How will/should the Democrats attack Palin?

[JD50]

Oh sh1t, someone ran the Harveybot script. Quick, reboot the server!!

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: JD50
Oh sh1t, someone ran the Harveybot script. Quick, reboot the server!!

One more, and I WILL post one of my macros, including times, dates, facts and links naming and proving the Bushwhackos' crimes. If that's what you want, keep it up.

What I don't want is John McShame with more of the same.

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: JD50
Oh sh1t, someone ran the Harveybot script. Quick, reboot the server!!

One more, and I WILL post the entire proof macro. If that's what you want, keep it up.

+1?

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: JD50
Oh sh1t, someone ran the Harveybot script. Quick, reboot the server!!

One more, and I WILL post the entire proof macro. If that's what you want, keep it up.

+1?

OK. By popular request, I present to you the Bushwhacko crimes, the same crimes John McShame has supported and wants to continue. And before anyone screams that I'm posting "macros," you bet I'm quoting from my previous posts. They take a long time to write and format, and they happen to be true so I'm not going to rewrite the same information from scratch to reply to the same bullshit. Here are five general areas of high crimes:

1. TREASON

2. MURDER

3. LYING TO CONGRESS

4. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

5. WAR CRIMES

---

1. TREASON

In law, treason is the crime of disloyalty to one's nation. A person who betrays the nation of their citizenship and/or reneges on an oath of loyalty and in some way willfully cooperates with an enemy, is considered to be a traitor. Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as: "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aided or involved by such an endeavour.

The Constitution of the United States, Art. III defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort.

Here's another definition:

trea·son

(tre'z?n)
n.

1. Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
   
2. A betrayal of trust or confidence.

If you don't consider offering only a continuous string of ever changing lies as justification for taking the nation into a war that has squandered thousands of American lives and trillions of dollars in current and future debt, or illegal, unconstitutional unwarranted spying against American citizens to be a betrayal of trust or confidence, please tell us what it is. :shocked:

Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution provides that each president shall recite the following oath:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

The Vice President also swears of affirms a similar oath. Since the day Bush and Cheney took office, they and their henchmen have waged an aggressive war against the rights guaranteed to all American citizens under the U.S. Constitution.

Instead of upholding and defending the Constitution, and well before the FISA law was rewritten, your TRAITOR In Chief and his gang were shredding the rights guaranteed to every American citizen by that document with illegal domestic spying.

AT&T Whistle-Blower's Evidence
05.17.06

Former AT&T technician Mark Klein is the key witness in the Electronic Frontier Foundation's class-action lawsuit against the company, which alleges that AT&T illegally cooperated in an illegal National Security Agency domestic-surveillance program.

In this recently surfaced statement, Klein details his discovery of an alleged surveillance operation in an AT&T office in San Francisco, and offers his interpretation of company documents that he believes support his case.

In 2003 AT&T built "secret rooms" hidden deep in the bowels of its central offices in various cities, housing computer gear for a government spy operation which taps into the company's popular WorldNet service and the entire internet. These installations enable the government to look at every individual message on the internet and analyze exactly what people are doing. Documents showing the hardwire installation in San Francisco suggest that there are similar locations being installed in numerous other cities.

The physical arrangement, the timing of its construction, the government-imposed secrecy surrounding it, and other factors all strongly suggest that its origins are rooted in the Defense Department's Total Information Awareness (TIA) program which brought forth vigorous protests from defenders of constitutionally protected civil liberties last year:

"As the director of the effort, Vice Adm. John M. Poindexter, has described the system in Pentagon documents and in speeches, it will provide intelligence analysts and law enforcement officials with instant access to information from internet mail and calling records to credit card and banking transactions and travel documents, without a search warrant." The New York Times, 9 November 2002

To mollify critics, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa) spokesmen have repeatedly asserted that they are only conducting "research" using "artificial synthetic data" or information from "normal DOD intelligence channels" and hence there are "no U.S. citizen privacy implications" (Department of Defense, Office of the Inspector General report on TIA, December 12, 2003). They also changed the name of the program to "Terrorism Information Awareness" to make it more politically palatable. But feeling the heat, Congress made a big show of allegedly cutting off funding for TIA in late 2003, and the political fallout resulted in Adm. Poindexter's abrupt resignation last August. However, the fine print reveals that Congress eliminated funding only for "the majority of the TIA components," allowing several "components" to continue (DOD, ibid). The essential hardware elements of a TIA-type spy program are being surreptitiously slipped into "real world" telecommunications offices.

In San Francisco the "secret room" is Room 641A at 611 Folsom Street, the site of a large SBC phone building, three floors of which are occupied by AT&T. High-speed fiber-optic circuits come in on the 8th floor and run down to the 7th floor where they connect to routers for AT&T's WorldNet service, part of the latter's vital "Common Backbone." In order to snoop on these circuits, a special cabinet was installed and cabled to the "secret room" on the 6th floor to monitor the information going through the circuits. (The location code of the cabinet is 070177.04, which denotes the 7th floor, aisle 177 and bay 04.) The "secret room" itself is roughly 24-by-48 feet, containing perhaps a dozen cabinets including such equipment as Sun servers and two Juniper routers, plus an industrial-size air conditioner.

The normal work force of unionized technicians in the office are forbidden to enter the "secret room," which has a special combination lock on the main door. The telltale sign of an illicit government spy operation is the fact that only people with security clearance from the National Security Agency can enter this room. In practice this has meant that only one management-level technician works in there. Ironically, the one who set up the room was laid off in late 2003 in one of the company's endless "downsizings," but he was quickly replaced by another.

Plans for the "secret room" were fully drawn up by December 2002, curiously only four months after Darpa started awarding contracts for TIA. One 60-page document, identified as coming from "AT&T Labs Connectivity & Net Services" and authored by the labs' consultant Mathew F. Casamassima, is titled Study Group 3, LGX/Splitter Wiring, San Francisco and dated 12/10/02. (See sample PDF 1-4.) This document addresses the special problem of trying to spy on fiber-optic circuits. Unlike copper wire circuits which emit electromagnetic fields that can be tapped into without disturbing the circuits, fiber-optic circuits do not "leak" their light signals. In order to monitor such communications, one has to physically cut into the fiber somehow and divert a portion of the light signal to see the information.

How is that not a violation of their oath of office to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?

How is that not a violation of allegiance toward one's country or the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies?

Even if you don't believe that in so doing, they have committed treason, they have most definitely violated their oaths of office. :|

2. MURDER

Under Federal and most state statutes, one definition of murder is committing an act in callous, reckless or wanton disregard or depraved indifference for the safety of others that, in fact, causes the death of another. One foreseeable consequence of war is death... in fact, many deaths. As of 7/17/08, your TRAITOR IN CHIEF and his criminal cabal have murdered 4,124 American troops (and growing) and left tens of thousands more wounded, scarred and disabled for life in his war of LIES in Iraq.

All of the American casualties did not occur in one cataclysmic event. They happened over the years we since the Bushwhackos started their illegal war. If you question whether their actions constitute callous, reckless or wanton disregard or depraved indifference for the safety of others, it begs the question of how many times, and over what period, can one consider excusing those ongoing, repeated acts that continue to raise the number of dead and wounded Americans on a daily basis. At what point does it shock the conscience sufficiently to cross the threshold from being 4,124 cases of mere negligent homicide, which is another criminal offense? :shocked:

3. LYING TO CONGRESS

In case you didn't know it, lying to Congress is a felony even if it is not done under oath. The following list of public lies are the same ones the Bushwhackos fed to Congress to convince them to authorize their war of LIES. It took just a few minutes to find lots of threads, including some like this one going back to 2004. The "macros" weren't as long, then, but either was the string of known lies. :shocked: (All times are Pacific time zone):

10/14/2007 01:34 PM

Originally posted by: Harvey

Remember, YOU asked for this, so don't give me shit about its length or the fact that I posted it previously.

• "Iraq is busy enhancing its capabilities in the field of chemical and biological agents, and they continue to pursue an aggressive nuclear weapons program. These are offensive weapons for the purpose of inflicting death on a massive scale, developed so that Saddam Hussein can hold the threat over the head of any one he chooses. What we must not do in the face of this mortal threat is to give in to wishful thinking or to willful blindness."
  Vice President Dick Cheney, 8/29/02
  
• "Some have argued that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent - that Saddam is at least 5-7 years away from having nuclear weapons. I would not be so certain. And we should be just as concerned about the immediate threat from biological weapons. Iraq has these weapons."
  Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 9/18/02
  
• "No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq."
  Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 9/19/02
  
• "This man poses a much graver threat than anybody could have possibly imagined."
  George W. Bush, 9/26/02
  
• "The Iraqi regime is a threat of unique urgency."
  George W. Bush, 10/2/02
  
• "There's a grave threat in Iraq. There just is."
  George W. Bush, 10/2/02
  
• "There are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands alone because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place. Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists."
  George W. Bush, 10/7/02
  
• "The Iraqi regime is a serious and growing threat to peace."
  George W. Bush, 10/16/02
  
• "There is real threat, in my judgment, a real and dangerous threat to American in Iraq in the form of Saddam Hussein."
  George W. Bush, 10/28/02
  
• "I see a significant threat to the security of the United States in Iraq."
  George W. Bush, 11/1/02
  
• "I would look you in the eye and I would say, go back before September 11 and ask yourself this question: Was the attack that took place on September 11 an imminent threat the month before or two months before or three months before or six months before? When did the attack on September 11 become an imminent threat? Now, transport yourself forward a year, two years or a week or a month...So the question is, when is it such an immediate threat that you must do something?"
  Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 11/14/02
  
• "Saddam Hussein is a threat to America."
  George W. Bush, 11/3/02
  
• "The world is also uniting to answer the unique and urgent threat posed by Iraq whose dictator has already used weapons of mass destruction to kill thousands."
  George W. Bush, 11/23/02
  
• "The Iraqi regime is a threat to any American. They not only have weapons of mass destruction, they used weapons of mass destruction...That's why I say Iraq is a threat, a real threat."
  George W. Bush, 1/3/03
  
• "Saddam Hussein possesses chemical and biological weapons. Iraq poses a threat to the security of our people and to the stability of the world that is distinct from any other. It's a danger to its neighbors, to the United States, to the Middle East and to the international peace and stability. It's a danger we cannot ignore. Iraq and North Korea are both repressive dictatorships to be sure and both pose threats. But Iraq is unique. In both word and deed, Iraq has demonstrated that it is seeking the means to strike the United States and our friends and allies with weapons of mass destruction."
  Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 1/20/03
  
• "Iraq poses a serious and mounting threat to our country. His regime has the design for a nuclear weapon, was working on several different methods of enriching uranium, and recently was discovered seeking significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
  Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 1/29/03
  
• "Well, of course he is.?
  White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett responding to the question ?is Saddam an imminent threat to U.S. interests, either in that part of the world or to Americans right here at home??, 1/26/03
  
• Iraq poses "terrible threats to the civilized world."
  Dick Cheney, 1/30/03
  
• Iraq "threatens the United States of America."
  Dick Cheney, 1/30/03
  
• Iraq is "a serious threat to our country, to our friends and to our allies."
  Dick Cheney, 1/31/03
  
• "This is about imminent threat."
  White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 2/10/03
  
• "The dictator of Iraq and his weapons of mass destruction are a threat to the security of free nations."
  George W. Bush, 3/16/03
  
• "The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder."
  George W. Bush, 3/19/03
  
• "It is only a matter of time before the Iraqi regime is destroyed and its threat to the region and the world is ended."
  Pentagon spokeswoman Victoria Clarke, 3/22/03
  
• "The threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction will be removed."
  Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 3/25/03
  
• "We gave our word that the threat from Iraq would be ended."
  George W. Bush 4/24/03
  
• "Absolutely."
  White House spokesman Ari Fleischer answering whether Iraq was an "imminent threat," 5/7/03
  
• "Saddam Hussein is no longer a threat to the United States because we removed him, but he was a threat...He was a threat. He's not a threat now."
  George W. Bush, 7/2/03
  
• Iraq was "the most dangerous threat of our time."
  White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 7/17/03
  
• "We ended the threat from Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction."
  George W. Bush, 7/17/03
  
• "There's no question that Iraq was a threat to the people of the United States."
  White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan, 8/26/03
  
• We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the ?90s, that it involved training, for example, on BW and CW, that al-Qaeda sent personnel to Baghdad to get trained on the systems that are involved. The Iraqis providing bomb-making expertise and advice to the al-Qaeda organization.
  
