Democrats & Liberals Archives

What Problem Does Sarah Palin Have With America?

Who is “Black Helicopter” Steve? No, he’s not a paranoid alter ego of mine, he’s the fellow Sarah Palin tried to put in her old city council seat. The Republicans like to talk about judgment when dealing with the more extreme people Barack Obama knows, judgment in terms of whether he should have been seen in the same room with folks they consider radicals. But Sarah Palin? The applicable question is much worse.

You call it a question of judgment when you're trying to say, "He's a nice guy, but he gets his ideas hanging around with the wrong people." McCain and others have had to resort to that, because Obama has been consistently middle of the road in his presentation. If you say "folks, look at this dangerous nut" and point at Obama, he'll just flash that smile and you'll look like you're full of it.

Of course the Republicans still act, but time and time again when it comes to evidence that Obama either had an intense relationship with Ayers, the silence is deafening. The Republicans think the mere question, the mere suspicion should be enough to bring the conclusion, which is convenient since they're trying to win an election.

Palin's associations with people like Mark Chryson, and her husband's association with the Alaska Independence Party connects her to a network of Right Wing groups, of which a number essentially want their states to secede from the union. The Party's founder refused to be buried under an American flag, saying that the fires of hell were glaciers compared to his hatred for the US Government.

It's amazing that she can accuse Democrats and Liberals of being anti-American, given the people she associates with, given the goals of their organizations.

The Republicans, since the time of Nixon, have picked up the old Confederate sympathies, the spirit of state's rights taken to the extreme, and have kept those resentments simmering. Just simmering, not boiling up. But it's a balancing act, really. Palin's only interested in that balancing act for the sake of self-preservation.

Whereever she's shown up, she's brought the culture war with her, even into the politics of a town of a few thousand. In Wasilla, these fringe political operators were her comrades.

When she talks about Obama having a view of America different from the average person, does she say that holding a considerably different view herself? If the Republicans want to have a debate on radical associations, they should be smarter than this, smarter than handing question about people's patriotism to somebody who associates with people who think this country is imperfect enough that a decent size chunk of it should withdraw from it. And in case you think she doesn't still hold sympathies for this group, let her express her warm regards for this separatist group to you herself.

Posted by Stephen Daugherty at October 17, 2008 7:11 PM
Comments
Comment #267276

Stephen,

Now I know what she meant when she said she enjoyed being in a part of the country that was Pro-American.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/17/palin-clarifies-what-part_n_135641.html

Someone says it is small-towns that she relates to…nope, it’s the areas that want to secede.

Posted by: Marysdude at October 17, 2008 9:23 PM
Comment #267295

Stephen

I was listening to NPR a few days ago and a fellow Alaskan politician, (didn’t catch his name) was saying that the Sarah Palin of today does not compare in any way shape or form with that of Alaska Palin. He said she associated more with democrats in the legislature than she did republicans. Most of her accomplishments came about by way of dealing with the dems. She near as I can tell has simply shape shifted her ideology to serve an agenda. Who knows what her true beliefs are. Like McCain I doubt she really knows anymmore. But then they both are working hard at appeasing the GOP. But then what more can we expect from the lockstep party.

Posted by: RickIL at October 17, 2008 10:55 PM
Comment #267297

Stephen, there are some pretty enormous problems with these false equivalencies you’d like to draw between Palin’s past associations and Obama’s.

For starters—and this is not a small difference but a giant whopping 100-story high one that’s bigger than Godzilla sitting on King Kong’s shoulders: these individuals you mention haven’t done anything illegal, much less commit terrorism bombings.

Belonging to organizations like the John Birch Society, or even a militia group, or holding minority political views not shared by the Democratic Party, is NOT illegal.

Considering the Obama campaign’s efforts of late to use the force of law to silence all critics and stamp out dissent, this might change in the future. But as of now, it is still not only considered perfectly legal but Constitutionally-protected to hold minority political viewpoints.

That is, until you start setting off bombs and trying to kill people like Obama’s buddy Ayers did.

Posted by: Loyal Oppostion at October 17, 2008 11:28 PM
Comment #267302

LO,

Ayers did what? When exactly was he convicted of that? Or did you just rewrite the legal code?

Posted by: googlumpugus at October 18, 2008 5:25 AM
Comment #267305

LO,

Let’s see…Palin doesn’t just associate with an organization that desires to, and works toward secession, but her husband belongs to that organization for several years, and she makes speeches that encourage that organization in its quest.

Obama sets on a committee that wishes to assist public schools in reformation to a better educational system, and on the same committee is a man who protested a dishonorable war when Obama was a child. The same man has stated for the record that he regrets any violence he was a party to, but wishes he could have done more to stop the dishonorable war.

We are supposed to pick which one of these as the most dangerous to our American way of life? And, to pick which one to help lead our nation?

Posted by: Marysdude at October 18, 2008 6:05 AM
Comment #267306

why isnt the obama people saying more about this? I watched chris matthews of MSNBC last night talking with a senator from Wisc. who kept saying with a smile on her face that Obama was a traitor/anti-american becasue of his close connection with Ayers and not once did Matthews correct her premises. She kept talking about, and so did pat robertson, by the way, about Obama being in ayers living room, etc. Why isnt he putting out ads after ads about his non connection with Ayers? why isnt anyone asking Ayers??? WHy hasnt the press gone to AYres and asked him to make a statment? why arent those folkes from that education committee come out and talked about that committee and what it was? why not flood the airwaves with that? why isnt move.org or someone flooding the airwaves with Palins connection with the separatists and quotes from the man who headed it about how much he hates the US???

sadly, this tactic from the republicans seems to be taking track and I am getting really worried that the damage done by this in 3 weeks could give mccain the election.

Posted by: judye at October 18, 2008 8:50 AM
Comment #267308

LO-
Their founder was found dead following a plastic explosives deal gone wrong. But that’s not the point. The people Palin is palling around with were not merely colleagues on some charity board, but political allies, and in the case of her husband, Todd Palin, family.

No, the organizations are legal, but that’s not the point. If Sarah Palin is going to make a big deal out of Barack Obama’s casual acquaintance with Ayers, and pretend like this reflects on his politics, then its only fair to hold her to her own standard, and illustrate her own rather mutually beneficial relationship with right-wing radicals in that place where she got most of her executive experience. And obviously, if we look at that video, she hasn’t seen fit until rather recently to cut her ties with them.

Why do Republicans get to associate with dangerous radicals and the political fring with such impunity? It’s more than unfair, it’s dangerous. The Right has gotten too comfortable with the company of loonies, and I hope I can help them pay a price for that.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at October 18, 2008 8:59 AM
Comment #267312

judye,

There is plenty of information out there about the committee and Ayers’ part in it. There is plenty of information out there about Obama and his part in it too.

mccain/Palin thinks that shouting these fabrications often and loud enough will help win the election, but so far it has not resonated well with the American voters. The Republican party has used this ‘swiftboat’ method so much that it reminds folks of the story of the shepherd who cried wolf. It is coming back to bite them.

The mess they say about the Ayers, Obama connection is not true, but even if it was, they have used up their credibility, and would not be believed about it.

What did Abe say? “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and you can fool all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time. It is as true today as it was in the 1850s. The Republican ‘fooling’ has run its course.

Posted by: Marysdude at October 18, 2008 9:24 AM
Comment #267314


The only thing the people need to secede from is the Democratic and Republican parties. Get some self-respect and get rid of these creatures who do everything they can to divide us.

In a divided nation, wealth and power determine what we stand for rather than the people.

Posted by: jlw at October 18, 2008 9:35 AM
Comment #267316

IMHO McCain/Palin are helping out Obama/Biden by continuing to talk about this Ayers non-issue. Most voters have heard bits and pieces about it and when discussing it, at least with me, are given the facts and also told about Palins association with the AIP. Not as many conservatives and repubs have heard about the AIP and it sure is fun to watch them squirm when they hear the story as part of a rebuttal to their Ayers comments. The shine comes off the Palin apple real quick when her background is opened up for discussion.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 18, 2008 9:45 AM
Comment #267317

I have also been wondering why Barack and the Dems don’t bring out some of this stuff on Ms. Palin. I am really tired of playing nice. Also there are plenty of things on McCain that we can tar him with and use the “guilt by association thing”.

All I hear are the McCain and company saying we need to know about his ties to Ayers. Barack, the media, and some republicans have all said over and over again what his association with Ayers is but that doesn’t make McCain and troops happy. There is nothing more that Barack can say that will stop them talking about Ayers. This will continue until election day and longer if the GOP thinks it can milk it. That is why I think the only possible way to stop it is to go on the attack and make them regret bringing it up. Everytime a repub mentioned Ayers I would come out with something about them.

The other day I was at the Mall and smiled and spoke to a couple of people I didn’t know. I sat in the food court and ate near a couple of people I didn’t know an spoke to them. I voted early and stood in line talking to a couple of people I didn’t know. Later I wondered if it turned out one was a criminal or had done bad things earlier in their lives how that information could be used to tar and feather me. All I have to say is Barack is a better person than me because I would mount a strong attack to let people know they could not defame and ruin my reputation without the same being done to them.

Sadly, I had wanted a positive up beat campaign and was willing to over look the little lies that campaigns tell about each other and knew there would be some negative ads but this Ayers thing is beyond belief. We now have Michelle Bachman from Minnesota on Chris Matthews calling for the MSM to investigate congress to find out who is pro and anti american. Not once did he ask her who gets to decide what is and isn’t american. Who died and appointed her GOD to slander Barack on national tv the way she did.

If there is no other reason to stop McCain than to stop Ms. Palin, that is good enough for me. Initially after she was nominated I thought we just needed to stop focusing on her and giving her so much attention. Well I WAS WRONG!!! I find her to be UNAMERICAN! and that’s what democrats need to start saying.

Posted by: Carolina at October 18, 2008 9:48 AM
Comment #267332

>I find her to be UNAMERICAN! and that’s what democrats need to start saying.
Posted by: Carolina at October 18, 2008 09:48 AM

Carolina,

She shows herself to be less American each and every day…

Posted by: Marysdude at October 18, 2008 11:27 AM
Comment #267338

jlw-
People divide on their own, especially in a Democracy where the majority rules, and each group wants to get in good with a potential majority, or in the opposition that can put up a good fight against them.

