Why is everyone afraid of change, no matter what side you happen to be on? I noticed no one in the BetaNews site uses their real names, God givin names, sorry for the non-believers in this BetaNews site but wake up and stop hiding! "We the people" Any history buffs out there? Ok, I feel better now, I'll go see my therapist and friends at AA... Peace to all that just want a day off...24/7/365

creationism or science, god or technology?

here she is in a 2 part vid, basically describing that drilling, gas lines and the war in iraq is because god wanted it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QG1vPYbRB7k

Let me guess:

She's speaking in front of a Church congregation.

I'm sure Obama wouldn't mention God once in front of a congregation....right?

A little context and perspective make all the difference.

Here is a letter from someone who knows her.

http://my2bucks.wordpres...-sarah-palin-since-1992/

I'm not sure if that other letter was real or not, but this one is real.

technology?

she is all for the technology of drilling in alaska regardless if it means contaminating and killing the nature. unfortunately, the technology to clean up oil spills is still based on paper towels, sponges and elbow grease.

however, the royalties for drilling in alaska mean lots of revenue for them: lower taxes for alaskans and pay raises for the state employees, including herself.

So we should remain dependent on foreign oil?

Or perhaps you'd rather smoke some more crack and believe we can somehow get by *without* oil...today.

What would *you* suggest?

Love the crackpot bit about "killing nature". Nice rhetoric. Did you know that the "nature" near the pipeline is actually becoming overgrown? How's *that* for "killing nature", genius?

Amazingly enough, oil can be drilled for and transported without destroying everything in it's path. We've come a ways since the Valdez...

It's amazing how we could put a man on the moon in the 60's and yet in 2008 we can't invent a power source to to replace oil.

But I agree, drill away in Alaska. Even if it does kill nature. It's too far, too damn cold and there's nobody there to enjoy it anyway so turn it into a oil pit LOL:-)

I wouldn't go quite that far. ;)

But if we'd put 1/2 of the money we currently put into guaranteed failures like Ethanol, we could have this problem licked in no time...

Or maybe take a week off in Iraq and use that $2.4 billion to find a solution.

The problem is that they are trying to replace the oil. When they should be replacing the engine with one that doesn't run on oil/gas. We are still using the same mechanics of an internal combustion engine invented more than 300 years.

...and we are still using those silly round things, called wheels. Where is that darn hover craft or super sonic jet pack that all those movies form the 50's and 60's said we be using today?

Replacing Oil is what we need to do.

Storage of electricity for electric motors requires a battery. As it stands, we have no known way of producing one so that the production, care, and disposal of it doesn't outwiegh it's benefits.

A combustion motor running on clean fuel does not have that problem. We just need to stop subsidizing farmers and get back to actually developing that fuel.

it is due to national security that we utilize everyone else's oil.

then when they run out, we would have our own reserves to utilize, which by some estimates would be 60 years from now.

didn't you know that those projects were set back because our secondary moon and the moon base left our space in 1999:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space:1999

Does that tinfoil hat chafe at all?

Ah DatabaseBen...nice sound bite but bears no semblance to the truth. I lived in Alaska and the pipeline and drilling has caused no spills or contamination. The only spill was created by a drunken captain at the port facility and I believe he was from the lower 48.

Having lived there, there is a reason why running lines underground is difficult and that is terrain and permafrost. That is why the Alaskan pipeline is, for the most part above ground. You also have the problem that most communities are made up of only about a couple hundred people and can only be reached by plane.

While there are many policies that I think she is wrong on, this is not one of them. No government in the lower 48 has a much transparency under her as Alaska and no government does a better job of using the internet to provide health care and transparency in health care as her administration. Even Ma, with its mandated health care, is totally opaque and now running 400-700 million over budget.

Finally, on the issue of earmarks, people need to realize that Alaska is 90% owned by the Federal government and a lot of that money goes to the National parks and not the pork barrel spending by others in Congress (except for the bridge to nowhere which she killed).

So be critical of her on a lot of issues but this isn't one of them.

The effects of Global warming and dimming are the result of pollution in the lower 48 and around the world and not based on Alaskan policy.

What's with all the blank replies, folks?

Thank you for a fair and balanced assessment (and avoiding partisanship). I'd certainly like to see this updated if and when Palin's office provides a response to your questionnaire.

I am encouraged that there is a lot to like in Palin's history and, in particular, her implementation of technology that improves government transparency. I am also encouraged that one of my pet issues - tele-health - has been on her radar and received her support.

I am most surprised at the fact that Palin, Obama and McCain seem to be far closer in spirit than any of them are to Biden. Biden's answers were quite unsettling for me (attempts to extend copyright aggressively to protect Hollywood interests and opposition to net neutrality).

At the risk of being a bit rude, may I suggest that Kathleen Stevenson actually learn something about Palin - rather than just mastering the crude caricature of her painted by web sites like DKos - before making such ridiculous claims? I am truly sick of "true believers" (of either stripe) gassing up non-political forums with partisan rants!

This is an interesting review.

One correction: Gov. Palin's political record also includes a year (early 2003-early 2004) as the chair and ethics officer of the Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Commission, which regulates the state's energy industry (which in turn provides the largest part of the state's budget). During that year, she acquired a better grounding in the intersection of government and energy. It was also from this job that she began taking on the ethically challenged GOP good-old-boy network: First she forced the resignation of her fellow commissioner, Rudy Ruedrich, who was (and is, unfortunately) the state GOP chairman. After he left, she enlisted technical help to search the government-owned computer he'd left behind, and was able to retrieve files he thought he'd deleted which proved that he'd used the computer for party business and, far worse, that he had a variety of close connections to various companies the Commission was supposed to be regulating. He ended up pleading no contest and accepting a $12k fine.

When her complaints about Ruedrich and other ethical problems continued to be ignored by state attorney general Greg Renkes and incumbent Gov. Frank Murkowski (who'd appointed her and who, along with Don Young and Ted Stephens, formed the ruling troika of Alaska politics), Sarah Palin resigned from the Commission and took them on in the press, despite being threatened with prosecution by Renkes. She forced Renkes' resignation. Then she ran against, and soundly whipped, Murkowski in the 2006 GOP primary, after which she went on to beat both popular former Gov. Tony Knowles and an independent candidate, Andrew Halcro, in the general election. (It's Halcro who's been the driving force in making up the non-scandal known as "Troopergate" a/k/a "Tasergate," by the way.)

Gov. Palin's personal use of technology is suggested by recent press accounts of interviews in which she's had to set down one or the other of her two Blackberrys for a moment to begin breast-feeding her infant son Trig. Their family also owns (and has parked in their backyard, which is on a lake) a Piper Cub float-plane; I'm not sure whether both she and Todd are pilots, or only one is, but in my experience, pilots tend to be pretty technology-savvy.

Its also worth noting that Gov Palins brother in law is a drunk and a wife beater (thats why her sister is divorcing him). And it is the contention of the governors staff that such a person has no business in a position of authority. IE a State Trooper. The police chief rightly looked into it and didn't find the brother in law having any marks on his record and didn't remove him.

The only abuse of power that happened was that the governors office then found a new person for the chiefs position and the previous chief took retirement instead of demotion. Hence the forced retirement complaint and the investigation.

But of all the things she has done for Alaska. This one thing is the only thing they can dig up on her. well that and that her underage teenage daughter went and got herself pregers. Whoppty doo. Like that has ANYTHING to do with policy.

She is a anti-choice, creationist, environmental exploitationist, and right wing extremist. I do not care if she wants to gpl her genome and open source her personal assistant's api, she is commonplace evil.

- KathleenStevenson

"She is a anti-choice, creationist, environmental exploitationist, and right wing extremist. I do not care if she wants to gpl her genome and open source her personal assistant's api, she is commonplace evil. "

Kathleen -

I'm glad that you are so open minded. But since when does not wanting to murder innocent children make you "commonplace evil"? Seems kind of like the other way around, doesn't it?

Since when does acknolwedging that some people feel that God might have something to do with our existence evil?

Since when is responsible usage of natural resources evil? Do you live in a hose, or under a bridge? Were any trees cut down to make your home?

Come on. Stop throwing fire bombs w/ no factual support. It makes you look bad.

She is a anti-choice...

I love that analysis...I also love how apparently 80% of Alaskan's approve of this "right wing extremist" and "commonplace evil". Sorry if I have more faith in the people of Alaska than you do.

She has encouraged both creation and evolution be taught in the schools. Given the religious sentiments of many Alaskans, this seems a reasonable compromise. Also, you forgot to add the slur that she supports only abstinence sex education. In fact, she has supported teaching condom use, as well. The caricature will fade away as she is better known.

Is this some kind of joke? Murder innocent children? Using a condom is murdering innocent children? That's pretty funny. Also, just because you religious nutjobs think that an embryo is the same as a full grown child, doesn't mean the entire country/world feels the same way. If a woman gets pregnant and doesn't want the child, it's her choice to do something about it. It has been this way since the dawn of time. No government agency should be allowed to change that.

The existence of God precludes the existence of aliens and there is far more proof of the possibility of alien life (not necessarily intelligent life, but life nonetheless) than there is of God. You may not like it, but that's how it is. Now you may think I'm some kind of atheist for saying that, but far from it. I believe in spiritualism more than I believe in religion. But to believe there is one specific God and your religion is the right one is simply ridiculous. At any rate, religion should have no place in politics. What ever happened to the separation of state and church?

Now for my favorite one "responsible usage of natural resources" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Phrases like that always make me laugh pretty hard. We've already polluted the air and devastated the land. Let's start off shore drilling and destroy whatever life is left in the oceans too! Yeah, sounds like responsible usage of resources to me. Why don't you just say what you really mean? You want cheaper gas prices and to that end, you want cheaper oil. No matter how you get it, you just want it and want it now. You're a typical American who was born into a certain lifestyle of luxury and decadence. Who cares if you destroy the planet as long as you can drive your 2 ton SUV three blocks down the street to the McDonald's because your 300 pound a** can't walk that far.

Thank God for Palin!!!

Obama and the leftist femnazi's are the REAL radical extremists.

By the way---if you are not pro life what are you---pro death???

Our culture has been so consistently brainwashed with left wing radical femnazi bull@#$% for so long that these types of women and the so called "men" that have foolishly bought into this feminization that these left wing misfits only SEEM normal. Quite the contrary. THESE are the real radicals.

Palin is just normal---NOT a radical at all.

FYI : )

Why are you so angry???

Thank God for Palin!!!

Obama and the leftist femnazi's are the REAL radical extremists.

By the way---if you are not pro life what the are you---pro death???

Our culture has been so consistently brainwashed with left wing radical femnazi bull@#$% for so long that these types of women and the so called "men" that have foolishly bought into this feminization that these left wing misfits only SEEM normal. Quite the contrary. THESE are the real radicals.

Palin is just normal---NOT a radical at all.

FYI : )

Hatred is going to lose, loser -

http://www.guardian.co.u...ons2008.republicans2008

Kashin -

You need to practice and improve your straw-man techniques if you want anyone to believe you.

Nowhere did I mention condom use. I know of no pro-life people who equate condom use with intentional abortion.

You yourself called the unborn "a child" when you said 'If a woman gets pregnant and doesn't want the child,...". What do you call it when someone kills a child?

Obama advocates not just first, second or third trimester abortion rights, but even the denying of medical services to a child after it has been born via a botched abortion - is tis not the very same thing as infanticide?

I'm pro-choice before a child is created, and pro-life afterwards. Isn't that the civilized postion to take?

You also said "But to believe there is one specific God and your religion is the right one is simply ridiculous. " Here are two thoughts to ponder - 1) Your disagreement is with Jesus, not with me. He is he one who said "I am the way, the truth or the life, no one comes to the Father but by me". Was Jesus crazy or lying when he said this, or was he telling the truth? and 2) It would be hypocritical for me to claim to be a follower of Christ if I did not also subscribe to what He said about Himself. If other ways also lead to God, then Jesus was a fool to go through what He went through.

Finally, your characacture of my life style and lving standard is completely out of touch with the fact. Without knowing me or my lifestyle, you hurl insults and derision at me. That speaks a lot more about you than about me.

Thanks for your close and absent minded response. God gave you a brain, start using it instead of repeating what someone else has brain washed you into thinking.

God gave everyone the right to choice, and the sins were born by Jesus. Now get over it. If someone wants to be prochoice, they have a right, even given by God and Jesus. If they want to be prolife, then all the more power to them.

Its not up to you to make someone elses choices, that's why God gave up his only son so that we, humans on this earth, have the choice to live our lives knowing our sins are already absolved.

I would expect no other comment from extreme liberal hacks.

There is no difference from being pro choice and being a murderer they are one in the same. Funny how you can kill a poor innocent child but its not ok to kill a convicted murderer, for God sake you are backwards.

Do you drive a vehicle? Those forms of transportation need fuel in order to run so why not find the oil and drill it untill an other form of energy can be found and implemented. I love the response of we can't drill there then b****h about importing oil from places that don't like us very much. I bet you use the energy that you are so opposed to finding to heat your house, make stuff for your everyday needs but I guess that is different. You must really live under a rock to think that we don't need those oil and natural gas fields. You really are out of touch with reality.

The last part is directed at others that comment about exploiting the earth as they say.

Like I stated before do you own a car, heat a house, watch television, listen to the radio. All that uses electricity and that is the reason that we need the oil. Unless you use no energy then you are a hypocrite.

Wow, implying I have a problem killing a convicted murder... over stepping your bounds aren't ya? Implying something that you have no knowledge about.

What your convictions are are yours, don't put them into my face and try to make me you. Every human being is distinct and its not only allowed, but encouraged by the most of the religions I'm aware of, including Christianity.

If you believe in Jesus, and you don't believe any and every person has a right to choose for themselves to be pro life or choice, you've missed the message. That's all I've got to say.

"If a woman gets pregnant and doesn't want the child, it's her choice to do something about it."

How about she not have sex in the first place? If you're going to do the deed, you have to accept the consequences.

"The existence of God precludes the existence of aliens"...

No, it doesn't.

"God gave everyone the right to choice, and the sins were born by Jesus..."

Oh I get it....murder a fetus and say "woops...well, I guess I'll be forgiven..."

So if I choose to become a serial killer, that'll be okay, 'cause Jesus is gonna make it right with God, huh?

Do you guys seriously have to resort to the "serial killer" bit to make a point?

One would think, if you thought about it for more than 30 seconds, you'd be able to come up with something a little less absurd and perhaps even something that constitutes an actual argument...

So I guess that partial birth is still ok as is if some how a child survives the process that they should be denied medical care. Like it or not that is a person and deserves treatment. But nope Obama has voted more than once that is ok to kill the child.

That is the right solution. It seems that people now a days no longer feel that actions have consequences. Morals down the dumper. Also men need to step up and be men about their actions. To many men seem to think that their responsibility is finished when they are. To many women forced into raising a child because the men won't accept their responsibility.

I think it illustrates the point quite nicely.

Oil is not the only way to produce electricity. One new approach I found interesting is the Japanese team that plans to beam energy down from space. http://www.sciam.com/art...g-solar-energy-in-space

20 years off and quite expensive, but food for thought.

We in the good old USA call it solar power :)

So we deal with High costs and dwindling supply, and continue our dependence on th Middle East while we wait?

No, not if I have anything to say about it.

The point that you can make totally absurd statements?

Sure.

*Anything* compared with absurd extremes, makes the point that the person making the comparison can't argue logically or coherently, thus resorting to such emotional rhetoric.

Absurd extremes? Such as sarcasm? I notice you employ the device quite frequently (and quite effectively, I might add.) I personally have no problem with sarcasm; I use it myself. However, there would seem to be little difference between rhetoric and sarcasm. Before you go about giving tutorials on arguing logically or coherently, perhaps a *personal* inventory would be in order.

Perfect response!

*laughs*

Point, but there's a big difference:

I use sarcasm to point out the absurd, you use it to *argue* the absurd.

Semantics, Mr. Tool. I "pointed out" the absurdity of thinking one can go around sinning at will, because after all, Jesus has given we mortals a sin debit card.

Little difference.

Now, that's all I have to say on the matter, you cantankerous man. ;-)

Cantankerous?

How *dare* you speak the truth. ;)

Big Business doesn't like Net Neutrality, so she won't like it.

We don't need her record, look at the way this country has been ran the last 8 years. They are pro-big business.

Tell us please, about the giant strides made by the Democratically controlled Congress responsible for passing all laws and reform during the past two years, Nimrod?

Yes, the Democrats should have been able to accomplish miracles. I mean, two whole years. Right.

So what if there's a Republican president read to veto every new legislation that the Dems pass that is supposed to bring about change...

To the author of the article: the fact that you would extrapolate from the gas pipeline to the internet...do you also consider the internets to be a series of tubes?

"Yes, the Democrats should have been able to accomplish miracles. I mean, two whole years. Right."

