children.

So once again I ask you: how much of one's personal private sexual history should one be forced to confess prior to choosing to run for office. Give me a detailed list of what you think is exclusionary for running for office.

Is anything that anyone else in the world might find offensive automatically exclusionary? If you and your wife like to play tie me up and spank me games, and Bob Smith finds that morally repugnant, should he get to know before he decides whether to vote for you?

So once again, what precisely about people's private sexual lives is fair game to the public when one is deciding to run for office?

Persuading a mid level staffer to falsely claim paternity of your child is fair game to the public.

[mariab]

Hi all. I've just realized that in my post #51 I've typed “Paley“ instead of “Palin“. Can one get more Ripperological for a Freudian slip? Bruce Paley for President!
(Incidentally, Paley is American, even if his first name sounds so Aussie.)

[Zodiac]

Palin vs Palin!!!

Hello Zodiac. Hmm, quite appropriate. Palin on a Palin thread.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

Yes indeed, very apprpriate! I have to confess that I find both of them 'laugh out loud funny', albeit for entirely different reasons!!!

Michael,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQOMxz-O7Sc&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3YiPC91QUk&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U01xasUtlvw&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13JK5kChbRw&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk&feature=channel

Sarah,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrzXLYA_e6E

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uP5CbDC1I0s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRkWebP2Q0Y&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z75QSExE0jU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rXmuhWrlj4&feature=channel

And finally,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMyNk8J1c8g

Best wishes,
Zodiac.

[lynn cates]

Palin

Hello Zodiac. Hmm, quite appropriate. Palin on a Palin thread.

Cheers.
LC

[Zodiac]

Temptation!!!

Hello Ally.

"If you and your wife like to play tie me up and spank me games, and Bob Smith finds that morally repugnant, should he get to know before he decides whether to vote for you?"

So, does this mean Zoot and her identical twin sister Dingo are right out for the highest office? (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

"Oh wicked, bad, naughty Zoot!!!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjio-F47IfM

Best wishes,
Zodiac.

[lynn cates]

Castle Anthrax

Hello Ally.

"If you and your wife like to play tie me up and spank me games, and Bob Smith finds that morally repugnant, should he get to know before he decides whether to vote for you?"

So, does this mean Zoot and her identical twin sister Dingo are right out for the highest office? (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC