The Republican Thread

[NorthSideSox72]

A woman who shoots wolves out of an airplane and doesn't believe in evolution is normal ?

Shoots wolves out of an airplane? I must have missed that one. Is that even legal, for anyone other than FWS or other gov't personnel?

 

[BigSqwert]

Shoots wolves out of an airplane? I must have missed that one. Is that even legal, for anyone other than FWS or other gov't personnel?

 

LINK

 

Palin didn't think Alaskans should be allowed to chase wolves from aircraft and shoot them -- they should be encouraged to do so.

[Soxbadger]

It is in Alaska:

 

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/NATURE/05/03/....enn/index.html

 

And a bounty was placed on wolves in 2007:

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17735990/

 

The incentives include offering 180 volunteer pilots and aerial gunners $150 in cash for turning in legs of freshly killed wolves, Gov. Sarah Palin's office announced Tuesday.

 

For the sake of fairness I only pulled articles that were published prior to Palin being chosen for VP. The first is from 2000 I believe and the second is 2007.

[NorthSideSox72]

LINK

That is appalling. Seriously. Forget about whether or not you approve of hunting, which I have no problem with at all. But that is just disgusting, and I don't see how any "hunter" with any kind of self respect could do that and call themselves sportsmen. Not to mention that the idiotic idea that we should offer bounties to kill natural predators, so more people can kill more hooved animals, is disturbing.

 

This pisses me off.

 

[StrangeSox]

That is appalling. Seriously. Forget about whether or not you approve of hunting, which I have no problem with at all. But that is just disgusting, and I don't see how any "hunter" with any kind of self respect could do that and call themselves sportsmen. Not to mention that the idiotic idea that we should offer bounties to kill natural predators, so more people can kill more hooved animals, is disturbing.

 

This pisses me off.

 

Her support of that practice is enough to completely turn me off of her. It's disgusting.

[EvilMonkey]

Looks like "the One" gets some more free Tv time on SNL this week.

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20...ss-topheadlines

[EvilMonkey]

If anyone is interested in the contrast, here is Gibson's interview with The Messiah back in June. The hardest question he got was somethign abotu Hillary. No asking about rumors or smears, no asking him about foreign leaders, all softball.

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Story?id=5000184&page=1

[NorthSideSox72]

If anyone is interested in the contrast, here is Gibson's interview with The Messiah back in June. The hardest question he got was somethign abotu Hillary. No asking about rumors or smears, no asking him about foreign leaders, all softball.

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Story?id=5000184&page=1

amazing how this campaign has shifted so quickly into something much harsher.

 

[Cknolls]

Sent: Thu 9/11/2008 6:52 PM

To: Kathryn Lopez

Subject: I love her feistiness

 

I am not your typical Republican. Pro-life, gun owning lesbian with a partner and we are voting for McCain and we are doing because of Palin. We love her feistiness and understand what it means to have to take on stupid, ignorant comments about who we are.

 

So we hope she stays on offense and never backs down

 

 

 

Keep it boys, your doing a bang up job.

[StrangeSox]

Sent: Thu 9/11/2008 6:52 PM

To: Kathryn Lopez

Subject: I love her feistiness

 

I am not your typical Republican. Pro-life, gun owning lesbian with a partner and we are voting for McCain and we are doing because of Palin. We love her feistiness and understand what it means to have to take on stupid, ignorant comments about who we are.

 

So we hope she stays on offense and never backs down

 

 

 

Keep it boys, your doing a bang up job.

 

I'm sorry, but that's just a dumb reason to vote for someone to be President.

[Steve9347]

I'm sorry, but that's just a dumb reason to vote for someone to be President.

Considering Mrs. Palin would probably condemn them for being lesbians in the first place...

 

Gov. Sarah Palin's church is promoting a conference that promises to convert gays into heterosexuals through the power of prayer.

 

"You'll be encouraged by the power of God's love and His desire to transform the lives of those impacted by homosexuality," according to the insert in the bulletin of the Wasilla Bible Church, where Palin has prayed for about six years.

Edited September 12, 2008 by Steve9347

[EvilMonkey]

Considering Mrs. Palin would probably condemn them for being lesbians in the first place...

Well, the Log Cabin Republicans have endorse McCain/Palin, which is important because they did NOT endorse Bush, so I guess she wouldn't be that bad towards lesbians. Sorry that she doesn't fit into your stereotype.