• "Our intelligence sources tell us that he (Saddam) has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production."
  George W. Bush, 1/28/2003 State of the Union Address
  
• "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
  George W. Bush, 1/28/2003 State of the Union Address
  
• "We know he's been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons."
  Dick Cheney, 3/16/2003 on ?Meet the Press?
  
• We know, for example, in connection with the original World Trade Center bombing in ?93 that one of the bombers was Iraqi, returned to Iraq after the attack of ?93. And we?ve learned subsequent to that, since we went into Baghdad and got into the intelligence files, that this individual probably also received financing from the Iraqi government as well as safe haven.
  Dick Cheney, 9/14/2003 on "Meet The Press"

You can continue with info about more lies and deception as documented in the 9-11 Commission Report from 2004.

If that's not enough for you, we can move on to admin quotes about the mysteriously disappearing communications between the Whitehouse and Gonzo the Clown and his lackeys at the Department of Justice and their lies about a host of their other lies, failures and deceptions.

Want more? No problem, but remember, if you do, YOU asked for it. :shocked:

11/03/2007 05:59 PM (See later post in same thread with more detail on first half)

Originally posted by: Harvey

It took me only two minutes to find several of my posts with the following list of Bushwhacko lies and incompetence from one of my earlier posts. I warned you, and I apologize in advance for reposting it because it's very long, but since you insist...

• The "intelligence" fed to Congress and the American people was cherry picked and directed from the top.
  
• Rumsfeld set his own parallel "intelligence" operation within DOD when the CIA and FBI couldn't tell him what he wanted to hear.
  
• There was no yellow cake uranium in Niger.
  
• There were no aluminum tubes capable of being used in centrifuges process nuclear material.
  
• There were no facilities for making nerve gas or biological weapons.
  
• There were no long range rockets.
  
• There were no WMD's.
  
• There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq.

They ignored any information from competent internal sources that ran counter to their ambitions:

• They ignored all warnings about the possiblity of an attack like 9/11, despite explicit warnings from people like Richard Clarke, former terrorisim advisor to Presidents Reagan, Bush Sr. and Clinton. Richard Clarke also warned Bush that Saddam probably was not tied to 9/11.
  
  The Bushwhackos didn't want to hear that so they did what any good exec would do -- They fired him.
  
• They claimed their pre-war planning included plenty of troops to handle foreseeable problems in the aftermath of their invasion, despite warnings from Army Chief of Staff, Eric Shinseki that they would need around 400,000 troops to do the job.
  
  The Bushwhackos administration didn't want to hear that so they did what any good exec would do -- They fired him.
  
• Before Bush started his war of lies, Ambassador Joseph Wilson was sent to Niger to investigate reports that Saddam was trying to buy yellow cake uranium. He returned and informed that the reports were false.
  
  The Bushwhackos administration didn't want to hear that so they did what any good adminstration would do. They outed his wife, Valerie Plame's identity as a covert CIA operative, blowing off her value to our national security and endangering her life and the lives of everyone who ever worked with her anywhere in the world.

Need more lies? Try these:

Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction
Dick Cheney, speech to VFW National Convention, Aug. 26, 2002

Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.
George W. Bush, speech to UN General Assembly, Sept. 12, 2002

No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
Donald Rumsfeld, testimony to Congress, Sept. 19, 2002

If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world.
Ari Fleischer, press briefing, Dec. 2, 2002

We know for a fact that there are weapons there.
Ari Fleischer, press briefing, Jan. 9, 2003

Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard, and VX nerve agent?. The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.
George W. Bush, State of the Union Address, Jan. 28, 2003

We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons - the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.
George W. Bush, radio address, Feb. 8, 2003

Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.
George W. Bush, address to the U.S., March 17, 2003

The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder.
George W. Bush, address to U.S., March 19, 2003

Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly?..All this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes.
Ari Fleisher, press briefing, March 21, 2003

We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat.
Donald Rumsfeld, ABC interview, March 30, 2003

But make no mistake - as I said earlier - we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found.
Ari Fleischer, press briefing, April 10, 2003

We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them.
George W. Bush, NBC interview, April 24, 2003

There are people who in large measure have information that we need?.so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country.
Donald Rumsfeld, press briefing, April 25, 2003

We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so.
George W. Bush, remarks to reporters, May 3, 2003

I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now.
Colin Powell, remarks to reporters, May 4, 2003

I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein ? because he had a weapons program.
George W. Bush, remarks to reporters, May 6, 2003

We said what we said because we meant it?..We continue to have confidence that WMD will be found.
Ari Fleischer, press briefing, May 7, 2003

You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons....They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two. And we'll find more weapons as time goes on, but for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong. We found them.
George W. Bush, remarks to reporters, May 31, 2003

U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and find" weapons of mass destruction.
Condoleeza Rice, Reuters interview, May 12, 2003

We never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country.
Donald Rumsfeld, Fox News interview, May 4, 2003

I don't believe anyone that I know in the administration ever said that Iraq had nuclear weapons [SEE NEXT QUOTE].
Donald Rumsfeld, Senate appropriations subcommittee on defense hearing, May 14, 2003

We believe [Hussein] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.
Dick Cheney, NBC's Meet the Press, March 16, 2003

They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer.
Donald Rumsfeld, remarks to the Council on Foreign Relations, May 27, 2003

"I think some in the media have chosen to use the word 'imminent.? Those were not words we used. We used 'grave and gathering' threat." [SEE NEXT QUOTES].
Scott McClellan, press briefing, Jan. 31, 2004

This is about an imminent threat.
Scott McClellan, press briefing, Feb. 10, 2003

After being asked whether Hussein was an "imminent" threat: "Well, of course he is."
Dan Bartlett, CNN interview, Jan. 26, 2003

After being asked whether the U.S. went to war because officials said Hussein?s alleged weapons were a direct, imminent threat to the U.S.: "Absolutely."
Ari Fleischer, press briefing, May 7, 2003

11/07/2007 01:23 PM (Links and details for the first half of the previous post):

Originally posted by: Harvey

Before Bush started his war of lies, Ambassador Joseph Wilson was sent to Niger to investigate reports that Saddam was trying to buy yellow cake uranium. He returned and informed them that the reports were false, and that several European intelligence agencies had thoroughly discredited the source for the reports.

The Bushwhackos administration didn't want to hear that so they did what any good adminstration would do. They outed his wife, Valerie Plame's identity as a covert CIA operative, blowing off her value to our national security and endangering her life and the lives of everyone who ever worked with her anywhere in the world.

