How Sarah Palin Won The Debate

96 comments ↓

#1 clintonloyalist on 10.03.08 at 1:20 pm

I think she did a great job from what I saw. My mind is made up so I really don’t worry about the debates anymore in this race. The best candidate in this race was robbed of what is rightfully hers. This should be Hillary’s big moment, but she got shoved out of the way by the DNC. The real race is actually between Palin and Obama, since she is next in line for the presidency. I was taken by her reference to have more power to the VP. I bet if Biden would have said that, it would show how power hungry he is. That is pretty much my only criticism.

#2 badlybehaved on 10.03.08 at 1:37 pm

I thought that it showed that John McCain was willing to give her some autonomy, which is great. She really has some strengths; it counteracts the idea that she is just a pretty face on the ticket.

#3 Karen123 on 10.03.08 at 1:52 pm

Even if you don’t agree with her on all issues you have to stand back and say at the very least this woman has some kind of inner strength & a backbone of steel. And even her more ardent detractors in the MSM admit she held her own against a man with 35 years of experience in Washington ( a true old school, insider). That must mean she did really well.
I’m not sure she won on points & substance though there were a few things that she made very clear (global warming, energy solutions & alternatives, same sex marriage, Biden’s past flip flops). I also like the way she pivots from a high profile politician engrossed in a high stakes debate to a Mom surrounded by her brood in an instant. And I don’t think that’s at all calculated or staged.

#4 mbander on 10.03.08 at 2:45 pm

I thought Sarah did a fine job last night. Senator Biden spoke a number of untruths, many of which are being pointed out online – I won’t go into all of them, I just wanted to point out that Obama and now Biden seem to think it’s just fine to simply say “I didn’t say that” when the proof they are lying is so easily available online. They really think very little of us.

And for those of you who watch polls, if you get discouraged that the polls show that people thought Biden won, here’s an interesting post from the far left Daily Kos where they encourage their followers to spam the polls:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/2/205127/601/705/612540

Makes you think that they don’t believe Biden performance was not a good as they hoped – otherwise EVERYONE could have seen how well he did without spamming the polls.

#5 Rozathegreat on 10.03.08 at 3:51 pm

Even though I do not think she won the debate, (I actually hate that whole winner-loser idea regarding debates……….what is this 3rd grade?) I am developing a lot more respect for her. I still think she’s as full of it, as any politician, but as far as being a fighter, and humble, she DEFINITELY wins points in my book.

Overall, I think it was a GREAT debate. I had critiques on both candidates, and they both at times said something that made me go hmmmmmm.

So this business about either “flopping” is just nonsense.

~Roza

#6 just_an_observer on 10.03.08 at 4:10 pm

i thought palin exceeded all expectations. she was the complete opposite of the drone that the mccain campaign sent to chat with katie couric. i couldn’t believe that they were even the same person. i cannot help but wonder how different the polls and campaign positions would be if the debate took place before the couric interview. i don’t love palin’s policies, but to say that she held her own is an understatement.

i think the senate is the premier stage for debate in the united states (that said, the senate is not a good proving ground for future presidents … this year will mark the first time since JFK that a sitting senator is elected to the white house, and only the 4th time in american history). as such, palin had an uphill battle, going against a senator of 30+ years. and she defended her turf well.

echoing karen123’s comments regarding the pivot at the end from politician to person, the exchange between the palin family and the biden family at the end of the debate was great.

#7 TmCm on 10.03.08 at 11:13 pm

Meh. I’ll admit that, unexpectedly, she managed to not pull a Nixon and drown in her own flop sweat.

However, I think that’s the only standard she exceeded by. Watching the replay of the debate later that evening after having listened to it on NPR, I got the impression looking at her that she was more relieved than anything else to have gotten the script out without fumbling her lines too badly.

However, it was pretty clear that she wasn’t prepared to handle any questions that deviated from that script. The complete blowing off of the health care question for more rhetoric about taxes was dismissive, rude, and completely out of place. Ostensibly, Mrs. Palin, you ARE there to answer the moderator’s questions, not repeat verbatim the talking points you memorized just the night before.

Also, this folksy, down home nonsense is starting to make my ears bleed. From any candidate. Didn’t we just get done with 8 years of a likable, down-home retard?

#8 Rozathegreat on 10.03.08 at 11:34 pm

Who we wanted to have a beer with.

You forgot about that one!

~Roza

#9 laskerjones on 10.04.08 at 2:07 am

I’ve hemmed and hawed and circled around my own response for several weeks now but I find that ultimately I must make my voice heard.

I am a 48 year old gay white man and I’ve been working for feminist issues and politicians since the late 1970’s. (Does anyone here remember the ERA? The saddest day of my life, June 30, 1982, is when the radification deadline ran out.) Was there even a more electrifying moment than when Geraldine Ferraro accepted the VP nomination? I remember sitting watching my TV and crying. I also remember lobbying at the Democratic convention in 1980 for Ted Kennedy because we (my NOW chapter) believe that Jimmy Carter wasn’t liberal enough. Jimmy Carter? And who did we end up with? Ronald Reagan!

I’ve traveled the country lobbying, pamphletting, leafletting and ringing doorbells for feminist/female candidates. I have NEVER knowingly voted for an anti-choice politician in my life … (okay, that’s a lie. I did it once when I voted for Bob Casey — over Rick Santorum. And yes, I was forced to do that because the PA Dems took out Barbara Hafer and replaced her with Bob Casey.)

I’ve followed the PUMA movement closely with much interest because I am fascinated by the single-minded determination and enthusiasm of the movement (and yeah, I know that sounds patronizing but I absolutely don’t mean it to.)

But I have come to a decision (and I know that this is going to make pretty much everyone here nuts) — It’s immoral not to vote for Obama.

Okay, I’ll stand here and let people throw bricks at me for several minutes.

There, that’s done. Now, for my reason. And, actually, it’s very simple. My desire to see Hillary as Pres comes from the same place which drives me to make sure the Republicans don’t put another woman-hating judge on the Supreme Court.

And we’re only one away.

Just one away. (And yes, I realize that we’re only one away because there is not a justice on the bench right now who wasn’t voted there by the Dems in the Senate.)

John Paul Stevens is 88. That’s just 12 years from being a century old. At least two, if not three, justices are hanging on simply because that don’t want to be replaced by a Roberts or Alito clone (men who bald-faced LIED during their confirmation hearings regarding women’s issues.)

My political bottom line is pro-choice. (I would, in fact, vote for a pro-choice anti-gay candidate before I would vote for an anti-choice pro-gay candidate … so I know some of what you’ve been going through.) Anyone who cares about a woman’s right to control her own body must absolutely make sure that the Republicans have no say over the matter … and as painful as it is, that means a Democratic president and Republican-proof majorities in both chambers.

I know, I know, I know … People hate me for thinking like this and hate me even more for posting this on a site they consider a safe haven. But I’ve agonized over this decision for weeks and weeks and have to say that the debate last night really clinched it. We used to say that the Feminist Movement will have achieved it’s goal when women were allowed to be just as stupid as men … but watching Palin last night I realized that maybe we should have set the bar a bit higher. We’ve had 8 years of thuddingly stupid leadership, I don’t want to have 8 more.

This will probably fall on deaf ears (and perhaps it should considering that I’ve posted it on this site) but please don’t hate me. You may disagree with me, but please don’t think I’ve made this decision lightly or without consideration.

#10 bob1 on 10.04.08 at 5:02 am

One man (President) she met got a Fatwa in Pakistan another man (Senator) she debates starts crying begging to go easy on him. Man! This woman knows politics and is the best debater ever. Here is a one time chance not to be missed to have an incredible woman as Vice President of the US.

#11 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 6:52 am

TmCm – I think you completely overlooked Biden’s gaffes as well. Remember this is the man that received the lowest amount of votes while running for President – because he just doesnt’ know when to keep his big flap shut.

All of a sudden – the Obama Trolls come on here like Joe Biden – yes of all people Joe Biden is now a solid candidate. You could of put Curious George as Obamas running mate and you would be fawning all over him as well.

This man made a derogative comments about Obama being a clean, intelligent black man.

This man made derogative comments about you need to speak Indian if you were going to be a paton at a 7/11 or Dunkin Donuts facility.

This man kept instructing a man in a wheel chair to rise, the only thing that would of topped that would be Obama showing up and laying his hands on this guys head and telling him that he was cured.

Below are the actual items he lied about at the debate.

1. TAX VOTE: Biden said McCain voted “the exact same way” as Obama to increase taxes on Americans earning just $42,000, but McCain DID NOT VOTE THAT WAY.

2. AHMEDINIJAD MEETING: Joe Biden lied when he said that Barack Obama never said that he would sit down unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmedinijad of Iran. Barack Obama did say specifically, and Joe Biden attacked him for it.

3. OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING: Biden said,“Drill we must.” But Biden has opposed offshore drilling and even compared offshore drilling to “raping” the Outer Continental Shelf.”

4. TROOP FUNDING: Joe Biden lied when he indicated that John McCain and Barack Obama voted the same way against funding the troops in the field. John McCain opposed a bill that included a timeline, that the President of the United States had already said he would veto regardless of it’s passage.