[Steve9347]

Well, the Log Cabin Republicans have endorse McCain/Palin, which is important because they did NOT endorse Bush, so I guess she wouldn't be that bad towards lesbians. Sorry that she doesn't fit into your stereotype.

I'm not trying to fit her into a sterotype, sorry to offend the great Palin, I was just pointing out that with her strong religious beliefs including the ones of her own church, chances are she's not big on the whole gay/lesbian thing. SO defensive!

[Balta1701]

If anyone is interested in the contrast, here is Gibson's interview with The Messiah back in June. The hardest question he got was somethign abotu Hillary. No asking about rumors or smears, no asking him about foreign leaders, all softball.

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Story?id=5000184&page=1

I'll bet you that interview was payback for Gibson's debate work earlier in the year.

[EvilMonkey]

First, 'elite' was a racist code word for 'black'. Then 'community organizer' became code for 'black'. Now, the new code word of the day for black is 'disrespectful'.

 

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/216121.php

[clyons]

First, 'elite' was a racist code word for 'black'. Then 'community organizer' became code for 'black'. Now, the new code word of the day for black is 'disrespectful'.

 

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/216121.php

That's certainly far-fetched. But FWIW, what is the strategic utility of an ad labelling your opponent "disrespectful?" That he lacks the politeness to be president? Pretty lame.

[EvilMonkey]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/12/us/polit...amp;oref=slogin

 

"Hanging on Biden's every word"

[EvilMonkey]

[EvilMonkey]

Obama's credibility gap, per The Australian. The paper, not DBAHO.

 

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story...35-7583,00.html

[DrunkBomber]

Gov. Sarah Palin's church is promoting a conference that promises to convert gays into heterosexuals through the power of prayer.

 

"You'll be encouraged by the power of God's love and His desire to transform the lives of those impacted by homosexuality," according to the insert in the bulletin of the Wasilla Bible Church, where Palin has prayed for about six years.

 

Ya, lets start talking about some things that the candidates churches do again. "God damn America"

[southsider2k5]

I recommend actually going to the website to see exactly how much stuff was edited out. Its pretty bad, especially when combined with how soft the Gipson/Obama interview was.

 

'http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/09/13/abc-news-edited-out-key-parts-sarah-palin-interview

 

ABC News Edited Out Key Parts of Sarah Palin Interview

By P.J. Gladnick (Bio | Archive)

 

A transcript of the unedited interview of Sarah Palin by Charles Gibson clearly shows that ABC News edited out crucial portions of the interview that showed Palin as knowledgeable or presented her answers out of context. This unedited transcript of the first of the Gibson interviews with Palin is available on radio host Mark Levin's website. The sections edited out by ABC News are in bold. The first edit shows Palin responding about meeting with foreign leaders but this was actually in response to a question Gibson asked several questions earlier:

 

GIBSON: Have you ever met a foreign head of state?

 

PALIN: There in the state of Alaska, our international trade activities bring in many leaders of other countries.

 

GIBSON: And all governors deal with trade delegations.

 

PALIN: Right.

 

GIBSON: Who act at the behest of their governments.

 

PALIN: Right, right.

 

GIBSON: I’m talking about somebody who’s a head of state, who can negotiate for that country. Ever met one?

 

PALIN: I have not and I think if you go back in history and if you ask that question of many vice presidents, they may have the same answer that I just gave you. But, Charlie, again, we’ve got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time. It is for no more politics as usual and somebody’s big, fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they’ve had opportunities to meet heads of state … these last couple of weeks … it has been overwhelming to me that confirmation of the message that Americans are getting sick and tired of that self-dealing and kind of that closed door, good old boy network that has been the Washington elite.

 

 

Next we see that Palin was not nearly as hostile towards Russia as was presented in the edited interview:

 

GIBSON: Let me ask you about some specific national security situations.

 

PALIN: Sure.

 

GIBSON: Let’s start, because we are near Russia, let’s start with Russia and Georgia.

 

The administration has said we’ve got to maintain the territorial integrity of Georgia. Do you believe the United States should try to restore Georgian sovereignty over South Ossetia and Abkhazia?

