The Political Execution of Sarah Palin

Let's Get Real, People

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/11/beck.palin/index.html
from PolMach Forums

Glenn Beck has very well written and thought provoking article today on the CNN site regarding the smear campaign that is going on against Sarah Palin.  The main points that I would like to address are:

1.  "Sarah Palin believes that God told her to go to war in Iraq."

Really?  Hmm.  I don't remember those being her words.  Let me go back and check.  No, she said that we should all pray that the war was in God's plan, "Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan.". 

Now, being of what many consider  a new age religion (we can save that debate for another time), I can't honestly say that I know a lot about God's plan is, but I can say it doesn't sound like she said that God sent us to war.  She explained this, despite a misquote from Charles Gibson on her exact quote, as to being similar to Abraham Lincoln's speech where he says that we cannot know what the exact will of God is.  Despite that others may state that religion plays no place in politics and we have a separation of church and state.  First, tell that to Mitt Romney, then you might want to include that sentiment to almost every politician in our country including Barach Obama who prayed, ""Give me the wisdom to do what is right and just. And make me an instrument of your will."

2.  "Sarah Palin has no experience."

Okay.  Well, let's look at exactly what that experience is compared to the experience of the person that is actually running for the main office on the other party ticket, shall we?

First and foremost neither candidate would be running if they didn't feel they were qualified and experienced enough for the job, correct?  So, keeping that in mind let's place their experience side by side. 

When Barack announced he would run for the presidency he had served exactly 767 days as a state senator. During that time his own party during the primary campaign questioned the amount of time he actually spent performing his duties.  Several senators let the nation know that he had voted present or was absent over 100 times. Present does not mean that he voted yes or no, it means that he voted a strong maybe.  Maybe's won't be good enough in decision making in the White House.

 Sarah Plain agreed to run as a vice presidential nominee after having served as Governor of Alaska for 634 days.  How much more experience did Obama get in those extra 133 days?  Evidently, in his opinion, enough to make him less than a heart beat away from making major decisions for an entire country.  But with all due respect out of the two Palin is the only one that has executive experience.  She has run a business, a small town, and a state.  The state she has run has given her an insight into the energy crisis and what we need in that arena.  She would be one heartbeat from the presidency, yes, but he would be zero heartbeats away.

3.  "Palin was just a small time mayor. Obama has more employees working on his campaign then they have citizens in her whole home town."

First, that might or might not be true.  I have no idea.  But I do know this, employees go home at night.  They get a paycheck for work they complete.  People who live in a small home town are home all day and all night.  Decisions made for them impact entire family units, schools, businesses, and government systems.  If an employee of Barack Obama does not do their job they get fired and are off the team.  If an employee of the city doesn't do his job the entire community may suffer.

Secondly, I think people may have forgotten that after that time as serving as mayor she also has served as governor.  Whoops.  Is managing a presidential campaign the same as managing an entire state?  I think the duties here might be slightly different. 

Finally, Barack has rightfully bragged about his money raising skills.  I have to say this has been impressive.  But even so, his $22 million dollar per month intake is not comparable to the more than $1.3 billion dollar monthly intake of the state of Alaska, which is run by Sarah Palin.

4.  "Palin only supports abstinence taught in sex education classrooms."

Well, even if this were true, does it really matter if that is what she supports?  I think somewhere along the line we forget that we have a powerful voice in this country - the vote.  But in reality this is not what the lady believes anyway.  Palin actually said, "I'm pro-contraception, and I think kids who may not hear about it at home should hear about it in other avenues. So I am not anti-contraception. But, yeah, abstinence is another alternative that should be discussed with kids. I don't have a problem with that."   This is hardly an earth shattering stance.

5.  "Sarah Palin cut special needs funding in Alaska by 62%.  She says she's an advocate for families with special needs?"

Whoever started this rumor really didn't do their homework.  It didn't take long to find the true information here.  By rerouting the monies in her state and designating educational programs, such as a military program for youth, Sarah Palin actually increased the monies given to special need children by over $40,000 per student.  That is more than a lot of states can even fathom.  The state of Alaska has a budget for special needs children of $73,840 per student, and Palin accomplished this in only three years.

Now, I realize that her good pal from Wasilla started spreading rumors about her.  But in truth this woman's claims have been proven to be either stretched beyond the recognizable truth or out and out lies.  Why?  Who knows.  Sometimes people say things to get their 15 minutes of fame.  What motivates people to do smear campaigns?

So, before you go to the voting box, (I honestly don't expect people to change their minds) I hope you feel better informed.  When you mark your box or pull your lever pull it as an informed voter and not one that is steered by misquotes, lies, and truth stretching.  We are, after all, a nation of intelligent people.

 

republican
11,445 views 17 replies
Reply #1 from PolMach Forums Top

Dear PatsyD:

     Well, here we go again.  Perhaps simplicity would be useful, here.  First, the discussion about war and "God" is disconcerting.  We are not in the era of the Crusades.  And the last that I checked, the Christian "God" doesn't approve of killing.  Second, let's close the issue of "experience."  Unless a candidate is an incumbent, NO candidate has ever been able to list "President" on their resume.  I know that we're talking "government experience."  Still, the dynamics of the Presidency just don't parallel experience in other elected offices.  That the Governorship of any state is characterized as "executive" experience, a state is not the country, not even remotely close.

     Another presidential campaign, another round of childish bickering.  The facts are that Gov. Palin has no federal government experience, and that's troubling.  The facts are that Gov. Palin would, god forbid, assume the Presidency should something happen to Se. McCain.  That's troubling.

     There are several versions of what constitutes "facts" around Governor Palin.  The ones I listed above are indisputable.  So yes, when you go to pull the lever, don't allow your mind to be glutted by informationj obtained from sources the support for which you have no inkling to.  Stick with what we ALL know to be true, and recognize that the "truth" seldom eminates from a media outlet.

 

Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top

And the last that I checked, the Christian "God" doesn't approve of killing.
End of quote

Who did you check with?  If it was your religion - oops! You just pulled a Palin!

Unless a candidate is an incumbent, NO candidate has ever been able to list "President" on their resume.
End of quote

Not true - Grover Cleveland and Teddy Roosevelt both were able to list "president" on their resume.  Taht alone shows that you do not know what you are talking about, just spouting talking points again.

The facts are that Gov. Palin has no federal government experience, and that's troubling.
End of quote

Hmmm - So FDR was troubling?  Bill Clinton was troubling?  Dukakis and carter were troublin (well they were but you dont mention them).

The ones I listed above are indisputable.
End of quote

Actually you listed very few facts, and the ones you listed were incorrect.  So an incorrect fact is not a fact, but vulgar terms is called a lie.

recognize that the "truth" seldom eminates from a media outlet.
End of quote

And definitely not from the liberal side of this election.

Object Desktop - Get all of our enhancement utilities in one suite
Reply #3 from PolMach Forums Top

Hello:

Answering Point for Point:

1.  Sure, no argument here on this one.  But on the same hand Palin is totally misrepresenting (or has up until last night) the facts on "The Bridge to Nowhere" so it par for the course on how the game is played.  I agree its bullcrap regardless of who does it. 

2.  First the point on experience was McCain's point that he made an issue in the election.  Likewise on the idea that the VP should be ready to step into office on day one just in case the need arises.  Again being all for cutting through the bullcrap...If you ask your opponent the question you had better be prepaired to answer the same question. 

3.  From what I understand about her time as Mayor she took a town with a surplus and put it into debt (to the tune of $22 million...thats 22,000,000) increased spending 33% and taxes collected increased 38% (from years 1996-2002).  In addition as result of her mishandling of matters members of her party presured her to have an administrator handle daily matters. 

4.  If true then it is risky because the President sets policy and as result of the last eight years seems to have the muscle to overflex its bounds.  Oh I am almost certain that its been proven an inefective method to teach children (they do it anyway and without other precautions).