We determine for ourselves what we stand for. It’s only because the American people were lured by the promise of easy money, a return to easy times, that we find ourselves in this pickle. We picked the wrong way to deal with the problem of complexity

In a system like ours, any group that splits up into multiple parties is penalized. This is how the conservatives in canada have less than half the votes, but nonetheless hold power. When the chips are down, people want to be part of a majority, and that will benefit a two party system.

But a two party system, in my opinion, hides beneath its skirts a multitude of factions, which may run to the other lady and hide under her skirts instead, given the right provocation. Different interest groups have gone back and forth on this.

What’s broken down, I think, is the sense of common citizenship, of the differences between ourselves as Republican and Democrats being emphasized. I live near two ladies, one middle aged, one elderly, and I like these people. They’re Republicans. And that doesn’t get in the way of me liking them. The differences are incidental to the fact that we live in the same communities, in the same states, in the same country. To me, part of being American is recognizing that America is no one race, no one religion, no one philosophy. We’re not a nation built on one group of people always getting their way. We’re a nation where each side, whether they realize it or not, is party to a compromise that keeps the peace and makes us better neighbors.

I think its a pity to have that gift and reject it, to have the opportunity and the space to live in peace with your neighbors, and ruin it all for simple BS.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at October 18, 2008 11:52 AM
Comment #267340

carolina

Sadly, I had wanted a positive up beat campaign and was willing to over look the little lies that campaigns tell about each other and knew there would be some negative ads but this Ayers thing is beyond belief. We now have Michelle Bachman from Minnesota on Chris Matthews calling for the MSM to investigate congress to find out who is pro and anti american. Not once did he ask her who gets to decide what is and isn’t american. Who died and appointed her GOD to slander Barack on national tv the way she did.

It seems like every election cycle brings out the fact that the GOP would like us to believe that they are the party of honor. And as a result should be the party that gets to decide who is or isn’t American. Don’t you know that anyone who opposes their views are nothing less than biased socialists with underlying horrible agendas at hand. Seeing as the last eight years have certainly painted the GOP as the party of failure they have nothing left but to attempt to paint the left as a bigger failure than themselves. In essence they are working at convincing the American people that the only choice they have is the lesser of two evils. I find it all particularly disgusting. If I were a republican I would be offended and embarrassed that they could stoop so low as to think I am that easy to manipulate.

Posted by: RickIL at October 18, 2008 11:54 AM
Comment #267344

We have reached a sad and disturbing time, that I’m more aware of than I have been of others. I’ve lived through some others, but with ignorance and without the knowledge of their magnitude.
I have Republican friends who I love dearly, and acquaintances that I easily tolerate….when politics don’t enter the fray. So how is it we can communicate, eat together, share special times and people, be emotionally involved at all levels, but when our political beliefs are questioned or challenged, we become bitter enemies?? We’re of one mind when dealing with outside threats.
With that all said, it is still the Democratic party that continues to distance itself from the vicious, hateful and venomous attacks like those that are taking place against the Obama movement. Whether it’s because of his perceptions, his voting history, his ideas and plans for this country, or just because of his color….it is downright evil in context.
Sarah Palin is no less ugly about it than McCain is, but she is just stupid…..plain and simple. McCain and his stratetists are calculating and driven.

Posted by: janedoe at October 18, 2008 12:43 PM
Comment #267351

janedoe writes: “With that all said, it is still the Democratic party that continues to distance itself from the vicious, hateful and venomous attacks…”

And then at the same times writes; “it is downright evil in context. Sarah Palin is no less ugly about it than McCain is, but she is just stupid…..plain and simple. McCain and his stratetists are calculating and driven.”

Does anyone besides me see the contradictory statement here? Kinda sounds like a blaspheming angel to me!

Posted by: Jim M at October 18, 2008 1:37 PM
Comment #267352

RickIl writes; “I find it all particularly disgusting. If I were a republican I would be offended and embarrassed that they could stoop so low as to think I am that easy to manipulate.”

As regards “manipulation” I would ask RickIL to consider this;

“Flip-flopping reveals the prime meridian of presidential politics. If an analyst will collate all the positions to which all the candidates move, he will find himself close to the true center of national politics.

Thus, though he is the nominee of a party that is in thrall to the environmental movement, Obama has signaled conditional support for offshore drilling and pumping out of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

While holding to his pledge for a pullout of combat brigades from Iraq in 16 months, he has talked of “refining” his position and of a residual U.S. force to train the Iraqi Army and deal with Al Qaeda.

On Afghanistan, he has called for 10,000 more troops and U.S. strikes in Pakistan to kill Bin Laden, even without prior notice or the permission of the Pakistani government.

Since securing the nomination, Obama has adopted the Scalia position on the death penalty for child rape and the right to keep a handgun in the home. He voted to give the telecoms immunity from prosecution for colluding in Bush wiretaps. This onetime sympathizer of the Palestinians now does a passable imitation of Ariel Sharon.

No Democrat has ever come out of the far left of his party to win the presidency. McGovern, the furthest left, stayed true to his convictions and lost 49 states.

Obama has chosen another course. Though he comes out of the McGovern-Jesse Jackson left, he has shed past positions like support for partial birth abortion as fast as he has shed past associations, from William Ayers to ACORN, from the Rev. Jeremiah Wright to his fellow parishioners at Trinity United.

