Rob, I'm sorry, but when I see nothing about the candidate that suggests she is anything other than what I've said she is - in essence, a cipher, catapulted to the national stage for McCain's political advantage (and appeasement to the extreme right wing of the GOP), coupled with a deliberate disparagement of anything resembling "Ivy League Elitism" as "Un-American," in so many words, yes, I think that's a problem, in all its panoply of colors. I think it's ignorant, I think it's widespread, and I think it lowers the bar for our country's political discourse. And I don't just say it, I say why. You may not like the argument, but your characterizing it as just "sloppy method" doesn't hold water, particularly when you've just lumped Lindsey Lohan in with anyone else who has a problem with Palin's candidacy. As I said, it's the same tactic employed by Spiro Agnew: you've characterized me, presumably, and anyone thinking like me, apparently, as "an effete corps of impudent snobs who characterize themselves as intellectuals." I don't know whether Lohan likes or dislikes Palin's candidacy, and frankly, I don't care. I know why I have a problem with it, and have said why. It is the very appeal to anti-intellectualism, in plain English, to supplanting a considered thought on foreign policy with a straight-faced posture of "No-Blink" and "we live next door," or any of the other ridiculously insipid thoughts coming from Palin, that I condemn. There were, and are, so many qualified candidates that would serve the country well, who come from your party, and who are women; but these were passed over to appease the most shortsighted, bigoted bunch of goons in our nation's history. Barry Goldwater utterly condemned their ascendancy, and he was right. With Goldwater, I condemn the lapping of it up, without any further consideration, by many ignorant people. You can dismiss me as an elitist asshole, smug and supercilious in my postings, or you can see that perhaps Goldwater had a point, and Palin exemplifies it.
You're apparently passing up McCain as well, then, as his budget and Obama's budget look very little different from one another? I also asked a question. To you, to Rob, to anyone who dismisses the article or its sentiments.
Northpoint - The article definitely captured your point, up to and including the speakers assumption that those who dont share his/her view or values is a knuckle dragging baboon. That is simply not true, and again... it is just as insulting and incorrect to dismiss the intelligence of someone that likes Palin as it is to falsely elevate those that like Obama to some pinnacle of intelligence. When Hollywood idiots like Lindsey Lohan and Barabara Streisand are touting Obama, I have a feeling liking him isnt a hard proof of intelligence. Frankly I happen to think Obama has inferior judgment and credentials to any of the four running and has received a pass on vetting because the press has bought into the Emporers New Clothes school of thought that says those that *dont* see his value are just stupid. I count Palins experience as a mayor as high value experience because of my own involvement in municipal government, and I want more people in DC with a clue what the guy at the dinner table with his family is thinking. If that bothers you, fine, dont agree, but if you want to classify me as stupid because you disagree, you lower yourself in the process. The fact that she was elected governor against entrenched opposition while Obama glided into DC because his opponent imploded in a sex scandal is further evidence Obama has yet to face a proper vetting. His close and recent ties to Bill Ayres and Tony Rezko and others are not signs of the superior judgment he claims to have, and that counts double for him because he is running against McCain, infinitely more experienced. Judgment is all Obama can try to argue. Prior to him becoming their only hope for the White House even most Democrats spoke of Obamas experience as pitiful compared to McCain... so his judgment has to appear solid. He provides hard evidence to the contrary. Again - Dont tell me you celebrate excellence while trying to get others to vote for the least qualified candidate for President. The inexperience is at the top of the Obama ticket. Electing electing a partyline senator to President doesnt foretell change from politics as usual, and voting a rookie to CnC in a violent time doesnt scream "excellence"... it screams "high risk gamble".
Rob, I don't think you're ignorant, and I don't think you're stupid. I think a good many others, are. Let me take just one element, and if I could, ask you to reply to what is literally said in the below fragment: Let me ask you directly. Is it reasonable, for any scenario under the sun, for Palin, Cindy McCain, the Fox commentator, presumably others (all saying so with a straight face, and serious intent) - is it reasonable to believe that simply because Alaska is next to Russia, this somehow gives Palin any kind of "training" whatsoever to deal with the prickly world of international relations? More generally, has it not been a part of GOP politics, say, since Spiro Agnew, at least, to look on a "Harvard Elite" - like John F. Kennedy, for instance - as somehow not really American, with the notion of "American" encapsuled in the opening strains to Copland's Fanfare for the Common Man? Has there not been a problem with the &^%$$^& ridiculous notion that somehow patrie lies in what the hell you call a frickin' french fry? I don't have a problem with the "common." I come from it. I do have a problem with what I sincerely feel I have seen, over the last great stretch of time, a culture that has turned more limited in its outlook, more mean-spirited, more cleaving between "American" and "not American," and Palin's candidacy exemplifies this profound shift, to me. She was foisted to the national stage at the end of an extreme right-wing gun, and such a thing does damage to our polity. This is my view, anyway. Bottom line, and a question: Goldwater also had a profound problem with this. Was he wrong?
The Article Tthe quote doesnt get past the first sentence without basing it's point on a false premise. Common in partisan rhetoric, but still a logical fallacy. No relevant experience? Perhaps he thinks she's running for Secretary of State or something, but her experience in government both as a governor and as a mayor in a small town would either one make her as capable of more than a Senator. Vice Presidents roles have varied dramatically from one administration to the next, and McCain wasnt looking for a Dick Cheney... because his own strengths differed from Bush. Look at the activities of the various VPs in your own lifetime for proof of their varied roles. LOL. What a magical pile of horse-shit. Applying the same standard... Obama is a basketball player that stumbled into a 13k job as a community organizer and is on the verge of stumbling into a bigger job than Palin. So the girl used scholarship pageants to help pay for college, did I miss the part where Obama cured cancer during his senior year? If having a great college resume was the ONLY indicator of future success we wouldnt have elections, we'd just take the guy with the highest GPA. The beauty queen comment IS just a sexist comment used to bolster a weak argument that's based on a false premise. It is safe to assume the writer wasnt exactly teetering on voting for McCain until Palin came along... so this is just a typical partisan hack job masquerading as journalism. Writer has a right to an opinion, but it's visibly skewed. ======== Re: Northpoints Questions for Me NPT SAID: Is it reasonable, for any scenario under the sun, for Palin, Cindy McCain, the Fox commentator, presumably others (all saying so with a straight face, and serious intent) - is it reasonable to believe that simply because Alaska is next to Russia, this somehow gives Palin any kind of "training" whatsoever to deal with the prickly world of international relations? I know in her interview with Gibson she merely answered his question after he brought up seeing Russia, and I doubt she considers "policy" experience... nor have I seen her personally claim so. I dont hold her responsible for what others say... and if she herself DID claim so (obviously it isnt policy experience) it would be no less full of shit than comments and claims made by the opposing campaign, some of which extend from the mouths of the candidates themselves. Long as we have the bullshit meter out... ...explain how the VP on the other side is not lying thru his teeth on the trail given that he has said multiple times that Obama is highly unqualified and now multiple times the he is extremely qualified. Is it "intellectually honest" to apply standards to the opposition that the home team gets a pass on? NPT SAID: More generally, has it not been a part of GOP politics, say, since Spiro Agnew, at least, to look on a "Harvard Elite" - like John F. Kennedy, for instance - as somehow not really American, with the notion of "American" encapsuled in the opening strains to Copland's Fanfare for the Common Man? Has there not been a problem with the &^%$$^& ridiculous notion that somehow patrie lies in what the hell you call a frickin' french fry? I'll defend everything a GOP Maryland Governor-turned-VP uttered when I was a kid if you'll do the same for a Democratic Governor from the same era. The one you get to play was seen on national TV barring blacks from the doors to a college. Let me know when you wanna do our George Wallace/Spiro Agnew debate. As for the french fries... I thought it was silly then too... so whomever you were listening to will have to defend themselves. Was it McCain or Palin? NPT SAID: I don't have a problem with the "common." I come from it. I do have a problem with what I sincerely feel I have seen, over the last great stretch of time, a culture that has turned more limited in its outlook, more mean-spirited, more cleaving between "American" and "not American," and Palin's candidacy exemplifies this profound shift, to me. She was foisted to the national stage at the end of an extreme right-wing gun, and such a thing does damage to our polity. This is my view, anyway. The Common Man Theme ROFL... politicians from every party have run on the common man theme since long before we were born. In the 1800s everyone tried to claim they'd been born in a log cabin, even if in reality that "cabin" had 20 or 30 servants working inside it in varying capacities. Politicians try to convey their association with those they are speaking to... and ridiculous symbolism is frequently the order of the day. Watch all footage of Obama and Biden speaking at local gatherings... note that they invariably have their sleeves rolled up. Why? Does anyone believe either's job required 10 minutes of heavy labor in the last decade? Did they not have enough staff and had to set up the stage personally? Naah... just the "common man" showmanship at work. Again: Intellectual Honesty? If you watched the 2004 DNC debates... for a while it looked like John Edwards and Wesley Clark were having a competition for who grew up in more modest means. The "Common man" thing is by no means a GOP invention. Clark and Edwards looked like contestants in the "I grew up a poor black child in Alabama" essay contest. Just happens it must be the GOP's year to play on the common man theme, although Biden has tried to play the same card a few times, he just doesnt resonate with voters because the idea that someone that's been in Congress that long being in touch with middle America just strikes most as BS. Again, intellectual honesty requires that you be similarly disgusted when either party does it, not just the one you don't like. Palin is Common? For the record, I want someone that has a handle on what the common man is thinking... not "a common man" (or in this case "woman"). Is everyone forgetting this is the governor of a state we're talking about? She rose to that role pretty damned fast in political terms... that is far from "common".
No no no, I am not at all suggesting anything of the sort. I was merely posting the poll as discussion. I am not one of those "down with whitey" whiners. I was merely stating how sad it is that some people would actually let that be a deciding factor for something as serious and sacred as their vote for the future of the country. And it's very true, you can't get an accurate number of people who feel that way because most would not admit it in public for shame or fear, it usually shows unconsciously in their actions. I would stand shoulder to shoulder with a klansman to fight for my country. I can always curse him later. I personally could care less who is a racist or not, but to think that some form of racism would be more important to some than the fact the we are all Americans, and we fight and die together, and always have, no matter your personal hang ups is sad. The future of everyone in the nation comes first...you are welcome to hate blacks, Hispanics, and anyone else where ever you want. but to possibly jeopardize the nation if you know it not to be the choice of logic based on some hang up that is in your mind, is well....just sad. I don't even hate racist. I actually feel sorry that they have such hate in their heart and no logical reason for it, just to hate. I would hate to die like that, because at the very last minute, before your last breath, it will all have been for nothing. Such a waste of life.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Colombian President Alvaro Uribe stated they look forward to working with Palin after the election.
Rob, the quoted paragraph specifically states "intellectual training," and this was the thrust of the article, so you're subtly changing the line of argument. Like the commentator, I am troubled not only by Palin's complete lack of training, but by her apparent lack of curiosity; "Ready" and "don't blink" mean nothing. Secondly, really? Her mayorship of a town of 6500 provides her prima facie better qualification than a U.S. Senator? By that reasoning, would the owner of the town's one gas station also be more qualified, because he's had "executive" experience? Ever been to Red Bluff, California? And I consider it just a tad hypocritical of folks to hammer Obama for his President run on so little tenure in the Senate, when Palin has been Governor as long as Obama has been running for the presidency. And on a case-by-case basis, I'd evaluate each one of them. Palin is Dan Quayle - a cipher, and a hired hand to simply garner a swath of the electorate. Well, not really. I'm aware you give little value to formal education, but to ignore Obama's Columbia U. honors education in International Relations, or his accomplishments at Harvard Law - top law student in the nation, President of the Harvard Law Review - is to ignore a significant difference between the two. Add to that that while he could have chosen an easy path to corporate plenitude, he did choose a life devoted to serving causes that mattered to him, and what he did brought relief to people who needed it. I don't consider the beauty queen comment sexist, but it is judgmental. Anyone remember Reagan, the actor, and Bedtime for Bonzo jokes? ======== Re: Northpoints Questions for Me He brought it up, because she said it previously, Cindy McCain said it previously, and Fox News said it previously, as a serious point. You should know this, I would think, since we covered it in a previous exchange: http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=9186258&postcount=26 And the problem is, no, she does consider this as bona fide experience when it comes to foreign policy. Now, it might not bother you that this woman couples such "experience" with off-the-hip foreign policy pronouncements, to include pre-emptive strikes and war with Russia, but it bothers the hell out of me. As with everything else I've seen, and in complete agreement with the writer of the article, she displays zero desire to untangle the complexities inherent to the world of international relations. In other words, Is spot on. No, it isn't honest to presume both sides aren't full of shit. Both sides are full of shit in this respect, and as we both know, this practice has been a part of the American landscape as long as I can remember. The slugfest of the primaries becomes the love fest of the general. You did happen to see the paeans given to McCain by Romney and Guiliani at the RNC, right? You remember, the fellas who trashed McCain during the primary, stuff like: http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/01/27/romney-attacks-mccain-on-mccain-leiberman/ And Guiliani's trashing McCain, generally, on his "conservative" credentials? It should also give you pause that this is what McCain had to say, debating (and trashing) Romney, in October of 2007: Sound familiar? It's magically O.K., now, for his running mate? Rob, if you think I am speaking of one line uttered by Agnew, and not of the sentiment expressed therein, we've missed each other entirely. The sentiment is what I speak to - it was expressed then, it is expressed now, it is the subject of the article, it is exemplifed by Palin's candidacy, and this is the essence of everything I've been discussing in this part of the thread. I consider both wrong, obviously, and this isn't a referendum on whether Agnew, a Republican, was better or worse than Wallace, a Democrat. I consider your hypothetical tit-for-tat a bit of game playing, to be honest. Not certain whether either McCain or Palin have used the term (though would guess at least McCain has, based on his anti-France stand - see below), just know its use by the people who hamstrung McCain into his VP choice. The folks screaming "Freedom Fries" are the folks who threatened a partisan civil war at the RNC if McCain picked Lieberman, his true choice. By way of background, this is the timbre of the idiocy behind it; again, it is the sentiment, and not the thing itself, which is astoundingly moronic (but sadly, taken seriously), in my opinion: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/11/politics/main543555.shtml As to McCain himself: It is this kind of arrogance that has marked the President's international posture, and it is woefully shortsighted, in my opinion. Yes, agreed, both parties play the theme. But only one party also seems to trash a distinguished education as somehow a marker for being "Un-American." If Obama's distinguished Columbia and Harvard education is a sign of his "elitism," Palin's bouncing around in 5 colleges, McCain's poor performance at the Academy, Bush's "C" GPA is a sign of "from the people." I find this moronic. I'm not a proselyte for Obama. Particularly since winning the nomination, he's proven himself to be just another politician, and I'm not happy with any choice out there. But I find Palin's selection the nadir in American politics, and, if "smarts" were all that mattered, I wouldn't mind someone in the White House who actually spoke the Queen's English with reasonable facility, know what I mean? I don't consider that a negative. Rob, we've both said it, I think, that these kinds of wheels only turn, and never get anywhere. I think Palin's a cipher, cannot for the life of me find any kind of reasonable justification for her selection beyond the political expediency, and you apparently feel the same for the Obama-Biden ticket. I've said my peace. Just a note - received a rep with the following comment: This is an example of what I'm talking about, Rob. When I served, I was ready and willing to die in the defense of my country. The poster is referring to my comments on reparations, apparently, and though I forget exactly what I said, I think I felt it somewhat hypocritical of my country to demand reparations of Germany, while ignoring what damage we caused as a result of our intervention in Vietnam. To me, love for one's country includes wanting it to do the right thing. Whether reparations are or are not the right thing (thinking on it, I seem to recall the issue for you came down to whether we formally lost, or not) someone telling a vet, whose ass was on the line as any other vet, and whose willingness to die in the defense of his country was unchecked, that he is a "disgrace to America" - well, this is precisely the point of my contributions here. I have seen far too much declaration of what is "American" and what "not American." And to the gutless little prick who left me the anonymous rep, fuck off. You don't know me well enough to presume anything regarding my character or my sense of honor - a threshold just a tad higher than leaving an anonymous rep on a web forum.
