Palin just another hypocrite [Archive]

BinCo

09-01-2008, 02:10 PM

So it looks like the Bush administration/Right Wing Abstinence only training sort of failed on this one. I guess we're expected to be abstinent, but not them.;)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26496189

At least she's gonna make her daughter get have the kid and get married and deal with it. "Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child..."

So, she knows how tough it will be for her daughter to continue life on any path she thought she might have available and will now be forced to marry a man she might not have wanted to marry, have a child she can't take care of and run into the biggest fork in the road she might ever see.

More of that good 'ol guilt trip of "you made your bed, now sleep in it" mentality that seems to have done wonders for humanity.

bullet

09-01-2008, 02:18 PM

How does this make Sarah Palin a hypocrite? She is pro-life, and always has been? She is not responsible for the decision her daughter made to have sex, and she is being the supportive mother that she should be. I didn't read anything that indicated she was forcing her daughter to get married. Guys, c'mon, I've read through here and seen so many people blasting and bashing President Bush, or anyone even remotely related to him. What good does that do? We have two major political parties in this country, and they don't agree on a lot of things but just hating on people because they think or act differently doesn't accomplish anything. How about some constructive dialogue. What should she do in this case, kick her daughter to the curb for having the audacity to get pregnant? Ship her off to a secret place and hide her from the rest of the world? Enough name calling, let's stick to the facts and be civil.

simonsebs

09-01-2008, 02:32 PM

McCain, Obama agree: Don't use Palin's pregnant daughter as political fodder (http://www.suntimes.com/news/elections/rnc/1138831,CST-NWS-react01web.article)

Nice to see them both taking the high road on this. We should all do the same.

hm0504

09-01-2008, 02:32 PM

At the other end of the child spectrum, Palin has a 4 month old baby with Down Syndrome. Though I am not a "mother should stay home with the kids until they're all grown up type" (ideally, I would like to see parents have the realistic opportunity to equal split income generation and parenting), mothers almost exclusively are best suited for caring for babies (some fathers can breastfeed but that is a rarity). As such, I would like to know how Ms. Palin will be able to handle the challenges of caring for a baby with Down Syndrome while managing the steep learning curve required to be a VP, or simply be on the campaign trail. Seems to me like the family has enough stress going on.

Bob S.

09-01-2008, 02:39 PM

I agree with bullet. If you are going to call someone a hypocrite, at least supply proof.

hm: " I would like to know how Ms. Palin will be able to handle the challenges of caring for a baby with Down Syndrome while managing the steep learning curve required to be a VP, or simply be on the campaign trail."

She can afford to hire a specialized nanny who can provide her child the intense attention he will need.

Bob S.

Boreas

09-01-2008, 02:40 PM

I understand there are rumours that the four month old baby is actually her grandchild with the 17 year old. Either way, I agree with those who say that politicians' families should be a little off limits.

I heard a program on CBC yesterday that said sex ed, either abstinence based, or informative is not effective. The biggest indicator of whether teens will engage in sex or take precautions is the family and support network around the teen.

I am impressed that Governor Palin is supporting her daughter, in public anyway. I also wonder how she can parent as a VP.

BinCo

09-01-2008, 02:56 PM

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/01/1320417.aspx

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/01/palin-on-abortion-id-oppo_n_122924.html

She supports abstinence only. Her own daughter seems ignorant of how to have safe sex, or chose to get pregnant. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that she is the wrong person for the job. McCain chose her for 2 reasons, she is very conservative and she has a vagina.

I have no problem with what people do in their own families. I hate politicians and anyone else who thinks that they know what is best for the rest of us. Politicians should defer what is taught in sex ed to the professionals and doctors and stay the heck out of it.

I find it disgusting that these same jerks talk about smaller, less intrusive, government and yet have the audacity to shove their morals in our face and in our lawbooks. They want less government, except where their interests are at. They want a constitutional ban on gay marraige, yet are happy to allow two people to marry in 10 minutes or less in Vegas and get divorced the next day. They stand against government sponsered healthcare, yet are vehement about getting involved in beginning of life and end of life decisions that should be between a family and their doctor. They talk about the free-market, yet reward oil companies with billions in tax breaks when they are making world record profits. The talk about how the market will correct itself, yet support propping up Bear-Stearns with a bail out. Talk about wanting to help the enviroment, yet sue the Federal Government for putting the Polar Bear under Federal protection. Talk about being good stewards of the earth that God blessed them with, and fight 99% of the scientists worldwide who say global climate change is real and we are the most likely cause.

Not to go off on you bullet, I just am surrounded in my business world with people like Palin. People who believe that they know what is good for you. It seems to, more often than not, be the old addage "do as I say, not as I do". I am not sure what she should do in this case. When someone has made a career out of being pro-life, anti sex-ed she does not have much of a choice does she? It's just sad that the chicken has come home to roost in their own house. Maybe if she had been a little more interested in comprehensive sex ed and taught her daughter that, little Bristol would not be pregnant. Than again, that's not what she is about.

BinCo

09-01-2008, 03:03 PM

To be clear. I call her a hypocrite because she supports a program that has been shown to be a dismal failure and the proof is under her own roof.

Sex is only for married men and women. Now, here is more proof that it is a failure when someone who is as close as it gets to that supporter gets pregnant. Even if it comes out that the birth control failed, she still had sex when she was not married.

usmc1

09-01-2008, 03:12 PM

How does this make Sarah Palin a hypocrite? She is pro-life, and always has been? She is not responsible for the decision her daughter made to have sex, and she is being the supportive mother that she should be. I didn't read anything that indicated she was forcing her daughter to get married. Guys, c'mon, I've read through here and seen so many people blasting and bashing President Bush, or anyone even remotely related to him. What good does that do? We have two major political parties in this country, and they don't agree on a lot of things but just hating on people because they think or act differently doesn't accomplish anything. How about some constructive dialogue. What should she do in this case, kick her daughter to the curb for having the audacity to get pregnant? Ship her off to a secret place and hide her from the rest of the world? Enough name calling, let's stick to the facts and be civil.
The hypocrisy is in belonging to a party, and taking a personal position, wherein people are lectured that they must adhere to a very narrow set of "family values" which include no sex out of marriage and certainly not teenage sex. And by extension from this position that were the rest of the country adhere to these values everything would be hunky-dory.

Well we're seeing where those values have been instilled in a family which is still having to cope with the unmarried teenage pregnancy of a 17-year old despite those values.

Not only is the hypocrisy of self-righteousness exposed but, the self-contradiction of unwanted result of that hypocrisy is also high-lighted.

And lest anyone think that it was unfair of the so-called leftists to call attention to this issues, it was McCain and Palin who put this child up on the stage to portray the "perfect conservative Christian" family. They put the kid in the spotlight, and are now outraged that the "baby bump" showed under that spotlight and people are talking about it.

This does not disqualify Palin from anything other than sanctimonious sermons about conservative Christian child-rearing as a benchmark. Right, this does not disqualify her at all, there are a myriad of other very real reasons as to why she is disqualified.

brazhunter

09-01-2008, 03:30 PM

How does that make Palin a hypocrite?

I suppose she could drag the kid off and force her to have an abortion. That would make her a hero in the eyes of the left anyway.

Qikdraw

09-01-2008, 04:11 PM

Personally I think this is a non issue really. Palin has much more she can be criticised on.

Palin was for the bridge to nowhere before she was against it (http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/08/29/did-palin-really-fight-the-bridge-to-nowhere.aspx)
Palin does not believe that global warming is man made (http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/sarah_palin_vp/2008/08/29/126139.html)
Palin Was a Director of Embattled Sen. Stevens's 527 Group (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/01/palin_was_a_director_of_embatt.html#more)
She was/is part of the Alaskan Independant Party, that wants to seperate from the US (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHFY1otOWjQ) (youtube video)
Her lack of critical US history is troublesome (http://eagleforumalaska.blogspot.com/2006/07/2006-gubernatorial-candidate.html) (question 11)
The whole 'troopergate' scandal, which is well known now and no need to add a link.
She doesn't know what a VP does. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=006axc2aELE&feature=related) (youtube link)

Thats a whole heck of a lot for not knowing who the heck she was a week ago. Republicnas are saying she has foreign policy experience because Alaska is next to Russia. :confused: :rolleyes: What is it the republicans are smoking?

hm0504

09-01-2008, 04:17 PM

The hypocrisy is in belonging to a party, and taking a personal position, wherein people are lectured that they must adhere to a very narrow set of "family values" which include no sex out of marriage and certainly not teenage sex. And by extension from this position that were the rest of the country adhere to these values everything would be hunky-dory.

...

Kind of like being the VP candidate of a party that decries the utter depravity, evil, and dangerousness of homosexuality...and yet having a daughter who is a lesbian.

Boreas

09-01-2008, 04:23 PM

I suppose she could drag the kid off and force her to have an abortion. That would make her a hero in the eyes of the left anyway.

It would not make her a hero in the eyes of this "leftie". Life is sacred. Bottom line though, it is not our place to decide what this young woman choses to do. It is also none of our business.

It is interesting that only "keeping" the baby, or abortion are seen a options. What about parenting the child? This is not a possession. It is a human life. Can this young woman actually parent the child? Again, not our place to judge, presumably she has family around her to support her. Adoption has seemingly not been raised as an option. Again, we are not privy to her decision-making. It just does not seem to be on the table.

So, to be totally judgemental here. A parent who advocates abstinence as the only option ought to be able to instill that value into her child(ren). Isn't that right? What, she is human? Her daughter is human. Imagine that. A political figure in such a visible position is human with human frailties. Who knew? :rolleyes:

Boreas

09-01-2008, 04:25 PM

Kind of like being the VP candidate of a party that decries the utter depravity, evil, and dangerousness of homosexuality...and yet having a daughter who is a lesbian.

What! :eek: Say it isn't so! :rolleyes: :sneaky:

tinhfwv

09-01-2008, 04:30 PM

Not to go off on you bullet, I just am surrounded in my business world with people like Palin. People who believe that they know what is good for you.

"People like Palin"? Are you claiming to know her personally? I'm sorry you're surrounded by people you don't like, and that it makes you angry, but projecting that anger on someone you don't know, and that you've stereotyped, is wrong.

And BTW, Obama showed a lot of compassion and decency in his comments on this issue today. If he is the leader you say he is, then follow him.

NudeAl

09-01-2008, 05:39 PM

While I applaud both nominees for saying that this is a private family matter and should not be part of the political voting process human beings being what they are it will be.

It is hard on the whole family, I cannot even imagine how it is in that family right now. I hope and pray that the young woman will be able to make the changes needed to give this child the love it needs and do the things needed to be a good parent. Of course the real innocent in the whole situation is the unborn child. While it is tempting to say something about the whole unfortunate thing I feel it is not fair to pass judgement. We all have some skeletons in our closet.

Croydon

09-01-2008, 06:55 PM

How does that make Palin a hypocrite?

I suppose she could drag the kid off and force her to have an abortion. That would make her a hero in the eyes of the left anyway.
Knock on wood, are you not paying attention?

The hypocrisy is in the "conservative family values" that republicans shove down our throats. The same values that they think everyone in America should adhere to.

The hypocrisy is in the fact that Palin has touted her family as the epitome of conservative values. She portrayed her family as the All American Christians who do not believe in abortion, go to church every sunday, and believe in abstinence only education. When she was chosen as VP, she thrusted her "perfect family" to us all. She exposed her children and family to media. Guess what happens when you do that? You open yourself to criticisms and there will be bloggers, pundits and reporters looking left and right at every detail of your life to expose some scandal.

The funny thing is that the Palin family ARE NOT perfect. They face the same problems like any other family.

This is a great example of why abstinence only education DOES NOT work and these Christian conservatives need to get it together and understand that.

I believe that abstinence should be taught to our kids IN CONJUNCTION with education about safe sex. Let's face it, not every child is going to wait until marriage. Parents need to stop fooling themselves and get it straight that Johnnie and Suzie are not little kids anymore. They are grown adolescents who have raging hormones coupled with peer pressure. You can talk all you want about waiting until marriage but for many teens, they will not be waiting that long. So what is the harm in giving them all the information they need to make a smart and informative decision. If I had a kid, I would rather he/she wait until marriage but reality is that will not happen. In any case, I want to ensure that he/she has ALL the information needed: condoms, birth control, knowledge of STDs and pregnancy. The point to make that having sex is a big responsibility and if you think you are ready for it, here are the possible consequences. This is the same approach my father used with me and my two brothers.

These kids who only receive abstinence only education have sex with NO IDEA what the consequences are to their decision. Ladies and gentleman, this is how Palin's daughter got pregnant. Her parents were too foolish to let her in on all things sex and sexuality.

Do you think that Palin's daughter would have gotten pregnant had she known about condoms and birth control? It is possible she could have gotten pregnant but I am willing to bet that had she had the right information, she would have made a more educated decision about sex (i.e. not have it or use a condom).

What is hypocritical is that these Christian conservatives talk endlessly about how Americans are losing their morals and the darling of conservative family values, The Palin Family, are the same people that Christian conservatives frown upon.

blackrebel

09-01-2008, 08:26 PM

Stupid comments like this push me hard to the right. The thing is that YOU PEOPLE are to caught up in your Bush hatred to see that you are just plain ... off.

THIS has nothing to do with Bush, but then again, in your narrow world, everything wrong about anything is related to Bush and those on the right. Stupid kids? it's Bush's fault, even though scores have been declining looooooong before he walked into office. YOU PEOPLE feel better than to blame parents who let MTV, VH1 and worse to raise their kids.

Need I go on? Better yet, I need to just ig YOU PEOPLE, get my business up and running, raise my income WITHOUT WAITING FOR SOME LIBERAL HAND OUT ... and put my daughter through college WITHOUT a hand out. Sorry that YOU PEOPLE can not relate to being strong within your self.

"If you need some person to look for hope, there is no hope for you"

So it looks like the Bush administration/Right Wing Abstinence only training sort of failed on this one. I guess we're expected to be abstinent, but not them.;)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26496189

At least she's gonna make her daughter get have the kid and get married and deal with it. "Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child..."

So, she knows how tough it will be for her daughter to continue life on any path she thought she might have available and will now be forced to marry a man she might not have wanted to marry, have a child she can't take care of and run into the biggest fork in the road she might ever see.

More of that good 'ol guilt trip of "you made your bed, now sleep in it" mentality that seems to have done wonders for humanity.

NudonyII

09-01-2008, 10:00 PM

Stupid comments like this push me hard to the right. The thing is that YOU PEOPLE are to caught up in your Bush hatred to see that you are just plain ... off.

THIS has nothing to do with Bush, but then again, in your narrow world, everything wrong about anything is related to Bush and those on the right. Stupid kids? it's Bush's fault, even though scores have been declining looooooong before he walked into office. YOU PEOPLE feel better than to blame parents who let MTV, VH1 and worse to raise their kids.

Need I go on? Better yet, I need to just ig YOU PEOPLE, get my business up and running, raise my income WITHOUT WAITING FOR SOME LIBERAL HAND OUT ... and put my daughter through college WITHOUT a hand out. Sorry that YOU PEOPLE can not relate to being strong within your self.

"If you need some person to look for hope, there is no hope for you"

Who said anything about blaming it on Bush (well, maybe someone did - I'm too sleepy to read the whole thread)? This has nothing to do with Bush in particular; merely the agenda his party has been trying to drill in our heads, at the expense of conventional wisdom. I won't reiterate what Croydon said, because he nailed it better than I could have. He's right. No one wants Bristol to abort (which is something that the uber-conservatives keep going on and on senselessly about). We're merely stating that the so-called "traditional family values" Republican Christians keep shoving down our throats have very little basis and practicality in the realities of our culture. That's why they're mostly unable to enforce these very rules within their own families. And that's what we are pointing out.

Hopefully this will now become quite clear and people will no longer be dupped by this "political scheme" to get more votes.

And by the way, blackrebel, it was thanks to a government "hand out" that I was able to get through college and go on to be a success in my field. Would you rather I be still flipping burgers at McDonald's?

usmc1

09-02-2008, 04:51 AM

Today's Palin revelation: While mayor of the village of Dogsquat, Alaska, pop 6,000 and seven igloos, and 18 husky teams, and five moose, she secured $27-million in federal earmarks for her hamlet. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26504638/)

So much for her conservative credentials and opposition to waste in government spending.

Hypocrisy is, as hypocrisy does! Dang old conservative don't mind federal spending if it's making someone rich, but it sets their bleak souls, and withered little black hearts a twitter and their hateful mouths flapping if a penny goes toward improving the lives of ordinary Americans. Hypocrisy!

Boreas

09-02-2008, 06:44 AM

BlackRebel, I was going to reply differently, then I wasn't. It really irks me whenever anyone refers to "YOU PEOPLE" or similar epithets. Such blanket accusations shut down any possibility of conversation. Perhaps that is what you want. Whenever we resort to blanket statements about any group of people, we are putting ourselves in a superior position.....in OUR minds anyway. This tactic has been used to oppress and silence others since the dawn of time.

Wanting a better country with some supports from the government is not the same as wanting hand outs.

I doubt that you have gotten where you are completely on your own steam. I am sure you have family or friends who have helped you through your life. Perhaps you have even benefitted from a government "hand out".

May you find some peace. I also pray that your country has wiser leadership with the next administration. Whichever candidate wins the election.

brazhunter

09-02-2008, 07:11 AM

The hypocrisy is in the fact that Palin has touted her family as the epitome of conservative values.

You still fail to show how that makes Palin a hypocrite. It only shows that her kid, like most kids, made a mistake.

This is a great example of why abstinence only education DOES NOT work and these Christian conservatives need to get it together and understand that.
Sex ed doesn't work all that well either and for the same reason drug abuse ed doesn't. Children and teenagers by nature think they're invincible and 'it won't happen to me' and routinely stretch the boundaries and rules to see how much they can get away with. Doesn't have a damn thing to do with libs or conservs or parental values except that some value systems reduce the likelyhood of problems, not eliminate it.

Boreas

09-02-2008, 07:39 AM

You still fail to show how that makes Palin a hypocrite. It only shows that her kid, like most kids, made a mistake.

Sex ed doesn't work all that well either and for the same reason drug abuse ed doesn't. Children and teenagers by nature think they're invincible and 'it won't happen to me' and routinely stretch the boundaries and rules to see how much they can get away with. Doesn't have a damn thing to do with libs or conservs or parental values except that some value systems reduce the likelyhood of problems, not eliminate it.