One question remains: Will a President Obama, with his party in absolute control of both Houses, revert to the politics and policies of the Left that brought him the nomination, or resist his ex-comrades’ demands that he seize the hour and impose the agenda ACORN, Ayers, Jesse, and Wright have long dreamed of?

Whichever way he decides, he will be at war with them, or at war with us. If Barack wins, a backlash is coming.”

Excerpt from; http://townhall.com/columnists/PatrickJBuchanan/2008/10/17/the_coming_backlash?page=1

Posted by: Jim M at October 18, 2008 1:56 PM
Comment #267365

Sarah Palin is no less ugly about it than McCain is, but she is just stupid…..plain and simple. McCain and his stratetists are calculating and driven.

Jim M…..show me just exactly what you interpret to be vicious and hateful about what I said. Would you prefer I use the word ignorant, in place of stupid??? Okay….you got it!
If you’re so enamored with her, then you should listen to what she says. Most recent example is her speaking in N.H. about how great the northwest is…….. And don’t try to tell me that she just mis-spoke. She doesn’t have a clue what this “lower 48” is all about because she obviuosly hasn’t felt the need to broaden her horizons and deepen her knowledge.

Posted by: janedoe at October 18, 2008 3:49 PM
Comment #267370

janedoe, I really don’t want to get into a competitive listing of misspoken words and statements that have been uttered by both sides. When Obama talks about 57 states and Biden asks a cripple to stand up I just take it as a simple error, not a sign of ignorance or stupidity.

That America is fast becoming a nation of intolerance and great division in our politics is obvious and I would like all of us to stop with the name-calling.

Our candidates for political office are human and subject to error and all the other human failings we share in common.

Posted by: Jim M at October 18, 2008 4:22 PM
Comment #267371

janedoe,

She was too busy watching them pesky Rooshuuuns to learn about the rest of us. In fact she thinks there are actually pockets of Americans who are Pro-America. I guess the rest of us are secessionists? And if she does think that…which ones of us is she for?????

Posted by: Marysdude at October 18, 2008 4:24 PM
Comment #267376

Well now you’ve done it dude…… I’ll have to dwell on that one all day.

Posted by: janedoe at October 18, 2008 4:39 PM
Comment #267394

Jim M

One question remains: Will a President Obama, with his party in absolute control of both Houses, revert to the politics and policies of the Left that brought him the nomination, or resist his ex-comrades’ demands that he seize the hour and impose the agenda ACORN, Ayers, Jesse, and Wright have long dreamed of?

You really should quit putting all your faith in Limbaugh, Fox News and that ilk. Those folks are nothing more than false prophets pursuing the right wing agenda of a totalitarian authority which answers to no one. Their agenda is purpose driven and serves to fuel and ignite the hatreds whose mantra I know you would prefer to pin to the liberal side of things, but the reality is that it is your party that seeks ultimate control of all things at the expense of everyone else.

Thankfully it appears that more and more people everyday are seeing your party for the bigoted and careless failure it has evolved into. The reason Obama is ahead in the polls and making fast ground in many red states is that most people recognize him as a good, thoughtful and genuine person of compassion with the best of intent. Those characteristics are not by and large associated with the GOP or its members in these times by most level headed Americans. I am quite capable of seeing beyond the foolishness of Ayers and the ridiculous lengths that you folks are going to in efforts to associate Acorn as some sort of out of control plot, funded by Obama to steal the election. I will leave that problem to you who are so easily swayed by the influence of those who put the perpetuation of their party before the best interests of this nation.

Posted by: RickIL at October 18, 2008 7:02 PM
Comment #267395

janedoe

McCain and his stratetists are calculating and driven.

You covered most of the reasons for all the hateful vitriol. A certain amount of it has always existed. The GOP is fooling no one. They know these conditions exist and all it takes is a tiny spark to ignite the fire. Anything for the cause. Right? I personally view those who would intentionally motivate such behavior in a worse light than those who practice it. They seek to use such “calculated” despicable acts to further as you say a “driven” agenda. They are not honorable or decent people.

Posted by: RickIL at October 18, 2008 7:13 PM
Comment #267402

“The reason Obama is ahead in the polls and making fast ground in many red states…”

Why does the left say the polls don’t mean anything when McCain was ahead, but when BHO is ahead they mean something.

Posted by: Oldguy at October 18, 2008 8:18 PM
Comment #267403

oldguy

Why does the left say the polls don’t mean anything when McCain was ahead, but when BHO is ahead they mean something.

I wasn’t aware that the left says that. Who is the left anyway? I think I recall some mention of the polls not meaning a lot early on, I can’t recall making any such claims myself. At this point though with such little time to go and quite a few red states moving to blue I think they do carry a lot of credence. They are clear indicators of a trend. I do however realize that nothing is set in stone.

Posted by: RickIL at October 18, 2008 8:30 PM
Comment #267404

Since I can’t start a new thread will post this here.
INTERESTING INFORMATION
[George Bush vindicated]


You will find verification links at the end of this shocking article.

This has been flying under the radar. Read the MSNBC article and check the truthorfiction.com site. The TorF version is shown below. This event is factual. I have an increased respect for President Bush. He has taken the heat of being called a liar and a war monger for 5 years while he kept his silence to protect the people of the world. This is truly a display of selfless honor.