Heads of state say that about everyone new. It certainly does not imply endorsement or preference. They are looking forward to working with anyone that will help them keep control of their country from terrorist Opium growers in Afghanistan, and Cocaine traffickers in Columbia. Just about every Head of state around the world will say that they are looking forward to working with whomever is elected. It's about as general as sending a telegram saying "We are sorry for you loss". Doesn't mean that you actually liked the departed. Also, the one thing that is apparent is that some on this thread will support anyone as long as it means not supporting Obama or giving him any credit for anything at all (with statements like "did I miss the part where he cured cancer?"). I have never seen such anger and disgust for a candidate for no apparent reason. I did not support Omama just on GP. I actually listened to the issues, studied the resumes. Watched the speeches. Looked up the education and record of everyone involved. It seems that some of you did not do any of that just based on some of the ridiculous accusations and propaganda i see in this thread. Most of your are taking a 3 minute sound byte that you heard on TMZ, or the crap that is leaning so far right on the Conservative Newsletter (Yes I get it everyday), and posting it up like it is gospel. Hardly anyone discusses any issues based on Reference, government, and at least major news outlets. A few people here would rather pick a fight, than support their issue, and that troubles me. It shows that there is more to this election than the qualifications of the candidates. Many of you could care less what the qualifications are...why else would you ridicule and downplay them, and glorify mayor of a small town that no one had ever heard of before, as executive experience ? Get real. Anywhere else in the world the education and experience that Obama has would be welcomed with open arms, but here ion this thread it's made fun of because he didn't find a cure for the plague. What is wrong with you people ? No intelligent person can consider mayor of a town where the biggest problem is petty larceny, and drunken brawls qualifies anyone to do anything except run a bar. But if your only issue is "not the other guy" then mayor of Springfield is good enough for you to keep the fantasy that Mayor Quimby is qualified to command nuclear submarines and fix the economy with a suitcase full of cash. Ask yourself one question ? Why is Sarah Palin being kept away from reporters, and not talking to the press except for prewritten statements and speeches? It been a few weeks now. Even Dan Quayle got to field question every now and then....and most a little more taxing that, "Can you balance motherhood and the duties of the VP?" If that doesn't make everyone nervous, then you must have other reasons for not looking at both candidates objectively, even if it insults your own logic and intelligence. Who would vote for a candidate that can't talk to reporters ? The democratic party is not the holy grail and Barack Obama is not the holy savior, although some of you take great pride in sounding like racist idiots by saying that. But I'm not getting angry anymore with a 9pt lead int he polls. I suspect some of you in the final hour will post pictures of him with a tail. So be it. What I see here is not disagreement on the issues..It's hate.
I earlier asked Biz for specifics (twice, actually, and got nothing), so not hopeful here. Nevertheless, as far as I can tell, Reporters were banned from the meeting with Palin and Karzai (part of the McCain campaign's firewall around Palin generally, actually - god forbid a candidate for the vice presidency should be asked, you know, a question, and be expected to, you know, uh, answer), so I'd be curious to see a source for the above comment.
Actually, there were not banned. You are correct that they wanted to ban them, but at the very last minute they decided that they can't test their candidate without the media and let them in. I don't have a direct source to link, but I know because I saw the meeting on CNN last night showing her talking with Karzai then panning over to the back of the room showing all the media that was crammed in trying to ask questions and take pictures.... Edit: some of the news is still stating that reporters were banned, but I guess it's all in how you look at it. The media is stating that "pool" reporters were allowed in but no "print" reporters were allowed......
are they worried that she might sound stupid? If that is the case why are they not worried about McCain say something stupid?
I actually am on CNN and Fox all day. They said at the last minute they allowed one producer in with his photographer for 30 seconds. No one was allowed to ask questions. This is unheard of. I have never seen a candidate running for office that didn't take every piece of camera time available. I have never seen a candidate that did not, will not, and that the party will not let answer questions. When I saw Obama in vegas, not only did he take questions, he stayed around with us "regular people" and answered our questions for quite some time. Joe bidens problem is that he talks too much. I can't believe that people who support her do not see this, or somehow try to justify it. It is unheard of.
Northpoint - My schedule at the moment doesnt include time for a point by point (damn these exchanges are getting long... mine as well). I will mention that if I held education in contempt I would not have worked my way thru college despite not having the benefit of someone else to pay for it, nor would my first wife hold an MBA and my second wife be a dissertation away from a doctorate and hold a masters. Education is a great thing, but I dont accept as a replacement for integrity, experience, or accomplishemnt... and history is full of examples of people who transcend their own lack of educational creds. I apparently hold lawyers in much lower esteem than many, but working with them in the courts for the last decade has taken a little of the luster off that group. I know you've probably worked with them and may hold a different opinion, but tho many great men have been attorneys, the profession seems to draw people of base character in greater numbers these days. Being a lawyer isnt in my opinion a sign someone is bad, it just isnt proof theyre good. I'll also mention that Palin is still running for VP. You can tell me Obama is more qualified if you want and I'll still think I'd rather have her there for reasons I've stated regarding the difference I see in fundamental positions on some issues and such... but bottom line I still hold the guy running for the top slot to a higher standard than the one runniing for VP... and I infinitely prefer the top of our ticket to Obama. =====
