Palin . Backmann , Why Aren't Women Mad as Hens ?

Jump to Last Post 1-34 of 34 discussions (199 posts)

0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
I would like to know why our fair and balanced media is so silent when it comes to how these two are treated ? Migrain headaches , and pregnant daughters , Liberal media wouldn't touch this issue with someone elses hands ! Or in other words. Where is the womans lib movement ? Where are the "enraged and offended" politically correct Police from the left on this issue? Got their heads burried in the sand?
reply report
1. 0
  PrettyPantherposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Did it ever occur to you that many strong, intelligent, capable women might view Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann as deserving of the treatment they have received? In the same way that Donald Trump deserved the ridicule he received from the media for his stupid pursuit of Obama's birth certificate?
  
  Us women can spot a phony a mile away. I'm referring to Sarah Palin when I say "phony." I think that Michelle Bachmann is authentic.
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yes they can spoy a phony alright , they voted for President Obama didn't they!
  reply report
  85
  donotfearposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
  60
  mikelongposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  The former phoney, the latter loony
  
  I am wondering why more women don't openly challenge either Palin or Bauchman. These two are like misguided pied pipers, leading unknowing-naive women (and men) politically and socially astray..
  
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27QTX46X … ure=fvwrel
  
  Barbies gone wrong.....but still getting paid (including hook-ups for the kiddies):
  
  http://voices.washingtonpost.com/reliab … _paid.html
  
  This is a tangental doozy:
  
  http://truthquake.com/2011/06/18/sarah- … ve-values/
  
  Fraud is an understatement..
  reply report
2. 61
  Evan G Rogersposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Palin and Bachman are idiots.
  
  Women deserve a much higher standard of expectations than those two project.
  
  As much as I oppose their political philosophies, Michelle Obama or Hilary Clinton are MUCH better candidates for "women's rights-esque" politicians.
  
  When I hear Palin or Bachman, I think "ignoramus". When I hear Hilary, I think "intelligent and principled, if wrong... and her husband was a scumbag". When I think of Michelle Obama, I think "Principled and intelligent, but wrong".
  
  No -- it's not because the media treats them that way, it's because Clinton and Obama don't say idiotic things.
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  They didnt huh? So its OK to dis a woman because you think that they think shes an Idiot. Uh HUH !
  reply report
  61
  Evan G Rogersposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  ... ... what?
  
  It's ok to "dis" ANYONE if they're an idiot.
  reply report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  We are on opposite ends of the political spectrum, but I want to give you kudos for not having your agenda color your evaluation of these two women. You do not have a knee-jerk need to defend everything conservative, and I give you credit for that.
  When I disagree with you in the future, it will be with a proper amount of respect. LOL.
  reply report
  61
  Evan G Rogersposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  lol, thanks.
  
  Hil-dawg and Michele just seem... competent, y'know?
  
  Bachman and Palin... ... ermm...
  reply report
  61
  Evan G Rogersposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Pelosi on the other hand.... she looks like an evil side kick who doesn't know what's going on.
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "As much as I oppose their political philosophies, Michelle Obama or Hilary Clinton are MUCH better candidates for "women's rights-esque" politicians."
  
  Those two are glaring examples of the self made Woman.
  
  reply report
  85
  rebekahELLEposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  and the problem is?
  
  women who can think on their own?
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  There is no problem.
  
  They may be able to think on their own, they just couldn't get anywhere on their own.
  reply report
  85
  rebekahELLEposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I would love to see a woman president, but most certainly the first woman president is going to need to be strong, decisive, intelligent and able to represent what is best for all Americans.
  
  Is any candidate (male or female) able to make it on their own? I don't think so, they surround themselves with people smart enough to make it seem like they can.
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "Is any candidate (male or female) able to make it on their own?"
  
  Yes, many have made it on their own. But the two specific people you mentioned certainly didn't.
  
  "I don't think so, they surround themselves with people smart enough to make it seem like they can."
  
  True, our current President is living proof.
  reply report
  85
  rebekahELLEposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I expected this response..
  
  No president can make it on his own nor should they. But they need to be strong enough to make the tough, best decisions when necessary.
  
  We have politicians in Congress now who simply don't care about the average American. They make it tough for any president. I hope something is resolved this weekend.
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  You expected it? Good, its true.
  
  And you think the best decision is to tax more and keep spending? Yeah, thats a tough decision.
  
  Those congressman were sent to make it tough on Obama, you didn't get that?
  reply report
  85
  rebekahELLEposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  they were sent to do a job for all Americans.. geez, you don't get it?
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  No, they were sent to do a job for those they represent.
  
  That job was to make it tough for Obama to move his agenda along.
  
  It is you who doesn't get it.
  reply report
  85
  rebekahELLEposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I get it fine, Jim. I simply don't believe they are doing their job well. Off to the pool, enough politics.
  reply report
  75
  lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Uh, Nooooooo, they were sent in there for Jobs Jobs Jobs!!
  
  And, they AREN'T doing that!
  
  so--as a grade....F. minus.
  reply report
  67
  SparklingJewelposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  ...you mean the media doesn't report to mainstream America the idiotic things that may be said... right?
  reply report
3. 60
  Randy Godwinposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  A moron by any other name....is still a moron. Do you feel Palin represents all women?
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I think Palin represents women as much as Hillary , its just the double standards you use to chose which you like! The migrain issue is okay if you don't like her , Palin isn't likeable by liberals so its ok that shes dissed for being a hunter or having a loose daughter ! HUnbh!
  reply report
  84
  kerrygposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  She's not dissed for having a loose daughter, she's dissed for continuing to push abstinence-only sex ed despite its blatant failure in her own family.
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  It was a blatant failure in Clintons house too but you're willing let that slide for Hillarys sake!
  reply report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  What are you referring to?
  
