Sarah Palin

[flipflop121]

On the Sarah Palin.

 

 

 

She reminds me of the ultimate massivly [bleep]y soccer mum. the one that twists and turns everything said and done, while silently sticking knives in your back. Her induction as VP was nothing more then a 20minuete bashing of obama. (Okay 17minuete, the other 3 was saying how good McCain is)

 

 

 

Now on to her issues

 

 

 

Pro-life, even in cases of rape and incest.

 

 

 

Considering she is a women i find this stance completly disturbing, Being pro-choice i believe in the women having the right to do with her body what she decides, to give no choice even in the case of rape just disturbes me.

 

 

 

Wants creationism taught in school

 

 

 

Science class should be for science, the debat about this should end there. to imply that creationism is a valid scientific proof would be a disgrace to the works and methods of basic scientific princibles.

 

 

 

Has a lot of experience

 

 

 

By far one of the funniest things i have heard from this whole political campaign was the media talking about her experience. she started in a PTA of a school (58% finishing rate) she then became a mayor of a small town (9000 approx) and then became the governor of Alaska (population 650,000 and has been there for only 15 months). to me this adds up to, less experience then Obama has. and a real killer in McCain's one real winning factor he had over Obama (that being experience) Obama has the VP of a very experienced washington campainer. McCain has an alaskan hockey mom.

 

 

 

Has international experience

 

 

 

being close to canada and russia doesnt actually give you internation experience. again, one of the funnier things said this election.

 

 

 

Believes iraq is the work of god

 

 

 

Actually quite sad that she believes this, Iraq isnt even in the holy land. and last time i checked, God being ultimatly powerfull doesnt need a war to gain oil.

 

 

 

Has a Handicapped child

 

 

 

Ginger touched on this subject briefly, as im sure many others have. While having a child with a disability is a bonus to your Pro-life ideals and how you support it. it will and has to take time away from your presidencial responsibilities. if McCain is elected and dies, can she take the time to run a country, deal with 5 children (one being a newborn with down-syndrome) and help to try manage her daughters life, who is pregnant at the age of 17.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

These are just a few reasons i think she is a poor candidate for VP and i believe a last ditch effort by McCain to try and salvage something from this election.

 

 

 

 

 

p.s politics and religion should never co-exist, when this happens dangerous and stupid things often ensue.

[angryjoe]

...she is a bit of a [bleep] though.

[flipflop121]

...she is a bit of a [bleep] though.

 

 

 

true, and in a society where image is everything it is a factor im sure McCain used in deliberation. but it SHOULD have no say on the politics.

 

 

 

unfortunatly the fact she is

 

A) a women

 

B) a hot women

 

 

 

will merely give her a few votes from people who have no idea about politics

 

 

 

i only hope that the people who would otherwise have voted for McCain realise the mistake they made and swap to Obama in at least the same numbers that un-educated americans who dont care about politics will simply vote republican.

[Furah]

Pro-life, even in cases of rape and incest.

 

 

 

Considering she is a women i find this stance completly disturbing, Being pro-choice i believe in the women having the right to do with her body what she decides, to give no choice even in the case of rape just disturbes me.

 

 

 

Wants creationism taught in school

 

 

 

Science class should be for science, the debat about this should end there. to imply that creationism is a valid scientific proof would be a disgrace to the works and methods of basic scientific princibles.

 

 

 

Sorry to irritate people, but from these two things I would vote McCain if I was American and the voting age

[mmmcannibalism]

On the Sarah Palin.

 

 

 

She reminds me of the ultimate massivly [bleep] soccer mum. the one that twists and turns everything said and done, while silently sticking knives in your back. Her induction as VP was nothing more then a 20minuete bashing of obama. (Okay 17minuete, the other 3 was saying how good McCain is)

 

 

 

Now on to her issues

 

 

 

Pro-life, even in cases of rape and incest.

 

 

 

Considering she is a women i find this stance completly disturbing, Being pro-choice i believe in the women having the right to do with her body what she decides, to give no choice even in the case of rape just disturbes me.

 

 

 

Wants creationism taught in school

 

 

 

Science class should be for science, the debat about this should end there. to imply that creationism is a valid scientific proof would be a disgrace to the works and methods of basic scientific princibles.

 

 

 

Has a lot of experience

 

 

 

By far one of the funniest things i have heard from this whole political campaign was the media talking about her experience. she started in a PTA of a school (58% finishing rate) she then became a mayor of a small town (9000 approx) and then became the governor of Alaska (population 650,000 and has been there for only 15 months). to me this adds up to, less experience then Obama has. and a real killer in McCain's one real winning factor he had over Obama (that being experience) Obama has the VP of a very experienced washington campainer. McCain has an alaskan hockey mom.

 

 

 

Has international experience

 

 

 

being close to canada and russia doesnt actually give you internation experience. again, one of the funnier things said this election.

 

 

 

Believes iraq is the work of god

 

 

 

Actually quite sad that she believes this, Iraq isnt even in the holy land. and last time i checked, God being ultimatly powerfull doesnt need a war to gain oil.

 

 

 

Has a Handicapped child

 

 

 

Ginger touched on this subject briefly, as im sure many others have. While having a child with a disability is a bonus to your Pro-life ideals and how you support it. it will and has to take time away from your presidencial responsibilities. if McCain is elected and dies, can she take the time to run a country, deal with 5 children (one being a newborn with down-syndrome) and help to try manage her daughters life, who is pregnant at the age of 17.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

These are just a few reasons i think she is a poor candidate for VP and i believe a last ditch effort by McCain to try and salvage something from this election.