The thing that gets me with these types of situations is the notion that some folks hold themselves up as better than others when they say they follow "traditional family values". Of course, they are human too, and their kids get pregnant and worse. So, my feathers get ruffled when there is a holier than thou attitude involved. Of course, I do not know if this is the case with Governor Palin.

I agree with your comments about sex ed and drug education. What kids tend to respond to is good parental support, and peer support. If they are blessed to have whatever the right mix is, then they'll come out well. If they are given critical thinking skills, and are able to make their own decisions about life choices, they tend to make healthier choices. Of course, there is a certain amount of a crap shoot involved.

brazhunter

09-02-2008, 08:00 AM

What kids tend to respond to is good parental support, and peer support. If they are blessed to have whatever the right mix is, then they'll come out well. If they are given critical thinking skills, and are able to make their own decisions about life choices, they tend to make healthier choices. Of course, there is a certain amount of a crap shoot involved.

Well said.

Sanslines

09-02-2008, 08:11 AM

The thing that gets me with these types of situations is the notion that some folks hold themselves up as better than others when they say they follow "traditional family values". Of course, they are human too, and their kids get pregnant and worse. So, my feathers get ruffled when there is a holier than thou attitude involved. Of course, I do not know if this is the case with Governor Palin.

What is important to remember is that not all Republicans hold themselves up to hypocritical standards. I am referring to Republicans right now but what is said pertains to all people of all political parties. It is wrong to make sweeping generalizations about an entire class of people based upon either the actions of the few or the actions of the many. This is called 'stereotyping' and is wrongly used against Republicans as well as Democrats.

Obama demonstrated wise judgement when he clearly stated that he would not make a political issue out of Palin's family life. Too bad some others will not follow his example.

nud_bare

09-02-2008, 08:45 AM

I had made up my mind months ago that as much as I like McCain's maverick politics I wouldn't vote for him if he pandered to the religious right by choosing a strong religious conservative as his VP running mate. And by strong religious conservative I mean someone that believes laws need to be passed that support their religious views or that existing laws need to be interpreted according the their religious views.

Back when Attorney General Gonzales was firing a group of Federal attorneys I read an article that stated that each new administration appoints thousands of people to federal jobs.

I also read on one of the nude hiking sites that thousands of "wildlife"cameras are being placed along hiking trails to monitor wildlife.

So my question is , what influence will Gov. Palin have in appointing these thousands of jobs and do you want some strong religious conservative sending more law enforcement into the forest, or limiting nudity on more and more nude beaches and hot springs. Or scouring over the 10's of thousands of photos from these wildlife cameras looking for YOU.

My suggestion is that if you are going to vote based on a single issue or on a morality issue , VOTE NUDE!!

PS. It doesn't matter to me that Gov. Palin's daughter got pregnant as long as she gives her daughter all the emotional support she needs. And financial support too. After all, isn't this her first grandchild?

usmc1

09-02-2008, 08:49 AM

You still fail to show how that makes Palin a hypocrite. It only shows that her kid, like most kids, made a mistake.

Sex ed doesn't work all that well either and for the same reason drug abuse ed doesn't. Children and teenagers by nature think they're invincible and 'it won't happen to me' and routinely stretch the boundaries and rules to see how much they can get away with. Doesn't have a damn thing to do with libs or conservs or parental values except that some value systems reduce the likelyhood of problems, not eliminate it.

There are so many levels of hypocrisy and cynicism connected to this mess that it hard to know where to start.

But, let me speak as a father who helped his wife successfully shepherd and guide two sons and a daughter through the teenage years, a political activist, and a person who lives at least part of his life in public.

McCain and Palin put this child up on the national stage while knowing that she was not married and quite pregnant, full well knowing that when the knowlege of her pregnancy became public, it would be a matter of public discussion.

I propose to any parent here, that it is not a family value, nor a kind and loving thing to put one's 17-year old daughter's most intimate secret up for display before a morbidly curious public. It is callous, and very darkly manipulative to then claim that the family has a right to privacy and then claim the affair as a virtue and that this just shows how that we're like other Americans.

They are not like other Americans; this child-mother-of-a-child, will not have to go on welfare, will not have to struggle through life as a single mom trying to get healthcare and education for herself and her child.

I am certain that all families have a certain amount of dysfunction, teenagers having sex without contraception is a quite old story. It certainly is not a cause for shame or rebuke. And it is the right thing for the child's family to stand behind her and help her, that is the right thing and certainly should not be claimed as a political point--"look at me I've done the right thing". No kidding lady, you're doing what a mom is supposed to do, so no props there.

But, it is hypocritical, cynical, and very, very ugly to take that 17-year old child's private life public and try to turn it into a political advantage. These people are not naive, stupid maybe, but not naive. They knew how it would play out.

No parent should do such a thing to their child.

That is merely one of the levels of hypocrisy involved in this situation.

BinCo

09-02-2008, 10:52 AM

Come on now. I'm not being mean to Republicans. I was one for a long time. I would not even consider myself a hardline Dem. I voted for Perot. I vote by the people, not the letter after their name. I would hope for more conversations that can be civil, but "you're either with us or against us" is the moto of one side. What I wanted to point out is how one more high ranking politician got caught saying one thing while having the results come down on her.

Is it bad that her daughter is pregnant? To me, yes. I have seen and known far too many young girls whose lives were altered from their dreams because of a young pregnancy. My wife is one of them.

Is she a bad choice? Yes. there are more qualified people.

My 2 cents for now.

Qikdraw

09-02-2008, 10:53 AM

If you want to debate, debate, thats what democracy is about. You can quit with the passive agressive attacks though. Which I am noticing a few posters are doing. Never assume other people are stupider than you are.

I have yet to see anyone refute my reasons for Palin as being unacceptable though. Have you heard the latest too?

<EMBED src=http://www.youtube.com/v/UYYiw_y2qDI&hl=en&fs=1 width=425 height=344 type=application/x-shockwave-flash allowfullscreen="true"></EMBED>

This is just grasping at straws.

Qikdraw

09-02-2008, 12:26 PM

If you wanna debate, debate. Quit with personal or generic 'YOU PEOPLE' attacks.

If you have nothing more to contribute than ad homenim attacks then you do yourself a disservice, and you let your 'side' down.

C'mon. Debate! Give me solid good reasons why Palin is the single best person out of all the republican politicians out there. So far since Palin was named all I have seen so far has been attacks against people not liking her, not one single, valid reason why she is good.

So come on. I dare you. Tell me why she is the single best republican for the job. Be prepared to back it up with solid proof, in the form of links of articles or video.

nimrod

09-02-2008, 12:49 PM

I see this situation as more ironic than hypocritical, but I can see the hypocracy in it too. To exbound on how important family values are and how abstinace only sex ed. is the only way while your unmarried 17 year old daughter is pregnant is hypocritical. No doubt kids make mistakes, but too say in public that their views on child raising is the best and only way to teach our children while their children are making some of the biggest mistakes a child can make(from their own point of view), I do not see how anyone cannot see the hypocracy.

Should this be a political issue? I do not think so, but the far religious right as made it one when they decided that to spread their message and make people follow their religious views they had to become political and make or change laws that better fit their particular religious views. Palin being in the political field will be held to a higher standard then others because those that vote want them to be almost god-like and free of any mistakes, and in their eyes she has commited one of the biggest sins, "What about the childern?!".

Qikdraw

09-02-2008, 01:01 PM

I am still waiting for reasons why Palin is the best choice the republicans can come up with. I am still holding to the opinion that this was simply a ruse to get the media to stop talking about Obama's amazing speech. That she'll drop out before the election. Now the media is starting to ask the same thing too.

Hell even Palin's mother in law isn't sure who she'll vote for, nor what Palin brings to the table (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/republican_race/2008/08/30/2008-08-30_sarah_palins_motherinlaw_uncertain_about.html).

Faye Palin admitted she enjoys hearing Barack Obama speak, and still hasn't decided which way she'll vote.

-snip-

"I'm not sure what she brings to the ticket other than she's a woman and a conservative. Well, she's a better speaker than McCain," Faye Palin said with a laugh. "People will say she hasn't been on the national scene long enough. But I believe she's a quick study."

*edit* The bookies are saying 'John McCain more likely to drop Sarah Palin (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/republican_race/2008/09/02/2008-09-02_john_mccain_more_likely_to_drop_sarah_pa.html)' and are laying odds to that effect. In fact bets have completely stopped on McCain winning the presidency since Palin was chosen.

brazhunter

09-02-2008, 03:42 PM

C'mon. Debate! Give me solid good reasons why Palin is the single best person out of all the republican politicians out there. So far since Palin was named all I have seen so far has been attacks against people not liking her, not one single, valid reason why she is good....

So come on. I dare you. Tell me why she is the single best republican for the job.
Simple.

1) She's the one best able to help McCain get elected.
2) She still has as much or more experience as Obama, who has spent most of his senatorial career campaigning instead of legislating.
3) She's still the VP candidate, not the presidential candidate so however experience she may or may not have as compared to Obama, she may have as many as 8 years to learn on the job. Obama would have exactly none.
4) Nobody's threatening race riots if she and McCain lose.
5) She's certainly no more right-partisan than Biden is left-partisan.
6) She doesn't spend as much time doing her hair as Biden.

That said, she's well spoken on energy which IS the #1 issue facing the country and actually knows something about it, as opposed to Obama who plans to simply legislate new energy technology into existence.

nimrod

09-02-2008, 04:32 PM

Simple.

1) She's the one best able to help McCain get elected.
2) She still has as much or more experience as Obama, who has spent most of his senatorial career campaigning instead of legislating.
3) She's still the VP candidate, not the presidential candidate so however experience she may or may not have as compared to Obama, she may have as many as 8 years to learn on the job. Obama would have exactly none.
4) Nobody's threatening race riots if she and McCain lose.
5) She's certainly no more right-partisan than Biden is left-partisan.
6) She doesn't spend as much time doing her hair as Biden.

That said, she's well spoken on energy which IS the #1 issue facing the country and actually knows something about it, as opposed to Obama who plans to simply legislate new energy technology into existence.

Is this ment as a joke? No. 6 is why I ask.

I do not see any facts in this post I see opinions and attacks on Obama and Biden disguised as comparison but no real facts that make Palin the best running mate for McCain. The only reason I see that she was chosen was because of her right leaning stances and she is a women and they wanted to try to take the votes that would have went to Hillary, like women are not smart enough to vote for the person and not the sex.

BinCo

09-02-2008, 04:33 PM

Simple.

1) She's the one best able to help McCain get elected.
2) She still has as much or more experience as Obama, who has spent most of his senatorial career campaigning instead of legislating.
3) She's still the VP candidate, not the presidential candidate so however experience she may or may not have as compared to Obama, she may have as many as 8 years to learn on the job. Obama would have exactly none.
4) Nobody's threatening race riots if she and McCain lose.
5) She's certainly no more right-partisan than Biden is left-partisan.
6) She doesn't spend as much time doing her hair as Biden.

That said, she's well spoken on energy which IS the #1 issue facing the country and actually knows something about it, as opposed to Obama who plans to simply legislate new energy technology into existence.

A response, in order.

1) Really? More so than ANY other Republican that was on the short, or long list? Is it that, since she is a woman, she was moved up the list in hopes of pulling in the waffling Clinton supporters? Unfortunately there are people that are just that shallow.

2) You might want to look that up again. The info I read is that she started as Mayor of a small town in 1996 and that was the year he was elected to state senate. She had 4 years on a city council before that and he started working as director of the Developing Communities Project in Chicago in 1985 for 3 years. If anything, they might have the same amount of public service record. I would discount being on the city council of a small town and other small public services as they are not usually a full time position.

3) McCain is a 72 year old Cancer survivor. He has a very good chance of dying in office and making her the President. Obama has a good chance of being assassinated in office. So BOTH VP's stand as good a chance of becoming President in their term. I would say it is a better chance than any other in American history. So, I would discount that statement. Besides, Bush had ZERO time in Washington and look what we got. I would rather have an experienced Senator as President than a person who was Governor for 1.5 years of any state.

4) Please post a link to the threats you speak of. I have heard nothing of the sort. If it goes to the Supreme Court again, I would place my bet that your are correct though.

5) Yup, but she certainly has never met with a single foriegn dignitary either. Biden has, for a long time too. I think he was even in head of a little Senate commitee that concentrates on that. I heard that she just got her passport in the last 2 years. So she hasn't even been out of the country before that. Has she even been to the lower 48 before becoming Governor?

6) He he he. But how much does she spend on that doo? And we all saw that great 80's hair she had. :p

Yup, just what we need, another Big Oil person in the white house who will bow down to whatever the oil companies want. So, if gas was $1.46 8 years ago and $4.00 today, will it be $10.95 after 8 years of her in office? "She's well spoken". Don't you mean "well spoken for" By Big Oil? Let's see, her hubby works for an oil company, she was chairwoman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, her future son-in-law works for an oil company. Hmmmmm, I wonder what she thinks of alternative energy? Instead of having another President that favors oil above anything else, why not have one that sees that we need to expand?

usmc1

09-02-2008, 04:40 PM

Simple.

1) She's the one best able to help McCain get elected. proof of sparse pickings then
2) She still has as much or more experience as Obama, who has spent most of his senatorial career campaigning instead of legislating. No she doesn't
3) She's still the VP candidate, not the presidential candidate so however experience she may or may not have as compared to Obama, she may have as many as 8 years to learn on the job. Obama would have exactly none. OH, I see, OJT
4) Nobody's threatening race riots if she and McCain lose.Race riots?
5) She's certainly no more right-partisan than Biden is left-partisan.Yes, she is too.
6) She doesn't spend as much time doing her hair as Biden.She does too, and has much than he does.

That said, she's well spoken on energy which IS the #1 issue facing the country and actually knows something about it, as opposed to Obama who plans to simply legislate new energy technology into existence. No she's not, her energy utterances are uninformed parroting of oil company dogma

See, blanket assertions work both ways. My opinion versus yours. The difference is, I can provide evidence to support mine, where yours are merely opinion without substantiation.

baregreg

09-02-2008, 04:47 PM

http://www.theforumsite.com/images/smilies/popcorn4jj.gif
.
.
.
.
.

Boreas

09-02-2008, 05:41 PM

I have managed to survive this thread and I am in no way a Democrat. :confused: What does that make me.

As a Canadian, I am VERY thankful that I do not have to vote and make a decision down there. :)

Sanslines

09-02-2008, 05:52 PM

You want to talk about issues then go research and post where either Joe Biden or Ed Rendell did anything meaningful for Scranton PA - which is one of the top five 'dying' cities in this nation. You tell us how either of them did anything to create meaningful work in that particular 'working class' city. When you are done doing this, then I will tell you where the Republicans have also failed this city. This is the basis of a 'fair' debate.

Boreas

09-02-2008, 05:59 PM

http://www.theforumsite.com/images/smilies/popcorn4jj.gif
.
.
.
.
.

Well said. Pass the popcorn. :eatpopcorn:

EricNY

09-04-2008, 08:30 AM

Off Topic content has been removed.

If you want to revive this thread do so with respect for others and their opinions.

brazhunter

09-04-2008, 08:49 AM

You want to talk about issues then go research and post where either Joe Biden or Ed Rendell did anything meaningful for Scranton PA - which is one of the top five 'dying' cities in this nation.
Rendell's been great about raising taxes on the entire state to fund pork projects in Philadelphia. Rest of the state is pretty much SOL though.

brazhunter

09-04-2008, 08:55 AM

Is this ment as a joke? No. 6 is why I ask.
Yes, #6 was a joke... though I see the Boston Hearld printed an article to day were the best the columnist could do to bust on Sara Palin's speech was complain about her hair style being out of date.

See, I did it for a funny to lighten up this forum and she's getting paid to do it as political commentary. Go figure.

Sanslines

09-04-2008, 09:15 AM

Rendell's been great about raising taxes on the entire state to fund pork projects in Philadelphia. Rest of the state is pretty much SOL though.

You are forgetting the endless homicide epidemic that continues to this day. I remember one night last February when there were 5 homicides commited in one 8 hour period!

As for Scranton, here is what I am referring to about Scranton and yet the media does not challenge Joe Biden about what he has ever done for his hometown or what the current governor Democrat Ed Rendell has done for this city. Of course the party loyalists don't want you to know about the actual performance of their leaders (or tremendous lack of it) for that would get in the way of creating the 'dream'.

Scranton lands on Forbes ‘dying’ list
BY JEREMY G. BURTON
STAFF WRITER

Published: Thursday, August 07, 2008
Updated: Thursday, August 7, 2008 1:00 AM EDT
Landing a spot on one of Forbes magazine’s popular lists is often a distinction for the rich and famous.

But in Scranton’s case, it’s a black eye for the down and out.

Forbes has named Scranton among “America’s Fastest-Dying Cities,” a list of 10 Rust Belt stragglers that also includes Cleveland, Detroit and Buffalo, N.Y.

The story, published Tuesday on the magazine’s Web site, bases its analysis on a few chief criteria — population loss, unemployment and meager Gross Domestic Product growth.


According to Forbes, the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre metropolitan area’s population declined 11,197 since 2000, while unemployment in June reached 6.2 percent, and its GDP is growing annually at only 1.3 percent.

“It’s terrible to end up on a list like that, period,” said Austin Burke, president of the Greater Scranton Chamber of Commerce. “It undoes all the good we’ve been doing, at least from a psychological point of view.”

By Forbes’ estimation, these 10 cities “struggled the worst of any areas in the nation in the 21st century. And they face even bleaker futures.”

That’s not the whole picture, said Teri Ooms, executive director of the Joint Urban Studies Center, a Wilkes-Barre think tank.

Ms. Ooms cited Internal Revenue Service numbers that point to population growth. And the U.S. Census Bureau recently estimated that in 2007 Scranton saw its smallest annual loss since the 1940s.

She said people in the know, developers and business leaders, know better.

“We’re our own worst enemy,” Ms. Ooms said. “People in the two counties say, ‘See, I knew it. I told you.’ We tend to focus on the negative.”

Mayor Chris Doherty was blunt in shrugging off the bad publicity.

“It’s obvious Forbes has never been to Scranton,” he said.

“Look at our city,” Mr. Doherty added. “It speaks for itself. The proof is coming into Scranton.”

Mr. Burke and Ms. Ooms said they wished Forbes’ analysis extended to real estate values and higher education, or investment and labor numbers.

From 1997 through 2007, job growth was modest but positive in Scranton/Wilkes-Barre, which includes Hazleton, climbing by more than 7 percent, according to state data.

