Sarah Palin, Republican Vice Presidential Candidate

[Demosthenes11]

I'm just sayin now, people swallow 90% of what's posted on here as true, and I don't think anyone cares enough to do checks on it even though a lot of it smells like bullshit.

3-4 mishaps in a journalistic career probably isn't that significant or odd either

[aurik]

I'm just sayin now, people swallow 90% of what's posted on here as true, and I don't think anyone cares enough to do checks on it even though a lot of it smells like bullshit.

3-4 mishaps in a journalistic career probably isn't that significant or odd either

Mishap? You call inventing sources and fabricating material for partisan purposes a mishap?

[Zilong]

3-4 mishaps in a journalistic career probably isn't that significant or odd either

Only if you're on Foxnews

[Beckwin]

I think you're full of shit. You're claiming everyone else is a sheep now just because an article critical of obama is called into question. Why haven't you been researching to refute pro-obama/anti-mccain articles you've found to be questionable?

goddam.

[Correction]

3-4 mishaps in a journalistic career probably isn't that significant or odd either

Really? Dang, someone get captain mishap on the phone right now, he's got a job again!.

[Maxxthepenguin]

Demos, provide solid examples please. You're obviously offended by something, please tell us what.

We'll listen and be kind, I promise

[Olo401]

...and McCain wants to give it to them.

Where was your proof that McCain wants to bail out the failing corporations?

http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008...annie-freddie/

Campaign Senior Policy Adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin also issued a written statement Saturday declaring that McCain-Palin support the current steps being discussed in order to help voters affected by the mortgage giants from facing further difficulties.

“John McCain supports the steps needed to keep the financial troubles at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from further squeezing American families and endorses the idea that management and shareholders should not benefit from government backing. While details are not yet available, the actions taken today are consistent with those objectives. Fannie and Freddie have been the poster children for a lack of transparency and accountability, and remind us of the needed reforms to financial markets in general,” Holtz-Eakin said.

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/06/freddie-mac-mccain/

Organizations such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are too important to allow to fail. McCain and the Bush administration are willing to throw away their hard-line ideologies when it comes to powerful corporations, but not when it comes to struggling homeowners who also need government intervention.

...

This is now the second major government bailout McCain has backed this year. In March, he supported the Federal Reserve’s $30 billion credit line to finance the takeover of Bear Stearns by JP Morgan.

[Olo401]

http://www.nypost.com/seven/09152008...wal_129150.htm



I may be wrong, but aren't there US laws stating that sitting senators cannot act alone in asking a foreign government's leaders to do something without the Presidents consent?

Actually, it has no bearing. Bush will pull out the extra troops he sent in regardless of what anyone says, until we are back at the level of force on the ground before Petraeus took over. As President and CIC of the armed forces that's his Constitutional right. To be honest I think Bush expects the violence to go back up with fewer troops in the country, because he doesn't get that the reason the violence went down isn't because we sent more troops in, it's because the Iraqis got fucking sick and tired of everyone (U.S., Al Qaeda, Medhi Army) blowing their countrymen up. Personally, I'm quite happy that they chose to assist our troops, and I'm damned glad that they've proven themselves worthy of that task.

As far as Obama's negotiations there, I suspect it's more future-looking than anything, trying to buy the needed time to fully draw down troops, and restore the country's infrastructure (which should have been done by now anyways, but we know how the Bush Administration is with rebuilding from a disaster i.e New Orleans, the WTC dirt pit..)

[Suited Aces]

proof

Here's proof both candidates supported bailing Fannie and Freddie out:

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stateupdates/gG5WlF

Given the substantial role that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac play in our housing system, I believe that some form of intervention is necessary to prevent a larger and deeper crisis throughout our entire economy. I will be reviewing the details of the Treasury plan and monitoring its impact to determine whether it achieves the key benchmarks I believe are necessary to address this crisis.

and here's proof that neither want to help Lehmen:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080915/D9375B500.html

Over the weekend, advisers both to McCain and Democratic rival Barack Obama said they did not favor a government bailout of Lehman Brothers like that previously provided to Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac. (FRE) The government also help engineer the recent sale of Bear Stearns Cos. to J.P. Morgan & Co.

we should still blame McCain though.

[Kuya]

Whoosh, my friend, whoosh.

[Kuya]

http://www.elpais.com/articulo/inter...lpepiint_4/Tes

A esta última teoría se han sumado algunas seguidoras de Hillary Clinton. Nayeli Salvaraj tiene 30 años, una hija y vive en el norte de Virginia. En todas las elecciones ha votado al partido demócrata. Hasta ahora. "Estoy a favor del aborto, pero no es el centro de mi vida. Yo quiero que llegue una mujer a la Casa Blanca y mi partido faltó al respeto a Hillary Clinton cuando no la nombró ni vicepresidenta. Fue sexista. Así que sí, votaré a los republicanos por primera vez, por Sarah Palin".

Holy mother of God. People can't be this dumb, they just can't be.

[Maxxthepenguin]

http://www.elpais.com/articulo/inter...lpepiint_4/Tes

Holy mother of God. People can't be this dumb, they just can't be.

Ay yay yay, no queiro!

......

[Demosthenes11]

I think you're full of shit. You're claiming everyone else is a sheep now just because an article critical of obama is called into question. Why haven't you been researching to refute pro-obama/anti-mccain articles you've found to be questionable?

goddam.

no, I'm merely laughing / commenting that there are so many sources posted on here all the time, probability says some are not credible, and the one time someone calls an article into question / does research on the author, it's this article.

I'm not researching to refute those other article because it's not worth my time. When something is printed like this article, I won't jump to any conclusions.

I'm really curious to see if this is a legitimate article

[Beckwin]

I think maybe a page or two ago someone posted a freerepublic link that was pretty much laughed at. I'm pretty sure the "Trig is actually Bristol's baby" story was scrutinized as well.

keep crying. I like how you throw in that you won't research or refute anything... pretty much affirms your role as the heckler around here.

[geno]

Bad (read: not credible, biased) sources are quoted all the time on here and treated as the truth.

The one time it doesn't mean something good for your candidate, you bring it up. Incredible.
Doesn't even matter if this shit is true or not. You are a hypocrite

I don't understand. If the truth on this particular claim didn't matter, then why did you argue it as being more "pressing" than the teleprompter? Clearly, it being true WOULD have mattered and is obviously a more serious issue. But, also clearly, its not true (or rather, its a terrible spin on something that IS inconsequential). What is funny though, is that what you are doing is such a strangely identical parallel to how both politicians have handled claims about them: ignore them and point out the hypocrisies of the other side.

I have an idea: how about every time someone posts an article with shaky grounds to stand on, you call them out on it? This type of response is both reasonable and respectable. You directly contradict a specific issue and prove your point as best as can be done. You know whats not a reasonable response? Making a mental list of these incidents and then using them as a diversion when you want to do the same thing.

Because if there is one thing I can't stand, its people who don't understand what being a hypocrite implies. Realize that even if you are completely justified in your claim, and this thread is just jam-packed with links to the most liberal sites on the net without any support, while that does make a lot of people hypocrites, it doesn't make them wrong. I can't emphasize this point enough.

Lets take a real simple but extreme example. Murder is wrong, right? What about if the person witnessing the murder is a murderer themselves? Whats the reasonable response here? Let both people keep murdering while they call each other hypocrites? Or call them out on their own specific acts as they happen?

Don't get me wrong, its fine to call people hypocrites as it does point out where other people have used slimy tactics to get their way through an argument, but unless its just a footnote of a more focused post, it does nothing to legitimize your points besides through a shiny object out to distract everyone.

[Kuya]

Ay yay yay, no queiro!

......

Translation, you monolingual twats:

Many of Hillary's supporters have joined to this last theory. Nayeli Salvaraj is 30 years old, has a daughter, and lives in the northern parts of Virginia. In every election she's participated in, she has voted Democrat. Till now. "I support abortion, but the issue is not at the center of my life. I want a woman to reach the White House, and my party has failed to deliver when they did not name Hillary as their candidate or when Obama did not name her as her Vice President. That was sexist. Therefore now i will vote Republican, i will vote for Sarah Palin."

Dumb cunt.

A esta última teoría se han sumado algunas seguidoras de Hillary Clinton. Nayeli Salvaraj tiene 30 años, una hija y vive en el norte de Virginia. En todas las elecciones ha votado al partido demócrata. Hasta ahora. "Estoy a favor del aborto, pero no es el centro de mi vida. Yo quiero que llegue una mujer a la Casa Blanca y mi partido faltó al respeto a Hillary Clinton cuando no la nombró ni vicepresidenta. Fue sexista. Así que sí, votaré a los republicanos por primera vez, por Sarah Palin".

[Demosthenes11]

@ Kuya: Plenty of blacks doing the same for Obama. Fucking retarded both ways

@ geno: I don't think you understood my point there...but I poorly phrased it
The truth matters, just not in the context argued. The very fact it is just assumed false is purely based on the fact that it is read as anti-obama.

[Zosi]

no, I'm merely laughing / commenting that there are so many sources posted on here all the time, probability says some are not credible, and the one time someone calls an article into question / does research on the author, it's this article.

The reason why this particular author is getting scrutiny is precisely because he's been known to totally make shit up in the past. It's not random chance or probability, he's a repeat offender.

In addition, there's a rather important distinction that you appear to be completely ignorant about. An op/ed article is a primary source for analysis, and a secondary source for the actual information. If you introduce new information (a 'scoop' like he's claiming) in an opinion piece, you fucking better have actual sources for it, and not just "a little bird told me". Case in point, the most specific he gets about the Iraqi foreign minister's comments is "in an interview", he doesn't say which interview, and a quick Google search for those quotes shows nothing but results referring to HIS OWN ARTICLE, the vast majority of which are conservative blogs. There's no primary source to be found.

[Olo401]

Here's proof both candidates supported bailing Fannie and Freddie out:

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stateupdates/gG5WlF

and here's proof that neither want to help Lehmen:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080915/D9375B500.html

we should still blame McCain though.

What's your point? He asked for proof that McCain was in favor of it. I provided that proof. Equating his current position to Obama's doesn't change the fact that McCain is a hypocrite and a liar. McCain is trying to hide from the fact that his Senate records stands behind the supply-side, laissez-faire policies of the past 25 years that created this mess, just because it fits his ambitions at this moment in history. Oh look, the people want regulation, Obama wants regulation, so let's say we're for it too. Oldest bullshit political trick in the book.

[Beckwin]

...you're implying that blacks haven't had a history of voting overwhelmingly democratic. hillary actually competed strongly among blacks until Bill's barack obama/jesse jackson comments. it's not quite the same.