« Update on Sarah Palin’s alleged affair | Main | Firefox, forgive me. I’m in love with Chrome. »

September 06, 2008

Comments

I gather the syllogism goes like this

Sarah Palin is a politician

Politicians typically lie

Therefore Sarah Palin is a liar

Therefore it's fair to keep floating any rumors that might help to besmirch her character.

The lies, Idler are things like she didn't support the bridge to nowhere when she did before she did not. If someone lies about one thing like how well she has managed the funds for the people of Alaska, then they will lie about others. Isn't that the justification the right wing used to go after Bill Clinton for lying about a blowjob?

Rain, good response to Idler. Right on. It isn't making mistakes that's a problem for politicians -- we all do that.

It's refusing to admit a mistake. We've suffered through eight years of that with Bush.

This is why Troopergate is so important. There's phone call evidence that her staff put pressure, on her behalf, to have a state trooper fired. That's bad enough.

Worse, is Palin's refusal to admit that she did this. And now, the McCain campaigns's attempt to get the investigation into Trooopergate delayed until after the election.

Palin claims she didn't do anything wrong. Great. Then she should do everything she can to get the investigation moving, and a report issued ASAP. Is that happening? No.

This shows she's got something to hide. Not a good sign for a supposed maverick reformer. Sure sounds like the same old Bush administration "shuck and jive."

"Worse" is Palin's refusal to interpret the "evidence" adduced in a way that is politically convenient to you.

What obligation does Palin have to go out of her way to lend credence to something that is being exhumed out of political opportunism? Democrats have searched high and low, without the encumbrance of decency, to find something, something that might make Sarah Palin go away.

You just think you have a better chance with this, even though it's a trivial matter attached to a law suit that was dismissed nearly a decade ago.

Regarding the lame charge of "lies" about the bridge to nowhere, exactly when were these lies perpetrated? The governor may have thought it was a fine project but then decided that it was not and successfully killed it.

Keep digging in the muck, folks. Maybe you'll find something. In the meantime, you just look dirtier and dirtier.

Palin said during her speech that she helped stop the bridge to nowhere except she didn't do that. So she said something just now which proved to be a lie. Her 'resume' is full of that kind of thing.

Do some research, Idler. There is plenty of information on the lies of Palin but people like you believe what your party tells you. You watch fox or listen to rush and think you are getting the whole story. You smugly think wow, we have a real mean woman here who is going to show those nasty liberals what for. You are being used to make a lot of money for some while others pay the price. You buy into the welfare mom being something that threatens you while it's really groups like Haliburton who have gotten richer off the Iraq war with no accountability.

When this happens, it's not just democrats who get hurt. Economically the republicans haven't helped the middle class and you didn't hear McCain or Palin say a word about making it better. So unless you are a billionaire, you are supporting a party who doesn't support you. They gave a dime in tax cuts to the average person while running the country into a massive debt that who knows when it can be gotten in control.

Rush jokingly says that people refer to his fans as mind-numbed robots. Anybody can be that if they refuse to do research for themselves. If they believe whatever is said without looking for the real truth. Palin isn't who you want to think and you are thinking she is in it for you. She's not!

There's plenty of information out there on Palin's real record, on what she did versus what she says she did. It's only a question of whether you look or trust someone else to do it for you.

If you liked Bush, well vote for McCain Palin and get more of it. If you think any talk about environment is done by communists, be prepared for air you can't breathe.

It's actually funny, in a sarcastic sense to watch how the Republicans fall in line on this without looking or thinking. Now McCain says he's going to be the agent of change. McCain voted with Bush 90% of the time. How much change were you expecting from him? Words in conventions are cheap, but they seem to work with a lot of people who don't bother to look for the facts.

You will not find real facts from Rush or fox. They are told what to say and given their talking points. 90% of talk radio is the same way. But you can find out if you aren't afraid of what you will see. There is a pretty funny video out on Jon Stewart's Daily Show with actual clips of Rove and others saying one thing before the Palin nomination and something totally the opposite now... and somehow their fans fall right in line, nod their heads and go amen.

