logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!
> Sarah the Scapegoat?, A Rising or Shooting Star for the GOP?
Playing the Blame Game?
You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Total Votes: 44
Guests cannot vote 
nighttimer
post Nov 7 2008, 08:50 AM
Post #1


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,660
Member No.: 504
Joined: February-16-03

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



Suddenly the Straight Talk Express has become the Back Stabbing Express with unnamed staffers ripping Sarah Palin and suggesting she was a loose cannon who was unprepared, didn't know basic geography and played the part of the campaign drama queen.

The dissing of Sarah Palin included a forced silence on Election Night.

CNN) -- Republican VP nominee Sarah Palin had prepared to deliver a concession speech before John McCain's Tuesday night -- and brought her remarks with her to his Phoenix concession -- but senior McCain campaign adviser Steve Schmidt told her she could not.

Two McCain sources say Palin clearly did not understand the protocol of a concession speech, and expected she would have the chance to deliver one of her own.
link

Additionally, other stories have appeared in the aftermath of the loss that paint an unflattering picture of Palin:

#Fox News, a channel that had been generally flattering in its coverage of the "Palin phenomenon", reported that aides were astonished when they learned she was unaware that Africa was not a country but a whole continent. She was also said to be unable to name the countries that belong to the North American Free Trade Agreement: the US, Mexico and Canada
. link

# NEWSWEEK has also learned that Palin's shopping spree at high-end department stores was more extensive than previously reported. While publicly supporting Palin, McCain's top advisers privately fumed at what they regarded as her outrageous profligacy. One senior aide said that Nicolle Wallace had told Palin to buy three suits for the convention and hire a stylist. But instead, the vice presidential nominee began buying for herself and her family--clothes and accessories from top stores such as Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus. According to two knowledgeable sources, a vast majority of the clothes were bought by a wealthy donor, who was shocked when he got the bill. Palin also used low-level staffers to buy some of the clothes on their credit cards. The McCain campaign found out last week when the aides sought reimbursement. One aide estimated that she spent "tens of thousands" more than the reported $150,000, and that $20,000 to $40,000 went to buy clothes for her husband. Some articles of clothing have apparently been lost. An angry aide characterized the shopping spree as "Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast," and said the truth will eventually come out when the Republican Party audits its books.

A Palin aide said: "Governor Palin was not directing staffers to put anything on their personal credit cards, and anything that staffers put on their credit cards has been reimbursed, like an expense. Nasty and false accusations following a defeat say more about the person who made them than they do about Governor Palin."

# At the GOP convention in St. Paul, Palin was completely unfazed by the boys' club fraternity she had just joined. One night, Steve Schmidt and Mark Salter went to her hotel room to brief her. After a minute, Palin sailed into the room wearing nothing but a towel, with another on her wet hair. She told them to chat with her laconic husband, Todd. "I'll be just a minute," she said
. link

#Palin was apparently a nightmare for her campaign staff to deal with. She refused preparation help for her interview with Katie Couric and then blamed her staff, specifically Nicole Wallace, when the interview was panned as a disaster. After the Couric interview, Fox News reported, Palin turned nasty with her staff and began to accuse them of mishandling her. Palin would view press clippings of herself in the morning and throw "tantrums" over the negative coverage. There were times when she would be so nasty and angry that her staff was reduced to tears. link


The right-wing blogosphere is spitting nails. Michelle Malkin calls those whispering to Carl Cameron of Fox News and other reporters "cowards."

Let's assume the rumor-mongers are telling the truth for a moment. Who does it damn more: Sarah Palin or McCain and his vetters who green-lighted her for the vice presidential nomination? Don't need an Ivy League degree to figure that one out.

Sarah Palin worked her heart out. She energized tens of thousands to come out who would have otherwise stayed home. She touched countless families. I didn't agree with everything she said on the campaign trail. But two fundamental conservative stands she took mattered greatly to me: She vigorously defended the Second Amendment and the sanctity of life more eloquently in practice than any of the educated conservative aristocracy.

And she did it all with a tirelessness and infectious optimism that defied the shameless, bottomless attempts by elites in both parties to bring her and her family down.

Shame on the smearers who don't have the balls to show their faces.
link

The Questions for Debate:

1. Why are McCain's staffers tearing down Sarah Palin?

2. Should she have been allowed to give a concession speech?

3. Why hasn't McCain or a senior staffer publicly defended Palin and put an end to this?

4. Will Palin run for the presidency in 2012 (and if so, what does she need to do next time that she didn't do this time?)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Delvy
post Nov 7 2008, 09:59 AM
Post #2


****
Contributor

Sponsor
October 2006

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 81
Member No.: 5,892
Joined: February-22-06

From: Diss, Norfolk, UK
Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



1. Why are McCain's staffers tearing down Sarah Palin?

2. Should she have been allowed to give a concession speech?

3. Why hasn't McCain or a senior staffer publicly defended Palin and put an end to this?

4. Will Palin run for the presidency in 2012 (and if so, what does she need to do next time that she didn't do this time?)


1. They are clearly expressing frustrations that developed on the campaign trail. They feel that she cost them in the long run, despite the motivation of the base for the GOP through her appointment. And some of the things that have come out are truely terrifying.....

2. As I understand it it would have been highly unusual for her to do so. McCain was the lead on the ticket, it is his responsibility and one that I think he discharged with nobility and honour. She should not have been allowed to; after all, what would it have added to the occassion, apart from a probably very partisan attack that seemed somehow inappropriate.

3. Because she has largely brought it on herself - the "going rogue" at the end of the campaign and the body language between her and McCain after his last speech said it all I think.