Ms. Ooms said she doesn’t put much stock in lists like this one, but they do have an impact.

“We’re trying to build up an image,” she said. “This takes away from it, certainly.”

The sad thing is that I personally know Scranton and facts seem to get in the way of the false 'image' that some are trying to create. Scranton is in Lackawanna County and was a huge coal mining area. When the coal ran out so did the jobs. Also the death of the Bethlehem Steel Works facilities due south in the Lehigh Valley did nothing to help the situation in Scranton as the steel works used enormous amounts of coal to keep the blast furnaces going.

Qikdraw

09-04-2008, 11:21 AM

Yes, #6 was a joke... though I see the Boston Hearld printed an article to day were the best the columnist could do to bust on Sara Palin's speech was complain about her hair style being out of date.

Remember the weeks of media outcry over Edwards' haircut? Sorry I'm not going to be sympathetic on that one.

See, I did it for a funny to lighten up this forum and she's getting paid to do it as political commentary. Go figure.

I thought it was funny. :D

I still haven't seen Palin's speech yet, I'm going to watch it today though, but from my neighbour she did really well.

G I Joe

09-04-2008, 01:55 PM

Thanks to Sarah Palin's speech last night all I can say is "Run, Forrest (Obama), Run!"

Sanslines

09-04-2008, 03:58 PM

Thanks to Sarah Palin's speech last night all I can say is "Run, Forrest (Obama), Run!"

Another one of Obama's aliases is Forrest Gump??? Wow!!!

usmc1

09-04-2008, 04:10 PM

Palin raises $8 million — for Obama

Obama's coffers have been filling since Sarah Palin attacked him repeatedly in St. Paul last night.

An Obama aide confirms Drudge's report that Obama has raised about $8 million from more than 130,000 donors and is on pace to raise $10 million by the time McCain reaches the stage tonight.

UPDATE: Obama spokesman Bill Burton says, "Sarah Palin's attacks have rallied our supporters in ways we never expected. And we fully expect John McCain's attacks tonight to help us make our grass-roots organization even stronger."

You go girl!:smoking:

baregreg

09-04-2008, 05:16 PM

Palin raises $8 million — for Obama

Obama's coffers have been filling since Sarah Palin attacked him repeatedly in St. Paul last night.

An Obama aide confirms Drudge's report that Obama has raised about $8 million from more than 130,000 donors and is on pace to raise $10 million by the time McCain reaches the stage tonight.

UPDATE: Obama spokesman Bill Burton says, "Sarah Palin's attacks have rallied our supporters in ways we never expected. And we fully expect John McCain's attacks tonight to help us make our grass-roots organization even stronger."

You go girl!:smoking:
Good.
I actually think Rudy Giuliani speech was full of attacks too.
I don't care what party does does it. But it's big turnoff for me when either side does it.

Sanslines

09-04-2008, 05:20 PM

Good.
I actually think Rudy Giuliani speech was full of attacks too.
I don't care what party does does it. But it's big turnoff for me when either side does it.

Yes but you are only hearing part of the story. The other part is how much money she has raised for the McCain side. She wins the prize for being the best fund raiser (for both sides) so far.

Qikdraw

09-04-2008, 06:07 PM

Yes but you are only hearing part of the story. The other part is how much money she has raised for the McCain side. She wins the prize for being the best fund raiser (for both sides) so far.

I haven't seen any numbers yet, I hadn't realised they had released them. Is it from when she was announced or after her speech?

What has she pulled in?

baregreg

09-04-2008, 06:12 PM

Yes but you are only hearing part of the story. The other part is how much money she has raised for the McCain side. She wins the prize for being the best fund raiser (for both sides) so far.
I just heard on the news that she has raised 1 million for the G.O.P. so far.

NudeAl

09-04-2008, 06:13 PM

I can't believe they are still going to send Caribou Barbie to be VP. I mean if McCain was a younger man or in better health no biggie but she is just a heart beat away from the highest most powerful office in the land, YIKES! McCaine has had cancer 3 times and he suffered greatly in the POW camp and the effects of those things is cumulative all those old beatings will be coming back to haunt him more and more.

Naturist Mark

09-04-2008, 07:32 PM

I just heard on the news that she has raised 1 million for the G.O.P. so far.

Wow, I bet that has the Obama camp worried! (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/04/obama-raises-8-million-af_n_124023.html)

-Mark

baregreg

09-04-2008, 08:35 PM

Wow, I bet that has the Obama camp worried! (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/04/obama-raises-8-million-af_n_124023.html)

-Mark
Mark

My reply to Sanslines was meant to show that the Obama campaign has raised 10 times the amount as the pretty lady from Alaska has for her party.

Naturist Mark

09-04-2008, 09:01 PM

Mark

My reply to Sanslines was meant to show that the Obama campaign has raised 10 times the amount as the pretty lady from Alaska has for her party.

Yep, I see that now. I need to scroll back to previous pages to see the full context. Still, do you think an 8 to 1 or 10 to 1 fundraising advantage is enough given the 'liburl media' and all the 527 money? Heck, they even managed to banish Olbermann from St. Paul. Sometimes it seems like everyone is against Obama except a majority of the American people.

-Mark

MJ_KC

09-04-2008, 09:17 PM

In my opinion, the selection of Palin has had more of an effect on getting people to choose Obama instead of McCain.

Palin is even more conservative in her opinions than what I have seen from McCain, so that tends to be a big turn off for moderates and independents who have been critical of Bush. I don't see any of the hard core conservatives ever voting for Obama, so I do not see why McCain didn't select a moderate running mate.

jon71

09-04-2008, 11:20 PM

I think the reason why is that he was too chicken to call the bluff of right-wingers. They were saying "oh unless he picks a staunch conservative as his running mate the party will abandon him and they'll be a huge walk-out at the convention". I don't believe it. What would the upset conservatives do. Would they vote for a ticket with a pro-choice canditate at the top and bottom spot because they're upset that the bottom man (or woman) on the other side is pro-choice? Would they stay home or vote for Barr and guarantee that Obama wins? No they wouldn't. A token number may stay home and Barr might go up from 3% nationally to 4% but that would be it. Upper ninety percent of them would hold their nose and vote for McCain anyway. It's wonderful for Democrats that he was afraid to call their bluff. Not only that but he wasted the entire convention trying to assure the people who ALWAYS vote Republican that he was one of them. Not one appeal to new voters, to independents or ticket splitters anywhere. There wasn't even any small olive brance to moderate Republican's anywhere. The Democratic convention from start to finish was reaching out to everyday Americans talking about how to make things better. So far we aren't being contested for swing voters. Well if swing voters, moderates, and independents aren't important to Republicans they are VERY welcome in the Democratic party.

usmc1

09-05-2008, 04:39 AM

Palin raises $8 million — for Obama

Obama's coffers have been filling since Sarah Palin attacked him repeatedly in St. Paul last night.

An Obama aide confirms Drudge's report that Obama has raised about $8 million from more than 130,000 donors and is on pace to raise $10 million by the time McCain reaches the stage tonight.

UPDATE: Obama spokesman Bill Burton says, "Sarah Palin's attacks have rallied our supporters in ways we never expected. And we fully expect John McCain's attacks tonight to help us make our grass-roots organization even stronger."

You go girl!:smoking:

Hey gang, the "overnights" are in. She did it! Watta gal...

<link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/Shane/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msoclip1/01/clip_filelist.xml"><style>  </style> Obama raises $10 million after Palin speech<o:p></o:p>

GOP raises over $1 million since speech

usmc1

09-05-2008, 05:30 AM

Getting to know all about you...

About Sarah Palin: an e-mail from Wasilla

A suburban Anchorage homemaker and activist — who once did battle with the Alaska governor when Palin was mayor — recounts what she knows of Palin's history.

By Anne Kilkenny
Posted on September 2, 2008. Printed on September 5, 2008.
http://www.crosscut.com/2008-election/17341/

Editor's note: The writer is a homemaker and education advocate in Wasilla, Alaska. Late last week, Anne Kilkenny penned an e-mail for her friends about vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, whom she personally knows, that has since circulated across comment forums and blogs nationwide. Here is her e-mail in its entirety, posted with her permission.
<hr>I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Gov. Sarah Palin since 1992. Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her father was my child's favorite substitute teacher. I also am on a first-name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more City Council meetings during her administration than about 99 percent of the residents of the city.

She is enormously popular; in every way she's like the most popular girl in middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice for vice president and won't vote for her can't quit smiling when talking about her because she is a "babe."

It is astonishing and almost scary how well she can keep a secret. She kept her most recent pregnancy a secret from her children and parents for seven months.

She is "pro-life." She recently gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby. There is no cover-up involved here; Trig is her baby.

She is energetic and hardworking. She regularly worked out at the gym.

She is savvy. She doesn't take positions; she just "puts things out there" and if they prove to be popular, then she takes credit.

Her husband works a union job on the North Slope for BP and is a champion snowmobile racer. Todd Palin's kind of job is highly sought-after because of the schedule and high pay. He arranges his work schedule so he can fish for salmon in Bristol Bay for a month or so in summer, but by no stretch of the imagination is fishing their major source of income. Nor has her lifestyle ever been anything like that of native Alaskans.

Sarah and her whole family are avid hunters.

She's smart.

Her experience is as mayor of a city with a population of about 5,000 (at the time) and less than two years as governor of a state with about 670,000 residents.

During her mayoral administration, most of the actual work of running this small city was turned over to an administrator. She had been pushed to hire this administrator by party power-brokers after she had gotten herself into some trouble over precipitous firings, which had given rise to a recall campaign.

Sarah campaigned in Wasilla as a "fiscal conservative." During her six years as mayor, she increased general government expenditures by more than 33 percent. During those same six years, the amount of taxes collected by the city increased by 38 percent. This was during a period of low inflation (1996-2002). She reduced progressive property taxes and increased a regressive sales tax, which taxed even food. The tax cuts that she promoted benefitted large corporate property owners way more than they benefited residents.

The huge increases in tax revenue during her mayoral administration weren't enough to fund everything on her wish list, though — borrowed money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt but left it with indebtedness of more than $22 million. What did Mayor Palin encourage the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? Or a new library? No. $1 million for a park. $15 million-plus for construction of a multi-use sports complex, which she rushed through, on a piece of property that the city didn't even have clear title to. That was still in litigation seven years later — to the delight of the lawyers involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it would be. She also supported bonds for $5.5 million for road projects that could have been done in five to seven years without any borrowing.

While Mayor, City Hall was extensively remodeled and her office redecorated more than once.
These are small numbers, but Wasilla is a very small city.

As an oil producer, the high price of oil has created a budget surplus in Alaska. Rather than invest this surplus in technology that will make us energy independent and increase efficiency, as governor Sarah proposed distribution of this surplus to every individual in the state.

In this time of record state revenues and budget surpluses, she recommended that the state borrow/bond for road projects, even while she proposed distribution of surplus state revenue: Spend today's surplus, borrow for needs.

She's not very tolerant of divergent opinions or open to outside ideas or compromise. As mayor, she fought ideas that weren't generated by her or her staff. Ideas weren't evaluated on their merits but on the basis of who proposed them.

While Sarah was mayor of Wasilla, she tried to fire our highly respected city librarian because the librarian refused to consider removing from the library some books that Sarah wanted removed. City residents rallied to the defense of the city librarian and against Palin's attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew her termination letter. People who fought her attempt to oust the librarian are on her enemies list to this day.

Sarah complained about the "old boy's club" when she first ran for mayor, so what did she bring Wasilla? A new set of "old boys." Palin fired most of the experienced staff she inherited. At the city and as governor, she hired or elevated new, inexperienced, obscure people, creating a staff totally dependent on her for their jobs and eternally grateful and fiercely loyal — loyal to the point of abusing their power to further her personal agenda, as she has acknowledged happened in the case of pressuring the state's top cop.

As mayor, Sarah fired Wasilla's police chief because he "intimidated" her, she told the press. As governor, her recent firing of Alaska's top cop has the ring of familiarity about it. He served at her pleasure and she had every legal right to fire him, but it's pretty clear that an important factor in her decision to fire him was because he wouldn't fire her sister's ex-husband, a state trooper. Under investigation for abuse of power, she has had to admit that more than two dozen contacts were made between her staff and family to the person that she later fired, pressuring him to fire her ex-brother-in-law. She tried to replace the man she fired with a man who she knew had been reprimanded for sexual harassment; when this caused a public furor, she withdrew her support.
She has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in help. The City Council person who personally escorted her around town, introducing her to voters when she first ran for Wasilla City Council became one of her first targets when she was later elected mayor. She abruptly fired her loyal city administrator; even people who didn't like the guy were stunned by this ruthlessness.

Fear of retribution has kept all of these people from saying anything publicly about her.

When then-Gov. Frank Murkowski was handing out political plums, Sarah got the best, chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission — one of the few jobs not in Juneau and one of the best paid. She had no background in oil and gas issues. Within months of scoring this great job, which paid $122,400 a year, she was complaining in the press about the high salary. I was told that she hated that job: the commute, the structured hours, the work. Sarah became aware that a member of this commission (who was also the state chair of the Republican Party) engaged in unethical behavior on the job. In a gutsy move which some undoubtedly cautioned her could be political suicide, Sarah solved all her problems in one fell swoop: got out of the job she hated and garnered gobs of media attention as the patron saint of ethics and as a gutsy fighter against the "old boys' club," when she dramatically quit, exposing this man's ethics violations (for which he was fined).

As mayor, she had her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork from Sen. Ted Stevens. Lately, she has castigated his pork-barrel politics and publicly humiliated him. She only opposed the "bridge to nowhere" after it became clear that it would be unwise not to.

As governor, she gave the Legislature no direction and budget guidelines, then made a big grandstand display of line-item vetoing projects, calling them pork. Public outcry and further legislative action restored most of these projects — which had been vetoed simply because she was not aware of their importance — but with the unobservant she had gained a reputation as "anti-pork."

She is solidly Republican: no political maverick. The state party leaders hate her because she has bit them in the back and humiliated them. Other members of the party object to her self-description as a fiscal conservative.

Around Wasilla, there are people who went to high school with Sarah. They call her "Sarah Barracuda" because of her unbridled ambition and predatory ruthlessness. Before she became so powerful, very ugly stories circulated around town about shenanigans she pulled to be made point guard on the high school basketball team. When Sarah's mother-in-law, a highly respected member of the community and experienced manager, ran for mayor, Sarah refused to endorse her.
As governor, she stepped outside of the box and put together of package of legislation known as "AGIA" that forced the oil companies to march to the beat of her drum.

Like most Alaskans, she favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). She has questioned if the loss of sea ice is linked to global warming. She campaigned "as a private citizen" against a state initiaitive that would have either protected salmon streams from pollution from mines or tied up in the courts all mining in the state (depending on whom you listen to). She has pushed the state's lawsuit against the Department of the Interior's decision to list polar bears as a threatened species.

McCain is the oldest person to ever run for president; Sarah will be a heartbeat away from being president.

There has to be literally millions of Americans who are more knowledgeable and experienced than she.

However, there are a lot of people who have underestimated her and are regretting it.
Claim vs. Fact

"Hockey mom": True for a few years
"PTA mom": True years ago when her first-born was in elementary school, not since
"NRA supporter": Absolutely true
Social conservative: mixed. Opposes gay marriage, but vetoed a bill that would have denied benefits to employees in same-sex relationships (said she did this because it was unconsitutional).
Pro-creationism: Mixed. Supports it, but did nothing as governor to promote it.
"Pro-life": Mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby but declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life legislation.
"Experienced": Some high schools have more students than Wasilla has residents. Many cities have more residents than the state of Alaska. No legislative experience other than City Council. Little hands-on supervisory or managerial experience; needed help of a city administrator to run town of about 5,000.
Political maverick: Not at all.
Gutsy: Absolutely!
Open and transparent: ??? Good at keeping secrets. Not good at explaining actions.
Has a developed philosophy of public policy: No.
"A Greenie": No. Turned Wasilla into a wasteland of big box stores and disconnected parking lots. Is pro-drilling off-shore and in ANWR.
Fiscal conservative: Not by my definition!
Pro-infrastructure: No. Promoted a sports complex and park in a city without a sewage treatment plant or storm drainage system. Built streets to early 20th century standards.
Pro-tax relief: Lowered taxes for businesses, increased tax burden on residents
Pro-small government: No. Oversaw greatest expansion of city government in Wasilla's history.
Pro-labor/pro-union: No. Just because her husband works union doesn't make her pro-labor. I have seen nothing to support any claim that she is pro-labor/pro-union.

Why am I writing this?

First, I have long believed in the importance of being an informed voter. I am a voter registrar. For 10 years I put on student voting programs in the schools. If you google my name, you will find references to my participation in local government, education, and PTA/parent organizations.
Secondly, I've always operated in the belief that "bad things happen when good people stay silent." Few people know as much as I do because few have gone to as many City Council meetings.
Third, I am just a housewife. I don't have a job she can bump me out of. I don't belong to any organization that she can hurt. But I am no fool; she is immensely popular here, and it is likely that this will cost me somehow in the future: that's life.

Fourth, she has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100 or so people who rallied to support the city librarian against Sarah's attempt at censorship.

Fifth, I looked around and realized that everybody else was afraid to say anything because they were somehow vulnerable.

Caveats: I am not a statistician. I developed the numbers for the increase in spending and taxation two years ago (when Palin was running for governor) from information supplied to me by the finance director of the City of Wasilla, and I can't recall exactly what I adjusted for: Did I adjust for inflation? For population increases? Right now, it is impossible for a private person to get any info out of City Hall — they are swamped. So I can't verify my numbers.

You may have noticed that there are various numbers circulating for the population of Wasilla, ranging from my "about 5,000" up to 9,000. The day Palin's selection was announced, a city official told me that the current population is about 7,000. The official 2000 census count was 5,460. I have used about 5,000 because Palin was Mayor from 1996 to 2002, and the city was growing rapidly in the mid-1990s.

Anne Kilkenny is a homemaker and education advocate in Wasilla, Alaska.

EricNY

09-05-2008, 08:45 AM

Getting to know all about you...

She is enormously popular; in every way she's like the most popular girl in middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice for vice president and won't vote for her can't quit smiling when talking about her because she is a "babe."
Anne Kilkenny is a homemaker and education advocate in Wasilla, Alaska.

How this for a Vice Pres......

:D

usmc1

09-05-2008, 08:48 AM

How this for a Vice Pres......

