Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditCan you imagine the reaction if Barack Obama courted or belonged to a political party that advocated secession from the United States?
Conservatives and political commentators would go apoplectic. So why isn't Sarah Palin's affiliation with the far right Alaskan Independence Party (AIP) a bigger deal?
Todd Palin was a member of the party from 1995 to 2002. Sarah attended the group's convention in 1994 and 2000 and sent a videotaped greeting for the AIP in 2008.
Here's how the group's founder, Joe Vogler, described his political beliefs:
"The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government," Vogler said in a 1991 interview. "And I won't be buried under their damn flag. I'll be buried in Dawson. And when Alaska is an independent nation they can bring my bones home."
The AIP participated in a conference of secessionist movements held in Vermont in 2006. "The First North American Secessionist Convention," was the official title. Attendees included the neo-confederate League of the South, messianic Christian Exodus and the libertarian New State Project.
In her 2008 address, Palin said the AIP "plays an important role in our state's politics."
Although she's been in "virtual seclusion" the past few days, it would be nice to know exactly what "important role" Palin believes the AIP plays, in Alaska and elsewhere.
Share this article
- Atrios
- Arts and Letters Daily
- The Caucus
- Campus Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- The Daily Gotham
- Daily Kos
- FAIR
- Feministe
- Feministing
- Firedoglake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Gothamist
- In these Times
- Hendrik Hertzberg
- Huffington Post
- Matthew Yglesias
- Media Matters
- Mother Jones
- My DD
- New York Review of Books
- Openleft
- Pam's House Blend
- Political Wire
- The Progressive
- RaceWire
- Real Clear Politics
- Roberto Lovato
- Romenesko
- Swing State Project
- Talking Points Memo
- Ta-Nehisi Coates
- Tapped
- Tech President
- Tompaine
- The Washington Note
- Utne Reader
- Wonkette
RSS
So she's possible guilty of treason? Bwah-ha-ha Yup, a true candidate of the f-a-a-a-a-a-a-r right nutters.
Posted by leftofcenter at 09/03/2008 @ 12:47pm
Happy-There was a movement in Texas,but most members are in prison.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/03/2008 @ 12:56pm
Country First, right?
Posted by nicR at 09/03/2008 @ 12:57pm
I dunno; does she ever espouse any of thos sentiments? It sounds like she was just trying to appeal to the sliver she had in common with them (big government=problematic). I think this claim needs a lot more substantiation before it can be said to mean much.
By the way, fun sidenote...I believe Texas actually reserves the right to secede (and divide up into 5 smaller units). I could be wrong about that.
Another sidenote: it's technically not treason.
Posted by Thrawn at 09/03/2008 @ 12:57pm
After Palin's speech they will chant Alaska instead of USA.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/03/2008 @ 12:58pm
Thrawn-Her husband was a member and she,very much,supports the movement.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/03/2008 @ 12:59pm
As a country on its own, Alaska, so close to the Big Bear, could apply for US foreign aid & get vastly more than it does in earmarks ... as long as all the cash goes for US weapons.
No fair buying from China.
Not yet anyway.
Posted by sloper at 09/03/2008 @ 1:22pm
This welcome denunciation of these Alaska traitors including Todd Palin must mean that leftists have given up on the insane ideology behind the unjust, racist Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act. However, if you still want to push the breakup of the US as your Democrat forefathers of the Confederacy did, then Maj. Gen. Sherman and his Army of the Tennessee ought to deal with the Hawaiian rebels. As the man himself says, war is hell. And all the more so for those who, while making unjust war, also commit treason against the United States.
Posted by feinfein at 09/03/2008 @ 1:27pm
HAPP, of course, won't answer the question...
"What if Michelle Obama had belonged to a separatist group and Barack had SMILINGLY addressed said group on video?"
Think we'd EVER hear the end of it and calls of "Obama hates America, he wants to break it up!!!!!"???
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 1:28pm
Posted by feinfein at 09/03/2008 @ 1:27pm
If you want to make the case that "The Palins are no wackier than extremists on the Left!"....please do.
The rest of us will just consider the health of a "President John McCain"!
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 1:32pm
feinfein-Southern democrats were not leftists.In fact,they were right wingers who, typically, were evangelicals.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/03/2008 @ 1:35pm
>>>it would be nice to know exactly what "important role" Palin believes the AIP plays, in Alaska and elsewhere. <<<
This should be the first question righ tout of the box:
"Governor Palin, did you support your husband Todd's decision to join a political party that wanted to succeed from the United States; and if not, why did you send a video address to that party indicating that they play an "important role" in US politics?"
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 1:50pm
I dunno; does she ever espouse any of thos sentiments? \ Posted by Thrawn at 09/03/2008 @ 12:57pm
Did they ask that question when Republican's crucified Obama for being in Wright's church?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 1:51pm
"No! I say God Damn America!"
Remember that one? Now we have the right justifying this line, "The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government" and why it is ok for Palin to belong to a party that believes that.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 1:55pm
The amazingly baffling scale of the hypocrisy of this moment would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 1:57pm
Posted by nicR at 09/03/2008 @ 12:57pm
Just a question of which country they're discussing?
Posted by feinfein at 09/03/2008 @ 1:27pm
As to Hawai'i .. I lived there for 10 years (so kinda know what I am speaking of) .. so I do know that we stole it fair and square. I was never truly give a choice to become a state. We simply unseated the sovereign through military force and decided it was ours. (Of course, if we hadn't the Japanese would have)
Thrawn
Palin DID say that the AIP represents "an important group" in Alaska and she welcomes them to the table
Posted by leftofcenter at 09/03/2008 @ 2:00pm
Lynette Clark, the chairman of the AIP, tells ABC News that Palin AND her husband Todd were members in 1994, even attending the 1994 statewide convention in Wasilla. Clark was AIP secretary at the time.
"We are a state's rights party," Clark -- a self-employed gold miner -- tells ABC News. The AIP has "a plank that challenges the legality of the Alaskan statehood vote as illegal and in violation of United Nations charter and international law."
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 2:08pm
McCain, when introducing Palin on Friday in Ohio, praised her as a champion for "reform to end the abuses of earmark spending." When it was Palin's turn to speak, she mentioned her claimed opposition to the famous pork barrel project, "the Bridge to Nowhere" as an example of her tough stance on earmarks. Well, we all know now that she was actually for the bridge long before she was against it. Apparently her love affair with earmarks doesn't end there:
… under her leadership, the state of Alaska has requested 31 earmarks worth $197.8 million in next year's federal budget …
But hey, it was her first shot at being governor of Alaska. Maybe things were different when she was mayor?
As mayor of the small city of Wasilla, Alaska, Palin appears to have made use of the system she now decries, hiring a Washington lobbyist, Steven Silver, to represent the town.
After he was hired, the city obtained funding for several projects, including a city bus facility that received an earmark valued at $600,000 in 2002. That year a local water and sewer project received $1.5 million in federal earmarks, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan watchdog organization.
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 2:10pm
Hmmm, Steven Silver, why does that name sound familiar? Talking Points Memo is quick to remind us:
… Silver appears to have additional ties that could further undercut Palin's image as a squeaky-clean reformer. According to Senate lobbying disclosure reports examined by TPMmuckraker, from 2002 to 2004 Silver listed as a client Jack Abramoff's lobbying firm, Greenberg Traurig. On Greenberg's behalf, Silver lobbied the federal government on "issues relating to Indian/Native American policy," "exploration for oil and gas" and "legislation relating to gaming issues" -- the very issues that Abramoff headed up for Greenberg at the time. In other words, Silver appears to have been a part of "Team Abramoff.
So this is the breath of fresh air that McCain wants in Washington? Earmarks aplenty and links to the infamous Jack Abramoff? If that's a step in the right direction, I don't want to see the step in the wrong one.
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 2:11pm
Washington Post:
After the legislature passed a spending bill in April, Palin went through the measure reducing and eliminating funds for programs she opposed. Inking her initials on the legislation, Palin reduced funding for Covenant House Alaska by more than 20 percent, cutting funds from $5 million to $3.9 million. Covenant House is a mix of programs and shelters for troubled youths, including Passage House, which is a transitional home for teenage mothers.
According to Passage House's Web site, its purpose is to provide "young mothers a place to live with their babies for up to eighteen months while they gain the necessary skills and resources to change their lives" and help teen moms "become productive, successful, independent adults who create and provide a stable environment for themselves and their families."
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 2:12pm
PASTOR PROBLEM:
From the age of 12 and for most of her adult life, Sarah Palin attended the Wasilla Assembly of God. Apparently, Sarah Palin's God was a vengeful God; one that made Himself helpful to the Bush administration from time to time by damning critics of the president, Democrats, and other irredeemable sinners. The Huffington Post writes that the church's preacher, Ed Kalinins:
… preached that critics of President Bush will be banished to hell; questioned whether people who voted for Sen. John Kerry in 2004 would be accepted to heaven; charged that the 9/11 terrorist attacks and war in Iraq were part of a war "contending for your faith;" and said that Jesus "operated from that position of war mode."
Kalinins also offered a nuanced view of foreign policy, preaching that 9/11 and the Iraq war were part of a greater struggle over Christianity, with Jesus playing an important role as a very exacting general:
"What you see in Iraq, basically, is a manifestation of what's going on in this unseen world called the spirit world. … We need to think like Jesus thinks. We are in a time and a season of war, and we need to think like that. We need to develop that instinct. We need to develop as believers the instinct that we are at war, and that war is contending for your faith. … Jesus called us to die. You're worried about getting hurt? He's called us to die.
It can't necessarily be assumed that Palin agrees wholeheartedly with her former pastor. But in an address to the church three months ago, Palin also used disconcertingly religious language to frame the conflict in Iraq:
"Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending (U.S. soldiers) out on a task
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 2:14pm
that is from God," she exhorted the congregants. "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan."
Considering how much flak Obama got for the statements of his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, this is an issue Palin needs to address.
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 2:14pm
Palin Can't Even Run a Car Wash
Many politicians have a strong background in business: CEOs, executives, business presidents, self-made millionaires, etc. The thinking is that a businessperson is economically savvy, has executive experience, and can make tough calls and quick decisions. Well Palin has some experience in the private sector: While she was mayor of Wasilla, Palin had time to open up a car wash in Anchorage. Good for her, nothing wrong with a little public service cushioned by some private business while raising a family. But by the time Palin was governor of Alaska, her business had run into trouble, as Matthew Mosk reports for the Washington Post:
State records show the business ran into trouble with Alaska's division of corporations business and professional licensing after Palin became governor of the state in 2006.
A Feb. 11, 2007, letter to the governor's business partner advises that the car wash had "not filed its biennial report and/or paid its biennial fees," which were more than a year overdue.
The warning letter was written on state letterhead, which carried Palin's name at the top, next to the state seal.
On April 3, 2007, the state went further and issued a "certificate of involuntary dissolution" because of the car wash's failure to file its report and pay state licensing fees.
The least you can accuse Palin here is of mismanagement (of a car wash!); at worst she was abusing her political clout by trying to cut corners. Either way, Palin doesn't come off as the kind of executive you'd want running your business, let along your country.
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 2:16pm
Palin lied about visiting Ireland as part of her foreign policy experience John Aravosis (DC) · 9/02/2008 02:21:00 PM ET · Link 61 Comments · reddit · FARK · Digg It!
She didn't visit Ireland, which is what the McCain-Palin campaign claimed to Politico's Ben Smith on Saturday. She had a short refueling stopover, which means at best her extensive Irish diplomacy amounted to buying a sweater and a beer mug in the Shannon airport.
Why does Sarah Palin's duty-free-diplomacy matter? Because John McCain, who is 72 and has had 4 bouts of cancer, just picked Sarah Palin to replace him as commander in chief should he die or be incapacitated in office. Sarah Palin, in an effort to bolster her non-existent national security expertise, claimed she had visited 3 countries: Germany; Kuwait; and Ireland. Now we find out that one of those three, 33% of her experience, was pretty much a lie. Did the McCain campaign know that Palin basically lied to the media and the American people? Or did this Irish blogger do the vetting that the McCain campaign couldn't be bothered to do?
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 2:18pm
Ed Kalinins and Larry LVLIB Robinson sound like they'd be pals!
heheh
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 2:24pm
Two points here. The assertion that the media would go bonkers if a dem did this is obvious. This points to the inescapable fact of "the right wing media". Ok duh! But how did the phrase "liberal media" ever get any play? They used it over and over. So dont ever say "media" with out "The right wing" in front of it.