4. I think she will try. If she does she will appeal directly to the GOP base and find strong support there but she will find that her folksy wit and staged persona will quickly rub clear under a fuller campaign run. If she does manage to get the nomination I think she will loose greater than McCain has and help propel the GOP further into the wilderness.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Vanguard
post Nov 7 2008, 10:14 AM
Post #3


******
Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 325
Member No.: 6,505
Joined: September-16-06

From: So Cal
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



QUOTE(nighttimer @ Nov 7 2008, 08:50 AM) *
Suddenly the Straight Talk Express has become the Back Stabbing Express with unnamed staffers ripping Sarah Palin and suggesting she was a loose cannon who was unprepared, didn't know basic geography and played the part of the campaign drama queen.

The dissing of Sarah Palin included a forced silence on Election Night.

CNN) -- Republican VP nominee Sarah Palin had prepared to deliver a concession speech before John McCain's Tuesday night -- and brought her remarks with her to his Phoenix concession -- but senior McCain campaign adviser Steve Schmidt told her she could not.

Two McCain sources say Palin clearly did not understand the protocol of a concession speech, and expected she would have the chance to deliver one of her own.
link

Additionally, other stories have appeared in the aftermath of the loss that paint an unflattering picture of Palin:

#Fox News, a channel that had been generally flattering in its coverage of the "Palin phenomenon", reported that aides were astonished when they learned she was unaware that Africa was not a country but a whole continent. She was also said to be unable to name the countries that belong to the North American Free Trade Agreement: the US, Mexico and Canada
. link

# NEWSWEEK has also learned that Palin's shopping spree at high-end department stores was more extensive than previously reported. While publicly supporting Palin, McCain's top advisers privately fumed at what they regarded as her outrageous profligacy. One senior aide said that Nicolle Wallace had told Palin to buy three suits for the convention and hire a stylist. But instead, the vice presidential nominee began buying for herself and her family--clothes and accessories from top stores such as Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus. According to two knowledgeable sources, a vast majority of the clothes were bought by a wealthy donor, who was shocked when he got the bill. Palin also used low-level staffers to buy some of the clothes on their credit cards. The McCain campaign found out last week when the aides sought reimbursement. One aide estimated that she spent "tens of thousands" more than the reported $150,000, and that $20,000 to $40,000 went to buy clothes for her husband. Some articles of clothing have apparently been lost. An angry aide characterized the shopping spree as "Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast," and said the truth will eventually come out when the Republican Party audits its books.

A Palin aide said: "Governor Palin was not directing staffers to put anything on their personal credit cards, and anything that staffers put on their credit cards has been reimbursed, like an expense. Nasty and false accusations following a defeat say more about the person who made them than they do about Governor Palin."

# At the GOP convention in St. Paul, Palin was completely unfazed by the boys' club fraternity she had just joined. One night, Steve Schmidt and Mark Salter went to her hotel room to brief her. After a minute, Palin sailed into the room wearing nothing but a towel, with another on her wet hair. She told them to chat with her laconic husband, Todd. "I'll be just a minute," she said
. link

#Palin was apparently a nightmare for her campaign staff to deal with. She refused preparation help for her interview with Katie Couric and then blamed her staff, specifically Nicole Wallace, when the interview was panned as a disaster. After the Couric interview, Fox News reported, Palin turned nasty with her staff and began to accuse them of mishandling her. Palin would view press clippings of herself in the morning and throw "tantrums" over the negative coverage. There were times when she would be so nasty and angry that her staff was reduced to tears. link


The right-wing blogosphere is spitting nails. Michelle Malkin calls those whispering to Carl Cameron of Fox News and other reporters "cowards."

Let's assume the rumor-mongers are telling the truth for a moment. Who does it damn more: Sarah Palin or McCain and his vetters who green-lighted her for the vice presidential nomination? Don't need an Ivy League degree to figure that one out.

Sarah Palin worked her heart out. She energized tens of thousands to come out who would have otherwise stayed home. She touched countless families. I didn't agree with everything she said on the campaign trail. But two fundamental conservative stands she took mattered greatly to me: She vigorously defended the Second Amendment and the sanctity of life more eloquently in practice than any of the educated conservative aristocracy.

And she did it all with a tirelessness and infectious optimism that defied the shameless, bottomless attempts by elites in both parties to bring her and her family down.

Shame on the smearers who don't have the balls to show their faces.
link

The Questions for Debate:

1. Why are McCain's staffers tearing down Sarah Palin?

They tear her down in part because IMO she was more a liability than an asset. They also tear her down because too few can maintain any modicum of civility in mattters of politics.

2. Should she have been allowed to give a concession speech?

If protocol calls for the losing VP candidate to stay out of the public eye in this way then she should not have been allowed.

3. Why hasn't McCain or a senior staffer publicly defended Palin and put an end to this?

Because no one believes enough that she deserves such a defense? Someone probably will eventually though I can little trust anything out of the mouth of anyone so close to either campaign.

4. Will Palin run for the presidency in 2012 (and if so, what does she need to do next time that she didn't do this time?)

If the accusations are true (though I've seen enough with my own eyes), she needs to learn better her grade school geography though IMO it goes much beyond that. I do not see a reasonable scenario where in 4 yrs I would be willing to vote for Palin. My vote went to the Libertarian candidate and I consider myself to have strong social conservative leanings! Go figure.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
moif
post Nov 7 2008, 11:49 AM
Post #4


*********
suspending disbelief

Sponsor
February 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,685
Member No.: 424
Joined: February-3-03

From: Aarhus, Denmark
Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



1. Why are McCain's staffers tearing down Sarah Palin?

If they are, if your sources are accurate, then I'd guess it was to shift the blame from their own failure.


2. Should she have been allowed to give a concession speech?

No, it doesn't take two people to concede defeat. If she wanted to address the party faithful, then a press brieifing would suffice.


3. Why hasn't McCain or a senior staffer publicly defended Palin and put an end to this?

Palin makes them look good by comparison.


4. Will Palin run for the presidency in 2012 (and if so, what does she need to do next time that she didn't do this time?)