5. OPPOSING CLEAN COAL: Biden says he’s always been for clean coal, but he just told a voter that he is against clean coal and any new coal plants in America and has a record of voting against clean coal and coal in the U.S. Senate.

6. ALERNATIVE ENERGY VOTES: According to FactCheck.org , Biden is exaggerating and overstating John McCain’s record voting for alternative energy when he says he voted against it 23 times.

7. HEALTH INSURANCE: Biden falsely said McCain will raise taxes on people’s health insurance coverage — they get a tax credit to offset any tax hike. Independent fact checkers have confirmed this attack is false

8. OIL TAXES: Biden falsely said Palin supported a windfall profits tax in Alaska — she reformed the state tax and revenue system, it’s not a windfall profits tax.

9. AFGHANISTAN / GEN. MCKIERNAN COMMENTS: Biden said that top military commander in Iraq said the principles of the surge could not be applied to Afghanistan, but the commander of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force Gen. David D. McKiernan said that there were principles of the surge strategy, including working with tribes, that could be applied in Afghanistan.

10. REGULATION: Biden falsely said McCain weakened regulation — he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie.

11. IRAQ: When Joe Biden lied when he said that John McCain was “dead wrong on Iraq”, because Joe Biden shared the same vote to authorize the war and differed on the surge strategy where they John McCain has been proven right.

12. TAX INCREASES: Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn’t see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more.

13. BAILOUT: Biden said the economic rescue legislation matches the four principles that Obama laid out, but in reality it doesn’t meet two of the four principles that Obama outlined on Sept. 19, which were that it include an emergency economic stimulus package, and that it be part of “part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20.”

14. REAGAN TAX RATES: Biden is wrong in saying that under Obama, Americans won’t pay any more in taxes then they did under Reagan.

Oh and spare me any Factcheck – they are no longer a viable resource to go to since it was uncovered that Obama is tied in with them – I actually emailed them and they never contacted me back.

#12 Renshaw on 10.04.08 at 10:43 am

Oh, Sparky. Is your real name Karl Rove? Be careful, Karl. The justice department is doing some investigation and you might end up with an indictment or two. Of course, George may pardon you.

As for the debate – let’s get down to it. This isn’t American Idol or America’s Got Talent. It’s not okay to “lower the bar” and then say she did okay or she didn’t screw up and that means she won.

You know who lost? The American people. Over and against everything else, her comment regarding the powers the Constitution gives the Vice-Presidency (or doesn’t), the adulation given to Dick Cheney’s interpretation of the Vice-Presidency (which is simply dangerous for our country) and her desire to have more power as Vice-President should result in two consequences:

1. Sarah Palin has no idea what the Constitutional duties of the Vice-President are.

2. Sarah Palin has a hidden ambition with regards this office she seeks.

Apart from the fact that Obama’s numbers continue to rise even after this debate. Apart from the fact that Palin had no idea that General “McClellan” was a Civil War general, and not the current commander of the Nato troops in Afghanistan (probably nervousness? one hopes), apart from the fact that the winks and aw-shucks moments may be cute but didn’t work (we already have had the guy we would have a beer with for eight years), apart from the fact that she referred to the natural gas pipeline as some kind of reality when in fact it has yet to be fully approved by both Canada and the First Nation (Native community living on reservation land that will ‘host’ the pipeline) and that not one bit of it has yet to be built, apart from the fact that she out and out declared that she wouldn’t answer the questions presented (I don’t think you get that option when in office, you have to address the issue at hand), she did alright.

Spin it any way you want. The electoral map is turning into an Obama win. Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Colorado, and Missouri (all swing states) are leaning heavily into the Obama camp from almost every state poll. Virginia and Indiana are also in the Obama column, but are still in play. It’s going to be very difficult for McCain to gain that much ground in four weeks.

As for the comment that the real race is between Obama and Palin, all I can say is – read your civics notes from high school again. McCain is the chosen nominee, not Sarah.

For all the talk on this board about sexism, I would like to ask some questions:

1. If one of the three male candidates spent a good deal of their body language winking, shrinking their nose, shooting kisses, etc. – how would you respond? So if commentators comment on Sarah’s actions – why is that sexism? Is it one rule for men and another for women in your eyes?

2. Why, if Sarah Palin is such a barracuda, is she not allowed to simply sit down with journalists and answer questions? Is she fragile? Do they (the McCain campaign) believe that she is simply not able to handle it?

3. Why is asking someone what newspaper or magazine they read this morning a “gotcha” question? All she had to say was “The New York Times, The Washington Post, The National Review and The Wall Street Journal” (two liberal and two conservative). She could have even just said her hometown newspaper.

4. Isn’t McCain telling her what’s going on? On Friday, she was interviewed by FoxNews. She was surprised to find out that McCain pulled the campaign out of Michigan. Not gotcha – but a problem.

5. Did you see the Couric interview when McCain was sitting next to her? He rushed in and answered questions directed to her. If i was a woman, I would have been infuriated. Do you really need “Daddy” or “Hubby” to rush in and take care of you?

I’m sorry. You’ve had your fun. Sarah was entertaining and McCain lured you embittered Hillary supporters to him by throwing you Sarah. Too bad that Obama’s rising and most ardent support is coming from white women. Things are serious right now and we have to take people like Sarah and Dubya and send them back to Alaska and Texas.

Aw, shucks. Say it ain’t so, Joe.

#13 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 11:59 am

Obamas numbers are manipulated – just like they did to John Kerry in the 2004 election. The MSM kept stating that Kerry was winning in all the polls and then they lost – why? Because someone calls another person up doing a poll and ask them questions to get the results they want.

Again – the polls were wrong last time – so they are not credible to me now.

Renshaw – go back and look at Biden’s mistakes, lies and gafffes. There is a reason this man received the lowest votes in the Democratic Race for Presidency. Please don’t try to test my intelligence by now hiking him up on a pedestal as if he is “the top” line of intelligence in the Senate.

Go back and read it – but you won’t – you want to fall back on your rhetoric that Sarah’s is not intelligent – but get this – now all of a sudden Biden is – Please spare me.

Try a better argument – you aren’t winning on this.

#14 Rozathegreat on 10.04.08 at 1:18 pm

If the polls are right, and Obama-Biden win in Nov……………..

Then what?

~Roza

#15 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 1:36 pm

Roza – Good question. There are two options – he truly was the winner – or voter fraud was implemented.

I have a question to ask you. If you were to hear that voter fraud is being implemented by ACORN, in addition to quite a few indictments have been issued by some of these ACORN personnel and Obama was heavily involved with them.

If you were to hear that ACORN was actually getting homelesss people to the voters registration, feeding them and providing some of then clothing to vote for Obama – and then Obama won – would you turn the other way, because a win is a win – especially if it was for your candidate – or would it make you feel uneasy about the win, but still accept it because your chosen candidate won – or would you feel uncomfortable now about the candidate because of the way he won and support an investigation?

Just curious.

#16 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 1:39 pm

Roza, I’m directing the question to you, because I feel that of all the Obama supporters you have had your eyes somewhat open and provide a response that you feel is true to yourself.

I couldn’t ask the others because they are so totally biased – their responses, in my opinion, would be construed as not being viable.

#17 One4Justice on 10.04.08 at 1:39 pm

“If the polls are right, and Obama-Biden win in Nov……………..Then what?”

What do you mean “Then what?” Then we make the best of it. We brace ourselves for the tax-and-spend socialism fallout. And may God help us all.

#18 Rozathegreat on 10.04.08 at 2:17 pm

For one, I support the investigation NOW, and not just ACORN, anybody, any organization, any party, and any state that is involved with voter fraud. But I also think to insinuate that Obama will win because of voter fraud is a far stretch, unfair, and a discount to reality. And to insinuate that because Obama has been a supporter of the organization that he is responsible for its mess, is an even farther stretch.

If ACORN is getting homeless people to vote, and feeding and clothing them, and if those homeless people actually go to the polls to vote. That’s not unethical or illegal. I think its great and I wonder why no organization has reached out to that demographic before. They do still count right? They are people. Being homeless does not qualify you from voting. Also, you cannot pay or bribe someone into voting for anything, because last time I checked only one person goes into a booth at a time, so there is no way to prove that person actually did what they said they would do.

The reality is this, voter registration has spiked tremendously not because of fraud, but because people are sick of the mess that has been going on the last 8 years, and believe it or not ALOT of people see a difference in Obama. Voter registration has mainly spiked because of awareness. Now more than ever before people are saying “hey get up! get out! and vote! You can make a difference. Why have you been wasting this right that our ancestors fought so hard for? Yes, even you, an ex-con off of parole or probation can vote. Hey black/hispanic woman/man your vote does count! Hey poor woman/man your vote counts too!” People are proactive now. And it is making a difference.

So, no I would not feel uncomfortable about Obama winning, because I know that there are millions of people that support him and his cause, and are voting for him to win. If anything that’s why he’ll win, not because of voter fraud. I mean lets be honest here. The ONLY reason George Bush won is not because voter fraud, but because his supporters actually showed up on election day, and all we did was talk shit, and be mad.

