Sarah Palin, Republican Vice Presidential Candidate

[Xno Kappa]

I do have a question however, since you know, I'm one of those bible thumping, creationist, anti-abortion conservatives; why is it, that the democratic females were all about having a female break glass ceilings in regards to Hillary; and that women need to burn their bra's and be out in the public on and on and on... the GOP does this and it goes to you need to be barefoot and pregnant? I'm asking out of pure why not if I agree with the choice or not, but as a why organizations like NOW are so against her even though they were so for Clinton. Isn't it in theory the same thing?

Articles which were supported by NOW http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...ght_sexis.html
where they say the bashing of Clinton was a "she-devil" (Chris Matthews on MSNBC, who helpfully supplied an on-screen mockup of Clinton sprouting horns). "But for all Clinton's political blemishes, the darker stain that has been exposed is the hatred of women that is accepted as a part of our culture." Marie Cocco Washington Post.

While they don't back her abortion policy they're all for the bashing of her and her family. Why the double side of things? And why is organizations like NOW not in support of a female. It's like they love to hear the bark of a woman in charge until it's a different bark then they're used to and then it's back to the kitchen with you there's dishes to be done.

This is pretty much how I see the election on the supposed sexism issue;
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/in...in-gender-card

EDIT: Honestly, I wanna see how this is refuted. Not spunned, refuted DIRECTLY.

[Rivieras]

Doesn't change my opinion of him but at least it's now more of he loves killing babies; something that I have grave reasons to not vote for him.

And how did you come up with this illuminating fact? Didn't think he wanted to eat the fetus to grow stronger for the stem cells.

Edit - As far as it being pulled from the blogosphere it's the bloody internet, what do you expect? And doesn't really matter where the speech is being made; you don't speak as such because then you begin giving the younger more impressionable people the idea that whatever the US and it's government does is for the Good because "God" Said so.

Hell I know the DC is corrupt; by using her as such would begin implying that we do Gods work. Which we sure as shit don't.

[Seraph]

You Americans have an unhealthy obsession with the private lives of others, especially your politicians. If what they did isn't illegal, it really shouldn't concern any of you.

It's usually more about the concern of the trend of poor decision making, as opposed to really caring what they do in their private lives. One can make the point that poor decision making at home is an indication of poor decision making 'at work'.

I'd rather have people be a little too focused on the personal lives of the people who might potentially represent them to the world, as opposed to not giving a shit.

Just because what someone does isn't illegal doesn't mean shit. If people are lying, or trying to screw me, I want to know about it. Most of the 'dick moves' in the world aren't illegal, doesn't mean they aren't dick moves, or don't affect others.

[Day]

So, ugh, Day, aside from the fact that you usually show up whenever i say something negative about the US; do you actually disagree with what i said?

Sometimes I agree, its just really fucking annoying how you lump everyone in the US together like we all operate on one unified brain ... something I'm sure you'd just love if people were doing it to you.

[Beckwin]

I do have a question however, since you know, I'm one of those bible thumping, creationist, anti-abortion conservatives; why is it, that the democratic females were all about having a female break glass ceilings in regards to Hillary; and that women need to burn their bra's and be out in the public on and on and on... the GOP does this and it goes to you need to be barefoot and pregnant? I'm asking out of pure why not if I agree with the choice or not, but as a why organizations like NOW are so against her even though they were so for Clinton. Isn't it in theory the same thing?

Articles which were supported by NOW http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...ght_sexis.html
where they say the bashing of Clinton was a "she-devil" (Chris Matthews on MSNBC, who helpfully supplied an on-screen mockup of Clinton sprouting horns). "But for all Clinton's political blemishes, the darker stain that has been exposed is the hatred of women that is accepted as a part of our culture." Marie Cocco Washington Post.

While they don't back her abortion policy they're all for the bashing of her and her family. Why the double side of things? And why is organizations like NOW not in support of a female. It's like they love to hear the bark of a woman in charge until it's a different bark then they're used to and then it's back to the kitchen with you there's dishes to be done.

