Free Sarah Palin: McCain Camp Called Out by CNN Reporter

[HollyS]

Date: 9/25/2008 7:24:07 PM
Author: luckystar112
I wonder what Obama''s doing?

Oh.

I needed that laugh. Thanks luckystar!

 

[HollyS]

Date: 9/25/2008 1:01:07 AM
Author: decodelighted
I *love* that the print media is doing snarky headlines like ''Palin smiles in the vicinity of world leaders'' because they''re not allowed to HEAR ANYTHING THAT GOES ON. Probably because a whole lotta nothing is being said ... because her UN Tour is a big ol'' photo op & nothing more. They''ve probably forbidden her from saying anything substantive to ''world leaders''.

Agree that its RIDICULOUS to hide-her-in-plain-sight & shield her from any DISCOURSE on, um, THE JOB she''s applying for, or even BASIC knowledge about the 98.8% of the country outside of Alaska.

But, gosh, looks like McCain HIMSELF is hiding from the debates. Ditching? Really? To single handedly save the economy? Puh-leeze. Congress is making fine progress without you old blow-hard.

And his CAMPAIGN MANAGER''s company was taking 15K PER MONTH from Freddie Mac for *nothing* .. no work **NADA** up ''til ONE MONTH AGO (exposed in Newsweek today) ... this revealed AFTER McCain did the circuit poo-pooing the idea of his guy being in bed with Freddie Mac. So what if he doesn''t take a salary from the company anymore. The company is IN HIS NAME. He OWNS it. He''s GOING BACK when he''s done w/McCain. Money for nothing? What''s scarier, what''s more inside-the-beltway-old-croneyism that THAT?

Are you unfamiliar with Franklin Raines, former CFO of Fannie Mae? Unaware that he has been under investigation by the feds for manipulating ''profits'' to maximize his bonus? Unaware that he ''earned'' about 16 million on the backs of some of these unfortunate lendees we now have to save? Unaware that he''s been heavily involved in Obama''s campaign, to include heading up his VP search?

Just wondering.

 

[thumbelina]

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/26/161211/491/588/611664

 

[VRBeauty]

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

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.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

Not to suggest that eveyone in public office should be a historian, but an informed opinion about the issues of the day isn''t infomed unless it''s based on some knowledge. The thought of anyone in a policy-making position being informed by just their own opinions, and not having an basis for evaluating the advice coming their way, is not comforting.

 

[arjunajane]

I am late to this thread, but Fi and I had a laugh about this story the other day - its unbelievable that this person with so little experience or qualifications, and who is basically ignorant, could one day be the US president. I never thought I'd say this, but that would be even worse than Bush.

Her not responding to the media also reminds me of something funny that happened in Australian politics this week, when newly appointed Shadow Treasurer Julie Bishop made a number of gaffs on her first day in Parliament.
Firstly, she didn't know the official national cash rate while doing an interview... Then, she plagiarized portions of The Wall Street Journal in her maiden speech !

Of course, this drew alot of jokes and criticism from The Govt - it was about the only time I've enjoyed watching Question Time, lol !

I felt this was all the more sadder seeing as she is the first woman to be appointed to the role.
Perhap Palin's party is afraid of similiar gaffs being made, no? (I mean, even more than she's already made, of course - The Bush Doctrine = His World View, LOL!)..

 

[AGBF]

Date: 9/25/2008 11:46:15 PM
Author: 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.

OK, so I said it first.... But now Bob Herbert is joining me. He is suggesting that if John McCain really cares about the United States that he will remove Sarah Palin fom the Republican ticket. In my opinion it is the only responsible thing that Mr. McCain can do. Excerpts from Mr. Herbert's column follow. I have to be fair and point out that Mr. herbert has said only that she Ms. Palin should be removed if it proves her abysmal performance is not just the result of nerves. I, on the other hand, am sure that she should be removed from the ticket immediately for the safety of the United Sates.



September 27, 2008
Op-Ed Columnist
Palin’s Words Raise Red Flags
By BOB HERBERT


"The country is understandably focused on the financial crisis. But there is another serious issue in front of us that is not getting nearly enough attention, and that’s whether Sarah Palin is qualified to be vice president — or, if the situation were to arise, president of the United States.

History has shown again and again that a vice president must be ready to assume command of the ship of state on a moment’s notice. But Ms. Palin has given no indication yet that she is capable of handling the monumental responsibilities of the presidency if she were called upon to do so.

In fact, the opposite is the case. We know that there are some parts of Alaska from which, if the day is clear and your eyesight is good, you can actually see Russia. But the infantile repetition of this bit of trivia as some kind of foreign policy bona fide for a vice presidential candidate should give us pause.

The McCain campaign has done its bizarre best to shield Ms. Palin from any sustained media examination of her readiness for the highest offices in the land, and no wonder. She has been an embarrassment in interviews.

But the idea that the voters of the United States might install someone in the vice president’s office who is too unprepared or too intellectually insecure to appear on, say, 'Meet the Press' or 'Face the Nation' is mind-boggling.

The alarm bells should be clanging and warning lights flashing. You wouldn’t put an unqualified pilot in the cockpit of a jetliner. The potential for catastrophe is far, far greater with an unqualified president.

