Sarah Palin ~ Unbelievable!

jenns

Does anyone in this country care about the issues any more?  Or is it all about who can stay in the news and draw a crowd?

 

Yes there are still a lot of people who care about the issues. I am one of them and I will be voting McCain

I would not vote for ANYONE who would set back women's rights fifty years. Sooo, I am voting for Obama.

That being said, my dad, who is 73, just registered to vote for the first time so he can vote for McCain.  My FIL, a Republican, switched to the Democratic party because he will NOT vote for McCain.

This is going to be the most historic (and most watched!) campaign since FDR took office.

 

The majority of people weighing in seem to only be concerned with the pro-choice/pro-life issue. I realize that a change in the supreme court could turn the tide, but is it truly likely? Is it the ONLY issue anyone cares about? I realize this forum is mostly frequented by women, but aren't there other issues we care about? What about health care? More/less military spending? Balancing the budget (or at least making a dent in the debt)?  Issues regarding taxes? Anything else?

If there isn't anything else worth caring about and we're a good sampling of the general public, then the candidates just need to state their position on where they stand on the abortion issue and call it a day.

Thank you, Cathy for stating that so well.

I do believe that there are far more important issues than that of abortion, yet this is the one issue that everyone seems to harp on.  For me, the big issues are national security, taxes, & our poor economic conditions.  Abortion is one of the lesser issues that I am concerned about. 

I am not surprised that outside of this forum, people really do like Sarah Palin.  She comes across as a real person, not just another politician.  I believe that this is a large reason that she has a 90% approval rating.  If she & John McCain are smart, they will take advantage of her popularity with the voters, & work hard to get out & address some of the real issues that Americans are interested in.

 Those polls (supposed 90% approval rating) are all about ignoring the people who have not decided yet. That seriously skews the results. And/or they sample just a few hundred people. That isn't a large enough number of people to make such a sweeping statement as "90% approval."

I don't listen to or believe these polls. How they ask questions and what options they give has everything to do with how people answer.

That being said, I would be EXTREMELY surprised if 90% of Alaskans approved of Sarah Palin. I have been talking to people everywhere, in the the grocery line, on the street, wherever I meet people. So far I have not met ONE PERSON who is voting for McCain, and quite a few who have changed their minds to Obama since McCain took Palin. I know some people are voting for him, but I'm surprised at how many are not.

The place I live is a thorough mix of all sorts of political affiliations. More than one person has remarked to me that he/she could see Palin running for a national office in ten years. But not now. She really doesn't have the experience she needs if she's going to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency.

I'm very concerned about affordable health care, and the wars. I also want the US to get serious about alternative energy, and I don't mean nuclear power plants. I don't choose a candidate on just one issue. 

I don't like Palin because her ideas are too extreme for me, and I think McCain is just going to keep doing what Bush has been doing. I will be voting for Obama.

Actually, one of the things I like about Palin is her strength on energy. McCain's knowledge is weak, leaving him influenced by misguided attempts to further the ethanol fiasco, to continue to buy from OPEC at a dizzying pace. And nuclear power is a way to conserve other fuel. Otherwise, you are burning fuel, right now, with your computer, bemoaning that we're burning fuel. No such thing as a free lunch. If you want the price of heating oil and natural gas to go down, we have to quit burning it to generate electricity. Which means we need to get it from nuclear power plants. Did you know that you get more radiation from a CAT-scan than the release of radiation from the entire 3-Mile Island incident? And I didn't make that up. It's one of those inconvenient facts.

Just because Palin has a religious conviction doesn't mean she can make it into law. Nor do I think she would want to deny medical treatment to women who are victims of rape. I think that's reaching too far.

Is anyone getting just a bit of the irony of saying she is setting BACK women's rights by becoming vice pres of USA, the first woman in history to have a solid chance besides Ferraro? Seriously? Setting women back by becoming Vice Pres? Really? I guess sexism can rear it's ugly head anywhere. Like asking whether she will handle the job or worry about her family. No one asked that of Clinton (either one) and no one has asked that of Obama. So it's convenient sexism for reasons of political parties. Just her.

