-
Website
http://michiganmessenger.com/ -
Original page
http://www.michiganmessenger.com/3383/palins-first-lie-as-vp-candidate -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
By the way, does McCain think all women are interchangeable? Hillary for Palin? Like his first wife for his second?
But her own words show that the opposite of that was true, that the only reason the project was canceled was because they couldn't get enough money from Congress to get it done.
Any intelligent person knows when you choose to have unprotected sex at 43 you have a very high probability of having a child with Downs Syndrome. She used poor judgment not using birth control.
Would she use better judgment dealing with our economy?
Would she use better judgment dealing with our enemies?
I for one am not willing to take a chance on Pahin’s and McCain’s judgment.
See: Huether, C.A. (1998). "Maternal age specific risk rate estimates for Down syndrome among live births in whites and other races from Ohio and metropolitan Atlanta, 1970-1989". J Med Genet 35(6): 482–490. PMCID: PMC1051343
Risk is quite low for mothers in their 20's, but there are more children with Down's born to this age group only because they have the largest number of pregnancies. This is not the same as a change in risk. The odds of a woman having a child with Down's is less than 1/2% during their 20's, increasing to under 1% by age 35, but increases dramatically to above 5% at 45 and later.
Any woman getting pregnant after age 34 must know that the odds of having a child with Down's increases, and makes a deliberate choice if they are receiving good gestational medical care. In my case I had genetic counseling with both my pregnancies as it was mandatory for every mother that would be age 34 or older at the time of birth in this particular practice. Palin must have known these odds if she was receiving competent care.
Frankly, I'm mystified as to why a woman of her age with 4 kids and an extremely demanding job like the Governorship of a state would get pregnant at all. Is she going to have more kids while serving as Vice President? if so, what are the ramifications if she's pregnant, in labor, and John McCain becomes unable to execute his duties as president due to any illness that might befall a person of his age?
I think there's a lot of other questions we need to be asking ourselves and these candidates, because on the face of it they haven't thought this all out.
"On the face of it they haven't thought this all out"??? Illness can befall anyone of any age. Are you suggesting that all candidates should be men? They don't do inconvenient things like giving birth to babies at the exact moment the president lies unable to execute his duties.
A commenter questioned Palin's judgment since she chose to have a high risk pregnancy. It's a legitimate question as to whether her decision-making is as sound as it should be, particularly when aggregated with Palin's actions in regards to her brother-in-law or her firing of subordinates when mayor simply because they did not support her candidacy, or Palin's bizarre decision to take a flight home while in labor, after her water broke.
You attacked the commenter's point using inaccurate information, and I pointed it out.
It's apparent that the McCain campaign did not send an advance team to vet Palin; if McCain was also exercising solid decision-making skills, he would have chosen a candidate that had a better history of decision-making of their own, regardless of age, race or gender. Would we be having this exchange, or would you be so defensive if McCain's team had chosen Kay Bailey Hutchison or Tim Pawlenty, or any number of other Republican candidates? I seriously doubt it.
Your points on her behavior while in power are legitimate points as they speak to her actions and abilities while serving the public - fair game.
One last point on questionable judgement - Obama, under fire for plagiarism in his speeches, chose Joe Biden as a running mate whose previous presidential run was scuttled as a result of, among other things, his blatant plagiarism. Now that's questionable decision-making skills.
And FYI: The only people labeling those Obama quotes as plagiarism were his detractors trying to embellish the situation. The original author said Obama had permission to use the material. Permission grants rights. Having rights is not plagiarism.
*sigh*
1. to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own
2. to use (another's production) without crediting the source
3. to commit literary theft
4. to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source.
No citation = plagarism
I don't think telling a professor that I had the permission of the author to pass his work on as my own would cut it.
As for the issue of having a child -- in spite of the risk to the child, in spite of child endangerment manifest in her choice to fly just before the end of her pregnancy AND AFTER HER WATER BROKE -- her position on government interference in other families' reproductive choices makes her own reproductive choices fair game.
You don't want the public asking questions like this? Then you don't want the government involved. You can't have it both ways.
And how nice of you to try and change the subject from Palin to Obama-Biden, too. Stay on topic or you risk having your comments deleted for violating the site's comment policy.
The voters backing him are going to ruin our country. All that America stand for will be flushed away and we will looking to be a socialist country one step away from Communism! Bleeding heart Liberals looking for a free hand out , so they can lay around on there lazy butts and the next door neighbor does ALL the hard work!
And Palin is most certainly running as POTUS -- the "just-in-case" POTUS. She's the backup to a guy who's 72 years old, has had multiple bouts of cancer, and a mess of health problems he refuses to disclose to the public. If he drops dead or more likely becomes incapacitated, she's the POTUS. Palin knows virtually nothing about the role of the vice president, but I'm sure she knows that much.
Be careful what you ask for Raine1.
I have and you don't want to see it. You don't want anyone else to see it either and that is why you delete the posts pertaining to it.
FYI: The Constitutional amendment regarding free speech refers to political discourse ONLY, not necessarily any idiot who has something to say regarding sock puppets. The following is political discourse, not rantings of lunacy. If there is no truth in it, then why do you ban it?
Show me your friends and I’ll show you your future.
In his 1995 book, Dreams From My Father, Barack Obama describes a relationship he had with “Frank,” when Obama lived in Hawaii, and how he went to “Frank” for advice about college, racial matters, and other lessons of life. So, just who is this mysterious Frank, who so deeply influenced the life of Barack Obama?
Obama’s Communist Mentor Frank Marshall Davis Was Under Investigation by the FBI for 19 Years! Veteran investigative reporter and editor of the Accuracy In Media (AIM) report, Cliff Kincaid, has obtained the 600-page FBI file on “Frank”, who was none other than the infamous pro-Soviet Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis. The complete FBI file and an analysis of the shocking information can be seen in its entirety at www.usasurvival.org
Kincaid gives details of how Davis was a mentor to Obama in Hawaii for eight or nine years before he turned 18 and went off to college.