:D

Cleans up pretty good. Better than moose hunter I've ever met.

Sanslines

09-05-2008, 08:51 AM

How this for a Vice Pres......

:D

You can't post that. You are a married man. KRC will get upset and yell at you. See what you have done? No dinner for you tonight!

Sanslines

09-05-2008, 09:03 AM

Palin looks too happy in the top photo. No one should be that happy. Something is very fishy here.

brazhunter

09-05-2008, 09:24 AM

How this for a Vice Pres......

:D

Would you guys really want to see Cheney or Biden like that? :D

usmc1

09-05-2008, 10:37 AM

Alright guys, (generic all sex inclusive guys, that is) the green screen mystery is solved. And, I've just got to say, my initial reaction to the media twitter this morninga bout another of McCain's green screen fiascos was reaching and way snarky even for America's left-wing, dirty commie, stink-pot media. Really, I did. Or I did until I read this.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/5/111829/9917/18/587802

Seems the folks were treated to seeing John McCain standing in front of a CG backdrop of Walter Reed's well manicured green lawn. But, TV viewers merely saw him in front of another greeen screen, which makes the older American gent, look a tad pasty. Not a good visual, but go figure, and wtf really cares except some namby pamby artistes? Right.

Oooops, now I get it. Turns out the image the GOP image-makers threw up behind John was indeed Walter Reed. But, not the military hospital, it was, fer cryin' out loud y'awl, a picture of Walter Reed Middle School in California.

No wonder the economy is in the tank, the occupation of Iraq (oh excuse me, I mispronounced that, Eye-Rack) was a disaster, the mayor of dogsquat Alaska is under serious consideration for next to lead the free world, gas is $4.00 a gallon, umemployent is 6+%, and people don't have health insurance and seniors are falling into Death by Donut Hole.

These idiots can't even google up the right picture for their backdrop. Walter Reed Middle School, rotflmao&pmpwsrfmn&tsdmf. And they want to run the country for eight more years?...I don't think so!

Wait, there will be plausible denial coming shortly. Wanna bet?

A staff member did it and they're outraged and the staff member was fired. No wait, it was the symbol of the kind of middle school we could all have if we'd just go ahead with the school voucher program. Nowwait, it was those hecklers that did it. Yeah, yeah, we can say they and the dirty, commie, stink-pot, liberal media did it.

Qikdraw

09-05-2008, 12:42 PM

Would you guys really want to see Cheney or Biden like that? :D

Can Cheney even smile like that? lol

But no... I really don't think I want to imagine either one in lingerie. :D

hm0504

09-05-2008, 02:27 PM

I just need to know which books she wanted banned from the Wasilla public library (you recall, she tried to have the librarian filed for not obeying der Führer's orders). (Btw, I've seen some fake lists of books so don't be fooled by those.)

usmc1

09-05-2008, 02:44 PM

I just need to know which books she wanted banned from the Wasilla public library (you recall, she tried to have the librarian filed for not obeying der Führer's orders). (Btw, I've seen some fake lists of books so don't be fooled by those.)
I'm waiting for that one too, make a great debate question.

Naturist Mark

09-05-2008, 04:42 PM

I just need to know which books she wanted banned from the Wasilla public library (you recall, she tried to have the librarian filed for not obeying der Führer's orders). (Btw, I've seen some fake lists of books so don't be fooled by those.)

What the books were wasn't important, Palin certainly didn't care. It was just a loyalty test - would a public employee do what Sarah Palin told them to do for no reason except that she told them to do it. The Library director failed the test. According to an interview on NPR Mayor Palin was very big on loyalty oaths (to HER) and tests. She reportedly cleaned house, even among the civil employees, and the pattern repeated when she became Governor. Apparently Alaska isn't that different from the political machine politics of Philadelphia or Chicago.

-Mark

hm0504

09-05-2008, 05:06 PM

I'm waiting for that one too, make a great debate question.

Wouldn't it be cool if we lived in a society where politicians, particularly those campaigning, had to, on a regular basis, directly and clearly answer questions posed by the electoral public?

Naturist Mark

09-05-2008, 08:08 PM

http://media.adn.com/includes/assets/images/mast_logo.gif
Palin's Stall (http://www.adn.com/opinion/story/516641.html)
Governor is stonewalling the Troopergate investigationGov. Sarah Palin is taking the wrong approach to Troopergate. She should be practicing the open and transparent, ethical and accountable government she promised when running for governor and boasts about now that she's on the national stage.

Instead, Gov. Palin has begun stonewalling the Legislature's attempt to get the bottom of allegations that she, her family or staff violated ethical or state personnel rules.

As a result, the Troopergate allegations hang over Palin's future and cloud her candidacy for vice president.

Instead of trying to delay the whole thing, Palin should take a cue from U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens, who asked that his corruption trial be moved up so it would be completed well ahead of the November general election. Voters deserve to know the outcome of Sen. Stevens trial and the investigation into Palin.

When this investigation into Troopergate started, Gov. Palin's response was refreshingly open. Since she became the Republican candidate for vice president, her approach has changed for the worse. America deserves the same openness and ethics from vice-presidential candidate Palin that she promised to Alaska voters in 2006.

Full Editorial (http://www.adn.com/opinion/story/516641.html)

Naturist Mark

09-05-2008, 09:11 PM

http://ndn.newsweek.com/site/images/newsweek.gif
Team McCain and the Trooper (http://www.newsweek.com/id/157439/page/1)
Nominee's ally moves to curb probe of PalinKey Alaska allies of John McCain are trying to derail a politically charged investigation into Gov. Sarah Palin's firing of her public safety commissioner in order to prevent a so-called "October surprise" that would produce embarrassing information about the vice presidential candidate on the eve of the election. more (http://www.newsweek.com/id/157439/page/1)

-Mark

Sanslines

09-06-2008, 04:39 AM

September 6th, 2008 • 4:25 am

Thank the Agenda Media for the Record Ratings (http://www.letfreedomringblog.com/?p=3186)

According to this AP article (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D930S7U81&show_article=1), this week’s Republican National Convention was the most watched political convention in history. Of the four major party candidates, only Sen. Biden didn’t attract 40 million viewers the night of his acceptance speech. Here’s a portion of the AP’s reporting:
The GOP presidential candidate attracted roughly the same number of viewers to his convention acceptance speech Thursday as Obama did before the Democrats last week, according to Nielsen Media Research.

It marked the end of an astonishing run where more than 40 million people watched political speeches on three nights by Obama, McCain and Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin. The Republican convention was the most-watched convention on television ever, beating a standard set by the Democrats a week earlier.

Three times in two weeks, political speeches were watched by more people than the “American Idol” finale, the Academy Awards and the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics this year.

“It clearly suggests that a great number of Americans think that who will be the next president is important and worthy of their time,” said Tom Rosenstiel, a former political reporter and director of the Project for Excellence in journalism.
While I agree with Mr. Rosenstiel that most Americans are interested in this year’s election, I think the main reason why people tuned into the Republican National Convention was because of how the hatemongers in the Agenda Media treated Sarah Palin. This is anecdotal proof that most American voters rejected the elitist comments made by Sally Quinn, Andrea Mitchell and Campbell Brown.

Another reason why a record number of people watched was because of America’s fascination with Sarah Palin. She’s taken the week by storm. People wanted to see if her introductory speech in Dayton, OH was the exception or the rule.

In that speech, she talked lovingly about Trig, the Palins’ newborn who was born with Down’s Syndrome, as “a beautiful baby boy.” She talked about fighting hard against corruption in Alaska and winning those fights. She talked about her husband Todd’s being a union member working on “Alaska’s North Slope” working on oil rigs. In other words, she described her family as the prototypical American family.

Wednesday night, they wanted to know more about this woman who was causing a firestorm in the media. They wanted to know that she was more than just another pretty face.

What the sane portions of America found out was that Gov. Palin is intelligent, tough, poised and charismatic, traits that they’re drawn to. They also found out that she’s as plain-spoken as the neighborhood’s hockey mom, something else that people connect with.

What America saw Wednesday night caused them to see how Sen. McCain would follow up that performance. though he didn’t deliver the type of speech that Gov. Palin gave them Wednesday night, he finished with a flourish that had people standing up and cheering all across the nation.
At first, I thought of the speech as workmanlike. I’ve since concluded that it was inspirational, too. How could you not be inspired when Sen. McCain said this:
I fell in love with my country when I was a prisoner in someone else’s. I loved it not just for the many comforts of life here. I loved it for its decency; for its faith in the wisdom, justice and goodness of its people. I loved it because it was not just a place, but an idea, a cause worth fighting for. I was never the same again. I wasn’t my own man anymore. I was my country’s.
The more I pondered that paragraph, the more I started being inspired by the speech. I suspect that a great many people reached that conclusion, too.

It’s safe to say that the enthusiasm gap that was appallingly apparent in January has disappeared, thanks in large part to the Agenda Media’s adoration of Sen. Obama and their reviling of Gov. Palin. People know that their views aren’t objective. They know that they want Obama to be our 44th president so badly that they’ll do or say anything that they think will put him over the top.

In taking that approach, they’ve turned people off. They’ve pushed people away from Sen. Obama. They’ve caused people to rally to Gov. Palin’s defense while uniting the Republican Party in the most ironic of ways.
Now the race begins in earnest. Rest assured that the McCain-Palin ticket will take the fight to the Obama-Biden ticket. What the final outcome will be is still to be decided, of course, but I can’t wait for Election Day.

Sanslines

09-06-2008, 04:48 AM

Laura Bush to Dems: Watch Your Step (http://www.letfreedomringblog.com/?p=3162)

September 1st, 2008 • 12:46

First Lady Laura Bush cautioned Democrats (http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0908/Laura_Bush_warns_Dems_away_from_antiPalin_sexism.h tml?showall) that sexist remarks about Sarah Palin might backfire. Here’s what Politico is reporting:
First lady Laura Bush said today that sexism aimed at Sarah Palin was a very real prospect and suggested Democrats watch what they say about the Alaska governor and John McCain’s ticketmate.

“The other side will have to be particularly careful,” Bush said in an interview on Fox News from St. Paul, “because that’s something we all looked at.” Questioned about whether Palin may face sexism from the media in the way Hillary Rodham Clinton supporters claim she did, Bush said: “I think that’s a possibility.”

The first lady, who had been planning to speak to the GOP convention tonight before Gustav scrambled the schedule, expressed pride in Palin.

“I’m going to get what I wanted, which is to be able to vote for a Republican woman,” Bush said. “People, as they get to know her, are going to be so impressed with her grit and her sensible judgment.” “She has shown how terrific women can be, and how strong women can be, in office.”
The Left’s smear websites have already thrown alot of conspiracy theories out there. None have stuck. In fact, Kos has retreated from the story that Sarah Palin didn’t give birth to Trig, that it was their daughter’s illegitimate child.

The more conspiracy theories that the Left tries throwing at Gov. Palin, the bigger the backlash against the Left will be.

Mrs. Bush is right, though. The more people get to know Gov. Palin, the more they’ll love about her. I can’t remember where I read this but someone was making the point that Sarah Palin doesn’t fit nicely in a box of any sort. She’s unabashedly conservative. Her husband is a proud member of a union but he isn’t a registered Republican. She’s staunchly pro-life and an evangelical Christian who won a local beauty pageant. She’s a picture of femininity and an avid outdoorsman. (That fits the description of a tomboy, doesn’t it?)

Any attempts by Democrats to smear her will hurt the Obama-Biden ticket almost as much as Biden hurts the Obama-Biden ticket.

Sanslines

09-06-2008, 05:09 AM

Rather than cut and paste, I am providing links to some interesting reading which gives us a lot to think about.

http://www.feministing.com/archives/010705.html

Awwww but cut and paste is so much fun!

Sanslines

09-06-2008, 05:17 AM

August 31st, 2008 • 11:54 am

They’re Insulting Us Again (http://www.letfreedomringblog.com/?p=3155)

John Kerry, who served in Vietnam, has just returned to insult our intelligence. This time, he’s done what I didn’t think possible. Here’s what he just said (http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0808/Kerry_attacks_Palin_as_Cheneyesque.html):
“With the choice of Gov. Palin, it’s the third term of Dick Cheney,” Kerry said on ABC News’ “This Week.” “He’s chosen somebody who doesn’t believe climate change is man-made.”
Kerry added that Hillary Rodham Clinton supporters should be offended if people suggest Palin was selected to draw some of the female vote away from the Barack Obama-Joe Biden ticket.
“It’s almost insulting to the Hillary supporters,” Kerry said, calling Palin a “Cheneyesque social conservative who’s going to satisfy the base. John McCain is a prisoner of the right wing, not a maverick.”
Comparing Sarah Palin to Dick Cheney is like comparing Madonna to Pope Benedict. Calling it a stretch is massive understatement. Calling it idiotic is so John Kerry.
Actually, I shouldn’t call Sen. Kerry an idiot. I don’t want to demean idiots that way. That isn’t fair.
UPDATE: Just when I thought liberals couldn’t get more stupid than Sen. Kerry, I get an email from the DNC. Here’s the spin they’re selling this morning:
Friend –
Over the last week this race has been transformed.
Barack named Joe Biden as his running mate, and they accepted the Democratic nomination at our historic open convention in Denver.
Our team is complete, and our movement is growing rapidly. But now we are facing our first major challenge together.
The August financial reporting deadline is tomorrow at midnight, and we have an opportunity to show that a campaign funded by ordinary people can go toe-to-toe with the Washington lobbyists and special interests lined up behind John McCain and the Republican Party.
Dear God, these people think we’re idiots. John McCain is the pawn of Washington lobbyists? They can’t be serious. Sen. McCain’s son didn’t lobby his dad like Hunter Biden did on behalf of the bank he was lobbying for.
Saying that their “movement is growing rapidly” is as credible as saying John Kerry isn’t an out-of-touch Europe-loving elitist. It’s insulting to hear such spin.
Let’s be clear, though. Democrats have gotten away with this crap for years. They think they can still get away with it now. They think that all they need are the hate-mongering idiots of the far left blogosphere and the Agenda Media. They’re about to find out that that’s a failing recipe.
Let’s be clear about something else, too. People keep saying that Sen. McCain picked Sarah Palin because he wanted to pick off some of Hillary’s supporters. While it’d be nice picking off Hillary’s supporters, that isn’t what she’ll do. Lots of women in Maine, Massachusetts and northern Michigan will relate to her as a hockey mom. Pro-life Catholic Democrats will flock to her because she chose to give birth to a baby she knew would have Down’s Syndrome.
Disillusioned feminists, who are slowly rejecting the progressives’ brand of feminism, will be attracted to Gov. Palin. Independents will love the fact that she’s taken on the corruption within her political party at what might’ve been great risk to her political future. Undeterred, Sarah Palin took on, then defeated, many of the corrupt old boys’ network.
Don’t think that that message won’t sell at a time when the congressional approval rating is just slightly higher than chicken pox and influenza. Don’t think that that won’t sell when 80+ percent of Americans think we’re heading in the wrong direction. BTW, 80+ percent of Alaskans think she’s doing a great job. Coincidence? I think not.
While Sen. Obama preaches the empty gospel of Hopeandchange, while liberal elitists like John Kerry talk down to us, Sarah Palin will be connecting with voters all across America.
That’s why John Kerry and the DNC are desperately trying to paint a false image of Sarah Palin. They know that if America gets to know her, they’ll vote for her in droves.

usmc1

09-06-2008, 05:32 AM

McCain Allies Move To Derail Trooper Investigation (http://www.newsweek.com/id/157439)

http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/37588/thumbs/r-MCCAIN-TOP-huge.jpg (http://www.newsweek.com/id/157439)
Trying To Remove Democrat In Charge Of Investigation... Claim Probe "Politicized"... Looking To Prevent "October Surprise"... Palin's Husband Hiring Own Lawyer... (http://www.newsweek.com/id/157439)EARLIER: Palin Trooper Investigation Fast Tracked (http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5734511&page=1)

Sanslines

09-06-2008, 05:34 AM

LOL Sanslines, maybe so, but I am short and sweet with responses anyway. I think more can be said with fewer words and with that I am posting another link that makes sense not for just Palin but for both parties. We need to stop, look, and listen to what they are saying.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/madeleine-m-kunin/its-time-to-stop-look-and_b_124276.html

Moonshadow,

What are you really trying to say??? That I am some kind of 'windbag'???

Seriously though, I agree that all of the rhetoric, false, and misleading statements coming from both political sides is meaningless. The only thing that should matter is the candidate's position on issues. Overall, I agree more with Biden's stance on positions but I do have some MAJOR reservations. When Biden states that he wants to spend more money to hire more qualified teachers, I immediately know that he is extremely out of touch with the real problems facing education.

I spoke with a friend of mine who is a university Mathematics professor. He was sharing his experiences with one of his classes this semester which is a remedial mathematics class. He is attempting to teach something as basic as "what is the value of x when x + 1 = 4 ?" He gets all kinds of answers including 5, 22, 147, etc and these answers are from high school graduates! Some of these graduates took not only algebra and trig in high school but also took calculus and can't even answer such a basic question. He also has high school graduates in his class who can't do the simple math (addition and subtraction) necessary to balance a checking book. I asked him about how anyone can graduate from high school unprepared for the basics of life and we both agreed that the answer is NOT a lack of money. The REAL problem is that the high school teachers (of whom the majority are not imcompetent) are disillusioned and disinfranchised about teaching because their hands are tied. They have to fight students and parents who would rather file lawsuits against the school districts then have a free hand in teaching. The answer to all of this is to demand that the teacher's unions start to protect the teachers and free up their hands so that they will be able to teach and hold students accountable for performance. Most teachers are good teachers who really want to teach but with the present system, all they seem to be able to do is automatically give high school students an 'A' and pass them along regardless of what they actually learned.

It would be wonderful if we could have an actual discussion and debate concerning all politicians stance on issues instead of the non stop stream of false and misleading rhetoric from the die hard politicians but that appears to be impossible.

usmc1

09-06-2008, 05:42 AM

The Guide to the Conservative Palinguage Vol.2 -- the People's Edition (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-ridley/the-guide-to-the-conserva_b_124368.html)<o></o>

This is the Vol. 2 of The Guide to the Conservative Palinguage (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-ridley/your-pocket-guide-to-spea_b_123606.html). I'm calling this one the People's Edition because you, the people, have obviously been taking AP courses in talking Conservative. I've been slammed with responses. Enough that I can promise you there will be future volumes. Along with some of mine, I've mixed in a few of yours for everybody's linguistic pleasure.
<o></o>
Before we start, I'd like to note that I intimated in Vol. 1 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-ridley/your-pocket-guide-to-spea_b_123606.html) that English is a Latin based language. Hondorf was among a few others who pointed out that English is "primarily German based, yes, but it is really a hybrid of Germanic and Romantic languages . . . by the way, I am a redneck."

