# Question for republicans



## Danielle_E. (Oct 8, 2008)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/06/m...r_n_132366.html

Needless to say I am TOTALLY disgusted with Sarah Palin now, I have absolutely lost any respect I had for this woman BECAUSE she should have asked her supporters to cease this kind of talk but SHE DID NOT!!! This IS A FACT, not the ridiculous statements coming out of the VP candidate for the republicans. Talk about inciting hatred. The republican ticket has taken this WAY too far and I hope that this kind of behaviour loses the presidency for them. They do not deserve it. I can just imagine what mess they would cause in the foreign scene., heaven help us all in this world if that was allowed. World war III I wouldn't be surprised if they can't control the way they behave and speak. It's one thing to be a "pit bull" it's quite another to be an "ignorant pitbull" and that is what I think of her and the republican ticket now. I know that if McCain is succesful in his bid as president and Palin is the VP I will have lost total respect for the government of the U.S.A.

For those of you who are republicans my question is "Is this kind of behaviour from your candidates acceptable to you"? and do you feel that this is just part and parcel to an election?


----------



## CyndiM (Oct 8, 2008)

Ok I'll answer, and this is only MY personal opinion.

First, this IS the Huffington Post, not the most unbiased paper in the country.

Second, (I may not get this word for word) "The secret service agents didn't hear anything, no threatening statements were reported to them by law enforcement or citizens." And it seems no one knows if it was said who it was directed at Obama or Ayers and there seems to be some doubt as to if the words were 'kill' and 'him'.

Third, could it have been a Democrat protester who wanted to kill McCain?

I really see nothing in the article you posted that would cause WWIII. How is it she is responsible for things people shout out in the crowd? Have you ever attended one of these events? I have a banner in my car trunk that a protester displayed during a McCain/Palin speech in Cedar Rapids. Those three girls were escorted out after the banner was torn from their hands by a friend of mine who then gave it to me. That was during her speech then during McCain's speech a girl got up on the shoulders of a guy and started yelling cr*p, he started yelling and so did another girl and boy (these were all college kids) they were also escorted out by the local law enforcement. There were other protesters who showed up demanding to know where their "Free Speech" area was.

So again I ask who was this person yelling about McCain, Obama or Ayers?

Ayers is a known terrorist, he has admitted to the bombings and has also said he is only sorry he didn't do more damage. What a nice guy. I would be embarrassed to admit I knew him if I did!

I will very openly say I am scared to think of what will happen should Obama be elected.


----------



## laughingllama75 (Oct 8, 2008)

Let me get this straight.......Governor Palin needs to control a person in the crowd, while Senator Obama's pastor can spew hatred against whites, for 20 years and he sat there and did nothing? Oh, I forgot. He "left" that church (not because he felt it was the right thing to do, only because he was pressured into it).

this just goes to show, it doesn't matter what side a person is on.....we always think "our side" is the only side. I generally try not to get into these conversations, but man........I couldn't help it this time.

I agree with the fact being racisit (sp?) in NOT cool......and I would think we should have evolved past that point......but it is on both sides, black and white.


----------



## Minimor (Oct 9, 2008)

I'm trying to figure out how Sarah Palin--or any speaker--is supposed to control the utterances of every person in the crowd. If she was the one saying Kill Obama....or Kill Anyone, whoever "him" might be....if "Kill him" was even an exact quote, and there seems to be some question about that...If Sarah was the one actually saying someone should be killed, then I would say that was very wrong of her.

But Sarah Palin did not say that, or at least I cannot see anywhere that anyone is even hinting that she said that or anything like it, and I fail to see how she can be responsible for things said by a heckler in the crowd. I'm quite sure that a "people, please play nice" from her would have had no effect on such a heckler in the crowd. It's commonplace for speakers everywhere to ignore such utterances from the crowd, for to acknowledge an utterance like that simply serves to lend credibility to the words.

How do we know that the person who yelled out those words was a Republican? Perhaps it was someone planted by the Democrats in an effort to discredit Sarah Palin? Did you consider that possibility?


----------



## AppyLover2 (Oct 9, 2008)

> I will very openly say I am scared to think of what will happen should Obama be elected.


I used to feel that way but with all the hate surrounding this campaign I'm afraid of what will happen whether he's elected or not. I think either way it's going to be a really bad time for this country. I'm afraid there will be a war...but it won't be WWIII. I pray to God I'm wrong for everyone's sake.


----------



## anita (Oct 9, 2008)

This Huffinger woman is from a marxist state in Europe according to her accent. Does someone know from where she is?

Rumania I guess. Google the history of this country you will be surprised.

What does she know


----------



## Basketmiss (Oct 9, 2008)

It is amazing that someone would blame Sarah Palin for what someone in the audience says!! Come on- can we all say what we want or not? She didnt make them say this, If it was kill, might not have been. Doesnt matter-she doesnt control their mouths!

How about when McCain asked "Who is Barrack Obama" someone in the crowd yelled a terrorist- McCain was shocked by this, paused and went on-he cant control what someone in the audience says, so it isnt his fault or in his control what someone thinks or spouts off!

Come on and open your eyes and see what is starring you right in the face...


----------



## Cathy_H (Oct 9, 2008)

It should not be permitted no matter who is speaking.......... What gets me is why people who are blaming Palin will not see anything wrong with Obama's "bedfellows". Too many roads leading to too many questionable people and they still will not pull off the blindfolds..................................... Folks if Obama is elected he WILL OWE someone & that someone WILL NOT have you nor your Country's best interests at heart. You WILL go down with the rest of us!


----------



## Danielle_E. (Oct 9, 2008)

This also appears in the Washington Post and other papers, I believe that the Washington Post is the one that reported this first. When a candidate uses words in her/his speech during a rally such as "terrorist" etc you are darn right it will bring out some of the



cases in the audience. Those that take it to heart and believe with all his/her heart that Obama is a terrorist or her rhetoric about what Obama supposedly said about the troops, etc. Yes she is responsible for inciting this kind of behaviour. The people in the audience are replying to statements she is making. For such a supposed christian person I find her extremely two faced, sorry just my opinion. The campaign has got so out of hand and away from issues that like others I am truly concerned that some






case will try and assasinate Obama should he be successful and become President of the United States. I can only imagine what would happen in the U.S. if this did happen. You would have civil unrest that is for sure, at the very least. It certainly doesn't help the image of the U.S. when these rallies are shown on t.v. worldwide. It is a small word after all because of it. We keep hearing Americans saying that your country is one of tolerance. This is not what is being potrayed and it brings the image back of the 1960s. This is a big step backwards in image. Everyone has the right to feel the way they do, freedom of speech but at what cost? All candidates, McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden have to ensure that stick to the issues and show what each group will bring to the Presidency. All this other stuff is not helping and will only fuel bigotry, hatred. As someone said, this will just keep your country divided after the election as well which is so sad expecially with the difficult times that are ahead without adding this to the mix.


----------



## Danielle_E. (Oct 9, 2008)

Basketmiss said:


> It is amazing that someone would blame Sarah Palin for what someone in the audience says!! Come on- can we all say what we want or not? She didnt make them say this, If it was kill, might not have been. Doesnt matter-she doesnt control their mouths!
> How about when McCain asked "Who is Barrack Obama" someone in the crowd yelled a terrorist- McCain was shocked by this, paused and went on-he cant control what someone in the audience says, so it isnt his fault or in his control what someone thinks or spouts off!
> 
> Come on and open your eyes and see what is starring you right in the face...


Of course you are not responsible if someone yells such a thing out IF you are not inciting the crowd. Ignorance breeds ignorance. I wonder what young people (non-voting) think of this rhetoric if they are listening to the campaigns? I don't think adults are being very good role models in this instance. Palin/McCain continue over and over again on inuendos, on personal attacks that are the lowest of the low. If they want to attack Obama than they should stick to attacking his policies and what he is saying he wants to do if he should become President. The other stuff they are throwing out there is nothing but nasty and crass garbage. Do they not realize how that makes them look? Are these the tactics of a potential presidential candidate in the face of adversity and perhaps a loss in seeking to be president? Is this the kind of rhetoric that will be used in the international scene with leaders of other countries that may not tow the line as far as the U.S. is concerned? If it is the way they would rule office than I do truly feel that this may cause a war and I am being very sincere when saying that. This is not the way a President should act. JMHO


----------



## SweetOpal (Oct 9, 2008)

Danielle_E. said:


> I can only imagine what would happen in the U.S. if this did happen. You would have civil unrest that is for sure, at the very least. It certainly doesn't help the image of the U.S. when these rallies are shown on t.v. worldwide.


Well thank goodness YOU live in Canada!


----------



## Minimor (Oct 9, 2008)

> The campaign has got so out of hand and away from issues that like others I am truly concerned that some case will try and assasinate Obama should he be successful and become President of the United States.


Danielle, if he becomes president and if he gets assassinated, I seriously doubt that it will be because of anything that has been done or said by anyone in this campaign. 
I have heard from several people in all different parts of the US that they fear he will be assassinated by one of two groups in the US and I'm quite sure that neither of these groups nor their members are being influenced by anything said at any of the speeches or rallies, whether it is the speaker or members of the audience that are saying them!

I fear what kind of a mess there will be if these people are right--but if it comes to pass I don't believe it will be the fault of Palin or McCain.


----------



## Basketmiss (Oct 9, 2008)

I agree, no-one should be allowed to speak about someone else that way-but it does happen in our world. We cant control it no matter how much we want it to stop-thats the freedom of speech deal...

I dont agree that Sarah instigated it. You could say some really bad things to me and that wouldnt MAKE me start spouting off terrorist or lets kill someone!

We are all responsible for our own thoughts, what we say, what we do- I dont believe anyone can MAKE you, its a nice excuse tho to say well she got those people razzed up so then all because of her they started spouting off outrageous things... So it is her fault, No it is the person who said its fault. They apparently have these bad feelings towards the person (in this case-O ) to start with... I dont say those are reasonable thoughts, I say that is how someone might have felt..

I am worried about what MIGHT happen if O gets in- I mean for his actual safety....


----------



## Danielle_E. (Oct 9, 2008)

> Well thank goodness YOU live in Canada!


You're right and very astute of you



and your absolutely right, the U.S. is an island and nothing done in the U.S. affects their neighbour to the North



or anyone else, I forgot about that. How absolutely silly of us who don't reside in the U.S. to forget that.


----------



## Sonya (Oct 9, 2008)

> When a candidate uses words in her/his speech during a rally such as "terrorist"


Bill Ayers IS a terrorist...that is a fact, she was stating a fact. I don't know how you can blame her for what someone says in the audience, that's just ridiculous.

If you feel that what a stranger in the audience says speaks of Palin's character, then I wonder what you think of Rev. Wright's sermuns, that must speak loads and loads about Obama's character?

The heckler in the crowd went to see Palin speak...Obama went to see Wright speak..for 20 years I might add.


----------



## McBunz (Oct 9, 2008)

Bill Ayers WAS a terrorist. Nobody is denying this.. He is now into Education reform and it has been said over and over on the news

that anyone into Education reform knows this man.. Are they all guilty by association.?????. So by spewing this over and over is insighting hate.


----------



## SweetOpal (Oct 9, 2008)

Danielle_E. said:


> > Well thank goodness YOU live in Canada!
> 
> 
> You're right and very astute of you
> ...



Just out of curiosity, what is it that you think either of the choices is going to help or hurt your country of Canada? How and what is Obama going to do that is going to benefit you verses how McCain being elected is going to destroy Canada? You only seem to bring up these things about the rest of the world when someone commends you for living in another country and having such deep roots to our election, so I am curious as to what you are expecting?


----------



## minimama (Oct 9, 2008)

Danielle,

I have a suggestion. Since every time you post I go and read to see if maybe this time you have something worthwhile to actually add instead of just spewing what you read in biased newspapers and see on biased television, maybe you could take some of that time away from these unproductive actions and put together a plan of salvation for our country. You do not seem to have time to work on your own, but definitely have plenty to work on ours so, I would absolutely love to hear what your plan of attack would be to fix our current situation here in the US. And this has nothing to do with who wins or loses the election here. It has nothign to do with any candidate. I want to hear what you are going to do to fix our economy, our laws, our debt, etc. You are trying so hard to present yourself as intelligent, informed, and well read, I am curious to see what you have in mind.

And no, I am not being sarcastic, I really would like to read what you have to say on how you would fix this. You have yet to show us you are informed about what goes on here, about what it is like to live here and be a part of this country, although you have certainly made attempts at doing so. So, prove me wrong, prove you have a clue about what you try so hard to convince us of. According to what you keep posting, if you can solve the US's problems, you will sovle the problems of the world. Because evidently if we sneeze here, Europe wipes their nose. Maybe this is part of the problem. Maybe other countries need to stand on their own and let us do the same. Maybe we need to stop worrying so much about how everyone else in the world is doing and start to finally focus on fixing what is going on right here. Oh but then that would be MY plan not yours, so let's hear yours.

I'll wait.


----------



## Sonya (Oct 9, 2008)

> How about learning about the REAL Sara Palin??HERE


beginning of the article....Lucille, the waitress...now that's a reliable source!

edited to add:

Palin has an 80% approval rate in Alaska from the info I've seen. That's pretty good if you ask me.


----------



## OhHorsePee (Oct 9, 2008)

I so have to laugh about all of this. It's ok for one party member to be linked to and associated with terrorists, fraudulent organizations (to which he paid them $800,000), can skip out on 45% of his senate votes but still get paid by us tax payers etc etc but dang it if a woman who is in the run for VP (not even president) and she is dirt. I am just beyond baffled about how many years you people want us women to go back in our rights to run for something like this. Why don't we just have women not allowed to vote anymore even. Go back to barefoot and pregnant so we can start this all over and tell our daughters no they can't be president or even vise president one day. Someone might not like something they say or the clothes they wear.


----------



## AppyLover2 (Oct 9, 2008)

> rhetoric about what Obama supposedly said about the troops


Rhetoric???? Supposedly said????? Haven't you been watching any American TV??????

I'm glad McCain is bringing these things out......some people actually care who NObama's associates are. Others are either so blinded by his charisma or so bent on rabble rousing that they don't care about the issues. Although our election will affect other countries no one will be more affected than US.

Bill Ayers IS an UNREPENTANT terrorist. To me that says more than enough.

I'm don't know what most of you do for a living and don't care.....but it seems to me there are so many political experts here that at least some of you should be in Washington.

Edited to add a comment to Fran. Oh yeah, and don't forget she winks and flirts too. Disgusting.