 

 

 

 

 

p.s politics and religion should never co-exist, when this happens dangerous and stupid things often ensue.

 

 

 

first off if you want to attack her character im just going to point out that I dont believe anyone she has worked with in alaska has said a single bad thing about her.

 

 

 

on abortion--before you go all crazy about not allowing abortions for rape go to wikipedia and type in plan b pills. That should explain a very good way to prevent pregnancy from rape. If that doesnt just do some google searching. Definition of life is something that is really hard to get a concrete definition of, because few people can agree what designates life in this case. You realize that saying giving the woman the right to do whatever she wants to her body has a nice way of ignoring the unborn child.

 

 

 

creationism in schools--I already said earlier this isnt a good idea at all. I know somewhere she said she meant that if a debate about evolution vs creationism starts it shouldnt stop, but this was probably covering herself and it is a bad idea to teach it in schools.

 

 

 

experience--lets see obama worked as a community organizer for 4 years then moved onto the senate for about 2 before campaigning. She served as mayor for approximately 6 years governor for 1 and 3 years in various positions usually ethic based. Even if it was a small town id say 6 years as mayor is at least as good as 4 being a community organizer. Also, since she is running for vice president if elected she actually will have on the job time to learn what it takes to be president if that becomes necessary, Obama would have to jump right in

 

 

 

international experience--she worked with Canada on pipelines that run from alaska to the United states, im not going to say she is an expert but she has done more then be near Canada and Russia.

 

 

 

iraq--yeah your right, I mean freeing people from a ruthless dictator is a terrible thing to do. Not like he was commiting mass murder or anything like that. Sure, there is still violence there but you cant argue that combat deaths are worse then mass murder.

 

 

 

her children--let me take this moment to point out that she does have a husband. Believe it or not, her husband could actually do some of the child care :shock: isnt that a radical thought! In addition, her 18 year old son is about to be deployed to Iraq and is an adult so that brings the number of children she would be taking care of to 4. Her pregnant daughter is 17 so im sure she can handle herself fairly effectively. Her other 3 children are 13, 7, and about 1 respectively. I think her husband can handle a 13, 7, and 1 year old, not to mention that if they came to washington with her she would still be there a good amount of time.

 

 

 

edit--to the comment about her getting votes for mccain by being a woman. Its not like Obama is getting votes for being black or anything, clearly only republicans have people vote for them based on appearances.

[magekillr]

Regardless of your opinion on the ethics of abortion, it's not a matter for the federal government to rule on.

 

 

 

Why not?

 

 

 

The 9th and 10th Amendments. I'm not saying they should ban it at all, that would be as invalid as mandating it should be legal. It should just be left to state legislatures.

 

 

 

Right, and there are state legislatures who have bans ready and rearing to go if Roe vs. Wade is ever overturned. So I ask you this: what other things would you leave only to the state legislatures? I asked Jack about the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which technically by your definition is unconstitutional.

 

 

 

This is exactly why I cannot stand our Bill of Rights, and why I agreed with James Madison. I know people who do not think Universal Health Care is a "right", simply because it's not listed in the Bill of Rights.

 

 

 

[T]he Framers did not intend that the first eight amendments be construed to exhaust the basic and fundamental rights.... I do not mean to imply that the .... Ninth Amendment constitutes an independent source of rights protected from infringement by either the States or the Federal Government....While the Ninth Amendment - and indeed the entire Bill of Rights - originally concerned restrictions upon federal power, the subsequently enacted Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the States as well from abridging fundamental personal liberties. And, the Ninth Amendment, in indicating that not all such liberties are specifically mentioned in the first eight amendments, is surely relevant in showing the existence of other fundamental personal rights, now protected from state, as well as federal, infringement.

[Ginger_Warrior]

on abortion--before you go all crazy about not allowing abortions for rape go to wikipedia and type in plan b pills.

 

There is no article by that name. You are referring to Levonorgestel, which only works in the first 72 hours after intercourse. This leads to one problem, and one fallacy in the pro-life argument.

 

 

 

The problem is that not all rape cases are reported within 72 hours, and some even go unreported altogether. It becomes impossible for a woman in such a situation to get the medication - unless that is, you honestly suggest we should punish rape victims for not coming forward within the first 72 hours by not offering them an abortion. Nor is it 100% efficient either - anything less than 100% would still leave a possible need for an abortion open.

 

 

 

The fallacy is that pro-life demonstrators argue life begins at conception. 72 hours after fertilisation is still a life to them nonetheless, thus logically they cannot argue this would be a suitable alternative to an abortion.

 

 

 

Definition of life is something that is really hard to get a concrete definition of, because few people can agree what designates life in this case. You realize that saying giving the woman the right to do whatever she wants to her body has a nice way of ignoring the unborn child.

 

A child which may or may not philosophically exist depending on when you deem life to have started. Giving blanket rights to a life whose existence remains such a controversial argument with strong points on both sides is ludicrous. Hence why it should be left for the woman to decide what she deems as the start of life; and if a woman does believe life starts at conception, not to opt for an abortion and have the child.

 

 

 

international experience--she worked with Canada on pipelines that run from alaska to the United states, im not going to say she is an expert but she has done more then be near Canada and Russia.

 

Diplomatic experience with Canada hardly equips a person for diplomacy with Iran. It would be like saying, "That nurse has worked in a care home - let her do brain surgery".