Clearly, none of us should judge a neck by its color.

A reminder, we're collecting Palinisms here, and over at That Minority Thing.com (http://www.thatminoritything.com/). If you've got 'em, send 'em.

<o></o>Ready? Let's begin!

If you get 18 million people to vote for you in a national presidential primary, you're a "phoney." Get 100,000+ people to vote you governor of the 47th most populous state in the Union, you're "well loved."

SoyAA says: If you are biracial and born in a state not connected to the lower 48, America needs darn near 2 years and 3 major speeches to "get to know you." If you're white and from a state not connected to the lower 48, America needs 36 minutes and 38 seconds worth of an acceptance speech to know you're "one of us." <o></o>

If you give your wife a dap on stage, it's actually a "terrorist fist jab." If your daughter licks her palm so that she can slick down your youngest child's hair on national TV it's an "adorable moment." (Seriously, forget about abstinence only, teach these folks some grooming skills).

DTD SAYS: If your pastor rails against inequality in the United States of America, you're an "extremist." If your pastor welcomes a sermon by a member of Jews for Jesus who preaches that the killing of Jews by terrorists is a lesson to Jews that they must convert to Christianity, you're a "fundamentalist."

If you're a black man and you use a scholarship to get into college, then work your way up to being the president of the Harvard Law Review, you're "uppity." If you're a conservative and your parents pay your way to Hawaii Pacific University . . . you only have four more schools to attend over the next five years before you somehow manage to graduate (it might be five more schools over the next five years. No one has yet verified whether or not Palin was actually ever registered at the University of Hawaii at Hilo. But, you know how shady people are who ever attended any kind of school in Hawaii).

SeanOcali says: If you're 18, white, and get a 16 year old girl pregnant "life happens." If you're 18, black, and impregnate a 16 year old girl, you're a "registered sex offender."

If you spend 18 months building a campaign around the theme of "Change," it's just "empty rhetoric." If one week before your party's national convention you SUDDENLY make your candidacy about "Change," that's "red meat."

And your last lesson for the day:
<o></o>
If you are a Democrat, an Independent, or even a moderate Republican, if you're female, male, white, black, Asian, Hispanic, bi-racial, multi-ethnic, or GLBT, if you're a Jew, Gentile, Muslim, agnostic or atheist -- "Yes, we can!"
<o></o>
If you're a pitbull with lipstick from Alaska, "Yup, yup!"

Naturist Mark

09-06-2008, 06:40 AM

PhotoBuff

09-06-2008, 07:50 AM

It seems that Palin's nomination, and now the rebublican campaign, is about comparing her to Obama (as if she were running against him and not McCain). In Palin's acceptance speech, and in the speeches/commentary by others, her "executive" experience as mayor and governor is brought up to emphasize Obama's lack of such experience. The irony here is that the republicans (and everyone else) seems to be missing the fact that there is no evidence being presented of McCain's "executive" experience. In terms of the "executive" experience (running a business, city, state, etc.) that Palin is touting herself for having and bashing Obama for not, it certainly appears to me that if Obama is not qualified to be president then McCain is not either. By the republicans own talking points, Palin is more qualified than either Obama OR McCain. In a twisted sort of way, this may be appropriate in light of McCain's age and the potential stresses induced by a presidency - it is not hard to imagine that Palin could become president if McCain is elected and cant last the four year term.

I watched both parties conventions and what really struck me was that, despite all the apparent glitz and polished showmanship of the democratic event compared to the relatively bland republican convention, the democrats still seemed to me to come accross as the most genuine. Whether i believe in the democrats vision, platform, and policies (or not) I definitely felt more confident that they believed, and were more passionate about, what they were communicating.

Sanslines

09-06-2008, 08:21 AM

It seems that Palin's nomination, and now the rebublican campaign, is about comparing her to Obama (as if she were running against him and not McCain).

It is the media that is comparing Palin to Obama. One of the reasons for this is that Palin is a more dynamic speaker then McCain. When asked about Palin, Obama clearly replied that he is running against McCain and NOT Palin. The issue is pretty much dead now as the media tried and failed to get Obama to 'run' against Palin.

Naturist Mark

09-06-2008, 09:23 AM

It is the media that is comparing Palin to Obama.

So Rudy Guiliani (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFQG8TGLqys), John McCain (http://current.com/items/89273199_inaccuracies_in_mccain_ad_comparing_palin _to_obama), and Sarah Palin (http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/gops_strawman_community_organi.html) are "the media"?

-Mark

Sanslines

09-06-2008, 10:10 AM

So Rudy Guiliani (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFQG8TGLqys), John McCain (http://current.com/items/89273199_inaccuracies_in_mccain_ad_comparing_palin _to_obama), and Sarah Palin (http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/gops_strawman_community_organi.html) are "the media"?

-Mark

Do you ever watch network evening news? ABC Evening News??

brazhunter

09-06-2008, 10:55 AM

is about comparing her to Obama (as if she were running against him and not McCain).

The left & the dems immediately brought up that she not qualified and doesn't have the experience to be VP while the POTUS candidate has even less. Why shouldn't they compare them?

usmc1

09-06-2008, 11:43 AM

The left & the dems immediately brought up that she not qualified and doesn't have the experience to be VP while the POTUS candidate has even less. Why shouldn't they compare them?

That is an untruth, as has been posted here several times.

PhotoBuff

09-06-2008, 12:27 PM

..... Why shouldn't they compare them?

No particular reason why everyone shouldn't be compared to everyone else. That wasn't my point. My point is that the focus became Obama's lack of executive experience relative to Palin while nobody seems to be looking at McCain's exectutive experience which, relative to Palin, isn't any better than Obama's. McCain, it seems, is getting a bit of a free ride.

But really, everyone should be comparing VP to VP and President to Presidient. As VP, Palin's executive experience is not nearly as relevant as either McCain's or Obama's lack thereof for the presidency.

Sure, Palin has reportedly balanced a (state and city) budget, for example, but this is not the role of a VP unless McCain (who has never directly had such responsibility) want's to delegate that duty. Maybe Palin should be running for the top slot with McCain as VP?

I feel somewhat the same about Obama and Biden when it comes to international issues - I think Biden is much more experienced and stronger.

Fitz1980

09-06-2008, 12:30 PM

Really which "dems?" The media certainly asked but they've been asking the same of Obama. The dems on the other hand do have every right to ask "how can you spend months beating us over the head with the experience card and than turn around and pick someone with little to none?"

<embed FlashVars='videoId=184086' src='http://www.thedailyshow.com/sitewide/video_player/view/default/swf.jhtml' quality='high' bgcolor='#cccccc' width='332' height='316' name='comedy_central_player' align='middle' allowScriptAccess='always' allownetworking='external' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' pluginspage='http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer'></embed>

Qikdraw

09-06-2008, 01:33 PM

Sure, Palin has reportedly balanced a (state and city) budget, for example, but this is not the role of a VP unless McCain (who has never directly had such responsibility) want's to delegate that duty. Maybe Palin should be running for the top slot with McCain as VP?

It is prefectly acceptable to look at Palin's 'executive' experience, but the hate filled right is whining about it right now. Look at how the McCain campaign is attacking the media rather than answer questions.

Palin needs to be looked at, her experience as mayor and as governor. Apparently her small town is now saddled with a 20 million dollar debt she left them. In only 2 terms. She tried to have books banned, tried to fire the librarian, screwed up the sports centre project so it cost the city far more than it should have. These are all fair game to look at, yet the McCain campaign, and the hate filled right wing is crying fowl because these questions are asked. When asked to name one order Palin gave the National Guard instead of answering the question the McCain campaign cancelled an interview with Larry King because they didn't like the question.

Now they are stalling an investigation over Palin's alleged abuse of power. This is the same thing the Bush administration has been doing, the same tactics. Even before they get into office they are abusing power. If she did no wrong, what has she to hide? The republicans should be pushing to make this go faster not slower.

The McCain campaign said this election is not about issues, its about personalities. Well now we know their personality, they want to pull the wool over every American's eyes. But it ain't working. This election is about issues and the democrats will not let the republicans play their games. So they whine, and complain. You see it on tv, you see it in the newspapers, and you see it on these boards, instead of defending policy the hate filled right is attacking anyone who questions them.

Pathetic.

usmc1

09-06-2008, 02:18 PM

The left & the dems immediately brought up that she not qualified and doesn't have the experience to be VP while the POTUS candidate has even less. Why shouldn't they compare them?

OK, you want comparison? Here. Dang, y'awl just make this so easy!

BARAK OBAMA

Obama entered Harvard Law School in 1988.

In 1989 Obama was selected as an Editor of the Harvard Law Review based on his grades and a writing competition.

In 1990 Obama was elected President of the Law Review, editor-in-chief and supervising the law review's staff of 80 editors.

Obama graduated with a Juris Doctor (J.D.) magna *** laude from Harvard in 1991

A summer Associate at the Chicago law firms of Sidley & Austin in 1989 and Hopkins & Sutter in 1990.

In 1991 was Awarded Fellowship at the University of Chicago Law School

Published autobiography - Dreams from My Father in mid-1995.[21]
From April to October 1992 Obama directed Illinois Project Vote, a voter registration drive with a staff of 10 and 700 volunteers that achieved its goal of registering 150,000 of 400,000 unregistered African Americans in the state

Crain's Chicago Business names Obama to its 1993 list of "40 under Forty" powers to be.

Obama taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School for twelve years, as a Lecturer for four years (1992–1996), and as a Senior Lecturer for eight years (1996–2004).

In 1993 Obama joined Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, a 12-attorney law firm specializing in civil rights litigation and neighborhood economic development. An Associate for three years from 1993 to 1996, then Counsel from 1996 to 2004.

Obama was a Founding Member of the Board of Directors of Public Allies in 1992, non-profit organization dedicated to youth leadership development

Obama served on the Board of Directors of the Woods Fund of Chicago, a philanthropic organization devoted to poverty relief and the promotion of social mobility, founded in 1941 which in 1985 had been the first foundation to fund Obama's DCP, from 1993–2002

Obama served on the Board of Directors of The Joyce Foundation from 1994–2002, a charitable foundation based in Chicago with Assets of $986,172,775.00.

Obama served on the Board of Directors of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge from 1995–2002, as founding President and Chairman of the Board of Directors from 1995–1999. A public-private partnership founded in 1995 with a focus to improve school performance.

Obama served on the Board of Directors of the Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the Center for Neighborhood Technology, and the Lugenia Burns Hope Center.

Obama was elected to the Illinois Senate in 1996

Obama reelected to the Illinois Senate in 1998, and again in 2002

Unsuccessful bid for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives in 2000

Obama announced his Campaign for the U.S. Senate in January 2003

In January 2003, Obama became Chairman of the Illinois Senate's Health and Human Services Committee

In the November 2004 general election, Obama received 70% of the vote, the largest victory margin for a statewide race in Illinois history.

Obama was sworn in as US senator from Illinois on January 4, 2005
Obama held Assignments on the Senate Committees for Foreign Relations, Environment and Public Works and Veterans' Affairs through December 2006.

In January 2007, Obama took additional Assignments with Health, Education, Labor and Pensions and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

Obama became Chairman of the Senate's subcommittee on European Affairs.

2008 - Obama is currently the Junior United States Senator from Illinois.

SARAH PALIN
College #1 - Hawaii Pacific University a freshman during the fall of 1982,

College #2 - North Idaho College, a community college in Coeur d'Alene - A general studies major for two semesters, in spring 1983 and fall 1983.

College #3 - The University of Idaho from fall 1984 to spring 1985. ; majored in journalism with an emphasis in broadcast news.

In 1984, Palin won the Miss Wasilla Pageant, then finished Second in the Miss Alaska pageant

College #4 – Attended Matanuska-Susitna College in Palmer, Alaska in fall 1985

College #5 – University of Idaho; Spring 1986, Fall 1986 and Spring 1987

In 1987 Sarah Graduated from the University of Idaho with a Bachelor of Science degree in communications-journalism

In 1988, Sarah was a Sports Reporter for KTUU-TV in Anchorage, Alaska.

Palin served Two terms on the Wasilla, Alaska, city council from 1992 to 1996

Palin served Two terms as Mayor of Wasilla from 1996 to 2002

Unsuccessful campaign for Lieutenant Governor of Alaska in 2002

Palin Appointed to the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and Chaired the Commission from 2003 to 2004

November 2006, Palin was elected the Governor of Alaska,

PhotoBuff

09-06-2008, 02:45 PM

OK, you want comparison? Here. Dang, y'awl just make this so easy!

Very Good Info! Thanks. How 'bout something similar for McCain? I 've heard a lot about his being a POW (seems that's more important for them to talk about than his service as a senator) and his military service (crashing planes and being a self admitted flyboy jerk). I haven't heard much about his education, legal and/or business acumen, congressional record (other than he voted with bush some 90% of the time). What, if anything, makes him more qulaified for Prez than Obama?

usmc1

09-06-2008, 02:52 PM

[quote=usmc1;208007][b]OK, you want comparison? Here. Dang, y'awl just make this so easy![/B

Very Good Info! Thanks. How 'bout something similar for McCain? I 've heard a lot about his being a POW (seems that's more important for them to talk about than his service as a senator) and his military service (crashing planes and being a self admitted flyboy jerk). I haven't heard much about his education, legal and/or business acumen, congressional record (other than he voted with bush some 90% of the time). What, if anything, makes him more qulaified for Prez than Obama?

I'll research that for you, but on my blog, I suggested people not confuse longevity with accomplishment and achievement! The deadwood factor so to speak.

Qikdraw

09-06-2008, 04:20 PM

Very Good Info! Thanks. How 'bout something similar for McCain? I 've heard a lot about his being a POW (seems that's more important for them to talk about than his service as a senator) and his military service (crashing planes and being a self admitted flyboy jerk). I haven't heard much about his education, legal and/or business acumen, congressional record (other than he voted with bush some 90% of the time). What, if anything, makes him more qulaified for Prez than Obama?

John McCain has a lot of experience dealing in the government, while he doesn't have the 'executive' experience Palin has, he has far more government experience than Obama and Palin put together. Good or bad, however you look at his issues thats the truth. Will that help him make a good president? I donno, I think its less about experience than judgement. McCain has shown poor judgement in supporting the war from even before day one, and now he's pushing that the surge worked, which completely diregards the fact that we are paying terrorists not to attack us, and who recently said they want more money or they'll start attacking again, and they wre being paid before the 'surge, completely ignores the ceasefire by the Sadrist movement, and completely ignores the man the McCain praises at every turn who has said that the lessening violence would have been possible without the surge, Gen. Patraeus.
His drilling stance is a canard to give more to oil companies, as we won't see a drop of oil for 20 years, and he has no provisions to make sure any of that oil is used only in the US. Right now we send 1.8 million barrls of oil a day to the open market. Oil drilled for in the US. McCain wants to increase this number for the oil companies so they can keep making more money off the backs of Americans.
His leadership abilities are called into question when he took a back seat to the making of the party platform. Almost like he doesn't care, he'll say whetever it takes to get elected. How can he not care what the party platform is? How can he be the 'maverick' against his own party when he lets them tell him what he is going to run his campaign on? When Obama speaks the democrats listen, when McCain speaks his campaign rushes to say he didn't really mean that.

As for McCain's military service, crashes or no, he served 22 years in the military and I respect his service. He comes from a line of servicemen, and his sons continue the tradition. This is honourable and should be respected. He spent 5 years in hell I would not want anyone to go through, he came out of that and did something with his life. Thats commendable, even if I do not agree with his politics.

Sanslines

09-06-2008, 05:03 PM

the hate filled right is attacking anyone who questions them.

Pathetic.

What about the hate filled left?

Check out the site 'sista told ja' where sister will tell you what you need to know!

Naturist Mark

09-06-2008, 06:55 PM

Sure, Palin has reportedly balanced a (state and city) budget,

Actually not ...

As Mayor, ‘Hard-Core Fiscal Conservative’ Sarah Palin Left Wasilla $20 Million In Debt (http://thinkprogress.org/wonkroom/2008/09/03/wasilla-in-debt/) and this was despite securing over $27 million in earmarks for her town of 6,700 people in just the 3 years from 2000 to 2003. (Sarah Palin is the earmark queen (http://thinkprogress.org/wonkroom/2008/09/03/palin-earmarks/) of Alaska - which is the biggest recipient of earmarks in the USA.)

-Mark

PhotoBuff

09-06-2008, 08:29 PM

As for McCain's military service, crashes or no, he served 22 years in the military and I respect his service. He comes from a line of servicemen, and his sons continue the tradition. This is honourable and should be respected. He spent 5 years in hell I would not want anyone to go through, he came out of that and did something with his life. Thats commendable, even if I do not agree with his politics.

I absolutely agree with you on this point and, since you quoted me on your response, I want to say that nothing in any of my previous posts should be construed as in any way minimizing or denigrating McCain's highly commendable service to our country. This is a point that I've not heard anyone of any political party affiliation dispute. That's all the more reason for McCain, the Republicans, and the media to stop reminding us of it at every opportunity and put the focus on real issues.

NudeAl

09-06-2008, 10:12 PM

I just read that Palin made some really off color remarks about Obama when he beat Clinton. Something along the lines of, "I see Sambo beat the *****." I wonder if this is going to be in the mainstream news? She seems to have quite a colorful vocabulary.

http://www.laprogressive.com/2008/09/05/alaskans-speak-in-a-frightened-whisper-palin-is-%E2%80%9Cracist-sexist-vindictive-and-mean%E2%80%9D/

usmc1

09-07-2008, 05:37 AM

ki4kxq

09-07-2008, 07:45 AM

Nowhere in that whole article was proof that she actually said that or anything on par with that statement. This incident was alledged by someone who wouldn't even give her name. If someone is going to say something on par with that kind of allegation, toward either Obama or Palin, or anyone else, they need to give their name. Otherwise it should not be given any credibility at all.

If someone put something like that against Obama with no proof whatsoever, the people of this forum would go nuts, and rightly so. That whole article was nothing more than unsubstantiated rumor mongering and hate speech.