Republicans seem to think the damage that Bush has done to this country and that Palin McCain will continue only impacts Democrats. It gets us all, my friend... (used that last because it irks me so much when McCain uses it all the time-- friend my foot)

What were we talking about?

Oh, yes, Sarah Palin.

Is it your contention that she had nothing to do with stopping the bridge to nowhere?

Idler, yes, Palin was very much for the Bridge to Nowhere. Alaskans know that, and (according to Reuters)are upset that she's playing fast and loose with the truth. Once again. See:
http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed7/idUSN3125537020080901?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=10215

Excerpt:
In the city Ketchikan, the planned site of the so-called "Bridge to Nowhere," political leaders of both parties said the claim was false and a betrayal of their community, because she had supported the bridge and the earmark for it secured by Alaska's Congressional delegation during her run for governor.

I just love the smell of the corn patch this time of year right after you water it.
There is this wonderful sweet smell that hangs in the air; its great!
All of the work on the bee hives is done except for an occasional feeding. Oh, and talk about a killer smell. Opening a bee hive lets out about the finest smell that a nose ever found, this time of year!
How about our wonderful fall weather. Doesn't get better than this!
Add a positive attitude to it all and life is all good!
Speaking of positive attitudes; I'm sure that President McCain will find a spot in his cabinet for B. Hussein Obama.
OOOOPS!!
Sorry if that last part was off-topic.
:-Q

She actually cancelled the project. You'd rather ignore that.

Does her statement convey the entire truth? No. But it's not untruthful, as is your contention that she had nothing to do with cancelling the project.

The article suggests that she finessed her earlier support, when she realized that it was creating a bad impression on a national level. That's a politically prudent thing to do and in itself may be no indication of a reforming spirit. However, other things clearly do, and she does get credit for actually killing the project.

The fact that the recipients of the pork are resentful that they didn't get it isn't exactly impartial testimony.

Idler, I admire your rationalizations. We all adjust reality to fit our world view, but I find that conservatives are better at this than progressives -- who have a greater respect for reality.

Thanks for taking part in our discussions here. Really. I find it interesting to see how conservatives think -- just a lot different from how most of the people I interact with see the world.

I agree with your last comment, Brian. I think it's very neat that you have comments from the right and from people who aren't vicious or nasty. I have read a lot of what the right says in other places and there is a group of them that are vicious and slur anybody who disagrees with them. I feel the ones here disagree but in a way that indicates they are good people but just see it differently. I hope those good people will actually look for the facts on Palin and not believe what Rove wants them to believe.

What gets me is how Rove slipped out of Bush's administration; so he could do what he is doing. McCain has seen himself taken over and the man I could have voted for in 2000 has sold out everything in which he believed (or said he did).

I watched the delegates at the Republican convention cheer the 9/11 photo and wondered what has happened to their brains. I listened to them talk about how wonderful small towns are and how they know things the rest of the country (world) doesn't. But when Daily Show asked what that was, they had no clue. I live in the country, near a small town, know quite a lot about both, and guess what there is as much corruption here as anywhere. It only takes looking and not being someone else's dupe. You might snicker, Harry about McCain winning but if he wins, he will have a battle to actually own his own administration. Palin would be much easier to control and a lot like Rove probably hope that McCain won't be around long. Palin is who you on the right need to be looking at as she's most likely to be the president sooner than later. Look at her actual record to see what that would mean. Alaska is a beautiful state. It does not represent the average of what America faces.

Issues are what we need to be looking at now-- whether we are on the right or the left. Forget personalities and think about the real issues that face us. Iraq has been one but the economic situation is a bigger one and could impact a lot of people's hoped retirement. Whose brought about that looming economic crunch (at the least)? Who got us into this debt (tip it's not welfare moms)? How much responsibility for the housing crunch is due to Phil Gramm, who McCain will have on any cabinet of his (assuming he gets to choose)? Look and don't believe one source.

who has not whose... gotta start proof reading sooner than later :)

I appreciate your civility too, Rain.

