About Sarah Palin: A Letter From Anne Kilkenny

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
IT APPEARS TO BE LEGIT?

ONE RANDOM WOMAN TALKING **** WIHOUT ANYONE FACT CHECKING ANY OF IT?

APPEARS TO BE LEGIT? :ANGRY:

OH HELLO THERE! WHEN I WAS 22 I MET BARACK OBAMA WORKING FOR HIM IN THE SENAE. EVERY DAY HE SET UP A DART BOARD AND THREW DARTS AT A PICTURE OF MATTHEW MCANAUGHEY SCREAMING 'KILL WHITEY' AND DOWNING FIVE QUARTS OF THE MOST VILE LIQUIFIED COMBINATION OF RED BEANS, FRIED CHICKEN AND AIDS SAUCE. AND HE LOOKED EVEN MORE LIKE A MONKEY THEN THAN NOW. DOES BOTOX WORK FOR EARS?!??!? PRINT IT *****ES!



The bias of Apolyton has hit a new high low. If this were a dance party, the music would have stopped and the DJ would scream 'party's over' and then everyone turned and saw you grinding with a transsexual. How embarrassing, redact your post or I will do it for you.

Needs more smilies.

[Naked Gents Rut]

Americans are so gullible...

We’ve been flooded for the past few days with queries about dubious Internet postings and mass e-mail messages making claims about McCain’s running mate, Gov. Palin. We find that many are completely false, or misleading.

* Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn’t cut it at all. In fact, she tripled per-pupil funding over just three years.

* She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term.

* She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She’s been registered as a Republican since May 1982.

* Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a "courtesty" when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state.

* Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."

A few of these claims were included in a chain e-mail by a woman named Anne Kilkenny. We'll be looking into other charges in that e-mail for a future story.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html

[Asher]

Are you referring to yourself?

Only one of those things is mentioned in the chain letter (banning books). And the corny explanation (she asked a "What if") basically says it was true but she's saying it was all hypothetical.

That actually, if anything, endorses the credibility of the email since that's the only thing they can nitpick...?

[SlowwHand]

Botox for ears?

[Naked Gents Rut]

That actually, if anything, endorses the credibility of the email since that's the only thing they can nitpick...?

If you had read to the end of the piece, you would see that they're still working on another piece focusing entirely on the Anne Kilkenny letter. It seems doubtful they'll confirm the contents given the nature of FactCheck.org and this little nugget they threw in at the end...

According to the New York Times, she’s a Democrat. According to Kilkenny herself, Palin “has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100 or so people who rallied to support the City Librarian against Sarah’s attempt at censorship."

I'm sure a Democrat who believes Palin has held a grudge against her for more than a decade due to an argument over a non-existent attempt at censorship will prove to be a totally reliable source.

[Asher]

I'm sure *****es like Palin make all kinds of enemies. Such is politics.

What's important is if the letter contains truth, which seems extremely likely. Don't choose the messenger.

[SlowwHand]

At least if you're pissing some people off, you're doing something, generally.

[Asher]

Doing something is the worst thing to do when you're a bumbling idiot, though.

[Wiglaf]

Joe Biden is a moron. He advocated sending millions of dollars in cash to Iran to "show the Arab people we don't hate them." He wanted to divide Iraq along sectarian lines, a move that would have almost certainly caused genocide. And he went to crappy schools and had crappy grades. He made racist comments about Indians and even plagiarized a speech.

So until you start being a little less hypocritical and biased, keep the snake in its cage.

[Wiglaf]

This is actually so sad it's funny, especially since it's the liberal The New Republic.

http://www.tnr.com/columnists/story.html?id=ba9b09bb-ed01-4582-b6ec-444834c9df73&k=93697

At the Tuesday-morning meeting with committee staffers, Biden launches into a stream-of-consciousness monologue about what his committee should be doing, before he finally admits the obvious: "I'm groping here." Then he hits on an idea: America needs to show the Arab world that we're not bent on its destruction. "Seems to me this would be a good time to send, no strings attached, a check for $200 million to Iran," Biden declares. He surveys the table with raised eyebrows, a How do ya like that? look on his face.

The staffers sit in silence. Finally somebody ventures a response: "I think they'd send it back." Then another aide speaks up delicately: "The thing I would worry about is that it would almost look like a publicity stunt." Still another reminds Biden that an Iranian delegation is in Moscow that very day to discuss a $300 million arms deal with Vladimir Putin that the United States has strongly condemned. But Joe Biden is barely listening anymore. He's already moved on to something else.

[Asher]

That sounds so much better than Palin. Seriously.

At least he's entertaining.

[Wiglaf]

PALIN HAS BOOBIES :ANGRY:

THIS IS A GAY THING AND I WILL HAVE NONE OF IT1

HAIR PLUGS!!111

[Asher]

An essay on Palin's boobies:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-steinem4-2008sep04,0,7915118.story

Palin: wrong woman, wrong message
Sarah Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Hillary Clinton. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger.

By Gloria Steinem
September 4, 2008

Here's the good news: Women have become so politically powerful that even the anti-feminist right wing -- the folks with a headlock on the Republican Party -- are trying to appease the gender gap with a first-ever female vice president. We owe this to women -- and to many men too -- who have picketed, gone on hunger strikes or confronted violence at the polls so women can vote. We owe it to Shirley Chisholm, who first took the "white-male-only" sign off the White House, and to Hillary Rodham Clinton, who hung in there through ridicule and misogyny to win 18 million votes.

But here is even better news: It won't work. This isn't the first time a boss has picked an unqualified woman just because she agrees with him and opposes everything most other women want and need. Feminism has never been about getting a job for one woman. It's about making life more fair for women everywhere. It's not about a piece of the existing pie; there are too many of us for that. It's about baking a new pie.

Selecting Sarah Palin, who was touted all summer by Rush Limbaugh, is no way to attract most women, including die-hard Clinton supporters. Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Clinton. Her down-home, divisive and deceptive speech did nothing to cosmeticize a Republican convention that has more than twice as many male delegates as female, a presidential candidate who is owned and operated by the right wing and a platform that opposes pretty much everything Clinton's candidacy stood for -- and that Barack Obama's still does. To vote in protest for McCain/Palin would be like saying, "Somebody stole my shoes, so I'll amputate my legs."

This is not to beat up on Palin. I defend her right to be wrong, even on issues that matter most to me. I regret that people say she can't do the job because she has children in need of care, especially if they wouldn't say the same about a father. I get no pleasure from imagining her in the spotlight on national and foreign policy issues about which she has zero background, with one month to learn to compete with Sen. Joe Biden's 37 years' experience.

Palin has been honest about what she doesn't know. When asked last month about the vice presidency, she said, "I still can't answer that question until someone answers for me: What is it exactly that the VP does every day?" When asked about Iraq, she said, "I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq."

She was elected governor largely because the incumbent was unpopular, and she's won over Alaskans mostly by using unprecedented oil wealth to give a $1,200 rebate to every resident. Now she is being praised by McCain's campaign as a tax cutter, despite the fact that Alaska has no state income or sales tax. Perhaps McCain has opposed affirmative action for so long that he doesn't know it's about inviting more people to meet standards, not lowering them. Or perhaps McCain is following the Bush administration habit, as in the Justice Department, of putting a job candidate's views on "God, guns and gays" ahead of competence. The difference is that McCain is filling a job one 72-year-old heartbeat away from the presidency.

So let's be clear: The culprit is John McCain. He may have chosen Palin out of change-envy, or a belief that women can't tell the difference between form and content, but the main motive was to please right-wing ideologues; the same ones who nixed anyone who is now or ever has been a supporter of reproductive freedom. If that were not the case, McCain could have chosen a woman who knows what a vice president does and who has thought about Iraq; someone like Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison or Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine. McCain could have taken a baby step away from right-wing patriarchs who determine his actions, right down to opposing the Violence Against Women Act.

Palin's value to those patriarchs is clear: She opposes just about every issue that women support by a majority or plurality. She believes that creationism should be taught in public schools but disbelieves global warming; she opposes gun control but supports government control of women's wombs; she opposes stem cell research but approves "abstinence-only" programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions; she tried to use taxpayers' millions for a state program to shoot wolves from the air but didn't spend enough money to fix a state school system with the lowest high-school graduation rate in the nation; she runs with a candidate who opposes the Fair Pay Act but supports $500 million in subsidies for a natural gas pipeline across Alaska; she supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, though even McCain has opted for the lesser evil of offshore drilling. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger.

I don't doubt her sincerity. As a lifetime member of the National Rifle Assn., she doesn't just support killing animals from helicopters, she does it herself. She doesn't just talk about increasing the use of fossil fuels but puts a coal-burning power plant in her own small town. She doesn't just echo McCain's pledge to criminalize abortion by overturning Roe vs. Wade, she says that if one of her daughters were impregnated by rape or incest, she should bear the child. She not only opposes reproductive freedom as a human right but implies that it dictates abortion, without saying that it also protects the right to have a child.

So far, the major new McCain supporter that Palin has attracted is James Dobson of Focus on the Family. Of course, for Dobson, "women are merely waiting for their husbands to assume leadership," so he may be voting for Palin's husband.

Being a hope-a-holic, however, I can see two long-term bipartisan gains from this contest.

Republicans may learn they can't appeal to right-wing patriarchs and most women at the same time. A loss in November could cause the centrist majority of Republicans to take back their party, which was the first to support the Equal Rights Amendment and should be the last to want to invite government into the wombs of women.

And American women, who suffer more because of having two full-time jobs than from any other single injustice, finally have support on a national stage from male leaders who know that women can't be equal outside the home until men are equal in it. Barack Obama and Joe Biden are campaigning on their belief that men should be, can be and want to be at home for their children.

This could be huge.

[Wiglaf]

I found a longer article.

