| Author |
Message |
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
 Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:47 am PALIN SELECTED AS MCCAIN'S VP!!! |
|
It has now been confirmed that
Alaska Governor Sarah Palin has been selected to be John McCain's running mate!!!
Change is out of Obama's hands now. As one analyst said, you can't get farther away from D.C. than Alaska! Plus, she's a woman, a former commentator, a former mayor, and mother of 5 (including a downsyndrome child). Hillary Clinton voters, here we come!
Talk about creating excitement!!
| Quote: | McCain picks Alaska gov as running mate.
DENVER - John McCain tapped little-known Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his vice presidential running mate on Friday in a startling selection on the eve of the Republican National Convention.
Two senior campaign officials disclosed McCain's decision a few hours before the Republican presidential nominee-to-be and his newly-minted running mate appeared at a rally in swing-state Ohio.
Palin, like McCain, is a conservative with a maverick streak who has shown a willingness to clash with others in her own party. A self-styled hockey mom and political reformer, she has been governor of her state less than two years.
Palin's selection shocked numerous Republican officials.
At 44, Palin is a generation younger that Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, who is Barack Obama's running mate on the Democratic ticket.
She is three years Obama's junior, as well � and McCain has made much in recent weeks of Obama's relative lack of experience in foreign policy and defense matters.
In making his pick, McCain passed over several more prominent prospects who had figured in speculation for months � Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge among them.
Palin flew overnight to an airport in Ohio near Dayton, and even as she awaited her formal introduction, some aides said they had believed she was at home in Alaska.
She is a former mayor of Wasilla who became governor of her state in December, 2006 after ousting a governor of her own party in a primary and then dispatching a former governor in the general election.
Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080829/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_mccain_veepstakes |
Last edited by Republican_Man on Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:45 am; edited 2 times in total
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
squiggy
Stooge Two
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Posts: 3007
Location: Messing with the fabric of Video Game realities. I'll summon Shiva on you! I SWEAR!
|
| Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:56 am |
|
Talk about thinking outside the box... McCain probably could have done a hell of a lot worse, but I don't think, much better.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:27 am |
|
| squiggy wrote: | | Talk about thinking outside the box... McCain probably could have done a hell of a lot worse, but I don't think, much better. |
Are you kidding? This is a great pick! Hillary's gotta be fuming right now! That's awesome! lol.
"Sarah Barracuda," as she was nicknamed in high school and revived as Mayor of Wasilla, should go up against Obama in a basketball game!
Very strong, very independent, saved that state hundreds of THOUSANDS of dollars in transportation costs. Not afraid to fire people for more effective, efficient government. I'm excited!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin
McCain-Palin '08!
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:54 am |
|
...how is she independent? She's anti-gay marriage, anti-abortion, nothing independent there. For lower spending and the death penalty... what a shocker. Wants to open ANWR--so surprising for a republican...? Ontheissues.org keeps records of major decisions of national importance that a person makes. She has practically none. http://www.ontheissues.org/Sarah_Palin.htm
So is this the "experienced" choice? Should McCain die, would he really want someone so "inexperienced" to replace him? She has no foreign policy credentials at all, she didn't even go to school for anything impressive. A degree in journalism from the university of Idaho. She's been on the city council, then a mayor--this "city" had 5,000 people in it. She was elected governor last year. Maybe he picked her because she's got a clean record? If he wants to keep hitting Obama on inexperience, then he's going to have a problem there.
So she's a woman, so what? That was an obvious cop-out. There were more interesting, more forceful choices he could have made.
And not afraid to fire people... when there is a huge problem right now with jobs... that's excellent. I would put that in an ad "Not afraid to fire you."
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Aug 29, 2008 12:17 pm |
|
I'm busy prepping for college today, but I intend one putting together a column stating the case for Sarah Palin, who has more executive experience than Obama and Biden combined, is more in-tune with middle-class and working America, and so much more. She's held in high regard by other governors, tasked with balancing a budget (something Obama and Biden haven't done), has a record of ethics reform, knows the energy issue better than anyone, and more. She's no less credentialed than Barack OBama.
But I'll respond to your arguments, which are what we would expect from the Obama campaign, in that written piece later.
