The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Archives

Sarah Palin

Faced with Palin, Women's Groups to Turn to Obama


Kim Gandy (R), President of the National Organization for Women, announces NOW's endorsement of Democratic
presidential candidate Barack Obama during a news conference Sept. 16, 2008, in Washington, D.C. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)

By Lois Romano
Clearly worried about the impact Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has had on the presidential race, the Obama campaign stepped up its efforts to court women this week, recruiting Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton to join Sen. Joe Biden for a taped webcast answering questions from women, announcing a list of high profile women who are endorsing Sen. Barack Obama and releasing a tough anti-McCain ad targeting women.

On Monday, as part of his "Women's Week of Action," Obama held a conference call with female supporters to outline the issues he will bring to the forefront in the weeks ahead, such as health care, the Supreme Court and pay equity.

And today in Washington, a number of high profile unions and groups representing millions of women joined together to throw their support to Obama. Ellie Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority Foundation, and Kim Gandy, president of the National Organization for Women -- both of whose organizations supported Clinton in the primaries -- held a press conference here announcing the support of ten groups for Obama.

NOW's endorsement represented the first time in 24 years the group has endorsed a general election presidential candidate -- the last being Walter Mondale in 1984, who ran on the first ticket to feature a woman as a vice presidential running mate.

The largest organization for women's rights, NOW says it is stepping into the contest to educate women about Palin's positions and highlight Obama and Biden's long-time commitment to policies that support women personally and economically.

"For us its a red alert," said Gandy. "Palin is so out of touch with women. I don't think people fully understand her positions."

"They are stark differences between these two candidates," said Smeal. "John McCain has a 26 year record of voting against issues important to women."

Smeal cited McCain's opposition to a bill that would afford equal pay to women, his opposition to abortion funding and a vote he cast against breast cancer research.

The new Obama pay equity ad says that "women work to help support their families but are paid just 77 cents to a dollar a man makes. It's one more thing John McCain doesn't get about our economy. He opposed a law to guarantee women equal pay for equal work, calling it too great a burden on business.... A burden on business? How about the burden on our families."

McCain's campaign quickly countered saying McCain's pays women on his senate staff better that Obama does.

Posted at 4:12 PM ET on Sep 16, 2008  | Category:  Sarah Palin
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: Obama Ridicules McCain's Economic Response | Next: Unions Protest Outside McCain's Va. Condo


Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Once again folks, Obama is all talk and no action. He is trying to woo women voters by saying he will support all kinds of things supposedly important to women. But we've heard it all before . . . FISA, abortion, death penalty, faith based initiatives, offshore oil drilling. This nambypamby is not willing to fight for ANYTHNG. He changes his position whenever it is politically expedient to do so. That's change all right.

NOway, NOhow, NObambi!

Posted by: Regenbogen | September 21, 2008 6:29 PM

NOW has done the pro Women thing by endorsing OBAMA/ BIDEN. They realize that the rights of women will be erroded by the republicans. They know the importance of having experienced people as POTUS, not flip floppers who have late stage Alzheimers and Metastatic Melanoma.

Posted by: mimi | September 21, 2008 2:08 PM

Palin's personal choices are one thing; her official policies are another. She seems to draw the line well so far, according to a USA Today article "Palin governs from the center". She vetoed an anti-gay bill saying it was unconstitutional. She does not want to offend Democrats because she needs their votes for her financial and energy reforms -- which succeeded well. She has 80-90% approval ratings in Alaska (although 47% favored the gay side in a recent referendum).

I wonder how much reseaerch NOW and the other supposedly feminist organizatoins did on Palin's actual policies and record. A few months ago NARAL endorsed Obama over HILLARY!

Posted by: fsteele | September 20, 2008 1:56 PM

McCain has to pay women and men more because they don't want to work for him.

Posted by: Todd | September 19, 2008 2:29 PM

Well I'm not an elitist, and I think for myself. Regardless of the hurt feelings that are out there over Hillary and Gov. Palin -- I'm looking at the issues. I'm deeply concerned over the Anti-Choice platform that McCain/Palin represents. I am certainly alarmed at an agenda that jeapordizes women's personal choice. I'm also deeply concerned how the McCain/Palin platform deliberately evades and downplays the Huge and extreme change they have promised they will work towards... that is overturning Roe v Wade. For the vast majority of Republicans and Democrats, while many say they are Pro-life, they still believe that the decision is and should remain a woman's personal choice... not the governments. Please consider this. The McCain/Palin Anti-Choice stance was political cow-towing to an extreme position and it is evident to me that the VP pick was entirely to please the Evangelical Right. McCain didn't pick who he wanted, it was indeed purely political. Please compare, study and do the math... Look at McCain's record on women's issues. Also pls. know that until he was strongarmed, McCain when asked about if his own daughter was pregnant, believed the situation was "deeply personal" and her choice. Remember that.

Posted by: Kathy M | September 19, 2008 12:20 AM

RRow, wrong again, McCain voted AGAINST every bill for women's rights and WRONG again about Obama's campaign heading up that investigation, it was people from her OWN state that initiated that investigation, and this woman has not been abroad and met with any foreign leaders and doesn't have a clue about foreign policy, and as for the Russia comment, i saw that myself and didnt take it out of context, she said what she meant, and as far a Palin's experience, there is no comparison to Obama, and this woman cannot say she does and no one else for that matter. When it comes to porkbarrel spending, she had got more money per capita than any other state in the union. She is a flip flop artist. There are 4 times more people in my CITY than it is in her WHOLE STATE, and because she lives 40 miles from Russia, doesn't give her any foreign experience when she never dealt with the Russian Gov't on no level. Obama was his state's senator before he ran for the US Congress, has met with numerous foreign presidents and prime ministers, and you equate that little TART to Obama? Get real lady. As for smear tactics, McCain and Palin has been doing that throughout this whole campaign to avoid the real issues and what they plan to do about them, while in the meantime, Obama just ignored them and played them like the stupid idiots they are and went on to lay his plan out for the country and tell how he was going to do it, but we havent as Americans, heard anything about McCain's plans other than he agrees with G W Bush on most things, and his top advisors come from Bush and are BIG BUSINESS LOBBYISTS, the same lobbyists that got our country in this financial mess, so how can he control BIG BUSINESS LOBBYISTS when the OWN HIM, and yes they do OWN HIM. His campaign went broke in the PRIMARIES, but all of a sudden he's back in the money, money from his pill addicted wife, and all the BIG BUSINESS LOBBYISTS that financed him again, and now he OWES THEM BIG TIME, and thats a price the American people CANNOT AFFORD TO PAY, and we will NOT because McCain and Palin WILL NOT GO TO THE WHITE HOUSE IN JANUARY!

Posted by: thakatchaser | September 18, 2008 8:49 PM

PS
Did you know only one person in the senate took more money from Fannie Mae than Obama and that was his buddy Dodd. He has been bought by him just like Excelon. Plus, fannie mae is more in bed with the dems than repubs, so again, do a little research.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 18, 2008 5:52 PM

thakatchaser
If you read the UNEDITED version of the ABC interview, you will see you are incorrect regarding her russia statement.
Secondly she is running for VP and has had more foreign affairs and executive experience than Obama who is running for President. He knew nothing when he started running "I agree with Hillary" was his common response to any foreign affairs question), and was going to bomb Pakistan. LOL, he states his executive experience is his running for pres. So I wouldn't go down the experience road, it just points out his lack of. I have no reason to believe McCain is going to die, his mother is still going strong at 96, and if he did, as I said Palin is more qualified than Obama.
The reason she is not going to go down the troopergate road is because IT IS A SMEAR TACTIC of the OBAMA campaign, his team of 30 lawyers did this because they are so afraid of her. The guy who was fired has stated: Palin never asked him to fire the trooper, but if you want to talk about liars, we have a list of 113 Obama has told so far. McCain and Palin have more integrity than Obama has in his little finger. McCain is not another Bush, the republicans don't like him because he has a record of fighting them. Ex.: immigration reform, campaign finance (another thing Obama lied about), voted against the tax breaks for the oil co's (unlike Obama) and voted against the Bush tax cuts.
So do a little research before you try to debate, instead of reading the national enquirer.
And oh yes, we shouldn't consider the advancement of women, because we have seen how Obama treated Hillary and other women. If he loses it is his own fault, she was more qualified than him, but he couldn't even ask her to be VP. Plus we see how he has less women on his staff, less women in advisory positions and pays them less than the men. Actions speak louder than words. So I believe McCain will do far more for women than Obama will, he already has.

Posted by: rrow | September 18, 2008 5:42 PM

RRow, not to rain on your parade but there are bigger issues here than a woman in the White House. There were a number of women McCain could have chosen that are immensely more qualified to be VP than Sarah Palin. After the idiotic statement Sarah made in the TV interview, your vote for her should have been out the window, because this crazed nutjub of a woman says she would preempt a military strike on Russia if they attacked Georgia again stating that they have a membership in NATO, which they dont, and we are supposed to help them because we are. She doesn't have a clue about foreign policies or dealing with terrorists and McCain's mortality would make that idiot president, and i doubt McCain will even make it a full term given his medical history and age. You need to see the real issues this country faces and not vote for some loony vagina because she has one. Please pay attention to Palin, she's a compulsive liar and is scandalous and i hope for God's sake the troopergate investigation which she is trying to sue Alaska to stop, is over before November. If this woman wasn't guilty of the charges, why is she suing Alaska to stop the investigation? Why is she all lawyered up and the man she cheated on her husband with trying to get his divorce records sealed?? I'm glad the courts did not grant him the secrecy of those divorce papers, because i truly believe she is the main reason for his divorce. Also she is not top on the ticket, so a vote for her and McCain will allow the same Bush failed policies. McCain has done absolutely NOTHING for the American people the whole 26 years in Congress and voted NO on ALL women's rights issues, so i suggest you check his record before you cast a vote for them, and if you do vote for them, i hope you don't have a sub-prime mortgage or got over $100,000 in the bank. All the banks are becoming Gov't controlled because of Republican deregulation of the banking industry, and now the Republican administration is taking our tax money to bail an INSURANCE company of all businesses with $80 billion dollars. McCain and Palin is for big business and that lil eskimo pie doesn't give a damn about women in America, trying to force her religious beliefs down the throats of the American people, and take away your right to choose what you do with your body. Do the research before you cast a ballot for McCain/Palin.

Posted by: thakatchaser | September 18, 2008 3:13 PM

Here is a red alert for NOW, NARAL and Emily's list; YOU HAVE LOST ALL CREDABILITY WITH WOMEN AFTER YOUR FAILURE TO SUPPORT HILLARY IN THE PRIMARY. It is time for some new womens orgaizations who put the promotion of women before their political party. I have withdrawn from these organizations and joined WOMENCOUNT. They are non partisan.
Are women so dense they don't see that a women in the whitehouse, no matter what party will do more to promote women than then the old Roe V wade argument. Do they not see men have been using this as a whip to control women for 40 years now? Wake up! - it's not going to be overturned, you are empowering men, not women with this constant threat.
It was quite obvious the democrats do not respect women by what they did in this election, they did not care about Hillary or us, but thought they could do whatever, and then just whip us with roe v wade afterwards to get our vote. Now they are geting scared. Wake up - we have leverage, if you don't use it you will lose it. If we elect Sarah Palin, they will realize they will have to work for our votes and respect us. If you look at Sarah Palins record you will see; twice they tried to add abortion restricting ammendments to bills, but she would not allow it. They also tried to pass something restricting gay rights but she refused to allow it, stating it is unconstitutional.
Women need to stop being their own worst enemies and unite behind the election of a women in the whitehouse.

Posted by: rrow | September 18, 2008 2:13 PM

Thank you NARAL for endorsing Barack Obama instead of Hillary Clinton before the primaries were even over. Yeah, that was really forward thinking--endorsing an unqualified man over the more qualified woman. I've come to understand that some so-called feminists have a very limited agenda, and supporting women does not seem to be high on the list. This truly saddens me.

It was Hillary all the way for me, but I'm not willing to vote for someone who only says he is for women but hasn't walked the walk. He is a fraud. http://senatorobamaisanopportunist.blogspot.com/2008/06/barack-obama-pays-female-staffers-less.html I will be voting McCain/Palin.

Posted by: ccinatl | September 18, 2008 10:12 AM

"For us its a red alert," said Gandy of NOW. "Palin is so out of touch with women". Yes it's a RED alert, because Palin IS in touch with middle American men and women. The Democratic party has become the elitist party, and those people are afraid of Palin. The 18 million democrats that were thrown under the bus by the DNC are lovin' Sarah Palin and her family. Most women today are juggling home, family and job...and are impressed with just what Sarah Palin has been able to accomplish. Just color me another Dem for McCain/Palin...I didn't vote for Obama because I didn't trust him and still don't. You're kidding yourselves if you don't believe there are a lot of us. Country before Party!

Posted by: jeleanoro | September 18, 2008 7:27 AM

They sure don't look very happy. Palin and Hillary, whatever they're facing, usually face it with humor and happiness.

Posted by: fsteele | September 17, 2008 11:39 PM

Jeff you need to check the facts, because what you are saying is as idiotic as it gets. You go ahead and vote for McCain because in this movement in America to stop the Repugnants from taking our jobs, our housing, controlling our women, bailing out big business while not giving anything to the middle class, still lying about Iraq while our troops are still getting killed in a farce of a war that should have never happened , then brag that a surge worked that got 4,160 of our loved ones killed for nothing while the man that attacked America still runs free after killing 3000+ plus of us, now lets see now, that puts our death toll at over 7,000 people and 130,000 wounded that have to fight for proper health care when they get home, and the Democrats had nothing to do with it, it was Bush and Cheney in their quest for OIL they didnt get and never will while Iraq has 80 billion in AMERICAN BANKS, but yet the Bush administration with John McCain's support is still spending away our kids future at the rate of 10 Billion per month, and you wanna vote for McCain?? Admit you are racists and would never vote for a black man no matter how smart he was and how much it would be in your best interest to vote for him, just assinine, ignorant, juvenile and just plain stupid.The nrw American movement will put Obama in the White House for the next 8 years, BANK on it, unless you BANK at Merrill Lynch, or buy insurance from AIG.

Posted by: thakatchaser | September 17, 2008 10:57 PM

Kathy,

Can I take your lack of response an admission that the financial crisis can't be entirely laid at the feet of the Bush administration?

Unfortunately for us normal people most politicians are corrupted by their power. At the end of the day they all serve themselves and their special interests more than they serve the people who elected them. They all lie, cheat and steal while passing it off as public service. Sorry to say we're stuck with them.

Posted by: Jeff | September 17, 2008 7:07 PM

Larry,

You're absolutely correct. Feminists aren't about supporting women. They're about furthering a leftist ideology.

Posted by: Jeff | September 17, 2008 5:52 PM

There is a sense that liberal Obama women will betray their gender for their male Democrat bosses. Under Bill Clinton, so called feminists ran for cover when Clinton’s stain appeared on the dress of a low-level government worker. Then there was the media destruction of many women by Clinton and the gals on the left, while other women attempted to to explain to their young daughters what the Democrat president was doing to office workers with his little cigar.
Even when a long-handled woman resurfaced with a rape charge against Clinton, liberal women attacked the victim while Clinton smirked in that hillbilly way....
Similarly, with Palin, liberal women are American women’s worst enemy. They are clawing and tearing at Palin like a pack of she-wolves, never questioning the talking points and orders given them by Obama and his operatives. Perhaps the womens’ movement is dead. That would explain how Obama was able to turn Hillary into his reluctant personal cheerleader so easily.
Whatcha think ladies?
http://americanpoliticalblog.wordpress.com/

Posted by: Larry Clifton | September 17, 2008 5:42 PM

Sorry, Most of the data is from Wikipedia but verified by NY Times.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print

Thinking for yourself doesn't imply a vacuum. Reading is a very powerful tool.

The problem with the housing market actually was caused by providing mortgages to people who couldn't afford to pay for them. If you want to call it handouts to poor people that's up to you.

Posted by: Jeff | September 17, 2008 5:02 PM

LOL, Jeff, I see you know how to cut and paste. I see - the reason the banking industry failed was....wait for it.....handouts to poor people!!!!

You're hilarious. Try thinking for yourself one of these days. Believe it or not, your brain won't explode.

P.S. - when you c&p, you're supposed to give the link.

Posted by: Kathy D. | September 17, 2008 4:54 PM

Kathy,

The seeds of the sub-prime mess were planted years ago in 1977, enhanced by loosened lending standards under Bill Clinton, with Bush proposed reforms squashed by the Democrats under the idealism of "affordable housing." I know this doesn't agree with your talking points but facts are facts.

Have you heard of The Community Reinvestment Act? This dates back to 1977 and was passed by Congress to provide credit, including home ownership opportunities to underserved populations and commercial loans to small businesses. It was passed despite considerable opposition from the mainstream banking community.

The Clinton Administration revised the act in 1995,substantially increasing the number and aggregate amount of loans to small businesses and to low- and moderate-income borrowers for home loans.

In 2003, the Bush Administration recommended regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry. This change was to move governmental supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under a new agency created within the Department of the Treasury. The changes were generally opposed along Party lines and eventually failed to happen. Representative Barney Frank(D-MA) claimed of the thrifts "These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis, the more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." Representative Mel Watt (D-NC) added "I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing."

Posted by: Jeff | September 17, 2008 4:46 PM

Jeff, he wasn't negotiating. He was meeting with them. The whole nonsense about negotiations came from the same kind of lying traitor that the Bush admin relied on to get us into Iraq. If you notice, no reputable news agency has come out with this report. Only Rupert Murdoch's yellow press quoting the liar who said Jews in Iran were being forced to wear yellow armbands. Give it up.

I've learned that conservatives don't change their thinking, no matter how erroneous, no matter how much evidence they get to the contrary. So go vote for McCain. He's going to lose anyway. Most Americans are not as willfully stupid as hardcore wingers.

Posted by: Kathy D. | September 17, 2008 4:41 PM

This article is absolutely right!
I would just like to add, you evangical so-called christians are going to get screwed in the end. McCain has no intention of doing what you think for you. If you are such cristians then, why do you not help the poor and disadvantaged like Jesus did? All you care about is money and white people. Most of you are racist! Believe me, I live in the Bible Belt, used to drive Limos for a living. Most of my clients were the preachers who go on t.v. begging for money. They ALL live in mansions, take Limos, talk down to service workers, think they are better than everyone else, (including you, their followers), take private jets in private airports, I could go on and on. They are THE BIGGEST HYPOCRITES EVER! So, you better think twice about McSame/Painlin. Because thats exactly what your gonna get.

Posted by: mary b | September 17, 2008 4:30 PM

Kathy,

Sorry to inform you but a senator does not have to right to have a meeting with officials from a foreign nation and tell them to disregard any negotiations from the sitting President of the United States.

The Logan Act makes it a criminal offense for any unauthorized citizen to engage in negotiations with foreign officials "with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government." So far I've not heard that either the Bush Administration or the State Department provided Obama authorization to negotiate.

Obviously his intention was to manipulate Iraqi officials for his own political gain.

Posted by: Jeff | September 17, 2008 4:30 PM

Jeff, we need intelligent leadership from a new perspective. The old ways have failed. Today we are watching corporate SOCIALISM on the grandest scale the world has ever seen. Our government is giving billions in handouts to corporate entities that operated like the Wild West. McCain and his financial advisor Gramm were gung ho to remove all regulations on the federal banking industry. Now because of their short sighted and outdated form of free market capitalism, the US taxpayer has been saddled with trillions in new debt.

Try thinking. It won't kill you.

I don't think all people who vote against Obama are racist, but it's definitely a much bigger factor than any of the phony sexism that the "strong woman" Palin keeps crying about.

Posted by: Kathy D. | September 17, 2008 4:24 PM

I find it bizarre that so many postings say they "don't need a group to tell them how to vote". An endorsement is simply that- an endorsement. If you don't like what you see, find a web site which will screen out the real news and only post according to your uninformed views.

So someone tell me - what does it mean
(to you- to our country)
when the evangelical and fundamentalist churches actually DO tell their congregations HOW to vote? To me it means we have entire passels of people being told not to think on their own. Oh , but that has been going on strong now for about 8 years, now.

Posted by: Heddy | September 17, 2008 4:18 PM

Kathy,

I just finished reading the rest of your rant. Typical liberal talking points, if you don't vote for Obama your a RACIST. How ignorant.

I don't support him because he's corrupt (Rezko, ACORN), anti-American (Ayers, Wright)and a socialist liar (too many sources to name).

His tired rhetoric of victimization and class warfare is divisive and completely counter to his promise of HOPE. Hope what, for government handouts?

Posted by: Jeff | September 17, 2008 4:06 PM

Jeff, he is a U S Senator. He is perfectly within his rights to have conversations with heads of state - although we can't use the words of that fink the Post quoted. It is important that final decisions not be made with the departing president, on a matter with which the Congress and the American people have a right to oversee. GIven the secretive and dishonest nature of the Bush presidency, all Americans should want to see these decisions postponed until a new, hopefully more transparent & honest, government can be voted in.

As for these faux-feminists who are big fans of the pig Limbaugh - I don't think there's a one of you who would have voted for Obama in the first place. Polls are showing Obama moving back into a lead and also showing that it's only conservative women who are under the spell of this dingbat from Fargo. The stench of lies and incompetence is collecting around McCain and his silly Barbie Veep. Not a moment too soon. It's high time the US finally had a President we can trust and be proud of.

Posted by: Kathy D. | September 17, 2008 4:05 PM

The article is misleading...only the most liberal of democratic women are turning to Obama. As a Hillary supporter and life-long dem, I will be voting for McCain for several reasons including me desire to see a woman VP. The dems blew their chance with me. Any pundit who thinks all of Hillary's women are voting for Obama aren't listening. I predict at least 25% of Hillary's supporters are voting for Mccain. Sexism needs to end in campaigns and a republican woman can break the glass ceiling just as easily as a democratic woman. Obama didn't have any need for Hillary or her supporters and he won't be getting many of them come November.

Posted by: Meredith | September 17, 2008 9:31 AM
_____________________________

Meredith--you are out of your mind. You are neither a Hillary supporter or a life-long Democrat. If you were, you would support Hillary's stance that Obama should be president. Don't you see--if he's president he will absolutely appoint her to a high-ranking position. You're a traitor to your gender and your party. Go cry to the Republicans about it because we don't want you back. Just because Sarah Palin has a vagina doesn't mean she's going to do anything for women. She will help reverse Roe v. Wade, will make abortion illegal even in cases of rape and incest, help refuse birth control to responsible adults, teach abstinence-only education, which only hurts people. Ignorance is not bliss and you're being terribly ignorant right now. Don't vote for the two people who will reverse what our gender has fought for for so many years!

Posted by: Jessie | September 17, 2008 3:55 PM

Kathy,

Your comment about getting facts is funny. Perhaps I should counter with open your eyes.

Obama's campaign confirmed the basics of the report.
"Obama had told the Iraqis that they should not rush through a "Strategic Framework Agreement" governing the future of US forces until after President George W. Bush leaves office, she said."

They put a nice spin on it but the facts are still there. Obama attempted to interfere against the interests of the United States.

Posted by: Jeff | September 17, 2008 3:48 PM

Get some facts, Jeff. That bogus report about Obama, printed in the yellow press NY Post, was given by the same guy who tried to start WWIII with his false reports that Iran was making Jews wear yellow armbands.

What Obama wants - what all Americans should want - is for the Bush admin. to not push through a deal committing the U.S. to permanent bases. Any such plan should be submitted to the full vote of the newly elected Congress. As usual with Obama, his position is moderate, fair and based on true democratic principles. After 8 years of having our government run by lying plutocrats, I realize that's a unique concept.

I'm continually floored by the anti-Obama types and their reliance on lies and misinformation to buttress their views. It really adds to the impression that they're looking for any reason to vote against a black man. It's pretty sick how Palin keeps crying fake sexism when the real elephant in the corner is the very real racism that haunts this election. She sets all women back with the way she’s hiding behind her own skirt. Imagine a candidate for VP who won’t meet with the press! How can we vote for someone we know absolutely nothing about except the lies and disinformation spread by McCain’s handlers?

Posted by: Kathy D. | September 17, 2008 3:29 PM

I am surprised at all the self proclaiming intelligent liberal women spewing so many lies. Obviously they can't even factcheck their statements before they embarrass themselves with their uniformed remarks.

Just because you read it on the Internet and you repeat it, doesn't make you appear knowlegable...but it's good for a chuckle. So please continue.

Posted by: dan | September 17, 2008 3:20 PM

NOW's message of equality may have had some value once-upon-a-time, but the group has become irrelevant. Women have arrived! We are powerful, we are smart, and we don't need a group telling us how to think and how to vote.

Elle, my point in introducing myself was simply to illustrate that conservative women are not necessarily passive, uneducated stepford wives. Many of us are highly educated and highly successful, while still having families and believing in conservative, traditional values. Obviously, lipstick and motorcycles have nothing to do with qualifications for national office.

Posted by: Harley | September 17, 2008 3:01 PM

There indeed are liberals (who take from others) and conservatives (who produce).

---------

I'm a liberal, and I don't take anything from anybody. I'm in a high tax bracket, so I put a lot of money into the government's pocket. I think you need to consult a dictionary on the meaning of the words liberal and conservative.

Incidentally, it is the liberal mindset that has 'produced' civil rights, including the right for women to vote in the first place. That was not a particularly 'conservative' perspective at the time of its passing.

The liberal mindset is an advocate of progressive change, and the conservative mindset is an advocate for the status quo. If the words hadn't been rendered meaningless by years of abuse and misuse, it would be very ironic that McCain is running on a platform of change.

Posted by: Joe | September 17, 2008 2:54 PM

I forgot to add that I wear lipstick, skirts, am a professional, a leader, an educator, run a business, ride a motorcycle,
(and NONE of those attributes make me or ANYONE ELSE QUALIFY for national leadership)
And, I enjoy my status as a women due in total to the liberal reforms of the past 40 years,
since I was ....3...
I agree with Mariana, let's work to increase the awareness of our people and to dispel the rampant ignorance !

Posted by: Elle | September 17, 2008 2:14 PM

I call for many, many more groups such as this, and other admirable groups, to step up NOW to endorse Obama ! We MUST participate in any way we can, now, in the democratic process by voicing our opinions in ways that register. I call for more antiPalin rallies in Alaska and all over the country ! This is a serious, grave situation- that of the public having misperceptions about Palin to the point where they would actually bring her anywhere near national leadership - we need to do everything we can now to bring the truths to light !

Posted by: Elle | September 17, 2008 2:08 PM

I'm a highly paid, professional women with my own sexy "First Dude" and five great kids. I wear lipstick, skirts and high heels, but also ride a motorcycle for fun.

NOW is completely out of touch with many REAL women. They promote agendas that de-feminize women, de-masculinize men, devalue children, devalue life, promote divisions and dissentions within families, and purport to "know" what is in the best interest of women generally.

Excuse me, but NOW doesn't speak for me, nor for many women in society. The group should be named the National Organization for Liberal Women, because they obviously hate conservatives.

Frankly, they are an embarassment and SO OUTDATED.

But alas, there is light and hope in the world. Palin has shattered their ill-conceived notions of what a woman needs to do (include murder fetuses) and be in order to be successful and happy in life. NOW's world view has be shaken to the ground.

Palin is maternal (heaven forbid!), she's sexy, she's smart and talented, and has a studly husband who helps with the kids. She's enormously successful in elected office. And to top it off, she kicks butt in fishing, hunting, and athletics. She is the NEW FEMINIST I can admire.

NOW, it's time to wake up. There's a new wave coming....

Posted by: Harley | September 17, 2008 2:03 PM

I am so glad to see that the great majority
of posts for ALL of the recent articles I have read in the past couple weeks are both women and men of all ages who are appalled by the totality of the McCain /Palin ticket.
My hope is a win for Obama, and that it results in better education and increased literacy for our country, so that the ignorance level decreases and the population is more informed through reading , rather than reacting to Tv sound bytes.

Posted by: Mariana | September 17, 2008 1:59 PM

Women’s Rights Groups Support Obama

Today my womanhood demands
That I conform to their commands
That I uphold the public heist
To elevate Hawaii’s Christ.

My duty as a democrat
Requires that I should vote like that
To disobey would cause a schism
In the domain of feminism!

But there’s one thing I’d like to know
Before off to the polls I go:
Where were these admirable dames
When Hillary was called bad names?

When women’s rights were under test,
When she was smeared, did they protest?
When media sexism became obscene,
How come they didn’t intervene?

While Sarah is torn up to shreds
They lie calmly in their Obama beds
From which they seek to rule my mind -
Please tell me, are they deaf and blind?

http://formidablyuselesspoet.blogspot.com/

Posted by: formidablyuselesspoet | September 17, 2008 1:44 PM

This woman is nothing but trouble. Who in their right mind would pick a candidate under investigation. That is only a sign of things to come if they are elected.

What a mess.

Posted by: Terri | September 17, 2008 1:02 PM

By the way, "Obama's" books were actually written by Jon Favreau.

Posted by: Jeff | September 17, 2008 11:30 AM

And Obama trying to cut backroom deals with Iraq to wait until after the election before releasing positive news isn't winning at all costs?

Posted by: Jeff | September 17, 2008 11:28 AM

And Obama trying to cut backroom deals with Iraq to wait until after the election before releasing positive news isn't winning at all costs?

Posted by: Jeff | September 17, 2008 11:28 AM

Obama is a man of rare talent with the highest academic credentials. He became rich by writing a best selling book. Good for him, but that's not a path that is open to 99.9% of ordinary Americans.

Republicans - with Palin as their tarted up beauty queen distraction - have ALWAYS been against the common man. McCain would have invested our Social Security in the market that just tanked. His health plan will hurt far more Americans who are already suffering. His tax breaks for the super rich will increase our deficit. His moronic VP will be incapable of taking over in a crisis. The Republicans care about winning at all costs. They just don't care about governing.

Now they've found a lying, ambitious woman with limited education and no experience whose job is to bamboozle average American women into thinking she's just like them. Well, you know what? Average American moms wouldn't make their teenage daughter into a national spectacle. They wouldn't abandon their handicapped newborn to pursue an office they're not remotely qualified for, out of pure personal ambition and greed. This is the standard Republican trick and it's only their total lack of respect for the American people that allows them to pull it off time and again.

Posted by: Kathy D. | September 17, 2008 11:15 AM

Is every American worse off than they were 8 years ago? Obama became rich under the Bush administration and many of his friends did as well.

Posted by: Jeff | September 17, 2008 11:01 AM

Latest on Healthcare

New Studies Report Wide Disparity in Health Care Plans
By Perry Bacon Jr.
Barack Obama and John McCain are both proposing more than $100 billion a year in spending for health care, but the candidates' plans have vastly different goals, and vastly different outcomes.

New studies from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center and the policy journal Health Affairs suggest that Obama's proposal would eventually cover more than 34 million of the roughly 47 million Americans currently without insurance, while McCain's would cover at best 5 million uninsured.

Obama's plan relies on a variety of measures to reduce the number of uninsured, such as increasing the number of people in programs such as Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program, requiring all children to have insurance and offering subsidies for people who cannot currently afford insurance.

Obama's plan was crafted with the intention of creating universal health insurance, although both studies suggest some people would remain uninsured. McCain, meanwhile, touts his plan as one that will rely more on the consumer market to reform health care.

Currently, the value of a person's health care plan is not taxed, creating essentially a subsidy by the government for health care. McCain would tax health benefits while creating a $5,000 tax credit -- $5,000 for families or $2,500 for individuals -- to subscribe for insurance coverage. The studies assume that millions of Americans will use this credit to purchase health care and that some businesses will drop employees from their health insurance plans, resulting in some people losing insurance as well.

Both proposals would face an uphill climb to becoming law. Virtually all congressional Democrats are opposed to McCain's health care vision, which they believe would destroy the employer-based health care system and replace it with one that benefits the young and healthy but not people who are older or sick. (Health insurance companies charge much higher prices for people who are older or have chronic illnesses.)

With the federal budget deficit increasing and a huge list of other projects already proposed, it's not clear that a Democratic Congress would push through Obama's health-care plan either. Some congressional Democrats are already touting more modest goals, such as making sure that all children have health insurance.

McCain's plan spends as much money, helps far fewer people and increases taxes on a benefti currently not taxed. Solid conservative thinking!

:-)

Posted by: toritto | September 17, 2008 10:15 AM

I'm so sad to see that the Republicans were right about women - that so many are gullible and stupid enough to vote for ANY woman, including one that is so incompetent and radically ideological she would expose our nation to great risk.

Anyone who thinks the party that coined the term "feminazi" gives a damn about women is either willfully dishonest or a fool. Palin is to Clinton as Clarence Thomas is to Martin Luther King. The Repubs know how to play on the ignorance and bigotry of Americans - they're geniuses at it.

Palin governs a state with the HIGHEST rate of RAPE and LOWEST rate of HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION in the nation. What are women's issues anyway? These female Palin supporters sound like bitter women who think this is about getting back at men, rather than caring for what's best for our nation in a time of crisis.

Posted by: Jeanne | September 17, 2008 10:02 AM

I wish phony "Democrats" like Meredith would stop posting. All the Democratic women I know, including HIllary Clinton supporters, are voting for Obama.

BTW, did you know that when she was mayor, Palin had the town charge rape victims for their rape kits? Nice, huh?

Posted by: tony the pitiful copywriter | September 17, 2008 9:46 AM

The article is misleading...only the most liberal of democratic women are turning to Obama. As a Hillary supporter and life-long dem, I will be voting for McCain for several reasons including me desire to see a woman VP. The dems blew their chance with me. Any pundit who thinks all of Hillary's women are voting for Obama aren't listening. I predict at least 25% of Hillary's supporters are voting for Mccain. Sexism needs to end in campaigns and a republican woman can break the glass ceiling just as easily as a democratic woman. Obama didn't have any need for Hillary or her supporters and he won't be getting many of them come November.

Posted by: Meredith | September 17, 2008 9:31 AM

There indeed are liberals (who take from others) and conservatives (who produce).

America is diverse...if the conservatives moved out...there would be a large void that the liberals could not fill...they would die because the producers left. The taxpayers left.

It's funny that people can sit at a dinner, listen to Streisand and give $28K each but don't donate to truly worthy causes. Wht don't all the Hollywood liberals start giving money to the poor directly?

The government is not telling you what to do with your body...just that you shouldn't kill an innocent body (baby).

Posted by: anon | September 17, 2008 8:54 AM

Voting for McCain and Palin is not a choice at all, it's the Bush administration incarnate. Obama is calling for the regulation of all financial institutions and the elimination of the variable rate mortgage, that in itself will boost this economy greatly. Those of you who wants to vote Republican needs to read Obama's economic plan before you cast that ballot. I really wish people stop using the terms "liberal" and "conservative" because there is no such animal, there is only the American people and their diversified ways of life and none are the same, so it's idiotic to categorize the country in such a general fashion. Palin is a bad choice for this country because she doesnt recognize diversity, she wants to cram her religious ideals down the throats of the American people when 75% of the people dont share her religious beliefs and religion has no place in politics in a diversified country such as the United States, there are more important issues at stake. No one, no Gov't has the right to pass laws saying what an individual can do with their body. The Gov't cannot live for or die for any of us so they in essense have no rights to tell a woman she cannot have an abortion if she wants to, because they are crying now about supporting orphaned children and the children services people abuse them worse than them living in broken homes. Our lives are also at stake big time as long as there is not that 700 mile fence and National Guard troops permanently stationed across the whole length of that fence with full police powers to shoot anyone who flees them coming into the country illegally transporting drugs and humans. Some people are just idiots because they would rather see the country go down in flames before they would vote for a black man, and that notion is just ignorant, assinine, juvenile, and just plain stupid. Barack Obama is the best choice for this country and Obama will be the next president of the United States, because he stands for the people, not for big business and big business lobbyists. Lobbyists should be banned from the Congress floor because they have no business in Gov't business, nor do they have a right to be in Congressional debates. The Gov't needs to take back control of this country regulate financial institutions, drug companies, the whole medical field, and the factories that outsource labor and there should be laws that says if a company wants to outsource jobs, they will pay extremely high tarriffs to import the goods back to the US, no tax cuts, no tax loopholes and no help from the Federal Gov't in any shape or form. This will stop them from outsourcing our jobs. Obama is on the right track and i guarantee that if he becomes president, he will be our president for 2 terms, then Hillary Clinton will be president for the next 8, so a Democratic vote now will insure a Democratic majority for the next 16 years and with a Democratic majority Congress, pass some of the necessary safeguards for our financial stability. Remember folks, every time there is a Republican president, this country gets in enormous debt, but when there is a Democratic president, the budget starts to balance and jobs are created, so the choice is yours, 4 more years of Bush, or Obama, the man who will change this country for the betterment of all Americans, not just big business and the rich. NO MCCAIN AND NO PALIN!

Posted by: thakatchaser | September 17, 2008 8:05 AM

God fobid that something happend to Seator McCain. Life is just like that for all of us. Don't you want to hear your Rebublican VP talk to the people, discuss important issues, world issues. Do you not want to no something about your Hidden and protected possible, next President? I don't see any concern from anyone in your Country. Bless you all, from Canada.

Posted by: justadad55+ | September 17, 2008 8:03 AM

Torrito....healthcare is a human right only in that you have a right to get a job and afford it through buying an insurance plan or self insuring. It is not free and needs to be paid for by someone. That's where your personal accountability comes in.

If you believe in it so much, why don't you put together a not for profit organization to insure people? If the big insurance companies are too expensive just because of profit - put something together that's not for profit.

Maybe you are not well off enough to retire yet...maybe you should still work for that "right" you want.

The fact is...health care is a limited resource. If we have a nationalized system, the costs skyrocket and lines form because of the limited nature of the resource.

Liberals...they want their cake and ice cream and even some chocolate sauce at my expense.

Posted by: makeusproud | September 17, 2008 7:19 AM

Even if it is through that Obama would tax higher (which I do not think so), I do not understand the issue. I rather pay more taxes on my investment income than have no investment income at all. I rather pay higher taxes on a good job in a stable economy than having my job outsourced to India or China. McCain is just more of Bush (lower taxes and better deals for the top earners, unstable economy, fewer jobs, bad education for the kids no mortgage, expensive war, no respect in the world, the USA being 3rd class, etc.etc.)

Posted by: Melanie | September 17, 2008 6:59 AM

Even if it is through that Obama would tax higher (which I do not think so), I do not understand the issue. I rather pay more taxes on my investment income than have no investment income at all. I rather pay higher taxes on a good job in a stable economy than having my job outsourced to India or China. McCain is just more of Bush (lower taxes for high incomes, unstable economy, fewer jobs, no mortgage, expensive war, no respect in the world, the USA being 3rd class, etc.etc.

Posted by: Melanie | September 17, 2008 6:56 AM

EVERY AMERICAN KNOWS THAT THEY ARE INFINITELY WORSE OFF TODAY THAN THEY WERE 8 YEARS AGO.DO THEY WANT MORE OF THE SAME OR DO THEY WANT REAL CHANGE? AMERICANS HAVE LESS MONEY IN THEIR POCKETS THAN EVER BEFORE. CLUELESS McCAINE AND EMPTY HEADED PALIN WILL ONLY ENSURE MORE OF THE SAME

Posted by: BM | September 17, 2008 5:35 AM

In the early 1900's women were to obey, do the cooking, the work around the house, and produce children for the most part. It was not a happy time for them.

Through the civil rights movement, they gained certain equal rights, and ushered a new era.

Yet now, a woman who hunts, provides the majority of the family income, and cares deeply about her children whether they be still a fetus or born with a disability is seen as "not mainstream".

Instead, women want to be pampered, treated with "equality". The chance to chose if thier child lives or dies while it remains in the womb, at the expense of a husbands choice or otherwise. The right to work outside the house (but not to be the main breadwinner because thats still the mans job). And equality means that you cant make a joke because it might be inappropriate.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not making the case to vote for Palin, because frankly the republicans would not want the vote of whiners who use their sex or race to better themselves in life.

But let me remind you of something when you talk about races or genders turning to the democratic side of the fence.

An old republican white guy with maverick ideals and a physical disability freed the slaves.

who is oppressing who?

Posted by: dale | September 17, 2008 4:41 AM

The NOW organization has a strength of 500,000 women according to wikipedia. The number of women in the United States is approximately 150,000,000. Out of these conservatively if 50% are of voting age, ie 75,000,000. If we assume only 2/3rd of these women vote on Nov 4th ie 50,000,000. So even if all the 500,000 members of NOW go to vote on Nov 4th, it is only 1% of all the women who will be casting a vote. That's all Hillary could find? What about the 18 million women who cracked the ceiling for her. Hillary could find only 500,000 of them? What a joke.

Posted by: Gina | September 17, 2008 3:39 AM

Palin can skin a Moose .... I guess from the Republicans point of view that's all the requirements she needs to be McCain's Nurse. When you look at Dick Cheney shooting some poor jerk for a Quail (little brown bird) it makes it a little easier to understand how Republicans think, doesn't it ???

Posted by: SadAmerican | September 17, 2008 3:34 AM

Don't fall into the same East/West Coast trap as the Democrat Party has always done. There are more women in the Heartland of this country who are rooting for Sarah Palin than will ever vote for Obama. We are feminists who are tired of our liberal "sisters" telling us how we should be like them.

I for one feel that any and all women should be allowed to live their lives as they see fit. If they wish to ride their husband's coattails to power then they should do so. If they want to Botox themselves into plastic so be it. However, don't belittle the woman who gladly stays home to care for her family or who runs for Governor in a state that so many elitists feel is inconsequential.

Hillary, Nancy, Oprah, Eleanor, Gloria and the rest are has-beens of a bygone era. It is now time for a new generation of feminists to step to the forefront and take over the mantel of feminism.

Posted by: Catherine in MI | September 17, 2008 1:03 AM

The feminazists are scared, confused and threatened by Sarah Palin, a brilliant woman that has proven to be able to be a mother, a wife and a successful professional that has broken the old boys club in governance, stopped corruption in government and fought for the people she represents.

Women that understand the struggles women have to go thru in this male dominated world find hope in Sarah's nomination for VicePresident of the United States of America by JohnMcCain, who is confident in her choice of a woman.

Barack failed to accept the choice of Hillary Clinton by 18 million democrats and ignored and rejected Hillary Clinton and instead chose an old Washington insider desecrating the flag of change he had been waiving.

On the other side,Cain's choice of a woman reformer demonstrated he means change in Washington and has given hope to former Hillary supporters and women in America.

It is time for a woman to be Vicepresident and in 2012 President of the US.

Country First!
McCain/Sarah Palin

Posted by: Manolete | September 17, 2008 1:00 AM

My wife calls them the NOLWs. National Organization of Liberal Women. Or some L word like that. They represent maybe 2% of American women. If they were conservative women they would be completely and totally ignored. This group should be ignored. They don't support women's rights, they support liberalism and men who want to help them kill the babies they created. The are Women with serious issues. Which is why they support someone like the O.

Posted by: Bill | September 17, 2008 12:28 AM

My god I keep waking from this Dream (nightmare) where John McCain is Boss Hogg from the Dukes of Hazard, but he also is the captain of the Love Boat, but its sickeningly, listing to one side where we see Sarah Pale, the size of a great white whale, and she is vomiting all the banquet food from the various special ethnic gourmet café s on board- she looks like that mother in the Early Johnny Deep movie called "whose afraid of Gilbert grape" Yuck the ship is not far from the coast of china, The Chinese are selling tickets to the rest of the world. Bin Laden in a Tux is in the front row. The audience is laughing hilariously, and shooting moose guns at the ship, and passengers- this is scary-the ship is called simply: THE USA. Is this a premonition or just a reaction to the disgusting entertainment that Fox news is presenting?
Also Oh yeah the little valet (the Tran racial, transvestite one) is Sean Sanity, and keeps begging everybody if they would like him to kiss their backsides. YUC, YUCK Phooey.

Posted by: Chuck Trent | September 17, 2008 12:06 AM

REPOSTING. Forget to sign my name.

Palin has come out in favor of war against Russia over Georgia and South Ossetia. The Russian leader has responded to her threats and wont back down.

"Palin the pit-bull" is a threat to world peace, picking a fight with a nuclear power.

It is not a fight we can win, either, no matter how big her flag pin is. McCain already says we need more troops just to deal with the Taliban.
Also the Russians are fighting the Chechen rebels, who are aiding the Al-Quaida, so if we fight the Russians we would be aiding the Al-Quaida.
I bet she didnt think of that!!
We would need to start a draft and start training them for mountain warfare and hope that if we win, the Russians dont nuke them. We would be fighting an endless cause, in the states south of Russia, unable to stop Russian reinforcements, because we dare not set foot on Russian soil.
It would be worse than Vietnam.
Palin is a pitiful leader, making war-talk about matters she either doesnt understand or else she hopes to be the one who ushers in Armageddon. I thought those fundamentalists lived by Faith in the Divine Person. Starting war with the Bear sounds like trying to create Armageddon to me. Anyway, I am voting AGAINST HER AND MCCAIN. NO DRAFT & no chance of war with Russia over 1,500 year old feuds between the South Ossetian ethnic Iranians and the Georgian Christians, thank you.

Posted by: Bruce Becker | September 16, 2008 11:59 PM

Palin has come out in favor of war against Russia.
The Russian leader responded to her threats and wont back down.

"Palin the pit-bull" is a threat to world peace, picking a fight with a nuclear power.

It is not a fight we can win, either, no matter how big her flag pin is.
We would need to start a draft and start training them for mountain warfare and hope that if we win, the Russians dont nuke them. We would be fighting an endless cause, in the states south of Russia, unable to stop Russian reinforcements, because we dare not set foot on Russian soil.
It would be worse than Vietnam.
Palin is a pitiful leader, making war-talk about matters she either doesnt understand or else she hopes to be the one who ushers in Armageddon. I thought those fundamentalists lived by Faith in the Divine Person. Starting war with the Bear sounds like Armageddon to me. Anyway, I am voting AGAINST HER AND MCCAIN. NO DRAFT & no chance of war with Russian, thank you.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 11:54 PM

Ok I'm gonna go beddie=bye now.

Good night to all the freedom loving liberals out there!! Be proud!!


:-)

Posted by: toritto | September 16, 2008 11:53 PM

I love McCain's "victory in Iraq" speeches.