Boreas

09-07-2008, 08:08 AM

That is an interesting article MoonShadow. The author makes some good points and I am inclined to agree.

I have been thinking about this a bit. People said the media or whoever was harsh on Clinton because she is female. They said that things like her ambition would not be an issue if she were male. I have wondered if the same thing is happening for Palin. I think there is some stuff going on because she is female. Would the elbowing in basketball be an issue if she were male? Would characteristics that invite the "pit bull with lipstick" (I know she said that in her speech) comments be an issue? Likely not. So, on one hand, sexism is alive and well in 2008.

On the other hand, I agree that Palin is the antithesis of feminist values on many levels. Some of her core values (or the ones that are being shown) appear to set women back a long way and that disturbs me. For instance, being against abortion is not so bad on a certain level. One could say she is consistent by saying she is still against it in instances of rape. I can generally respect someone who stands by their beliefs. The problem for me is that if you are against abortion, then you had better support women with unplanned pregnancies, because they are going to happen. She seems to have cut some of these services and that is disturbing. That is only one thing that disturbs me about Sarah Palin.

I probably could go on. I won't, for now anyway. :)

NudeAl

09-07-2008, 08:23 AM

Nowhere in that whole article was proof that she actually said that or anything on par with that statement. This incident was alledged by someone who wouldn't even give her name. If someone is going to say something on par with that kind of allegation, toward either Obama or Palin, or anyone else, they need to give their name. Otherwise it should not be given any credibility at all.

If someone put something like that against Obama with no proof whatsoever, the people of this forum would go nuts, and rightly so. That whole article was nothing more than unsubstantiated rumor mongering and hate speech.

I disagree, it was anonymous source that provided the information that lead to the Watergate investigations. Many of the most shocking abuses of power have also been revealed by those who were afraid to give their names. I think those of who have seen certain things that are not common knowledge are wise to be afraid of revealing some secrets. I also feel however that certain things need to be made public. In that situation the anonymous source is the correct method. It warrants further investigation is all I am saying.

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 08:23 AM

I probably could go on. I won't, for now anyway. :)

Awww ....don't stop now. One thing to remember is that the election is between Obama and McCain. It is not between Biden and Palin. If the election was between Palin and Biden, I would be inclined to vote for Biden for I overall agree with many of his issue stances. My decisions are based upon a review of where each candidate stands on issues and not upon hysteria driven hate mongering. That's why it is best to keep the tv turned off until after the election when the media will have to find something else to fill their time slots with.

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 08:26 AM

It warrants further investigation is all I am saying.

Then should not all unidentifed sources be treated the same way regardless of which party initiates the information?

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 08:33 AM

The problem for me is that if you are against abortion, then you had better support women with unplanned pregnancies, because they are going to happen. She seems to have cut some of these services and that is disturbing. That is only one thing that disturbs me about Sarah Palin.

Planned Parenthood provides invaluable services.

Boreas

09-07-2008, 08:34 AM

I read the article that NudeAl posted and agree, there is a lot of generalization and negativity. I don't have a problem with the anonymity of the people quoted. This is a small community, and standing up in such a manner may have negative consequences that we can't know well. I think this article brings up some potentially serious concerns. The more we get to know Ms. Palin, the more we see she has some less than desirable characteristics.

I live in an area that is very similar to how Palin's area is described. There is oil and gas here, and big money. Along with it are strong attitudes, racism, sexism and social problems. I have lived here for nine years, and though it has improved during that time, this is still a manly man world up here. Historically, people who lived here could not rely on authorities or the government. Heck the authorities and government probably did not even know this place existed I am sure. Consequently, you have strong people in this area. I have no doubt that Alaska has many of the same characteristics.

So, the fact that Ms. Palin got to where she is/was because of who she knows would be expected. There is though, a responsibility to use that well, and with respect. As for my previous post regarding criticism because she is female, I suspect that if she is the way she is being described in that article, she would be criticized as a man too.......we had a similar male city official in this town who thankfully has since been fired.

As for hate only coming from one side, that is nonsense. Has there been NO similar comments about Obama? By that I mean comments that may be unsubstantiated. Comments that come from the right-wing "hate machine" rather than the left-wing "hate machine"? Nothing commenting about "inexperience", without acknowledging his great accomplishments before he got into politics?

ki4kxq

09-07-2008, 08:36 AM

That article Moonshadow placed on this forum is very disturbing. One sentence in particular jumps out. The one where the author asserts that rascists, sexists, and classists make up the republican base. What kind of hate mongering is that? The republican base is anything but those things.

The republicans believe that each person has it in them to succeed. They believe if you give children in poverty stricken areas with dismal schools vouchers so that they can go to better schools, they can get the education they need. Democrats don't think so and fight to keep vouchers and charter schools out of the picture, pandering to the teachers unions.

When you design a welfare state, you keep people beholden to you. You make them weak and at your disposal. Republicans know that strong people who are independent, are much better informed and will not follow the lies of the liberal left. I believe it's racist when you tell a whole group of people that they are not smart enough nor strong enough to make it without your help and guidance. That is something the democrats love to do.

Classist? This person is kidding right? What party and candidates are constantly trying to pit americans against each other. Phrases like "tax cuts for the rich" when tax cuts were given to every tax bracket, are meant to promote classism.

Check your history and you will find that it was the republicans that got the Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed. The democrats were fighting it tooth and nail.

There is not one thing that any politician can do to see that I get the pay that I deserve. That is up to one person, me. One thing I see woman's rights groups do is not stand up for women in every situation, only when it suits their political agenda. That makes them anything but a women's rights group. Women have reproductive rights in this country. They can choose to not have sex and get pregnant. The feminists say that women should have absolute control over their bodies. Really? Then why isn't selling an organ or selling yourself on the street legal? People don't have unfettered rights over their bodies here or anywhere else. Why should killing a baby that happens to be inside you be more of a right than selling a kidney?

I for one don't think we gain any points in credibility by calling any one group of people racist,sexist, and classist. Especially when the so called "great society" of handouts, crafted by democrats, has put more people in poverty and kept them there for longer than any period of history I can think of.

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 08:36 AM

If someone put something like that against Obama with no proof whatsoever, the people of this forum would go nuts, and rightly so. That whole article was nothing more than unsubstantiated rumor mongering and hate speech.

The sad thing is that unidentified authored articles have been 'poisoned' by the party loyalist extremists. Both sides have worked to destroy any credibility of unidentified sources of information. If you research on line, you will find that any unidentified source of information against Obama is immediately dismissed as a 'right wing smear'. The same thing occurs for any unidentified source of information against McCain.

Boreas

09-07-2008, 08:37 AM

Awww ....don't stop now. One thing to remember is that the election is between Obama and McCain. It is not between Biden and Palin. If the election was between Palin and Biden, I would be inclined to vote for Biden for I overall agree with many of his issue stances. My decisions are based upon a review of where each candidate stands on issues and not upon hysteria driven hate mongering. That's why it is best to keep the tv turned off until after the election when the media will have to find something else to fill their time slots with.

Really? I thought the election was between McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden? Are they not teams? I thought that the VP has to be in a position to take over in the event the President cannot finish the term.

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 08:40 AM

Women have reproductive rights in this country. They can choose to not have sex and get pregnant.

This involves personal responsibility for one's own actions. In today's lawsuit happy society, whenever anything happens to someone, they immediately look around to blame someone else. The promotion of this way of thinking is just one of the serious problems in this country.

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 08:44 AM

Really? I thought the election was between McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden? Are they not teams? I thought that the VP has to be in a position to take over in the event the President cannot finish the term.

Supposed to be that way with the primary focus on Obama and McCain for one of those two individuals will be president. Their policiies are what will initially drive any changes that are to occur. If a president dies, then the vice president steps in and traditionally vice presidents have mostly carried on the policies of the president that they are replacing. As it stands now, the overwhelming focus is on Palin.

ki4kxq

09-07-2008, 08:46 AM

Boreas, with all due respect to the point you made about comments regarding Obama's inexperience without touting his accomplishment. That is a far cry from some "unidentified" source alleging that she heard Palin make an absolute racist comment that she can neither prove nor disprove.

I can say that Obama is unqualified no matter what he did before holding political office. That is my opinion and in no way denegrates Obama. If I came out though and said that I overheard Obama calling women some derogatory term, that would be irresponsible. Especially if I wouldn't give my name or be able to prove my allegation. One is an opinion, the other is a very serious allegation with absolutely NO PROOF, meant to stir up trouble.

Identifying someone's political beliefs is fine. Calling someone a racist with no proof is beyond the pale.

usmc1

09-07-2008, 08:47 AM

I just read that Palin made some really off color remarks about Obama when he beat Clinton. Something along the lines of, "I see Sambo beat the *****." I wonder if this is going to be in the mainstream news? She seems to have quite a colorful vocabulary.

http://www.laprogressive.com/2008/09/05/alaskans-speak-in-a-frightened-whisper-palin-is-%E2%80%9Cracist-sexist-vindictive-and-mean%E2%80%9D/
No, not until they are forced to. This former pot-smoking, back-sliding, holy-roller (bailed out of her life-long Pentecostal home-church when it became politically inexpedient) will be made of Teflon for awhile still.

But still, the conservatives are in tough fix here, defending the indefensible. I'm enjoying watching their leaps of faith. Bless ole Peggy Noonan, a lifetime of right-wing sycophancy and she finally got something right--its' over!

Surf the news and public affairs shows this weekend and you'll not see Palin anywhere. The Republicans are scared spitless that she will be on her own and asked a real question by a real reporter. I imagine they've got her locked away cramming and Googling and reviewing her notes from her GOPAC training days.

They will gag on a gnat and swallow a camel as long as she bows to big oil, opposes abortion, and genuflects before Dobson and his crowd of satanic imps.

ki4kxq

09-07-2008, 08:53 AM

It was a commentary by a person not unlike what is said and done on this forum by a lot of posters. Do we think posters here should not be given any credibility? And how did you deduce it to be hate speech? What do you call a lot of the political threads on this forum? How is it any different?

The post I was referring to was the one above yours where the waitress alledgedly overheard Palin saying "so Sambo beat the b$#%@". That was ridiculous, especially since this source wouldn't even identify herself. Naturist Mark is always telling us not to believe everything Hannity and Glenn say, yet they are willing to put themselves up to be identified and questioned. Yet we are supposed to trust this unnamed source. Yeah, right.

I have answered about your article though. I keep with the same opinion there. This person paints the whole base of the republican party as racists, sexists, and classists. While I believe that the liberal ideology is classists and racists, I have never said the Democrat party base is racists. Just grossly uninformed about the real life consequences of their party's so called compassion. I believe when you call someone a racist, without proof of any kind, those are and should be fighting words.

Boreas

09-07-2008, 08:57 AM

The republicans believe that each person has it in them to succeed. They believe if you give children in poverty stricken areas with dismal schools vouchers so that they can go to better schools, they can get the education they need. Democrats don't think so and fight to keep vouchers and charter schools out of the picture, pandering to the teachers unions.

Really? I know many people who fight for human rights, and who promote the idea of a social safety net who do so BECAUSE they believe that each person has it in them to succeed for the most part. They also recognize that life is NOT black and white, succeed or fail. Often people have other reasons for not succeeding. Would you expect someone in a wheelchair to run a marathon? No. Why would you expect someone with an "invisible" disability to accomplish what someone who is "whole" could do. As I have said before, the "free market" is not free of influence. It is a shell game and propaganda. The market has been influenced by those in power for ages. Also, this mentality depends on people being down in order to gain. It is based on greed, not on the noble values you espouse.

When you design a welfare state, you keep people beholden to you. You make them weak and at your disposal. Republicans know that strong people who are independent, are much better informed and will not follow the lies of the liberal left. I believe it's racist when you tell a whole group of people that they are not smart enough nor strong enough to make it without your help and guidance. That is something the democrats love to do.

No, you do not. When you create a PROPER welfare state, you provide step-stools and ladders so people can become independent and succeed.

Have you gotten to where you are by being TOTALLY independent? Without ANY help? The notion of doing it yourself is a lie.

ki4kxq

09-07-2008, 08:58 AM

LOL ki4kxq ---- how is the article I posted any different in generalizations from what you just posted?

I stated policies that were racist and classist. Your source said the republican base (people, not policies) were racist. Big difference.

Naturist Mark

09-07-2008, 09:00 AM

They will gag on a gnat and swallow a camel as long as she bows to big oil, opposes abortion, and genuflects before Dobson and his crowd of satanic imps.

USMC1 - Sometimes your hyperbole goes too far. You shouldn't equate Dobson's crowd with satanic imps. I really think you own an apology to satanic imps.

-Mark

Boreas

09-07-2008, 09:01 AM

I stated policies that were racist and classist. Your source said the republican base (people, not policies) were racist. Big difference.

I think you need to reread some of your recent posts where you make generalizations about both republicans and democrats. I have quoted one above.

ki4kxq

09-07-2008, 09:05 AM

Sorry Boreas, I have to disagree with you. That is the big problem I have with liberal ideology. Some liberals look at successful people and say how lucky they are to have achieved what they have. They say they must have gotten help along the way. No, most did not. What they did was work their butts off, got beaten up along the way. Sometimes going broke in the process. The difference is they kept right on going. The help I got along the way was no help. When I was fresh out of college, I did some stupid things with money, to the point I couldn't pay rent and eat. Called home for a handout. You know what my dad said? "Well, I guess you got yourself into a jam, guess you need to figure out how to fix it." Thank God for that man. I did fix it. Sold blood plasma for 3 weeks. Thing is, I've never made those same mistakes again. You all look at pain and suffering (within reason) as something to be avoided. It's not, it is a learning experience.

People in wheelchairs race in marathons often. Just saw a story about an Iraq veteran with no legs. He has opened up a chain of sub shops. He is franchising the business and all the franchisees are amputees from the war. Guess nobody told him he was supposed to be a victim.

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 09:13 AM

Have you gotten to where you are by being TOTALLY independent? Without ANY help? The notion of doing it yourself is a lie.

Over the years, there have been many movements that involved going 'back to the earth'. Remember the REAL hippies?

Boreas

09-07-2008, 09:15 AM

NO NO NO NO NO! You missed my point ki. Would you expect that person in the wheelchair to actually stand up and RUN the marathon on his/her feet??? NO you would not. Of course people can do marathons and better in wheelchairs. The fact is, they do need that wheelchair. There is nothing wrong with that. People can and do succeed with some support.

I also did NOT say that people succeed because of luck. They of COURSE succeed with hard work and skills.

I am NOT supporting a victim mentality. I agree, it does not serve any useful purpose.

Please step away from your black and white world for a minute and imagine that SOME people need more help than others to succeed. Pain and suffering is not something to be avoided. It is something to use sometimes. I believe that BS makes good fertilizer. My point is that you do not penalize people for being down, and you sometimes have to recognize that there are circumstances that are more difficult to overcome.

A worldview that says it is only hardwork and skill that allows success is uneducated and uninformed.

Boreas

09-07-2008, 09:16 AM

Over the years, there have been many movements that involved going 'back to the earth'. Remember the REAL hippies?

Yes, there are many REAL hippies in this province. They are generally working in community and are helping each other.

We have lost some of that informal connection. Of course, there is still some here. We sometimes need to supplement this with formal supports.

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 09:19 AM

People in wheelchairs race in marathons often. Just saw a story about an Iraq veteran with no legs. He has opened up a chain of sub shops. He is franchising the business and all the franchisees are amputees from the war. Guess nobody told him he was supposed to be a victim.

Funny you should mention this. We have an organization around here called 'Capabilities' that employs so called handicapped people. The reason that I use the words 'so called' is because if you ever met these individuals, you would instantly notice that their attitude is not about what they can not do, but what they can do. They are extremely positive and uplifting people who don't dwell upon misfortunes. I always support this organization and enjoy meeting with the staff members. They can do much more then work......they can teach you something very important about life.

The only 'help' that some of them needed was very basic accomodation such as a specially equiped van to pick up some of those in wheelchairs and bring them to work. Even the state acknowledged that it was far more cost effective to render the little bit of help needed to assist these individuals in becoming productive members of society. This sure beat the state's normal 'easy way out' which is to send money.

FYI, these so called handicapped people are the most outspoken about being given the most expensive and WRONG kind of help. They only needed a chance at work and a bit of help to get there.

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 09:21 AM

Well stated. Life is not black and white. There are many situations where one cannot "succeed" (and success is not black and white as each of us have different definitions for success).

Absolutely, a proper welfare program does provide "step-stool" for people to become independent and successful in what they pursue. It saddens me how so many make the erroneous assumption that we are in a welfare state that makes individiuals "beholden". Simply, not true.

Yes life is not black and white but the state sponsored bureaucratic system is. That's the problem with the current system.......it is rigid and does not allow for individual circumstances.

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 09:23 AM

It saddens me how so many make the erroneous assumption that we are in a welfare state that makes individiuals "beholden". Simply, not true.

The system can be used either way. It can be used as a stepping stone for those who want to honestly help themsleves and it can also be used as a cushion by those who are too lazy to work to provide for themselves because they don't have to. The challenge of any good system is to be flexible enough to allow the proper help be given to those who want to help themsleves and not waste energies on those who can't be bothered.

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 09:25 AM

What is the definition of success? Success for one person is complete and utter failure to another.

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 09:28 AM

Yes, there are many REAL hippies in this province. They are generally working in community and are helping each other.

We have lost some of that informal connection. Of course, there is still some here. We sometimes need to supplement this with formal supports.

I am surrounded by hippies and am a modern day version of a hippy myself. We provide our own foods, provide our own heat, and are working to provide our own electricity through windpower.

Have you ever heard of the Amish?

ki4kxq

09-07-2008, 09:34 AM

I think you need to reread some of your recent posts where you make generalizations about both republicans and democrats. I have quoted one above.

Generalizations about ideology and belief systems. I have NEVER painted any group of people as racists. I don't think you know the gravity of being demonized by being called a racist in the states. It is used to discredit everything you say, and as such, should be shut down the moment someone plays the race card.

Again, there is a difference in pointing out how a policy is racist in its intent or consequences, and calling someone a racist.

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 09:34 AM

The "system" depends on where you are. Some states have better "systems" than others. The current systems in place in many areas work. What makes them seem to not work is due to those individuals who milk the system for their own self-serving and selfish reasons - to work the system in their behalf. This is not the majority of people who use the system. More emphasis and effort needs to go in preventing the free-loaders. My understanding from friends in the human service field, is this is difficult due to lack of staff. Human service programs are the first which get slashed from budgets or funds significantly reduced while caseworkers, outreacher workers, etc have tremendous caseloads.