(snip)

For those who think Sarah Palin is in that league, there is no problem. But her unscripted public appearances would lead most honest observers to think otherwise. When asked again this week about her puerile linkage of foreign policy proficiency and Alaska’s proximity to Russia, this time by Katie Couric of CBS News, here is what Ms. Palin said she meant:

'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 went on, but lost her way midsentence: 'It’s funny that a comment like that was kind of made to — cari — I don’t know, you know? Reporters ...'

Ms. Couric said, 'Mocked?'

'Yeah, mocked,' said Ms. Palin. 'I guess that’s the word. Yeah.'

It is not just painful, but frightening to watch someone who could become the vice president of the United States stumbling around like this in an interview.

Ms. Couric asked Ms. Palin to explain how Alaska’s proximity to Russia 'enhances your foreign policy credentials.'

'Well, it certainly does,' Ms. Palin replied, 'because our, our next-door neighbors are foreign countries, there in the state that I am the executive of. And there—'

Gently interrupting, Ms. Couric asked, 'Have you ever been involved in any negotiations, for example, with the Russians?'

'We have trade missions back and forth,' said Ms. Palin. '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 do they go? It’s Alaska. It’s just right over the border. 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 our state.'

It was surreal, the kind of performance that would generate a hearty laugh if it were part of a Monty Python sketch. But this is real life, and the stakes couldn’t be higher. As Ms. Palin was fumbling her way through the Couric interview, the largest bank failure in the history of the United States, the collapse of Washington Mutual, was occurring.

The press has an obligation to hammer away at Ms. Palin’s qualifications. If it turns out that she has just had a few bad interviews because she was nervous or whatever, additional scrutiny will serve her well.

If, on the other hand, it becomes clear that her performance, so far, is an accurate reflection of her qualifications, it would behoove John McCain and the Republican Party to put the country first — as Mr. McCain loves to say — and find a replacement for Ms. Palin on the ticket."


Deborah

 

[iheartscience]

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?


§ 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

These are great, swimmer! I would love to know the answers to these.

 

[iheartscience]

Date: 9/27/2008 9:01:07 AM
Author: AGBF

Date: 9/25/2008 11:46:15 PM

Author: 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.

OK, so I said it first.... But now Bob Herbert is joining me. He is suggesting that if John McCain really cares about the United States that he will remove Sarah Palin fom the Republican ticket. In my opinion it is the only responsible thing that Mr. McCain can do. Excerpts from Mr. Herbert''s column follow. I have to be fair and point out that Mr. herbert has said only that she Ms. Palin should be removed if it proves her abysmal performance is not just the result of nerves. I, on the other hand, am sure that she should be removed from the ticket immediately for the safety of the United Sates.

September 27, 2008

Op-Ed Columnist

Palin’s Words Raise Red Flags

By BOB HERBERT

''The country is understandably focused on the financial crisis. But there is another serious issue in front of us that is not getting nearly enough attention, and that’s whether Sarah Palin is qualified to be vice president — or, if the situation were to arise, president of the United States.

History has shown again and again that a vice president must be ready to assume command of the ship of state on a moment’s notice. But Ms. Palin has given no indication yet that she is capable of handling the monumental responsibilities of the presidency if she were called upon to do so.

In fact, the opposite is the case. We know that there are some parts of Alaska from which, if the day is clear and your eyesight is good, you can actually see Russia. But the infantile repetition of this bit of trivia as some kind of foreign policy bona fide for a vice presidential candidate should give us pause.

The McCain campaign has done its bizarre best to shield Ms. Palin from any sustained media examination of her readiness for the highest offices in the land, and no wonder. She has been an embarrassment in interviews.

But the idea that the voters of the United States might install someone in the vice president’s office who is too unprepared or too intellectually insecure to appear on, say, ''Meet the Press'' or ''Face the Nation'' is mind-boggling.

The alarm bells should be clanging and warning lights flashing. You wouldn’t put an unqualified pilot in the cockpit of a jetliner. The potential for catastrophe is far, far greater with an unqualified president.

(snip)

For those who think Sarah Palin is in that league, there is no problem. But her unscripted public appearances would lead most honest observers to think otherwise. When asked again this week about her puerile linkage of foreign policy proficiency and Alaska’s proximity to Russia, this time by Katie Couric of CBS News, here is what Ms. Palin said she meant:

''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 went on, but lost her way midsentence: ''It’s funny that a comment like that was kind of made to — cari — I don’t know, you know? Reporters ...''

Ms. Couric said, ''Mocked?''

''Yeah, mocked,'' said Ms. Palin. ''I guess that’s the word. Yeah.''

It is not just painful, but frightening to watch someone who could become the vice president of the United States stumbling around like this in an interview.

Ms. Couric asked Ms. Palin to explain how Alaska’s proximity to Russia ''enhances your foreign policy credentials.''

''Well, it certainly does,'' Ms. Palin replied, ''because our, our next-door neighbors are foreign countries, there in the state that I am the executive of. And there—''

Gently interrupting, Ms. Couric asked, ''Have you ever been involved in any negotiations, for example, with the Russians?''