Why do they have a familiar ring? It's simple really. McCain is still fighting Vietnam. One minute he was top-gunning those "commie gooks" in their cities and rice paddies and the next he was in a prison camp for five and a half years. He's lucky they didn't kill him on the spot. After all, that's what he was doing to them.

I'm sure he came home wondering how did we "lose"? After all, we had all the fire power, the carriers, the aircraft, the men, the economics - we were the "super power". I'm sure he thinks we lost because we didn't have the "guts" to pursue "victory". We were "betrayed" by those nasty "librals" "Stabbed in the back" so to speak.

Of course we all now know (except maybe for John) that a "commie" Vietnam was no danger to the United States; that their war was one of nationalism vs. colonialism. They fought the French colonialists, then their American successors.

My bedroom set is marked "Made in Vietnam" and American corporations are pouring in for the cheap labor. No labor unions in a commie country you know.

McCain now seeks "victory" in Iraq. He hasn't learned what the Vietnamese knew all along - eventually you will go home. The Iraqis know it. Absent permanent occupation (not a good idea) the Iraqis will rule themselves.

Iraq is a history of coup and counter-coup; of Kings and strongmen. It will be thus after we are gone. I give the government maybe 5 years. Iraq is not a "nation" in the western sense. It was drawn on a map by the British and French after dismenbering the Ottoman Empire. France got modern Syria and Lebanon; the Brits got Iraq, Jordan and the Palestine Mandate (lucky them). Neither country cared exactly who lived within the new borders. T

he Ottomans ruled Iraq as three "provinces" one each for Sunni, Shia and Kurd. They were smarter than Johnny McCain will ever be.

Posted by: toritto | September 16, 2008 11:41 PM

Jeff,

Remember we are talking $0 to $66,354 or about where 60% of taxpayers are, excluding the $0 aren't the bulk of these people paying somewhere between 10% and 25% tax?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States


"Yes I am saying that you can't cut income taxes on people who don't pay income tax. All you can do at that point is give them money that someone else has paid in taxes.

Cutting back on handouts will provide incentive for most people to work harder. Unless you just love your work you put forth the effort to create a better life for your family.

Posted by: Jeff | September 16, 2008 11:02 PM"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 11:38 PM

McCain is against everything the working class of America stands for. Remember the primaries, we sw him for what he was and his campaign went broke, but now all of a sudden he's back in the money, money from the same lobbyists he allows to outsource our labor, support a war that should not have been preemtive because there was no threat to the US, then his so called surge to clean it up and his deception to make the American people believe he won a war. His surge didnt work folks, there are several reasons it didnt. 1)If there was no war, there wouldnt have been any surge. 2) The lies by him in the Bush administration about WMD's that were never found. 3) 4,159 dead American soldiers dead for nothing. 4) 10 Billion a month spent there when we get none of the oil and the Iraquis have 80 Billion in NY banks 4) the food for oil program that never came to fruition 5) bogas contracts given to Halliburton ( Dick Cheney's company) 6) McCain's wanting to stay in Iraq for 50 to 100 years, now you tell me if the surge worked, all the surge was is a cleanup of the mess he supported with GW Bush, when Obama said no, dont attack Iraq, send our troops to Afghanistan to get Bin Laden who killed 3000+ people on the infamous 09/11/2001, now we are in a war on 2 fronts while Russia is buliding up it's troops and looking at the US hungrily as their next point of conquer. McCain also doesn't want that 700 mile border fence to be built or the Gov't to require E-Verify for all Factories, businesses and landlords, and opposes fund suspension for sanctuary cities that violate Federal law by telling it's police officers they cannot check a suspects immigration status and no powers to deport any they find. Any city that supports illegal immigration should immediately have all their Federal funding cut until they comply with the Federal laws already on the books. There doesnt need to be ANY immigration reform except the bureaucratic work visa programs, and implementation of the E-Verify system and the 700 mile fence. If it's that easy for a Mexican to cross the border, how easy would it be for a trained TERRORIST? The next president (as Obama says he will) overturn NAFTA. NAFTA i admit was a Clinton boo boo, but that can be fixed much easier than the Republican's dying economic policies. NAFTA is the most dangerous bill this country has adopted because it's an avenue for a terrorist attack on this country. We get too many consumer goods from foreign countries that hate the US ( due once again to the Bush administration's failure to talk to rogue nations without pre-conditions) China has been systematically poisoning the American people, but yet the Republicans vote down any bill to stop trade with them, which should have stopped immediately starting with the lead toys and tainted pet food, and to me China is saying we even want your pets dead, not just the American people. Your children and loved ones lives are in grave danger with the warmongering McCain and Palin ticket, they adopted the Bush doctrines saying they have the authority for preemtion against a country that does not attack the United States, which will call for the drafting of our children next time they want to strike a country with our weakened military that is already fighting a war on 2 fronts. The choice is clear, NO MCCAIN AND NO PALIN IN O8, VOTE FOR BARACK OBAMA/JOE BIDEN if you want REAL CHANGE!

Posted by: thakatchaser | September 16, 2008 11:31 PM

bitterindependent, good point!! I think you're responding to my post. I brought that 95% of blacks are voting for Obama ... is to bring up the sense of togetherness that is lack in women. No, I don't expect 95% of the women will vote for a female candidate b/c I can hold my breath... I'll just end up dead before I see that. You have to also admit, that there is a good number of blacks voting for Obama b/c he is black. Or at least I've heard many.

____________________________________

i don't deny that there are some blacks that are voting for obama because he is black, but i'm also not denying that there are some women that were voting for hillary because she was a woman.....there is nothing wrong with that as long as their views are basically in line with your own....must blacks that i talk to in the barbershops say that both hillary and obama were good choices and they had a hard time chosing because mostly they liked the clintons, but again historically blacks vote for the candidate that they think has the strongest chance to win....early in the campaign blacks were not going to vote for obama until they saw that he could get the white vote which everyone knows is more important because of the numbers...i gave up on the republicans two years ago because their values are not in line with mine anymore...i agree with you that 95% is high but not much of a difference when you look at the history... i think that any Democrat with a sound plan should be president....sorry for the long post...

Posted by: bitterindependent | September 16, 2008 11:27 PM

I'm an old retired guy living on a golf course in the sunny south. I was a senior banker with one of the largest banks (still sound!) in the northeast.

I have an adequate income through solid annuities (for life), and social security.

I own my home outright.

I am on medicare and prescription drug coverage. Good thing. I paid $1,120 a month for medical insuracne for myself along for seven months between the end of my corporate health insurance and medicare. I had a heart attack in 1995 which resulted in my being "uninsurable" Fortunately the state I live in mandates that the insurance company I had must sell me a policy since I had no break in coverage. They did, but at a price.

I would have no coverage without medicare.

I dont wait for doctor's appointments and have had no trouble getting the treatment I need from the doctor I want in a timely fashion. This nonsense about "bureaucrats" is just that - nonsense.

No older person would ever voluntarily give up medicate. Young people only wish they had it.

My oldest daughter is a prosecutor in the state where I live and my younger is with an international data processing firm.

I believe that the Bush administration is the worst in my lifetime (born during FDR) and no way in hell would I vote to give them another chance notwithstanding that at my age it would make no decernible difference to me who is elected.

There - you have my biography

Posted by: toritto | September 16, 2008 11:18 PM

bitterindependent, good point!! I think you're responding to my post. I brought that 95% of blacks are voting for Obama ... is to bring up the sense of togetherness that is lack in women. No, I don't expect 95% of the women will vote for a female candidate b/c I can hold my breath... I'll just end up dead before I see that. You have to also admit, that there is a good number of blacks voting for Obama b/c he is black. Or at least I've heard many.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 11:14 PM

toritto, what is your background? Not trying to be a smart alec... but want to know your points of view and where it comes from. I see you've only pulled McCain's plans (and not Obama's)... ignored the NET gain of 1 million, and yes... eventually more could go into the no health insurance, 44 million in the long run is debatable.

I come from a country w/nationalized healthcare... it's rather ineffective. Due to the high costs, there are limited resources, w/lots and lots of patients. People can't get in the ER's b/c the hospitals are overwhelmed... only the rich are able to get in quicker. Did you know that here in the U.S. you don't have to have insurance to get into the ER? Did you also know that the gov't poor money into managed care organizations for Medicare and Medicaid, who really can't effectively manage patients effectively? and actually wasting more money?

What makes you think the $1.6 trillion won't be abused... and get us into deeper problems. Reminds me of a credit card where we borrow money for the now, expecting to pay it later... before it flops. Nationalize healthcare is not the answer... BTW, Obama's plan calls for Employers to pay more money for healthcare... for that to happen, (1) job loss (2) reduce wages. He'll have to cut other fundings for this... which ones? The army, navy, etc will be trimmed... he said. In this dangerous times w/Russia and Iran? Not sure that's a good one.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 11:08 PM

i know that it is always convenient to use a scapegoat for why one person wins over another, but the history of the black vote is never correctly represented in the media so here are the FACTS about the black vote....

Blacks only vote for the democrat that has the best chance to win....very few black folks wanted to vote for obama because hillary was running and they wanted to support her....i challenge anyone to find a black presidential candidate in U.S. history other than obama that got more than 60% of the black vote....here is a place to start:

Jesse Jackson. Jackson campaigned for the Democratic nomination twice, in 1984 and 1988. These runs secured his place as the pre-eminent black American leader of the era.

Lenora Fulani. In 1988, Fulani—a psychologist—ran as an independent and was the first black woman to appear on presidential ballots in all 50 states. She also ran in 1992.

Alan Keyes. Having served in the Reagan administration, Keyes campaigned for the Republican nomination in 1996 and 2000 (and also lost to Barack Obama in their race for a Senate seat in 2004).

Carol Moseley Braun. A U.S. senator, Moseley Braun briefly sought the Democratic presidential nomination in 2004.

Al Sharpton. In 2004, this New York-based activist campaigned for the Democratic presidential nomination.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-10-19-kerry-black-vote_x.htm

in all these cases black voted 80%-95% for the white guy because he had a better chance to win…….can anyone disprove this fact?


Posted by: bitterindependent | September 16, 2008 11:05 PM

Anonymous,

Yes I am saying that you can't cut income taxes on people who don't pay income tax. All you can do at that point is give them money that someone else has paid in taxes.

Cutting back on handouts will provide incentive for most people to work harder. Unless you just love your work you put forth the effort to create a better life for your family.

Posted by: Jeff | September 16, 2008 11:02 PM

I haven't read everything... I am sorry. But heard about "healthcare" as a right. Don't want to argue this point w/anyone. But fact is, someone DOES have to pay for it. If you think the gov't needs to pay for it, where will they get money? From taxpayers? From Employers? .... so it means someone needs to work right?

That aside, if anyone thinks Obama can give you healthcare... you're sorely mistaken. Healthcare is sooooo costly, and w/this growing population of the baby boomers, expect more financial problems. ALL health economists (excluding Obama's advisor)... say that his plan will NOT work. It's unrealistic. McCain's plan doesn't answer it either. We don't have a workable plan from either candidate.

Posted by: Kim | September 16, 2008 10:56 PM

Heehee. Healthcare is unavailable to over 44 million Americans.

Why is that?

Because (a) it is too expensive = insurance companies want to maximize their profits and (b) it is unavailable at any price if you have a "condition".

What insurance companies WANT is a young healthy 20 or 30 something with no current illnesses. Hopefully when they get taht demographic they can milk the premiums for years before they have to lay out a dime.

Makes sense to me.

But what about the rest of folks? Older ones, poor ones, sick ones?

I'm on dat "socialist" medicare - it works fine. No bureaucrat "tween me and my doctor" = I go to the same doctors I went to before I went on medicare. I give em my card - they're fine with it. No waiting no fuss.

Single payer - easy for the doctor to file the claim.

Works great. Ask any old person.

Healthcare is a human right. Nobody should die cause they aint got no insurance. They wind up in emergency rooms clogging up the system and we all pay for it anyway.

:-)

Posted by: toritto | September 16, 2008 10:53 PM

http://www.gravmag.com/oil3.html#ak

"Q: I have read that most of Alaska's oil is exported to Japan. Is this true?

A: No. Since 1996, from 5% to 7% of Alaska North Slope (map, left, from USGS) oil was exported, about half of it to South Korea and the rest to China and Japan. Those exports ceased in 2000, and since then all Alaskan crude has gone to the US, mostly through Washington and California refineries. See the following sites for more information:
ANWR.org • NCSE • State of Alaska
Q: I think the U.S. should produce more oil, such as from ANWAR and elsewhere so that we can achieve energy independence and not import oil from the Middle East. How do you think we should go about this?

A: Sorry to say this, but I think the idea of "energy independence" for the United States is a completely fictional concept, at least in terms of petroleum independence. We currently (2007) import around 63% of our requirements — and we do not do that because there is a bazillion barrels of oil hidden somewhere in the US just waiting to be produced. The US is probably the most thoroughly explored large nation on Earth, and all the ANWRs and other possibles out there are tiny drops in the bucket of our gas-guzzling habits. It MIGHT be possible to achieve a modicum of "independence" through rigorous conservation, but that cannot happen in any short time frame (like a few years). To do so, EVERY person in the US would have to reduce their consumption by 60%. Are you willing to refrain from heating your home on 4 out of 7 days per week, all year long? Or not drive at all on 4 out of 7 days per week, forever more? Or cease buying products whose manufacture, packaging, and distribution are gasoline-intensive — such as all imported foods, or vegetables from California in winter that are hauled further than a few hundred miles, or a thousand other things. It's simply not gonna happen.

We might BEGIN to approach the idea of working toward reducing our consumption by applying a big federal gasoline tax - like 50¢ or $1.00 per gallon. But that's not gonna happen either - there would be so many bureaucratic "exceptions," "exemptions," special cases, that it would fall on its face. And no Congressman would do something so politically distasteful, even if the good of the country were at stake — as I personally believe it is."

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 10:52 PM


Sarah Palin is to Hillary or for that matter to Pelosi, what a Kracker Barrel in Boise is to the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art!!

Certainly not someone we want representing the best and classiest in America

Posted by: Daniel Screed | September 16, 2008 10:48 PM

Of course we have a right to life, unless you happen to be a fetus. Darn how those contradictions always get in the way.

You're right to life gives you the right to live your life in freedom. It doesn't guarantee you a particlular quality of life or lifestyle. It certainly doesn't give you the right to infringe on someone else's freedom by taking their hard earned money to use as you see fit.

When you reach into my pocket you are violating my rights.

Posted by: Jeff | September 16, 2008 10:46 PM

Good pointa2j1953,

If we are not drilling everywhere we can and we are exporting about 7% of crude oil production from the Alaska North Slope (ANS) to South Korea, Japan, and China.

We might want to sort this out before expanding our drilling too far.

"About Alaskan oil--Did you know that instead of the lower 48 benefiting from that "cheap oil" it's being sold to China? And what have we gotten from China?--tainted drugs, toys painted with lead paint so our children can get lead poisoning which affects their development & has put some children into Special Education because of the damage done to their brain.

Posted by: a2j1953 | September 16, 2008 10:37 PM "

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 10:45 PM

"95% of blacks are voting for Obama b/c he's black." ... I should correct this... and just say that "95% of blacks are voting for Obama"...period.

Sexism showed it's face... let's forget about getting ahead... ever! and NOW does not speak for me.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 10:45 PM

This is hilarious, women have always been women's greatest critics... men know this. We're the most jealous too... and most often, we look at other women and judge each other more than men judge us. It's no wonder there are so many men out there who can disrespect women b/c we can't even respect each other. Shame.

My husband said a black man will be a president before a white woman will be... my father said the same. I didn't believe it. 95% of blacks are voting for Obama b/c he's black. Glad to see that we can live together and being from a different race, since I am a minority.

Sadly however, I am a woman... a decent woman... who NOW and all the feminists tells me that they're fighting for "me?"... do they know what I think is important. Palin taking us back? You can't even do what she has already accomplished! Amazing! Absolutely Sad... so so so sad. First Obama's campaign treats Hillary like dirt, spits on her, laughs at her... when she took her hands out to shake his, he turned away. Now you're telling me that you're for Obama b/c he's for women's rights? No thank you. THis woman scream at how he treated Obama... now you're kissing his lying faux character. No way, No how, No Obama!!

I am not a Christian, so before you judge, and call me a religious nut as most liberals do... just be quite, be quite...

Didn't people say that Bush would overturn Rove Vs Wade? He's been there nearly 8 years, has he? The answer is "no"... will any politician? "no"... and if they do? The state gets control, the people gets control... hmmm, not so bad. I am pro-choice, but I do recognize and appreciate the pro-lifers out there... and absolutely do not bash them for taking us back. Life is not to be ashamed of. People have gotten too selfish in this world... it's the "me" generation.

It's a sad day, but we all know that women don't like each other... it's in our genes. Hence, we'll never get ahead...

This woman is for McCain/Palin.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 10:42 PM

Scott,
Excellent post. The only problem is that it's too complex for most democrats to understand. They typically to bumper sticker slogans:
Change, Hope, Do you want 4 more years of Bush?, A woman's right to choose, etc..
There are really 2 kinds of liberals. The first is the elite blue-bloods from the coasts with superior attitudes and socialist leanings. The second are the working class and poor who the elites exploit to gain power. The elites keep telling the poor that they will improve education, health care, create a robust economy and most importantly give them tax relief. What the exploited class fails to grasp is that their promises ring hollow. They never deliver what they say they will, only enough to keep the exploited poor and on board.

It's a shame that they just don't get it.

Posted by: Jeff | September 16, 2008 10:42 PM

Excuse me Jeff but doesn't the Constitution say we have certain "inalienable" rights that include LIFE (what quality of life do you have without health insurance?).

About Alaskan oil--Did you know that instead of the lower 48 benefiting from that "cheap oil" it's being sold to China? And what have we gotten from China?--tainted drugs, toys painted with lead paint so our children can get lead poisoning which affects their development & has put some children into Special Education because of the damage done to their brain.

Posted by: a2j1953 | September 16, 2008 10:37 PM

Alice Paul

When their lobbying efforts proved fruitless, Paul and her colleagues formed the National Woman's Party (NWP) in 1916 and began introducing some of the methods used by the suffrage movement in Britain. Tactics included demonstrations, parades, mass meetings, picketing, suffrage watch, fires, and hunger strikes. These actions were accompanied by press coverage and the publication of the weekly Suffragist.

In the election of 1916, Paul and the NWP campaigned against the continuing refusal of President Woodrow Wilson and other incumbent Democrats to support the Suffrage Amendment actively. In January 1917, the NWP staged the first political protest to picket the White House. The picketers, known as "Silent Sentinels," held banners demanding the right to vote. This was an example of a non-violent civil disobedience campaign.

In July 1917, picketers were arrested on charges of "obstructing traffic." Many, including Paul, were convicted, incarcerated and tortured at the Occoquan Workhouse in Virginia (later the Lorton Correctional Complex) and the District of Columbia Jail.

In protest of the conditions in Occoquan, Paul commenced a hunger strike. This led to her being moved to the prison’s psychiatric ward and force-fed raw eggs through a plastic tube. Other women joined the strike, which combined with the continuing demonstrations and attendant press coverage, kept the pressure on the Wilson administration. In January, 1918, the president announced that women's suffrage was urgently needed as a "war measure." Wilson strongly urged Congress to pass the legislation. In 1920, after coming down to one vote in the state of Tennessee, the Nineteenth Amendment was passed.

Women - many suffered so that you can vote.

DON'T FORGET TO REGISTER AND VOTE.

You owe it to Alice Paul

Posted by: toritto | September 16, 2008 10:35 PM

jeff: Sorry but healthcare is a human right. We could of course look like Calcutta - maybe there will some Mother Theresa to care for the dying in the streets.

My grandmother used to tell me a story. She talked of Marie Antoinette - grandma was certain that when Marie's head was locked into the guillotine she still didn't know why she was there.

Its what happens when a few have everything and most have nothing to lose.

Think of healthcare as being a lynchpin in the social contract.

Posted by: toritto | September 16, 2008 10:31 PM

Wow, we now have 2 groups of women. This is sad... but everyone have their own rights. BTW, this forward thinking woman is educated, works full-time, children have a FABULOUS parent at home (father)... is for the Palin/McCain ticket.

Moving back? Hardly think so... BTW, when they claimed that Hillary experienced sexism... no one on the republican side screamed... I did, absolutely... and so did Fox News... but if you only watch CNN or other liberal media, you wouldn't have heard it.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 10:24 PM

How can you call health care a human right? Don't you understand that somebody has to pay for it?

Where do you draw the line on human rights?
Food
Clothing
Shelter
Basic transportation
Couldn't you make the same argument for all those life essentials? Should the government provide all of life's necessities? At what point to we become responsible for ourselves, our families and our own communities? This is not a federal government issue. This is local at best and if people want to provide charity they should do so willingly not forced under the heavy hand of the federal government.

Quit whining that it's not fair.

Posted by: Jeff | September 16, 2008 10:24 PM

GeraldD,

70% seems high, I have heard 57% favor drilling.

"A majority of Americans (57%) interviewed in a mid-May Gallup Panel survey approve of expanding drilling for oil in offshore and wilderness areas considered to be off-limits."
http://www.gallup.com/poll/108121/Majority-Americans-Support-Drilling-OffLimits-Areas.aspx

As far as I know we are still not drilling in all the existing area we can, and already congress is expanding those areas in a reasonable way.

If we are not drilling as much as we can currently I am not sure the expanded areas will immediately make a big difference on their own.

I also worry that the people expressing the greatest desire to drill tend to be connected with the oil industry which would likely benefit first from increased drilling.

The problem is that if you focus too much on drilling, because of the delay before it provides production, you end up trying to bridge from then to then, not now to then.

Better to put those record oil profits into alternative energy sources, exploiting current drilling, and possibly judicious expansion where extraction is especially inexpensive.

CNG is a reasonable bridge energy source, even nuclear done right (and assuming we can ever sort out the waste issue), as well as wind and solar are viable alternatives.

Even if you consider all of ANWR and the other areas you may be talking 75 billion barrels, by 2030 the estimated global use per day is expected to be 120 million barrels, meaning that all increased drilling would equate to 625 days worth of global consumption. If you assume a US consumption of 20 million barrels it is only a US supply of 10.3 years, assuming we drilled and pumped every barrel.

The sooner we start working to break our addiction to oil the better.

"Of course, we’re going to need oil for many years, but instead of exalting that — with “drill, baby, drill” — why not throw all our energy into innovating a whole new industry of clean power with the mantra “invent, baby, invent?” That is what a party committed to “change” would really be doing. As they say in Texas: “If all you ever do is all you’ve ever done, then all you’ll ever get is all you ever got.”" -- Tom Friedman

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 10:23 PM

NOW may call themselves the National Organization for Women, but they don't represent most women in America - at least not me! It is absurd they still exist and claim to represent us. I am a feminist, I fought for women rights all my life, became an engineer and a mother, and participated in protests for equal pay. All this and I have nothing but admiration for Palin. I am voting for Obama for other reasons, but I am SICK and TIRED of these stupid, ignorant women saying they represent ALL women. They are trying to stereotype all women, which is exactly what I, as a woman, have been trying all my life to fight - the only difference is before the fight was against male chauvinists - now it's against NOW.

Posted by: Annette | September 16, 2008 10:12 PM

Manolete

You like diliberately uninformed people (like you) running our government.

You want four more years of what we just had.

By all means vote for Pain and McShame

Posted by: Eldora | September 16, 2008 10:10 PM

Manolete

You like diliberately uninformed people (like you) running our government.

You want four more years of what we just had.

By all means vote for Pain and McShame

Posted by: Eldora | September 16, 2008 10:10 PM

gerald: Alaskan oil is no cheaper than Saudi oil to the other 49 states.

Alaska has a windfall profits tax on oil companies. The oil being pumped out of the ground in Alaska "costs" about $20 a barrel. By the time it leaves Alaska it is at the world market price, the "profit" being taken by the oil company and the State of Alaska.

The State then sends nice checks to Alaska residents.

Dont sound like a very good deal to me - unless Alaska (like Texas) does not tax the oil at the wellhead and ships it to the rest of the country at the much lower price.

It is "ours" after all - why isn't it any cheaper? Nice Republican scam.

Posted by: toritto | September 16, 2008 9:55 PM

Scarier than Ronnie Regan, something I thought would be unbeatable

Posted by: robert smissen | September 16, 2008 9:54 PM

DO YOU KNOW MUCH ABOUT ALASKA??----THEY ARE NUMBER ONE IN HIGH SCHOOL DROP OUT RATE AND LACK OF COLLEGE GRADUATES----THAT'S RIGHT, WORST IN THE NATION.....IF PALIN HELPS THE REST OF THE EDUCATION SYSTEM LIKE SHE'S HELPED ALASKA....WE CAN ALL JOIN HER AT THE FLAT EARTH SOCIETY AND WAIT FOR END OF TIMES....

Posted by: benighse | September 16, 2008 9:52 PM

Anonymous,
The reason we need to focus on fossil fuels at least in the short term is to gain enough time to create a bridge to the time when those new technologies actually become economically viable. Hydrogen currently is NOT an economically viable alternative. Neither is CNG, BUT, CNG as a non renewable, yet readily available alternative to oil, is much closer to being economically feasible than is hydrogen which is a renewable resource.

But to get at that CNG, you must drill!

You imply that a comprehensive drilling program will have only marginal impact upon the oil futures market. That logic is simply not true. A comprehensive drilling program will have a significant impact. The impact upon the jobs that will be produced from a comprehensive drilling, transport, pipeline, and refinery program will also be significant. And the fact that the money we currently send overseas to foreign oil suppliers if left here at home in our own economy will have a significant impact as well. We are not saying that we should not pursue renewable energy sources; quite the contrary I support them all, especially solar and wind. But the fact of the matter is that solar and wind will take 10 years or more to develop. Our economy simply can't afford to shell out $90 to $150 per barrel oil to overseas suppliers for 10 years. As Boone Pickens so clearly points out this is going to be the largest transfer of wealth in the history of mankind. And we can't afford it. The Democrats are up to their necks in responsibility for high oil prices and high gas prices. The American people clearly recognize that responsibility. The American people support drilling by a margin in excess of 70%. Let Obama be the one to tell that 70%+ block of voters that he doesn't agree with them. He has never had the courage to stand up before and I seriously doubt Obama will break that streak given those stats. The Democrats who control Congress bear a large part of the responsibility for high oil & gas prices. Those prices are having a very negative impact upon our economy. Therefore the Democrats bear at the very least a part of the responsibility for the lackluster economy. Those Democrats include Pelosi, Reid and Obama!

Posted by: GeraldD | September 16, 2008 9:47 PM

Makeusproud:

Ask the millions of old people who never could save enough for retirment about those "socialist" welfare checks For many its their only income and the only thing separating them from living in the street.

As for medicare, your fine private sector insurance dont want old people at any price.

I personally had a seven month gap between the end of my corporate health benefits and my eligibility for medicare. So I called my insurance company and asked for a policy.

They turned me down flat. I had a heart attack in 1995. Luckily the state I live in makes it mandatory that the company sell me a policy because I had been with them previously.

They did. They charged me $1,120 a month.

I'm lucky. I could afford it.

There are 44 million without health insurance and there would be 50 million more without medicare.

Healthcare is a human right.

:-)

Posted by: toritto | September 16, 2008 9:47 PM

Why in the world would anyone vote against a man who will drop all taxes on the elderly who make less than $50,000 a year?

With the economy in a shambles, those who have worked their entire lives (and raised us) can no longer afford to live on their meager pensions. In the onslaught of inflation, food is up 30%.

Get real and wake-up! Only one candidate cares about the American People - Barack Obama.

OBAM/BIDEN 08

mcshame/palin - WHEN PIGS FLY!

Posted by: SusanMVeteranforObama | September 16, 2008 9:46 PM

The new Obama pay equity ad says that "women work to help support their families but are paid just 77 cents to a dollar a man makes. It's one more thing John McCain doesn't get about our economy. He opposed a law to guarantee women equal pay for equal work, calling it too great a burden on business.... A burden on business? How about the burden on our families."

HERE's how you covered this:
McCain's campaign quickly countered saying McCain's pays women on his senate staff better that Obama does.

HERE's the right way to cover it:
McCain's campaign was unable to refute the facts cited in the Obama ad.

SHAME on the media for thinking an irrelevant attack that's totally off the issue is "fair and balanced" reporting.

Posted by: Palin'sNoHillary | September 16, 2008 9:42 PM

toritto I could not agree with you more. That $1200 per resident amounted to $741 million dollars that Palin could have invested in alternative energy if she really wanted to reduce our dependency on foreign oil.

http://www.adn.com/legislature/story/442702.html

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 9:36 PM

Drill! Drill! Drill!

Know much about Alaska and its "budget"??
Of the 50 states, Alaska ranks No. 1 in taxes per resident and No. 1 in spending per resident. Its tax burden per resident is 21/2 times the national average; its spending, more than double. The trick is that Alaska's government spends money on its own citizens and taxes the rest of us to pay for it.
Although Palin, like McCain, talks about liberating ourselves from dependence on foreign oil, there is no evidence that being dependent on Alaskan oil would be any more pleasant to the pocketbook.
Alaska is, in essence, an adjunct member of OPEC. It has four different taxes on oil, which produce more than 89% of the state's unrestricted revenue. On average, three-quarters of the value of a barrel of oil is taken by the state government before that oil is permitted to leave the state.
Alaska residents each get a yearly check for about $2,000 from oil revenues, plus an additional $1,200 pushed through by Palin last year to take advantage of rising oil prices. Any sympathy the governor of Alaska expresses for folks in the lower 48 who are suffering from high gas prices or can't afford to heat their homes is strictly crocodile tears.
Sounds like an oil sheikdom doesn't it? Point is Alaska has a windfall profits tax on oil companies operating there - even on oil shipped to the other 49 states - even though it belongs to our country.
Alaska oil is no cheaper for someone in Massachusetts than it is for someone in India. The windfall taxes collected from the rest of us are sent out in nice annual checks to the residents of Alaska.
Is that like ..... state welfare/socialism? Nah!! Can't be!! They’re Republicans!! Tough budget you're "managing" there Gov. No wonder you support drilling!! Bigger checks for Alaskans!!

Posted by: toritto | September 16, 2008 9:32 PM

Anon.. Are we talking about the same Palin?

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM106_palin_doc.html

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 9:24 PM

GeraldD, why are we not drilling everywhere that we currently can?

You do realize that any benefit from expanded drilling will be 10 years in the works and amount to 3-4 cents per gal?

Here is a really good article by Tom Friedman for you...
"Making America Stupid
Why would Republicans, the party of business, want to focus our country on breathing life into a 19th-century technology — fossil fuels — rather than giving birth to a 21st-century technology — renewable energy? As I have argued before, it reminds me of someone who, on the eve of the I.T. revolution — on the eve of PCs and the Internet — is pounding the table for America to make more I.B.M. typewriters and carbon paper. “Typewriters, baby, typewriters.”"
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/opinion/14friedman.html?_r=1&em&oref=slogin

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 9:21 PM

Governor Sarah Palin, a real woman that can do it all well. govern a state and shake thing up, raise a family, hunt, fish, win a beauty pageant. She makes all of this look easy and with a smile.

All the liberal feminists whine and complaign about women rights yet they put down a women that has proven that they can do it all. Most liberal feminists think they represent all females but they do not because their agenda is not main stream.

So all of you liberal feminists go vote for Obama and see what he does for you, probably what he did for Hillary who was one of your own. Nothing!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 9:20 PM

Torrito...

The liberal agenda divides people. It takes from the most productive. That is not right...that is theft.

The conservative agenda asks that if you want the luxuries of life, you work for them. Ask yourself honestly...we live in the top 3% of the worlds population. Do we really have anyone that is poor?

Sure..we have people that want more things...but government should make sure people don't get wet (simple roof over their head) and don't starve (simple food). That's it...no perks!

Otherwise...people vote themselves a share of the treasury...sure to doom the country (look at SS and medicare and other entitlements).

I vote conservative b/c of values AND b/c if I want to earn the big bucks someday...I don't want someone taking it from me.


Posted by: MakeUsProud | September 16, 2008 9:18 PM

I'm an old retired guy who doesn’t have to work and I can honestly say it won't matter to me in the long run who wins this election. At my age any election I participate in could be my last. I do believe however that the current administration has been the worst in my lifetime (born during FDR). I don't think anyone can rationally deny that. We have had 8 years of corruption, unnecessary war and shredding of the Constitution. Recently we reached the highest unemployment rate in 5 years and the deregulated Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had to be rescued by the taxpayers before they collapsed of their own accord. Three of the five world class investment banks on Wall Street are gone. Now this party wants us to give them 4 more years so that John the "maverick" can fix Washington. ...like I was born yesterday.

If "small town working class" rust-belt voters and disgruntled Clinonistas in Ohio, Pa., Michigan and Indiana help re-elect the GOP then I for one don't want to hear anymore whining from them about their disappearing jobs and livelihoods, the high cost of college and gas, lack of health care etc. Let Johnnie's "patriotism" put food on your table. Go flip burghers!

Screw 'ya. Cling to your guns and religion. Pray to Jesus when you go hunting for a meal. Stay with that church and keep your weapon. You will need both the soup kitchen and the rifle. You will deserve what you get.

I got mine already. I live comfortably in the sunny South on a golf course, got my steady income, my "socialist" medicare and prescription drug coverage that you younger people wish you had but will never get under the Republicans. I sent my girls to college and they are successfully out on their own. The world won't run out of gas before I go and the planet won't get too hot.

A McCain election ain't gonna hurt me!

As Johnny Carson used to say - I upped my lifestyle - up yours!

God helps those who help themselves - if you're in deep doodoo economically and you vote Republican for their "values", you deserve it.

Posted by: toritto | September 16, 2008 9:13 PM

Many of the problems our economy faces have been brought on by high oil and high gasoline prices. For the past 2 years, the Democratic leadership, including Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barack Obama had pulled all sorts of strings to make the American people believe that the economy is collapsing. They have not passed up any opportunity to hurt the economy in order to make their point. Refusing to take common sense steps to keep oil and gasoline prices low is just one thing the Democratically controlled Congress has done to hurt the economy. We are now sending several billion dollars each and every day overseas. Our money is employing foreign workers to drill, pump, refine, and transport oil, instead of employing American workers to do those same jobs. Who in their right mind would question the impact this currency drain is having? Higher gas prices make it more difficult to meet one's home mortgage payments. And defaulting on Mortgages in part has brought on the current crisis. So should some of the fault of our current Wall Street Crisis be laid at the feet of Pelosi, Reid, Obama, and their other liberal Democratic friends? Without a doubt it should!

Posted by: GeraldD | September 16, 2008 9:11 PM

For all those who think McCain is for lower taxes ... he will follow in the footsteps of Bush who stuck to Reagan's Supply-Side economics like a book.

It doesn't work.

Rich people get tax cuts ... they buy a yacht. :-P

Posted by: Gumbo_Kamaaiana | September 16, 2008 9:08 PM

Makeusproud: If you make a lot of money - say more than $250K a year or more - then voting McCain is voting your economic interest and makes perfect sense.

If you're a regular schnook like most of us then you are not voting your economic interest but voting for McCain for some other reasaon - usually a "values" reason.

The GOP is great a diversionary tactics - welfare mothers - patriotism - god - guns and gays.

If you're sitting in a rust belt state for example with no job, no ability to send your kid to college or pay for his wedding, no healthcare and no retirement funds and you vote Rebpulican you deserve what you get.

Let McCain's patriotism put food on your table.

:-)

Posted by: toritto | September 16, 2008 9:08 PM

Jay...A liberal by any other name is just a socialist.

The title fits...someone that wants to take from someone that has something to give to someone that doesn't want to excel for that something. Collective community...blah blah blah. I think we're stronger when people choose solutions versus being forced into them. If YOUR GUYS really believe government is the solution, will you volunteer 10% more of your income to government? Or...does it need to be someone else?

Why does Obama (and every other lib) take tax deductions? I thought government needs/deserves more from the "rich."

How many Trillions of dollars have been redistributed in this country with little effect?


Posted by: makeUsProud | September 16, 2008 9:05 PM

Torrito....

I am fine and dandy paying taxes to help support your child that has real handicap.

I am not fine paying for able bodied people to sit on their asses.

My grandfather had a stroke and was immobile. It was horrible. Fortunately, he was wise with his money. But, had he not been, I think our country does owe the indigent something. They cannot take care of themselves and require care. That is compassion.

In the beginning...there was perfection. Then Adam and Eve ate from the wrong tree. God is clear that life is not easy....and we face that everyday. There are struggles, and that is the human experience.

I choose lower taxes and the ability to "donate" to the causes I deem worthy.

It's funny how the liberals in the race really contribute a pittance to charity compared to the EVIL rich conservatives. That's been my experience. Libs want to force you to give to a government...because they won't give to something they consider worthy otherwise.

Jeff.....I suggest we tax the lower wage earners more than the higher...now that is REAL incentive...DON'T YOU THINK?

Posted by: MakeUsProud | September 16, 2008 9:00 PM

McCain is for lower taxes?

Sure is, if you make $160,973 or more per year, especially so if you make more than $226,982.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 8:58 PM

To the morons that continue to use the categorical term of 'liberals'. You must also still use the term 'yankees', because you seem to still wave a Rebel Flag somewhere in your mind. Being a thoughtful and independent thinker does not mean that one is a liberal. Your vocabulary is as bad as "W's".

Posted by: Jay | September 16, 2008 8:53 PM

Think of it this way.

We have been hearing since Reagan that “Government is the problem”; that government should get “out of the way”; that the private sector can always do it better and cheaper.

If one has this philosophy then it is natural to undermine government; to get it “out of the way”.

The Bush administration has systematically undermined the efficacy of the government by gutting any agency which it views as “standing in the way”.

You appoint “your guys” no matter how incompetent; you oust the professionals; you gut their budgets. You oppose anything which might “impede” the private sector corporations - consumer protections; food inspections; road and bridge inspection; financial regulations. You politicize the Justice Department, so that it finds nothing, even torture, objectionable. Anti-trust enforcement becomes non-existent.

You never lift a voice or use the bully pulpit against corporations shipping jobs wholesale overseas. Our retailers buy their inventory from China and you ship them our money, never insisting that China adjust its foreign exchange rate. Then you borrow the money back from China to plug our budget deficit, caused by corporate tax cuts and cuts for the top 1% of Americans. You ship the borrowed money to our oil suppliers and oppose any effort to reduce dependency by seeking alternative renewable sources of fuel. After all, you’re an oil man.

You start an unnecessary war costing hundreds of billions of dollars much of it going to favored construction companies doing work shoddy enough to electrocute ten soldiers in their showers. Hired thugs masquerading as “security details” rake in more of the money, answering to no one. You “rebuild” Iraq (which we never had to destroy anyway) while the Iraqis have almost $80 billion in the bank.

You shred the Constitution, abridge habeas corpus. You get elected by selling your “values” while robbing the country blind. You never talk about economics. You always scare the voters with the next bogeyman around the corner. When the media disagrees with you, you attack it as “unfair” with “liberal bias”. You start your own media outlets that parrot the party line.

You take the country into a permanent state of war with a volunteer army - a state so permanent no one even notices it anymore as they go to the mall. You ask nothing from them but their acquiescence.

“Just go shopping folks!”

What we clearly have now is a corporate state run by those who think law doesn’t apply to them.

Call it fascist.

Posted by: toritto | September 16, 2008 8:53 PM

Obama's Double-Dealing Diplomacy
1 hour, 52 minutes ago (9-16-08)
Investor's Business Daily


Election '08: Barack Obama premised his campaign on calling for a speedy withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. But now he's been quietly telling Iraq "not so fast." It's part of a deceptive pattern.


Election: Barack Obama, who premised his campaign on calling for a speedy withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, has now been quietly telling Iraq "not so fast." It's part of a deceptive pattern.Iraq's Foreign Minister Moshyar Zebari told the New York Post's Amir Taheri that Obama made delaying the troops' return a key theme of his talks with Iraqi leaders during his campaign stop in Baghdad last July.

"He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the U.S. elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington," Zebari told Teheri, on the record.

Funny, that's not what Obama told voters. He has made an immediate pullout the cornerstone of his campaign. Taheri's report signals the Democratic standard-bearer would manipulate the war's end for political advantage and is willing to deceive voters to do it.

This in itself is reprehensible. But his secret calls also leave U.S. troops unnecessarily in harm's way. It's the kind of foreign policy meddling that serves Obama's interests over the national interest.

"Obama has given Iraqis the impression that he doesn't want Iraq to appear anything like a success, let alone a victory, for America," Taheri reported. "To be credible, his foreign-policy philosophy requires Iraq to be seen as a failure, a disaster, a quagmire, a pig with lipstick or any of the other apocalyptic adjectives used by the American defeat industry in the past five years."

Can Obama be trusted? We ask because he's shown a pattern of secretive double-dealing with voters, not just in his talking about small town voters one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco, as Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin pointed out, but particularly in foreign affairs.

It dates back to at least February, when Obama's economic adviser, Austan Goolsbee, secretly told the Canadian embassy that Obama's demagoguery against NAFTA in the primaries was just a Styrofoam-pillar bid to win the Ohio vote.

Obama's pattern of deception continued. In March, Colombian troops raided a FARC terrorist camp in Ecuador and recovered a terrorist computer belonging to a top FARC warlord, Raul Reyes.

Computer e-mails revealed that someone who knew Obama's positions had secretly met with the terrorists and assured them Obama would cut U.S. military aid under Plan Colombia and veto its free trade pact. Both are major goals of the Marxist terrorists aligned with America's enemies.

Subsequent events confirmed this. Obama did come out in favor of shutting Colombia out of free trade. More disturbingly, Obama adviser Daniel Restrepo last week told Colombia's Radio Caracol that Obama planned to convert the military aid Colombia needs to crush terrorists into social aid programs that don't.

That's not the end of it. Now Obama is double-dealing with Iraqi officials to leave American troops in harm's way and prolong the appearance of war long enough to call it a failure and win votes.

The astonishing thing about Obama's deals is they're the very thing Democrats accused Republicans of without a shred of proof.

They accused Richard Nixon of making a secret deal with the North Vietnamese to prolong the Vietnam war enough to presumably win election in 1968.

Years later, in 1980, they accused Ronald Reagan of making a secret deal with Iranian terrorists holding U.S. diplomats hostage to win election over incumbent Jimmy Carter.

Neither of these claims, often repeated by leftist historians, has ever been proven. But the statement of Iraq's foreign minister, speaking to a leading writer on foreign policy, is considerably stronger as evidence. It signals that Obama places politics over the national interest to the extent that he would work against his own public positions to gull voters into electing him.

It's the absolute opposite of John McCain's courageous position supporting the surge in Iraq, even as politicos were warning him he'd lose the election for it. "I'd rather lose an election than lose a war," McCain said.

With Obama's promises to sit down with dictators in Venezuela, Cuba, Syria and Iran, voters have a right to ask if he's made any deals at odds with his public condemnations of them, too. Before he starts acting like president, he needs to come clean to voters and reveal his true positions. Whatever they are, voters have a right to know.


Posted by: scott | September 16, 2008 8:52 PM

MCain opposed a bill that would afford equal pay to women and voted against breast cancer research? Good Lord! This I did not know. I'm very thankful for this article.

Posted by: Inkfingers | September 16, 2008 8:51 PM

To the morons out here that want to ridicule Senator Obama over his middle name, Hussein. Hussein is NO more threatening than 'George' or 'Bubba'. Food for thought.

Posted by: Jay | September 16, 2008 8:49 PM

To the person that stated
"While I believe that in other cases besides rape, resorting to an abortion means that you haven't thought the consequences through, but ultimately women should have the choice. After all, isn't it much better to terminate a pregnancy that would bring a life into this world that you can't afford to keep, versus bringing the child into the world and not being able to support it and give it a life equal if not better than your own?"

Couldn't the same be said for liberals that can't afford to live? I mean, you tax me to pay for things YOU want. Maybe we need to abort all liberals that suck away at the lives of the productive?

Nope...we just need to defeat you...as we will...because McCain has sound policies:
Lower taxes
Private solutions
Family Values
Strong Military
Promote Energy and Energy Independence

The only issue I have with him right now is whether he'll kick out the illegals and build the fence. I hope he does!

But...sorry Dems...cry in your taxpayer financed beer...NOBAMA is going down!

Yippeee!


I laugh when someone says the lower 50% receive little tax relief under McCain. WTF? How much do thee people pay in tax? $5? How do you give back something they didn't give?

When did it become evil to want something you earned vs having it taken from you by nanny state government?

Dang socialists....

You know..if we ever had another revolution in this country it would be bye-bye liberals. They can't fend for themselves...they only take.


Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 8:48 PM

So if I follow this right Jeff you are saying that not giving people in the lower and mid tax brackets a break would provide an incentive to do more? And somehow that giving the tax cuts to the upper income people and corporations will trickle down?

This is the age old bubble up/trickle down difference. You mention the very lost tax brackets, but the differences extend beyond that level.

Obama's biggest cuts happen in the $0 to $66,354 or about where 60% of taxpayers are.

From $66,354 to $160,972 the cuts are almost identical.

From $160,973 to $603,402 McCain's tax cuts are 1%-3.1% greater.

Above $603,402 Obama taxes the most and McCain cuts the most.

So people have to ask themselves where do they fit into this and what are they for.

Maybe this chart will help.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html

"The reason that the lowest income people would receive the least income tax benefit is because they DON'T pay income taxes. Did you know that 40 percent of American taxpayers don't pay any income tax?

Under Obama those people would receive a tax credit which means that the productive elements of society would be paying them not remain unproductive. Some incentive to improve themselves, don't you think?

Posted by: Jeff | September 16, 2008 8:17 PM"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 8:42 PM

CommonSense posted "You need to start thinking globally, and start worrying about the future of our NATION"

Yes, this is exactly why you need to vote Obama / Biden, contrary to what you say.

Calling someone a "liberal" is now a compliment. It is admitting they are honest, capable, common sense people. With an agenda for all Americans. To reduce taxes for the vast majority of Americans.

Of course, you just need to invert that definition for the Republican machine these days. Don't insult peoples' intelligence. It is clear what McCain is about. The same deceit, divisiveness, hate and fear mongering, and greed. Look at the economy, it is imploding. McCain says its sound. Duh. Palin talks war with Russia like its moose pie.

America needs to vote common sense.