Because Palin's VP candidacy and the platform she's a part of are almost completely antithetical to the women's movement. She's against a woman having control over her own body, and her running mate is also against equal pay for women. The platform is also against affirmative action, which women, white ones especially, have been served more by than any other demographic. Her selection for VP was grossly transparent as a desperate attempt to grab women voters, which feminists find disrespectful to their intelligence. I'm sure NOW could express some sort of approval or pride for her being elected Governor, as it's something she by and large accomplished on her own merits, but they do not like what they perceive as a token woman on the ticket to get votes.

Hillary was someone who built her presidential campaign on her merits and someone who has supported feminist issues. Her getting 18 million votes on that basis is something for feminists to be excited about.

basically: to feminists, Palin is an Uncle Tom/token negro.

[Sera]

It's like they love to hear the bark of a woman in charge until it's a different bark then they're used to and then it's back to the kitchen with you there's dishes to be done.

I don't care if the "barker" has a vagina or not. I really really really couldn't care less. Why is it that the fact that she is a woman even an issue? Who cares? She's grossly inexperienced, a proven liar, a proven doubletalker, not well traveled, quite the proven hypocrite, and as Zosi pointed out, she can't seem to (nor does she even desire to) keep her nose out of my uterus or MY private life! Why should I owe her the same respect she can't extend to me? If it weren't her OWN policies that were responsible (statistically) for situations LIKE the one she finds her daughter in, I wouldn't give a flying rats anus about whether or not her kid was knocked up. She supports a policy that restricts my choices and causes problems like the one her own daughter is confronting. I'm supposed to trust that?

Let's see if it sounds good this way:

He has a bachelor's of arts in Journalism. He's good looking, was a star football player in high school, and a sportscaster at his local news station. He was a President of his Moose Lodge, then became Mayor of a town of 10,000 people. He lost an election for Lt. Governor, but ran for state Governor and won, making him the Governor of a state with 650,000 people. He has a 80% approval rating in a state that is nearly exclusively republican, and very strongly religious. He has been quoted as saying that Iraq is "God's war." He's been governor for 20 months. He's extremely pro-life, opposing abortions even in cases of rape and incest. He is strongly supportive of abstinence ONLY sexual education and says that contraceptive education will not find his support. His 17 year old daughter is 5 months pregnant, and will be marrying the father, an 18 year old high school student. McCain chose him after one 15 minute phone call. He lied about a bridge to nowhere deal, stating that he said thanks but no thanks, when really he took the money and used it for other purposes rather than returning it to the US taxpayers when he decided not to use the money for the purpose of which it was inteded and granted to him.

From now on, anytime you read something about Palin, just drop the "s" off of "she" and that should make it easier to focus.
No man ever fucking cared about the gender card til some neocon beauty queen with no experience gets called out for being the unqualified embarassment she is. NOW everyone wants to cry foul? When Palin herself called Hillary Clinton a "whiner"?

Oh HELL no.

[Saphirea]

And how did you come up with this illuminating fact? Didn't think he wanted to eat the fetus to grow stronger for the stem cells.

Edit - As far as it being pulled from the blogosphere it's the bloody internet, what do you expect? And doesn't really matter where the speech is being made; you don't speak as such because then you begin giving the younger more impressionable people the idea that whatever the US and it's government does is for the Good because "God" Said so.

Hell I know the DC is corrupt; by using her as such would begin implying that we do Gods work. Which we sure as shit don't.

Well where do I begin...

Ok for state to restrict late-term partial birth abortion

On an issue like partial birth abortion, I strongly believe that the state can properly restrict late-term abortions. I have said so repeatedly. All I've said is we should have a provision to protect the health of the mother, and many of the bills that came before me didn't have that.
Part of the reason they didn't have it was purposeful, because those who are opposed to abortion have a moral calling to try to oppose what they think is immoral. Oftentimes what they were trying to do was to polarize the debate and make it more difficult for people, so that they could try to bring an end to abortions overall.
As president, my goal is to bring people together, to listen to them, and I don't think that's any Republican out there who I've worked with who would say that I don't listen to them, I don't respect their ideas, I don't understand their perspective. And my goal is to get us out of this polarizing debate where we're always trying to score cheap political points and actually get things done.
Source: Fox News Sunday: 2008 presidential race interview Apr 27, 2008