P.S. For the first time ever, I am truly excited about John McCain's candidacy for President! Wednesday night I got a McCain background, and now I'm thrilled.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Fri Aug 29, 2008 12:29 pm |
|
Obama: Degree from Columbia University in New York City, where he majored in political science with a specialization in international relations. Law degree from Harvard, president of the Harvard Law Review.
Palin: Degree in Journalism from Idaho State.
Obama: Community organizer/civil rights attorney '85-'88. 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). 7 years in the Illinois State Senate. 3 years in the United State Senate.
Palin: High-school athlete. Runner-up in the Alaska miss America contest. 4 years on the city council for Wasilla, Alaska, polulation: 5,470. Mayor of Wasilla for 10 years. Governor of Alaska since 2007.
|
|
|
beansidhe
Ensign, Junior Grade
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 42
|
| Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:16 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | I'm busy prepping for college today, but I intend one putting together a column stating the case for Sarah Palin, who has more executive experience than Obama and Biden combined, is more in-tune with middle-class and working America, and so much more. She's held in high regard by other governors, tasked with balancing a budget (something Obama and Biden haven't done), has a record of ethics reform, knows the energy issue better than anyone, and more. She's no less credentialed than Barack OBama.
|
Actually, Obama has more executive experience in running his campaign than Sarah Palin has.
She is governor of a state with a population smaller than 16 American cities.
Prior to that, she was the mayor of a town of 6500.
She has absolutely no national nor foreign policy experience.
And she is the running mate of an elderly candidate.
That is frightening.
In addition, if McCain thinks she is going to sway Hillary Clinton voters, it might have helped if she hadn't said of Clinton that she didn't like Clinton's whining. 
As it is, her ultra-conservative stances do not endear her to Clinton voters. Contrary to some opinion, women do not vote for a candidate simply because she's a woman. Were that the case, Clinton would be the Democratic candidate.
She's also a lousy public speaker.
I truly think this choice will hurt McCain's campaign. It may help bring evangelicals back into the fold, but it ruins his "lack of experience" charge against Obama.
And Biden will make mincemeat of her in the debates.
|
|
|
Lord Borg
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 27 May 2003
Posts: 11214
Location: Vulcan Capital City, Vulcan
|
| Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:43 pm |
|
I'm pretty sure the lines being used of being far from DC wasn't used in the terms of distance. Also, if I am getting this correctly...are you banking on the fact she is a woman? Wouldn't that be a wrong reason for someone to win, no matter who it is, and what party they were with?
I hate to say it, but I think Hilliary, at least for this election, has turned the voters away from a female being in the White House. I suppose we shall see in November, but...no one should hold their breath.
-------signature-------
When you cried I'd wipe away all of your tears
When you'd scream I'd fight away all of your fears
And I held your hand through all of these years
But you still have
All of me
|
|
|
squiggy
Stooge Two
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Posts: 3007
Location: Messing with the fabric of Video Game realities. I'll summon Shiva on you! I SWEAR!
|
| Sat Aug 30, 2008 1:19 am |
|
rofl... uhm... wow.
I just watched a few interviews she fumbled over on both CNN, and the Daily Show with Jon Stewart((It's kinda amusing, he picks out the good ones.))
I love her muffed over speech about asking what exactly the Vice president does.
I think McCain f-ed up. Notably, that she actually MENTIONED the fact that half the reason people would vote for HER was strictly because she's female, and I have to admit... despite previous impressions, today, she 'distinguished' herself as a Hillary-Ambulance chaser.((On National Television)).
While I at first thought that her inept manner of talking in public may help keep the spot-light on McCain, she... shouts... stupidly, and loudly, over him.
I hate to admit to this... but I actually think that this is much more likely to go over to Obama. He may be 'experience challenged', but... uh... he's uhm.... well... see... like McCain, he has a speech writing team, that hands him written cue cards... that... he reads. And I don't think... she was reading any cue cards... when... ROFL... sorry, I'm actually WATCHING the clips as I'm writing this... uhm... I think that McCain just screwed himself out of a job.
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Sat Aug 30, 2008 12:29 pm |
|
Anybody else a little frightened by a person who is against abortion even in the case of rape and incest? Along with plan-b in these cases? No, she's not running FOR president, but she has a pretty decent chance of becoming president given McCain's age.
