Sudden change of mind.

reply to post by poet1b

I have been specific, while you are all over the board.

I see. I suppose the fact that I source my information isn't worth anything?

Where have I been all over the board? How is attacking excessive spending when claiming to be a fiscal conservative worse than trying to equate someone to terrorism over a loose connection?

Factcheck.org

Palin supported it even after McCain denounced it, then blamed "inaccurate portrayals" when she canceled it for lack of money. Obama and Biden voted for the big transportation bill that contained it. McCain's vote was one of four against. Our time line gives full details.

NBC News, Sept. 13: Palin has come under fire in recent days for misleadingly saying she told Congress “thanks but no thanks,” refusing an earmark for a bridge to a sparsely inhabited island in her home state. Independent groups and media fact-checkers have said Palin advocated for the federal earmark before opposing it, only ended after Congress had essentially killed it, and kept the $223 million for the appropriation after the project was killed.

Palin had cut the refrain from her speech during her three-day visit to Alaska. But she came back to it today, citing it as an example of earmark reform she and McCain would push for in the White House.

“I told Congress thanks but no thanks to that Bridge to Nowhere – that if our state wanted to build that bridge, we would build it ourselves," she said.

Basically, yeah, she told Congress she didn't want the money after they gave her the money and then killed the project. Then she kept the money and used it for other projects.

The digested version of the time line:

* Palin expressed support for the bridge while running for office.
* Congress removed earmarks for both bridges long before Palin was elected.
* While campaigning, Palin still made statements supporting the Gravina bridge, which had no earmarks at that time.
* Palin chose not to use the money for the Gravina bridge but kept it for other projects, including the Knik Arm bridge.
* Biden and Obama voted for the authorization bill, which included the earmarks, and the final appropriations bill, which didn't. McCain voted against the authorization but was not present for the vote on the appropriations bill.
* Biden and Obama voted against redirecting the money intended for Alaska to Louisiana. McCain did not vote.

Personally, I think the whole project was stupid. Why build a bridge to an island inhabited by 50 people? But that's not the point. I am not discussing who advocated the bridge. I am talking about someone who basically requested money, got it, and then when the job didn't get done, kept it.

And don't say I can't use factcheck.org just because of the Annenberg foundation. Also, you didn't respond to any of the sources I provided, you just said that I'm "all over the board". You think her billing of Alaskan taxpayers for nights that she stayed at home was fiscally conservative?


Palin relied on earmark system she now opposes

On Friday, when McCain introduced her as his running mate, she said she "championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending," the legislative technique used to slip projects into appropriations bills without rigorous congressional review.

But under her leadership, the state of Alaska has requested 31 earmarks worth $197.8 million in next year's federal budget, according to the website of Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), the former chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Palin has recently been publicly critical of requests made in past years by Stevens and others for $223 million in federal funds for a bridge from Ketchikan, Alaska, to Gravina Island, calling it "the Bridge to Nowhere," a derogatory label critics attached to the project.

As a candidate for governor in 2006, she backed funding for the bridge.

After her election, however, she killed the project, saying she would use the federal funds for other purposes.

I can keep going if you want? I just don't see how anyone can claim that she is more fiscally conservative than anyone else in this election.

[edit on 1-11-2008 by Sublime620]

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Sublime620

 

I repeat. No one should have to feel guilty for not supporting Obama.

You have repeated this several times. I don't get it at all. Why are you introducing this idea of "feeling guilty" into this discussion? Who says they feel guilty? How is that part of this discussion?

My read on the OP was that Die Another had an abrupt and inexplicable change of mind while voting. An impulse.

#

It is clear: you think a lot of people are not voting for Obama, and then feeling unnecessarily guilty. Totally wrong, man. People are voting for Obama because they are looking for change. They are voting for McCain because they want to maintain the current status quo a bit more.

That is all there is to it. No guilt involved.

reply to post by Sublime620


Find a credible source, and then you have something. Fact check is skewing their information. We have been through this before.

Palin made a few weak statements supporting the Bridge, and then turned against it before congress approved of the project.

Here is a legitimate link to the real story.

www.politifact.com...

Your characterization is wrong.

The fact remains, Obama voted for the bridge to nowhere twice, while Palin cancelled it.

reply to post by Buck Division


The op expresses guilt for voting for McCain, and that is straight up wrong. This is very clear.

reply to post by poet1b


INCORRECT. It even says it in your source:

Long before Palin killed the project, Congress washed its hands of the bridge.

Congress had accepted the deal. Palin was concurrent. Then Congress "washed their hands of it". Then, eventually, Palin did also. However, she kept the money and used it elsewhere.

Please, do show where my source has in the past skewed facts intentionally.

*Edit to add:

By the way, while I believe officially the foundation remains neutral, the Mrs. Annenberg has announced that she supports McCain.

[edit on 1-11-2008 by Sublime620]

Originally posted by dunwichwitch

Oh and by the way... have a drink on me. Let's all quit our jobs and get #faced drunk and beg the puppets tp beg their masters to push the big red button and end this stupid experiment so we can all move onto better illusions.

Kindly do not include my in your apocalyptical fantasies.

I have never voted for the wrong person but I did think long and hard about giving Nader my vote instead of Gore in 2000. I wasn't in a battleground state and was on the west coast so I voted for Nader.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Buck Division

 

The op expresses guilt for voting for McCain, and that is straight up wrong. This is very clear.

Incorrect. What s/he feels is what s/he feels. What is very clear is that people should be able to share their experiences without being told how to feel about them or worse yet how they feel.

reply to post by Sublime620


If congress washed its hands of the bridge, then why did congress supply the money for the bridge. This statement makes no sense. Fact is a fact, Palin killed the project, while congress left it open.