Obama's brother says things that could be embarrassing to him, Carter's brother did embarrassing things but it could be wrong to hold either one accountable for the actions of another, yet we are supposed to hold Palin accountable.

"Mommy, how did Sarah Palin set back women's rights?"

"By becoming Vice President of the most powerful nation on Earth."

"How does that work?"

"I have no idea."

 

 

Well you nailed that one Cathy

 And for the others that say she will push back womens rights, lets be clear here, it is the abortion issue and the abortion issue alone that you are speaking of. She has no intentions or beliefs in women not voting and not being able to hold the same jobs as men, so it is not women's rights it is abortion. Try to be clear.

  This issue is important to me also, but it is not at the top of my list. The country, the economy, the military, protecting out citizens from those in the world that activley seek our death, are some of the ones at the top of my list. I would vote for McCain even is he were not pro life.

 I highly doubt she is going to pursue this issue as a priority, McCain isn't going to let her, he is far more to the left of Palin, and even if they do pursue this issue it will be along the lines of preventing late term abortions. I know the hard core people want the right to terminate their pregnacies right up to the moment the "fetus" is born naturally, but most Americans find late term abortions offensive. So the most you have to worry about is not being able to abort at 8 months, wow what a blow to women's rights that would be.

 

jeano

The place I live is a thorough mix of all sorts of political affiliations. More than one person has remarked to me that he/she could see Palin running for a national office in ten years. But not now. She really doesn't have the experience she needs if she's going to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency.

 

 

So they are going to vote for Obama and put a highly inexperienced man as the President, because Palin hasn't got the experience to be a heartbeat from the presidency? That logic is just hysterical.  Is it just me or is this logic flawed?

  If it is the inexperience that concerns people, they really should take a closer look at Obama, personally I think most have their underwear in a twist over the one single issue of abortion which is so very important to them that they would throw away the economy, national security and the future of America for the assurance that abortion will always be available to anyone, anytime, for any reason.

BEVOLASVEGAS

the big issues are national security, taxes, & our poor economic conditions. 

Well I guess I don't understand why people who feel that our current economic conditions are poor, would continue to elect the same party again and again.  The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result!  Bush's policies obviously are not working to help the economy, and I do believe that Obama wants to take the country in a new direction, hence the (albeit tired) "change" message.  Note how McCain has also jumped on the change bandwagon.  Sarah Palin is simply Bush all over again.  8 years of republican policies are enough for me.

jenns

[Well I guess I don't understand why people who feel that our current economic conditions are poor, would continue to elect the same party again and again.  The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result!  Bush's policies obviously are not working to help the economy, and I do believe that Obama wants to take the country in a new direction, hence the (albeit tired) "change" message.  Note how McCain has also jumped on the change bandwagon.  Sarah Palin is simply Bush all over again.  8 years of republican policies are enough for me.

Seems to me that the economy was in pretty good shape until the Dems took control of Congress.  But I guess everyone forgets about that.  How about Pelosi ending the last session before a vote could take place on energy and trying to lower gas prices?  She jetted off for her 5-week vacation while a bunch of Republicans stayed and debated the issue for hours, part of which was in complete darkness because Pelosi turned the lights off on them!  It's just so easy for people to blame Bush for everything that's unpleasant in their lives, and to compare McCain to Bush, when there are many, many instances of McCain voting the opposite of Bush's stances on issues.  But, I suppose if you (the collective you, not directed at anyone here on this forum) keep repeating the same thing to yourself, then it becomes true.

dgriego

personally I think most have their underwear in a twist over the one single issue of abortion which is so very important to them that they would throw away the economy, national security and the future of America for the assurance that abortion will always be available to anyone, anytime, for any reason.

 

And the reverse -  the assurance that abortion will not be available (though futile) to anyone, anytime, for any reason.  One of the reasons the religious right pushed Bush to success.  IMO this gets in the way of the real issues. 

 Well, of *course* people are focusing on Palin's stance on abortion, and sex education, and "family values." That's what *Palin* is (and has been) focusing on, too! That and gas/oil. People will focus on what she chooses to broadcast to the world, and so far, that's been primarily her "small-town family values." The media keeps harping on the same things over and over and over again because, quite honestly, she hasn't given them much material to work with!