But I have a similar question for you. If John McCain wins, and the next 4 years DO indeed turn out to be an absolute travesty and a third Bush term, and in 2012 our country is so screwed up that it really doesn’t matter who gets elected in 2012…….are you going to feel uncomfortable because you voted for him? Or will you just be satisfied that Obama didn’t win?

~Rozalemagne

#19 Rozathegreat on 10.04.08 at 2:20 pm

“What do you mean “Then what?” ”

It was pretty much self-explanatory. It wasn’t a trick question.

~Roza

#20 Rozathegreat on 10.04.08 at 2:21 pm

Uh oh, Sparky……Was that a compliment?

Don’t got getting all mushy on me………I’M KIDDING!

~Roza

#21 Renshaw on 10.04.08 at 2:35 pm

So, let’s get this right. Obama is manipulating the polls in his favor:

ABC News – 50/46
CNN – 48/45
Cook Political Report – 44/40
Democracy Corps – 49/45
Diageo National – 48/39
Fox News – 45/39
Gallup – 45/38
Ipsos – 46/42
CBS – 49/40
L.A. Times – 42/41
Marist – 47/53
NBC – 46/45
Newsweek – 46/46
Pew Research – 49/42
Quinnipiac – 49/45
Rasmussen – 46/46
Time – 50/43
USA Today – 50/43
Zogby – 44/46

Reagan – 8 Years / Bush 1 – 4 Years: Economy (Trickle Down Economics) consisted of out of control government spending, rising deficit and national debt, unemployment rises more than ever, America invades Granada and President “won’t negotiate with terrorists” ends up in Oliver North scandals selling arms for hostages in Iran, invades Iraq but won’t take care of Saddam.

Clinton – 8 Years: Economy consisted of controlled government spending, balanced budget, no deficit, paying down national debt, lowest unemployment in decades, America invades no country but joins in multinational NATO forces to bring Kosovo under control.

Bush 2 – 8 Years: Economy (Trickle down economics), economy out of control, huge government spending, wants to put Social Security into Stock Market which almost goes under (imagine where our Social Security would be if Bush did what he wanted), unemployment may hit 12% by end of his term – highest since Great Depression, highest numbers of home foreclosures, national debt is higher than ever (USA owes over 500 billion dollars to China), deficits are highest in history, America is attacked by terrorist organization Al-Quaida with worst attack on our own land since Pearl Harbor, America invades Afghanistan and Iraq. Highest number of people in America without health insurance. Money we spend on Iraq war which is the most unpopular war with Americans (over a half trillion dollars) could have paid for every American to have health insurance at no cost to them, rebuilt every school in America, repaved every road and rebuilt every bridge.

Yes, let’s have no more Democrats like Bill Clinton and bring on four more years of Bush called McCain and Palin.

By the way, her latest attack on Obama is that he “palled around with terrorists” meaning Bill Ayers of the Weathermen who tried to orchestrate bombing attacks on American targets like the Pentagon 40 years ago. Obama was 8 years old 40 years ago. I’m sure as an 8 year old boy, he was helping the Weathermen plan attacks. This woman is certainly a piece of work, isn’t she?

Aw shucks, there you go again, bringing up the past.

#22 Renshaw on 10.04.08 at 2:38 pm

The reason she makes the claim is that Obama met Bill Ayers (twice) and Bill Ayers is from Chicago where Obama is from.

Yup! Gosh darn it, that’s solid evidence if you ask me!

#23 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 2:49 pm

Rosa – In recent years, ACORN’s voter registration programs have come under investigation in Ohio, Colorado, Missouri and Washington, with some employees convicted of voter fraud.

ACORN officials said they were looking into the problem.

Obama hid an $800,000 payment to ACORN through “Citizen Service, Inc.. a non-profit group for his campaign advance work. the Pittsburgh Tribune Review reports “An Obama spokesman said Federal Election Commission reports would be amended to show Citizens Services Inc. — a subsidiary of ACORN — worked in “get-out-the-vote” projects, instead of activities such as polling, advance work and staging major events as stated in FEC finance reports filed during the primary.”

Why hasn’t this whole story about ACORN and Obamas mentioned in the MSM relaing to possible voter fraud to win the election?

If it was McCain, Obama and his 9,000 lawyers would be all over it.

Roza – this isn’t just rumors – these are plain facts – people have been convicted and on-going investigations continue.

ACORN and Obama’s ties are disturbing.

#24 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 2:51 pm

Bill Ayers, ACORN, Chicago Annenberg Challenge (which is also associated with Factcheck.org), Rev. Wright, those missing years at Columbia U – we know NOTHING about Senator Obama, NOTHING. Unlike McCain, Palin or Biden there is no one from Obama’s past who steps up and talks about his character. No one except his wife.

Where are his Columbia undergrad or Harvard Law fellow students, his community organizer buddies – there is no one. Who is he really? More importantly, who is behind him?

#25 Rozathegreat on 10.04.08 at 2:57 pm

Sparky, I agree with you. I said that before. ANY organization that is suspected of voter fraud should be investigated. Period.

It just troubles me when everything negative in politics is associated with Obama. And that seems to be happening alot lately. And you can’t just say because of ACORN’s voter fraud (alleged) he won. That’s silly and its just unrealistic.

Thats all I’m saying.

~Roza

#26 badlybehaved on 10.04.08 at 3:23 pm

I posted this earlier on the Gaff section (Is it called a thread?) but since I had a link involved it is “awaiting moderation” so ignore it on the other place.

Roza:
You are right Roza, Pumas are not voting for him anyway. That doesn’t mean that we and everyone else doesn’t have a right to know. Let say that John McCain, rather than being a prisoner of war for 5 years went to Vietnam and disappeared but nobody knew where he was or what he was doing. Don’t you think people would have a right to ask questions? I know there were questions about what Bush was actually doing when he was supposed to be reporting for Reserve duty and that was a few weekends. When you say this is a double standard are you saying its racism?
If Obama had a history of working for a Leadership trainer for Acorn and they were doing good work I would think it was a good thing; If he had a history of providing housing for the poor and it was good housing I would applaud him but the good folks of Grove Parc were left in a mess.
I urge you to investigate for yourself. I don’t think arguing here is very effective. You can spend an afternoon on the internet and hear and see for yourself what the folks at Grove Parc have to say, what the caucus workers have to say, who Ayers and Dohrn are today. There is post on another site thatshows the long long list of problem people for Obama even if you discount 75% of them its still a list that raises too many questions.

#27 Renshaw on 10.04.08 at 3:23 pm

Roza,

The only place where “everything negative in politics is associated with Obama” is right here on this site.

I love it, Factcheck.org is an Obama operative organization. And with the election a month out, Sparky is already screaming voter fraud. Worried Sparky?

What is funny is that Bush v Gore wasn’t one of the Supreme Court cases Sarah could remember.

Oh, and speaking of buddies, Sparky – you should read the stories of John McCain’s war buddies who can’t stand him. Funny, how one’s old buddies come up for the other side and other side only.

By the way, Sparky. I’m just going to start calling you Karl since that’s who you really are. This whole site is just a ploy to get people to come over to the Republican side. You PUMA’s were never real Hillary supporters to begin with.

So, Karl, please come out of the closet. On second thought, please don’t!

#28 WasHRCnowPalin on 10.04.08 at 3:26 pm

Renshaw,

I don’t regard polls so much anymore,,, for the Obamedia distort everything,,, the questions, the facts, the history, the positions…. so the Obozo enjoys all that free press… but even in that environment Sarah Palin is acknowledged as holding her own. Where it a level playing field then all of Biden’s inaccuracies and Sarah’s accomlishments would be there for all the world to judge and then you would be decrying the accuracy of the polls.

I know it causes you and the sexist Obozo great pain to think that a WOMAN will be a heartbeat away from the presidency in a few weeks… but get used to the idea.. it going to happen in spite of the prejudiced media… the American people will come around on November 4 and your homey is headed back to Chicago to organize another failed housing project with acknowleged terrorists Ayers.

Buckle up boy!

Go Sarah 2008!!! Hillary 2012!!!

#29 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 3:40 pm

Renshaw, in my lifetime there are two types of Gay men. The ones that love women hang out with them and become life long friends.

Then there are people like you – that are just plain jealous of woman. You have this inner-turmoil going on of love/hate and the best you can do to quelch yourself is to attack them in any way possible.

I am acqainted with the folks in the gay community that were involved with the inception of coming out, establishing the flag and the Gay Parades worldwide, and they – whether you like it or not – won’t even vote for Obama.

They have meetings set up to discuss politics and they are uncomfortable with this man. Many Gays are executives and own businesses and they are concerned what Obama’s financial and tax goals.

I could be called worse. Karl Rove, if I’m not mistaken is called the “architect” – again, I called be called worse. So coming from you, I’ll take it as a back-handed compliment.

Roza, it’s not that everything and everyone is bashing Obama. Consider the environment that you are in – it’s a PUMA page – what did you expect – us to drink the Kool-aid and fawn all over him like the rest of the MSM.

