Free Sarah Palin: McCain Camp Called Out by CNN Reporter

[Krissie]

Date: 9/25/2008 5:58:47 PM
Author: decodelighted

Date: 9/25/2008 2:35:14 AM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/25/2008 1:33:35 AM
Author: luckystar112

Date: 9/25/2008 1:01:07 AM
Author: decodelighted
Congress is making fine progress without you old blow-hard.

Well, that was necessary.

LOL yeah...obviously Congress is *not* making fine progress or they would have a clearcut plan already. Anyway, I thought we were talking about Palin and the press; perhaps a new thread needs to be started over that rant...

DING DING DING ... they *did* come to an agreement w/o McCain''s grand campaign-snuffing sacrifice.

And, according to the thread *title* this is also about the ''McCain Camp''.

*shrug*

I guess it''s a good thing he didn''t *really* suspend his campaign -- unless you count the Couric interview, spending the night in NY, continuing to run TV ads all across the country, having his surrogates on the newsmedia all day attacking Obama, spending most of Thursday with his campaign manager, keeping all campaign offices open and operational, and plans to give interviews all evening as coming to Warshington to force a resolution on the bailout bill. Which, for the record, isn''t exactly a piece of legislation I''d want fast-tracked anyhow - the potential cost to taxpayers is too great to rush it through the legislature on any kind of self-imposed timetable (supposedly incentivizing Democrats to hammer it out by debate time).

 

[mrssalvo]

Date: 9/25/2008 6:03:53 PM
Author: decodelighted

Date: 9/25/2008 10:27:40 AM

Author: luckystar112

Why should I have to pay for your dumb decision (consumer or lender)?

Will you be joining the ''I *heart* The Great Depression 2.0'' Facebook group? ''Cause that''s what''s Bush is claiming will happen w/o The Great Bail-out. What a mess.

yeah, but who at this point really believe''s Bush? I agree..a mess it is.

 

[luckystar112]

I wonder what Obama''s doing?

Oh.

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/25/2008 5:58:47 PM
Author: decodelighted

Date: 9/25/2008 2:35:14 AM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/25/2008 1:33:35 AM
Author: luckystar112

Date: 9/25/2008 1:01:07 AM
Author: decodelighted
Congress is making fine progress without you old blow-hard.

Well, that was necessary.

LOL yeah...obviously Congress is *not* making fine progress or they would have a clearcut plan already. Anyway, I thought we were talking about Palin and the press; perhaps a new thread needs to be started over that rant...

DING DING DING ... they *did* come to an agreement w/o McCain''s grand campaign-snuffing sacrifice.

And, according to the thread *title* this is also about the ''McCain Camp''.

*shrug*

Oh did they really? News to me...http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26884523/?GT1=43001 Looks like they *DIDN''T* come up with an agreement.

Also, before talking about McCain''s campaign manager getting money from F&F I would suggest looking at how much Obama himself has gotten. No one is clean.

 

[AGBF]

The people of the United States should rise up and take a stand against John McCain on the grounds that he was willing to forfeit the future of the United States in order to garner the goodwill of the right wing voters in the United States for his own personal gain. David Letterman made a great show of how much Mr. McCain had sacrificed as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, giving everything but his life for his country. (He attributed this quotation to former President Clinton.)

Mr. McCain is now selling out his county to benefit himself. He is willing to throw away his country in order to make use of Sarah Palin in the short term. If he dies in office, she could bring this country down. She is uneducated and ineducable. She is, no matter what the Republican campaign tries to tell you, not a bright woman. She is superstitious and primitive. This account of her television interviews is truly pathetic.



September 26, 2008
The TV Watch

A Question Reprised, but the Words Come None Too Easily for Palin
By ALESSANDRA STANLEY

"Her first interview, with the ABC News anchor Charles Gibson, was too hard. The second, with Sean Hannity on the Fox News Channel, was too soft. The third, however, did not turn out to be just right for Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska.