Perhaps she will, but for any hope of success, she'll probably have to grow a penis.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Julian
post Nov 7 2008, 12:23 PM
Post #5


Group Icon

*********
Every day, when I wake up, I thank the Lord I'm Welsh

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 2,932
Member No.: 496
Joined: February-14-03

From: Swindon, UK
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Other



1. Why are McCain's staffers tearing down Sarah Palin?

Mostly because I think her selection was only ever a cynical electoral move to mobilise Republican supporters who didn't warmt o McCain. I don't think the McCain camp ever really liked her, they just thought (wrongly, as it turnd out) that she'd be a politically useful but politically harmless broadener of the McCain campaign.

Instead, she ended up alienating uncommitted voters, and (towards the end of the campaign at least) asserting enough of her own mind that she would have been potentially dangerous to a McCain Presidency - I think she'd have been an active plotter against McCain rather than just an idiot VP akin to Dan Quayle. (In purely political terms, I mean.)

Hell hath not fury like a woman scorned, as a famous Midlands bloke once wrote, and I think Palin will react to the blame for an overall lacklustre campaign being pointed at her by old-school Republicanism. I think this reaction will take the form of doing everything she can to entrench the more neoconservative, muscular Christianity she represents as the dominant Republican force. I foresee a battle for the soul of Republicanism every bit as bitter and protracted as the battle for the soul of the Labour party in Britain during the 1980s when they found themselves out of tune with the electorate and thumped by a resurgent opposition. (A battle which has not been matched by the British Conservative party, which is why I believe they will fail as a government if they do win the next British GE.)

And if this is the route she goes down, I think it will be every bit as disastrous as it was for the British Labour party and keep them out of any kind of national power for four or even five elections.

2. Should she have been allowed to give a concession speech?

No. Defeated VP nominees don't give the concession speech, the defeated Presidential candidate does. Joe Biden didn't get to do a victory speech either. Them's the breaks. If she wants to do a concession speech I'm sure she'll get the opportunity to do so if she stands in 2012 and is selected as the Republican Presidential candidate.

3. Why hasn't McCain or a senior staffer publicly defended Palin and put an end to this?

McCain was, I think, forced into the type of campaigning by his advisers, who foisted Palin on him as a VP. I think we saw the McCain of old that we didn't see enough of during this campaign - decent, upstanding and principled (there were flashes, such as him telling some Republican hecklers that Obama was a good man and would not be a bad President) - in his concession speech, and I think his main motivation at the moment will be to distance hismelf from mainstream politics for a while. I don't think anyone can blame him for that, whatever their opinions of him.

I think his senior staffers are hoping to have another crack at the Presidency, and by extention juicy cabinet jobs and a lifetime of lectures and directorships ever after, and having worked up close with Palin this time around, they don't think she has any chance of winning. The 2012 election, I mean; I don't doubt she'd have a very strong chance of getting the GOP nomination.

The GOPs problem, like any party in any democracy that has made most of the running for a long time and then suddenly finds themselves out of power, is that they have to come to terms with why they lost as much and as urgently as coming to terms with losing itelf. They will be thinking that they need to revisit how they communicate, that somehow they failed to get their message across. They will be thinking about how they need to be more disciplined, and how the gaffes this time around cost them votes (which is, I think, the motivation behind a lot of the anti-Palin sniping).

The truth is, though, that their policy platform, especially that of the socially conservative Christian Right that Palin is such a part of, has been roundly rejected by the electorate, who have seen enough of it in government to have formed a negative opinion. If the GOP want to be back in power - in either Congress or the White House - inside a generation (over which time a new group of voters will grow up shaped by Democrat dominance and inevitably reject it when they get the chance), they must have a root-and-branch review not just of how they campaign, but of what they believe. Much of it will stay the same, and some of the now-cherished tenets that they think of as core Republican ideas will turn out not to be, but only if they go through the review process. By trimming their sails to match the way the wind is blowing, the policies that come out of their revised core principles will almost automatically be more appealing to voters.

The temptation, though, will be to cling to their current principles. The voters had a collective brainfart. We didn't communicate clearly enough.

It echoes being dumped, in some ways. The natural human reaction is grief, then anger and self-justification, but none of those things help us change and grow in ways that will make our next relationship work any better. A period of introspection followed by some positive changes to ourselves (finally going to the gym, learning to control our temper, etc.) is going to be far more productive than just concluding that the other person is a bit strange and you're really okay as you are (though in relationships, and occasionally in elections, that really is what's going on).

4. Will Palin run for the presidency in 2012 (and if so, what does she need to do next time that she didn't do this time?)

I think she'll try, and I think she's got a good chance of securing the GOP nomination. Four years' more experience of national politics may temper her and cause her to change her views in nationally useful ways, or may retrench her opinions which are already out of kilter with the voters. I suspect the latter, though I don't discount the former.

What does she need to do next time that she didn't this time? If she spent the next four years just listening to ordinary Americans, rather than the party sympathisers she seems to have surrounded herself with during this campaign (and which, to her credit, she seemed to have resisted doing in her time as Alaska governor), that'll help.

More than anything, though, I think she should spend her time reading some books. Maybe take a Politics Philosophy and Economics degree - she's got time. This would give her some proper grounding and make her look less like someone who thinks with her gut and her Bible. Even if that's still how she thinksat the end of her studies, she'd at least be able to understand her opponents better, argue better against them in their own terms, and make he own case better in was that appeal to everyone, not just the gosh-darn-I-burned-the-muffins cutesy way that she's been limited to this time around. She'll still be able to do that when it's called for, but she'll also be able to hold her own in TV interviews without coming across as ignorant or inarticulate or both, as she often did in this campaign.

Hell, while she's at it, she could do her studying at a foreign university and get some real foreign policy experience at the same time. Oxford, Cambridge, the Sorbonne, Rio de Janiero, Cologne, Johannesburg, Moscow, Delhi, Tokyo - anywhere, really.

She'd come back a different person - i.e. not the partisan attack moose/caribou Barbie/gaffe generator, but not the person suspicious of the patriotism of anyone living in a community with a population of more than 5,000 she came across as this time around either. An educated, thoughtful rightwing politician with populist instincts is almost always going to do better at the ballot box than a ignorant, thoughless rightwing politician with populist instincts. The populist insticnts will secure "the base", and the education and thoughtfulness will stand a chance of attracting moderates and floating voters, rather than the ignorance and thoughtlessness alienating them as they did this time around.

Basically, like the GOP as a whole, she will benefit most if she realises that what the electorate has rejected is (some of) her ideas, rather than her self-presentation, and she works harder to come up with some new ideas rather than just trying to repackage the same tired old and (mostly) failed ones.

This post has been edited by Julian: Nov 7 2008, 12:38 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Paladin Elspeth
post Nov 7 2008, 12:31 PM
Post #6


*********
I want the 10th Doctor for President!

Sponsor
August 1, 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,987
Member No.: 721
Joined: May-10-03

From: Between 2 Great Lakes
Gender: Female
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



1. Why are McCain's staffers tearing down Sarah Palin?

Because they don't want to accept responsibility for not vetting her properly and they are embarrassed.

2. Should she have been allowed to give a concession speech?

When no other running mate has given a concession speech? I don't think so.

3. Why hasn't McCain or a senior staffer publicly defended Palin and put an end to this?

See the answer under #1, and they are being sore losers. EDIT: I think McCain does want to distance himself from this and that "the less said, the better". I still think he wanted Joe Lieberman as his running mate but his campaign told him to select Palin.

4. Will Palin run for the presidency in 2012 (and if so, what does she need to do next time that she didn't do this time?)

Not unless she gets an education about government, geography, and current events. She didn't know the NAFTA countries? Sheesh.

Sarah Palin got a raw deal. While she didn't have the requisite educational level, the McCain campaign didn't do their homework, and that wasn't her fault. She was given an opportunity and she took it. She is an ambitious person, a diamond in the rough. Time will tell if she can correct the knowledge deficits that became so glaringly apparent over the past several weeks.

I disagree with you, moif. I think a woman will become President some day, but she will have to be seen as knowledgeable and capable as well as charismatic when the opportunity avails itself. A brain should be the requisite organ, not being able to "write one's own name in the snow". I am hoping that after the last eight years the American people have finally learned this.

This post has been edited by Paladin Elspeth: Nov 7 2008, 01:08 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post Nov 7 2008, 01:23 PM
Post #7


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,328
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



1. Why are McCain's staffers tearing down Sarah Palin?

It's the smarmy factor. There's no "I" in "Team" until things go wrong, then the "U" shows up along with wagging fingers. Just a bunch of kids without a clue, and the top dogs have no excuse. Simply clueless.

2. Should she have been allowed to give a concession speech?

No, that would have been another big mistake. However, it fits with some other things that she has done, trying to upstage McCain. Is that foolish pride or something more sinister?

3. Why hasn't McCain or a senior staffer publicly defended Palin and put an end to this?

What's the point? It's over. Now do no further damage. If it were me, I'd take these punks aside and thrash them up and down privately. Much more effective. My dramatic ending would go something like this, "If you ever want another job in this political gig, you'll do well to shut that trap pronto!" It'd probably be more colorful.

4. Will Palin run for the presidency in 2012 (and if so, what does she need to do next time that she didn't do this time?)

I don't think she'll be able to attract enough money to get a campaign off the ground. But if she wants to give it a whirl, better read a bunch on how we got to where we are and talk with people who know, or at least think they know. Then write something. Synthesize -- learn, discuss and synthesize. Build a supportive network. And for Josh's sake, stop porking out! I suggest writing something about the campaign, what she learned, where she wants to go from here. Do an Obama.

I'm doubtful that this train wreck will ever get straightened out.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
moif
post Nov 7 2008, 03:16 PM
Post #8


*********
suspending disbelief

Sponsor
February 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,685
Member No.: 424
Joined: February-3-03

From: Aarhus, Denmark
Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(Paladin Elspeth @ Nov 7 2008, 01:31 PM) *
I disagree with you, moif. I think a woman will become President some day, but she will have to be seen as knowledgeable and capable as well as charismatic when the opportunity avails itself. A brain should be the requisite organ, not being able to "write one's own name in the snow". I am hoping that after the last eight years the American people have finally learned this.
Some day yes, but not probably not Sarah Palin in 2012.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BoF
post Nov 7 2008, 03:35 PM
Post #9


**********
Giga-bite: "I catch mice & rats - 2 & 4 legs."

Sponsor
October 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,126
Member No.: 3,423
Joined: August-14-04

From: Texas
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(moif @ Nov 7 2008, 09:16 AM) *
Some day yes, but not probably not Sarah Palin in 2012.

I agree. If Barack Obama has accomplisshed nothing else, he has demolished the idea that the presidency is exclusively for white males. His election opens the door for the potential election of women, Latinos and others.

I hope Sarah Palin is never elected president, not in 2012, 2016, 2020, 2024 ...You get the idea.

I'm glad I have lived long enough to see Obama's election. I hope I'm around long enough to see a qualified woman elected.

BTW: I get aggarvated with Chris Matthews, but he nailed it a few weeks ago when he said "comparing Sarah Palin to Hillary Clinton is like comparing an igloo to the Empire Estate Building."

This post has been edited by BoF: Nov 7 2008, 03:49 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Trouble
post Nov 7 2008, 03:37 PM
Post #10


*******
Five Hundred Club

Group: Members
Posts: 736
Member No.: 1,142
Joined: September-6-03

From: Regina, Sk. Canada
Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: None



1. Why are McCain's staffers tearing down Sarah Palin?

The speed at which internal staffers are vetting details about Palin speaks to a schism within the party. Can anyone quantify the extent of animosity between her and the larger conservative crowd? The cult of personality surrounding this candidate is not insignificant. Perhaps the party finally came to grips with reality and realized they had made a poor choice? At any rate, the justifications of internal staffers cannot really be speculated on by the public.

