Re: Sarah Palin! Again!
 

Wow....I am just amazed my people's thinking...so what if she went back to work 3 days after birth....you did not mention if her husband did as well. I was so disappointed that Sara did not just follow her daughter around 24/7 to make sure you made the right decisons. how about giving credit to her and the family...she is accepting responsability, so unlike other kids!!!! All we can do is just that...teach our kids to be responsible for their actions, kids are going to do what they want, the key is being taught to prepare for the actions. Seems to me, they are done well teaching their kids that!!! Said alot to me

What does the VP do, please name something Dick has done in the 4 years, I hardly saw him myself, her point was done well. He has done nothing....hence...its time to clean up that type of behavior,. we deserve more for what we pay him, I think her comment was great......I am open to listen....name some exact things he has done for the people

Re: Sarah Palin! Again!
 

Sorry, but they did a breakdown on that particular outfit, including jewelry and it did come to approximately $300,000. Let's be fair about this.

See the breakdown:

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/robert-s...00-outfit.html

Re: Sarah Palin! Again!
 

Just an FYI -- here's the source of the $300,000 outfit.

Again, this should be a non-issue. She has the money. She has the right to spend her money as she sees fit so long as it is not to harm another. It ain't none of our bizwhacks!

Re: Sarah Palin! Again!
 

It was on Television tonight. Reported yhe price . I still think it outlandish. Out of touch.

Re: Sarah Palin! Again!
 

It was on Television tonight. Reported yhe price . I still think it outlandish. Out of touch.
__________________________________________________ ______________--

Didnt see the report but I am sure of two things without even asking...

..../.the DRESS price was NOT $300,000 as reported on here...

/......They did NOT report the cost of Michelle Obama's dress

Re: Sarah Palin! Again!
 

The next time you pay your bills, think of Dick Cheney. The next time you buy gas, think of Dick Cheney. The next time you hear of one of our young people being killed in Iraq, think of Dick Cheney. Dick Cheney and George W. Bush were chained at the hip. But, they left enough room for John McCain. Whether you believe it or not, you cannot afford 4 more years of the same.

Re: Sarah Palin! Again!
 

Bucco, I answered your question previously. Not please answer mine. Can you ever admit you're wrong? The OUTFIT costs close to $300,000. End of story. It's a fact. Geesh!

Re: Sarah Palin! Again!
 

The next time you pay your bills, think of Dick Cheney. The next time you buy gas, think of Dick Cheney. The next time you hear of one of our young people being killed in Iraq, think of Dick Cheney. Dick Cheney and George W. Bush were chained at the hip. But, they left enough room for John McCain. Whether you believe it or not, you cannot afford 4 more years of the same.
__________________________________________________ ________-

CHELSEA...I honestly can understand some of what you say and think here. I do not think Dick Cheney raised my bills in any way,nor do I think he had anything to do with the price of gas but I can actually understand a lot of what you feel.

Where we stand divided is that I do not believe Sen McCain is as close to the Bush WH as you think, and more especially it is no excuse to put a radical left winger in the WH. As I said to you before.....had the Democratic party done a better job with a nominee I would join you this November.

Re: Sarah Palin! Again!
 

Actually, the price of at least one of dresses Michelle Obama wore at the DNC was mentioned -- $138.00. Of course, there was no mention of the price of her jewelry, etc., but I think it would be safe to assume it was not an ostentatious display.

Going back to the subject matter of this thread, comparing what Cheney has done in the past 4 years to what Palin might do is comparing apples and oranges. The Vice President's role in an administration really is decided by the President. Some VPs are very active in national and international affairs. Cheney has met with several foreign dignataries, both here and abroad. Some VPs are so far removed from the office of the President that they may as well be a minor staffer. Some VPs sit in on every or almost every cabinet meeting; some are not even informed when they are to occur. So, what Cheney has or has not done is irrelevant. What is relevant is: what role does McCain see for Palin if he wins?

Re: Sarah Palin! Again!
 

Actually, the price of at least one of dresses Michelle Obama wore at the DNC was mentioned -- $138.00. Of course, there was no mention of the price of her jewelry, etc., but I think it would be safe to assume it was not an ostentatious display.