Voted against banning partial birth abortion

Obama's record in Illinois represents that of a pragmatic progressive, who pushed for moderate reforms and opposed right-wing legislation. In the IL legislature, voting "present" is the equivalent of voting "no" because a majority of "yes" votes are required for passage. Many IL legislators use the "present" vote as an evasion on an unpopular choice, so that they can avoid being targeted for voting "no." During the 2004 Democratic primary, an opponent mocked Obama's "present" vote on abortion bills with flyers portraying a rubber duck and the words, "He ducked!".
In 1997, Obama voted against SB 230, which would have turned doctors into felons by banning so-called partial-birth abortion, & against a 2000 bill banning state funding. Although these bills included an exception to save the life of the mother, they didn't include anything about abortions necessary to protect the health of the mother. The legislation defined a fetus as a person, & could have criminalized virtually all abortion.
Source: The Improbable Quest, by John K. Wilson, p.147-148 Oct 30, 2007

Rated 100% by NARAL on pro-choice votes in 2005, 2006 & 2007

Sen. Obama received the following scores on NARAL Pro-Choice America's Congressional Record on Choice.
2007: 100 percent
2006: 100 percent
2005: 100 percent
Source: NARAL voting record, www.ProChoiceAmerica.org Jan 1, 2008

Yes, I have major issues with his stances on this. How can one say you're a "Devout Christian" yet believe in the killing of unborn life. Same with his running mate, saying "Catholic" and yet not agreeing with teachings of the church. No wonder the USCCB want's to deny him Communion along with Pelosi.

[Xno Kappa]

Well where do I begin...








Yes, I have major issues with his stances on this. How can one say you're a "Devout Christian" yet believe in the killing of unborn life. Same with his running mate, saying "Catholic" and yet not agreeing with teachings of the church. No wonder the USCCB want's to deny him Communion along with Pelosi.

I can sum up your post quite easily since you refuse to acknowledge the others that show the hypocrisy of Palin.

FUCK RELIGION, CHURCH =/= STATE!

[Saphirea]

Because Palin's VP candidacy and the platform she's a part of are almost completely antithetical to the women's movement. She's against a woman having control over her own body, and her running mate is also against equal pay for women. The platform is also against affirmative action, which women, white ones especially, have been served more by than any other demographic. Her selection for VP was grossly transparent as a desperate attempt to grab women voters, which feminists find disrespectful to their intelligence. I'm sure NOW could express some sort of approval or pride for her being elected Governor, as it's something she by and large accomplished on her own merits, but they do not like what they perceive as a token woman on the ticket to get votes.

Hillary was someone who built her presidential campaign on her merits and someone who has supported feminist issues. Her getting 18 million votes on that basis is something for feminists to be excited about.

basically: to feminists, Palin is an Uncle Tom/token negro.

Thank you for writing something that I could read and understand, again, my lack of knowledge comes into play and it's more of a "Why is this like this" not a "Oh hell no I won't listen because it's someone supporting a democrat"

[zoobernut]

And why does their personal beliefs and religion have anything to do with their policies and the laws that the rest of the citizens of this country have to follow?

This country despite many peoples efforts is not Christian or Catholic. They are not making policies for themselves they are making them for the whole country.

[Correction]

You Americans have an unhealthy obsession with the private lives of others, especially your politicians. If what they did isn't illegal, it really shouldn't concern any of you.

If our government can tell us what's legal and not legal in our own bedrooms, the personal lives of our politicians is fair fucking game.

[Seraph]

Doesn't change my opinion of him but at least it's now more of he loves killing babies; something that I have grave reasons to not vote for him.

Gonna go off on a slight derail and rant here. Sorry, but this annoys me.

For years, I was raised in a very,very Pro-Life setting. Now, I'll say it up front; I'm not all that thrilled about abortions. I generally feel it is the lazy way out. Adoption is always an option that is overlooked by both sides. Do I feel abortion should be illegal? Eh, that's still up for grabs in my mind.

"Pro-Life" always seems to imply the lack of choice. You have baby cells in you, and now you need to raise and take care of them. Pro-lifers never seem to mention adoption, since apparently that's not the glorious holy road to take. This always pissed me off about the Pro-Life education I always recieved.

"Pro-Choice" people pissed me off just as much. They argue for choice, and the choice is always abortion. I never hear adoption talked about. Never. I mean, seriously, if you don't want to take care of the upcomming child, or do not possess the means to, why is giving it up such a big deal? It resolves the problem without any moral or emotional problems that I know of. Maybe abandonment, but I'd rather know I was given a chance than be dead. Is it due to the shame of having to carry a child for 9 months that you ultimately don't plan on raising? I'd say suck it up, and be the better person.

As for the stem-cell research issue, that's just another example of these two groups butting heads. There is no need to kill demi-babies anymore. Hell, they can get stem cells from the placenta now. There is no destruction of unique human life. The dilema now is 'gabage can, or science lab' as far as this birth waste product goes. We used to rip organs out of dead people and mix and match them before. I don't necessarly see the moral dilemma in growing new ones, or producing the cells to make a failing organ work again. The fear of responsible science always came off as ignorant to me. I'm not talking about some super mutent army of clone people. I'm talking about helping sick people. Just another way of trying to help and respect human life.

Everytime I see this issue brought up, you just get people on each side of the wall seeing who can piss higher, instead of finding realistic solutions, it's always 'UR DOIN IT WRONG'.


And as far as creationist stuff goes, you can believe whatever you want as to our initial origins, but don't go off spouting that evolution doesn't exist. Why the hell do you think people get the flu every year? The damn stuff mutates each season. Don't tell me Jesus puts new colds on earth every year because the doctors pray for more money. I try to be as religious as I can, and even I don't buy that. -_-



Edit: My point becomes this; just because something is considered morally wrong, doesn't mean it can necessarly be illegal. Many times divorces, lying, and other situations are considered immoral, but are far from illegal. The issue of legality becomes "What happens when different groups of people disagree on something is morally wrong?" How do you decide whether it should be illegal? This falls directly into the abortion debate.

[Saphirea]

I can sum up your post quite easily since you refuse to acknowledge the others that show the hypocrisy of Palin.

FUCK RELIGION, CHURCH =/= STATE!

No but are you to throw your religious beliefs out the window if it's something that you've been brought up with all of your life and you too believe?

Take religion out of the equation. Morally I believe that abortion is killing babies because I feel that life begins at conception. If that wasn't the case then why is it countlessly people are charged with double homicide / double manslaughter in cases where the woman was found to be pregnant?

[Saphirea]

Gonna go off on a slight derail and rant here. Sorry, but this annoys me.

For years, I was raised in a very,very Pro-Life setting. Now, I'll say it up front; I'm not all that thrilled about abortions. I generally feel it is the lazy way out. Adoption is always an option that is overlooked by both sides. Do I feel it should be illegal? Eh, that's still up for grabs in my mind.

"Pro-Life" always seems to imply the lack of choice. You have baby cells in you, and now you need to raise and take care of them. Pro-lifers never seem to mention adoption, since apparently that's not the glorious holy road to take. This always pissed me off about the Pro-Life education I always recieved.

"Pro-Choice" people pissed me off just as much. They argue for choice, and the choice is always abortion. I never hear adoption talked about. Never. I mean, seriously, if you don't want to take care of the upcomming child, or do not possess the means to, why is giving it up such a big deal? It resolves the problem without any moral or emotional problems that I know of. Maybe abandonment, but I'd rather know I was given a chance than be dead. Is it due to the shame of having to carry a child for 9 months that you ultimately don't plan on raising? I'd say suck it up, and be the better person.

As for the stem-cell research issue, that's just another example of these two groups butting heads. There is no need to kill demi-babies anymore. Hell, they can get stem cells from the placenta now. There is no destruction of unique human life. The dilema now is 'gabage can, or science lab' as far as this birth waste product goes. We used to rip organs out of dead people and mix and match them before. I don't necessarly see the moral dilema in growing new ones, or producing the cells to make a failing organ work again. The fear of responsible science always came off as ignorant to me. I'm not talking about some super mutent army of clone people. I'm talking about helping sick people. Just another way of trying to help and respect human life.