You're not going to convince anyone who protests. So what, go for those who can still think for themselves.
Second point. Succession is just as valid as divorce. Its just stupid to force people together that dont want to be. If states can split the scene then the terrible race to the bottem ends as people get local control. Espicially since in the new country, the corporations would all be foriegn, and unable to smack the locals around with supreme court rulings and takings. People that oppose succession are simply corporate dupes.
Posted by Econ_Amateur at 09/03/2008 @ 2:24pm
Yeah, bottom line is that McPOWhowmanyMANSIONS doesn't really have a clue:
"Reporters asked McCain in November 2007 whether he supported grants for sex education in the United States, whether such programs should include directions for using contraceptives and whether he supports President Bush's policy of promoting abstinence.
"Ahhh, I think I support the president's policy," McCain said."
Posted by hsuBfools at 09/03/2008 @ 2:34pm
McCain had criticized earmarks from Palin Three times in recent years, the Arizona senator's lists of 'objectionable' pork spending have included earmarks requested by his new running mate. By Tom Hamburger, Richard Simon and Janet Hook, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers September 3, 2008 WASILLA, ALASKA -- For much of his long career in Washington, John McCain has been throwing darts at the special spending system known as earmarking, through which powerful members of Congress can deliver federal cash for pet projects back home with little or no public scrutiny. He's even gone so far as to publish "pork lists" detailing these financial favors.
Three times in recent years, McCain's catalogs of "objectionable" spending have included earmarks for this small Alaska town, requested by its mayor at the time -- Sarah Palin.
Now, McCain, the likely Republican presidential nominee, has chosen Palin as his running mate, touting her as a reformer just like him.
McCain has made opposition to pork-barrel spending a central theme of his 2008 campaign. "Earmarking deprives federal agencies of scarce resources, at the whim of individual members of Congress," McCain has said.
But records show that Palin -- first as mayor of Wasilla and recently as governor of Alaska -- was far from shy about pursuing tens of millions in earmarks for her town, her region and her state.
This year, Palin, who has been governor for nearly 22 months, defended earmarking as a vital part of the legislative system. "The federal budget, in its various manifestations, is incredibly important to us, and congressional earmarks are one aspect of
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 2:45pm
this relationship," she wrote in a newspaper column.
In 2001, McCain's list of spending that had been approved without the normal budget scrutiny included a $500,000 earmark for a public transportation project in Wasilla. The Arizona senator targeted $1 million in a 2002 spending bill for an emergency communications center in town -- one that local law enforcement has said is redundant and creates confusion.
McCain also criticized $450,000 set aside for an agricultural processing facility in Wasilla that was requested during Palin's tenure as mayor and cleared Congress soon after she left office in 2002. The funding was provided to help direct locally grown produce to schools, prisons and other government institutions, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan watchdog group.
Wasilla received $11.9 million in earmarks from 2000 to 2003. The results of this spending are very apparent today. (The town also benefited from $15 million in federal funds to promote regional rail transportation.)
The community transit center is a landmark: a one-story, tile-fronted building with a drive-through garage. Its fleet of 10 buses provides service throughout the region. Mat-Su Community Transit Agency officials say the building was made possible with a combination of federal money and matching gifts from a private foundation.
Taylor Griffin, a McCain campaign spokesman, said that when Palin became mayor in 1996, "she faced a system that was broken. Small towns like Wasilla in Alaska depended on earmarks to take care of basic needs. . . . That was something that Gov. Palin was alarmed about and was one of the formative experiences that led her toward the reform-oriented stance that she has taken as her career has progressed."
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 2:46pm
Palin, he said, was "disgusted" that small towns like hers were dependent on earmarks.
Public records paint a different picture:
Wasilla had received few if any earmarks before Palin became mayor. She actively sought federal funds -- a campaign that began to pay off only after she hired a lobbyist with close ties to Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), who long controlled federal spending as chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. He made funneling money to Alaska his hallmark.
Steven Silver was a former chief of staff for Stevens. After he was hired, Wasilla obtained funding for several projects in 2002, including an additional $600,000 in transportation funding.
That year, a local water and sewer project received $1.5 million, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, which combs federal spending measures to identify projects inserted by congressional members.
When Palin spoke after McCain introduced her as his running mate at a rally in Ohio last week, she made fun of earmarking. She said she had rejected $223 million in federal funds for a bridge linking Ketchikan to an island with an airport and 50 residents, referring to it by its derogatory label: the "bridge to nowhere."
In the nationally televised speech, she stood by McCain and said, "I've championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. In fact, I told Congress thanks, but no thanks, on that bridge to nowhere. If our state wanted a bridge, I said, we'd build it ourselves."
However, as a candidate for governor in 2006, Palin had backed funding for the bridge. After her election, she killed the much-ridiculed project when it became clear the state had other priorities. She said she would use the federal funds to fill those needs.
This year she submitted to Congress a list of Alaska p
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 2:47pm
METTEYA "Lynette Clark, the chairman of the AIP, tells ABC News that Palin AND her husband Todd were members in 1994, even attending the 1994 statewide convention in Wasilla. Clark was AIP secretary at the time."
Ms. Clark has retracted that story. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/ 2008/09/02/alaska-party-official-says-palin-was-not-a-member/
Probably why the instant article used the word "affiliated". It would've been better to have openly stated that the initial story didn't hold up.
However, the facts of her husband's membership and her willingness to offer a video address to the 2008 convention and attend the 1994 and 2004 conventions (when she was in public office as a Republican) raises the possibility that she may be ideologically sympathetic but registered as a Republican for political purposes. Certainly further questioning along this line would be appropriate.
THRAWN Correct about the additional Texas republics. The specific language is in the congressional joint resolution that admitted Texas as a state. http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/ avalon/texan02.htm
"New states, of convenient size, not exceeding four in number, in addition to said state of Texas, and having sufficient population, may hereafter, by the consent of said state, be formed out of the territory thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of the federal constitution."
Posted by brunowe at 09/03/2008 @ 2:48pm
rojects worth $197.8 million, including $2 million to research crab productivity in the Bering Sea and $7.4 million to improve runway lighting at eight Alaska airports. A spokesman said she cut the original list of 54 projects to 31.
"So while Sen. McCain was going after cutting earmarks in Washington," said Steve Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense, "Gov. Palin was going after getting earmarks."