Going back to the subject matter of this thread, comparing what Cheney has done in the past 4 years to what Palin might do is comparing apples and oranges. The Vice President's role in an administration really is decided by the President. Some VPs are very active in national and international affairs. Cheney has met with several foreign dignataries, both here and abroad. Some VPs are so far removed from the office of the President that they may as well be a minor staffer. Some VPs sit in on every or almost every cabinet meeting; some are not even informed when they are to occur. So, what Cheney has or has not done is irrelevant. What is relevant is: what role does McCain see for Palin if he wins?
__________________________________________________ ___________________-

Ok REDWITCH...just for the sake of accuracy. The dress you allude to that Michelle Obama wore at the price you quote was during her appearance on the View, and SHE BROUGHT UP THE PRICE (no reason I suppose). Her dress at the DNC....just under $2000 !
I cant believe I am even disucssing this but as with the other claims I have seen on here..it is only fair to keep it accurate (like McCain wants the war togo on for 100 years....the RNC is the ONLY group to do negative advertising, etc).

To your second point...I would ask the same of Sen Obama..what role will Sen Biden play ? I really am not that tuned into that right now, but if the question is asked of one it should be asked of both !

Cannot believe I got involved in a discussion on the price of a dress from TWO millionaires :)

Re: Sarah Palin! Again!
 

I agree that the cost of Cindy McCain's COMPLETE OUTFIT (Not just dress) is a silly subject. But it did cost $300,000. BUCCO! Here's the link of the breakdown. Can you ever ever admit you're wrong?

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/robert-s...00-outfit.html

Re: Sarah Palin! Again!
 

I agree that the cost of Cindy McCain's COMPLETE OUTFIT (Not just dress) is a silly subject. But it did cost $300,000. BUCCO! Here's the link of the breakdown. Can you ever ever admit you're wrong?

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/robert-s...00-outfit.html
__________________________________________________ _----

I admit I am wrong about 100 times a day !

Now, you have to begin to read the entire thread.....I said at 9:21 PM last night

"SHIGHSMI....for the record, Vanity Fair reports the dress cost $3000 NOT $300000...THEe entire outfit including jewelry,etc has a tag of somewhere near your number...Michelle Obama spent almost 2000 on her dress...no word on the stuff that goes with it.

Hey...both are millionaires..ok"

THAT SORT OF AGREES with the thread just wanted to make sure it was accurate...I never ever ever once said that it did NOT...NEVER..since I posted that, you have called me on this at least twice for NO REASON. I agreed with the price as you see at 9:21...you called me on it at 9:59 and then again this morning. I ignored last night but why are you beating me up on something I have agreed on a long time ago..so many other things !

Re: Sarah Palin! Again!
 

According to that article, $280,000 of that $300,000 was for jewelry. Not sure why that is relevant to anything though. Hope she had some good bodyguards.

Re: Sarah Palin! Again!
 

Hahahahaha Bucco! OK, let's both take a chill pill. The day is young and we're not! ;D

Re: Sarah Palin! Again!
 

Not sure where to post this and I really am not sure how I feel about it...was tempted to post it in the thread about Gov Palin and the library, but nah....

Oprah Winfrey....she decided against her staff's wishes not to invite Gov Palin on her show...said she will have no candidates on until after the election although she has had both the Sen and his wife from Illinois on previously !

Just found it interesting !

Re: Sarah Palin! Again!
 

Bucco, agree with you 100% -- Obama should answer what Biden's role will be in his Presidency. I didn't say it for the simple reason we were discussing Palin, not Biden.

As to the cost of the outfits, again, a non-issue. These women can afford these dresses and jewelry, so what possible difference should it make to a voter if they wore $3,000 or $138 dresses anywhere. (Personally, I thought Cindy's dress was hideous -- at least the color -- but not everyone has Jackie's taste.) Not. our. business.

ditto
 

I also think Palin is in the deep end of the pool and has not learned to swim.
I think every part of a persons life is open for discussion in this high level run
Palin shows heart but also is very shallow for a VP postion.

Funny thing, now we are worried about how much an outfit cost.. The VP's Role is a know deal. On either side. What about Palin wanting the extra power in the senate that she somehow thinks should be hers. And better yet thinks the Constitution grants this????? I guess she wants to out do DC? Or better yet should we expect the following if they win and she is VP?
A violation is a Violation. Dont matter who you are..

FINDING NUBMER ONE:

For the reasons explained in section IV of this report, I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act. Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) provides

The legislature reaffirms that each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust.

