Originally Posted by BBQMan

You need to team up with Talk Host - equally biased and equally misguided. Sarah Palin had a great track record as governor of the largest state is the union. More natural resources, more diversity of climate and wildlife, more coastline, etc than any other state. Every state has its challenges, but Palin has done an exceptional job facing great challenges. One can contend that states such as CA.FL.TX present a greater challenge, but certainly no sane person would equate the task of beings a governor of such states as Delaware, Rhode Island, Vermont, Connecticut or New Hampshire to that of being Governor of Alaska.

As pointed out, she is doing the honorable thing if she intends to run for another office. McCain, Obama, Biden, Clinton etc showed no such principles. I would be much more likely to vote for her than any of the others mentioned.

All I know is numbers, and after McCain announced her as his running mate, what happened with the numbers???!!!

Originally Posted by RCT

All I know is numbers, and after McCain announced her as his running mate, what happened with the numbers???!!!

Actually, McCain's numbers got a boost when he announced Sarah Palin as his running mate. Maybe he was trying to get the Clinton voters by having a woman on the ticket? It made it a tighter race but McCain was the wrong man for the job. Alot of people pinched their collective noses and voted for him because of the alternative.

Originally Posted by Keedy

Actually, McCain's numbers got a boost when he announced Sarah Palin as his running mate. Maybe he was trying to get the Clinton voters by having a woman on the ticket? It made it a tighter race but McCain was the wrong man for the job. Alot of people pinched their collective noses and voted for him because of the alternative.

When Gov. Palin visited TV during the campaign, the event filled LSL to the breaking point, and TV had to broadcast the event over its community access channel to accommodate the response. She definitely brought life into what would have been a very dull Republican campaign, and helped get rid of the Republican ticket image as "fuddy-duddy."

Just finished watching the History Channel's "Presidents" series. It didn't show more than two or three past presidents as being "larger than life" persons - the rest were fairly ordinary people caught up in the times and having to respond as best they could. What was really evident from the series is that the USA has survvived in spite of many presidents, and that the country is much greater than the presidential office-holder. That thought does give me hope for the future....

So, Gov. Palin - as one "of the people" - becoming a potential presidential candidate (and winning) is not a frightening thought.

Personally, I don't think Sarah would make a good president. If the Republican Party is looking for a women candidate, here's is list of better choices than Sarah, such as:

Senators: Lisa Murkowski, Alaska(?!?); Olympia Snowe, Maine; Susan Collins, Maine; Elizabeth Dole North Carolina; Kay Bailey Hutchison, Texas

Governors: Oline Walker, Utah; Linda Lingle, Hawaii, M. Jodi Rell, Connecticut

Members of the House: Ileana Ros-Lehtinen Florida; Deborah Pryce, Ohio; Barbara Cubin, Wyoming; Sue Myrick North Carolina; Jo Ann Emerson, Missouri; Kay Granger, Texas; Mary Bono, California; Heather Wilson , New Mexico; Judith Borg Biggert , Illinois; Shelley Moore Capito, West Virginia; Marsha Blackburn, Tennessee; Ginny Brown-Waite, Florida; Candice Miller, Michigan; Marilyn Musgrave, Colorado; Thelma Drake, Virginia; Virginia Foxx, North Carolina; Cathy McMorris Rodgers, West Virginia; Jean Schmidt, Ohio

Cabinet: Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State; Elaine Chao, Secretary of Labor; Margaret Spellings, Secretary of Education; Mary Peters, Secretary of Transportation; Susan Schwab, US Special Trade Representative

I don't think Republications really want a women president just yet. Having Sara run with McCain was obviously made to get voters unhappy with Hiliary not getting the Presidential nomination on the Republican side.