Thank God for these blogs and the internet sources, otherwise all we would have to rely on is strictly whtat the MSM shoves down our throat.

Did you know that Obama now has a television station – you can watch him 24/7. I am serious about this. I’ll give you the link if you are interested.

Perhaps Renshaw and his closest girlfriends might pay attention and will grab a week’s supply of popcorn and settle down on the couch and perpetually watch it and then the world will be right again.

#30 Renshaw on 10.04.08 at 3:41 pm

Hi WasHRCnowPalin,

No, it doesn’t bother me at all that a woman could be vice president or president. It bothers me that THIS woman could be. But obviously, you have but one criteria to put to this woman – that she have a vagina. She passes! And you don’t pay attention to polls, because of the media bias? Does that go for the universities as well? Marist is manipulated by Obama? Boy, is he ever powerful.

By the way, when you folks go to look up Obama and Acorn? You’ll see that the ones most obsessed with this and calling Acorn a left-wing Marxist organization are The National Review, FoxNews and the Republican National Committee. Very objective sources.

And isn’t funny that Obama’s professors all remember him very well. Frankly, as a professor, I can very well tell you that some of my most brilliant students wouldn’t be known by their classmates. Especially if they came in to the university in their second or third year as Obama did with Columbia. Oh, wait..they’ll tell you that Obama never completed a thesis. Guess what? A thesis wasn’t required. Oh, wait…they’ll say that he didn’t graduate with honors. He wasn’t eligible for Latin honors since he didn’t spend the four years at Columbia, a requirement at the time. And, wait…yes, Ayers is a big terrorist. He’s also teaching in Illinois right now, so I believe if he was wanted as a terrorist – we would have something more to fear: that our government couldn’t arrest a wanted terrorist who is living in our country and teaching in a public school system.

But to get the conversation back to where it should be —- how’s everyone’s 401K’s doing under the current Republican administration? You know, the one who wanted no regulation on Wall Street which McCain lobbied for?

#31 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 3:43 pm

Renshaw – Try the Detroit Free Press….and many, many more. It’s all over the internet in different states.

Bad voter applications found
Clerks see fraudulent, duplicate forms from group
BY L.L. BRASIER • FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER • September 14, 2008

You are beyond delusional and frankly no longer credible.

#32 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 3:45 pm

Type in Voter Fraud ACORN and see how many hits you get – it’s endless.

Because the internet doesn’t stop at Fox News.

You are so ridiculous Renshaw….poor sad angry woman hater.

#33 Renshaw on 10.04.08 at 3:45 pm

Oh, and Karl (Sparky), I don’t have any jealousy of women at all. I don’t find women threatening. I find Sarah Palin hard to take seriously. And whatever gay men you’re talking to, it sure isn’t the LGBT community in most of the nation. Yes, even we in the gay community have the Log Cabin folks who, for the life of us, we can’t understand. Why don’t you go read some of Andrew Sullivan before you start acting like some kind of expert on the gay community.

And isn’t wonderful that gay men are executives and own businesses. Wow! Just like you normal folk, huh???? You’re hatred for gay men is so clear, it isn’t even funny.

#34 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 3:49 pm

Not expert, just know enough to know that not all of them are delusional as you.

They seriously weighed in all of the candidates – they didn’t just look at Democrats or Republicans…although there are gay Democats, Republican and Indepents – fascinating stuff huh?

Amazing that they are all not one dimensional like you – and can actually think for themselves….

They are smart enought to know that they are not being shoved back in the closet. That they have come along way and understand that just because someone has a “D” on their forehead that they blindly just vote for them.

Brilliant, just brilliant, but you just wouldn’t or don’t want to understand it.

#35 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 3:50 pm

Hatred? Please, why don’t you just call me racist also. The only hater is you – you probably look in the mirror and don’t like what you see – perhaps that is why you hate Sarah so much.

Makes one wonder…..h-m-m-m-m.

#36 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 3:52 pm

You know, you could be partially correct – I do have a distaste for one delusional gay “women hater” man.

Take a wild guess – better yet – you are not that bright – go to the mirror and then try to guess (hint: keep your eyes open while looking at your reflection).

#37 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 3:54 pm

Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater, Renshaw is a woman hater….

#38 badlybehaved on 10.04.08 at 3:54 pm

Renshaw:
My gut reaction to you is not ladylike but since I’m badlybehaved I just can’t help myself. Don’t you have some buggers to pick or something?
Let’s talk about Biden besides his many previously listed screw-ups. When has he ever given any credit for the Violence Against Women Act to Pat Schroeder or the female staffer who actually wrote it? Who do you think was chairing the White Male Judiciary Committee that gang-banged Anita Hill and put Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court? FactCheck is funded by the Annenberg Foundation, need we say more. I thought you said at one point you were a history teacher. If so I do you teach them that it is irrelevant?

#39 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 3:55 pm

Now if you say it enough times, continuously through the internet,k through the MSM, on Billboards, on talk radio, of someone were to actually meet you – that would be the first thing on their mind – before you even opened your mouth.

Now think about what the Obama Team set up for Sarah Palin.

#40 Renshaw on 10.04.08 at 4:00 pm

Shoved into the closet like McCain would like? He would never repeal Don’t Ask / Don’t Tell (which I never supported – wow, I didn’t support a Democratic idea!). He also would never allow us the legal rights that come with marriage. It almost made Sarah Palin puke right on the stage to admit that she would not stand in the way of Civil Unions but both she and McCain want marriage defined as only between a man a woman. So forgive me if I don’t do a dance of joy around their potential administration. I also don’t agree with their economic policies, their health care plan, their plan for Iraq, their plan to give tax breaks to Exxon and the very wealthy, etc. Forgive me for actually reading their websites and coming to the conclusion that Obama has the policies I like and agree with. Yes, I made up my mind. You seem to think that being a Maverick or Barracuda or whatever other animal you can come up with means going against the grain. I think voting for the President involves choosing the person you think has the most qualifications to do the job well. I don’t care about whether I “like” them in the sense of “wanting to have a beer with them” or “connecting” with them. I don’t need to connect to my president. I want the president to do the job, represent our interests internationally, safeguard our economy and keep us safe. I want the VicePresident to be able to step into the presidency if need be. In my opinion, the ones who meet that criteria are Obama and Biden. (By the way, I didn’t vote for Obama in our state’s primary. But he is the candidate that I support now.)

Four more years of Bush is something I won’t put up with. And that is what I see with McCain / Palin.

Further, I think the choice of Palin was the most irresponsible choice ever made by John McCain. Seems I’m not alone in that thought.

And as for your closet comment – conservatives like McCain and Palin think that I’m disordered, immoral and probably intrinsically evil. No, I don’t think they’ll get my support.

#41 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 4:18 pm

You obviously haven’t done your homework. Try looking throught the internet and read all the claims on Sarah’s stance on gays – you’ll be surprised it is two-sided.

You won’t – because it may disrupt your horse blinders.

Yeah – you are a pretty angry person. Very sad.

#42 badlybehaved on 10.04.08 at 4:20 pm

Biden said the same thing about gay marriage. How is it possible that you did not hear that. Hillary is the only candidate that marched side-by-side with Gays and Lesbians. Bush was dishonest and arrogant, so is Obama. I guess your choice is clear.

#43 Renshaw on 10.04.08 at 4:51 pm

Oh – I did hear what Biden said. I wasn’t too pleased about it either, but at least he Barack Obama are in support of granting us Civil Unions and some legal rights. Here is an article with an interview Sarah Palin gave to Newsweek:

atching the vice presidential debate, you might have gotten the impression that Sarah Palin supports civil rights for same-sex couples. During an exchange on the topic, both she and Joe Biden said they oppose gay marriage. But Biden added that he and Barack Obama favor granting gay couples many of the same benefits—hospital visitation rights, health benefits—that married couples enjoy. Palin was tougher to pin down. She clearly didn’t want to appear intolerant, but neither did she want to seem to embrace gay rights. “[N]o one would ever propose, not in a McCain-Palin administration, to do anything to prohibit, say, visitations in a hospital or contracts being signed …” she said.

The folks in Alaska might have been surprised to hear that. In the past, Palin has described her opposition to granting gay couples the benefits married couples receive. In an August 2007 interview with NEWSWEEK, Palin said she had upheld such benefits (angering fellow conservatives) but only because the state Supreme Court said it was unconstitutional to deny them:

NEWSWEEK : And do you have a position on that? Would you like to see it? Do you care? PALIN: I would vote to further define the definition of marriage as it pertains to benefits even—yes, I would.

That is, not extend benefits to same-sex couples?
Correct. And if it took an amendment to our constitution, I would go there …

The Alaska governor was careful not to say anything like that during the debate. Biden, sensing an opportunity, tried to force Palin into clarifying her position. “I’m glad to hear the governor … thinks there should be no civil-rights distinction … between a committed gay couple and a committed heterosexual couple. If that’s the case, we really don’t have a difference.”

Moderator Gwen Ifill threw it back to Palin: “Is that what you said?” Palin dodged the question: “Your question to him was whether he supported gay marriage and my answer is the same as his and is that I do not.” A spokeswoman for the McCain campaign told NEWSWEEK that Palin opposes “all forms of discrimination against people with different lifestyles.”

