Hey, CanvasShoes, way to completely ignore the links in the articles I sent you to. You might want to stop doing that, it’s the internet equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting “la la la I cannot hear you!” Did you completely miss the bits where the article states that Obama’s and McCain’s tax plans were gone over and analyzed by the NONPARTISAN Tax Policy Center? So fine, you don’t like reading from a union site–how about Business Week, is that neutral enough for you?
Here’s a quote, to save you the effort of actually clicking the link to read it:
So, rather than taking the weak position of “I don’t like the place where the words are written,” would you care to actually debate the two tax plans on their relative merits? Or are you so blinded by partisanship that you can’t actually see that numbers don’t lie?
Here’s a lovely bit of video wherein McCain blames the Minnesota I-35 bridge collapse on his new VP candidate’s “Bridge to Nowhere.” I’d like to hear him answer the questions he asked in the video now. Figure he’d flip flop on it? Any bets? Anyone?
And go Ron Wyden (he’s my Senator, w00t!) for calling Palin and the DOE on making a deal to sell off a hundred billion cubic feet of natural gas drilled in Alaska to Japan–thereby insuring the heating costs for Americans stay nice and high this winter. We really, REALLY need a “Drill it here, keep it here” policy–once it comes out of the ground it ceases to belong to the American people who pay for the infrastructure to get it out and it goes to the highest bidder to make the oil companies fatter. If we’re going to let those bastards rape our land and our coasts, we need to make sure that every drop they get goes to us, and us alone. Bet they’d back off on the “drill, baby, drill” philosophy if it meant they couldn’t get the highest possible price for it…
But you miss Shoe’s point, I think, Aleq. She doesn’t believe Obama. She thinks he’s lying about his tax policy, if I read her correctly. Maybe I’m mistaken and read it wrong. It wouldn’t be the first time I’ve done that in my life.
I’m a bit confused why you clipped out the part about how the trooper tazered his stepson, threatened to kill the grandfather, take down the rest the family, and drive around, drinking beer in his squad car.
I think this is disingenuous unless you can provide an analysis that selling natural gas to Japan raises prices in the US.
We live in a global energy market. Even if the US was truly energy self-sufficient we’d still sell oil and natural gas overseas and buy from overseas. Likely it is cheaper to sell to Japan and buy from North Sea rigs because of shipping. Probably costs more to ship Alaska gas to New York than it does to buy and ship from an oversea source.
Supply and demand–as Wyden’s letter points out, that’s as much gas as would be used by 1.4 million households in this country. If there’s more gas available, the price will be lower, neh? There are at least that many families on the West Coast who’d be more than happy to use it, and the East Coasters can get theirs from the North Sea if it’s cheaper to ship from there. Shipping a thousand miles or so down the coast is not going to be spendier than shipping to Japan, no way no how. We also have pipelines in place to transport gas all down the Left Coast so it seems disingenuous to assume that selling to Japan is “cheaper” than using the gas right here, a couple thousand miles across contiguous land mass.
Occam’s Razor says that Japan will pay more for it right now, which will be justification later on this winter to keep prices high in the US due to scarcity. Since Alaskan natural gas already goes to US cities in the lower 48, selling it to Japan is highly unlikely to be a cost cutting move–it’s a money grab.
I’m a bit confused why you don’t understand the real-life pain caused to children going through bitter, ugly, nasty, hateful divorces, and don’t get why a judge would admonish the adults involved to knock it the hell off or suffer the consequences. And in this case, the adults who were inflicting emotional damage on those children were Sarah Palin and her gang of thugs. The actions of Wooten are irrelevant to the matter of whether the actions of Palin were causing emotional damage. A judge found that they were and admonished her for it, almost costing Palin’s sister custody of her children. The judge who heard all the evidence apparently felt that either the allegations against Wooten were without merit, or would be considered on their own in his findings, but they did not mitigate Palin’s own personal responsibility to act like a fucking grown up and not a vindictive bitch.