----------



## Jill (Oct 9, 2008)

> WOW... I dug deeper and found this.. It even has how many cars Palin owned since 1994... Strange... but it really gets involved in her life.. How do people get all this info??
> This is a .pdf file
> 
> http://mudflats.files.wordpress.com/2008/0...006-vetting.pdf


I think you should wash your hands after digging where it seems like you're digging






Never mind that it seems 1/2 of those vehicles were ATVs, got some old trucks, a trailer, some actually owned by others. I just text search to get to the vehicle info you held out but only just glancing at the document, it smells like it could also use a "vetting".

To me, that .pdf doesn't seem like much of an "ah-ha! gotcha!".

Anyway, I'm happy I clicked this topic after all. I saw it yesterday and figured "nah, don't even look" but then this morning I was really happy to read so many outstanding replies


----------



## Jill (Oct 9, 2008)

Well... I just heard Sarah Palin say she and her husband owned a snow mobile shop for years -- sure guess that explains all the atv's and maybe some of the trucks. With those ATV's explained, she owned a perfectly ordinary number of vehicles (which is such a non issue anyhow, my gosh...)


----------



## Bassett (Oct 9, 2008)

Jill I heard it too. I wish they would have let us see the whole thing instead of cutting us off. Good speech what I did hear.



Oops they just put it back on.

Shoot, just wrapping it up.


----------



## Katiean (Oct 9, 2008)

Personally, I think no matter who is elected we are screwed. I do not agree with everything McCain says. But, I think he is the lessor of the two evils. Obama has a pastor that hates whites, a terrorest fund raiser and he wants to interfear in a civil war in Darfor(sp?). I am not saying that what has gone on in Darfor is OK. I think we should render humanitarian aid but it is like Georga, you can try to stop what is b going on by talks and sanctions but you cant go in with military force. Obama did not say one thing about helping the people of Georga with their being attacted. But then they are not black. Ok McCain ownes 7 houses. I would too if I had the money. We owned 4 houses when I was a kid. And how many vehicals did have? Let me count ours. But then when I was a young adult I would buy an almost new car and 6 months later trade it in on something different. How can I condem anyone for owning a number of cars. And isn't it Jay Leno that has 35 cars? Why get wound up about what someone else owns? I mean unless you are just julious(again I can't spell). Why is it that the only things we can pick on McCain and Palin about is how much of what they own? and Obama wants to attac other countries and he has terrorests and racests as friends. You know you can't chose your family but your friends are a different story. I think if average Joe six pac had a terrorest for a friend the feds would be looking at Joe. but Obama is OK?


----------



## LowriseMinis (Oct 9, 2008)

anita said:


> This Huffinger woman is from a marxist state in Europe according to her accent. Does someone know from where she is?Rumania I guess. Google the history of this country you will be surprised.
> 
> What does she know








First of all, it's spelled ROMANIA.

Secondly, Huffington is from GREECE.

Third, she knows PLENTY about politics.

Arianna started her career in the 80's writing articles for the National Review. She covered the 1996 election with Al Frankin. She has been nominated for an Emmy and ventured into acting a time or two. Again, it's easier to copy/paste the rest of this, so this is all quoted from Wikipedia:

"Huffington's politics began changing in the late 1990s, moving noticeably to the left. During the former Yugoslavia Balkans wars of the 1990s Huffington opposed United States intervention in the crisis.

In 2000, she instigated the 'Shadow Conventions', which appeared at the Republican National Convention in Philadelphia and the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles.[5]

Huffington heads The Detroit Project, a public interest group lobbying automakers to start producing cars running on alternative fuels. The project's 2003 TV ads, which equated driving sport utility vehicles to funding terrorism, proved to be particularly controversial, with some stations refusing to run them.

In a 2004 appearance on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart she announced her endorsement of John Kerry by saying that "When your house is burning down, you don't worry about the remodeling." In recent years, she has been closely associated with the Democratic Party. Huffington was a panel speaker during the 2005 California Democratic Party State Convention, held in Los Angeles. She also spoke at the 2004 College Democrats of America Convention in Boston, which was held in conjunction with the 2004 Democratic National Convention.

California recall election participation

Huffington was an independent candidate to replace California governor Gray Davis in the 2003 recall election. She described her candidacy against front-runner Arnold Schwarzenegger as "the hybrid versus the Hummer," making reference to her ownership of a hybrid vehicle, the Toyota Prius, and Schwarzenegger's Hummer.

Despite briefly retaining former U.S. Senator Dean Barkley as a campaign advisor and advertising executive Bill Hillsman as her media director, she dropped out of the race on September 30, 2003. "I'm pulling out, and I'm going to concentrate every ounce of time and energy over the next week working to defeat the recall because I realize now that's the only way to defeat Arnold Schwarzenegger," she said. Others attributed her exit to her inability to garner support for her candidacy, noting that polls showed that only about two percent of likely California voters planned to vote for her at the time of her withdrawal.[6] Though she failed to stop the recall, Huffington's name still appeared on the ballot and she placed 5th in a field of 135 candidates, capturing 0.6 percent of the votes. Her former husband endorsed Schwarzenegger."


----------



## LowriseMinis (Oct 9, 2008)

Cathy_H said:


> Folks if Obama is elected he WILL OWE someone & that someone WILL NOT have you nor your Country's best interests at heart. You WILL go down with the rest of us!


Is it okay if I borrow your tinfoil hat for a while?

I get so tired of seeing things like this with no proof. Again, conjecture. Ties. Loose ties at that.

Three terms in the Illinois senate, 12 years working at the U of Chicago, and a member of the U.S. Senate since 2005, and now a presidential candidate. Do you really, honestly believe that through all that-through mudslinging, negative campaigning, fingerprinting, background check after background check, Obama would be able to hide true, close, terrorist associations or actions?

Do we as Americans really have so little faith in the abilities of our own country?

We've got it all laid out on the table. Wright, Ayers, Acorn, whatever else. People are throwing mud and it _isn't sticking._ The voting public at large isn't ignorant, not this time around. Those kinds of tactics worked as recently as this last election but the tickets this time, the condition of our country have people interested. They are educating themselves. Obama supporters and independents know about Obama's supposed ties, and they're telling us 'Yeah, that's nice, now give us something more substantial because we don't buy it.'

Maybe we can't hold Palin responsible for what some people are calling out at the rallies. Personally, I think if Obama heard a supporter say 'kill whitey!' at his rallies, he'd put a stop to it. Regardless, that people still THINK Obama's a terrorist, that people THINK it's okay to make a threat on his or anyone's life regardless of if they mean it or not, that someone's base is so worked up that they seem almost ready to lynch this man?

That sort of behavior is someone's fault, it isn't Obama's, and I find it disgusting. Whoever is spreading these lies, whoever is fearmongering, they should be the ones responsible to control it.

Oh, wait. "Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin on Saturday slammed Sen. Barack Obama's political relationship with a former anti-war radical, accusing him of associating "with terrorists who targeted their own country.""


----------



## Katiean (Oct 9, 2008)

If someone says yes he is my friend but I was a kid when he did those bad things. Does that make it OK. The man is a terrorest turned University profesor (which a terrorest should not be able to teach ANYTHING in any of our universities or schools)turned fund raiser. You know a lepord never changes his spots.