By the way – Sarah’s incomprehensible English is real – not a typo. No, she doesn’t support Gay Rights in the least.

#44 badlybehaved on 10.04.08 at 5:15 pm

My take on this is from other people’s conversations on the internet that seemed really pissed about what Biden said. Once again the Dems disappoint. You know when you cut and paste things all the time I don’t usually bother to read it. How do I know the context. Whatever. I would guess that Sarah will not go back on her position. I’m not gay but I think this conversation would be about the use of the word Choice. There is disagreement about that in the gay community isn’t there?

#45 PUMAsympathiser on 10.04.08 at 5:23 pm

A change of subject from the above exchange, but does anyone understand what’s going on with the MSM? It has gone from being biased to being complicit in the corruption that should be investigated. The overwhelming question to me is “Why?” I understand factcheck.org since comments here let me to investigate its connection to Obama. What explains the MSM? It has to be more than simply being partisan.

As for this Palin did a great job. I wasn’t impressed with Biden at all. They indicated that he didn’t hve any real mistakes. Let me count the ways:). Many from saying that the VP position is described in Article I, to his statements about Eastern Europe being wrong (Bosnia isn’t stable, but then Obama said in his debate that Russia isn’t a Democracy so neither understand that part of the wrold) , to letting Palin make him admit that Obama opposes gay marriage. She cleverly put him in the position of admitting that – and it is certainly something that I had not heard before.

#46 badlybehaved on 10.04.08 at 5:59 pm

Well Gwen Ifill’s’s upcoming book on Obama might be a clue. Things not reported….Do you know that the mother of Soldier that was killed in action asked O to not use it as a tool on his campaign. There was an interview about it on a public radio station. I heard about more charges of Acorn voting fraud on NPR. I also know that my local public radio station started being pro Obama way back in March (Hillary has gotten my pledge money since). My guess is that the so called white, educated Obama supporters have socialist leanings themselves.The Woodstock Nation all grown-up. Maybe we need a socialist-democratic party? You have any theories?

#47 Rozathegreat on 10.04.08 at 6:01 pm

SPARKY WHAT HAPPENED!?!

I was gone for like an hour and came back and things have gone haywire! What’s up with that.

But back to our conversation. I didn’t say everything and everyone is bashing Obama. I said that on this site it seems as if every negative thing or organization that is remotely tied to Barack Obama is exploited to make him a sexist, voter fradulent, foreign islamic, non-citizen terrorist. But yes, I did expect that on this site, and I’m not mad at it, it’s just an observation.

Badlybehaved, no I am not saying its racism……..double standard influenced by hatred, maybe……..but racism, definitely not. I don’t do that whole “the white man is oppressing us/keeping us down” race card thing.

~Rozalemagne

#48 Anne Marie on 10.04.08 at 6:02 pm

Sparky,

Great post! I loved the comment about Obama “laying his hands” on the guy in the wheelchair t help him “rise.” It made me LOL.

Also, your “fact check” of debate verbosity was right on target.

As for Renshaw and his/her “Karl Rove” comments, I would like to say that he/she is “lowering the bar” in voting for Obama. Our bar is much higher…at Hillary height…because it is based on our own sense of integrity and self-respect.

As PUMAs, we pledge never to vote for a candidate who:
1. lies to us
2. changes his position when the wind (or the polls) shift
3. has corrupted himself through his many unsavory associations
4. has obtained funds illegally / is registering “voters” illegally
5. authors shallow books about, by, and for himself
6. parades around Europe like some rock star (Hell, even REAL presidents and
REAL royalty don’t do that)
7. disrespects 18 million voters in his own party
8. disenfranchises two major states
9. nullifies the rules of the DNC by stifling the voices of 18 million voters and
their elected superdelegate
10. seeks the “woman’s vote” through blackmail but yet shows no respect for
“women’s issues,” such as equal rights and equal pay (p.s. We are not his
“sweeties”)
11. most scary of all: promotes his own propaganda by using young children

#49 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 6:10 pm

Understood Roza – no worries on my end.

Unfortunately for woman hater Renshaw – he has super-glued the horse-blinders on his head.

I was making a point to him that if you say things enough times – people will eventually believe it, or if they are open-minded – investigate it to see if it is true.

Obama has had a free pass from the MSM – we will not give it to him here.

On the other hand – sending a throng of lawyers in Alaska to try to find somehow to remove her off the ticket – is plain Chicago Style Politics.

Look at the history on how he got involved in politics to begin with – he had his mentor ousted from her seat and then proceeded to have his rivals removed off the ticket – in the end – he was the only one left standing to take the seat.

These aren’t stories – these are facts.

#50 Rozathegreat on 10.04.08 at 6:14 pm

Anne Marie, there is NO WAY your bar is at “Hillary height”, and Sarah Palin was an ok substitution for you. While I respect people’s choice to support her for “logical adult” reasons, that’s just not one of em’.

Sitting out in protest would be a more logical protest, or maybe just admitting that you weren’t really for Hillary as a candidate, but just as a womanand you’re voting for Palinn out of spite, would be an even better explanation. But saying Sarah Palin comparable to Hillary Clinton is like saying 2+2=7. Don’t BS, just be real.

~Roza

P.S. A candidate can’t really stifle the votes of 18million people if 12 of the 18 are voting for him.

#51 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 6:16 pm

Thanks Ann Marie!

The children singing was eerie. Reminded me of some Cuban leader years ago…Hugo Chavez recently – disturbing, very disturbing – it my lifetime – I never thought I would be seeing the things that we are now seeing here in the United States – the signs are all there.

We march on.

#52 Rozathegreat on 10.04.08 at 6:16 pm

sorry “stifle the voices”.

~Roza

#53 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 6:17 pm

12 out of 18 are not voting for him – there are over 7 million voters (less than half) that are committed to voting for anyone – except Obama.

#54 One4Justice on 10.04.08 at 6:21 pm

I’m not saying it was a trick question, Roza. I’m saying it was an unintelligible question. If you really intended the question to start a dialogue instead of just being a flip remark, why don’t you give some examples of the possible answers. All I can think of are: a.) make the best of it; or b.) make the worst of it. So why would you even ask a question like that?

#55 Rozathegreat on 10.04.08 at 6:21 pm

I mean really guys. Is the children singing (as lame and wierd as it was) a show by Obama. I think it was more of the foolish parents. That’s an example of what I mean by EVERYTHING negative being blamed on him.

But I do agree with you on that being wierd. Just like I saw a baby in the mall yesterday with a “babies for Obama” shirt on and I thought that was a bit dysfunctional. But they don’t even sell those on the Obama website, so do you blame him or the retarded parents that dressed their child in that crap.

Let’s just distinguish between the 2, that’s the only point I’m trying to make.

~Roza

#56 Rozathegreat on 10.04.08 at 6:25 pm

One4justice,

It’s not even worth the argument, so just let it go. I was talking to Sparky, she got it AND answered it. So maybe you are just not as bright as she is.

Whatever the case, It’s not that big of a deal.

~Roza

#57 One4Justice on 10.04.08 at 6:26 pm

Well, we do agree on the fact there are many Obama followers that are over the top. I guess where we part ways it that I think he encourages it, and you are apparently unable to see how he does so.

#58 One4Justice on 10.04.08 at 6:27 pm

Sparky can see it, so maybe you’re just not as bright as she is

#59 Rozathegreat on 10.04.08 at 6:27 pm

Sorry Sparky. I forgot those Gallup polls are skewed and inaccurate.

~Roza

#60 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 6:30 pm

Roza – I’m actually suppose to be working on my finals – my bad.

I really need to get back to studying and stay focused.

PUMAs – stay strong!

#61 Sparky on 10.04.08 at 6:30 pm

Exactly Roza – there is hope for you yet…heh,heh…..:)

#62 Rozathegreat on 10.04.08 at 6:32 pm

One4justice,

Sparky responded to my question:

“Roza – Good question. There are two options – he truly was the winner – or voter fraud was implemented.”

My question was clear, and she answered clearly. So what are you talking about? That’s why WE were having the conversation. It REALLY wasn’t a trick question. It was a simple one,so stop making it hard.

Did you have a bad day today? Trying to pick a fight?

It’s very amusing.

~Roza

#63 Rozathegreat on 10.04.08 at 6:33 pm

Funny, Sparky.

Good luck on the finals!!!

~Roza

#64 One4Justice on 10.04.08 at 6:36 pm

Ok forgive me. Let me try again:

“Roza good question! There are two possiblities: Either he really did win, or he really didn’t.”

There. All better?

#65 Rozathegreat on 10.04.08 at 6:54 pm

Doesn’t really matter. I got the opinion of the blogger I was looking for.

But since you need some attention;

Good girl/boy! That was a VERY good and clear answer. Good for you!

~Rozalemagne

#66 One4Justice on 10.04.08 at 7:10 pm

Thank you, thank you.

It took quite an effort for me to think in such simplistic terms. But now that I understand how your mind works, I will try frame my future responses accordingly.