Considering that you’re taking at absolute face value the accusations that came out of a very messy divorce, I’d suggest you take a look at this article from the Anchorage Daily News published back in July which details BOTH sides of the issues you named, all of which was pulled out of the 400+ page investigation dossier which Wooten allowed to be released to the public.
And you’re totally handwaving away the fact that a FAMILY COURT JUDGE told Palin’s sister to rein in her relatives and knock off the badmouthing or she’d lose her custody–in favor of the oh-so-scary Wooten. Do you really think family court judges are so woefully unaware of the facts in divorce cases that they’re willing to take away custody for something totally unimportant, especially when they’re bucking someone who has the power to make their lives miserable? Please. Adjust your skirt, your bias is showing.
There is a finite supply of natural gas to be had. Lots of places want it. If Japan cannot buy from Alaska they will have to buy from somewhere else. Since we need to import fuel that means the price merely rises elsewhere as the Japanese access those resources.
Natural gas is fungible and part of a global market. US suppliers are free to buy Alaska gas if it makes sense as well.
It is not that easy to get that gas overland. Which is why one of Palin’s greatest accomplishments so far was to broker a deal with TransCanada pipelines to build a multi-billion dollar pipeline from Alaska, through Canada, to the lower 48. Something her predecessor couldn’t manage to get done after a decade of trying. Unfortunately, it’s not built yet.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s not even started yet, is it?
As for who Sarah Palin is, I repeat from above - she appears to be George W. Bush in a skirt and without a very rich Daddy to pave her way. Ideologically, she seems to line up identically. Her lack of interest in the actual workings of policy and government appear to be identical, as does her attachment (or rather lack thereof) to truth or ethics in her campaign statements and governing style, and her emphasis on personal loyalty over competence in her choice of employees.
I found it incredibly difficult to accept that we re-elected Bush in 2004. But if we manage to elect McCain/Palin in 2008, I truly don’t know what to do. I am not capable of leaving the country - I’m too old, too poor, and have elderly parents. On top of that, I really have no reason to care - I am the youngest of my cousins in my family on both sides, and I barely know (if at all) their children, nor do I have any nieces and nephews. The chances are, whoever is elected will not have any major impact on my own life (possibly excepting health care, if a President Obama were able to get it through). But I do care, desperately. I watch an hour and a half of BBC and PBS news every week night, and 3 hours of commentary every night M-F. I spend most of my days debating politics on the SDMB. And I can’t seem to stop! It’s stupid, and I wish I could stop, but this is a worse addiction that food has ever been, and I have been VERY overweight at times.
Okay, let’s clear up some faulty information here.
Natural gas is not so fungible. Natural gas is very different from oil in that way. Either you transport it by pipeline or you spend a great deal to compress it, generally into liquid form, to transport it by other means. For example, Japan theoretically decreasing their demand for natural gas from Asian sources would not have any effect on supply available to North America, as those Asian sources used in America. They are instead transported throughout Asia and (mostly under Russian control) to the EU.
Alaska has long had well identified reserves of natural gas. The issue in development more than anything else has been the cost of getting to the demand. Current pipelines only have so much capacity and are used for oil as well. Shipping costs lots. New pipelines cost lots. Who builds it? Who pays? When natural gas was fairly cheap it was hardly worth it to build it.
Several pipeline proposals have been competing. The one favored by Palin may award the project to a Canadian company and give them half a billion dollars just to seed it. Building the pipeline has become more doable because of increases in North American natural gas demand and without increased prices. The Bush administration and the Canadian government both have problems with the selected project, mainly, if I understand correctly, in that both would like to see more free market forces at work. The selected project includes, in addition to that half billion dollars of seed money, publicly funded price supports.
The Palin supported pipeline would not run to the lower 48. It would stop in Alberta. From there it would rely on existing capacity.
