Of course, brave Anonymous, Palin is such a joke that the governor of New York finds it necessary to promote a blonde gun-toting mother of two to the Senate.
I'm sure it's just a coincidence. Barry Soetero couldn't be any more concerned about Sarah Palin than he is about releasing his own birth certificate.
Yep, it's just MY imagination. That's why Newsday drew exactly the same conclusion, as have several other bloggers on both sides of the political spectrum.
The topic of Obama's ineligibility for the presidency will not go away any more than Sarah will. Look for more in a courtroom near you! :)
YOU described Gillebrand as a "Palin-killer." That implies there's something to Palin. Newsday said "she has potential Sarah Palin pizazz and energy from a different, more moderate and informed starting point."
Sarah Palin was a sensation, no doubt. She demonstrated pizazz and energy last fall, but turned out to uninformed about so many things.
Gillebrand could only be described as a "Palin-killer" Palin were on top.
Palin isn't.
Newsday simply said Gillebrand has the similar levels of pizazz and energy as Palin but with one important distinction -- Gillebrand is informed. Palin was not.
And give it up on the so-called ineligibility thing. I think the Supreme Court has already addressed that one. You are sounding like a very sore loser.
Nobody even knows who Gillebrand is, as she herself has testified.
Palin, on the other hand, had websites like Palintology devoted just to her prior to her appearance on the national scene.
Palin energized the conservative base to an enormous degree - without her, McCain never would have gotten as close as he did. I personally don't know a single person who voted for McCain in the election who had intended to vote at all prior to Palin's entrance.
Gillebrand, on the other hand, has polarized the Democrat base.
The Supreme Court has not addressed the issue of Obama's eligibility at all. It has, to date, not been heard by SCOTUS.
The case has consistently been struck down in lower courts exclusively because the litigants lack standing, not on the facts of the case. SCOTUS can't take up a case unless the litigants have standing to bring it.
So, this is going to dog Obama for a long time to come, as various litigants try to find a case which gives them the standing to call for the requisite documentation.
Given that you apparently don't even know what the Democrats are saying about Gillebrand, your ability to inform anyone about what's going on with Obama's eligibility is in serious doubt.
That's just a small sampling. The Democratic Party are trying her out as a Sarah Palin look-alike, and she's failing miserably. She's even got promises from other Democrats that they'll oppose her when she runs - and she's not even sworn in yet!
Meanwhile, even the Wall Street journal law blog speculated on Obama's citizenship problems in December, while the AOL poll showed 52% of those taking the poll agreed it had merit. Only five states showed a minority of those polled disagreed (NY, CT, DE VT, RI).
Steve is right on this Gillebrand being chosen at least in part as a "Palin-killer," a left-wing answer to Sarah Palin, who is not going away and, if she becomes better educated on national and international issues, has the potential of rebuilding a dominant "conservative" coalition that might, please God, repair the severe damage inflicted on the U.S. during the Bush-Obama years.
But Steve is wrong about the Obama citizenship thing. There's simply nothing to it, and no court is going to give it the time of day. It is morally certain that he was born in Honolulu, and anyway it is unlikely in the extreme that the courts will reexamine "natural born citizen" in such a way as to overturn Obama's election on a legal technicality.
Sarah Palin is the only Palin killer there is.
ReplyDeleteShe's a joke and she isn't going anywhere.
Of course, brave Anonymous, Palin is such a joke that the governor of New York finds it necessary to promote a blonde gun-toting mother of two to the Senate.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure it's just a coincidence.
Barry Soetero couldn't be any more concerned about Sarah Palin than he is about releasing his own birth certificate.
And what does this new junior-senator-to-be of NY have to do with Sarah Palin? Nothing. Only in your imagination.
ReplyDeleteAnd enough with the birth certificate. That's been debated to death elsewhere and you know there's nothing to it. Yawn...
Yep, it's just MY imagination.
ReplyDeleteThat's why Newsday drew exactly the same conclusion, as have several other bloggers on both sides of the political spectrum.
The topic of Obama's ineligibility for the presidency will not go away any more than Sarah will. Look for more in a courtroom near you! :)
YOU described Gillebrand as a "Palin-killer." That implies there's something to Palin. Newsday said "she has potential Sarah Palin pizazz and energy from a different, more moderate and informed starting point."
ReplyDeleteSarah Palin was a sensation, no doubt. She demonstrated pizazz and energy last fall, but turned out to uninformed about so many things.
Gillebrand could only be described as a "Palin-killer" Palin were on top.
Palin isn't.
Newsday simply said Gillebrand has the similar levels of pizazz and energy as Palin but with one important distinction -- Gillebrand is informed. Palin was not.
And give it up on the so-called ineligibility thing. I think the Supreme Court has already addressed that one. You are sounding like a very sore loser.
Nice try.
ReplyDeleteNobody even knows who Gillebrand is, as she herself has testified.
Palin, on the other hand, had websites like Palintology devoted just to her prior to her appearance on the national scene.
Palin energized the conservative base to an enormous degree - without her, McCain never would have gotten as close as he did. I personally don't know a single person who voted for McCain in the election who had intended to vote at all prior to Palin's entrance.
Gillebrand, on the other hand, has polarized the Democrat base.
The Supreme Court has not addressed the issue of Obama's eligibility at all. It has, to date, not been heard by SCOTUS.
The case has consistently been struck down in lower courts exclusively because the litigants lack standing, not on the facts of the case. SCOTUS can't take up a case unless the litigants have standing to bring it.
So, this is going to dog Obama for a long time to come, as various litigants try to find a case which gives them the standing to call for the requisite documentation.
It ain't done yet, not by a long shot.
Nice try.
ReplyDeleteA big difference you leave out. Palin would have been VP. Big difference between VP and Senator.
I know quite a few people who would have voted for McCain but didn't because of Palin.
How has Gillebrand polarized the Democratic base?
And no one is listening to folks like you about the citizenship thing. Instead, you are just listening to one another...
Given that you apparently don't even know what the Democrats are saying about Gillebrand, your ability to inform anyone about what's going on with Obama's eligibility is in serious doubt.
ReplyDeleteTry these:
Daily Kos "Opposition... swift, furious widespread"
NY Daily News "A Civil War erupted"
ArticleBase "At Least Five Prominent Democrats protest"
Yahoo News "Gillibrand Unpopular Among Peers"
That's just a small sampling.
The Democratic Party are trying her out as a Sarah Palin look-alike, and she's failing miserably. She's even got promises from other Democrats that they'll oppose her when she runs - and she's not even sworn in yet!
Meanwhile, even the Wall Street journal law blog speculated on Obama's citizenship problems in December, while the AOL poll showed 52% of those taking the poll agreed it had merit. Only five states showed a minority of those polled disagreed (NY, CT, DE VT, RI).
Steve is right on this Gillebrand being chosen at least in part as a "Palin-killer," a left-wing answer to Sarah Palin, who is not going away and, if she becomes better educated on national and international issues, has the potential of rebuilding a dominant "conservative" coalition that might, please God, repair the severe damage inflicted on the U.S. during the Bush-Obama years.
ReplyDeleteBut Steve is wrong about the Obama citizenship thing. There's simply nothing to it, and no court is going to give it the time of day. It is morally certain that he was born in Honolulu, and anyway it is unlikely in the extreme that the courts will reexamine "natural born citizen" in such a way as to overturn Obama's election on a legal technicality.