I notice you are beginning to acquire the same taste for egocentricity as The One. If you’re not careful, before you know it one of those weird parents in the Mall will have their baby sporting a “Rozalemagne” shirt!

#67 Rozathegreat on 10.04.08 at 8:07 pm

You should really go back and catch up on the conversations that go on between other bloggers. Because when you make assumptions like the “ecocentricity” comment, you make yourself look a little stupid. Noticed how no one responded?

But allow me to clear that name up for you…………………….

Rozalemagne is a name actually given to me in fun (the other night), from badlybehaved. She was writing to me that a girl she went to school with started off calling herself “Amy the Great” and then changed it to “Amylemagne” (like Charlemagne-Charles the great). So in fun, she said you should change your name to “Rozalemagne”, and I responded with “Ok badlybehaved, don’t laugh at me when I start signing off with that name” to which she said “Agreed. It’s a deal”. So when I saw that she was online today, I signed off with that name. We ARE on opposite sides of the battle, but still respect each other, and show that we still have a sense of humor.

I see you lack that. It must really suck.

But on another note, you should try that thinking in “simplistic terms” thing sometimes. Not often (because I know how hard it is for one-sided people to think out of their comfort zone) but sometimes. But for us well-rounded people (Obama & McCain supporters alike) everything doesn’t have to be so overANALysed. Sometimes it’s just 2+2=4….simple. So don’t strain yourself by trying to “frame your future responses accordingly”.

You are in dyer need of attention. Do you lack that at home? or in life?

~Roza

~Roza

#68 Phantom on 10.04.08 at 8:08 pm

Sarah did not just win…we must look at substance of her candidacy. She, as a governor, has brokered the pipeline that previous governors had been talking about. While the previous Govs. of Alaska were trying to find a way to work with the major oil players for various reasons, she went and struck a deal with the Gov’t of Canada to get this deal done. You know who was at her debate watch party in Alaska-her Dem. opponent that she beat for the office. He had nothing but praise for her and talked about the outstanding contributions she has made to that state. Obama & Biden…Did you know that Obama wants to meet with Iran leaders to negotiate with Evil (Iran) & Biden suggested that we give Iran (Evil) $200 million of our tax dollars without strings attached to pay Evil off….Ironically, Iranians wake up everyday and chant “Death to Americans” and burn American flags. What does Joe Biden, the foreign policy expert, think that those people would have done with $200 million dollars of the American’s money? They would have put it to good use—Funding the organizations that endorse Obama (Hezbollah) and train soldiers to fight the Americans in Iraq and buy fissile materials and oh yeah to have a greater budget to buy IEDs that have been used to kill our soldiers…..These 2 are some clowns!!!

#69 badlybehaved on 10.04.08 at 8:37 pm

Nite Rozalemagne; I’m doing football and Nebraska is getting it’s butt kicked. Helps me keep it all inperspective

#70 Rozathegreat on 10.04.08 at 8:46 pm

Funny. Sounds like my father and husband watching the Georgia vs. Alabama game last weekend.

Nite 2 u 2. Have a great Sunday.

~Rozalemagne

#71 Phantom on 10.04.08 at 8:46 pm

Sarah Paili—Look at her career progression
1. Member of PTA
2. City Council Member
3. Mayor (cut taxes, balance budgets, cut property taxes on families, fought corruption, cut wasteful spending)
4. Chair, Alaska Oil and Gas Commission (Energy Expert, Exposed Corruption, Resigned when Governor would not address the corruption that she uncovered that happened to be from members of her own political party)
5. Governor
a) brokered a gas pipeline with the Canadian Govt to move our nation toward energy independence and a deal that previous govs. could not accomplish,
b) balanced the budget to create a surplus
c) Sold Alaska’s corporate jet and relieved the executive chef to cut wasteful spending
d) Provided Alaskans with a refund from the budget surplus and processing an additional amount toward the end of the year (what governor in our history has done this—Look at the conditions of the state govts across the nation)
e) Reduced wasteful spending and Attacked corruption
f) Energy Expert—Invited to speak across America on Energy issues and Energy Independence Initiatives
g) Serves as Commander-in-Chief of Alaskan National Guard
h) Responsible for the Executive Branch of Govt and State Initiative and Policy Agenda
I) The Chief Executive Officer of 24,000 state employees

Look at Obama’s progression
1) Community Organizer of Acorn
a) promoted to head trainer on how to cheat elections and obtain fraudulent loans (lie loans) that have led to our economic meltdown.
b) As Attorney for ACORN, he and his law firm sued banks on ACORN’s behalf for not granting even more of these toxic loans that have stolen the wealth from homeowners and portfolio investments from Americans
2) IL State Senator (part-time)
a) kicked everyone off the ballot so that he could vote himself in (whether legal or not, it shows that he did not believe that the people would elect him otherwise..because it’s legal doesn’t make it right–suppressed the choice of the people…sound’s familiar)
b) after kicking people from the ballot that would have voted and took a stance for the people of IL, he votes present on tough, contraversial issues
3) U.S.Senator
a) successfully pushed to get his opponent’s divorce records released which ultimately destroyed his candidacy
b) votes along party lines almost 100% of the time
c) follows Harry Reid to the microphone to say that America has lost this war & we are broken….Oh Obama is a follower: He followed Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, Rezko, Pflegar, ACORN, Reid, Pelosi, and so many others
d) voted to raise taxes on single Americans making $42,000/yr
e) voted for the Bush-Cheney Energy Bill, which gave an enormous amount to the Oil companies–which was attributed to the spike in gas prices and the profits
f) voted to not fund the troops in a final passage of an appropriation bill
g) you want to see fraud exposed, follow this link:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=5922487&page=1

#72 One4Justice on 10.04.08 at 9:52 pm

Hey Roza, looks like I got under your skin. My bad. To answer your questions: no and no. But you should take your own advice and not waste so much time on analysis—-your confusion regarding The One and clearly demonstrates you are a very poor judge of character. And speaking of analysis, why do you suppose you signed your last post to me twice? ROFLMAO

#73 badlybehaved on 10.04.08 at 10:37 pm

Laskerjones;
I can’t speak for anyone but myself but I certainly don’t want to throw bricks ay you. My take on this whole thing is that what happened to Hillary should be a hate crime. Without the ERA it never will be. To me Roe v Wade has become a tool of manipulation that mostly male Democratic politicians use to get women’s votes. The same way they use their ‘more tolerant’ platform on gays and lesbians. For me, the mother of three daughters, I think it’s worth risking the right to choose in order to claim our right to be equal citizens. Hillary didn’t need choice she needed to be treated with the dignity she earned by being a member of the human race.

#74 Rozathegreat on 10.05.08 at 9:06 am

Ok O4J. JUSTICE SERVED! And don’t feel “bad”, you didn’t get under my skin, but I must’ve gotten under yours. So much so that you had to keep checking back last night to see if I would respond. But go ahead you can have the last word, since you will obviously keep going on about something so simple.

~Roza

P.S. You were really rolling on the floor laughing your ass off that I signed my post 2wce? I had a P.S. down there, but I erased it because I was pretty sure you wouldn’t get it. But I forgot to erase the 2nd signature under it. It’s so funny, because when it posted and I saw the 2nd signature on there I said to myself “I bet me signing twice will be another topic of discussion with him/her tomorrow”.

So predictable, but so silly.

~Rozalemagne

#75 boemery on 10.05.08 at 4:39 pm

Sparky,
You are bad to the bone! Giving facts, eliminating bullshit from the trollers (Renshaw, TmCm, Angela, and I believe Roza is one too, though you might disagree)

Imagine not having anything better to do than that… sad. It’s like people who watch soap operas and then complain about how bad they are.

Anyway…I had a most brilliant post on the day after the debate, and due to a bit of ADD, I clicked over without submitting it. Such is life. I’m so proud of Sarah. I really think she showed she’s not just a ‘one hit wonder’ so to speak. She went after the real target, which is BO, and she used Biden’s own words to do it. Brilliant. The reality is, despite the beastie Charlie and Couric interviews, she has re-injected life into this thing again, and we are re-energized. I was honest to admit I was concerned, but the debates erased it. I mean, there were in fact some funny moments, but she showed that she is a ‘real’ person, and Biden has been in there lyin’ so much he’s good enough to make it appear real. The bottom line is this, and his own running mate said it – Obama is not ready to be president! And if we have anything to say, and WE DO! – he will not be.
NoBama08!

#76 Sparky on 10.05.08 at 4:48 pm

Boemery – the below should make your skin crawl – it made mine:

In his biography of Barack Obama, David Mendell writes about Obama’s life as a “secret smoker” and how he “went to great lengths to conceal the habit.” But what about Obama’s secret political life? It turns out that Obama’s childhood mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, was a communist.

In his books, Obama admits attending “socialist conferences” and coming into contact with Marxist literature. But he ridicules the charge of being a “hard-core academic Marxist,” which was made by his colorful and outspoken 2004 U.S. Senate opponent, Republican Alan Keyes.