The answer is to just 'drop out'. Forget about hate filled politics, the 'system', etc and create your own system. Come and join the modern day hippy movement. Also show your rejection of the system by doing this:

<CENTER>Burn Your Bra

</CENTER><CENTER>That's Right...Get Rid of it...Throw It Away...</CENTER>

<CENTER> </CENTER>

(Now for the rest of the story - yes this is a brief aside but will show your support to reject the current system!)

Another thing you can do for breast disease, including fibrocystic breast disease, which are lumps in the breast, and breast cancer, is to Burn Your Bra. That's right, get rid of it. It is an epidemic throughout Canada and the U.S.

Until recently, women have been told there is no known way to prevent these diseases. Fortunately, through breast cancer research, it has been discovered that the wearing of tight bras is a major cause of breast disease.

A two-year bra and breast cancer study conducted by Sydney Ross Singer involving interviews with nearly 5,000 women (half of whom had breast cancer) revealed that women with breast cancer:

Wore tighter bras, and;
Wore them longer than those who had not (yet) developed the disease.

In fact, all of the cancer group wore bras over 12 hours daily while the comparison group had 25% going either bra-free or wearing bras less than 12 hours daily.

The Problem Caused By Bras:
<DL><DT>Mechanical. <DD>It is a mechanical interference with the breast lymphatic drainage. In todays's world, we are exposed to cancer-causing toxins in our food, air, water, and medications. <DD>Once in our tissues, these toxins must be flushed out via the lymphatics. However, a bra-constricted breast cannot adequately perform this cleansing process, resulting in toxin accumulation in the breast. </DD></DL>

Great News:
The great news is that breast disease--we are talking about lumps--can virtually be eliminated by not wearing a bra. Women who stop wearing their bras altogether report complete recovery from pain, swelling, cysts, and lumpiness within weeks.

Naturist Mark

09-07-2008, 09:36 AM

The republicans believe that each person has it in them to succeed. They believe if you give children in poverty stricken areas with dismal schools vouchers so that they can go to better schools, they can get the education they need. Democrats don't think so and fight to keep vouchers and charter schools out of the picture, pandering to the teachers unions. Obama supports (http://www.dmiblog.com/archives/2007/08/where_do_the_candidates_stand_3.html) public school choice and charter schools. Vouchers are designed to divert public funding to private pockets - furthering the Republican agenda of breaking public education and the greater goal of privatizing all government functions.

Classist? This person is kidding right? What party and candidates are constantly trying to pit americans against each other. Phrases like "tax cuts for the rich" when tax cuts were given to every tax bracket, are meant to promote classism. LOL. There they go again. Whenever a Democrat (or centrist independent) point out the facts of right wing class warfare, they are accused by the right of engaging in class warfare for the act of identifying it. Speaking the truth is an unfair tactic. The sad thing is that the mass media has internalized this backward reasoning. "Tax cuts for the rich" is a fair characterization of tax cuts that go overwhelmingly to the very wealthy. That is undeniable, yet they deny anyhow, switching to arguments that the wealthy pay the most taxes, so they "deserve" the biggest cuts. Normally the right is against "entitlements", except when they are for the privileged. By the way, anyone want to wager how long it takes for someone to pop up calling this post "classist"?
Check your history and you will find that it was the republicans that got the Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed. The democrats were fighting it tooth and nail.Keep checking and you will discover that many of the Democrats (http://hnn.us/articles/12832.html) fighting the civil rights act became Republicans - the triumph of Nixon's southern strategy. Johnson knew this would happen as he signed the bill "We've lost the south for a generation."

-Mark

ki4kxq

09-07-2008, 09:41 AM

Funny you should mention this. We have an organization around here called 'Capabilities' that employs so called handicapped people. The reason that I use the words 'so called' is because if you ever met these individuals, you would instantly notice that their attitude is not about what they can not do, but what they can do. They are extremely positive and uplifting people who don't dwell upon misfortunes. I always support this organization and enjoy meeting with the staff members. They can do much more then work......they can teach you something very important about life.

The only 'help' that some of them needed was very basic accomodation such as a specially equiped van to pick up some of those in wheelchairs and bring them to work. Even the state acknowledged that it was far more cost effective to render the little bit of help needed to assist these individuals in becoming productive members of society. This sure beat the state's normal 'easy way out' which is to send money.

FYI, these so called handicapped people are the most outspoken about being given the most expensive and WRONG kind of help. They only needed a chance at work and a bit of help to get there.

And this very limited help is what republicans are all for. You see, when someone does everything for you, there is no pride in the accomplishment of success. By all means, give the right kind of help. Sometimes the right kind of help does not mean money at all. It can be something as simple as a mentor. Help someone get an education, but make them work for it. Plenty of other folks worked 40 hours while going to school and being a single parent. It is a very short term displeasure for a very long term gain. My problem with some programs is that people think that the folks shouldn't have to work through their help. They should give at least as much as they receive. Maybe that includes caring for someone else's child while they go to school.

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 09:43 AM

furthering the Republican agenda of further breaking public education and the greater goal of privatizing all government functions.

-Mark

Please, please, please go to your local high school and spend some time there. If you take an objective look, you will realize that throwing endless amounts of money at schools is NOT the answer. I went to a 'poor' school where structure and discipline was always maintained. We all learned .........including the 'poor kids who were too dumb to learn'. We learned because our teachers cared enough to instill within us a discipline and understanding of the power of education. We learned in spite of race, religion, or background. This had absolutely nothing to do with money. If you also spend time dong some objective research, you will find that many students who come from some of the poorest countries, know much more then some of our students who come from 'fantastically wealthy' schools by comparison.

Learning anything involves some effort. Yet in today's society some expect to have others do all of the hard work 'learning' for them.

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 09:50 AM

:O surely not!!! ;)

Burn that bra!!!

hm0504

09-07-2008, 09:51 AM

This is a great commentary by a contributor of a blog from one of my "feminist" readings, but her words could be my words and thoughts regarding Palin.

Sarah Palin and the (De)volution of Feminism

...
If Republicans and family scandal make unlikely bedfellows...
...

*name withheld and used with permission*

The last few decades of history would seem to indicate the two are very LIKELY bedfellows!

Boreas

09-07-2008, 09:57 AM

The only 'help' that some of them needed was very basic accomodation such as a specially equiped van to pick up some of those in wheelchairs and bring them to work. Even the state acknowledged that it was far more cost effective to render the little bit of help needed to assist these individuals in becoming productive members of society. This sure beat the state's normal 'easy way out' which is to send money.

FYI, these so called handicapped people are the most outspoken about being given the most expensive and WRONG kind of help. They only needed a chance at work and a bit of help to get there.

Yes this is the type of thing I mean. You look at people's abilities, not their deficits. Of course, there are times where you look at deficits and try to figure out how to turn them into strengths, or you find ways to minimize the deficits. A van or wheelchair is an example of how you might minimize a deficit.

I had a friend who was blind. He always said that his biggest handicap was other people. He was a fully functioning person who happened to be unable to see. That is the same as any so called disabled person. They generally have more abilities than disabilities.

Boreas

09-07-2008, 10:05 AM

I am surrounded by hippies and am a modern day version of a hippy myself. We provide our own foods, provide our own heat, and are working to provide our own electricity through windpower.

Have you ever heard of the Amish?

I grew up in a part of Ontario that had a lot of Mennonites, some of whom were "Old Order" Mennonite, which is the same or similar to Amish.

I do agree, it is good to provide your own food wherever you can. I would love to do that more. I have a couple of minor barriers to that. I do not have the skills right now. I will need someone to guide me (not do it for me) so that I can learn how to do this. I also live in a part of the country where it is winter for nine months of the year......okay I exaggerate.....a BIT. We cannot grow ALL our food. So, I do the second best thing. I try to buy as much local and organic food as I can. At least I can support our local farmers and small business people.

I am not sure if you would have heard about our listeria (sp?) problem here in Canada. It is a bacteria that has caused many food borne illnesses, and some deaths here. It is linked to one meat processing plant in Toronto, and has affected the entire country. I believe it will be a wake-call that big business is not always the good thing.

Boreas

09-07-2008, 10:06 AM

Generalizations about ideology and belief systems. I have NEVER painted any group of people as racists. I don't think you know the gravity of being demonized by being called a racist in the states. It is used to discredit everything you say, and as such, should be shut down the moment someone plays the race card.

Again, there is a difference in pointing out how a policy is racist in its intent or consequences, and calling someone a racist.

Your generalizations were not about racists or such. They are broad statements about the welfare state and dems vs republicans. In my mind, that is as offensive as racist comments.

Boreas

09-07-2008, 10:10 AM

The answer is to just 'drop out'. Forget about hate filled politics, the 'system', etc and create your own system. Come and join the modern day hippy movement. Also show your rejection of the system by doing this:

<CENTER>Burn Your Bra

</CENTER><CENTER>That's Right...Get Rid of it...Throw It Away...</CENTER>

YES!!! :cheering::cheering::cheering: :smash: :applause:

Get the word out! :hippy:

I agree with the rest of the article. I cut it to save space.

That concept though of promoting an idea is far better than opposing an idea.

Fitz1980

09-07-2008, 11:10 AM

Check your history and you will find that it was the republicans that got the Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed. The democrats were fighting it tooth and nail.

Not quite. Here's the breakdown of who voted for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

The original House version:
Democratic Party: 152-96
Republican Party: 138-34

The Senate version:
Democratic Party: 46-21
Republican Party: 27-6

The Senate version, voted on by the House:
Democratic Party: 153-91
Republican Party: 136-35

The bill divided and engendered a long-term change in the demographics of both parties. President Johnson realized that supporting this bill would risk losing the South's overwhelming support of the Democratic Party. As Vice President, Johnson pushed the Kennedy administration to introduce civil rights legislation, telling Kennedy aide Ted Sorensen that "I know the risks are great and we might lose the South, but those sorts of states may be lost anyway."[14] Senator Richard Russell, Jr. warned President Johnson that his strong support for the civil rights bill "will not only cost you the South, it will cost you the election." The South indeed started to vote increasingly Republican after 1964.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

Although the phrase "Southern strategy" is often attributed to Richard Nixon strategist Kevin Phillips, he did not originate it,[1] but merely popularized it.[2] In an interview included in a 1970 New York Times article, he touched on its essence:

From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats."[3]

While Phillips was concerned with polarizing ethnic voting in general, and not just with winning the white South, this was by far the biggest prize yielded by his approach. Its success began at the presidential level, gradually trickling down to statewide offices, the Senate and House, as legacy segregationist Democrats retired or switched to the GOP. The strategy suffered a brief apparent reversal following Watergate, with broad support for the Southern Democrat Jimmy Carter in the 1976 election. But with Ronald Reagan kicking off his 1980 Republican presidential campaign proclaiming support for "states' rights" in Philadelphia, Mississippi, the site of the murder of three civil rights workers in 1964's Freedom Summer, it appeared the Republican Party was going to build on the Southern Strategy again. Although another Southern Democrat Bill Clinton was twice elected President, winning a handful of Southern states in 1992 and 1996, he won more votes outside the South and could have won without carrying any Southern state.

Qikdraw

09-07-2008, 11:22 AM

Boreas, with all due respect to the point you made about comments regarding Obama's inexperience without touting his accomplishment. That is a far cry from some "unidentified" source alleging that she heard Palin make an absolute racist comment that she can neither prove nor disprove.

I agree, I dismissed that stuff out of the article.

I can say that Obama is unqualified no matter what he did before holding political office. That is my opinion and in no way denegrates Obama. If I came out though and said that I overheard Obama calling women some derogatory term, that would be irresponsible. Especially if I wouldn't give my name or be able to prove my allegation. One is an opinion, the other is a very serious allegation with absolutely NO PROOF, meant to stir up trouble.

However dismissing Obama as unqualified without backing up your statements is just as irresponsible. While it is your opinion, you should have something to back it up or people may just dismiss it without any valid proof, just like we dismiss the waitresses story.

Identifying someone's political beliefs is fine. Calling someone a racist with no proof is beyond the pale.

I agree. However the article did mention a lot of factual information that can be checked. The recall efforts against her as mayor, the debt she saddled the city with, the line item vetos she did, the state legislators overturning her vetos, the city administrator that was hired and the reasons for that, the sports complex building, the park, raising taxes, etc... Instead of letting the state pay for itself, she wants to deficit spend, how is that responsible?

There are many more things against Palin than unnamed sources of alleged racial comments, which I agree do not belong.

usmc1

09-07-2008, 11:45 AM

USMC1 - Sometimes your hyperbole goes too far. You shouldn't equate Dobson's crowd with satanic imps. I really think you own an apology to satanic imps.

-Mark

You're absolutely right, I have gotten beyond myself and over spoke; to all the satanic imps among us, need I name you?, I hereby express my regrets for any discomfort and pain which my remarks might have caused you.

I do want to express my gratitude to Mark for raising my awareness as to the tender sensibilities of satanic imps. And here I've been thinking they're crass, callous, ignorant, unfeeling and soulless. Satanic imps has got feelings, go figure!

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 11:48 AM

And this very limited help is what republicans are all for. You see, when someone does everything for you, there is no pride in the accomplishment of success. By all means, give the right kind of help. Sometimes the right kind of help does not mean money at all. It can be something as simple as a mentor. Help someone get an education, but make them work for it. Plenty of other folks worked 40 hours while going to school and being a single parent. It is a very short term displeasure for a very long term gain. My problem with some programs is that people think that the folks shouldn't have to work through their help. They should give at least as much as they receive. Maybe that includes caring for someone else's child while they go to school.

The major problem that I have with the Republican plan is that it assumes that people will always be able to work to provide for themselves. In cases such as when there is a severe recession, people lose jobs, and are not able to find work, then they do need a safety net in place. People can seldom meet household expenses while collecting unemployment and the average amount of time to find new work has steadily increased. Six months unemployment comes and goes very quickly.

Can you imagine if you become ill on your job and your employer finds a way to get rid of you to save spending money on health care costs rather then meeting their obligations to fulfill their health care commitment to you? This is a very real and very scary situation. This is one of the biggest reasons why I believe that nothing short of a sensible national health system should exist for every American. Health care is much too important to leave it to employer or insurance company decisions. BTW, I am not very happy with either McCain's or Obama's health care plan for both fall far short of this goal.

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 05:14 PM

ki4kxq, and what programs are those who "people think that the folks shouldn't have to work through their help." I am not aware of these programs.

I sincerely hope that one of the programs to be cut is NOT Alcoholics Anonymous for this forum is enough to drive anyone to drink to excess and the time will come when we all will need support from AA.

Qikdraw

09-07-2008, 05:43 PM

I sincerely hope that one of the programs to be cut is NOT Alcoholics Anonymous for this forum is enough to drive anyone to drink to excess and the time will come when we all will need support from AA.

LOL

This is a side issue, but did you ever see the Penn & Teller Bullsh&t episode about AA? It was actually very interesting.

Boreas

09-07-2008, 06:06 PM

I sincerely hope that one of the programs to be cut is NOT Alcoholics Anonymous for this forum is enough to drive anyone to drink to excess and the time will come when we all will need support from AA.

They cannot cut funding to AA. It is a self supporting organization that relies on donations of its members.

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 06:13 PM

They cannot cut funding to AA. It is a self supporting organization that relies on donations of its members.

I know that. I think that you missed the implied humor. Oh well........I tried.........now back to the grind.......

Sanslines

09-07-2008, 06:17 PM

A retired, decorated Marine on the "Liberal Hate Mongers". Looks like both right and left hard core extremists are locked in a 'life or death' struggle.

Bob Newman, a decorated, retired US Marine, is host of the “Gunny Bob Show” on Newsradio 850 KOA in Denver, and host of “Inhuman Newman’s Anger-Management Hour” on 630 KHOW, also in Denver. His “Global Positioning Statement,” a daily insider’s update on the war on terror, is carried by various Clear Channel radio stations from coast to coast. A ground-combat veteran, he is the director of international security & counterterrorism services for The GeoScope Group and is the military science & terrorism columnist for The Denver Daily News.

Hate, Violence And The Liberal Way

Bob Newman
As a lad growing up in Thomaston, Maine, in the 1960s, I loved studying myths and legends and was always interested in learning facts about those myths and legends of which most people were unaware. So you can imagine my amusement each time liberals show America what they are really about, which so often these days are hate, violence and the damaging of the Bill of Rights and Constitution in general, with free speech being a prime target within the latter. It wasn’t that long ago that liberals were believed to be non-violent defenders of the Constitution who shunned hate.

Today the tiger’s stripes are in full view.

Liberals cringe when they think of Iraqis enjoying freedoms they didn’t have just over two years ago, and they become angry when the news reports a major reduction of attacks on U.S. troops along with a corresponding reduction of casualties. Liberals did not want the Bush doctrine to succeed, especially in the Middle East where most of the people are brown-skinned Muslims. As freedom spreads through the region, liberals grimace and curse as conservatives point to democracy marching into lands where once tyranny was pandemic.

And liberals know that the more freedom spreads in the Middle East and elsewhere in Asia, the more the liberal message of oftentimes race-based hate and violence will be called into question by Americans who are seeing the left in its true light.

“Camel jockeys” with rights are a liberal’s worst nightmare.

More and more Americans are recognizing the real left and the violent, hateful liberals who make it up. In Denver recently, three leftists who were about to attempt to strip President Bush of his right to free speech were caught before they could carry out their plan of disrupting a gathering of people who had come to hear the president speak. The liberals were ejected from the event and are now angry that they were caught and prevented from violating the 1st Amendment rights of a fellow American. The leftist Denver Post is calling for the heads of the Republicans who caught the hate mongers before their anti-1st Amendment plan could be put into action. Incredibly, the fish-wrap daily says it was wrong for someone to have prevented the leftists from preventing a conservative American from exercising his free-speech rights.

Can you say “irony” right after you say “hypocrisy?”

The liberals, encouraged by the notoriety their Marxist poster boy Ward Churchill has garnered of late, have now taken to threatening and physically attacking conservative speakers like Ann Coulter, Bill Kristol, David Horowitz, et al. This is classic liberal hate, whose manifesto calls for assaulting those with whom they disagree. Last night, Alan Colmes of FOX News Channel’s “Hannity & Colmes,” joked at how Horowitz was assaulted by a liberal at a recent college speech.

