Gov Palin and Congressman Paul debate on FOXNEWS with Judge Andrew Napolitano

Conservatives4Palin ^ | 06/12/2010 | Doug Brady

[unseen1]

Gov Palin and Ron Paul as well as Rand Paul debate important issues to the TEA PARTY in this video

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

Yeah, you're right, Johnstown gets hit with flash floods regularly because of its unfortunate punchbowl geography and the confluence of its two rivers. The "shoot to kill" order was first issued by the local police in 1889 when (false) rumors spread of widespread rapine and pillage the day after the big flood. Undoubtedly, the order remained a solid tradition in subsequent floods.

I just finished reading McCullogh's classic book about the Johnstown Flood, and what is remarkable is how the community came together, reformed its government and launched search and rescue and rebuilding efforts on its own within a day or two, without federal of state help, which did not arrive for nearly a week after the disaster.

[jla]

Palin has strong core principles, but comes across as an intellectual lightweight.

Let's assume you are correct, which I don't believe, what could not a 'President Palin' do or accomplish?
And I'd like to ask if you would list three Presidents whom you think were intellectually adept.

[jla]

To 13 - Your summation is well stated as well as accurate.
Palin attended a Yankees game with Giuliani, I'm willing to bet some conservatives were just sure she would come out with a statement in favor of gay marriage and abortion.

[dforest]

Palin has strong core principles, but comes across as an intellectual lightweight.

Palin comes across that way mostly because of her accent and speaking style. It reminds me of the way people spoke in the movie "Fargo" She also has a high pitch to her voice. Dropping the g's is fine when making an unserious point, but in serious conversation about policy it doesn't work well.

Palin is crafty and she is smart but is in a way somewhat responsible for the impression people get.

I was thinking about this the other day when I heard Haley Barbour talking. I bet the left and the East Coast folks think he is like Boss Hawg.LOL

Blanche Lincoln isn't much better.

Funny how it didn't seem to bother the left with Kennedyspeak. That was pretty awful. Cuba was Cuber.

[wastedpotential]

“And I’d like to ask if you would list three Presidents whom you think were intellectually adept.”

First - I like Sarah Palin, but when she could not answer the question about a Supreme Court case she disagreed with, other than Roe v. Wade, it disappointed me. She comes across as too folksy in my opinion, but that is just that, my opinion.

As for the question, the left has always viewed their candidates as intellectually superior, but frankly, that is just snobbery. They believe that being in agreement with the Ivy League or Europe somehow is more enlightened than being in agreement with the common man. With that in mind, here are my three:

#1 - Ronald Reagan. He had a folksy way about him too, and was dismissed by media elites as non-intellectual, but he communicated with a much larger vocabulary and in a way that expressed a deep understanding of what is needed for this country. He believed in cutting taxes, stronger defense and in moral absolutes of right and wrong, good and evil. He spent more time in public office than Palin has, so he probably was better versed in “government speak” than she is. As for communication - there is not, and probably never will be, any one better. He could make even his harshest critic feel at ease with a joke, but then turn around and make the boldest of statements, such as calling the Soviet Union “evil.” Palin seems to lack his “gravitas,” but that is just my opinion.

Not impressed by our recent crop, although I do like Dubya better than most. Here are the other 2 then:

#2 - Richard Nixon. While he was a fool for getting caught up in the Watergate scandal (he was going to win anyway, so why do it?), he was very adept politically. He opened our relationship with China to begin the weakening of the soviet union, got us out of the Vietnam mess and brought the country out of the tumultuous 60s that Lyndon B. had left him. Kissinger probably was the true brains of his foreign policy, but I will give Nixon credit. He came across as intellectually adept.

#3 - Hmmmmm......... can’t think of one that actually served as president that I would classify that way that has served in my lifetime, so I will have to go with some candidates that did not make it.
Fred Thompson was very intellectually adept, even if he was emotionally inept during his 2008 campaign.
Dick Cheney is one of the most intellectually adept Republicans of the past 50 years (did he ever run for prez?).
Newt Gingrich, while I find his global warming ideas to be ridiculous, his masterminding of the 1994 election and the subsequent showdown with Clinton was brilliant - if only he had had the media savvy of Bill.

What do you think?

[wastedpotential]

BTW - I also think a president Palin could accomplish quite a bit - but I do not think she is electable by the majority of Americans. Her appeal is to no more than 45% of the population in my opinion.

[wastedpotential]

It is not just Palin’s speaking style or accent, it is also her choice of vocabulary. She seems to have a limited vocabulary in most interview settings.

[Jim W N]

Glad we got to hear from these great folks including Judge Napolitano who I greatly admire.

I'm sorry there wasn't more distinction made between state and federal "government" and "government intervention" which I think creates confusion in the analysis and debate. Regulation and emergency activities regarding oil company issues and abortion are legitimately STATE issues and they are NOT CONSTITUTIONALLY LEGITIMATE FEDERAL issues.