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 2:48pm
Posted by JOMAMMA at 09/03/2008 @ 2:27pm
Hypocrisy....
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 2:51pm
The amazingly baffling scale of the hypocrisy of this moment would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 1:57pm
or unnoticed.
by most.
Posted by frosty zoom at 09/03/2008 @ 2:53pm
And I thought Hillary was the "Queen of Earmarks"!
It looks like Palin has got Hillary beat, and then some!
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 2:53pm
Posted by JOMAMMA at 09/03/2008 @ 2:50pm
I know the details of Palin's obvious lack of vetting by McCain are troubling to you, but SO WHAT?
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 2:54pm
"Now consider just how wealthy Alaska would be if it did become an indepedent state... They could get rid of all the Federal man dates, spending, and taxes..."
Not wealthy at all. Alaska has actually received more in Federal money than it has paid in taxes. http://www.taxfoundation.org/ research/show/22685.html
There would also be the expectation that it would have to undertake cost-sharing for any American bases contained therein. Also, Alaska is a classic one-resource economy. Should oil prices drop, which has been happening recently, it would be squeezed badly.
There would also be the upkeep of its own military, postal service, etc.
Posted by brunowe at 09/03/2008 @ 2:55pm
Ed Kalinins and Larry LVLIB Robinson sound like they'd be pals!
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 2:24pm
damn!
i step out and all the best jokes are gone.
Posted by frosty zoom at 09/03/2008 @ 2:57pm
I know the details of Palin's obvious lack of vetting by McCain are troubling to you, but SO WHAT?
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 2:54pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Cutting and pasting whole articles is obnoxious, that's what? I pretty much skipped over them myself.
Frankly, you seem to have gone off the deep end ever since Obama picked Biden.
Posted by brunowe at 09/03/2008 @ 3:00pm
Posted by JOMAMMA at 09/03/2008 @ 2:24pm
PLEASE, John, defend Palin by actually DEFENDING the idea of Alaskan secession....
that'll surely sweep this under the rug!
LOL
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 3:01pm
BTW, METTEYYA does make a good point...
if you COULD get an honest, straightforward answer from the Right ...
how many of them would say "Yeah, okay. McCain OBIVOUSLY didn't vette Palin as good as he should have. It's been 96 hours and she's had more scandals than most Veeps have in half a term in office!"
Of course they want....wagons are circled....but you KNOW that they are getting a little steamed at a "great choice"...who requires constant "Okay, well, so? It's not THAT much nuttier than some of the stuff on the far, far extreme Left... Uh...let's talk about Obama again!" care.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 3:04pm
Posted by JOMAMMA at 09/03/2008 @ 2:24pm
you are the archetypical "short-sighted" human.
you know,
the one who knocks down a forest
so he can
make some "money",
buy a big screen t.v.
and watch programs about forests.
ready to shoot bears from a helicopter?
Posted by frosty zoom at 09/03/2008 @ 3:04pm
seeing how they would have no welfare or give away programs
by JOHN "FROM THE GUT" MAASCH
The Permanent Fund Dividend is a program benefiting Alaskans without a felony conviction who have resided in the state for at least one calendar year preceding the date applied for a dividend and intend to remain an Alaska resident indefinitely at the time applied for a dividend. The amount of each payment is based upon a five-year average of the Permanent Fund's performance and varies widely depending on the stock market and many other factors.
Though the payouts have varied from the smallest ($331.29 per person in 1984) and the largest ($1,963.86 per person in 2000), they usually vary between $600 and $1,500 ($900 and $1,800 when adjusted for 2005 dollars). Although the principal or corpus of the Fund is constitutionally protected, income earned by the Fund, like nearly all State income, is constitutionally defined as general fund money [subject to legislative appropriation for any purpose ... but, in practical political terms, the public tolerates spending Fund income mostly only for 'inflation-proofing' and for paying dividends].
THE PFD PAYOUT-ABOUT OCTOBER OF EACH YEAR--IS ACKNOWLEDGED TO HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL EFFECT ON ALASKA'S ECONOMY, BOTH IN TOTAL AND ESPECIALLY IN RURAL ALASKA WHERE UNEMPLOYMENT CAN REACH 60% AND WHERE CASH IS SCARCE.
Annual individual payout (in nominal dollars): Year Amount 2007 $1,654.00 2006 $1,106.96 2005 $845.76 2004 $919.84 2003 $1,107.56 2002 $1,540.76 2001 $1,850.28 2000 $1,963.86 1999 $1,769.84 1998 $1,540.88 1997 $1,296.54 1996 $1,130.68 1995 $990.30 1994 $983.90 1993 $949.46 1992 $915.84 1991 $931.34 1990 $952.63 1989 $873.16 1988 $826.93 1987 $708.19 1986 $556.26 1985 $404.00 1984 $331.29 1983 $386.15 1982 $1,000.00
Posted by frosty zoom at 09/03/2008 @ 3:08pm
darin-So,you agree that Palin and Ayers have much in common.Does that you mean that you will still support Palin?
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/03/2008 @ 3:17pm
Alaska has as much or more oil that the ME
BY J. IT'S GOTTA BE TRUE MAASCH
<<<<<<>>>>>>
washingtonpost.com
Alaska Oil Field's Falling Production Reflects U.S. Trend
Technology Postpones the Inevitable At Prudhoe Bay and Other Locations By Justin Blum
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 7, 2005; D01
PRUDHOE BAY, Alaska -- Oil keeps flowing through a maze of aging wells, pumps and pipelines that poke through the snow on this desolate North Slope tundra.
But this vast field is ailing: Output has fallen by nearly 75 percent from its peak in 1987 and is expected to continue dropping.
<<<<<>>>>>
In 1998, the USGS estimated that between 5.7 and 16.0 billion barrels of technically recoverable oil 1 are in the coastal plain area of ANWR (also referred to as the 1002 Area), with a mean estimate of 10.4 billion barrels, of which 7.7 billion barrels falls within the Federal portion of the ANWR 1002 Area. 2 In comparison, the estimated volume of undiscovered, TECHNICALLY recoverable oil in the rest of the United States is about 120 billion barrels
www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/ anwr/pdf/sroiaf(2008)03.pdf
<<<<<>>>>>
Summary of Reserve Data as of 2007 (billions of barrels)
Country Reserves
Saudi Arabia 260
Canada 179
Iran 136
Iraq 115
Kuwait 99
United Arab Emirates 97
Venezuela 80
Russia 60
Libya 41.5
Nigeria 36.2
United States 21
Mexico 12
<<<<<>>>>>
Posted by frosty zoom at 09/03/2008 @ 3:19pm
Posted by brunowe at 09/03/2008 @ 3:00pm
Skip over at you peril.
