McCain chooses Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska

JimHawkins · Post by **JimHawkins** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 3:37 pm

I hear you but sometimes, and I'm sure you've seen this, the n's don't jive with what we 'see'..

And of course there is more to predicting length of life than the data you have presented.. It's not like you have offered up some mathematical prediction for a complete model of his life expectancy...

By all means do so...

Otherwise you're using the same method.

mhosea · Post by **mhosea** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 3:48 pm

Gene DeMambro wrote:Mike, you just emphasized my point for me. Read what you wrote, and you'll see it.

Your statement was referent to a logical fallacy equivocating the label of an ideology with the ideology itself. You've fallen for a little semantic sleight of hand, misdirection. Pro-choice is not about the choosing per se, it's about the legality of a particular choice. Trying to make it about choosing per se, not to mention about the entire spectrum of reproductive rights (over most of which there is no controversy in the US, anyway), is just marketing. The "pro-life" position is that abortion should not be a legal option in pregnancy just as murdering your spouse shouldn't be a legal option for getting out of a marriage. To the same extent, "pro-life" is also marketing, as here again, the matter is limited to a very specific context and does not extend in any way, form, or fashion to other contexts where "life" might or might not be defended, such as, for example, capital punishment or hunting. I think we'd have better discussions about such things if people would just stick to the subject and not play silly games with labels. It offends peoples' intelligence to pretend that you can slap an overly generalized label on something and backdoor your way to winning an argument with it. Your average person will not recognize the precise logical fallacy involved, but they will still realize instinctively that it's BS.

Jason Rees · Post by **Jason Rees** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 4:24 pm

Gene DeMambro wrote: If John McCain was the maverick everyone claims he is (at at least he was), he would set politics aside and go with a VP choice who augments his own philosophy, much like Clinton-Gore. Then John McCain would win - in a landslide.

No, he wouldn't. Obama's got a solid lock on his base. They're not going anywhere. McCain's base, however, has a history of sitting out elections if they get ignored. They said it plainly: if John McCain would have picked Lieberman, his base would have stayed home. I don't think for a minute all those people on the left would have come over to John McCain... all those age cracks? They would have doubled. People would have joked that a retirement home was being set up in the White House. And that would be the nicest comment.

We had John Kerry in 2004. We had Hillary Clinton in 2008. Both with more experience than Sen. Obama.

Kerry had the character of a snake. As for Hillary, it's the Democratic Party that decided experience didn't matter. Hillary's a centrist, to boot. I would have considered voting for her.

Think our problems would be solved if McCain pushes the button? I dare you to try and convince us all our problems would be over.

See, that's where you misunderstand me. I don't think McCain is crazy. I don't think he would push the button. But I don't think Obama 'CAN' push the button. I don't think Putin believes it either. That's the difference.

And please tell us what Pres. Bush and VP Cheney are doing about the problems you mentioned. I'm all a quiver with anticipation.

Nothing. Absolutely nothing. See, I'm not a Republican. Bush and Cheney have their faults. I won't defend their lackluster performance in these matters. At all.

My issue is the psychophantic behavior of the Democrats fawning over Obama, a socialist with zero practical experience.

Maybe we should take a lesson from Ronald Reagan on that one:

I wish we would. Obama's no Reagan. Not even close.

Holiday? What holiday? There's a holiday? Enjoy![/quote]

Glenn · Post by **Glenn** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 4:32 pm

Bill Glasheen wrote: Sarah Palin was/is a Maverick because she bucked her own party and cleaned up the boondoggle in Alaska energy. When her party chose to ignore her desire to clean house, she ran against the governor who appointed her in the primaries and beat him. Then she ran against a former Democrat governor and beat him. Then she (shock) did what she said she would do. She cleaned up the energy corruption.

I have seen this mentioned a few times on this thread, but where is this description of her coming from? I'm hearing a different story from people from Alaska, their view of her is that she has redirected the energy corruptness for personal gain but hardly done away with it, a view partly fueled by her husband working in the oil industry in Alaska. Dis-information making the rounds? Possibly, but in a brief search I have not seen any good unbiased descriptions of what exactly she did to 'clean up energy corruption'. Anyone have any good links?

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 5:08 pm

Glenn wrote:
Bill Glasheen wrote:
Sarah Palin was/is a Maverick because she bucked her own party and cleaned up the boondoggle in Alaska energy. When her party chose to ignore her desire to clean house, she ran against the governor who appointed her in the primaries and beat him. Then she ran against a former Democrat governor and beat him. Then she (shock) did what she said she would do. She cleaned up the energy corruption.
I have seen this mentioned a few times on this thread, but where is this description of her coming from? I'm hearing a different story from people from Alaska, their view of her is that she has redirected the energy corruptness for personal gain but hardly done away with it, a view partly fueled by her husband working in the oil industry in Alaska. Dis-information making the rounds? Possibly, but in a brief search I have not seen any good unbiased descriptions of what exactly she did to 'clean up energy corruption'. Anyone have any good links?

Indeed the bloggers are working fast and furious to paint either positive or negative pictures of her. No surprise there...

This Wikipedia reference is heavy with citations, so probably isn't a bad start.

Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commissioner

Governor Murkowski appointed Palin to the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, where she chaired the Commission from 2003 to 2004, and also served as Ethics Supervisor.[19] She resigned in protest over what she called the "lack of ethics" of fellow Republican members.[20][6]

After she resigned, Palin exposed the state Republican Party's chairman, Randy Ruedrich, one of her fellow Oil & Gas commissioners, who was accused of doing work for the party on public time and working closely with a company he was supposed to be regulating.[19] Palin filed formal complaints against both Ruedrich and former Alaska Attorney General Gregg Renkes, who both resigned. Ruedrich also paid a record $12,000 fine.[6]

More from Wikipedia.

Energy and environment

***

Shortly after taking office, Palin rescinded 35 appointments made by Murkowski in the last hours of his administration, including that of his former chief of staff James "Jim" Clark to the Alaska Natural Gas Development Authority.[31][32] Clark later pleaded guilty to conspiring with a defunct oil-field-services company to channel money into Frank Murkowski's re-election campaign.[33]

In March 2007, Palin presented the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act (AGIA) as the new legal vehicle for building a natural gas pipeline from the state's North Slope.[34] This negated a deal by the previous governor to grant the contract to a coalition including BP (her husband's former employer). Only one legislator, Representative Ralph Samuels, voted against the measure,[35] and in June, Palin signed it into law.[36] On January 5, 2008, Palin announced that a Canadian company, TransCanada Corp., was the sole AGIA-compliant applicant.[37][38] In August 2008, Palin signed a bill into law giving the state of Alaska authority to award TransCanada Pipelines $500 million in seed money and a license to build and operate the $26-billion pipeline to transport natural gas from the North Slope to the Lower 48 through Canada.[39]

So I believe these two citations address your questions, Glenn.

- Bill

AAAhmed46 · Post by **AAAhmed46** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 9:46 pm

Bill Glasheen wrote:

P.S. I voted Ron Paul in the primaries. By the time Virginia came around, the results were a done deal. My vote was meant to be a statement about the 2-party system.

Hear! Hear!

AAAhmed46 · Post by **AAAhmed46** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 9:51 pm

.....ah the eastern europian ''ill kick your ass'' face, but with some real hotness.

Pilf

(Prime-minister id like to......)

Rising Star · Post by **Rising Star** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 2:10 pm

http://www.peteyandpetunia.com:80/VoteHere/VoteHere.htm

Enjoy

John

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 4:25 pm

As usual, there's a lot of detail in that Jib Jab video. It takes several viewings to pick up all the subtleties.

Not as attention-grabbing as some of their earlier stuff, but still good.

- Bill

Jason Rees · Post by **Jason Rees** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 5:43 pm

I miss jib-jab in a slow political season.

Glenn · Post by **Glenn** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 9:49 pm

Bill Glasheen wrote: So I believe these two citations address your questions, Glenn.

Yes, thanks!

Glenn · Post by **Glenn** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 10:01 pm

So the conservative Republican vice-presidential candidate announces today that her unmarried 17-year old daughter is 5-months pregnant. Will this have any effect on the election, particularly with the conservative segment McCain is hoping to reach by choosing Palin as his running mate?
Palin says daughter, 17, is pregnant

By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer
36 minutes ago

ST. PAUL, Minn. - John McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin, said Monday her 17-year-old unmarried daughter is five months pregnant, an announcement stealing even more thunder from McCain and a Republican presidential convention already overshadowed by Hurricane Gustav.

ADVERTISEMENT

Adding to the day's drama, McCain aides said the announcement was aimed at rebutting Internet rumors that Palin's youngest son, born in April, was actually her daughter's.

The national convention, which a political party counts on to send its candidate surging into the fall campaign, already had been relegated to a distant second to the hurricane on TV, in newspapers and on Internet Web sites.

Monday's statement, attributed to Sarah and Todd Palin and released by the campaign, said that Bristol Palin would keep her baby and marry the child's father, identified only as a young man named Levi. The baby is due in late December.

"Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned. We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents," Sarah and Todd Palin said in their brief statement.

The disclosure came on the opening day of the Republican National Convention, which has been scaled back because of Hurricane Gustav, and three days after McCain named Palin as his vice presidential running mate. Coming after the randomness of Gustav, the revelation added to the sense of unscriptedness that is hanging over the convention.

"Life happens," said McCain adviser Steve Schmidt.

"An American family," added colleague Mark Salter.

Palin told McCain's team about the pregnancy during lengthy discussions about her background, and the senator knew about it when he made her his surprise pick Saturday, aides said. At several points during the discussions, 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.

Prominent religious conservatives, many of whom have been lukewarm toward McCain's candidacy, predicted that the announcement would not diminish conservative Christian enthusiasm for the vice presidential hopeful, a staunch abortion opponent. In fact, there was talk that it might help.

