Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Believe in Sarah

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 11:09 AM
link   
I’ve heard a lot around here recently about how McCain should drop Palin and select another Vice President. I have to say that honestly, that would completely ruin his chances of becoming President. I want to be perfectly clear about one thing from the beginning.

Palin is under attack because she was such a good choice, and I’ll explain to you why.

For Democrats this cycle, one of their strongest cases against McCain was that he was another Bush clone. When McCain chose Sarah Palin as his running mate, he showed how truly different from George Bush he really is. Bush never would have made a decision like that.

Furthermore, Sarah Palin only drives home one of the more important aspects of the McCain campaign; that despite being in politics for as long as he has, he is an outsider and a strong foe of corruption in government. McCain is the one who stands up against earmarks, pork, and lobbyists. He is the one who backs campaign finance reform. Palin brings these same qualities to the ticket.

None of these so called “scandals” reflect anything negative on Sarah Palin herself. Hers are the kind of family issues that many American woman face.

Should Palin not serve as VP because her daughter is pregnant? Or because her husband had a DWI 20 years ago? Or because her sister married a state trooper, who used a tazer on his 11 year old son? Or because she used her legal right to fire the head of the State Police when he saw no reason to fire the trooper?

Sarah Palin has an extensive public record, with more executive experience than Obama or Biden (or McCain).

After years and years of electing pre-molded political figures, we have the chance to vote for a real person with real problems that millions of American can relate to.

By standing by Palin, McCain reveals much about his attitude and stance on issues that plague many Americans. His loyalty to her shows us not only his decency, but also his good sense.

All of these things only further illustrate the point of the RNC; that John McCain is nothing like George W. Bush.




posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by nyk537
Palin is under attack because she was such a good choice, and I’ll explain to you why.


You may be right that SOME people are attacking her because they feel threatened by her. Personally, there's only one reason I do not support her and that is her political views. They are 180 degrees out from mine.

I don't have an opinion one way or another whether McCain should replace her. I really don't care. It's not going to make a difference in my vote.



When McCain chose Sarah Palin as his running mate, he showed how truly different from George Bush he really is. Bush never would have made a decision like that.


A decision like what? I don't understand what specifically about McCain's choice is so different than what Bush might decide. Can you expand on that? Thanks.



None of these so called “scandals” reflect anything negative on Sarah Palin herself. Hers are the kind of family issues that many American woman face.


I agree 100% that her family issues are absolutely irrelevant. But there are a lot of issues being discussed that reflect her politics, which are highly relevant.


Or because she used her legal right to fire the head of the State Police when he saw no reason to fire the trooper?


That is possibly an abuse of power. She is under investigation and the truth about the situation will come out. But for now, firing someone because they refuse to fire someone else (for personal reasons) does sound like an abuse of power.



All of these things only further illustrate the point of the RNC; that John McCain is nothing like George W. Bush.


I'm not convinced. Not at all. If anything, Sarah Palin is even MORE like G.W. Bush than McCain is.



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


It is more people in the Republican Party who are being sour on Gov. Palin. There are a few of the former candidates who thought they were going to be chosen for the VP slot, and they are letting their grumblings known through the grapevine. Sen McCain will keep her, since letting her go would show he has no backbone.
The Democrats have nothing to fear, as Gov Palin is as conservative as they get. She may scare away more moderate voters. The conservative base would have voted for Sen. McCain anyways.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Sara on Lobbyists...

www.washington post.com


ST. PAUL, Minn., Sept. 1 -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin employed a lobbying firm to secure almost $27 million in federal earmarks for a town of 6,700 residents while she was its mayor, according to an analysis by an independent government watchdog group.


On earmarks...


In fiscal 2000, Wasilla received a $1 million earmark, tucked into a transportation appropriations bill, for a rail and bus project in the town. And in the winter of 2000, Palin appeared before congressional appropriations committees to seek earmarks, according to a report in the Anchorage Daily News.


But, in the article, they lay out much, much more than that. Palin has frequently asked for earmarks throughout her terms as Mayor and Governor.

Also...


In February, Palin's office sent Sen. Stevens a 70-page memo outlining almost $200 million worth of new funding requests for Alaska.


And...

www.desseretnews.com


Palin's current request to Stevens, "would still put Alaska No. 1," said Steve Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a watchdog group that tracks earmarks closely.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 12:13 PM
link   
The Republicans have set themselves up in a very confusing situation this election cycle.