On July 5, 2008, the Associated Press (AP) released a story titled: Secret U.S. mission hauls uranium from Iraq.
The opening paragraph is as follows:

The last major remnant of Saddam Hussein’s nuclear program a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium reached a Canadian port Saturday to complete a secret U.S. operation that included a two week airlift from Baghdad and a ship voyage crossing two oceans.

See anything wrong with this picture? We have been hearing from the far-left for more than five years how, Bush lied. Somehow, that slogan loses its credibility now that 550 metric tons of Saddam’s yellowcake, used for nuclear weapon enrichment, has been discovered and shipped to Canada for its new use as nuclear energy.

It appears that American troops found the 550 metric tons of uranium in 2003 after invading Iraq. They had to sit on this information and the uranium itself, for fear of terrorists attempting to steal it. It was guarded and kept safe by our military in a 23,000-acre site with large sand beams surrounding the site.

This is vindication for the Bush administration, having been attacked mercilessly by the liberal media and the far-left pundits on the blogosphere. Now that it is proven that President Bush did not lie about Saddam’s nuclear ambitions, one would think the mainstream media would report the story. Once the AP released t he story, the mainstream media should have picked it up and broadcast it worldwide.

This never happened, due in large part I believe, to the fact that the mainstream media would have to admit they were wrong about Bush’s war motives all along. Thankfully, the AP got it right when it said,
The removal of 550 metric tons of yellowcake the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment was a significant step toward closing the books on Saddam’s nuclear legacy.

Closing the book on Saddam’s nuclear legacy. Did Saddam have a nuclear legacy after all? I thought Bush lied. As it turns out, the people who lied were Joe Wilson and his wife.

Valerie Plame engaged in a clear case of nepotism and convinced the CIA to send her husband on a fact finding mission in February 2002, seeking to determine if Saddam Hussein attempted to buy yellowcake from Niger. The CIA and British intelligence believed Saddam contacted Niger for that purpose but needed proof.

During his trip to Niger, Wilson actually interviewed the former prime minister of Niger, Ibrahim Assane Mayaki. Mayaki told Wilson that in June of 1999, an Iraqi delegation expressed interest in ‘expanding commercial relations’ for the purposes of purchasing yellowcake.

Wilson chose to overlook Mayaki’s remarks and reported to the CIA that there was no evidence of Hussein wanting to purchase yellowcake from Niger.

However, with British intelligence insisting the claim was true, President Bush used that same claim in his State of the Union address in January of 2003.

Outraged by Bush’s insistence that the claim was true, Wilson wrote an op-ed in the New York Times in the summer of 2003 slamming Bush.

Wilson did this in spite of the fact that Mayaki said Saddam did try to buy the yellowcake from Niger. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence disagreed with Wilson and supported Mayaki’s claim. This meant nothing to Wilson who was opposed to the Iraq war and thus had ulterior motives in covering up the prime minister’s statements.

It was a simple tactic really. If the far-left and their friends in the media could prove Bush lied about Hussein wanting to purchase yellowcake from Niger, it would undermine President Bush’s credibility and give them more cause for asking what other lies he may have told.

Yet, the real lie came from Wilson, who interpreted his own meaning from the prime minister’s statements and concluded all by himself that the claim of Saddam attempting to purchase yellowcake was ‘unequivocally wrong.’ Curiously, the CIA sat on this information and did not inform the CIA Director, who sided with Bush on the yellowcake claim. This was made public in a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report in July 2004.

Valerie Plame also engaged in her own lie campaign by spreading the notion that the Bush administration outed her as a CIA agent. Never mind that it was Richard Armitage — no friend of the Bush administration — who leaked Plame’s identity to the press. Never mind that Plame had not been in the field as a CIA agent in some six years.

The truth is, due to their opposition to the war, Joe Wilson, Valerie Plame, the mainstream media and their left-wing friends on the blogosphere engaged in a propaganda campaign to undermine the Bush administration. Now that Saddam’s uranium has been made public and is no longer a threat to the world, do you think these aforementioned parties will apologize and admit they were wrong? Don’t count on it. The rest of the American people should hear the truth about Saddam’s uranium. It is up to you and me to inform them every chance we get.

As far as the anti-war crowd is concerned, the next time they say that, ‘Bush lied,’ we should tell them to, ‘Have the yellowcake and eat it too.’


This story was verified, if you want to check it for yourself, click on the links below.

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/u/uraniumyellowcake.htm

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334


Posted by: papioscarw at October 18, 2008 8:49 PM
Comment #267406

Papioscarw,
From your own link:
“U.N. inspectors documented and safeguarded the yellowcake, which had been stored in aging drums and containers since before the 1991 Gulf War. There was no evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991, the official said.”

The only thing shocking about this is the stupidity of people who pretend it offers some sort of justification for the invasion of Iraq, and the subsequent death of over one million human being.

I don’t think I’ve used the term ‘dumbass’ on this site before, but it is definitely time. The person pushing this story at “truthorfiction” is a colossal dumbass. Don’t buy into it for a second, papioscarw, not one second. It’s stupid. The person at “truthorficiton” is a dumbass. That person isn’t even a decent liar. Avoid it, papioscarw. They draw you into their own dumbassery with their lame, pathetic lies. Avoid those people!