However, through Frank Marshall Davis, Obama had an admitted relationship with someone who was publicly identified as a member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA). The record shows that Obama was in Hawaii from 1971-1979, where, at some point in time, he developed a close relationship, almost like a son, with Davis, listening to his “poetry” and getting advice on his career path. But Obama, in his book, Dreams From My Father, refers to him repeatedly as just “Frank.”

The reason is apparent: Davis was a known communist who belonged to a party subservient to the Soviet Union. In fact, the 1951 report of the Commission on Subversive Activities to the Legislature of the Territory of Hawaii identified him as a CPUSA member. What’s more, anti-communist congressional committees, including the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), accused Davis of involvement in several communist-front organizations.

By the way – I know this is off course – but Frank was also known as being Bi-Sexual and wrote an underground Porn book relating to being a Pedophile with a 13 year old girl named Ann. – interesting food for thought.

I interjected that for Renshaw “the woman hater”, can’t wait for his comments, name calling and outright outrage.

#77 boemery on 10.05.08 at 4:54 pm

Alot of things I’ve seen and heard about BO make my skin crawl. The ostriches don’t want to know though. They want their messiah. btw, I believe there is proof that he isn’t even naturalized, hope so. I’m praying for an “October surprise’ that will sink his ship once and for all. Larry Sinclair, if you’re anywhere around, get PICTURES!!!!!!

#78 boemery on 10.05.08 at 4:58 pm

P.S. Isn’t it interesting how Mad Michelle hasn’t been heard from of late? Coinkidink? Me thinks not. She’s another one. I don’t know which one is worse, except that she’s not running for Pres. But the whole ‘With Barack, you’re gonna have to…’ thing is too much. She makes him sound like fucking Kim Jong Il.
I love this blog!!!

#79 Sparky on 10.05.08 at 5:04 pm

So true – we need to continue digging information up – they can only come up with so many execuse for him -there are some that he just can’t get around.

If his birth certificate is no big deal – why not produce it. Forget the fact that you are running for President of the United States and that it is a prerequisite.

If they can go after Sarah for the stupid “troopegrate” issue – by the way brought on by the corrupt Republican she had ousted and a Obama friendly Democrat “special investigator” – why not investigate this silly – easy to explain legal document.

It should be a matter of public record – why is it even being blocked.

They had McCain explain his birth certificate – why not Obama.

What is the secret?

#80 Renshaw on 10.06.08 at 7:54 am

Hey Sparky, I loved this post from Anne Marie on Saturday. Let’s take this one by one:

As PUMAs, we pledge never to vote for a candidate who:
1. lies to us – you mean like Sarah and the bridge to no where, like John McCain and his Health Care tax, like Sarah and the gas pipeline that isn’t built and probably won’t be, like McCain saying he’s against pork spending and then goes against the $700 billion bailout bill until another $150 billion of pork are added?

2. changes his position when the wind (or the polls) shift – like John McCain and his position on abortion or the Bush tax cuts. He was for abortion rights until he was against them. He was against the Bush tax cuts until he was for them.

3. has corrupted himself through his many unsavory associations – Keating 5? His top campaign aid getting $15,000 a month from Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae?

4. has obtained funds illegally / is registering “voters” illegally – like the contributions from the ex-Soviet state of Georgia?

5. authors shallow books about, by, and for himself – “Faith of My Fathers: A Family Memoir” by John McCain; Why Courage Matters: The Way to a Braver Life” by John McCain. I wonder if he includes how he left his hurting and disfigured wife and married a trophy wife who had more money than God a month later.

6. parades around Europe like some rock star (Hell, even REAL presidents and REAL royalty don’t do that): Ronald Reagan? John F. Kennedy? Since when are rock stars royalty? Since when did Obama claim royal identification? Could it be just a tad bit of jealousy that McCain couldn’t fill a football field with 10,000 people when he announced Sarah Palin’s candidacy while Obama filled a German park with over 200,000 people (Germans) waiving American flags? If I remember correctly, Germany is one of our strongest allies in Europe? Like Spain? Oh, wait, John McCain thinks Spain is an enemy state.

7. disrespects 18 million voters in his own party – this old shoe. How did he do that? By winning the votes? By not choosing Hillary for VP? And isn’t it awful how he has such POWER over Hillary that he FORCES her along with the DNC to support him. After all, she isn’t a strong willed independent woman, is she? If she were, no one would be able to force her to do anything, would they? By the way, aren’t McCain and Palin the Mavericks? Don’t they identify themselves as those who love to piss off and disrespect their parties?

8. disenfranchises two major states – the other old shoe. Both the Michigan and Florida state Democratic committees knew exactly what they were doing. The candidates knew the scoop.

9. nullifies the rules of the DNC by stifling the voices of 18 million voters and their elected superdelegate – numbers 7 and 8

10. seeks the “woman’s vote” through blackmail but yet shows no respect for “women’s issues,” such as equal rights and equal pay (p.s. We are not his “sweeties”) – okay, this one is so blatant. John McCain voted AGAINST the Violence Against Women act. Sarah Palin supports him in that. She also wants to take away every woman’s reproductive rights. At least McCain would allow an abortion if the woman so chooses in the case of rape or incest, harm to the mother’s life. Sarah would only allow it in the case of harm to the mother’s life (although wait – when they find the gay gene and can test for that with amniotic fluid, they’ll all rush to allow abortion!). McCain voted AGAINST the Fair Pay act. Sarah supported him in that and still does.

11. most scary of all: promotes his own propaganda by using young children – not like Sarah’s “We chose life” with our special needs child or her daughter Bristol’s unwed pregnancy. I can just imagine what you people would say if Barack and Michelle Obama had a special needs infant or if they had a teenaged daughter who was found out to be pregnant by some tough talking street kid from Chicago. You’d have a field day.

These eleven comments are indicative of the blinders you have.

By the way, according to the polls today – Obama / Biden has risen even more in the polls and is currently over 300 electoral votes on the electoral map.

#81 Sparky on 10.06.08 at 9:57 am

The Polls from who – the Media driven Obama Team. In 2004 the Polls showed that John Kerry was leading by a landslide – and we all know how that ended up.

So believe in your fairytale polls – just like your “fairy” tale leader.

Who was putting out the information for the above – oh yes – Team Obama – listen, grovel, drool – he must be right – because only the weak of mind would believe it.

Let’s talk about voter fraud – ACORN – the Financial crisis and the mysterious donations from the middle eastern countries – which by the way now is being investigated.

Even the Huffington Post is now investigating ACORN.

Keep believing Renshaw – you are so blinded by hating woman you can’t even see what is in plain site.

You sad, sad woman hater.

#82 C6H5NC on 10.06.08 at 11:36 am

Sheesh. I didn’t visit this site for a couple of days and all of a sudden the place if full of angry Obama trolls. This is almost as bad as YouTube.

Sparky: Keep up the good fight.

#83 Sparky on 10.06.08 at 11:49 am

Will do C6H5NC – stop by more often, we need you.

We march on!

#84 SharkGirl on 10.06.08 at 4:03 pm

I was undecided if I would support Palin or not. I’m an Independent voter that has no problem crossing parties in order to vote who I think best fits what I want to see happen in America.

I was very impressed with how she handled the debate, and especially how she answered the questions.

#85 Sparky on 10.06.08 at 5:28 pm

Welcome aboard SharkGirl!

#86 Renshaw on 10.10.08 at 8:40 pm

Since the article isn’t, for some strange reason LOL, appearing here – you should know that Sarah Palin, the poor dear, was found to be guilty of abusing her executive power as gov of Alaska in the firing of the state’s public safety commissioner. The panel, by the way, was made up of 10 Republicans and 4 Democrats – McCain calling them all Obama supporters. Funny how this probe started long before Sarah was chosen to be the VP candidate. Seems, the committee said in their report, that she abused the “public trust”. Wasn’t it Sarah who was saying that Obama couldn’t be trusted?????

Oh, I did like it very much to see John McCain telling people today that Obama wasn’t an Arab, wasn’t scary, was a decent citizen and that an Obama administration wasn’t anything to be scared of. I really did like that!

#87 Sparky on 10.11.08 at 6:37 am

Oh really Renshaw, you probably like when people tell you how much you hate women as well.

Did you tell the rest of the story how some of the people on the board dissented because they called it a witch hunt – did you review how they came to their conclusions – that although the firing was founded, they felt she still was biased in her decision – hmmm interesting outcome – or was it that some of these people on the committee are actually on the Obama Campaign team – even more interesting.

By the way Renshaw – Heath Ledger is dead and they were just actors.

#88 just_an_observer on 10.11.08 at 8:48 am

sparky, you are guilty of your own retort to supporters of obama who refuse to see things the exact same way that you do … see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.

#89 Renshaw on 10.11.08 at 8:12 pm

Oh, Sparky – thank you for reminding me of Heath’s untimely death. McCain’s campaign is dead, too.

And you have no idea what Brokeback Mountain (both the original story and the movie) mean to the gay community.

But of course, since one of your most intelligent responses to me is to call me a woman hater, I’m not surprised.

Say what you will about the details of the findings – the report says that Sarah broke the public trust. Her approval numbers are dropping faster than leaves off an autumn tree. McCain can do nothing but call Obama a “pro-abortion radical” (so, I guess, are most Americans). He has to confront the bigotry of his own supporters and declare an Obama administration “nothing to fear.”

