Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PROLIFE who wrote (768859)	3/27/2009 1:54:04 PM
From: pompsander	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Goodness, Pro...you sound purturbed again. Haven't you realized calling people's names only reflects badly on your debating skills....such as they are.

To: PROLIFE who wrote (768859)	3/27/2009 2:21:51 PM
From: pompsander	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Since you seem to have a real attachment to Palin, could you clairfy if she is going to take the stimulus money, or not? Even her own republican legislative leaders are having a little trouble with the "sarah two step". _____________ The Odd Lies Of Sarah Palin XXVIII: Meeting The Legislature The special charm of Sarah Palin's congenital lying habit lies in the triviality of the usual matters at hand. Yes, her life is a Judge Judy episode - except she's not as good a liar as most of the participants in that show. So long ago, she insisted that she had not fired a librarian as mayor, even as he had her termination letter in hand. Or she insisted that she asked her daughters for permission to run for vice-president, even though her own office put out an itinerary and press release that proved that didn't happen. And so she still claims she opposed the Bridge to Nowhere, even though no sane person with access to Google believes her. And she kept saying she had provided medical records, when she never did. And on and on and on ... But the most amusing are the ones where the lies get really complicated really quickly, like a Ricky Gervais skit. So she said she wouldn't take all the federal stimulus money, then said she would, then said she'd never said she wouldn't. Still with me? So she scheduled a meeting with the legislature. Or did she? Let's break this one down, shall we? From the ADN: [The issue] boiled over when Palin sent a statement to the press blaming the Legislature for the meeting falling apart. "Governor Sarah Palin was scheduled to participate telephonically in a meeting with legislative leadership today when legislative leaders cancelled the meeting to host their own press conference," it said. The Senate president and House speaker said that is not true. They did hold a press conference Thursday afternoon to announce a clearinghouse for people to find information about applying for stimulus grants. But they said that had nothing to do with the cancellation of their meeting with Palin. Legislative staff said that Jerry Gallagher, the governor's legislative director, had told them Wednesday that Palin wouldn't even participate by phone. Gallagher contacted them again late Thursday morning and said Palin was available by phone but by that point the meeting had been canceled and it was too late, according to the speaker's office. The iconic quote in the piece, the quote that tells you all you need to know about this politician: Senate President Gary Stevens said the statement Palin sent to the press about what happened was "absolutely false, absolutely false." "Someone should be brought to task on that," the Kodiak Republican said. Good luck with that. andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com

To: PROLIFE who wrote (768859)	3/27/2009 3:18:55 PM
From: pompsander	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Best article on the subject yet, Pro...Read and Learn. The republicans have to get smarter...and they need totally new leadership. ________________________________ A Target-Rich Environment Karl Rove made a habit of employing this strategy in the salad days of the Bush revolution: draw out the more voluble, more controversial, more trigger-happy Democratic voices and use them reductively, cutting off more legitimate debate with more legitimate Democrats. Rove had two goals in mind. Calling out liberal bugbears is like using cattle prods on the hindquarters of the conservative base. It wakes them up, gets them paying attention, and helps them rally around the protagonist. Rove was also focused on Americans with fewer partisan attachments; nothing pulls independents away from the center like an opposition party that's lost its moorings. And this worked for a while. One of the reasons why Barack Obama's political team is so confident -- "arrogant," as Rove would say today, in their success is that even while some of Obama's signature policies are viewed with healthy skepticism, Republicans are still splashing around in a fetid wading pool. Obama has room to maneuver because Republicans are giving him room. And while Rove was a master at strategic communications, his lessons didn't seem to stick. Take the appearances in the public square of Dick Cheney and Rush Limbaugh. Cheney remains the principle exponent of Republican national security policy. A lot of Republicans now disagree with the Cheney Doctrine, but because President Bush left no real political heirs, and because no real independent, conservative foreign policy voice has emerged, Cheney's grumbles echo. (Sen. Dick Lugar is a voice, but he is not a partisan persuader. Rudy Giuliani has been fairly silent since the demise of his presidential campaign.) The Democratic National Committee could not be more delighted to treat Cheney as the primary political enemy and foil. Each time Cheney opens his mouth, the DNC -- or Robert Gibbs, if he's in the mood -- finds a way to reduce Republican opposition to President Obama's plans to the words of someone who is very unpopular with most Americans. (A side note: Cheney, smarter than the average elephant, understands this. He has his legacy to defend. He is worried not about criminal prosecution; rather, if the Obama mindset over next four-to-eight years sets in, Dick Cheney, a guy who most Americans don't like, will be the Dick Cheney that Andrew Sullivan knows: truly infamous and even wretched; someone who sanctioned torture; someone who abused executive power with relish. Obama's Justice Department may soon renounce the legal foundations upon which Cheney's policies were constructed and may even cite the former administration's lawyers for misconduct. If they do this -- once they do this -- the edifice will be nothing but dust.) And since the GOP is a PINO -- a Party In Name Only at this point, other Republicans unwittingly pile on. When Rush Limbaugh told the Conservative Political Action Conference audience that he wanted Obama to fail, Republican Senators rebuked him, thus extending the story. The chairman of the Republican National Committee, Michael Steele, called Limbaugh "incendiary," later apologized, and later, in a trendy, post-modern way, said that he meant what he said all along. Limbaugh's ratings have surged since the White House made him the subject of their derision, which is exactly what the White House wanted. The more Republicans identify with Limbaugh, the better; the more Republicans apologize for Limbaugh, the better. To the Obama team, Limbaugh embodies Clinton-era conservatism to most Americans. I would bet that the DNC has polled on this, although I don't know for certain. When Cheney insisted that Obama's policies were making America less safe, conservative House Republicans like Zach Wamp were frustrated that "the people who led us yesterday" still seemed to represent the Republican Party. But as Wamp knows, the bench is short and uncomfortable to sit on. So as Democrats focus on Limbaugh, Cheney and Rove, the result is a twofer; remind independents of why they voted for change and continue to perpetuate the Republican identity crisis. politics.theatlantic.com