Posted by: Paul Stewart | September 16, 2008 8:42 PM

How we got to where we are on choice:

1962: Abortion mother returns home
An American mother-of-four is on her way home amid a storm of controversy after being given a legal abortion in Sweden.
Sherri Finkbine, a TV presenter from Phoenix in Arizona, was denied an abortion in her home state following intense negative publicity surrounding her case.

The 30-year-old mother decided to terminate her fifth pregnancy after discovering that tranquilizers she had taken in the first few weeks of her pregnancy contained the drug Thalidomide.

In recent months there has been increasing evidence suggesting Thalidomide causes severe foetal deformities including missing limbs, deafness and blindness.

Public condemnation

Mrs Finkbine, host of children's television programme "Romper Room", told her story to the local newspaper, believing it would alert other mothers in the same situation to the dangers of the drug.

But she became the focus of an intense anti-abortion campaign and worldwide public condemnation.

The negative publicity led her local hospital in Phoenix to withdraw a tentative offer of a legal abortion for fear they may be held criminally liable - the current law in Arizona states that abortion can only be carried out to save the mother's life.

Mrs Finkbine and her husband, Robert, a school teacher, took the case to the Arizona State Supreme Court but were unsuccessful.

Despite vilification from anti-abortionists across the United States and the world she flew to Sweden where the operation was carried out.

After the operation it was confirmed that the foetus had no legs and only one arm .

Mr and Mrs Finkbine arrive in London en route to Phoenix, Ariz

When she returned to Phoenix Mrs Finkbine's local doctor asked her to register with another physician.
She was dismissed from her job, and her husband was suspended from his high school teaching post.

Their children were hounded, anonymous death threats poured in by post and telephone and the press swarmed around their home.

She and her husband went on to have two more children.

Worldwide, some 8,000 women who took thalidomide as a sedative and to alleviate morning sickness, gave birth to babies with deformities.

Thalidomide was available in the UK from 1958 and taken off the market in late 1961 after tests revealed it disrupted foetal development.

In 1973 after a barrage of press and public pressure, The Distillers Company (Biochemicals) Ltd, who produced and marketed the drug in Britain, eventually agreed to provide a trust fund and lump sum payouts to all children affected.

compliments of the BBC


Posted by: toritto | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM

Is anyone surprised? I mean, just look at what these women have to deal with:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184086&title=sarah-palin-gender-card

Posted by: H | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM

Posted by: H | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM

So a number of professional feminists endorse Barack Obama. What a surprise. As Cathy Young pointed out recently in an excellent op-ed, Sarah Palin is despised by these feminist pros because she doesn't claim to be a victim of sexism and because she doesn't look to the federal government to solve the "women's issues" formulated by professional leftwing feminists. Let's see how the working women of the US vote in November. Many will vote for Senator Obama. But many will vote for Gov. Palin because she is their model of what a woman can be.

Posted by: Graniteman | September 16, 2008 8:26 PM

Wow, all the PitBull backers are just rushing to expose their pathetic idiotic selves. Let's see, you back the PitBull and call attacks against her "sexist," and then you perverts decide to insult how the women from NOW and FTF look in the picture. Just more transparent hypocrisy.

I hope that McLame comes out with an ad saying, "Women count, but only if I think that they're hot!" Wait!, he doesn't need to say that. He already ditched his first wife when she was helpless to marry the Beer Bimbo. Now he's hitched his wagon to the Ms. Alaska. Pathetic-

Posted by: jill d. | September 16, 2008 8:24 PM

Check out this great McCain site. It's hilarious.

http://mccainandpalin08.com/

Posted by: lt | September 16, 2008 8:24 PM

Hey William Manning-
Stop whining and move to Canada.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 8:22 PM

Dear Mr. William Manning,

That is just blatant ignorance for Senator Obama. Just because his middle name is Hussein does not mean that he is that radical Islamic fundamentalist you think he is.

Please, if you're going to name call, at least get the facts straight.

Posted by: Gumbo_Kamaaina | September 16, 2008 8:21 PM

Touchdown! This is great news for America!

The Republican Christian movement is also strongly in favor of Obama!

Together we can win and take back America!

Let's work together America and elect Obama!

Posted by: Republican Christians for Obama! | September 16, 2008 8:21 PM

basementfrog

Apparently you didn't take a good look at the picture at the top of the page. Those creatures are a different species.

Posted by: Jeff | September 16, 2008 8:21 PM

PENTECOSTAL PALIN---A VP FOR CREATIONISM AND SPEAKING IN TONGUES BEFORE END OF DAYS.....YES, SHE IS OUR VERSION OF AN AMERICAN TALIBAN, BUT WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF 17 YEAR OLD VIRGINS IN ALASKA TO OFFER UP FOR HER TYPE OF CHANGE....SARAH, HAS BECOME THE NANUCKIE OF THE NORTH, NO DOUBT SHE ALSO NOW CLAIMS TO HAVE FOUND THE LOST NORTHWEST PASSAGE-----"JESUS SAID ALL WE HAD TO DO WAS MELT ALL THAT ICE!!!" ....." SEE WHAT A LITTLE GLOBAL WARMING CAN DO???? PRETTY SOON WE WON'T EVEN HAVE TO TRAVEL TO ARIZONA TO WARM UP IN THE WINTER."....YES, SARAH.....WE HEAR YOU!!!....BUT IT'S NOT WHAT WE WANT TO HEAR......PLEASE KEEP YOUR RELIGION OUT OF AMERICAN POLITICS.....AND YOU WONDER WHY REASONABLE, WORKING WOMEN ARE ENDORSING OBAMA....SIMPLY BECAUSE HE IS THE BEST CHOICE.

Posted by: benighse | September 16, 2008 8:19 PM

Every year and its always the same song and dance. They all come out of the wood work and promise everything under the sun, when in reality you get very little. The gas price still goes up and we pay. HIGHER TAX and we still pay. I vote every year still ending up disappointed. I just wish we could go for none of the above and start over. One has tried to sway women with a woman, and got more men voters. The other promises a new Washington and CANNOT even pledge to the flag or the Bible on which this country was based on to start with. I say GOD please help us all.

Posted by: William Manning | September 16, 2008 8:19 PM

Remember that old coyote ugly...


"I'd chew my arm off and slip away"?

The real women are gone; the ugly old coyotes remain with McCain.

Posted by: basementfrog | September 16, 2008 8:19 PM

Anonymous,

The reason that the lowest income people would receive the least income tax benefit is because they DON'T pay income taxes. Did you know that 40 percent of American taxpayers don't pay any income tax?

Under Obama those people would receive a tax credit which means that the productive elements of society would be paying them not remain unproductive. Some incentive to improve themselves, don't you think?

Posted by: Jeff | September 16, 2008 8:17 PM

Anonymous,

Umm,

"We should endorse the best candidate for the country and that is Obama/Biden!!!"

First of all, Obama and Biden are 2 people. They are not a candidate.

"The abortion rate.....decreased the fastest under Clinton."

Second, that's because he had a vasectomy.

Third, get a job!

Posted by: Jeff | September 16, 2008 8:12 PM

Palin is not representative of the typical woman. She is a lying Republican rascal dressed in a skirt. She is the last person in the world most women would want to have a beer with. And I don't see how many can relate to her life and family choices.

The end comment by McCain reflects the typical approach by McCain on the issues. Indeed it underlines his idea of change - he likes to change the subject. I mean, who is worried about the women in their campaign offices. We are talking about changing the workforce in America.

But that is the kind of deflection and evasion that is classic Bush/Rove/McCain/Palin.

Posted by: Paul Stewart | September 16, 2008 8:10 PM

Barack Hussein Obama is gonna' lose come November. Start crying now, you whiny liberal wackos!

Posted by: Former Democrat | September 16, 2008 8:08 PM

This is common misinformation.

For all the details on both tax plans see this doc, sort out the details and decide for yourself.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411693_CandidateTaxPlans.pdf

To quote:

"The Obama plan would still provide the largest tax breaks, measured as a percentage of after-tax income, to those in the bottom quintile. Each quintile would, on average, receive a tax cut but those at the very top of the income scale would receive tax increases. On average, the top 1 percent would receive a tax increase equal to about 3 percent of income; that figure would rise to about 5 percent of income for the richest 1 in 1,000 households.
As in 2009, the McCain tax plan provides very little benefit to households at the bottom of the income distribution in 2012. Households in the lowest quintile receive tax cuts averaging about 1 percent of income. Because McCain’s plan extends all of the regressive 2001–06 tax measures (other than complete repeal of the estate tax) and cuts corporate taxes, those in the top 1 percent receive average cuts representing 9.5 percent of income; that figure is 11.6 percent for the top 0.1 percent of households.
URBAN-"


"I hope you're retired from your middle management position now because if you're not, Obama really thinks you make TOO much money and need to be "neighborly" and let him decide who to give your extra money to.

Lot's of luck sucker."

Posted by: Jeff | September 16, 2008 7:55 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 8:06 PM

toritto you may not have understood my post. I didn't ask a question or solicit your response. I was stating my opinion on your victim status.

Calling me a moron was a bit uncalled for.

Posted by: Jeff | September 16, 2008 8:05 PM

Wow. Sure are a lot of liberals trying to perpetuate the Obama-Biden myth on this web site. Are you all friggin' nuts?!?!?!

Look, first off, saying a woman is out of touch with women, is foolish, to begin with. Feminist groups will always support the Democratic Party...having had Billary as a potential candidate for President just makes it all the more convenient for the Democrats to say, "See. I told you we're the women's party..." Paaaaalleeease!!!!

Obama's background is SOOOOOOOO questionable, it's pathetic. People, you really need to enlighten yourselves... And Biden??? So, he's a better VP choice than Palin???????????? HOW?! In what universe?!?!!!!!! Want to see our country really fall apart??? Elect Obama-Biden, and you'll see us fall from the GREAT COUNTRY we are, to a nation losing oh-so-important economic, technological, and national defense-related ground to countries like China, the E.U. conglomerate, and other major international players. Trust me, folks, the world is not what is used to be. You need to start thinking globally, and start worrying about the future of our NATION, instead of your own immediate, personal needs. If you have children or grandchildren, the only way we're going to be able to preserve the American way of life is if we elect a President who has a proven track record of showing strength and honor in even the worst of times life has to offer. Elect McCain-Palin. Do yourselves and our future generations a favor. NO TO OBAMA-BIDEN!! VOTE YES FOR MCCAIN-PALIN!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: CommonSense | September 16, 2008 8:05 PM

Hooray! This is wonderful news. Perhaps more people, women and men, will begin looking objectively at the policies and see that Obama/Biden are so much more in line with what Americans say they want regardless of gender or political party. Sound policies on the economy, education, investment in infrastructure, energy and more! Woo hoo! It is insulting to insist that I should vote for Palin because she is a woman, or women organizations should endorse her for the same reason. We should endorse the best candidate for the country and that is Obama/Biden!!! And for any single issue voters out there who base a decision solely on pro-life, please read the research. The abortion rate has steadily decreased since 1974, and decreased the fastest under Clinton. The decrease in abortion rate SLOWED under Bush arguably due to his failed sex education policies and the huge increase in the number of people living in poverty. The best way to reduce abortions is to educate people and fight poverty/the welfare cycle. If you really want to decrease abortions, vote for the social programs that reduce them, vote Obama!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 8:02 PM

Another thing. Why does choice only matter when it comes to abortion? Why don't I have the choice on what to do with the money I earn? Why does the government take so much for redistribution to those who made poor choices while I was making wise ones? Why does the government force me to participate in their ridiculous Social Security system where I will not only get a return on my investment but will actually receive less than I paid in? I agree that the government doesn't belong in a woman's womb but they should stay out of most every other aspect of our lives as well.

Also, why are men forced to pay child support for children they never wanted and preferred to have aborted? Don't men have rights as to whether they want to take on the responsiblity of being a parent or is that decision solely up to women?

Posted by: Jeff | September 16, 2008 8:01 PM

Jeff: I usually dont respond to morons.

Posted by: toritto | September 16, 2008 7:57 PM

Dear Anonymous:

I feel for your loss as well.

We didn't know in advance how Mike was going to be......but if we had we would have wanted to make the choice ourselves...actually herself.

When my wife got pregnant with our fourth child she considered abortion. We had one healthy kid out of three. Her friends and family were worried how things would turn out. We talked it over and she told me she couldn't go through with another pregnancy.

I made her an appointment for an abortion around lunch time. I came home from work to take her. She started crying. She couldn't do it. We had another healthy girl.

BUT SHE HAD THE CHOICE!

We can all live our values everyday. We just can't force someone else to live our values.

Posted by: totitto | September 16, 2008 7:56 PM

Toritto that was a very touching story. I suggest that you never should have had kids in the first place. It doesn't sound like you have the capacity to love someone for any reason beyond what they can do for you.

I hope you're retired from your middle management position now because if you're not, Obama really thinks you make TOO much money and need to be "neighborly" and let him decide who to give your extra money to.

Lot's of luck sucker.

Posted by: Jeff | September 16, 2008 7:55 PM


http://www.politico.com/static/PPM106_palin_doc.html

Finally I read some facts.

Shame on the citizens who have no respect for women or their leaders (especially those who are women). I marveled how Sarah Palin was attacked just because she was picked as a VP candidate. Shame on those ugly Americans and unprofessional media.

Posted by: Outsider's view | September 16, 2008 7:55 PM

Dear MsLook@thefacts,

While I cannot speak for Torrito, I think what he is trying to say is that people should have a choice ... whether or not they are ready for that emotional task or not. After all ... they have a right to live their life as they see fit as well.

While I have never had kids of my own yet (I'm still a college student) ... it's a personal choice we all deserve to make ... and I think that's the idea ... a choice.

We should be allowed to make the choice ourselves, not by the government.

Posted by: Gumbo_Kamaaina | September 16, 2008 7:55 PM

Some interesting insight on Palin from her former competitors.

http://tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=95f6fdd6-ab58-4afd-b144-adfb27e340aa

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 7:53 PM

ALASKA LOVES SARAH for the great work she has done reforming government to work for the citizens, and AMERICA IS FALLING IN LOVE WITH SARAH for her genuine sincerity, honesty and brilliant mind.
It is time to recognize that women can do a great job, many times better than men and Sarah Palin's record shows she is exceptional.
THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN AND THE LIBERAL MEDIA IS IN DISARRAY, CONFUSED AND FOAMING AT THE MOUTH after the Maverick, John McCain chose Sarah Palin, a woman reformer for VP. Their response has been a vicious attack on Sarah ranging from insults to smearing and the sexist tactics that brought Hillary's campaign crashing down.
OBAMA FRACTURED AND DIVIDED THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WHEN HE REJECTED THE CHOICE OF 18 MILLION DEMOCRATS and instead of choosing Hillary Clinton for VP, he chose an old Washington politician Joe Biden, and by this grave mistake in choice, negated the flag of "change" Obama had been waiving and replaced it with the flag of "more of the same".
On the other side, THE MAVERICK STOLE THE MANTRA OF CHANGE FROM BARACK WHEN HE SELECTED A WOMAN REFORMER FOR VP, who has gained the respect of the State she governs as well as of the nation governors.
THE MCCAIN/PALIN TICKET HAS GIVEN HOPE FOR THE FUTURE OF AMERICA TO ALL THE 18 MILLION FORMER HILLARY SUPPORTERS who now have a very compelling reason to vote for the republican ticket, as a way to put their country first by electing a president that has the qualifications, experience and love for our country and at the same time elect a woman to the White House as equal partners in governance and leadership of our country.
Country First!

DEMOCRATS FOR MCCAIN/PALIN!

Posted by: Manolete | September 16, 2008 7:52 PM

Palin is frightening just look at the facts. Yes, its great that she is a woman running as VP of an all boys club, I congradulate her, but that does not mean she is qualified. She barely graduated college, changing schools multiple times whereas Obama is a scholar, she denies human involvement in global warming... As a woman working in environmental science this is just obsurd, she has spent millions of alaskan dollars on aerial hunting obviously she has no concept of conservation, not to mention her stand on reproductive rights and the failing school system in her state.. I could go on and on.. Simply put she isnt the right PERSON for the job.. Do a little research people and quit being manipulated by the media...

Posted by: MsLook@thefacts | September 16, 2008 7:51 PM

Torrito, I feel for you and your loss.
But, I went through the same with a grandson. So, are you saying that you would rather have killed your son than having him for ten years? That's the gist of your post.

I don't agree with you at all.

Posted by: annonymouse | September 16, 2008 7:50 PM

I have to say you people are totally nuts. The distorotion that women are paid far less than men is not true when you look at equivalent education, experience and position. You can't just take an average across all working men and women. This is because women have CHOICE and often choose to take time out of the work force to raise families. When they return 15-20 years later they're behind the men who in many cases didn't have the CHOICE to stay home and raise the family. DUH.

Why don't you all stop being whiners and victims and admit that there are differences between the sexes that cut both ways.

As for this group of angry cows supporting Obama, fantastic! Scores of normal women see this as another reason to move toward McCain and Palin. Palin is a woman who successfully balances home, family and career with a smile on her face. The fact that she can excel with a smile on her face is what really angers these witches.

Posted by: Jeff | September 16, 2008 7:48 PM

The women of NOW. They won't tolerate any penis other than their own.

Posted by: Hillary Swank | September 16, 2008 7:44 PM

Imagine, women would back Hillary Clinton, a PROVEN habitual liar on almost every issue, a woman who doesn't even have the moxie to leave a man who makes her look like a cold fish, (until he didn't help her to become president). Don't hold your breath until she files for divorce now, if she has any ----- at all. They flock to Hillary and put down a hard-working woman who has more experience than Obama or Hillary. Hillary Clinton is a proven liar, and who knows what all from her days as first lady of Arkansas. Does it not bother you to see her talk about not backing NAFTA, when she was attending pro-NAFTA meetings. That she backs unions, when she spent six years on the Wal-Mart board, the most union breaking company in America. Was she asleep?? She is against NAFTA and foreign made goods, while 90 % of Wal-Mart goods are from China. Read up libs.

Posted by: annonymouse | September 16, 2008 7:43 PM

Woman! Listen up! Letme tell you a story.

My wife and I had a profoundly retarded son - he never spoke a word or walked - he never sat up - he never looked at me - for all I knew he was deaf and blind as well.

Every meal he ever ate we fed him. Every diaper he ever wore we changed him. Every foot he ever moved from where he was lying we carried him. Every time he went to bed we carried him upstairs. Every morning we carried him downstairs.

We became a test marketing project for Depends adult diapers - we got 'em free and had to let the manufacturer know what we thought of them.

He lived to be ten years old. We did nothing but worry about what was going to happen to him. Then one day he simply woke up and died.

My wife gave up the best ten years of her life caring for Michael. We got no help from any government agency except our local school for handicapped kids. No medicare ; no medicaid; no state assistance. You see I "made too much money" - I was a middle management officer in a bank with two other kids and it was the only income in my home - but I made too much money.

Michael is gone now. So is my wife. She never went to church. She was not a believer. If there is a God in his heaven then she is sitting under a massive oak watching her perfect 10 year old son play with his 12 year old brother (yes - we lost two boys) in the green grass under a sunny sky with a cool breeze moving through his hair mop - "Mommy look at me!! Look at my kite!!" and she will wave and smile.

There was no preacher at her funeral - except for a local female Methodist minister who knew my wife, a woman who never went to church, a woman who lived Christianity in her daily life . I will not forget her kindness. She spoke without being asked of how this woman went on to have two fine daughters after her two disabled sons and how she made a lunch hour appointment for an abortion and changed her mind at the last minute.

Talk is cheap. It’s a lot easier talk about having a kid like Mike than to be the parents. Too many of you fine religious folk feel so good about yourselves, then you smile and go on to your next “Fellowship” meeting or casserole supper knowing you saved another life.

No one should have to bear a Michael at 30 if they don’t want to.......that’s choice.

Those who advocate the opposite should be prepared to urge society to provide care for that child for its entire life, even if you have to raise taxes. It’s the cost of being pro-life. Think of that the next time you see two old people pushing an adult retarded child in a wheel chair in the mall.

Posted by: toritto | September 16, 2008 7:42 PM

The brutal attacks on Palin by the feminazi's should of been expected. Palin represents the best of womanhood and American values..she chose life for her baby's rather than killing them, even the retarded one.

Posted by: Todd Pollard | September 16, 2008 7:42 PM

Sarah Palin is a diversion to distract us from what has actually be going on these past eight years. Those of you who are even considering her, consider this:

If you would have asked her six months ago if she would be nominated for the position of VP of the US, she would have laughed at you. How ready can she possibly be?

Now the GOP are continually grooming her so that she seems ready enough to you. She has five kids - one just headed off to Iraq (how distracting is that?, one is pregnant (how distracting is that?), the same one is making wedding plans (oh my, how distracting is that!), another one is a young infant (how distracting is that), and that same infant has a disability (how distracting is that)?

She is being used to manipulate us, and it's time to wake up! Consider the following article:

This is a very interesting read concerning McCain's choice of Palin and Republican manipulation from an unusual and surprising religious perspective. I highly recommend checking it out:

http://www.newsflavor.com/Opinions/McCain-Hijacks-Christianity-Via-Palin.240929

Posted by: LaRae | September 16, 2008 7:41 PM

Palin is not a real candidate. She is just a pawn. She is being used by the McCain camp. If Obama had picked Hillary, McCain would not have picked Palin. McCain's top 5 campaign managers were previously lobbyist for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Oooo that tells me there's real change on the way. Fight the Orwellian candidates!!!! Take back our media. Close down FOX news for they are the prapaganda machine of the right. Our nation is at stake!! Save our constitution!!! Vote Obama/Biden.

Posted by: Julie | September 16, 2008 7:41 PM

You might want to look at the direction your red line is heading though...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

"Don't know. Is that the reason that I am now in the lead in the average of 11 polls??
Out of touch hmmmm?

Posted by: McCain?? | September 16, 2008 7:26 PM"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 7:39 PM

While both candidates' picks of their VP being rather surprising, a McCain/Palin ticket is definitely frightening.

Sarah Palin is a mother of a daughter who is unmarried, young, and pregnant ... she even said in I believe, 2006, that even if her own daughter was raped, she would not allow an abortion.

While I believe that in other cases besides rape, resorting to an abortion means that you haven't thought the consequences through, but ultimately women should have the choice. After all, isn't it much better to terminate a pregnancy that would bring a life into this world that you can't afford to keep, versus bringing the child into the world and not being able to support it and give it a life equal if not better than your own?

She also claimed this year that while Alaska is suffering the effects of global warming, it is not man-made ... how can it NOT be man-made? Is this someone we really want in the VP seat ...? Someone who wants to ignore the climate change going on in this world and wants us all instead to suffer from it? Low-lying island nations will disappear due to the rising sea levels ... all the scientists in the world cannot be wrong.


Also, people need to realize that while Obama advocates for change in Washington ... speaking about it and bringing about it are two different things. Our government is set up so that things are hard to change ... if not, we could have someone like Thatcher in the UK who did a lot because the English system is set up and that way and allows it :) While I am confident he can bring about change, if he makes in to the Oval Office, we need to realize that change may not necessarily happen in a few weeks :)

All in all, I hope that people take a more enlightened approach to this election and look at both candidates, their platforms, and stop nitpicking at the little things and look at the big picture :)

Obama/Biden '08

Posted by: Gumbo_Kamaaina | September 16, 2008 7:39 PM

"Is it just me or are the NOW women uglier than a pig with lipstick?"