Spark, don’t be afraid. Obama will not hurt you. Really. He won’t.

#90 Renshaw on 10.11.08 at 8:15 pm

Sparky,

The avatar means something you’ll never know. And I’m fully aware that Heath and Jake are actors. As great actors, they brought Jack and Ennis to life.

And, Sparky – I don’t hate women. I really don’t hate anyone. It takes too much energy to hate people. I disagree with people’s politics and racism, their homophobia and sexism, their myopic view of things and their ignorance.

Sparky, you do enough hating for all of us.

#91 Sparky on 10.11.08 at 9:03 pm

Renshaw – protesting a little too much are we? So obvious….

#92 badlybehaved on 10.11.08 at 9:04 pm

Check out Marilyn Katz another SDS radical and guess who she works for and raises money for. There’s an article in the Chicago Tribune. So you tell me why it is that poor picked-on Obama has all these. People in his cadre. Is he just bad at reading people; that a new qualification for president?
Turns out he’s lying about being the first Ecru president of the Harvard Law Review. (Who’s surprised?)
What? Michelle and Bernadine Dohrn were working together at the Chicago Office of Sidley Austin in the summer of 87? Oh My!
The true irony of the situation is that it’s looking like Obama is a tool for some aging 60’s radicals, who preached Kill your Parents and kill the rich..but the reason they didn’t have any consequences for their acts of terrorism was because Ayers’ very rich white daddy found them nice jobs in spite of their history. I wonder what would have happened to him if he were a poor Black Panther instead? Next dot to connect is to figure out which of the companies that Billy’s dad was the honcho at are contributing to Obama. Even though Billy only gave 200 dollars.
So which is it Renshaw is Ecru-man totally corrupt or incredibly naive?
As for who is hateful; none of us are so bored that we go to Bot sites to hassle people. You do spend a lot of energy coming here; All you are doing when you come here is confirming why any sane person SHOULD be afraid of what Ecru-man will do.

#93 badlybehaved on 10.11.08 at 9:45 pm

All you PUMAs you really have to go to the PUMApac site. You can download Keep the Change Nobama cash and other fliers to take campaigning. SOME PUMA DID A GREAT JOB!!!!!! THANKS.

#94 truelogic on 10.12.08 at 12:14 am

Sarah Palin won the debate? Do not worry, it rhetorical. I know she did not.

#95 IndieDogg on 10.12.08 at 12:41 am

This sounds like a bit of a pissing match between people who aren’t about to change their minds so I’m not sure why I bother [and don't bother writing back to tell me what an X, Y or Z I am (in your opinion, which has no weight with me)] but there are a few points being missed about the whole “expose” from the Alaska “committee.”

First, what is being quoted is the report of the “investigator” — which was released by the committee — and has not been ratified, voted on or otherwise acted on by either the committee or any other branch of Alaska state government. The Attorney General specifically has counseled all to be very careful about reading anything into it or drawing any conclusions. But, on to the subject matter itself:

A) Todd Palin (who was apparently the most concerned about this trooper still being on the job) came to the defense of his extended family, and others. I wouldn’t apologize for that and I don’t expect he will.

The gentleman who was offered a transfer (for insubordination totally unrelated to any trooper issue) and chose to resign, was never instructed or asked to fire anybody by the Governor, according to him, quoted today.

There has been speculation that the Governor, because the Governor by definition has influence due to the nature of the position, might have “abused” that influence to gain some personal advantage (normally, under Alaska law, assumed to be financial — the statute they cite is used in bribery cases or extortion cases — public officials trading influence for dollars). As the Governor’s attorney has pointed out, there is not evidence in this matter that even remotely approaches a covered situation.

And, note, as to the above admission by the department head himself that he was never asked to fire anybody, his replacement in the position also was never asked to fire anybody and the trooper remains employed today. What they did do was to try to get the public safety commissioner to act on the allegations against the trooper (a complaint case started before Palin became Governor) and remove a dangerous person from the employ of the state.

The report is the report of one investigator. That’s it. The investigator hired by the vehemently anti-Palin head of this witch hunt who is on record as promising an “October Surprise” to take Palin down (and was originally planning to release the “report” of his investigator — a threat he made, by the way, well before the report was even finished (anybody wonder how he knew how it might come out) — three days before the election so no one would have time to respond — a move blocked by the committee). It engages in rank speculation about motive and cause and effect that cannot possibly be substantiated. It is the rankest speculation.

But, there is more. Speaking of potential tangible “gain” to Governor Palin from all this.

The only thing Governor Palin (or Todd Palin) had to “gain” from the dismissal of a potentially dangerous state trooper from the state payroll, was the public good. He should have been dismissed and the only “injustice” remaining related to this incident is that he’s still working, with law enforcement authority, carrying a weapon and driving a state vehicle. I’ve worked with a lot of law enforcement officers at all levels, including federal and I can’t imagine this man still being in uniform. If something happens involving this trooper, with his record and the state’s notice of his behavior, the lawsuit against the State of Alaska for allowing him to remain on the job will be monstrous.

But all that you folks can tear up and scatter around the yard and amuse yourselves with. It can occupy many kittens for hours. Enjoy.

But, to the crux of this thing that’s been overlooked (not by the campaign but by a host of bloggers) relates to the dispute between the Governor and one of her appointees (by law) running a state agency. The fellow to whom she offered a transfer who whose, instead, to resign.

The entire incident, once you get past the conjured up “troopergate” tabloid story, shows the Governor in only the best possible light. I would talk about it all the time, as perhaps they will. If you think Governor Palin is going to run from this, you just don’t know her at all.

The guy was transferred for insubordination but, more specifically (as I understand it), for refusing to cut his budget.

That was one of the Governor’s driving missions in office, to cut spending and streamline state government. Having to fire a department head because he refused to reduce spending in his department says nothing but good things about the Governor. Position I’d recommend, if she cared what I thought about it: I did it and I’d do it again tomorrow.

Side Note: The “report” suggested that family issues with the trooper in question might have had something to do with the transfer/resignation of the department head. Now, aside from the speculation, which has no place in a “finding” of any fact-finding enterprise [imagine a jury coming back with a verdict of, "Well, they might have done something but they didn't do what you said they did and, anyway, we're not sure what it might have been, or whether they did it at all but they probably maybe did, but it wasn't anything they couldn't do anyway and that's all we have to say about it"]. Aside from the fact “probably maybe” should never be included in such a report, the “personal interest” issue can be turned around. The insubordination that the department head demonstrated, which eventually led to his transfer/resignation, indicates he had a bone to pick with the Governor. Might his own personal animosity have led him to resist replacing a state employee despite that employee’s clear record of misconduct? If he’d gotten rid of this trooper when he should have, there would have been no “issue” in the first place. Whether or not there is a real issue even now is highly suspect.

But, bottom line and regardless of that peripheral issue: The Governor removed him because he wouldn’t reduce spending. I say Bravo!!!

A disclaimer. I was once a state department head, appointed directly by the Governor. We had a budget cut-back and all department heads got a memo telling us to submit revised annual budgets showing a 5% overall reduction, to come from wherever we chose. It was not easy. The largest expense is salary and fringes so you’re facing firing somebody. But, I did it. The Governor was my “boss” in all ways, and department heads always serve “at the will of the Governor.” That’s the way it is and everyone understands that.

If I had called the Governor and said I wasn’t going to do it, I would not have lasted through the day, much less been offered a transfer. The Executive Department is the Governor’s team. No questions asked. In fact, on a change in administration, the first thing all department heads wait to hear is whether or not they’re going to be kept on. In some states, everyone submits a resignation letter by protocol so the Governor can simply accept those he or she is changing and keep the others if they so choose (there are some very specialized positions that are considered to be “non political” in nature — but the head of the state police and the head of the state NGuard unit(s), for example, certainly are not in that category). The Governor is expected to put their own people in place and they do, with rare exception.

In summary, there is no “there” there.

So, for those who care, there it is. For those who don’t, I don’t.

#96 Frankster on 10.13.08 at 3:56 pm

Yes, Sarah Palin exceeded all expectations. Of course, they were the lowest expectations for a Vice Presidential candidate in a debate in memory. But to her credit, she did not give the kind of incoherent nonsensical l answers she had become known for due to recent interviews with the media. It just goes to show that with enough rehearsal and preparation, she is quite capable of reciting the talking points given to her by the McCain campaign. She is also quite capable of ignoring questions that she is unprepared to answer and falling back on her energy talking points and folksy winking at the camera. Her voice was a little shaky for much of the debate, but she did not pass out or vomit, which was good.

Of course, the thought of her sitting across the table from Vlad Putin or another international adversary instead of Katie Kouric and having to respond to him without coaching or rehearsed talking points, with the balance of international power in play, scares the hell out of me, as it does most people paying attention.

But I digress. Given her non-disaster at the debate, I think she may be entitled to another pageant award, even though she never got to play her flute or put on a bathing suit this time. The charm was still there, if not the unrehearsed competence and knowledge, and isn’t charm what really matters in a national leader?