Sarah Palin

[Mabelle]

Re: Palin -she what?!

she scares the shit out of me. I am not an American, but please dear god, dear whoever, don't let her become VP!!!!

 

[Dizzy]

I'm not a big fan, but then again I'm not a fan of any politician who says anything other than "I want to leave you alone." That said, nobody's promising that this election cycle. But I do find Palin interesting. I like the fact that she was a governor. The office of the governor of any state is far similar to the office of the presidency than any senator's job. Legislative branch members and executive branch members have different responsibilities, so to judge someone as a 'good congressman' would mean nothing in relation to their potential as president. A governor, however, is much more comparable.

I don't agree with Palin's opinions on abortion; but then again, neither the VP nor the POTUS can overturn Roe v. Wade. I'm not much worried about that. I don't care if someone disagrees with abortion and/or BC, but as long as they don't do anything to change it, I've got no problems with differing opinions.

I like that she is a supporter of freedom of expression. I don't like that she looked into the censorship of library books. I really like that she recognized (as governor, at least) that she represented her constituency and made numerous references that said something along the lines of "I may not agree with X, but the people of Alaska feel that X necessary/beneficial" in regards to various issues, including sex education.

I have issues with her foreign policy views, but I also realize that she won't have that big of an impact on our foreign policy. For this reason alone I'd love to have the candidates give us a rough idea of who they'd put in their cabinet also. Our FP is dependent on that cabinet and that needs an overhaul.

If the media is right, we should expect some open seats in the Supreme Court during the next 4 years. That's a major deciding factor for me in this election cycle; I want to see some better justices appointed. I want to elect someone who I think will do that.

Overall, I'm pretty unimpressed with her, but I think that she was an excellent choice for McCain. Fact remains, some people do vote based on petty issues: sex, whether or not someone hunts, because they'd be the first blank (black person, woman, Eskimo, etc) in that position. McCain was lagging behind with votes from women and Palin is helping to close that gap. The fact that they both have children who are serving in the military will sway some voters, especially since the media made such a circus around her oldest leaving for the ME.

She's also a less polarizing VP pick than Biden, which I thought was an odd pick for Obama. He just doesn't do much for the voters from what I've seen, and I think that's evident by the fact that McCain and Obama are running a tight race here. In my state they're pretty much tied, which is a rarity since NY tends to be a Democrat stronghold.

I won't make my decision until just before election day, but I'm pretty disappointed all around. Everyone seems to be much more concerned with the Russian/Georgian conflict, abortion, and what the latest political stunt being pulled (anyone see those pictures of McCain as the 'warmonger'?) than they do with the real issues.

I'd love to hear what they plan to do about the economy (and more than just "Oh noez! we're doomed!" or "everything is fine. My company is still making insane profits."), what their goals are regarding the healthcare issues and their long-term plans for that, and I'd love to hear what they have to say over simple foreign policy issues. Unfortunately, those seem to be akin to the plague and nobody's saying anything useful about any of it. Damn shame, if you ask me.

Quote:

Guns are always a polarizing issue, but the reality is that criminals will ALWAYS have guns. Forbiding a citizen's choice to apply for, purchase and own arms, will take away a measure of their protection or simply make the citizens the criminals for having a gun.

Wonderfully said.

 

[elegant-one]

Quote:

Originally Posted by duckduck LOL! Not only can you operate a gun, you can look cute doing it too!

Aw, thats sweet of you

I had a real fear of guns so they wanted to teach gun safety & how to defend myself if I had to. We own a .22 caliber which is what I cut my teeth on. I only like target practice though, I personally could never shoot an animal.

Our gun is in a lock box, which is weird because our son is grown up & moved out a long time ago.

I hope we remember where the key is.

 

[*Stargazer*]

Quote:

Originally Posted by duckduck I actually used to be anti-gun and felt there was no reason for a normal, sane person to want to own one.

I used to be the exact same way. Then a stranger tried to sexually assault me in my apartment.

I learned how to use my husband's 9MM the next weekend. It's been in a biometric safe next to my bed ever since.

 

[*Stargazer*]

And now someone has hacked Palin's personal email account. Gawker has screenshots posted. They've also posted her contact list and cell phone number for her daughter.

Wow.

 

[Nox]

Re: Palin -she what?!

Uhh.... surprise...? (Not trying to be an ass, I'm just saying this is totally within her character.)