Posted by: phx8 at October 18, 2008 9:18 PM
Comment #267410

Wow! phx8, great usage of the best descriptive words I’ve ever witnessed…dumbassery…again I say, WOW!

I love it so much I’d like your permission to use it myself one of these days…without having to give you credit for it…I want the credit for its use myself…LOL ;)

Posted by: Marysdude at October 18, 2008 9:47 PM
Comment #267413

And along those same lines…..what a great dumbasscumentary !!!

Posted by: janedoe at October 18, 2008 10:05 PM
Comment #267414

Hey guys, this is one of the best run-downs on Palin I’ve seen yet…let’s hope it hits the MSM.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/18/the-palin-plunge-voters-s_n_135857.html

Posted by: Marysdude at October 18, 2008 10:15 PM
Comment #267418

LOL dude….would one call that an endorsement??
Don’t forget to watch Saturday Night Live…..and then Meet The Press tomorrow. Colin Powell is going to be on, and there are lots of rumors abounding that he will give Obama the thumbs up.

Posted by: janedoe at October 18, 2008 10:42 PM
Comment #267424

Marysdude,
Sure, help yourself. The word is original as far as I know. The truthorfiction site seemed to to hit a kind of intellectual nadir. It required- nay, demanded- a new word all its own. The article itself is unintentionally hilarious. Really, I’m stumped to describe something so foolish. Hence, a new word: dumbassery.

Sure enough, Colin Powell endorsed Obama. Not that his endorsement in any way undermines the truthorfiction dumbassery. Heh heh. It’s a shame Powell undermined his career by fronting for the invasion of Iraq, but at least he has the grace to recognize his mistake. He just got caught wanting to be a team leader more than he wanted to trust his own judgment. He should have known better, and he knows it, and he admits it.

Posted by: phx8 at October 19, 2008 12:06 AM
Comment #267426

I’ve heard that Powell might endorse Obama tomorrow, but if he’s actually done so already I haven’t seen that in any of the news anywhere.

Personally, I don’t see why or how that would matter to anybody but Powell at this point.

I’ve long wondered if Powell might want to run for President himself some day, and if so, an Obama-endorsement would pretty much obliterate any chance of it. At best, he might be tapped to serve in an Obama administration, but there’s absolutely no way he’d win a Democratic primary as a former Republican stalwart.

If Powell wants to be President some day, his best bet would be to sit out this election season and then, if Obama wins, seek the Republican nomination in 2012. If he was really serious about it, he’d endorse McCain, putting him back in the Republicans’ good favor, and instantly vault himself into the upper ranks of 2012 contenders. An Obama endorsement, however, would be a big so-what. It would simply lose him whatever standing he still has among Republicans, be taken as a predictable gesture of Black solidarity, and effectively end any big ambitions Powell might have for his own future career.

Posted by: Loyal Oppostion at October 19, 2008 1:22 AM
Comment #267428

papioscarw-
Let me be blunt about that situation. The basic evidence for that exchange was forged. All the other evidence was merely reinterpretation of that information, or repetition of that information through other sources in order to get the appearance of a growing consensus.

The operative question in that situation is the question of whether one tries to rewrite the facts as people know it to suit an agenda and forward a policy, or whether one tries to rewrite the agenda and change the policy to suit the facts, using the spin and public relations to justify and run interference for handling thing responsibly.

Any Republican who justifies the outing of Valerie Wilson justifies the betrayal of agents based on their spouses political activities. If you hold this self-righteous notion that somehow the situation requires it, stop for a moment and consider the risk in any such outing: you risk losing or compromising any sources attached to that agent (running spies is what field agents mostly do, not the James Bond crap) You risk losing the front they work for (Brewster Jennings int his case) as enteprising reporters and counterintelligence officers run down associations they previously had no cause to question. You also shut off the flow of good information from them.

Does this sound like an appropriate response to political embarrassment?

The Republican leadership, in it’s self-righteous quest to defeat the liberals and fulfill its agenda are undermining this nation’s strength and power in this and so many other ways.

If you’re wondering why so many are attracted to a candidate whose message is hope, just consider what a state of despair this country must be in for that to sell. That’s where eight years of Bush and the twelve years of Republican dominance of Congress have left us. Americans are tired of the Republicans fulfilling their agenda at America’s expense, while demonizing anybody who rejects their radicalism or oppose their abuses of power.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at October 19, 2008 8:12 AM
Comment #267433

Colin Powell just endorsed Barack Hussein Obama. His endorsement, while LO doesn’t think it matters to anyone but himself, while it might not move a lot of people over to the Obama camp it is yet another thing putting a drag on McCain’s ability to close the gap. Powell cited, among other things, McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin as one of the deciding factors. He said she is not ready to be president and would push the GOP further to the right in an unhelpful way for his party and our country. He also addressed this anti-Muslim crap going on with GOP supporters and to some extent fomented by the GOP leadership in a very articulate way. He said that when McCain told that woman in Minnesota that Obama isn’t a Muslim, he is a good man he should have said, “he’s a Christian but so what if he was a Muslim.” Every American, regardless of religion should have a realistic expectation that they, or someone like them, can aspire to be president and that people won’t discount them because of what religion they follow. John Meacham said that getting the endorsement of Colin Powell is getting the endorsement of the preeminent military figure of our time. Meacham is no liberal either,

Chuck Todd also said that the McCain campaign was giving up on hopes to win the popular vote and is concentrating only on the electoral college. Which, tactically is a smart thing but is telling in that he is conceding that he isn’t the choice of the majority of the American people. I think I am one of the few people who still believes in the electoral college but to campaign with a strategy designed to win with a popular minority is telling. Good tactic, but telling.