The cut-and-pastes show McCain could not have possibly vetted Palin or he would have run from her like the plague.
You can't spend all of your time defending your VP and mount a successful presidential campaign. The fact that McCain doesn't understand this means he is not ready to be president, or he is losing it after 35 years in Washington.
1. Palin and her husband flirts with succession from the United States.
2. Palin attempts to ban library books she doesn't like and fire the city librarian if she doesn't go along.
3. Palin fires police chief of Wassila because he wants the bars to close at 2am rather than 5am and this upset Palin's bar owner campaign contributors.
4. Palin fires her chief public safety officer, the former police chief of Anchorage, because he doesn't want to be used in her family feud in firing the ex-husband of her sister.
5. Palin skipped out of paying her taxes and fees on her car wash that she owned, and failed to file required financial statements.
6. Palin's pastor of 30 years thinks political opponents of Bush won't go to heaven and that Jesus is some kind of war general that kills people that don't believe in him.
7. Palin voted to strip funds from a group that helps teen moms, LIKE HER DAUGHTER, get skills and lead productive lives after pregnancy.
8. Palin hired an Abramoff lobbyist to get earmarks that even McCain objected to
9. Palin inflates her foreign policy experience by claiming a refueling stop as a "visit to Ireland".
And the list keeps building every hour...
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 3:19pm
Cut an Paste usually get passed by and just clog up the blog..
Posted by JOMAMMA at 09/03/2008 @ 2:50pm
oh,
the pain of facts.
Posted by frosty zoom at 09/03/2008 @ 3:21pm
Isn't that what Obama's mentor (and best friend), Bill Ayers, said in a NYT editorial on 9/11/2001?---Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/03/2008 @ 3:10pm
Is it? Could you please quote the ENTIRE editorial (not just the snippets Sean Hannity feeds)?
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 3:26pm
These different standards mean Republicans can go too far on individual liberty and Dems can go too far on collectivism without any negative consequences.
Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/03/2008
my god, darin.
time to look at the forest instead of scratching at the trees.
Posted by frosty zoom at 09/03/2008 @ 3:29pm
darin-When you join such a group,like her husband did, and support such a group,like SarahPalin does,then it's because you agree with it's views.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/03/2008 @ 3:30pm
I'm so proud that no one has picked on Paulin for her hairdo. I mean...the first time I saw her I thought she was going to sell me a Frigidare or something. Looking at her, she does remind me eerily of the anti-feminists of the sixties. Pat Boone's sister....oh, what was her name, or Annet ( the disney girl...Funiccello or something). I mean...this women is not my idea of 21st century woman. Maybe, and only maybe, a 20th Century fox (love Morrison).
It's a good thing for McCain that we don't elect presidents based on there VP picks. We do, or at least we should, elect them based on there staff. After all, there staff presumably will be running things after they're elected.
But this selection either shows a staff in desperation or a leader stuck in the sixties.
Posted by Brillig at 09/03/2008 @ 3:35pm
I'm so proud that no one has picked on Paulin for her hairdo. I mean...the first time I saw her I thought she was going to sell me a Frigidare or something. Looking at her, she does remind me eerily of the anti-feminists of the sixties. Pat Boone's sister....oh, what was her name, or Annet ( the disney girl...Funiccello or something). I mean...this women is not my idea of 21st century woman. Maybe, and only maybe, a 20th Century fox (love Morrison).
It's a good thing for McCain that we don't elect presidents based on there VP picks. We do, or at least we should, elect them based on there staff. After all, there staff presumably will be running things after they're elected.
But this selection either shows a staff in desperation or a leader stuck in the sixties.
Posted by Brillig at 09/03/2008 @ 3:38pm
I don't care that Palin is involved in this movement because I was involved in a similar one in Montana,but I am enjoying the hypocrisy being spewed by the right with their idiocy about how the left hates America and then they get energized by someone who wants to abandon America and form her own country or commonwealth.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/03/2008 @ 3:40pm
Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/03/2008 @ 3:29pm
Funny how you are willing to tie Obama to Wright and Ayres but you are willing to let Palin walk free. You say that Palin didn't agree with their views so that's ok. Obama has shown no indication of agreeing with Wright's or Ayre's views yet you won't let that go. Funny how hypocritical you guys become when it's yours under the microscope.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 3:47pm
They once served on a common board and live in the same neighborhood....taking the connection much deeper than reality dontcha think?
Posted by leftofcenter at 09/03/2008 @ 3:54pm
"1. I am not defending anyone, I am just saying sesesh for many in Alaska might be appealing and I can undestand it. I AM saying your panic and scfreeching over Palin is hilarious, especialy when you praise BYRD a former KKK or Kennedy, a murder at worst, manslaughter with DWI at best..so how do you expect the right to even pay any attention to your long cut and pastes or your moral pontificating? It is a joke!"
I don't praise Byrd. I don't know where you get that from. I do find your guy's hypocrisy hilarious though.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 3:55pm
And the list keeps building every hour...
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 3:19pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Most of that stuff has been covered; in articles on Alternet in particular. It is simpler and more considerate to provide a precis and a link.
Posted by brunowe at 09/03/2008 @ 4:02pm
You should find ALL politicians hypocrisy hilarious...not just those on the right. Posted by JOMAMMA at 09/03/2008 @ 3:59pm
Oh I do. I dislike politicians in general.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 4:03pm
Posted by JOMAMMA at 09/03/2008 @ 3:59pm
This is my problem with all of this. We have had to listen to you, Happy, Ponti, LVL and Frank pontificate constantly over the last few months of this election talking about how Obama consorting with Wright and Byrd is a travesty and easily disqualifies him for the job. You then have someone who was apart of a group that wants to secede from America. A group who's leaders make statements like, "The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government," and you are defending it as being fine. That quote is easily as bad as "God damn America" even when it is taken in context. Yet you are defending this. You are saying that she didn't actually share their beliefs. However we have been saying that for MONTHS and it was never good enough for you guys. It's just hilarious to see how fast your attacks have turned against you and how right we have been proven about your stances on these things. That it only matters when the left does it.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 4:08pm
Posted by 2HAPPY at 09/03/2008 @ 3:40pm
That wasn't the question, HAPP.