The thing is, the pig is actually the cutest of animals. Between the snout, the curly tail, and the pink color. To coin a phrase about these NOW harpies: They can put on lipstick, but they still ain't no pigs!

Posted by: Michelle Obama | September 16, 2008 7:37 PM

That's Walter MONDALE not Walter "Monday" -- but who remembers?

Posted by: annie simon | September 16, 2008 7:36 PM

I likes me some pigs is all. Boy, I likes to infiltrate a pig where the sun don't shine.

Posted by: Democrats 08 | September 16, 2008 7:32 PM

Quote: "WE NEED CHANGE: (DEMOCRAT) OBAMA IN WHITE HOUSE

Posted by: CHANGE | September 16, 2008 7:25 PM "

Change is just a word with no meaning (except to Obama). A change from what to what and HOW??
For someone with the least experience of all the candidates and who has voted "present" more than yes or no in his short time as senator, he can't change anything. Especially since Congress will have to vote for change. The democrats have been in power in Congress for years and they haven't changed anything yet, except for the worse. Think on it!

Posted by: annonymouse | September 16, 2008 7:32 PM

From the looks of these "women" in the picture, I hardly think they are representative of ALL WOMEN! They are OLD!

Posted by: CAO | September 16, 2008 7:31 PM

Is it just me or are the NOW women uglier than a pig with lipstick?

Posted by: Obama approves this comment | September 16, 2008 7:31 PM

@Joanna "Well, he should have chosen a woman for his VP, then he would not be having this problem."

Are you serious? You are saying women would support a candidate just because there is a woman on the ticket? Maybe women who are sexist would vote that way, but not all women!

Posted by: Kelly | September 16, 2008 7:30 PM

How do you kill the environment in Alaska? Don't need to piggy Palin is already on that one. How do you kill he environment every where? elect piggy McCain and piggy Palin.

Posted by: Democrats 08 | September 16, 2008 7:29 PM

Equal pay for womem? Look at the staffs of Obama and McCain. McCain has a higher percentage of women and they are piad just a little more than the men. Contrast that to Obama where there is a big difference in pay. That is on his own staff. Sure he believes in equal pay...NOT.

Posted by: obama's not | September 16, 2008 7:29 PM

It is with great enthusiasm that I announce today, on behalf of the nation's oldest and largest women's rights organization, that the National Organization for Women Political Action Committee (NOW PAC) proudly endorses Sen. Barack Obama for President of the United States.

It is no coincidence that I am joined in this announcement by so many allied organizations that collectively represent a broad and diverse cross-section of U.S. women. From teachers to social workers, from business owners to college students, women in this country are lining up behind the candidate who is out there every day standing up -- clearly and consistently -- for women. Women of all ages, races and ethnicities are coming together in support of Sen. Obama and his pledge to fulfill this country's promise of equal opportunity for our daughters as well as all our sons.

Although it is very unusual for us to endorse in a presidential election, this is an unprecedented candidate and an unprecedented time for our country. The NOW PAC reviewed Sen. Obama's record and public statements on issues that disproportionately affect the women of this nation, and I spoke with him at length about his commitment to women's equality. For example:

On pay equity. Sen. Obama is a co-sponsor of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act, legislation to end wage discrimination against women.

On reproductive rights. Sen. Obama is a co-sponsor of the Prevention First Act, to strengthen access to contraception and reproductive health care, and prevent unwanted pregnancies. He strongly supports Roe v. Wade and will oppose any efforts to overturn it.

On violence against women. Sen. Obama supports the continued reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act -- of which Sen. Joe Biden is the chief sponsor -- as well as the Security and Financial Empowerment (SAFE) Act, which is legislation to provide legal, medical and financial support to victims of domestic violence.

On the Supreme Court. Sen. Obama opposed the nominations of George Bush's extreme right-wing nominees to the Supreme Court, who have consistently ruled against women's rights,

For more than a decade, Barack Obama has said "yes" to women's rights, while John McCain has consistently said "no" - NO to pay equity, NO to contraceptive access and reproductive rights, NO to appointing Supreme Court judges who will uphold women's rights and civil rights, NO to funding shelters and other anti-violence programs, and NO to supporting working moms and dads with policies that support work/life balance.

NOW supported Sen. Hillary Clinton in the primary, and now we join with her in saying "NO" -- No Way, No How, No McCain! And we proudly stand arm-in-arm with her in putting our hopes and our dreams, our hard work and our hard-earned money, behind the next President of the United States -- Barack Obama, and his running mate, longtime friend and ally of women, Sen. Joe Biden.

Posted by: Cody | September 16, 2008 7:28 PM

They are not liberal feminist groups...they are just liberal groups.

How many women were freed of oppression because of Bush? How about tens of millions?

Yet...they can't get over it. I'd like to see the parade of people proud they had an abortion. It's a short line.

They won't back Palin why? Amazing...a tremendously successful woman...extremely intelligent...yet CONSERVATIVE....ohhhhh the horror. She's for personal accountability. She's for making her way. She's for family.

She must be the devil.

They're jacked that she upstaged Hillary in a HUGE way. She has class, a respectable family, and the Clintons aren't a pimple on her butt.

This is awesome.

She did NOT take paying for rape kits out of the Wasilla budget. Give me a break.

I don't care about your uterus...just the innocent BABY you want to murder. You made the choice when you spread your legs ladies....

And...just because some ultra libs attending a Mary Kay party don't like her...who cares? Most women do relate to her. A woman with a career, a family and responsibilities. She doesn't make herself out as a victim. She values life. She takes on the establishment.

She'll make an EXCELLENT VP and hopefully PRESIDENT someday.

Posted by: MakeUsProud | September 16, 2008 7:27 PM

Quote; "Who is out of touch now Mccain.


Don't know. Is that the reason that I am now in the lead in the average of 11 polls??
Out of touch hmmmm?

Posted by: McCain?? | September 16, 2008 7:26 PM

If you want to know more about Sarah Palin this 63pg document is a good place to start. Read, research, and come to your own conclusions.

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM106_palin_doc.html

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 7:25 PM

Palin is a pig and a man, I guess that makes her a pigman. Oink oink..

Posted by: Democrats 08 | September 16, 2008 7:25 PM

WE NEED CHANGE: (DEMOCRAT) OBAMA IN WHITE HOUSE

Posted by: CHANGE | September 16, 2008 7:25 PM

Please don't GENERALIZE --- I'm a woman and there's no way I'll vote for Obama! So it is NOT all Women who are turning to this very INEXPERIENCED candidate!!

I'm embarassed to have people think I MIGHT be part of this group of woman turning to Obama!

NObama -- for me!

Posted by: CAO | September 16, 2008 7:24 PM

Quote: "By the way, Sarah Palin was an unwed mother to be, most likely that is why they eloped!!"

By the way, so was Obama's mother, and at a very early age.

So???? Look up James David Manning PhD on youtube if you want to know the truth. Oh, you don't want to know the truth, just rumors.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 7:24 PM

Just another "hackey mam" with lipstick? in the words of Austin Powers -- "That ain't no woman! It's a man, man!"

Posted by: Democrats 08 | September 16, 2008 7:24 PM

Those women are so ugly, they make my dick roll up.

Posted by: Gloria Frankensteinem | September 16, 2008 7:22 PM

Senator Obama is certified as the least experienced candidate among others.

Senator Obama has pressed the present button many times than a Yes or even No button, so his claim of bringing change is many times questionable, before voting.

We should not have Senator Obama who would learn for first four years in White House.

Posted by: John | September 16, 2008 7:17 PM

I cannot believe these Women's groups are going to vote for Obama. They were supporting Hillary and now Obama is using her, and other well known women that were on his VP list. Now he is asking them to go out and get votes for him because of the influx of votes for McCain due to Sara Palin. Well, he should have chosen a woman for his VP, then he would not be having this problem. This is the USA and you are not required to vote for your party.

Posted by: Joanna

The women who supported Hillary and are now supporting Senator Obama are wise, intelligent women who recognize Obama's Hillary's policies are almost identical on issues; we also recognize that McCain and his "partner and soulmate", Sarah Palin are way off base and totally opposite of Hillary and Obama's policies and views on what is best for America and for us, ALL of us, WOMEN and MEN, and CHILDREN, GRANDCHILDREN! Pilan's husband belonged to an outfit that has NO RESPECT FOR AMERICA; they identify themselves as "ALASKANS" and say they are NOT AMERICANS!! They have tried to secede from the USA, and Todd Pilan was right in the middle of it!! Pilan accompanied her husband to this outfit's "club" meetings. Just recently she told this group they were doing a good job. WHY should we place this ANTI-AMERICAN COUPLE anywhere near the White House?? Perhaps McCain chose Pilan to help him completely destroy our country. McCain is so fickle that I have lost all respect for him!! What did he think? That any woman would do? Sarah Pilan is a bimbo compared to Hillary Clinton who has worked for women and children and their rights for most of her adult life!!

By the way, Sarah Palin was an unwed mother to be, most likely that is why they eloped!! They were married ONLY almost 8 months when she gave birth to their eldest son; now her daughter has followed in her mother's role model and is an unwed mother as well! Sarah preaches "abstinance"; however, she herself did not abide by that belief and neither has her daughter!!

Posted by: NinaK | September 16, 2008 7:13 PM

Abortion is not about yes/no choice. It's about yes choice only (or you'll be condemned by feminists who hate other women).

Posted by: Dmitriy | September 16, 2008 7:07 PM

NOW is full of sh!t. To them abortion is more important than woman's equality and right.

Posted by: Dmitriy | September 16, 2008 7:05 PM

What a shame on Mccain he appoints Palin as VP who is so oppose to all the things women care like equal pay, womens' right to choose etc and then Mccain appoints Carly Fiorina who made $21 MILLION as CEO of HP to court women's votes. C'mon where are Mccain's morals who is he kiddin like all women will just flock to his party because he has 2 women at high profile positions. Who is out of touch now Mccain.

Posted by: rita | September 16, 2008 7:05 PM

The Media is owned by the conservatives and Republicans in this country.
Palin does not represent me or my views.
I find it interesting that the Republican party, which is interested in big business and not the average Joe, is known for its slime machine and swift boating of candidates it wishes to get rid of, has somehow magically become the religious party because of its stance on 2 issues- Abortion and same sex marriage. I see nothing about the Republican party that is even remotely Christian.

Posted by: Just Josephine | September 16, 2008 7:04 PM

You go girls and ladies...you rock with Obama/Biden ticket. Finally it seems like the msg is getting out how out of touch Mccain is when it comes to women's issues.

Posted by: tony | September 16, 2008 7:02 PM

LOL @ Therese

The ONLY reason you're voting for her is because she's a woman? Given that, your vote, along with the "countless" other women who are going to vote for her just because she's a woman shouldn't be counted. Why wouldn't you want the country to have a better few years than the last 8 have been? Just to see a woman in the white house? We all understand that women are important, and that we can't get anywhere with out 'em. But there's a limit on what you do just because someone is a woman.

Remember this when you vote, Palin is going to take most of your choices as a woman away. Choices that her daughter was allowed to make, but you and your daughter will be robbed of those choices if she's elected. So go ahead and vote for her, but don't come crying and complaining when everything is up-side-down in your world in a year or so.

Posted by: Joe | September 16, 2008 7:01 PM

LOL! You Republicans are so funny! If you weren't so damn dangerous, you little buggers would almost be cute. Let's take a vote now. How many conservatives in the house are voting based on the moral decay of society...and how many of you are rich (or at least were until Bush got his hands in the cookie jar)? LOL!

Posted by: America Undone | September 16, 2008 7:01 PM

LOL! You Republicans are so funny! If you weren't so damn dangerous, you little buggers would almost be cute. Let's take a vote now. How many conservatives in the house are voting based on the moral decay of society...and how many of you are rich (or at least were until Bush got his hands in the cookie jar)? LOL!

Posted by: America Undone | September 16, 2008 7:01 PM

Was going to vote for Hillary but will now vote for McCain. If only we Dems would nominate someone near the center. He/She would be a shoe in! Have we not learned from Mondale,Dukakis,Gore and Kerry? As you will see again, The elite left wing of thr Dem, party does not speak for most Americans.

Posted by: Roger | September 16, 2008 7:01 PM

As a women who became an adult in the late 60s, I have watched NOW move into an arena that is ever more anti-female. They have become ever more strident and liberal- and they define the WHOLE world as an abortion issue. They define their political world by its ability to chose abortion as a method of birth control. And now, with a real chance to have a woman in the White House, they STILL would rather fight about an issue that is all ready the law of the land, (neither Bush nor Reagan were pro abortion but the law stood) and sacrifice a competent woman on the altar of their uterine rights. I am ashamed of them. And a very dear friend of mine who has NEVER once in her 58 years voted for a democrat informed me that SHE will vote for Palin. Why? Because she was and is a working mother of 4 WITH a severely handicapped (since birth) 27 year old son. I am sick of these women who push abortion as a form of birth control despite the availability of birth control including the morning after pill.

Posted by: Sharron | September 16, 2008 7:00 PM

Governor Sarah Palin, a real woman that can do it all well. govern a state and shake thing up, raise a family, hunt, fish, win a beauty pageant. She makes all of this look easy and with a smile.

All the liberal feminists whine and complaign about women rights yet they put down a women that has proven that they can do it all. Most liberal feminists think they represent all females but they do not because their agenda is not main stream.

So all of you liberal feminists go vote for Obama and see what he does for you, probably what he did for Hillary who was one of your own. Nothing!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 7:00 PM

As a women who became an adult in the late 60s, I have watched NOW move into an arena that is ever more anti-female. They have become ever more strident and liberal- and they define the WHOLE world as an abortion issue. They define their political world by its ability to chose abortion as a method of birth control. And now, with a real chance to have a woman in the White House, they STILL would rather fight about an issue that is all ready the law of the land, (neither Bush nor Reagan were pro abortion but the law stood) and sacrifice a competent woman on the altar of their uterine rights. I am ashamed of them. And a very dear friend of mine who has NEVER once in her 58 years voted for a democrat informed me that SHE will vote for Palin. Why? Because she was and is a working mother of 4 WITH a severely handicapped (since birth) 27 year old son. I am sick of these women who push abortion as a form of birth control despite the availability of birth control including the morning after pill.

Posted by: Sharron | September 16, 2008 7:00 PM

Concerned - Obama is not as qualified as Governor Palin - that is scary.

Posted by: Kimt | September 16, 2008 7:00 PM

Yes, I think the tide is turning. The Sarah gimmick is wearing off and we are all now starting to see the truth.

I live in Montana, where we had a female governor on the last go-round. It was neat because she was the First Woman Governor of Montana. The honeymoon didn't last long. She turned out to be SOOOOOO lame, clueless in fact. There were bumper stickers all over saying "My governor is dumber than YOUR governor!"

She was giving ALL women a bad name. She had to go, and we voted her right on out of our hair, thank goodness. And that's why we have a Democratic governor in this red state today!!

So please take it from me, do NOT vote for Sarah Palin just because of her gender. Gender ain't nothin' if there's no substance and integrity to back it up. Any girl can use her sex appeal to get ahead, but that type of woman is usually looking out for HERSELF ONLY!!

Come on, you other gals know the type. That's Sarah in a nutshell. The WORST type of social climber!!

Posted by: lindsay | September 16, 2008 7:00 PM

Governor Sarah Palin, a real woman that can do it all well. govern a state and shake thing up, raise a family, hunt, fish, win a beauty pageant. She makes all of this look easy and with a smile.

All the liberal feminists whine and complaign about women rights yet they put down a women that has proven that they can do it all. Most liberal feminists think they represent all females but they do not because their agenda is not main stream.

So all of you liberal feminists go vote for Obama and see what he does for you, probably what he did for Hillary who was one of your own. Nothing!

Posted by: abby | September 16, 2008 7:00 PM

MBEE, well stated! Thank you for clearing this up. Jerry Springer: 2 Oparah: 0 The values of the great American people are not so great, and they are not color blind.

Posted by: Tdonner | September 16, 2008 6:59 PM

MBEE, well stated! Thank you for clearing this up. Jerry Springer: 2 Oparah: 0 The values of the great American people are not so great, and they are not color blind.

Posted by: Tdonner | September 16, 2008 6:59 PM

What are all those men doing standing in front of that Feminist Majority sign?

Posted by: dolph | September 16, 2008 6:59 PM

MBEE, well stated! Thank you for clearing this up. Jerry Springer: 2 Oprah: 0 The values of the great American people are not so great when are not color blind.

Posted by: Tdonner | September 16, 2008 6:59 PM

McCain thought he could win over women when he chose Palin as his running mate. How stupid!

Posted by: Tranity | September 16, 2008 6:44 PM

Concerned08 - What did she do in Alaska? Let's put it all on the table right now... Alaska has been a net taker state, taking more in federal funds than it has paid in federal taxes for more than the last 20 years. Alaska's economy is dependent on two things... price of energy and federal spending. When both go up, Alaska booms. This is the exact opposite of the American economy. The whitehouse can't tap a higher power to get more money like Palin did, there is nowhere else to go. America does not have 1/3rd of it's economy being higher government subsidies, like Alaska.
Leading one of the most dependent states in the union is a far different task than leading the entire union and it's a task that not a single Palin supporter has even tried to argue she's ready for, other than mindlessly chanting "experience as governor" as if all experience was equal(it's not).
I will grant you that you and others can relate to her, that's true, but I would ask you this... Do you think you're fit to be president? Do you think all the people who can relate to her are ready to run the country? I can relate to myself more than anyone else and I have started one successful corporation that has kept my bills paid for 5 years, but I would not be a good president. I can relate to all of my closest friends, but I can't think of one of them who would make a good president. There has to be more to a candidate than whether you can relate to them, otherwise you're feeling and not thinking.
We can't afford another 4 years of what we've had. This decision is too important to feel, it's time to think. People went with their guts following Bush and look what it got us? All those people who felt they could "relate" to him and now who are they lining up behind? Palin, and she's not even the candidate! What a horrible thoughtless way to pick a president and we're going to pay sorely as a nation if we pick ANOTHER president that way.

Posted by: Benjamin | September 16, 2008 6:39 PM

You can parade all the women that you want, but I am still voting for John McCain and Sarah Palin.

Governor Palin is the best female candidate that I have seen in a long time and I am happily going to vote for this ticket.

NOW and all of these feminists groups do not represent me and countless other women! The truth is that these organizations represent liberal women only and are fronts for liberal organizations which includes the media.

You can try to "pressure" us rational thinking women to vote your way, but it will not work. Scream, holler, I don't care. You're wrong about Governor Palin and should be ashamed of yourselves for how you are behaving.

Posted by: Therese | September 16, 2008 6:39 PM

There is an article on numerous web sites suggesting Amir Taheri confirms that Obama tried to interfere with troop withdrawls from Iraq during his visit overseas. It is being reported in the international press as well. That is a hell of an allegation and directly impacts National Security Policy. Has anyone got more info on this?

Posted by: carold | September 16, 2008 6:39 PM

We will see three new supreme court justices appointed in the next four years. McCain has promised his party that he will appoint only ulta-conservative candidates.

Say goodbye to a woman’s right to choose with the reversal of Roe v. Wade. Buh bye.

As for the political response to Proposition 8. McCain says yes, while Barack Obama says no. A yes vote would ban same-sex marriage.
Do conservative republicans like John McCain and Sarah Palin understand, or respect, the moral foundations of this country? The U.S. Constitution is abused by conservative republicans at every turn. And they have the nerve to ask for four more years....

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM

Yes Ladies Lets go get Obama/Biden elected. i just cant believe all the lies that Palin is telling and the people seem to act like they dont matter. what is wrong with this people. Palin is not qualified to be VP or as far as I see Gov. she got in when the chips were down backstabbed her so called republican party and won. she is a two faced lying poor excuse for a woman. and I will be damed if she gets into the white house and turn it into a flop house. And not that its part of the issues but everyone should go to u-tube and see the video of the young black man that says he is Bristol Palin's baby father. this young man has been begging for help with Gov Palin and the fact that she is trying to keep him a secret because he is black. I look at the video and I think the young man is sincere but you just never know. I would like to know how can we get this video out to see if its real or just some more political BS.

check it out on utube.

and stand your grounds ladies and lets elect Obama for president of the united states.

also like on of the responses says go to the alaska news paper and see the protest that was held after Palin had her rally. funny how they are not showing that.

Posted by: Ladyej | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM

Yes Ladies Lets go get Obama/Biden elected. i just cant believe all the lies that Palin is telling and the people seem to act like they dont matter. what is wrong with this people. Palin is not qualified to be VP or as far as I see Gov. she got in when the chips were down backstabbed her so called republican party and won. she is a two faced lying poor excuse for a woman. and I will be damed if she gets into the white house and turn it into a flop house. And not that its part of the issues but everyone should go to u-tube and see the video of the young black man that says he is Bristol Palin's baby father. this young man has been begging for help with Gov Palin and the fact that she is trying to keep him a secret because he is black. I look at the video and I think the young man is sincere but you just never know. I would like to know how can we get this video out to see if its real or just some more political BS.

check it out on utube.

and stand your grounds ladies and lets elect Obama for president of the united states.

also like on of the responses says go to the alaska news paper and see the protest that was held after Palin had her rally. funny how they are not showing that.

Posted by: Ladyej | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM

Yes Ladies Lets go get Obama/Biden elected. i just cant believe all the lies that Palin is telling and the people seem to act like they dont matter. what is wrong with this people. Palin is not qualified to be VP or as far as I see Gov. she got in when the chips were down backstabbed her so called republican party and won. she is a two faced lying poor excuse for a woman. and I will be damed if she gets into the white house and turn it into a flop house. And not that its part of the issues but everyone should go to u-tube and see the video of the young black man that says he is Bristol Palin's baby father. this young man has been begging for help with Gov Palin and the fact that she is trying to keep him a secret because he is black. I look at the video and I think the young man is sincere but you just never know. I would like to know how can we get this video out to see if its real or just some more political BS.

check it out on utube.

and stand your grounds ladies and lets elect Obama for president of the united states.

also like on of the responses says go to the alaska news paper and see the protest that was held after Palin had her rally. funny how they are not showing that.

Posted by: Ladyej | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM

Yes Ladies Lets go get Obama/Biden elected. i just cant believe all the lies that Palin is telling and the people seem to act like they dont matter. what is wrong with this people. Palin is not qualified to be VP or as far as I see Gov. she got in when the chips were down backstabbed her so called republican party and won. she is a two faced lying poor excuse for a woman. and I will be damed if she gets into the white house and turn it into a flop house. And not that its part of the issues but everyone should go to u-tube and see the video of the young black man that says he is Bristol Palin's baby father. this young man has been begging for help with Gov Palin and the fact that she is trying to keep him a secret because he is black. I look at the video and I think the young man is sincere but you just never know. I would like to know how can we get this video out to see if its real or just some more political BS.

check it out on utube.

and stand your grounds ladies and lets elect Obama for president of the united states.

also like on of the responses says go to the alaska news paper and see the protest that was held after Palin had her rally. funny how they are not showing that.

Posted by: Ladyej | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM

Yes Ladies Lets go get Obama/Biden elected. i just cant believe all the lies that Palin is telling and the people seem to act like they dont matter. what is wrong with this people. Palin is not qualified to be VP or as far as I see Gov. she got in when the chips were down backstabbed her so called republican party and won. she is a two faced lying poor excuse for a woman. and I will be damed if she gets into the white house and turn it into a flop house. And not that its part of the issues but everyone should go to u-tube and see the video of the young black man that says he is Bristol Palin's baby father. this young man has been begging for help with Gov Palin and the fact that she is trying to keep him a secret because he is black. I look at the video and I think the young man is sincere but you just never know. I would like to know how can we get this video out to see if its real or just some more political BS.

check it out on utube.

and stand your grounds ladies and lets elect Obama for president of the united states.

also like on of the responses says go to the alaska news paper and see the protest that was held after Palin had her rally. funny how they are not showing that.

Posted by: Ladyej | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM

Yes Ladies Lets go get Obama/Biden elected. i just cant believe all the lies that Palin is telling and the people seem to act like they dont matter. what is wrong with this people. Palin is not qualified to be VP or as far as I see Gov. she got in when the chips were down backstabbed her so called republican party and won. she is a two faced lying poor excuse for a woman. and I will be damed if she gets into the white house and turn it into a flop house. And not that its part of the issues but everyone should go to u-tube and see the video of the young black man that says he is Bristol Palin's baby father. this young man has been begging for help with Gov Palin and the fact that she is trying to keep him a secret because he is black. I look at the video and I think the young man is sincere but you just never know. I would like to know how can we get this video out to see if its real or just some more political BS.

check it out on utube.

and stand your grounds ladies and lets elect Obama for president of the united states.

also like on of the responses says go to the alaska news paper and see the protest that was held after Palin had her rally. funny how they are not showing that.

Posted by: Ladyej | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM

There is an article on numerous web sites suggesting Amir Taheri confirms that Obama tried to interfere with troop withdrawls from Iraq during his visit overseas. It is being reported in the international press as well. That is a hell of an allegation and directly impacts National Security Policy. Has anyone got more info on this?

Posted by: dbc | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM

DemtoRep is a Republican troll that trolls the blogs looking to disrupt intelligent discussion. Ignore them!

Posted by: Sandra S | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM

How dare the McCain think we would fall for such a gimmick. We are not that stupid! No Palin. Oh yes what is wrong with having an Ivy League education? some who can obviously do what Palin and McCain can't think!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am tired of dirty politics, I am tired of the lies, and distraction! oh if I don't know the answer or have a solution I will just bully my way to the whitehouse. I am a retired women living on fixed income, and I will not vote for anyone becuase she is a women. She must be qualified! I will not be represented by a stupid women in the white house.

Posted by: Amy | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM

McCain campaign spokesman Ed O'Callaghan said that Palin is "unlikely to cooperate" with the [Troopergate] investigation...When the investigation was announced less than two months ago, Palin said she welcomed it and promised her full cooperation. See The Washington Post
Under Sarah Palin, Wasilla made rape victims pay for their own rape kits, according to former Alaskan governor, Tony Knowles. "Eight years ago, complaints about charging rape victims for medical exams in Wasilla prompted the Alaska Legislature to pass a bill -- signed into law by Knowles -- that banned the practice statewide."
Sarah Palin has stated that we should "perhaps" go to war with Russia in an NBC interview with Charles Gibson.

GIBSON: And under the NATO treaty, wouldn't we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?
PALIN: Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help.
A day before she was announced as the Republican vice presidential candidate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin wrote a letter to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger urging him to veto a bill that would impose a clean-air fee on cargo containers moving through Oakland and other California ports. Reported in the Mercury News
According to a 2006 article in the Anchorage Daily News, Sarah Palin said she thinks creationism should be taught alongside evolution in the state's public classrooms.
An informal adviser who has counseled Gov. Sarah Palin on ethics issues urged her in July to apologize for her handling of the dismissal of the state's public safety commissioner and warned that the matter could snowball into a bigger scandal. Wall Street Journal.
Palin didn't listen.
While claiming to be a "reformer" Palin billed the state of Alaska $17,059 for "per diem" travel expenses for 312 nights she spent at her home in Wasilla. Here's the Washington Post article. According to the Washington Post, the last guy who did that in Alaska resigned because of the scandal.
Palin was not a very good mayor, according to one Wasilla resident. "Far from being a fiscal conservative, Palin left Wasilla in debt, was intolerant of "divergent opinions" and "has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in help." Read the story in the Anchorage Daily News.
She DID support the Bridge to Nowhere (before she opposed it). Palin claimed that she said "thanks, but no thanks" to the infamous Bridge to Nowhere. But in 2006, Palin supported the project repeatedly, saying that Alaska should take advantage of earmarks "while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist." According to the Associated Press, Palin sought $197 million in so-called "earmarks" for Alaska in 2009. In the previous budget year, she asked for earmarks worth $256 million.

Quote from a Fox News story: THE FACTS: Palin did abandon plans to build the nearly $400 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport. But she made her decision after the project had become an embarrassment to the state
Palin has actively sought the support of the fringe Alaska Independence Party. Six months ago, Palin told members of the group, who advocate for a vote on secession from the union, to "keep up the good work" and "wished the party luck on what she called its 'inspiring convention'. Here Palin is addressing the party >.
Palin favors drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Palin questioned the science behind predictions of sea ice loss linked to global warming. Speaking about climate change, she said, "I'm not one though who would attribute it to being manmade."
In 2008, the state of Alaska under Palin's guidance sued Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne in an attempt to reverse his decision to list polar bears as a threatened species.
Palin opposed a state initiative that would have banned metal mines from discharging pollution into salmon streams.
Palin has close ties to Big Oil. Her inauguration was sponsored by BP.
Palin is extremely anti-choice. She doesn't even support abortion in the case of rape or incest. "I am as pro-life as any candidate can be," Palin wrote on July 1, 2002, to the Alaska Right to Life board, according to the Anchorage Daily News
Palin opposes comprehensive sex-ed in public schools. She's said she will only support abstinence-only approaches.
Palin supports the aerial shooting of wolves in Alaska -- despite ballot measures in the state in which voters twice since 1996 have voted to end the practice. (This according to the Wall Street Journal)
As mayor, Palin tried to ban books from the library. Palin asked the library how she might go about banning books because some had inappropriate language in them—shocking the librarian, Mary Ellen Baker. According to Time, "news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire Baker for not giving "full support" to the mayor."
After she took office as mayor in November 1996, Palin asked for letters of resignation from six department heads based on allegations that they were still supporting the former mayor. She also fired Police Chief Irl Stambaugh, who unsuccessfully sued her for wrongful termination, according to court records.
In an address last June, the Republican vice presidential candidate also urged ministry students to pray for a plan to build a $30 billion natural gas pipeline in the state, calling it "God's will."
Read the Associated Press story.

Really, what kind of God does she worship? Not the one most of us do!

This woman is an anti-choice, anti-sex education, anti-environment, far Right religious fanatic. The only thing she has in common with Hillary Clinton is her anatomy.

Posted by: WOMENAGAINSTSARAHPALIN | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM

How dare the McCain think we would fall for such a gimmick. We are not that stupid! No Palin. Oh yes what is wrong with having an Ivy League education? some who can obviously do what Palin and McCain can't think!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am tired of dirty politics, I am tired of the lies, and distraction! oh if I don't know the answer or have a solution I will just bully my way to the whitehouse. I am a retired women living on fixed income, and I will not vote for anyone becuase she is a women. She must be qualified! I will not be represented by a stupid women in the white house.

Posted by: Amy | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM

There is an article on numerous web sites suggesting Amir Taheri confirms that Obama tried to interfere with troop withdrawls from Iraq during his visit overseas. It is being reported in the international press as well. That is a hell of an allegation and directly impacts National Security Policy. Has anyone got more info on this?

Posted by: dbc | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM

There is an article on numerous web sites suggesting Amir Taheri confirms that Obama tried to interfere with troop withdrawls from Iraq during his visit overseas. It is being reported in the international press as well. That is a hell of an allegation and directly impacts National Security Policy. Has anyone got more info on this?

Posted by: dbc | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM

McCain campaign spokesman Ed O'Callaghan said that Palin is "unlikely to cooperate" with the [Troopergate] investigation...When the investigation was announced less than two months ago, Palin said she welcomed it and promised her full cooperation. See The Washington Post
Under Sarah Palin, Wasilla made rape victims pay for their own rape kits, according to former Alaskan governor, Tony Knowles. "Eight years ago, complaints about charging rape victims for medical exams in Wasilla prompted the Alaska Legislature to pass a bill -- signed into law by Knowles -- that banned the practice statewide."
Sarah Palin has stated that we should "perhaps" go to war with Russia in an NBC interview with Charles Gibson.

GIBSON: And under the NATO treaty, wouldn't we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?
PALIN: Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help.
A day before she was announced as the Republican vice presidential candidate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin wrote a letter to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger urging him to veto a bill that would impose a clean-air fee on cargo containers moving through Oakland and other California ports. Reported in the Mercury News
According to a 2006 article in the Anchorage Daily News, Sarah Palin said she thinks creationism should be taught alongside evolution in the state's public classrooms.
An informal adviser who has counseled Gov. Sarah Palin on ethics issues urged her in July to apologize for her handling of the dismissal of the state's public safety commissioner and warned that the matter could snowball into a bigger scandal. Wall Street Journal.
Palin didn't listen.
While claiming to be a "reformer" Palin billed the state of Alaska $17,059 for "per diem" travel expenses for 312 nights she spent at her home in Wasilla. Here's the Washington Post article. According to the Washington Post, the last guy who did that in Alaska resigned because of the scandal.
Palin was not a very good mayor, according to one Wasilla resident. "Far from being a fiscal conservative, Palin left Wasilla in debt, was intolerant of "divergent opinions" and "has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in help." Read the story in the Anchorage Daily News.
She DID support the Bridge to Nowhere (before she opposed it). Palin claimed that she said "thanks, but no thanks" to the infamous Bridge to Nowhere. But in 2006, Palin supported the project repeatedly, saying that Alaska should take advantage of earmarks "while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist." According to the Associated Press, Palin sought $197 million in so-called "earmarks" for Alaska in 2009. In the previous budget year, she asked for earmarks worth $256 million.

Quote from a Fox News story: THE FACTS: Palin did abandon plans to build the nearly $400 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport. But she made her decision after the project had become an embarrassment to the state
Palin has actively sought the support of the fringe Alaska Independence Party. Six months ago, Palin told members of the group, who advocate for a vote on secession from the union, to "keep up the good work" and "wished the party luck on what she called its 'inspiring convention'. Here Palin is addressing the party >.
Palin favors drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Palin questioned the science behind predictions of sea ice loss linked to global warming. Speaking about climate change, she said, "I'm not one though who would attribute it to being manmade."
In 2008, the state of Alaska under Palin's guidance sued Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne in an attempt to reverse his decision to list polar bears as a threatened species.
Palin opposed a state initiative that would have banned metal mines from discharging pollution into salmon streams.
Palin has close ties to Big Oil. Her inauguration was sponsored by BP.
Palin is extremely anti-choice. She doesn't even support abortion in the case of rape or incest. "I am as pro-life as any candidate can be," Palin wrote on July 1, 2002, to the Alaska Right to Life board, according to the Anchorage Daily News
Palin opposes comprehensive sex-ed in public schools. She's said she will only support abstinence-only approaches.
Palin supports the aerial shooting of wolves in Alaska -- despite ballot measures in the state in which voters twice since 1996 have voted to end the practice. (This according to the Wall Street Journal)
As mayor, Palin tried to ban books from the library. Palin asked the library how she might go about banning books because some had inappropriate language in them—shocking the librarian, Mary Ellen Baker. According to Time, "news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire Baker for not giving "full support" to the mayor."
After she took office as mayor in November 1996, Palin asked for letters of resignation from six department heads based on allegations that they were still supporting the former mayor. She also fired Police Chief Irl Stambaugh, who unsuccessfully sued her for wrongful termination, according to court records.
In an address last June, the Republican vice presidential candidate also urged ministry students to pray for a plan to build a $30 billion natural gas pipeline in the state, calling it "God's will."
Read the Associated Press story.

Really, what kind of God does she worship? Not the one most of us do!

This woman is an anti-choice, anti-sex education, anti-environment, far Right religious fanatic. The only thing she has in common with Hillary Clinton is her anatomy.

Posted by: WOMENAGAINSTSARAHPALIN | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM

How dare the McCain think we would fall for such a gimmick. We are not that stupid! No Palin. Oh yes what is wrong with having an Ivy League education? some who can obviously do what Palin and McCain can't think!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am tired of dirty politics, I am tired of the lies, and distraction! oh if I don't know the answer or have a solution I will just bully my way to the whitehouse. I am a retired women living on fixed income, and I will not vote for anyone becuase she is a women. She must be qualified! I will not be represented by a stupid women in the white house.

Posted by: Amy | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM

TexasProud wrote: "What I am getting from some people is abortion=pro-women."

You're hearing wrong. What people say is:

Pro-choice = pro-women.
Anti-choice = anti-women.

No one is "pro-abortion." That's like saying people are "pro-heart surgery" or "pro-bankruptcy."

Posted by: drossless | September 16, 2008 6:00 PM

i knew once women started hearing what palin stands for they were going to be pretty pissed off..i have also noticed womenagainstsarahpalin has had 10,000 new members a day ..palin is against everything clinton has fought for.. for 35 years.

Posted by: tom | September 16, 2008 5:53 PM

I've read so many comments and I have to agree with Hope on one thing. This election is about you! We must as women we must move forward. I am so insullted that McCain insulted all women by suggesting that any old skirt would do. Women are emotional and stupid. Women can't make the right decision becuase we are petty, and some how seemed to miss the point. Unfortunatley judging by some of the post this is true. But there are many of us who have not missed the point. Ladies please stop posting irrevalent comments and focus on the issue! NO MCCAIN! NO PALIN! we must protest!

Posted by: Lacey | September 16, 2008 5:51 PM

why don't you take a little bit of your own advice if it's possible for your narrow mind...

THE FACTS: Palin's husband (whom she regularly copies on government business emails) belonged to the AIP for years and they attended AIP conventions... whose leader proudly proclaims "I'm an Alaskan, not an American. I've got no use for America and her damned institutions."

Palin.. addressing the AIP convention recently, tells them to "keep up the good work."

Posted by: Gina | September 16, 2008 5:49 PM

If you feel the need to vote republican....write Ron Paul on the ballot. He's an american you all should truely be proud of.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:46 PM

NOBAMA IS THE ONE WITH THE LEAST EXPERIENCE!! YOU ARE LAUGHABLE--HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HAHA-HA-HA-HA NOW MY BELLY HURTS--BY THE WAY I HATE KOOL-AID!!

Posted by: DEMTOREP | September 16, 2008 5:45 PM

Brainsmart,

Get back to me after you finish reading the Daily Kos talking points, because name-calling doesn't make your point, it just makes you look petty. Jeremiah Wright is (was?) the inspiration for Obama's campaign, and William Ayers hosted the fundraiser to kickstart Obama's political career in Chicago politics. You can say guilt by association, but when you don't have a long enough period in the public eye, you are judged by the company you keep. In reality, as long as we are comparing your Presidential candidate to our Vice Presidential candidate, it just reenforces the stature gap he has with McCain.

Posted by: TexasProud | September 16, 2008 5:45 PM

obama needs to give a barn party in all the hick towns in america come nov 4 he need to keep the hicks from voting you see they don't pull handles or press buttons they look at photos and when they see just who he is guess what thats right he's not one of them they will sound the alarm.i am telling you folks the hillbillys will decide this election.sarah can't do any wrong in the hick towns why she is one of them.i hear obama need the white vote.question why don't mccain need the black vote.

Posted by: frank | September 16, 2008 5:44 PM

Story false!!!PUMAS FOR PALIN ALL THE WAY!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh_ipqk6dj4

Posted by: demtorep | September 16, 2008 5:39 PM


Operation Chaos is a go!!! I say again, Operation Chaos is a go!!! Rush has given the green light!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:42 PM

Women are people first and people have have a wide variety of opinions, opinions which may trump women's issues. Expect no bloc of women voting for either candidate as each has far more to offer than just women;s positions

Every women knows that if an incompetent women goes "first" it will be a long time before there is a second one

Posted by: nclwtk | September 16, 2008 5:42 PM

MBEE, well said. Get the word out! Post that ALL OVER THE WEB!
Also, if you're ever in WV, I'll cook you dinner!

Posted by: Sarah Palin's Porkbarrel with Lipstick | September 16, 2008 5:39 PM

Story false!!!PUMAS FOR PALIN ALL THE WAY!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh_ipqk6dj4

Posted by: demtorep | September 16, 2008 5:39 PM

Ladies Hillary or no Hillary. This has nothing to do with the fact Palin is against women. There is nothing strong about being a lier, and a hypocrite just check her records. My God doesn't integrity have any value. McCain choose the least qualified women he could get a the last minute. She can't challenge him on any policies or ideas becuase why? she can see Russia from her house. What is the matter with you! Do you not get out the kitchen, or diapers long enough to know Palin is a fraud! I too wanted a women on the tickete but not this idiot! . Here's a thought Hillary is not Vice President material she is President material we will see herin 2012 but not if Palin get in the whitehouse! Under no circumstance can we allow this to happen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We will not accept being set back over 50 years becuase McCain think we are stupid. Ladies put your emotions aside and think! This not about Obama this is about you!!!!!Our daughters nor any women deserve Palin!

Posted by: hope | September 16, 2008 5:37 PM

BrainSmart and Cal are so biased it is unbelieveable that someone can actually belive these lies. You need to try and discover the facts before you make your statements.
The FACTS: Obama has attented a church for 20 years with a pastor the spews anti-american and racist retoric.
His mentor is a socialist.
He needs to be running the soviet union not the united states..

Posted by: TheFacts | September 16, 2008 5:35 PM

A secretive VP who values loyalty among cronies above all else and shuns most media contact.

Where have we seen this before ?

And NO unscripted moments for the Sarahinator during this campaign, too much potential for a disastorous gaffe.

What's her role in a McBush WH anyway ?

Energy czar ?

I ask again, where have we seen this before ?

Posted by: MA | September 16, 2008 5:33 PM

Subject: Much clearer now

I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight.....

If you grow up in Hawaii , raised by your grandparents, you're 'exotic' and 'different.'

Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, you're an American story.

If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.

Name your kids Willow , Trig and Track, and you're a maverick.

Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.

Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, then you're well-grounded.

If you spend 3 years as a community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, help register 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, 8 years as a State Senator of a district of 750,000 people, chair the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people, sponsor 131 bill s, and serve o n the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works, and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.

If your resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city
council and 6 years as the mayor of a town of 7,000 people, 2 years as governor of a state of 650,000 people, you're qualified to be a heartbeat away from the presidency.

If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.

If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, left your ill wife, and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian.

If you teach responsible, age-appropriate sex education, including the use of birth control, you erode the fiber of American society.

If you staunchly advocate abstinence-only education, while your teen daughter ends up pregnant, you're responsible.

If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, you don't represent America 's family values.

If your husband is called 'First Dude', has a DWI conviction, didn't register to vote until 25, and was a member of a group that advocated secession of Alaska from the USA, yours is the quintessential American family.


And, finally, if you're famous for your quick temper, you're the one to have your finger on the red nuclear button.

OK, much clearer now.

Posted by: mbee | September 16, 2008 5:33 PM

Sarah Palin is trying to accuse Barack Obama of asking for too much money in earmark spending.

Let's look at the facts.

1. Obama is a U.S. Senator for a population of over 12,000,000 people. It's the 5th largest state in the U.S. by population.

2. Sarah Palin was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska. It's one of the largest cities in Alaska. Population? 9,000. 12,000,000 divided by 9,000 = 1,333.33 times larger population in Illinois than in Wasilla.

3. Obama requested $1 billion over three years for the state of Illinois. He didn't receive most of this funding.

4. Palin received $27 million over 8 years for Wasilla. How? She hired a lobbyist.

$1 billion divided by 3 years = $333,333,333 per year, or $27.78 per resident per year. REQUESTED. Not received.

$27 million divided by 8 years = $3,375,000 per year, or $375 per resident per year. RECEIVED. Not requested. RECEIVED. (And actually, Palin's town of Wasilla had a population closer to 6,000 when she stared as mayor.)

That's 11 times more funding RECEIVED by Palin than Obama even REQUESTED!!! And meanwhile, Palin's state (Alaska) makes BILLIONS (with a "b") of dollars a year on oil. Must be nice to have a country full of oil wells. How many oil wells do you have in your neighborhood?

More importantly, let's look at the details. Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun Times received an exhaustive list of Obama funding requests since 2005, when he took office as U.S. Senator of Illinois.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/03/sweet_scoop_obama_after_initia.html

These so-called "earmarks" include:

-- investment in info technology to improve govt. programs

-- investment in green tech such as fuel cell tech

-- biotech investment such as genetic research at leading facilities in Chicago

-- improving air and water quality and safety

-- arts and science education and training programs

-- providing hospital funding for growing communities

-- improving water and sewer systems in urban areas near Chicago

-- teacher training programs

-- drug abuse treatment and prevention programs

-- employment and training programs through Goodwill

-- reading and literacy programs

-- charter school funding

-- improved mental health treatment facilities

-- renovations of a children's hospital

-- rural education and technology infrastructure

-- disease prevention and public health education

-- improved farming and ag tech to increase crop yields and food safety

-- after school programs for at-risk youth

-- assistance for rehabilitating criminals who are overcrowding our prisons

-- repairing and maintaining dams, levees, and other civil engineering projects

Gosh, Obama sounds like a really bad guy, huh? (Look at the list for yourself! It's a good set of solid initiatives, with transparent grant requests and proven effectiveness. You get a return on your investment for these sorts of things.)

Read the Obama "earmark" list. Then ask yourself: Why are we spending billions in Iraq, when these worthy projects are not being funded in the United States?

Who's really putting "Country First"???

Posted by: SarahPalin's Porkbarrel with lipstick | September 16, 2008 5:31 PM

Palin is WEAK....and thats not a sexist comment....Hillary Clinton is a strong woman and she has earned respect from everyone....

Palin cant even campaign by herself because the McBush team is worried someone might ask a question that she cant answer from her previous "experience" as gov or mayor.....

Women are waking up and realizing that Palin isnt Hillary Clinton (www.sarahpalinisnthillaryclinton.com) They share no similar ideas on any subject....if you want to vote for Hillary, vote for her mission and her ideals that will be made under an Obama presidency

We are not voting for a race, an age, or a gender in this election....we are voting for ideals, agenda and policies....Obama's policies on taxes, the economy, education, jobs, the environment have all been proven more effective by independent analysts...

Obama08

Posted by: Oregon4Obama | September 16, 2008 5:31 PM

I think that McCain's push for a virtual unknown that he spent less time vetting than I spend drinking a cup of coffee shows a serious lack of judgement--Sarah Palin was a crazy choice after a ten minute discussion, and I think she was crazy to accept! It sounds like a power thing to me, and desperation on McCain's part to get women voters-
I know Viet Nam vets who were never POW's that I would NEVER want to see in charge of my welfare--they went through too much to be stable, so I can't even fathom how McCain's mind works after the hell HE went through--Let's give the democrats a chance to bring back the surplus that President Clinton left us--

Posted by: Amy-Nevada | September 16, 2008 5:27 PM

Ladies Hillary or no Hillary. This has nothing to do with the fact Palin is against women. There is nothing strong about being a lier, and a hypocrite just check her records. My god doesn't integrity have any value. McCain choose the least qualified women he could get a the last minute. She can't challenge him on any policies or ideas becuase why? she can see Russia from her house. What is the matter with you! Do you not get out the kitchen, or diapers long enough to know Palin is a fraud! I too wanted a women on the tickete but not this idiot! . Here's a thought Hillary is not Vice President material she is President material we will see her 2012 but not if Palin get in the whitehouse!