Originally Posted by joannej

Personally, I don't think Sarah would make a good president. If the Republican Party is looking for a women candidate, here's is list of better choices than Sarah, such as:

Senators: Lisa Murkowski, Alaska(?!?); Olympia Snowe, Maine; Susan Collins, Maine; Elizabeth Dole North Carolina; Kay Bailey Hutchison, Texas

Governors: Oline Walker, Utah; Linda Lingle, Hawaii, M. Jodi Rell, Connecticut

Members of the House: Ileana Ros-Lehtinen Florida; Deborah Pryce, Ohio; Barbara Cubin, Wyoming; Sue Myrick North Carolina; Jo Ann Emerson, Missouri; Kay Granger, Texas; Mary Bono, California; Heather Wilson , New Mexico; Judith Borg Biggert , Illinois; Shelley Moore Capito, West Virginia; Marsha Blackburn, Tennessee; Ginny Brown-Waite, Florida; Candice Miller, Michigan; Marilyn Musgrave, Colorado; Thelma Drake, Virginia; Virginia Foxx, North Carolina; Cathy McMorris Rodgers, West Virginia; Jean Schmidt, Ohio

Cabinet: Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State; Elaine Chao, Secretary of Labor; Margaret Spellings, Secretary of Education; Mary Peters, Secretary of Transportation; Susan Schwab, US Special Trade Representative

I don't think Republications really want a women president just yet. Having Sara run with McCain was obviously made to get voters unhappy with Hiliary not getting the Presidential nomination on the Republican side.

So, you think every one of those women is better qualified or are you just being facetious? How about narrowing the field down to three? Now that would be interesting.

Originally Posted by Keedy

How about narrowing the field down to three? Now that would be interesting.

You're so right, Keedy. The mediocrity of that list is alarming. The list represents fully 5% of both the House and Senate and several pretty important cabinet secretaries.

Personally, I can't project any of them into the oval office. In comparison, Sarah Palin is probably just as attractive a candidate as any on that list. But that sure doesn't suggest that any of them would be the type of person that 300 million people should feel comfortable following and being affected by their judgement in governing the country.

Where did all our leaders go?

Originally Posted by KayakerNC

Surprising, coming from Fox News.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uvj-X...layer_embedded

Who is Liz Trotta? First time I have seen her.

Yoda

A member of the loyal opposition

Originally Posted by joannej

Personally, I don't think Sarah would make a good president. If the Republican Party is looking for a women candidate, here's is list of better choices than Sarah, such as:

Senators: Lisa Murkowski, Alaska(?!?); Olympia Snowe, Maine; Susan Collins, Maine; Elizabeth Dole North Carolina; Kay Bailey Hutchison, Texas

Governors: Oline Walker, Utah; Linda Lingle, Hawaii, M. Jodi Rell, Connecticut

Members of the House: Ileana Ros-Lehtinen Florida; Deborah Pryce, Ohio; Barbara Cubin, Wyoming; Sue Myrick North Carolina; Jo Ann Emerson, Missouri; Kay Granger, Texas; Mary Bono, California; Heather Wilson , New Mexico; Judith Borg Biggert , Illinois; Shelley Moore Capito, West Virginia; Marsha Blackburn, Tennessee; Ginny Brown-Waite, Florida; Candice Miller, Michigan; Marilyn Musgrave, Colorado; Thelma Drake, Virginia; Virginia Foxx, North Carolina; Cathy McMorris Rodgers, West Virginia; Jean Schmidt, Ohio

Cabinet: Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State; Elaine Chao, Secretary of Labor; Margaret Spellings, Secretary of Education; Mary Peters, Secretary of Transportation; Susan Schwab, US Special Trade Representative

I don't think Republications really want a women president just yet. Having Sara run with McCain was obviously made to get voters unhappy with Hiliary not getting the Presidential nomination on the Republican side.

There are several women from both the major parties who would be excellent potential candidates - Pres & VP. So far, the Dems have limited themselves to two (one as a VP candidate and one as a potential candidate, despite several very good "of the people" choices being available) and the Reps have also limited themselves to one (who is "of the people").

Ms. Palin as a very pro-active Republican forces the Republican Party to examine itself from the inside-out, determine what its core values and principles are, and what kind of platform it will support. If that activism results in a Republican party with a clearer image, vision and mission, then the "two party system" is enhanced. If that activism results in her becoming a standard-bearer for the Republican Party, so be it.

One would think that the Democratic Party would be overjoyed should Ms. Palin become the Republican standard-bearer over the next few years. Party strategy would be easier to formulate, since the potential opponent would be well-known and a litany of sound-bites could be accumulated over that time frame.

