Speaking of rearranging the deck chairs...

TerryRC wrote:Sarah Palin lives her values and that is what really has your britches in a snit. She didn't abort her imperfect child. Her daughter will give birth to the child isn't exactly convenient for anybody. She frequently takes her children to work and on trips and she gets slammed for that. You did it just now, implying she is endangering Trig somehow by traveling and that she is somehow harming her 17 y/o physically fit pregnant daughter the same way.

How is she living up to "family values", steph?

Is a mom gallivanting around the country traditional family values? It's OK because she takes her kids out of school and drags them around with her?

Dragging her kids in the spotlight to be used as props (look, I kept my special needs baby) (even though my daugher is out-of-wedlock knocked up, I'm still for abstinence-only sex-ed)?

Very family values.

If Sarah Palin favored abortion on demand, she'd be your hero. Of that I am convinced.

Sure, sure. Because I'm a one-issue type of person. Please!

She is an unethical person, period. She is also a hypocrite. She cries about socialism while her state is one of the biggest receivers of "redistributed wealth" in the country.

I'm sorry, is that last part being "sexist"?

Either you're not as bright as I have always thought you are or you are just being argumentative.

I'm probably brighter than you have always thought. Why can't I be bright AND argumentative?

I'd like to know how Sarah Palin isn't living up to her family values! Is it because she isn't home baking cookies? Is it because she has a career? Is it because she has a life that extend beyond her husband and her children?

I am convinced abortion is a deal breaker for you. She is a woman who opposes abortion, so surely there must be something wrong with her.

Alaska receives a disproportionate amount of federal money until you consider the degree of federal intrusion Alaskans endure. Alaska was admitted into the union in large part because of the contributions her natural resources could provide the rest of the nation. These natural resources by and large are hands off to Alaskans. They can't be developed because of federal intervention. Let Alaskans develop her natural resources and there will be no need for all those tax dollars.

Obama is a socialist because of his stated goals of redistribution of wealth and a nanny state providing cradle to grave care.

I am convinced abortion is a deal breaker for you. She is a woman who opposes abortion, so surely there must be something wrong with her.

See, there you go bringing sex into the debate.

You, not me.

I have supported many people that personally opposed abortion. Have you supported any pro-choicers?

I'd like to know how Sarah Palin isn't living up to her family values! Is it because she isn't home baking cookies? Is it because she has a career? Is it because she has a life that extend beyond her husband and her children?

Steph, is being a stay-at-work mom family values?

Is using your kids as campaign tools family values?

She tried to capitolize on her "moral high" ground. Pointing out that she isn't standing on it is "sexist"?

I have told you how her actions belie her words, you just don't want to see it, choosing to dismiss my arguments by calling me "sexist".

Alaska receives a disproportionate amount of federal money until you consider the degree of federal intrusion Alaskans endure. Alaska was admitted into the union in large part because of the contributions her natural resources could provide the rest of the nation. These natural resources by and large are hands off to Alaskans. They can't be developed because of federal intervention. Let Alaskans develop her natural resources and there will be no need for all those tax dollars.

So socalism is OK when Palin does it?

Alaskans already get a fat check from the companies profiting on Alaska's resources. Do you know who pays for the "windfall taxes" the state of Alaska receives? We do because the companies pass the costs to the consumer.

Obama is a socialist because of his stated goals of redistribution of wealth and a nanny state providing cradle to grave care.

McCain favors a progressive tax. Farking socialist. McCain wants to give money to every American for health care - farking socialist.

Why all the hate for Obama while giving McCain a pass?

I don't care, mind you, but it does make you look a little hypocritical.

sodbuster wrote:Well Steph I did not just post that out of the blue I was responding to an earlier post about how she spent 150K on clothes and makeup.

Plus I was kidding.

But you got to admit she smears it on pretty thick.

Reminds me of Tammy Faye Baker...

(and yes if Obama smeared it on that thick and spent 150K I would criticize him too.)

Lenscrafter runs a daily 2 for 1 special. Perhaps you should head on down Sherman.

TerryRC wrote:I am convinced abortion is a deal breaker for you. She is a woman who opposes abortion, so surely there must be something wrong with her.

See, there you go bringing sex into the debate.

You, not me.

I have supported many people that personally opposed abortion. Have you supported any pro-choicers?

I'd like to know how Sarah Palin isn't living up to her family values! Is it because she isn't home baking cookies? Is it because she has a career? Is it because she has a life that extend beyond her husband and her children?

Steph, is being a stay-at-work mom family values?

Is using your kids as campaign tools family values?

She tried to capitolize on her "moral high" ground. Pointing out that she isn't standing on it is "sexist"?

I have told you how her actions belie her words, you just don't want to see it, choosing to dismiss my arguments by calling me "sexist".

Alaska receives a disproportionate amount of federal money until you consider the degree of federal intrusion Alaskans endure. Alaska was admitted into the union in large part because of the contributions her natural resources could provide the rest of the nation. These natural resources by and large are hands off to Alaskans. They can't be developed because of federal intervention. Let Alaskans develop her natural resources and there will be no need for all those tax dollars.

So socalism is OK when Palin does it?

Alaskans already get a fat check from the companies profiting on Alaska's resources. Do you know who pays for the "windfall taxes" the state of Alaska receives? We do because the companies pass the costs to the consumer.

Obama is a socialist because of his stated goals of redistribution of wealth and a nanny state providing cradle to grave care.

McCain favors a progressive tax. Farking socialist. McCain wants to give money to every American for health care - farking socialist.

Why all the hate for Obama while giving McCain a pass?

I don't care, mind you, but it does make you look a little hypocritical.

What gives you the idea I support McCain? If I were giving McCain a pass, I would vote for him. I am not.

Alaskans are entitled to decide what to do with Alaska. They are entitled to utilize and develop her natural resources for the energy, jobs, and revenue that they would provide. Sarah Palin did not create the problems associated with all the federal regulations and restrictions Alaskans face, she just must work with what is presented to her. If the federal government is going to violate the right of Alaskans to manage their own natural resources and develop and utilize the natural resources of their land, surely it is reasonable for Alaskans to demand some compensation for that.

The problem could easily be eliminated by restoring the rights of Alaskans to govern what belongs to Alaska. This is absolutely unthinkable to those who favor a centralized government that manages every aspect of our lives. That is not Sarah Palin's fault and to blame her for the consequences of these policies she has zero control over is ridiculous.

If the federal government wants to put a stranglehold on the land and resources of the citizens of Alaska, Alaskans are due compensation. I would imagine Governor Palin and a majority of the citizens of Alaska share that view. That isn't socialism.

As far as McCain is concerned, how am I giving McCain a pass? This Republican states her preference for Chuck Baldwin (who isn't a socialist) on a regular basis. I am voting for him and encourage others to vote for him. I oppose McCain for a number of reasons, including but not limited to his own socialist tendencies.

Perhaps Sarah Palin should keep Bristol and Trig hidden away somewhere. Would you prefer she send Bristol off to some far off home for unwed mothers to give birth and hand Trig off to a wet nurse to care for while she's out on the campaign trail? Would that make her a "better" mother or demonstrate her "family values" for you? They are her children and they belong with their mother as much of the time as possible.

yikes....sorry about the double McCain comments. I started posting my response, got interrupted and went back to it. lol

Vote for Chuck Baldwin, Terry. He isn't a socialist, not even a lite-socialist.

Perhaps Sarah Palin should keep Bristol and Trig hidden away somewhere. Would you prefer she send Bristol off to some far off home for unwed mothers to give birth and hand Trig off to a wet nurse to care for while she's out on the campaign trail? Would that make her a "better" mother or demonstrate her "family values" for you? They are her children and they belong with their mother as much of the time as possible.

Perhaps the kids should be in the school that they are enrolled in, you know, like most of the kids in this country?

As far as McCain is concerned, how am I giving McCain a pass? This Republican states her preference for Chuck Baldwin (who isn't a socialist) on a regular basis. I am voting for him and encourage others to vote for him. I oppose McCain for a number of reasons, including but not limited to his own socialist tendencies.

Hold on, you went after me for giving Clinton and Obama a pass for not being at home for their kids (I didn't, of course) because I didn't bring them up when I went after Palin.

I'm not to go after you, however, for not bringing McCain up when you rant about "socialism".

The problem could easily be eliminated by restoring the rights of Alaskans to govern what belongs to Alaska. This is absolutely unthinkable to those who favor a centralized government that manages every aspect of our lives. That is not Sarah Palin's fault and to blame her for the consequences of these policies she has zero control over is ridiculous.

She has slightly more than zero control or she is one ineffectual governor.

Regardless, if you don't want to see the hypocrisy of someone that cries about "wealth redistribution" while presiding over it, I guess I can't make you.

There are plenty of reasons to dislike Palin without bringing her sex into it.

If you want to label me a "sexist" though, go right ahead.

So, when you made the assertion that the abortion issue is a deal breaker for me, I asked you a question:

I have supported many people that personally opposed abortion. Have you supported any pro-choicers?

I voted for Capito.

I will vote for Capito, who isn't what I would call pro-life.

The education of Sarah and Todd Palin's children is none of our business. It is their business. Certainly a legitimate argument can be made that they are gaining quite of bit of knowledge and enviable experiences in their travels with their mom about US geography, culture, history, and goverment among other things.

McCain doesn't espouse the kind of socialism cradle to grave Obama does. If my only two choices were Obama and McCain I would vote for McCain. Thankfully I have better options.

The governor of any state is very limited in what kind of impact they can have on federal rules and regulations. I don't know just how you propose Sarah Palin go about changing federal policy on Alaskan lands. I'm quite certain if she could get the feds out of Alaska, she would gladly do so.

"I will vote for Capito, who isn't what I would call pro-life."

Well Steph you denied that the other day.

