Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Maybe this has been brought up in this thread already...Palin is playing to the division that is occurring in this country. And that division isn't going to go away after this election.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erma View Post
I agree with her...you folks obviously do not travel to small communities and rural areas.
I do. Particularly in Alaska. Because of Palin's record on rural issues, particularly subsistence rights, she isn't as well liked there as she is in the Anchorage bowl and the Mat Valley.
She can give all the lip service she wants to what she calls the "real America"; she has yet to actually do much of anything for the residents of rural Alaska.
I said the precentage of people who VOTE not the percentage of people who register.
Oh dear, what a "pro-American" thing to say. Not.
I'd laugh but you know what--I hear comments like that a lot from the republicans. I hear it so much that I wish it had been one of the questions during the Town Hall debate between McCain and Obama.
Let's picture it:
"Senators, do you think America would be better off if fewer people voted?"
What do you think McCain would have said? Not exactly a pro-American POV when you really stop to think about it.
Sure it is ! It is the democrats goal to make it as easy as possible to get every ignoramous under every rock to vote. Good for the democrats not so much for the country!
Sure it is ! It is the democrats goal to make it as easy as possible to get every ignoramous under every rock to vote. Good for the democrats not so much for the country!
Of course. And lets not stop there. Lets by everyone lunch (or liquor) and get everyone registered. Need a ride to the polls? We've got you covered there as well.
being "american" has been redefined by the hard right.
hypocracy insane spending, world aggression and sexual immorality is ok as long as you wrap up in flag and go to church on sunday.
Sure it is ! It is the democrats goal to make it as easy as possible to get every ignoramous under every rock to vote. Good for the democrats not so much for the country!
Do you think that you have more of a right to vote for our country's leaders than those "ignoramouses" to whom you so eloquently referred, even though said "ignoramouses" also have to live and work here, and abide by the same laws as you?
i will jump in here and say that it is our right to be seriously aggravated by people who do not take the time to be informed about the candidates and to make decisions that will take money away from the working person! (i agree that there should be no name calling but i certainly understand the frustration level). we do not need bigger government, more taxes, more global spending programs, more social programs, and a corrupt leader who is going to hand over power to wall street when he gets elected. look at the clause that the democrats put in the bailout bill:
Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.
that means that no taxpayer will have a say in how the money is spent and warren buffett is going to be our next treasury secretary. that is big time wall street scary! who was 1st in line for the wall street bailout money, you guessed it! warren buffett!!
Being anti-war is NOT the same thing as being anti-military. If you love the miitary you do not want to see them misused and abused just so that war profiteers can enrich themselves. Being willing to see our brave warriors die so that Haliburton can grow richer is being anti military AND anti American.
A person joins the military presumably to defend his country in time of war, if he is called to do so. The Commander in Chief decides when, where, and why so send troops to war.
The attack on our country on 9/11 was an act of war. A response was called for. No longer could the United States do nothing (such as we had after the attack on the USS Cole). Such a horrific attack as 9/11 required a large scale response; thus the plans to not only go after the enemy in Afghanistan, where it was presumed Bin Laden resided, but to go after our enemies wherever they may be given refuge (and I remember Bush spelling this out clearly well before the war began).
The wisdom of going into Iraq is clear. Saddam was a threat, always had been, he had the capability of harming his neighbors, and had already attacked them previously (Kuwait). It would have been folly to leave him in power where he could assist our enemies (and I believe he would have — Saddam was no friend of America).
No one has "misused and abused" our military. Their job is to go where they are sent and carry out their orders to the best of their ability. The war on terror is just, it is right, and it is not "illegal" as some claim. We have the right to defend our country.
Haliburton. Why do you people love to mention Haliburton, a services company, that has more knowledge than any other company in the oil services business. It is understandable that Haliburton would be the company of choice in the rebuilding of the Iraq oil fields.
You might do well to drop the cliches which you lefties throw out continually and actually think for once. But I don't think anyone on the left is capable of original thought.
Maybe this has been brought up in this thread already...Palin is playing to the division that is occurring in this country. And that division isn't going to go away after this election.
There isn't as much "division" in this country as you surmise. One poll (I forget who does it) which is done consistently year after year, and asks the same question, consistently shows that over 60% of Americans identify themselves as "conservative".
I would say (and this is my opinion) that the majority of those who don't identify themselves as "conservative" are still not of the group that identify with organizations such as "MoveOn.org" and those of the far left like them. The radical left is a very small minority, but they make a lot of noise, and dominate a lot of the Blog space on the Internet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metlakatla
I do. Particularly in Alaska. Because of Palin's record on rural issues, particularly subsistence rights, she isn't as well liked there as she is in the Anchorage bowl and the Mat Valley.
She can give all the lip service she wants to what she calls the "real America"; she has yet to actually do much of anything for the residents of rural Alaska.
Which I suppose accounts for her high approval rating of around 80%? Something about your statement just doesn't ring true.
Well, 40% is a pretty large number that identities as "not conservative". And we're not all conservative about the same things. I'm more conservative about money issues. I'm pro-life for myself, but I don't find that issue a "litmus test". Others are just the opposite.
As for her ratings in Alaska, it sounds like Sarah is popular where most of the people live, but less so in the rural areas. And I can just imagine now that her every flaw has been exposed, what has happened to her popularity.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 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 2 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.
