Could this spell the end for Sarah Pallin?

[Rockie]

I wasn't compiling a list LH, I was only talking about Palin. Your assessment of Nixon and Bush is, if anything, too kind to them in my opinion, so I don't know where it is you think we disagree. In fact, Bush and Cheney belong in prison as far as I'm concerned. Especially Cheney, because I think Bush was his puppet on a string and it was really his agenda for the last eight years.

But for this thread let's keep the focus on Palin, who you seem to agree would be a total disaster too.

[LH]

There's been total diasters on both sides of the 49th. It doesn't say much for the intelligence of the electorate and a mistake made one time......well there can be misjudgements, BUT when you do it a second time and it's now back to back misjudgements?
Rockie, I'm of the belief that based on the political intelligence of those doing the voting, Sarah Pallin is NOT to be laughed at and with the right election team, enough finances and the right timing, Granny Clampett could run for PM or President and has a damn good chance of assuming either Office. Whether you are qualified for such an office has no bearing anymore except to people like you and me. The right timing, the right monies, the right bunch of liars and PR team running the show is what counts nowadays

[bmc]

I'm of the belief that based on the political intelligence of those doing the voting, Sarah Pallin is NOT to be laughed at and with the right election team, enough finances and the right timing, Granny Clampett could run for PM or President and has a damn good chance of assuming either Office. Whether you are qualified for such an office has no bearing anymore except to people like you and me. The right timing, the right monies, the right bunch of liars and PR team running the show is what counts nowadays

+1

And a compelling argument for a benevolent dictator being a pretty good way to lead a country.

[Rockie]

Of course she is good for a laugh. Lots and lots of them actually if SNL's ratings during the election are to be believed. She is also to be feared if she actually took an election, and I've said that many times as well. Matt Damon said it best in that famous clip "she could have the nuclear codes", and that doesn't begin to address the internal policy and worldwide economic damage that would surely result. She would either be an easy mark for someone smarter and more devious like Cheney to use as a front, or she could actually make policy herself which is even scarier.

The last election had her riding the coattails of McCain and she was only a potential threat, but American voter turnout came in record numbers I think simply because American voters with a brain who are otherwise too apathetic to bother couldn't let that happen. If Palin actually ran for the big chair I think it would motivate even more people to stop it.

But maybe I'm giving Americans too much credit.

[Icebound]

And a compelling argument for a benevolent dictator being a pretty good way to lead a country.

MY dictator or YOUR dictator?



...

[Siddley Hawker]

And a compelling argument for a benevolent dictator being a pretty good way to lead a country.

We 'ave try dat, us we.

[l_reason]

Ron James talking about Sara Pallin

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f98TaKJomnk

[LH]

Rockie ---------- understand your fears and your meaning, BUT the Americans have a 'trump card' in their political system that Canada doesn't have. The vast majority of Canadians attribute way more power to the White House than it has. They are constantly 'drummed-to-death' via the media about "the President this or the Presideent that" and therefore grant him much more powersz than he actually has. So to counter your fears and those like you, his counter is a Congress who's make-up is a majority from the opposite Party that he represents. Broken-down even moreso, it would be best if that majority exists particularly in the Senate. The person third-in-line to assume the Office of President in an emergency is the Senate Majority Leader and he casts a huge shadow in the halls of Congress. If the Presendent is even thinking of introducing a policy or a policy change, that will be one of the very first people that he confers with before that introduction. To not do so is political suicide for him and he gets to regret it very soon and very hard.

So if Pallin wants to run as a Republican and the Congress is mostly Democrat as at present, then there's your counter-check. History shows that any President who has not had Congress on his side, basically gets nowhere with anything and his Presidency is doomed to be termed a failure therafter.

We can't do or expect any of he above here in Canada because the PM is the Leader of the Party that assumes power on election night. If they don't assume power, then he doesn't either.The closest thing we have to the Americans then is a Minority government where the elected Party has to be very careful what they do and if there's a violent disagreement about something, then they can find themselves back on the campaign trail once again.

[bmc]

It'll be interesting to see if the Freeman effort will succeed in introducing a new form of government in that valley Cat Driver intends to settle them in. There may be a role for Sarah as their supreme leader.

Just a thought.

[LH]

Well wherever that valley is, Sarah Pallin should take all the other stupid politicians with here. If that's the case, then that valley will have a large city soon after.

[Rockie]

Rockie ---------- understand your fears and your meaning, BUT the Americans have a 'trump card' in their political system that Canada doesn't have. The vast majority of Canadians attribute way more power to the White House than it has. They are constantly 'drummed-to-death' via the media about "the President this or the Presideent that" and therefore grant him much more powersz than he actually has. So to counter your fears and those like you, his counter is a Congress who's make-up is a majority from the opposite Party that he represents. Broken-down even moreso, it would be best if that majority exists particularly in the Senate. The person third-in-line to assume the Office of President in an emergency is the Senate Majority Leader and he casts a huge shadow in the halls of Congress. If the Presendent is even thinking of introducing a policy or a policy change, that will be one of the very first people that he confers with before that introduction. To not do so is political suicide for him and he gets to regret it very soon and very hard.