Posted by: tcsned at October 19, 2008 9:44 AM
Comment #267436

LO,

After a successful Obama 8 years, the Republicans might be begging Colin to run and restore their party.

Posted by: googlumpugus at October 19, 2008 10:33 AM
Comment #267437

“If he was really serious about it, he’d endorse McCain, putting him back in the Republicans’ good favor, and instantly vault himself into the upper ranks of 2012 contenders. An Obama endorsement, however, would be a big so-what. It would simply lose him whatever standing he still has among Republicans, be taken as a predictable gesture of Black solidarity, and effectively end any big ambitions Powell might have for his own future career.”

Regardless of his mistaken speech at the UN in the lead up to the Iraq invasion, I have long admired Colin Powell for his ability to place honesty, and integrity above his interests for political gain.
That Republicans could belive his endorsement of Obama would merely be about “Black solidarity” reflects more about the Republican Party’s closed-mindedness, and it’s willingness to to place party over country than it does about Powell’s honor.

Powell did indeed endorse Obama this morning.
Chalk up another point for honor and integrity.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky at October 19, 2008 10:40 AM
Comment #267440

>Chalk up another point for honor and integrity.

Rocky
Posted by: Rocky at October 19, 2008 10:40 AM

Rocky,

It is the one thing that has been missing from the Republican agenda since 1994, and may very well mean the end of the ‘Grand Old Party’. If Republicans do not begin to act with integrity and honor (get rid of the likes of Newt and Karl), it may very well not recover.

We, as a nation, have tried it the dishonorable way and have failed in just about every way there is to fail. Into the future, no matter what decisions are made regarding the economy, taxes, national prestige, wars, etc., we slide down the slippery slope to oblivion if it is not done with honor…

Posted by: Marysdude at October 19, 2008 12:27 PM
Comment #267443

Rocky, I agree, as many will, with your opinion of the Powell endorsement.
I’ve also admired him for many things, his obvious intelligence, his demeanor and the way he distances himself from the furor and frenzy of Washington DC.
The McCain camp has already spun the announcement to show it as being insignificant by playing up endorsements from others.
I don’t believe that cockiness is the order of the day, but I do think we’re hearing the last gasps of a dying effort by McCain and co. One could almost feel sorry for him if he hadn’t chosen such a nasty and beligerent approach to this quest.

Posted by: janedoe at October 19, 2008 12:55 PM
Comment #267446

McCain can say that this endorsement was no surprise and it is insignificant but the last thing his campaign needs is to have 3 or 4 days of the news cycle dominated by this as it surely will. Not only is it telling that one of the most respected military people of our time supporting a candidate from the other party, he did so with only 16 days left before the election. This will take up probably about 25% of the time left with this news when McCain needs everyday to push him closer to the mark to have any chance of winning this election. This takes things in the opposite direction. As I said in my previous post, it’s not so much that Powell’s endorsement with directly transfer into a lot of votes but it makes it impossible for McCain to make any headway in the last few days before we vote.

mccain/PALIN are in serious trouble. They have run a horrible campaign and, I think, a strategically stupid one to seem to be appealing only to the GOP base and ignoring the independents and moderates. They’ll need some serious tricks up their sleeves to pull this out.

I can’t wait to see what the next two weeks has to offer.

Posted by: tcsned at October 19, 2008 1:18 PM
Comment #267449

Like King Harold being killed at the Battle of Hastings on 14 October 1066 fghting the Norman invaders, led by William the Conqueror. That was the last staw..

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 19, 2008 1:33 PM
Comment #267450

Rodney - I’m not sure if this endorsement is analogous to King Harold’s arrow through his eye but Powell’s endorsement will certainly be prominent on Obama’s Bayeux Tapestry. Nice historical reference :)

Posted by: tcsned at October 19, 2008 1:42 PM
Comment #267455

Good posts here re: Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barack Obama.

Here’s a link to Powell’s Meet the Press appearance, as well as his news conference afterward. Both are well worth watching.

What is McCain to do when so many intelligent Republicans have decided to put the needs of our country first by supporting Obama? We’re talking about people who have never supported a Democrat before in their lives here. People like Susan Eisenhower (and Julie Nixon Eisnehower), and William F. Buckley Jr., and Christopher Hitchens, and now Colin Powell. Let’s be clear, these people haven’t suddenly been transformed into Democrats and Progressives in the least — it’s just that all of them seem to understand that their party has come to represent a complete lack of new ideas, as well as logic and reasonableness.

These folks want their country to be lead by an intelligent man with a steady hand and an ability to reach across the aisle in order to lead ALL Americans in a better direction. That’s Obama.
What McCain is offering is the same dismal direction we’ve been on for eight years — and on behalf of just the chosen few who are Wealthy GOP Plutocrats, or enraged Christian Caucasian Culture Warriors.