 

PALIN: First off, we’re going to continue good relations with Saakashvili there. I was able to speak with him the other day and giving him my commitment, as John McCain’s running mate, that we will be committed to Georgia. And we’ve got to keep an eye on Russia. For Russia to have exerted such pressure in terms of invading a smaller democratic country, unprovoked, is unacceptable and we have to keep…

 

GIBSON: You believe unprovoked.

 

PALIN: I do believe unprovoked and we have got to keep our eyes on Russia, under the leadership there. I think it was unfortunate. That manifestation that we saw with that invasion of Georgia shows us some steps backwards that Russia has recently taken away from the race toward a more democratic nation with democratic ideals. That’s why we have to keep an eye on Russia.

 

And, Charlie, you’re in Alaska. We have that very narrow maritime border between the United States, and the 49th state, Alaska, and Russia. They are our next door neighbors.We need to have a good relationship with them. They’re very, very important to us and they are our next door neighbor.

 

GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?

 

PALIN: They’re our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.

 

GIBSON: What insight does that give you into what they’re doing in Georgia?

 

PALIN: Well, I’m giving you that perspective of how small our world is and how important it is that we work with our allies to keep good relation with all of these countries, especially Russia. We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it’s in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along.

 

We also see from Palin's following remark, which was also edited out, that she is far from some sort of latter day Cold Warrior which the edited interview made her seem to be:

 

We cannot repeat the Cold War. We are thankful that, under Reagan, we won the Cold War, without a shot fired, also. We’ve learned lessons from that in our relationship with Russia, previously the Soviet Union.

 

We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it’s in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along.

 

Palin's extended remarks about defending our NATO allies were edited out to make it seem that she was ready to go to war with Russia.

 

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.

 

But NATO, I think, should include Ukraine, definitely, at this point and I think that we need to — especially with new leadership coming in on January 20, being sworn on, on either ticket, we have got to make sure that we strengthen our allies, our ties with each one of those NATO members.

 

We have got to make sure that that is the group that can be counted upon to defend one another in a very dangerous world today.

 

GIBSON: And you think it would be worth it to the United States, Georgia is worth it to the United States to go to war if Russia were to invade.

 

PALIN: What I think is that smaller democratic countries that are invaded by a larger power is something for us to be vigilant against. We have got to be cognizant of what the consequences are if a larger power is able to take over smaller democratic countries.

 

And we have got to be vigilant. We have got to show the support, in this case, for Georgia. The support that we can show is economic sanctions perhaps against Russia, if this is what it leads to.

 

It doesn’t have to lead to war and it doesn’t have to lead, as I said, to a Cold War, but economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, again, counting on our allies to help us do that in this mission of keeping our eye on Russia and Putin and some of his desire to control and to control much more than smaller democratic countries.

 

His mission, if it is to control energy supplies, also, coming from and through Russia, that’s a dangerous position for our world to be in, if we were to allow that to happen.

 

That answer presented Palin as a bit too knowledgeable for the purposes of ABC News and was, of course, edited out. Palin's answers about a nuclear Iran were carefully edited to the point where she was even edited out in mid-sentence to make it seem that Palin favored unilateral action against that country:

 

GIBSON: Let me turn to Iran. Do you consider a nuclear Iran to be an existential threat to Israel?

 

PALIN: I believe that under the leadership of Ahmadinejad, nuclear weapons in the hands of his government are extremely dangerous to everyone on this globe, yes.

 

GIBSON: So what should we do about a nuclear Iran? John McCain said the only thing worse than a war with Iran would be a nuclear Iran. John Abizaid said we may have to live with a nuclear Iran. Who’s right?

 

PALIN: No, no. I agree with John McCain that nuclear weapons in the hands of those who would seek to destroy our allies, in this case, we’re talking about Israel, we’re talking about Ahmadinejad’s comment about Israel being the “stinking corpse, should be wiped off the face of the earth,” that’s atrocious. That’s unacceptable.

 

GIBSON: So what do you do about a nuclear Iran?

 

PALIN: We have got to make sure that these weapons of mass destruction, that nuclear weapons are not given to those hands of Ahmadinejad, not that he would use them, but that he would allow terrorists to be able to use them. So we have got to put the pressure on Iran and we have got to count on our allies to help us, diplomatic pressure.

 

GIBSON: But, Governor, we’ve threatened greater sanctions against Iran for a long time. It hasn’t done any good. It hasn’t stemmed their nuclear program.

 

PALIN: We need to pursue those and we need to implement those. We cannot back off. We cannot just concede that, oh, gee, maybe they’re going to have nuclear weapons, what can we do about it. No way, not Americans. We do not have to stand for that.

 

Laughably, a remark by Gibson that indicated he agreed with Palin was edited out:

 

PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln’s words when he said — first, he suggested never presume to know what God’s will is, and I would never presume to know God’s will or to speak God’s words.

 

But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that’s a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God’s side.

 

That’s what that comment was all about, Charlie. And I do believe, though, that this war against extreme Islamic terrorists is the right thing. It’s an unfortunate thing, because war is hell and I hate war, and, Charlie, today is the day that I send my first born, my son, my teenage son overseas with his Stryker brigade, 4,000 other wonderful American men and women, to fight for our country, for democracy, for our freedoms.

 

Charlie, those are freedoms that too many of us just take for granted. I hate war and I want to see war ended. We end war when we see victory, and we do see victory in sight in Iraq.

 

GIBSON: I take your point about Lincoln’s words, but you went on and said, “There is a plan and it is God’s plan.”

 

Gibson took her point about Lincoln's words but we wouldn't know that by watching the interview since it was left on the cutting room floor. I urge everybody to see just how the unedited version of the first interview compared to what we saw on television by checking out the full transcript. It is a fascinating look into media manipulation via skillful editing.

[kapkomet]

But there's absolutely no media bias.

 

Pllllllueaaaase.

[whitesoxfan101]

But there's absolutely no media bias.

 

Pllllllueaaaase.

 

Well to be fair, it's not a bias, it's a flat out rooting interest. The media wants the man who was a community organizer just like Jesus Christ in the White House, and will do anything they can to help him out. The fact this race is still so close shows, among other things, how little the media means and/or how tired of them people in America are.

Edited September 14, 2008 by whitesoxfan101

[southsider2k5]

File this one under, it isn't easy being green, or under Homer Simpson election them of "Can't someone else do it?"

 

http://www.aspendailynews.com/section/home/129327

 

Results of a program using Aspen’s Canary Initiative to sell carbon offset credits to Democratic National Convention attendees are a little underwhelming.

 

The program, set up by the DNC Host Committee through the Denver Convention and Visitors Bureau and rolled out about a week before the convention started, raised a total of $18.34 worth of Canary Tags, offsetting 0.9 tons of carbon emissions.

 

The offsets were aimed at DNC-goers other than the official delegates, who had a separate carbon offset program through Vermont-based Native Energy. That program, set up in January through the Democratic National Convention Committee, was utilized by 65 percent of the DNC’s 4,440 delegates.

 

Carbon-offsetting programs estimate the amount of CO2 generated through the burning of fossil fuels associated with transportation, lodging and other travel-related activities. For rates between $10 and $20 per ton of CO2, users purchase the offsets and the money goes to pay for renewable energy projects or other programs that reduce carbon emissions.

 

According to Parry Burnap, director of greening for the 2008 host committee, the program’s DNC aims suffered due to the limited time her committee and the Denver Convention and Visitor’s Bureau had to get the word out to media, vendors and various others on the periphery of the DNC.

 

“You need more targeted marketing than a general press release,” Burnap said.

 

But the program and the carbon calculator it uses — which can be found through the Web site Denver.org — are not going anywhere. “We regard this as a legacy program,” Burnap said.

 

Denver is also the first city to offer carbon offsets for large events on its convention and visitors bureau Web site.

 

“Any convention that comes to Denver has a way to easily calculate its carbon impact,” said Kim Peterson, director of Aspen’s Canary Initiative.

 

The Canary Initiative’s Canary Tags program was selected because it has been up and running for several years and has a portfolio of in-state projects. The Denver offset program could eventually partner with a carbon offsetting program through Gov. Bill Ritter’s Energy Office and its Colorado Carbon fund, but the Web site still directs offset purchasers to Aspen’s Canary Tags Web site.

 

Peterson was hoping funds raised through the host committee for the DNC could be used for a signature project. But that will not be possible, as less than $20 was raised.

 

“Here’s three (compact fluorescent) light bulbs for the office,” Peterson said.

[email protected]

[Cknolls]

No surprise here:

 

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2008809140383

 

Be careful workers of Clerk's office, I smell a racism defense.