Have you since checked your facts?

What I said was that she received the endorsement of a right to life group, although I can't recall which one at the moment. She is far better on the issue of abortion than her abortion on demand opponent.

bmd wrote:An acclaimed celebrity makeup artist for Sarah Palin collected more money from John McCain’s campaign than McCain’s foreign policy adviser.

Amy Strozzi, who also works on the reality show “So You Think You Can Dance,” was paid $22,800, according to campaign finance reports for the first two weeks in October. In contrast, McCain’s foreign policy adviser, Randy Scheunemann, was paid $12,500, the report showed.

You'd think they would have tweezed her mustache a little better before her photoshoot w/ Newsweek.

Man, did they overpay or what?!?!?!!?

The problem could easily be eliminated by restoring the rights of Alaskans to govern what belongs to Alaska. This is absolutely unthinkable to those who favor a centralized government that manages every aspect of our lives. ........................

If the federal government wants to put a stranglehold on the land and resources of the citizens of Alaska, Alaskans are due compensation.

What is it that the citizens of Alaska own that the federal government is putting a stranglehold on?

The education of Sarah and Todd Palin's children is none of our business. It is their business. Certainly a legitimate argument can be made that they are gaining quite of bit of knowledge and enviable experiences in their travels with their mom about US geography, culture, history, and goverment among other things.

All I know is that my kids can only miss so much school without being held back.

So I guess rules aren't rules when the Palin's break them.

So, I guess we have decided to give Palin a pass on the blasting "wealth redistribution" while presiding over the biggest chunk of pork (per person) received by a US State in recent years.

Her kids have had many chances to travel on someone else's dime. She is now being investigated for her expense accounts, recently changed. An example: taking Bristol to stay with her for five days in a luxury hotel for a five HOUR meeting. (link)

When I pointed this out, I was told by Sam that I was just jealous because rank has its privileges. Never mind that what she did was likely against Alaska state law (the companions must be on official state business). Never mind that she is supposed to be setting an example for the rest of Alaska's state employees.

I give. I'm just a sexist pig for not liking Sarah Palin.

TerryRC wrote:
All I know is that my kids can only miss so much school without being held back.

That's not true. I used to think the same thing but if they have passing grades, the school system cannot hold them back.

That's not true. I used to think the same thing but if they have passing grades, the school system cannot hold them back.

I don't know the law here. In NY, they can tell you to make up the days in summer school, passing or not. If you fail to, they will hold you back.

Regardless, it doesn't refute my other criticisms of Palin.

Palin could walk on water and you would find reason to criticise here and I think we all pretty much know why.

And I think NCLB has pretty much rendered a lot of educational standards, including learning, null and void.

Palin could walk on water and you would find reason to criticise here and I think we all pretty much know why.

Why, Aaron. Why?

Tell us the reasoning behind your gratuitous assertion. I can't wait.

And I think NCLB has pretty much rendered a lot of educational standards, including learning, null and void.

Yea, Bush!

So do you think Obama will repeal NCLB or do you think he'll tweak it to give the federal government MORE control?

TerryRC wrote:Palin could walk on water and you would find reason to criticise here and I think we all pretty much know why.

Why, Aaron. Why?

Tell us the reasoning behind your gratuitous assertion. I can't wait.

My opinion.

ziggy wrote:

The problem could easily be eliminated by restoring the rights of Alaskans to govern what belongs to Alaska. This is absolutely unthinkable to those who favor a centralized government that manages every aspect of our lives. ........................

If the federal government wants to put a stranglehold on the land and resources of the citizens of Alaska, Alaskans are due compensation.

What is it that the citizens of Alaska own that the federal government is putting a stranglehold on?

There is ANWR for starters, but that's just the beginning.

Stephanie wrote:

ziggy wrote:

The problem could easily be eliminated by restoring the rights of Alaskans to govern what belongs to Alaska. This is absolutely unthinkable to those who favor a centralized government that manages every aspect of our lives. ........................

If the federal government wants to put a stranglehold on the land and resources of the citizens of Alaska, Alaskans are due compensation.

What is it that the citizens of Alaska own that the federal government is putting a stranglehold on?

There is ANWR for starters, but that's just the beginning.

And who owns ANWAR?

ziggy wrote:And who owns ANWAR?

Constitutionally speaking, Alaska 'owns' the Artic National Wildlife Reserve that is federally protected. The only land that can be owned by the federal government is a 'district' which has been ceded by a state for the sole purpose of a national capital. All other land belongs to the state or to private citizens.

At least that's the way I understand it.

I think you misunderstand it, Aaron.

Whether in WV, or in Alaska, lands designated as NWR are owned by the federal government- just like with Wilderness lands.

I don't think I do Frank. I'm pretty sure the state retains ownership of the land, unless it's privately owned. If the federal government had the ability to claim land and protect it federally and claim ownership, none of us would own any land.

It is owned by the federal government. Otherwsie it does not qualify for NWR status. Check it out.