Discussion: 10 comments so far…

1. By jfnance32

   9/4/08 at 8:02 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   Thank you, Mr. Progresive Democrat

   Please use continue to use Palin's daugther as club and feel free to whack Palin frequently over the head with it.

   Al Gore...nope...will not go to your gutter level

2. By JohnF

   9/4/08 at 9:21 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Sarah Palin bring her daughter onto the stage at the Republican convention last night?

   Nobody's is moralizing about her daughter's conduct. What has people upset, and legitimately so, is the hypocrisy her story exposes in the Republican party. Sarah Palin says that the decision to keep the baby was her daughter's and that she respects her daughter's decision. Fair enough. But saying she respects her daughter's choice implies that her daughter had a choice.

   However, Sarah Palin won't respect your decision (nor would she have respected her daughter's decision) if you choose to terminate an unintended pregnancy. In fact, she will put the power of the state behind this. No abortions. Period. Are you a victim of rape? Incest? Will the baby be born in a vegetative state? In Sarah Palin's America you will carry that baby to term by force of law. If you choose to end the pregnancy, or if you are the doctor who carries out the procedure, you go to jail.

3. By jfnance32

   9/4/08 at 9:29 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   Obama was the only state senator who tried to stop a bill that would have given human legal rights to babies born from botched abortions.

4. By neiman1

   9/4/08 at 9:31 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   Why do liberals think the state educational system has to teach sex education as though they are the parents. Resistance to sexed is not because parents don't want their kids to know anything, they just don't want it taught "one size fits all" in a public school by a teacher they may disagree with. Parents hold the responsibility to educate on this and to choose when and how, its only those that think the state should raise our children that cannot see this. And, teaching abstinence does not guarantee their wont be undesired pregnancy any more than teaching preventive means eliminates them either. It's just a question of when do we lose our children to STATE CONTROL.

5. By ksand99

   9/4/08 at 9:36 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   As I pointed out yesterday, the McCain campaign announced Sarah Palin's daughter's pregnancy in a PRESS RELEASE.

   Now they are upset that people are talking about it?

   I think it shouldn't factor into the race, but it's funny that they're mad about it, after sending out an all points bulletin!!!!

6. By thebs

   9/4/08 at 10:26 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   Roger Simon said it best:

   "We should stop reporting on the families of the candidates. Unless the candidates want us to."

   "Sarah Palin wanted the media to report on her teenage son, Track, who enlisted in the Army on Sept. 11, 2007, and soon will deploy to Iraq."

   "Sarah Palin did not want the media to report on her teenage daughter, Bristol, who is pregnant and unmarried."

   "Sarah Palin thinks that one is good for her campaign and one is not, and that the media should report only on what is good for her campaign. That is our job, and that is our duty. If that is not actually in the Constitution, it should be. (And someday may be.)"

   Coupled with her press release (good one, ksand), it's just another double standard.

   I'm seeing that alot these days from the Republicans.

7. By boftx

   9/4/08 at 12:01 p.m.

   Suggest removal

   The only thing that matters to me is that Sarah Palin's values are essentially 180 degrees away from mine. The only overlap we have is on guns, and I am willing to bet she would be appalled if she knew the true purpose of the 2nd Ammenedment, a truly radical idea.

   She, along with her most ardent supporters, represent exactly what Wesly Clark meant when he said that seperation of Church and State is not to protect the Church from the State, but rather to protect the State from the Church.

   Having said this, I think Obama is as bad a choice for POTUS as McCain, and I will be voting "None of the above".

8. By Future2012

   9/4/08 at 12:14 p.m.

   Suggest removal

   It is clear that Sarah Palin's short "personal introduction" speech latest night, has scared Democrats to death.

   Looking as the hate and venom spewed above, it is appears that Democrats, in full panic mode, will go all out to demonize the AK gov.

   Sarah is second on the ticket and just like Biden will be implementing the the policies of the top of their Tickets.

   So there can be no surprise on what policies Palin will run on.

   I realize that McCain put a hugh burden on the Media to go out and do their own job of vetting Palin.

   The media is still mad that they did not know Palin was being vetted by McCain over the last six months. Don't forget the FBI checks that have to be done. The team was up all over AK seeking input and the media did not bother to check it out.

   After Sarah Palin studies up on McCain's policies (go to McCain's website, for health care, education, economy, taxes,small businesses, etc. ) and starts getting the daily "classified briefing" that Biden, Obama, and McCain already get, I am sure the media and Sunday talk shows will get a chance at Palin to quiz her.

   No doubt the media will not ask Palin about AK GOV. decisions she has made.

   No doubt the media will not ask Palin about how she jump started the $40 billion NG pipeline

   No doubt the media will not ask Palin about trips to Iraq to check on her National Guard Troops.

   No doubt the media will not ask Palin about her pro life position

   No doubt the media will not ask Palin about her position on "all of the above" energy sources

9. By thebs

   9/4/08 at 12:24 p.m.

   Suggest removal

   So future, your grand argument for Palin's policy-free pronouncements are:

   She's studying McCain's WEBSITE?

   I thought McCain said she was a great, intelligent, independent woman.

   Now you're claiming she's boning up quick to toe his line?

   In other words, she accepted the nomination while UNPREPARED to be vice president.

   You've given her 60 days to figure out where she stands on the most important issues of the day?

   Something tells me Biden doesn't need any "prep" time.

   You compare her "personal introduction" speech, which was heavy on the sarcasm and feather-light on policy to Biden's which was heavy on the policy and there's a clear choice here.

   No "blank slate" with Palin. We need someone who can step into the Presidency without a last minute cram session.

   You're right, she scared us. She showed how little emphasis she places on heady stuff like foreign policy, national security, health care and education.

   I wasn't nearly as hard on Bush in 2000 for the same crap.

   But I've learned my lesson and I'm going to be relentless now.

10. By cmon

    9/4/08 at 5:49 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Once again, I CHALLENGE YOU Nance, future and others, to step up and answer 2 simple questions. It is obvious you are unable to do this, so YOU LOSE!!! HAHAHAHA. I laugh at your pitiful attempts at talking-points blather..

    1. Do you support the idea of a state seceding from the US? Yes or no.

    2. Do you believe that Armageddon is approaching, and that the best way to speed it along is to empty our Nuclear arsenal upon others? Yes or no

    Even you are smart enough to answer two simple questions-or are you just going to avoid/evade/spin/redirect/vilify/lie/demonize.

    Real simple: answer or shut the heck up, until you cea find at least one or two REAL facts, and not the junk that obviously you are unable to produce yourself, since I hear your exact words parroted by pundits before you get a chance to write them here (Can we say lack of individual thought?)

    Put up or shut up