2. Should she have been allowed to give a concession speech?

The answers she provided during her run were extremely hollow and devoid of content. If she had displayed a better grasp of the issues she might have been given more leniency. Ultimately the choice was not hers to make.

3. Why hasn't McCain or a senior staffer publicly defended Palin and put an end to this?

If the reports of her attacking staffers in a diva-esque fashion are remotely true, this girl is high maintenance. Palin has openly discussed about running in 2012. The magic of the moment is distorting her grasp on her abilities. I'll refer to my link.

QUOTE(Alternet)
Perhaps Schmidt didn't want McCain's speech marred by contrived folksiness, desperate winking and one last pander to the conservative base. Certainly no one wanted the night to end with Palin setting the groundwork for a 2012 campaign for the White House.


4. Will Palin run for the presidency in 2012 (and if so, what does she need to do next time that she didn't do this time?)


If she does she will have an immense learning curve on what it means to be a civil servant. She has no grasp of the responsibilities of public office, ran up a tab bigger than what was reported and then gave the party credit card to her family. If patronage is occuring this early in her career, this is an omen of things to come.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Curmudgeon
post Nov 7 2008, 03:51 PM
Post #11


********
I am an unpaid protester!

Sponsor
August 1, 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 1,186
Member No.: 729
Joined: May-14-03

From: Michigan
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



The Questions for Debate:

1. Why are McCain's staffers tearing down Sarah Palin?

Let's see, the favorite expression of the talking heads on the TV this election cycle has been she is being "thrown under the bus." From about the day after her nomination, there has been controversy over whether or not she was adequately vetted, qualified, etc. John McCain took every opportunity to express how "proud" he was of her, but perhaps the staff wants to make certain that in 2012 they are not staffing a Sarah Palin/Joe the Plumber for president tcket.

2. Should she have been allowed to give a concession speech?

"Two McCain sources say Palin clearly did not understand the protocol of a concession speech..."

The political staff probably knew better what the protocol is, but by then, I had heard enough of her voice. As a member of the public, we clearly needed to hear John McCain concede more than we needed to hear his VEEP concede.

3. Why hasn't McCain or a senior staffer publicly defended Palin and put an end to this?

My vision of McCain at this point is that he is at an undisclosed residence contemplating his future. If the Senate splits 59-41, his "maverick" vote with the Democrats could end a filibuster and force action in the Senate. If he feels the Republicans are ready to throw him under the bus, it may put him in a position of power for the remainder of his term. Perhaps he is finally hearing from his staff what the press and the Democrats were trying to tell him about Sarah Palin...

4. Will Palin run for the presidency in 2012 (and if so, what does she need to do next time that she didn't do this time?)

I was discussing with PE last night that I think the Republican Party is setting her up big time. The news has been reporting that Senator Ted Stevens appears likely to be re-elected, but may be ejected from the Senate by a 2/3 vote. "In that case, the Governor of Alaska would appoint his replacement." She can't appoint herself, I heard several times yesterday; but in 1939 Kentucky's Governor "Happy" Chandler resigned so that his Lt. Governor could be promoted to Governor and appoint him to the Senate. There is an ad on TV that asks, but doesn't answer, "Do sharks have eyelids?" With enough information, I found his story on the Internet. It may be a story that is taught in every political science course, or it may be a story that is being spoon fed to the media. I can well imagine Alaska's Lt. Governor accepting her resignation, being sworn in, and then saying, "Yes Sarah, I could have appointed you to the Senate, but I chose to appoint someone who I felt was better qualified and able to represent our state in the Senate.

Well, back to Wasilla to see if they want a candidate for Mayor with a $150,000 wardrobe...

That's right, the party sent a repo man for the clothes. Well, If the party repossessed "The Straight Talk Express," maybe there is no bus left to throw her under.

I can foresee a Republican primary campaign in four years drawing to a close, and the presumptive nominee attempting to select a Vice Presidential candidate. What qualified candidate would risk going through the same meat grinder Sarah Palin has gone through since Tuesday? flowers.gif

QUOTE(moif @ Nov 7 2008, 06:49 AM) *
Perhaps she will, but for any hope of success, she'll probably have to grow a penis.
I worked in a factory with close to 100 buildings, and several thousand employees. There was one union member who had undergone a sex change operation. At any given time, everyone knew what building "it" was working in, and special provisions were made for a separate locker room and bathroom facilities. From my experience, Ms. Palin would face far more resistance if she suddenly claimed that she had grown a penis. She might draw larger crowds, but certainly fewer votes.

This post has been edited by Curmudgeon: Nov 7 2008, 04:22 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DaffyGrl
post Nov 7 2008, 04:38 PM
Post #12


********
Millennium Mark

Sponsor
November 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 1,758
Member No.: 2,889
Joined: April-10-04

From: California
Gender: Female
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: None



1. Why are McCain's staffers tearing down Sarah Palin?

Because they can? Seriously, I think itís a case of sore losers looking to lash out Ė and sheís an easy target. Itís far easier to shift the blame to her than the presidential candidate or the campaign itself. Honestly, I feel that McCain got more votes with her than if heíd chosen another running mate. She appealed to that hard-core, religious fundamentalist base that got Bush elected twice. Unfortunately, no one in the McCain campaign realized that the majority of the country was sick and tired of that simplistic view and its effect over the last 8 years. To use a sports analogy, they called a play that had already failed, expecting a different result this time around.

2. Should she have been allowed to give a concession speech?

Absolutely not. Itís never been done, and doesnít need to be.

3. Why hasn't McCain or a senior staffer publicly defended Palin and put an end to this?

I donít know the answer to this. Maybe because the election is over, no one cares. Maybe McCain feels as if his choice of Palin as running mate was forced upon him, and he couldnít care less what happens to her now.

4. Will Palin run for the presidency in 2012 (and if so, what does she need to do next time that she didn't do this time?)