----------



## Laura (Oct 9, 2008)

LowriseMinis said:


> anita said:
> 
> 
> > This Huffinger woman is from a marxist state in Europe according to her accent. Does someone know from where she is?Rumania I guess. Google the history of this country you will be surprised.
> ...








THANK YOU for posting this as a voice of reason ::::shaking my head::::


----------



## Bassett (Oct 9, 2008)

> Again, it's easier to copy/paste the rest of this, so this is all quoted from Wikipedia:


Why? Because you can't spell all the words. Sorry she did this Anita. It was a very LOW blow. There are many, many people on here who don't know how to spell and use proper English but it is VERY, VERY rude to correct them on it. Shame on you Lowrise. Now you are really getting picky.


----------



## LowriseMinis (Oct 9, 2008)

I just figure if you're going to accuse someone of being a Marxist, you should know how to spell the country they are from. Although I might not mind a visit to 'Rum'mania this weekend!

Secondly, it's not okay for me to correct spelling, but is okay for someone to accuse a person of being a Marxist from a country they've never lived in with nothing to back up that claim?

And Bassett, shame on you for condemning what you see as a personal attack (correcting spelling is a personal attack, really?) while making one of your own.

I know I'm awfully picky expecting people to do research and use facts.


----------



## Jill (Oct 9, 2008)

LowriseMinis said:


> anita said:
> 
> 
> > This Huffinger woman is from a marxist state in Europe according to her accent. Does someone know from where she is?Rumania I guess. Google the history of this country you will be surprised.
> ...


Allow me to enlighten you, *Lowrise*





It is spelled Rumania in parts of the world, and it wouldn't surprise if if that doesn't include where Anita and her family are from.


----------



## LowriseMinis (Oct 9, 2008)

According to Anita's profile, she's from Texas. I figured she spelled it the same way.

If that's not the case then Anita, please accept my apology for being culturally insensitive, as that was not my intent.


----------



## Jill (Oct 9, 2008)

I beleive from previous posts, Anita came here from another Country. I would bet that one or two other people now living in TX did as well.

You know what they say --_ "when you assume..."_.


----------



## LowriseMinis (Oct 9, 2008)

I, once again, find it interesting people are choosing to nitpick little things about my post rather than tackle the issues I just posted. Huffington is a qualified woman, and I feel that Palin is certainly doing more than her share of fearmongering and is in part responsible for the sort of comments happening at her rallies.

Instead of tackling either of those, people are choosing to talk about how to spell Romania.

I really _do_ feel like a politician.


----------



## LowriseMinis (Oct 9, 2008)

Why Mary Lou! Are you implying that if we hold Obama responsible for supporting terrorists by his connections, that we have to do the exact same thing with McCain?


----------



## susanne (Oct 9, 2008)

Getting back to the subject of this thread:

Whether or not Sarah Palin was able to prevent such an outburst, she is very much responsible for her reaction.

I would hope that ANY candidate or public figure, in that situation, no matter what their politics may be, would STOP and say that this is unacceptable.

Mob behavior is a dangerous thing; to encourage it or simply to let it happen is absolutely wrong.

"All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing."


----------



## Bassett (Oct 9, 2008)

> 'Rum'mania



Whoops, missed spelling this one right and I DON'T see any sarcastic rolling eyes. You must be slipping.


----------



## Danielle_E. (Oct 9, 2008)

LowriseMinis said:


> I, once again, find it interesting people are choosing to nitpick little things about my post rather than tackle the issues I just posted. Huffington is a qualified woman, and I feel that Palin is certainly doing more than her share of fearmongering and is in part responsible for the sort of comments happening at her rallies.
> Instead of tackling either of those, people are choosing to talk about how to spell Romania.
> 
> I really _do_ feel like a politician.


You know LowriseMinis, a few weeks ago I was shocked at some of the things being said here, implied, the attacks by a certain group but now I don't think anything is going to shock me anymore. I truly use to think that the U.S. was a tolerant, land of plenty, generous, etc. but your election is deteriorating my respect or the image that is being portrayed if it truly does represent the true fabric of the U.S. What I am seeing is a nation that allows their politicians that will stoop to the lowest of lows - tring to discredit first off with the religion card - saying Obama is a muslim... First off please tell me what is wrong with people being muslim, if in fact he were. What are americans saying to the muslims that reside in their country - that they are considered terrorists because of their religion? This is fear mongering at it's ugliest. Second, if you work with someone who has been charged with a crime - now that means that everyone working with that person is a crimminal as well? Alluding that a person is different (different color or religion) makes them unpatriotic, "not one of us (Palin)"???? That is just plain ugliness and it has no place in our societies in ANY country. What is this teaching children? More of the same? Is "intolerance" what you want the world to see on their television sets? Is this the picture the U.S. is trying to portray around the world of themselves while spouting we are the most tolerant country in the world. I don't think people will buy that one anymore.

First there was the guy in Florida with his infamous sign on his property that WAS racist - now there is some guy who owns a parking lot and he has a sign saying that if you have an Obama sticker on your car you aren't allowed to park you car on his lot



. Then you have a law officer who is wearing his uniform at a rally.....



. I know the rah rah sisterhood won't care but I have lost alot of respect in the last few weeks of what I thought was a great nation. I think you are still a powerful military power but the rest has basically evaporated for me because of some of the things said here by some.

You can defend all you want but if the republican ticket would not have gone down the road they did, fear mongering, implying terrorism - terrorist, etc. you wouldn't have people yelling out "kill him" or "treason". So to that effect the republican ticket is trying to incite people and they are suceeding but it's not pretty and reflects poorly on them and the U.S.

And to the person who asked how it affects me as a Canadian. It doesn't because I am now choosing to not cross the border to go shopping anymore or vacation in the U.S. I am sorry, I am just being honest in how I feel about what I can not compromise on, my morals won't allow me. Bigotry and racism has no place in this world wherever it rears it's ugly head. If the democrats Obama/Biden) were using these tactics I would be speaking as vehemently against them insead of McCain and Palin.


----------



## Jill (Oct 9, 2008)

LowriseMinis said:


> Instead of tackling either of those, people are choosing to talk about how to spell Romania.


Lowrise, now come on. YOU are the one who took it upon yourself to "correct" Anita's spelling of Romania. Which is belittling and just flat out funny because you were not even correct in the nit-picky correcting you yourself initiated.


----------



## LowriseMinis (Oct 9, 2008)

susanne said:


> "All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing."


Exactly, Susanne. And while I disagree with Palin, very strongly!, in terms of policy, I still believe she's a good person. I feel the same about McCain. I want for them to stand up and say comments like that are unacceptable.


----------



## Bassett (Oct 9, 2008)

> Instead of tackling either of those, people are choosing to talk about how to spell Romania


You started it, Sweetie.


----------



## LowriseMinis (Oct 9, 2008)

And Jill, you may have noticed I posted an apology to Anita. I sincerely hope she chooses to accept it, but I stand by the rest of that post.

Bassett, do not call me sweetie or any other term of endearment.


----------



## Katiean (Oct 9, 2008)

Mary Lou - LB said:


> ############
> This morning John McCain put out a list of 100 former ambassadors who are supporting his campaign. Number two is Leonore Annenberg, the wife of Ambassador William Annenberg, the founder of the Annenberg Institute of Reform, which funded the Annenberg Challenge, which once had two famous board members: former "domestic terrorist" William Ayers and Sen. Barack Obama.


Are we playing 6 Degrees od Obama?


----------



## tagalong (Oct 9, 2008)

> You started it, Sweetie.


What are we, twelve years old now??!!





Neener neener and other taunts do not belong in such serious discusssions... IMO.

The smirking and



and high fives and mockery that has run through these threads is sad. How about facts instead of sneering... how about issues instead of personal attacks.... how about the future instead of constantly rehashing the past.. how about solutions instead of accusations....

When the phrase Rah Rah Sisterhood first came up, I shook my head - but also had to nod a bit as all the high-fives and complete and total contempt that some have demonstrated for the opinions or thoughts of others have made these threads less about facts - which some of us constantly try to present from NON-partisan sites that point out the failures on BOTH sides.... and all about fables and bashing. All about viral emails that are designed to alarm you or anger you - and as some of us have shown - have no basis in FACTS. Facts seems to have become something to be stepped around and avoided in these threads... and that alarms me more than any fear-mongering viral email could....

JMHO - but less taunting and more discussion... less baiting and more thoughtful debate... would be welcome.

_*edited for clarity and redundancy*_


----------



## Bassett (Oct 9, 2008)

> JMHO - but less taunting and more discussion... less baiting and more thoughtful debate... would be welcome.


This is not debating. It is reprimanding. You only want to hear what you believe. Anything else posted by certain people are considered biased by some people, so what is the use. When I say something that is my opinion I get jumped on so turn about is fair play. Ever hear of that one. tsk tsk tsk


----------



## AppyLover2 (Oct 9, 2008)

There have been several comments about the Rah Rah Sisterhood, high fiving, etc. and it certainly seems to work both ways. This finger pointing, preaching and nasty remarks being made to and about one another is sad. Seeing how heated our "discussions" get confirms my fears that people who are not quite so rational might get even more carried away. This too is gonna get worse before it gets better.

Right now Fox News is interviewing someone who signed 78 voter registration cards. Well DUH I didn't know it was wrong. :arg!

(Not edited at all .... go for it if you disagree.)


----------



## minimama (Oct 9, 2008)

I do not feel that the US should pay for the world to eat while our own people starve on the streets.....call me "Intolerant"

I do not feel that illegal aliens to our country should get a free ride on my tax payer dollar.......call me "Intolerant"

I do not feel that the US should put up with all these other countries asking us for our help and then making it look like we forced our aid upon them......call me "Intolerant"

I am tired of other countires relying on us to get through their rough patches and then turning on us as soon as they have their help........call me "Intolerant"

I am tired of the US being called upon to Mother other countries who are trying to pull it together and being attacked for doing so....call me "Intolerant"

I am tired of other countries telling us how we should be voting and how it is going to affect them so much when if in fact those other countries could get their own act together in the first place, our elections would not have such a major monumental impact!! .......call me "Intolerant!"

You all would be self-reliant and not depending on us like you do.

I do not so much think we are intolerant as I do think so many in this country are tired of being the bad guys of the world but the only country to consistently step up to help......anyone...anytime...anyplace. All the while our own country suffers for the help we give. So if other countries don't like it so much and want to consider us intolerant, don't take our help anymore. Do it on your own.


----------



## AppyLover2 (Oct 9, 2008)

At the risk of sounding like a member of the Rah Rah Sisterhood......VERY well said Minimama!!!!!


----------



## tagalong (Oct 9, 2008)

> This is not debating. It is reprimanding. You only want to hear what you believe. Anything else posted by certain people are considered biased by some people, so what is the use. When I say something that is my opinion I get jumped on so turn about is fair play. Ever hear of that one. tsk tsk tsk


*Bassett*, I just offered my opinion on what would make a better conversation - for all of us. ALL of us. And you come back with yet more jeering and condemnation....





This is not about "turnabout is fair play". This is not about who said what last and oneupmanship and neener neener and tit for tat. It is possible to discuss thngs without the sneers... or so I suggested. It was JMO - and it has been made clear how inconsequential that is if I am not all about praising McCain and Palin. I am also NOT all about praising Obama.... far from it.

And no - contrary to some of the posters in these threads - I do not only want to hear "what I believe" as you say.... I want the _facts_ (sorry to use that dreaded word again) on BOTH sides. I have doubts about BOTH sides. If I have had more posts to note the facts here against GOP claims - that is simply becuase there are far more GOP posters in these threads stating things as facts that have been anything but. On another board the mix is more 50/50... and we deal with the FACTS as they relate to both sides... when both Obama and McCain have sidestepped, embellished, flip-flopped etc. And yes, such discussions can be civil and informative with both sides contributing.... it is happening elsewhere.

I'll say it once more... BOTH sides are guilty of a multitide of political nonsense. And IMO they are wasting our money playing their little games...


----------



## Jill (Oct 9, 2008)

minimama said:


> I do not feel that the US should pay for the world to eat while our own people starve on the streets.....call me "Intolerant"I do not feel that illegal aliens to our country should get a free ride on my tax payer dollar.......call me "Intolerant"
> 
> I do not feel that the US should put up with all these other countries asking us for our help and then making it look like we forced our aid upon them......call me "Intolerant"
> 
> ...


Rah!!!


----------



## Bassett (Oct 9, 2008)

> I have had more posts to note the facts here against GOP claims - that is simply becuase there are far more GOP posters in these threads stating things as facts that have been anything but.


Okay In WHOSE opinion are these NOT facts. You know it works 2 ways. Maybe we don't believe things people put on here as TRUE facts neither. You can not prove anything any more than anyone else.


----------



## Matt73 (Oct 9, 2008)

I've decided to stay out of the whole political "scene" here LOL. BUT...I have to say. I'm really scared for the U.S. (and the world for that matter) this coming year. I've got some really bad vibes regarding a lot of things. As many people have mentioned, if Obama wins (I'd love that) I don't think things are going to go well (I predict several assassination attempts



. If McCain wins...I don't think things are going to go well. I just feel this sense of doom. I've felt it for a while and it's getting stronger. And...if we thought 9/11 was bad...well...I'm just scared...


----------



## SweetOpal (Oct 9, 2008)

I guess I missed the rah rah sisterhood deal, but I agree with everything that minimamma has said on this thread. I think most American's feel this same way regardless if you are dems or rep's. I for one feel we need to worry about our own country! And I honestly don't ever think about what Canada, Russia, Great Britian or Romania is thinking about us.

I know what most Romanian's are thinking as I am married into a Romanian family, all here legally and never used the welfare system of this great nation, they worked for everything they have ever had, never taken a hand out from our Country, and I know I speak the truth for them, when they say " They could not be more proud to be American's than any other nationality" and they have never been ashamed to be American's, regardless of what is going on in Washington!


----------



## Bassett (Oct 9, 2008)

> I've got some really bad vibes regarding a lot of things. As many people have mentioned, if Obama wins (I'd love that) I don't think things are going to go well (I predict several assassination attempts
> 
> 
> 
> . If McCain wins...I don't think things are going to go well. I just feel this sense of doom. I've felt it for a while and it's getting stronger. And...if we thought 9/11 was bad...well...I'm just scared...


Matt this is exactly what I feel except I trust MaCain more than Obama and would really like to see him win. No matter who wins they have a BIG job ahead of them and it will take everyone working together to do it. I also feel Obama will not be safe if he wins and I've said this for some time. It would scare me to even be in his situation.