On the 'CBS Evening News' on Thursday, Katie Couric asked Ms. Palin, Senator John McCain’s running mate, what she meant when she cited Alaska’s proximity to Russia as foreign affairs experience. Ms. Palin could have anticipated the question — the topic of their interview, pegged to her visit to the United Nations, was foreign affairs. Yet Ms. Palin’s answer was surprisingly wobbly: her words tumbled out fast and choppily, like an outboard motor loosened from the stern.

'That Alaska has a very narrow maritime border between a foreign country, Russia, and on our other side, the land — boundary that we have with — Canada,' she replied. She mentioned the jokes made at her expense and seemed for a moment at a loss for the word 'caricature.' 'It — it’s funny that a comment like that was — kind of made to — cari — I don’t know, you know? Reporters —'

Ms. Couric stepped in.'Mocked?' Ms. Palin looked relieved and even grateful for the help. 'Yeah, mocked, I guess that’s the word, yeah.'

Ms. Couric pressed her again to explain the geographic point. “Well, it certainly does,” Ms. Palin said, “because our, our next-door neighbors are foreign countries, there in the state that I am the executive of.”

Ms. Couric asked the governor if she had ever been involved in negotiations, for example, with her Russian neighbors.

'We have trade missions back and forth,' Ms. Palin said. 'We — we do — it’s very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America, where — where do they go? It’s Alaska. It’s just right over the border.'

Ms. Palin, looking at Ms. Couric intently, kept on going. 'It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to — to our state.'

That exchange was so startling it ricocheted across the Internet several hours before it appeared on CBS and was picked up by rival networks.

While it is quite likely, and perhaps understandable, that Ms. Palin felt nervous and spooked by all the media attention, it wasn’t a reassuring performance. Ms. Palin looked more steady and confident when she took a few questions from reporters after a visit to ground zero in Lower Manhattan, her first, gingerly encounter with campaign reporters since her nomination.

The CBS interview, shown partly on Wednesday and partly on Thursday, was only a first taste — Ms. Couric is scheduled to go out on the campaign trail with the Palin team early next week. But it may be hard for Mr. McCain’s running mate to recoup. It wasn’t her first interview on national television, but in some ways it was the worst.

Ms. Palin was criticized — and mocked — for appearing to be stumped when Mr. Gibson, on ABC, asked her on the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks to define the Bush doctrine. The McCain campaign, however, cast the scorn as sexism and media snobbery.

Ms. Palin’s interview with Mr. Hannity the following week went more smoothly, but perhaps too smoothly. Mr. Hannity mostly seemed intent on giving Ms. Palin a chance to correct any confusion left by her ABC interview. 'What do you view as the Bush doctrine?' he asked. Ms. Palin replied, 'That’s a great question, and being an optimist, I see our role in the world as one of — being a force for good and one of being the leader of the world.'

Ms. Couric asked her questions firmly but gently, careful not to seem flippant or condescending. But she ended on a 'gotcha' moment. After Ms. Palin attacked Senator Barack Obama for saying he would meet with leaders of Syria and Iran without preconditions, Ms. Couric reminded the governor that she recently met with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who supports direct diplomacy with both countries. 'Are you saying Henry Kissinger is naïve?' Ms. Couric asked. Ms. Palin replied, 'I’ve never heard Henry Kissinger say, "Yeah, I’ll meet with these leaders without preconditions being met." '

After the interview, Ms. Couric faced the camera and added a postscript. 'Incidentally, we confirmed Henry Kissinger’s position following our interview,' she said, explaining that Mr. Kissinger supports talks 'without preconditions.'"


Deborah

 

[strmrdr]

actually Sarah is right, a president or VP never meets with anyone without a pre-set agenda.
To do otherwise wastes the very limited time they have.
They may discuss other issues but the main issues to be discussed is always set in advanced.

A Secretary of State on the other hand is one of the people who set up the meeting and more often than not meet with foreign leaders without conditions.
It is apples and oranges!

As far as I'm concerned she would make a better president than the other 2 clowns.

 

[iheartscience]

Date: 9/26/2008 12:05:42 AM
Author: strmrdr

As far as I''m concerned she would make a better president than the other 2 clowns.

