Replies

Andrew Jackson quit the Senate in 1825. Jackson had become a major national figure in the presidential race of 1824 losing to John Adams. He certainly did. Twice IIRC.

However Jackson didn't "make his bones" as an US Senator, a Governor, nor as Judge in which he also resigned.

So then it's okay for Andrew Jackson to quit (apparently several times) but it's not okay for Palin to quit, because Jackson once lead the Battle of New Orleans?

What's the difference?

If quitting is wrong, then why justify it for Jackson?

If quitting is a legitimate thing to do, then why hold Palin to a different standard?

So then it's okay for Andrew Jackson to quit (apparently several times) but it's not okay for Palin to quit

No, it is NOT okay to quit and make money by starring in reality shows with idiots like Kate Gosselin. That is the sort of thing that will be used by Barrack Obama and his cronies if she ever ran for President in ads that might be as devastating as the Willie Horton ads were for Michael Dukakis.

So then it's okay for Andrew Jackson to quit (apparently several times) but it's not okay for Palin to quit...

I could wuss out and say that it was different times and different situations ...but no.

Jackson quit his positions mainly because he found them unproductive or unsatisfying(either political or financially) Jackson rarely retreated for his enemies and when he did it was for tactical reasons. If Jackson wanted something, one had to beat him.(He wasn't called old Hickory for naught) He didn't allow his political enemies to win without a fight(Jackson took on any foes who dared and killed them...sometimes literally) He would never let his opponent run him off the field without being bloodied.

But personal, the main thing, the thing that buries itself like a tick is that she quit her office because of pressure from Left,the very F****** people who takes great glee in attacking conservatives.

She portrayed herself as an strong, tough, conservative woman yet humorous, feminine, and dare I say, very beautiful. She was the anti-Hillary, our American Maggie Thatcher.

Instead of digging and withstanding the assaults, she gave in to them. It gave endless comfort to the enemies of conservatives and conservatism and they would, if she was elected, keep using this tactic until she left office. Worked once, will work again. They could say "If we can crack the female version of Ronald Reagan, we could crack anyone on the Right.

Either by bad advice or lack of imagination she didn't but should have found resources or lawyers to fight the frivolous cases and STILL do her job. Completing her term of office.

If that D####ed Bubba could do it against REAL criminal acts and complete eight years of his presidency, she could get some conservative lawyers to dismiss those meritless lawsuits. She could have written her books to pay for the bills and still have time to get ready to run a presidential campaign.

It could be done but, for whatever reason, she didn't.(I'd like to think it was for her family)

Anyway, thank you for a real debate and not go for the cheap (and fruitless) tactic of name calling. I enjoy playing "cat and mouse games with those who do but I always enjoy a good debate on the merits.(always learn from debates, sometimes even change my opinion!)

Thank you, Red