I certainly hope not, but she is ambitious, and it is possible. What I think will happen is that after a year, most people will be saying ďSarah who?Ē like we all did when she was picked as McCainís running mate. Peopleís memories fade after time, and generally donít remember who ran and lost in the previous campaign, especially VP candidates. I think some of the things that came to light about her during the campaign have tarnished her golden image in Alaska, and her future is nothing if not uncertain.

One thing for sure is that she needs to educate and inform herself. If she were a contestant on "Are You Smarter than a 5th Grader" she would fail miserably.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
moif
post Nov 7 2008, 05:32 PM
Post #13


*********
suspending disbelief

Sponsor
February 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,685
Member No.: 424
Joined: February-3-03

From: Aarhus, Denmark
Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(Curmudgeon @ Nov 7 2008, 04:51 PM) *
QUOTE(moif @ Nov 7 2008, 06:49 AM) *
Perhaps she will, but for any hope of success, she'll probably have to grow a penis.
I worked in a factory with close to 100 buildings, and several thousand employees. There was one union member who had undergone a sex change operation. At any given time, everyone knew what building "it" was working in, and special provisions were made for a separate locker room and bathroom facilities. From my experience, Ms. Palin would face far more resistance if she suddenly claimed that she had grown a penis. She might draw larger crowds, but certainly fewer votes.
That wasn't quite what I had in mind, but thanks for the laugh.

I don't think its any great secret that gender equality has yet to be acheived in most western countries (including my own). What I'm wondering now is if the 150 odd million American women could find a suitable icon, and coughed up enough money, could they simply buy the presidency just as every previous winner of the office has done as far back as I can remember?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bikerdad
post Nov 7 2008, 05:37 PM
Post #14


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 2,829
Member No.: 715
Joined: May-8-03

Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



The Questions for Debate:

1. Why are McCain's staffers tearing down Sarah Palin?

First, because of the time-honored post election tradition of the losing side throwing a blamestorm.
Second, are McCain staffers actually doing this? Its all anonymous. Malkin has a very good point.
Third, because the staff, who are pretty much exclusively from the moderate element of the party, never like Palin from the git-go and now they're venting.

2. Should she have been allowed to give a concession speech?
Certainly would have been "change", wouldn't it? I don't know one way or the other, nor do I really care. The only concession speech that I think ever mattered was Al Gore's.

3. Why hasn't McCain or a senior staffer publicly defended Palin and put an end to this?
Dunno. Possibly because McCain is constitutionally incapable of defending fellow Republicans? whistling.gif Possibly because the senior staffers" are looking to work with other Republicans for their runs on the WH, and so are laying the groundwork now. Possibly because McCain is buying the anti-Palin spin, since he can't accept that the biggest mistakes of the campaign were his.

4. Will Palin run for the presidency in 2012 (and if so, what does she need to do next time that she didn't do this time?)
She might, or might not. I hope that she does. One thing she would need to do is interviews on sports radio. I know that sounds goofy, but not only would she shine there, it would also allow her to reach a natural demographic that doesn't pay much attention to politics.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wertz
post Nov 7 2008, 07:51 PM
Post #15


Group Icon

*********
Advanced Senior

Sponsor
January 2003

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 3,235
Member No.: 181
Joined: October-23-02

From: Franklinville PA
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: None



Why are McCain's staffers tearing down Sarah Palin?

It was Sarah Palin! No, it was the liberal media! No, it was the financial crisis!

No, it was the fact that the McCain campaign was one of the worst political campaigns in US history and that their candidate kept flipping on issues to side with one of the most unpopular administrations in US history. Anything, but face the truth: the McCain campaign (and their candidate) SUCKED.

Should she have been allowed to give a concession speech?

No. The fact that it even occured to her to do so is yet another further different example of her general ignorance of, well... everything.

Why hasn't McCain or a senior staffer publicly defended Palin and put an end to this?

Because they don't want to.

Will Palin run for the presidency in 2012?

Please, please, please, please, please! Yes, Sarah - run! And win the nomination! If that happened, the Democratic victory in 2012 would make Obama's victory over McCain look like Gore's victory over Bush.

In all seriousness, I expect she will - she's that out of touch with reality. If she does, I expect her bid will be Giuliani 2.0.

And if so, what does she need to do next time that she didn't do this time?

I'd start with a brain transplant.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fife and Drum
post Nov 7 2008, 08:50 PM
Post #16


******
Senior Contributor

Sponsor
February 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 480
Member No.: 2,098
Joined: December-30-03

From: Louie Ville KY
Gender: Male
Politics: Slightly Conservative
Party affiliation: Democrat



1. Why are McCain's staffers tearing down Sarah Palin?

Iíve worked numerous campaigns and itís as much an emotion investment as anything else. Having vested their time and hearts their psychological immune system is kicking in against the person they probably feel cost them the election.

And unfortunately itís a sign of the times. As their Old School candidate showed with possibly his best speech of the year, there is a way to lose with dignity and grace. It used to be when you lost you thanked those who helped and congratulated your opponent. End of story.

Unfortunately too many have become blameful victims.


2. Should she have been allowed to give a concession speech?

If itís true that she had prepared a concession speech it just further demonstrates that not only does she need remedial geography lessons, but she doesnít even understand the rules of her own vocation. She must have an ego the size of her state.

Maybe the McCain staff were correct in believing she might have attempted to upstage her boss.


3. Why hasn't McCain or a senior staffer publicly defended Palin and put an end to this?

Because they no longer work for Mccain?


4. Will Palin run for the presidency in 2012Ö..


It was obvious she really enjoyed her brief stint and if Iím correct about the size of her ego sheíll be back. But I was shocked the other night when the story broke regarding her level of geographical understanding. The shock wasnít regarding her limited capacity, but the fact it was being reported on Faux, first by Shep then Bill.

It appears those in charge of the GOP channel donít particularly care for the governor and donít want her around in four years.


(and if so, what does she need to do next time that she didn't do this time?)