They're running against themselves. McCain is supposed to be this maverick and outsider to Washgton who is going to fight the establishment, and he has chosen Palin in part to bolster that image.

The problem with that image is the Republicans are the establishment. They've had the White House for the last eight years, the Senate the last five out of eight years, the House of Representatives for the last six out of eight years and the Supreme Court for the whole time. McCain has been a Republican all that time and has voted with Bush and the Republicans in the Senate many times. He's hardly a Washington "outsider." McCain is running against the Bush legacy while being endorsed and supported by Bush.

Admittedly, Palin is a real outsider with a feisty temperament, so she helps bolster Mc Cain's image as a reformer, but she could just as easily be a loose cannon. Because of McCain's age the vice presidential choice is especially crucial.

Barack Obama was only known to party insiders before his presidential bid, and it appears Palin is the same, so she can't be faulted for being new to the scene. I saw Palin's speech last night and she was very cute; she reminded me of the peppy student council president in my high school. But in truth I don't really know her and am biased because of her views on many things. The coming election will tell how effective people perceive her to be.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 03:02 PM
link   
I think she was chosen not for her ability to do the job, not for her talents, skills, or previous experience. She wasn't even chosen because of the kind of person she is.

She was chosen because of her image. How she could be portrayed, how McCain and his campaign would look because of choosing her.

They wanted to appeal to hardline christians, women, evangelicals, gun-toting anti-abortionists (if that isn't an oxymoron....)

I don't believe in her, because she has been staged, precisely. She's only been the nominee for a week, but yet look at just how much dirt was hiding just underneath the surface.. Those qualities they try to ascribe to her, the anti-government spending crusader, the moral high ground, the "maverick governor".. are clearly just a facade.. It doesn't really stand up to close scrutiny, but that's ok for the Republicans, because they didn't need it to. They just needed her to appeal to those special interest base groups, who will vote for her because she's "Just like them".

She's not just like me. I believe in the right to choose. I don't believe in hunting for sport. I believe in evolution, in science, I believe in following the path that makes the most sense and has the best results when it comes to things like teenage pregnancy - abstinence education doesn't work, which her daughter could obviously attest to, but I'm quite sure that hasn't changed her mind on sex ed or contraception.

There are two kinds of people in the world. There's one kind, who, they have a belief, an idea that something will work. They travel along that road until they hit a big roadblock, something that says "Your theory was wrong, this clearly isn't working". They back track, go find a different route, maybe one that works, maybe not. But they keep going until they do.

The other kind of people, the Palin kind of people, they hit that roadblock, and instead of reevaluating their position, their belief, they reevaluate how they were applying that - they weren't trying hard enough, some excuse for how it didn't work. Clearly the belief is correct, the method was wrong. They get out the ladders, the national guard, the bombs, whatever, and they blast through that barrier and keep going. They don't allow reality to change their minds, they believe that they can change reality to fit their opinions. IF Palin changed her mind on her beliefs about abstinence, in the wake of her daughter's pregnancy, if she decided that maybe comprehensive sex education and contraceptives available to teens were the way to go, then maybe I'd believe in her.. but if she holds to her current position (which so far it appears she has, at the very least publically) then all she is is another leader just like Bush, who never strays from course, no matter how often it's demonstrated to him just how insanely incorrect he is.

So, no. I don't believe in her character, nor her public image..



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Sarah Palin is as real as it gets and she and McCain have my vote. He will keep her despite what others think and she will not back down from all who challenge her. I'm waiting to hear McCain's speech tonight to really feel the strength in the two. Sarah hit a Grand slam last night and it's only the first inning.
I agree with you nyk357 and I believe it is time for a change.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Solarskye
and I believe it is time for a change.


Couldn't agree with you more. And this is the "real change we've been waiting for"!


McCain and Palin are going to shake things up like you wouldn't believe,and I can't wait for them to get started.

Since I wasn't old enough to vote for Reagan, this is by far the most excited I have EVER been to vote in November.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 03:33 PM
link   
nyk537, I wonder if you might answer a couple of questions I posed to you in my post?

I don't understand what specifically about McCain's choice of Palin as VP is so different than what Bush might decide. Can you expand on that?

AND

You said Bush would never have made a decision "like that". And I wonder what you mean? A decision like what?

Thank you.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 03:39 PM
link   
I find the difference to be quite apparent.

McCain chose Palin.

Bush chose Cheney.

I don't think I need to explain the difference in those two.