5.  From what I understand Anne Kilkenny (who wrote the e-mail in question) is a resident of the town/city that she was mayor of and knows her personally.  This gives her waaaaaaaaaaay more credibility in my mind of actually knowing this woman.  I agree that it should not be taken at face value and I admit I have not seen a point-counterpoint of her statements.  I will add two things here:  1) Its in the nature of the election and sadly even reporting to add a spin on thing...to report at a slant...and so two opposing people can look at the same thing...with all the same information and statistics and then look us in the eyes and say often contradictory things...and they are almost never held accountable for it...so who can really say in the end?  And Finally Anne Kilkenny did not intend for that e-mail to be made public...again because everyone is a liar liar pants on fire can you beleive anything...and if you can't then how do you keep from going crazy. 

 

Rev Phil

 

Reply #4 from PolMach Forums Top

Rev.Phil.  I want to thank you for your comments... :)

But as for Anne Kilkenny, the media had originally interviewed her.  She has no longer been in the spotlight because after evaluation of her claims they were found to be erroneous.  Other citizens that know Sarah Palin more intimately have said that "Anne is not hard to irritate."  She has been known to go out and create conflict in the city, but not to be hateful to be noticed and considered intelligently.  Basically her facts were mostly fact because her opinion made it so.  Every small town, including mine, has a person such as this.  We love em, seriously, because they keep us on our toes.

Secondly, as for the debt in the city of Wasilla, if you look that was explained by several people now in charge of the town.  It's not an unfamiliar story of a growing community.  It was also, I'm sure, a learning experience for Palin.  Not unlike myself who had to do student teaching before taking over my own classroom.  I'm not inept I just had to have a starting ground.

As for the bridge to no where, well, that project was done, true.  I have no idea when exactly she changed her position, but it was evident her position was changed.  Many politicians change ideas on their policies after truly investigating the issue.  Sometimes they find that things have changed and they have to change as well.  It's called life.

 

Reply #5 from PolMach Forums Top

Quoting lesterleon,
Dear PatsyD:   Another presidential campaign, another round of childish bickering.  The facts are that Gov. Palin has no federal government experience, and that's troubling.  The facts are that Gov. Palin would, god forbid, assume the Presidency should something happen to Se. McCain.  That's troubling.  
End of lesterleon's quote

So, if I am to understand you correctly, no person that has served only as a governor is qualified to run as president?  Only those people that have served as representatives or senators of a particular state are qualified enough?

So by your own standards the following person were not fit to become President of the United States:

James Monroe; Grover Cleveland (who previously to becoming Governor of NY was mayor of Buffalo and before that a sheriff in Erie Co.); Theodore Roosevelt, who had only served as Secretary of the Navy before becoming VP and then President; Rutherford B Hayes; William McKinley; Woodrow Wilson, who before becoming Governor of New Jersey was the president of a University; Calvin Coolidge, who was VP after only serving as Governor and LT. Governor of Mass.; Ronald Reagan; Bill Clinton, who was only Attorney General of AK for two years before becoming Gov. of AK and then president of the US; George W Bush.

I think your philosophy might be a tad bit flawed, but that is strictly my own personal opinion.

Reply #6 from PolMach Forums Top

Point-By-Point Rebuttal

 

1.          Regardless of the candidate, and regardless of the political party represented, the separation of church and state issue CANNOT just be “kicked to the side.”  NONE of our candidates need to infuse their personal spirituality into government.  No god representing any major religion I’m familiar with commands murder, anyway.

 

2.          Yes, some candidates might run whether they believe they’re qualified or not.  It’s called opportunism, and Governor Palin is a prime example.  And the experience issue requires clarification.  The truth is, Governor Palin has no FEDERAL government experience.  Senator Obama is not a STATE Senator, either.  He works for the FEDERAL Government.  And comments about commanding the Alaska National Guard are, well, silly.

 

3.            Mayor Palin left her town/city deep in debt AFTER she inherited a balanced budget.

 

4.          Governor Palin believes that Roe v. Wade should be overturned.  Why should the rights this case affords be stripped away because Govern Palin disagrees with them?  Of the people, by the people, and for the people, please.

 

5.          Relative to education, Alaskan children are subsidized at the rate of $230.00 per child.  Senator Obama’s state?  $21.00 per child.  Enough said.