----------



## tagalong (Oct 9, 2008)

Bassett said:


> > I have had more posts to note the facts here against GOP claims - that is simply becuase there are far more GOP posters in these threads stating things as facts that have been anything but.
> 
> 
> Okay In WHOSE opinion are these NOT facts. You know it works 2 ways. * Maybe we don't believe things people put on here as TRUE facts neither. *You can not prove anything any more than anyone else.


In whose opinion? Not ANYONE's "opinion" - just the facts as thay are laid out for all to see. No spin. No dancing around the truth.

*Bassett*... I have gone out of my way to only quote places that are NON-partisan. Or, if they are not - to state that HuffPo leans left or that Newsmax is far right. If someone quotes Newsmax as an unbiased source, I have pointed out that that may not be the case. Ditto for Huffington Post or Daily Kos. I have noted when a certain blogger is right... or left... and thus what they say must be viewed in that context. But the sites that accumulate the facts - like factcheck.org - do not lean any way but towards the truth. And they state clearly when either csndidate has strayed from that. They also examine those viral emails that some hold dear... and show what is accurate and what is not. They truly are fair and balanced. They have no agenda. They do not support either candidate.

I have also said _repeatedly_ that yes, it works two ways - for both sides. Not just one direction - as many would have us believe.


----------



## Basketmiss (Oct 9, 2008)

Bassett said:


> > I've got some really bad vibes regarding a lot of things. As many people have mentioned, if Obama wins (I'd love that) I don't think things are going to go well (I predict several assassination attempts
> >
> >
> >
> ...


Right on Bassett!!


----------



## onlyminis (Oct 9, 2008)

Ok, first replying to the origional post, sorry but how in the WORLD do you expect anyone to control a crowd? There can be anyone and EVERYONE there, you can't blame the republicans, let alone the Americans for a single person!





Second, as for your decision to never visit our country again, I'm sorry you feel this way, but honestly, just like we can't control one in a crowd, we can't control the man with the racist sign in his yard, or the man with the parking lot, unless of course you want us to become a police state, now THERE is a scary thought!

We're not sheep, we EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US make our own decisions based on our own thoughts, upbringing, lifestyle, family and environment. If you think you're not able to lower yourself to visit our country then I'm sorry, last I knew Canadians were allowed to voice their opinions also.

om


----------



## susanne (Oct 9, 2008)

Imagine if Sarah Palin had had courage and the integrity -- or even the brains to turn the situation to work for her...

She would have frozen in mid-sentenc, stared down this individual (or at least in their general direction) and said, "John McCain is a man of character who would not give in to his captors in Vietnam, and he would not stand for this. I will not stand for this, and if you continue, the secret service will escourt you out."

This "person" would be silenced, as perhaps would be the entire crowd. Those standing near the perpetrator(s) would turn to stare at them, and embarrassed murmurs would be heard. The mob mentality would shift against him or her. It would be on every television in the country, and, funny thing...the nation would take notice. Even those who disagree most vehemently with her would give her at least a grudging respect.

That would be an act of heroism and patriotism, in appearance if not in fact. Sad that it didn't happen.


----------



## Matt73 (Oct 9, 2008)

This is all just so sad to me. There is one country. There is one Republic. The Earth! I darning hate boundaries and exclusivity. Minimama, Jill. Come on. I Love ya. But... I wish we could all just be one (I know that's stupid to say but, hey).


----------



## MiniHunterHorseFan (Oct 9, 2008)

Wouldn't it just be better if there were no Republicans or Democrats? I'm sure you've heard of the saying, "A house divided cannot stand." Imagine what weakness our country is showing to foreign countries with all the bickering and debating going on amoung our own borders. Why, it is almost like a second civil war.


----------



## CyndiM (Oct 9, 2008)

minimama said:


> I do not feel that the US should pay for the world to eat while our own people starve on the streets.....call me "Intolerant"I do not feel that illegal aliens to our country should get a free ride on my tax payer dollar.......call me "Intolerant"
> 
> I do not feel that the US should put up with all these other countries asking us for our help and then making it look like we forced our aid upon them......call me "Intolerant"
> 
> ...


I said this a few days ago in another thread just not as well. Thank you Minimama for saying what I was thinking.

Mary Lou your link entitled HERE would have maybe been a bit more credible if there was more substance to it and if the other articles written by the same person hadn't been so overwhelmingly biased (the ones I read).

Back to the original topic. I have been to these rallies! The person speaking doesn't hear these people. The sound echoing back is unbelievable the crowd is loud, clapping and cheering.

There is *NO PROOF* to the words shouted. In fact it may NOT have even been a supporter of McCain/Palin. The *ONLY* people who were shouting out with derogatory words/statements were *definitely NOT Republicans* at the last rally I was at!

So until I have proof that those were the actual words spoken I won't believe what a very biased news paper prints. Until I have proof it was a McCain supporter shouting out I won't believe what is printed in a biased newspaper.

That being said I had a phone call from a former cell mate of my step-son, who said he had just gotten out of prison., and the reason he was in prison was because he had said he wanted to KILL President Bush. Now if the words* had* been spoken (as some say) the secret service would have been all over that person like flies on horse manure.

Is America perfect? NO! Are all of the people in America perfect? NO! Are some stupid enough to make offensive signs? YES! Does that mean Sarah Palin or me or anyone else are responsible for what they do? NO! One of the unfortunate liabilities with free speech is, some idiots take that to mean they can say ANYTHING they want to in any form they want.


----------



## Danielle_E. (Oct 10, 2008)

You are right, she is not responsible for anything she says at her rallies or anything that transpires because of what she is insinuating or says either

"Barack Obama, she told 8,000 fans at a rally "launched his political career in the living room of a domestic terrorist!” This followed her earlier accusation that the Democrat pals around with terrorists. “This is not a man who sees America the way you and I see America,” she told the Clearwater crowd. “I’m afraid this is someone who sees America as imperfect enough to work with a former domestic terrorist who had targeted his own country.” The crowd replied with boos

Palin also told those gathered that Obama doesn’t like American soldiers. “He said that our troops in Afghanistan are just, quote, ‘air-raiding villages and killing civilians,’ ” she said, drawing boos from a crowd that had not been told Obama was actually appealing for more troops in Afghanistan.

Her attacks on the media have begun to spill into ugliness. In Clearwater, arriving reporters were greeted with shouts and taunts by the crowd of about 3,000. Palin then went on to blame Katie Couric’s questions for her “less-than-successful interview with kinda mainstream media.” At that, Palin supporters turned on reporters in the press area, waving thunder sticks and shouting abuse. Others hurled obscenities at a camera crew. One Palin supporter shouted a racial epithet at an African American sound man for a network and told him, “Sit down, boy.” "

Your right, she heard none of this and nobody else did as well. The camera crew was hearing things as well as the african american sound man and its acceptable for someone seeking election as a representative of a country to act this way.


----------



## CyndiM (Oct 10, 2008)

I *did not *say she was not responsible for the words coming out of her mouth. I said she is not responsible for the words coming out of other peoples mouths.

He did launch his political career in Ayers, a known terrorist, house. He does pal around with a terrorist. Ayers IS a KNOWN terrorist! Ayers admits he IS a terrorist and only regrets he didn't do MORE harm!(2000) What part of that don't you understand?






NObama DID say our troops were doing those things! He may be saying NOW we need more troops in Afghanistan but that has only changed since he saw public opinion was against his original thinking.

