2008 US Election

Palin publicly criticized him for his role in the VECO scandal and called for him to speak out about it. She said something along the lines that he should be trying to prove his innocence, but instead he is saying nothing.

Considering she backed his opponent, I would assume she is not endorsing him for senate.

He continues to show support for her, yes, even though she has obviously distanced herself from him.

But what politician hasn't dealt with corruption?

Look at Obama and that Rezko scandal. There is so much corruption in politics I can't imagine not being involved with someone who is dirty at one point or another.

Honestly, Kathleen, I have to disagree. I ever so often have to remind myself that 70% of this country (the 60% non-voters and 20% Bush voters and now McCain voters) are plain and simple retards. I know it hurts and I know it's terrible cause most people I know aren't like that, but statistics don't lie....

What's worse is that everyone goes along with it (well all the republicans anyway) when truly this does raise issues. It is interesting to note that Palin is against sex education in Alaska public schools and wants abstinence as the only form of birthcontrol teachings in school. Isn't that ironic? If that is her political stance, I must conclude that it is her personal belief also. NOW, her daughter too is a statistics in the fact that no sex ed and abstinence only DOES NOT WORK!

BUT, it's all good, cause the kid is keeping her baby. Therefore, it's all GOOD!!



What gets me is that somehow she is supposed to be the role model on anti abortion rightousness because she has a baby with down syndrome and decided to keep her baby! How is that nothing but her CHOICE in the matter? Nobody asked the baby if that was the right choice (which I don't think could be answered anyway)? How does making the CHOICE to keep a fetus make one a role model on the issue? It's brainwashed hogwash for retards! Pro-choice supporters are exactly that: pro-CHOICE, so that people like Palin can keep her baby even though it might be disputable whether or not that is the right thing to do. Right thing for the family and right thing for the baby.


They are private, as long as they in line with party philosophy - oh and religious fanatic philosophy....

Ok - Ok - then "I" deserve better damnit LOL. I understand what you are saying though.

Read this article from the Washington Post - the woman CUT funding for teenage Mothers.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the...l?hpid=artslot

Yeah - and that just sucks. Don't the rest of us deserve privacy in order to make our own choices?

Asking for him to speak out about his innocence isn't exactly critizism in my view. Perhaps she could have voiced an opinion on how wrong it is to have other people pay for his personal real estate remodels? Now, that would be critizism.

where did you get that from? She did not endorse his opponent as of today.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalra...ed-hometo.html

but she hasn't distanced herself from him. All she did was taking down photos on her website that show the TV commercial Stevens put together for her during her race for governor. In fact, the photos were taken down very recently, hmmmmm guess it wouldn't be in her interest running as VP .... hmmm...

What's more is that she herself collected money in the exact same fundraising campaign that Stevens is also under investigation for.

Please explain. All it is is fingerpointing and hot air. There is nothing there...

Classy! And why exactly isn't she your hero? Afterall you too are woman.....


Classy as this:

Her bridge to nowhere statement: It's insulting and degrading to the endth degree. The very name 'bridge to nowhere' degrades the native people of Ketchikan as it implies they are nothing in nowhere. Ironically, she used to support the bridge until the state received the funding to build, then she realized that nationally this may not have been such an embracable endevour and nixed the building, but kept the funding for the state. Never giving the money to the very people of Ketchikan or providing the fund for their use and development!!

She doesn't believe in global warming. This is just histerical.

She sued the federal government over the listing of the polar bear on the endangered species list. Come again?

She supported the shooting of wolves from airplanes, until the Alaskan voters decided no more.

I could go on, but I have to pick up my son from football practice. God forbid I'd be late and later decide to run for VP and it would all come out .... it would be obvious that I am not capable of running a political office if I was late to pick up my child ...... *sigh*

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archi...9/1305615.aspx

Stevens is running for re-election to the Senate this year, and he is in a tough race. He survived his primary last week, despite the fact that Palin backed his opponent.

Not endorsing him is distancing herself from him.

An ABC News review of campaign records shows Rezko, and people connected to him, contributed more than $120,000 to Obama's 2004 campaign for the U.S. Senate, much of it at a time when Rezko was the target of an FBI investigation.

"It surprised me that late in the game he [Obama] continued to take contributions from somebody who was under a rather dark cloud in the state," said Cynthia Canary of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform, a group that has worked closely with Obama and supported his legislative efforts.

Seems like she isn't the only one taking money from shady people!

Rezko had been widely reported to be under investigation by the U.S. attorney and the FBI at the time Obama contacted him and has since been indicted on corruption charges by a federal grand jury in a case that prosecutors say involves bribes, kickbacks and "efforts to illegally obtain millions of dollars."

As I have said, a great deal of politicians have connections with corruption of some sort. Dirty money runs rampant among politicians these days, Obama and Palin included.

What I meant is that first I agreed with Jim, as I've also been living in a world where women do more than men when it comes to kids, where a dad spending his life at work instead of home is way more tolerated than when a mother does the same, etc... And then with Alex, you, Keeper and Kathleen reacting, I realised how wrong that first thought was. It's so obviously wrong to me it even goes against my own life and principles as a dad. Yet my first "reflex" thought was to agree with Jim.

I was taking this example to say that understanding something and imprinting it in your natural thinking process are two different things. And men won't lose their sexist automatism just like that, however sincerely they want to, not after thousands of years of being tought and experiencing the opposite.


Ponrauil

Do you actually know who she supposedly endorsed? The article only claims that she 'backed' the opponent. Not sure if backing equals supporting/endorsing and since there is no name, there isn't a way to check on it.

I did a google search on palin supporting vickers or curry but it found nothing. If there is not one news blurb on her endorsement, I'd suspect she hasn't actually endorsed anyone and backing was a term used to claim who knows what.

I did NOT read this!!!


*lalalaaalallaaala*


at least you came to realize...

What's so shocking about it? Does it never happen to you to have a first automatic thought on something, anything, and then realise the next minute that that tought was totally wrong or irrelevant?


Ponrauil