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Mon Sep 01, 2008 9:18 pm |
|
So, does the hypocrisy of the attacks on Palin's daughter's pregnancy bother anyone else? I really enjoyed the theory about Palin's youngest son, 
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Mon Sep 01, 2008 10:28 pm |
|
I haven't been able to put together my Sarah Palin analysis yet, being at college now and all, but I'll try to soon. In the meantime, there's a fantastic article on RealClearPolitics.com that compares Obama (the candidate who wants the highest office now) to Sarah Palin (the candidate who wants to be VP and could become President). For the record, I'd go with the one with not so much experience for VP than the one with not so much experience for President.
| Quote: | Sarah Palin vs. Barack Obama
By Gerard Baker
Democrats, between sniggers of derision and snorts of disgust, contend that Sarah Palin, John McCain's vice-presidential pick is ridiculously unqualified to be president.
It's a reasonable objection on its face except for this small objection: it surely needs to be weighed against the Democrats' claim that their own candidate for president is self-evidently ready to assume the role of most powerful person on the planet.
At first blush, here's what we know about the relative experience of the two candidates. Both are in their mid-forties and have held statewide elective office for less than four years. Both have admitted to taking illegal drugs in their youth.
So much for the similarities. How about the differences?
Political experience
Obama: Worked his way to the top by cultivating, pandering to and stroking the most powerful interest groups in the all-pervasive Chicago political machine, ensuring his views were aligned with the power brokers there.
Palin: Worked her way to the top by challenging, attacking and actively undermining the Republican party establishment in her native Alaska. She ran against incumbent Republicans as a candidate willing and able to clean the Augean Stables of her state's government.
Political Biography
Obama: A classic, if unusually talented, greasy-pole climber. Held a succession of jobs that constitute the standard route to the top in his party's internal politics: "community organizer", law professor, state senator.
Palin:A woman with a wide range of interests in a well-variegated life. Held a succession of jobs - sports journalist, commercial fisherwoman, state oil and gas commissioner, before entering local politics. A resume that suggests something other than burning political ambition from the cradle but rather the sort of experience that enables her to understand the concerns of most Americans..
Political history
Obama: Elected to statewide office only after a disastrous first run for a congressional seat and after his Republican opponent was exposed in a sexual scandal. Won seat eventually in contest against a candidate who didn't even live in the state.
Palin: Elected to statewide office by challenging a long-serving Republican incumbent governor despite intense opposition from the party.
Appeal
Obama: A very attractive speaker whose celebrity has been compared to that of Britney Spears and who sends thrills up Chris Matthews' leg
Palin: A very attractive woman, much better-looking than Britney Spears who speaks rather well too. She sends thrills up the leg of Rush Limbaugh (and me).
Executive experience
Obama: Makes executive decisions every day that affect the lives of his campaign staff and a vast crowd of traveling journalists
Palin:Makes executive decisions every day that affect the lives of 500,000 people in her state, and that impact crucial issues of national economic interest such as the supply and cost of energy to the United States.
Religious influences
Obama: Regards people who "cling" to religion and guns as "bitter" . Spent 20 years being mentored and led spiritually by a man who proclaimed "God damn America" from his pulpit. Mysteriously, this mentor completely disappeared from public sight about four months ago.
Palin: Head of her high school Fellowship of Christian Athletes and for many years a member of the Assemblies of God congregation whose preachers have never been known to accuse the United States of deliberately spreading the AIDS virus. They remain in full public sight and can be seen every Sunday in churches across Alaska. A proud gun owner who has been known to cling only to the carcasses of dead caribou felled by her own aim.
Record of bipartisan achievement
Obama: Speaks movingly of the bipartisanship needed to end the destructive politics of "Red America" and "Blue America", but votes in the Senate as a down-the-line Democrat, with one of the most liberal voting records in congress.
Palin: Ridiculed by liberals such as John Kerry as a crazed, barely human, Dick Cheney-type conservative but worked wit Democrats in the state legislature to secure landmark anti-corruption legislation.
Former state Rep. Ethan Berkowitz - a Democrat - said. "Gov. Palin has made her name fighting corruption within her own party, and I was honored when she stepped across party lines and asked me to co-author her ethics white paper."