  Besides, Hillary wasn't pushing abstinence only. She wasn't trying to sell herself as the uber-Christian. She wasn't trying to sell the idea of one set of family values for all.
  
  What are you talking about?
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  It was a blatant failure in Clintons house too but you're willing let that slide for Hillarys sake!
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  So its Ok to allow migrains to be the issue ! Your people jumped all over the media that called Hillary for dressing "frumpy " when she ran . But Backmanns migrain is fair game ......Hypocracy rules the forums ?Again.
  reply report
  60
  Randy Godwinposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Are you a suggesting a possible political nominee dressing "frumpy" would affect their decision making abilities as much as them being a "moron"?
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  No Randy that came from her own party .....You.
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  No Randy that came from her own party .....You.
  reply report
4. 65
  I am DB Cooperposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  If you truly believe the "liberal media" wouldn't touch a story about a male Democratic vice presidential candidate's teenage daughter getting pregnant, especially if said candidate supported abstinence-only education, you are naive.
  reply report
60
Stump Parrishposted 11 years ago
Most of them are laughing at the people who actually believe that these two represent the best the right has to offer.
reply report
1. 0
  ahorsebackposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Laugh all they want , we've seen what what the left offered!
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
My point is , serious voter immressions or not , where is the anger from the all inclusive left ? From the standpoint of fairness or offensive media treatment. Is it Ok now because it's your media pundits attacking a republican ? Because thats the impression I get from the silence that has ensued!
reply report
1. 0
  PrettyPantherposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Believing that women will defend someone solely because they share the same gender is itself stereotypical and condescending.
  
  "Mad as hens"? LOL
  reply report
  74
  getitriteposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Then, I guess he also must have no problem with blacks supporting O.J. Simpson solely because he's black.
  reply report
  84
  kerrygposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yup. I get annoyed when any media - liberal, so-called liberal, or conservative - uses sexist insults (b****, c***, etc.) in relation to these women, or attacks them on ludicrously sexist grounds like "what would happen if the president had PMS in the middle of a terror attack."
  
  However, the most common epithets I see leveled against either of them are "moron" and "idiot," neither of which is sexist in the slightest. If you say stupid things, then you can expect to be called an idiot, whatever your sex or gender identity.
  reply report
  61
  Evan G Rogersposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  once again, the video of Colbert re-enacting Paul Revere's ride the way that Palin described it is classic.
  reply report
  84
  earnestshubposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Colbert is one smart cookie. I love his show and the Daily show as well.
  reply report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Agreed. Idiocy is not a gender-specific characteristic.
  
  reply report
  85
  rebekahELLEposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  +
  reply report
  84
  kerrygposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  HubPages really needs to add a "like" button to forum posts.
  reply report
60
Stump Parrishposted 11 years ago
So did a few republican states horse. That trend will continue if the GOP continues to promote people like this.
reply report
60
Stump Parrishposted 11 years ago
Evan, I missed that one. is it on youtube?
reply report
76
Uninvited Writerposted 11 years ago
I didn't like Margaret Thatcher either. I do not vote for people solely based on gender.

Palin was attacked for her pregnant daughter because she pushed a "just say no" agenda for teens.

I don't know enough about Bachmann other than some of the silly things she stands for. I believe her migraine issue was brought up by a potential Republican opponent... male of course.

Yes, occasionally male journalists have sexist attitudes. But like kerryg says, idiot or moron are not genders specific.
reply report
1. 84
  kerrygposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  The thing about Bachmann is that (unlike Palin, imho) she actually believes the crazy s*** that spews out of her mouth. Also, she shares the persecution complex common in many conservative Christians, so she's able to tap into the language of Christian victimization in a way that brings the troops rallying to her defense no matter how far-out her claims of victimhood actually are. Every attack on her makes her claims of victimization look more valid, and every claim of victimization makes her look crazier to outsiders, so it becomes a self-perpetuating cycle.
  
  She tends to be underestimated by people who don't understand that aspect of the particular fundamentalist subculture she's emerged from. In recent years, the same characteristic has been spreading to conservatives as a whole, so I think she's a bigger threat than many people give her credit for.
  reply report
2. 0
  ahorsebackposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  No I suppose not as long as you dont like them , I love the double standards of Liberal idealists!
  reply report
  76
  Uninvited Writerposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Show me the double standard in my post. You seem to be saying they should not be criticized just because they are female and that if they are it must be sexist.
  
  I wouldn't vote for any woman...of any political party...just because she is a woman.
  There would have to be substance behind her.
  
  Any criticism I had of Thatcher...and Palin... and Bachmann has nothing to do with their gender. Other than being embarrassed that they are being used as representative of female politicians.
  reply report
0
Sherlock221bposted 11 years ago
From what has been written about Baroness Thatcher, it seems she didn't like working with women MPs, preferring to surround herself with yes men, who she controlled with an iron rod, even telling those with beards to shave them off or how they should have their hair cut. However, Thatcher came into politics, when there were very few women, and the odds were stacked against them. They therefore had to work harder and become harder than the men, if they were to survive. Even today, the House of Commons and House of Lords are dominated by men, with women still being in a minority.
reply report
82
RooBeeposted 11 years ago
What an incredibly condescending post! I'll agree with the other posters in that idiocy and ignorance isn't exclusive to one race or gender. None of what has been said about these women has been gender-specific or sexist.