Really? You think she would be better than McCain or Obama? I''d love to hear your reasons because it seems pretty obvious that she''s completely unprepared and unknowledgeable.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/26/2008 12:07:54 AM
Author: thing2of2

Date: 9/26/2008 12:05:42 AM

Author: strmrdr


As far as I'm concerned she would make a better president than the other 2 clowns.

Really? You think she would be better than McCain or Obama? I'd love to hear your reasons because it seems pretty obvious that she's completely unprepared and unknowledgeable.

In what areas?
The questions asked were stupid.
Why is the question of what Bush believes in important?
A smart person would have asked her what her beliefs are and where she stands on the issues of today!
That is where I agree with a lot of what she believes in.
This is exactly what I'm talking about with the media asking stupid questions.

 

[iheartscience]

Date: 9/26/2008 12:12:03 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 9/26/2008 12:07:54 AM

Author: thing2of2

Date: 9/26/2008 12:05:42 AM


Author: strmrdr



As far as I''m concerned she would make a better president than the other 2 clowns.

Really? You think she would be better than McCain or Obama? I''d love to hear your reasons because it seems pretty obvious that she''s completely unprepared and unknowledgeable.

In what areas?

The questions asked were stupid.

Why is the question of what Bush believes in important?

A smart person would have asked her what her beliefs are and where she stands on the issues of today!

That is where I agree with a lot of what she believes in.

This is exactly what I''m talking about with the media asking stupid questions.

All of them, really. Clearly foreign policy. General political knowledge also. She has so little experience that the thought of her as president is laughable and frightening. I can''t think of a worse idea, really.

As for the questions asked being stupid, why is asking her about her stances on issues stupid? What do you want the media to ask her? All about being a hockey mom and hunting moose?

 

[miraclesrule]

Because I am in a sadistic mood tonight, I think the best line of the evening regarding Sarah Palin came from Chris Rock:
"All that A$$, and she can''t shake it"

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/26/2008 12:20:33 AM
Author: thing2of2


All of them, really. Clearly foreign policy. General political knowledge also. She has so little experience that the thought of her as president is laughable and frightening. I can''t think of a worse idea, really.


As for the questions asked being stupid, why is asking her about her stances on issues stupid? What do you want the media to ask her? All about being a hockey mom and hunting moose?

She has just as much foreign policy experience as Obama...

Asking about the Bush doctrine isn''t about the issues.

Ask her where she feels the country should be headed.
What is her leadership philosophy?
What leadership skills do you bring to the table?
What is her economic philosophy?
What is her domestic philosophy?
A good question to ask would be: In what areas do you disagree with McCain?

Some other stuff id ask about:
Iraq and Afghanistan
Military preparedness
Executive liability
Tort reform
prescription prices.
medical system reforms
You know important stuff like that that badly needs attention.

Do you know where she stands on any of that stuff?
The media has had a bunch of opportunities to ask about those issues but they would rather ask stupid questions.

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/26/2008 1:03:58 AM
Author: strmrdr

She has just as much foreign policy experience as Obama...

Asking about the Bush doctrine isn''t about the issues.

Ask her where she feels the country should be headed.
What is her leadership philosophy?
What leadership skills do you bring to the table?
What is her economic philosophy?
What is her domestic philosophy?
A good question to ask would be: In what areas do you disagree with McCain?

Some other stuff id ask about:
Iraq and Afghanistan
Military preparedness
Executive liability
Tort reform
prescription prices.
medical system reforms
You know important stuff like that that badly needs attention.

Do you know where she stands on any of that stuff?
The media has had a bunch of opportunities to ask about those issues but they would rather ask stupid questions.

Yeah, I would like to see people ask her about HER OWN stances; not other people''s. Who cares if she doesn''t know everything about John McCain? Biden has shown that doesn''t know how Obama stands on several issues & actually has gone against the Obama campaign (i.e. ads)...so what is the big deal?

I think it''s funny when people believe that the candidates come up with any plans/ideas on their own; it''s not as if Palin OR Obama are burning the midnight oil coming up with foreign policy themselves.

 

[ksinger]

Date: 9/26/2008 1:03:58 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 9/26/2008 12:20:33 AM
Author: thing2of2


All of them, really. Clearly foreign policy. General political knowledge also. She has so little experience that the thought of her as president is laughable and frightening. I can''t think of a worse idea, really.