The current pipeline is not yet a done deal. That Canadian company has agreed to take the money and finds the price support inducements sufficient, but the project still needs to get by the Canadian and US Federal approval processes. The deal commits Alaska to only negotiate with them. Noncompete.
A competing pipeline project may still go through without the government money or price supports involved. BP and Conoco-Philips still plan on building their own pipeline without the state’s help. Their long term plan may extend that pipeline all the way to Chicago to add more capacity to that segment and they are in discussion with Exxon to also participate. They did not bid for the state supported projected. If they do still build their own then Alaska will be potentially paying for something scarcely used as those companies are the producers of natural gas.
Sarah Palin is falsely claiming crdit for something that has not yet happened, may not happen, and if it happens represents only a victory for big government involvement with dollars invested in a foreign country’s company in a noncompete fashion over free market forces accomplishing the same goals. Long term is one pipeline proposal better or worse for Alaska? I don’t know and don’t care. Long term is one better or worse for the US? Probably the BP-Conoco Philips one as it includes a plan to extend the pipeline to the US, not just to Alberta. Has either actually even begun construction? No. Still just high level talk for now.
To the question someone asked above (sorry, I wish I could answer everyone point by point). About I don’t believe Obama’s plan and policy. Only he worded it to sound as if I didn’t believe a proven policy and fact.
No, I don’t. He’s said, and placed some cute little Excel like calculators for our supposed upcoming tax breaks, and we’re supposed to take that as a guarantee that that is what will actually happen once he’s in office? I can line out a bunch of fancy charts and graphs about my personal finances too, it doesn’t mean that I’m going to stick to them. So no, I don’t believe that he will provide that which he says he will provide.
In addition, I’m still against free healthcare, and not requiring people to have responsibility and accountability for their own expenses and lives. Many of his policies and plans (no they don’t LOOK that way, you have to read between the lines of his rhetoric), are just glossed over social programs. Sadly, some people don’t care and in fact are FOR socialism. I believe that able-bodied men and women should be accountable for their own lives. I honestly do not get this thing of “well, neighbor B has cooler stuff than me, that’s not fair, even if I don’t work as much as he does or pay my bills”. And that is what socialism allows, is to force the person who’s actually working for him/her self, to fork over the results of their own sacrifices and hard work.
Just for GP, … It’s Wasilla, pronounced Wah Sill Ah. And Sarah’s last name is pronounced Pay lin. Not Pollen, Paal en etc.
Re; Shayna…
Again, a person is known by the company he keeps, and while Obama may be the most honest, most loving most “unity is all” person there is, his closest supporters and advisers don’t support that stance. They’re either racist (Wright, Father Flager [sp?]), or dishonest (Rezko)
I find it really amusing that Shayna was practically blowing a gasket over her “not being allowed to ask question of, or know the potential vice president” when all along the press has been soft pedaling Obama and any attempt to ask a hard question regarding HIS past (and he’s the Prez candidate, not the vp), is met with accusations of racism.
I don’t care what color he is. But I DO care that he has issues in his past that the press is madly protecting him from.
As for the “surprise to local press,” based upon what the press comes out with on any story, I’m not surprised. What I have to say about the WILD, frantic, fanatic spin that’s going on out there is:
1.) I’ve never seen this kind of panic stricken insistence upon finding dirt on VICE presidential candidate before. Mostly over the 30+ years I’ve been voting, they’re ignored, or sometimes made fun off ala, Qualye-isms.
2.) As to the Troopergate, Bristol’s pregnancy, abortion, Banned books crap, and the bridge to nowhere etc,… despite what the national press is insisting upon, that’s not how it went down locally.
3.)Bristol’s pregnancy. She pretended to be pregnant and then bore “her” baby which is really Bristol’s (even though Bristol is still only 5 months pregnant). I mean, really? Good grief. Not to mention, gee, I don’t know about you all, but the first thing I’m going to do if my teenage daughter comes to me and says “mom, I’m pregnant”, is call the press and then shout it from the rooftops. Again, come ON! Bristol is 5 months pregnant. As with any family, I’m sure family meetings, with both families, talks about what to do and so on, including when to share with the state took place. When Sarah found out she was a nominee for VP, one of the first things she did was tell about Bristol. But nooooOoo, she must have been “hiding” it right?
