Originally posted by Leo Strauss

Even though they were democrats in name they were more an opposition party to the "North". The civil rights movement is a progressive movement to the core and you know it!!!

Leo, stop drinking your Kool-Aid for just a minute to actually read what you write. "Democrats in name" means they were um... how can I put this... Democrats!

The Democrats are who tried to squelch the civil rights movement in the 60's.

That said, back on topic, this thread is about the scandalous investigation of Sarah Palin replacing somebody in her cabinet, and the ongoing investigation of such.

I believe this investigation was encouraged by Palin to clear her of the false accusations against her. I also believe that the Dems have been pathetic today in their attempts to find ways to discredit Palin. All except Obama of course. Obama showed class and leadership with his kind and complimentary words of congratulations to Palin.

Too bad his "followers" are slow learners.

I do not plan to vote Republican, but even I think this thread is pure propoganda.

I assume the smears will continue from both sides.

Originally posted by jamie83

The Democrats are who tried to squelch the civil rights movement in the 60's.

Now that is a classic quote for the ages!! "The Democrats are who tried to squelch the civil rights movement in the 60's." ????

This is either pure ignorance or more right wing manipulation and propaganda. You obviously don't have the facts or your reasoning is deeply flawed by your politics.

Do the names John F Kennedy and Robert Kennedy ring a bell Jamie???

Thurogood Marshall....Lyndon Johnson??? Voting rights act???

I am not a kid Jamie come back when you are ready to have an honest debate.

every politician has skeletons in their closet so it's no surprise to me that she is being investigated.

i like her and she is pro-life

and if old man McCain falls out...she is gonna be your next President. hehe

Originally posted by jamie83

This is what I was referring to when I said it was the Democrats who tried to squelch the Civil Rights Act. You may also want to refresh your memory regarding the party that George Wallace belonged to. I believe he was less than enthusiastic about giving blacks equal rights.

This is from the very next paragraph in Wiki that you used for your source:

From Wiki:

It was at this point that President Kennedy was assassinated. The new president, Lyndon Johnson, utilized his experience in legislative politics and the bully pulpit he wielded as president in support of the bill.

Because of Smith's stalling of the bill in the Rules Committee, Celler filed a petition to discharge the bill from the Committee. Only if a majority of members signed the discharge petition would the bill move directly to the House floor without consideration by advocates. Initially Johnson had a difficult time acquiring the signatures necessary, as even many congressmen who supported the civil rights bill itself were cautious about violating House procedure with the discharge petition. By the time of the 1963 winter recess, fifty signatures were still wanting.

On the return from the winter recess, however, matters took a significant turn. The President's public advocacy of the Act had made a difference of opinion in congressmen's home districts, and soon it became apparent that the petition would acquire the necessary signatures. To prevent the humiliation of the success of the petition, Chairman Smith allowed the bill to pass through the Rules Committee.

Lyndon Johnson, a democrat, got this bill passed. Without the Democrat, Lyndon Johnson, the Civil Rights Act would never have passed.

Your revisionist history is disingenious at best or just more lies from the lying liars of the GOP!!

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
Your revisionist history is disingenious at best or just more lies from the lying liars of the GOP!!

No lies or being disingenuous at all Leo. I correctly stated that it was a Democrat, Smith, who tried to stop the Civil Rights Act. Obviously he didn't succeed. I thought you already realized that.

Back on topic...

Palin is not going to get impeached for replacing a member of her own cabinet. It was Palin who welcomed an independent investigation to clear her name of the false allegations.

I think this election might seriously hinge on the respective candidates VP choice.

All polticans have skeletons in thier closets, just like you and just like me. If this is the only one in her's, It seems fairly small.

I for one am going to withhold judgement on Palin as a VP choice until I see her in a debate against Biden.

I do think this has made the race much more interesting.

Originally posted by beforetime
Thats right 5 minute's into announcement she is his vp

obama rat pack already got every corner angled
to beat down the woman vote.

the women vote that was going to vote for Hillary.

that's all this is.
next we will here how she is a racist or bigot in the new's
it's how the democrats are running this campaign this year.

you think this is dirty... Maybe dirty like Bushies calling SC voters to remind them Mccain has got a black baby?


On a side note your Woman vote angle is cute. I guess being an opportunist is a good thing???

Well if the DEMS lose yet another one, your party will be very out of favor for a very long time. Next time around my generation will have learned from your parties victories.
You guys will PAY for all the dishonesty and lack of fortitude at some point. The left will have a Carl Rove one day and we will be so tired of losing that we will get as low as you can go.