 

[Shimmer]

Re: Palin -she what?!

I love sensationalism. It's so awesome.

 

[Korms]

Re: Palin -she what?!

Apparently one of her e-mail accounts has been hacked which, if true (not sure if it has been confirmed yet)

Sarah Palin Emails: Sarah Palin's Personal Emails

Edit:Yeah, so this was already posted in the other Sarah Palin thread. Hah, oh well I suppose the news has only just reached UK shores.

 

[miss_supra]

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Stargazer* And now someone has hacked Palin's personal email account. Gawker has screenshots posted. They've also posted her contact list and cell phone number for her daughter. Wow.

I may not agree with her views but that is the invasion of her privacy and hope those involved are punished for their actions.

 

[MACLovin]

Yeah, hacking into her email is just completely uncalled for. Even if they are investigating her for using a private email account to possibly conduct government business (and thereby skirting some sort of law prohibiting the exchange of information on gov computers), that should be done privately and through the proper channels. Not for some 16 year old 'haX0r' who thinks he's a badass. That's just wrong.

 

[MAC_Whore]

Quote:

Originally Posted by duckduck Thank you so much for saying so - I am feeling kinda dumb right now. I had to go look at some LOLcats and this thread for a while just to make myself feel better ....

Ah, I didn't mean to make you feel bad. Sorry!

I always appreciate your contributions.

LOLcats cure everything. I am on that site religiously every day. Did you see the new LOLcelebs part of the site? It's pretty funny.

 

[darkwater_soul]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bellaconnie80 If the best you can do is insult people who don't plan on voting the way you do, you won't win many people to your side. You've made nothing but assumptions (erroneous ones at that) and then have the nerve to question my research habits? stargazer the above quote is what YOU said and I responded to.. I'll ask you again, please DO NOT put words in my mouth! And since you have do so much of your research I had expected you to know the 'gun happy idiot' I was referring to is Palin.. after all SHE is the only person I have been speaking of! And yes, its very misleading to not know you are against Palin when you always come to her defense.. very very very misleading! you have questioned my intelligence time and time again.. and now I must question yours! what on earth do you mean I dont have to take Palin as my VP if I dont like her? if she wins I have no choice which is why I'm speaking my mind so passionately now and begging to keep her out of power! Please lets not be petty and concentrate on me when the issue at hand is Palin!! like I've said in previous posts LETS STICK TO THE IMPORTANT ISSUES! I had to defend myself against you and shimmer because I am being attacked but you two have said what you had to say to me and I've responded so please lets be adults and go back to the debate at had

That's what they have been trying to do. You keep saying you want to stick to important issues, but you have yet to RAISE ONE. Calling her names (Palin) doesn't discuss her political views. They aren't coming to Palin's defense, they are merely stating that debate isn't about petty remarks and mudslinging, it's about the discussion of views, issues and facts - not of harsh words and rash statments. If you want the topic to go back to discussion, then post some of her views you agree with and why, where you got your sources, and I'm sure you'll find everyone will be much more apt to debate with you.

 

[Shimmer]

Just some light reading.
Quote:

We’ve been flooded for the past few days with queries about dubious Internet postings and mass e-mail messages making claims about McCain’s running mate, Gov. Palin. We find that many are completely false, or misleading. * Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn’t cut it at all. In fact, she increased funding and signed a bill that will triple per-pupil funding over three years for special needs students with high-cost requirements. * She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term. * She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She’s been registered as a Republican since May 1982. * Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a "courtesy" when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state. * Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."

Quote:

According to an April 2008 article in Education Week, Palin signed legislation in March 2008 that would increase public school funding considerably, including special needs funding. In particular, it would increase spending for certain special needs students that Alaska calls "intensive needs" (students with high-cost special requirements) from $26,900 per student in 2008 to $73,840 per student in 2011. That almost triples the per-student spending in three fiscal years. Palin's original proposal, according to the Anchorage Daily News, would have increased funds slightly more, giving intensive needs students a $77,740 allotment by 2011. Education Week: A second part of the measure raises spending for students with special needs [the intensive needs group] to $73,840 in fiscal 2011, from the current $26,900 per student in fiscal 2008, according to the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development. Unlike many other states, Alaska has relatively flush budget coffers, thanks to a rise in oil and gas revenues. Funding for schools will remain fairly level next year, however. Overall per-pupil funding across the state will rise by $100, to $5,480, in fiscal 2009. ... Carl Rose, the executive director of the Association of Alaska School Boards, praised the changes in funding for rural schools and students with special needs as a "historic event," and said the finance overhaul would bring more stability to district budgets. According to Eddy Jeans at the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development, funding for special needs and intensive needs students has increased every year since Palin entered office, from a total of $203 million in 2006 to a projected $276 million in 2009. Those who claim that Palin cut special needs funding by 62 percent are looking in the wrong place and misinterpreting what they find there. They point to an apparent drop in the Department of Education and Early Development budget for special schools. But the special schools budget, despite the similar name, isn't the special needs budget. "I don’t even consider the special schools component [part of] our special needs funding," Jeans told FactCheck.org. "The special needs funding is provided through our public school funding formula. The special schools is simply a budget component where we have funding set aside for special projects," such as the Alaska School for the Deaf and the Alaska Military Youth Academy. A different budget component, the Foundation Program, governs special needs programs in the public school system. And in any case, the decrease in funding for special schools is illusory. Palin moved the Alaska Military Youth Academy's ChalleNGe program, a residential military school program that teaches job and life skills to students under 20, out of the budget line for "special schools" and into its own line. This resulted in an apparent drop of more than $5 million in the special schools budget with no actual decrease in funding for the programs. Not a Book Burner One accusation claims then-Mayor Palin threatened to fire Wasilla’s librarian for refusing to ban books from the town library. Some versions of the rumor come complete with a list of the books that Palin allegedly attempted to ban. Actually, Palin never asked that books be banned; no books were actually banned; and many of the books on the list that Palin supposedly wanted to censor weren't even in print at the time, proving that the list is a fabrication. The librarian was fired, but was told only that Palin felt she didn’t support her. She was re-hired the next day. The librarian never claimed that Palin threatened outright to fire her for refusing to ban books. It’s true that Palin did raise the issue with Mary Ellen Emmons, Wasilla’s librarian, on at least two occasions, three in some versions. Emmons flatly stated her opposition each time. But, as the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman (Wasilla’s local paper) reported at the time, Palin asked general questions about what Emmons would say if Palin requested that a book be banned. According to Emmons, Palin "was asking me how I would deal with her saying a book can't be in the library." Emmons reported that Palin pressed the issue, asking whether Emmons' position would change if residents were picketing the library. Wasilla resident Anne Kilkenny, who was at the meeting, corroborates Emmons' story, telling the Chicago Tribune that "Sarah said to Mary Ellen, 'What would your response be if I asked you to remove some books from the collection?' " Palin characterized the exchange differently, initially volunteering the episode as an example of discussions with city employees about following her administration's agenda. Palin described her questions to Emmons as “rhetorical,” noting that her questions "were asked in the context of professionalism regarding the library policy that is in place in our city." Actually, true rhetorical questions have implied answers (e.g., “Who do you think you are?”), so Palin probably meant to describe her questions as hypothetical or theoretical. We can't read minds, so it is impossible for us to know whether or not Palin may actually have wanted to ban books from the library or whether she simply wanted to know how her new employees would respond to an instruction from their boss. It is worth noting that, in an update, the Frontiersman points out that no book was ever banned from the library’s shelves. Palin initially requested Emmons’ resignation, along with those of Wasilla’s other department heads, in October 1996. Palin described the requests as a loyalty test and allowed all of them (except one, whose department she was eliminating) to retain their positions. But in January 1997, Palin fired Emmons, along with the police chief. According to the Chicago Tribune, Palin did not list censorship as a reason for Emmons’ firing, but said she didn’t feel she had Emmons’ support. The decision caused “a stir” in the small town, according to a newspaper account at the time. According to a widely circulated e-mail from Kilkenny, “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.” As we’ve noted, Palin did not attempt to ban any library books. We don’t know if Emmons’ resistance to Palin’s questions about possible censorship had anything to do with Emmons’ firing. And we have no idea if the protests had any impact on Palin at all. There simply isn’t any evidence