On Human Life
Obama: Devoutly pro-choice. Voted against a bill in the Illinois state senate that would have required doctors to save the lives of babies who survived abortion procedures. The implication of this position is that babies born prematurely during abortions would be left alone, unnourished and unmedicated, until they died.
Palin: Devoutly pro-life. Exercised the choice proclaimed by liberals to bring to full term a baby that had been diagnosed in utero with Down Syndrome.
Now it's true there are other crucial differences. Sen Obama has appeared on Meet The Press every other week for the last four years. He has been the subject of hundreds of adoring articles in papers and newsweeklies and TV shows and has written two Emmy-award winning books.
Gov Palin has never appeared on Meet the Press, never been on the cover of Newsweek. She presumably feels that, as a mother of five children married to a snowmobile champion, who also happens to be the first woman and the youngest person ever to be elected governor of her state, she has not really done enough yet to merit an autobiography.
Then again, I'm willing to bet that if she had authored The Grapes of Wrath, sung like Edith Piaf and composed La Traviata , she still wouldn't have won an Emmy.
Fortunately, it will be up to the American people and not their self-appointed leaders in Hollywood and New York to determine who really has the better experience to be president.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/sarah_palin_vs_barack_obama.html |
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Lord Borg
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 27 May 2003
Posts: 11214
Location: Vulcan Capital City, Vulcan
|
| Tue Sep 02, 2008 3:14 am |
|
You know what bothers me? The fact shes a woman is brought up in several points leading into her favor. That shouldn't matter in the election, and I fear the results being tainted either way because she is a woman. Its just not right.
-------signature-------
When you cried I'd wipe away all of your tears
When you'd scream I'd fight away all of your fears
And I held your hand through all of these years
But you still have
All of me
|
|
|
beansidhe
Ensign, Junior Grade
Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 42
|
| Tue Sep 02, 2008 11:14 am |
|
| Arellia wrote: | | Anybody else a little frightened by a person who is against abortion even in the case of rape and incest? Along with plan-b in these cases? No, she's not running FOR president, but she has a pretty decent chance of becoming president given McCain's age. |
Not to mention that she is against sex education and promotion of birth control.
|
|
|
calvin
Lieutenant, Junior Grade
Joined: 31 Jul 2008
Posts: 78
Location: SoCal
|
| Tue Sep 02, 2008 4:45 pm |
|
| Lord Borg wrote: | | You know what bothers me? The fact shes a woman is brought up in several points leading into her favor. That shouldn't matter in the election, and I fear the results being tainted either way because she is a woman. Its just not right. |
i agree. the first woman President or VP will be a landmark event in history. whoever takes that place will be a symbolic icon of our nation's cultural progress. it should be someone of noble character who actually merits such historic importance.
or it'll just end up like the election of Margaret Thatcher, which was celebrated for all the wrong reasons. yes, she was the first woman to become prime minister, but she wasn't a good leader, and her reactionary policies made the UK worse off.
we need a Thurgood Marshall, not a Colin Powell.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue Sep 02, 2008 4:47 pm |
|
| beansidhe wrote: | | Arellia wrote: | | Anybody else a little frightened by a person who is against abortion even in the case of rape and incest? Along with plan-b in these cases? No, she's not running FOR president, but she has a pretty decent chance of becoming president given McCain's age. |
Not to mention that she is against sex education and promotion of birth control. |
In terms of her position as President and Vice-President, I find the sex education and birth control aspects irrelevant, as I do not believe the federal government should be playing a role in sex ed anyway.
With regards to her position on abortion, sure, it's extreme, but there's very little even the President can do aside from appointing justices to the court, and you're going to get a pro-life President who will appoint constructionist judges to the court anyway, so it really doesn't matter policy-wise since there's no significant difference between the two.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Tue Sep 02, 2008 5:30 pm |
|
I don't quite see why people are freaking out at this point over the fact that yes, there are people who are going to vote for her because she's a woman. Yeah, it isn't the best reason, but why give any more attention to that fact than that people are going to vote for her based on her opinions about abortion? Everybody votes because of their own wants and needs.