Well, Sarah Palin's accomplishments in less than two years in office as governor certainly outshine the almost complete lack of accomplishments of a Democratic Congress.

*Following her electoral success supplanting the "good old boy" network of corruption in her own party, Palin followed that up with actually throwing out the good old boy appointees.

*Still not sitting on her laurels (as the Democratic Congress has sat on something situated at a lower anatomical position), Palin then proceeded to veto wasteful spending--and get her vetos upheld in a legislature filled with good old boy animosity--but also worked--and succeded--to worthwhile expand programs (such as those for special needs children, quite contra to the Lefty lies)

*Still has--as of last week's polling in Alaska--an 80% approval of her constituency, whereas the Democratic Congress has sunk to the low 20% range.

*One reason for her popularity in Alaska can be traced to the fact thaty she DID say
No thanks" to the bridge to nowhere... and "Thanks bunches!" for the money which she used on legitimate, needed infrastructure that real people saw was needed (rather thasn spending it, as Senator Stevens had designed, to simply enrich a few fat cats in the old boy network). That's sticking it to remote pols and bureaucrats in D.C. and asserting a little of that old 10th Amendment vigor more States need to. (Oh, yeh, that nasty 10th Amendment that no Lefty has ever liked.)

Oh, there's more, for folks willing to do their own homework. Folks who just parrot whatever Moveon.org, DailyKos or Mass Media Podpeople Hivemind Dhimmicrappic propaganda they've heard recently don't have any facts available to argue, though.

"To the author of the article: the fact that you would extrapolate from the gas pipeline to the internet...do you also consider the internets to be a series of tubes?"

(Some people are immune to information.) Shelleyp, since you've apparently been sleeping in a corner in a box under a bridge somewhere, here's a cluebat: technically savvy folks (and even pseudo, semi-savvy wannabes who have at least been exposed to something more technically sophisticated than the "12:00" blinking on their outdated VCR) ALL know that "pipes" and "pipelines" have been a ready metaphor for connectivity for the better part of two decades. Rip Van Shelleys, of course, haven't a clue.

"To the author of the article: the fact that you would extrapolate from the gas pipeline to the internet...do you also consider the internets to be a series of tubes?"

Actually, the backbone fiberoptic cables are analogous to tubes or pipelines. What would you call them ? In fact, some fiberoptic cable sets are run through pipelines or pipeline rights of way. You knew that, didn't you ?

"...has been ran the last 8 years..."?

That's "has been run," my obviously Democratic friend. Let me guess: BA in General Studies?

You are right they should have done something but instead did nothing.

So True. Current congress = Lowest...Approval...Rating...Ever. 100% fluff and no substance as usual.

You go Democrats.

I can't believe you didn't give her press office a chance. I mean you didn't have to post this today. Next week would of been fine. Just think how many requests for information they have received since she was named McCain's VP. Plus her positions only matter if something happens to McCain. The vice president only has two jobs. Break a tie in the senate (when was the last time that happened) and to check on the health of the president everyday. Yeah McCain is old, but so is his mom and look she looks like she's doing well in her nineties. I personally think that she will make a good vice president and eventually a good president. What other politician has an approval rating over 80%. I also think she has more experience at being president then Obama does, but that doesn't matter since Obama is running against McCain.

My prediction is that this story will disappear from the BetaNews front page as quickly as the McCain one did. On the other hand Obama's stand on technology seemed to be up for days.

I noticed that as well...

Gov. Palin's office has the same chance today that we've offered all week. Our door is open; if we get a response any time between now and November 4, you'll read it.

-SF3

How does being the Governor of Alaska (for 19 months) give her even "a short time on the national political scene"? That's her first experience on the *state* level.

She hasn't operated on the national level at all, we don't know that she knows anything about life in the 48 contiguous states, and it seems wholly improbable she has contemplated international level issues. That does not mean she was not a terrific City Councilwoman for a little town of 9,000 people, but we're talking about electing her to lead the World (if anything happens to McCain).

Why did McCain choose the most inexperienced VP candidate he could find? Maverick or bonehead?- he's got me confused now. What an insult to the qualified Republican VP candidates who have experience, vision, and had something to say.

Somebody should have intervened.

Washington needs a dramatic change. Sometimes the biggest gains come from individuals who have no preconcieved ideas about how to accomplish something. Many of our greatest accomplishments come from people who weren't aware that what they were doing was not possible. She comes with no preconcieved ideas about some issues. I like what McCain did. If he cannot finish serving his term, maybe she will be there long enough to learn how to be president before he leaves.
I'm tired of the same old Washington. Any new idea that stirs the way things are done in Washington is fine with me. Lets give her a chance.

It's funny you should say that about the Republicans. Your argument totally disregards the fact that the democrats chose a nominee for PRESIDENT who has ABSOLUTELY NO EXPERIENCE WHATSOEVER, IN ANYTHING. Funny isn't it?

Obama has not operated at the "national" level either, he has no record, and everything he's ever done is something that he eventually changed his mind on. What an insult to America.

And then he chooses a VP whose been in politics since Jesus was a boyscout. (Oops! did I just mention religion??!)

So much for change.

Loving it...

b**** about her Executive experience, Dems.

We love watching you complain about her limited experience while you back a guy with *none*.

Entertaining as hell.

@Patriot4Ever: "it seems wholly improbable she has contemplated international level issues"

Improbable, true, since most governors do not ever have reason to deal with international issues at all and have no "foreign policy experience. Kind of like Ronald Reagan, you know?

But no, not like Reagan, since in her slightly less than 2 years as governor she has at least negotiated an international gas pipeline (and taken it out of the hands of the good old boy/big oil hands and placed it sqaurely in an open, public arena); dealt with international fishing rights with Canada, Russia, Japan, and South Korea.

Sure, these aren't deals staring down nuclear proliferation, but her international experience as an executive with broad powers (Alaska's a "powerful executive" state, by constitution) is at least an order of magnitude greater than either Obama OR Biden (a political hack who has been wrong on every single foreign policy issue for at least the last two decades and whose every decent original idea has been plagiarized).

He was President of Harvard Law Review, if I'm not mistaken. And while that's not anything even close to a Mayor or Governor position...it shows that he has been in a position of Authority and Leadership before. And those are principles which can travel from job to job. Just making sure the "facts" don't get skipped here.

What are the Democrats so afraid of they won't let Larry King interview Palin? If she can't answer questions from Mr. Suspenders asks how will she be able to stand up to terrorists, and God help up if McCain dies in office leaving her commander and chief of this country.

http://thinkprogress.org.../09/05/palin-larry-king/

http://thinkprogress.org...09/02/mccain-cancel-cnn/

Um.. Dude, was that a typo?

Uh...you mean the Republicans? Rest assured, she's not afraid of Larry King. Sarah would figuratively chew him up one side and down the other, field dress him, and serve him for supper! And she wouldn't need a teleprompter to do it.

same old lies, different faces.. want real change, want to see this country restored to greatness? then dont vote obama or mcCain... vote Baldwin. http://www.baldwin08.com

I'd rather vote for someone who has more than one tenth of a percentage of actually winning, thank you.

Yeah -
Afterall, better broadband proliferation is just like adding more tubes. (Ignore the fact that Sarah Palin has 0 technologically demonstrative experience and Alaska is light years away from residing inline with existing backbone topologies. Its not just tubes that make the internet work ya know.)

McCain-Palin 2008
--------*--------
Country First

http://www.johnmccain.com/

vote for palin, secede from the union

One has to wonder why that was modded down...

Edited after the fact?

What did I miss, fewt?

Isn't she the extremist biggot who's fighting for the secession of Alaska? So much for the "Republic".

Perhaps you should change to a reliable source of news. She's certainly not fighting for the secession of Alaska and perhaps you're the one who's an extremist biggot

I think he has Palin confused with Pelosi...

LOL!!! God what a shrew Pelosi is.

Hatred and stupidity are going to lose, loser

http://www.guardian.co.u...ons2008.republicans2008

True we don't know her views on Alaska and the US, and even if she told us, we couldn't trust a word she says.

However we do know her husband belongs to the party that wants Alaska to seceed, and she addressed and supported the party many times.

That is a little close to home.

I do not trust her, and this has seriously damaged any trust I had in McCain, since as rational people we know she is NOT the 'most qualified' Republican he could have picked.

On policy I can't trust her positions, especially the ones that conflict with McCain severely.

She pushed and got more earmarks for her little town than Boise, ID, and originally supported the Bridge to Nowhere.