As for the questions asked being stupid, why is asking her about her stances on issues stupid? What do you want the media to ask her? All about being a hockey mom and hunting moose?

She has just as much foreign policy experience as Obama...

Asking about the Bush doctrine isn''t about the issues.

Ask her where she feels the country should be headed.
What is her leadership philosophy?
What leadership skills do you bring to the table?
What is her economic philosophy?
What is her domestic philosophy?
A good question to ask would be: In what areas do you disagree with McCain?

Some other stuff id ask about:
Iraq and Afghanistan
Military preparedness
Executive liability
Tort reform
prescription prices.
medical system reforms
You know important stuff like that that badly needs attention.

Do you know where she stands on any of that stuff?
The media has had a bunch of opportunities to ask about those issues but they would rather ask stupid questions.

Really? You mean the philosophical underpinning for the Bush administration''s justification of a war that is draining our economy, straining our military to the breaking point, and ruining our reputation in the world is not an issue? Does she even know what is meant by "preemptive" versus "preventive" war, or why it is a vitally important distinction? It was NOT a fluff question.

 

[iheartscience]

Date: 9/26/2008 1:03:58 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 9/26/2008 12:20:33 AM

Author: thing2of2



All of them, really. Clearly foreign policy. General political knowledge also. She has so little experience that the thought of her as president is laughable and frightening. I can''t think of a worse idea, really.



As for the questions asked being stupid, why is asking her about her stances on issues stupid? What do you want the media to ask her? All about being a hockey mom and hunting moose?

She has just as much foreign policy experience as Obama...


Asking about the Bush doctrine isn''t about the issues.


Ask her where she feels the country should be headed.

What is her leadership philosophy?

What leadership skills do you bring to the table?

What is her economic philosophy?

What is her domestic philosophy?

A good question to ask would be: In what areas do you disagree with McCain?


Some other stuff id ask about:

Iraq and Afghanistan

Military preparedness

Executive liability

Tort reform

prescription prices.

medical system reforms

You know important stuff like that that badly needs attention.


Do you know where she stands on any of that stuff?

The media has had a bunch of opportunities to ask about those issues but they would rather ask stupid questions.

The Bush doctrine certainly is an issue, but aside from that disagreement, I have to agree with you that these are all great questions that I''m sure would have been covered by now if she was allowed to talk to the media!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/26/2008 8:35:14 AM
Author: thing2of2


The Bush doctrine certainly is an issue, but aside from that disagreement, I have to agree with you that these are all great questions that I''m sure would have been covered by now if she was allowed to talk to the media!

No it isn''t, how she would have handled it is what is important.
The media is much more interested in why she didn''t murder her child because it was defective than any real issues.

 

[thumbelina]

Date: 9/26/2008 11:54:25 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 9/26/2008 8:35:14 AM

Author: thing2of2



The Bush doctrine certainly is an issue, but aside from that disagreement, I have to agree with you that these are all great questions that I''m sure would have been covered by now if she was allowed to talk to the media!

No it isn''t, how she would have handled it is what is important.

The media is much more interested in why she didn''t murder her child because it was defective than any real issues.

Are you really saying that the philosophy that largely justifies sending our soldiers off to die in a war started for no real reason is not an issue? The question Charles Gibson asked was "Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?" Her response was "In what respect, Charlie?" That was her chance to tell us how she would have handled it. Instead she said it was "his world view." These interviews are her opportunities to tell us what she''s about, what her beliefs are. Instead she''s showing us that she has memorized a few sound bites (and not very well), hasn''t learned from her mistakes (still with the "Russia is our neighbor" so of course I have foreign policy experience), and may not really have an original view on anything. Where''s Todd when you need him?

Another question we can ask Palin is what makes the "murder" of an unborn child (even in cases of incest and rape) such a sin, and not the murder of our soldiers and innocent Iraqis.

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/26/2008 12:19:52 PM
Author: thumbelina

Another question we can ask Palin is what makes the ''murder'' of an unborn child (even in cases of incest and rape) such a sin, and not the murder of our soldiers and innocent Iraqis.