So, want to talk issues?

For me, right now, I think the #1 most important issue is foreign policy. So... what are Palin's feelings on foreign policy? Anyone?

As a long-time California resident, immigration policies are also very important to me. So... what's her stand on immigration?

What about science and technology funding? Are we to assume that, based on her very conservative ideology, she is against stem cell research? Of any kind, of new lines, or...?

How is the media (or us armchair pundits) supposed to ask deep and probing questions about issues she doesn't have strong experience or even feelings about?

A lot has been made of Obama's lack of experience, which I think is a very legitimate complaint. To counterbalance those weaknesses, he chose a very experienced, long-time politician - Joe Biden. Biden's stand on most all of the major issues is very well documented, and supported by his extensive voting record. Palin...? Not so much.

It makes me very nervous because I feel in some respects Palin is a "blank canvas" that will be painted by the current Republican Party to represent whatever they think will sell best to the American people. Not necessarily what they think is best for the country, but what they think will sell.

The issue of the "bridge to nowhere" is the misappropriate of federal funds (aka-your tax dollars).  That was a gross misappropriation, and she held the correct (IMO) conservative view of saying "thanks but no thanks" as she put it, if they want the bridge, they'll build it themselves.  That is how it should be with projects of that nature...the responsibility of the state, and let the residents of that state vote on whether or not they want their state tax money going to such a project. 

That's all well and good -- except that she KEPT the money that was given to Alaska for this project and instead used it on other little pet projects (like her huge fancy gym, for instance).

The woman is a whack-job and I want her as far away from the presidency as possible.  McCain, himself, is really not all that terrible.  The idea of Palin stepping in to the position of POTUS if something happened to him, though (which is very likely, unfortunately), is absolutely UNTHINKABLE.  I can't figure out why so many women swoon over Palin when all she wants to do is take away all of your rights.

The turnover of Roe v. Wade is more possible than you know -- I believe there are three members of the Supreme Court that could possibly be replaced during the next presidential term.  If McCain (or god forbid, Palin) loads it with heavy anti-choice judges it could easily be overturned.  Why would we even want to chance it?

KarissaKS

That's all well and good -- except that she KEPT the money that was given to Alaska for this project and instead used it on other little pet projects (like her huge fancy gym, for instance).

Actually, I did some reading on this today. It looks like by the time Palin took office Congress had already removed the restrictions on the funds so instead of being specifically for the bridge, the money became essentially "for whatever sort of development-thing Alaska wants to use it for." (http://www.adn.com/sarahpalin/story/511471.html)

But it is the federally funded Bridge to Nowhere in Ketchikan that seems destined to make or break Palin's national reputation as a cost-cutting conservative.

The bridge was intended to provide access to Ketchikan's airport on lightly populated Gravina Island, opening up new territory for expansion at the same time. Alaska's congressional delegation endured withering criticism for earmarking $223 million for Ketchikan and a similar amount for a crossing of Knik Arm at Anchorage.

Congress eventually removed the earmark language but the money still went to Alaska, leaving it up to the administration of then-Gov. Frank Murkowski to decide whether to go ahead with the bridges or spend the money on something else.

In September, 2006, Palin showed up in Ketchikan on her gubernatorial campaign and said the bridge was essential for the town's prosperity.

She said she could feel the town's pain at being derided as a "nowhere" by prominent politicians, noting that her home town, Wasilla, had recently been insulted by the state Senate president, Ben Stevens.

"OK, you've got Valley trash standing here in the middle of nowhere," Palin said, according to an account in the Ketchikan Daily News. "I think we're going to make a good team as we progress that bridge project."

One year later, Ketchikan's Republican leaders said they were blindsided by Palin's decision to pull the plug.

Palin spokeswoman Sharon Leighow said Saturday that as projected costs for the Ketchikan bridge rose to nearly $400 million, administration officials were telling Ketchikan that the project looked less likely. Local leaders shouldn't have been surprised when Palin announced she was turning to less-costly alternatives, Leighow said. Indeed, Leighow produced a report quoting Palin, late in the governor's race, indicating she would also consider alternatives to a bridge.