Besides, when you take into account that a lot of people are going to vote for Obama because of his racial background, this isn't much different.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Tue Sep 02, 2008 5:54 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | beansidhe wrote: | | Arellia wrote: | | Anybody else a little frightened by a person who is against abortion even in the case of rape and incest? Along with plan-b in these cases? No, she's not running FOR president, but she has a pretty decent chance of becoming president given McCain's age. |
Not to mention that she is against sex education and promotion of birth control. |
In terms of her position as President and Vice-President, I find the sex education and birth control aspects irrelevant, as I do not believe the federal government should be playing a role in sex ed anyway.
With regards to her position on abortion, sure, it's extreme, but there's very little even the President can do aside from appointing justices to the court, and you're going to get a pro-life President who will appoint constructionist judges to the court anyway, so it really doesn't matter policy-wise since there's no significant difference between the two. |
It's significant for some of the reasons Calvin mentioned--her possibly being the first woman VP, if we have a first woman VP it would be a shame if it wasn't someone really special. That's debatable, some people do think she's very special... I do not. Second, McCain has chosen one of his top advisers with this choice, and his top adviser is so freakishly anti-birth control anti-abortion that it's really, really scary. If he appoints these kinds of people to the board of education, to the health department... the serious damage he could do. Not only does she believe in abstinence-only education, she also believes in teaching creationism in a science classroom. It's more than the supreme court, he appoints an entire cabinet that can write policies that--thanks to the traditions of George W.--are frequently not approved by congress via loopholes.
And, of any VP in history, she is the most likely to become president by virtue of McCain's age. She has a decent chance of being president. That would give these policies all the more power.
Some people might not see reproductive rights as "important"... but I do. I know too many girls who could have avoided abortions or life-destroying pregnancies if they had just been educated on birth control. People who have parents that will educate their own children in these matters are just lucky--children of parents who refuse to talk about sex OR let the kids have a class on sexual protection are the unluckiest of all. The minority? Perhaps. But in America a minority still amounts to hundreds of thousands and even millions. Besides that... it's hard to have it both ways. You can outlaw abortion and stop teaching about contraceptives... if you want to see a whole lot of girls with a whole lot of babies they never intended. If you're going to outlaw abortion at least take steps to make sure people understand how to avoid a pregnancy.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue Sep 02, 2008 6:16 pm |
|
I understand your hesitation, but stand in firm disagreement. Of course this comes from our different viewpoints; I don't believe there is a right to privacy in the Constitution, and while I support teaching abstinence along with contraceptive education and I do believe Roe v. Wade is perhaps the most reasonable compromise we could have, I'd rather have someone firmly pro-life as VP (more so than me) rather than someone so radically pro-abortion as Barack Obama as President. There's nothing she can do about teaching creationism in the classroom (a position with which I do firmly disagree, but that would never fly anyway), and the chances of Roe v. Wade being overturned are extremely thin. The real danger is having a court which will expand that further, the result of a Barack Obama presidency.
And you can find her someone who's not really special; I do. She's ideal, IMO, for the first woman VP.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue Sep 02, 2008 6:18 pm |
|
I just finished reading the NY Times hit job on Sarah Palin and wanted to post this National Review blog post in retort:
| Quote: | Team McCain Hits Back on Palin, Vetting
Had a long talk this morning with a senior strategist in the McCain campaign. I think it�s fair to say Team McCain is seriously unhappy with a New York Times story, �Palin Disclosures Raise Questions On Vetting,� which came out this morning and is driving much of the coverage of the issue. The story begins:
| Quote: | A series of disclosures about Gov. Sarah Palin, Senator John McCain�s choice as running mate, called into question on Monday how thoroughly Mr. McCain had examined her background before putting her on the Republican presidential ticket.
On Monday morning, Ms. Palin and her husband, Todd, issued a statement saying that their 17-year-old unmarried daughter, Bristol, was five months pregnant and that she intended to marry the father.