• There were no aluminum tubes capable of being used in centrifuges to process nuclear material.

Evidence on Iraq Challenged
Experts Question if Tubes Were Meant for Weapons Program

By Joby Warrick
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 19, 2002

A key piece of evidence in the Bush administration's case against Iraq is being challenged in a report by independent experts who question whether thousands of high-strength aluminum tubes recently sought by Iraq were intended for a secret nuclear weapons program.

The White House last week said attempts by Iraq to acquire the tubes point to a clandestine program to make enriched uranium for nuclear bombs. But the experts say in a new report that the evidence is ambiguous, and in some ways contradicts what is known about Iraq's past nuclear efforts.

The report, from the Institute for Science and International Security, also contends that the Bush administration is trying to quiet dissent among its own analysts over how to interpret the evidence. The report, a draft of which was obtained by The Washington Post, was authored by David Albright, a physicist who investigated Iraq's nuclear weapons program following the 1991 Persian Gulf War as a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency's inspection team. The institute, headquartered in Washington, is an independent group that studies nuclear and other security issues.

"By themselves, these attempted procurements are not evidence that Iraq is in possession of, or close to possessing, nuclear weapons," the report said. "They do not provide evidence that Iraq has an operating centrifuge plant or when such a plant could be operational."

The controversy stems from shipments to Iraq of specialized aluminum metal that were seized en route by governments allied with the United States. A U.S. intelligence official confirmed that at least two such shipments were seized within the past 14 months, although he declined to give details. The Associated Press, citing sources familiar with the shipments, reported that one originated in China and was intercepted in Jordan.

The shipments sparked concern among U.S. intelligence analysts because of the potential use of such tubes in centrifuges, fast-spinning machines used in making enriched uranium for nuclear bombs. High-strength, heat-resistant metals are needed for centrifuge casings as well as for the rotors, which turn at up to 1,000 rotations per minute.

There is no evidence that any of the tubes reached Iraq. But in its white paper on Iraq released to the United Nations last week, the Bush administration cited the seized shipments as evidence that Iraq is actively seeking to develop nuclear weapons. Bush's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, said in a televised interview that the tubes "are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs, centrifuge programs."

Since then, U.S. officials have acknowledged differing opinions within the U.S. intelligence community about possible uses for the tubes -- with some experts contending that a more plausible explanation was that the aluminum was meant to build launch tubes for Iraq's artillery rockets.

"But the majority view, held by senior officials here, is that they were most likely intended for gas centrifuges," one U.S. intelligence official said in an interview.

The new report questions that conclusion on several grounds, most of them technical. It says the seized tubes were made of a kind of aluminum that is ill-suited for welding. Other specifications of the imported metal are at odds with what is known about Iraq's previous attempts to build centrifuges. In fact, the report said, Iraq had largely abandoned aluminum for other materials, such as specialized steel and carbon fiber, in its centrifuges at the time its nuclear program was destroyed by allied bombers in the Gulf War.

According to Albright, government experts on nuclear technology who dissented from the Bush administration's view told him they were expected to remain silent. Several Energy Department officials familiar with the aluminum shipments declined to comment.

Note the date -- September 19, 2002, BEFORE they launched their war of LIES.

• There were no facilities for making nerve gas or biological weapons
  
• There were no long range rockets.
  
• There were no WMD's.
  
• There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq.

Even Colin Powell has since said he strongly questioned the "evidence" the Bushwhackos were pimping to Congress and the American people before he gave his infamous dog and pony show at the U.N.

Powell: Some Iraq testimony not 'solid'

Saturday, April 3, 2004 Posted: 11:05 AM EST (1605 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said his pre-war testimony to the U.N. Security Council about Iraq's alleged mobile, biological weapons labs was based on information that appears not to be "solid."

Powell's speech before the Security Council on February, 5, 2003 --detailing possible weapons of mass destruction in Iraq -- was a major event in the Bush administration's effort to justify a war and win international support.

Powell said Friday his testimony about Iraq and mobile biological weapons labs was based on the best intelligence available, but "now it appears not to be the case that it was that solid," Powell said.
.
.
. (continues

You can pick and choose from the examples in the article, but remember George Tenet's "slam dunk?" Remember the infamously unreliable testimony from "Curveball? :roll:

Powell also told columnist, Robert Scheer that he and his department?s top experts never believed that Iraq posed an imminent nuclear threat, but that the president followed the misleading advice of Vice President Dick Cheney and the CIA in making the claim.

Robert Scheer: Now Powell Tells Us
.
.
On Monday, former Secretary of State Colin Powell told me that he and his department?s top experts never believed that Iraq posed an imminent nuclear threat, but that the president followed the misleading advice of Vice President Dick Cheney and the CIA in making the claim. Now he tells us.
.
.
I queried Powell at a reception following a talk he gave in Los Angeles on Monday. Pointing out that the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate showed that his State Department had gotten it right on the nonexistent Iraq nuclear threat, I asked why did the president ignore that wisdom in his stated case for the invasion?

?The CIA was pushing the aluminum tube argument heavily and Cheney went with that instead of what our guys wrote,? Powell said. And the Niger reference in Bush?s State of the Union speech? ?That was a big mistake,? he said. ?It should never have been in the speech. I didn?t need Wilson to tell me that there wasn?t a Niger connection. He didn?t tell us anything we didn?t already know. I never believed it.?

When I pressed further as to why the president played up the Iraq nuclear threat, Powell said it wasn?t the president: ?That was all Cheney.?
.
.
. (continues)

4. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

The Bushwhackos have continually withheld evidence from Congress regarding Whitehouse involvement with anything and everything from Alberto Gonzales' communications to their involvement with outing covert CIA operative, Valerie Plame, to their direct involvement with the CIA's use of torture and the subsequent destruction of the tapes showing them in the act of committing that torture.[/list]

5. WAR CRIMES

George W. Bush, Dickwad Cheney, Alberto Gonzales and others authorized and encouraged American intelligence agencies to commit gross violations of human rights, including TORTURE, in violation of international laws and obligations under the Geneva Conventions, which Berto the Clown Gonzales derided as "quaint."

