Rahm Emanual: Pit Bull Politician

http://money.cnn.com/2008/11/06/news/newsmakers/emanuel_easton.fortune/?postversion=2008110613

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Maybe pit bulls with lipstick on are a bit more friendly. Lots of pit bull owners (those whose pits don't wear lipstick) end up in court. Just last week some idjit took her pit bull mommy with pups to the public park. Pit bull attacked an 80 some odd year old man who just happened to be walking past minding his own business. Haven't heard if the poor old fellow survived, last I heard he was in critical condition.

The county put the pit bull down, don't know what happened to the pups. If I were Palin I wouldn't want to associate myself with pit bulls with or without lipstick. That's all I gotta say about that......for now anyway.

This is one thread I can't help posting to. First, I want to say that I absolutely hate the new p.c. term "clearly." Clearly this, clearly that from news anchors, talk show hosts, you name it.

As for the comment by Michelle Obama, if she is proud of her country "for the first time" then she's running a little late in my opinion. I've been a Democrat all my life but no more. The color of the candidate's skin has nothing whatsoever to do with anything, I don't care if he is pea green with orange stripes. Obama scares the bejeezers out of me!! Read about him and listen to him and learn. I'll not be voting for him. I would not have voted for Hillary. Why? Doesn't matter if she's a woman or not. I have no respect for her. I certainly don't admire her for standing by her man.

As for McCain, his stupid comment I think speaks for itself and doesn't show a lot of intelligence. Secondly, he is too old. While I admire his military service, I think if we like the condition of our country now, we'll enjoy more of the same and worse under his leadership.

Listen to both politicians. They both want to give amnesty to illegal aliens and I am dead set against it. Reagan (and I'm no fan of his either) tried that and now we have at least twice as many to deal with as we did then. It is purely political, get the votes whereever they can.

Then there's the matter of our country being sold off to foreign investors one piece at a time and the huge national debt to China. What happens when they call in their mortgage? Will they demand, California, Texas and maybe Alaska or will they just take over the whole danged country?

As for voting in this election????? I probably will just stay home for the first time since I've been old enough to vote. We don't even have a candidate to vote for that is the lesser of the evils in my opinion. I think the last good leader we had was Harry Truman, "walk softly and carry a big stick."

who misuses taxpayer dollars whether it is for sex or whatever the reason may be. I personally feel that our government is trying to tax us to death while they continue to do nothing but spend and, IMO, that is misusing taxpayer dollars as well.

If Ensign misused taxpayer dollars....nail him. If Sanford did....nail him. You seem willing to give Clinton a free pass just because he didn't penetrate Lewinsky with his own pecker. Nevermind that he lied under oath. As for Edwards, his wife was supposed to have been dying from cancer when he diddled another woman. That is his own personal business but you can't get much lower than that.

When it comes to pubs with some of you people, they can't sneeze wrong without some of you guys picking them apart. You went after Palin because her daughter had premarital sex and got knocked up. I'm sure none of you had sex before marriage either, huh? Here we have President Obama breaking campaign promise after campaign promise and all you can say in defense is that we are getting our news only from Fox News or you instantly assume we are pubs. Not all of us are pubs and many of us get our news from many news sources and not just Fox.

Funny how Barney Frank can screw us over with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and hire a guy he was getting sexual favors from (could be the reason why Frank refuses to get dentures) and that was all fine and he still (for some God awful reason) holds the position that he has.

If you pay attention to what Obama is doing right now this might make sense. Obama is filling his cabinet not only with people who agree with him, but also people who disagree with him. Presumably he's following the lead of Lincoln who did this with his cabinet members. The conclusion I come up with is that just because Rahm said it doesn't necessarily mean it will be law.

Top 5 Reasons it Sucks to Be Sarah Palin

Over the past week, a fresh new trove of Sarah Palin stories has been offered up to the American people, making plain, once again, that meteoric fame often comes with a hefty pricetag. In the five months since she was plucked from relative obscurity to become John McCain's running mate, Palin has resided on the very sharp blade of a double-edged sword. With her pit bull campaign role, delivering the harshest lines of attack against Barack Obama, Palin quickly became a woman that you loved, or loved to hate. Well, that hasn't changed. But a few recent developments, as magnified by the ever-present media magnifying glass, are making Palin's glass feel a little more half-empty.

1. Back taxes. From the Anchorage Daily News, comes word that Sarah Palin must pay back income taxes on upwards of $17,000 in per diem expenses (meals, lodging, etc.) that she charged to the state of Alaska while living in her own Wasilla home. No exact word on how much the Governor will have to fork over. On the bright side, the ADN article goes on to say that it seems like nobody in Alaska politics, Democrats included, really pays their taxes properly (following a national trend).

2. New enemies. The Washington Post details Palin's awkward reunion with state legislators:

A number of factors seem to have contributed to the bumpy homecoming: a residual anger among Democrats for the attack-dog role Palin assumed in the McCain campaign, lingering resentment from Republicans for the part she may have played in McCain's defeat and a suspicion crossing party lines that the concerns of Alaska, at a time of economic crisis, will now be secondary to her future in national politics.

3. Lack of privacy. Just as Hollywood movie stars, while giving interviews, often complain that they have no privacy, so too must the Palin family grapple with the simultaneous lure and repulsion of flashing cameras. This week, Bristol Palin decided she wanted to relay lots of personal details to Greta van Susteren about the birth of her son, and her feelings on how sexual abstinence is not "realistic" for teenagers. And the governor herself, interviewed by People magazine and in a new biography disclosed that she'd hid the news that she was pregnant with her son Trig from her own family until the final weeks before his birth. (Tommy has more).

4. Stimulus. She hates the stimulus bill, and will build new roads to prove it. Before President Obama signed the stimulus bill into law, Palin declared that he should veto it. Why? It contained too much wasteful spending. Well, that seems like an odd criticism given that Palin is now proposing to build a road to Nome that will cost an estimated $4 million per mile.

5. Ashley Judd and Planned Parenthood. Governor Palin is a potent symbol, and, like Hillary Clinton before her, she has become a sure fire way to raise money and attention for groups or individuals who staunchly disagree with her views. Consider the attention she has brought to the practice of aerial hunting, and the cash she continues to raise for Planned Parenthood.

I'm talking about just having the ability to commit your loved one to whatever facility you choose for treatment. The reason we have so many crazy homeless people out there isn't because fo Regeanomics or lack of federally funded programs. It is because the liberals are so intent on protecting the rights of the individual to the extend that it actually becomes harmful to the individual. Sure, civil rights are important and sacred, but to what degree to we allow a person to harm themselves? What risks do we endure so that our schizophrenic neighbor's right not to take medication is protected?