Palin's record shows a large decrease in federal government assistance of Alaska. You continue to ignore the bigger picture.

reply to post by Buck Division


What part of "regretting" my vote don't you get?

I got a right to express my opinion, just like everyone else.

It is wrong for anyone to regret voting for McCain. That is my opinion.

Apparently, you think you have the right to take away my opinion. Once again, this is extremely wrong.

If you feel guilty for not voting for Obama, that is wrong. IMHO

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Buck Division

 

What part of "regretting" my vote don't you get? I got a right to express my opinion, just like everyone else. It is wrong for anyone to regret voting for McCain. That is my opinion.

You know what? Maybe I am just arguing semantics. I will accept "regret".

I think "guilt" implies regret over having committed some sort of offense. It is a stronger word than "regret". It implies a need for punishment or penitence.

I would say someone might regret voting for someone, without feeling guilty.

Finally, I don't want to hammer you on this point because -- even if your comment is slightly out of context -- it is absolutely true that people should not EVER feel "guilty" for casting a vote (although you might "regret" that vote later.) That is true.

#

I like the way you stick to your guns, Poet. In some ways, this topic is about flip-flopping around, and I like your persistence, even though we can't reach agreement. You definitely have strength of purpose!

Edit: What I mean to say is, of course you have a right to your opinion. I value that.


[edit on 1-11-2008 by Buck Division]

reply to post by poet1b


They supplied their money, and then washed their hands of it. Instead of arguing with me, why don't you read my post. Hell, on the site I provided, factcheck.org, that you so conveniently dismissed for no reason, it has a TIMELINE of the events.

Why don't you look at it and try to understand it better?

I guess if I was broke,had nothing in the future and no direction then I too would vote for Obama,sounds like with his plan why work? let the rich people take care of you

reply to post by Oldtimer2


That or, give the majority of the country more money so that they can use their own discretion on what to buy.

95% of this country makes less than $250,000. We're all bums?

Originally posted by die_another_day
I was going to vote for Obama almost tentatively, but when I was choosing, I mindlessly voted for McCain instead.

How very strange! I tend to go with Res Ipsa on this one.

But you do say you were "tentative" about voting for Obama. So maybe you never really supported him in the first place. If you did, then I'm sorry that you lost all control.

Fortunately, there are HORDES of Republicans and new voters voting for Obama so I REALLY doubt your vote is going to make a difference. If you ARE in Florida as your avatar states and Florida goes for McCain, I think we can rightfully blame you.

I think this is going to happen ALOT, when it is time to pull the trigger your suconscious knows the correct choice and fights your heart to do the right thing.
It is a basic survival instinct. Your subconscious knows what to do to survive.

I know a bit dramatic but you get the picture.

After weeks of watching and listening to many of my friends, family and co-workers, I tend to think that there will be a reverse Bradley effect.

I think that there are more people inclined to vote for Obama based on policies and platform, but feel socially pressured to vote for McCain - particularly here in the South.

I think that, in the private moment of casting their own ballot, they will think of the last eight years and vote for something intellectually, philosophically and strategically different. They will vote for Barack Obama. I hope.

[edit on 1/11/2008 by kosmicjack]

die_another-day, I'm proud of you for voting your conscience at the moment it mattered most. Don't waste a precious moment of your life regretting your decision. My question to you now if why are you wanting validation for your honest decision? Why do you feel the need to tell others of this decision?

As far as those who will change their minds at the last moment I agree that many people will do the same as you. My father, a conservative Republican whom I have fought with for many years over politics, had told me he couldn't possibly vote for McCain and wouldn't vote this year. As a Democrat for the past 16 years who will be voting Republican for the first time in my life I had sadly accepted his decision. He called me this morning and told me that he voted by absentee ballot and had indeed gone ahead and voted for McCain because of... get this... Sarah Palin! I was stunned that this 68-year-old man voted against his first impulse due to his support of Palin. Wow, there is hope for McCain yet!

OMG......Obama is on TV in nevada and says, "we are 3 days away from change......" He sounds so glorious.......

NOT! He cannot do what he says.....and we as a country are going to follow the pied piper down the road to HELL>...........

I am not ready for this and just sheer knowledge how government works know that he cannot do the things he says......so what I am thinking is he is going to totally change our form of government. I am scared as hell watching him...........he has to tell us he has confidence in "you" the american people.........I HAVE CONFIDENCE IN ME! I DON"T NEED HIM telling me he has confidence.......are we in such self pity that we need to be told by him how "great" we are? I already know that.....and know that OH GOD here we go..........I hate this reality. Really hate it......I am his age and totally do not believe how he believes....My generation needs to stand up and stop this nonsense......He has NOT won me over and we are in for the biggest depression since WW1........I am well.......can't put it into words.....Please those out there come to your senses. and .........
realize that he is just rhetoric........words and "they are just speeches" more taxes is NOT the way to go..........he is going to bankrupt what is left of the reeling economy. GO VOTE your conscience....and it will be very clear.
speaknoevil07

Originally posted by poet1b
As far as foriegn affairs, lets say, that if Palin was in charge, I think our enemies would tread very lightly.

She is a real enigma.

Nope - just a loose cannon. She speaks without thinking. It is obvious she doesn't know what to say - and that is because she doesn't know what she is doing.
Dangerous choice.

[edit on 1-11-2008 by spinkyboo]

[edit on 1-11-2008 by spinkyboo]