Oprah came out to support Obama right away. It's her show, she's made the billions. She has the right to have on or not have on anyone she wants to. I don't know where you got the staff wanted her. I'm very close with one of the producers and I find that highly unlikely. But I doubt if Palin would do it anyway. When Oprah really wants to dig into a person she does. I would love to see Palin on Oprah or The View. She wouldn't stand a chance. (Well maybe with that twit Elizabeth.)
But everyone kind of ignores her anyway. :icon_wink:

Please....give us a break!!! What about McCain's drinking!!! What matters are the issues TODAY!!! Let's talk ISSUES...not about either candidates' past. We are in the worst mess ever. FOCUS on the issues and let's get the candidates to take a stand. We don't want to see any more negative ads from either candidate. I live in PA and just about every commercial break is a political ad! How would you like to be bombarded day in and day out like we are!

couldnt agree with you more!!!!! See how the debate goes..

I find it totally amusing when the tit for tat.....
 

on either side and this forum about who did what wrong....or who is less wrong or righter than another.....especially given the high percentage of politicians, who steal, cheat whore around, have low or no ethics, do nothing that doesn't have gain for them or their special interest groups and on and on and on.....

abuse of power? How refreshing!!!! It means some one chose to do something.
It is one :cus: of a lot better than the play it safe/do nothing trash ethics politicians who are not only in office but some how manage to get re elected.

Use the same Palin type microscope....fly specks in the pepper analysis of the Congressional, Senatorial (State and Federal), Gubernatorial, Mayoral et al incumbents. There certainly is much, much more concern harbored in these offices that are significantly more deserving of partisan ire.

Abuse of power....thank goodness there are some with the character to at least do something!!!!!!

I won't say we have a double standard, that would infer there are some and we know that certainly is not the case.

What a pity!

BTK

People are complaining about picking on Obama after what they did to Ms. Palin. I'm glad I wasn't posting on this forum last September!!!barf

I have posted in another thread about baiting and bashing. This is an example.
Pulling up a thread posted almost a year ago and using to bait with a
left-handed bash is unacceptable.

Please don't do it.

Of course your right. I ended up on this during a search for airports. DUH. I can't wait to get home and have my own computer.

pssssst, Keedy, come over here right now and listen to Boomer, er Miss Kitty, er Boomer....ohhhh, I know, I have truly gone mad....

But anyway, OK. Now, please listen. First of all, check that six-shooter right up here behind the bar while you are in here.

It will be better to just get over last fall. It's here. It's now. And lots of issues can be discussed as issues. Just issues. That's what real discussion is about. Issues.

We live in a world of information overload. A world from which it seems like the links are never missing anymore. And we could literally paper the board with a link war. That would be easy to do.

Of course, a link sometimes can be quite a good thing. But too many links as thread starts look to me like a leaflet drop like I said the other night when I was explaining some stuff from my angle. We could fling Huffington out there and follow it with Beck and on and on it could go and go. And what would be the point?

There are some really good links in cyberspace. (like the ones I use, of course. ;) -- just kidding. I think we have finally progressed to the stage where we can laugh.) But considering our sources and how they support our own opinions with facts is a really good way to use links. Links can be great starting points. But there are so many out there in cyberspace. There are those in political who make excellent use of links, sharing information on which they comment. And yeah those links can be a little slanted sometimes, but not inflammatory links for the sake of venting.

Also, Mr. Tony, Mr. Admin, Sir, made a really good point the other day about removing the political opinions that are being dragged around the whole board in the signature line. (I have seen them, too.)

Keedy, when I signed on here in November 2007, I had watched for a while. And then I joined. And then I started to post. And then it became part of my routine. And I could not seem to shut up. To this day, it remains my only board. I have watched it grow from a lame little operation with a short column over to the side where a post might appear every half hour if we were lucky. And then it started to grow. And we had information and fun everywhere.

The separate forums began to appear and Political was one of them And it went along with some back and forth that could get maybe a little hot from time to time, during the election, but really no big deal. Still OK.

But at some point fairly recently, things got cranked up to a level that was not like the board I had known for so long. The slant to the right had gone up another notch. And the posts in Political seemed to be dominated by repeated phrases that had been gleaned from the right wing media din.

We have a few remaining in Political who will truly discuss issues as issues. But we also lost some good ones along the way when they just gave up because of the onslaught of all the stuff of the hatred of Obama that permeates parts of the media now. (And trust me, I am sure not defending the far left media. They can get nasty, too.)