''We have trade missions back and forth,'' said Ms. Palin. ''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 do they go? It’s Alaska. It’s just right over the border. 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 our state.''

It was surreal, the kind of performance that would generate a hearty laugh if it were part of a Monty Python sketch. But this is real life, and the stakes couldn’t be higher. As Ms. Palin was fumbling her way through the Couric interview, the largest bank failure in the history of the United States, the collapse of Washington Mutual, was occurring.

The press has an obligation to hammer away at Ms. Palin’s qualifications. If it turns out that she has just had a few bad interviews because she was nervous or whatever, additional scrutiny will serve her well.

If, on the other hand, it becomes clear that her performance, so far, is an accurate reflection of her qualifications, it would behoove John McCain and the Republican Party to put the country first — as Mr. McCain loves to say — and find a replacement for Ms. Palin on the ticket.''

Deborah

Great Op-Ed. I completely agree. She is so clearly in over her head it''s painful. Watching her with Katie Couric felt like an SNL skit. It was terrible. In fact, someone in the Dem thread''s fiance was listening to it in the other room or something and actually thought it was an SNL skit!

 

[strmrdr]

I think its hilarious how the left wing hates her and the republican base loves her.
Her selection saved the election for McCain as the base for the most part can not stand McCain as he is not a conservative.
As far as not doing well in a couple interviews the others running have had a ton of time to prepare for it.
She was yanked out of Alaska and thrown into the spotlight.
I am waiting until she hits her stride and gets used to interviews to make any judgments.
She is a smart lady and just because she is inexperienced giving interviews does not mean she would make a bad VP or President.
A lot of the republican base would rather see her running than McCain.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 9/27/2008 10:36:05 AM
Author: strmrdr

I think its hilarious how the left wing hates her and the republican base loves her.

Then again, you thought that it was hilarious to pretend that canned soup was vomit.... Or is that hitting below the belt?



Deb

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/27/2008 11:01:49 AM
Author: AGBF

Date: 9/27/2008 10:36:05 AM

Author: strmrdr


I think its hilarious how the left wing hates her and the republican base loves her.

Then again, you thought that it was hilarious to pretend that canned soup was vomit.... Or is that hitting below the belt?

Deb

I wounded you hit me!
I thought I felt a skeeter bite.
I am rather disappointed however as I have been very careful not to attack anyone here and keep my dislike reserved for Obama and his servants in the media.
Unlike some who want to shut up everyone who disagrees with them I respect your right to think as you want even if I think you are off base on your political views.
Oh well I still think ya is sweet when you aren''t talking politics!

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 9/27/2008 10:36:05 AM
Author: strmrdr
She is a smart lady and just because she is inexperienced giving interviews does not mean she would make a bad VP or President.

She is so far from a "smart lady" it makes my HEAD SPIN. And, as far as giving interviews goes -- the lady's sparse job history includes a stint as an on-air personality. Being on camera is one of the very, very few things she HAS experience in. Including studying broadcast journalism in college and, not to mention the whole sad beauty pageant dealie.

Loved the mash-up video between that dumb dumb dumb Ms. South Carolina "U.s. Americans" "such as" "people don't have access to MAPS" ... with Palin's Couric interview. The similarities were UNCANNY!

 

[ksinger]

Date: 9/27/2008 10:36:05 AM
Author: strmrdr
I think its hilarious how the left wing hates her and the republican base loves her.
Her selection saved the election for McCain as the base for the most part can not stand McCain as he is not a conservative.
As far as not doing well in a couple interviews the others running have had a ton of time to prepare for it.
She was yanked out of Alaska and thrown into the spotlight.
I am waiting until she hits her stride and gets used to interviews to make any judgments.
She is a smart lady and just because she is inexperienced giving interviews does not mean she would make a bad VP or President.
A lot of the republican base would rather see her running than McCain.

Yeah, the Republican "base" whatever THAT is - the values/religious voter? that most on this board claim NOT to be, is the same "base" that elected Bush twice. I suspect some of them have had the scales fall further from their eyes in the last couple of years, to judge by how unpopular he is among the faithful. Maybe more of them are willing now to put sense over party solidarity.

I suspect more republicans than are willing to admit it are thinking more along the lines of this guy:

http://www.neoconstant.com/1309/another-palin-apostate/

 

[AGBF]

Date: 9/27/2008 11:22:08 AM
Author: strmrdr

I am rather disappointed however as I have been very careful not to attack anyone here and keep my dislike reserved for Obama and his servants in the media.

Unlike some who want to shut up everyone who disagrees with them I respect your right to think as you want even if I think you are off base on your political views.

I''m sorry, Karl. I get really angry at some things I see posted here, but that doesn''t mean I have to act angry towards the people who express those sentiments. Furthermore, in your case, I wasn''t even angry at what you had posted. I was sort of fooling around on the outer boundaries of what might be acceptable...and I stepped over the line.

You are right that you didn''t deserve that and I apologize. You are a truly good guy and you did nothing to ask for bad treatment.


Deb

 

[iheartscience]

Date: 9/27/2008 10:36:05 AM
Author: strmrdr
I think its hilarious how the left wing hates her and the republican base loves her.

