Sarah Palin

[Nox]

Quote:

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

But wait, there's just one difference that wasn't the case in any of those...

We are one Supreme Court Justice away from overturning it. One.

 

[Nox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Stargazer* We have more than two choices. I'm certainly not voting for either the Democrats or the Republicans.

Thank you! I am certainly voting Dem. this time around, but I really wish more noise was made about the Green party's All-Female, All-Minority ticket this time around. That was the real 'first' about this election. Obama and Palin are not "firsts", I'm sorry, but I am sick of it being used as "qualification".

 

[bekins]

You know what I hate about politics, is that everyone is making a huge deal about her daughter getting knocked up, and her stance on abstance! But her daughter is of the age of consent, actually older, in Alaska age of consent is 16! So even if she was taught abstance doesn't mean she agreed with it, obviously, or choose to follow it. I am sure we have all been taught things that we didn't agree with and as we grow up we make our own decisions. I don't think its fair to judge Politicians on the lives of their grown children. Some people may not think that 17 is grown, but the law states otherwise here! I may not agree with all of her policies. I think their can be a give and take with the teaching of abstance, which is what I was taught, but was also given the information about proper birth control.
Also she was acutally the only VP candidate to meet face to face with Mcain prior to being chosen. They talked on the phone a few times and actually met twice despite popular belief once at his vacation home, and once at the National Governors Association meeting.
This is going to be a very interesting election to say the least. If you look through out history you will see that black men have always been a step ahead of women in politics. They got the vote before us, they had the right to own property before we did, they were elected into office before we were. So it will be interesting to see if this election follows past precedent or not.

 

[bekins]

Quote:

Originally Posted by concertina Its fine to call both of them names, as long as they're based on fact. Fact: Sarah Palin fired her sister's ex-husband from a job without provocation Fact: Sarah Palin tried to bully a librarian into banning books she didn't agree with Fact: Sarah Palin is as anti-choice and anti-equal right to marry as anyone I've ever seen ...yep, that makes her a bitch in my book.

not fact Her brother-in-law is still employed as a State Trooper. The one who was fired was Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan, he states it was because she was trying to get her to fire her Brother-in-law, but no evidence of that has acutally been found, and they are investigating the "incident". ThWalter Monegan himself has said, According to Monegan, he was unsure why he was dismissed, but not firing Wooten "could be part of it."[
Could be part of it, even he isn't saying thats why he was let go, and he was an at will employee(most of americans are) meaning they can be fired for any reason or no reason at all! Just wanted to put that in here. If we are going to judge someone on past incidents lets make sure we have all the facts correct.

 

[concertina]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bekins not fact Her brother-in-law is still employed as a State Trooper. The one who was fired was Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan, he states it was because she was trying to get her to fire her Brother-in-law, but no evidence of that has acutally been found, and they are investigating the "incident". ThWalter Monegan himself has said, According to Monegan, he was unsure why he was dismissed, but not firing Wooten "could be part of it."[ Could be part of it, even he isn't saying thats why he was let go, and he was an at will employee(most of americans are) meaning they can be fired for any reason or no reason at all! Just wanted to put that in here. If we are going to judge someone on past incidents lets make sure we have all the facts correct.

Thank you for pointing out my mistake, I appreciate it the clarification. The fact still stands that she *fired* someone that didn't do what she wanted him to. There are numerous stories coming out the state about her bullying and intimidation techniques. I think those are worth paying attention to.

 

[franimal]

Quote:

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

We still have an obligation to elect people who represent us as a nation and who have values we can respect. We do not ignore a candidate's history or personal/ moral values just because they don't have the ability to immediately change our lives. Who gets elected this year makes a difference or no one would care so much. We have seen politicians forced out of office because of choices they made in their personal lives which weren't in line with the values of the people they serve. It is a matter of who you can respect as a leader and why, and I do not respect her views on abortion and gay marriage because they are DISGUSTING!

 

[gooblyglob]

Quote:

Originally Posted by duckduck I want the absolute most intelligent, hard working, qualified person in this country to be leading it, and I don't give a flying f*uk if they are black, white, male, female, straight, gay, skinny, or fat. America's problems will not be solved by gender, they will be solved by intelligent, qualified people.

BRAVO

my thoughts exactly!

 

[Shimmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by franimal We still have an obligation to elect people who represent us as a nation and who have values we can respect. We do not ignore a candidate's history or personal/ moral values just because they don't have the ability to immediately change our lives. Who gets elected this year makes a difference or no one would care so much. We have seen politicians forced out of office because of choices they made in their personal lives which weren't in line with the values of the people they serve. It is a matter of who you can respect as a leader and why, and I do not respect her views on abortion and gay marriage because they are DISGUSTING!

What about the people whose views she DOES represent?
What about the people who DO believe that marriage is between a man and a woman?
What about the people who honestly believe in preserving life?
What about the people who believe it's poor decision making to have a life based on credit that one can't afford?
What about people who believe sex is a commitment that shouldn't be made without some kind of active commitment between the partners?
What about the people who believe in marriage as a lifetime commitment?
What about the people who believe in the right as guaranteed by our Second Amendment to keep and bear arms, not for the purpose of inflicting harm but for the purpose of defense?
What about the people who believe that life gives you what you earn, not what the government 'owes' you for existing?
What about the people who believe in working for what they get, and teaching their children the value of honest labor, honest sweat, and an honest education?
What about the people who believe in the right to practice religion and believe as they wish, as long as they're not inflicting harm on another person?
What about the people who believe children should be cared for, moms and dads should parent the children, and a stable home is the best environment for a child?

What about the people who DON'T believe as you do? Don't they deserve representation? Wouldn't YOU want representation in their shoes?

Just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean they shouldn't have representation.

 

[purrtykitty]

Quote:

Originally Posted by franimal I do not respect her views on abortion and gay marriage because they are DISGUSTING!

BTW, Obama does not support gay marriage, only unions.

 

[Lapis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimmer What about the people whose views she DOES represent? What about the people who DO believe that marriage is between a man and a woman? What about the people who honestly believe in preserving life? What about the people who believe it's poor decision making to have a life based on credit that one can't afford? What about people who believe sex is a commitment that shouldn't be made without some kind of active commitment between the partners? What about the people who believe in marriage as a lifetime commitment? What about the people who believe in the right as guaranteed by our Second Amendment to keep and bear arms, not for the purpose of inflicting harm but for the purpose of defense? What about the people who believe that life gives you what you earn, not what the government 'owes' you for existing? What about the people who believe in working for what they get, and teaching their children the value of honest labor, honest sweat, and an honest education? What about the people who believe in the right to practice religion and believe as they wish, as long as they're not inflicting harm on another person? What about the people who believe children should be cared for, moms and dads should parent the children, and a stable home is the best environment for a child? What about the people who DON'T believe as you do? Don't they deserve representation? Wouldn't YOU want representation in their shoes? Just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean they shouldn't have representation.

Yes but shouldn't they have the BEST representative possible?
I think no matter where you fall you want a strong country and economy, which we don't have right now and I don't think McCain/Palin can provide.

Plus she's proven herself a lair (she talks about being an advocate for special needs kids and cut the Special Olympics funding! she raised taxes and said otherwise) and seems to be war mongering (she would attack Russia!) no she is not the wisest person to place one heart beat away from running this country

 

[Shimmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lapis Yes but shouldn't they have the BEST representative possible? I think no matter where you fall you want a strong country and economy, which we don't have right now and I don't think McCain/Palin can provide.

But what about the people who DO think McCain/Palin can provide the direction THEY would like to see the country go?
Everyone wants representation, everyone wants this governmental advocacy where the government represents their views...but they don't want the government to represent the opposing view.
Fact (not opinion, fact) is, there are people who believe in the same things McCain/Palin do, and the numbers aren't small.
Quote:

Plus she's proven herself a lair (she talks about being an advocate for special needs kids and cut the Special Olympics funding! she raised taxes and said otherwise) and seems to be war mongering (she would attack Russia!) no she is not the wisest person to place one heart beat away from running this country

All politicians are liars. Every. Last. One. Of. Them.
Clinton lied on the stand and committed perjury, and it's all well and good because it was only over a piece of ass. Never mind that were you or I to do it, we would have landed in jail, particularly over a case of that magnitude.

Expecting a politician to be perfect is ridiculous.
Expecting the government to conform 100% to the public is ridiculous.
Expecting that an elected representative is going to be a 100% accurate representation of the populace is ridiculous.
You're not voting for the person you agree 100% with, you're voting for the person you disagree with the least.

 

[Lapis]

I totally agree but for me like the advocate for special needs comment, I'm on forums with mothers who broke down in tears over that comment and plan to vote for McCain based on that alone!!
Yes she's a lair like all of them but when you invoke your special needs child, and it tugs at the heart strings of other women with special needs children and they hang their hopes on you helping to get their kids help and you are lying there should be a special place in hell for you!

And yeah I know they are people who agree with them, but ok is it enough to just agree with their "moral" stance what about the economy?
I mean if McCain was pro gay marriage etc etc etc he still couldn't get my vote because her has no economic plan atleast not one that helps my family.

 

[Shimmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lapis I totally agree but for me like the advocate for special needs comment, I'm on forums with mothers who broke down in tears over that comment and plan to vote for McCain based on that alone!!

The Special Olympics and special needs children are not mutually inclusive or mutually exclusive endeavors.
I don't have to donate to Special Olympics to believe in the March of Dimes, for example.
Quote:

Yes she's a lair like all of them but when you invoke your special needs child, and it tugs at the heart strings of other women with special needs children and they hang their hopes on you helping to get their kids help and you are lying there should be a special place in hell for you!

Well. It's just fortuitous for her and her political career that she managed to have a child with Down Syndrome, isn't it? I mean, really, it's such a great thing for her because her life even came with its own little prop, conveniently packaged in a form that people could identify and empathize with.
Forgive my sarcasm, but really. One doesn't have to fund Special Olympics to fund or support programs for special needs children.
Quote:

And yeah I know they are people who agree with them, but ok is it enough to just agree with their "moral" stance what about the economy? I mean if McCain was pro gay marriage etc etc etc he still couldn't get my vote because her has no economic plan atleast not one that helps my family.

Do you honestly think Obama does? Neither of them do.
And even if they did, they would STILL have to implement it through Congress. Guess what. That's not a walk in the park. It's not like the President walks into the Oval Office and pulls up the USA's Quicken and Microsoft Money and balances our checkbook.

 

[franimal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimmer What about the people whose views she DOES represent? What about the people who DO believe that marriage is between a man and a woman? What about the people who honestly believe in preserving life? What about the people who believe it's poor decision making to have a life based on credit that one can't afford? What about people who believe sex is a commitment that shouldn't be made without some kind of active commitment between the partners? What about the people who believe in marriage as a lifetime commitment? What about the people who believe in the right as guaranteed by our Second Amendment to keep and bear arms, not for the purpose of inflicting harm but for the purpose of defense? What about the people who believe that life gives you what you earn, not what the government 'owes' you for existing? What about the people who believe in working for what they get, and teaching their children the value of honest labor, honest sweat, and an honest education? What about the people who believe in the right to practice religion and believe as they wish, as long as they're not inflicting harm on another person? What about the people who believe children should be cared for, moms and dads should parent the children, and a stable home is the best environment for a child? What about the people who DON'T believe as you do? Don't they deserve representation? Wouldn't YOU want representation in their shoes? Just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean they shouldn't have representation.

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

 

[Shimmer]

Quote:

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

Absolutely.

I would just hope that American citizens understood the need for representation of both sides of the coin.

 

[Lapis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimmer The Special Olympics and special needs children are not mutually inclusive or mutually exclusive endeavors. I don't have to donate to Special Olympics to believe in the March of Dimes, for example. Well. It's just fortuitous for her and her political career that she managed to have a child with Down Syndrome, isn't it? I mean, really, it's such a great thing for her because her life even came with its own little prop, conveniently packaged in a form that people could identify and empathize with. Forgive my sarcasm, but really. One doesn't have to fund Special Olympics to fund or support programs for special needs children. Do you honestly think Obama does? Neither of them do. And even if they did, they would STILL have to implement it through Congress. Guess what. That's not a walk in the park. It's not like the President walks into the Oval Office and pulls up the USA's Quicken and Microsoft Money and balances our checkbook.

It does sorta go hand in hand in most minds that when you say advocate for special needs children you would include the special Olympics!

And bully for her using her child to help sucker in the mom vote, the special needs kids don't need that money anyway

Ok I've read up on Obama, and McCain, the first atleast has more of a plan than the latter, and yeah Congress has to work with the Pres, but I like seeing what ideas the contenders have, and with McCain they aren't that well laid out

 

[franimal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by purrtykitty BTW, Obama does not support gay marriage, only unions.

I didn't say he does. I am not voting for McCain or Obama.

 

[Shimmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lapis It does sorta go hand in hand in most minds that when you say advocate for special needs children you would include the special Olympics! And bully for her using her child to help sucker in the mom vote, the special needs kids don't need that money anyway

Who's to say the money wouldn't go to research and development and treatment?
Quote:

Ok I've read up on Obama, and McCain, the first atleast has more of a plan than the latter, and yeah Congress has to work with the Pres, but I like seeing what ideas the contenders have, and with McCain they aren't that well laid out

Seeing their ideas is definitely important.

 

[Lapis]

Shimmer she cut funding in half!
Then she cut funding for the home for pregnant teens and for the catholic charity (what they do can be seen here Catholic Charities USA - The Network at a Glance feed the poor, metal health, etc)
But she got a lovely tanning bed for her office? hmmmm something is "wong" as my daughter would say.

But I will check to see if she upped funding to hospitals in the state

I know she started basically a commission to look at medical care, but then she went crazy with the pen slashing funding that did the same things she asked the commission to look at, so that sorta null and voided it for me.

 

[MAC_Pixie04]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bekins You know what I hate about politics, is that everyone is making a huge deal about her daughter getting knocked up, and her stance on abstance! But her daughter is of the age of consent, actually older, in Alaska age of consent is 16! So even if she was taught abstance doesn't mean she agreed with it, obviously, or choose to follow it. I am sure we have all been taught things that we didn't agree with and as we grow up we make our own decisions. I don't think its fair to judge Politicians on the lives of their grown children. Some people may not think that 17 is grown, but the law states otherwise here! I may not agree with all of her policies. I think their can be a give and take with the teaching of abstance, which is what I was taught, but was also given the information about proper birth control.

This is nothing against you, it's a general statement.

I don't buy that whole "age of consent" nonsense. Age of consent doesn't make it okay for her high school daughter to be having a baby with her high school boyfriend. 17 isn't grown; 17 isn't the age to be making babies. She can't even vote, what qualifies her to have a child?

And the issue with abstainence-only sex education is that it doesn't allow public schools to give information about proper birth control. They can detail the biological changes and effects on the body and sexual organs, and it teaches them NOT to have sex, not how to have protected sex or how to seek proper birth control, it simply teaches them to just abstain from sex. And as her daughter is showing us, that shit just doesn't WORK. Kids are going to have sex, it's sad and scary but true. Regardless of whether they get proper information or not, they'll have sex anyway. I recently conducted a survey and wrote a paper about high schoolers and sex education, and 90% of my survey subjects, ages 14-18 said they would continue to have sex even if a reliable birth control method were not available. And unless taught how to properly protect themselves, they'll have sex and have babies or spread disease, thanks to abstainence only sex-ed. You would think this situation would make her want to rethink her position, because she has a living, breathing, knocked up example of the aftermath of Abstainence Education living at home with her.

And then to save the day...let's just marry her off. Let's marry her off to the "fucking redneck" (per his Myspace) who doesn't even WANT children or to get married. Because that makes it okay. She's old enough to legally consent to sex, so since she's having his baby, why not throw in a shotgun wedding to boot? I'm sorry, but the age of consent argument is bullshit. A few years ago I reached the age of consent in California, and i'm STILL not ready to have anybody's baby, period.

There's a few states where the age of consent is 14/15, should those 8th and 9th graders be excused when they pop out babies too? Because the law says it's okay for them to have sex?