As if it’s something so shameful and shocking in this day and age of Pamela Anderson’s home movie sex tapes and every other starlet mini-celeb wannabe getting preggers (Nicole Ritche etc). Sheesh.
4.) Her personal, repeat PERSONAL stance and support of pro-life. Sooo? How does that affect anyone? Do you really think she’s going to get into office and make sure that we all are sent back to the backalley butcher shops and coathanger days? It’s possible that there is some group of psycho pro-lifers who think that. But for reasonably intelligent people who honestly have babies’ lives in mind, it simply isn’t logical, nor would it save babies’ lives. Late term abortion controversy is another subject for another time.
Also, no one has answered another point I previously brought up. McCain is 72. NOT 92, and as far as we all know, he’s in reasonable health. My parents are in their 70s. My dad still does construction work, and my mom still mucks out the horse stalls for her and my sister’s horses. As I said previously, my granddad was still pruning and caring for his tomatoes the day before he died at 93. Do you all know something horrendous about McCain’s health that the rest of the country doesn’t know?
Your words “borderline” and “seems” are right on. Most of we Alaskans consider her actions re: Trooper Wooten to have been correct. He’s a bad bad man, and a rogue corrupt cop. Normal citizens who have tried to turn him in have found no satisfaction, if not the governer looking into and asking questions about why this guy is on the force, who else? And as for her “abuse of power” That is what she did re: Moneghan, ask “why is this guy still on the force”. Moneghan wasn’t fired, he was offered a job that was on the same level as that he enjoyed as head of the troopers, same pay and rank. HE chose not to take it. According to our State Labor board, he is the party that separated employment. And as to asking him about why Wooten was still employed given his criminal activities (drinking in his patrol car, tazoring a 10 year old, shooting moose out of season) Why shouldn’t she have? It’s not as if he was some innocent that she personally wanted to get rid of. Isn’t the governer kind of the last port in the storm in this kind of situation? Remember, we’ve all had decades to deal with Alaskan politics and issues. It’s very funny and frustrating to see how they’re being spun (and boy HOW are they being spun!!!) in the national media.
Again, not how it went down locally.
The bridge to nowhere thing. We all started getting wind of it, it was, at least in the local scuttlebutt, Ben Steven’s baby to begin with. We all started mooing, shuffling our hooves and shaking our horns. Next thing we know Palin says (paraphrased), “Okay, this isn’t gonna work? It’s gone”. And some months later, it was.
The plane… I heard the speech of hers also. What she said was “So, I PUT it on ebay”. Period. I didn’t hear her say anything else. Yes, we Alaskans knew that it was sold below what Murky had paid for it, and FTR, we were glad it was gone, most of us didn’t believe that prisoners should be shipped south in luxury for many times what a coach ticket cost. Not sure where you got your figures on that, but I’ve flown in lear jets up here many times, TRUST me charter flights have huge price tags, and if you’re flying on a federal project, FAA rules require two pilots, not just a copilot (I know, because I frequently arrange charter flights, and/or fly in jets for federal projects), and that adds even a bigger price tag. Add in the “wheels up to Wheels down” wages of all of the prison personnel on board, food costs, where do they stay? (have to have at least 8 hours in between flights, do you think they’re going to make the pilots and prison guards cool their heels at the airport?). Not to mention, payments were still being made on it something like 35k a month if memory serves, media didn’t tell you that did they? So even if flying prisoners costs $50 bucks in fuel, they’d still be flying south at a huge price tag. So, selling it at a loss stopped the huge monthly payments on the damned thing.