Her selection saved the election for McCain as the base for the most part can not stand McCain as he is not a conservative.

As far as not doing well in a couple interviews the others running have had a ton of time to prepare for it.

She was yanked out of Alaska and thrown into the spotlight.

I am waiting until she hits her stride and gets used to interviews to make any judgments.

She is a smart lady and just because she is inexperienced giving interviews does not mean she would make a bad VP or President.

A lot of the republican base would rather see her running than McCain.

I don''t hate her-I just think she''s a joke. A funny joke, I must admit.

And Republican support for her is definitely waning now that the excitement has worn off and the reality of her incompetence is setting in.

 

[swimmer]

Date: 9/26/2008 3:46:32 PM
Author: 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
Sorry Storm, Palin is VERY clear that she is opposed to a woman''s right to choose, even if she was raped. Ask Dukakis if that was a fair question...


§ 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.
Um, most scientists disagree with you. But you might like that


§ 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
Read the question, she didn''t have the librarian fired, just chased her out of town for having books on the shelf that Palin did not like.


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


fair question but there are more important ones
What might those questions be? The EU is now more populous and has a much more viable economy...while providing healthcare to most everyone and one year paid maternity leave in some countries.


§ 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
yeah, that one was pretty pointed.


§ What is the function of the Federal Reserve?


another useless question
really? I think its really important, wonder what she thinks it is...



§ 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.
The funny thing is that this question list was published before her disastrous interview!


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


10,000? 5 billion?


very stupid question
you are right, we all know she thinks the earth is 5,000 years old.


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


mention him even once in your convention speech?

very stupid question
exactly, we all know that Bush is political poison now.


§ 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
true, very pointed and we could always stop spending money on invading countries that were not involved in 9/11 and never had WMD.


§ 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
her answer would have been to lock and load. (nice image of polar bears on the road to have sex)


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


Alaska pipeline. How do you know?


very stupid question
agreed! idiotic question, she can see Santa and Jesus (and the randy polar bears) from her house, nuff said.


This article can be found on the web at:



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

 

[LAJennifer]

Date: 9/27/2008 10:47:26 PM
Author: swimmer

Date: 9/26/2008 3:46:32 PM
Author: 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
Sorry Storm, Palin is VERY clear that she is opposed to a woman''s right to choose, even if she was raped. Ask Dukakis if that was a fair question...


§ 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.
Um, most scientists disagree with you. But you might like that


§ 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
Read the question, she didn''t have the librarian fired, just chased her out of town for having books on the shelf that Palin did not like.


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


fair question but there are more important ones
What might those questions be? The EU is now more populous and has a much more viable economy...while providing healthcare to most everyone and one year paid maternity leave in some countries.


§ 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
yeah, that one was pretty pointed.


§ What is the function of the Federal Reserve?


another useless question
really? I think its really important, wonder what she thinks it is...



§ 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.
The funny thing is that this question list was published before her disastrous interview!


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


10,000? 5 billion?


very stupid question
you are right, we all know she thinks the earth is 5,000 years old.


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


mention him even once in your convention speech?

very stupid question
exactly, we all know that Bush is political poison now.


§ 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
true, very pointed and we could always stop spending money on invading countries that were not involved in 9/11 and never had WMD.


§ 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
her answer would have been to lock and load. (nice image of polar bears on the road to have sex)


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


Alaska pipeline. How do you know?


very stupid question
agreed! idiotic question, she can see Santa and Jesus (and the randy polar bears) from her house, nuff said.


This article can be found on the web at:



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

Perhaps she would indicate that Mars is experiencing global warming without greenhouses or Martians.

(1999 - 2001 ice cap changes on Mars - http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/CO2_Science_rel/1_panel_animated.gif )

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/27/2008 5:51:02 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 9/27/2008 11:22:08 AM

Author: strmrdr


I am rather disappointed however as I have been very careful not to attack anyone here and keep my dislike reserved for Obama and his servants in the media.


Unlike some who want to shut up everyone who disagrees with them I respect your right to think as you want even if I think you are off base on your political views.

I''m sorry, Karl. I get really angry at some things I see posted here, but that doesn''t mean I have to act angry towards the people who express those sentiments. Furthermore, in your case, I wasn''t even angry at what you had posted. I was sort of fooling around on the outer boundaries of what might be acceptable...and I stepped over the line.


You are right that you didn''t deserve that and I apologize. You are a truly good guy and you did nothing to ask for bad treatment.



Deb

apology accepted its all kewl
I was rather grumpy myself.
I apologize too.

 

[arjunajane]

I am of course very late to this thread, and not sure if this has already been bought up..But seeing as Palin is running on her rep as a great mother etc, and seeking the female vote, and she is fundamentally against abortion - did she ever stop to think what all the international media attention and scrutiny would do to her pregnant teenage daughter??!! Whom has no other choice but to have this baby whether she likes it or no..
That doesn't strike me as a "family first" kinda woman - more like a "advancement of my career at any cost"..

For me, as a woman, this inconsistency would be enough to make me question her, and I'm not even a mother.