Keedy, I am worried about our country, just like you are. And so many others. And I have found that political discussions in real life, also, are becoming so angry sometimes. These are difficult times. And sometimes I think I am living in an Orwell book.

I saw someone compare TOTV to a newspaper somewhere along the line. And sadly, we all know that now newspapers almost all have their slants. And when I saw the cranking up that was happening here on TOTV, I considered just logging off forever. I thought I was seeing TOTV turn into a political rag (or maybe rage) on some days and a real snoozeroonie on others.

And then the lid blew late last week.

And now I think I see a glimmer of hope. Hey, maybe we can have more real discussions in Political. Discussions that I know some people really enjoy reading. Discussions of issues.

And, Keedy, I am not picking on you at all. I appreciate it that you told Mr. Tony that he was right and that you should not have dug up that old thread. Chelsea is a wonderfully funny lady. And yes she is a Democrat but we forgive her. And Chelsea is the one who brought us that thread where we had so much fun writing captions for pictures. There is so much more here than just our politics.

And I have to hand it to you, Keedy, that was downright classy of you to admit that Mr. Tony is right. (But I still want you to hand over that six-shooter to me while you are in here. I will keep it for you right here behind the bar.)

And thanks, Keedy, for listening.

Boomer

Thank you...

Hear! Hear!
 

Hear! Hear!

Sometimes I think it would be far easier to simply take a hike. The only reason I come back sometimes is to see what all the partisans of a particular leaning would find to argue about...er, ah "discuss".

[Well, I wasn't here on this forum last fall but it was turned up a few notches in the threads I read. As far as your friend being funny...well, humor is subjective...I didn't chuckle once.
We are going through extraordinary times and that makes alot of people nervous. Some of us saw it coming but many refused to see.

Boomer....You have written my name at least 5 times in your post. Please send me a PM if you want to talk one on one.

Now that the "moderate" republican candidate in the New York election has withdrawn from the race and endorsed the democrat, it is clear that Sarah Palin not only had the guts to endorse the conservative candidate over the republican, the foresight to see that it really was a two person race and should not include a "moderate" republican, and the political power to make a difference. We will see who has the star power in two nights.

JimJoe:

How did that work out for you? We New Yorkers (upstate) are far smarter than that.:wave::wave::wave::wave::wave:

I am sure you are proud of a win with 49% of the vote, and the defeated conservative had no support from the republican party. I wonder how Sarah can do if she actually shows up. Obviously President Obama and Biden didn't have much luck with their appearances in Virginia and New Jersey.

The media keeps calling Dede, whatever her last name is, a moderate. She is liberal. She is further to the left then Owens. Considering he only had a few weeks, Hoffman did okay. He only lost by 3% points. I'm sure ACORN alone could account for that amount.

Didn't know they were involved. Show me!

I am.

I believe the LIBS will take any small victory they can. This is just the start of some real CHANGE. CHANGE that I believe in. :clap2::clap2:

Small change like ... a sweep of the Presidency, the House, the Senate? It's only been 11 months. Sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride:MOJE_whot:.

I didn't say ACORN had anything to do with NY23. I have no evidence one way or the other. I was implying that that is their MO. I do know that whenever there is a recount, mysterious votes start coming out of the woodwork. The votes always favor the Democrat.

jurek, et al...the following article typifies the nimble
 

footing of one like Pelosi:

http://www.politico.com/livepulse/11..._Virginia.html

Can you imagine what she would have had to say if the Dems would have cleaned up last night.

I do believe in playing to a strong position no matter what....but there is a practical limit. To say that Virginia and NJ didn't really matter is a rather knee jerk, non thinking response (typical Pelosi).
I wonder if they will matter to her in the 2010 Congressional seats.

It some what portrays what I come up against with Dems all too often...it is the old....I may not be right all the time but I am never wrong....attitude.

btk

Gimme a Break!
 

The votes always favor the Democrat? On what planet? Lets' talk about George W.'s thuggery recount in 2000, and Ken Blackwell's rigged Ohio election in 2004. Those are for the highest offices in the land- anthig else is small potatoes.

Growing up in Nassau County. L.I., the cons had such a stranglehold on the election process that they controlled all offices up to and incuding U.S. senator, and part-time mobster Alphonse D'Amato.

Of course, when you look at virtually any local party system, the concept of fair & free election recounts go right out the window.

This only a comment about "The vote ALWAYS favor the Democrat."