NOT ALL Americans want to see our troops brought home without finishing the job. The press would have you believe that we are ALL demanding the troops come home NOW though!

There have been a few times I have booed the press (they just couldn't hear me). Have you paid attention to how biased they are? Look at what they did to Hillary.

*Where do you get your information? At first it was just two words "kill" and "him". Now there have been news people insulted and abuse shouted at them along with racial slurs. Come on do you realize how absurd this sounds? If all of this were really happening it would be front page news around the world and top of the hour news on every TV station in the US as well as the world.*

Why is it when NObama asks questions that get huge roaring negative responses from the crowds don't you criticize him? He is as guilty, or more so, of doing what you accuse Sarah of doing.


----------



## tagalong (Oct 10, 2008)

> He did launch his political career in Ayers, a known terrorist, house. He does pal around with a terrorist. Ayers IS a KNOWN terrorist! Ayers admits he IS a terrorist and only regrets he didn't do MORE harm!(2000) What part of that don't you understand?


Well, I understand that despite what Sarah assures the crowd and tries to whip them into a frenzy about.... that _these_ are the facts... and they do not jibe with Palin's attacks.

It is easy to check all this out - and yet we still tend to rely on what we are "told" is the "truth".

I'll quote the entire passage from factcheck.org and supply the link as well... http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/ta...iladelphia.html

They checked all this out back in April when Hillary made a stab at building it into something and then dropped it as she knew it went nowhere....



> Obama's Radical "Connection"
> 
> Clinton exaggerated the violence committed by an Obama acquaintance who had been part of a radical group in the 1960s and 1970s and who refused to apologize for setting bombs.
> 
> ...


So no - they do not "pal around". What exactly does that mean, anyway? Do they do lunch? Go to baseball games? No - Ayers is not now a "terrorist" - he was also cleared of all charges.



> NObama DID say our troops were doing those things! He may be saying NOW we need more troops in Afghanistan but that has only changed since he saw public opinion was against his original thinking.


Not quite right. Back to factcheck again addressing the McCain ad about that...

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

And an excerpt...



> What Obama said more than a year ago at an August 2007 campaign stop was *a criticism of administration military strategy* and not a criticism of "our troops":
> *Obama (August 2007): We've got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we're not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous problems there.*
> 
> At the time, then-Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney attacked Obama for the remark. But Obama was on solid ground. As The Associated Press concluded: _"As of Aug. 1 [2007], the AP count shows that while militants killed 231 civilians in attacks in 2007, Western forces killed 286. Another 20 were killed in crossfire that can't be attributed to one party."_
> ...


So Obama agreed with Bush, Gates & McKiernan that more troops were required in order to eliminate the need for increased air power and thus air raids that resulted in excessive civilian casualties.

I like this excerpt as well...especially the part I bolded..



> Was Obama "dishonorable" to say what he did? That's pretty strong language. We note that the Obama campaign routinely describes McCain's campaign as "dishonorable," for running ads like this one. We'll leave it to readers to sort out who's honorable and who's not. *The way candidates loosely throw around such emotionally loaded terms, however, sometimes reminds us of Lewis Carroll's Humpty Dumpty, who tells Alice, "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less."*


Very true.

As far as voting for troop funding...



> The McCain campaign's "ad facts" also point to a single troop-funding bill that Obama voted against in 2007. As we've written before, Obama first voted for a version of the bill that included a timetable for withdrawal. President Bush vetoed the bill. Obama then voted against a version that did not contain withdrawal language. And for the record, McCain himself voted against the troop-funding bill when it contained withdrawal language.





> *Where do you get your information? At first it was just two words "kill" and "him". Now there have been news people insulted and abuse shouted at them along with racial slurs. Come on do you realize how absurd this sounds? If all of this were really happening it would be front page news around the world and top of the hour news on every TV station in the US as well as the world.*


Sadly - the racial slur bit has been in every report I have read as one wire service quotes another... but whether it is true or just somebody's spin is anybody's guess.

Without actual video evidence I would be inclined to discount it...



> Why is it when NObama asks questions that get huge roaring negative responses from the crowds don't you criticize him? He is as guilty, or more so, of doing what you accuse Sarah of doing.


What Sara Palin has done at times in the past couple of days - is seek to enrage the crowd based on personal smears. She is pushing buttons and deliberately so - she is dealing in innuendoes instead of facts - and she is far too smart not to realize that. It is one thing to get the crowd with you on important issues... and quite another to try and rev them up based on personal attacks. And then to smirk and wink about it....



JMO. McCain deserves better. A maverick should not have to resort to endless smears and negativity - which is what his TV ad campaign has become.

I wish both candidates would spend more time telling us what they* will* do - and not what the other guy did or might have done ... or might do.


----------



## LowriseMinis (Oct 10, 2008)

"(The New York Times published a piece on the relationship last week that concluded: "A review of records of the schools project and interviews with a dozen people who know both men, suggest that Mr. Obama, 47, has played down his contacts with Mr. Ayers, 63. But the two men do not appear to have been close.""

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/20...s_att.html#more

How do you define 'palling around'?


----------



## Jill (Oct 10, 2008)

susanne said:


> Imagine if Sarah Palin had had courage and the integrity -- or even the brains to turn the situation to work for her...


Imagine it? I believe Sarah Palin all the things you just mentioned. She's a very successful and intelligent woman, and I admire her.

Matt, I'm just embracing the ridiculous nickname that some others decided to give the Republican women of the forum. As if we haven't contributed 1,001 well thought out posts and only high five each other. "you ask for it, you got it" kind of thing. I figured that would go better than referring to the other side as the Dumb Dumb Democrats





And it would be great if we could all be one. You feel worried about McCain but I promise you, I have sincere, deep concerns about Obama. I wish I didn't. I'd love it if I felt the US would be okay under either candidate


----------



## AppyLover2 (Oct 10, 2008)

I may be mistaken but I think Obama's comment about "raiding villages and killing civilians" was made during the first debate. I know I heard him say it and was very disappointed to hear him make disparaging remarks about our troops. Palin was 100% correct when she said that is not something someone who wants to be the next Commander In Chief should say.

As far as what Palin should have said when faced with hecklers in the crowd I expect we've all played the "I should have said" game ourselves a few times. I did hear her comment to one heckler....don't know what he shouted but her response was something like "God bless you sir. My son is fighting in Iran to insure that you have the freedom to speak your mind." I personally thought it was an excellent comeback and from the applause and cheers of the crowd it appeared they did too.

Now to add more fuel to the fire the "race game" is being played.

IMO If America, as we know it, survives the next few months it will only be by the Grace of God.

Edited - The Obama comment was made during a campaign speech in New Hampshire - not during the debate as I thought. I remembered hearing it, but not where he was when he said it.

A question for the Obama supporters - are you denying that he said it?? Or trying to justify it?? Or just trying to ignore it??


----------



## Danielle_E. (Oct 10, 2008)

Seems like Bush agreed that extra troops were needed because and the entire thing needs to be put here, not just picking and chosing a few words as usual....



> ]Democrat Barack Obama said it, the Republican Party pointed out in a screaming headline Tuesday that highlighted the presidential candidate's comments on Afghanistan and the killing of civilians.
> Behind the scenes, Obama's rival campaigns buzzed about his statement uttered Monday during a campaign stop in New Hampshire when he was asked about his plan to move troops into Afghanistan.
> 
> Democratic presidential hopeful, U.S. Sen Barack Obama, D-Il., listens to citizens' concerns during a campaign stop in Hanover, N.H., Monday, Aug. 13, 2007. (AP Photo/Jim Cole) (Jim Cole - AP)
> ...