She also campaigned for Stevens (Internet tubes guy), and he won the primary with 7 federal indictments, and now she claims she isn't one of his supporters. WTF?

Is this good policy or even change? The answer is no...

She may have supported Stevens 5-6 years ago. That's 5 yeears before he was indicted. She has never actively campaigned for Stevens. She now doesn't even feel comfortable even sitting next to the guy. (Good for her.)

She did campaign for the guy (Sean Parnell) running against Don Young.

>trust I had in McCain,

You trusted McCain? Now that is the real WTF!

If he was going for most qualified, then no.

But he wasn't...obviously.

He was losing support of the Conservative Base. She'll bring them back.

On the off chance that his people are smart enough, it is also possible that one of the reasons they picked her was her limited experience.

It's been nothing but a pleasure to listen to all the Obama supporters whine and moan about her limited executive experience when Obama himself...has *none*.

If they wanted to pick someone who would show the absolute hypocrisy and total lack of ability to *think* of those supporters, she had to be the #1 choice.

"He was losing support of the Conservative Base. She'll bring them back."

At the risk of the Conservative Base voting for Obama..?

No. At the risk of them not voting, or voting for a third-party candidate.

Exactly.

She stood on a stage and offered her support for Stevens during his Republican Primary that he barely won. (This is just a couple of months ago.)

She also hired his son to lobby for earmark money, this year even.

When she was mayor, (just 20 months ago) tried to get 15 million to build a train between her hometown and the ski resort owned by Stevens...

She used and like Stevens up until the day McCain picker her, that is NOT a maverick or change, that is lying about your personal views.

After a few more days, she has been proven to be a liar, not just a spinner, but a flat out liar.

Coming away from all of this, I still trust Obama, and respect Obama's intelligence, I can't say the same for McCain.

I'm sorry, McCain screwed himself on this one, he is no longer in the 'for consideration' column here.

She is better looking then Hilary Clinton

To me, there's nothing more attractive than a strong, intelligent, confident woman like Sarah Palin. Looks don't hurt either. She is dead sexy!

Lacking in broadband? I am guessing the people in Alaska are too busy working to dink around on the internet all day.

internetworld7: despite the "classic" Apple commercial about Apple being the "solution" to a totalitarian society, they are obviously the opposite. What brand of Apple did you get? Well, the only brand allowed: Apple.

Besides, all of you Apple hippies are required to vote for Obama so he can tax the PC users and give our money to you so you can buy another goofy looking useless Apple instead of getting a job and moving out of your mother's basement.

Actually Alaska has the 2nd highest rate of computer ownership of any state. Broadband speeds are a bit slower because of geography, but broadband penatration has always been very high. Why? Rural residents often can't drive to a brick and mortar store or library.

Most state business has been migrating online at a very fast pace - much faster than in most other states.

Ya’ll know why we Republicans are Pro Life doncha , I can assure you leftie hippie clueless fools! It has nothing to do with any vague, misguided esoteric, indeed archaic notion of the brotherhood of man, well being to all, and like garbage.
Answer is quite simple friends’ “We need more cannon fodder”!

like these morons don't get enough news coverage through the traditional media, do we have to see it here as well? lets stick with beta's please? possibly a beta presidential candidate (someone who isn't all polished by democratic or republican parties

I just want to know if she is a Mac user or a PC loser like McCain.

What was that about MobileMe and "It just works!"?

Go kiss Job's liberal @ss and have him figure out why he is afraid of enlarging the OSX market into the larger world of PCs? and the enterprise space.

Or is Apple not able to present machines of sufficient significance and design to compete on a level playing field with the rest of the market?

And if they are, you might want to convince your effete 'head up his arrogant @ss' Jobs that he can climb out from under the bed and face the larger market.

Of course we wouldn't want anything to endanger that drug c0cktail that keeps ole Steve wobbling about... And suddenly that term seems to make perfect sense.

>>figure out why he is afraid of enlarging the OSX market into the larger world of PCs?

That is an easy answer... They have enough trouble with OS X's percent of crashes on controlled hardware.

Working with the OSX86 project, is only a taste of the horrible levels of instability and performance issues OS X would face if they were to compete in a vast hardware market like Windows or Linux has to do.

OS X's stability level no longer is above Windows/Vista on their own hardware, Jobs can't afford to show how immature OS X is when it comes to diverse hardware or dealing with an infinite level of configurations working together.

If you really want to know. There is not an Apple computer in the State of Alaska Government outside of educational outdated computer labs. And Most of those have grants to upgrade to PC networks rather then their dated appletalk.

And though Alaska is the richest state in the union, our state government seldom uses any of those funds for trivial upgrade like internet infrastrusture. We spend those funds on much needed schools upgrades, Roads, and Public service (IE Fire Police and Hospitals).

And because of the harshness of our living environment our roads seldom last more then a decade without constant repair.

Its also worth noting that cost of living in Alaska is one of the most expensive in the union, and under Palins administration she pushed to release much of the budget surplus of the state and return it to the people in the form of Fuel relief. Considering a large population of the state has some of the highest Heating fuel prices in the country. Each and every person that is a Alaskan resident (children included) are receiving an additional $1300 this September ON TOP OF the already $2000 permanent fund dividend that we get from oil proceeds. So for a typical Alaskan family, 2 adults and 2 children, they will receive around $13,000 and a few days. Most of which is expected to go into fuel costs to secure a fast coming winter.

So when it comes to if she uses a mac or a PC I can see that is a priority in her administration. NOT!

A nonsensical claim.

Obviously you have no idea that Apple is fully compliant with the latest Intel Roadmap - complete with its compatibility and native use of Intel's 64 bit BIOS know as the Extensible Firmware Interface (EFI) - of which even Vista is not yet complaint! - and any hardware that is fully complaint with the Intel Roadmap will work.

If its not, that's your problem!

The OSX86 project is a kludge in that it still has trouble working around the TCM which has nothing to do with screwy peripherals running on a 3rd party proprietary BIOS - most probably by Phoenix.

So place the blame where is belongs - on wacko proprietary 3rd party workarounds that are not complaint with the Intel Roadmap as they conveniently provide shortcuts and patches for their kludges assemblage oc components as they fail to meet Intel's Roadmap requirements.

Apple is NOT, nor should they, be held accountable for other's cheap and dirty shortcuts which already present enough problems for their native assemblies!

And immature? Yeah, like FreeBSD is immature. Get a clue and then run back and play with your oh so mature and stable Windows which is so mature that it still demands a 3rd party proprietary 32 bit BIOS and isn't complaint with even Intel's industry standard EFI developed for the Itanium! But you can be proud that Windows is compatible with late 80's standards! I bet you are still lamenting their FINALLY dropping NetBIOS! LOL!

The fact is that Aple could make SUBSTANTIAL gains in both the enterprise markets and in terms of market penetration with OSX - but only if they restructure much of how they do business (in the case of the enterprise) and simply anal retentive control in terms of tying the OS to their Hardware via the use of Trusted Computing Module based authentication.

There is no reason they can't compete head to head in the hardware market, and any increase in market share even on a non-Apple PC drives growth and demand. And if the other PCs aren't Intel Roadmap compliant - blame THEM, as they are fully responsible for their shortcommings and not Apple for being out of touch.

Oh yes Apple the new monopoly that MS once was, I hope she doesn't have one if it will piss you off.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/157545

she is the only reason i would consider voting for mcain

http://www.huffingtonpos...-karl-rov_n_123852.html It's sad when a comedian gives the best news.

While amusing, they left out the context in the palin bit.

Rove's a moron, we all know that. ;)

Palin wasn't playing the victim card. She was acknowledging the challenge may exist and that if that was the case, she was up to it. It's a far cry from saying, 'They don't like me because I'm a woman...waaaah!'

i think she is real nice. a fresh face with new ideas for washington. i can't believe all these bad things they are saying about her daughter and family. she is like many of my friends and people i work with. im glad she didnt kill her baby.

who are you are you a moderator? why are you searching my name? why are u mocking me?

You are surprised by this?

Now ONLY supports women who are liberals. Otherwise they eschew the rights of women who are accused (and as history has shown - FALSELY) whenever a liberal interest is at stake, be it with Clinton and all of the "Bimbo eruptions" - of who the ONLY Bimbo was Bill Clinton.

For generations the objection of 'how can a woman have a family and a job" was fought in order to allow women to enter the marketplace, and who is the first to use it??? Well, of course its those same self-righteous @ssholes who claim to support the rights of others - AS LONG AS THEY ARE LIBERALS.

