McCain’s ‘Hail Sarah’ Pass

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Momtothree @ 09/03/2008 8:46:55 AM

    Sarah Palin began her campaign by putting her five children, and her future grandchild, albeit hidden under the babys blanket, right on stage next to her. She continously talks about her son in the military and her down syndrome baby, using these two children in a blatent attempt to further herself and the Republican Party. Then when news of the pregnancy of her unwed 17 year old hits, she, and the Republicans, spin around and claim that " children are off limit". Well, which is it, are you using your children in the campaign or not? Or is the truth that you are using the children when it works to your advantage, and then demanding privacy for them when it does not. Very disengenious, and very uncaring about the lives of your children. If this woman would use her children this way, what won't she do.

    • Posted By: bojack27 @ 09/03/2008 11:50:05 AM

      I wonder motherofthree if you was going for an interview and the only thing that the person hiring you pays attention to is your three children would you think that was fair? What does your three children have to do with your past performance in your chosen career? So if I was to tell you that your opinion doesn't matter since you have three children and there is no way that you should or could make an informed opinion on the issues since your children have been your main concern all of your life and you should stay home a let the men make all of the decisions .... because this doesn't concern a motherofthree..... I think you would be very offended....

      If you are going to go after someone then go after their policies not their children... or maybe we should vett the children of the candidates and not the person themselves..... your choice.... but as a woman you should be ashamed to assume that Sarah Palin is flaunting her children out for political gain.... If she would have left her children at home then you would have said that she is a bad mother..... No one has said anything when alll the other candidates who have brought their children with them to show solidarity and oneness.....

    • Posted By: Clari-fides @ 09/03/2008 11:46:12 AM

      I think if you do any research, you will find that she had the support of her family before making this decision to run as VP. I am a mom of nine with a child with cancer and I am disgusted to hear about how she is isn't taking the "proper" care of her children coming from total strangers as yourself . As a woman shame on all of you who would go on the attack of a 17 year old, and do you truly think that perhaps it would have been better to "hide" the Down Syndrome baby?

  • Posted By: Omaar @ 09/03/2008 11:46:14 AM

    Mccain did Not Vet This Woman at all !!!

    Source: www.thenewyorktimes.com

    Note: The surprises, however, continued Monday when it was revealed that Palin's 17-year-old daughter was pregnant, that the governor had hired a lawyer to defend her in an ethics investigation, that she attended meetings of a fringe party calling for Alaskan independence and that her husband had been arrested for drunken driving.

    Big Note: Ms. Clark said that Ms. Palin???s Husband, Todd, was a Former Member of the Party.

    Big Note: After checking the party???s archives, Ms. Clark said that she could find no documentation that Governor Palin had been a member of the party.

    She said Ms. Palin ATTENDED the party???s 1994 and 2006 Conventions and provided a Video-Taped Address as governor to the 2008 convention
    --------------------

    You were surprised, sure. But what about McCain?

    September 2, 2008, 10:32 pm

    Alaska Party Official Says Palin Was Not a Member
    By The New York Times

    The chairwoman of an Alaskan political party that advocates a vote on the state???s succession from the union said Tuesday that she had been mistaken when she said Gov. Sarah Palin was a member of the group.

    A front-page story in The New York Times on Tuesday and articles in other news media reported that Ms. Palin was a member of the Alaska Independence Party for two years in the 1990???s.

    Big Note: The information in the Times article was based on a statement issued Monday night by Lynette Clark, the party???s chairwoman, who said that Ms. Palin joined the party in 1994 and in 1996 changed her registration to Republican.

    On Tuesday night, Ms. Clark said that her initial statement was incorrect and had been based on erroneous information provided by another member of the party whom she declined to identify. The McCain campaign also disputed the Times report, saying that Ms. Palin had been registered consistently as a Republican.

  • Posted By: ilovemykids @ 09/02/2008 11:27:24 PM

    ICYEYES800: First of all, educated people know how to spell...second of all, who do you think you are, GOD? How on earth do you know how any person would react to the news that they are going to have a child who has Down's Syndrome? I have NEWS FOR YOU--supporting a woman's right to choose does not mean you have had or would have an abortion. I support pro-choice causes and would never personally have an abortion. Asserting that Michelle Obama and her husband would choose to have an abortion says much more about YOU and your irrational, silly judgments. Shame on you!

    • Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 09/03/2008 9:43:49 AM

      Obama's comment that he wouldn't want his girls "punished" with an unwanted pregnancy because they had engaged in premarital sex support the conclusion that he would support getting them an abortion.

      • Posted By: summer4077 @ 09/03/2008 10:03:15 AM

        No, it just shows that he supports their ability to at least have OPTIONS.

        • Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 09/03/2008 10:53:51 AM

          It's the word "punished" that reveals how he feels about it. He gave the baby that label, not them.

          Because it would be a "punishment" for his daughters and not for him, it also suggests that he wouldn't be there for them the way Gov. Palin is for her daughter.

  • Posted By: vindido @ 09/03/2008 10:24:01 AM

    Not that I really want to introduce facts into these fine diatribes I mreading on this blog site,but obama Hussein is chairman of a sub committee dealing with the war in Afghanistan.Does any one know when he last convened a meeting of this committee?Or has he been too busy the last two years of his not quite three years in the Senate running for President?And the national media is criticizing Palins lack of experience?What a joke.They are i nfull panic mode

  • Posted By: jon-jon alter @ 09/02/2008 5:14:30 PM

    How about a female supporter of the man above the fray candidate barry:

    ==========
    Posted By: patty_pata @ 09/02/2008 11:52:21 AM

    Comment: American wake up and donot elect this pair please!!!. Do you want a clueless VP who will promote how their 17 year olds should have sex and babies.
    ===============

    Why is there never included a reason WHY people should vote FOR barry?

    • Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 09/02/2008 5:30:22 PM

      Why is she worried about electing a woman whose daughter is pregnant and not worried about the example it would set for our teenagers to elect a man who used cocaine for years?

      • Posted By: THE RAVEN @ 09/02/2008 5:53:04 PM

        Why should we vote for mccracker and a woman whose daughter can't keep her panties up? And Obama didn't use coke for yerars, either. You must be thinking of mccracker's dope-stealing wife.

        • Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 09/03/2008 10:17:13 AM

          Go read Obama's book again. He admits using cocaine for years. This fact was reconfirmed in an interview by a Chicago reporter who questioned Obama's representation during an earlier campaign that he had only experimented with mj as a teenager.

        • Posted By: neocon @ 09/02/2008 6:23:43 PM

          So, your a sexist as well as a racist?

    • Posted By: Zig Zag @ 09/02/2008 5:27:30 PM

      Sure - because Obama has integrity. McCain, on the other hand, sold his for a chance at the White House. Take a look at the latest:

      John McCain has claimed that he believes there is a special place in hell for Tucker Eskew and the others who were behind the push-poll that implanted the idea in S.C. voters' minds in 2000 that he had fathered an illegitimate black child, but that sure didn't stop him from hiring Eskew to help prepare Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

      • Posted By: ludicrous @ 09/02/2008 8:55:03 PM

        "Obama has integrity"

        How about an example? A present day proven to exist in life example as regards politics.

        • Posted By: Zig Zag @ 09/02/2008 9:14:25 PM

          He refuses to call Sarah Palin a hyprocrit after her daughter got knocked up by her redneck boyfriend. I think that is pretty good.

          Now how about you providing one for McCain?

      • Posted By: jon-jon alter @ 09/02/2008 5:35:49 PM

        ...same thing...nothing concrete about barry...attacks toward the opposition/poster.

        • Posted By: Zig Zag @ 09/02/2008 6:06:51 PM

          If you say it enough, maybe it will come true. Moron.

    • Posted By: ludicrous @ 09/02/2008 8:53:19 PM

      Because there are none. He can only be compared to.

  • Posted By: Zig Zag @ 09/02/2008 5:22:27 PM

    And it just keeps getting better and better:

    Three months before she was thrust into the national political spotlight, Gov. Sarah Palin was asked to handle a much smaller task: addressing the graduating class of commission students at her one-time church, Wasilla Assembly of God.
    Her speech in June provides as much insight into her policy leanings as anything uncovered since she was asked to be John McCain's running mate.
    Speaking before the Pentecostal church, Palin painted the current war in Iraq as a messianic affair in which the United States could act out the will of the Lord.
    "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 [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God," she exhorted the congregants. "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."
    Religion, however, was not strictly a thread in Palin's foreign policy. It was part of her energy proposals as well. Just prior to discussing Iraq, Alaska's governor asked the audience to pray for another matter -- a $30 billion national gas pipeline project that she wanted built in the state. "I think God's will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that," she said.


    • Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 09/02/2008 5:28:55 PM

      Christians often pray that what they are doing fulfills God's plan, as distinguished from their own plans.

      Apparently you do not attend church regularly, because this is in fact an expression of recognizing the fallibility of humans who think they know what God's plan is. We only see through the glass darkly....

      "Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right."

      Amen!

      • Posted By: Zig Zag @ 09/02/2008 6:05:05 PM

        I am a Christian and I do go to church - but I am also a firm believer in a clear separation of church and state.

        Is it God's plan for us to invade Iraq - I don't think so. It was good ole Dubba that got us into this mess by listening to what he thought was God telling him what to do.

        And what about the terrorists on 9/11? They would tell you that they were following God's plan.

        God and religion have no place in foreign policy. Some of the greatest acts of terror and violence have been done in the name of God and religion.

        We should keep the praying focused on the well being of our troops, as well as the Iraqi's we are supposed to be helping.

        • Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 09/03/2008 10:15:04 AM

          You would not want the president to pray before making a decision like going to war, and ask that God's plan be revealed, that His will be done, on earth as it is in heaven?

    • Posted By: griffin1 @ 09/02/2008 5:24:43 PM

      I'm sure there's more to come, McCain isn't so bright

      • Posted By: Zig Zag @ 09/02/2008 5:30:03 PM

        It's going to be a fun-filled September !!!

  • Posted By: jon-jon alter @ 09/02/2008 6:14:02 PM

    Here's a jonjon allstar:
    =================
    Posted By: THE RAVEN @ 09/02/2008 17:53:04

    Comment: Why should we vote for mccracker and a woman whose daughter can't keep her panties up? And Obama didn't use coke for yerars (sic), either. You must be thinking of mccracker's dope-stealing wife.
    ===========================================

    • Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 09/03/2008 10:11:02 AM

      Obama himself said in his book that he used "blow" for years. He reconfirmed this in an interview with a Chicago reporter who questioned the inconsistency with his book when Obama tried to represent his "drug" history as mere experimentation with mj during a campaign.

      Deny, deny deny, as much as you like, it is Obama's own words that support the facts.

    • Posted By: imposter @ 09/03/2008 2:20:42 AM

      Raven must be a barrybot and an alter and fineman fan.

    • Posted By: Zig Zag @ 09/02/2008 6:44:30 PM

      O.K., I'll admit, this one was a little harsh - even for me.

  • Posted By: jon-jon alter @ 09/02/2008 6:15:51 PM

    Another jonjon disciple:
    =====================
    Posted By: BobbyNY @ 09/02/2008 6:12:49 PM

    So this is a last ditch effort to bring an ex-beauty queen to possibly occupy the highest seat in the land? Who's next Mary Poppins?

    =================================

    • Posted By: Zig Zag @ 09/02/2008 6:43:21 PM

      If John McCain thought it would get him elected, he would have picked Coco the Clown, Whatever scruples and integrity the man had were lost a while ago. He has sold his soul for a shot at the White House.

      • Posted By: ludicrous @ 09/02/2008 8:48:55 PM

        And Obama?

        • Posted By: Zig Zag @ 09/02/2008 9:11:23 PM

          Obama has integrity. Any other questions - ludicrous (by the way, your name is quite appropriate).

          • Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 09/03/2008 10:08:27 AM

            What integrity?

            Obama is the unnamed "political candidate" referred to in a section of the indictment that accused Rezko of orchestrating a scheme in which a firm hired to handle state teacher pension investments first had to pay $250,000 in "sham" finder's fees (Note: he was found guilty). From that money, $10,000 was donated to Obama's successful run for the Senate in the name of a Rezko business associate, according to the court filing and the source.

            Rezko, who was part of Obama's senatorial finance committee, also is accused of directing "at least one other individual" to donate money to Obama and then reimbursing that individual -- in possible violation of federal election law (Note: he was found guilty).

            Obama donated more than $44,000 in Rezko-linked contributions to charity last year, including the $10,000 donation mentioned in the court filing.

            That money was donated to Obama by Joseph Aramanda, a Glenview businessman and Rezko associate who, sources have said, is the ???Individual D??? prosecutors say received the $250,000 in finder???s fees demanded by Rezko. Individual D did nothing to earn those fees, according to prosecutors.

            The $10,000 contribution to Obama was given in Aramanda???s name on March 5, 2004, records show. While Obama???s camp has said the senator did not know Aramanda, Obama???s office hired Aramanda???s son as an intern in 2005, at Rezko???s urging.

            http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/749138,obama20web.article

  • Posted By: BobbyNY @ 09/02/2008 7:05:47 PM

    Barack Obama is one of the smartest politicians in the last 50 years to run for the presidential office. When you look at the current president, makes you smile. His compassion and leadership skills will lead this country to prosperity. Example, look how he ran his campaign? The envy of all the compatriots. Based on performance and example, why is there even a question? John McCain, even though he served his country well, was captured and tortured for five years. Must have an impact on judgement, so we can't blame him for picking Sarah. What we can blame him for , is refusing to admit when he is wrong. Jonjon....you may go to bed now.

    • Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 09/03/2008 10:05:48 AM

      Compassion? Have you checked Obama's position on providing medical care for babies born alive after an induced delivery/late term abortion?

    • Posted By: ludicrous @ 09/02/2008 8:46:43 PM

      "Example, look how he ran his campaign?"

      Well, let's, shall we?

      No old Washington!
      Biden 35 yrs in Washington

      Transcender of Race!
      Allowed the only democratic president in 28 years, who has championed civil rights throughout his career, to be labeled a racist. Never once stood up and said hey I"m half-white. Preferred to use his typical white women grandmother to equate with NO NO NO GODDAM AMERICA, the US of KKK A. wright. Has not reached out to the balck community as Sen Clitnon did to her supporters.

      Above the fray!
      Allowed his surrogates (including the DNC/MSM) to unfairly attack his opponent and said nothing to stop it.

      The Great Unifier!
      Hired Patty Solis Doyle. Needed the people he trashed to do his job since it seems he can't. DIdn't reach out to President Clinton until he needed him. Will allow Senator Clinton to be blamed for not "unifying the party".

      The Patriot!
      Refused to see our maimed and injured troops in Landstuhl. Refused to honor the flag in Iowa. Talks about his "grandfather the WWII veteran" and never refers to him by name. (Nor the rest of his family except the father who abandoned him for another white woman.)

      The Man of Integrity!
      Lied repeatedly about the money he got from Rezko, lied about knowing about Wright, lied about having released his tax records when he hadn't...

      CHANGE!!!
      Yes. This he has done superbly! Public financing, abortion, FISA, handguns...

      • Posted By: imposter @ 09/03/2008 2:04:04 AM

        Funny how they discount even facts. Sad opinions? Obvious facts. Says alot when the barrybots don't even know Biden has been in Washington for 35 years, that barry hired solis doyle and that he didn't visit US troops in Landstuhl.

      • Posted By: Zig Zag @ 09/02/2008 8:52:10 PM

        More right wing propaganda. You sure sent a lot of time of this, too bad it's all wrong.

        • Posted By: ludicrous @ 09/02/2008 9:17:26 PM

          "ALL wrong?"

          Shows you're just an instigator and don't know a thing about Obama.

          • Posted By: Zig Zag @ 09/02/2008 9:24:14 PM

            Guess what - you'll all wrong again (not much of a surprise there).

            Your big long post is nothing more than your sad opinions. Not really worth the effort to respond.

            Now if you ever come up with something meaningful to say, I'll be happy to give you a meaningful response.

  • Posted By: Cincinnati Rick @ 09/02/2008 9:34:58 PM

    Only children and the childish will blindly assume that change is for the better. Things can get worse. Weimar Germany was a shambles and then they had someone take charge and move the country "forward." Czarist Russia was in need of change...they got it!

    Obama is an empty suit who is lost without his teleprompter...Hillary cleaned his clock in their so-called "debates" and then he ducked John McCain and any forum where he might have to think on his feet.

    So far from bringing people together, Obama has never had the courage or character to break with his party line or the interest groups therein. McCain fought Bush and Rumsfeld publicly over Iraq and worked with Democrats against the Bush administration on numerous issues: campaign finance, immigration reform, Anwar, Guantanamo, to name a few. When asked about his record, Obama cites working with Dick Lugar against nuclear nonproliferation. My, such boldness ! You don't know whether to laugh or cry listening to such inane drivel. McCain's a man...Obama is a boy.

    To be sure, McCain is too old. It's a pity he got savaged by Bush and Rove back in 2000. But better late than never. And far better for the country that the checks and balances operate by not having the Executive and Legislative branches in the hands of ideologues of the same persuasion. An unchecked Nancy Pelosi is the best argument I know against Obama.

    So McCain made a political move with Palin to grab some of the "change" and "just plain folks" mantra from Obama and make obvious that this will not be a third term for Bush. It is amusing to hear the arguments that she is not "ready on day one." Of course, she's not! But what is more frightening: the contingent possibility that she will be called upon to be ready or the absolute certainty that Obama would be, if he were elected? Any sane person would rather take their chances with a Vice President learning on the job than a President who had to!

    • Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 09/03/2008 9:57:56 AM

      Actually Obama did break with the party on an issue recently.

      Obama will vote against democratic positions if it falls within his pay-to-play pattern of political favors. His FISA vote was payback for all those communications companies who have supported his campaign with big $$$, giving them retroactive immunity for violating their customer's Constitutional and civil rights.

    • Posted By: ludicrous @ 09/02/2008 9:43:20 PM

      Obama doesn't deign to talk to the poor huddled unwashed masses. He needs an open air stadium and CNN to beam him to the WORLD!

      • Posted By: marksgershenson @ 09/03/2008 7:36:19 AM

        http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/02/by_juliet_eilperin_when_alaska.html

  • Posted By: Skallywag @ 09/02/2008 1:04:34 PM

    As an American, I am embarrassed and insulted by the lot of you. I sit here and read these comments, many ranting and raving about why the other guy is no good. But not one of you people has ever stood up and said "This is it, this is all you have to offer?" to both political parties. It is because of people like you, who refuse to challenge the political machine to give us better candidates (which is the only way we can change the quality of our elected officials) that the leadership of this great nation will remain mired in the swamp of mediocity for many, many years to come. You extole the miniscule virtues of your candidate soley to point out that the other guy is wrong or bad or evil or whatever you decide to ramble about - as long as it is negative about the other guy. I for one find both positives and negatives in both candidates, asi I have stated before, and as a veteran, I understand leadership. If I were still on active duty, I would be very nervous to have either of these two men as my CO. As a PFC in the Army or Marines, you have no choice of who your CO is going to be, but as voting citizens, we do. So why, just WHY did you pick these two to compete for the Presidency? you setteld for hot dogs when we need new york strip steaks.

    • Posted By: LudwigVanBeet @ 09/02/2008 1:14:28 PM

      Skallywag; what choice did we have? All we can do is promote the best one which is 100% OBAMA.

      • Posted By: Skallywag @ 09/02/2008 1:38:18 PM

        NO, we don't have to accept either one of these two wieners, demand the steaks! Voice you dissatisfaction, write to both parties and let them know, BHO and MCC are NOT GOOD ENOUGH! What choice did we have? Reminds me of the recalcitrant sailor standing in front of the corpsman with a bout of the clap - "I didn't really have a choice doc, it was the blonde or the brunette and they both said they were clean." How stupid can you get...

        • Posted By: LudwigVanBeet @ 09/02/2008 1:44:28 PM

          Well Moron , pick someone and we promise to vote for him or her Show us how to do it Skullwag.

          • Posted By: Skallywag @ 09/02/2008 1:58:22 PM

            I was wrong in thinking that maybe someone would hear and understand. Your blind support for your candidate is admirable, but could be detrimental in the long run. There was a candidate in each party that was more qualified than either of these two individuals. BHO and MCC are pretty close to scraping the bottom of the barrel on both sides. As for naming names, that is part of the exercise - for you to utilize the brain that exists within your skull to evaluate all the primary candidates and figure it out. Like every other BHO supporter, you don't want to work for it, you want it handed to you.

            • Posted By: olderwiser @ 09/02/2008 2:52:55 PM

              Thank you, Skallywag. We are properly admonished.

              • Posted By: olderwiser @ 09/02/2008 3:05:58 PM

                I would respectfully submit that voting for president has nothing to do with intelligence, or whatever it is that you say we lack, Skallywag. We only have two choices. We can spend months in the library studying, or just flip a coin outside the voting booth, or vote for gender, party, and all the other things involved, and then we get another president. We all have the same power. One vote. Being smart has no advantage over being dumb there at the ballot. Some do it because they like the one they voted for and some prefer to do it against whichever one they disliked. There are your positives and your negatives. The best deal is that we all get to vote. The smart, the dumb and the ugly. No flies on that.

                • Posted By: Skallywag @ 09/03/2008 9:53:24 AM

                  You bring out very valid points. The issue I have with the entire process is that it is no longer a true election, based upon a candidate's ability to lead this country. It is now nothing more than an overblown popularity contest with people voting not for the leadership of a candidate, but only voting to go against the guy you don't like. Sometimes it may be better to vote for an individual for the good of the country, whether we like him or not (hence the term vote intelligently). I like to think that I have voted that way, though what a candidate says versus what he does once elected are two different things. However, I will not vote for a liar.

    • Posted By: Zig Zag @ 09/02/2008 2:10:21 PM

      Your an idealist but not a realist. Perhaps we can change the parties long-term, but today, in this moment, these are the choices we have. You have to choose. To do nothing, or try something that will be ineffective for this election, is simply a frustrating lesson in futility.

  • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 09/02/2008 11:24:19 PM

    Interesting. Both ASK PLUS' query[asking why I was ''feeling sad today''], and my 6:30 PM reply[as well as my earlier 8:37 AM for Sept.02], focusing on the federal Operation BOARD GAMES and its relationship to the Obama campaign have vanished into thin air. It could be mere coincidence.

    But this is not the first time that this has occurred while on NEWSWEAK.[which otherwise,as many can instantly tell you,posts nearly everything else I opine upon]. What is it about this investigation and the ties of many of its defendants and indictees to his campaign which extend far beyond Rezko that NEWSWEAK does not want you to know about? Here then,is your homework lesson for today.

    Who is Allison Davis? What cabinet position does Obama envision for this person?

    While the MSM wastes time on Palinian ''DUIs'' and ''fishing without a licence'',it strangely ignores one of the largest federal state corruption cases in modern American history,in Chicago,involving one Barack H.Obama.

    Why would this be........?

    www.opednews.com Apr.04 2008. ''Operation BOARD GAMES For Slumlords''.

    • Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 09/03/2008 9:45:49 AM

      Obama is the unnamed "political candidate" referred to in a section of the document that accuses Rezko of orchestrating a scheme in which a firm hired to handle state teacher pension investments first had to pay $250,000 in "sham" finder's fees. From that money, $10,000 was donated to Obama's successful run for the Senate in the name of a Rezko business associate, according to the court filing and the source.

      Rezko, who was part of Obama's senatorial finance committee, also is accused of directing "at least one other individual" to donate money to Obama and then reimbursing that individual -- in possible violation of federal election law.

      Obama donated more than $44,000 in Rezko-linked contributions to charity last year, including the $10,000 donation mentioned in the court filing.

      That money was donated to Obama by Joseph Aramanda, a Glenview businessman and Rezko associate who, sources have said, is the ???Individual D??? prosecutors say received the $250,000 in finder???s fees demanded by Rezko. Individual D did nothing to earn those fees, according to prosecutors.

      The $10,000 contribution to Obama was given in Aramanda???s name on March 5, 2004, records show. While Obama???s camp has said the senator did not know Aramanda, Obama???s office hired Aramanda???s son as an intern in 2005, at Rezko???s urging.

      http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/749138,obama20web.article

      • Posted By: pearsoncrz @ 09/03/2008 9:50:59 AM

        So what did Rezko get out of it?

        Obama said, "The one area where [Rezko] did have a political interest in Springfield that emerged - this is all pre-Blagojevich - was gaming. He was one of the minority investors in Rosemont. That's one area where he could have asked me for favors, but did not, partly because I was clearly on record as being opposed. I was a gaming opponent as [Sun-Times Springfield Bureau Chief] Dave McKinney will recall.

        http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/844597,transcript031508.article

        Oh sure, Obama said he was against gambling, but how did he vote?

        On Nov. 14, 1997, he backed legislation to permit riverboat casinos to operate even when the boats were dockside. The measure, pushed by the gambling industry and fought by church groups whose support Obama was seeking, passed with two "yeas" to spare -- including Obama's. He wasn't exactly up front with his constituency, telling a church group on a 1998 campaign questionnaire that he was "undecided" about whether he backed an expansion of riverboat gambling. The senator who led the opposition to the gambling measure, Republican Todd Sieben, said "He was obviously paying attention to this vote. It was a major, major issue in the state, and it was a long debate," Sieben said. "The inadvertent 'Oops, I missed the switch' -- I'd be kind of skeptical of that."
        http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-obamavotes24jan24,0,4956975,full.story?coll=la-home-center

        It wasn't the only key vote that Obama said he voted the wrong way by "mistake" -- Barack Obama angered fellow Democrats in the Illinois Senate when he voted to strip millions of dollars from a child welfare office on Chicago's West Side. But Obama had a ready explanation: He goofed. "I was not aware that I had voted no," he said that day in June 2002, asking that the record be changed to reflect that he "intended to vote yes."

        On March 19, 1997, Obama announced he had fumbled an election-reform vote the day before, on a measure that passed 51 to 6: "I was trying to vote yes on this, and I was recorded as a no," he said.

        On March 20, 1997, Obama voted "present" on a key telecommunications vote.
        HEY CWA members, WAKE UP and smell the TRUTH ABOUT OBAMA.

        He stood on March 11, 1999, to take back his vote against legislation to end good-behavior credits for certain felons in county jails. "I pressed the wrong button on that," he said.

        He was the lone dissenter on Feb. 24, 2000, against 57 yeas for a ban on human cloning. "I pressed the wrong button by accident," he said.


  • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 09/02/2008 11:29:40 AM

    Well it seems the democrats are not happy with any thing and will go to the ends of the earth to discredit people. Sarah palin???s 17y/o daughter is pregnant but so is 2 million other unmarried teens in America! But because its Mrs. Palin???s kid that makes her a bad parent or not in touch with her children???. I guess all the other parents of the other 2 million are bad as well! But wait her husband got a d.u.i. 22 yrs ago and had an accident that caused some property damage so he???s an awful person according to the liberal democrats! It makes no difference that Joe biden is a long time big government spender all the while he claims to be a regular guy! He says I ride Amtrak everyday to work and home he fails to mention that that Amtrak ride costs 97 dollars a day! That???s about the amount of money that 25% Americans make day (they are the low income earners but before taxes they are considered middle class according to the government which is a bunch of bull in my opinion that???s at poverty level!) and he spends it on Amtrak yeah he a regular Joe! And barrack Obama well he???s no angel either he???s got some pretty bad bill???s hidden in his closet not to mention his admitted marijuana and cocaine use years ago but lets not talk about that says the liberal media lets talk about mr.palin???s d.u.i. Or the 17 y/o???s pregnancy this liberal bias in the media is getting a little aggravating but I think that the American people will see that this whole thing is leaning to far left and it will back fire in obama???s face costing him the chance at being the leader of the free world! It???s a shame that our election process has come to this! as you can see all the dirt being dug up is from the move-on.org idiots who wants those morons running the country they have obama in thier poket he's thier hand picked choice !

    • Posted By: weneedalternatives @ 09/03/2008 9:50:56 AM

      I find your arguments very weak. First I don't think the McCain/Palin ticket wants to get into Obama's drug use when Cindy McCain has been in rehab twice for addiction and Palin is an admitted weed smoker (note: it's illegal in Alaska but illegal according to U.S law). That's a battle they will not touch trust me.

    • Posted By: saulmelissa @ 09/02/2008 1:33:20 PM

      come now, it's the game of politics, If the dems had a teen pregnancy in their corner, you know the good, conservative Republicans would be having a field day too...I am more worried that Palin admitted that she has no idea what a VP actually does in a day. Or that she supported Alaska seceding from the US..I'd like to actually hear some news on something the world actually cares about...Sex ed is helpful, but with or without it, there will be teen pregnancy...

    • Posted By: LudwigVanBeet @ 09/02/2008 12:06:59 PM

      I beg you and plead with you willnot vote, to at least learn how to spell so we can read your comments, seriously what cause the spelling errors, dementia, or dyslexia.

  • Posted By: sharenews @ 09/02/2008 11:52:19 PM



    MY RESPONSE TO HARLEY Posted By: HarleyisHere @ 09/02/2008 21:23:49 below:

    HARLEY SAYS: She (Palin) said and I quote"my son enlisted in the Army on sept 11 almost 7yrs of war go by, SOME HOW he does NOT deploy, NOW suddenly, she says he will deploy in a "few months" conviently AFTER the election...hmmm ever just wonder?


    I SAY: Harley, do you ever research what you post before you make outrageous claims like above in these blogs??


    THE FACTS:


    * First of all, when the 9/11 terrorist attack happened back in 2001, Palin???s SON was 12 YEARS OLD.

    * Sarah Palin???s son enlisted in the U.S. Army Sept 11, 2007 at the age of 18. (LAST YEAR)

    http://operationyellowelephant.blogspot.com/2008/08/mccains-vp-picks-son-is-in-army.html


    * He is scheduled to go over to IRAQ on Sept 11, 2008 (NEXT WEEK)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLcc3C-80Hg


    • Posted By: summer4077 @ 09/03/2008 9:30:37 AM

      So she's encouraging her son to join a baseless cause and possibly get slaughtered at 18...fun times in the Palin family! But it's all rifles and guns and god in 'Laska ya'll. Please.

  • Posted By: bshapi1 @ 09/03/2008 7:54:41 AM

    Sarah Palin..... you've got to be kidding. This is like placing a high school senior who has run a Junior Achievement project and have them nominated to be president of General Motors. It's all over Republicans.... I do not know how ANYONE in the party can say they are behind the ticket of McCain/Palin 100% with a straight face. I wish I had stock in Pepto Bismol.... Most of the Republican party will be needing this after the first Presidential and Vice Presidential debates. IT'S ALL OVER but the formality of the actual election on November 4. January 20.... OBAMA/BIDEN.......
    Get used to it. Folks, this will be the ticket for at least the next 4 years.

    • Posted By: Skallywag @ 09/03/2008 9:28:32 AM

      Reply to both your posts - If you consider only the folks in Miami that speak english, then the populations of Alaska and Miami are about even. Alaska has more natural resources, but Miami is much harder to run considering the very large portion of the population that keeps forgetting where they liv ein the USA (contrary to their efforts). This palin lady has more executive experience than BHO, hands down, but choosing her was MCC desperatly trying to woo the women voters of the country. Because of thepoor choices and decisions during his campaign, MCC has all but conceded the election to BHO. Considering that if MCC is elected, the names and faces in the white house change, the status quo doesn't. The sad truth is that now we are very likely to have to deal with BHO as POTUS for at least 4 years (please only 4...) until someone can stand up and really lead this country. It will be a very long time until this country is led by a real leader.

  • Posted By: jon-jon alter @ 09/02/2008 5:01:28 PM

    Another jonjon disciple:

    posted By: neos @ 09/02/2008 12:04:22 PM

    Comment: I am puzzled by McCain's pick for V.P. Hell of a risky gamble I'd say. Palin seems perky, quirky, scrappy, quite the "character", but scarcely presidential. My main complaint with her so far is that she didn't turn McCain down cold. She seems bright enough to know that she is incredibly unqualified to run Starship America.

    On C-span today, a group of republican strategists were asked, "if Sarah Palin were Sam Palin, would HE have been selected." To their credit the panel answered honestly that no , HE would not. So it appears that this is a gimmick to go after the female vote even at the risk of putting an unqualified candidate in the white house."

    • Posted By: griffin1 @ 09/02/2008 5:13:04 PM

      of course he is going after the woman's vote, but it is an insult, at least Hillary earned her 18 million votes and her supporters stood strong but at the end of the day Obama and Hillary are on the same team. Just last year Palin called Hillary a whiner and now she is asking Hillary supporters to help her shatter the glass ceiling well Palin what have you done to earn 18 million supporters, this is an insult. Palin is not even in the same league as Hillary, Big mistake McCain we know better and we will do better, Thanks but no thanks

      • Posted By: TexasPride @ 09/03/2008 8:43:07 AM

        Be honest. You weren't considering John McCain even BEFORE he announced Palin as his running mate. You were already voting for Obama/Biden regardless who McCain picked, as were most everybody on here trashing Palin. We'll just have to wait and see how the election plays out. My guess is that Obama will win. After all the threats of riots, race wars, and the media's examination of Palin with a fine-tooth comb as compared to the hands off approach taken by the media when it comes to Obama's shady past and extremely questionable associates, how could he not? We may be the ones that pull the lever, but it is the media that picks our leaders by way of their selective reporting, steering the masses to their point of view. This is American Pravda, plain and simple. Those old enough to remember the former Soviet Union and Communism know of what I speak. Those too young to remember haven't a clue what they are wishing for. It just SOUNDS good.

    • Posted By: ludicrous @ 09/02/2008 8:58:17 PM

      Yeah but the Democrats haven't admitted that if Sen Clinton was a man and Obama a woman he wouldn't have made it past January--if he got in at all.

      • Posted By: imposter @ 09/03/2008 3:08:17 AM

        can't mention that because it proves that race is more important than gender - no matter the degree of inexperience. he's got 2500 people on his staff. how many can fit in the Lincoln bedroom?

      • Posted By: Zig Zag @ 09/02/2008 9:16:01 PM

        Alright, that comment is just stupid.

    • Posted By: jon-jon alter @ 09/02/2008 5:03:21 PM

      neos:

      What if Sen Clinton's and barry's resumes were switched? Who would be the nominee and who would have been laughed out of Iowa?

      • Posted By: Zig Zag @ 09/02/2008 5:23:44 PM

        Same result - a Democrat in the White House.

        • Posted By: jon-jon alter @ 09/02/2008 5:36:30 PM

          you didn't answer the question.

          • Posted By: Zig Zag @ 09/02/2008 6:10:18 PM

            Sure I did - you just didn't like the answer.

  • Posted By: rhkwalk @ 09/03/2008 7:49:11 AM

    Where are your facts? I'm outraged at this article. Can you take a deep breath and actually hear yourself? Women feel patronized? Give me a break. Says who? Were they patronized by the fact that Hillary Clinton was running for the Democratic nomination? What, only the top spot of the ticket is good enough? Is it insulting to the take the bottom of the ticket? Why does gender have to come into it? Any attacks on Palins qualifications are an equal attack on Obama qualifications. At least she has run something and I can judge her efficiency or not!

  • Posted By: ICYEYES800 @ 09/02/2008 10:55:50 PM

    It is totally ridiculious to have ANY debates about Palin's pregnancies, her children, or their children....THE HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT THE OBAMA'S WOULD HAVE DONE AND WHAT A DESCENT PERSON DOES WHEN DISCOVERING THEY HAVE A DOWN SYNDROM CHILD......OBAMAS' WOULD HAVE THROWN IT IN THE TRASH....ABORT...THEN WE HAVE GOOD, DESCENT, GOD FEARING PEOPLE WHO FIND ALL LIFE VALUABLE..AND FINDING WORTH IN THE CHILD.... Aborting and having live birth abortions is NOT ACCEPTABLE TO CIVILIZED PEOPLE...Just say NO to O

    • Posted By: marksgershenson @ 09/03/2008 7:35:57 AM

      http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/02/by_juliet_eilperin_when_alaska.html

    • Posted By: marksgershenson @ 09/03/2008 1:16:10 AM

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/02/palins-church-may-have-sh_n_123205.html

  • Posted By: DavidCA @ 09/03/2008 12:58:50 AM

    The Republican slime machine has been operating at full throttle for months, cheered on by McCain's "humorous" and/or blatantly false attack ads. What's the matter, fellas? You can dish it out, but you sure can't take it.

    • Posted By: sharenews @ 09/03/2008 1:16:49 AM


      Vicious rumors being nationally promoted about Palins 4month baby with Downs Syndrom and her pregnant daughter? Obama claims that kids especially are off the map and should not be part of politics. As for the investigation about Palin having a part or not in the troopergate stuff, that is fair game. But really, I can believe how disgusting the press has been (certain media outlets especially) attacking Palin about the daughter and a downs syndrom baby not being Sarahs baby? All the ridiculous talk about how Palin can run for office cuz she has 5 kids, the personal stuff pertaining to her family life, should not be out there to the extent it is. My God, the press talking about her husband being dui and being stopped on the road at 19 or 20 yrs old? Even Obama admitted back in his early years of doing drugs and drinking when he was lost for a few yrs. The Media is out of control. The more they mash down on this woman the more I am feeling the whole Hillary bashing thing again and the likelihood to vote McCain / Palin ticket.

      • Posted By: marksgershenson @ 09/03/2008 7:35:20 AM

        http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/02/by_juliet_eilperin_when_alaska.html

    • Posted By: imposter @ 09/03/2008 2:17:12 AM

      And the obamabots? Just look at these blogs. It was unbelievable when Sen Clinton was in the race. And how are the polls? Obama finally hits 50%. Why because of Sen Clinton's endorsement. Her supporters went from 71% to 80% backing obama.

  • Posted By: marksgershenson @ 09/03/2008 7:34:34 AM

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/02/by_juliet_eilperin_when_alaska.html

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse