True 'dat. You'll have a bigger impact on which way the country goes by voting carefully for your senators and congressmen and communicating with them frequently. They seem to be more honest if they know you're watching.

THAT is the point. We agree. Now how do we tell the masses that at nearly every lecture by either one of those two clowns (Obama and McCain) that everytime they open their mouths and say, "I am going to get you affordable health care for all the uninsured.", or "I am going to tax the large Corps" or "I am going to get you relief from your mortage foreclosure.", that it is all BS. None of them CAN DO ANYTHING. Only Congress can do it and there are few bills that make it to law that are not filled with pork or have not been significantly altered due to the influence of lobbiests and special interest groups working the elected officials over. Nothing can be done without CONGRESS. Who becomes president is actually not nearly as important as who runs congress.

Here's my prediction of the election results.

With some exceptions (e.g. Florida, Kansas), I think it will break down approximately like this:
Confederate states = McCain
Union states = Obama
Union territories = McCain
http://americancivilwar.com/pictures...uth_states.gif

Doesn't require a turban. These are religious zealots; it's already a holy war to them.:headshake

Of course she didn't. The mayor doesn't bill rape victims for the cost of the forensic evidence collection. What the mayor does do is appoint the police chief, Charlie Fannon, after firing his predecessor. Then Charlie Fannon, chief of police, does this:
Let the record show that this is an example of the rare and precious "executive experience" that Sarah Palin, alone among all four candidates for executive office in this national race, can claim.

Of course, mere Senators can only claim to work on legislation, crafting laws, supporting some, opposing others. Like in 2005 when the Congress passed a law requiring states to provide rape exams free of charge or reimburse victims their costs. This is all the Senators running for executive office can claim on the subject:
From here.

For what its worth From Here

As usual it all depends upon who's Kool Aid you are drinking.

I've found the same headlines. This one is less obviously wrong, but more importantly wrong. My objection goes to the proposition that "the evolution question" even has a side that creationism can represent.

I don't want to derail the thread, so I'll just say this: Someone who says the evolution question deserves to include creationism doesn't know what they're talking about. It is a ridiculous mixing of two valid independent subjects of inquiry. But they have no business being compared by the same criteria. You might as well have this. I would add a fifth complaint, that it's impossible to scientifically measure, by weight a person's religious beliefs.

Discuss, sure. Gain information, I'm all for it. Treating creationism as a scientific subject, preposterous.

These people look like people I might run into at my gorcery store. Just normal folk.

..And ~50% of the country voted for Dubya the second time around. :3_eyes:

Ok, let's compare Kool Aid recipies, shall we? I would contend that USA Today is more neutral than NewsBusters.org

From Newsbusters.org 's about us page:
This is Rumors and Truth material, not Non Partisan Sanity Check material. Consider the source!

So, let's go to the original document for all these stories, written long before Palin became a shooting star.

Look at the facts presented here. Palin was mayor of Wasilla at the time. The sitting police chief was fired by her and replaced with Charlie Fannon. That's *her* guy making the quotes above. She chose him, using her executive experience. He's implementing her vision of what Wasilla should be. That's not Kool Aid. That's bedrock fact.

Let's look at what he said. He says he's opposed to the new law. And, insultingly, says that the criminal should pay for the cost as part of the sentencing. That's brilliant. Assuming you get a conviction. As the father of a daughter, I **DEFINITELY** don't want her raped, and, god forbid she is raped, that she's billed for the police work to prosecute the criminal. EVEN IF THE F*CKER GETS AWAY WITH IT. Come on, Fannon is ready to bill the criminal upon conviction? What if he's not convicted? The "victim" is billed? gtfoh.

:thumb:

I wonder how this compares with evidence collection procedures for other crimes.

Did you get a bill from the state patrol for battery usage on their radar gun?

The point of this is that it matters not about her ability to qualify for the position of VP. People love to make a big deal out of this very hazy quite debatable event. What is the fear? she is going to mandate some change to the Constitution? She is going to mandate teaching of Intelligent Design in our schools? People said the same things about Kennedy and his religious affiliation with the Catholic church. She has no power as VP to do anything. Even as president the wedge issues like gay marriage have no merit. These are all states rights issues. Presidents don't make the law.

Ok what you have done here is what most of the liberal press have done and tried to make a lose association between what her "choosen" chief said and what she actually said or did. That is at least, like most of the press has reported, misleading, actually I think it is total and utter BS. Her chief said it. Not her. Blaming the comments of the chief as if they were her policy is stupid. Hell if every mayor in any major city could control the comments of the police chief they would have them all on a string like a puppet. That isn't going to happen.

Here's the way I see it going down...

http://i306.photobucket.com/albums/n.../electoral.jpg


By the way, Palin was found guilty of corruption/abuse of power for doing the same thing Kwame Kilpatrick did. I hope she gets the same sentence.


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/11/us/politics/11trooper.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin


http://www.reuters.com/article/newsO...4998X420081011

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/...ion/index.html

http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2008/10/palin.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics...,6863069.story

Then we are decided.

---
I just had a thought: Perhaps we could shorten Obama/Biden to O'Biden and McCain/Palin to McPalin. Wouldn't that simplify things?

McPalin ... the new shish-kebab snack from MacDonalds!

Recipes anyone?

I find this interesting. This is the first time in recent history that the first name of a VP candidate appears as the lead on a campaign sign.

Does anyone remember ever seeing "Al!" signs for Clinton/Gore or "George!" signs for Reagan/Bush?

I find it funny that the Republicans were bitching about Obama the celebrity and then went out and found one of their own.

BTW, I think this sign design is new because the neighbor had a McCain/Palin sign up until a few days ago.

Technically, these yard signs are illegal according to our homeowners association bylaws. I argued the case in one of our committees years ago that they should be allowed and there was a verbal decision made to allow them. Unfortunately, it may still be technically a violation and my wife is the President of the association, so I feel I need things to be clearer in order to respond with my own Obama sign.:(

I think it is great. They are comparing the two canidates with the least experience on par.

I'm sorry, don't you mean your Joe! sign?

Jobama

Jomammaobama

October 11, 2008
Lefty bloggers fall for fake Palin SAT

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...or_fake_p.html

Oh God this is rich, The Daily Kos at the forefront again. :D

The forgery appears to have originated with a purported "Background Report" on Palin that was posted anonymously to a Web site. It was swiftly swallowed blogs such as Daily Kos ("it sure seems credible"), and Wonkette ("a 425 verbal sounds about right"). None of them apparently noticed or cared that the front page of the "report" revealed it to be an obvious fake: The document, which features purported DMV records from 2006, bears a "RECEIVED" stamp dated "6-24-03."

Is the received stamp supposed to be for the whole thing or just the first page?

There is DMV entries in December 2004, for 2005 and 2006 ATV vehicles.

It also contains a bit about Bristol Palin's baby daddy, making statements on his MySpace page.

I read DailyKos regularly - multiple times a day, usually.
Not once did anything about Palin's SATs appear on the front page NOR within the top-recommended diaries.

judging dailykos for some of the way-down-the-ladder shit-slinging is like judging the Cellar on the basis of Radar, tw, UG, and your homophobic drivel, merc, and ignoring the whole rest of the forum.

dailykos is great if you simply want to get the most extreme liberal slant on anything. Just the exact opposite of the Rush Limbaugh types. Try to find something that isn't so completely biased so that you can make your own decisions based on facts, something those of that ilk are severely lacking. Lemme guess, you read moveon.org too.

It seems like Obama is winning so I wonder why all the 'will race effect the election'? type of talk. If he is winning isn't it a moot point?

Sarah who?

Not if you count the "Bradley effect" theory that states that actual votes for minority candidates running against Caucasian candidates are lower than polled.

She was fired, and rehired after public outrage. She eventually quit.They say she was, and she did address their convention. She could have just been humoring them, though."has not pushed" was probably the best way you could have phrased that, as she both called for teaching creationism, and promised not to push it during her campaign. Of course, even the idea of "both sides" is problematic in itself, as "both" implies "two", and once magic is allowed, there are infinite possible "sides" to the "debate". During her term, under her chosen police chief, the bills for rape kits, and no other police activity, were sent to the victims' insurance. So, Yes.

As for Kos, on a site where anyone can post anything I wouldn't have mentioned anything if you'd restricted your original comment to posters. But you included bloggers, implying some level of support from the Daily Kos iteslf. So we have an example of "The Daily Kos at the forefront again." That diary entry has five reccommendations, and is full of comments debunking the story. To show up outside of the archives for more than a few minutes, you need hundreds of reccommendations. So not only did this forefront issue not come from Kos bloggers, it didn't even attract much support from the posters.

And none of your examples rise to the level of "terrorist", which was what your original "no different" was a response to.

Perhaps Merc's point was whether or not Palin created the policy to charge for the kits. To that, the answer is no - It was one of her predecessors - not her. Who actually started this policy? Look it up.

They seem to want to make it appear as though she implemented the policy - that is wrong.

Can we once and for all put this to rest and stop playing the semantics games?

