• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Todd Palin Had Big Role in Sarah's Politics

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Who really was the governor of Alaska?

(Feb. 5) -- Newly released e-mails show that Todd Palin, Sarah Palin's husband, played an active role during her term as Alaska governor and in her campaign for vice president.

Some 1,200 e-mails released to NBC News by the state of Alaska show that Todd Palin's role in policymaking was far-reaching. According to NBC News, "The governor's husband got involved in a judicial appointment, monitored contract negotiations with public employee unions, received background checks on a corporate CEO, added his approval or disapproval to state board appointments and passed financial information marked 'confidential' from his oil company employer to a state attorney."

http://www.aolnews.com/politics/art...role-in-sarahs-politics-e-mails-show/19346679
 

rbell

Active Member
Kinda like how Hillary played an active role during Bill's presidency:sleep:

This is why CTB is hard for me to take seriously. His double standards and intellectual dishonesty stand out. (which is an accomplishment here!)

When inconsistencies or double standards are pointed out to him, he disappears from that thread. (He starts a new one instead on a different subject...one he hasn't been called out on in the past week.)
 

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
This is why CTB is hard for me to take seriously. His double standards and intellectual dishonesty stand out. (which is an accomplishment here!)

When inconsistencies or double standards are pointed out to him, he disappears from that thread. (He starts a new one instead on a different subject...one he hasn't been called out on in the past week.)

Can you show me a web site that shows that Hillary sent hundreds of e-mails to Bill advising him on policy? I don't think so.
 

Bro. Curtis

<img src =/curtis.gif>
Site Supporter
Who was behind Clinton's failed health care reform ? (Hint...it was called "Hillary Care")

Who took care of the "bimbo eruptions" ?

I guess it's OK, or unnewsworthy when a democrat does it.

How did Todd's advice hurt Sarah ? Was his advive worse for her than Hillary's was to Bill ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

targus

New Member
Can you show me a web site that shows that Hillary sent hundreds of e-mails to Bill advising him on policy? I don't think so.

I can show you where she attempted control a huge part of the national economy when she took her shot at nationalized health care - all done behind closed doors.
 

rbell

Active Member
Uh-oh.

You've hit crabby with facts!

The forecast calls for a 90% chance of disappearance.
 

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Who was behind Clinton's failed health care reform ? (Hint...it was called "Hillary Care")

Who took care of the "bimbo eruptions" ?

I guess it's OK, or unnewsworthy when a democrat does it.

How did Todd's advice hurt Sarah ? Was his advive worse for her than Hillary's was to Bill ?

You and others are quick with comments, but no proof, no links to information. You are very quick to call names. I guess you realize you are stepping in it again. :laugh:

I think my question in the OP is a fair one. If Sarah ran for president who would we really be voting for, Sarah or the "First Hunk?"

Bell said, "Uh-oh.

You've hit crabby with facts!

The forecast calls for a 90% chance of disappearance. "

I see opinions, but I see no references to credible information. Can you supply them?

Clinton is the past. We cannot do anything about that era now. So, let's look to the future.

I will disappear for a good part of today and maybe tomorrow. We have two feet of snow and it is still coming down. Time to get the snow blower out and clear my driveway and help the neighbors. Cheers.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

targus

New Member
You and others are quick with comments, but no proof, no links to information. You are very quick to call names. I guess you realize you are stepping in it again. :laugh:

I think my question in the OP is a fair one. If Sarah ran for president who would we really be voting for, Sarah or the "First Hunk?"

First Hunk?

Uhhhh... Isn't that name calling?

More Crabby hypocrisy.

I see opinions, but I see no references to credible information. Can you supply them?

You need a reference to confirm that Hillary Clinton ran the last healthscare scam?

Is your memory really that bad?

Clinton is the past. We cannot do anything about that era now. So, let's look to the future.

But Bush isn't in the past?

More Crabby hypocrisy.

I will disappear for a good part of today and maybe tomorrow. We have two feet of snow and it is still coming down. Time to get the snow blower out and clear my driveway and help the neighbors. Cheers.

Help your neighbors?