 

[ksinger]

Date: 9/29/2008 7:59:31 AM
Author: arjunajane
I am of course very late to this thread, and not sure if this has already been bought up..But seeing as Palin is running on her rep as a great mother etc, and seeking the female vote, and she is fundamentally against abortion - did she ever stop to think what all the international media attention and scrutiny would do to her pregnant teenage daughter??!! Whom has no other choice but to have this baby whether she likes it or no..
That doesn''t strike me as a ''family first'' kinda woman - more like a ''advancement of my career at any cost''..

For me, as a woman, this inconsistency would be enough to make me question her, and I''m not even a mother.

No, it isn''t career that drives that for her, it is religion. She''s not answering to public opinion, she believes she''s answering to God. I''m truly beginning to see that the international community may NOTE that we are driven by religion here, in our politics, but since they don''t exist in that matrix - where it is all about you every single day of your life - they simply can''t understand on a visceral level, just how it can have the iron hold it does. Believe me: it DOES. Of course I live in a state that is considered to be right smack in the middle of the "buckle of the Bible belt", so my experiences may be skewed a bit.

I also see this bemusement from those who''ve spend lives on the coasts or in large metropolitan areas. They don''t really "get it"....

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 9/29/2008 8:10:57 AM
Author: ksinger

Date: 9/29/2008 7:59:31 AM
Author: arjunajane
I am of course very late to this thread, and not sure if this has already been bought up..But seeing as Palin is running on her rep as a great mother etc, and seeking the female vote, and she is fundamentally against abortion - did she ever stop to think what all the international media attention and scrutiny would do to her pregnant teenage daughter??!! Whom has no other choice but to have this baby whether she likes it or no..
That doesn''t strike me as a ''family first'' kinda woman - more like a ''advancement of my career at any cost''..

For me, as a woman, this inconsistency would be enough to make me question her, and I''m not even a mother.

No, it isn''t career that drives that for her, it is religion. She''s not answering to public opinion, she believes she''s answering to God. I''m truly beginning to see that the international community may NOTE that we are driven by religion here, in our politics, but since they don''t exist in that matrix - where it is all about you every single day of your life - they simply can''t understand on a visceral level, just how it can have the iron hold it does. Believe me: it DOES. Of course I live in a state that is considered to be right smack in the middle of the ''buckle of the Bible belt'', so my experiences may be skewed a bit.

I also see this bemusement from those who''ve spend lives on the coasts or in large metropolitan areas. They don''t really ''get it''....

Karen, this is a truely astonishing insight. What ever happened to the separation of religion and politics??!
I''m sorry, but sometimes I think the whole religion thing is just a cop-out to make up for these type of behavious. Oh, I''m not selfish potentially ruining my daughters'' life, because God wants me to follow this path..sheesh

If what you say is true - she believes she is answering to God and not public opinion - how can any sane person think she will make a decent politician??
What makes them think she will ever have the public''s best interests at heart?
I''m sorry, you''re right, I just don''t get it..

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/29/2008 12:30:47 PM
Author: arjunajane

I'm sorry, but sometimes I think the whole religion thing is just a cop-out to make up for these type of behavious. Oh, I'm not selfish potentially ruining my daughters' life, because God wants me to follow this path..sheesh

If what you say is true - she believes she is answering to God and not public opinion - how can any sane person think she will make a decent politician??
What makes them think she will ever have the public's best interests at heart?
I'm sorry, you're right, I just don't get it..

Could you please explain why stating religious beliefs as a reason would be a "cop-out"? If anything, that is honesty. Many people say they are opposed to abortion for a variety of other reasons that would be considered more of a cop-out when the true reason is religion. If Palin claimed to oppose abortion because of biology or the Constitution (which are valid reasons as well) instead of her religious faith as the true motivation behind her views, then THAT would be cop-out. Also, did you read any reports about Palin's daughter being forced to have her child? Could it be that her daughter WANTS to have this child whether Palin wants her to or not? I know two women whose parents "forced" them to have abortions; what about that? It happens on both sides, but until I read something from Palin's family's mouth that says her daughter doesn't want to keep the child I'm not going to jump to the conclusion that she is being forced against her will. It would be VERY simple for her daughter not to have the child if that is what she really wanted; just call ONE local newspaper and tell them and the story would be on MSNBC in minutes. What makes me think she will have the public's interest in mind if, through a series of unlikely events, she becomes President is that she has not legislated in her political career to push her beliefs on the people. There are several articles about this floating around, I would suggest google if you want to learn more.

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 9/29/2008 12:39:00 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/29/2008 12:30:47 PM
Author: arjunajane

I''m sorry, but sometimes I think the whole religion thing is just a cop-out to make up for these type of behavious. Oh, I''m not selfish potentially ruining my daughters'' life, because God wants me to follow this path..sheesh

If what you say is true - she believes she is answering to God and not public opinion - how can any sane person think she will make a decent politician??
What makes them think she will ever have the public''s best interests at heart?
I''m sorry, you''re right, I just don''t get it..

Could you please explain why stating religious beliefs as a reason would be a ''cop-out''? If anything, that is honesty. Many people say they are opposed to abortion for a variety of other reasons that would be considered more of a cop-out when the true reason is religion. If Palin claimed to oppose abortion because of biology or the Constitution (which are valid reasons as well) instead of her religious faith as the true motivation behind her views, then THAT would be cop-out. Also, did you read any reports about Palin''s daughter being forced to have her child? Could it be that her daughter WANTS to have this child whether Palin wants her to or not? I know two women whose parents ''forced'' them to have abortions; what about that? It happens on both sides, but until I read something from Palin''s family''s mouth that says her daughter doesn''t want to keep the child I''m not going to jump to the conclusion that she is being forced against her will. It would be VERY simple for her daughter not to have the child if that is what she really wanted; just call ONE local newspaper and tell them and the story would be on MSNBC in minutes. What makes me think she will have the public''s interest in mind if, through a series of unlikely events, she becomes President is that she has not legislated in her political career to push her beliefs on the people. There are several articles about this floating around, I would suggest google if you want to learn more.

Indy, clearly you and I disagree on many things here. Since the RNC''s thread you seem to have been targeting my posts.
You have your views and opinions and I have mine - neither is more right or better, and I am entitled to express them. Once more, I don''t know what about my above statement is unclear.
But frankly, its late here, and I''ve had enough.

Good night !

 

[LAJennifer]

Date: 9/29/2008 12:52:40 PM
Author: arjunajane

Date: 9/29/2008 12:39:00 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/29/2008 12:30:47 PM
Author: arjunajane

I''m sorry, but sometimes I think the whole religion thing is just a cop-out to make up for these type of behavious. Oh, I''m not selfish potentially ruining my daughters'' life, because God wants me to follow this path..sheesh

If what you say is true - she believes she is answering to God and not public opinion - how can any sane person think she will make a decent politician??
What makes them think she will ever have the public''s best interests at heart?
I''m sorry, you''re right, I just don''t get it..

Could you please explain why stating religious beliefs as a reason would be a ''cop-out''? If anything, that is honesty. Many people say they are opposed to abortion for a variety of other reasons that would be considered more of a cop-out when the true reason is religion. If Palin claimed to oppose abortion because of biology or the Constitution (which are valid reasons as well) instead of her religious faith as the true motivation behind her views, then THAT would be cop-out. Also, did you read any reports about Palin''s daughter being forced to have her child? Could it be that her daughter WANTS to have this child whether Palin wants her to or not? I know two women whose parents ''forced'' them to have abortions; what about that? It happens on both sides, but until I read something from Palin''s family''s mouth that says her daughter doesn''t want to keep the child I''m not going to jump to the conclusion that she is being forced against her will. It would be VERY simple for her daughter not to have the child if that is what she really wanted; just call ONE local newspaper and tell them and the story would be on MSNBC in minutes. What makes me think she will have the public''s interest in mind if, through a series of unlikely events, she becomes President is that she has not legislated in her political career to push her beliefs on the people. There are several articles about this floating around, I would suggest google if you want to learn more.

Indy, clearly you and I disagree on many things here. Since the RNC''s thread you seem to have been targeting my posts.
You have your views and opinions and I have mine - neither is more right or better, and I am entitled to express them. Once more, I don''t know what about my above statement is unclear.
But frankly, its late here, and I''ve had enough.

Good night !

The red text is not opinion - it''s fact.

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/29/2008 12:52:40 PM
Author: arjunajane

Date: 9/29/2008 12:39:00 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/29/2008 12:30:47 PM
Author: arjunajane

I'm sorry, but sometimes I think the whole religion thing is just a cop-out to make up for these type of behavious. Oh, I'm not selfish potentially ruining my daughters' life, because God wants me to follow this path..sheesh

If what you say is true - she believes she is answering to God and not public opinion - how can any sane person think she will make a decent politician??
What makes them think she will ever have the public's best interests at heart?
I'm sorry, you're right, I just don't get it..

Could you please explain why stating religious beliefs as a reason would be a 'cop-out'? If anything, that is honesty. Many people say they are opposed to abortion for a variety of other reasons that would be considered more of a cop-out when the true reason is religion. If Palin claimed to oppose abortion because of biology or the Constitution (which are valid reasons as well) instead of her religious faith as the true motivation behind her views, then THAT would be cop-out. Also, did you read any reports about Palin's daughter being forced to have her child? Could it be that her daughter WANTS to have this child whether Palin wants her to or not? I know two women whose parents 'forced' them to have abortions; what about that? It happens on both sides, but until I read something from Palin's family's mouth that says her daughter doesn't want to keep the child I'm not going to jump to the conclusion that she is being forced against her will. It would be VERY simple for her daughter not to have the child if that is what she really wanted; just call ONE local newspaper and tell them and the story would be on MSNBC in minutes. What makes me think she will have the public's interest in mind if, through a series of unlikely events, she becomes President is that she has not legislated in her political career to push her beliefs on the people. There are several articles about this floating around, I would suggest google if you want to learn more.

Indy, clearly you and I disagree on many things here. Since the RNC's thread you seem to have been targeting my posts.
You have your views and opinions and I have mine - neither is more right or better, and I am entitled to express them. Once more, I don't know what about my above statement is unclear.
But frankly, its late here, and I've had enough.

