Robert J McElwain
New member
Does Palin's past membership in the Alaskan Independence Party make any difference?
So Palin has a couple minor skeletons...
- Thread starter grymster2007
- Start date
- Status
Just watched Matt Lauer yapping about Palin. He was a bit fixated on the daughters pregnancy as well as anything else he could bring up. Obviously Palin has the liberal press like Lauer upset and they can't help themselve, the gotta dig in the dirt.
Makes me think even more that she's a great choice.
Makes me think even more that she's a great choice.
Silver Bullet
New member
Good one !
Ha! He doesn’t need his staff to do that; the liberalMedia is doing it for him.
And CNN. Did you see any of their “coverage” of the Republican convention ?
Fowardassist, you rock on! Nobody’s gonna pull a quick one, eh? No siree.
What about this juicy tidbit. Surely this will sink the McCain/Palin war wagon!
Palin had once received a citation for fishing without a license.ST. PAUL, Minn. — Sarah Palin voluntarily told John McCain's campaign about her pregnant teenage daughter and her husband's 2-decade-old DUI arrest during questioning as part of the Republican's vice presidential search.
Arthur B. Culvahouse Jr., the lawyer who conducted the background review said that Palin underwent a "full and complete" background examination before McCain chose her as his running mate.
Then came the campaign's disclosure that Palin's unmarried 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, was pregnant. In addition, the campaign also disclosed that Todd Palin, then age 22, was arrested in 1986 in Alaska for driving under the influence of alcohol.
At several points throughout the process, McCain's team warned Palin that the scrutiny into her private life would be intense and that there was nothing she could do to prepare for it.
First, a team of some 25 people working under Culvahouse culled information from public sources for Palin and other prospective candidates without their knowledge. For all, news reports, speeches, financial and tax return disclosures, litigation, investigations, ethical charges, marriages and divorces were reviewed.
Reports, 40-some pages and single-spaced, on each candidate then were reviewed by McCain, Schmidt, campaign manager Rick Davis and top advisers Mark Salter and Charlie Black.
Among the details McCain's campaign found: Palin had once received a citation for fishing without a license.
Palin, like others on the short list, then was sent a personal data questionnaire with 70 "very intrusive" questions, Culvahouse said. She also was asked to submit a number of years of federal and state tax returns, as well as any controversial articles she had written or interviews she had done. The campaign also checked her credit.
Then, Culvahouse conducted a nearly three-hour-long interview.
He said the first thing she volunteered was that her daughter was pregnant, and she also quickly disclosed her husband's DUI arrest.
"We came out of it knowing all that we could know at the time," he said.
As for the financial records review, Culvahouse said: "It was very clean. We had no issues there."
Looks pretty rushed to me. You too, Forwardassist? We got her now...
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
Wow, my in-laws raised two intelligent beautiful girls who are great mothers and wives, honest, hard-working, God-fearing girls. Their son is a pathological liar and adulterer.
They must be terrible parents.
Here's a concept to internalize:
IF SHE DIDN'T DO IT SHE'S NOT RESPONSIBLE!
How can it be that Palin is held accountable for something her husband did before they were married but BO is not responsible for endless friendships with terrorists and America haters? Friendships which HE CHOSE!!
They must be terrible parents.
Here's a concept to internalize:
IF SHE DIDN'T DO IT SHE'S NOT RESPONSIBLE!
How can it be that Palin is held accountable for something her husband did before they were married but BO is not responsible for endless friendships with terrorists and America haters? Friendships which HE CHOSE!!
Shadi Khalil
New member
Litering and......Smoking the refer..
I heard she likes to party with the green, or atleast used too...
I heard she likes to party with the green, or atleast used too...
JuanCarlos
New member
She can't be held accountable for the pregnancy. But she can be held accountable for supporting a policy that has now been shown in her own home to depend on living in a fantasy world full of wishful thinking and maybe some unicorns.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
...many Americans also support and those that do not will not generally be voting republican anyway.
JuanCarlos
New member
Well, yeah peetzakilla I get that. But how does that then make it inappropriate for the Democrats to point out this difference in their policy/platform, and using it as an example? We do have independents in this country, and I'd wager that at least some might make a decision based on this issue, and in a race that will likely be decided by a 1%-2% margin in one or two states, I don't see any reason why they shouldn't run with it.