Bragging about your charitable works?
 

rbell

Active Member
I think my question in the OP is a fair one. If Sarah ran for president who would we really be voting for, Sarah or the "First Hunk?"


Clinton is the past. We cannot do anything about that era now. So, let's look to the future.

OK, so let me get this straight: You criticize Palin for hubby's involvement. You say that's bad.

You ignore Hillary's involvement in Bill's administration. That's OK, by you.

When your double standard is pointed out, you respond with an anorexic line of reasoning: "I'm looking forward, not backward." Yet, Hillary is likely to run again for President.

Which is it, Crabby? Are you looking back, or not? Why is it OK for Billary's admin, but not Sarahtodd?

It's OK...you don't have to answer...because at the end of your post, we see this:

I will disappear for a good part of today and maybe tomorrow.

It's pretty obvious to me that even you recognized you've been called out on your double standard and intellectual dishonesty. Even you know your arguments are being pounded into dust. How convenient for you that the weather is cooperating. At least it saves you from having to come up with a less plausible reason to bail on this losing argument of yours.
 

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
OK, so let me get this straight: You criticize Palin for hubby's involvement. You say that's bad.

You ignore Hillary's involvement in Bill's administration. That's OK, by you.

When your double standard is pointed out, you respond with an anorexic line of reasoning: "I'm looking forward, not backward." Yet, Hillary is likely to run again for President.

Which is it, Crabby? Are you looking back, or not? Why is it OK for Billary's admin, but not Sarahtodd?

It's OK...you don't have to answer...because at the end of your post, we see this:

It's pretty obvious to me that even you recognized you've been called out on your double standard and intellectual dishonesty. Even you know your arguments are being pounded into dust. How convenient for you that the weather is cooperating. At least it saves you from having to come up with a less plausible reason to bail on this losing argument of yours.

Well, I must admit that you have one standard, the Republicans can do no wrong and the Democrats can do no right.

In my OP I simply ask a question. I did not make a judgmental statement. You took it as a negative ... that is your problem not mine.

I am sure Bill and Hillary had discussions. I expect every president and governor does have discussions with their spouse. Eleanor Roosevelt certainly made her views known. But, I do not think there was ever any doubt that FDR was president. With the revelation of hundreds of e-mails it does make a person wonder who was really making the decisions.

My guess it really does not matter now. I think Sarah's political life is over. I think she is making too much money with her book, her lectures and especially with Fox to consider running again.

Do you think she will run for any political office in the future?
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
picture.php
 

just-want-peace

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
CTB sez
You and others are quick with comments, but no proof, no links to information
.

If you need proof for Hillary's "co-presidential" involvement, you would need proof that bovine excrement has an odor!

This is a new low for even you Crabby!

'Course desperate times (the collapse of "OMAMA CARE") call for desperate measures (fishing for ANYTHING
with which to clobber the conservatives and shift the focus off the failed policies of HIS MAJESTY).
 

targus

New Member
Well, I must admit that you have one standard, the Republicans can do no wrong and the Democrats can do no right.

What? Accusations with no proof, reference or link?

More Crabby hypocrisy.

In my OP I simply ask a question. I did not make a judgmental statement. You took it as a negative ... that is your problem not mine.

You reveal your bias with your own words.

" If Sarah ran for president who would we really be voting for, Sarah or the "First Hunk?"

More Crabby hypocrisy.


I am sure Bill and Hillary had discussions. I expect every president and governor does have discussions with their spouse. Eleanor Roosevelt certainly made her views known. But, I do not think there was ever any doubt that FDR was president. With the revelation of hundreds of e-mails it does make a person wonder who was really making the decisions.

You have to be kidding !!!

The Clintons made a huge deal about the co-presidency.

They made a huge deal of Hillary being in complete charge of the healthscare scam.

My guess it really does not matter now. I think Sarah's political life is over. I think she is making too much money with her book, her lectures and especially with Fox to consider running again.

Then why did you go to all the trouble of starting a thread to slam her?
 

just-want-peace

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Then why did you go to all the trouble of starting a thread to slam her?

Could it be that Crabby, like all liberals (Rs & Ds), are scared to death of her, because the public initially responded so positively to her.