I must say that that statement lacks logic. That''s like saying the soldiers are committing suicide by going over there.

 

[thumbelina]

Date: 9/26/2008 12:23:11 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/26/2008 12:19:52 PM

Author: thumbelina


Another question we can ask Palin is what makes the ''murder'' of an unborn child (even in cases of incest and rape) such a sin, and not the murder of our soldiers and innocent Iraqis.

I must say that that statement lacks logic. That''s like saying the soldiers are committing suicide by going over there.

I''m not sure what your definition of logic is. One of the risks of sending our troops into combat is death. We ALL know that, including those soldiers being sent over. Our troops put their trust and faith into the country, not to mention our Commander-in-chief, to send them for the right reasons.

 

[Loves Vintage]

Date: 9/26/2008 12:23:11 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/26/2008 12:19:52 PM

Author: thumbelina


Another question we can ask Palin is what makes the ''murder'' of an unborn child (even in cases of incest and rape) such a sin, and not the murder of our soldiers and innocent Iraqis.

I must say that that statement lacks logic. That''s like saying the soldiers are committing suicide by going over there.

I disagree. It is a legitimate question, and something I often wonder myself. Why are the lives of innocent Iraqis deemed less valuable than our own? Why is a six year old child in Iraq who gets killed by the US less important than an unborn child? Why is it ok to send our soldiers into harm''s way, particularly when there is no justifiable reason for doing so, but it is not ok for a woman to abort a fetus that resulted from a brutal rape?

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 9/26/2008 11:54:25 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 9/26/2008 8:35:14 AM
Author: thing2of2


The Bush doctrine certainly is an issue, but aside from that disagreement, I have to agree with you that these are all great questions that I''m sure would have been covered by now if she was allowed to talk to the media!

No it isn''t, how she would have handled it is what is important.
The media is much more interested in why she didn''t murder her child because it was defective than any real issues.

We must be reading different media. Never heard that one.

 

[MoonWater]

I couldn''t agree more. I think she fumbled even with questions I thought she could have answered well. Maybe not to the satisfaction of someone that doesn''t like her, but still competently. I was shocked at how bad she''s becoming.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/overload.html

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/26/2008 12:33:21 PM
Author: thumbelina

I'm not sure what your definition of logic is. One of the risks of sending our troops into combat is death. We ALL know that, including those soldiers being sent over. Our troops put their trust and faith into the country, not to mention our Commander-in-chief, to send them for the right reasons.

Yes, and one of the risks of a police chief assigning policemen to investigate a crime is death. I wouldn't draw a direct correlation to murder. Palin has not sent one troop to Iraq, so I don't know why you would ask *her*. Anyway, the distinction between murdering a child in the womb vs. sending a troop to fight in a war is pretty clear to me, but I guess we disagree. For one, death is imminent in abortion and not so in war.

ETA: My father is a VN vet so I certainly have no misconceptions about the horrid things that war brings; I just don't think you're comparing apples to apples. I assume those in positions of power to commission others to go to their possible deaths must live with their decisions and I have too much faith in mankind to think anyone would purposefully send their fellow countrymen to their deaths for no reason. Again, we must just disagree.

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/26/2008 12:39:50 PM
Author: Loves Vintage

Date: 9/26/2008 12:23:11 PM
Author: IndyGirl22
I must say that that statement lacks logic. That''s like saying the soldiers are committing suicide by going over there.

I disagree. It is a legitimate question, and something I often wonder myself. Why are the lives of innocent Iraqis deemed less valuable than our own? Why is a six year old child in Iraq who gets killed by the US less important than an unborn child? Why is it ok to send our soldiers into harm''s way, particularly when there is no justifiable reason for doing so, but it is not ok for a woman to abort a fetus that resulted from a brutal rape?

If we are going to go that far, then we should *all* ask ourselves these questions. I don''t think any human life is more valuable than another; be it in the womb, in Iraq, or otherwise. I was simply saying that comparing abortion, the controlled destruction of a fetus in the womb, to sending troops to war (most of whom chose to join the forces for this particular reason), was a jump in reason and logic. The bolded part is your opinion, so perhaps that is why we disagree. Some people view rape as "no justifiable reason" to "murder" a fetus; some think there is never a "justifiable reason" to go to war at all. Just depends on where you stand on about a million other issues.