Although I am now quite non-violent (I haven’t beaten anyone up in about a decade), I know that, because of my previous life as a Marine for 20 years on active duty, such an attack on me while giving a speech would instantly result in my liberal would-be assailant waking up in a coma. I, for one, will not allow myself to be assaulted by anyone, as I have both a legal right and moral obligation to defend myself, and said defense will not be with a chocolate-cream pie, but a rapid combo of flailing limbs and appendages. Rather than run off or just take the hit, I encourage all conservatives to vigorously defend themselves against anyone who assaults them.

What is especially entertaining is how the liberals will now decry my promise to defend myself against them.

There’s that “irony” word again.

Boreas

09-07-2008, 06:18 PM

I know that. I think that you missed the implied humor. Oh well........I tried.........now back to the grind.......

Actually I did get it.....belatedly. I realized that I probably came across as too serious in the post and could have commented on the fact that we could all end up needing the program! :doh:

ki4kxq

09-07-2008, 08:22 PM

I sincerely hope that one of the programs to be cut is NOT Alcoholics Anonymous for this forum is enough to drive anyone to drink to excess and the time will come when we all will need support from AA.

The answer is duct tape. There are certain people on this forum that make my head absolutely explode. When I start reading posts from these forums, I wrap my head in duct tape. This holds all the pieces togethe when my head does explode, making it easy for the paramedics.

Qikdraw

09-07-2008, 08:27 PM

A retired, decorated Marine on the "Liberal Hate Mongers".

Why is it that retired vets are supposed to be more believible? They can pander hate just like anyone else.

Qikdraw

09-07-2008, 08:30 PM

The answer is duct tape. There are certain people on this forum that make my head absolutely explode. When I start reading posts from these forums, I wrap my head in duct tape. This holds all the pieces togethe when my head does explode, making it easy for the paramedics.

LOL I am sure there are others who feel the same way about your posts and other people's posts.

Boreas

09-07-2008, 08:41 PM

The answer is duct tape. There are certain people on this forum that make my head absolutely explode. When I start reading posts from these forums, I wrap my head in duct tape. This holds all the pieces togethe when my head does explode, making it easy for the paramedics.

You do that too? :sneaky:

Please tell me I am one of the people who make your head explode! :) At least that would suggest to me that you might be thinking about things. :D

ki4kxq

09-07-2008, 08:51 PM

You do that too? :sneaky:

Yep, and let me say, if I make some people reach for the duct tape, yippee. LOL

Boreas

09-07-2008, 09:45 PM

Get the duct tape out ki4kxq:

Twisting the concept of "elite"
Republicans distort language to conceal their real allegiances......

http://www.straightgoods.ca/ViewFeature8.cfm?REF=443

*P.S. could you please tell me what your nick means.

Sanslines

09-08-2008, 04:51 AM

Why is it that retired vets are supposed to be more believible? They can pander hate just like anyone else.

Bob Newman, a decorated, retired US Marine, is host of the “Gunny Bob Show” on Newsradio 850 KOA in Denver, and host of “Inhuman Newman’s Anger-Management Hour” on 630 KHOW, also in Denver. His “Global Positioning Statement,” a daily insider’s update on the war on terror, is carried by various Clear Channel radio stations from coast to coast. A ground-combat veteran, he is the director of international security & counterterrorism services for The GeoScope Group and is the military science & terrorism columnist for The Denver Daily News.

usmc1

09-08-2008, 04:54 AM

Follow the right-wing party line or you're out of here. Olberman and Matthews booted from anchor chairs. It's good when Fox, CNN, & ABC does it for the right, but let someone stand up for the center and center left, and it's "You're outta here!"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/08/AR2008090800008_pf.html

Sanslines

09-08-2008, 05:24 AM

Yep, and let me say, if I make some people reach for the duct tape, yippee. LOL

I was talking with a poly sci student the other day and she told me that America's Greatest (Media) Heroes are Republicans. Isn't that amazing? There is John Wayne, Batman, Superman, Spiderman, McCloud, Walker - Texas Ranger, why even Herman Munster was a Republican (who worked at the 'Parlor' rather then stay home on disability). The list goes on and on. She also told me that in the case of Batman, both Batman and his loyal butler Alfred were Republicans. Aunt Harriet was a Democrat who was always being kidnapped by villains and it always took Batman to save her. Amazing!

brazhunter

09-08-2008, 05:33 AM

Follow the right-wing party line or you're out of here. Olberman and Matthews booted from anchor chairs. It's good when Fox, CNN, & ABC does it for the right, but let someone stand up for the center and center left, and it's "You're outta here!"
That would be off the deep end left for Olberman.

That aside, this from a guy who thinks it's the role of government to determine what fair is, re: Fairness Doctrine. :eek:

ki4kxq

09-08-2008, 06:45 AM

I was talking with a poly sci student the other day and she told me that America's Greatest (Media) Heroes are Republicans. Isn't that amazing? There is John Wayne, Batman, Superman, Spiderman, McCloud, Walker - Texas Ranger, why even Herman Munster was a Republican (who worked at the 'Parlor' rather then stay home on disability). The list goes on and on. She also told me that in the case of Batman, both Batman and his loyal butler Alfred were Republicans. Aunt Harriet was a Democrat who was always being kidnapped by villains and it always took Batman to save her. Amazing!,

LOL Sounds about right. I always loved Herman Munster, now I know why.

ki4kxq

09-08-2008, 07:00 AM

Get the duct tape out ki4kxq:

*P.S. could you please tell me what your nick means.

It is a ham radio operator license call sign. Since these numbers are unique, it makes a perfect username for just about everything I do. Nobody else ever has it. My boyfriend also uses his the same way.

Let's face it. Someone running for President will most likely have way more money than the average working guy. So what. I don't really think that money alone makes someone an elitist. That to me is someone who has no idea how the average person lives, and I'm not talking about simply money wise. Things like taking your kids hunting, hanging out at the lake, driving yourself instead of a driver. That is why I believe GW was not touted as an elitist. He owned a baseball team and his first jobs were in the oil fields of West Texas. A far cry from both Al Gore and John Kerry in lifestyle.

I never understood the cry about other people's wealth anyway. If my neighbor makes 1 million a year, how on earth does that impact what I make. More power to him. Gives me incentive to work a little harder or do something that he's doing. This endless trying to get folks worked up over someone else's wealth is disgusting. The American economy is not a pie with limited amount of pieces. It is a limitless thing. You have the freedom and the opportunity to make as much or as little as you like. If some of these folks weren't constantly obsessing over what other people have, they would have more time to benefit themselves.

On a side note, Obama has flip flopped again. After saying in April that he would work to immediately reverse the Bush tax cuts, he is now saying that he may leave them in place. Hmmmm. Begs the question, is he just saying that because people understand his plan as stated before would be horrible to the economy and will indeed leave them in place, or is he just trying to save his failing candidacy by saying anything to get elected?

Boreas

09-08-2008, 07:55 AM

If some of these folks weren't constantly obsessing over what other people have, they would have more time to benefit themselves.

Do you really think "these folks" have time to obsess about what others make? In my world, the people who have been negatively affected by massive cuts to social programs don't give a hoot about others' salaries, really. They are too busy trying to live.

I do not think the issue in the article was about people's wealth or not. It was about their connection to the people they say they are representing.

Sanslines

09-08-2008, 08:18 AM

Do you really think "these folks" have time to obsess about what others make? In my world, the people who have been negatively affected by massive cuts to social programs don't give a hoot about others' salaries, really. They are too busy trying to live.

I do not think the issue in the article was about people's wealth or not. It was about their connection to the people they say they are representing.

The Green Party is the answer:

The Green Party of the United States is a federation of state Green Parties (http://www.gp.org/states.shtml). Committed to environmentalism, non-violence, social justice and grassroots organizing, Greens are renewing democracy without the support of corporate donors (https://secure.democracyinaction.org/Greens/shop/custom.jsp?donate_page_KEY=26). Greens provide real solutions for real problems (http://www.gp.org/platform.shtml). Whether the issue is universal health care, corporate globalization, alternative energy, election reform or decent, living wages for workers, Greens have the courage and independence necessary to take on the powerful corporate interests. The Federal Elections Commission (http://www.gp.org/fec/) recognizes the Green Party of the United States as the official Green Party National Committee. We are partners with the European Federation of Green Parties (http://www.europeangreens.org/) and the Federation of Green Parties of the Americas (http://fpva.org.mx/).
The Green Party decision making body is the National Committee (http://www.gp.org/committees/nc/), composed of delegates from each accredited state party. State NC representatives and other committee participants are chosen by each state party.

The Green Party of the United States was formed in 2001 as a reincarnation of the older Association of State Green Parties (1996-2001). Our initial goal was to help existing state parties grow and to promote the formation of parties in all 51 states and colonies. Helping state parties is still our primary goal.

As the Green Party National Committee (http://www.gp.org/fec/) we will devote our attention to establishing a national Green presence in politics and policy debate while continuing to facilitate party growth and action at the state and local level.

Green Party growth has been rapid since our founding in 2001and Green candidates are winning elections (http://www.gp.org/elections.shtml) throughout the U.S. In 2004, the Green Party National Convention nominated David Cobb and Pat LaMarche (http://www.votecobb.org/) for the Green Presidential ticket.

We are grassroots activists, environmentalists, advocates for social justice, nonviolent resisters and regular citizens who've had enough of corporate-dominated politics.

We are a confederation of Green Parties from states around the country. We are also the recognized partner of the European Federation of Green Parties (http://www.europeangreens.org/).

The Green Party of the United States began as the Association of State Green Parties. The ASGP was formed after the 1996 elections to fill a void in national Green politics and to help existing state parties develop.
Green Party growth has come from a near doubling of state party members since our founding. This growth culminated in the 2000 Presidential Nominating Convention (http://www.gp.org/convention2000.shtml) in Denver, CO on the weekend of June 24, 25. At the 2000 convention, the Green Party formally nominated Ralph Nader and Winona LaDuke (http://www.votenader.org/) to be our nominees for President and Vice President.

In 2004, our Presidential campaign ticket was represented by David Cobb and Pat LaMarche (http://www.votecobb.org/). The 2004 Green National Convention, Forward! 2004 (http://www.gp.org/convention2004/), was in Milwaukee, WI. (More on Green Party Conventions and National Meetings (http://www.gp.org/convention.shtml))

The mission of the Green Party of the United States is to build the Green Party into a viable political alternative in the United States, and our operating principle has been to keep it simple and focused. Our support comes from thousands of volunteers at the national and local level and from small contributions from individual citizens. Our growth plan includes managing our national office as a focus for national organizing and hiring field organizers to work with local groups and parties to help mobilize greens in voter registration drives, election activity and daily citizen action. Our preference is to leave most decision making and financial resources at the state and local level, minimizing our budgetary needs. This method has met with wide acceptance from Green groups around the country and is what has fueled our growth so strongly.

The Green Party has a broad platform (http://www.gp.org/platform.shtml) that ranges from protecting the environment to our Blue-Green pro-labor agenda to human rights and social justice. Green groups around the country not only run candidates for office, but work consistently in between elections on issues of concern in their community. This kind of activism is fundamental to our grassroots values and keeps us grounded on local issues, building the support networks needed to run candidates for local office first, followed by higher offices later. With over 220 officeholders (click here for up-to-date officeholder information (http://www.feinstein.org/greenparty/electeds.html)) in local office around the country from Hawai'i to Washington DC, we walk our talk at the grassroots.

Boreas

09-08-2008, 08:29 AM

I am leaning towards green for this election. I live in a riding where the conservatives could run a fence post and it would win, so my vote is spitting into the wind. I am going to vote my conscience and so far the greens match my views. The Canadian leader, Elizabeth May is impressive.

I read the other day (on wondercafe.ca) that the Green Party has strong neo-liberal (aka neo-conservative) views. Any thoughts on that?

ki4kxq

09-08-2008, 08:40 AM

Do you really think "these folks" have time to obsess about what others make? In my world, the people who have been negatively affected by massive cuts to social programs don't give a hoot about others' salaries, really. They are too busy trying to live.

I do not think the issue in the article was about people's wealth or not. It was about their connection to the people they say they are representing.

Hear it all the time. We work in a blue collar industry and the constant griping of what can the government get me is enough to make my head spin. We own our company and truck but lease the truck to a very large trucking company. People all the time lamenting about what this company turns in profit, and others like it. My question to them is "what difference does it make what their profit is"? How on earth does that impact you? You have your own truck, if you're not happy with what you are getting here, there are hundreds of other companies to lease to, or, even better you can take all the risk yourself and get your own authority. Instead of listening to an audiobook every once in a while on negotiating, to increase their bottom line they are in the truck stop restaurant complaining to anyone who will listen. Yet people all around them are making money. That is the mentality I was referring to.

The connection to the people is why I mentioned in an earlier post that term limits are what the people should demand. That would keep the politicians constantly being sent home and replaced by new folks from the community. Career politicians can never have any connection to the people they represent, regardless of party or intentions.

Sanslines

09-08-2008, 08:49 AM

I am leaning towards green for this election. I live in a riding where the conservatives could run a fence post and it would win, so my vote is spitting into the wind. I am going to vote my conscience and so far the greens match my views. The Canadian leader, Elizabeth May is impressive.

I read the other day (on wondercafe.ca) that the Green Party has strong neo-liberal (aka neo-conservative) views. Any thoughts on that?

Because the Green Party is not in the national spotlight (as both the Democratic and Republican Parties are), they can be much more honest about their stance on issues. They do not need to sensationalize or cater to media hype. The Greens are very progressive and that may just be the problem that most people have accepting the greens - they are just too 'radical' for mainstream.

usmc1

09-08-2008, 08:59 AM

I am leaning towards green for this election. I live in a riding where the conservatives could run a fence post and it would win, so my vote is spitting into the wind. I am going to vote my conscience and so far the greens match my views. The Canadian leader, Elizabeth May is impressive.

I read the other day (on wondercafe.ca) that the Green Party has strong neo-liberal (aka neo-conservative) views. Any thoughts on that?

The Greens, as with any other minority party in the United States, will loose their issues which gain the most traction to one or another of the two parties. Once any minority party establishes a significant flowwing around an issue, one of the two major parties co-opts that issue.

Look at all these fringe God & Country parties in the U.S., whatever they have stumbled on that has voter resonance is now well instituted in the GOP.

Yeah there's always tht fringe element disenchanted with the two majors that will hang on with their single-issue party, but, the truth is, they are largely insignificant in elections. Yeah, I heard of Perot and Nader, but I think on very close examination those two examples really serve the point..I truly doubt they were the spoilers that some think they were.

ki4kxq

09-08-2008, 09:07 AM

Look at all these fringe God & Country parties in the U.S., whatever they have stumbled on that has voter resonance is now well instituted in the GOP.

So God and Country are now on the fringe? Well, if that's the case I guess I truly am a fringe voter. These values of God and Country are now well instituted in the GOP? Gives me even more reason to vote republican this year.

usmc1

09-08-2008, 10:19 AM

So God and Country are now on the fringe? Well, if that's the case I guess I truly am a fringe voter. These values of God and Country are now well instituted in the GOP? Gives me even more reason to vote republican this year.

No, the God and Country fringe parties are. Don't be obtuse, it is not becoming in an adult!

Sanslines

09-08-2008, 10:21 AM

LOL These posts are fantastic in that it is interesting to see how everyone thinks and where they are coming from.

Boreas and Sanslines, I would love to vote Green but as we know, a minority party doesn't stand a chance in h***! Sadly, too.

Maybe not at the national level, but around here we have a rare few who have won seats to city council level positions. They spend most of their time educating others as to what their party is all about and do have some influence. For example, one of the cities here has been conducting studies and plans to erect enough windmills to supply enough power for all residential dwellings within the county. This project has involved close cooperation with the federal government (yes, the current administration has spent money strongly supporting alternative energy sources - but this appears to be another secret that most are not aware of), state government, local government, and close cooperation with industries such as General Electric who design and build modern electricity generating windmills.

usmc1

09-08-2008, 10:26 AM

And for those of you wanting to pooh-pooh Troopergate, here's this on that sizzling red-hot issue, then ask yourself, if it ain't a problem why the bunker mentality from the GOP?

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB122084155153309153.html?mod=special_page_campaig n2008_leftbox

Boreas

09-08-2008, 11:00 AM

Because the Green Party is not in the national spotlight (as both the Democratic and Republican Parties are), they can be much more honest about their stance on issues. They do not need to sensationalize or cater to media hype. The Greens are very progressive and that may just be the problem that most people have accepting the greens - they are just too 'radical' for mainstream.

Do you think they have neoconservative policies?

Boreas

09-08-2008, 11:04 AM

The Greens, as with any other minority party in the United States, will loose their issues which gain the most traction to one or another of the two parties. Once any minority party establishes a significant flowwing around an issue, one of the two major parties co-opts that issue.

Well, our system has a bit more flexibility for "fringe" parties. Heck, the Bloc Quebecois, a separatist party, was the official opposition for a bit. How stupid is that??? Anyway, even if we have one MP or hopefully a couple more, they will have SOME voice in Parliament. The NDP has been able to keep Harper a little closer to centre than he would like. It does serve SOME purpose here.

Perhaps the US needs to switch to a Parliamentary system!

Boreas

09-08-2008, 11:06 AM

LOL These posts are fantastic in that it is interesting to see how everyone thinks and where they are coming from.

Boreas and Sanslines, I would love to vote Green but as we know, a minority party doesn't stand a chance in h***! Sadly, too.

I don't expect the Greens to lead Canada. I just want them to have a voice. One of our best governments happened when the New Democratic Party (left, and social democratic) was opposition. They acted as a conscience to the leaders. That was a good thing. Sadly, our system has changed a bit since then, so it will be more difficult. Never-the-less, a few MP's and a certain porportion of the population voting has a BIT of weight here.

usmc1

09-08-2008, 01:43 PM

Well, our system has a bit more flexibility for "fringe" parties. Heck, the Bloc Quebecois, a separatist party, was the official opposition for a bit. How stupid is that??? Anyway, even if we have one MP or hopefully a couple more, they will have SOME voice in Parliament. The NDP has been able to keep Harper a little closer to centre than he would like. It does serve SOME purpose here.

Perhaps the US needs to switch to a Parliamentary system!

I could get down with that. I'd love to see a Q & A instead of a State of the Union.

EricNY

09-29-2008, 11:38 AM

On a lighter note.....

From beauty pageant......broadcaster wannabe...to Governor....and the white house

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/26/sarah-palins-beauty-pagea_n_129667.html

:eek: