Palin....The Next Reagan!

[breezy1077]

That's just silly. I meant nothing about whether Regan's son said it or not. As it is, one could easily make a point that someone's son, or daughter, doesn't know an individual as well as everyone else because supposedly said child would be blinded to a parent's faults by love. As one would hope, and expect. If anything, then, Michael's comments about the comparison could clearly be taken with a grain of salt.
Again, Palin is no Reagan, and never will be.

Okay, I'll type slowly for you. My point was that regardless of whether his son said it, or it was said by someone else entirely, it didn't make it true.You brought up the point about his son saying it, so therefore it must be true because according to you the son would know him better than anyone.
I then clarified my comment that his son may indeed by prejudice in favor of the father, which one would hope for in anyone's children, but that doesn't make the son's opinion valid. Clear now? She still doesn't hold a candle to Reagan, no matter who says it, including you.

And she's not Reagan because YOU say it? You can't have it both ways.

 

[wardfamily1]

Okay, I'll type slowly for you. My point was that regardless of whether his son said it, or it was said by someone else entirely, it didn't make it true.You brought up the point about his son saying it, so therefore it must be true because according to you the son would know him better than anyone.
I then clarified my comment that his son may indeed by prejudice in favor of the father, which one would hope for in anyone's children, but that doesn't make the son's opinion valid. Clear now? She still doesn't hold a candle to Reagan, no matter who says it, including you.

No need to be condescending (BTW, did you miss the post by MackeyMouse?). I was merely pointing out, with YOUR quotes, that first you said it was "...regardless of who said it..." then you stated ...I meant nothing about whether Regan's son said it or not..." It should be one or the other, not both.

You've misunderstood, ward. The only thing I was attacking was the faulty logic of the message I was replying to. This a standard form of discourse, called reductio ad absurdum.

I didn't misunderstand anything from you, I quoted profdsny.

 

[bicker]

Sorry for my confusion... I thought you were referring to what I wrote.

 

[djm99]

It's like a domino effect. Consider the bailout this week. At what point in time will the Gov't hold a monopoly on every facet of American life? As we grow more and more dependent on the gov't...we lose more and more freedom.

Sarah Palin is that you - you didn't answer the question. Since we have lived with Medicare for several decades now, in what way have YOU lost your freedom?

 

[breezy1077]

Sarah Palin is that you - you didn't answer the question. Since we have lived with Medicare for several decades now, in what way have YOU lost your freedom?

I answered.

 

[gmboy95]

Ok let me try this one.....I think sarah Palin is the next Abraham Lincoln!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[ntsammy5]

Ok let me try this one.....I think sarah Palin is the next Abraham Lincoln!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

She's growing a beard????????????

 

[Oreo Cookie]

Sarah Palin is that you - you didn't answer the question. Since we have lived with Medicare for several decades now, in what way have YOU lost your freedom?

I agree with you, the question wasn't answered. Saying it's like a domino effect isn't an answer, there needs to be a specific freedom that has been lost. The answer was deflection, which Palin is good at.

I think Palin has energized the neocon base, but that is where the similarities between Reagan and Palin end. She's good a prepared speeches.

 

[breezy1077]

I'm confused why dems might feel threatened by Michael Reagan's comparison....oh, that's right, Reagan took 48 states in one of the greatest political landslides in history....

Carry on...

 

[tinkryansmom]

She's growing a beard????????????