Crikey me - I never even heard about the rape kits thing.
Sorry, because this isn't germaine to the thread (as it might not be a Palin introduction) but are you seriously telling me that the richest country in the world makes women reporting rape pay to have it proved? Or that it was even an issue up for discussion?

If that's the case - and I admit I may have the wrong end of the stick - (nasty pun only mildly intended) then it's like my Mum says - the rich stay rich by holding onto their money.

Here is a link for you to read about it. Read it carefully.

Here is an even better one.

Thank you.
There is no conclusive proof that Palin supported this, but I am still appalled by it.

I appreciate the fact that "they" were determined to recou the costs from the insurance companies rather than individual women, but it still shocks me that gathering evidence is considered differently in a sexual crime than a burglary. They don't show that on CSI!

You need to do more research, much of that is bull shit that does not directly involve Palin. Another prime example of KOS rumor picked up and run by the liberal press is the SAT score Scandle.

All of it involves Palin. The rape kits may or may not directly involve her, but the rest do. None of it is bull shit.

If Palin was so innocent, then she would have scored significant political points by aggressively denying those accusations. Then use those accusations as proof that she was being smeared. Instead Palin was silent.

Palin, who is right there continuously with McCain and his campaign staff, says nothing? Instead we only get this tacit denial from the campaign's communications director? Either the campaign is so devoid of political savvy as to not have Palin deny this, or the campaign has good reasons to fear further press investigations. Well the McCain campaign also cannot trust Palin to campaign without McCain. Numerous reasons why Palin does not deny this accusation - and all suggest negative conclusions about Palin.

If the problem did not exist, a politically savvy Palin would have personally done the denials AND earned political points for doing so. She did not or could not. Either way, that is the damning fact – just another problem with the right wing’s perfect choice.

Even George Jr was not so dumb as to be kept mute on the campaign trail.

*Blinks* that's a really good point tw.

Total and utter Bull Shit.

If you get the candidate to say the words "rape kit" then you win the election.

Perhaps there is no way to conclusively prove it either way - as was the case. Perhaps the utter denials served no point other than drawing more attention to a non-issue. Perhaps - perhaps not...

Who started this policy? Apparently it was not Palin. How long has this policy been in place? Is this practice common elsewhere? Where else is it still happening? Perhaps it would be better to proactively address those issues elsewhere. Perhaps - perhaps not...
Damning questions that are not being asked by the media. Why is that?

"Daily Kos"

The rumor mill, ala, liberal news source.

Two Alaskan Women Speak Out on Palin
 

It's interesting to hear these two Alaskan "women-on-the-street" talk about Palin:

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-113360

Two girls who barely have started their periods? Good source... :rolleyes:

Q: Where does Palin stand on foreign policy?
A: Dunno, Alaska.

That was good. :D

That video was worth about as much as asking two guys in Deer stands what they think of gun rights.

I see mercy and cm as apologists for the actions of the police chief, when making an association with Sarah Palin.

I don't see the same distance being granted to Barak Obama when he's being tarred with an association with Bill Ayers.

This is despite the fact that Palin *hired* Fannon, Fannon reported directly to Palin and no such hierarchical relationship exists between Obama and Ayers at all.

Why the different reactions to a pair of relationships?

I see your double standards and raise you one case of buyers guilt with Obama.

Comedy is down the hall....

What "buyers guilt" are you talking about?

btw, we agree about the "double standards" at least.

In the absence of any elaboration, I'm going to have to consider your frequent "bull shit" as an ungracious way of conceding the point.

Cute but not an answer to V's question.

I see what you did thar.

Whoa there V - I'm not apologizing for anyone. I offered another "possible" scenario for their/her reaction relating to a prior post.
I still believe in what I posted. I do not "know" what happened nor does anyone else. I must say though - that I do not weigh the two situations equally.

Her response to the findings, in my opinion, is appalling and outright wha wha WHAT THE ____????

OJ was pleased to be cleared too. The first time, anyway. :rolleyes:

ApologIST not apologIZE.

classicman, I see your point about the quote you posted. To me, that is just a plain lie.

Trying to boldface lie her way out of her responsibilities. I don't want that. To me, it carries substantial weight because it is first hand. Her words. They're unambiguously wrong. Not taken out of context, not twisted, just flat wrong. And repeatedly so. Also, it's fresh. This is something that is happening now, current events, not something when she was in the second grade fact checking Biden's congressional record against his rhetoric. Also, it's a big damn deal as an indicator of what kind of action I can expect from her in similar circumstances in the future.

This is pretty damning.

V, I agree with you. It is very very damning!

Well doesn't it make her the perfect replacement for Cheney? :haha:

Not 'til she shoots someone in the face.

:lol:

And she smoked pot! :eek:

But it was legal.