During the next couple of years, we may get to learn a lot more about Ms. Palin, and as we learn more about her and her views, she may be a pleasant surprise to many. Time will tell.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

There are several women from both the major parties who would be excellent potential candidates - Pres & VP. So far, the Dems have limited themselves to two (one as a VP candidate and one as a potential candidate, despite several very good "of the people" choices being available) and the Reps have also limited themselves to one (who is "of the people").

Ms. Palin as a very pro-active Republican forces the Republican Party to examine itself from the inside-out, determine what its core values and principles are, and what kind of platform it will support. If that activism results in a Republican party with a clearer image, vision and mission, then the "two party system" is enhanced. If that activism results in her becoming a standard-bearer for the Republican Party, so be it.

One would think that the Democratic Party would be overjoyed should Ms. Palin become the Republican standard-bearer over the next few years. Party strategy would be easier to formulate, since the potential opponent would be well-known and a litany of sound-bites could be accumulated over that time frame.

During the next couple of years, we may get to learn a lot more about Ms. Palin, and as we learn more about her and her views, she may be a pleasant surprise to many. Time will tell.

Here is a good analysis by a respected source.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/...is_yet_to.html

Originally Posted by Yoda

Who is Liz Trotta? First time I have seen her.

Yoda

A member of the loyal opposition

http://www.foxnews.com/bios/talent/li-trotta/

You may remember her for her kill Obama/Osama off-color "joke".

http://crooksandliars.com/2008/05/25...th-if-we-could

Deny that

Originally Posted by KayakerNC

http://www.foxnews.com/bios/talent/li-trotta/

You may remember her for her kill Obama/Osama off-color "joke".

http://crooksandliars.com/2008/05/25...th-if-we-could

Do you actually expect anyone to give any credence to a fifteen second news clip that clearly omitted what had been said before and what was being said at the end of a very artful edit? Kayader, you're much smatter than this. Anyone who spends even five minutes browsing the crook and liars site will realize that this is an extreme left wing site dedicated to the destruction of any and all conservatives. The Clinton's politics of personal destruction continues alive and well.

Originally Posted by RCT

All I know is numbers, and after McCain announced her as his running mate, what happened with the numbers???!!!

Yes, RCT, let's look at the numbers. I can show numbers that Governor Palin was a conscientious, conservative and competent Governor. Can you do the same for Obama? Palin had a budget surplus in Alaska, Obama has quadrupled the deficit in just five months. Unemployment has gone from e little over 6% to 10% under his leadership. This after assuring the American people that if the stimulus package was passes, unemployment would remain at less than 8%. We have twenty some czars supervising cabinet operation and all parts of the economy without congressional oversight or Senate consent to their appointment. We have gone to a government ownership or control of the banking industry, the automobile industry, the energy business and soon, in all probability, the health care industry. The last time I looked up the terms this was socialism and bordering on naziism. Yes, I said the N word - I have always avoided it in the past as extremist, but our National, no longer Federal Government is in the hands of extremists, as certainly as any government in history going to authoritarian government practices and national control of the economy. The United States is adopting a Nationalist - Socialist form of government whether we choose to admit it or not.

In another thread, I posted the observation and amazement of people in the Soviet Union at the speed at which the 'sheeple' of the United States were running over the cliff to a marxist economy despite its failures in other economies around the world. Perhaps we should have listened more carefully to the futurists that forecast the breakup of the United States in the year 2010.

Yep, and with the media as an accomplice. Imagine the last administration trying to get away with these shenanigans? The MSM would be fit to be tied.

Originally Posted by BBQMan

Do you actually expect anyone to give any credence to a fifteen second news clip that clearly omitted what had been said before and what was being said at the end of a very artful edit? Kayader, you're much smatter than this. Anyone who spends even five minutes browsing the crook and liars site will realize that this is an extreme left wing site dedicated to the destruction of any and all conservatives. The Clinton's politics of personal destruction continues alive and well.

Exactly!! Liz Trotta is a Conservative.
Now, go back and listen to her remarks on Sarah Palin. It sounds very much like Fox News, and their talking heads, are throwing her under the bus.