 

[Loves Vintage]

Date: 9/26/2008 12:12:03 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 9/26/2008 12:07:54 AM

Author: thing2of2

Date: 9/26/2008 12:05:42 AM


Author: strmrdr



As far as I'm concerned she would make a better president than the other 2 clowns.

Really? You think she would be better than McCain or Obama? I'd love to hear your reasons because it seems pretty obvious that she's completely unprepared and unknowledgeable.

In what areas?

The questions asked were stupid.

Why is the question of what Bush believes in important?

A smart person would have asked her what her beliefs are and where she stands on the issues of today!

That is where I agree with a lot of what she believes in.

This is exactly what I'm talking about with the media asking stupid questions.

Assuming you're right, and all of the questions were just too stupid, then a smart responder would have responded with what her beliefs are and where she stands on the issues of today. No one is beholden to answer the questions they are asked, and then stop responding. Politicians do this all the time. Bring the interviewer back to the issues they want to talk about. Sarah Palin can't even do that.

So, let's not blame Katie and Charlie and whoever that guy on fox *a-choo* news is.

 

[thumbelina]

Date: 9/26/2008 1:10:47 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/26/2008 12:33:21 PM

Author: thumbelina


I''m not sure what your definition of logic is. One of the risks of sending our troops into combat is death. We ALL know that, including those soldiers being sent over. Our troops put their trust and faith into the country, not to mention our Commander-in-chief, to send them for the right reasons.

Yes, and one of the risks of a police chief assigning policemen to investigate a crime is death. I wouldn''t draw a direct correlation to murder. Palin has not sent one troop to Iraq, so I don''t know why you would ask *her*. Anyway, the distinction between murdering a child in the womb vs. sending a troop to fight in a war is pretty clear to me, but I guess we disagree. For one, death is imminent in abortion and not so in war.


ETA: My father is a VN vet so I certainly have no misconceptions about the horrid things that war brings; I just don''t think you''re comparing apples to apples. I assume those in positions of power to commission others to go to their possible deaths must live with their decisions and I have too much faith in mankind to think anyone would purposefully send their fellow countrymen to their deaths for no reason. Again, we must just disagree.

The definition of war is the waging of armed conflict against an enemy -- death is imminent in war too. But if you can cite one war where no deaths occurred, then I stand corrected.

If we use your reasoning that Palin has not sent one troop to Iraq, so why ask *her* ... then shouldn''t we also be able to say that Palin has not had one abortion, so why would she have a right to dictate my choice to have one?

But at least we do have something in common... my father served three tours of duty in Vietnam.

 

[risingsun]

The problem is not that Palin is not being asked the right questions. She is not attempting to express her own knowledge and perspective on the vital issues facing this country. I take that to mean that she doesn''t or hasn''t developed a coherent POV that she can present and discuss with her interviewers. I know when I''m on the hot seat and flailing around. Does she have that much self awareness?

 

[swimmer]

Just wanted to re-post some questions for Palin suggested a while back in the Nation

§ Suppose your 14-year-old daughter Willow is brutally raped
in her bedroom by an intruder. She becomes pregnant and wants an
abortion. Could you tell the parents of America why you think your child
and their children should be forced by law to have their rapists''
babies?

§ You say you don''t believe global warming is man-made. Could
you tell us what scientists you''ve spoken with or read who have led you
to that conclusion? What do you think the 2,500 scientists of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change are getting wrong?

§ If you didn''t try to fire Wasilla librarian Mary Ellen Baker
over her refusal to consider censoring books, why did you try to
fire her?

§ What is the European Union, and how does it function?

§ Forty-seven million Americans lack health insurance. John
Goodman, who has advised McCain on healthcare, has proposed redefining
them as covered because, he says, anyone can get care at an ER. Do you
agree with him?

§ What is the function of the Federal Reserve?