----------



## Buckskin gal (Oct 10, 2008)

I doubt if anyone is trying to deny it was said but by golly it is the truth that civiliasns are being killed in these stupid wars that are going on. Why deny it? Our troops are doing the best they can, with the training they are getting and we can't hide our heads in the sand and say it is okay that civilians have not been killed. Do you honestly believe that it is okay that civilians have been killed and we should give honor to it happening.....I don't think so. Serious mistakes are made but they should not be hidden. JMHO



AppyLover2 said:


> I may be mistaken but I think Obama's comment about "raiding villages and killing civilians" was made during the first debate. I know I heard him say it and was very disappointed to hear him make disparaging remarks about our troops. Palin was 100% correct when she said that is not something someone who wants to be the next Commander In Chief should say.
> As far as what Palin should have said when faced with hecklers in the crowd I expect we've all played the "I should have said" game ourselves a few times. I did hear her comment to one heckler....don't know what he shouted but her response was something like "God bless you sir. My son is fighting in Iran to insure that you have the freedom to speak your mind." I personally thought it was an excellent comeback and from the applause and cheers of the crowd it appeared they did too.
> 
> Now to add more fuel to the fire the "race game" is being played.
> ...


----------



## AppyLover2 (Oct 10, 2008)

Whoa Buckskin!!!! I, in no way, implied that no civilians are dying nor did I imply that it's ok if they are. My concern is that we have a presidential candidate who maligns the military troops who are risking their lives in support of our nation.

Sheesh.....talking about someone putting words in your mouth. :arg!

And Danielle you're doing your typical thing by trying to detract from my comments.....I didn't say anything about extra troops being needed.

My question still stands. Although you're both pretty quick to criticize my comments neither of you are bothering to explain your position.


----------



## littlesteppers (Oct 10, 2008)

AppyLover2 said:


> Whoa Buckskin!!!! I, in no way, implied that no civilians are dying nor did I imply that it's ok if they are. My concern is that we have a presidential candidate who maligns the military troops who are risking their lives in support of our nation.
> Sheesh.....talking about someone putting words in your mouth. :arg!
> 
> And Danielle you're doing your typical thing by trying to detract from my comments.....I didn't say anything about extra troops being needed.
> ...

















Our military is the best in the world..our young man and woman serve PROUD..and they deserve our support..you can voice your opinion..because they fight for freedom..some people just don't get it..BTW my hubby is a veterean,..so don'tell me I don't know what I am talking about..I been in military circles for 25 years..

I do believe IF Obama becomes president we will get the "draft" back..did anybody catch this on One of his speeches..we ALL fight..Not just a few selected??


----------



## AppyLover2 (Oct 10, 2008)

I know this is going to be (another) unpopular comment, but here goes.....Actually if I thought we might get the draft back I might reconsider who I'm voting for. I think it would be good thing both for our country and for those thousands of aimless young people who have no idea what they're going to do with the rest of their lives. As a 25 year veteran myself I'd vote for the return of the draft in a heart-beat.


----------



## Danielle_E. (Oct 10, 2008)

> may be mistaken but I think Obama's comment about "raiding villages and killing civilians" was made during the first debate. I know I heard him say it and was very disappointed to hear him make disparaging remarks about our troops. Palin was 100% correct when she said that is not something someone who wants to be the next Commander In Chief should say.


I posted more than just the few bits you mentioned above is all I did. I think it's only fair to do so because too many things are being taken out of context and that truly doesn't represent what candidates say. It has to work both ways and I know you will agree that is only fair - taking sound bites here and there for either of the candidates is truly not fair or a true representation of what they are saying or trying to convey. ( I know our politicians here try the same thing during elections)Once that is done if you still feel the way you do than that is fine. By looking at the entire speech I don't agree with Palin's remarks as I took his comments to say "we need more troops so that we can do a more systematic job and minimize civilian casualties. I am sorry if you felt that by doing so I was trying to say he didn't say those words at all.

I guess you feel then because Bush agreed that more troops needed to be sent in and that too many civilians were in fact dying that he should not have been Commander in Chief for the last 8 years or that he is unpatriotic, etc.? I may not like Bush but I certainly could never say he was not a patriotic Commander in Chief for your country or that he truly didn't have your country's best interest at heart.


----------



## AppyLover2 (Oct 10, 2008)

One thing I've discovered during the past few weeks is that ya just can't argue with a rock.


----------



## Bassett (Oct 10, 2008)

> One thing I've discovered during the past few weeks is that ya just can't argue with a rock.
















Ain't that just the truth?


----------



## LowriseMinis (Oct 10, 2008)

AppyLover2 said:


> One thing I've discovered during the past few weeks is that ya just can't argue with a rock.


I've concluded the same thing.

However, this information might be what Obama's comments stem from.

"But as the Washington Post pointed out (LINK), "Much of the U.S. military's emphasis here, however, remains on killing or capturing insurgents, ...(b)ut energetic pursuit of insurgents has produced another problem -- a mounting toll of civilian casualties, mostly in bombing raids. The deaths have inflamed public opinion, turned many Afghans against the foreign forces and further strained (Afghan president Hamid) Karzai's credibility. 'Sooner or later, every liberating force becomes an occupying force,' said one Western analyst here. 'A majority of Afghans were glad to see the coalition arrive in 2001, and most of them still are, but collateral damage and cultural insensitivity are key issues here. Even if the Taliban are using civilians as human shields, in the court of public opinion it is still the foreign forces that killed them.""

We are causing heavy civilian casualties in Afghanistan right now, and I don't think that's acceptable. Obama is calling for more troops and more resources to go to Afghanistan so we have more manpower and better intelligence to act upon, and the resources for our troops to act swiftly but carefully. I wasn't aware that wanting those things for our troops was a bad thing.


----------



## tagalong (Oct 10, 2008)

AppyLover2 said:


> I may be mistaken but I think Obama's comment about "raiding villages and killing civilians" was made during the first debate. I know I heard him say it and was very disappointed to hear him make disparaging remarks about our troops. Palin was 100% correct when she said that is not something someone who wants to be the next Commander In Chief should say.


Well, then Palin is wrong (go figure) as the current Commander in Chief said that very thing. She should check her facts before saying such things - but facts rarely enter into attack-politics - on either side.

Anyway - as I quoted on the previous page from factcheck.... I'll bold all the key parts... the link is on the previous page... and it is important to note the quote in its entirety...



> What Obama said more than a year ago at an August 2007 campaign stop was* a criticism of administration military strategy and not a criticism of "our troops":*
> Obama (August 2007): We've got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we're not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous problems there.
> 
> At the time, then-Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney attacked Obama for the remark. But Obama was on solid ground. As The Associated Press concluded: "As of Aug. 1 [2007], the AP count shows that while militants killed 231 civilians in attacks in 2007, Western forces killed 286. Another 20 were killed in crossfire that can't be attributed to one party."
> ...


So Obama agreed with Bush, Gates and McKiernan that more troops were needed so that less air power would be required... thus less air raids... and less civilian casualities...

Good thing none of them was Commander in Chief.

Oh.

Wait a minute...


----------