 

[Druidx]

Looking forward to Harveys Blah Blah Blah Blah Cabal yadda yadda yadda Cabal Blah Blah Blah

Always worth a good laugh

 

[JD50]

Seriously, reboot the fvking server before it goes off again. Give me the root password and I'll do it myself.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Druidx
Looking forward to Harveys Blah Blah Blah Blah Cabal yadda yadda yadda Cabal Blah Blah Blah

Always worth a good laugh

Yeah... I'm sure the families and friends of those 4,150 dead Americans are laughing up a storm about it, and I'm sure they appreciate your support for your murdering Traitor In Chief and his gang who killed them.

I'm sure all of those who lost thier jobs, their homes and the basic ability to feed and clothe their kids and manage the basics of a life are just cackling up a storm, too.

 

[Coldkilla]

Have Hillary do it. If Obama so much as questions her policies its sexist because people are fundamentally stupid.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Coldkilla
Have Hillary do it. If Obama so much as questions her policies its sexist because people are fundamentally stupid.

Good idea. But then again it would make Hillary look like the bitch the average soccer mom thinks she is. Palin sucked up to Hillary in her introductory speech. Hillary would look bitter if she retaliatied.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Coldkilla
Have Hillary do it. If Obama so much as questions her policies its sexist because people are fundamentally stupid.

Good idea. But then again it would make Hillary look like the bitch the average soccer mom thinks she is. Palin sucked up to Hillary in her introductory speech. Hillary would look bitter if she retaliatied.

that was smart at least.

 

[Coldkilla]

Bill too would be pissed, as it probably pisses off his wife. And when Hillary gets mad - Bill gets furious

 

[Specop 007]

I imagine my qouting is going to be all fucked up on this one.....

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Well actually, YOU brought up Palin and creationism.

Well, actually, no, I didn't. Palin didhttp://www.boston.com/news/local/articles_of_faith/2008/08/sarah_palin_on.html because she advocates allowing such idiocy to be taught in public schools.

Did you or did you not make a post pissing and moaning about creationism? Was this or was this not posted because your grasping at anything to piss and moan about "dem damn Republicans!"?

John McCain's vice-presidential pick, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, is an evangelical Protestant with a strong record of opposition to abortion and an openness to teaching creationism in the public schools.

She's entitled to believe in her favorite myths and fantasies. No public official should be allowed to foist bullshit like creationism/creation "science" on our public educational institutions.

From your own link..

creationism (should be discussed in schools)

I suppose you want the issue irrevocably silenced forever! If you discuss it you will be punished!! Shes not saying teach creationism to the exclusion of evolution. She wants it discussed.
Way to support that freedom of speech Harvey. Expected from liberals. Its only free as long as YOU agree to it right? Then again, God forbid we have logcial meaningful debates in our schools. Dont want to raise people who can think on their own, hell the Democratic party would cease to exist!

If that bothers you then I ask why doesnt the indoctrination of children into Islam bother you?

Please tell us which, if ANY, candidate for President or Vice President advocates "indoctrinating children into or "forcing children to practice."

If you can't answer that, you're blowing smoke out of your ass.

It was meant as a litmus test, no more. I wanted to see if you were just trying to piss and moan about conservatives or if you actually gave a damn about the school curriculum. Its obvious. You dont give a shit whats taught, you just want to bash away at the conservatives for what they want discussed.

I mean really, as a rabid liberal I would think you would be more concerned about having a terrorist representing your party. Does that part bother you?

A terrorist??? Exactly WHO are you calling a terrorist? :shocked:

Why it doesn't bother you that YOUR party, represented by the Bushwhacko administration, are guilty of TREASON for shredding the rights guaranteed to all American citizens under our formerly great, formerly honored Constitution?

Shredding the Consitution?! Now tell me, how long did DC ban pistols? Or Chicago? When was the first gun ban? Bout a century ago! Yeah, tell me about how Bush is shredding the Constitution.... I suppose with your narrow blinders he has been the first hasnt he? Dare we discuss the taps of the 60's? Might ruin your pretty little view of the world.

As of 8/29/08 3:57 pm EDT, 4,150 American troops have died in your Traitor In Chief's war of lies in Iraq.

The Bushwhackos are guilty of MURDER for every one of those deaths.


Traitor In Chief's war of lies in Iraq is also the direct reason why tens of thousands more American troops are wounded, scarred and disabled for life.

Funny, most of the GI's think we should be there too. I think I'll take their opinion of it over yours. Seeing as they are willing to DIE for this country, and your willing to...What again? Sell it out to the first terrorist that comes along? Right.

Your Traitor In Chief and his criminal cabal are guilty of committing TORTURE and other horrendous WAR CRIMES and CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.

Your Traitor In Chief and his criminal cabal are a greater threat to the United States of America than Osama Bin Laden, all of Al Qaeda and all the Al Qaeda wannabes of the world. At least, they acknowledge they are out to destroy us while

Well that was a mouth full wasnt it? Crimes against humanity....Wow. Now you can provide some proof right? Who made these laws? Is this based on Chinas laws, Americas laws....Exactly WHO decides whats a "Crime against humanity"? As for being more dangerous then Osama, thats only because they actually LIKE America. For people such as yourself who despise this country and what it stands for, yes you think they are a threat. For people like you who want this country to fail, for people like you who support terrorists like Obama and Ayers, yes Bush is a threat. He stops people like you from destroying this country.
Terrorism isnt limited to people overseas Harvey.......

The only representatives of either party who can rightly be called terrorists are REPUBLICANS, and John McShame represents nothing more than a continuation of all of their crimes against the people of the United States of America and the world. :thumbsdown: :|

Really? Shall we compare the acts of Obama and Ayers to that of McCain. Shall we compare the fact McCain was a prisoner of war fighting FOR this country, whereas your vaunted Obama was actively invovled in bombings and the murder of police officers?

Whos the real terrorist Harvey? McCain, who fought FOR this country, or Obama and people like you who fight against it?

 

[Coldkilla]

lmao @ Specop. Being a POW doesn't mean you are able to lead...

 

[mizzou]

no need to attack her at all. Watch TV and listen to how people defend her. They are so vague about her credentials I swore I heard a "president of high school student council" in one of them

I haven't seen one straight answer to the question "Should McCain pass the baton, is she the best VP from the Republican Party to lead the country?"

Can't WAIT to see the polls on how she can handle the economy, etc. etc.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: JD50
Oh sh1t, someone ran the Harveybot script. Quick, reboot the server!!

One more, and I WILL post one of my macros, including times, dates, facts and links naming and proving the Bushwhackos' crimes. If that's what you want, keep it up.