However, I think it's interesting that you think it's OK to make a factually false claim as the basis of questioning someone else's veracity.

follow her record, Idler. Look at the Alaskan papers. She didn't say no to the Bridge to Nowhere until Congress had already indicated it was a no go and she was told she could have the $233 million anyway for whatever loose projects he wanted. In short, she took the pork from the rest of us. The truth of it can be found many places and the Boston Herald is only one: http://news.bostonherald.com/news/2008/view.bg?articleid=1116208&srvc=2008campaign&position=12 Palin has been a pork gatherer in her small town also. The problem is does the rest of the country have any possible method to keep sending money off that way? We are so deeply in debt as a nation to other countries, where do we hope to borrow it if she continues her policies. McCain is no better. What any of the politicians say needs to be checked against what happened. Words are cheap. Borrowing money not so much so.

Rain,

If you're irritated at not being able to "keep sending money off" then you shouldn't be on the side of the disgruntled people who didn't get their bridge. If you're against federal money for state infrastructure projects come out and say so. If the money went to fund a more modest ferry project for that particular geography, isn't that a good thing? Especially if it's true that projected costs for the bridge rose to nearly $400 million.

The Boston Herald story is an attempt to parse a single claim made by Gov. Palin to call attention to the possibility that, as the author put it, the reality is more complicated. More complicated, but not false, as you either recklessly or dishonestly claimed.

The reporter was at least fair enough to acknowledge that, you know what, Palin does look like a more responsible kind of governor. Taken all in all, the story shows a kind of grudging respect, despite the reporter's mission to focus on an equivocal claim. The reporter acknowledges that Palin did not lie, while insisting, fairly enough, that "the truth is more complicated" than Palin's soundbite suggests.

Rain took a less honest path by claiming that Palin lied. That itself was a falsehood. I'll go on record saying that such a low level of prevarication shouldn't disqualify Rain from public office. On the contrary, it would be an asset.

I based what I said on what I have read many places-- that she said she stopped that project when she is not the one who did that-- public opinion stopped it. If the public had not become enraged, would she have gone ahead supporting it as she started out doing? If she hadn't been given the money anyway would she have still said stop it?

As for lying, people could be wrong, which I have yet to see that I was, and still not be lying. I would personally not want liars in public office.

Also, I am not a fan of pork barrel spending and have never said I was. There is a lot more to Palin's record than the one thing.

At any rate, you want to vote for McCain and have made that clear; so continuing to argue about it gains nothing.

To be fully clear, I don't want a christianist in office; so without a doubt a person of her value set (book banning for one) will not get my vote however they do on ferries or bridges. I didn't like her manner, her words, or her attitude and that naturally prejudices me against her. I might give someone I liked the benefit of the doubt when they say something that isn't exactly the truth.

The bigger truth in what Palin said is that she is against pork barrel spending but her record as mayor (a job that she hasn't exactly shown she excelled at given the debt she left that town) was that she coveted all the pork she could get-- when it was for her projects.

If I liked her though, saw her as someone I would enjoy sitting down and having a glass of wine with, more of a pagan and naturist, would I see it the same way, probably not. I have often, in my own blog, said most of us see (from the same set of facts) what suits us which you and I have just proven.

another link on the subject from the viewpoint of how Alaskans saw it and the timeline for her varying statements: http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed7/idUSN3125537020080901

Barack Obama rocketed to super-stardom after America’s Queen of TV, Oprah Winfrey threw her sup­port behind him. Transformed into a flawlessly pack­aged and directed Harpo production, the telepromted orator promises he will “heal the nation and repair the world.” This modest agenda includes promises to lift Americans from poverty and improve middle ­class living standards.

However, in Obama’s first foray into the arena of change, as a grass­roots organizer in Chicago’s poverty stricken South Side, Barack conceded defeat. “On issues we made very little progress, nothing that would change poverty on the South Side of Chicago.”

Unable to point to just one derelict South Side street revived during seven years in the Illinois Senate or as a US Senator, Obama’s promise to “heal the nation and repair the world,” is spectacularly unreasuring.

Barack Obama’s Iraq War track record is as dis­concerting as his history as the candidate of change...

2002 – Obama denounced the Iraq War as a “… dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.”

2004 – Told The New York Times, “I’m always care­ful to say that I was not in the Senate, so perhaps the reason I thought [the war] was such a bad idea was that I didn’t have the benefit of U.S. intelligence.”

July 2004 – Told the Chicago Tribune “There’s not that much difference between my position [on the war] and George Bush’s position at this stage.”

In 2007 (just before announcing his run for the Presidency), he outlined a plan to begin “redeployment of U.S. forces no later than May 1, 2007” and “remove all combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008.”

After winning the Democratic primary in 2008, Obama moved up the troop withdrawal date to May 2010, but this year the Bush administration has announced drawabacks of US troops from Iraq almost two years ahead of Barack's schedule.

Recently, following his speech at the Democratic Na­tional Convention he told reporters that the United States had an “absolute obligation” to remain in Iraq long enough to make it a success.

Barack was against the surge and now that the surge is a success he hasn't acknowledged his error in judgement(of course).

Barack Obama’s campaign is built on change, but he's never changed anything except his status as a politician. And the only time he was right about the Iraq war was when he admits he didn't have the US intelligence that may have led him to vote differently regarding the war.

Don't you all see? He's just another political hack full of as many contradictions, mistakes, BS and pandering as any other candidate, and he's accomplished nothing substantial to prove himself.

Don't believe for a minute I think McCain isn't above all this. He has a history of contradiciton which he spins as being a "maverick". So, I need not spell it out. It's plain as graffiti on a wall.

It's this fake, manufactured Obama image as the "candidate of change and hope" that needs to be exposed. Obamists are like cult followers sucking up the Kool-Aid. His real audacity is that he thinks, and often succeeds, he can get you to drink it.

That's politics. They're all phonies and liars. Maybe not at the core of their being, but that is how the game is played. It's the way the system works if you want to get votes.

All you really know is what the parties represent:

Republicans: Individual initiative. Smaller government.

Democrats: Entitlements and larger government.

Both have problems in the context of human weakness.


Republicans also are in favor of dictatorial powers in the hands of their president (when it's theirs), condor. They are in favor of rewriting the rights out of the Constitution and as for less gov't, not so when it's your bedroom or private sexual habits. What the Republicans originally stood for is very little like what we are seeing in Bush and likely will with McCain Palin.

I don't know for sure about McCain though. He has changed his mind so many times that who knows what he would end up doing. The worst fear is his tendency to be a loose cannon, to blow up and when someone has the power of the presidency, who could put a lid on that? How many wars can this country afford to fight at one time? And will Republicans finally quit borrowing to fund the ones they want?

Sarah Palin is a smarmy, pea brained wanna be book banner, end of the world any minute believing, Alaska out of the union, "god" will help us win the hockey game and Iraq- moron.

Is this off the deep end Alaskan Independence party shill really the best you can do?

The woman has enough BS already to her credit to sink 10 politicians...among them, her bogus claim to be a "pork cutter" after hiring a lobbyist that won Alasak 297 million in pork, NINE TIMES the per capita pork as the average state.

If you want to see how, in their own words, the current day republicans are completely FOS...check out the before and after palin words from several of these scumbags here...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbSI64A3lhM

How about some of you "conservatives" do some actual reading (?!) and turn off Faux news, Billy O and the pill popping hypocrite Limbbaugh?

Hopefully the press will do it's job and prove the multiple scandals that have been rumored, and this screechy bird brain will be history.


Rich

She is a sneivling right-wing bitch that needs to be taught a lesson. Stop betraying your gender with pro-life views and stay out of politics. It's obvious that she is a shitty mom...why else would she have a Down's Syndrome baby or let her 17-year old slut daughter get pregnant? Bush-Cheney have already destroyed this country...could she repair any of the damage?