 

 

 

iraq--yeah your right, I mean freeing people from a ruthless dictator is a terrible thing to do. Not like he was commiting mass murder or anything like that. Sure, there is still violence there but you cant argue that combat deaths are worse then mass murder.

 

Not the point he made. Nice strawman though.

 

 

 

edit--to the comment about her getting votes for mccain by being a woman. Its not like Obama is getting votes for being black or anything, clearly only republicans have people vote for them based on appearances.

 

Obama can't help the fact he's black (not unless he had plastic surgery anyway - and why should he?). McCain has a choice over his VP nomination, and there were many people better qualified for VP than Palin in the Republican Party.

 

 

 

McCain saw he was suffering in the polls and wouldn't stand a chance unless he had some major fightback come November. He went for shock to try and appeal to Obama's weakest group of support - Hillary's women supporters. For this he chose Palin. It's really as simple to interpret as political moves come.

[Faux]

The mud-slinging by the dems is funny as [bleep].

 

 

 

First the child coverup, now Palin cheating on her husband :lol:

[jackattack]

[hide=]

 

Believes iraq is the work of god

 

 

 

Actually quite sad that she believes this, Iraq isnt even in the holy land. and last time i checked, God being ultimatly powerfull doesnt need a war to gain oil.

 

 

 

Has a Handicapped child

 

 

 

Ginger touched on this subject briefly, as im sure many others have. While having a child with a disability is a bonus to your Pro-life ideals and how you support it. it will and has to take time away from your presidencial responsibilities. if McCain is elected and dies, can she take the time to run a country, deal with 5 children (one being a newborn with down-syndrome) and help to try manage her daughters life, who is pregnant at the age of 17.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

These are just a few reasons i think she is a poor candidate for VP and i believe a last ditch effort by McCain to try and salvage something from this election.

 

 

 

 

 

p.s politics and religion should never co-exist, when this happens dangerous and stupid things often ensue.

[/hide]

 

 

 

 

 

-She believes everything is a work of God as I'm sure many do.

 

-Obama has two daughters. Does that disqualify him from being President?

 

 

 

 

 

Regardless of your opinion on the ethics of abortion, it's not a matter for the federal government to rule on.

 

 

 

Why not?

 

 

 

The 9th and 10th Amendments. I'm not saying they should ban it at all, that would be as invalid as mandating it should be legal. It should just be left to state legislatures.

 

 

 

Right, and there are state legislatures who have bans ready and rearing to go if Roe vs. Wade is ever overturned. So I ask you this: what other things would you leave only to the state legislatures? I asked Jack about the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which technically by your definition is unconstitutional.

 

 

 

This is exactly why I cannot stand our Bill of Rights, and why I agreed with James Madison. I know people who do not think Universal Health Care is a "right", simply because it's not listed in the Bill of Rights.

 

 

 

[T]he Framers did not intend that the first eight amendments be construed to exhaust the basic and fundamental rights.... I do not mean to imply that the .... Ninth Amendment constitutes an independent source of rights protected from infringement by either the States or the Federal Government....While the Ninth Amendment - and indeed the entire Bill of Rights - originally concerned restrictions upon federal power, the subsequently enacted Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the States as well from abridging fundamental personal liberties. And, the Ninth Amendment, in indicating that not all such liberties are specifically mentioned in the first eight amendments, is surely relevant in showing the existence of other fundamental personal rights, now protected from state, as well as federal, infringement.

 

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure James Madison didn't think universal health care was a right. And obviously the framers didn't think the Bill of Rights was every right. That's why they left the door open to amendments.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

on abortion--before you go all crazy about not allowing abortions for rape go to wikipedia and type in plan b pills.

 

There is no article by that name. You are referring to Levonorgestel, which only works in the first 72 hours after intercourse. This leads to one problem, and one fallacy in the pro-life argument.

 

 

 

The problem is that not all rape cases are reported within 72 hours, and some even go unreported altogether. It becomes impossible for a woman in such a situation to get the medication - unless that is, you honestly suggest we should punish rape victims for not coming forward within the first 72 hours by not offering them an abortion. Nor is it 100% efficient either - anything less than 100% would still leave a possible need for an abortion open.

 

 

 

The fallacy is that pro-life demonstrators argue life begins at conception. 72 hours after fertilisation is still a life to them nonetheless, thus logically they cannot argue this would be a suitable alternative to an abortion.

 

 

 

Definition of life is something that is really hard to get a concrete definition of, because few people can agree what designates life in this case. You realize that saying giving the woman the right to do whatever she wants to her body has a nice way of ignoring the unborn child.

 

A child which may or may not philosophically exist depending on when you deem life to have started. Giving blanket rights to a life whose existence remains such a controversial argument with strong points on both sides is ludicrous. Hence why it should be left for the woman to decide what she deems as the start of life; and if a woman does believe life starts at conception, not to opt for an abortion and have the child.

 

 

 

What if the woman thinks life begins when the child can talk? Is a 24 week old baby that is born more of a person than a 9 month old baby that is still in the womb? And fertilization doesn't occur immediately. It can take a few days.

[Range_This11]

Pallin is a last ditch for McCain to gain votes. He realizes that there are a select few people left in this country that want stupid 15th century right wing ideas taught. Schools don't need church, they need thinking. The church has prohibited that for centuries and I think it's time we stop it in school. I'm still apathetic in this election because I don't see a candidate that I can support whole-heartedly, but McCain is definitely NOT the correct choice between the two.