The question was "Do you think McCain FULLY vetted Sarah Palin before picking her?"
You CAN'T honestly say he did...or else they would have gotten all this stuff out BEFORE she was picked and already had talking points to rebuff it.
YOU guys have been scrambling for 96 hours as more and more and more and more and more stuff comes out, trying to spin it and in fact (as noted) CONTRADICTING yourself on everything from "experience" to "How could ___ stay in that church for 20+ years and not believe that stuff?"
Frankly, the goofier stuff will probably die down....then you'll be left trying to explain why Walt Monegan was fired!
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 4:09pm
Posted by JOMAMMA at 09/03/2008 @ 3:33pm
MAASCH, don't get dishonest on us.
Of COURSE you're "defending someone"...you're defending Palin, because if she becomes "damaged goods", McCain loses and you want McCain to win...period.
I know you try, ol' pal, to sound like the "voice of reason on the Right" here sometimess....a candy-coated HAPP or little less zealous LVLIB, but you're going to pull the same lever they are and MUST defend Maverick John and the Beauty Queen as strongly as they do....no matter how ridiculous it gets.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 4:12pm
Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/03/2008 @ 3:29pm
So, again, you can't quote the entire editorial....just what "you've heard".
Right?
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 4:15pm
Jom I just love seeing people eat their own words, back pedal and just generally make excuses so quickly. I find it hilarious.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 4:19pm
haha, what a hoot this is! Every one of us here can relate to any group that's down on the federal government. We just all entertain our own frames of reference. It is actually the greatest unifying force on this blog, IMHO.
The universal, partisan hypocrisy on the issue of Gov Palin is a vision.
What a stoning.
Posted by freiheit1 at 09/03/2008 @ 4:21pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 4:15pm
Darin also conveniently forgets the part where Ayres says he is sorry for their arrogance.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 4:23pm
The fact that Palin has a secessionist bent shouldn't surprise anyone. She has been pushing real hard for freeing up Federal Land in Alaska so Alaskans can exploit it. Federal law and intervention in Alaskan affairs and as a barrier to Alaskans selling out OUR resources is a real pain in the ass to many Alaskans. Sarah wants to bring energy independence to the lower 48 --- just give her the keys to AWNR -- hahhahhah...what a frickin joke. Another Ted Stevens in pantsuit? If Alaska were to secede, wouldn't that make alot of Alaskans very rich selling off resources to say....the Japanese and the rest of down here in lower 48? This woman could give a rat's ass about whats good for the nation.....she wants whats good for her and her cronies. Another BJ for the oil companies on Sarah's terms. How quaint...what a maverick. Nice pick McCain.....the reaalllll McCoy.
Posted by OneVote at 09/03/2008 @ 4:26pm
>>>Mett has met the standard for the easiest to fly over.....LOL!!
Posted by 2HAPPY at 09/03/2008 @ 3:34pm <<<
You obviously didn't fly over the cut-and-pastes, or you wouldn't be responding.
I know you are as concerned as some of my Republican friends are that Palin will sink the McCain ticket. She is a small time politician who thinks and acts like one, and that is bad news for McCain as she enters a much larger stage where the stakes are much higher.
McCain disn't need to rally his base, he needed to reach out to moderates and independents. With the Palin pick, he has written off the middle of the electorate, as this reformer myth is going to explode over his head with all of those lobbyists he has been sucking up to.
The guy is toast!
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 4:26pm
Posted by brunowe at 09/03/2008 @ 4:02pm
Palin's shortcomings need a HIGHER PROFILE.
Here they are again:
1. Palin and her husband flirts with succession from the United States.
2. Palin attempts to ban library books she doesn't like and fire the city librarian if she doesn't go along.
3. Palin fires police chief of Wassila because he wants the bars to close at 2am rather than 5am and this upset Palin's bar owner campaign contributors.
4. Palin fires her chief public safety officer, the former police chief of Anchorage, because he doesn't want to be used in her family feud in firing the ex-husband of her sister.
5. Palin skipped out of paying her taxes and fees on her car wash that she owned, and failed to file required financial statements.
6. Palin's pastor of 30 years thinks political opponents of Bush won't go to heaven and that Jesus is some kind of war general that kills people that don't believe in him.
7. Palin voted to strip funds from a group that helps teen moms, LIKE HER DAUGHTER, get skills and lead productive lives after pregnancy.
8. Palin hired an Abramoff lobbyist to get earmarks that even McCain objected to
9. Palin inflates her foreign policy experience by claiming a refueling stop as a "visit to Ireland".
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 4:29pm
'Palin inflates her foreign policy experience by claiming a refueling stop as a "visit to Ireland".'
Hilarious.
Contemptuous too, but so what.
Palin is the next Monty Python.
Wait, the old MP had a Palin too.
No wonder.
This really is just one vast rightwing put-on.
You fascist guyz & galz are a million laughs.
Must be something in Palin's Assembly of God that encourages wit ... as surely these Christers wouldn't be encouraging deceit.
Posted by sloper at 09/03/2008 @ 4:30pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 4:23pm
No...he just never heard Sean Hannity MENTION those parts, because they don't fit the smear.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 4:33pm
Sean Hannity and Keith Olberman cancel each other out.
The physics of extremism.
Posted by freiheit1 at 09/03/2008 @ 4:37pm
The hypocrisy of the right on the secession issue is hysterical. If Obama had any connection whatsoever with any of the groups supporting carving out a separate Black Nation from the South, the right-wingers here and in the media would go nuts.
My own attitude to secession is that I support the right, but I only actually support or oppose secession based on the reasons its proponents put forward. For example, at least some abolitionists could have supported the North seceding from the Union if that would have brought about the end of slavery sooner, because the issue of human chattel slavery trumped, rightly so, the right of secession.
Posted by cka2nd at 09/03/2008 @ 4:41pm
By the way, far be it from me to defend a bourgeois politician, but Robert Byrd has long since apologized for his membership in the Ku Klux Klan, so that should be a dead issue.
Posted by cka2nd at 09/03/2008 @ 4:45pm
Posted by 2HAPPY at 09/03/2008 @ 4:43pm
HAPP, is there ANY logic to that?