It was a huge deal to us, Murky insisted on buying the damned thing despite the protests of the entire state, it wasn’t just a money thing when Palin got rid of it. It was proof that she understood how we felt, and the fact that it was one of the first things she accomplished showed that she could keep promises.
The AGIA thing. This is a heated, emotional topic up here. As I said in previous posts, there is a faction of Alaskans who believe that we should have taken a deal, ANY deal, ASAP no matter what. Palin said (again, paraphrased) “no, I’m going to fight the oil companies to get the best return for our (Alaskans, not govt) resource”. Not everyone likes it, but this is one of the biggest proofs of her fighting the “good ole boy” network. Not just going for the quickest deal. Murky was quick to do that, because he was in the pocket of the Oil companies. Sarah truly wants to do the right thing by Alaskans, and Americans too if we get a chance to drill for the other oil that’s here (again, another topic).
Yes, I’ve seen the newspapers, again, they spin a good yarn. And no, I don’t believe that Sarah is a perfect angel. Like I said in my very first post here, there isn’t a single politician who is. In fact there’s not a single one of us who are perfect. What I DO believe is that she is a good choice for VP. Something that you all, excluding Sarahfeehna, SamtheStone, and I, don’t seem to understand. She’s the choice for VP, not prez. And again, unless you all know something we don’t, 72 is NOT a death knell.
Obama is the choice for Prez. Yes, Sarah isn’t quite as experienced as a some people are insisting she should be, but what’s odd is that she far more experienced than Obama, and yet no one seems to find that alarming.
My “claim” huh? Well, unless they’re running fake voice-overs that aren’t really Wright, Father Flager (sp?) and so on. Are you saying that “United States of KKK” is just a fine and dandy way to refer to your fellow citizens, oh…no it’s okay, he didn’t mean it, it’s not his fault, it’s just he way he was raised, where he was raised, when he was raised…blah de blah." Isn’t that the same thing they say about child molesters and serial killers when they get caught? “Oh, well it’s where and how they were raised”. That might fly if you’re talking about a child who truly doesn’t know any better, but once a person is an adult, they need to have accountability for their words and actions.
There is never a time and place that it’s okay to hate someone for the color of their skin, and that is what Wright has done. If he’s wrong, he’s wrong, so what? That’s who he is. My problem isn’t so much with him (I write off anyone of any color who talks about another race as an idiot), but as a former churchgoer myself, you can NOT sit in a church for 23 years, and have a pastor marry you, and baptize your children, and not know his personal views and racial stance, particularly if he regularly spews such filth in church.
Again, a person is known by the company he keeps. See, if Obama had been upfront about the whole Wright thing, I’d have been at least two steps closer to his “side”. If he’d have been completely honest and said “you know what? You’re right, I overlooked really bad behaviour by this man and I shouldn’t have, I was wrong to let it slide and keep supporting him, that’s not how I believe…etc”. But he didn’t, he just sort of renounced the Rev. himself and then kept quiet. If he’d been truthful, I would have completely respected him. The fact that he didn’t renounce the heinous things Wright said speaks volumes to me.
As to Michelle,“this is the first time I’ve been proud of my country”. and “America is a mean-spirited country” is pretty hate-filled, subtly done, but hateful. Please also take into consideration that she went to that church and soaked up hate-filled nonsense from Wright and ALSO didn’t come out and say “Rev. Wright was wrong”.
What she’s saying is that Americans hate blacks, and refuse to allow blacks to be successful and prosperous solely due to this being the first time a black person has been nominated. (nevermind the fact that there are millions of successful black citizens all over the country, who bely the notion that whites “keep blacks down”).
She has a lot of nerve as graduate of a high level university (Ivy league IIRC) and a very wealthy successful woman, (who sends her kids to a 20K a year private school) to act as if blacks are unsuccessful because whites are mean, (as I’ve said in several other posts, I’ve got about every strike against me a person can have, and I still do fairly well, a person’s making it is due to their OWN accountability, and is not anyone else’s “fault”) and Americans have never done anything to be proud of until they nominated a black man as a pres. candidate. That is hate-filled speech. Yes, she tried to disguise it prettily, and I’ve noticed that since then the Obama campaign handlers are keeping a tight rein on her mouth, but those were at least two hateful comments that escaped her.