LO:

be taken as a predictable gesture of Black solidarity

Bush and Cheney killed off Neocon-Republican credibility completely. And this kind of unconscious, or perhaps unashamed, blatant racism seems to be what is going to bury the GOP for good. Because morally-upright intelligent people simply can’t stomach a party that only seems to stand for total failure and incompetence on the one hand, and shameful and embarrassing ignorance and stupidity on the other.

And that’s a terrible shame, in my opinion.
I mean, it’s not like I agree with a shred of the conservative world view, but if conservatives no longer have a political party to represent their intelligent, morally upright wing, they may start feeling like they have to join my party and start trying to drag it over toward the right, as a result.
With Obama finally defeating the DLC over leadership of the Democratic party, the very last thing Liberals and Progressives want to see is a bunch of Old School Conservatives trying to wrestle the Conservative, Corporate Appeasing Democrats back into power.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at October 19, 2008 2:27 PM
Comment #267484

Tina Fey and Sarah Palin were great on SNL last night, in the opening bit and Amy Poehler with Sarah P on Weekend Update. They even shot at Bullwinkle. For those who missed it, and since NBC will get the copywright cops after anyone who posts on youtube, and there isn’t much on dailymotion, these are from the NBC website:

This is the cold open:

gov-palin-cold-open/773761

and this is weekend update:

update-palin-rap/773781/

The funniest they’ve been in years.

Posted by: ohrealy at October 19, 2008 5:09 PM
Comment #267503

judye>why isnt the obama people saying more about this?

Because Obama doesn’t run that kind of campaign; his people are too busy talking about the issues instead of these BS “association” red herrings to which McCain/Palin have to resort because they have no such grasp of the issues.

Posted by: EJN at October 19, 2008 7:41 PM
Comment #267504

SD>What Problem Does Sarah Palin Have With America?

She has the same problem with America that most Repubs/Cons have with America: You’re either with us or you’re not patriotic; you either unquestioningly believe what we say or you’re a terrorist; you either fear what we tell you to fear or you’re a socialist; do as we say, not as we do.

Reps/Cons are the party/ideology for people who don’t like to think or are incapable of thinking.

That’s her basic problem with America.

Posted by: EJN at October 19, 2008 7:58 PM
Comment #267534

Hi everyone, it is nearly election time in the US. So it’s time for you to send your message to American voters by posting a photo message in the hope of a better world.


Time is running out, and it might be the last chance for you to raise your voice.

Please do not hesitate to post your message or if you did so already, just send a message to your friends to view our page or site.

Take part in making OUR world better, take action now,

Give US a hope

GIVE USA HOPE!

www.giveusahope.com

Posted by: giveusahope at October 20, 2008 10:35 AM
Comment #267584

Stephen
Very weak attempt and almost as silly as your defense of Wright.

But, I would like to ask you guys a very serious question: What do you believe is the main reason why these groups exist and why millions of average Americans understand and agree with them?

Posted by: kctim at October 20, 2008 4:05 PM
Comment #267609

>why millions of average Americans understand and agree with them?
Posted by: kctim at October 20, 2008 04:05 PM

kctim,

For the same reason more millions don’t…it’s a matter of upbringing, intelligence and how many branches there are on the family tree…err, genetics…

Posted by: Marysdude at October 20, 2008 7:16 PM
Comment #267689

Dude
That has nothing to do with it and is nothing but an attempt to avoid the real reason. A reason in which leftists, in their “we know better than you” beliefs, refuses to acknowledge and simply ignores.

IF leftists took the time to understand and respect differing views, things wouldn’t be as bad as they are now.

Posted by: kctim at October 21, 2008 10:24 AM
Comment #267704

>IF leftists took the time to understand and respect differing views, things wouldn’t be as bad as they are now.
Posted by: kctim at October 21, 2008 10:24 AM

kct
And…right back atcha…

Posted by: Marysdude at October 21, 2008 11:31 AM
Comment #267706

Oh, I understand and respect your all’s views Dude. I just don’t agree with them.
Where we differ is I don’t want to force you to act against those views.

Posted by: kctim at October 21, 2008 11:38 AM
Comment #267749

>Where we differ is I don’t want to force you to act against those views.
Posted by: kctim at October 21, 2008 11:38 AM

kctim,

Sure you do…

Posted by: Marysdude at October 21, 2008 2:17 PM
Comment #267782

Name one.

Posted by: kctim at October 21, 2008 4:07 PM
Comment #267932

a little background: her son is in iraq because of the fact that he and another teen vandalized 3 wasilla, ak buses. they broke windows, spray painted, and slit tires. the judge gave them either 1 year in jail, or sign up for the military.

she is stonewalling america. she will not release records. will not cooperate w/inquiries. and she is not the person who stood up to big oil. that would be the 12 tribes of alaska. she had no choice but to join them, or lose it all. and she did not want to stand up to big oil.

anyone wonder why all the people who speak about palin in alaska are white? don’t you wonder why that is. you would think there were no eskimo’s left.

another question to ask why can’t she tell the truth? i know that is in God’s top ten. you think that she would adhere to that since she has rebuked witchcraft.

Posted by: bluebuss at October 22, 2008 5:23 PM
Post a comment