Obama has been out in the public eye for over a year campaigning. YOU GUYS have been bringing up "Rev. Wright" and "Bill Ayers" for over six months. Plus, Hillary was SURELY looking into his closets as soon as she got scared.
Palin's been out in the public for 96 hours and the talk is thta McCain was SERIOUSLY considering Joe Lieberman as late as 2 weeks ago, with the Repub Establishment pushing Romney....Palin was a "Plan C".
You think if McCain had been SERIOUSLY considering Palin for the last few months that..."Bristol"...and "Walt Monegan"...and the "Alaska Independence Party" ....wouldn't have been out there already and become "old news"?
Or again, is it that you just can't ADMIT that?
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 4:50pm
Posted by 2HAPPY at 09/03/2008 @ 4:52pm
The Hillary votes that Obama can't get are not going to be won by picking Palin.
Hillary's voters will not accept an extreme anti-abortion candidate like Palin, and the few that would vote for Palin would vote for ANY Republican, as their REAL problem with Obama is his race not his policies or gender.
Posted by Metteyya at 09/03/2008 @ 5:22pm
"Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!" - Sar...er, Michael Palin
Posted by FLaim at 09/03/2008 @ 5:32pm
Posted by 2HAPPY at 09/03/2008 @ 4:43pm
Investigations and Alaskan Seccessionist movements are pretty ridiculous. I know YOU don't view them as such but most of America views it that way.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 6:03pm
I hate to be the one to put this out there, but...how many of these accusations are actually true? I mean, one could certainly argue that McCain's vetting was imperfect, but...really? After all of this, do we really believe that he screwed up THIS BADLY? I'm inclined to believe that at least some of them are claims whose truth-value is at best dubious, especially the classic corruption charges. They shouldn't be dismissed out of hand, necessarily, but I don't think we should just jump to assume they're completely true. This isn't to say they're malicious per se, just that they may not have been...carefully investigated before they were released.
Also, I completely agree that hypocrisy is a problem (yes, I am in fact saying "you're right, bad things are bad"). Palin's church should be viewed as seriously as Obama's was (though I don't care about Obama's pastor's theological beliefs quite as much as some of his blatantly false conspiracy theories, and even those I won't give tremendous weight to (i.e. AIDS)). In both cases, a church isn't just about the pastor, it's about the community that exists, and therefore people's decisions often aren't (and shouldn't be) wholly based on what the pastor does or doesn't say.
Finally...a Presidential nominee's views are more important than those of a prospective VP.
Posted by Thrawn at 09/03/2008 @ 6:20pm
"I'm inclined to believe that at least some of them are claims whose truth-value is at best dubious, especially the classic corruption charges."
The problem is the corruption charges were brought up a long time ago. She has had a lawyer for 2 weeks to address these. So this claim wasn't just brought up because she as running for VP.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 6:56pm
oops.....the opening of my earlier post didn't make it (the new Google Chrome acts a bid oddly on this blog, but is a pretty sweet browser overall)
Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/03/2008 @ 3:10pm
They once served on a common board and live in the same neighborhood....taking the connection much deeper than reality dontcha think?
Posted by leftofcenter at 09/03/2008 @ 3:54pm
Posted by leftofcenter at 09/03/2008 @ 6:59pm
Finally...a Presidential nominee's views are more important than those of a prospective VP. Posted by Thrawn at 09/03/2008 @ 6:20pm
That's the problem in this case it's the opposite. The VP is what is giving charge to McCain's camp. A lot of the right is now saying his campaign is worth it and you can see in the platform that more of her views are represented than his. That is why this is a funny selection.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 7:03pm
We have had to listen to you, Happy, Ponti, LVL and Frank pontificate constantly over the last few months of this election talking about how Obama consorting with Wright and Byrd is a travesty and easily disqualifies him for the job. You then have someone who was apart of a group that wants to secede from America. A group who's leaders make statements like, "The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government," and you are defending it as being fine. That quote is easily as bad as "God damn America" even when it is taken in context. Yet you are defending this. You are saying that she didn't actually share their beliefs. However we have been saying that for MONTHS and it was never good enough for you guys. It's just hilarious to see how fast your attacks have turned against you and how right we have been proven about your stances on these things. That it only matters when the left does it.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 4:08pm
I've corrected you several times yet you persist with this lie.
I never made a big deal of Wright's comments (feel free to go back and check). I even defended his remark about G damn America saying that I understood what he was saying but would not have stated it the same way.
And even the NY Times has retracted the lie about Palin belonging to the AIP.
And it's not leaders making those statements. It was one guy Vogler who was murdered in Canada in 1993.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/03/2008 @ 7:11pm
And why don't we add some actual context and facts about the AIP instead of just one outrageous quote.
"According to the Alaskan Independence Party's web site:
"The Alaskan Independence Party's goal is the vote we were entitled to in 1958, one choice from among the following four alternatives:
Remain a Territory. Become a separate and Independent Nation. Accept Commonwealth status. Become a State. The call for this vote is in furtherance of the dream of the Alaskan Independence Party's founding father, Joe Vogler, that Alaskans achieve independence under a minimal government, fully responsive to the people, and promoting a peaceful and lawful means of resolving differences."[7] The Alaskan Independence Party maintains that Alaska's vote for statehood is "invalid" because "the people were not presented with the range of options available to them" and because "federal government has since breached the contract for statehood".[8] Their web site addresses many questions about Alaskan Secession, including:
If Alaska became independent, wouldn't we lose a lot of federal money? [8] If Alaska were independent, what would happen to my social security check, federal pension, or military retirement?[8] If Alaska became independent, would U.S. military bases leave?[8] Under independence, what would happen to all the federal controls and regulations?[8] Would I lose my U.S. citizenship?[8]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaskan_Independence_Party
It has been noted that many people either belong or are sympathetic to the AIP in Alaska because of the independent nature of it's citizens and their near islolation from the lower 48 states.
In fact, overall, they seem like just the kind of people I would like.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/03/2008 @ 7:15pm
Ed Kalinins and Larry LVLIB Robinson sound like they'd be pals!
heheh
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 2:24pm
Possibly, while I wouldn't quite phrase things the same way, I understand exactly what he is saying and it is for the most part, inline with the beliefs of hundreds of millions of Christians in the US and around the world, including myself.