Good night !

I must say I don't understand the defensiveness, AJ. I have actually posted in this thread and just about every other thread well before you did, so please don't think I am somehow targeting you. Just because I disagree with you or ask your reasons for an opinion doesn't mean that I am targeting you. You stated an opinion and I did not say your opinion was invalid at any point in time. I actually asked for clarification as to why you felt that citing religious beliefs for a point of view is a "cop-out" and why you thought that Palin was forcing her daughter to have the baby. If you don't like requests for clarification then pelase feel free not to reply, I certainly don't think you owe it to me or anyone else on here. You also asked a couple questions in your post so I answered them as someone voting for McCain. I apologize if that is not what you wanted.

 

[ksinger]

Date: 9/29/2008 12:30:47 PM
Author: arjunajane

Date: 9/29/2008 8:10:57 AM
Author: ksinger

Date: 9/29/2008 7:59:31 AM
Author: arjunajane
I am of course very late to this thread, and not sure if this has already been bought up..But seeing as Palin is running on her rep as a great mother etc, and seeking the female vote, and she is fundamentally against abortion - did she ever stop to think what all the international media attention and scrutiny would do to her pregnant teenage daughter??!! Whom has no other choice but to have this baby whether she likes it or no..
That doesn't strike me as a 'family first' kinda woman - more like a 'advancement of my career at any cost'..

For me, as a woman, this inconsistency would be enough to make me question her, and I'm not even a mother.

No, it isn't career that drives that for her, it is religion. She's not answering to public opinion, she believes she's answering to God. I'm truly beginning to see that the international community may NOTE that we are driven by religion here, in our politics, but since they don't exist in that matrix - where it is all about you every single day of your life - they simply can't understand on a visceral level, just how it can have the iron hold it does. Believe me: it DOES. Of course I live in a state that is considered to be right smack in the middle of the 'buckle of the Bible belt', so my experiences may be skewed a bit.

I also see this bemusement from those who've spend lives on the coasts or in large metropolitan areas. They don't really 'get it'....

Karen, this is a truely astonishing insight. What ever happened to the separation of religion and politics??!
I'm sorry, but sometimes I think the whole religion thing is just a cop-out to make up for these type of behavious. Oh, I'm not selfish potentially ruining my daughters' life, because God wants me to follow this path..sheesh

If what you say is true - she believes she is answering to God and not public opinion - how can any sane person think she will make a decent politician??
What makes them think she will ever have the public's best interests at heart?
I'm sorry, you're right, I just don't get it..

Oh not so astonishing really. American politics has always been heavily tinged with religion. That bit about separation of church and state has always been a fiction of sorts, really. We trot it forth but it isn't true. But the true flowering of "religification" of our politics has happened rather recently - in the last 2 elections. I'd say, off the cuff, that it started firing up in the 60's and hit its stride in 2000. It has a lot to do with things that we can't talk about on this board...religion of course, and race relations too. It's all wound up together. It certainly isn't simple or clear cut, that's for sure.

There are several analyses out there if you care enough to read them...interesting enough to us Americans, but maybe not so riveting for those outside. Still, I would recommend "American Theocracy" by Kevin Phillips - it's recent but gives enough background on the recent evolution and direction of the two parties here to give you a good idea of the how, if not the why. Another good book for its analysis of the American distrust of learning and intellectualism is "The Age of American Unreason" by Susan Jacoby. It has a great chapter on the history of how Darwin's Theory of Evolution was initially misued and transmuted into the pseudocience of "social darwinism"by men who had a stake in convincing the masses that their deplorable state (poverty) was not only the will of God, but a law of nature too. Of course Darwin never said any such things, but it stuck. And pretty much hardened many of the relgious people against it. They were never keen on it to begin with. A quote from the book:

"It is useful to recall that intellectualism was not always synonymous with liberalism, especially economic liberalism, in the American mind. The irreconcilable conflict between evolutionism and biblical literalism would probably have been sufficient to engender a permanent fundamentalist antagonism toward all intellectuals and scientists who disputed any portion of the creation story in Genesis. But the fact that so many prominent intellectuals once used Darwinian evolution as an argument against all social reform provided yet another reason for populist fundamentalists to dismiss not only the theory of evolution but the rich intellectuals who seemed to be its most ardent supporters.
...
...
Regardless of political reversals of position, two critical ingredients of American anti-intellectualism and anti-rationalism have remained largely unchanged since the 1890's. The first is the belief of a significant minority of Americans the intellectualism and secular higher learning are implacable enemies of their faith. The second is the toxin of pseudoscience, which Americans on both the left and the right continue to imbibe as a means of rendering their social theories impervious to evidence-based challenges."

That's from Jacoby's book, which if I had to pick one, that would be the one. It's an easier read, to my way of thinking. Phillips is great info but more pedantic I think.

Anyway, that's it for the book reviews/recommendations this evening. Good luck trying to figure us out. If you do, please let us know.

