Posted on 08/09/2010 7:19:33 PM PDT by onyx
Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin's carefully crafted image as a regular hockey mom has taken a few hits since her unsuccessful vice presidential bid.
~snips~
But all those who wonder whether revelations of her personal prima donna qualities will damage her image are proceeding from an assumption that she does, in fact, disguise her self-centered side well in managed environments. I've long disagreed with that assessment, because her famous Facebook postings often have the tone of a nasty, snotty, slightly dense but popular high-school girl. Sample recent line: "Okay, Mr. President, you tell us we have to keep looking backward (as we’re steered toward the cliff)."
Palin's dark side came out in full effect this weekend, and this time the victim was not President Obama but a schoolteacher in small-town Alaska. Palin was there to film segment of a nature program on TLC, and she confronted Kathleen Gustafson who was holding up a sign reading "WORST GOVERNOR EVER." Palin clearly intended to disarm Gustafson with her charm, but instead got defensive.
Gustafson, said, "You swore on your precious Bible that you would uphold the interests of this state, and then when cash was waved in front of your face, you quit." To which Palin responded, her tone dripping with unamusing sarcasm, "Oh, you wanted me to be your governor! I’m honored! Thank you!" Palin went on to use the same tone of nasal condescension when saying she was "honored" that Gustafson considers her a celebrity.
It's true, schoolteachers are definitely not a Republican constituency, but anyone, even a Republican, running for president needs to make nice with them on a personal level, just as Democrats do with the military or police officers. This latest incident won't help Palin's negative favorability ratings.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
Take your smelly fingers out of your arse and do a simple Google search on... "Foreclosure Prevention Act" 2008 3221
It's freakin everywhere!
You are looking at old titles of HR 3211 before it was passed!!!!
And numbnuts, why on God’s green earth would you try to decieve Freepers with your post on Hunter’s economic acumen:
I repost your link
http://www.themiddleclass.org/legislator/duncan-hunter-171
Looks terrible. Mostly Fs
Yet the same site gives Pelosi all B’s and Waxman A’s
http://www.themiddleclass.org/legislator/henry-waxman-386
You fraudulent little toad. You use leftwinger sites to denigrate Hunter, and you haven’t the slightest clue how a bill is made and voted on.
Bull F’ing shit. I’m looking in the library of congress.
What a pathetic charge you lying little coward. I'm deceiving nobody.
It was the first of hundreds of links that comes up when you do a search.
Again moron, do a search on -->"Foreclosure Prevention Act" 2008 3221 <---
Idiot, the link you posted is dated February 2008. I've now told you that, what, five times!! That wasn't the final title.
When the bill passed on July 23rd in the House, it had the title that I mentioned.
How many times do I have to tell you that!!
Un-frickin-believable!!
You can also find dozens of hits to Bush lying about his Air National Guard Service, and 1000s attesting to the ‘fact’ that Obama has already posted his “birth certificate” on line. Amazing the misinformation you can find - and believe, when you’re an imbecile.
Tell me another 100 times. It still doesn't change the FACT that the Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008 was rolled into the The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 as section B of that bill by US Senate Amendment.
You're grasping at straws, MENSA
Idiot, the link you posted is dated February 2008. I've now told you that, what, five times!!
Tell me another 100 times. It still doesn't change the FACT that the Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008 was rolled into the The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 as section B of that bill by US Senate Amendment.
You're grasping at straws, MENSA
Okay, the final title was "HERA". That doesn't change a thing!
The history of the bill using the House Resolution number is clear whatever the title. Do you understand that???
Bill: H.R. 3221
Title: FPA HERA
Summary: The bill was designed to prop up Freddie and Fannie with up to $300 billion in additional funds. The bill also gave the department of Treasury the authority to place Freddie and Fannie into conservatorship, run by the FHFA, at a cost of up to an additional $800 billion.
Final Passage in House: 7/23/2008
Roll Number: 519 (Link)
How did Duncan Hunter Vote: "Yes"
Reasonable comment on the bill: It's uber socialism.
Do you understand?
I understand perfectly, as I have ever since I read the whole bill, it’s history and the titles of the votes.
The vote you keep waving around as the “final passage” WAS NOT a vote for the bill HR 3221. HR 3221 was already voted on and passed months before. It was a vote to amend the Senate Amendment - a House amendment to the FPA that the Senate had put into the bill.
Vote 519 reads:
“On motion that the House agree with an amendment to the Senate amendment to the House amendments to the Senate”
No.
I'm giving you a link to the history of HR3221. Look at it!
Before July 23, 2008, there was no common House/Senate HR3221 bill passed in the House. All House votes before July 23, 2008 had unresolved differences with the Senate.
The final vote on H.R. 3221 in the House was Roll Call 519, on July 23, 2008.
The history of HR3221 as seen in the link is clear.
The bill passed in the House on 8/4/2007.
The bill passed in the Senate on 4/10/2008.
Everything subsequent to that was how to amend it.
When a vote is for a bills passage, that's what it says. "passage". If the vote is for an amendment; Or an amendment to the amendment, it says that also. Jim DeMint in the Senate had several amendments that he proposed pass. Does that mean DeMint supported the bill? Of course not. The only question is if the House amendment associated with vote 519 was an improvement to the Senate's FPA or not?
From history link #1, one can come to your conclusion, but there is another history link that adds more detail about the Senate HR 3221 activity of April, 2008.
I'm looking at two different history links. Both links are missing things. They both need to be looked at.
Link #1 gives more detail about April 2008. It shows the Senate apparently amending the House version of 3221, so there was no concurrence when the Senate passed their version of 3221 as amended on April 10, 2008.
Link #2 then shows that both the House and the Senate were resolving differences all the way through to 7/23 in the House and 7/26 in the Senate.
If that's true, the House Roll Call Vote #519, on 7/23, would be an all inclusive vote. If not, then Roll Call #519 would have to be looked at separately to see what was in it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.