[Ginger_Warrior]

What if the woman thinks life begins when the child can talk? Is a 24 week old baby that is born more of a person than a 9 month old baby that is still in the womb? And fertilization doesn't occur immediately. It can take a few days.

 

Maybe pigs will fly before you actually start addressing arguments given to you. :roll:

 

 

 

For something to be a "right" there has to be a consensus for that right. Freedom of speech is a right in your country because the consensus is that the press should have freedom to express themselves, with certain obvious restrictions.

 

 

 

My point was about the extent to which "rights" can be given to an unborn baby (before the 24 week mark) given that it is a topic of such a controversial nature. Banning abortion in favour of the pro-life organisers would be in total ignorance to the equally as strong pro-choice argument. Therefore, you cannot apply a blanket "right" when there is no general consensus, and while there is a movement opposed to the banning of abortion which would become so resistant if a ban ever did come into effect.

[magekillr]

I'm pretty sure James Madison didn't think universal health care was a right.

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure their medical facilities were about as extensive as ticks and leeches.

 

 

 

And obviously the framers didn't think the Bill of Rights was every right. That's why they left the door open to amendments.

 

 

 

So why can't we say abortion falls under those amendments as Earl Warren and I believe? Btw, you don't know your history very well. The states AGAINST a Bill of Rights used that argument as their main reason for not having them. They foresaw, quite accurately, that people in the future would use the Bill of Rights as an "end all, be all".

[darkace21]

Don't know if this was posted already or not, I'm not looking through 14 pages.

 

 

 

It's quite obvious why he chose Palin.

 

 

 

Oil.

 

She's the Governor of Alaska.

 

Alaska=Oil.

[RSBDavid]

Don't know if this was posted already or not, I'm not looking through 14 pages.

 

 

 

It's quite obvious why he chose Palin.

 

 

 

Oil.

 

She's the Governor of Alaska.

 

Alaska=Oil.

 

 

 

I was thinking the same thing.

[jackattack]

I'm pretty sure James Madison didn't think universal health care was a right.

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure their medical facilities were about as extensive as ticks and leeches.

 

 

 

And obviously the framers didn't think the Bill of Rights was every right. That's why they left the door open to amendments.

 

 

 

So why can't we say abortion falls under those amendments as Earl Warren and I believe? Btw, you don't know your history very well. The states AGAINST a Bill of Rights used that argument as their main reason for not having them. They foresaw, quite accurately, that people in the future would use the Bill of Rights as an "end all, be all".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I didn't think anyone was against a Bill of Rights. And what does Earl Warren have to do with this. I don't think he was even alive when Roe v. Wade was decided.

 

 

 

 

 

What if the woman thinks life begins when the child can talk? Is a 24 week old baby that is born more of a person than a 9 month old baby that is still in the womb? And fertilization doesn't occur immediately. It can take a few days.

 

Maybe pigs will fly before you actually start addressing arguments given to you. :roll:

 

 

 

For something to be a "right" there has to be a consensus for that right. Freedom of speech is a right in your country because the consensus is that the press should have freedom to express themselves, with certain obvious restrictions.

 

 

 

My point was about the extent to which "rights" can be given to an unborn baby (before the 24 week mark) given that it is a topic of such a controversial nature. Banning abortion in favour of the pro-life organisers would be in total ignorance to the equally as strong pro-choice argument. Therefore, you cannot apply a blanket "right" when there is no general consensus, and while there is a movement opposed to the banning of abortion which would become so resistant if a ban ever did come into effect.

 

 

 

 

 

There is a consensus in many places. As someone said earlier many states are just waiting for the Roe v. Wade decision to be overturned. There are laws already passed that would outlaw abortion once they take effect after Roe v. Wade is overturned.

[magekillr]

I wasn't referring to Roe vs. Wade, I was referring to Griswold vs. Connecticut, which was used as a precedent for Roe vs. Wade in 1973.

 

 

 

Like, almost half of the states were against a Bill of Rights. Quite notably, James Madison was against them and did not want them in his Constitution, but a few states refused to ratify it unless there was a Bill of Rights in it. James obliged, unwillingly, and added them in.

[user1991]

Boy, these conservatives are really something, aren't they? They're all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you're born, you're on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don't want to know about you. They don't want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you're preborn, you're fine; if you're preschool, you're ****ed.

 

 

 

Conservatives don't give a **** about you until you reach 'military age'. Then they think you are just fine. Just what they've been looking for. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers.

 

 

 

Good old George Carlin :)

 

 

 

 

 

Why don't they just make it illegal after the baby has the capacity to suffer/become conscious..?

 

 

 

I mean, the conservative arguments on souls and the "potential for life" are both fallacious. 1. is just obviously idiotic, and if you look at 2., then you realise that you can apply the logic to a rape situation - that if you stop it, you have potentially stopped the birth of a new age Einstein or Beethoven..

 

 

 

The only actual good argument against it is whether the babies suffer or not.. Now I don't know if they do, haven't done any research, but I think that "life" actually begins when someone is conscious, not when their body develops.. So if they outlaw it after they become conscious, which I presume is late into pregnancy, then there is no problem really...

[magekillr]

Tell me about it.

 

 

 

Not only is she archaic about this, but she slashed funding for single teen moms from $5 million to 3.8 million. $5 million isn't even much money to begin with, and to cut it 20%? Damn...