What I don't want is John McShame with more of the same.

You can't always get what you want...and hopefully this time around you don't

 

[fskimospy]

Specop, freedom for discussion does not mean that you have to discuss fairy tales in science class in order to be open minded. She wanted to discuss made up creation stories in a class on evolution. This is a common tactic of creationists in an attempt to make creationism legitimate when it's not. "teach the debate" is the same horseshit they've been trying for years and it's no less shitty now than it ever was.

 

[PELarson]

One way will be over milk!

 

[Druidx]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Druidx
Looking forward to Harveys Blah Blah Blah Blah Cabal yadda yadda yadda Cabal Blah Blah Blah

Always worth a good laugh

Yeah... I'm sure the families and friends of those 4,150 dead Americans are laughing up a storm about it, and I'm sure they appreciate your support for your murdering Traitor In Chief and his gang who killed them.

I'm sure all of those who lost thier jobs, their homes and the basic ability to feed and clothe their kids and manage the basics of a life are just cackling up a storm, too.

You know the old saying about assumptions. It makes an ass out of you an your cabal.
I wanted Clark in 2004, I disagreed with him on several issues but believed he would still make a good leader.

I also wanted the Dems in congress who ran on the platform of standing up to Bush actually do something, they failed. So you see, your lame ass bot reply about my "Traitor an Chief" makes you look stupid, same as it always does.

 

[Coldkilla]

Actually if Obama never mentioned her at all - in any speech, anywhere - she would really remain an unknown and be unable to defend herself as she was never attacked.

Keep her out of the spotlight, and people will ask come election day: "Whos his running mate, anyway?"

 

[Craig234]

The way to attack her is to show she is a right-wing extremist nut job who the nation really does not want to be president, and she's one great reason to vote against the ticket.

 

[jpeyton]

Keep in mind, this is only what the first 24 hours of vetting has come up with. We'll hear more soon. But here's the good stuff:

She wants a Constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.

She is staunchly pro-life.

She supports teaching "intelligent design" alongside evolution in schools.

She wants to "aggressively extract" Alaska's natural resources.

Opposes environmental protection, especially when it gets in the way of mining or drilling.

Gave a $500 million subsidy and license to big gas company TransCanada for a gas pipeline with no guarantee of project completion.

Appointed a lobbyist from said big gas company as her deputy commissioner of natural resources.

Is under investigation by her own party for improperly pressuring her public safety commissioner out of office over a family dispute.

Her husband is an oil production operator for BP; big gas and big oil in da hizzy fo shizzy.

Pressed for Washington earmarks when she was a mayor. Governs over a state that receives more per capita federal spending than any other state in the union.

Does not believe there is a human impact on climate change.

Endorsed by Ted Stevens

McCain might have picked her in a ploy for the female vote, evangelical vote, soccer-mom vote, etc. But he also managed to snag a tried-and-true member of the Gas and Oil Party. Someone who doesn't believe in human impact on global warming, wants to drill anywhere and everywhere aggressively (including ANWR, which McCain opposes), doesn't care about environmental protection, appoints big oil/gas lobbyists to positions in her administration, and uses political power for personal gain (ethics be damned).

Text

By WILLIAM YARDLEY

Her father shot the grizzly bear whose hide is now draped over the sofa in her office. She, too, hunts and fishes. She runs marathons. She delivered her fifth child during her first term as governor. They call her husband, the reigning champion in the annual Iron Dog snowmachine race, First Dude.

Sarah Palin, Senator John McCain?s surprising selection to be his vice-presidential running mate, took Alaska by surprise, too, not long ago. Though indisputably Alaskan, she rose to prominence by bucking the state?s rigid Republican hierarchy, impressing voters more with gumption, warmth and charm than an established record in government.

It was a combination that dumbfounded her rivals.

?She wouldn?t have articulated one coherent policy and people would just be fawning all over her,? said Andrew Halcro, a Republican turned independent, who along with Tony Knowles, a Democrat, ran against Ms. Palin for governor in 2006. ?Tony and I looked at each other and it was, like, this isn?t about policy or Alaska issues, this is about people?s most basic instincts: ?I like you, and you make me feel good.? ?

?You know,? said Mr. Halcro, invoking the Democratic presidential nominee, ?that?s kind of like Obama.?

Before Ms. Palin, 44, became Alaska?s first female governor, in 2006, the top line on her political résumé was her tenure as mayor of Wasilla, a growing suburb of Anchorage with fewer than 7,000 residents. But even before a wide-ranging federal investigation began rattling through the Republican-controlled State Legislature over lawmakers? links to an oil services company, Ms. Palin jumped into the governor?s race as an outsider calling for reform.

She already had challenged the state Republican Party?s chairman, accusing him of abusing his role on a state oil and gas commission to do political work. And by the summer of 2006, Ms. Palin was taking on the governor, Frank H. Murkowski, a Republican lion of Alaska politics whose bluster and closed-door dealing had finally worn thin in the state.

Ms. Palin (pronounced PAY-lin), youthful and sympathetic with voters but bluntly critical of her party?s leadership, said state government was broken, that it needed to be transparent and responsive. Stunningly, she won in a landslide, trouncing Mr. Murkowski by more than 30 points in the Republican primary that summer and rolling through the general election.

Defying Expectations

Now, after barely 20 months in office in a state that has rarely played much of a role in national politics, Ms. Palin is again challenging expectations, including those of her own party.

?Did I wake up in a parallel universe?? said Mr. Halcro, who writes a blog that is frequently critical of the governor. ?I am absolutely shocked.?

Whatever similarities Ms. Palin and Senator Barack Obama may have in personal appeal, they seem to have little else in common. She is a conservative Protestant and has also been a member since 2006 of Feminists for Life, an anti-abortion group. She has supported the teaching of intelligent design in public schools, alongside evolution.

She is a member of the National Rifle Association, and has said Alaska?s economic future depends on aggressively extracting its vast natural resources, from oil to natural gas and minerals.

Ms. Palin said she supported Alaska?s decision to amend its Constitution to ban same-sex marriage. But she used her first veto as governor to block a bill that would have prohibited the state from granting health benefits to same-sex partners of public employees. Ms. Palin said she vetoed the bill because it was unconstitutional, but raised the possibility of amending the state Constitution so the ban could pass muster.