The only way abortion is a Constitutional issue is the due process clause protection of life, liberty, and property in the Constitution. Instead SCOTUS, with no Constitutional authority to do so, has made abortion legal at the federal level. SCOTUS has made abortion a federal issue. The only answer to that is either nullification at the state level and/or a Constitutional amendment banning abortion (under due process if need be).

[jla]

I didn't do a good job of making my query clear, sorry about that. I meant any POTUS, not necessarily in our lifetime.
If you are asking me who I believed to be intellectually 'heavyweights, the first name that comes to my mind is Jefferson, then Madison and JQ Adams. (The former preferred the company of farmers over politicians. Who does that sound like?) Both would have ably answered if asked to cite a SCOTUS decision they disagreed with. Both were also lawyers.

I can't fault Mrs Palin for her (non) answer. She couldn't name one off the top of her head, I shrug my shoulders and say, "so what?"
If presented the facts of a case I am confident Palin would be more than able to deem if it is, or not, constitutional.
I also realize that for 'aesthetics' sake; to convince those voters who aren't exactly in the 'serious thinker' category, Palin will need to see that episodes such as the Couric interview aren't repeated.

I wasn't implying that you were 'anti-Palin', as I appreciate your constructive and honest critique of her.

Not sure I'd describe Reagan as an 'intellectual'. I guess it depends on how one defines that term and how much importance it is to being POTUS. That stated, I firmly believe Reagan, along with Jefferson, our greatest and most effective POTUS.

[unseen1]

agree mostly.

protecting our oceans is a federal power.

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

article 1 sec 8

[Jim W N]

Not talking about oceans or Constitutionally allowed authority regarding admiralty, but oil company interference (unless the oil company has comitted “felony on the high seas”) and interference with state plans to prevent and or quickly remedy these kind of oil rig disasters.

[jla]

To 106 - If you are not watching O'Reilly at 8pm try to catch the replay at 11pm (ET).
The lady, Lisa Miller, who penned the 'Saint Sarah' article for Newsweek was just on. Very interesting, to say the least.

[Al B.]

First - I like Sarah Palin, but when she could not answer the question about a Supreme Court case she disagreed with, other than Roe v. Wade, it disappointed me.

Couric was trying to bait her into talking about Baker v. Exxon, which was fresh in the news and which Sarah had voiced her disagreement with. Sarah didn't take the bait.

[Al B.]

What was interesting about it? Just curious, as I can’t stomach BOR.

[jla]

BOR did a good job of eliciting her, more or less true, opinion of Palin. She appeared to compliment Palin, especially towards the end.
At the start of the interview I thought, "oh boy, here we go again, another liberal woman out to 'warn' everyone about Sarah Palin'.

(rare) Kudos to BOR for a job well done.

Catch the replay if you're able, Al. Would like to know your opinion of it.

[Al B.]

Thanks jla. I’ll DVR it and catch it in the AM tomorrow. Any kudos from me to BOR will indeed be rare...LOL.

[unseen1]

oh ok. was not understanding your point. did you see jindal told Obama admin and EPA to go to hell today and he started to build the berms with the national guard?

[Jim W N]

jindal told Obama admin and EPA to go to hell today and he started to build the berms with the national guard? I wished he had done that a couple of weeks ago. I was surprised and disappointed at Ron Paul's answer to Napolitano about state nullification of rouge federal mandates (scary “things the feds would do” – no specifics). Palin to her credit said that's exactly what Jindal should have done.

I think you, the Tea Partys by-and-large, and I are on the same page:

. .the federal government is bound by the limits of the Constitution.

I wish I had heard more arguments centered around the Constitution rather than "failed government" as the #1 problem (coming mostly from Ron Paul). Big government is our #1 problem no matter whether someone thinks its "failed” or not. I know Paul is against big government, but to me, he often fails to hit the nail on the head. I honestly think Ron Paul would be willing to nullify the Constitution in favor of some of his libertarian views.

Palin, on the other hand, nails it more often. Another observation between the two: I think Palin communicates values that resonate with the people the way Reagan did. I don't think Paul does this outside a small rabid following. I think Palin is the first real conservative since Reagan to communicate our true values that resonate with the American people

On this site, we analyze and pick things and people’s ideas apart. But I'm glad to see Palin and Napolitano trying to unify conservatives like this. I think here I’ve been discussing some of the "20%" differences and like the quote that the 80% commonality is what makes them friends and partners against this rouge federal government.

Thanks for posting this thread.

[Jim W N]

Having said all that, I think Plain looks like she might need to bone up on some of the legal issues and jargon. (ex. She seemed to stumble at the meaning of Napolitano’s question about “nullification.”)

[Jim W N]

Not sure I'd describe Reagan as an 'intellectual'.

Reagan was surprisingly well-read and understood and articulated nuances of issues and problems better than most. He also had amazing foresight (in the 50's he was explaining the socialist problem better than most including their stealth use of health care). If he wasn't an "intellectual", I think he was close, at least in some areas of thought.

What do you think of the idea that Palin is the first real conservative (potential) POTUS candidate since Reagan to communicate the true values in a way that resonates with the American people?