§ Cindy and John McCain say you have experience in foreign
affairs because Alaska is next to Russia. When did you last speak with
Prime Minister Putin, and what did you talk about?

§ Approximately how old is the earth? Five thousand years?
10,000? 5 billion?

§ You are a big fan of President Bush, so why didn''t you
mention him even once in your convention speech?

§ McCain says cutting earmarks and waste will make up for
revenues lost by making the tax cuts permanent. Experts say that won''t
wash. Balancing the Bush tax cuts plus new ones proposed by McCain would
most likely mean cutting Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security. Which
would you cut?

§ You''re suing the federal government to have polar bears
removed from the endangered species list, even as Alaska''s northern
coastal ice is melting and falling into the sea. Can you explain the
science behind your decision?

§ You''ve suggested that God approves of the Iraq War and the
Alaska pipeline. How do you know?



This article can be found on the web at:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080929/pollitt

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/26/2008 3:29:45 PM
Author: swimmer
Just wanted to re-post some questions for Palin suggested a while back in the Nation


§ Suppose your 14-year-old daughter Willow is brutally raped

in her bedroom by an intruder. She becomes pregnant and wants an

abortion. Could you tell the parents of America why you think your child

and their children should be forced by law to have their rapists''

babies?

stupid because No one is actually proposing that


§ You say you don''t believe global warming is man-made. Could

you tell us what scientists you''ve spoken with or read who have led you

to that conclusion? What do you think the 2,500 scientists of the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change are getting wrong?

There are just as many signs it is natural and taking the 100 year average the last 2 years has wiped out the supposed gain in temperature.


§ If you didn''t try to fire Wasilla librarian Mary Ellen Baker

over her refusal to consider censoring books, why did you try to

fire her?

stupid, more than likely she is prohibited by law from discussing the specifics of employee issue, that is HR 101


§ What is the European Union, and how does it function?

fair question but there are more important ones


§ Forty-seven million Americans lack health insurance. John

Goodman, who has advised McCain on healthcare, has proposed redefining

them as covered because, he says, anyone can get care at an ER. Do you

agree with him?

The tone and wording of the question is stupid but the right answer is no, next question


§ What is the function of the Federal Reserve?

another useless question


§ Cindy and John McCain say you have experience in foreign

affairs because Alaska is next to Russia. When did you last speak with

Prime Minister Putin, and what did you talk about?

She had that one coming for not being clear about what she meant so I will excuse it for being stupid.


§ Approximately how old is the earth? Five thousand years?

10,000? 5 billion?

very stupid question


§ You are a big fan of President Bush, so why didn''t you

mention him even once in your convention speech?
very stupid question


§ McCain says cutting earmarks and waste will make up for

revenues lost by making the tax cuts permanent. Experts say that won''t

wash. Balancing the Bush tax cuts plus new ones proposed by McCain would

most likely mean cutting Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security. Which

would you cut?

very stupid wording that does not leave room for another idea of how it will work. The question already draws a conclusion that may not be true. Personally considering the state of wall street I don''t trust the "financial experts" at all


§ You''re suing the federal government to have polar bears

removed from the endangered species list, even as Alaska''s northern

coastal ice is melting and falling into the sea. Can you explain the

science behind your decision?
the population is growing, mainly because they are closer together and don''t have to travel hundreds of miles to have sex, they have survived and thrived many many ice retreats in the past, they are very adaptable animals they have to be to survive in one of the most hostile regions on earth


§ You''ve suggested that God approves of the Iraq War and the

Alaska pipeline. How do you know?

very stupid question


This article can be found on the web at:


http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080929/pollitt

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/26/2008 2:43:37 PM
Author: thumbelina

Date: 9/26/2008 1:10:47 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/26/2008 12:33:21 PM

Author: thumbelina


I'm not sure what your definition of logic is. One of the risks of sending our troops into combat is death. We ALL know that, including those soldiers being sent over. Our troops put their trust and faith into the country, not to mention our Commander-in-chief, to send them for the right reasons.