This is at least one case where Republicans are supporting/implementing policies based on fantasies and wishful thinking, where Democrats want to base policy on facts and the real world. Yes, there are other issues where the opposite is true...all the more reason to jump on this one.
Which is exactly where that one line from Obama's speech came from...something about "regardless of how we might disagree on abortion, certainly we can agree on reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies." This right here is exactly what he was talking about.
As for the common argument I've heard that "olol kids already know about condoms anyway," I think you'd be surprised (or possibly saddened) at some of the incredibly common misconceptions that kids have regarding sex, pregnancy, and diseases. Abstinence-only education only amplifies the problem. And it is a problem, because these kids that don't know their third point of contact from a hole in the ground still have sex.
This is at least one case where Republicans are supporting/implementing policies based on fantasies and wishful thinking, where Democrats want to base policy on facts and the real world. Yes, there are other issues where the opposite is true...all the more reason to jump on this one.
Which is exactly where that one line from Obama's speech came from...something about "regardless of how we might disagree on abortion, certainly we can agree on reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies." This right here is exactly what he was talking about.
As for the common argument I've heard that "olol kids already know about condoms anyway," I think you'd be surprised (or possibly saddened) at some of the incredibly common misconceptions that kids have regarding sex, pregnancy, and diseases. Abstinence-only education only amplifies the problem. And it is a problem, because these kids that don't know their third point of contact from a hole in the ground still have sex.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
TRUE Abstinence-only education is almost non-existent and you should read here...http://www.heritage.org/Research/Abstinence/BG1533.cfm
Take a look at the platform for the Alaskan Independence Party, and I think Palin's association with it only makes a difference for Marxists and communists, by increasing how much they hate her and fear her election.
http://akip.org/platform.html
Among the platform provisions:
=====
To effect full compliance with the constitutions of the United States of America and the State of Alaska.
To reinforce the unalienable rights endowed by our Creator to Alaska law, by eliminating the use of the word "privilege" in the Alaska statutes.
To prohibit all bureaucratic regulations and judicial rulings purporting to have the effect of law, except that which shall be approved by the elected legislature. [Think BATFE]
To support the right of the individual to keep and bear arms.
To support the complete abolition of the concept of sovereign or governmental immunity, so as to restore accountability for public servants.
To support the rights of parents to privately or home school their children.
To support the privatization of government services.
To strengthen the traditional family and support individual accountability without government interference or regulation.
To support the right of jurors to judge the law as well as the facts, according to their conscience.
=====
The Federal government owns nearly 70% of Alaska - how does that square with "forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards and other needful buildings?"
Consider who's trying to paint this as a negative - the leftmedia which is on its knees under Obama's desk.
The above are selling points for Palin, as far as I'm concerned.
http://akip.org/platform.html
Among the platform provisions:
=====
To effect full compliance with the constitutions of the United States of America and the State of Alaska.
To reinforce the unalienable rights endowed by our Creator to Alaska law, by eliminating the use of the word "privilege" in the Alaska statutes.
To prohibit all bureaucratic regulations and judicial rulings purporting to have the effect of law, except that which shall be approved by the elected legislature. [Think BATFE]
To support the right of the individual to keep and bear arms.
To support the complete abolition of the concept of sovereign or governmental immunity, so as to restore accountability for public servants.
To support the rights of parents to privately or home school their children.
To support the privatization of government services.
To strengthen the traditional family and support individual accountability without government interference or regulation.
To support the right of jurors to judge the law as well as the facts, according to their conscience.
=====
The Federal government owns nearly 70% of Alaska - how does that square with "forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards and other needful buildings?"
Consider who's trying to paint this as a negative - the leftmedia which is on its knees under Obama's desk.
The above are selling points for Palin, as far as I'm concerned.
Also, I think there's a big mythology about what "abstinence-only" really means. Commentary from the left indicates that they apparently think it describes the absence of sex education, rather than a sex education curriculum that encourages abstinence instead of encouraging sex.
