• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republicans Disinvite Palin to Major Fundraiser

Lerxst

U mad bro?
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
17,108
Reaction score
5,786
Location
Nationwide...
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Article is here.
By Chad Pergram

FOXNews.com

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Sarah Palin is out and Newt Gingrich is in.

Congressional Republicans decided Tuesday to ditch the former GOP vice presidential nominee in favor of the former House speaker for the critical House-Senate fundraising dinner in June 8 in Washington. It's the marquee Republican event to raise money for GOP House and Senate candidates.

Just weeks ago, the House and Senate Republican campaign committees were giddy at securing the telegenic Palin for the dinner. But then things grew murky. At the time, the Alaska governor's office told FOX News that Palin was still considering the invitation and had not yet made a decision. Meantime, spokespersons for the committees insisted that Palin was scheduled and it was just a misunderstanding between the Alaska governor's office and Palin's political action committee, SarahPAC, that accepted the invite.

Sources familiar with the Palin snub fumed about how the governor handled this.

"She was a disaster," one Republican source told FOX News. "We had confirmation."

As for inviting Gingrich, National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman Ken Spain said the GOP "decided to go in another direction."

"Speaker Gingrich is a leader," Spain added.

Another source familiar with the invitation indicated that the campaign committees were so incensed with Palin that they did not even bother to officially notify her that they rescinded the invitation.

Multiple efforts to reach Palin's staff in Alaska for comment were unsuccessful.

The decision to book Gingrich instead of Palin seems to be indicative of growing discontent in the party with the Alaska governor and her potential ability to lead the GOP. And it's the latest in a series of gaffes that have plagued her since the November.

So is it fair to say that Sarah Palin is officially dead yet? Or is this just another death throe?
 
Last edited:
Is it fair to say that the GOP is officially dead yet?

If the best they have is Palin, Newt, Jindal and Limbaugh....things aren't looking so good.
 
Article is here.


So is it fair to say that Sarah Palin is officially dead yet? Or is this just another death throe?

Palin's not a suitable candidate for president. I just watched the following speech by Newt:

YouTube - Newt Gingrich Speech at 2009 CPAC

I find his world view somewhat startling. On foreign policy, he represents a horrible combination for a president: militancy and lack of military experience.
 
Last edited:
Palin's not a suitable candidate for president. I just watched the following speech by Newt:

YouTube - Newt Gingrich Speech at 2009 CPAC

I find his world view somewhat startling. On foreign policy, he represents a horrible combination for a president: militancy and lack of military experience.

Sweet mother of God...they were bringing him in with "Eye of the Tiger" by Survivor. Seriously, this is not a good image for the CPAC/GOP. Out of touch cornballs.

EDIT: Watching that thing makes me hope the GOP realizes just how filled with hot air he really is. Who is he talking to here? Liberals? Because all he's doing in this speech is rambling about how bad the Dems are and not even bothering to talk about what the Republicans are going to do better. Oh and he's bashing George W. Bush. Talking about how bad the Bush administration was. In fact all he seems to say is "let's talk about it." Just fairly ambiguous references to ideas they have but no real explanation of how they would implement them. How is this any different than the past? How is this any indication of the GOP's plan for fixing problems?

Blah blah blah.
 
Last edited:
Sweet mother of God...they were bringing him in with "Eye of the Tiger" by Survivor. Seriously, this is not a good image for the CPAC/GOP. Out of touch cornballs.

They should have used "I kissed a girl" by Katie Perry. :2razz:
 
Neo-Conservatism has yet to be eradicated by the Republicans.

The same reasons not to vote for them.

It might be the neocons in the US government that prevent the transnationalists from ushering in a One World Government. They have a niche until the libertarian movement picks up.
 
It might be the neocons in the US government that prevent the transnationalists from ushering in a One World Government. They have a niche until the libertarian movement picks up.

I'm not sure of that, the neocon types are overly religious and favor big government policies.

I'm not really fond of them. Goldwater 4vr!
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure of that, the neocon types are overly religious and favor big government policies.

I'm not really fond of them. Goldwater 4vr!

I don't think neoconservatism has anything to do with religion. When Bush spoke of "compassionate conservatism" you can pretty much think of that as a synonym for neoconservatism. The only issue I can think of that Bush pushed which is definitively linked to religion is the gay marriage issue.
 
I don't think neoconservatism has anything to do with religion. When Bush spoke of "compassionate conservatism" you can pretty much think of that as a synonym for neoconservatism. The only issue I can think of that Bush pushed which is definitively linked to religion is the gay marriage issue.