So if Pallin wants to run as a Republican and the Congress is mostly Democrat as at present, then there's your counter-check. History shows that any President who has not had Congress on his side, basically gets nowhere with anything and his Presidency is doomed to be termed a failure therafter.

We can't do or expect any of he above here in Canada because the PM is the Leader of the Party that assumes power on election night. If they don't assume power, then he doesn't either.The closest thing we have to the Americans then is a Minority government where the elected Party has to be very careful what they do and if there's a violent disagreement about something, then they can find themselves back on the campaign trail once again.

Cheney and Bush broke US law repeatedly and blew farts at anybody who questioned them on it. They lied the US and a few other gullible allies into a war that had nothing to do with security. They trashed not only the US economy, but the whole worlds. Tell me again how they don't have the power?

[LH]

Rockie --------they can do whatever they wish to do ILLEGALLY, but they can only do it LEGALLY for SIX months and/or until the President's budget runs out of money and he has to ask Congress for more. At that point he either lies again to get those monies or tells the truth. If the truth isn't what makes Congress happy, then they have the power to shut him down and rescind all the orders he issued concerning same. So when invaded Iraq, he had the power to do so for SIX months ONLY. At THAT point he must go before Congress to get permission to conduct that war any longer. IF, for whatever reason. Congress decides that they don't wish for America to be involved in that war, then they have the power to shut the President down and stop all further fighting. They can do this because it is written so in the US Constitution and the Senate represents 1/3 of Amercan government powers and the House of Representatives another 1/3. Both Houses make-up the US Congress and the Office of the President represents the last 1/3 of power power. Ergo, the Congress represents 2/3 of the power and they get to ORDER the President what to do or shut him down on anything any old time they so desire. They instituted that into the Constution because never again did they want to be ruled-over by ONE person, so they divided-up all the powers three ways.

Cheney's 'blowing of farts' at Congress is now under investigation. Any 'farts' blown by Bush will be covered by Cheney's ass as has happened before and NIxon had his covered as long as they could be covered in just the same way. In that case Nixon's 'ass-coverers' were all on the way to jail after awhile, and Nixon had to retire from Office or he would have been impeached.that's a matter of official record. Like I said before, the Office of the Prsident of the United States DOES NOT have the power that you consider it doesIt's a matter of recod and has been so since before 1800. Once having read about those powers,any Grade 9 drop-out will make another observation also.........the Office of our PMO has way more powers than Office of Presidentever had. The PMO doesn't put fear into other countries like the WhiteHouse does becaause the PMO doesn't have the resources or budgets to intimidate anyone about anything unless it's his own MP's.

As far as America's Allies were concerned, I don't believe for one second that Tony Blair didn't know exactly what was going on. I believe he 'trailed' along because not to do so would have had many other long-term repercussions for him and Great britain over the years. I believe Chretin suspected, knew or was advised outright what was taking place, but stood his ground and said "No" anyway.

America trashed the whole world's economy? Sorry, but America's books were in trouble long before anything took place in Iraq. If there's any 'trashing' of any world's economy going to take place over the last 10 years, it's China who was/is the one to fear in that regard. Who in the hell do you think is loaning these bail-out monies to America anyway?.......AND America admits it openly. Where are the 'Big 3' American automakers still making the vast majority of their vehicle manufacturing dollars anyway? From China where their manufacturing plants can't keep up with the demand for their vehciles. There's been a whole bunch of crap going on around the financial world in various Stock Exchanges that more than helped to contribute to any 'funny mortgage dealings' in the US. Sorry, but they contributed to this recession in fine style alright , but while they were doing that there was an equal amount of 'funny business' taking place in other G8 and weathy countries. Unless you've been on the moon or not paying attention you know darnn well about the shananiggans taking place in places like Britain and France and throughout Europe. They needed no help or contact from the US for that. Tonite I'll have supper prepared in a kitchen that contains few articles manufactured in the US and those that are, are made by firms owned by Japanese, Korean or Chinese companies. Afterwards I'll watch a supposedly American-manufactured plazma TV with a truly American name on the front, but really made by an Japanese-owned American company.


+++ If you really want to get a first class lesson on who has the powers in US government....the White House and it's Cabinet or Congress, then you might want to re-read about who weilded all the powers during Watergate. The Cheney's of Nixon's Cabinet learned who did REAL quick as 'where the buck stopped' eventually found out too. So not one milligram of what I've stated here about White House powers is any opinion of mine. I only know part of what probably took palce or eminated from the White House, but I also know the laws that they have to obey also. Our PM has no such laws to obide by.

[Rockie]

You have a lot of faith in the written law as it stands, except you're forgetting a President and VP who ignored it. Cheney might feel some heat over what he did for awhile but he will never go where he belongs which is in prison, and the damage is already done anyway. Bush will never be held accountable for what he did.

The United States is the largest economy in the world and operated with no restraint on unfettered greed for a long time. The trigger was the mortgage crisis, not in China, but the good ole USA. Bush refused to impose regulation on the powerhouse financial firms and they did create this mess.