Catch up on about a couple thousand years of history and buy an atlas.

Edited for grammar.

This post has been edited by Fife and Drum: Nov 7 2008, 08:53 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
EuroBlack
post Nov 7 2008, 10:26 PM
Post #17


*****
Century Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 196
Member No.: 5,095
Joined: June-5-05

From: Europe
Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE
But two fundamental conservative stands she took mattered greatly to me: She vigorously defended the Second Amendment and the sanctity of life more eloquently


eloquently? What, she said, "gimme a gun im gonna shoot the abortion clinic doctor from a helicopter?"
Kathleen Sibelius, Democratic governor of Kansas, hunts too, but at least she doesn't do it cowardly from a plane!
Don't like the snow? Don't hunt during winter!



Oh, and how you can be pro-guns and yet call yourself "pro-life" .... insanity.

There have been a lot of school shootings lately. Yet, how curious, I don't hear any body in the repub camp supporting arming all the students at school, while even 12 year old girls can be and ARE taught how to shoot a gun and some of them are pretty good at it. Why is that?

Because introducing more guns in an unstable environment is ST00000000PID, that's why.



Why hasn't McCain or a senior staffer publicly defended Palin and put an end to this?
He's old and he's slow and tired, and no doubt he will say something tomorrow.

Will Palin run for the presidency in 2012?
We wish! If wishes were moose that shot back ....

QUOTE
And if so, what does she need to do next time that she didn't do this time?

I'd start with a brain transplant.

Hilarious. Kudos.

The other questions are too silly.

Seriously, her last two or three interviews looked frighteningly sensible in the sense that they were completely gaffe-free. If she can string sentences together of more than 5 words, she'll be a dangerous threat to any repub candidate. Especially if she can victimize herself at the expense of the Mccain team. She will continue to fascinate in the way that a rabbit is fascinated by the snake: to our own detriment.

This post has been edited by EuroBlack: Nov 7 2008, 10:51 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kalabus
post Nov 8 2008, 08:50 AM
Post #18


******
Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 279
Member No.: 2,117
Joined: January-3-04

From: Illinois
Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: Independent



[1. Why are McCain's staffers tearing down Sarah Palin? Maybe this is natural after a campaign. Maybe they are angry at themselves for picking such an unvetted novice who lacked the intellectual heft (like you would find in an inexperienced Jindal) to avoid sounding like a clueless airhead. John McCain has always been a serious politician, an honorable one. Palin sort of brought in what seemed like the right wing version of Daily KOS'rs. Her sect seemed to be the gullible partisans, accusing and believing Obama to be a Bin Laden deciple, and these people were eager and ready to gobble up any new blog conspiracy that came along about Obama not being American. She sort of fed their psyche, that a "Real America" existed and was under attack, that community organizers were communists, that Obama palled around with terrorists and let's not forget Wright. This sort of egging spilled towards McCain, who was eventually forced to address it, which was beneath him. It's like seeing a big time star banging around on semi-pro teams at the tail end of his career. It was beneath John McCain, this campaign the Palin faction sort of inspired. I think it ticked the true believers in McCain off, that she ruined him in some way. That she represented the establishment handlers and religious interests that McCain probably still feels are agents of intolerance. McCain has been a maverick most of his career...a real one, not the Sarah Palin "I called myself one therefore I am" variety. Like the supporters of Robert E Lee slamming that turncoat Longstreet for Gettysburg, because slamming the man of intergrity, of ancient warriorship and nobility to them was a hit almost harder than losing the war.

2. Should she have been allowed to give a concession speech? For what? Was she conceding to Biden? No, just doesn;t seem right

3. Why hasn't McCain or a senior staffer publicly defended Palin and put an end to this? Palin has little known of her days in Alaska, but from what I have read the entire time from her, is that she uses anyone she can to get ahead and turns on them. She is a territorial, backstabbing sort according to the people who knew her in Alaskan politics.

From Wikipedia: Link

Barracudas occur both singly and in schools around reefs, but also appear in open seas. They are voracious predators and hunt using a classic example of lie-in-wait or ambush. They rely on surprise and short bursts of speed (up to 27mph (43 km/h)[3]) to overrun their prey, sacrificing maneuverability.

The larger barracudas are more or less solitary in their habits. Barracudas do not stick around to care for their young. Young and half-grown fish frequently congregate in schools. Their food is composed of fish of all types. Large barracudas, when gorged, may attempt to herd a shoal of prey fish in shallow water, where they guard over them until they are ready for another meal. Large barracudas have been known to eat young barracudas.


Sarah Barracuda makes up for in ambition and shrewdness what she lacks in intelligence.


4. Will Palin run for the presidency in 2012 (and if so, what does she need to do next time that she didn't do this time?

I think hitching a ride and having a clear path when McCain was out in 4-8 was her best shot. She lacks the intellectual skill to hold up in a debated format of drawn out national politics against people who actually can discuss issues. Her failings were not related to inexperience, but a serious lack of base knowledge that limited the things she could speak of and relate with. You could teach Forrest Gump calculus for a year straight and he still wouldn't get it. She is too behind the curve, and not interested in the nuances of global politics itself, just the position and power with it. She's not smart enough to be at that level and she will never be smart enough. Flashcard learning what she knows isn't going to work in an unfiltered mass format where the questions will flow and interweb beyond her limited comprehension of the issues. She can't always defer with a folsky wink and "Oh, I may not answer the questions you want, I'm gonna answer just to the people as well also, Joe sixpack and hockey moms uniting with Joe and therefore manifest as such"......that won't do it when she is an equal with supposedly 4 more years experience in 2008.

