Jump to content

Palin on Iraq


TexasTiger

Recommended Posts

Alaska Business Monthly: We've lost a lot of Alaska's military members to the war in Iraq. How do you feel about sending more troops into battle, as President Bush is suggesting?

Palin: I've been so focused on state government, I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq. I heard on the news about the new deployments, and while I support our president, Condoleezza Rice and the administration, I want to know that we have an exit plan in place; I want assurances that we are doing all we can to keep our troops safe. Every life lost is such a tragedy. I am very, very proud of the troops we have in Alaska, those fighting overseas for our freedoms, and the families here who are making so many sacrifices.

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-64...speaks-out.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites





Old news. Palin will be a domestic VP. The foreign stuff will be handled by our experienced guy. The one running for PRESIDENT. So I speak for many republicans when I say, SO WHAT!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok, what's her thoughts about Iran, Russia, Georgia, North Korea, Afghanistan?

Do democrats want this election to have more emphaisis on Iraq or on the economy or whichever way the wind blows during a particular day?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes he is deploying. This lady will make Michael Moore eat crow about Politicians not letting their kids join up. We have a Pow and a Current troop mom. This is going to be some good stuff. I think this is what the Republican party needed a new look.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's nice to know we have TT as the moral compass to lead us home

That's what libs do. Ask them and they will tell you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If these remarks seem to mean what Tex is implying, I see it as a plus. I think this war was a bad idea to begin with and figuring out a way to extricate ourselves without it disintegrating is the right call. If she can convey that idea to McCain and soften his notion of staying longer, good for her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's nice to know we have TT as the moral compass to lead us home

That's what libs do. Ask them and they will tell you.

No, you have that person you just heard about today in your sig picture that you've already given savior status to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If these remarks seem to mean what Tex is implying, I see it as a plus. I think this war was a bad idea to begin with and figuring out a way to extricate ourselves without it disintegrating is the right call. If she can convey that idea to McCain and soften his notion of staying longer, good for her.

Now you are just falling into the "100 years" idiocy. McCain does not want to be there one second longer than we HAVE to. But he's not going to cut and run at the first sign of difficulty like ANY dim would do. And Palin seems to be the type that would make that tough decision even if she didn't like it. That's what leaders of conviction do.

McCain doesn't need softening on Iraq and I don't think she will be soft on it either.

As Iraq is slowly becoming that albatross that is hanging around achmed's neck, we see that McCain had it right with his approach. Achmed can only CLAIM that he was against going as he was not actually part of the process at the time, therefore we must take his word for it. Hind-sight is 20/20 when you are claiming the BS he does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's nice to know we have TT as the moral compass to lead us home

That's what libs do. Ask them and they will tell you.

No, you have that person you just heard about today in your sig picture that you've already given savior status to.

How wrong you are. I have known about the beautiful governor of the great state of Alaska for some time now. And there has been speculation that she could be the pick for weeks now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That McCain and Palin both have sons over in Iraq, their own flesh and blood, puts an end to the asinine rhetoric from the Cindy Sheehans of the world. They'll now, more than ever , be forced to shut the hell up and respect the mothers and fathers of our fighting force, as well as those who FREELY enlisted to fight for their country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Palin is such a terrible pick, why are some folks here in a two minute drill running her down, instead of of having a par-tee?

obaby.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Palin is such a terrible pick, why are some folks here in a two minute drill running her down, instead of of having a par-tee?

obaby.jpg

She's a hypocritical, cynical pick who wasn't chosen to govern. She was chosen to get elected. I frankly don't know how she will work out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Palin is such a terrible pick, why are some folks here in a two minute drill running her down, instead of of having a par-tee?

obaby.jpg

She's a hypocritical, cynical pick who wasn't chosen to govern. She was chosen to get elected. I frankly don't know how she will work out.

What is the object in an election? One must be elected before one can govern. Maybe we should wait and see how she works out. She may be a disappointment, or she may be better than expected. In my view, Democrats had better candidates they left on a fairly deep bench this election cycle. Instead, the Democrat ticket includes two of the most liberal members of the Senate. Not sure if that's what most voters want. Maybe, maybe not. Time will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If these remarks seem to mean what Tex is implying, I see it as a plus. I think this war was a bad idea to begin with and figuring out a way to extricate ourselves without it disintegrating is the right call. If she can convey that idea to McCain and soften his notion of staying longer, good for her.

Now you are just falling into the "100 years" idiocy. McCain does not want to be there one second longer than we HAVE to. But he's not going to cut and run at the first sign of difficulty like ANY dim would do. And Palin seems to be the type that would make that tough decision even if she didn't like it. That's what leaders of conviction do.

McCain doesn't need softening on Iraq and I don't think she will be soft on it either.

As Iraq is slowly becoming that albatross that is hanging around achmed's neck, we see that McCain had it right with his approach. Achmed can only CLAIM that he was against going as he was not actually part of the process at the time, therefore we must take his word for it. Hind-sight is 20/20 when you are claiming the BS he does.