I actually hope your guys party finally bankrupts the nation and creates an AMERICAN Mexico of have alls and have squats.

Laugh now and enjoy, this OLD era will not last for long. I just hope we do not face a second civil war before that time.

Enjoy while you can

Originally posted by jamie83

Originally posted by Leo Strauss

Even though they were democrats in name they were more an opposition party to the "North". The civil rights movement is a progressive movement to the core and you know it!!!

The Democrats are who tried to squelch the civil rights movement in the 60's.

.

HA HA HA

You are funny!

I didn't say you were a kid Leo. I just said you weren't educated on this topic.

Wow your the one that doesn't read his own posts hah, here's two quotes, on from this page, one from the last page, both of which insinuate that you think he is a "kid" or "childish" you may not have said it directly but you certainly meant it

Are you actually that immature and really think you're funny or clever? Or are you a high school kid waiting for school to start up again?

Leo, stop drinking your Kool-Aid for just a minute to actually read what you write.

On topic: Tell me, what experience does this lady even have to be a VP, name one thing that qualifies her


Its pretty classic these days, everyone on the Right side is accusing the left side of Bias, Dirty Campaign tactics, and all out propaganda(yet the majority of their claims are not political and are rather social/personal issues, such as "the obama cult"
Stop being so scared of losing, its obvious your all desperate just like McCain is(VP pick is an obviously desperate move).


While on the left side, we democrats are doing our share of smearing but our smearing does not involve anything remotely near what McCain's campaign has been claiming about obama. The worst dirt that Republican's have on Obama is that he is "too popular" and "too well spoken".

Why don't all you republicans follow the steps of your fellow senators and congressmen who are no longer voting for McCain and are actually voting for a democrat(obama), there are more every day, look it up, there are a TON, but of course you republicans will never hear about this stuff on Fox news or CNN, the two worst news stations in the world besides the BBC(the most biased news on the planet)


Personally, I think both candidates are nothing compared Ron Paul, simply because Ron Paul is the only real politician that actually stands for what our constitution says.

Sadly you republicans have taken away many rights and have merely made our constitution irrelevant. Everyone that voted for bush contributed to our loss of rights, doesn't even matter that we got more democrats in the house or congress etc, because President bush has made it pretty clear that what he says goes, no wonder he loves that Veto pen(he is quoted as saying, "This pen is the most powerful tool i have" which i guess is true because the pen is far smarter than his mind)

I for one do not want this "Alaskan" lady to push her "views and morals on what is right and wrong" specially since Alaska is no where near the same as the rest of the united states, I don't care what she thinks is right or wrong, I care about what IS right and what IS wrong, but of course what one person thinks is the "right" way, another may think is wrong way

And those who think that he "impeachment for abuse of power" is irrelevant, where did your logic go? Straight out the window or what?

Since when is abuse of power irrelevant, no matter what the abuse may be?

I seem to recall Clinton getting impeached for sexual misconduct; I guess getting a blow job in the white house is far worse than abusing political power to get your way huh? (major sarcasm).

Abuse of power shows that this lady is not what we want in office, because she'll just be a repeat of bush and his abuse of power(which he should be impeached for).

And someone claimed that the police officer she wanted fired was screwing up a whole lot and "tasered" his son etc, well as another poster mentioned, that is not her responsibility in any form, and if that officer really did what you claim, well she should have informed her police force and had him arrested and put on trial... Clearly trying to just get the guy fired was in no way motivated by "doing the right thing" which would have been getting the proper justice dealt via court, she was motivated by personal feelings if all she tried to do was have him fired, thats a sad attempt at justice

[edit on 30-8-2008 by MaynardisGod]

I'm sorry to see this happening already.

It's a shame to see the media jumping all over this.

There is going to be a woman in the top branch of the executive. The time has come for all of that glass ceiling chatter to come true.

I believe that women are more excited this time around for that very reason.

This isn't the last we are going to hear about negatives about her or her new boss.

I'm just glad that Hilary is gone.

I hope you republicans are happy. You now have a nominee who just barely learned how to google a few weeks ago, with assistance I might ad. He can't even do what most 12 year olds in the country can do, and yet you want this old man to lead the world's most powerful and advanced country? Then he goes and picks one of the most inexperienced person in government to be his VP, so if he kicks off we get this woman who was a soccer mom and mayor of a little burg up in icy Alaska...she mayored over a town of less than 10,000...and we are to think she can command a super power in a world of today? Huh? Are you nuts? Is McCain nuts? Senile? What an insult to the integrity of this nation.

A vote for McCain is a vote for Incompetence! Pure and simple!