[jackattack]

I wasn't referring to Roe vs. Wade, I was referring to Griswold vs. Connecticut, which was used as a precedent for Roe vs. Wade in 1973.

 

 

 

Like, almost half of the states were against a Bill of Rights. Quite notably, James Madison was against them and did not want them in his Constitution, but a few states refused to ratify it unless there was a Bill of Rights in it. James obliged, unwillingly, and added them in.

 

 

 

 

 

That is ringing a bell. I forget which Federalist it was though. But with the ninth amendment I don't think they wouldn't have been against it.

[mmmcannibalism]

on abortion--before you go all crazy about not allowing abortions for rape go to wikipedia and type in plan b pills.

 

There is no article by that name. You are referring to Levonorgestel, which only works in the first 72 hours after intercourse. This leads to one problem, and one fallacy in the pro-life argument.

 

 

 

The problem is that not all rape cases are reported within 72 hours, and some even go unreported altogether. It becomes impossible for a woman in such a situation to get the medication - unless that is, you honestly suggest we should punish rape victims for not coming forward within the first 72 hours by not offering them an abortion. Nor is it 100% efficient either - anything less than 100% would still leave a possible need for an abortion open.

 

 

 

The fallacy is that pro-life demonstrators argue life begins at conception. 72 hours after fertilisation is still a life to them nonetheless, thus logically they cannot argue this would be a suitable alternative to an abortion.

 

 

 

Definition of life is something that is really hard to get a concrete definition of, because few people can agree what designates life in this case. You realize that saying giving the woman the right to do whatever she wants to her body has a nice way of ignoring the unborn child.

 

A child which may or may not philosophically exist depending on when you deem life to have started. Giving blanket rights to a life whose existence remains such a controversial argument with strong points on both sides is ludicrous. Hence why it should be left for the woman to decide what she deems as the start of life; and if a woman does believe life starts at conception, not to opt for an abortion and have the child.

 

 

 

international experience--she worked with Canada on pipelines that run from alaska to the United states, im not going to say she is an expert but she has done more then be near Canada and Russia.

 

Diplomatic experience with Canada hardly equips a person for diplomacy with Iran. It would be like saying, "That nurse has worked in a care home - let her do brain surgery".

 

 

 

iraq--yeah your right, I mean freeing people from a ruthless dictator is a terrible thing to do. Not like he was commiting mass murder or anything like that. Sure, there is still violence there but you cant argue that combat deaths are worse then mass murder.

 

Not the point he made. Nice strawman though.

 

 

 

edit--to the comment about her getting votes for mccain by being a woman. Its not like Obama is getting votes for being black or anything, clearly only republicans have people vote for them based on appearances.

 

Obama can't help the fact he's black (not unless he had plastic surgery anyway - and why should he?). McCain has a choice over his VP nomination, and there were many people better qualified for VP than Palin in the Republican Party.

 

 

 

McCain saw he was suffering in the polls and wouldn't stand a chance unless he had some major fightback come November. He went for shock to try and appeal to Obama's weakest group of support - Hillary's women supporters. For this he chose Palin. It's really as simple to interpret as political moves come.

 

 

 

to the first point Im pretty sure you dont have to report being raped to get the pills, I believe they are over the counter. Also, most teenagers if they were ashamed to admit it could probably call a friend to drive them to a pharmacy and not ask questions. Also, I have said that I would accept abortions being legal for something like the first trimester which would still allow time if they found out the pills failed. My main concern is stopping late term abortions and encouraging people to not have early term abortions. As to the statement of a pro life argument saying conception is life, just because most pro life people will say that doesnt mean its universal. I prefer immensely the plan b pills to later term abortions, and if most abortions were prevented by the taking of those pills it would be a near perfect outcome

 

 

 

to the definition of life, I agree the choice to abort is the womans in that case, what we need to do legally is make sure the definition of life is not pushing on infantacide.

 

 

 

I agree she doesnt have major foreign policy experience but vice president does lend itself to training

 

 

 

yes mccain did pick her partially for being female, just like how obama was promoted by the party because he was black it is a fair comparison.

[flipflop121]

[hide=]

on abortion--before you go all crazy about not allowing abortions for rape go to wikipedia and type in plan b pills.

 

There is no article by that name. You are referring to Levonorgestel, which only works in the first 72 hours after intercourse. This leads to one problem, and one fallacy in the pro-life argument.

 

 

 

The problem is that not all rape cases are reported within 72 hours, and some even go unreported altogether. It becomes impossible for a woman in such a situation to get the medication - unless that is, you honestly suggest we should punish rape victims for not coming forward within the first 72 hours by not offering them an abortion. Nor is it 100% efficient either - anything less than 100% would still leave a possible need for an abortion open.

 

 

 

The fallacy is that pro-life demonstrators argue life begins at conception. 72 hours after fertilisation is still a life to them nonetheless, thus logically they cannot argue this would be a suitable alternative to an abortion.

 

 

 

Definition of life is something that is really hard to get a concrete definition of, because few people can agree what designates life in this case. You realize that saying giving the woman the right to do whatever she wants to her body has a nice way of ignoring the unborn child.

 

A child which may or may not philosophically exist depending on when you deem life to have started. Giving blanket rights to a life whose existence remains such a controversial argument with strong points on both sides is ludicrous. Hence why it should be left for the woman to decide what she deems as the start of life; and if a woman does believe life starts at conception, not to opt for an abortion and have the child.

 

 

 

international experience--she worked with Canada on pipelines that run from alaska to the United states, im not going to say she is an expert but she has done more then be near Canada and Russia.