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 9/29/2008 9:44:28 PM
Author: ksinger

Date: 9/29/2008 12:30:47 PM
Author: arjunajane

Date: 9/29/2008 8:10:57 AM
Author: ksinger

Date: 9/29/2008 7:59:31 AM
Author: arjunajane
I am of course very late to this thread, and not sure if this has already been bought up..But seeing as Palin is running on her rep as a great mother etc, and seeking the female vote, and she is fundamentally against abortion - did she ever stop to think what all the international media attention and scrutiny would do to her pregnant teenage daughter??!! Whom has no other choice but to have this baby whether she likes it or no..
That doesn''t strike me as a ''family first'' kinda woman - more like a ''advancement of my career at any cost''..

For me, as a woman, this inconsistency would be enough to make me question her, and I''m not even a mother.

No, it isn''t career that drives that for her, it is religion. She''s not answering to public opinion, she believes she''s answering to God. I''m truly beginning to see that the international community may NOTE that we are driven by religion here, in our politics, but since they don''t exist in that matrix - where it is all about you every single day of your life - they simply can''t understand on a visceral level, just how it can have the iron hold it does. Believe me: it DOES. Of course I live in a state that is considered to be right smack in the middle of the ''buckle of the Bible belt'', so my experiences may be skewed a bit.

I also see this bemusement from those who''ve spend lives on the coasts or in large metropolitan areas. They don''t really ''get it''....

Karen, this is a truely astonishing insight. What ever happened to the separation of religion and politics??!
I''m sorry, but sometimes I think the whole religion thing is just a cop-out to make up for these type of behavious. Oh, I''m not selfish potentially ruining my daughters'' life, because God wants me to follow this path..sheesh

If what you say is true - she believes she is answering to God and not public opinion - how can any sane person think she will make a decent politician??
What makes them think she will ever have the public''s best interests at heart?
I''m sorry, you''re right, I just don''t get it..

Oh not so astonishing really. American politics has always been heavily tinged with religion. That bit about separation of church and state has always been a fiction of sorts, really. We trot it forth but it isn''t true. But the true flowering of ''religification'' of our politics has happened rather recently - in the last 2 elections. I''d say, off the cuff, that it started firing up in the 60''s and hit its stride in 2000. It has a lot to do with things that we can''t talk about on this board...religion of course, and race relations too. It''s all wound up together. It certainly isn''t simple or clear cut, that''s for sure.

There are several analyses out there if you care enough to read them...interesting enough to us Americans, but maybe not so riveting for those outside. Still, I would recommend ''American Theocracy'' by Kevin Phillips - it''s recent but gives enough background on the recent evolution and direction of the two parties here to give you a good idea of the how, if not the why. Another good book for its analysis of the American distrust of learning and intellectualism is ''The Age of American Unreason'' by Susan Jacoby. It has a great chapter on the history of how Darwin''s Theory of Evolution was initially misued and transmuted into the pseudocience of ''social darwinism''by men who had a stake in convincing the masses that their deplorable state (poverty) was not only the will of God, but a law of nature too. Of course Darwin never said any such things, but it stuck. And pretty much hardened many of the relgious people against it. They were never keen on it to begin with. A quote from the book:

''It is useful to recall that intellectualism was not always synonymous with liberalism, especially economic liberalism, in the American mind. The irreconcilable conflict between evolutionism and biblical literalism would probably have been sufficient to engender a permanent fundamentalist antagonism toward all intellectuals and scientists who disputed any portion of the creation story in Genesis. But the fact that so many prominent intellectuals once used Darwinian evolution as an argument against all social reform provided yet another reason for populist fundamentalists to dismiss not only the theory of evolution but the rich intellectuals who seemed to be its most ardent supporters.
...
...
Regardless of political reversals of position, two critical ingredients of American anti-intellectualism and anti-rationalism have remained largely unchanged since the 1890''s. The first is the belief of a significant minority of Americans the intellectualism and secular higher learning are implacable enemies of their faith. The second is the toxin of pseudoscience, which Americans on both the left and the right continue to imbibe as a means of rendering their social theories impervious to evidence-based challenges.''

That''s from Jacoby''s book, which if I had to pick one, that would be the one. It''s an easier read, to my way of thinking. Phillips is great info but more pedantic I think.

Anyway, that''s it for the book reviews/recommendations this evening. Good luck trying to figure us out. If you do, please let us know.

Karen, thankyou for the reading recommendations. I am definately interested and will see if I can get my hands on any of these locally.

 

[E B]

Latest Palin Gaffe: Can''t Name Supreme Court Case Other Than Roe V. Wade

"Today, the Washington Post''s Howard Kurtz reported on potentially embarrassing clips of Sarah Palin being interviewed by Katie Couric that haven''t yet been aired. The Politico has more information on one in particular:

Of concern to McCain''s campaign, however, is a remaining and still-undisclosed clip from Palin''s interview with Couric last week that has the political world buzzing.

The Palin aide, after first noting how "infuriating" it was for CBS to purportedly leak word about the gaffe, revealed that it came in response to a question about Supreme Court decisions.

After noting Roe vs. Wade, Palin was apparently unable to discuss any major court cases.

There was no verbal fumbling with this particular question as there was with some others, the aide said, but rather silence."

Source