>>you stated that palin was a crook. i asked you for some evidence. you provided none.<<
my evidence is the corrupt system.
my evidence is that palin is aligned with evil of BIG Capital - the rothschilds.
my evidence is that palin doesn't speak out against the EVILS debt based money, thereby supporting BIG Capital's Societal Asset Stripping Machine.
my evidence is that palin attacks the constitution.
i posted a video of her doing that.
did you miss it?
we need a constitutional breaking commander in chief, not someone who actually thinks the constitution ought to be upheld - like a constitutional professor.
the evidence is there, but the true believers like yourself will not understand it.
that's why i'm trying to get into specifics so that when palin is elected, we can both have a ruler by which to judge whether she's bad or not.
i laid out four questions that i think you agree with and that i'm convinced palin won't do.
it is pretty apparent you've already been brow beaten so much by those who lie to you that you have already thrown in the towel.
as long as obama loses, you are cool with the patriot act. you are cool with warrantless wiretapping. as loong a s republican is smiling back you while the looting goes on, you won't care.
it is precisely this approach that led me to say you've been manipulated by the media.
>>now you want to morph the subject of palin being a crook into me needing to answer your questions.<<
so we can agree to a standard to determine if she's actually working for the people and not rothschild's BIG Capital.
but you don't want to have a way to measure her success because you already know she'll allow the looting and continue attacking american civil liberties via the patriot act.
if true, your lowered expectations saddens me - you now better, but go along with the corrupt system and even defend it.
>>it's obvious that thus far in her life, she hasn't been a crook.<<
how is that obvious? i'd argue that it is obvious she sold out to BIG Capital... did she agree to allowing banksters to steal (crooks steal, gru) trillions from the american people to cover their (banskters) gambling losses?
has she called for the investigation and indictment of the millions of felony frauds committed against citizens by the banking interests?
that would be no. she runs interference for the crooks, acting as a gate keeper to keep the people from identifying her financial supporters as the rightful criminals - and that makes her a criminal.
you obviously disagree.
which is why some kind of yard stick should be used to gauge her performance should she become president. but you don't want clarity - and i think that is because you know the answer to those questions and palin will do exactly the OPPOSITE of what you want.
so you try and hide this fact.
>>why don't you admit that you were wrong? why don't you admit that palin isn't a crook or at least you have no evidence she is?<<
i've provided evidence.
covering for crooks makes one a crook. financing her campaign with crooked money makes her a crook. assaulting society by not exposing the EVILS of debt based money is criminal. failing to expose the CRIMINAL FEDERAL RESERVE (yeah, they broke the law to blow this bubble, read section 2A of the federal reserve act!), complaining about constitutionalists makes her an enemy of the constitution.
but hey, i admit i might be wrong. maybe palin will do the right things... which is why I IDENTIFIED THE RIGHT AND CORRECT THINGS SHE OUGHT TO DO.
you, on the other hand, ran away.
we obviously disagree about the future of what palin would do as president, but i've laid out a road map by which palin could prove me wrong.
and we both know SHE WILL NOT TRAVEL DOWN THAT ROAD.
which explains your less than stellar tactical evasion attempt. |