She might be arrogant enough to run, but she won't be effective or viable I suspect.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
EuroBlack
post Nov 8 2008, 01:23 PM
Post #19


*****
Century Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 196
Member No.: 5,095
Joined: June-5-05

From: Europe
Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(kalabus @ Nov 8 2008, 10:50 AM) *
1. like you would find in an inexperienced Jindal
2. John McCain has always been a serious politician, an honorable one.
3. This sort of egging spilled towards McCain, who was eventually forced to address it, which was beneath him. It's like seeing a big time star banging around on semi-pro teams at the tail end of his career. It was beneath John McCain, this campaign the Palin faction sort of inspired.
4. but from what I have read the entire time from her, is that she uses anyone she can to get ahead and turns on them. She is a territorial, backstabbing sort according to the people who knew her in Alaskan politics. Sarah Barracuda makes up for in ambition and shrewdness what she lacks in intelligence.
5. She can't always defer with a folsky wink and "Oh, I may not answer the questions you want, I'm gonna answer just to the people as well also, Joe sixpack and hockey moms uniting with Joe and therefore manifest as such"


1. The only thing I know about jindal is that he really and actually put Creationism back in the schools in Louisiana, and that he's getting a total pass on that. Liberal media, indeed.
2. He lost all that honor when he defended torture and gitmo, and most importantly threw his adopted daughter Bridget under the bus by working with Eskew. See my list of mccain 52 flipflops
3. Wait, didn't HE pick her? Why is the argument made that Sarah Pallin'-Around "just happened" to mccain? He did it to himself and that what's really hurt. Did the war in Iraq just happen to bush? Or the no-oversight financial market?
4. Well said. She's the ultimate vindictive, vicious prom queen, with the level of maturity to match.
5. This is the absence of responsibility that is the hallmark of the Bush-regime.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kalabus
post Nov 9 2008, 12:26 PM
Post #20


******
Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 279
Member No.: 2,117
Joined: January-3-04

From: Illinois
Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(EuroBlack @ Nov 8 2008, 01:23 PM) *
1. The only thing I know about jindal is that he really and actually put Creationism back in the schools in Louisiana, and that he's getting a total pass on that. Liberal media, indeed.
2. He lost all that honor when he defended torture and gitmo, and most importantly threw his adopted daughter Bridget under the bus by working with Eskew. See my list of mccain 52 flipflops
3. Wait, didn't HE pick her? Why is the argument made that Sarah Pallin'-Around "just happened" to mccain? He did it to himself and that what's really hurt. Did the war in Iraq just happen to bush? Or the no-oversight financial market?
4. Well said. She's the ultimate vindictive, vicious prom queen, with the level of maturity to match.
5. This is the absence of responsibility that is the hallmark of the Bush-regime.



Remember that I am mostly arguing for his team in regards to the "why" they are throwing Palin under the dog sled.

I agree with much of what you say, I was simply trying to answer the question as rationally as possible, mostly for what I suspect is driving his supporters to slam her.

Anyway...

1) I agree that Jindal is the sort of extreme social conservative that is jaw dropping in my head. Views on abortion, religion and creationism.....yeah, he's at the Jesse Helms portion of his party.

However, he is a brilliant person. He is someone who would ace an IQ test.

I was simply noting that if the GOP was going to pick someone inexperienced, youthful, exciting and that would play to their uber social conservative base elements, than Jindal (who is a smart guy) would have been a much better pick. He would not be stumped by true and false questions sort of things. As Obama showed, a man can make up for a lot of missing things when he is obviously a terribly bright person.

2) I don't think him being flimsy on torture (I did not click on the link, but I think he opposes torture, but doesn't want torture standards applied to the divisions of intelligence agencies and military that actually would be conducting covert tortures). I do not remember for sure, but also think McCain eventually turned on Gitmo. I do not know about his daughter or Eskew or what that means.

3) His handlers actually probably picked her, he didn't know her or anything about her really. Again though, this is not me trying to vindicateMcCain, this is me noting why I think his team is hammering Palin now. I think many of McCain's supporters and inner-guys see him as a warrior hero, as an honorable guy who has spent years crafting this maverick image they all believed in. It made McCain iconic. This is why I brought up Robert E Lee at Gettysburg. Robert E. Lee lost this battle, General Longstreet was the one who tactically understood it and the futility of Pickett's charge and the advantage of the Union positions and entrenchments. Longstreet was right and Lee was wrong. However, Lee's supporters were so caught up in the mystique of the man, of the God they had created, that they couldn't tolerate him being responsible for the crushing defeat that effectively ended the South. They all turned on Longstreet, Longstreet (additionally because he worked with the North after the war) was made as some sort of villain. Now, I'm not comparing Palin with Longstreet...she was never right of course and has no skills, but I think McCain's true believers and supporters are pushing this off on her, are making it her fault just to take the focus off their fallen hero and because they are bitter that McCain's last ride ended up like this. It is true that McCain is at fault for her, and he and his guys picked her, but I think this is therapeutic lashing out stuff for them. They are not thinking so much in her incompetence and ignorance reflecting poorly on McCain, but thinking in the "This woman soured McCain by proximity, ruined his last chance". It's like in baseball. The manager subs in a player who makes an error, because he is a junk fielder. Well, the initial anger isn't for the guy who ignorantly put him in the game, but for the player himself, and how he has hurt the team by failing.

4) Yes, confident and ambitious stupid people are very very scary.

5) I agree. Rove snuck by Bush on these superficial grounds. Wanting to have a beer with him and thinking he was a regular guy (whose grandfather was a senator, whose dad was head of the CIA, Veep and president...like most regular non-elitists) was the draw. He offered a lighter more common guy approach than the sexaholic Clinton campaign... loaded with all those "think that are so high and mighty" Ivy leaguers everywhere. ermm.gif . They ran on the fake Texas accent, churchy lingo, common guy and common thinker spiel. 8 Years later, they figured they would try the model out again, except make this one even less intelligent and needing even more proof from that jury that is still out on evolution and scence. They are foundationally irresponsible campaigns and administrations built entirely off this "hallmark card" charm of stupid comments, poorly structured sentences, and lots a good ole regular folk eatin, drinkin and usin religion to demonize others.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: February 20th, 2018 - 11:04 PM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.