?I don?t think a Hillary person would ever move to her, based on the issues,? said Jean Craciun, a strategic research and planning consultant in Alaska who has done political polling for Democrats and Republicans. ?I don?t think before today I would have ever heard someone call her a feminist.?

This month, Ms. Palin issued a last-minute statement of opposition to a ballot measure that would have provided added protections for salmon from potential contamination from mining, an action seen as crucial to its defeat. Her intense pursuit of a pipeline to deliver natural gas from the North Slope of Alaska to market in the Lower 48 led to what her administration has claimed as a major triumph: the Legislature this summer approved her plan to give a $500 million subsidy to TransCanada, a Canadian company, to help build the project.

The State Senate president, Lyda Green, a Republican who is also from Wasilla, has repeatedly sparred with Ms. Palin in the 20 months since she became governor. Like Mr. Halcro, Ms. Green called the governor?s economic policies ?liberal,? and said, ?I?d have concerns that she?d have the same negative impact on the nation that she has on Alaska.?

Ms. Green disagreed with the governor?s decision to award a license and $500 million in subsidies to the Canadian company, saying there was no guarantee that even with the subsidies a gas pipeline would be built.

Ms. Green said the governor was difficult for her to deal with, a state of affairs she traces to Ms. Green?s decision to remain neutral in Ms. Palin?s race against former Governor Murkowski.

?There was some resentment there that some of us didn?t come out and support her during the primary, and it never really got any better,? Ms. Green said. ?I found that if you disagreed with her or tried to amend or change something, that was sort of off-limits. She did not like being told no or to change it.?

Commitment to Pipeline

Rebuffing criticism of the pipeline subsidy, Ms. Palin has cast the pipeline as a way for Alaska to ?end our dependence on foreign oil.? She has said she hopes the pipeline effort will show that Alaska can contribute to a new energy economy, rather than be known as the state that receives more per capita federal spending than any other.

Critics in the state complained that Ms. Palin had undercut her clean-government image by appointing as her chief adviser on the pipeline a former lobbyist for TransCanada. The adviser, Marty Rutherford, her deputy commissioner of natural resources, earned about $40,000 lobbying the state government for a TransCanada subsidiary in 2003.

Asked recently whether Mr. Rutherford?s past work for TransCanada presented a conflict of interest, Ms. Palin told The Anchorage Daily News, ?Going on five years later, no.?

One of her most significant accomplishments as governor was passing a major tax increase on state oil production, angering oil companies but raising billions of dollars in new revenue. She said the oil companies had previously bribed legislators to keep the taxes low. She subsequently championed legislation that would give some of that money back to Alaskans: Soon, every Alaskan will receive a $1,200 check.

Appointed in 2003 to the state board that settles drilling disputes, the Alaskan Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, she became an outspoken critic of one of her fellow commissioners, Randy Ruedrich, for soliciting political contributions from the oil industry in his capacity as chairman of the state?s Republican Party.

Ms. Palin?s introduction to a national audience comes as little good news has come out of Republican politics in Alaska. The same corruption investigation that was brewing when she ran for office in 2006 has led to the convictions of three Republican state lawmakers, charges against still more and, most recently, the indictment of the most established and revered Alaska politician of all, Senator Ted Stevens.

The continuing trouble has made Ms. Palin?s calls for reform appear all the more prescient, yet she now is facing an investigation herself. The Republican-controlled Legislature has hired an independent investigator to determine whether Ms. Palin improperly pressured the former state public safety commissioner to resign this year.

The former commissioner, Walt Monegan, has said he felt pressure from Ms. Palin?s administration, and her husband, Todd, to fire a state trooper, Mike Wooten, who was going through a bitter divorce with the governor?s sister. The trooper was not fired.

Mr. Monegan told The Anchorage Daily News that Mr. Palin had showed him some of the findings of a private investigator the family had hired and accused the trooper of a variety of misdeeds, including drunken driving and child abuse.

Mr. Palin told the newspaper he feared for his wife?s safety and said Trooper Wooten had made threats against her and her family. The governor has acknowledged inquiries by her staff to the Public Safety Department but said she played no role in them. To demonstrate she welcomed the inquiry, Mrs. Palin asked the state attorney general to look into the accusations as well.

Born on Feb. 11, 1964, in Sandpoint, Idaho, Sarah Heath Palin was still an infant when her parents moved the family to Skagway, in southeast Alaska, after accepting teaching positions there. The family moved to Wasilla, a small, conservative and growing suburb of Anchorage where, as Mr. McCain noted, Ms. Palin was a ?standout high school point guard.?

The governor met her husband in high school, and she was later voted ?Miss Wasilla? in a local beauty contest. In 1987, she received a bachelor?s degree in journalism from the University of Idaho. A year later, she and Mr. Palin eloped.

The governor said Friday that she ?never really set out to be involved in public affairs, much less to run for this office,? referring to the vice presidency, but she rose quickly once she entered political life. ?A P.T.A. mom who got involved,? is how the current mayor of Wasilla, Dianne M. Keller, described Ms. Palin.

She was elected to the Wasilla City Council in 1992, then ran for mayor in 1996, she has said, because she was concerned that revenue from a new sales tax would not be spent wisely. She served two terms, through 2002.

As mayor, she oversaw the Police Department, which has 25 officers, and the city?s public works projects. Garbage collection is done by private companies, and a borough government oversees firefighting and public schools.

?This is really rural America,? said the deputy city clerk, Jamie Newman, who added that town residents were still reeling from the news that the woman who just six years ago served as their mayor could now be vice president of the United States. ?Frankly, everyone is in shock.?

Ms. Keller said that Ms. Palin had three major achievements as mayor: She cut property taxes, increased the city sales tax by half a percent to support construction of an indoor ice rink and sports complex, and put more money into public safety, winning a grant to build a police dispatch center in town.

Although she would later criticize Congressional earmarks like Alaska?s infamous ?Bridge to Nowhere,? proposed for the town of Ketchikan at a cost of about $400 million, as mayor she began the practice of making annual trips to Washington to press for them on behalf of their town.

A Fresh Family Tableau

Ms. Palin?s family presents Mr. McCain, who turned 72 on Friday, with fresh and wholesome campaign imagery. It also presents some potentially delicate issues. Mr. Palin, in addition to being a champion snowmobile racer, is an oil production operator on the North Slope, working for BP, a company that has had to make major repairs since a spill on the slope temporarily shut down production there in 2006.