The convention opened on time, though shortened out of concern that the party did not want to be seen whooping it up in St. Paul while thousands of Americans along the Gulf Coast were being threatened by the hurricane. From the convention podium, GOP officials asked delegates to take out their cell phones and text-message contributions to help in the relief effort.

McCain's wife, Cindy, and first lady Laura Bush were making their own appeals for relief help in the convention hall later in the day.

The delegates took up the party platform and other business, but most of the opening-day speeches — all of which had been expected to acclaim McCain and assail Democratic opponent Barack Obama — were scrapped.

Palin, the first-term Alaska governor, was in Minnesota preparing for her Wednesday night nomination acceptance speech when the campaign issued the statement from her and her husband; her family was home in Alaska.

"Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they will have the love and support of our entire family," the parents said.

The campaign said it was not disclosing the father's full name or age or how he and Bristol knew each other, citing privacy.

Sarah Palin's fifth child, a son named Trig, was born in April with Down syndrome. Internet bloggers have been suggesting that the child was actually born to Bristol Palin but that her mother, the 44-year-old Alaska governor, claimed to be the mother.

Palin spokesman Bill McAllister emphatically denied those rumors, and McCain adviser Mark Salter said the campaign announced the daughter's pregnancy to rebut them.

"Senator McCain's view is this is a private family matter. As parents, (the Palins) love their daughter unconditionally and are going to support their daughter," said McCain spokesman Steve Schmidt.

Reaction from religious conservatives was sympathetic.

Focus on the Family founder James Dobson issued a statement commending the Palins "for not just talking about their pro-life and pro-family values, but living them out even in the midst of trying circumstances." He added: "Being a Christian does not mean you're perfect. Nor does it mean your children are perfect. But it does mean there is forgiveness and restoration when we confess our imperfections to the Lord."

Roberta Combs, president of the Christian Coalition of America called the pregnancy private. "It's a matter that should stay in the family and they have to work through it together. My prayers go out to them."

Added Combs: "We're excited about the governor and think she's going to do well."

Mathew Staver, dean of Liberty University School of Law, said: "We're all sinners."

"We all make mistakes. Certainly, the ideal is not to get pregnant out of wedlock. But she made the right decision after her mistake," he said.

McCain advisers said Palin told them about the pregnancy during lengthy discussions about her background. At several points during the discussions, McCain's team warned Palin that the scrutiny into her private life would be intense.

Advisers said Palin's daughter should be afforded privacy like the other candidates' children. Said Schmidt: "If people try to politicize this, the American people will be appalled."

In Monroe, Mich., Democrat Obama condemned rumors involving the children of candidates and echoed the McCain campaign argument. He said, "I think people's families are off limits, and people's children are especially off limits."

"Our people were not involved in any way in this, and they will not be," he said. "And if I ever thought that there was somebody in my campaign that was involved in something like that, they'd be fired."

IJ · Post by IJ » Tue Sep 02, 2008 12:01 am

Obama's classy response is that the press should lay off and it has nothing to do with Palin's qualifications. He even pointed out his own mom was 18 when she had him. Funny, all this recent evidence that minors are not asexual creatures!

The only effect this should have on the race is that it raises some obvious questions. For example, when conservative leaders praise the family for their response, well, what does that entail? McCain and Palin oppose abortion and would seek to remove own young women's right to choose. Then there will be no correct choice to applaud, unless one means not getting a backstreet. Also, does one get praise for following one's ideals? It's like a paramedic responding to a call. If Palin supported her daughter getting an abortion, she'd be a hypocrite, so she seems hardly eligible for praise just for not turning her back on the plan when the stuff hit the fan.

This also should put some light on where candidates stand on reproductive issues. As Salon.com writes,

"The Bristol baby is also likely to get McCain all wound up in talk of his support for abstinence-only education. The Arizona senator has a record of voting against programs that use federal money to distribute condoms; he has voted against federal funding for programs that teach medically accurate, comprehensive sex education; and he has voted down programs that would make birth control more widely available. In March 2007, he stumbled when asked about his position on contraception in HIV prevention, asking an aid to "find out what my position is on contraception -- I'm sure I'm opposed to government spending on it, I'm sure I support the president's policies on it.""

Palin has also made incomplete but consistent statements about sex ed. I guess it doesn't always work even in your own house! Try OCPs + barrier contraception next time... and worry about changing classes in college instead of changing diapers. There's too much focus on after the fact management of unplanned pregnancy... I'm all for the ounce of prevention here (but not one ounce of proven-ineffective abstinence only teaching).

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 12:15 am

IJ wrote:
Obama's classy response is that the press should lay off and it has nothing to do with Palin's qualifications.

Your response is obviously different.

Meeeoooowwww!!!!!!

My response? There but for the grace of God go I.

Good thing we have all these pro-choice folks with and without families who can pass judgment because of their perfect family situations.

Oh wait...

- Bill