Home > Blogs > Reformed Chicks Blabbing > Wow! Palin is great!...
Reformed Chicks Blabbing
« Obama's non-specific... | Archives | Main Index | The DNC still doesn'... »
Wow! Palin is great! I just became a McCain supporter!
Friday August 29, 2008

posted by Michele McGinty @12:56pm Permalink email icon Email This arrow Add to »

* Add to Del.icio.us Add to Del.icio.us
* Fave on Technorati Add to Technorati
* Digg This Add to Digg
* Newsvine Add to Newsvine

Categories: Politics

I just got done watching the news conference and I was blown away. She lives up to her hype! She was brilliant, articulate, forceful, and made a very good case for McCain. She was so convincing that she convinced me to vote for McCain. I haven't been this excited about the election since Thompson announced his candidacy and look forward to blogging about her in the months to come. And I'm not the only one, my dad and husband have decided to vote for McCain as well. He really pushed us off the fence with this choice and I know that the pro-life community is ecstatic with this choice.

The great thing about Palin is that she's a reformer and compliments that aspect of the McCain candidacy. You could tell that he picked a candidate that complimented his policies, not someone who had to shore up his deficiencies the way that Obama had to with Biden helping him with his foreign policy credentials.

Good going, McCain! The timing of this has pushed Obama out of our mind and got us talking about your campaign and your choice.

BTW, it's about time we had a woman running on the Republican side and I hope she's able to make history and be the first VP elected (and eventually president -- wouldn't that be funny, the Republicans are first a woman president :-)

As to her lack of foreign policy experience:

It is pretty audacious for the Obama campaign to say that Governor Palin is not qualified to be Vice President. She has a record of accomplishment that Senator Obama simply cannot match. Governor Palin has spent her time in office shaking up government in Alaska and actually achieving results -- whether it's taking on corruption, passing ethics reform or stopping wasteful spending and the 'bridge to nowhere.' Senator Obama has spent his time in office running for President.

But she brings much more experience to the table, out of all these guys, she's actually lived in the real world like the rest of us. She brings executive experience and she brings experience with energy.

Update: The Obama campaign's second attempt at a statement was a lot more gracious:

"We send our congratulations to Governor Sarah Palin and her family on her designation as the republican nominee for Vice President. It is yet another encouraging sign that old barriers are falling in our politics. While we obviously have differences over how best to lead this country forward Governor Palin is an admirable person and will add a compelling new voice to this campaign," said Senator Barack Obama and Senator Joe Biden

Updated again: Another example that the left doesn't get it, from Rahm Emanuel:

"After trying to make experience the issue of this campaign, John McCain celebrated his 72nd birthday by appointing a former small town mayor and brand new governor as his vice presidential nominee. Is this really who the Republican Party wants to be one heartbeat away from the presidency? Given Sarah Palin's lack of experience on every front and on nearly every issue, this vice presidential pick doesn't show judgement: it shows political panic."

Why do the Democrats think that we should listen to them when they speak about the lack of experience of our candidate? It didn't bother them to nominate a guy with only two years of experience in the Senate, why should it bother them for us to nominate a woman who has executive experience? Sorry but the Democrats lost the experience card when they nominated Obama (who is the top of their ticket).

Updated yet again: Here's the video of her speech;

Comments (18)

Filed Under: casting stones, McCain, Palin, presidential election, Republicans, vice president
Post a Comment
Comments

What an awful pick. She has little to no experience. She is governor of a state that has fewer people than live in most large cities in the United States. The ONLY reason McCain picked her is because he thinks a woman well vote for a woman because they are a woman - what bull****. She is opposite of what Hilary stands for. Would you really want this woman becoming president if something happened to McCain. She would be the laughing stock of the US and the world. Are we that stupid that we would actually vote for this ticket. Believe me if we elect McCain/Palin he'll be like Herbert Hoover. One term and out and by that time we'll be in a depression. Is that what you want??? If so vote for McCain. You'll be shooting yourself in the foot and all the way up your damn leg.

Posted by: Richard | August 30, 2008 12:34 PM

This changed your mind? It's just bizarre to me that someone could be lukewarm about McCain, but the choice of a pro-life candidate with no serious experience suddenly changes the entire equation. Why?

I second this astute observation. Give the bandwagon time to warm up even? Cripes.

Posted by: Moonshadow | August 30, 2008 12:36 PM

I was a Hilary fan, and now I am voting for McCain. Good Choice McCain!

Posted by: Marge | August 30, 2008 10:35 PM

Marge, can you tell us why you supported Hillary Clinton and how Palin has earned your vote for McCain? I do not see much that they have in common and would really like to understand your thinking on this.

Posted by: DC | August 31, 2008 9:11 AM

http://healtheland.wordpress.com/2008/01/17/the-media-the-church-and-jamie-lynn-spears/

is this about bristol lynn spears or bristol palin. i can't figure it out.

where was her mother's guidance??? didn't she know what was going on in her own home??? was she too caught up in herself and her career that she let her daughter get knocked up???

what's happened to conservative christian values.. AT HOME?

Posted by: redeemer | September 2, 2008 9:17 AM
Read All Comments
Post a Comment

Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?

[Asher]

I win.