McCain's choice of Palin tells me that he is serious about reforming and shaking up Washington politics as usual. If he had chosen Romney or some other politician as usual, I would not be so excited.

I truly believe that McCain and Palin have a strong desire to put this country first as they say, and to fight for the people, not themselves.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by nyk537
I find the difference to be quite apparent.


I understand that YOU do. But to me, the only difference between Cheney and Palin is gender. Is that what you meant?



I don't think I need to explain the difference in those two.


Seriously, if I knew, I wouldn't have asked. If you don't want to answer, that's ok. I just thought I'd try to understand more of your point of view.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 03:48 PM
link   
No problem at all.

I think we can agree that Dick Cheney is not the most likable person to hold office. I also can safely say that he is not much of a reformer, or one who would challenge the process in Washington. Furthermore, I don't believe at all that he is the type who would speak out against Bush if he disagreed with him.

On the other hand, I think Palin is a true reformer, and likable to boot. I believe she would challenge the process in Washington and make things happen. I also honestly believe she will keep McCain in check if she needs to. McCain knows this, and that's partly why he chose her I think. They will keep each other, and Washington, honest.

Hope that helps some.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 05:46 PM
link   
I am respectful to those that believe in their candidates and appreciate when someone can present their opinions without resorting to attacking the opposing side. Great post nyk537. What I want to do in this post is offer a different opinion as to why she was the choice and why we are seeing the current fallout over the selection.

Campaign advisors always play a bigger role in campaigns than the candidates do. It's just like a sitting president who has a cabinet. Advisors and strategists are the ones who create the ads, get the surrogates out there, but most importantly they control the message. The reason why I am laying this out is so we can be clear on how I approach the choice of Sarah Palin for VP.

There was a division in the Democratic party prior to their convention. Barack Obama was doing much better than expected during the primaries and when it got neck and neck with Hillary Clinton the party decided to shift its support towards BO. The superdelegates and endorsements started to flood in in favor of BO and then a lot of them defected in BO's favor to send a message to Hillary to drop out. HC finally suspended her campaign and for the most part left the race. This split the party because the race was almost split evenly. Some of HC's supporters shifted to BO immediately. Some took a while to warm to BO. Some never made the jump.

Leading up to the DNC the press made a really big deal of the division to hype the convention. They trotted out the most disgruntled HC supporters on air, reported possibilities of a fight for the nomination on the convention floor and whatever else they could to hype the convention (because outside a few of the speeches the conventions are kinda boring). Well, Hillary came in an symbolically "unified" the party on day three and everyone was happy thereafter. Still had the speech at Invesco Field to fill in the hype gap.

The Sarah Palin pick can probably be attributed to the McCain campaign sensing the division in the D party that the press had been feeding all week long but they also were probably being fed false info from the BO campaign as well. The fact that the choice that John McCain made was last minute has been documented by several media sources and the "attacks" we are seeing are really a smokescreen for what really happened. I will explain.

By choosing Sarah Palin last minute and making the offer the day before the announcement did not allow the McCain campaign to follow normal vetting procedures. This meant that the press and the public (who wanted to know more about this relatively unknown candidate) were left to do the vetting on their own. Setting up an opportunity for internet vetting by the public (identified or anonymous) was not a good move. Neither was presenting this type of fresh face on the national stage. The press had very limited information and were not getting any access to SP. I truly believe that Sarah Palin appealed to John McCain as a VP pick but her pick was also a play to pick up some votes from the perceived Hillary disgruntled and to shore up the party base.

Soon, anonymous attacks were happening all over the internet and the funny thing is that a lot of the information was being poached from folks out in Alaska! A lot of this stuff was really out there, I read some of it. There was a half truth to a lot that was out there, think of the Chinese telephone game that we played as kids. Tabloid media go in the mix as well as the "respected" press. There were a lot of questions flying around and there were a few undesirable news cycles and the McCain camp had to shut it down.

Cont.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 06:06 PM
link   
Sarah Palin was attacked by keyboard warriors. The McCain campaign defended the fallout from a risky choice by implying that the BO campaign was behind the whole thing and then switched to a different defense by playing the sexist card. You see, they had to deflect the discussion to keep Sarah Palin in the news cycle and to keep the press from hammering her at the same time.