Among other less attention-grabbing news of the day: it was learned that Ms. Palin now has a private lawyer in a legislative ethics investigation in Alaska into whether she abused her power in dismissing the state�s public safety commissioner; that she was a member for two years in the 1990s of the Alaska Independence Party, which has at times sought a vote on whether the state should secede; and that Mr. Palin was arrested 22 years ago on a drunken-driving charge. |
The story, my campaign source told me, is �materially false.� Gov. Palin, the strategist said, was subjected to a �complete vet.� �That included her filling out a 70-question questionnaire that was highly intrusive and personal. She was then interviewed for more than three hours by A.B. Culvahouse. There were multiple follow-up interviews.� (I asked precisely how many follow-ups there were, but my source stuck with �multiple.�) �There was a thorough interview process,� the strategist continued. �There was a public records search and political vet. There was a private life and financial vet. Everything that has come out was known by the campaign through the vetting process.�
Okay. What about particulars? The strategist started at the bottom and moved up.
�Todd�s DUI � we judged that to be immaterial to the selection process. The ticket for fishing without a license � we judged that to be immaterial to the selection process.� On the charge that Palin was a member of the Alaska Independence Party, the strategist said, flatly, �She was never a member of the independence party, because she has been a registered Republican.� (Later, the McCain camp put out a statement saying it had provided reporters with �ALL voter registration documentation� showing that Palin has been a registered Republican since 1982 and �has never been a member of the AIP.�) And on the issue of Palin�s daughter Bristol being pregnant: �John McCain made a decision that did not affect his decision-making in terms of her qualifications.� (As far as the allegation that Gov. Palin faked a pregnancy to cover up for her daughter is concerned, it appears the McCain campaign knew about it and looked into it, but never very deeply because it had been proven false to the satisfaction of pretty much anyone outside The Atlantic or the DailyKos.)
From our conversation, it was clear that the McCain campaign paid a lot of attention to the so-called �Troopergate� issue. After all, unlike the �fake baby� story that has preoccupied the press, it is a real issue involving allegations that Palin abused her power. Last night, the McCain campaign distributed a "background guidance" memo to reporters on the issue. In our conversation, the strategist recounted much of the substance of that memo.
�Of course this issue came up in the vetting, and this is what we discovered,� the source said. �The man who was fired has said on the record that he was never pressured by the governor or the governor�s husband on the issue of firing Trooper Wooten. The governor had a vision for how she wanted that department to be run. The commissioner had a different vision.�
�The reason that members of the Palin family were having discussions with the head of the state police about this state trooper, who was her ex-brother-in-law, was because he had made threats against the family. He threatened to kill the governor's daughter, her father, and her sister. He tasered her 11-year-old stepson. And that is why the Palin family was concerned about this trooper.�
I brought up accusations that the McCain team has performed a �legal vet� on Palin but did not perform a �political vet.� In addition to the accusation that Palin had been a member of the Alaska Independence Party, there were issues like her change in position on the �bridge to nowhere� and her support for raising sales taxes in Wasilla, Alaska. �Change on the �bridge to nowhere?�� my source asked. �Are you saying there�s somebody out there who believes that should disqualify her to be vice president?� Barack Obama has changed his mind on a few things, the strategist added. As for sales taxes in Wasilla, the source said, �Every aspect of her political record is known to us. These people [McCain�s opponents] are desperate.�
As for what materials the campaign examined in the vetting, the source told me they checked out (almost) everything. �The only thing the campaign did not look at was the microfilm of the local newspaper, because it was impossible to look at the microfilm without revealing the search process,� the strategist said. �We made a calculation that we would be able to get all the information from the Anchorage newspaper, that it was unlikely that there would be items in the local papers that were problematic that didn�t make it to the Anchorage paper.�
Found here |
Last edited by Republican_Man on Tue Sep 02, 2008 6:21 pm; edited 1 time in total
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Tue Sep 02, 2008 6:18 pm |
|
... I thought you just said you didn't believe the government should have a hand in sex ed? And how would abortion be expanded beyond Roe v. Wade anyway?
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue Sep 02, 2008 6:37 pm |
|
| Arellia wrote: | | ... I thought you just said you didn't believe the government should have a hand in sex ed? And how would abortion be expanded beyond Roe v. Wade anyway? |
I don't believe the federal government should have a hand in sex ed.
The current Supreme Court upheld the federal ban on partial birth abortion; Barack Obama firmly opposed that (all the Democrats were disgusting and entirely disingenuous in the debate following that decision) and, under an Obama court, partial birth abortion would be legal and there would be other lessened restrictions on abortion (that, might I note, are entirely in line with Roe v. Wade).