Posted by: Hope | September 16, 2008 5:27 PM

Just like many of the pro-McCain, pro-Bush, pro-right wing sites, the hockey mom site screens all postings and weed's out honest discussion, debate or dissent.

Posted by: Wray | September 16, 2008 5:26 PM

Its not a sign of progress when the woman on the ticket is a liar!

Posted by: RubySlippers | September 16, 2008 5:25 PM

"TexasProud: We could get into the facts about her ex-brother-in-law, and the bridge to nowhere, but we can also talk about Saul Alinsky, Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, etc."
--------------------------------

You are not very bright. Rev Wright is a now-retired pastor who spoke his own views. Ayers is Chicago professor who happened to be Obama's neighbor a few years back. This IN NOW WAY compares to Palin's troopergate scandal and her continued lies on the bridge-to-nowhere. Palin is under investigation for illegally pressuring her commissioner to fire a state trooper, and then using the Attorney General's office to see what state investigator had learned. Her repeated saying she was against the bridge-to-nowhere is an outright lie, that she continues to repeat to build a false perception of being against earmarks (which she wasn't against when she hired lobbyists as mayor, to get earmarks). These go RIGHT TO THE CORE of Sarah Palin, unlike these guilt-by-association attacks that your guys have tried to use against Obama.

Posted by: BrainSmart | September 16, 2008 5:21 PM

Palin's own church believes she is unfit to teach Sunday school or lead a worship service. If she isn't even qualified to teach children Bible study how the heck can you say she is qualified to lead the United States!?

No McCain. No Palin. No Way.

Posted by: Cal | September 16, 2008 5:19 PM

What I am getting from some people is abortion=pro-women. I don't subscribe to that and there are many women who don't as well. I never said that ALL women should vote for McCain because of Palin, but I said it is a sign of progress for women for her to be on the national ticket.

Posted by: TexasProud | September 16, 2008 5:19 PM

There's some interesting spin coming from ol' straight-talker Johnny McCain today considering that he has voted with Bush over 90% of the time the last eight years and that McCain's economic advisor, Phil Gramm, was the biggest player out there in the deregulating of Wall Street.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxXMFW1YsNQ
.

Posted by: say what? | September 16, 2008 5:18 PM

Concerned08,

I'm with you, the vitriolic tone to some of these responses is because they have seen a strong woman on a presidential ticket, but not on the ticket they want. If you disagree with her on abortion, gay marriage, etc so be it, but to personally attack this woman they way they are (while overlooking some GLARING personal shortcomings with their 'chosen one') is beneath a response. We could get into the facts about her ex-brother-in-law, and the bridge to nowhere, but we can also talk about Saul Alinsky, Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, etc.

Honestly, it's getting old reading a shouting match between both sides. Obama isn't the antichrist, and Palin is pro-women.

Posted by: TexasProud | September 16, 2008 5:03 PM


...................................................................


Palin is pro-Palin (and there is nothing wrong with that). However, she comes down on the opposite side of most women's groups on women's issues. Sorry, that's just the truth...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:14 PM

Hey TEXAS PROUD,
Was Palin Pro-Women when she was charging rape victims for rape kits? How about when she cut funding for groups that help teen mothers? Good thing her kid does need the WIC program(WOMEN INFANTS AND CHILDREN) cause Grandma Palin cut funding to it also!
I say, "THANKS, BUT NO THANKS TO THAT MAYOR FROM NOWHERE!"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:12 PM

ProudTexas:

My comments go for you as well.

Palin is not at the top of the ticket and she stands behind the same agenda as McCain.

No matter what you think about Obama, don't prop the McCain agenda up as some sort of opportunity for gain for women.

He voted AGAINST a bill that demanded equal pay for equal work for women.

THAT is not progress.

Posted by: Ward6ForNow | September 16, 2008 5:08 PM

I can not stand how McCain thinks he can trick me into voting for him because he picked a women.

This is a cheap, weird gimmick, and all my girlfriends agree. We host MaryK parties all the time and Sarah Pollen is not acceptable.

Pander is sexism and McCain disrespected us all with this pandering, sexist ploy.

Posted by: Gene | September 16, 2008 5:07 PM

Palin = Puta

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:07 PM

Now, if only the NAACP had come out against Clarence Thomas, the SCOTUS problem wouldn't be so dire.

Posted by: thebob.bob | September 16, 2008 5:06 PM

STOP USING MY UTERUS AS A POLITICAL PLATFORM!

Posted by: RubySlippers | September 16, 2008 5:04 PM

Concerned08,

I'm with you, the vitriolic tone to some of these responses is because they have seen a strong woman on a presidential ticket, but not on the ticket they want. If you disagree with her on abortion, gay marriage, etc so be it, but to personally attack this woman they way they are (while overlooking some GLARING personal shortcomings with their 'chosen one') is beneath a response. We could get into the facts about her ex-brother-in-law, and the bridge to nowhere, but we can also talk about Saul Alinsky, Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, etc.

Honestly, it's getting old reading a shouting match between both sides. Obama isn't the antichrist, and Palin is pro-women.

Posted by: TexasProud | September 16, 2008 5:03 PM

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the center cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in lands of the north
A shape with Elephant body and the head of a woman,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant scavenging birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Alaska to be born?


Pardon me, Yeats, by the paraphrase...

Posted by: The center cannot hold | September 16, 2008 4:59 PM

Posted by: Joanna

you sound sooooo disappointed!!!! BTW i am a woman... and hillary and obama share the same common goals on women rights and even policies.... Biden even legislated the Violence Against Women Act! the democrats... regardless of the person are more for woman and family issues!

Posted by: rin | September 16, 2008 4:59 PM

"TexasProud" the visceral hatred from your post is glaring and obvious. Whats with you people demonizing anything you disagree with by calling it "liberal". The way you people act, you would think "liberals" lied us into the war with Iraq, or were in charge of the disastrous economic policy for the past 8 years thats almost destroyed this country. Is George W Bush a liberal, or are you, perhaps displacing and projecting the blame off of your own party.

Posted by: BrainSmart | September 16, 2008 4:59 PM

You guys don't get it. There are millions of women in this country who do relate to Sarah Palin and the type of life she has lived. Because of what she has done in Alaska, we find her strong and capable to stand up to the "good ole boys" in DC. She seems down to earth and even though she doesn't have an elite education you seem to think she needs to have, I would trust her "common sense" more than most who do.

She may be considered conservative, but looking at her record in Alaska, I think she is more of a centralist. She is pro-life, but she stopped a legislative move to ban abortions. She also stopped a bill to eliminate benefits for gays.

Your paper and the rest of the MSM who are doing everything you can to destroy this woman, is backfiring. You will see.

Posted by: concerned08 | September 16, 2008 4:35 PM
___________________________________________

I know you want so bad to believe in this woman, but she is against everything that women have fought for years to gain.

You might remind yourself that she is second a ticket to the egomaniac McCain.

To date, she has been a compulsive lier. In her interview with Charlie Gibson she confessed that she did secure federal funding for that "Bridge to Nowhere" because it was for an infrastructure project and she saw nothing wrong with it.

Then, days later, she was back on the stump saying that she turned down these funds and that when Alaska wanted to build a bridge it would do so itself.

The Palin popularity is associated with her unfamiliarity. Nobody knew who she was. However, as American men and women get to know her, to know how the McCain Agenda will impact them in the next 4 years, the facade of lipstick and animals will fade away and reality, like this stock market crisis, will be there to stare American's dead in the face.

Women have come too far to allow their hard earned gains to be eroded because of a desire to have a common chromosome 'near' the White House, one who will stand behind a presidential candidate that voted against equal pay for equal work for women in the workplace. Particularly, when there is a candadite that is championing that cause. (Obama/Biden)

On pay equity. Sen. Obama is a co-sponsor of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act, legislation to end wage discrimination against women. McCain voted against this bill.

On reproductive rights. Sen. Obama is a co-sponsor of the Prevention First Act, to strengthen access to contraception and reproductive health care, and prevent unwanted pregnancies. He strongly supports Roe v. Wade and opposes any efforts to overturn it.

On violence against women. Sen. Obama supports the continued reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act -- of which Sen. Joe Biden is the chief sponsor -- as well as the Security and Financial Empowerment (SAFE) Act, which is legislation to provide legal, medical and financial support to victims of domestic violence.

On the Supreme Court. Sen. Obama opposed the nominations of George Bush's extreme right-wing nominees to the Supreme Court, who have consistently ruled against women's rights,

For more than a decade, Barack Obama has said "yes" to women's rights, while John McCain has consistently said "no" - NO to pay equity, NO to contraceptive access and reproductive rights, NO to appointing Supreme Court judges who will uphold women's rights and civil rights, NO to funding shelters and other anti-violence programs, and NO to supporting working moms and dads with policies that support work/life balance.

Women, in 08 don't let "gender" allow you to vote against your best interests.

Posted by: Ward6ForNow | September 16, 2008 4:58 PM

to

Posted by: Joanna | September 16, 2008 4:48 PM

===========

Most of us supported Hillary because of her positions.

Unfortunately, she lost but I'm not running for the next available woman, that is beyond ridiculous. If a creationist, anti-environment, abstinence-only, gun toter is all you got,
I PASS!!!!!!!!!!!!


OBAMA/BIDEN support the issues that real world, forward thinking women support.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:56 PM

I cannot believe these Women's groups are going to vote for Obama. They were supporting Hillary and now Obama is using her, and other well known women that were on his VP list. Now he is asking them to go out and get votes for him because of the influx of votes for McCain due to Sara Palin. Well, he should have chosen a woman for his VP, then he would not be having this problem. This is the USA and you are not required to vote for your party.

Posted by: Joanna | September 16, 2008 4:48 PM


........................................................

Operation Chaos...ENGAGED!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:55 PM

And Joanna, another problem I have with some of you women is this:

How do you KNOW that Hillary would have accepted an offer to be Obama's VP? Are you SURE she would have wanted that? To be second to him? I doubt it. You can tear him down all you want, but the bottom line is that you have NO IDEA if Hillary would have accepted.

I could see him putting her in a cabinet position where she might really do some good.

I APPLAUD these women's organizations. They are doing the right thing. Obama is FAR more concerned about women's rights than Sarah Palin is. Don't forget who Obama is married to!!

Posted by: lindsay | September 16, 2008 4:55 PM

From concerned08: "There are millions of women in this country who do relate to Sarah Palin and the type of life she has lived. Because of what she has done in Alaska, we find her strong and capable to stand up to the "good ole boys" in DC. "

This makes me so ashamed to be a woman. You don't know a thing about what she's done in Alaska. Few do, since she doesn't think the American people deserve to know who they're electing. You've swallowed a cheap party line ("good old boys") from people who think you're an idiot. You want a President you can related to????What does that have to do with their qualifications? Lots of people were fooled into relating to W. and now our country is in the crapper.

Have some patriotism and stop voting with your hormones. You're proving the cynical GOP is right that women can be led around like barnyard animals. This woman is an embarrassment and an insult to anyone who really cares about our national security and our economic future.

Posted by: Jeanne | September 16, 2008 4:54 PM

I think the republicans should have countered with, "I know you are, but what am I." Its seem more appropriate to the campaign they're are running.

I read that article about about pay between McCain and Obama campaigns and I know any Sociology or Statistics professor would rip it up. Its not properly weighted at all.

Posted by: Lalo | September 16, 2008 4:54 PM

More distortions from the McCain campaign. I work for the federal government, and I'm sure the reason Obama's female staff make less than McCain's is that HE HAS A NEWER STAFF. How dumb do they think people are? Pretty dumb, I guess. No one hires in at the top scale of a federal salary range - you have to move up over time. Since McCain's been in the Senate since the early 1980s, of course, he has more women in higher positions! Count on the Rove operatives to trust many Americans not to use their brains or common sense.
=============================================


Thank you for this post


---------------------------------------------

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:52 PM

Dear Concerned08....uh yeah, we DO get it, dear.

You REALLY need to pull your head out of the sand and do some research. The only reason Sarah "stopped" the bills about abortion and gays is because her attorney general told her the bills were unconstitutional!! Meaning, just because Alaska wanted to pass the bills, they were over-ridden by the Law Of The Land, the United States Constitution. Last I heard, Alaska was still part of the USA and doesn't get to pass laws that go against the Constitution.

Anyone who thinks Sarah is a centrist is surely not too bright. She is more far-right than Bush!

Sarah Palin is NO feminist, and the only reason she wanted the Good Old Boys out of Alaska is so that she could take their place in the Unethical Hall of Shame. The woman is a vindictive, lying, uneducated con artist!!

You need to take off those rose-colored glasses and get a clue. NO offense, but REALLY, you do.

Posted by: lindsay | September 16, 2008 4:50 PM

I cannot believe these Women's groups are going to vote for Obama. They were supporting Hillary and now Obama is using her, and other well known women that were on his VP list. Now he is asking them to go out and get votes for him because of the influx of votes for McCain due to Sara Palin. Well, he should have chosen a woman for his VP, then he would not be having this problem. This is the USA and you are not required to vote for your party.

Posted by: Joanna | September 16, 2008 4:48 PM

That's the way to go ladies how, about when
we democratic win in nov.we have a nice
wag dag doodle, or dance! we men promise to be on our best behavior,and gentleman
like traits.Democratic men don't go around
calling our woman feminazis,and other degatorgy names,when don't even call our woman pitbulls with lipstick or cu@ts,and
most of us would never leave our wife,after an accident,for younger and richer,game!

obama/Biden

Posted by: Gentleman Jim | September 16, 2008 4:48 PM

TO
Posted by: concerned08 | September 16, 2008 4:35 PM
---------------------------------------------

I don't have an ivy league ed and I had to pay my way through a state college. I question the relevance of being able to relate to an elected official. Who cares if I want to have a beer with someone. I want that person to be able to digest complex issues and make choices that benefit people like me- middle class who had to work for what she has. From what I've seen, Palin does not have a grasp of any national or international issues, and when she is out of her comfort zone she goes on the attack. I've had enough of driven by instinct only bullies. Bush has proven this model does not work.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:47 PM

So you just loved the last eight years and all the behind the door dealings?!!!
In 2000 as Clinton left and Bush came in:

Unemployment 4.2% Now. 6.1%and growing
Federal Deficit 281Billion Surplus, Now 357Billion
National Debt 5.7 Trillion, Now 10 trillion and growing
This all under a Republican run government and Congress.

The Bush/Cheney people were literally in bed with the oil companies!" as stated by Chris Weigant

"If you think those lobbyists are working day and night for John McCain just to put themselves out of business, well then I've got a bridge to sell you up in Alaska." Obama said.

Phil Gramm had a lot to do with this entire bank/mortgage meltdown and most likely by all known accounts he will be named Secretary of the Treasury by McCain if elected to office.
So if you love the last 8 years ( McCain is best of friends with the Bush family and voted with Bush 90% of the time, ) and you want the same for your family, your children and grandchildren, be sure and vote for McCain, if not and you want real change then vote for Obama, if you don't want either then stay home and let someone else decide your future, oh! wait! that is what your doing when voting for McCain.

Posted by: Jules | September 16, 2008 4:47 PM

I do find it depressing that the feminist movement has been reduced to a single issue, abortion. There isn't a sane person who doesn't support equal pay for equal work, and contrary to what these feminst groups tell you, there has been significant progress in the pay gap, but if they said that, then they are stuck defending gov't funded abortions (which Biden said he was against on Sunday) and that isn't a winning issue. You ARE NOT being sexist if you vote against Palin, but you are being hypocrites if you are trying to destroy this woman because she isn't liberal. NOW and NAACP should insert a 'L' in both their acronyms to read NOLW and NAALCP so they can drop the pretense of representing all women and minorities and just representing LIBERAL women and minorities.

Posted by: TexasProud | September 16, 2008 4:46 PM

Obama doesnt have equal pay for his female staffers, the men in his campaign are paid more........google it

Posted by: Omar Sharrif | September 16, 2008 4:44 PM

Dear Concerned08,

Please read the editorials in the Anchorage Daily News and the comments. Also, please watch the YouTube videos of the recent large protests by women in Alaska against Sarah Palin. They have alot to say about her--she's corrupt, she doesn't represent their values, etc. They don't like her and they say that she is definitely not ready to be VP.

Posted by: judyc | September 16, 2008 4:44 PM

We need more information on Gov. Palin before we vote. Is there anything we can do to prevent Troopergate investigation from being postponed until after the election?

Posted by: Angelou | September 16, 2008 4:40 PM

Can you believe the McCain response, it wasn't no, he did support equal pay for equal work, it was, I pay my women more than you, now there!!!

What he didn't say is that one of those women is a washington lobbyist who he says he is going to run out of town if he became president.

Nancy Pfotenhauer
Senior Policy Advisor, Fmr. Energy Lobbyist
Pfothenhauer is a former energy lobbyist for Koch Industries.

Pfotenhauer lobbied on behalf of gas pipeline operator Koch Industries when it received the biggest civil fine in the history of the Clean Water Act for leaking 3 million gallons of oil into lakes and streams. Today she's McCain's senior policy adviser. Hopefully she doesn't have his ear on environmental policy.

McCain Sponsored Pipeline Safety Bill on Which Pfotenhauer Lobbied.
According to Senate records, McCain sponsored one of the pipeline bills on which Pfotenhauer lobbied, S.2438, the (King & Tsiorvas) Pipeline Safety Improvement Act in April of 2000.[Pipeline & Gas Journal, 6/1/00; S.2438, 106th Congress]

Posted by: Ward6ForNow | September 16, 2008 4:36 PM

You guys don't get it. There are millions of women in this country who do relate to Sarah Palin and the type of life she has lived. Because of what she has done in Alaska, we find her strong and capable to stand up to the "good ole boys" in DC. She seems down to earth and even though she doesn't have an elite education you seem to think she needs to have, I would trust her "common sense" more than most who do.

She may be considered conservative, but looking at her record in Alaska, I think she is more of a centralist. She is pro-life, but she stopped a legislative move to ban abortions. She also stopped a bill to eliminate benefits for gays.

Your paper and the rest of the MSM who are doing everything you can to destroy this woman, is backfiring. You will see.

Posted by: concerned08 | September 16, 2008 4:35 PM

Sarah Palin is the antithesis of the intelligent, strong, woman. Her qualifications are Nil for the job of VP and being one heart beat away from the presidency! Her record is anti-woman. She even put on hold programs to lower rape of women and child abuse in Alaska (the highest in the country) just so she could fulfill a childish vendetta against a government official who wouldn't fire her ex-brother-in-law. Its UNBELIEVALBE that any woman with a brain could possibly vote for any ticket with John (women don't deserve equal pay) McCain and Sarah (my high school friend is qualified to head the Department of Agriculture because she likes cows) Palin!!!! I was so insulted by the choice of an idiot like Sarah Palin when McCain could have chosen any number of smart republican women-like Olympia Snowe, Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Christina Todd Whitman, or Susan Collins.
No Way! No How! No McCain! No Palin!!!

Posted by: SuzinKS | September 16, 2008 4:35 PM

Women unite to stop this madness. Palin is not the right woman for us. We will be moving backwards instead of forward. Please vote for President Obama. Your child will not be drafted to go to war. If you allow McCain to win your child will be send overseas to get killed in McCain's unneccessary wars.

Posted by: ob08 | September 16, 2008 4:35 PM

Reading this article was such a relief. Now I can tell that I am part of the majority of the people who can see the MacCain/Palin Campain for what it is. They can't just change their story on issues when they feel like it. There are records which tell MacCain's story. There is no story on Gov. Palin that's why I want to see the results of Troopergate investigation before the elections. I want to see if she has really abused her power on the people she is supposed to be protecting and guiding or not.

Posted by: Angelou | September 16, 2008 4:34 PM

Religion is supposed to be off limits, but it's vital that the doctrines of Palin's church be discussed in a public forum. Most significantly, they adhere to the Biblical principle that a wife is to be submissive to her husband. The question, then, is will Todd Palin have as much influence in his wife's vice presidency as he has had in her governorship?

Posted by: RegLib | September 16, 2008 4:33 PM

These Polls remind me of the tide going in and out. In terms of Womens' Groups, etc, how could any sane woman vote for someone (man or woman) who would tell them how to run their uterus? Small issue (abortion), but an example of the candidate's stinking thinking. Even God, who has laws, gives humankind a 'choice'. McCain/Palin should also enforce such Old Testament laws as drunkenness, price of adultery, fornication, lying, etc. Then they would fit well in Tehran. If they truly mean to be "Pro Life" so much, then enact laws and enforcement to ensure that the EXISTING children RECEIVE regular child support payments from their evasive and irresponsible 'mommas and daddys' that continue to populate.

Posted by: Jay | September 16, 2008 4:31 PM

Walter Mondale, not Monday.

Posted by: kid5rivers | September 16, 2008 4:30 PM

Bumper sticker ideas:

FAILIN' with PALIN, DOWN the DRAIN with McCAIN

Posted by: Charles | September 16, 2008 4:30 PM

"McCain's pays women on his senate staff better that Obama does."
That's interesting. Each senator himself decides how much the staff get paid? Who foot the bill, taxpayers or the senator? Maybe Cindy hands out tips to the staffers.

Posted by: Iwonder | September 16, 2008 4:30 PM

They should highlight that Palin took paying for rape kits for victims out of the Wasila budget as mayor, forcing victims to pay for their own rape kits. That is totally gross and anti-woman and was a tiny expense. Tie that with Biden's authorship of the Violence Against Women Act and McCain's vote against that bill, and you have a home run!

Posted by: Sarah | September 16, 2008 4:28 PM

More distortions from the McCain campaign. I work for the federal government, and I'm sure the reason Obama's female staff make less than McCain's is that HE HAS A NEWER STAFF. How dumb do they think people are? Pretty dumb, I guess. No one hires in at the top scale of a federal salary range - you have to move up over time. Since McCain's been in the Senate since the early 1980s, of course, he has more women in higher positions! Count on the Rove operatives to trust many Americans not to use their brains or common sense.

By the way, I heard today on NPR that one of McCain's campaign directors was Dick Cheney's communications director. Explains a lot: McCain has gone to the sequestered, testy, secretive candidate mode rather than the open, press can ride the bus McCain on the Straight Talk Express.

Let's see now, his top people worked for Karl Rove and Dick Cheney...yes, I can TOTALLY see how people believe he is still a maverick who will change Washington! Of course!

Posted by: bethechange1 | September 16, 2008 4:27 PM

You've got to be kidding? A surge of women to McCain? The only women who will be voting for Palin are the conservative-fundamentalists, the core-constituency McCain was in danger of losing.

As far as women who are moderates and progressives, McCain is a 'no go.'

Posted by: helenofpeel | September 16, 2008 4:25 PM

I predict you'll end up seeing the surge of women migrating to McCain even out in the end. That 20-point bounce has already been reduced to under 10.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | September 16, 2008 4:17 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2009 The Washington Post Company