Why do you think that there were so many mentions of the media in unflattering terms chosen to appeal to the party base? It was part of the deflection, an unjustified effort to create and define a bad guy because Sarah Palin was not properly vetted. To this day Sarah Palin has not done any press outside of structured campaign events. She is being protected and the media does not have any access to her apart from the surrogates going out there with the talking points. The McCain campaign pulled a false flag on the press and the press are starting to fight back. The longer the press are denied access the worse it will be for Sarah Palin. The McCain campaign could very well lose the war by winning this battle. This whole affair was unfair to Sarah Palin.

There could have been other candidates who might have done better or worse, we won't know. I hope that Sarah Palin can get out of this mess because the whole thing is a distraction and I'd like to see the candidate on her own terms even though I am in opposition of just about everything she and Johnny stand for
. Just needlin' ya.

Good luck to you and your candidate, hope you will watch John McCain speak tonight.



posted on Sep, 7 2008 @ 03:12 AM
link   
This article

www.laprogressive.com...

makes some interesting accusations about Palin, if they're true.. interesting and worrying..


As Governor, Palin gave the legislature no direction and budget guidelines, according to the chair of a legislative committee. But then she staged a huge grandstand play of line-item vetoing countless projects, calling them pork. “They were restored because of public outcry and legislative action,” the aide said. “She vetoed them mostly because she had no idea what they were or why they were important.” But it was enough to get the McCain, who is mostly unobservant of the world around him anyway, to think Palin has a reputation as being “anti-pork”. In fact, Juneau observers note that Palin kept her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork ladled out by indicted Sen. Ted Stevens. She only opposed the “bridge to nowhere” after it became clear that it would be politically unwise to keep supporting it, these same insiders assert. Then, Palin fell back on her old habits and publicly humiliated him for pork-barrel politics. As for being “ready on day one” to be commander in chief, despite the repeated public claims she’s made, the Alaska National Guard commander said that, “she has made no command decisions, other than sending some troops to help fight a few brush fires and march in parades at county fairs.”


The entire article is worth a read, though as I said, it's not necessarily entirely true and confirmable, and I'll do my best to hunt down sources myself in the next day or so to see if I can confirm it all.. certainly much of it rings true, the assertions about her actions with regards to spending and "pork" for example.. Hard to say whether the racist remarks are true or false, but if that is the kind of person she is, she is definitely not someone who should be so close to the chair of ultimate power in the world..


This document mudflats.files.wordpress.com... is also a fascinating read, though lengthy.

A few snips..


Palin Used Part of the City’s Funds from the Alaska Revenue Sharing Fund to Fund Anti-Abortion Center. In 1997, Palin signed an ordinance appropriating $2,354 in funds to the Valley Crisis Pregnancy Center from the State of Alaska Revenue Sharing fund. The Valley Crisis Pregnancy Center lists itself as an “abortion alternative” in the Yellow Pages.
Crisis Pregnancy Centers Are Known To Give Misleading and Often Inaccurate
Information. A recent government investigation of pregnancy crisis centers found that “The
centers provided false and misleading information about a link between abortion and breast
cancer;” “The centers provided false and misleading information about the effect of abortion on
future fertility;” “The centers provided false and misleading information about the mental health
effects of abortion.” Planned Parenthood also says the centers offer free pregnancy tests but give
ambiguous answers about the results, show shocking films or slide shows while patients wait for
pregnancy results, make exaggerated promises of financial assistance, medical treatment, prenatal
and postpartum care and refuse or fail to provide contraceptive information.






Debt Service Increased 69 Percent Under Palin. In fiscal 2003—the last fiscal year Palin approved the budget—the total government debt service was $658,662. In fiscal 1996—the year before Palin took control of the budget—the debt service was $390,385. The increase was 69 percent. [Wasilla Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 2003, Table 1] Palin Left Behind Almost $19 Million In Long-Term Debt, Compared to None Before She Was Mayor. In fiscal 2003—the last fiscal year Palin approved the budget—the bonded long-term debt was $18,635,000. In fiscal 1996—the year before Palin took control of the budget—there was no general obligation debt. [Wasilla Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 2003, Table 10] Long-Term Debt Was $3000 Per Capita When Palin Left, Compared to None Before She Was Mayor. In fiscal 2003—the last fiscal year Palin approved the budget—the bonded long-term debt per capita was $2,938. In fiscal 1996—the year before Palin took control of the budget—there was no general obligation debt.



Palin Asked City Librarian About Censoring Books, Insisted It Was “Rhetorical.” In 1996, according to the Frontiersman, Wasilla’s library director Mary Ellen “Emmons said Palin asked her outright if she could live with censorship of library books.” Emmons said, “This is different than a normal book-selection procedure or a book-challenge policy…She was asking me how I would deal with her saying a book can’t be in the library.” Palin said in response, “Many issues were discussed, both rhetorical and realistic in nature.”


Palin Plead No Contest to Criminal Negligence Charge of Using a Drift Gillnet Without a Permit, Had Charge of Fishing Without an ID That Was Dismissed. In 1993, Sarah Palin used a drift gillnet to harvest salmon from the Bristol Bay area without an annual permit. Palin plead guilty to the Criminal Negligence charge. Palin also had a case dismissed where she was charged with fishing without a photo ID. The case was filed 6/28/93 and was disposed 8/25/1993. The jurisdiction was the Third Judicial District-Dillingham. [Alaska Criminal



The more I see of her, the more I read, the more questions I have, and the answers I'm seeing aren't good ones. I try to always see both sides of any position or argument, but I consistently cannot come up with a reason for McCain to choose Palin except to help him win the election by appealing to party hard liners. That's the only thing I see, not qualifications, not moral fortitude, not "reformerator"



[edit on 7-9-2008 by Inannamute]



posted on Sep, 13 2008 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


Here is a video from "The Daily Show" about the pundits who are claiming Gov Palin is being unfairly attacked. The clips are put up with earlier clips of these same pundits saying the opposite when it dealt with Hillary (even Gov Palin called Hillary a whiner).

www.thedailyshow.com...

Watch and enjoy



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 04:21 PM
link   
I must disagree that Palin has more experience. She was upheld by Republicans for being mayor a town of a few thousand, while Biden was criticized for not having enough experience being mayor of a city of almost 100,000.

Meanwhile, as far as experience goes, with the economic woes we are currently experiencing, why would I want someone who manages budgets this way:

Palin's Bridge to Nowhere
I am by no means a fan of mudslinging, but this is about policy and what platform she ran on. She ran on the platform of building her "bridge to nowhere", and then when she received the money, she did nothing with it. Not only did she do nothing with the 400 million she received, but Alaska got to keep it.


During her first speech after being named as McCain's surprise pick as a running mate, Palin said she had told Congress "'thanks but no thanks' on that bridge to nowhere."

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.



When she was running for governor in 2006, Palin said she was insulted by the term "bridge to nowhere," according to Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein, a Democrat, and Mike Elerding, a Republican who was Palin's campaign coordinator in the southeast Alaska city.



Last year, Palin announced she was stopping state work on the controversial project, earning her admirers from earmark critics and budget hawks from around the nation. The move also thrust her into the spotlight as a reform-minded newcomer.

The state, however, never gave back any of the money that was originally earmarked for the Gravina Island bridge, said Weinstein and Elerding.


Imagine if she gets to whisper in the President's ear on how to fund the military. "Here's a billion in military contracts. Oh, and if you don't build the tanks, you can just keep the money."

[edit on 16-9-2008 by Sublime620]



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 11:20 AM
link   
I'm not at all comfortable with the information that seems to be seeping out of the people who have worked with her in government. She portrays a fresh young face that takes on the corruption in government, but we're discovering that she plays the corruption game quite well herself.

This article is about an unauthorized $50,000 redecoration to her mayoral office that she had done illegally, using funds allocated to plow snow, grade roads and fill potholes.

I highly recommend reading the entire article. It's an eye-opener.



Carney confronted Mayor Palin at a City Council hearing, and was shocked by her response.

"I braced her about it," he said. "I told her it was against the law to make such a large expenditure without the council taking a vote. She said, 'I'm the mayor, I can do whatever I want until the courts tell me I can't.'"

"I'll never forget it -- it's one of the few times in my life I've been speechless," Carney added. "It would have been easier for her to finesse it. She had the votes on the council by then, she controlled it. But she just pushed forward. That's Sarah. She just has no respect for rules and regulations."


Palin's Wasteful Ways



posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 02:43 PM
link   
I find it kind of shocking that anyone is hinting that Palin should be dropped. She has done exactly what she was needed to do. She ignited the far right 's approval for the ticket and can be John McCain's hatchet-person. All the dem blogs have done is try and ruin her credibility at every turn, shows me they look at her as a worthy adversary. what more could you want in this political day and age?



posted on Sep, 18 2008 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
 


Where is someone hinting that she should be dropped? I haven't heard that.

Maybe I'm not reading carefully enough.





new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join