Barack Obama is the most radically pro-abortion presidential candidate in the history of the Democratic party. The proof is here. Look, as a general supporter of the conclusions of Roe regarding the three trimesters and government restrictions of them, this man's radical positions on measures like Illinois's bill SB 1095 frighten the hell out of me and infuriate me.
| Quote: | On March 30, 2001, Obama was the only senator to speak in opposition to a bill that would have banned the practice of leaving premature abortion survivors to die. The bill, SB 1095, was carefully limited, its language unambiguous. It applied only to premature babies, already born alive. It stated simply that under Illinois law, �the words �person,� �human being,� �child,� and �individual� include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.�
Two related bills introduced that day included slightly more controversial provisions about liability and medical procedure, but SB 1095 did not go nearly that far. This bill did not apply to those not born, nor did it grant born persons anything beyond recognition of their rights as persons.
Under this bill, SB 1095, babies born alive during an abortion would have to be treated just like every other baby that is born alive and prematurely � not left to die as at Christ Hospital, but given treatment according to an acting physician�s medical judgment as to what is necessary and what is possible � the same standard that applies to any other human being. |
I don't believe he supports infanticide, but any man who opposes a bill like that (especially one passed unanimously, with the exact same language, by the U.S. Senate) (Barbara Boxer even supported the, again, identical federal version), and says that a girl (in this scenario, his daughter) inadvertently getting pregnant would be "punished" by having the baby (punished by bringing new life into this world) loses a great deal of my respect and concerns me greatly.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
squiggy
Stooge Two
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Posts: 3007
Location: Messing with the fabric of Video Game realities. I'll summon Shiva on you! I SWEAR!
|
| Tue Sep 02, 2008 6:46 pm |
|
| Arellia wrote: | | ... I thought you just said you didn't believe the government should have a hand in sex edHe did. And I disagree. I believe it should be a MANDATORY part of the NATIONAL education system.? And how would abortion be expanded beyond Roe v. Wade anywayAbortion is pretty simple, isn't it? How can you expand beyond what is already there?? |
Agreed, at least on calling out a few good points there((If not necessarily exactly on the meanings)).
Partial Birth Abortion is, perhaps, a bit of a 'humane' way of doing things sometimes. Many people don't understand how difficult a life for a child with Down Syndrome, or Autism is like. Especially when their' parents DEMAND they fit in, which is something NO Child with Down Syndrome can do, and very few children with Autism can pull off.
And is it such an evil thing to be 'radically pro-abortion'?
And that bill, especially certain parts, like a baby born alive during an abortion would have to be treated like every other baby... I'm sorry, but it IS ethically wrong to force a doctor who is there to perform an abortion to have to explain to the patient that as it was 'born' alive, during the procedure, he could not finish. A woman should have the right to say "I can't raise this child. I shouldn't have it.", and have that right respected by ANY doctor((Regardless of religion, or point of view.)). I say that, despite many critiques I've made to the man, he just GAINED a little bit of respect from my point of view.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue Sep 02, 2008 7:00 pm |
|
| Quote: | | I'm sorry, but it IS ethically wrong to force a doctor who is there to perform an abortion to have to explain to the patient that as it was 'born' alive, during the procedure, he could not finish. |
You're not sorry. How dare you demean the life of an innocent baby like that - life that has indisputably been born? How dare you?
That's all I have to say to you.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Tue Sep 02, 2008 7:17 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | Quote: | | I'm sorry, but it IS ethically wrong to force a doctor who is there to perform an abortion to have to explain to the patient that as it was 'born' alive, during the procedure, he could not finish. |
You're not sorry. How dare you demean the life of an innocent baby like that - life that has indisputably been born? How dare you?
That's all I have to say to you. |
I've got to agree with you. Refuse someone life because of a disability? Who's right is that, really? If you birth a child, you don't have to keep it, and you certainly don't have to kill it.
My sister is pregnant, due in about two weeks, we should tell the doctor if the baby has any defects to kill her so that J and E's lives will be easier? Or are we having the nerve to say we're doing this for the sake of the child? What a load.
And since I've totally gone off, I'll just shut up.
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