Kincaid reveals, for the first time, that the FBI file on Frank Marshall Davis covers the years 1944-1963, meaning that he was under investigation or surveillance for at least 19 years. One document refers to Frank Marshall Davis having CPUSA affiliations dating back to 1931. Kincaid also has evidence showing that Davis was involved in communist activities in the 1970s, during the time he mentored Obama. Davis was included in the FBI’s security index, Kincaid notes, meaning that Davis could be arrested or detained in the event of a national emergency. The FBI material documents Davis’s anti-white and pro-Soviet views, infiltration of the Hawaii Democratic Party, and other activities.
Former FBI agent and popular talk show host G. Gordon Liddy said about Frank Marshall Davis, “Only very dangerous people were on the FBI security index, people who were on the side of an enemy and not on the side of the United States.”
Ironically, the young person Davis sent off to college, who would admittedly attend socialist conferences and pick Marxist professors as his friends, never had to undergo an FBI background check and, should he become President, will be in charge of overseeing the FBI!
Kincaid can explain why the communists targeted Hawaii – because of its strategic location and importance to the U.S. defense effort – and why one of the most disturbing FBI documents refers to information that Davis “was observed photographing large sections of the [Hawaii] coastline with a camera containing a telescopic lens.” The FBI information states:
“Informant stated that DAVIS spent much of his time in this activity. He said this was the third different occasion DAVIS had been observed photographing shorelines and beachfronts. Informant advised that it did not appear he was photographing any particular objects.”
Kincaid says this information strongly suggests the possibility of espionage or some other form of illegal activity on the part of Davis.
If Obama’s plans for America seem suspiciously Marxist in nature…IT’S BECAUSE THEY ARE!!! Nationalized health care…government control of the energy sector…government control of the housing sector…HELLO! This is Marxism/Socialism/Communism folks.
Ironically as John McCain was sacrificing a pound of flesh to defeat this ideology in Hanoi, Barry Obama’s mentors were devising a route of sneaking in through the back door of America with their Liberal Socialist agenda. Their ideal vehicle, a community organizer…a virtual unknown…someone who would rile the common man, and play on the heart strings of Americans whom, in large part, have always been sensitive and sympathetic to racial injustice.
The Republican Party freed the slaves. The Democratic Party was born out of those wealthy southern slave owners that made slavery and racial contention an issue in this our great nation. Republicans stand for less government and personal empowerment, the virtues this country was founded upon. Democrats have created a welfare state in which votes will be cast in favor of more government handouts.
Stalin and Hitler were good speakers too. Stalin and Hitler began by appealing to the common man and labor unions as well. Communist societies have come and gone in the world, and for very good reason…that system of government DOESN’T WORK. Those policies of government controlling every aspect of civilian life ARE PROVEN FAILED policies. Why should we now revert back to a failed system which untold millions of American servicemen have fought and died for to defeat?
Are you saying that democrats are communists or are you saying Obama will take some sort of action (beyond the stated democratic platform) as president that will turn the USA into 1960's USSR or communist China?
Keep in mind that nearly all major democracies in the world including Canada, Great Britain, Ireland, Demark, Sweden, Finland, Germany, France, Australia, New Zealand, India, etc. (I could go on and on) all have a National Health Care systems. Are you saying those countries are communist?
It's a little easier to cancel a project, when someone else ( Congress ) tells you you can't do it.
Or perhaps they've chose the Monica Goodling of the veep's office?
What scares me is that the GOP has chosen two morons to save this nation.
We have a man at the top of the ticket that was in the bottom of his class intellectually.
And the person that is 1/2 a breath away from the presidency attended 5 colleges before she was able to pull together enough credits to receive her diploma from the University of Idaho. They might have a piece of paper but do they have the intellighence to lead this nation in the hard times ahead? I don’t belive so. But what else is new we elected a moron to lead the United States Of America and look where it brought us. This white, Republican, woman will be voting for Barack Obama.
Palin Repeatedly Professed Desire To Renew Federal Funding For ‘Bridge To Nowhere’»
During the unveiling of his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R), Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) tried to cast her as a “reformer” and “fiscal conservative.” She boldly claimed that with regard to Sen. Ted Stevens’s (R-AK) infamous “Bridge to Nowhere,” she told Congress, “Thanks, but no thanks“:
I championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. In fact, I told Congress — I told Congress, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’ on that bridge to nowhere. If our state wanted a bridge, I said we’d build it ourselves.
It appears, however, that Palin is lying. As Bradford Plumer first noted, the Anchorage Daily News interviewed Palin during her 2006 campaign for governor. At the time, federal funding for the bridge had been stripped by Congress. They asked if she was in favor of continuing state funding for the project. “Yes,” she responded, noting specifically her desire to renew Congressional support:
Yes. I would like to see Alaska’s infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now–while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist.
That assistance never materialized. When she finally canceled the $400 million project, Palin lamented the fact that Congress was not more forthcoming with federal funding. She said in a statement at the time:
Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it’s clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island.
Palin’s desire to have federal funding directed toward pet projects in Alaska, however, did not diminish. As recently as March 2008 — around the time she first met McCain — her special counsel, John Katz, wrote in the Juneau Empire that despite recognizing increased scrutiny of such spending, Palin was not “not abandoning earmarks altogether.” While McCain expressed high-profile disdain for earmarks, the Palin administration held that:
[E]armarks are not bad in themselves. In fact, they represent a legitimate exercise of Congress’ constitutional power to amend the budget proposed by the president.