that we can find either way. Palin did re-hire Emmons the following day, saying that she now felt she had the librarian’s backing. Emmons continued to serve as librarian until August 1999, when the Chicago Tribune reports that she resigned. So what about that list of books targeted for banning, which according to one widely e-mailed version was taken “from the official minutes of the Wasilla Library Board”? If it was, the library board should take up fortune telling. The list includes the first four Harry Potter books, none of which had been published at the time of the Palin-Emmons conversations. The first wasn't published until 1998. In fact, the list is a simple cut-and-paste job, snatched (complete with typos and the occasional incorrect title) from the Florida Institute of Technology library Web page, which presents the list as “Books banned at one time or another in the United States.” Update, Sept. 9: We have revised this section dealing with accusations that Palin wanted to ban books from Wasilla's library to include more detail about what transpired at the time. Closet Secessionist? Palin was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party – which calls for a vote on whether Alaska should secede from the union or remain a state – despite mistaken reports to the contrary. But her husband was a member for years, and she attended at least one party convention, as mayor of the town in which it was held. The party's chair originally told reporters that Palin had been a member, but the official later retracted that statement. Chairwoman Lynette Clark told the New York Times that false information had been given to her by another member of the party after she first told the Times and others that Palin joined the AIP in 1994. Clark issued an apology on the AIP Web site. The director of Alaska’s Division of Elections, Gail Fenumiai, confirms that Palin registered to vote in the state for the first time in May 1982 as a Republican and hasn’t changed her party affiliation since. She also told FactCheck.org that Palin’s husband, Todd, was registered with AIP from October 1995 to July 2000, and again from September 2000 until July 2002. (He has since been registered as undeclared.) However, the AIP says Todd Palin "never participated in any party activities aside from attending a convention in Wasilla at one time." There is still some dispute as to whether Sarah Palin also attended the AIP’s 1994 convention, held in Wasilla. Clark and another AIP official told ABC News’ Jake Tapper that both Palins were there. Palin was elected mayor of Wasilla two years later. The McCain campaign says Sarah Palin went to the 2000 AIP convention, also held in Wasilla, “as a courtesy since she was mayor.” As governor, Palin sent a video message to the 2008 convention, which is available on YouTube, and the AIP says she attended in 2006 when she was campaigning. Didn't Endorse Pat Buchanan Claims that Palin endorsed conservative Republican Pat Buchanan for president in the 2000 campaign are false. She worked for conservative Republican Steve Forbes. The incorrect reports stem from an Associated Press story on July 17, 1999, that said Palin was "among those sporting Buchanan buttons" at a lunch for Buchanan attended by about 85 people, during a swing he took through Fairbanks and Wasilla. Buchanan didn't help matters when he told a reporter for the liberal publication The Nation on Aug. 29: "I'm pretty sure she's a Buchananite." But in fact, she wasn't. Soon after The AP story appeared, Palin wrote in a letter to the editor of the Anchorage Daily News that she had merely worn a Buchanan button as a courtesy to her visitor and was not endorsing him. The letter, published July 26, 1999, said: Palin, July 26, 1999: As mayor of Wasilla, I am proud to welcome all presidential candidates to our city. This is true regardless of their party, or the latest odds of their winning. When presidential candidates visit our community, I am always happy to meet them. I'll even put on their button when handed one as a polite gesture of respect. Though no reporter interviewed me for the Associated Press article on the recent visit by a presidential candidate (Metro, July 17), the article may have left your readers with the perception that I am endorsing this candidate, as opposed to welcoming his visit to Wasilla. As mayor, I will welcome all the candidates in Wasilla. Palin actually worked for Forbes. Less than a month after being spotted wearing the "courtesy" button for Buchanan, she was named to the state leadership committee of the Forbes effort. The Associated Press reported on Aug. 7, 1999: The Associated Press, Aug. 7 1999: State Sen. Mike Miller of Fairbanks will head the Alaska campaign chairman for Republican presidential candidate Steve Forbes, campaign officials said. Joining the Fairbanks Republican on the leadership committee will be Wasilla Mayor Sarah Palin, and former state GOP chairman Pete Hallgren, who will serve as co-chairs. Still, after nine years, the truth has yet to catch up completely. No Creationism in Schools On Aug. 29, the Boston Globe reported that Palin was open to teaching creationism in public schools. That's true. She supports teaching creationism alongside evolution, though she has not actively pursued such a policy as governor. In an Oct. 25, 2006, debate, when asked about teaching alternatives to evolution, Palin replied: Palin, Oct. 25, 2006: Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And you know, I say this too as the daughter of a science teacher. Growing up with being so privileged and blessed to be given a lot of information on, on both sides of the subject – creationism and evolution. It's been a healthy foundation for me. But don't be afraid of information and let kids debate both sides. A couple of days later, Palin amended that statement in an interview with the Anchorage Daily News, saying: Palin, Oct. 2006: I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum. After her election, Palin let the matter drop. The Associated Press reported Sept 3: "Palin's children attend public schools and Palin has made no push to have creationism taught in them. ... It reflects a hands-off attitude toward mixing government and religion by most Alaskans." The article was headlined, "Palin has not pushed creation science as governor." It was written by Dan Joling, who reports from Anchorage and has covered Alaska for 30 years.

