Sarah Palin: Extremist

[Karlis]

That might make her more sympathetic, but it doesn't make her a good leader.

Except, of course, when that wasteful spending could benefit her town. She helped finish off the Bridge to Nowhere (although it was in the death throes in 2007), but kept the money. Then, of course, there's the fact that it's kind of hard to get worried about "wasteful spending" when your state is rolling in the money from high oil prices.

I gather you are not a Palin fan. Why not?

Regards,

Karlis

[Dredimus]

I find it hilarious that every wants to jump on one wagon or the other, everyone complains about experience or the lack thereof, and its just hilarious. The fact is, No one on the ballot right now is truely what this country needs, none have that hard core leadership skill to turn this country around. You can have all the determination in the world, but that isn't to say you have the means to do so.

I could care less what Palins religious views are, every one Ive seen so far makes a huge deal out of the fact that she is a hard core christian or "pentacostal", and to be honest... who cares? You think she is gonna jump into the VP slot and start calling shots? NEWS FLASH for those of you that haven't wrapped your head around the whole political scheme... she wont be able to write laws... nor will Obama, or McCain, or Biden... We currently have a Democratic/liberal/left wing Congress, THOSE Are the people everyone should be looking at for a change... The same people in the same seats... and nothing is changing.... hmmm.... Lets blame everything on Bush....

I myself will be writing in the names of "Rick And Bubba" for President. More on them can be found HERE

Out of everyone here that is complaining and downing the candidates, I can almost guarantee that only 10% will actually make it to the polls... and thats sad.

[SoCrazes]

I find it hilarious that every wants to jump on one wagon or the other, everyone complains about experience or the lack thereof, and its just hilarious. The fact is, No one on the ballot right now is truely what this country needs, none have that hard core leadership skill to turn this country around. You can have all the determination in the world, but that isn't to say you have the means to do so.

I could care less what Palins religious views are, every one Ive seen so far makes a huge deal out of the fact that she is a hard core christian or "pentacostal", and to be honest... who cares? You think she is gonna jump into the VP slot and start calling shots? NEWS FLASH for those of you that haven't wrapped your head around the whole political scheme... she wont be able to write laws... nor will Obama, or McCain, or Biden... We currently have a Democratic/liberal/left wing Congress, THOSE Are the people everyone should be looking at for a change... The same people in the same seats... and nothing is changing.... hmmm.... Lets blame everything on Bush....

I myself will be writing in the names of "Rick And Bubba" for President. More on them can be found HERE

Out of everyone here that is complaining and downing the candidates, I can almost guarantee that only 10% will actually make it to the polls... and thats sad.

I agree with you about those who complain the most are the ones that don't vote. They always assert that "my vote doesn't count anyhow.". Register now (Illinois' deadling is October 7) and go out and vote for who you really want for president (write the name in if they aren't on the ticket). Don't believe those who say your wasting your vote if you write-in a candidate. For me, I'm debating between writing-in "Rick and Bubba" or Dr. Ron Paul. Seriously, I'm writing in Dr. Ron Paul if he isn't on the ballot (We'll find out next weed). The first time in my 20+ years of voting that I won't vote for a Republican.

[Startraveler]

You think she is gonna jump into the VP slot and start calling shots?

I believe part of the concern is that there is a nonzero chance she won't remain VP until 2012.

NEWS FLASH for those of you that haven't wrapped your head around the whole political scheme... she wont be able to write laws... nor will Obama, or McCain, or Biden...

Your point about working with Congress is well-taken (though presidents can and do write legislation). However, it very much matters who's in the Oval Office.

Out of everyone here that is complaining and downing the candidates, I can almost guarantee that only 10% will actually make it to the polls... and thats sad.

I myself actually don't go to the polls, I vote absentee. I never get the sticker.

[Incorrigible1]

She’s managing a twelve billion dollar budget while raising five children and running for vice president. Yes, that's pretty extreme. Me likey.

[SoCrazes]

Startraveler,

I can't agree with most of the over-the-top rhetoric in you posted, but I can absolutely agree that anyone that wants Intelligent Design to be taught in public school is certainly dead wrong.

But, on the other hand, this is politics, it's a political position, a political selection and was made in an attempt to garner votes. It's been at least twenty years since I've been surprised (or very upset) by anything any politician has done in any campaign.

IOW, I doubt very much that many so-called conservatives really believe that Intelligent design should be taught. It's just a way of getting the Bubba vote. After all, if one party doesn't go after a certain bloc, the other one absolutely will. It's all pandering, all of it.

Also, why on Earth is she being billed as "in Big Oil's pocket" or whatever. For God's sake, she's the Governor of one of the few oil-producing states. The people that elected her depend on that industry. What would the governor of Alaska be expected to do - shut down drilling there?

Get freaking real.

All. Of. It.

Harte

You answered your own question. She is "in Big Oil's pocket" because she has to be to get things done in the state of Alaska. The significance of this is that the GOP made an Alaska governor the running mate of McCain. Hence, another "Big Oil" ticket.

[MasterPo]

You answered your own question. She is "in Big Oil's pocket" because she has to be to get things done in the state of Alaska. The significance of this is that the GOP made an Alaska governor the running mate of McCain. Hence, another "Big Oil" ticket.

Funny.

We're constantly being told not to argue or fight and that a good leader has to reach across to all sides to come together for the people's sake. But I guess working with "big oil" (you still never defined that as oppose to small mom&pop oil) to provide a vital product doesn't count.

[SJB]

Sarah Palin: Extremist

8/29/2008

Here are some extremist positions by Palin:

She’s against abortion, even in cases of rape and incest.

She supports teaching creationism in schools.

She denies global warming and opposed listing polar bears as an endangered species because it might prevent off-shore drilling.

Speaking of drilling, she supports drilling in ANWR.

I guess not surprising, Palin is in big oil’s pocket.

http://www.alternet.org/story/96945/theocr...on/?page=entire

http://madwombat.wordpress.com/2008/08/29/...alin-extremist/

-Palin is currently in the middle of a controversial gas pipeline project in Alaska. She’s favored the ‘Trans Canada’ proposal that will run the pipeline through Canada, in effect shipping US jobs over the border. Many Alaskans, including former governors, have favored the “All Alaska Route”.

-She is also suing the federal government over listing the polar bears as a threatened species. The science was even compelling enough to convince the Secretary of the Interior that the bears needed to be listed. But acknowledgement of this issue, and the potential disruption to development on Alaska’s oil-rich north slope spurred Palin to attempt to stop the listing.

Does she want to open ANWR? Yes. Every politician in Alaska wants to open ANWR. It’s basically a requirement if you ever hope to get elected for anything. Even Mark Begich, the progressive Democrat running against the indicted Senator and Alaskan institution Ted Stevens, is pro-drilling. That’s the sea we swim in up here. There are a few anti-drilling folks, but you have to look hard to find them, and work hard to have them admit it.

Will all this wash with voters in the ‘Lower 48′? Time will tell.

cont to troopergate

http://mudflats.wordpress.com/2008/08/29/w...ns-perspective/

to women taking birth control ? Here's the group thinking Palin belongs too -

It also appears that Sarah Palin is a member of a misnamed group called Feminists for Life. FFL in fact engages in "cultural appropriation" of women's suffrage icons to promote a very woman-unfriendly agenda that--despite attempts to sound "not like those crazies in Operation Rescue"--would not only criminalise abortion but the IUD and hormonal birth control methods, and potentially everything outside the rhythm method (the term "abortifacient birth control" is a codephrase in the dominionist "pro-life" community for hormonal birth control--partly due to a unique urban legend claiming "the pill" and other hormonal birth control causes abortion and partly because of a unique definition of pregnancy beginning at conception rather than at implantation (the latter is what most mainstream OB/GYNs use) and thus making anything preventing implantation potentially "abortifacient").

- she'd leave you with only the rhythm method. lol good luck with that. More on her religion/beliefs here.

Palin and the neopentecostal dominionists

And troopergate is FAR from over.

Take a few hours off, and see what happens? Apparently it’s not possible to blink these days without missing the latest bit of Palin drama. While I was out snapping photos of the governor’s home town of Wasilla and its environs, the state of Alaska was busy running an errand for Sarah - finding her a lawyer Yes, she’s lawyered up. And the sparks are flying already.

It all goes back to Troopergate. If you need to consult the Troopergate Primer, go to http://mudflats.wordpress.com/2008/08/29/w...ns-perspective/

http://mudflats.wordpress.com/

cont........

http://mudflats.wordpress.com/

You know, for someone who had to post this nonsense, must really be nervous about McCain and Palin.

[Karlis]

I'm not sure exactly why, but Limbaugh seems to make sense to me.

Any liberals active here?

Karlis

David Limbaugh: Who is a hypocrite?

Saturday, September 6, 2008

Liberals are outraged at the supposed hypocrisy of Sarah Palin (and conservatives) for supporting abstinence-only education and family values generally in light of revelations concerning the pregnancy of her teenage daughter. It's only fair, then, that they should be called upon to explain their own hypocrisy in the compassion, privacy, gender, and race departments.

Liberals are sick and tired of conservatives lecturing them about family values. Yet it is liberals who do most of the moralizing and sermonizing, seeming to derive their entire sense of superior self-worth in favorably comparing themselves with heartless, bigoted conservatives.

Liberals claim a monopoly on compassion for the poor, minorities, women, and homosexuals. Yet when they get the chance to score political points, they abandon their allegiance to these groups as quickly as Barack Obama threw the Rev. Jeremiah Wright under the bus. Just ask Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice, or Michael Steele.

Liberals are fed up with conservatives for trying to regulate their "private" behavior. Yet it is they who want to regulate every minute aspect of our lives, from smoking to eating to weapons to energy consumption to confiscatory taxation to healthcare to retirement security.

Liberals insist that what a public official does in his private life is irrelevant to his public fitness or conduct. Yet they're now telling us that the private conduct even of a relative of a conservative candidate is fair game.

While misidentifying and condemning continued conservative support for Sarah Palin as hypocrisy, they're putting on a disgraceful clinic in what real hypocrisy looks like. They're showing us firsthand how they treat women who refuse to toe the liberal line, just as they've shown us how they treat African-Americans who dare stray from their liberally assigned ideology.

Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen, demonstrating his liberal erudition and enlightenment, described McCain's selection of Palin as "a sitcom of a vice presidential choice and a disaster movie if she moves up to the presidency." In mocking Newt Gingrich for defending Palin, Cohen displayed his respect for the fairer sex by comparing her to a horse. "It's a pity Gingrich was not around when the Roman Emperor Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, better known by his nickname Caligula, reputedly named Incitatus as a consul and a priest. Incitatus was his horse."

Regaling in smug self-satisfaction for putting it to an impressive, self-made, no-nonsense, but alas conservative woman, Cohen went on to attack GOP spokesmen for defending Palin, which he says betrays "a feeling of consummate contempt for the intelligence of the American people — a contempt that will be justified should Palin be the factor that makes McCain a winner in November."

Cohen is not the only celebrated media liberal who believes that only idiots could support Palin. NBC's Andrea Mitchell suggested that only uneducated Hillary Clinton voters, "not college-educated ones," could possibly support Palin.

In their world of twisted logic and values, liberals believe they've come upon the smoking gun with the Palin pregnancy. They are wholly oblivious to the endearing aspects of this story, from Sarah and Todd Palin's unqualified love and support for their daughter to Bristol Palin's decision to marry the baby's father and give birth to this child.

They see in this pregnancy slam-dunk proof of Sarah Palin's hypocrisy because she supports abstinence-only education — as if she claims abstinence-only is foolproof and as if her opposition to government-supported condom distribution caused this pregnancy. But why should that surprise us when leftists blamed Hurricane Gustav on Palin's insufficient deference to the liberals' man-made global warming narrative?

Many liberals can't fathom why this pregnancy isn't damaging Palin's and McCain's credibility as social conservatives. They can't comprehend how anyone could continue to trumpet moral values once he or someone close to him has committed a sin, as if moral perfection is a precondition to upholding moral standards.

The liberal position is morally bankrupt and suicidal to civilization. It is anathema to the Judeo-Christian worldview.

If one were disqualified from advocating moral standards because of his own sinful nature, we could have no moral standards because none of us approaches moral perfection. Thus, the logical consequence of the liberals' attempted intimidation of any sinner (and her mother) for promoting moral standards is the wholesale eradication of those standards.

By taking this absurd position, the liberal exposes his own practical opposition to moral standards and the utter cynicism in his claim to represent values voters.

What is truly bothering liberals is that conservative Sarah Palin is living out her compassion, her values, her love of family and her strong womanhood rather than just mouthing empty, self-serving bromides.

If you want a real lesson in liberal compassion, gender-neutrality and rank hypocrisy, stay tuned because they're just getting warmed up.

But so is Sarah.

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/sep/0...is-a-hypocrite/

[SoCrazes]

Funny.

We're constantly being told not to argue or fight and that a good leader has to reach across to all sides to come together for the people's sake. But I guess working with "big oil" (you still never defined that as oppose to small mom&pop oil) to provide a vital product doesn't count.

I most certaintly did define it. I always define, if asked, any terms I use in my posts. Unlike others I know

[SoCrazes]

I'm not sure exactly why, but Limbaugh seems to make sense to me.

Any liberals active here?

Karlis

David Limbaugh: Who is a hypocrite?

Saturday, September 6, 2008

Liberals are outraged at the supposed hypocrisy of Sarah Palin (and conservatives) for supporting abstinence-only education and family values generally in light of revelations concerning the pregnancy of her teenage daughter. It's only fair, then, that they should be called upon to explain their own hypocrisy in the compassion, privacy, gender, and race departments.

Liberals are sick and tired of conservatives lecturing them about family values. Yet it is liberals who do most of the moralizing and sermonizing, seeming to derive their entire sense of superior self-worth in favorably comparing themselves with heartless, bigoted conservatives.

Liberals claim a monopoly on compassion for the poor, minorities, women, and homosexuals. Yet when they get the chance to score political points, they abandon their allegiance to these groups as quickly as Barack Obama threw the Rev. Jeremiah Wright under the bus. Just ask Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice, or Michael Steele.

Liberals are fed up with conservatives for trying to regulate their "private" behavior. Yet it is they who want to regulate every minute aspect of our lives, from smoking to eating to weapons to energy consumption to confiscatory taxation to healthcare to retirement security.

Liberals insist that what a public official does in his private life is irrelevant to his public fitness or conduct. Yet they're now telling us that the private conduct even of a relative of a conservative candidate is fair game.

While misidentifying and condemning continued conservative support for Sarah Palin as hypocrisy, they're putting on a disgraceful clinic in what real hypocrisy looks like. They're showing us firsthand how they treat women who refuse to toe the liberal line, just as they've shown us how they treat African-Americans who dare stray from their liberally assigned ideology.

Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen, demonstrating his liberal erudition and enlightenment, described McCain's selection of Palin as "a sitcom of a vice presidential choice and a disaster movie if she moves up to the presidency." In mocking Newt Gingrich for defending Palin, Cohen displayed his respect for the fairer sex by comparing her to a horse. "It's a pity Gingrich was not around when the Roman Emperor Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, better known by his nickname Caligula, reputedly named Incitatus as a consul and a priest. Incitatus was his horse."

Regaling in smug self-satisfaction for putting it to an impressive, self-made, no-nonsense, but alas conservative woman, Cohen went on to attack GOP spokesmen for defending Palin, which he says betrays "a feeling of consummate contempt for the intelligence of the American people — a contempt that will be justified should Palin be the factor that makes McCain a winner in November."

Cohen is not the only celebrated media liberal who believes that only idiots could support Palin. NBC's Andrea Mitchell suggested that only uneducated Hillary Clinton voters, "not college-educated ones," could possibly support Palin.

In their world of twisted logic and values, liberals believe they've come upon the smoking gun with the Palin pregnancy. They are wholly oblivious to the endearing aspects of this story, from Sarah and Todd Palin's unqualified love and support for their daughter to Bristol Palin's decision to marry the baby's father and give birth to this child.

They see in this pregnancy slam-dunk proof of Sarah Palin's hypocrisy because she supports abstinence-only education — as if she claims abstinence-only is foolproof and as if her opposition to government-supported condom distribution caused this pregnancy. But why should that surprise us when leftists blamed Hurricane Gustav on Palin's insufficient deference to the liberals' man-made global warming narrative?

Many liberals can't fathom why this pregnancy isn't damaging Palin's and McCain's credibility as social conservatives. They can't comprehend how anyone could continue to trumpet moral values once he or someone close to him has committed a sin, as if moral perfection is a precondition to upholding moral standards.

The liberal position is morally bankrupt and suicidal to civilization. It is anathema to the Judeo-Christian worldview.

If one were disqualified from advocating moral standards because of his own sinful nature, we could have no moral standards because none of us approaches moral perfection. Thus, the logical consequence of the liberals' attempted intimidation of any sinner (and her mother) for promoting moral standards is the wholesale eradication of those standards.

By taking this absurd position, the liberal exposes his own practical opposition to moral standards and the utter cynicism in his claim to represent values voters.

What is truly bothering liberals is that conservative Sarah Palin is living out her compassion, her values, her love of family and her strong womanhood rather than just mouthing empty, self-serving bromides.

If you want a real lesson in liberal compassion, gender-neutrality and rank hypocrisy, stay tuned because they're just getting warmed up.

But so is Sarah.

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/sep/0...is-a-hypocrite/

I don't think it is a conservative vs liberal issue anymore. It seems to me to be a class war where the middle class in the U.S. is losing quickly.

[SoCrazes]

It is not a republican or democrat thing neither. It is a class war.

[MasterPo]

I don't think it is a conservative vs liberal issue anymore. It seems to me to be a class war where the middle class in the U.S. is losing quickly.

Depends how you define "middle class".

I'm not splitting hairs.

To some people $25k/yr is middle class. To others $40-50k/yr is. Where I live on Long Island a couple making $100k/yr can barely be called "middle class".

[SoCrazes]

Depends how you define "middle class".

I'm not splitting hairs.

To some people $25k/yr is middle class. To others $40-50k/yr is. Where I live on Long Island a couple making $100k/yr can barely be called "middle class".

Yes, you should consider the cost of living when comparing incomes.

[BlindMessiah]

Southwest Fl, where I live, 50-100k is considered MC. So it obviously varies.

[MasterPo]

Yes, you should consider the cost of living when comparing incomes.

That's my point. All fine and dandy to say the "middle class" is loosing. But I very much doubt that either candidate will publically admit that $100k may be middle class in a place like NYC or Long Island.

To extrapolate further, is $100k is middle class in some places then $200k is upper middle class and that's the range for increased taxation.

[SoCrazes]

Depends how you define "middle class".

I'm not splitting hairs.

To some people $25k/yr is middle class. To others $40-50k/yr is. Where I live on Long Island a couple making $100k/yr can barely be called "middle class".

Let's use a nontraditional definition: The Middle Class envolves people who aren't in the millionares club (congress) or contribute large donations to the millionares club. Democrats and Republicans have their differences but these differences are meaningless. This partisan politic game is to keep the masses' eyes off of the ball. Other forms of entertainment are used to do the same.

[MasterPo]

Tonight Fox News had an hour long show about Palin with interview and video done back in April this year.

She came across very well. Answered many of the criticisms that are being thrown at her.

They had Ferraro comment on things. She was impressed too! You can see the fear in her eyes. She told Biden he better be ready for her!

There's a new sheriff in town folks.

[libertyworld]

You know, for someone who had to post this nonsense, must really be nervous about McCain and Palin.

Bingo.

You get it.

Nervous grossly understates it though.

She is like the morning sun to the vampires and wicked witches of the left.

[SoCrazes]

That's my point. All fine and dandy to say the "middle class" is loosing. But I very much doubt that either candidate will publically admit that $100k may be middle class in a place like NYC or Long Island.

To extrapolate further, is $100k is middle class in some places then $200k is upper middle class and that's the range for increased taxation.

Please read this article about secret dealings between the White House and Congress. This may help you understand why it isn't a right-or-left or Republican-or-Democrat thing. It is a conspiracy, the vastness of this conspiracy is dependent upon the eye of the beholder.

http://www.credoaction.com/sirota/2007/05/...ay_10_bush.html

[Caesar]

Bingo.

You get it.

Nervous grossly understates it though.

She is like the morning sun to the vampires and wicked witches of the left.

LOL well putI was reading alot on the Clinton blogs and they are not happy with the Democrats check out the Puma groups most of these sites are less then a week old

[MasterPo]

Please read this article about secret dealings between the White House and Congress. This may help you understand why it isn't a right-or-left or Republican-or-Democrat thing. It is a conspiracy, the vastness of this conspiracy is dependent upon the eye of the beholder.

You seem to have a very Ivory Tower notion of how politics works.

What you call a "conspiracy" I say is just the normal negotiation, give&take that always happens in the Oval Office or the board room. Agreements and side deals are common. Most of life works that way. Hate to be the one to burst your bubble on it. Legislation isn't as simple as School House Rock shows it to be.

[Golden Hawk]

Your hatred knows no bounds. Do not: Post propaganda, smear or hate pieces about political figures or candidates.

Just don't vote for her, but your not going to sway anyone with all that venom.

SORRY ............

But not one issue mentioned above is any way propaganda, nor smear tactics. Everything that is mentioned about Ms. Pailan; aka Governor Pailan, is current, correct, and public record. The record has been submitted by the Republican party for issue, at the discretion of the general press; both national and international. None of the stories "supposedly leaked" by the Democrats has come from from anyone not directly linked to the GOP. As a former Republican, I assure you the other guys aren't "leaking" a darn thing.

One may add another story from the GOP, the church that Governor Palin attends is known for its' strong anti-homosexual views, amoung them that gays and homosexuals should be isolated fom the main stream of society. Today the church's minister announced another plan to cleanse homosexuals, that they can be completely cured by prayer, islotion and complete abstinance. The congregations members have signed an agreement to this end. Governor Pailins name does appear on that list.

[MasterPo]

One may add another story from the GOP, the church that Governor Palin attends is known for its' strong anti-homosexual views, amoung them that gays and homosexuals should be isolated fom the main stream of society. Today the church's minister announced another plan to cleanse homosexuals, that they can be completely cured by prayer, islotion and complete abstinance. The congregations members have signed an agreement to this end. Governor Pailins name does appear on that list.

Let me know when you get to the part where the Minister says they are the cause of all the ills in the world and should be overthrown. Then you can say she's on equal footing with Obama in terms of church experiences.

[Caesar]

One may add another story from the GOP, the church that Governor Palin attends is known for its' strong anti-homosexual views, amoung them that gays and homosexuals should be isolated fom the main stream of society. Today the church's minister announced another plan to cleanse homosexuals, that they can be completely cured by prayer, islotion and complete abstinance. The congregations members have signed an agreement to this end. Governor Pailins name does appear on that list.

Source please