Bottom line here is this, Sarah Palin would be a wrecking ball in the Whitehouse because there would be no one with the guts to reign her in and admit she is as stupid and unqualified as she is. I think you should get your head out of the US Constitution and start paying attention to politics, which is much different than governance.

[ottawa,kan]

Yo Rockie....I think traditionally it's " White House" Two words, both capitalized. As in "The White House"

[Rockie]

Yo Rockie....I think traditionally it's " White House" Two words, both capitalized. As in "The White House"

Yup, you're right. I stand corrected.

[LH]

Rockie -------- I don't have a lot of faith in ANY laws...American or Canadian. I related to you what is THE law in that regard and that not too long ago another President and certain members of his Cabinet did similar things. They all paid the price for it in some regard and it was Congress who made that happen. So my memory is very good even though you may doubt anything else about me. Nixon committed more known crimes than Bush and there's no comparison in that regard between the two men. The VP at that time was essentialy a 'eunch' which is what the office of VP is anyway. The majority of the rest of the cabinet just spent it's time breaking into places illegally, committing fraaud of all types. embezzeled and just about every crime but murder. The crime of murder I'll reserve for Nixon and MacNamara because I was one of those who they were essentially trying to murder. So please cease and desist with me about the crimes of Presidents, their Cabinets or their peers on this side of the 49th either.

All of the crimes of Nixon and certain members of his Cabinet did not get taken further by Congress because of who they were and the Offices they held. It therefore it didn't happen overnight and I cannot therefore foretell at this point if anything will happen to Cheney and/or Bush because it's too early yet. I also cannot state that "of course nothing will happen, don't be a dummy LH". I can't say or think that because of what happened before not all the long ago to another President and his collection of 'scumbags'. As far as folks not going to jail for doing major crimes or at least something happening to them, there's $75,000,000 that the Liberal Party of Canada embezzeled from the people of Canada and the man who engineered that embezzelment, Jean Carle, has yet to spent one night in any jail.......and no Liberal Party has repaid any part of that money. Not the same as what we're talking about, but still a major crime or at least it would be a major crime if LH or Rockie committed it. Please do not refer to "damage done" because the "damage" Nixon did in that regard still hasn't been repaid in any way. Even considering the dollar and how long ago Vietnam was, the cost of anything to do with Iraq STLL has NOT MET or EXCEEDED what was spent on Nixon's part of the Vietnam War. So BUsh is still 'a piker' in that regard also.

Sorry, but you better do some research Rockie because no country, including the USA, operates in this global economy with unfettered restraints. They just don't go about doing as they please. The mortgages, such as they were being awarded, had a very long history of being awarded as such. That was taking place before I was born and that date is 1944. While this was taking place in the US, there were similar, but not mortgage-related embezzlements and commercial crimes taking place in the major banks of other countries. All the mortgage crisis did was bring these to the forefront and found out about much sooner than they would have been. That's all part of what is termed 'the global economy', so if one person sneezes in Peking, someone in South Africa is going to say 'gudzunteith' soon after. As far as the Amerians and their huge economy pushing ther economies around with it's weight, that's dated statement and has been for some time, if it were ever true. If some media outlet, country or person has a gross dislike for the US, then they speak or relase only that kind of news that supports their positions. GM went bankrupt and amongst all the reporting done about it, there was neve a mention about the other 800+ companies, national and international that GM owned outright or has a large vested interest in. It was just GM period. Some mention of OPEL and SAAB, but that was it. No mention of KitchenAid; the fact that practically every APU that is plugged into airliners nationally and internationally is a GM-made APU; the fact that up until very recently, 40% of Toyota was owned by GM and 20% of Kia was owned by GM. The list goes on and on and on, but some folks still think Obama crazy for bailing them out. Obama couldn't have afforded NOT to bail them out period.

You can 'tie the tail of the donkey' to Bush about not putting regualations in place to prevent everything that went on, but you are forgetting two major items. He doesn't jhave the power to do that alone and needs Congress to agree with him and secondly, there have been many Presidents before him who have been asked by various financial experts and advisors to instigate such regualtions and all negated the idea. So you can't expect Bush to enact an Act of Congress if he doesn't have thjat power and why do all the otther Presidents get a "get-out'of-jail-free" card on this.....why just Bush. It chokes me to defend this asshole on anything, but I can't blame him for doing something he had no official powers to do.

I can't get my "head out of the US Constitution" on this because it was used in the not distant past to do exactly what you say can't happen because the President of the USA has just about the same powers as a King. I'm stating that he has no such powers and off-up a recent point in history where a President was kicked from Office and many of his Cabinet were tried and went to penitentary. If you are talking about illegalities that politicians have performed, then I'd walk very careful on that one because Canada has a whole bunch of them also, living and dead, who should've or should now be serving time in penitentarys.............and never did. At least not in recorded history did any PM get kicked from Office by any Federal Court and many of his Cabinet get tried and serve time for doing anything. Hell, we don't even have a mechanism in our system for doing anything like that anyway. So we can just bend over around here and hope they at least have enough class to kiss us while they're doin' us.