Whether she can or will attempt politics again is immaterial; she MIGHT, and they can't stand the idea of a woman that is pro-life, cooks, hunts, actually refused to abort a downs baby, etc---- may be in front of the American public for future public office.

She is the epitome of all the libs & NOW clatche despise; IOW a beautiful, intelligent, popular female, that did not bow to the liberals for help to get to where and what she is, and eschews basically the whole liberal philosophy!

Oh and one more critical point - she did all this w/o the advantage (yeah, right!!) of an Ivy League education. ('Course this was really an advantage since she missed(?) all that liberal trash that's coming from most schools now.:thumbs::thumbs:)

Then, on the other hand, it may be just because he's programmed to bash anything NOT OBAMA-ISH!:sleep:
 

rbell

Active Member
Well, I must admit that you have one standard, the Republicans can do no wrong and the Democrats can do no right.

Wow...It's amazing how intellectually dishonest you are. Does your conscience bother you when you lie?

In my OP I simply ask a question. I did not make a judgmental statement. You took it as a negative ... that is your problem not mine.

Like I said...I would hope that when you lie like you do...that your conscience bothers you. Otherwise, that is a very ominous sign regarding your ethics and your character.
 

Steven2006

New Member
It is just silly to try and deny Hillary was not very involved in Bill Clinton's presidency. They even bragged about it as a benefit. It took me two seconds to find the quote.

In 1992, when he was running for president, Bill Clinton bragged that his brainy lawyer wife would give voters "two for the price of one."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-01-22-billclinton_N.htm

That said, if her husband was involved to such a large degree I think that does hurt Palin. I am not a fan of any spouse being actively involved with someone voted for an elected office.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bro. Curtis

<img src =/curtis.gif>
Site Supporter
You and others are quick with comments, but no proof, no links to information. You are very quick to call names. I guess you realize you are stepping in it again. :laugh:

One need no further proof of your intellectual dishonesty than this.

I think my question in the OP is a fair one. If Sarah ran for president who would we really be voting for, Sarah or the "First Hunk?"

Given your applause of the gay lifestyle, I'm very worried about you.


I see opinions, but I see no references to credible information. Can you supply them?

Nope. Show my claim is wrong.
 

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
From the India Times:

Fox's Palin forgot to govern her hubby before governing Alaska
Surinder Mansukh
Feb. 6, 2010

She is blasting President Obama every day and night. She is eager to make neo cons of American right the icon of the "perfect world." She wanted to become the vice president! She is now the Fox's neo con spin artist. Mrs. Palin forgot one simple rule of the game! Governing starts at home before going to public life!

Her husband controlled her political life. According to new media, E-mails shed new light on Todd Palin's role while his wife was Alaska's governor, showing that the one-time oil field worker's advice was sought on board appointments and suggesting he was close to matters related to state government.

The self-proclaimed "First Dude" was Governor "in charge" in Alaska. Love spilled over into Alaska's Gubernatorial politics. "Love know no bounds" says some political think tanks. It is essential for politicians to separate their love life, religion, and personal finance from public life and activities. Co-mingling the two spells disaster.

"Have Meg take the news miner off the press release address list for a few days,see how long it takes them to realize their not on the list," the first Dude wrote to his wife Mrs. Palin in an e-mail, dated June 21, 2007, after the governor questioned the fairness of an editor in Fairbanks Daily News-Miner.

The neo cons are embarrased but did not leave the ring yet! They are saying it is normal that wives trusts their husbands.

Neo con dudes, it is not trusting, it is allowing governance by a person who was not officially elected to anything! Well, it is a good lesson for all in the world. Learn to govern your spouse first if they are naughty before taking the oath of Public office to govern the public who you really do not know
 

Martin

Active Member
First, I am not a Sarah Palin fan. My view of her is not positive at all. Having said that, however, I don't see why this is a big issue. She is certainly not the first government official whose spouse played a major role in her decision making. I think Hillary/Bill Clinton are good examples of this. This story sounds like more it's okay for us but not okay for you politics. Both parties do it and I have sick of it.
 
Top