 

Diplomatic experience with Canada hardly equips a person for diplomacy with Iran. It would be like saying, "That nurse has worked in a care home - let her do brain surgery".

 

 

 

iraq--yeah your right, I mean freeing people from a ruthless dictator is a terrible thing to do. Not like he was commiting mass murder or anything like that. Sure, there is still violence there but you cant argue that combat deaths are worse then mass murder.

 

Not the point he made. Nice strawman though.

 

 

 

edit--to the comment about her getting votes for mccain by being a woman. Its not like Obama is getting votes for being black or anything, clearly only republicans have people vote for them based on appearances.

 

Obama can't help the fact he's black (not unless he had plastic surgery anyway - and why should he?). McCain has a choice over his VP nomination, and there were many people better qualified for VP than Palin in the Republican Party.

 

 

 

McCain saw he was suffering in the polls and wouldn't stand a chance unless he had some major fightback come November. He went for shock to try and appeal to Obama's weakest group of support - Hillary's women supporters. For this he chose Palin. It's really as simple to interpret as political moves come.

 

 

 

to the first point Im pretty sure you dont have to report being raped to get the pills, I believe they are over the counter. Also, most teenagers if they were ashamed to admit it could probably call a friend to drive them to a pharmacy and not ask questions. Also, I have said that I would accept abortions being legal for something like the first trimester which would still allow time if they found out the pills failed. My main concern is stopping late term abortions and encouraging people to not have early term abortions. As to the statement of a pro life argument saying conception is life, just because most pro life people will say that doesnt mean its universal. I prefer immensely the plan b pills to later term abortions, and if most abortions were prevented by the taking of those pills it would be a near perfect outcome

 

 

 

to the definition of life, I agree the choice to abort is the womans in that case, what we need to do legally is make sure the definition of life is not pushing on infantacide.

 

 

 

I agree she doesnt have major foreign policy experience but vice president does lend itself to training

 

 

 

yes mccain did pick her partially for being female, just like how obama was promoted by the party because he was black it is a fair comparison.

[/hide]

 

 

 

I think quite a few teenagers whether they be raped or not would not like to confront a pharmicist about plan b pills. i can imagine it would be a degrading experience to go through, and i cant imagine a friend would particullary want to buy them for you as well, for exactly the same reason.

 

 

 

Im quite glad that you agree with me about creationism and the fact she lacks actual foreign policy, dipping your toe in the water doesnt mean you can swim.

 

 

 

but there is a real chance McCain may die during his presidency and would you be confident with this women running the country?

 

 

 

And on the Obama being black note.

 

USA is roughly 10% black, but 50% female... so honestly for a purely political move hilary would have been a better option, going in that vein of thought anyway

[flipflop121]

[hide=]While I disagree with many of Sen. John McCain's policies, I was willing to concede that he may at least make a wise, rational president and represent a step in the right direction for the nation. No longer. With his pick of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate, he has shown a spectacular, even dangerous lack of judgment.

 

 

 

In addition to her frightening lack of qualification to be vice president (much less president) of the United States, Palin is an evangelical, anti-choice, pro-gun, right-wing conservative who wants creationism taught in schools. She is currently under investigation by the Alaska Legislature for alleged abuse of office. Many of us in Alaska simply cannot imagine Palin having anything to do with U.S. foreign policy, domestic policy, national defense or the countless other affairs of federal governance.

 

 

 

A particularly worrisome aspect of the Palin candidacy is her abysmal record on the environment during her over 9000 years as Alaska governor, and how that would translate into national environmental policy if she became vice president. Her environmental record as governor of the nation's "last frontier" deserves close examination

 

 

 

Climate change. Although Alaska is ground zero in the crisis of global warming, Palin has done virtually nothing to address the problem except hold meetings and appoint a "climate sub-cabinet" that likewise has done little. Lots of talk, no action. Although in the past over 9000 years the Arctic summer sea ice shrunk to the lowest levels ever recorded, Palin apparently does not believe it is human-induced or cause for alarm. She was asked to establish an Alaska Office on Climate Change, an Alaska Climate Response Fund (based on a tax on Alaska oil production) and emissions reduction targets for Alaska, but has taken no action on those requests.

 

 

 

 

 

Polar bears. This summer, Palin filed suit against the Bush administration over the federal listing of polar bears as threatened, saying that her opposition was based on a "comprehensive scientific review." But when asked to release the scientific review, she refused. The document, later obtained by the public (from the federal government), clearly shows that, contrary to Palin's assertions, the state of Alaska's marine mammal scientists agreed with the federal conclusions that the polar bears are in serious trouble because of global warming and loss of their sea ice habitat, and that they would be gone from Alaska by 2050. Palin clearly decided to oppose the listing in order to protect Arctic oil and gas development, then publicly misrepresented the basis for her decision, and then tried to conceal all of that. Having run for office on a platform of honesty and transparency, this behavior was neither. Her extreme position here puts her to the political right of the Bush /Cheney administration.

 

 

 

Endangered species. Earlier this year, Palin approved a $2 million state appropriation for a conference on the "economic impacts" of the Endangered Species Act, designed to persuade the public that ESA listings were too costly and unwarranted. Recently she agreed to use the money instead to fund the state's lawsuit against the Bush administration over the polar bear listing -- a likely violation of the state constitutional provisions on appropriation. She opposes additional species listings and other protections in Alaska, where many species are at risk because of climate change and other threats.