I would personally like to see politicians remove their religions from the public spotlight.

They use it to influence voters way to much in the south and they deal with the crappy Republicans because they are Christians.

Georgia Republicans are nearly as bad as Democrats.
Grow government, spend, spend.
 
I would personally like to see politicians remove their religions from the public spotlight.

They use it to influence voters way to much in the south and they deal with the crappy Republicans because they are Christians.

Georgia Republicans are nearly as bad as Democrats.
Grow government, spend, spend.

The politicians or their constituents? I know a certain man by the name of Neil Boortz who hails from Georgia. He votes GOP and I would hardly consider him a "big government" kinda guy.
 
The only issue I can think of that Bush pushed which is definitively linked to religion is the gay marriage issue.

I'd say embryonic stem cell funding. He actually enacted that. He did little or nothing about gay marriage except talk.

It will be interesting to see what Obama does regarding gay marriage, if anything. Note how quick he was to overturn Bush's stem cell funding directive. Obama feels safe undoing Bush policy because he can't go wrong with his constituents. Creating new policy in the social arena seems like something he plans to duck... at least for now. No action on gay rights, either marriage or the military ban. He's thrown the drug legalization faction within his party under the bus. And that's a HUGE faction. The DU board was in an uproar the other day.

:2wave:
 
Last edited:
I'd say embryonic stem cell funding. He actually enacted that. He did little or nothing about gay marriage except talk.

It will be interesting to see what Obama does regarding gay marriage, if anything. Note how quick he was to overturn Bush's stem cell funding directive. Obama feels safe undoing Bush policy because he can't go wrong with his constituents. Creating new policy in the social arena seems like something he plans to duck... at least for now. No action on gay rights, either marriage or the military ban. He's ditched the drug legalization faction within his party. And that's a HUGE faction. The DU board was in an uproar the other day.

:2wave:

What's funny is I seem to recall him supporting medical marijuana prior to the election in 2000. Ironically, he appointed John Ashcroft to the office of Attorney General and he made a name for himself by throwing cancer-ridden grannies in jail.
 
Most of the local Georgia GOP are absolutely retarded.

I can deal with the antics of the GOP. The one worlders pose a grave ideological threat to our nation and every human being on earth. David Koh might be the right man for the job but I hope he's not indicative of Obama's future Supreme Court picks.
 
Perhaps so. Bachman is the one receiving more press recently, if you want to look a little closer at image and popularity. At the moment, it's anyone's time to shine in the spotlight.

Is it fair to say that the GOP is officially dead yet?

No, because that would be incredibly stupid. A recent example, we had several years of Democratic Party inactivity until Obama, Clinton, and Pelosi really picked up speed, and even then, we had to wait until the 2008 election year to feel like the Democrats were really going anywhere.

Neo-Conservatism has yet to be eradicated by the Republicans.

The same reasons not to vote for them.

And yet if we were to evaluate their possible influence (or the influence the decades themselves have had on our at-the-time "future leaders"), we could easily say that Republicans will fail to overthrow that identity of accepting the basis of a welfare state (Reagan accepted it, even if Democrats and Republicans of the era wish to say otherwise). In terms of foreign policy, that remains to be seen what our identity will become with regard to this "War on Terror" (now retitled something incredibly boring).

I'm not sure of that, the neocon types are overly religious and favor big government policies.

I'm not really fond of them. Goldwater 4vr!

Not really. Some are very religious, others are very supportive of so-called 'theocons' (or rather of the notion that a purely secular society cannot produce enough of an alliance to the betterment of themselves and of mankind), while others are indifferent or not really pleased with religion and politics.

It will be interesting to see what Obama does regarding gay marriage, if anything. Note how quick he was to overturn Bush's stem cell funding directive. Obama feels safe undoing Bush policy because he can't go wrong with his constituents. Creating new policy in the social arena seems like something he plans to duck... at least for now. No action on gay rights, either marriage or the military ban. He's thrown the drug legalization faction within his party under the bus. And that's a HUGE faction. The DU board was in an uproar the other day.

For some reason it is a dirty little secret of liberalism in the Democratic party to admit to itself that very few of its leaders are supportive of their measures for gay marriage or drug legalization. It should be obvious that it is politically unpopular to do so, and that many of these leaders to begin with aren't really for it.

Also the DU board (I love going to that site, just to laugh) is in uproar about everything except its intolerant policies towards liberal dissenters and conservatives. The cream of the crop of pond scum are true believers to those types of sites.
 
Last edited:
All stuff like this says to me is the left is very very afraid of Sarah Palin.