BTW - I assume you guys have been hearing about the Biden gaffes LOL, He has always had that talent. In the case of disagreeing publicly with his own campaigns stances on several positions and rebuking their commercials labeling McCain "dis-honorable"... he'd better get used to feeling this way. He has opinions based on years of experience and he's subject to rebuke by a guy with a fraction of his tenure. Bidens gonna explode or bite his tongue in half before its over. God help him if they win. BIDEN AS AN INTELLECTUAL I liked the new interview where he talked about the disparagingly about others not knowing history (speaking to Katy Couric on camera) and then commenced to talk about when the stock market crashed in '29 President Roosevelt acted... he got on the TV and addressed the nation, etc etc... Roosevelt wasnt President at the time of the crash and there was no television. Remind me again that Palin's the one making misinformed pronouncements with certainty. If they win, SNL will replace Bush mangling the English language with Biden mangling US history. === BRIDGE TO NOWHERE UPDATE Biden and Obama have both ripped Palin time after time on the Bridge to Nowhere... wasteful pork, "a bridge too far", etc. Because nobody in the mainstream seems to enjoy calling the Obama crew on their bullshit it has apparently taken a while for anyone to notice that both Biden and Obama voted for the bill approving the bridge they seem to consider a prime example of wasteful excess. FACT: Biden AND Obama Preferred that Bridge over Bridges Katrina Destroyed Before suggesting it they actually supported the larger funding bill and the bridge just happened to be a part of it and they could not possibly have voted against the otherwise worthy projects, consider the following. Before voting on the final form of the bill they voted DOWN an amendment by put forth by Senator Coburn that solely and specifically would have diverted the Alaska bridge funds to Louisanna to rebuild two bridges taken out by Hurricane Katrina. See Coburn Amendment (it is SA 2165... any other proposed amendments are on that page too) CNN Story Link ROLL CALL VOTE where Biden and Obama voted against diverting "bridge to nowhere" funds to Katrina bridges CNN ARTICLE: Apparently the word was out and they couldnt avoid telling on 'em The link to the entire article is here. It continues beyond the point I posted to detail Bidens own earmarks for a bridge within his own constituency that is not crucial but he has the pull to get worked on. In light of his comments about Palin and pork, especially the projects he made fun of... he has the same stuff on his own earmarks... a functional bridge, an opera house repair (opera patrons cant afford fundraisers?), a waterpark (oh, theres a basic piece of infrastructure) etc.... He's gonna nail himself if he goes after her again on the bridge HE supported in favor of helping the Katrina victims.
Yes, they were banned, and it isn't open to interpretation, or "how you look at it," as you say, Firegirl. You either allow news reporters in, or you do not. I'd second Hmansfield's understanding. They initially banned them, then, even when they said it was a "miscommunication" that resulted in the initial banning, an extremely limited set of print reporters were only allowed in for literally a matter of seconds, with no questions to be answered. They certainly didn't "miscommunicate" that from the start they wanted pictures taken for the photo op, but sort of uh, forgot the longstanding practice of allowing print reporters in so that the candidate may openly respond to questions put to him or her. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/bal-te.palin24sep24,0,3619473.story?page=2 It is inconceivable to me that anyone does not see this for what it is, a blatant firewall to protect Palin from any kind of transparent scrutiny. It has gone on since the RNC outing, and I find that unconscionable.
The green quote is itself evidence of racism, as you continue to be the only one injecting skin color into the debate. The red quote is a strawman argument. You attribute an action to us we've neither suggested nor done for the purpose of showing that we hold stupid views as proved by actions we perform only in your imagination. You have a vivid imagination, but a limited facility for logic. The blue quote is a figment of your own making... and I've tired of reading accusations of hate that evidence someone projecting their own racist leanings onto those that have not evidenced any. Again you denigrate your own case with this trash... so you now go on the "ignore list" with the other trolls that cant form an intelligent argument. Tell pizzman hi for me. I see no reason to read (much less reply to) unsupported personal blather which only prove you are the only racist in the thread. Adios Harold.
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's transportation department has completed a $25 million gravel road leading to the site of a bridge that Palin, as John McCain's vice presidential candidate, now boasts that she stopped, so as to save taxpayers money. The road was built with federal tax dollars. Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein said the 3.2-mile road will be useful for road races, hunters and possibly future development. But with no bridge to serve it, that's probably about it. "I think it will be good for recreational things like a 5K and a 10K," Weinstein said. "And instead of people walking through brush, it may be used for hunting in the area."
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/whats_the_full_story_on_the_bridge.html Good time line of the 'bridge to nowhere'
Rob, I'd disagree. http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=7931786&postcount=143 Tip of the iceberg, only. Under the guise of having an honest problem with the man and his policies, I've seen a mountain range of the kinds of stuff Harold is rightly pointing out. For the record, I'm white (with some American Indian), and, no, I never felt guilty in appraising Obama's candidacy - though at least one member has insisted, repeatedly, this is the only reason I will have supported him.