Everytime I see this issue brought up, you just get people on each side of the wall seeing who can piss higher, instead of finding realistic solutions, it's always 'UR DOIN IT WRONG'.


And as far as creationist stuff goes, you can believe whatever you want as to our initial origins, but don't go off spouting that evolution doesn't exist. Why the hell do you think people get the flu every year? The damn stuff mutates each season. Don't tell me Jesus puts new colds on earth every year because the doctors pray for more money. I try to be as religious as I can, and even I don't buy that. -_-

I agree with a ton of what you wrote here, especially the adoption angle. The amount of red-tape that one has to go through in the US to adopt is so high that's a ton are adopted from abroad. It's plain easier.
Also, I never said I don't believe in some aspects of evolution, I believe they can be taught side by side, something we'll not find out until our own death the answer too.

[Quixon]

McCain will never get women voters on his side....


Obama has Oprah Winfrey on his side.

[zoobernut]

No but are you to throw your religious beliefs out the window if it's something that you've been brought up with all of your life and you too believe?

Take religion out of the equation. Morally I believe that abortion is killing babies because I feel that life begins at conception. If that wasn't the case then why is it countlessly people are charged with double homicide / double manslaughter in cases where the woman was found to be pregnant?

Yes when you become a politician when you lead a country and when you are in charge of creating laws or passing laws that control how people live their lives I absolutely believe that you throw your upbringing and religion out the window. That is not the time or place to force other peoples into your beliefs. You can do whatever you want during your off time and live your life however you personally want to but your motivations for policy effecting the entire country should have no basis in what religion you were brought up with.

If someone brought up believing Voodoo was elected president would you be ok if they made it a law that everyone had to sacrifice a chicken every night?

[Sera]

Morally I believe that abortion is killing babies because I feel that life begins at conception...

And you know what? That's cool of you. I respect that. I don't agree though. Why should your morals dictate what others are allowed to do, if its none of your business? That's all I want to know. No one is going to put a gun to your head and force you to abort, so how are your values threatened by the fact that others have a choice to do what they feel is correct according to THEIR beliefs?

I also don't agree with the double homicide thing, though. You bring up a good point. Can't have it both ways.

If our government can tell us what's legal and not legal in our own bedrooms, the personal lives of our politicians is fair fucking game.

Only if that politician isn't a woman, apparently.

[Penthesilea]

No but are you to throw your religious beliefs out the window if it's something that you've been brought up with all of your life and you too believe?

Take religion out of the equation. Morally I believe that abortion is killing babies because I feel that life begins at conception. If that wasn't the case then why is it countlessly people are charged with double homicide / double manslaughter in cases where the woman was found to be pregnant?

You don't need to throw your beliefs out the window, just keep them to yourself. The double homicide argument won't stand because, as bad as it sounds, I'm certain the mother wanted it and felt like she could provide for it, whereas the aborted case is something that is either not wanted, unhealthy, or the parents are unable to care after the child.

[Rhinox]

No but are you to throw your religious beliefs out the window if it's something that you've been brought up with all of your life and you too believe?

Take religion out of the equation. Morally I believe that abortion is killing babies because I feel that life begins at conception. If that wasn't the case then why is it countlessly people are charged with double homicide / double manslaughter in cases where the woman was found to be pregnant?

For the party that quotes the founding fathers alot you guys sure love to shit on separation of church and state.

I'm a catholic but i'm also a fucking realist. If we were to stand by the Archaic teachings that the vatican wants to impose on us every time it passes an edict we would be fighting along side the radical extremists in trying to eradicate the jews. Alot of people put way to much faith into church leaders as if they have some direct line to god. They don't, they are human beings just like you or me. They don't have more of a connection to god then I do. they also have an agenda.

[Saphirea]

Well, should abortion be a nationally debated topic left to supreme court justices or left up to state legislation for the people to vote on then?

You guy's are bringing up good points, especially on the keeping them to yourself part. Even though I'm religious, I too support the sepreration of church and state, I don't want some government official telling me what religion I have to practice, or if I could be allowed to at all.