You are surprised by this?

Now ONLY supports women who are liberals. Otherwise they eschew the rights of women who are accused (and as history has shown - FALSELY) whenever a liberal interest is at stake, be it with Clinton and all of the "Bimbo eruptions" - of who the ONLY Bimbo was Bill Clinton.

For generations the objection of "how can a woman have a family and a job" was fought in order to allow women to enter the marketplace, and who is the first to use it??? Well, of course its those same self-righteous @ssholes who claim to support the rights of others - AS LONG AS THEY ARE LIBERALS.

wow - in STEREO!

Never thought I agree with you on anything, but I do. ;-)

Ironically, her opponents would have considered aborting exercising sound "judgment" on prenatal care.

I'm glad you like her - I suspect you'll be seeing a lot more of her face very soon.

She makes Dan Quayle look competent

Care to back that up with some examples?
I didn't think so.

Your wish is my command :) Just one example should be enough:

"The biggest project that Sarah Palin undertook as mayor of this small town was an indoor sports complex, where locals played hockey, soccer, and basketball, especially during the long, dark Alaskan winters.

The only catch was that the city began building roads and installing utilities for the project before it had unchallenged title to the land. The misstep led to years of litigation and at least $1.3 million in extra costs for a small municipality with a small budget. What was to be Ms. Palin's legacy has turned into a financial mess that continues to plague Wasilla."

This is taken verbatim from a moonbat rag known as "The Wall Street Journal"

And Obama has done what , , , , ,

Oh yeah he did work for an organization that was busted for voting fraud, bought a house with the help of a convicted felon, and has close to a billion in earmarks. Yup that is real change, typical democrates in action.

This is from a friend of yo mama!

Having now left Trinity United Church of Christ, can Barack Obama escape responsibility for his decades-long ties to Michael Pfleger and Jeremiah Wright? No, he cannot. Obama’s connections to the radical-left politics espoused by Pfleger and Wright are broad and deep. The real reason Obama bound himself to Wright and Pfleger in the first place is that he largely approved of their political-theological outlooks.

Obama shared Wright’s rejection of black “assimilation.” Obama also shared Wright’s suspicion of the traditional American ethos of individual self-improvement and the pursuit of “middle-classness.” In common with Wright, Obama had deep misgivings about America’s criminal justice system. And with the exception of their direct attacks on whites, Obama largely approved of his preacher-friends’ fiery rhetoric. Obama’s goal was not to repudiate religious radicalism but to channel its fervor into an effective and permanent activist organization. How do we know all this? We know it because Obama himself has told us.

A REVEALING PROFILE
Although it’s been discussed before (because it confirms that Obama attended Louis Farrakhan’s Million Man March), a 1995 background piece on Obama from the Chicago Reader has received far too little attention. Careful consideration of this important profile makes it clear that Obama’s long-standing ties to Chicago’s most rabidly radical preachers call into question far more than Obama’s judgment and character (although they certainly do that, as well). Obama’s two-decades at Trinity open a critically important window onto his radical-left political leanings. No mere change of church membership can erase that truth.

By providing us with an in-depth picture of Obama’s political worldview on the eve of his elective career, Hank De Zutter’s, “What Makes Obama Run?” lives up to its title. The first thing to note here is that Obama presents his political hopes for the black community as a third way between two inadequate alternatives. First, Obama rejects, “the unrealistic politics of integrationist assimilation - which helps a few upwardly mobile blacks to ‘move up, get rich, and move out. . . . ’ ” This statement might surprise many Obama supporters, who seem to think of him as the epitome of integrationism. Yet Obama’s repudiation of integrationist upward mobility is fully consistent with his career as a community organizer, his general sympathy for leftist critics of the American “system,” and of course his membership at Trinity. Obama, we are told, “quickly learned that integration was a one-way street, with blacks expected to assimilate into a white world that never gave ground.” Compare these statements by Obama with some of the remarks in Jeremiah Wright’s Trumpet, and the resemblance is clear.

Having disposed of assimilation, Obama goes on to criticize “the politics of black rage and black nationalism” - although less on substance than on tactics. Obama upbraids the politics of black power for lacking a practical strategy. Instead of diffusing black rage by diverting it to the traditional American path of assimilation and middle-class achievement, Obama wants to capture the intensity of black anger and use it to power an effective political organization. Obama says, “he’s tired of seeing the moral fervor of black folks whipped up - at the speaker’s rostrum and from the pulpit - and then allowed to dissipate because there’s no agenda, no concrete program for change.” The problem is not fiery rhetoric from the pulpit, but merely the wasted anger it so usefully stirs.

OBAMA’S NETWORK
De Zutter gives us a clear glimpse of Obama’s radicalism. Obama is called “progressive,” of course, and is said to yearn for “massive economic change.” That could simply mean an end to widespread poverty, rather than social restructuring. Yet Obama is also described as holding “a worldview well beyond” his mother’s “New Deal, Peace Corps, position-paper liberalism.” De Zutter lays out Obama’s ties to radical groups like Chicago Acorn, as Acorn’s lead organizer, Madeleine Talbott, is quoted affirming that: “Barack has proven himself among our members . . . we accept and respect him as a kindred spirit, a fellow organizer.” In “Inside Obama’s Acorn” I explore Obama’s links to this radical group, and to Talbott, who practices the sort of intimidating and often illegal “direct action” Acorn is famous for. (For more on Talbott’s affinity for “direct action,” see “Where Do We Begin?”)

De Zutter also touches on some other key elements of Obama’s network. Obama’s early organizing work for the Developing Communities Project was “funded by south-side Catholic churches.” Clearly, this early work cemented Obama’s close ties to Father Pfleger, whose support formed a critical component of Obama’s grassroots network. Precisely because of this early link, Pfleger threw his considerable support behind Obama’s failed 2000 bid for Congress. By the way, Pfleger’s political influence in Chicago is such that Mayor Richard Daley actually declared his 2002 candidacy for a fourth full term as mayor at Pfleger’s St. Sabina church. In “Inside Obama’s Acorn” I explore the possibility that Obama’s seat on the boards of a couple liberal Chicago foundations may have allowed him to direct funds to groups that served as his de facto political base. De Zutter quotes Woods Fund executive director, Jean Rudd, praising Obama for “being among the most hard-nosed board members in wanting to see results. He wants to see our grants make change happen - not just pay salaries.” No doubt, Obama was sincerely supportive of the sort of leftist organizations favored by the Woods Fund. However, if Obama was in fact looking to some of the groups supported by the Woods Fund as a personal political base, his unusually active board service would make all the more sense.

BLACK CHURCHES
The threads of this political network are pulled tighter as Obama turns to a “favorite topic,” “the lack of collective action among black churches.” Obama is sharply critical of churches that try to help their communities merely through “food pantries and community service programs.” Today, Obama rationalizes his ties to Wright’s Trinity Church by citing its community service programs. Yet in 1995, Obama was highly critical of churches that focused exclusively on such services, while neglecting the sort of politically visionary sermons, local king-making, and political alliance-building favored by Pfleger and Wright. Obama rejects the strictly community-service approach of apolitical churches as part of America’s unfortunate “bias” toward “individual action.” Obama believes that what he derogates as “John Wayne” thinking and the old, “right wing...individualistic bootstrap myth” needs to be replaced: “We must unite in collective action, build collective institutions and organizations.”

Obama sees the black church as the key to his plan for collective social and political action: “Obama . . . spoke of the need to mobilize and organize the economic power and moral fervor of black churches. He also argued that as a state senator he might help bring this about faster than as a community organizer or civil rights lawyer.” Says Obama, “We have some wonderful preachers in town - preachers who continue to inspire me - preachers who are magnificent at articulating a vision of the world as it should be.” Obama continues, “But as soon as church lets out, the energy dissipates. We must find ways to channel all this energy into community building.” Obama seems to be holding up people like Wright, Pfleger, and James Meeks (who he has listed as his key religious allies) as positive models for the wider black church - in both their rhetoric, and in their willingness to play a direct political role. If anything, Obama would like to see the political visions of Wright and Pfleger given greater weight and substance by connecting them to secular leftist political networks like Acorn.

END RUN
By the end of De Zutter’s piece, Obama’s distinctive vision comes clear. While in his years as a Chicago organizer and attorney, Obama took care to maintain friendly ties to the Daley administration, in Obama’s campaign for state senate, he specifically avoided asking the mayor or the mayor’s closest allies for support. Obama’s plan was to make an end-run around Chicago’s governing Democratic political network, by building a coalition of left-leaning black churches and radical secular organizations like Acorn (perhaps with de facto help from liberal foundation money as well). This coalition would provide Obama with the flexibility to play out a political career some distance to the left of conventional Illinois democratic politics. And sure enough, Obama’s extremely liberal record in Illinois vindicated his strategy.