 

[Shimmer]

I hope that first bulletin clarifies a few things.

 

[*Stargazer*]

^ factcheck?

Love it.

 

[enjoybeingagirl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kimmy it really doesn't matter whether she opposes abortion or not. one person cannot overturn the roe v wade ruling. one person in the american government can do scarcely anything. almost everything takes an act of congress and i think it's absolutely absurd to think that if palin comes into any sort of federal power, we'll all be doomed. ps. the roe v wade ruling was handed down in 1973. since then we have had richard nixon, gerald ford, ron reagan, george hw bush and george w bush in office...all republicans. has it been overturned yet? NOPE.

It does matter if McCain/Palin get elected because in the next 4-8 years, two liberal supreme court judges will retire, which leaves two seats open. Those seats will be filled by conversative judges if McCain/Palin are elected. At this point they only need one more vote to overturn roe v wade. So it can very well happen.

 

[rbella]

Do not touch my money. That is all I have to say. I worked my ass off for it, pulled myself out of poverty on my own, and do not look kindly on the government deciding when and where my hard earned dollar is spent.

 

[kimmy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by franimal Then vote for them. All I was saying is that you should vote for someone who shares the same values as yourself.

i completely agree. my intent was not to sway anyone's opinion. my intent was to just point out that while everyone wants to attack palin saying that she's going to take away our rights as women but they often forget that we have a checks and balances system that will not allow it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by enjoybeingagirl It does matter if McCain/Palin get elected because in the next 4-8 years, two liberal supreme court judges will retire, which leaves two seats open. Those seats will be filled by conversative judges if McCain/Palin are elected. At this point they only need one more vote to overturn roe v wade. So it can very well happen.

i never said it didn't matter if mccain and palin were elected. i said that her stance on abortion doesn't matter, by which i mean it will not affect the general public adversly. again, i was trying to remind people of the checks and balances system. i know the votes to overturn roe v wade were very close. HOWEVER, not every republican is against abortion. there are a great many republicans who are pro-choice. and do you really think the public would support that kind of ruling anyway? because i promise you that if they overturn it, the people will reinstate it.

 

[concertina]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kimmy i never said it didn't matter if mccain and palin were elected. i said that her stance on abortion doesn't matter, by which i mean it will not affect the general public adversly. again, i was trying to remind people of the checks and balances system. i know the votes to overturn roe v wade were very close. HOWEVER, not every republican is against abortion. there are a great many republicans who are pro-choice. and do you really think the public would support that kind of ruling anyway? because i promise you that if they overturn it, the people will reinstate it.

And how many women will suffer in the inbetween? How many women will die because they can't have the late term abortion they need to save their lives? How many incest and rape victims be forced to carry to term? How many unwilling mothers made? Or worse, how many women dying from desperate attempts to abort?

I appreciate the information Shimmer provided; it took a sliver of my anxiety away. I always like knowing the truth. But even in that factcheck article, there were some things that made my skin crawl.

I'm just ready for November. I'm ready for it all to be over. There's a group on Facebook I joined the other day: People Who Want to Stay Drunk until the Election is OVER

That sounds about like my best option right now...

 

[Shimmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by concertina And how many women will suffer in the inbetween? How many women will die because they can't have the late term abortion they need to save their lives?

Here's my thing with LTA...the mother STILL has to deliver the fetus...in WHAT situation does LTA save the mother's life? At that point, what purpose does the death of the fetus serve?


Quote:

I appreciate the information Shimmer provided; it took a sliver of my anxiety away. I always like knowing the truth. But even in that factcheck article, there were some things that made my skin crawl.

As is the nature of the beast, unfortunately.
Quote:

I'm just ready for November. I'm ready for it all to be over. There's a group on Facebook I joined the other day: People Who Want to Stay Drunk until the Election is OVER That sounds about like my best option right now...

I'm in.