No, an "idot dim" wouldn't have lied to this country and invaded the country in the first place

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Palin is such a terrible pick, why are some folks here in a two minute drill running her down, instead of of having a par-tee?

obaby.jpg

She's a hypocritical, cynical pick who wasn't chosen to govern. She was chosen to get elected. I frankly don't know how she will work out.

Biden was chosen to get elected. Obama wanted Kathleen Sebelius but internal polling showed the foreign policy experience issue was still a hinderance. He couldn't stomach Hillary so he chose a guy to fill in the foreign policy gap on his own resume to get elected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If these remarks seem to mean what Tex is implying, I see it as a plus. I think this war was a bad idea to begin with and figuring out a way to extricate ourselves without it disintegrating is the right call. If she can convey that idea to McCain and soften his notion of staying longer, good for her.

Now you are just falling into the "100 years" idiocy. McCain does not want to be there one second longer than we HAVE to. But he's not going to cut and run at the first sign of difficulty like ANY dim would do. And Palin seems to be the type that would make that tough decision even if she didn't like it. That's what leaders of conviction do.

McCain doesn't need softening on Iraq and I don't think she will be soft on it either.

As Iraq is slowly becoming that albatross that is hanging around achmed's neck, we see that McCain had it right with his approach. Achmed can only CLAIM that he was against going as he was not actually part of the process at the time, therefore we must take his word for it. Hind-sight is 20/20 when you are claiming the BS he does.

No, an "idot dim" wouldn't have lied to this country

So Bill Clinton never lied?

So Obama has not lied about "his life" during this campaign?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If these remarks seem to mean what Tex is implying, I see it as a plus. I think this war was a bad idea to begin with and figuring out a way to extricate ourselves without it disintegrating is the right call. If she can convey that idea to McCain and soften his notion of staying longer, good for her.

Now you are just falling into the "100 years" idiocy. McCain does not want to be there one second longer than we HAVE to. But he's not going to cut and run at the first sign of difficulty like ANY dim would do. And Palin seems to be the type that would make that tough decision even if she didn't like it. That's what leaders of conviction do.

McCain doesn't need softening on Iraq and I don't think she will be soft on it either.

As Iraq is slowly becoming that albatross that is hanging around achmed's neck, we see that McCain had it right with his approach. Achmed can only CLAIM that he was against going as he was not actually part of the process at the time, therefore we must take his word for it. Hind-sight is 20/20 when you are claiming the BS he does.

No, an "idot dim" wouldn't have lied to this country

So Bill Clinton never lied?

So Obama has not lied about "his life" during this campaign?

Lied to the American people about invading another country? A lie that has cost American 450 Billion dollars and over 4,000 soldiers lives, thousands wounded. No Clinton and Obama have never told those whoopers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Biden was chosen to get elected. Obama wanted Kathleen Sebelius but internal polling showed the foreign policy experience issue was still a hinderance. He couldn't stomach Hillary so he chose a guy to fill in the foreign policy gap on his own resume to get elected.

How do you know who Obama wanted? The one thing we do know is that Obama said the most important factor in his decision process was choosing some one who could step in and be ready to lead the country. Obama passed that test with his choice, McCain did not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Biden was chosen to get elected. Obama wanted Kathleen Sebelius but internal polling showed the foreign policy experience issue was still a hinderance. He couldn't stomach Hillary so he chose a guy to fill in the foreign policy gap on his own resume to get elected.

How do you know who Obama wanted? The one thing we do know is that Obama said the most important factor in his decision process was choosing some one who could step in and be ready to lead the country. Obama passed that test with his choice, McCain did not.

Too bad the dims didn't do that with their choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Biden was chosen to get elected. Obama wanted Kathleen Sebelius but internal polling showed the foreign policy experience issue was still a hinderance. He couldn't stomach Hillary so he chose a guy to fill in the foreign policy gap on his own resume to get elected.

How do you know who Obama wanted? The one thing we do know is that Obama said the most important factor in his decision process was choosing some one who could step in and be ready to lead the country. Obama passed that test with his choice, McCain did not.

So McCain did not make his decision based on what Obama thinks is the most important factor. How shocking!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As you well know, Obama is woefully lacking in experience. He therefore selected a candidate who has much experience thereby filling some of the gaping holes in his qualifications. McCain did EXACTLY THE SAME THING. McCain obviously has the experience to be president, but he is boring and needed to shore up the ultra-conservative vote. He chose an exciting, conservative candidate who might attract women voters and who reinforced his image as a maverick.

They both selected the VP candidate who they thought gave them the best chance of getting elected as POTUS. Do you really think otherwise? Do you really think that Obama is so noble that he would pick Biden while knowing that someone else gave him a better chance of winning the election?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Members Online

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...