I feel sorry for Alaska, her kids, and her husband who probably hasn't had a hot meal in years.

I see the "progressive" love and logic is in full flower:

"Hopefully the press will do it's job and prove the multiple scandals that have been rumored, and this screechy bird brain will be history. "

You, see the "multiple scandals" just have to be true, so we'll all just assume they are and wait for our allies in the press to provide proof.

Gotta love this enlightened discourse:

"She is a sneivling right-wing bitch that needs to be taught a lesson. Stop betraying your gender with pro-life views and stay out of politics."

What was Brian saying about bias and nastiness being a mark of the right? Philosophical disagreement is "betrayal." Uppity bitches need to be taught a lesson: the new feminist creed!

On a completely separate note, I have noticed here and elsewhere many commenters, left-wing and right-, concluding with the statement, "And if there's one thing this whole thing demonstrates..." Well, if I may make a non-partisan observation, if there's one thing this whole thing has demonstrated to me, it's that Americans don't know how to spell "hypocrisy." Surely that's something we can agree on!

GaryG really has it down. I hear Palin banged the entire football team at her high school and threatened the former players' families if they exposed her. Not only that, but she never graduated from college. Her degree was paid for with a bribe. All of her children's teachers reported signs of maternal physical and sexual abuse, but again threats and bribes have kept them silent. All evidence points to her being just a horrible, terrible person who would as soon eat your liver (raw) as be your friend. In fact, I've heard she's done just that, but its a rumor. We can rely on the Enquirer to confirm its validy soon, I hope, for the good of humanity and countless generations to come.

Rain said: "Republicans also are in favor of dictatorial powers in the hands of their president (when it's theirs), condor."

--Where did I deny that, or even bring up the topic in my last comment, Rain? What does that have to do with it? Your obsessive partisanship is distorting in your mind what I wrote.


I was not saying you said that, Condor. I was referring to what you said Republicans favored which was-- 'Individual initiative. Smaller government.' And adding on what the last administration has done with its trashing of the Constitution to gain more power for itself, with signing statements, and Republicans helped Bush do it.

The irony is that even McCain is running against Bush now. The problem is would McCain be that different. We know by her record and what she said in the Convention that Palin wouldn't...

What you were saying Republicans stand for has been what they have claimed, not what they have done when they had the power evidenced by the way the government has expanded under the power of Bush and the Republican controlled Congress until the American people said enough two years ago.

And I don't defend the do nothing Democrats either but just somebody has to stand up for what this country has stood for and seems to have forgotten when fear has driven the people to forget about freedom. It's about unalienable rights and a belief in the power of the individual to do good when that power is unleashed. Neither party has been very good at that which is why many of us are claiming we need change.

My hope is with Obama because of the reasons I have mentioned but if he doesn't do right, then someone else and keep changing parties and power until one of them remembers what we are supposed to be about.

I did the same thing. What a worthless rag the Enquirer turned out to be. There wasn't a thing in the article that hasn't been all over the net for a week. I did find a copy of the 'Palin Letter' online however and posted it on my blog. Now there's a real gem!

To all,

In her 9/7/08 @ 5:51 AM remarks (above), Rain stated of "the right" that: "...there is a group of them that are vicious and slur anybody who disagrees with them."

A lot of that also takes place in/at Brian's other weblog too.

Robert Paul Howard

Regarding this pot farm you are accused of having- if Sarah Palin's daughter's is caught with weed, would the holier than thou neo-cons then move to legalize it? They seem to shift with the wind these days. Personally, I prefer fresh garden tomaotes and tender squash, but whatever floats your boat.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Strange Up Salem

Welcome to HinesSight

  • Salem Political Snark
    My local political rants are now made on this badass blog. Check it out. Dirty politics, outrageous actions, sleaze, backroom deals — we’re on it. 

  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • Church of the Churchless
    Visit my other weblog, Church of the Churchless, where the gospel of spiritual independence is preached.

  • Welcome to HinesSight. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.