Aha, you’re the one I was trying to answer earlier in my super long post (sorry).
I answered the first part of your post in that one. But the second part here. What is interesting is that there were several dopers here just above us in the thread, who were stating how they had (though they didn’t use those exact words),negative gut reactions to McCain and Palin. Yes, you’re right, I have the same thing to Obama, though mine are based not JUST upon that, but upon other factors (such as those I outline in my super long post) as well.
He just so puts me in mind of a pretty wax apple. They’re so shiny and beautiful on the outside, they look EXACTLY like a real apple, until you get close, and they’re hollow. He’s a good looking man. I can see why people think he’s so charismatic, but I don’t buy it.
I don’t know. You seem to be able to imply some sort of nasty behavior and no one is calling you racist, even though the arguments against Wright are mostly manufactured sound bites from carefully clipped excerpts of fewer than a dozen sermons over 20 years and despite the fact that neither Rezko nor Pfleger are really close to Obama and that a couple of Chicago news outlets have been trying (and failing) to manufacture some sort of relationship regarding Rezko for over a decade. Based on your claims, here, it would seem that the only news sources you use to learn about Obama are on the Far Right and the only news sources you use to get reactions to Obama stories are on the Far Left. Everyone else was quite willing to pile on the manufactured scandals until they were demonstrated to be false, just as the silliness about Bristol and Trig were momentary blips of hoopla in the media that died down wheen genuine information got reported.
There’s so much I wanted to quote, but this is just a head-scratcher.
Exactly what do you think it means to be “pro-life”? Someone who is “personally pro-life” but believes that other women should have the option of a safe, legal abortion is called “pro-choice”.
Yes, if Sarah Palin had her way, she would “make sure that we all are sent back to the backalley butcher shops and coathanger days”. In other words, she would ban legal abortion. That’s what “pro-life” means, and it’s the whole reason why she was put on the ticket.
I’ve seen this a few times now, and I just don’t get it. Joe Lieberman and Tom Ridge would probably tell you that they personally believe that abortion is bad and they would not want their wives or daughters to have one, but they don’t believe in taking that choice away from everybody else. That’s why they were considered unacceptable for the VP slot. Palin does believe in taking that choice away from everybody else, and if she has the chance she will do what she can to restrict the right to an abortion, because that’s what pro-life means.
.
'm pro-life (I’m 49, a woman and yes, I’ve had an abortion), and so is my sister (44, a woman and has also had an abortion). My mom is also pro-life, she’s never had an abortion and she’s 71. Why do you think we’re pro-life? Are we in THE organization for Pro-Life? No, but we strongly believe in not killing babies if at all possible to convince pregnant women.
None of the three of us think that Pro-life means “send women back to the dark ages” though I am against late term abortions (again, another subject or I’ll post another mega post and we don’t want that).
I am firmly of the belief that where possible, women should be persuaded to adopt out their babies. Alternately (and of course this is nowhere on any ticket, it’s just my own irritated pet peeve) why the HELL isn’t there a Pro-effective birth control group? I know that there is a group of bonkers blowing up abortion clinics nutsos out there, that doesn’t make up the entire group of us. My family isn’t the only group of females who are against abortion, but more against the dark ages of back alley butchers.
I don’t think anyone but the crazies really wants to send women back to the dark ages. And from what source did you get that this was the reason she was put on the ticket. That’s not what either she or John McCain said.
Interesting. It’s okay for you to accept that they personally believe abortion is bad, but not Palin? Why didn’t she start here then? We’ve got a lot of heavily funded gov’t programs for abortions, and she hasn’t spent one iota of her time trying to restrict abortions for Alaskans.