In addition to Ms. Palin?s $125,000 state salary, Mr. Palin earned $93,000 last year running his own commercial fishing business and working part-time at BP?s oil production facility, according to her public financial disclosure reports.

Although Ms. Palin once said that her husband would quit his job at BP if she were elected governor, she later backed away from that. He took a leave from the company after she won, but went back to work there last year, saying his family needed the money. And the governor now says that because Mr. Palin is not in management, it poses no conflict with her own dealings with the petroleum industry, a major force in Alaska?s politics and economy.

Mr. Palin, who is part Yu?pik Eskimo, also received a few hundred dollars in dividends as a shareholder in two benefit corporations representing Alaskan Natives and $10,500 from the Iron Dog snowmobile race, which he has won several times. The Palins reported no debts other than the mortgage on their home.

The couple have five children ? Track, 19; Bristol, 17; Willow, 14; Piper, 7; and Trig, 4 months. Track joined the Army last year, a fact Ms. Palin mentioned in her introduction to the Republican ticket on Friday. Trig, who was born in April, has Down syndrome, which Ms. Palin seemed to allude to only obliquely on Friday, after she described him as a ?beautiful baby boy? then shifted from there to her selection as Mr. McCain?s running mate.

?Some of life?s greatest opportunities,? the governor said, ?come unexpectedly.?

Ms. Palin and her husband knew during her pregnancy that there were complications, though the boy?s condition was not revealed publicly until after he was born. Anti-abortion groups have praised Ms. Palin and her family.

?It speaks volumes about her personally and about how she walked her talk,? said Serrin M. Foster, president of Feminists for Life, an anti-abortion group.

Three days after giving birth, Ms. Palin was back at work.

Merged

 

[jpeyton]

Alright, scratch that, she supported the "Bridge To Nowhere" as much as Stevens, until it became a political liability.

Text

Republicans have been heavily touting Sarah Palin's reformist credentials, with her supposed opposition to Alaska's "Bridge to Nowhere" as Exhibit A. But how hard did she really fight the project? Not very, it seems. Here's what she told the Anchorage Daily News on October 22, 2006, during the race for the governor's seat (via Nexis):

5. Would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?

Yes. I would like to see Alaska's infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now--while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist.

So she was very much for the bridge and insisted that Alaska had to act quickly?the party of Ted Stevens and Don Young might soon lose its majority, after all. By that point, the project was endangered for reasons that had nothing to do with Palin?the bridge had become a national laughingstock, Congress had stripped away the offending earmark, shifting the money back to the state's general fund, and future federal support seemed unlikely. True, after Palin was sworn into office that fall, her first budget didn't allocate any money for the bridge. But when the Daily News asked on December 16, 2006, if she now opposed the project, Palin demurred and said she was just trying to figure out where the bridge fit on the state's list of transportation priorities, given the lack of support from Congress. Finally, on September 19, 2007, she decided to redirect funds away from the project altogether with this sorry-sounding statement:

"Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport, but the $398 million bridge is not the answer," said Governor Palin. "Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island," Governor Palin added. "Much of the public's attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here. But we need to focus on what we can do, rather than fight over what has happened."

Maybe I've missed something, but it sure looks like she was fine with the bridge in principle, never had a problem with the earmarks, bristled at all the mockery, and only gave up on the project when it was clear that federal support wasn't forthcoming. Now, Charles Homans, who knows Alaska well, says Palin's anti-corruption instincts are fairly solid (she sold off the gubenatorial jet upon taking office, for one), and a casual Nexis search suggests that she's fiscally conservative (insofar as that term makes sense in a quasi-socialist state like Alaska), but this hardly looks like the "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington" moment everyone's making it out to be.

P.S. Here's a piece that Palin's special counsel, John Katz, wrote in March of this year for the Juneau Empire, assuring the Alaskan public that Palin was still very much in favor of earmarks, but sadly needed to scale back her requests somewhat (to "only" 31 earmarks this year?down from 54 last year) in response to "unwanted attention" from Congress and the press.

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Specop, freedom for discussion does not mean that you have to discuss fairy tales in science class in order to be open minded. She wanted to discuss made up creation stories in a class on evolution. This is a common tactic of creationists in an attempt to make creationism legitimate when it's not. "teach the debate" is the same horseshit they've been trying for years and it's no less shitty now than it ever was.

Considering the one greatest influence on the world we live in is religion....Yeah, I think it should be discussed. And the fact that you represent a miority in regards to religion, well.... Tough titty said the kitty.

Unless you think that the only things which should be discussed are those which are proven beyond a doubt.
In which case we could cut down the classroom time to about 4 hours. Hell, in THAT case they would have never built CERN. To discuss and think about the unproven and unknown. Its mans finest quality.

Well, its SOME mens finest quality......

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Specop, freedom for discussion does not mean that you have to discuss fairy tales in science class in order to be open minded. She wanted to discuss made up creation stories in a class on evolution. This is a common tactic of creationists in an attempt to make creationism legitimate when it's not. "teach the debate" is the same horseshit they've been trying for years and it's no less shitty now than it ever was.

Considering the one greatest influence on the world we live in is religion....Yeah, I think it should be discussed. And the fact that you represent a miority in regards to religion, well.... Tough titty said the kitty.

In the proper class, that of Myths and Fables.

 

[Madwand1]

Obama-Biden commend McCain's VP pick

(CNN) ? Touring a bio-diesel plant in Monaca, Pennyslvania Friday afternoon, Barack Obama and Joe Biden reacted to news that the opposing ticket is now complete, complimenting McCain for choosing a woman but saying Sarah Palin just mirrors the Arizona senator?s policies.

?I'm sure that she will help make the case for the Republicans,? said Obama to reporters accompanying him on the tour. ?Unfortunately, the case is more of the same. And so ultimately John McCain is at top of the ticket.?

?As I indicated in my speech last night, I think that he wants to take the country in the wrong direction,? he added. ?I'm assuming Governor Palin agrees with him in his policies.?

Obama called Palin ?a compelling person? with a terrific personal story and said that her nomination next week is one more indicator that the country is moving forward.

?I think [it] is one more hit against that glass ceiling and I congratulate her and look forward to a vigorous debate,? said Obama. ?I'm pleased with my choice for vice president Joe Biden. I think he's the man who can help me guide this country in a better direction and help working families."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

Once again, Obama demonstrates some class and good sense in this.