Yes, and one of the risks of a police chief assigning policemen to investigate a crime is death. I wouldn't draw a direct correlation to murder. Palin has not sent one troop to Iraq, so I don't know why you would ask *her*. Anyway, the distinction between murdering a child in the womb vs. sending a troop to fight in a war is pretty clear to me, but I guess we disagree. For one, death is imminent in abortion and not so in war.


ETA: My father is a VN vet so I certainly have no misconceptions about the horrid things that war brings; I just don't think you're comparing apples to apples. I assume those in positions of power to commission others to go to their possible deaths must live with their decisions and I have too much faith in mankind to think anyone would purposefully send their fellow countrymen to their deaths for no reason. Again, we must just disagree.

The definition of war is the waging of armed conflict against an enemy -- death is imminent in war too. But if you can cite one war where no deaths occurred, then I stand corrected.

If we use your reasoning that Palin has not sent one troop to Iraq, so why ask *her* ... then shouldn't we also be able to say that Palin has not had one abortion, so why would she have a right to dictate my choice to have one?

But at least we do have something in common... my father served three tours of duty in Vietnam.

Yeah, we do have something in common; was your father in the US forces? My dad was a South VN fighting alongside and trained by Navy SEALs & we still have family over there that are suffering from consequences of the war. My point about Palin was that she has never been in Washington, thus had NOTHING to do with sending troops over there, so drawing comparisons to her sending troops over there to her views on abortion is illogical. Palin hasn't dictated any abortions; the Supreme Court took care of that. And although death does occur in war, it is not *individually* imminent like abortions are. There is a difference but if people really see *no difference* between abortion and war then I am wasting my breath and we can agree to disagree.

ETA: Just to be clear, I think Palin SHOULD be asked questions regarding Iraq and war in general; I just don't think Iraq and abortion is comparable.

 

[thumbelina]

Date: 9/26/2008 4:54:45 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/26/2008 2:43:37 PM

Author: thumbelina

Date: 9/26/2008 1:10:47 PM

Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/26/2008 12:33:21 PM


Author: thumbelina



I''m not sure what your definition of logic is. One of the risks of sending our troops into combat is death. We ALL know that, including those soldiers being sent over. Our troops put their trust and faith into the country, not to mention our Commander-in-chief, to send them for the right reasons.

Yes, and one of the risks of a police chief assigning policemen to investigate a crime is death. I wouldn''t draw a direct correlation to murder. Palin has not sent one troop to Iraq, so I don''t know why you would ask *her*. Anyway, the distinction between murdering a child in the womb vs. sending a troop to fight in a war is pretty clear to me, but I guess we disagree. For one, death is imminent in abortion and not so in war.



ETA: My father is a VN vet so I certainly have no misconceptions about the horrid things that war brings; I just don''t think you''re comparing apples to apples. I assume those in positions of power to commission others to go to their possible deaths must live with their decisions and I have too much faith in mankind to think anyone would purposefully send their fellow countrymen to their deaths for no reason. Again, we must just disagree.

The definition of war is the waging of armed conflict against an enemy -- death is imminent in war too. But if you can cite one war where no deaths occurred, then I stand corrected.


If we use your reasoning that Palin has not sent one troop to Iraq, so why ask *her* ... then shouldn''t we also be able to say that Palin has not had one abortion, so why would she have a right to dictate my choice to have one?


But at least we do have something in common... my father served three tours of duty in Vietnam.

Yeah, we do have something in common; was your father in the US forces? My dad was a South VN fighting alongside and trained by Navy SEALs & we still have family over there that are suffering from consequences of the war. My point about Palin was that she has never been in Washington, thus had NOTHING to do with sending troops over there, so drawing comparisons to her sending troops over there to her views on abortion is illogical. Palin hasn''t dictated any abortions; the Supreme Court took care of that. And although death does occur in war, it is not *individually* imminent like abortions are. There is a difference but if people really see *no difference* between abortion and war then I am wasting my breath and we can agree to disagree.


ETA: Just to be clear, I think Palin SHOULD be asked questions regarding Iraq and war in general; I just don''t think Iraq and abortion is comparable.

I''m not drawing a comparison between sending troops to war and her views on abortion. What I''m asking is what makes the death of one okay and the death of another not? What justifies the difference?