Alaskan Politics (statewide and nationwide) (Fairbanks, Ketchikan: island, reservation, Russians)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hey, yeah, Warpt--where can I read more about that road? I heard something about it the other day and it sounded like progress had been made for the case of building--I'd like to research it a bit more but it sounds like a good thing and not another case of "road/bridge to nowhere."
I am an independent. To answer your question: NO! McCain is wrong for the presidency, Pailin is wronger!
Neither choice is perfect, but then they never are. You have to weigh who you think will lead this country in the right direction. Personality, race, gender, geography have nothing to do with it.
She really needs to get a sixth grader to help her out with American History.
Obviously you are the one in need of a history lesson. Sarah wasn't even born in 1954 when the phrase was added to the Pledge, so she obviously couldn't have influenced public policy with her religious beliefs.
Next you will be blaming Sarah for the Civil War. Get a clue.
I'm confused. Palin responded to the question re. 'under God' with it was 'good enough for our founding fathers...'. The woman obviously believes that our 'founding fathers' developed the Pledge of Allegiance. Geeze!!
Regarding the question of this thread, I am not going to vote for McCain because of his choice of VP. I am not voting for McCain because he chose Palin for VP.
I know this board is made up of mainly Palin supporters. Sorry, much as I tried, I can't see this woman as any more than the joke protrayed by Fey on SLN.
How can anyone who has listened to her interview believe she is qualified to be VP?!? Without a teleprompter or a speech writer she comes off as a joke! She'll be a good VP because she can see Russia from Alaska? She knows nothing about foreign policy. She is embroiled in an ethics investigation. She wanted information on censoring books in her community. She has, if not out and out lied, twisted the truth regarding the 'Bridge to Nowhere'. She has denied supporting 'earmarks' when her record clearly shows she was a huge proponent of same. Her oil pipeline is mainly going to be in Canada and Canada will benefit because if Alaska doesn't meet its predetermined quota, penalties will be paid to Canada. How is this going to benefit America's economy? Oh, gawd, it just keeps getting worse everytime she speaks off the cuff!
I have been reading this board for a while and keep reading about the great things Palin has done for Alaska but no one has posted what those things are. All negative things stated/written/video tapped about Palin are poo-pooed as the 'liberal's spin'. Sorry folks, you can't 'spin' FACTS.
Hey, yeah, Warpt--where can I read more about that road? I heard something about it the other day and it sounded like progress had been made for the case of building--I'd like to research it a bit more but it sounds like a good thing and not another case of "road/bridge to nowhere."
The only problem with some of the points mentioned are that these problems predated Palin's election as Governor. Palin is thus left with the vestiges of Murkowski's actions. No politician that's ever served will please everyone. If they do they probably aren't doing much. I'm sure whoever get's elected we will all survive to pan the golden sands of Nome's beaches again next summer.
Last edited by stiffnecked; 09-17-2008 at 04:01 PM..
Just an aside...I would venture to bet that most (not all) people who have criticized Palin's comment about the Pledge had no idea when or how it was worded, created, or by whom, before they saw some blog or tidbit lambasting her about it.
Couldn't let this one go without a response, but I'll stop here before it gets too off-track..self direct to the politics forum after this, I promise.
Good things Palin's done for Alaska:
1. Counter-sued the wacko environmentalists who want the Polar Bear listed as endangered, which, if they got their way, would open the door for some heinous consequences here in Alaska
2. Said NO on the bridge to nowhere (and effectively thumbed her nose at the culture of grossly negligent earmarks in this state's government--which, admittedly, has gotten us some things we like, too, but isn't ethical).
3. Pushed a much-needed energy rebate through in time to attach it right to our PFD--pretty awesome payday for us residents, and that was a major political move in record time
4. Consistently pushed a pro-drilling in ANWR agenda--which would be a major boost to this state's economy in so many ways.
Please, present some credible evidence backing up your statements that she is "lying" in some way about the bridge to nowhere, and this fairy tale about Canada getting all the benefits/structure of a new pipeline. The "ethics" investigation? The Trooper that was fired was a prize ratbag, from all reports from within law enforcement communities, and was just plain a bad cop. He deserved what he got.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siouxcia
I'm confused. Palin responded to the question re. 'under God' with it was 'good enough for our founding fathers...'. The woman obviously believes that our 'founding fathers' developed the Pledge of Allegiance. Geeze!!
Regarding the question of this thread, I am not going to vote for McCain because of his choice of VP. I am not voting for McCain because he chose Palin for VP.
I know this board is made up of mainly Palin supporters. Sorry, much as I tried, I can't see this woman as any more than the joke protrayed by Fey on SLN.
How can anyone who has listened to her interview believe she is qualified to be VP?!? Without a teleprompter or a speech writer she comes off as a joke! She'll be a good VP because she can see Russia from Alaska? She knows nothing about foreign policy. She is embroiled in an ethics investigation. She wanted information on censoring books in her community. She has, if not out and out lied, twisted the truth regarding the 'Bridge to Nowhere'. She has denied supporting 'earmarks' when her record clearly shows she was a huge proponent of same. Her oil pipeline is mainly going to be in Canada and Canada will benefit because if Alaska doesn't meet its predetermined quota, penalties will be paid to Canada. How is this going to benefit America's economy? Oh, gawd, it just keeps getting worse everytime she speaks off the cuff!
I have been reading this board for a while and keep reading about the great things Palin has done for Alaska but no one has posted what those things are. All negative things stated/written/video tapped about Palin are poo-pooed as the 'liberal's spin'. Sorry folks, you can't 'spin' FACTS.
The Trooper that was fired was a prize ratbag, from all reports from within law enforcement communities, and was just plain a bad cop. He deserved what he got.
I'm a Palin supporter...but this needs to be corrected. The trooper wasn't fired. That's what made Palin upset, that more wasn't done to this trooper. Her commissioner wasn't technically fired either I guess. He was asked to take a different position and he refused which means he lost his job...Is that being fired? I don't know.
The big issue is whether she used undue influence in her postion of power to try to get someone fired. The fact that the person she tried to get fired was not fired I suppose has some bearing. So the real issue is whether she was using her power wrongly.
1. You say Palin is anti- NATIVE subsistence fishing/hunting. In Alaska, what are the differences in Native subsistence vs. our regular rural subsistence limits on fish/deer, etc? I know that northern Native people have special rights, such as harvest of marine mammals, but I was under the impression that overall, subsistence was subsistence, period. If I'm wrong, I sincerely want to learn. (And as a subsistence user, I'd be very curious as to why and to what extent she'd want to erode subsistence rights). Boosting commercial fishing seems like a great idea, but she should be able to do that without eroding subsistence rights.
2. Tribal soveriegnty, especially regarding children; I will express a thought that in many Native areas I've seen/heard/read about, Native children are at astronomically higher-than-normal risk for many of the following:
Sexual/physical abuse
Drug/alcohol abuse from an early age
Illiteracy
Teenage pregnancy
Suicide
Early drop-out from school
Incarceration
Perhaps Palin may be trying to assert more State authority and/or protection over some of these children who fall through the cracks and often end up addicted, dead, or in jail. Not sure what her motive is but this one does come to mind. There is no excuse for trying to otherwise undermine Native soveriegnty, of course.
I am sincerely interested in learning more about Palin's stance on these issues, her voting record, and any rationale she's come up with for other issues the OP mentioned.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
