Island,
the one thing you lose sight of in your opinion is the fact that Hillary already completed one term in the senate, completed a major university, is an established lawyer, has experience with most of the leaders in the world, understands the constitution, comprehends the way goverment works, knows all the senators and congressmen both former and current
AND Sarah Palin DOES NOT.
Yes, Hillary ran for her second term claiming that she would complete her term, but it was HER CONSTITUENTS that encouraged her to run for president, so it does not matter what she promised.
If her voting base was behind her decision, then what does the promise matter?
In Sarah Palins case, she has accomplished nothing, she was a puppet of the right wing gas and oil machine in Alaska, she has no constitutional experience and lacks the basic knowledge of how it works.
When asked, she couldnt even explain how the constitution works in relation to congress.
While in office as governor, she was under investigation for MANY ethics violations. Some were begining to stick, and it was looking like there were more to come that would "damage" her in the future. Her "handlers" thought it best to have her quit and start a nationwide tour for 4 years while her popularity among republicans was hot.
She couldnt even be honest when she announced why she was leaving.
Instead of stepping up to the microphone and stating that she was quitting in 2 weeks, instead, she steps up and announces that she "will not run for re-election".
A play on words, deception 101, making the public, thru implication that something other than the truth was happening. She never stated that she was quitting, rather, she said she will turn over power to the Lt Governor to govern the state at the end of the month.
Obviously, if she said she was quitting, then running for re-election would be impossible, but those words were carefully crafted so guys like you would "MISS" the real issue.
So what is the "real" issue with her quitting? There are several, politically, she turned down stimulus money for the presidential election to appear as a fiscal conservative, yet, when she left, the first thing the Lt Governor did was OVERTURN that decision and TOOK the money.
Second, more serious ethics charges were coming, and the possibility of being removed as governor "loomed" in her future. To protect her political future, her handlers needed her to leave office and those charges would just go away, and they did.
Your opinion of "she quit because she didnt want to take money for a job she wasnt doing" is not accurate.
This is what "they" want you to think, and you bought it.
Sarah Palin has accomplished nothing in her career that qualifies her to be president. She is qualified to be mayor in a small country town of 6300 people however, even in that job she was not without controversy.
Wasilla, the meth capitol of Alaska, and if that wasnt bad enough, her own "family" is involved in the meth trade. Better yet, she hired a police chief she favored over the existing chief and he supports charging women with the costs of investigating a rape.
Rape charges: As mayor, Sarah Palin and co. wanted to make rape victims pay
By
Molly Priesmeyer 9/9/08 1:15 PM
One of the most egregious outcomes of the Palin-as-celeb hysteria over the last two weeks has been the media assertion that she speaks for women, that she somehow is a “symbol” for the 21st Century neo-female. In fact, the anti-choice creationist is so far from this ideal by not only denying women the right to choice even as victims of rape, as mayor, she hired a police chief who supported charging victims of rape for the costs of investigating the crimes against them.
First reported by
Americablog, in 2000, Wasilla police chief Charlie Fallon, whom Sarah Palin hired, opposed then-governor Tony Knowles signing of a bill that would make it illegal for charging rape victims for gathering evidence of a sexual assault. “We would never bill the victim of a burglary for fingerprinting and photographing the crime scene, or for the cost of gathering other evidence,” Knowles told the Alaska Paper,
The Frontiersman, in 2000.
Yet Fannon, Palin’s hire, opposed the legislation, saying it required the city and communities to come up the funds for the forensic exams.The total cost to the city? Approximately $5,000 to $14,000, according to the paper. “In the past, we’ve charged the cost of exams to the victims insurance company when possible,” Fannon said. “I just don’t want to see any more burden put on the taxpayer.”
Sarah Palin, who is supposedly gathering momentum with women voters, has gone on record saying hiring Fannon was “the best decision [she] ever made.”
I think people should take the time to Re-think Sarah Palin before defending her on this board. Being attractive and professionally marketed to those inclined to be be de-void of facts will never get her elected.
Peace
). Her move, it seems to me, was political and financial. I don't have a problem with that. Why does she?