We teach and demand abstinence regarding drunk driving and alcohol consumption, along with the dire consequences that can result, why not in sexuality?
The essential message in traditional sex-ed is "it's good to have sex as long as you use contraception." This is kind of like saying "be sure to buckle up when you drive drunk."
Should teenagers be encouraged to watch porn, as one curriculum does?
We teach and demand abstinence regarding drunk driving and alcohol consumption, along with the dire consequences that can result, why not in sexuality?
The essential message in traditional sex-ed is "it's good to have sex as long as you use contraception." This is kind of like saying "be sure to buckle up when you drive drunk."
Should teenagers be encouraged to watch porn, as one curriculum does?
Playboypenguin
Moderator
This is the whole point to me. I will never willingly elect any official of any party that supports abstinence-only programs. They are a complete failure, a waste of public moneys, and damaging to our children. This is one of my major issues and I feel very strongly about it.
To support such programs a candidate has to completely ignore reality in favor of pleasing a narrow minded base and I will not accept that from an elected official.
I'll be voting McCain/Palin but hearing all the staunch conservatives leap to defend her unmarried, pregnant daughter is just too much. Not because defending the daughter is wrong but because if Biden had an unwed pregnant daughter, Rush and Co. would be pounding it 24/7 as a decline in "family values."
Don't even pretend they wouldn't.
Don't even pretend they wouldn't.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
Actually, I usually hear "Rush and Co." pounding the fact that when something like this happens to a conservative it's hammered on but we expect it from liberals and so ignore it. Exactly what's happening now.
JuanCarlos
New member
Drunk driving poses a very direct risk and all too often causes a very direct harm to other who are not engaging in the activity. You can argue that unwanted pregnancies do hurt our bottom line, and cost us tax dollars, but after seeing a dead body on the side of the road killed by another driver that was drinking I'm not thinking that the two are analogous.
Well, from talking to people who experienced it, it not only encourages abstinence (which I'd not argue as a bad thing...quite the opposite), but it discourages birth control. Basically, at least by what I hear second-hand (it's been many, many moons since I had to experience a sex-ed class), anytime you hear any form of birth control mentioned you're probably going to hear the failure rate mentioned in the same breath.
The problem is that kids are dumb, and unfortunately they tend to take this as a "might as well not bother." Then you get into kids that were determined to remain abstinent, so didn't bother preparing themselves, but then suddenly wind up naked and very not abstinent with no birth control handy...which, of course, doesn't stop them.
Of course not. But that's what I like to call a false dichotomy.
And it's arguable that porn should be discouraged not only for moral/values reasons, but also because it generally is going to promote unhealthy sexual attitudes and misconceptions. Though moral reasons are more than enough on their own.
And again, having sex (even teenage sex) and driving drunk are not analogous.
I have a dim memory of what my sex-ed was like (and it was back in...7th, maybe 8th grade?). It was along the lines of "sex can have incredibly dire and long-lasting consequences, and you should almost definitely wait a long, long time to have it...but if you do decide to be an idiot and have sex, for the love of all that is holy use a condom...you're at least less likely to end up dead or pregnant that way"
Exaggerating a little, but the point was that I seem to remember they found a way to discourage teenage sex in general while at the same time encouraging the use of birth control.
It's not so much "buckle up if you're driving drunk," it's more "if you're going to play Russian Roulette, you should probably only put one bullet in instead of three or four."
Of course it isn't. But it is a responsible answer. And to do anything that might be perceived as discouraging it is how you end up with more knocked-up girls...because kids will have sex anyway. There's been very little evidence that abstinence-only (to include "tell kids about birth control but mainly the failure rate") education has all that much affect on the rates of kids having sex, or the average age of first intercourse. It doesn't seem to have a negative impact on it either, but at least some studies I've read suggest that it has a negative impact on contraception use.
So kids have just as much sex, but use birth control less. Win....win?
grymster2007
New member
I know that arguing birth control is fun, but my question was if McCain's camp did their homework in checking out Palin's background. I like her and want to continue to, but it seems these things are sometimes done in a hurry.... and I'm grim, which often makes me consider the worst!
- Status