The De Zutter story sheds considerable light on the debate over the significance of Obama’s ties to Pfleger and Wright. For the most part, that debate plays out with a relatively apolitical notion of church membership in mind. Obama’s defenders say that he should not be held responsible for the occasional political excesses of his preacher. Critics point out that the extremism of Wright and Pfleger is long-standing and well known. At some point, this line of thinking goes, the radicalism of such preachers ought to become intolerable. And what does it say about Obama’s judgement that he actually built his own national reputation by pointing to his appreciation of Wright’s sermons? Obama’s critics also see his decision to join Wright’s church as an opportunistic move by a politically ambitious secular humanist in search of a respectable religious home.

I agree with all of these criticisms of Obama. Yet De Zutter’s article shows us that the full story of Obama’s ties to Pfleger and Wright is both more disturbing and more politically relevant than we’ve realized up to now. On Obama’s own account, the rhetoric and vision of Chicago’s most politically radical black churches are exactly what he wants to see more of. True, when discussing Louis Farrakhan with De Zutter, Obama makes a point of repudiating anti-white, anti-Semitic, and anti-Asian sermons. Yet having laid down that proviso, Obama seems to relish the radicalism of preachers like Pfleger and Wright. In 1995, Obama didn’t want Trinity’s political show to stop. His plan was to spread it to other black churches, and harness its power to an alliance of leftist groups and sympathetic elected officials.

So Obama’s political interest in Trinity went far beyond merely gaining a respectable public Christian identity. On his own account, Obama hoped to use the untapped power of the black church to supercharge hard-left politics in Chicago, creating a personal and institutional political base that would be free to part with conventional Democratic politics. By his own testimony, Obama would seem to have allied himself with Wright and Pfleger, not in spite of, but precisely because of their radical left-wing politics. It follows that Obama’s ties to Trinity reflect on far more than his judgment and character (although they certainly implicate that). Contrary to common wisdom, then, Obama’s religious history has everything to do with his political values and policy positions, since it confirms his affinity for leftist radicalism.

SENSE OF MISSION
It could be argued that the new and supposedly moderate, “bipartisan” Obama of 2008 is the real Obama. Unfortunately, that argument is unconvincing. Again and again, De Zutter reports that Obama’s true passion, deepest calling, and most authentic sense of mission is to be found in his early community organizing work. Obama’s own vision for himself as a legislator is as a kind of super-organizer/activist, extending the “progressive” quest for “social justice” to society as a whole.

I see no reason to doubt Obama’s self-account, and many reasons to accept it. As De Zutter notes, Obama gave up a near-certain Supreme Court clerkship to come to Chicago and do community organizing. It’s also easy to imagine Obama joining one of the many other less radical black churches on the south side of Chicago, if that was all he needed to launch a political career. Clearly, given his good relations with the Daley administration, Obama could have asked for its support in his bid for the Illinois State Senate. Yet at every turn, Obama took a riskier path. That suggests he was operating from conviction. Trouble is, the conviction in question was apparently Obama’s belief in the sort of radical social and economic views held by groups like Acorn and preachers like Wright and Pfleger.

Obama was certainly more rhetorically smooth, and no doubt less personally embittered than some of his mentors. Yet what stands out after a consideration of Obama’s larger personal and political history is the general convergence of political orientation between Wright, Pfleger, Acorn, Chicago’s “progressive” foundations, and Obama himself. Obama in Chicago was a man of the Left, doing his level-best to assemble a coalition free from the constraints of conventional, middle-ground Democratic politics.

OBAMA SPEAKS
If there is any doubt about the accuracy of De Zutter’s detailed account, we get the same message from this too-little discussed but revealing and important piece by Obama himself. The chapter from a 1990 book called “After Alinsky: Community Organizing in Illinois” was originally published in 1988, just after Obama joined Trinity. The piece is called, “Why Organize? Problems and Promise in the Inner City,” and it shows exactly what Obama hoped to make of his association with Pfleger and Wright.

Obama begins by rejecting the false dichotomy between radicalism and moderation:

The debate as to how black and other dispossessed people can forward their lot in America is not new. From W.E.B. DuBois to Booker T. Washington to Marcus Garvey to Malcolm X to Martin Luther King, this internal debate has raged between integration and nationalism, between accommodation and militancy, between sit-down strikes and boardroom negotiations. The lines between these strategies have never been simply drawn, and the most successful black leadership has recognized the need to bridge these seemingly divergent approaches.

Of course, even James Cone, the radical founder of black-liberation theology, sees himself as synthesizing the moderation of Martin Luther King Jr. with the radicalism of Malcolm X. Obama here seems to be calling for an inside/outside strategy like the one he would have learned working with Chicago Acorn. Note Obama’s reference to the controversial tradition of “direct action” favored by Acorn (and earlier by Saul Alinsky, whose tradition of radicalism the book is meant to carry on). Obama offers radicalism with a moderate face.

Obama sketches out a vision in which a politically awakened black church would ally with “community organizers” (like Obama and his friends from Acorn), thereby radicalizing the politics of America’s cities:

Nowhere is the promise of organizing more apparent than in the traditional black churches. Possessing tremendous financial resources, membership and - most importantly - values and biblical traditions that call for empowerment and liberation, the black church is clearly a slumbering giant in the political and economic landscape of cities like Chicago.

After expressing disappointment with apolitical black churches focused only on traditional community services, Obama goes on to point in a more activist direction:

Over the past few years, however, more and more young and forward-thinking pastors have begun to look at community organizations such as the Developing Communities Project in the far south side [where Obama himself worked, and first encountered Pfleger, SK]...as a powerful tool for living the social gospel, one which can educate and empower entire congregations and not just serve as a platform for a few prophetic leaders. Should a mere 50 prominent black churches, out of thousands that exist in cities like Chicago, decide to collaborate with a trained and organized staff, enormous positive changes could be wrought....

Give me 50 Pflegers or 50 Wrights, Obama is saying, tie them to a network of grassroots activists like my companions from Acorn, and we can revolutionize urban politics.

MYSTERY SOLVED
So it would appear that Obama’s own writings solve the mystery of why he stayed at Trinity for 20 years. Obama’s long-held and decidedly audacious hope has been to spread Wright’s radical spirit by linking it to a viable, left-leaning political program, with Obama himself at the center. The revolutionizing power of a politically awakened black church is not some side issue, or merely a personal matter, but has been the signature theme of Obama’s grand political strategy.

Lucky for Obama, this political background is unfamiliar to most Americans. There are others who share Obama’s approach, however. Take a look at this piece by Manhattan Institute scholar Steven Malanga on “The Rise Of The Religious Left” and you will see exactly where Obama is coming from. Malanga ends his account by noting that religious-left activists often partner with groups like MoveOn.org and attend gatherings featuring speakers like Michael Moore. After the 2004 election, there was some talk of the Democratic party “purging” MoveOn and Moore. Far from purging its radical Left, however, the Democratic party is now just inches away from placing it in the driver’s seat. That is the real meaning of the fiasco at Trinity Church.

I think it's credible by default just becasuee it's so damn LONG.

Nice steal.

All dirt is fair game. At least mine has sources.

I have a confession to make: I don't like Obama, either.

And please don't mock me. ;)

That makes him a "Radical Liberal"? Yeash. What a poor article. I agree with him on 70-80% of that stuff. I don't know why "concern about human rights" and "spending more on education" makes him bad. Apparently, the right wing is even more evil than I thought if that's the mark of a radical liberal.

NOTE: This is a posting of an e-mail from a friend of a friend's mothers.

-------------------------------------------

Regardless of who you are planning to vote for, please read this email I received from a good friend. Please share this with as many people as possible.

This is from a Bryn Mawr college grad to her fellow alums:

Dear classmates -

As an Alaskan, I am writing to give all of you some information on Sarah Palin, Senator McCain's choice for VP. As an Alaska voter, I know more than most of you about her and, frankly, I am horrified that he picked her. The most accurate description of her is red neck. Her husband works in the oil fields of Prudhoe Bay and races snow mobiles. She is a life time member of the NRA and has worked tirelessly to allow indiscriminate hunting of wildlife in Alaska, particularly wolves and bears.

She has spent millions of Alaska state dollars on aerial hunting of these predators from helicopters and airplanes, dollars that should have been spent, for example, on Alaska's failing school system. We have the lowest rate of high school graduation in the country. Not all of you may think aerial predator hunting is so bad, but how anyone (other than Alaska wolf-haters, of which there are many, most without teeth), could think this use of funds is appropriate is beyond me. If you want to know more about the aerial hunting travesty, let me know and I will send some links to informative web sites.

She has been a strong supporter of increased use of fossil fuels, yet the McCain campaign has the nerve to say she has "green" policies. The only thing green about Sarah Palin is her lack of experience. She has consistently supported drilling in ANWR, use of coal-burning power plants (as I write this, a new coal plant is being built in her home town of Wasilla), strip mining, and almost anything else that will unnecessarily exploit the diminishing resources of Alaska and destroy its environment.

Prior to her one year as governor of Alaska, she was mayor of Wasilla, a small red neck town outside Anchorage. The average maximum education level of parents of junior high school kids in Wasilla is 10th grade. Unfortunately, I have to go to Wasilla every week to get groceries and other supplies, so I have continual contact with the people who put Palin in office in the first place. I know what I'm talking about. These people don't have a concept of the world around them or of the serious issues facing the US. Furthermore, they don't care. So long as they can go out and hunt their moose every fall, kill wolves and bears and drive their snow mobiles and ATVs through every corner of the wilderness, they're happy. I wish I were exaggerating.

Sarah Palin is currently involved in a political corruption scandal. She fired an individual in law enforcement here because she didn't like how he treated one of her relatives during a divorce. The man's performance and ability weren't considered; it was a totally personal firing and is currently under investigation. While the issue isn't close to the scandal of Ted Steven's corruption, it shows that Palin isn't "squeaky clean" and causes me to think there may be more issues that could come to light. Clearly McCain doesn't care.

When you line Palin up with Biden, the comparison would be laughable if it weren't so serious. Sarah Palin knows nothing of economics (admittedly a weak area for McCain), or of international affairs, knows nothing of national government, Social Security, unemployment, health care systems - you name it. The idea of her meeting with heads of foreign governments around the world truly frightens me.

In an increasingly dangerous world, with the economy in shambles in the US, Sarah Palin is uniquely UNqualified to be vice president. John McCain is not a young man. Should something happen to him such that the vice president had to step in, it would destroy our country and possibly the world to have someone as inexperienced and inappropriate as Sarah Palin. The choice of Palin is a cheap shot by McCain to try to get Hillary supporters to vote for him. when McCain introduced her today, Palin had the nerve to compare herself with Hillary and Geraldine Ferraro. Sarah Palin, you are no Hillary Clinton.

To those of you who, like me, supported Hillary and were upset that she did not get the nomination, please don't think that Sarah Palin is a worthy substitute. If you supported Hillary, regardless of what you think the media and the democratic party may have done to undermine her campaign, the person to support now is Obama, not Sarah Palin. To those of you who are independent or undecided, don't let the choice of Palin sway you in favor of McCain. Choosing her shows how unqualified McCain is to be president. To those of you who are conservative, I guess you have no choice for president. But please try to see how the poor choice of Palin tells us a great deal about McCain's judgment.

While the political posturing inherent in the choice of Palin is obvious, the more serious issue is the fact that the VP is, literally, a heartbeat away from the presidency. Sarah Palin is totally and unequivocally unqualified to be vice president, let alone president. I know this is a lengthy and emotional email, but the stakes are high. I thought it might help for all of you, regardless of political affiliation, to know something about Palin from someone who has to live with her administration in Alaska on a daily basis.

Here's some basic background from MoveOn.org:

She was elected Alaska's governor a little over a year and a half ago. Her previous office was mayor of Wasilla, a small town outside Anchorage.

1. Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.

2. She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000.

3. Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.

4. She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change.

5. She's solidly in line with John McCain's "Big Oil first" energy policy. She's pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won't be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered species she was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.

6. Please forward this to everyone you know!

-------------------------------------------

These obviously aren't my words, so please don't take offense. If anyone has anything to share, add or correct, feel free. But do so without hostility please.

Excellent! I believe I'll vote for her, and based solely on this utter rubbish written by "a friend of a friend's mother". Come on, you can do better than that. I love the "basic background" from MoveOn.org. Priceless. More of this comedy please. As always, let the flaming begin.

"edit" I missed the "without hostility please" bit right at the end. That's comedy gold.

Was the author TRYING to make this an obvious fake? It should have been posted directly to SNOPES in the "Dear God, how could ANYONE fall for THIS" category.

It never ceases to amaze me how butt hurt people get over words. I didn't post this e-mail to offend anyone who is planning on voting for McCain. I posted it to educate people on this woman.

@DeKoquonut: This is definitely not a fake. I wouldn't waste my time if it was. Check the facts.

@imafurby: Yes, a "friend of a friend's mother." I'll break it down for you: I received this from a friend, who received it from his mother, who received it from her friend who lives in Alaska. Is that so hard to comprehend? Are their names important? Regardless, check the facts.

If you're both incapable of having an intelligent discussion about such an important subject, then don't bother responding. The comedy lies in the fact that you both are unable to deny any of the facts. To the best of my knowledge, the facts check out. If anything is false, then please CORRECT it instead of ridiculing the messenger.

The "letter" in this post is a fraud. As a 35 year Alaskan living in Anchorage, I can tell you that many of the "facts" are just wrong.
(BTW I supported Binkly Palin for state gov in the '06 primary, so I'm not a Palin supporter.)

If somebody wants to attack Sarah's credentials on foreign policy or her position on abortion, that's fair game.

Pretending to be an Alaskan and then spreading this sort of BS on the the internet says alot about Obama's fellow travellers. I can't believe that Obama would sink to this level, but obviously his supporters will...

E.G.
1) Palin never supported putting creationism in schools.
2) She is hardly freindly with big oil having just raised taxes on the industry to the highest level in AK history. (A punishment for the VECO corruption?)
3) Supporting gun ownership isn't a radical position in Alaska. All Alaskan state parties support and encourage gun ownership. (Yep, even the Greens and Democrats support the 2nd ammendment.)
4) Virtually no Alaskans supported Hilary. Nobody that I know actually will admit to having voted for Clinton. The AK democrats went pretty strongly for Obama.

It looks fake to me.

Skizelli, the letter obviously wasn't written by an Alaskan. Some of the minor details are correct, but most of them are not. Except for the assertion that Palin is pro-life (true) there isn't much truth.

Most of Palin's critics in Alaska have been on the right. Example: She recently delayed action on a pro-life bill, because she wanted to concentrate on AGIA (Alaska Gas Inducement Act) and the gas pipeline legistlation.

You've gotta love seeing Skizelli squrm.
For the first time in my adult life I now know we have a candidate I want to vote for. I'm sick of having to vote for the lesser of two evils. I'm voting for Palin and willing to accept McCain. At least I know he fought for our country. Not like a someone who for 20 years demonstrated allegance to an anti-American pastor. People like Skizelli should continue their lies, it kind of brings real Americans together. I almost want to send money to the McCain campain.

@rbuchanan: I don't think you know as much as you think you do, sir.

1) On Creationism: http://dwb.adn.com/news/.../8347904p-8243554c.html | http://www.thelangreport...ionism-taught-in-school/

2) On Big Oil: http://www.ktva.com/ci_10337913?source=most_viewed | http://www.miamiherald.c...cs/AP/story/665002.html

Still don't believe it? Google is your friend. There's more than one source.

3) You missed the point.

4) Just because you say it makes it so? At least try to support your claims.

Why stop there?...

5) She is presently under investigation in Alaska for abuse of power: http://www.ktva.com/ci_10026165

6) Last year she put out a bounty on wolves paying $150 for turning in legs of freshly killed wolves: http://dwb.adn.com/news/.../8726730p-8628810c.html | http://www.alternet.org/environment/97207

7) She supports aerial hunting of wolves and bears even though Alaskans voted twice to ban the practice: http://www.hsus.org/wild...ting_alaska_082108.html | http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=8851174

8) She used $400,000 of state money to fund a media campaign in support of aerial hunting: http://dwb.adn.com/front.../9253882p-9168881c.html

9) She is opposed to abortion even in cases of rape and incest: http://www.naral.org/ele...r/pr08292008_palin.html

10) She is a champion for big oil and supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and everywhere else: http://www.ktva.com/ci_10337913?source=most_viewed | http://www.miamiherald.c...cs/AP/story/665002.html

11) She believes man-made global warming is a farce: http://blogs.abcnews.com...08/palin-global-wa.html

12) She is opposed to listing the polar bear as an endangered species and is suing the federal government over it: http://www.reuters.com/a...s/idUSN2145097820080522

13) While mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire the city librarian because the librarian refused to censor books: http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/515512.html

Truth is, it's not just Democrats that feel this way (and I'm not a Democrat, by the way). There's plenty of Republicans and other parties voting against McCain simply because she's a poor choice for VP. It will be the Bush administration all over again. Open your eyes.

@RoninReno: Who exactly are these "real Americans" you're referring to? Are they the ones that think our economy is fine? :P

Proof that the Dems are absolutely TERRIFIED of this woman. They probably should be. What they don't seem to realize is that all this dumpster diving only serves to strengthen support for the VP nominee.

........NOTE: This is a posting of an e-mail from a friend of a friend's mothers.

........6. Please forward this to everyone you know!

How many spams have I deleted over the years which had stuff like that at the top and bottom? Money emails from Bill Gates, virus warnings, internet rumors and so on... That's damn near a guarantee that there's inaccurate info or misleading info.

And it gets tossed into the bit-bucket without further consideration, even with the 'Hey, it's not MY words!" disclaimer at the bottom.

Every politician who tries to do anything is going to piss off someone, who'll try to get back any way possible. That the approval rating of Palin is so high, with the things she's gotten done in Alaska so far, speaks highly for her - not against her.

As far as broadband in Alaska goes - 800kb is about what I had in Atlanta 5-6 years back and we certainly don't have the terrain or other connection challenges that they do in Alaksa. Given 'em five years, and then don't gripe because they've only got 20mb service while the rest of the nation averages 100mb.

*yawn*

Creationism:

Read her quotes again, she states, clearly, that neither should be part of the curriculum, *but*, if you are going to tech one, teach both.

Hardly fanatical.

Investigation: Whitewater, anyone? Who isn't under investigation? I though folks in this Country were innocent until proven guilty..

Drilling: We need it. Enough useful "green" power that isn't more pollutive than oil is still a ways away. Why continue our dependence on foreign oil when we have our own?

Hunting: Try living there...or in Minnesota...or in Wisconsin... We have the same problem with Deer they have with Wolves.

Man-Made global warming is a consensus, not a proven fact.

The polar bear is *far* from endangered. Look at some statistics. In many areas, they are overpopulated. Proof you can't do your own research and absolutely depend on the fanatic lib nutjobs for your information.

As always, you guys do make me laugh, if only for your blind belief that liberal soundbites=gospel.

"NOTE: This is a posting of an e-mail from a friend of a friend's mothers."

First question: how many mothers did this "friend of a friend" have? (Or, alternatively, how stupid and subliterate is the author of this SPAM wannabe?)

Second question: Is this the best sourcing you can get for this slop? "A Bryn Mawr college graduate" with no name, no attribution, no way of querying for bias, context, factual basis?

Worse than useless; completely stupid.

GREAT RESPONSE!

Here's some basic background from MoveOn.org:

(SNIP)

4. She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change

5. Sarah Palin is a clear threat to Obaq's presidential bid. Do and say *anything* to discredit the woman before it's too late. Make up freakish lies and innuendo about her youngest child, and when they are disproven, don't apologize or acknowldege your mistake. Further, make her daughter's teenage indiscretion the centerpiece of your attack de jour..ruin her young life at any cost.

These obviously aren't my words, and I don't give a rat's ass. If anyone has anything to share, add or correct, don't bother me with facts - I've already made up my mind.

I have no quarrel with you, PC_Tool. Your posts are always amusing to me. It would be nice, however, if you could back your claims with your sources. Until then, it doesn't really change the facts I've provided, does it? I'm merely trying to educate people about someone we hardly even know. If you believe that I think Obama is any better, think again. If anyone can recall, I stated that Obama was the Anti-Christ (jokingly). I haven't said one bad thing about McCain, or the Republican party for that matter, and for the most part I've tried being civil about the subject. Why can't anyone else? Instead people insist on insulting me as if I called their mother a dirty word. It's amusing to me how practically no one, aside from Alaskans, has heard of this woman up until now, and already people are defending her to the death without really knowing anything about her.

And haven't you heard? People in this country are guilty until proven innocent, unfortunately. Politics and the media are a good indication of that.

First answer: 1. It wasn't a chain letter.

Second answer: Scroll down. I provided sources for your enjoyment.

See above, then below.

"I've already made up my mind."

I'm sure you have. It's called blind faith.

Look in my posts in the McCain topic for links to her quotes regarding school curriculum.

and already people are defaming her to the death without really knowing anything about her.

Funny how that works both ways, isn't it?

I didn't realize there were two sides to science that needed to be taught.

Actually on further thought, there isn't. Since creationism doesn't follow the scientific method of disproving testable hypotheses to refine and retest new ones, there isn't anything in creationism that needs to be taught in schools other than that it isn't science and shouldn't be in science class.

They can stick it in comparative religion along with Ymir the frost giant and Pangu and the egg.

The people who spout 'teach both' are merely creationists who've learned to lie or too dim to distinguish between science and myth and is just as damning of someone's character, especially for a position of leadership.

So no, it may not be fanatical, but it does indicate that they're lying or too stupid to know what science is and what belongs in science class.

I pretty much agree with the rest though.

Just what is a "real" American? Someone who isn't virtual?

Do you like arguing with yourself?

Did *anyone* say they *both* had to be taught in "Science" class?

Anyone?

No?

Why can't it be taught along-side greek mythology?

Thanks for playing.

Fake or not, you have a right to your opinion. Thanks for sharing your input in a mature manner. I wish more people could respond this way instead of acting like I insulted them.

Funny?

Not really.

It's politics after all.

http://www.snopes.com/po.../soapbox/sarahpalin.asp

http://www.snopes.com/po.../soapbox/sarahpalin.asp

Heh.

Now *there* is something we can agree on. ;)

If moveon.org says it you can count it not being true. What a bunch of goofs.

You're either lying to yourself or being disingenuous. We both know that science class is where they're trying to 'teach both'.

I've had enough run-ins with their kind to know how they view it as their duty to lie for jesus.

*sigh*

Whatever.

The point remains. In her own words, she doesn't want it as part of the curriculum, but if they feel the need to teach it, teach both.

She never implied what class to tech it in, and unlike many, I am not going to sit here and claim I *know* what she was thinking...

I'd like to hear more from these candidates on tech issues (that affect every freakin' citizen!) like net neutrality, privacy, FISA, etc. And no, a piss-ant "position statement" on your website doesn't count.

My bet is, pols are pretty stupid people and they wouldn't understand it even after you explain it to them. Sorta like when someone explains why Seinfeld made that Vista ad.

I don't think Palin has a strong position on most these issues yet, but one can make some informaed guesses.

The AK Republican Party in pretty libertarian. It recently passed resolutions against the Real ID act. Subsequently, the AK legistature unanamously opposed implementing the Real ID act in our state. Alaska alaso has extensive privacy right written into its constitution. ALaskans take privacy right seriosuly.

Also worth noting, John McCain finished dead last in Alaska. (Behind Ron Paul.)

Love this lady.... She f*cking ROCKS!

This is the new politics of CHANGE and HOPE.

You can quote all the lefties you like.
Go to the Daily KOokS or Democratic underground to spread your hateful crap. This is a TECH forum, not your personal hate-blog.

Eat me F@G!

"loving peaceniks of the extreme left."

When someone talks like that, I'm out of there. They're not firing on all cylinders.

A painful way to interact with rocks...

One film clip of a polar bear jumping off the ice into the water and you cry like the Leave Brittany Alone YouTube Fairy.

THEY LIKE TO SWIM you idiot! There are MORE polar bears now than in years past!

Bleeding heart, no brain.

*laughing*

"Actions on gas pipeline suggest balanced net neutrality approach"

WHAT THE HELL??? Seriously? How does a gas pipeline suggest net neutrality? WOW! I mean really? WOW!

Bet you've been lookin' all week for a place to make this post...

I understand you feel passionate about this... But how about just sum it up and post the link next time.

I believe every word you say.
-William Ayers

That's the Gospel truth!
-Jeremiah Wright

Love the heading "why am I writing this" because ..."she has hated me since back in 1996".. Good reason.

This rubbish has very quickly become a hate chain letter, since I've had it forwarded to me in the last 48 hrs by a others who obviously think the same way.

That's what I call scary.

But can you copy and paste?

"I'm sure there is obvious bias in the article"
You don't say.