If she was that gungho about it, and that much a danger to women in Alaska re: abortions, she wouldn’t have gotten elected.
You are correct, most here have not been mean or nasty to me, dopers have been civil, intelligent and for the most part, level-headed here in this thread.
But the media itself has turned itself inside out whenever a person outside of their circle asks the questions about Ayers, for instance. Specifically, why does Obama keep as a supporter a man who CURRENTLY defends and is proud of his former actions as an American terrorist. Yes his actions were many years ago, when he was young, but he currently still states that he wishes he had done more.
As to Rezko, 10 years now? Please, Obama’s only been on the national scene since 2004. Though I suppose it’s possible that the folks in Chicago may have been investigating this for longer, here’s a newspaper: http://www.suntimes.com/news/watchdogs/757340,CST-NWS-watchdog24.articlet
At any rate, the Obama supporters on the news made a huge deal out of McCains houses he and his wife owned, but refused to answer, or turned the racist card on anyone who asked about the great deals Obama got on his houses in the Chicago area. I’ve read newspaper reports on this issue, the one I linked to skirts close to stating that there was some kissy-kissy going on, and others, “debunk” it, but don’t really answer the questions. Again, we all read the same news, and we all either read between the lines, or don’t, or carry away different interpretations. When all you get from the bloggers and news media is “well, you’re all racist then if you have to ask these questions” it definitely perks up a person’s ears.
And yes, I realize that the snippets that we get on the righties stations are small bits, but, with Wright alone, the ones that came down were SO horrendous, they were enough to stand on their own.
I give equal time to the lefties shows. Up here we only have 4 stations on AM that do talk radio, 3 of them share different programs, you might have a rightie one in the morning and then later a leftie one, the remaining station is all leftie all the time, and it is the same thing. So basically, all of us are getting our news, regardless of what side we’re on, from the same slanted sources. I guess it’s all in whose clips are more believable.
The only difference in the case of Palin, is that I live here, I’ve been through nearly 40 years of Alaskan politics and I know what she’s done. I went through the first “drafts” of all of these supposed “scandals” (like the bridge to nowhere, the bookbanning one, “troopergate” etc) before they got spun out of control by the national media.
I’m here to tell you, the way they played out locally over the last several years, and the way the stories sound now on the national news are worlds apart, and far, FAR less sinister than the national media is trying to make them out to be. Many of them in fact, not sinister or scandalous at all.
Again, I don’t think she is some perfect little angel. She’s a politician, ALL of them play the game. The issues, and people that are on the R ticket happen to be the ones I believe this time. Who knows, next time, as happened with Billy boy, I may vote the other way. If Hillary had won the nomination, even with all of her little problems, I would have leaned toward voting for her, and without Sarah on the ticket, I probably would have. Like I said at the very beginning of this thing, I’m not all that happy with either of them. I’m not really voting for McCain, but against Obama, Sarah just makes the choice a little less gagworthy.
But again, with Obama? I just can’t do it, like I’ve said all along, I have a very bad feeling about that guy.
How is Obama supposed to stop people from supporting him? Outside of charitable boards and one brunch over a decade ago, THERE IS NO RELATIONSHIP between Ayers and Obama. And Obama has, consistently, denounced Ayers’ actions.
“Refused to answer” is, to no one’s surprise, a complete li… misunderstanding?. Obama sat down, with documentation, with the editorial board of the Tribune and laid it all out for them. You can click hereAnd, here’s the thing, EVERYBODY involved in the sale, from the sellers, to the buyers, to the realtors to the banks, all said Rezko had NOTHING to do with the sale to the Obama’s. The owners have said the price Obama got was fair and was, again, in no way influenced by the sale to Rezko. "When we endorsed Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination Jan. 27, we said we had formed our opinions of him during 12 years of scrutiny. We concluded that the professional judgment and personal decency with which he has managed himself and his ambition distinguish him.
Nothing Obama said in our editorial board room Friday diminishes that verdict."