Also helps highlight a noticeable trend though.
Obama is becoming a dirty word.
In fact you rarely see anyone bothering to defend his actions more and more its simply excusing contradictory policies, or at best ignoring massive spending because you know he's hope change and kinda brown enough to lie about being black.


Reading the quote its clearly nothing but a scheduling mess up..........
Good example of a reporter more or less creating news( iow "making a mountain out of a molehill") though. That type of reporting has become a major problem across the board.
 
Last edited:
All stuff like this says to me is the left is very very afraid of Sarah Palin.

Also helps highlight a noticeable trend though.
Obama is becoming a dirty word.
In fact you rarely see anyone bothering to defend his actions more and more its simply excusing contradictory policies, or at best ignoring massive spending because you know he's hope change and kinda brown enough to lie about being black.


Reading the quote its clearly nothing but a scheduling mess up..........
Good example of a reporter more or less creating news( iow "making a mountain out of a molehill") though. That type of reporting has become a major problem across the board.

I can't speak for the left but I certainly don't see any reason to be afraid. She can't win. People don't like her. Even though it might be trivial stuff like her voice and her accent, it is what it is.
 
All stuff like this says to me is the left is very very afraid of Sarah Palin.
That's an absolutely ridiculous statement. It was ridiculous when it was being slung around during the campaign. Nobody on the left is afraid of this woman, quite the contrary. It actually appears as if the right is afraid of her in some way. And they should be. If they ever want to retake the White House and Congress, they better get on the stick and start pushing people that are a little more viable than Sarah Palin.
Also helps highlight a noticeable trend though.
Obama is becoming a dirty word.
Not really. That may be your perception, but it's not reality.
In fact you rarely see anyone bothering to defend his actions more and more its simply excusing contradictory policies, or at best ignoring massive spending because you know he's hope change and kinda brown enough to lie about being black.
What the hell does this even mean?
Reading the quote its clearly nothing but a scheduling mess up..........
Good example of a reporter more or less creating news( iow "making a mountain out of a molehill") though. That type of reporting has become a major problem across the board.
What I saw were stories about how she was "disinvited" and then later stories that appear to be the result of the GOP getting "on message" and now saying it was a scheduling snafu. It was FOX News who ran with it as a "disinvite" citing committee complaints about her actions, and stating they were "going in a different direction." What happened was this thing blew up in her face, looked bad, and then someone told everyone to shut up and get on message.
 
I laughed hard when I read this story. Not sure what is worse, Palin or Newt. A red neck brain-dead corrupt person with questionable morals.. hmm that applies to both.
 
It's a non story. Palin never confirmed, big deal, it's a fundraiser.

Mention Palin and the rabid left goes off, chasing their tails and sniffing each other butts. I laugh as I watch the slapnuts on the left reassure themselves that she's not a threat.
 
It's a non story. Palin never confirmed, big deal, it's a fundraiser.

Mention Palin and the rabid left goes off, chasing their tails and sniffing each other butts. I laugh as I watch the slapnuts on the left reassure themselves that she's not a threat.

Oh, I'm sure you do laugh. I laughed when I watched McCain's answer on Meet the Press on Sunday as to whether he would support his running mate in 2012. :rofl

MR. GREGORY: In terms of future leaders of the Republican Party, would you like to see Sarah Palin become president?

SEN. McCAIN: I'd like to see her compete. I think we've got some very good candidates: Jon Huntsman and--the problem when I run down these names, I always leave, leave out a, a name--Bobby Jindal, Tim Pawlenty. There's, there's so many. There's a lot of good, fresh talent out there.

MR. GREGORY: But would you support Palin?

SEN. McCAIN: Oh, I'd have to see who the candidates are and, and what the situation is at the time. But have no doubt of my respect, admiration and love for Sarah and her family.

March 29: Geithner, McCain - Meet the Press, online at MSNBC- msnbc.com

Yeah, she's a real threat alright. :lol:
 
This is ***Breaking News***


Damn right wingers always bringing up Palin! :lol:



Disinvited seems a strong word for what actually happened. no?
 
It's a non story. Palin never confirmed, big deal, it's a fundraiser.

Mention Palin and the rabid left goes off, chasing their tails and sniffing each other butts. I laugh as I watch the slapnuts on the left reassure themselves that she's not a threat.

Yeah, that's exactly what happens.
 
Oh, I'm sure you do laugh. I laughed when I watched McCain's answer on Meet the Press on Sunday as to whether he would support his running mate in 2012. :rofl



Yeah, she's a real threat alright. :lol:

I know right? Palin...:mrgreen:
 
Back
Top Bottom