 

6.          There is no smear campaign.  Why is it that Republicans cry “smear” when someone “dares” to disagree with them?  Pointing out the facts is not a smear, it’s pointing ou the facts.

Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
Regardless of the candidate, and regardless of the political party represented, the separation of church and state issue CANNOT just be “kicked to the side.”
End of quote
Why? Whether the president is religious or not, they cannot do a damn thing about creating a theocracy. And you forget again. Palin is running for VP, npt P. And last I checked. Obama is invoking God all over the place. So how can YOU justify supporting him?
Yes, some candidates might run whether they believe they’re qualified or not. It’s called opportunism, and Governor Palin is a prime example. And the experience issue requires clarification. The truth is, Governor Palin has no FEDERAL government experience. Senator Obama is not a STATE Senator, either. He works for the FEDERAL Government. And comments about commanding the Alaska National Guard are, well, silly.
End of quote
I just pointed out several presidents and candidates, that from your posting you obviously support that did not have any federal experience. SO FDR was a complete and utter failure? It is a non-squitir. As we have seen, federal experience does not seem to make a good president always. Nor does it indicate that the president will be bad. IN other words, again, why are you running against Palin? Is Obama running for VP now? Is biden going to be the power behind the throne?
Mayor Palin left her town/city deep in debt AFTER she inherited a balanced budget.
End of quote
So how did she do as Governor? How did Obama do with his budget? Oh wait, he never had one! And dont you think she learned? If we are to condemn her for something done 0 years ago, then Obama has enough skeletons in his closet (drugs, Ayers, wright, real estate gifts, mobsters, etc.) that makes palin look like Saint Theresa!
Governor Palin believes that Roe v. Wade should be overturned. Why should the rights this case affords be stripped away because Govern Palin disagrees with them? Of the people, by the people, and for the people, please.
End of quote
So do a lot of constitutional scholars because it is bad law. And here is a scoop for you too. 1 - over turning it will not outlaw abortion (bet you did not know that one). 2 - he president cannot over turn it (and she is not even running for the president, but the VP - why are you promoting her before the first ballot is cast?). YOu are rumor mongering and scare mongering but your boogey man is just casper.
Relative to education, Alaskan children are subsidized at the rate of $230.00 per child. Senator Obama’s state? $21.00 per child. Enough said.
End of quote
Indeed! Sounds like Obama is anti-education.
There is no smear campaign. Why is it that Republicans cry “smear” when someone “dares” to disagree with them? Pointing out the facts is not a smear, it’s pointing ou the facts.
End of quote
No smear? Have you seen the ads on Obama's children? No? You mean you have not been watching? Shame on you! Wait! There have been none! Shazaaam! The problem with spouting talking points is you do not understand why you are doing, the logic behind them, or the issues they relate to. So a refuation is easy, and the bot has no recourse but to either restate the talking points (as pretty much you did), start name calling, or go off to find more sheep to bleat "4 legs good 2 legs better" to.
Reply #8 from PolMach Forums Top

[quote who="lesterleon"]Point-By-Point Rebuttal . 2.          Yes, some candidates might run whether they believe they’re qualified or not.  It’s called opportunism, and Governor Palin is a prime example.  And the experience issue requires clarification.  The truth is, Governor Palin has no FEDERAL government experience.  Senator Obama is not a STATE Senator, either.  He works for the FEDERAL Government.  And comments about commanding the Alaska National Guard are, well, silly. 

Wow.  I honestly can't think that you believe that Obama having less than two years in office gives him federal experience that qualifies him enough to be president because by your standards he only has 175 days of federal experience and that would not be enough experience for anyone, according to your guidelines, to run the country.  Out of those official 175 days he has missed 2/3 of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings regarding Afghanistan.  He was also absent on an anti spy bill that he was sponsoring.  As a matter of record he's been absent from roll call in the Senate more times than he's been present during his time as US Senator.  Then the fact that over 100 times on voting on bills he has merely answered "present" doesn't instill a supreme vote of confidence on my part that his being in the Federal government has done much for his ability to lead and gives him an edge over ...well...anyone else running, including Ralph Nadar.