Andrew Halcro, who ran against Palin in 2006, told The Associated Press on Saturday that Palin changed her views after she was elected to make a national splash.

So, contrary to what I originally thought, it's not like Palin was like, "Hey Congress, can I have some money for a bridge? Okay, thanks! Yeah, I'm not really going to build that bridge after all, but thanks for the money!"

Edit: I still think the appointing of Supreme Court judges is one of the most important, and most under-appreciated, duties of any US President.

 

ron2

Just because Palin has a religious conviction doesn't mean she can make it into law. Nor do I think she would want to deny medical treatment to women who are victims of rape. I think that's reaching too far.

She has clearly stated that no abortion is acceptable INCLUDING terminating pregnancies caused by rape and incest.  I personally made no mention of her denying healthcare to rape victims. 

From the reading I've done the next president is likely to have two appointees to the SC - Stevens is 88 and Bader Ginsburg is rumored to want to leave but is hanging on to keep the stalemate on Roe V Wade.  So don't kid yourself this president will have a big influence.

I don't agree with her energy policies - I think Americans need to cut back on their energy usage in a BIG way, in particular oil dependency - not going into a 10 page post showing how this will be the best way to reduce our dependency on foreign oil - but I have done my research and understand how this works.  Tearing up the environment isn't the best way forward for me.  I have no issue with increasing nuclear, hydro or wind power generation.

ron2

Is anyone getting just a bit of the irony of saying she is setting BACK women's rights by becoming vice pres of USA, the first woman in history to have a solid chance besides Ferraro?

That is not why, I, or many others feel she is setting back women's rights.  Not sure how you made that leap.  Many women myself included are very protective of a woman's right to an abortion and feel undermined by a powerful, successful woman who wants to take it away.  We understand that men don't understand the situation as well because it isn't their body.

ron2

worry about her family. No one asked that of Clinton (either one) and no one has asked that of Obama

None of those have such a young family with a special needs NEWBORN and a pregnant teenage daughter.  I like that she is supportive of her daughter but feel very strongly that the kid who will be a mom needs her mom to be there for her.  I expect the president and vice president of this country to have their country as their first priority which means that Palin's daughter will not get the support she needs from her mom nor will Trig.  They SHOULD NOT take precidence over the needs of the country IF she becomes VP imho.

Also discovered that her Wikipedia profile was altered 30 times (all positive entries) int he 24 hours BEFORE her being announced as VP candidate - clearly an insider job and validity of the info has been heavily questioned.  Levi had a Facebook page and was strongly against keeping the child and getting married.  The page was removed. She as all for the bridge and then against it and using the against position as a soapbox. Not a good choice of soapbox imho - I'd have picked a topic that I hadn't done a 180 on.

I think she is backwards in thinking that abstinence is all that needs to be taught in schools.  Schools are for EDUCATION.  Teach abstinence at home.  NC adopted abstinence only in the nineties and has an increase in teen pregnancies and one of the worst rates in the country.  It is actually a topic of debate here - and this IS the Bible Belt.

And lastly - yes folks I unabashedly feel very strongly about abortion rights.  I also feel that religion doesn't belong in the forefront of politics.  The religious intolerance led by the religious right is downright repulsive to me.  Some of you see the military as the heart of our country I do not.  I see the Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights all of which have suffered heavy hits in the last 8 yrs.  I really think that one of the cores of our democracy is freedom of religion so no I will never support anyone who wants to foist their religious beliefs on the entire nation.  The extremeist position of the religious right ( I put her in that category) is no different than the extremist religious sects throughout the world. Including the ones we are fighting.

And lastly I was against the 'Iraq war' from day 1.  I do not believe it is helping anything.  I would rather see a percentage of that money go to ensuring affordable healthcare.  Read somewhere 3% of the 'war' budget would cover all americans.  No question what my decision would be.

So when I don't vote for McCain/Palin those are just some of the reasons - not just silly old abortion rights