 

 

 

 

 

Predator control. Palin approved and expanded the state's aerial predator control program, where wolves are shot from aircraft and bears hunted from aircraft and killed upon landing. This year, her state biologists even dragged 14 newborn wolf pups from their den and, having already shot their parents, then shot each of the pups in the head at close range. Last year, her administration offered a $150 bounty for each wolf killed until the bounty was ruled illegal by the courts. Hundreds of wolves are killed each year by this antiquated state program that has no scientific justification whatsoever, but rather is designed to appease Palin's urban sport hunter supporters.

 

 

 

 

 

Pebble mine. Palin aggressively opposed the "clean water initiative" on the August ballot in Alaska (which then failed), favoring instead foreign mining company desires for fewer government regulations controlling their toxic effluent into salmon streams. She has supported virtually any and all mining proposals that have come her way, even likely the enormous Pebble gold and silver mine proposed in the Bristol Bay watershed. That plan put at risk the largest runs of sockeye salmon in the world, where this summer fishermen caught more than 27 million salmon.

 

 

 

Exxon Valdez oil spill damages. Palin refuses to push Exxon to pay the government for the unanticipated environmental injuries from the disastrous 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. Almost 20 years later, the private case is still unresolved and the governments likewise have yet to collect full payment from Exxon. Shortly before Palin took office in 2006, the governments presented Exxon with a demand to pay $92 million for this additional environmental damage, but her administration has since not pressed the issue nor taken Exxon to court to collect the money. Meanwhile, Exxon reaps record profits from Alaska.

 

 

 

 

 

Trans Pacific shipping. Palin repeatedly has been asked by coastal residents and organizations to enhance the safety of merchant shipping through Alaska's Aleutian Islands, a primary shipping route between Asia and North America, but she's done nothing. Citizens want better vessel tracking, powerful rescue tugs along the route and a risk assessment. While her predecessor funded a scoping study, the Palin administration has not appropriated one dime to improve shipping safety through the Aleutians, and says it will take no further action to reduce risk for several years into the future.

 

 

 

The pattern is clear. On the environment, Sarah Palin is essentially George W. Bush, [bleep] Cheney and perhaps James Watt rolled into one, but with a more pleasant demeanor. At a time when the nation and world urgently need strong environmental leadership from the United States, it is important to look beyond charisma and carefully consider the environmental implications of our vote in November.[/hide]

 

 

 

grabbed from another site. looks like a quality leader

[Ginger_Warrior]

There is a consensus in many places. As someone said earlier many states are just waiting for the Roe v. Wade decision to be overturned. There are laws already passed that would outlaw abortion once they take effect after Roe v. Wade is overturned.

 

Right, so abortion would be outlawed in one state and not in the state next to it... can't you see the futile nature of that situation? :?

 

 

 

to the first point Im pretty sure you dont have to report being raped to get the pills, I believe they are over the counter. Also, most teenagers if they were ashamed to admit it could probably call a friend to drive them to a pharmacy and not ask questions.

 

...It's not really something you talk to your friends about. Seriously. Just trust me on that one...

 

 

 

I prefer immensely the plan b pills to later term abortions, and if most abortions were prevented by the taking of those pills it would be a near perfect outcome

 

I don't think there's a person here who would disagree. But these pills will not always work, and if a woman is traumatised following a rape, she may very well not have the confidence to get the pills. Hence the option of abortion should always be open, but sex education in schools (which is currently substandard) needs to nail it into people's heads that regardless of your ethical view on abortion, it is not a form of contraception.

 

 

 

to the definition of life, I agree the choice to abort is the womans in that case, what we need to do legally is make sure the definition of life is not pushing on infantacide.

 

We did exactly that only 4 months ago [link]. A reduction from 24wks to 20wks was deemed to have no evidence to back up its claim that survival rates were improving, and was defeated 332 to 190 in a free vote.

 

 

 

yes mccain did pick her partially for being female, just like how obama was promoted by the party because he was black it is a fair comparison.

 

No. The fair comparison would be Barack Obama having stood at his candidacy launch in Illinois and shouted "Vote for me - I know what it's like to be black!". As mentioned by flipflop, if they were playing that sort of politics, Hillary would have been a better choice anyway.

 

 

 

[hide=]While I disagree with many of Sen. John McCain's policies, I was willing to concede that he may at least make a wise, rational president and represent a step in the right direction for the nation. No longer. With his pick of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate, he has shown a spectacular, even dangerous lack of judgment.

 

 

 

In addition to her frightening lack of qualification to be vice president (much less president) of the United States, Palin is an evangelical, anti-choice, pro-gun, right-wing conservative who wants creationism taught in schools. She is currently under investigation by the Alaska Legislature for alleged abuse of office. Many of us in Alaska simply cannot imagine Palin having anything to do with U.S. foreign policy, domestic policy, national defense or the countless other affairs of federal governance.

 

 

 

A particularly worrisome aspect of the Palin candidacy is her abysmal record on the environment during her over 9000 years as Alaska governor, and how that would translate into national environmental policy if she became vice president. Her environmental record as governor of the nation's "last frontier" deserves close examination

 

 

 

Climate change. Although Alaska is ground zero in the crisis of global warming, Palin has done virtually nothing to address the problem except hold meetings and appoint a "climate sub-cabinet" that likewise has done little. Lots of talk, no action. Although in the past over 9000 years the Arctic summer sea ice shrunk to the lowest levels ever recorded, Palin apparently does not believe it is human-induced or cause for alarm. She was asked to establish an Alaska Office on Climate Change, an Alaska Climate Response Fund (based on a tax on Alaska oil production) and emissions reduction targets for Alaska, but has taken no action on those requests.

 

 

 

 

 

Polar bears. This summer, Palin filed suit against the Bush administration over the federal listing of polar bears as threatened, saying that her opposition was based on a "comprehensive scientific review." But when asked to release the scientific review, she refused. The document, later obtained by the public (from the federal government), clearly shows that, contrary to Palin's assertions, the state of Alaska's marine mammal scientists agreed with the federal conclusions that the polar bears are in serious trouble because of global warming and loss of their sea ice habitat, and that they would be gone from Alaska by 2050. Palin clearly decided to oppose the listing in order to protect Arctic oil and gas development, then publicly misrepresented the basis for her decision, and then tried to conceal all of that. Having run for office on a platform of honesty and transparency, this behavior was neither. Her extreme position here puts her to the political right of the Bush /Cheney administration.

 

 

 

Endangered species. Earlier this year, Palin approved a $2 million state appropriation for a conference on the "economic impacts" of the Endangered Species Act, designed to persuade the public that ESA listings were too costly and unwarranted. Recently she agreed to use the money instead to fund the state's lawsuit against the Bush administration over the polar bear listing -- a likely violation of the state constitutional provisions on appropriation. She opposes additional species listings and other protections in Alaska, where many species are at risk because of climate change and other threats.

 

 

 

 

 

Predator control. Palin approved and expanded the state's aerial predator control program, where wolves are shot from aircraft and bears hunted from aircraft and killed upon landing. This year, her state biologists even dragged 14 newborn wolf pups from their den and, having already shot their parents, then shot each of the pups in the head at close range. Last year, her administration offered a $150 bounty for each wolf killed until the bounty was ruled illegal by the courts. Hundreds of wolves are killed each year by this antiquated state program that has no scientific justification whatsoever, but rather is designed to appease Palin's urban sport hunter supporters.

 

 

 

 

 

Pebble mine. Palin aggressively opposed the "clean water initiative" on the August ballot in Alaska (which then failed), favoring instead foreign mining company desires for fewer government regulations controlling their toxic effluent into salmon streams. She has supported virtually any and all mining proposals that have come her way, even likely the enormous Pebble gold and silver mine proposed in the Bristol Bay watershed. That plan put at risk the largest runs of sockeye salmon in the world, where this summer fishermen caught more than 27 million salmon.

 

 

 

Exxon Valdez oil spill damages. Palin refuses to push Exxon to pay the government for the unanticipated environmental injuries from the disastrous 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. Almost 20 years later, the private case is still unresolved and the governments likewise have yet to collect full payment from Exxon. Shortly before Palin took office in 2006, the governments presented Exxon with a demand to pay $92 million for this additional environmental damage, but her administration has since not pressed the issue nor taken Exxon to court to collect the money. Meanwhile, Exxon reaps record profits from Alaska.

 

 

 

 

 

Trans Pacific shipping. Palin repeatedly has been asked by coastal residents and organizations to enhance the safety of merchant shipping through Alaska's Aleutian Islands, a primary shipping route between Asia and North America, but she's done nothing. Citizens want better vessel tracking, powerful rescue tugs along the route and a risk assessment. While her predecessor funded a scoping study, the Palin administration has not appropriated one dime to improve shipping safety through the Aleutians, and says it will take no further action to reduce risk for several years into the future.

 

 

 

The pattern is clear. On the environment, Sarah Palin is essentially George W. Bush, [bleep] Cheney and perhaps James Watt rolled into one, but with a more pleasant demeanor. At a time when the nation and world urgently need strong environmental leadership from the United States, it is important to look beyond charisma and carefully consider the environmental implications of our vote in November.[/hide]

 

 

 

grabbed from another site. looks like a quality leader

 

The daft thing is her position on half of those issues is exactly what makes her the darling of the Right.

[mmmcannibalism]

yeah by state abortion bans would not be worthwhile, especially because they would probably say crossing lines to get an abortion is illegal. Thats just asking for illegal abortions which are in no way good.

 

 

 

I dont see the logic of saying that if they were going by winning votes Hillary would be a better option then Obama. The primaries are votes too, and members of the party vote among the people in their own party running. Its not like a commitee chooses the candidate.

 

 

 

The democratic party in america has something around 90% of african american voters being a part of it. That would make being black an advantage in the primary I would say, just like Hillary being a woman helped her in some places. It just so happens that Obama won with nothing but being strongly liberal and giving good speeches.

 

 

 

I am getting sick of finding out how right wing sarah palin is. Could mccain not find a more moderate woman to run with?

[magekillr]

Oh hey, Sarah Palin understands economics so much that she is TOTALLY ready to take the Oval Office on day one.

 

 

 

Not:

 

 

 

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/51940.html

 

 

 

McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, speaking in Colorado Springs, Colo., said Fannie and Freddie had "gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers." The companies, however, aren't taxpayer funded but operate as private companies. The takeover may result in a taxpayer bailout during reorganization.

 

 

 

As explained to the campaigns, Fannie and Freddie would be placed under the control of their regulator, the new Federal Housing Finance Agency. This agency was created when President Bush signed legislation on July 30 replacing the prior regulator of Fannie and Freddie, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight.

 

 

 

Gaffe? Or someone who was a total pander pick and has no business being President or Vice President?