 

Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top

sheeeeit.

hopefully yall will live long enough to be around til they invent a working wayback machine thus enabling bhutto, allende, lincoln, kennedy in the company of hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of lesser known victims to help you appreciate the incredible difference between political exeution (painful and permanent for starters) and being interviewed as candidate for the office of vice-president of the united states.

i can't wait for the vp debate and your follow up article: "sarah palin loaded onto a cattle car headed straight to auschwitz where she's told to put her teeth und valuables in der bag und schower goot"

Reply #10 from PolMach Forums Top

Quoting kingbee,
sheeeeit.hopefully yall will live long enough to be around til they invent a working wayback machine thus enabling bhutto, allende, lincoln, kennedy in the company of hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of lesser known victims to help you appreciate the incredible difference between political exeution (painful and permanent for starters) and being interviewed as candidate for the office of vice-president of the united states.i can't wait for the vp debate and your follow up article: "sarah palin loaded onto a cattle car headed straight to auschwitz where she's told to put her teeth und valuables in der bag und schower goot"
End of kingbee's quote

I'm sorry.  Was any of your response written in English?  I'm having difficulty with deciphering exactly what you have said here. 

As far as the "execution" part goes in the title... it's a play on words.  Execute, like many words in the English language, has more than one meaning. 

Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top

kingbee - :rofl: XO :rofl:

 

For all the effort apparently going on up in Wasilla & Fairbanks to find the 'smoking gun' you'd think they could come up with something better than this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26695078

We really need to know about the 'lively debate' over a B&B ordinance?  In their mightily strained efforts to make the inane appear 'evil' and the ordinary appear 'unworthy,' they reveal for all to see their condescension, arrogance, stupidity and bias.  I would have no problem with such'investigative journalism' if we were getting the same level of drill-down on BO, but we're not - the particulars of his background have been largely glossed over in favor of superficial fluff or, worse, turning a blind eye.

Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top

A featured link on MSN's home page, no less.  (Edit button on fritz again)

Reply #13 from PolMach Forums Top

If it is a Barack Obama vs Palin matchup Palin looses every time to Baracks experience.  Yes Barack is a one term jr. senator, but he has been a sentor longer than Palin has been governor.  Obama deals with national budget and national issues, Palin deals with one of the smallest states issues.  Plus Obama was in the illinois legistor for 8 years so he has 11 years of senatorial experience vs Palin Governor and mayorial experience.  Gov and senator or about the same but state sentor trumps mayor of a city of 8000.

McCain however could in theory win the matchup against Obama if he argues correctly.  However what is more important than experience is judgement and McCains is terrible, voted for Iraq, against MLK day, admitedly knows nothing about the economy, and did the dumbest move in politics by picking an inexperienced running mate while running on the platform of experience.  I must admit McCain s still running a better campaign than Obama, any time a multi-millionair who owns 300 million dollars in beer factories who trades with communist countries, who doesn't know how much houses he has, whos vp husband is a criminal and wants to succede from the USA, can paint his opponent as an out of touch extreme elistist, who hates america, anyone who can do that must be doing something right.

IMO Obama has made the smartest judgement I have seen so far by choosing to not go to iraq and focus on afghanistan, an issue that actually matters.  McCain was for the surge, but under a president Obama there would be no war so no surge would matter.  I must admit it won't matter who is elected b/c advisors tell presidents what to do anywys.

Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top

Jmac8 -

You crack me up.  I'd rather have a man who doesn't need to know how many houses he has than one who's beholden to Tony Rezko for his.  Your evident ignorance of the beer business and international trade, not to mention Alaska politics, is laughable.

Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top

Yes Barack is a one term jr. senator, but he has been a sentor longer than Palin has been governor.
End of quote

Not including absenteeism?  If Obama had a REAL job, he would have been fired already. ;)

Reply #16 from PolMach Forums Top

Not including absenteeism? If Obama had a REAL job, he would have been fired already.
End of quote

 

McCain would have been fired long ago then

Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top

McCain would have been fired long ago then
End of quote

They all should be fired!