Anyone who gets into politics stands to be scrutinized, and unless I hear someone say "she can't run because she has a vagina" I hardly think that the complaints against these women is gender-based.

I am starting to realize that you like to bait people in this way. You're certainly not after a respectful and enlightening discussion!

And, again, the migraine thing was brought up by a fellow conservative. Picking and choosing which facts to ignore and which to highlight makes you just the same as the spin-doctor media that you complain so much about.
reply report
60
Stump Parrishposted 11 years ago
It's completely acceptable to dis (as you put it) any idiot regardless of sex. If she wants it to stop all she has to do is quit saying idiotic things. What are you trying to do here, audition for the Faux News Network?
reply report
81
Danette Wattposted 11 years ago
Regardless of political party, women will always be held to a different standard than male politicians. There will always be more emphasis on how they dress (too conservative or not), how they wear their hair, if they are perceived as feminine enough (by whatever moving standards society has decided 'feminine' is at the time), if they have children and if so, how many children they have, etc. etc.

Male politicians don't have to deal with this kind of crap. People want to know what they THINK, what their plan is.

Long before Obama came along, I told my husband there will be a black man in the White House before there is a woman. Black men got the right to vote before women. Men will always come before women.

I have never understood why this country just can't get over a woman being in power (oops, dirty phrase here - women in power!!). There are SO many other countries with women leaders, why not us??
reply report
1. 0
  Sherlock221bposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Age also seems to matter more for women MPs for some reason. A woman can be considered too old for the job, yet male MPs can work into their 80s, and no one thinks twice about it.
  reply report
  81
  Danette Wattposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I agree
  reply report
75
lovemychrisposted 11 years ago
I'm more upset that Elizabeth Warren wasn't nominated because she was way too tough on the banksters, and she likes to fight back with politicians!!

They had to nominate a man, who the men could feel comfortable being "Owned" by! ,)
reply report
61
thebrucebeatposted 11 years ago
In answer to the OP, women as a collective are not simpletons. They see these women for the frauds they are, the simple minded, undereducated pretenders that humiliate them as a gender.
They aren't as stupid as their sycophantic ideological husbands, boyfriends and dads.
reply report
1. 61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "They see these women for the frauds they are, the simple minded, undereducated pretenders that humiliate them as a gender."
  
  As opposed to those who further themselves by riding on the coattails of a man.
  
  They burned their bras and then bought new push-ups.
  reply report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  What does this even mean?
  reply report
  72
  Paradise7posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Whatever it means, it's insulting!
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "They see these women for the frauds they are, the simple minded, undereducated pretenders that humiliate them as a gender."
  
  But this isn't insulting at all, is it?
  reply report
  74
  getitriteposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  You mean you really think these women are NOT simple minded, undereducated pretenders?
  
  In fact, Sarah Palin pretended that she reads newspapers, in a TV interview, yet she could not name one paper that she reads.
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "You mean you really think these women are NOT simple minded, undereducated pretenders?"
  
  No I don't think that at all.
  
  Does that make me simpleminded as well?
  reply report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Is that rhetorical? If not, I think I have the answer.
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  And it would be another wrong answer.
  
  One would think you would get tired of that.
  
  I suppose to some its an art form.
  reply report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you for considering me an artist. Much obliged.
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Can't figure it out?
  
  Keep working on it.
  reply report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  That's Jimspeak. He takes it as a sign of his cleverness when those he perceives to be liberals can't make sense of his ramblings.
  
  Hi, Jim!
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Hi PP, thanks for the...
  reply report
  84
  kerrygposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "As opposed to those who further themselves by riding on the coattails of a man."
  
  How so? You could make a case for some coattail riding on Hillary's part (though I think it's partly a generational thing), but Michelle outranked Barack in seniority at the law firm where they met, and held a number of high ranking positions in the public, private, and charity sectors both before and after their marriage.
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "but Michelle outranked Barack in seniority at the law firm where they met, and held a number of high ranking positions in the public, private, and charity sectors both before and after their marriage."
  
  And you know that why?
  
  Because her husband is President, otherwise she would be anonymous.
  reply report
  84
  kerrygposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  So? If she sought national name recognition on her own but only achieved it through his actions, then she'd be riding on his coattails. As it is, she was originally opposed to him seeking national office, so the evidence suggests she didn't.
  
  Moreover, the fact that she acquired national name recognition as the wife of a candidate for national office does nothing to detract from her earlier independent accomplishments, which are considerable.
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "Moreover, the fact that she acquired national name recognition as the wife of a candidate for national office does nothing to detract from her earlier independent accomplishments, which are considerable."
  
  If you say so, her accomplishments are not why she is known. It is because she is the wife of the President.
  
  That is how Hillary Clinton became known.
  
  Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman managed to do it on their own even with being under-educated simpletons.
  reply report
  84
  kerrygposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Palin and Bachmann sought national office, and in one case achieved it. National name recognition was necessary to achieve their goals, therefore they sought national name recognition. I'm not knocking their accomplishments, only the judgment of anybody who votes for them.
  