And certainly we understand that you and others not only disagree but mock us for our beliefs. That is fine. It's a free country for expressing ones beliefs last time I looked.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/03/2008 @ 7:19pm
Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/03/2008 @ 7:05pm
Joining a political group isn't just sending one taped message Darin. She and her husband were members. MEMBERS.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 7:28pm
I've corrected you several times yet you persist with this lie. I never made a big deal of Wright's comments (feel free to go back and check). I even defended his remark about G damn America saying that I understood what he was saying but would not have stated it the same way. And even the NY Times has retracted the lie about Palin belonging to the AIP. And it's not leaders making those statements. It was one guy Vogler who was murdered in Canada in 1993. Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/03/2008 @ 7:11pm
I used the Wright comment in the general sense of the multiple right posters here not you. That's why I named multiple people not just you and then said right and ayre. Do you want me to point you out specifically every time I am talking about a group of people in general?
"During the 1970s, Vogler founded Alaskans for Independence to actively pursue secession for Alaska from the United States. In 1984,[1] he founded the AIP to explore whether the 1958 vote by Alaskans authorizing statehood was legal."
Weird because it says here Vogler was the founder. So it looks like it was one of the laders.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 7:34pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/03/2008 @ 7:19pm
Where in the Bible does it say "Don't support George W. Bush and you won't get into Heaven"?
Until you show me that...Yes, I'll mock THAT belief.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 7:37pm
In fact, overall, they seem like just the kind of people I would like. Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/03/2008 @ 7:15pm
So what about them is any different that what I said before. They are an Alaskan Secessionist group. Exactly what I have been saying. I quoted their FOUNDER as to what his views are and those views dictated the path of the party itself. No matter how much you try to gift wrap this turd it still stinks.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 7:37pm
Possibly, while I wouldn't quite phrase things the same way, I understand exactly what he is saying and it is for the most part, inline with the beliefs of hundreds of millions of Christians in the US and around the world, including myself. And certainly we understand that you and others not only disagree but mock us for our beliefs. That is fine. It's a free country for expressing ones beliefs last time I looked. Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/03/2008 @ 7:19pm
So you believe that not agreeing with George Bush is punishable with an eternity in hell? Because if you do and I mean this in the nicest of manors, you are crazy and need to seek psychiatric help.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 7:40pm
"Vogler would serve as the AIP's standard-bearer for most of the party's first two decades. He ran for governor in 1974, with Wayne Peppler as his running mate."
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 7:44pm
Where in the Bible does it say "Don't support George W. Bush and you won't get into Heaven"?
Until you show me that...Yes, I'll mock THAT belief.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 7:37pm
I said that he is accurate for the most part. However, there certainly is scriptural basis for making remarks that speak to Christians supporting their rulers.
"Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.
Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves."
Romans 13:1,2
Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake, whether to the king as supreme, or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good.
For this is the will of God, that by doing good you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men--
1 Peter 2:13-15
Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/03/2008 @ 8:00pm
I used the Wright comment in the general sense of the multiple right posters here not you. That's why I named multiple people not just you and then said right and ayre. Do you want me to point you out specifically every time I am talking about a group of people in general?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 7:34pm
You cited me specifically CCC
"We have had to listen to you, Happy, Ponti, LVL and Frank pontificate constantly over the last few months of this election talking about how Obama consorting with Wright and Byrd is a travesty and easily disqualifies him for the job.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 4:08pm"
Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/03/2008 @ 8:08pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/03/2008 @ 8:00pm
Oh, good....so if Obama wins, you'll follow those Scriptures and you'll support him?
Good to know.........uh.........right?
(Here's where you start creating a lot of caveats NOT found in Romans and Peter)
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/03/2008 @ 9:56pm
and Byrd
Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/03/2008 @ 8:08pm
Jesus can you see that I wasn't just talking about right. From now on I will make special exclusions just for you when I am listing multiple things.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 10:21pm
Obama has not be tested, and as BIDEN says, the POTUS is not for on the job training..I would feel MUCH better if the Obama ticket were reversed.
Posted by JOMAMMA at 09/03/2008 @ 9:18pm
There is nothing that prepares you for being President. EVERY President without exception receives on the job training. If you think that anything in this country "qualifies" you to be President then you think very lowly of what it is to run an entire country.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/03/2008 @ 10:33pm
The press attacks on her daughter didn't help Obama either.
Posted by JOMAMMA at 09/03/2008 @ 9:18pm
this is the stupidest of nonsense.
america, don't you care about yourself?
Posted by frosty zoom at 09/04/2008 @ 12:32am
I'd be happy if all the Republicans/evangelicals/warmongering/oil-drilling/ states-righters, etc. just moved to Alaska and left us big-city, blue state, coastline-loving citizens alone.
Posted by redemma at 09/04/2008 @ 12:54am
Such stupidity, maybe a bit of proof. Bring it forth. If these sorts of foolish accusations are going to be leveled by the wackiest of the left, try something more than misspelled adjectives, or nouns for that matter.
It gives a warm feeling to know that these are the folks that are on the left, not sure they can find their way to the polls even if they can identify the date in the calendar.
Harsh and shrill, the Democrats brought low -- I pity them ultimately, a great party once, no more.
Posted by J. Saxon at 09/04/2008 @ 01:28am
JOMAMMA, 2HAPPY, ZERO, redemma, J. Saxon,
The question must be asked: How can any one love a country that they wish to secede from? As I suspected, Sarah Palin is a rightwing, fringe, lunatic, homicidal, genocidal maniac who should be no where near the Presidency. But having said that, her leftwing, lunatic, homicidal, genocidal friends on the other side of the ledger have nothing to offer the American people or the world for that matter. But the truth could never be more clearer, if the Democratic candidates had any association with a Secessionist group like this, Sean Hannity and the Faux News Channel would talk about nothing else, all other news would cease to exist.............
Posted by POSEIDON at 09/04/2008 @ 03:45am
Posted by J. Saxon at 09/04/2008 @ 01:28am
You can't call us over-educated, elite intellectual snobs and then call us idiots too. It's illogical. Mr. Spock, patron saint of all of us geeks would not approve.
As for finding our way to the polling place every GPS owner I know is a Republican. Democrats lean toward maps-more challenging! Perhaps GWB would have had more luck with a "GPS to peace in the middle east"?
Live long and prosper!
Posted by Pogge at 09/04/2008 @ 05:02am