  We have no indication that Michelle Obama ever had the slightest interest in national office, or was ever anything but satisfied with her career as a respected individual in her own field of work, a position that did not require national name recognition and that she attained on her own merit and hard work, no coattails necessary. You can't criticize her for not achieving somebody else's goal.
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  We know you are not knocking their accomplishments, you would seem foolish for doing so.
  
  Especially since they both have accomplished things on their own merit.
  
  Hillary Clinton had her husbands name and Michelle Obama has not done anything that millions of women haven't done all over the world.
  
  Except to marry a narcissist.
  reply report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Let's see.
  Palin has lost her only national election, very probably because of her. She has quit her only statewide job.
  Bachmann has sponsored 38 bills, none of which have become law.
  
  These are the people you admire? Neither of them have any real grasp on American history or current events on a national or international level. They have proved themselves repeatedly to be of limited intellect and simply are operative on an ideological level.
  
  What is it you admire about them?
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "Palin has lost her only national election"
  
  Actually John McCain lost the election not Palin.
  
  Its not that I admire them as much as I can't stand those who attack them. It seems the more people scream about how dumb they are the dumber those screaming appear.
  
  Bachman is in Congress,are you?
  
  Palin has millions, do you?
  
  Couple of big giant dummies...ain't they?
  reply report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Since you base Palin's intelligence on her millions, you must have enormous respect for Paris Hilton, Sean penn, Brad Pitt, and Matt Damon.
  They all make her net worth look paltry.
  The truth is out. You're a hidden liberal.
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "Since you base Palin's intelligence on her millions"
  
  She was smart enough to make millions. Do you have millions?
  
  "you must have enormous respect for Paris Hilton, Sean penn, Brad Pitt, and Matt Damon."
  
  Paris Hilton inherited her money, she doesn't count. The rest have my respect for their talent.
  reply report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  So Lech Walesa was a putz. Just a lowly union guy, huh?
  
  The point is, what does someones net wealth have to do with their intelligence and worthiness to lead a country? The one thing it influences is the ability to pay for the campaign, which doesn't bring our best and brightest, as we've seen, but our wealthiest with assets to protect.
  
  The irony is Palin made her millions by being a voice for such a partisan sect of the Republican party that she cost them the election. She became famous by being revealed as an uneducated, unprepared, unfullfilled high school achiever who struggled to find a college that would graduate her, but was able to paint herself as a victim of the "main stream media" and gain the support of an equally uneducated ideological base which was big enough to buy her books and give her an audience that would make her wealthy. Think Michael Savage. Smart? On a cynical level, certainly. Barnum also knew there were suckers to be taken advantage of. Is he a hero? Is anyone that has made money, regardless of how, worthy of your worship?
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I defy you to find anywhere in this thread that I said Palin or Bachman had the goods to be President.
  
  No, someones net worth doesn't equate to a high IQ. Not attending Harvard or Yale does not equate to a low IQ.
  
  These two women are not drooling idiots no matter how you and the rest try to present them.
  
  Yesterday you called me a "misogynistic bigot" after you belittled two women.
  
  I really don't think you should be questioning others intelligence.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Once again, you fail to understand that finding two individuals wanting, in spite of them being women, does not make the critic a mysoginist.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Who called you a misogynist?
  
  By the way the above is the correct way to spell it.
  
  Like I said.
  
  I really don't think you should be questioning others intelligence.
  
  "Once again, you fail to understand that finding two individuals wanting, in spite of them being women, does not make the critic a mysoginist."
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "Yesterday you called me a "misogynistic bigot" after you belittled two women."
  
  This quote from you implies that I am a misogynist. Deny it if you like, but that is the point of your post. That's foolish, and denying it is cowardly.
  
  Thanks for the spelling correction. Appreciate it.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "This quote from you implies that I am a misogynist."
  
  Once again, who called you a misogynist?
  
  What you think it implies is irrelevant.
  
  What it says and the context that it is used is relevant.
  
  And it went waaaaaaaaay over your head.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  No, everyone reading it thoroughly understood the context.
  
  I don't think I have ever seen a poster who's avatar better reflected their online attitude. It's perfect. Well done.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "I don't think I have ever seen a poster who's avatar better reflected their online attitude. It's perfect. Well done."
  
  Thanks, yes everybody knows how angry I get.
  
  I'm crazy angry.
  
  I can't control my anger.
  
  I'm not mentally stable at this point.
  
  I love new people on the forums.
  report
  64
  Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "These two women are not drooling idiots no matter how you and the rest try to present them."
  
  Would you buy "non-drooling idiots?"
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  The only reason you don't like them is because they are conservative, that is the only reason.
  
  I bet you think Sheila Jackson Lee is a sterling example of a smart woman.
  
  How about Debbie Wasserman Schultz?
  
  I don't care about Palin or Bachman one way or the other.
  
  Its just sad that they are ridiculed by the left when you have people like the two mentioned above in the democrat party.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  They are villified for their inane comments that they make. The overwhelming evidence that these are not particularly well educated people, with a poor understanding of history and the same angry tone that you seem to find appealing in your posts is what makes them devisive and reviled.
  
  Can you really imagine Debbie Wasserman Schultz not knowing what newspapers she read, or where Concord is, in the context of the Revolutionary War? Can you make this kind of comparison in your head? Seriously?
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  http://www.theblaze.com/stories/deep-th … ckson-lee/
  
  http://www.examiner.com/public-policy-i … hat-stupid
  
  http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=42971
  
  I'm surprised they know their left from their right.
  
  I'm actually assuming that they do know.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Particularly with Wasserman's quotes, it is you that have a problem with her liberalism. She is not saying she can see Cuba from her house, or that the Alamo is in New Jersey. She just doesn't agree with your ideology.
  You hate the side of the aisle she's on.
  We who find Palin and Bachmann wanting just find them to be impossibly dim bulbs. You don't see us villifying George Will or Peggy Noonan, because although we might not agree with their politics, they aren't simpletons on a rampage against the intellect of the American people.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I'll ask again.
  
  Is Palin running for President? Is she running for anything?
  
  You are correct about disliking those two women.
  
  I have a hard time liking people who lie.
  
  I guess thats a character flaw on my part.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I didn't see the lies in the Wasserman quotes. I see her partisan viewpoint maximized, but that's all.
  
  Palin/Bachmann are just not very bright people.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "Palin/Bachmann are just not very bright people."
  
  They can probably spell misogynistic.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  That's what you've got?
  Wow.
  Game, set, match, huh?
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Thats pretty much all I needed.
  
  And what would it matter who could beat Obama now?
  
  The election is in November 2012.
  
  You knew that...right?
  
  I'll bet Palin and Bachman knew.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  So who is the miracle sleeper?
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I don't know.
  
  Anybody to the right of Obama.
  
  Anybody but Obama.
  
  Hide and watch.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  But aren't all of the current crop of candidates from the Republicans right of Obama? Aren't they all losing to him in the current polls?
  
  Apparently it will take more than that.
  
  Who's hiding?
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Who cares what polls say?
  
  Who cares what polls say right now?
  
  Just like November 2010 it will be ugly, but you go ahead and pretend otherwise if it makes you feel secure.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  You say who cares what polls say, while quoting a poll about a generic candidate.
  
  You are becoming a caricature of your own avatar.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, uh huh.
  
  My point is polls don't matter.
  
  But you seemed very impressed with them.
  
  So I provided one for you contradicting your assertion.
  
  I expect you will change your mind based on the provided poll.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Why would it. My statement was that there is no candidate currently that show any chance of beating him. I knew about your poll, which is why I worded my post as I did. Bush was losing to the generic candidate in his day, too. It's an irrelevancy. You have to put forward a candidate that isn't massively flawed and can unify a hopelessly divided Republican party.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Democrats have a problem with deciphering the political winds.
  
  It was just last October a leading liberal hubpager had declared the Republican party dead.
  
  Ron, is that you?
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  It certainly wasn't me. I saw the writing on the wall.
  
  Now that the public has gotten a taste of what they voted in, there is a great deal less enthusiasm. Walker has created a pushback that will have implications in the next election cycle. We have seen it in New York already. Even in the last election cycle, the most extreme Tea Partiers were some of the most profound defeats.
  
  Hubris is always the demise. The democrats showed that hubris and got pounded in the last cycle. The hubris in the Tea Party is turning that on its head in record time.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "Now that the public has gotten a taste of what they voted in, there is a great deal less enthusiasm."
  
  Really?
  
  Not where I live.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Where you live does not constitute a majority, my narrow viewed friend. Nor does mine, which leans more toward your way of thinking, and yet historically went for Obama in the last election.
  
  The country is starting to view the Tea Party as a large part of the problem. Their intractable stances on policy are helping to create the logjam in Washington and preventing any measurable progress.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Where have the big Tea Party rallies gone? When announced now, they get a couple of hundred supporters at these gatherings. Where is the evidence of the big grassroots movement that will change the face of American politics?
  
  When the Tea Party marched in my very Republican county's St. Patrick's Day parade, they were greeted with snickers and outright guffaws. I was shocked, but not just a little bit pleased.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "I suppose to some its an art form"
  
  Would your misuse of "its" vs. "it's" preclude you from making any further commentary?
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Nope.
  
  Heres a poll that has a generic republican beating Obama by 8%.
  
  Aren't they all losing to him in the current polls?
  
  http://www.gallup.com/poll/148487/repub … obama.aspx
  
  You see I knew it was it's, just as I know its here's.
  
  I just didn't care.
  
  You just didn't know.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Very weak. I had the integrity to thank you for the correction. You want to be lauded for not caring, as if anyone would buy that. Pretty sad, and a headline announcing your insecurity.
  
  No generic candidate will run against Obama. That's the problem the Republicans have. The party has been split in two by people like yourself who will not compromise, even within their own party. When a candidate is compared to the president, none of them have the support to beat him. You guys are cannibals, eating your own future.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "The party has been split in two by people like yourself who will not compromise, even within their own party."
  
  You may compromise your principles but don't expect me to.
  
  A Republican will win the next Presidential election, the party will be just fine.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  The nature of a democratic republic is compromise, and the Founding Fathers were unified around the concept that competing parties were the enemy of a republic.
  
  The death knell of your position is in its refusal to compromise. Without it, nothing gets done. It's a huge country with many different points of view, and a democratic republic has to embrace that reality or fail.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "The death knell of your position is in its refusal to compromise."
  
  The death of the Republican party or more accurately its current leadership, will be their willingness to compromise.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  How do you expect our government to operate without compromise?
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Our government in its current form is the problem.
  
  I don't want our government in its current form working at all.
  
  I thought that was clear.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  So what do you suggest? Are you advocating revolution? Just curious as to your solution.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  A revolution of sorts yes.
  
  It would be revolutionary to elect principled leaders.
  
  As it stands we have the right looking very much like the left.
  
  We elect persona not person.
  
  Prime example Barrack Obama.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  What would be the difference if we had all these very principled leaders that didn't necessarily share the same principles and all refused to budge?
  
  Or is your answer to elect only those leaders that share your particular set of principles? Is that your vision? You win, and don't have to fight to justify your position any more?
  
  You aren't much of a fan of a democratic republic, then.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "Or is your answer to elect only those leaders that share your particular set of principles? Is that your vision?"
  
  Lets see, Yes my answer is to elect only leaders who share my particular set of principles.
  
  I elect people to represent me, but, I am not the only one voting.
  
  You vote for those who share your particular set of principles don't you?
  
  Maybe you don't and if not then you are not thinking straight.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  So what is the difference in your new vision for an improved state?
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  What?
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Stay focused.
  What is the difference in what you propose and what we have now? Is it that we would have more principled leaders with your principles? What is this revolution you seek?
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Staying focused isn't the problem.
  
  The fact that you ask a question that has already been answered is.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  All I saw you say was "vote in principled leaders". Ok. Does that mean they don't compromise with anyone and we simply let the logjam go on because no one will work with anyone else? How is that different from what we have now?
  Come on. Make a little effort. Or say "I don't know." No crime in that either, but alot of integrity.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "All I saw you say was "vote in principled leaders"
  
  Yep, if only the left would do the same instead of voting for the politician who has the biggest cult following we might get somewhere.
  
  Goodbye.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  And like Kaiser Soze....
  
  He was gone.
  
  LOL.
  report
  80
  Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  LOL.
  And like the good (well, not so good, actually) Kaiser Soze, out with a limp, too
  report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  You outlasted Jim. Hehehehe.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Gotta buy groceries sometimes.
  report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Alrighty then.
  You never really responded to this last post of mine. What happens when we have all these terribly principled people that are devoted to opposite sets of principles and refuse to compromise or work with each other? How will the results be different from the stalemate we are currently experiencing in Washington?
  Obama has proved himself to be a throwback to an era when compromise created legislation. As opposed to the characterization of Obama as a far-left crazy, he has alienated many in his own party by being willing to compromise with the Republicans who have then proven to be intractable, unwilling to move toward a compromise agreement.
  How would things be improved if he was not willing to move at all?
  You want stoic, steadfast principle from all, but don't seem to realize what that would do to governance in this country.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "he has alienated many in his own party by being willing to compromise with the Republicans who have then proven to be intractable, unwilling to move toward a compromise agreement."
  
  He has alienated many in his own party because he is an unprincipled scumbag.
  
  The Republicans better not compromise with him.
  report
  80
  Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  No need for any compromise.
  
  Super Boner is on the case and will save the day.
  Oh wait. Wasn't it Boner who walked out of talks with the president, saying Congress would solve the problem without his help? But oh wait. Wasn't this supposed to be Congress's job in the first place?
  Tick tock, tick tock. August 2 is a mere week and a day away....
  report
  61
  Jonathan Jancoposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Losers often reply with bullsh!t! So brace yourself! People who have no argument like to pretend they do. Hence, the existence of conservatism. It's like the reptilians vs. humans. One is light and one is dark, and there is nothing anyone can do about it!
  report
  64
  Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Wrong! They are not conservative. They are radical. Senator Dick Lugar is a conservative whom I respect quite a lot. However, the reason I don't respect them is that they are air heads, not remotely qualified for public office.
  report
  64
  Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Paris has quite a lot of "talent" so to speak.
  report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  So to speak.
  report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
Oh Oh .......This forum has been overrun by The eight percent winners ! Time to book out of here now ! What ? .....you want to know what eight percenters are .

Eight percenters are the ones in the jury pools that defence attorneys love to pick for juries . No matter what ....they will never agreee with anyone , they are there only to go against the current , if someone says the sky is blue . Nope sorry! ...its aqua or teal or sea green!.
reply report
1. 61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Thats different than a 1%er.
  reply report
72
Paradise7posted 11 years ago
I've never "ridden on a man's coattails" and never will. I've resisted gender bias and gender stereotyping my whole life. I'm about fed up with what's happening on these forums. Take your male chauvinist attitude and shove it up the orifice, after salting it first.
reply report
1. 61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "I've never "ridden on a man's coattails" and never will."
  
  And nobody ever said you did.
  
  "I've resisted gender bias and gender stereotyping my whole life."
  
  How wonderful for you.
  
  "I'm about fed up with what's happening on these forums. Take your male chauvinist attitude and shove it up the orifice, after salting it first."
  
  The orifice? Which orifice would that be? Its pretty obvious that you may be the problem with the forums, you don't like people to have different opinions than your own. Oh what a wonderful world it would be if everyone just agreed with you.
  reply report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Fortunately, most of us do. You will find that out when election results come in and neither of these cretins are anywhere near the office they covet.
  I guess I didn't understand your previous post, because I haven't actually met a mysoginistic bigot before. Sorry. It just took me by surprise.
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "They see these women for the frauds they are, the simple minded, undereducated pretenders that humiliate them as a gender."
  
  Thats a quote from you.
  
  When you say things like this is it ok to call you a misogynistic bigot?
  
  When will people like you ever learn?
  reply report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  No, that wouldn't make any sense, my simple minded friend.
  
  You see, I am talking about two specific people. You are talking about an entire class of people.
  
  Do people find you interesting? Takes all kinds, doesn't it?
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I'm talking about two specific people.
  
  Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton, I guess you missed that.
  
  "Do people find you interesting?"
  
  I don't know and I don't care. Do you find calling people names is beneficial to your argument? Does it make you less wrong?
  reply report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Where did you specify your comments were limited to Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama?
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Why don't you reread this thread.
  
  Let me help you with one thing, I never thought you were misogynistic or a bigot because of the views you hold toward Palin, Bachman or any other conservative woman that you say are cretins.
  
  I didn't feel the need to bolster my views with ridiculous claims.
  
  If you are unable to converse without resorting to the common left-wing tactic of name calling and deflection then maybe you and I shouldn't continue.
  
  That seems like a good idea to me, the written word seems to confound you anyway.
  reply report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Since you use "left wing" as a pejorative, I would call that the pot calling the kettle black.
  
  And I did re-read it.
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I couldn't be more proud of you.
  reply report
61
Jonathan Jancoposted 11 years ago
Many of her Republican opponents will bring up 'feminine' issues of why she is unqualified. The reason for this is because they actually support her stoneage policy stances. The TPers are so stupid that their own economic advisors publicly say they are stupid. And my mother, who is a prominent women's advocate and has been since she was a teenager, tells me she's insulted from her unwavering feminist pov that the Republicans would even let Palin or Bachman run in the first place.
reply report
84
earnestshubposted 11 years ago
I have seen enough of both of them to see they are both morally bankrupt.
reply report
1. 85
  donotfearposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
So I'll stick with being a one percenter , than an eight percenter ! The difference ? one percent of righteousness is better than 30 percent 0f bigotry , bias , liberal idealism , and intectual chaovanist. Are you liberals reading from a teleprompter again ?
reply report
1. 61
  Jonathan Jancoposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Well, whoever runs your teleprompter clearly doesn't know how to spell.
  reply report
0
Sherlock221bposted 11 years ago
I don't know who Backmann is, and know very little of Palin, as she doesn't seem to make the news in the UK. The couple of times I have seen her made me think somewhat of a female George Bush. So, I doubt she can be what America needs, even is she is being "misunderestimated."

Concerning the bigger picture of women in politics, there does seem a need to even the numbers up a lot. I understand that being female doesn't necessarily equate to having a better or even a different understanding. It is however time, that politics became less of a male affair. 50% of the population should be equally represented. Perhaps it is time for some form of positive discrimination, because equality seems to be too slow in coming.
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
Sherlock interesting interpretations!
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
Johnathan is that the beast you cain do !
reply report
75
AEvansposted 11 years ago
"Why aren't women mad as hens?" Because we are not hens. But on the serious side I don't care for Palin or Backmann so everyone should vote for me next election. Julianna is officially running for President of the United States!
reply report
1. 60
  Doug Hughesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Are you a write-in candidate or are you the nominee of the party party.
  reply report
  75
  AEvansposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I am a write in candidate. You can run with me and be the Vice President.
  reply report
  60
  Randy Godwinposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  A member of the Elite choosing a mere commoner (sorry Doug, fos) as a running mate? That just isn't done!
  reply report
  75
  AEvansposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  mmmmmm.....******Thinking***** Will have to go back and research. lolololo !
  reply report
60
Chaotic Chicaposted 11 years ago
Palin as a person is fine, as a political candidate, not so much. I have four kids, volunteer actively at their school, I can hunt, I have been shooting sharp-shooter since I was twelve, I am a believer in self-sustainablity, and I am not qualified to run for political office because of it.

I am not against a woman president but she needs to be more than just a woman's lib headliner. She needs to be able and qualified, just as any man.
reply report
1. 61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "She needs to be able and qualified, just as any man."
  
  If thats true then how would you explain Barrack Obama?
  reply report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Because he made the case to the American public that he was a sane, intelligent person. You may not agree, but he made the case to the majority.
  These two have not. It isn't any more complicated than that, is it?
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  We are talking about being "qualified".
  
  Is he sane? I guess.
  
  Is he intelligent? I suppose.
  
  Is he qualified? Based on the requirements to become President the answer is yes.
  
  Based on the facts and his tenure the answer is no.
  
  He's a total disaster.
  reply report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  We could argue the disaster evaluation, but the fact is he made the case that he was capable. These two women have not. What don't you understand? They are failing in the eyes of the electorate.
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  He didn't make the case to me.
  
  He didn't make the case to about 45% of voters.
  
  About 12% of the 55% that he did make the case to have figured out that they were wrong.
  
  Time heals all.
  
  Is Palin even running for President?
  reply report
60
Stump Parrishposted 11 years ago
Sd thing is Chica, they are both just as qualified as the majority of the GOP possibles. They sure don't set their requirement bar very high do they?
reply report
1. 60
  Chaotic Chicaposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Agreed. Somewhere along the line our standards have slipped and nobody is crying out. Had I realized where we would be by now I would have focused my studies on politics!
  reply report
  61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "Somewhere along the line our standards have slipped"
  
  That was November 2008.
  reply report
  61
  TMMasonposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  We were slipping a long time before that... that was simply the day we landed flat on our face in the shit pile, and I do not believe we will be stumbling back to our feet any time soon, Jim.
  
  A sad state our country is in.
  reply report
  60
  Doug Hughesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I do disagree with your assessment of future prospects.
  
  By 2012 the Tea Party will be completely discredited and the GOP will either reform or die off and be replaced by moderate conservatism with a new name.
  
  Radical conservatism in defense of the richest half-percent is going the way of the dodo.
  reply report
  60
  Chaotic Chicaposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  That is precicely right, TMMason. We started slipping while I was growing up and everybody just looked the other way because it was profitable.
  reply report
61
TMMasonposted 11 years ago
And just imagine if Bachmann has a migraine while she was having PMS... oh my God!!
reply report
61
TMMasonposted 11 years ago
Well I am not so sure obama can carry many of these 57 states in this election, or the Dems or Progressives... so i don't think the tea party members are going any where.

Matter of fact I would wager money that there are even more conservative tea party types in the Senate and House after the next election, and I know the Presidency will be Republican at the very least.
reply report
1. 61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Who do you think will beat Obama right now?
  reply report
  61
  TMMasonposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I am not worried about right now, Bruce. The election is over a year away yet, be patient.
  reply report
  61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  From what's being offered and the polls that show how they'd do against him, maybe a little worry would be justified.
  reply report
2. 60
  Doug Hughesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "Matter of fact I would wager money that there are even more conservative tea party types in the Senate and House after the next election, and I know the Presidency will be Republican at the very least."
  
  How much are you willing to bet on each? The House, the Senate and the Presidency?
  
  Who do you trust to hold the money?
  reply report
60
Stump Parrishposted 11 years ago
You plan on sharing that poll or are we just supposed to take your word for it like we are supposed to believe that tax cuts create jobs?
reply report
1. 61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls … -1745.html
  
  He's absolutely right about the poll. Unfortunately, they can't run a generic candidate, and the humans they have are deeply flawed.
  reply report
60
Stump Parrishposted 11 years ago
nope my mind is still convinced your last name is really Gump
reply report
1. 61
  Jim Hunterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks for your contribution to the discussion.
  reply report
61
TMMasonposted 11 years ago
Progressives on the Right, who have betrayed our principles and compromised away all our values and ideals for 90 years, are a dying breed and even now are on the run.
reply report
80
Mighty Momposted 11 years ago
I'm late to this party, I know. And Jim Hunter and thebruceat are having their own discussion on larger issues.

I want to comment on the OP, however.
The media focus on Michelle Bachmann's supposed migraines (which apparently she has not even had an episode since 2010) is a low blow. But at the same time, the media's glorification of her taking in 23 foster children is equally ridiculous. Like that qualifies her to run the United States?
So they're giving her special treatment -- on both ends.
Neither of which has anything to do with her qualifications or electability. Distraction, distraction, distraction....
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
I think theres as much or more presidential ability in in Backmanns socialworking raising kids than in Pres. Obamas socialworking in Chicago's downtown neigorhoods, If he actually did do that! By the way what made him presidential material anyway. No corporate experience , now real political experience. Actually he came from withinin Blogadovich's neighborhood isn't it???
reply report
1. 61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  What do you mean, "If he actually did do that?"? What a silly statement.
  He was a state senator, a U.S. senator as well. Not bad for someone you claim had no political experience.
  Do you have people around you that let you get by with these ridiculous statements?
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
Lets face the facts guys , Democrats blew it this Presidential election. You started out perfectly getting everyone out to the polls , From 18 to 27 year olds elected Pres. Obama ! Using the grass roots ideals of the great Former loser Governor from Vermont -Howard Dean {My home state ]. Ok. So now what .The kids went back to the frat parties after that "victory" and then partied right through the 2010 elections. OOOPS!
I am hearing more and more desent from his followers lately .No one yet has mentioned exactly what made him Presidential material. Except his wall street following !
reply report
1. 61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  If we blew it, what did the Republicans do?
  
  Oh, that's right.
  
  LOSE!
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
Got you a little worried last year didn't they , and just wait , even liberals are learning the hard way . PC doesn't work for much! Its okay to admit you blew it, dont be so hard on yourselves! . Perhaps one day soon we can all drop the partisan crap and vote for the person .....not the Image!
reply report
1. 61
  thebrucebeatposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Non-responsive.
  reply report
75
lovemychrisposted 11 years ago
Well, I have to be partisan, because I'm pro-choice.

There IS only one party (of the 2) that I can go to.

Both Palin and Bachmann are anti-abortion.

There is only one party (of the 2) that holds women as equals, That cares about personal freedom, and that does NOT throw poor people to the DOGS.

Sorry--you call it partisan, I call it standing by my beliefs.
reply report
1. 0
  ahorsebackposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Lovemychris, It is sad that the workings and manipulations of the ideals in politics , on both sides, is as simply stated as you're post! "There is only blah ,blah blah blah".... One of two parties. ", My point exactly! Do you really believe that abortions is as simple as black and white. Yes or no ? Because you are pro choice there is only one party that can be yours.!!! I consider myself closer to a conservative ideology and believe 100 percent in a womans choice! I can live with the idiots who say NO ABORTIONS , what I have trouble with is the blinding affects of political correctness that feed into the lefts everyday actions in politics.
  reply report
61
thebrucebeatposted 11 years ago
My turn. Going to dinner.
reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

Palin . Backmann , Why Aren't Women Mad as Hens ?

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

Palin . Backmann , Why Aren't Women Mad as Hens ?

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies