Palin has history of ethics abuse

[gabosaurus]

Seems as though Miss Snowshoe Deerhunter has been lying, cheating and deceiving for a lot longer than most of us realize. Unfortunately, the tactics that blinded the rubes of backwoods Alaska can't stand up to scrutiny in the real world.

http://www.newsminer.com/news/2008/oct/14/palin-has-checkered-history-ethics-issues/

[stephanie]

I explained a while back that the News Miner is as worthless as the NYslimes..

but keep em coming..since you liberals here seem to think you know more about her than us here FROM Alaska, and those 80% of Alaskan voters who approve of Sarah Palin...

:dance:

[gabosaurus]

Good for her. She will need that Alaska approval rating next month at this time.

[diuretic]

I can see a long and cold winter in Alaska for Sarah.

[theHawk]

Seems as though Miss Snowshoe Deerhunter has been lying, cheating and deceiving for a lot longer than most of us realize. Unfortunately, the tactics that blinded the rubes of backwoods Alaska can't stand up to scrutiny in the real world.

http://www.newsminer.com/news/2008/oct/14/palin-has-checkered-history-ethics-issues/

LOL, thats her "history of ethics abuses"? A $2800 trip to Scottsdale that other Governors were given too?

Obama giving $14 million in tax dollars to Tony Rezko isn't an abuse of power, right?

Obama giving hundreds of thousands of dollars to a personal friend to build a garden in Chicago, one that never got built, isn't abuse of power.

Obama paying ACORN $800,000 to enlist an army of fraudulent voters isn't an abuse of power.



Pull your head out of your ass Gabby. :poke:

[mundame]

I can see a long and cold winter in Alaska for Sarah.

True...........after McCain loses she has to go back to Alaska for the winter!

And apparently people there are pretty fed up with her. She isn't on speaking terms even with the leader of her own party in the legislature.

[GW in Ohio]

LOL, thats her "history of ethics abuses"? A $2800 trip to Scottsdale that other Governors were given too?

Pull your head out of your ass Gabby. :poke:

No. This is her history of ethics abuses:


ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, whose reformer image took a hit in a report concluding she abused her powers to settle a family score, has skirted state ethics rules before for personal benefit and used her office to help friends and supporters, according to an Associated Press review of records.

Palin's first try at statewide office, after six years as mayor of Wasilla, was an unsuccessful run for lieutenant governor in 2002. To raise money, she improperly used her City Hall office and equipment, city records show. A year later she would make headlines by blasting a fellow Republican for, among other things, improperly using his government position to boost his campaign.

Then, in 2006, Palin won the governor's race with a vow to reform state ethics. But in less than two years, she has repeatedly taken actions that violated her own stated standards for ethical behavior — if not state law. In the process, the Republican vice presidential nominee has become much like the old-school politicians she attacked during her rise to power.

Some examples:

_She pummeled opponents for giving oil companies and other businesses too much control of state government. Yet she appointed the founder of an engineering firm that received $6.8 million in state business as head of the transportation department.

_She has accepted dozens of gifts worth tens of thousands of dollars since taking office, including two free trips last year that she failed to report on disclosure forms, despite criticizing state legislators for the gifts they take.

_She is under another investigation, accused of misusing her office to campaign against a voter referendum calling for tighter mining regulations. Her husband, Todd, has accepted free trips from a mining company to look at their proposed new site.

_Another ethics complaint, unresolved, accuses her staff of finding a state job for a friend and campaign contributor.

Last week, an investigation by the Alaska legislature found that Palin, running mate to Republican presidential candidate John McCain, abused her powers when she and her husband improperly pressured the state public safety commissioner to fire her sister's ex-husband, a state trooper. The brother-in-law was never fired, but Palin fired the commissioner in July.

"It's all about the power, and it frightens me," said state Rep. Beth Kerttula, a Juneau Democrat who like many in the minority party have supported Palin on some issues, including energy policy. "She doesn't seem to know where the boundaries are."

"She's very good at reading the public's discontent and pandering to it," said Larry Persily, who worked in the governor's Washington, D.C., office until resigning earlier this year.

Palin faced questions during her 2006 gubernatorial race about her use of the Wasilla mayor's office four years earlier to run for lieutenant governor. Palin used city staff and office equipment — including a fax machine, computers for e-mail and a City Hall phone number — to run her campaign, according to city records.

She apologized for those transgressions in 2006, but only this month acknowledged to the AP that the city initially paid for a campaign flight in that 2002 race and that weeks later she reimbursed the city.

"According to people who worked with her at the time, the travel agency inadvertently billed the city rather than her personally," McCain campaign spokesman Taylor Griffin said in a written statement. "To ensure that it was corrected immediately, she reimbursed Wasilla and the campaign later reimbursed her. It's an example of Gov. Palin's commitment to the highest standards of ethics."

Palin brushed the issue aside when she ran for governor, arguing it was nothing more than an opponent's smear campaign.

She has cast herself as Alaska's ethics watchdog. In her most dramatic move, she revealed in 2003 that the state's Republican Party leader was campaigning from his state job. She then challenged incumbent Gov. Frank Murkowski two years ago on a platform of government reform.

After her victory, though, Palin reverted to political tradition, rewarding even marginally qualified friends and campaign backers with high-level positions.

A friend from her Wasilla High School class was named to manage the state's agriculture office after a career in real estate. A family friend and campaign worker became head of the state agency that distributes dividend checks to Alaskans from oil revenue. Her real estate agent's husband received an appointment to the state real estate board.

Palin's biggest political splash was from attacking the big oil companies that she said ran the state. She challenged their political power, and promised voters that her administration would avoid cozy relationships with business.

But one of her first cabinet appointments didn't live up to that pledge.

Leo von Scheben, a co-founder of Anchorage-based USKH Inc. engineering firm, took over the state's Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, and his firm's state business increased, records show. USKH received $6.8 million in state transportation contracts last year, up 13 percent from $6 million the year before.

Von Scheben stopped taking a salary and all benefits from the company when he stepped into the state job. But he didn't sever all financial ties. Von Scheben receives annual stock payments that he arranged before he left the company in 2007 that will continue for 10 years, according to his financial disclosure forms.

Von Scheben said he has recused himself on projects pursued by the firm and that others in the agency select companies to receive state business. He said he believes his appointment may have cost his former company state business, although he doesn't regret taking the job.

"If the state can't draw on some private sector people, they're missing out," he said.

Palin claims passage of broad ethics reforms as an accomplishment following state corruption scandals. But Palin didn't report as gifts two free trips she received in 2007 as legislators were debating the new ethics law.

"This is simply a rare oversight, nothing more," campaign spokesman Griffin said when asked about the omissions by the AP.

Palin has, in fact, reported most of her gifts on her annual financial disclosure forms, something her predecessor never did, according to Alaska Public Offices Commission records.

The unreported paid trips:

_The $2,988 cost of Palin's April 2007 flight and hotel in Scottsdale, Ariz., for a four-day conference was paid by the James B. Hunt Jr. Institute of North Carolina, a nonprofit education policy group. Palin received the same free trip as dozens of other governors invited over the years to attend the annual summit, institute spokesman April White said.

_A May 2007 overnight visit with her three daughters and her parents attending a family reception at Mt. Chilkoot Lodge in Skagway, Alaska, was paid for by friend and former deputy campaign treasurer Kathy Hosford, one of the lodge's owners.

"We weren't open and it was just on a friendship basis," Hosford said.

The Palins used two suites valued at $150 each, said Sharon Leighow, a spokeswoman in the governor's office.

The same day Palin visited Skagway, executives of the Anchorage-based VECO Inc. pleaded guilty to offering bribes to five legislators. Palin, mingling with old family friends and town residents, spoke briefly with local reporters during her visit, calling the corruption developments "atrocious" and promising change.

"There are problems in state government," Palin told The Skagway News, "and on our watch it is our responsibility to show people that we are going to clean things up."

Persily, who said he left Palin's administration because he didn't enjoy working in Washington, said Palin is skillful in "attacking the 'good ol' boys.' The good ol' boys that Palin is talking about are those that can't help her politically."

Democratic state Rep. Mike Doogan said Palin, even as she bends or breaks the rules herself, acts as if she invented ethics in Alaska.

"It's insulting to those of us who have always done the right thing," he said.

[GW in Ohio]

As far as I'm concerned, Sarah Palin's ethics transgressions have no bearing on the presidential race. It's Alaska stuff that should stay in Alaska. It's between her and the voters in that state.

But the point is, Palin made a splash by being John McCain's attack dog. She tried to smear Obama with so-called "character issues."

But if you're going to attack the other guy on character issues, you'd better be squeaky clean yourself.

Palin isn't.

[stephanie]

you people are so scared of people bringing up legitimate points and questions about the little Marxist...she is now an attack dog....:laugh2:

[GW in Ohio]

you people are so scared of people bringing up legitimate points and questions about the little Marxist...she is now an attack dog....:laugh2:

This is an example of why some of you are just not to be taken seriously.

The topic is Sarah Palin's ethical abuses. The Hawk says there's nothing there.

I quote the AP article that says there is a lot there.

And stephanie comes back with some bullshit response about Obama.

We're not talking about Obama here, toots. We're talking about Palin.

I'll reiterate what I said earlier.....

I don't care about the troopergate business, or any of Palin's other questionable ethical issues. That's the kind of stuff that goes on in politics all the time and it's Alaska stuff.

But if you're gonna come out and be the GOP attack dog and start smearing Obama with so-called "character issues," you'd better be squeaky clean yourself.

Palin isn't.

[stephanie]

This is an example of why some of you are just not to be taken seriously.

The topic is Sarah Palin's ethical abuses. The Hawk says there's nothing there.

I quote the AP article that says there is a lot there.

And stephanie comes back with some bullshit response about Obama.

We're not talking about Obama here, toots. We're talking about Palin.

I'll reiterate what I said earlier.....

I don't care about the troopergate business, or any of Palin's other questionable ethical issues. That's the kind of stuff that goes on in politics all the time and it's Alaska stuff.

But if you're gonna come out and be the GOP attack dog and start smearing Obama with so-called "character issues," you'd better be squeaky clean yourself.

Palin isn't.

hey, I don't care...the only thing I cared about is the made up shit you all spread around and using her children for your alls smears..but unfortunately, that is now expected from you all...

[Yurt]

As far as I'm concerned, Sarah Palin's ethics transgressions have no bearing on the presidential race. It's Alaska stuff that should stay in Alaska. It's between her and the voters in that state.

But the point is, Palin made a splash by being John McCain's attack dog. She tried to smear Obama with so-called "character issues."

But if you're going to attack the other guy on character issues, you'd better be squeaky clean yourself.

Palin isn't.

at least be honest and admit that biden's role was/is obama's attack dog

[retiredman]

at least be honest and admit that biden's role was/is obama's attack dog

Biden's attacks are on McCain's policies, not his character. big difference.

and all the poll show that McCain is losing support by going negative and avoiding the issues.

IMHO, McCain lost all chance to carve out a credible position with the voters on this economic mess by voting FOR the bailout package. By voting the same way as Obama did, he's got nothing to positively differentiate himself economically given his long support for Bushenomics.

[Yurt]

Biden's attacks are on McCain's policies, not his character. big difference.

and all the poll show that McCain is losing support by going negative and avoiding the issues.

IMHO, McCain lost all chance to carve out a credible position with the voters on this economic mess by voting FOR the bailout package. By voting the same way as Obama did, he's got nothing to positively differentiate himself economically given his long support for Bushenomics.

so obama's character is off limits :laugh2: he is running on his character and judgment in addition to his policies...and i guess is doesn't matter if the presidential candidate is a liar or best friends with osama bin ladin...hey mccain is best buddies with bin ladin....hey bush is in with the oil sheiks...all character attacks but YOU support those kind of attacks......:poke:

and of course biden has attacked mccain's character....erratic....angry man...

come on dude, stop relying on obama's wonderful biography of himself and read about the real obama, not the obama that obama wants to believe is the real obama....good lord...you dispute things over the internet...but you will believe out of hand anything obama says in a book and refuse to see any negatives like his relationship with ayers...i know he is not your messiah, but you are coming close to hero like worship....sad

[mundame]

Biden's attacks are on McCain's policies, not his character. big difference.



To me, character is the WHOLE thing. I'm not interested in a bunch of stupid, empty, lying promises they never, never, never keep, not after ol' Bush promised to be a united not a divider and not do nationbuilding in the 2000 election and I believed him and voted for that fool. [Sigh]

Character is why I never voted for Clinton: two words about the 1992 campaign --------

Gennifer Flowers.

And yet Clinton was a rather successful president, so character isn't a foolproof way to judge either. Though I think no one would vote for those Monica months again, no matter how well he did presidenting.

And so I was right: his character was as a philanderer, and later he did worse, amazingly worse, every detail spelled out on the evening news. http://deephousepage.com/smilies/blush.gif


Character is what neither of this year's pair have any of, as far as I can tell. Sheeeeeeeeesh.

[GW in Ohio]

at least be honest and admit that biden's role was/is obama's attack dog

Of course he is. That's the VP candidate's role.

[mundame]

Of course he is. That's the VP candidate's role.


It's not good for their health, though...........

Ol' Cheney's just gone back for another "procedure."

[GW in Ohio]

so obama's character is off limits :laugh2: he is running on his character and judgment in addition to his policies...and i guess is doesn't matter if the presidential candidate is a liar or best friends with osama bin ladin...hey mccain is best buddies with bin ladin....hey bush is in with the oil sheiks...all character attacks but YOU support those kind of attacks......:poke:

and of course biden has attacked mccain's character....erratic....angry man...

come on dude, stop relying on obama's wonderful biography of himself and read about the real obama, not the obama that obama wants to believe is the real obama....good lord...you dispute things over the internet...but you will believe out of hand anything obama says in a book and refuse to see any negatives like his relationship with ayers...i know he is not your messiah, but you are coming close to hero like worship....sad

Obama's character is not off limits. But if you're going to attack his character, it has to have some substance. The Ayers connection is pure bullshit, as is the Tony Rezko connection. Everyone knows when you're in public life you have contacts with many people. It happens quite often that someone who supports you has been guilty of some transgression. But that doesn't mean the candidate is guilty by association.

The Acorn thing is another example. Whatever they may have done, Obama didn't do it, and he didn't condone it. So that's a bullshit issue. It's an attempt to smear his character.

Now, the Rev. Wright thing is another matter. Obama used bad judgment there. From a practical standpoint, if you have national political aspirations, you don't want to belong to a church where an asshole like that is ranting. He may have stayed in the church out of inertia, or loyalty. I don't know. But it was a mistake.

But even the Rev. Wright thing is not enough to sink Obama's candidacy. Okay, he used bad judgment. But he did eventually disavow Wright.

[mundame]

But even the Rev. Wright thing is not enough to sink Obama's candidacy.


Absolutely NOTHING is enough to sink Obama the Holy.

He could eat kittens on the 6:00 news and still get 313 electoral votes.

But he did associate with characters, MANY bad characters, any one of which would sink a white politician's run for office.

So I see a lot of Teapot Dome scandals coming up, and ol' Jesse Jackson and friends getting mucho richo.

[Yurt]

Obama's character is not off limits. But if you're going to attack his character, it has to have some substance. The Ayers connection is pure bullshit, as is the Tony Rezko connection. Everyone knows when you're in public life you have contacts with many people. It happens quite often that someone who supports you has been guilty of some transgression. But that doesn't mean the candidate is guilty by association.

The Acorn thing is another example. Whatever they may have done, Obama didn't do it, and he didn't condone it. So that's a bullshit issue. It's an attempt to smear his character.

Now, the Rev. Wright thing is another matter. Obama used bad judgment there. From a practical standpoint, if you have national political aspirations, you don't want to belong to a church where an asshole like that is ranting. He may have stayed in the church out of inertia, or loyalty. I don't know. But it was a mistake.

But even the Rev. Wright thing is not enough to sink Obama's candidacy. Okay, he used bad judgment. But he did eventually disavow Wright.

tell your fellow dem mfm that....

as to the rest, i and others have repeatedly shown the issues do matter....

[manu1959]

Obama's character is not off limits. But if you're going to attack his character, it has to have some substance. The Ayers connection is pure bullshit, as is the Tony Rezko connection. Everyone knows when you're in public life you have contacts with many people. It happens quite often that someone who supports you has been guilty of some transgression. But that doesn't mean the candidate is guilty by association.

The Acorn thing is another example. Whatever they may have done, Obama didn't do it, and he didn't condone it. So that's a bullshit issue. It's an attempt to smear his character.

Now, the Rev. Wright thing is another matter. Obama used bad judgment there. From a practical standpoint, if you have national political aspirations, you don't want to belong to a church where an asshole like that is ranting. He may have stayed in the church out of inertia, or loyalty. I don't know. But it was a mistake.

But even the Rev. Wright thing is not enough to sink Obama's candidacy. Okay, he used bad judgment. But he did eventually disavow Wright.

so if i associate with a group that commits fraud....a group that preaches hate.....a group the steals and embezzles....and a group that once tried to overthrow the government and express no remorse about it to this day.....

i am good to go to run the country.....

[GW in Ohio]

tell your fellow dem mfm that....

as to the rest, i and others have repeatedly shown the issues do matter....

They matter to YOU, and to other right wingers, because you're desperate for anything that might rescue McCain's sinking candidacy.

The rest of the electorate has responded with a collective......:lame2::gives::lame2:

[Little-Acorn]

Remarkable. The leftist hysterics are working overtime, trying to dig up every little piece of trash they can find to use against Sarah Palin, and by extension, John McCain.

I thought Barry had the election all sewn up? All the polls say so. Why, then, the frantic digging, almost to the point of insanity?

Do you leftists know something that normal people don't? Hearing hoofbeats, perhaps? Don't trust your carefully-weighted-with-more-Dems-than-Repubs polls quite as much as you have been claiming?

My sympathies.

[retiredman]

so obama's character is off limits :laugh2: he is running on his character and judgment in addition to his policies...and i guess is doesn't matter if the presidential candidate is a liar or best friends with osama bin ladin...hey mccain is best buddies with bin ladin....hey bush is in with the oil sheiks...all character attacks but YOU support those kind of attacks......:poke:

and of course biden has attacked mccain's character....erratic....angry man...

come on dude, stop relying on obama's wonderful biography of himself and read about the real obama, not the obama that obama wants to believe is the real obama....good lord...you dispute things over the internet...but you will believe out of hand anything obama says in a book and refuse to see any negatives like his relationship with ayers...i know he is not your messiah, but you are coming close to hero like worship....sad

of course it is not off limits. I highly recommend that McCain keep focusing on Obama's character and keep trying to turn the page on the economic crisis. It has worked so well for him thus far, don't you think? And Biden's attacks are not on character per se, but behavior. big difference.

I draw my opinion of Barack Obama from a variety of sources. So do you, obviously. I just happen to at least have read his work... you have not.

[manu1959]

They matter to YOU, and to other right wingers, because you're desperate for anything that might rescue McCain's sinking candidacy.

The rest of the electorate has responded with a collective......:lame2::gives::lame2:

it is not about mccain or bush......it is about understanding the morals and ethics of obama......he has made choices to surround himself with people of questionable moral and ethical character.....

this man may well become president......do you really believe he will suddenly become good at picking people....picking people that will run this country .....

his cabinet choices will quite likely be filled with the same bad choices he has made in the past ...... he is a poor judge of character and he has proven it several times over .....

[retiredman]

Remarkable. The leftist hysterics are working overtime, trying to dig up every little piece of trash they can find to use against Sarah Palin, and by extension, John McCain.

I thought Barry had the election all sewn up? All the polls say so. Why, then, the frantic digging, almost to the point of insanity?

Do you leftists know something that normal people don't? Hearing hoofbeats, perhaps? Don't trust your carefully-weighted-with-more-Dems-than-Repubs polls quite as much as you have been claiming?

My sympathies.

here is what neophytes like you don't seem to understand. the larger the Obama victory, the longer his coattails. The longer his coattails, the better chance we have of getting 60 senators. With 60 senators, and a democratic house, we can undo eight years of George Bushonomics in six weeks. With 60senators, Stevens and Ginsburg can retire and be replaced with two young liberal judges who will hold off the four horsemen of the apocalypse for years to come.

We don't just want to win against McCain, we want to win BIG.:laugh2:

[Yurt]

They matter to YOU, and to other right wingers, because you're desperate for anything that might rescue McCain's sinking candidacy.

The rest of the electorate has responded with a collective......:lame2::gives::lame2:

if we are so desperate, why do you loobs keep digging up stuff about PALIN :laugh2:

[retiredman]

if we are so desperate, why do you loobs keep digging up stuff about PALIN :laugh2:


see post #26

[mundame]

see post #26


Is this like the story about the jokebook in the jail house?

Eventually, someone just yells out the numbers and everybody laughs?

I like this idea. I think MFM and Yurt ought to just post numbers back and forth to each other from now on.

[Yurt]

Is this like the story about the jokebook in the jail house?

Eventually, someone just yells out the numbers and everybody laughs?

I like this idea. I think MFM and Yurt ought to just post numbers back and forth to each other from now on.

maybe you should address posts where you ask someone a question and they answer you :poke:

[Yurt]

see post #26

so you desperate...got it...

[namvet]

Seems as though Miss Snowshoe Deerhunter has been lying, cheating and deceiving for a lot longer than most of us realize. Unfortunately, the tactics that blinded the rubes of backwoods Alaska can't stand up to scrutiny in the real world.

http://www.newsminer.com/news/2008/oct/14/palin-has-checkered-history-ethics-issues/

your bipolar. you know nothing about the real world. only the closet you live in. BTY this is a liberal paper. we'll keep an eye out for your next lie.

[retiredman]

so you desperate...got it...

no. clearly, you did not get it. Either you are being purposely disingenuous or you are a true moron. We don't want to just win, we want to win BIG. Even Pat Buchanan is saying that an Obama win is a foregone conclusion...we don't want to just win, we want to have a landslide, because the bigger the landslide, the longer Obama's coattails and the longer his coattails, the closer we get to 60 senate seats. With victory basically assured at this point, long coattails and 60 senate seats is the new target. The more mud we can dig up on McCain and Palin, the more we can paint them as erratic and angry and out of touch and uninformed and unethical, the bigger the margin. Please tell me that is not really too complex of a concept for a guy who passed the bar.

[retiredman]

Is this like the story about the jokebook in the jail house?

Eventually, someone just yells out the numbers and everybody laughs?

I like this idea. I think MFM and Yurt ought to just post numbers back and forth to each other from now on.

some guys can tell 'em and some guys can't.:laugh2:

[namvet]

IF Osama wins it wil be because of the biggest voter fraud in history

[Yurt]

no. clearly, you did not get it. Either you are being purposely disingenuous or you are a true moron. We don't want to just win, we want to win BIG. Even Pat Buchanan is saying that an Obama win is a foregone conclusion...we don't want to just win, we want to have a landslide, because the bigger the landslide, the longer Obama's coattails and the longer his coattails, the closer we get to 60 senate seats. With victory basically assured at this point, long coattails and 60 senate seats is the new target. The more mud we can dig up on McCain and Palin, the more we can paint them as erratic and angry and out of touch and uninformed and unethical, the bigger the margin. Please tell me that is not really too complex of a concept for a guy who passed the bar.

so when repubs talk about character...they are desperate...but when dems talk about character...it is because you want to win big....

did someone say something about disingenuous :laugh2:

[retiredman]

so when repubs talk about character...they are desperate...but when dems talk about character...it is because you want to win big....

did someone say something about disingenuous :laugh2:

we ARE winning. you are not. 14 point lead as of today. read it and weep, mo-fo!

[Yurt]

we ARE winning. you are not. 14 point lead as of today. read it and weep, mo-fo!

LMFAO....dude, you ain't winning shit...do you really have that much faith in polls?

further, it is laughable that just because one is winning, they are allowed to attack character so as to get a bigger majority......but the person who is losing, who is also trying to get a bigger majority...is desperate

are you really this much of a party hack that you can't even see the hypocrisy of your own words?

[retiredman]

LMFAO....dude, you ain't winning shit...do you really have that much faith in polls?

further, it is laughable that just because one is winning, they are allowed to attack character so as to get a bigger majority......but the person who is losing, who is also trying to get a bigger majority...is desperate

are you really this much of a party hack that you can't even see the hypocrisy of your own words?

I don't have a great deal of faith in the accuracy of polls, but I do have a fair amount of faith in the cumulative preponderance of poll trends. And I never said that you couldn't attack Obama's character...go for it. the fact remains: the electorate negatively responds to YOUR attacks. The fact remains, you are desperate for a win. We could coast into one.:laugh2:

I just think that coasting into a win is the wrong approach. I think running against the wind - grinding hard into a landslide - makes much more sense.

[Yurt]

manfrommaine;309317]I don't have a great deal of faith in the accuracy of polls, but I do have a fair amount of faith in the cumulative preponderance of poll trends.

you: i do not have great amount of faith in the accuracy of opinions...but i do have a fair amount of faith in the cumulative preponderance of opinions...

are opinions votes?


And I never said that you couldn't attack Obama's character...go for it.

you called me and others "desperate" for doing so....that is the same as saying you should not be doing it, well, unless you are a desperate fool...stop with your silliness....


the fact remains: the electorate negatively responds to YOUR attacks. The fact remains, you are desperate for a win. We could coast into one.:laugh2:

that is NOT a fact, it is opinion. i suggest you learn the difference padawan...here i thought you were teaching me patience, alas, i am teaching you :laugh2:



I just think that coasting into a win is the wrong approach. I think running against the wind - grinding hard into a landslide - makes much more sense.

so of couse, the opinioned polled ""winner"" can attack, but the opinion polled ""loser"" cannot

much, you have to learn ;)

[retiredman]

you: i do not have great amount of faith in the accuracy of opinions...but i do have a fair amount of faith in the cumulative preponderance of opinions...

are opinions votes?

no. but they oftentimes translate directly into them

.

you called me and others "desperate" for doing so....that is the same as saying you should not be doing it, well, unless you are desperate fool...stop with your silliness....

you are free to do whatever you want. Like I said, the polling data reveals that McCain's reliance on attack ads is hurting his campaign, but DO keep at it, by all means!!

that is NOT a fact, it is opinion. i suggest you learn the difference padawan...here i thought you were teaching me patience, alas, i am teaching you :laugh2:

the fact is: polls reveal that negative ads are hurting McCain and not helping him...grasshopper

so of couse, the opinioned polled ""winner"" can attack, but the opinion polled ""loser"" cannot.

Again...you are putting words in my mouth....you LIAR ;)

you can do whatever the hell you want to do. I only point out the logic that states that your attacks on Obama seem to help Obama while democrats attacks on McCain seem to not have a similar effect - probably due to the selective scarcity of them.

[GW in Ohio]

here is what neophytes like you don't seem to understand. the larger the Obama victory, the longer his coattails. The longer his coattails, the better chance we have of getting 60 senators. With 60 senators, and a democratic house, we can undo eight years of George Bushonomics in six weeks. With 60senators, Stevens and Ginsburg can retire and be replaced with two young liberal judges who will hold off the four horsemen of the apocalypse for years to come.

We don't just want to win against McCain, we want to win BIG.:laugh2:

Man from Maine: A very cogent post. It will indeed be a very big year for Democrats and a very bad year for Republicans. The only question is the size of the victory. A number of Republican congresspersons and senators whose seats should be safe are either headed for defeat or in danger.

Liddy Dole in North Carolina is a prime example.

And I'd like to add a note to my Republican friends here at DP........

Guys: It's going to be a very bad election year. My best advice to you is to lose with class, don't be assholes about it, and re-group. Take the opportunity to redefine the Republican party. If there's anything that's true about American politics, it's that everything is cyclical. If you're down today, you'll eventually be on top when the wheel turns.

For my part, I promise not to be an asshole by rubbing your noses in it.

[stephanie]

Man from Maine: A very cogent post. It will indeed be a very big year for Democrats and a very bad year for Republicans. The only question is the size of the victory. A number of Republican congresspersons and senators whose seats should be safe are either headed for defeat or in danger.

Liddy Dole in North Carolina is a prime example.

And I'd like to add a note to my Republican friends here at DP........

Guys: It's going to be a very bad election year. My best advice to you is to lose with class, don't be assholes about it, and re-group. Take the opportunity to redefine the Republican party. If there's anything that's true about American politics, it's that everything is cyclical. If you're down today, you'll eventually be on top when the wheel turns.

For my part, I promise not to be an asshole by rubbing your noses in it.

gag me

[Immanuel]

Obama's character is not off limits. But if you're going to attack his character, it has to have some substance. The Ayers connection is pure bullshit, as is the Tony Rezko connection. Everyone knows when you're in public life you have contacts with many people. It happens quite often that someone who supports you has been guilty of some transgression. But that doesn't mean the candidate is guilty by association.

The Acorn thing is another example. Whatever they may have done, Obama didn't do it, and he didn't condone it. So that's a bullshit issue. It's an attempt to smear his character.

Now, the Rev. Wright thing is another matter. Obama used bad judgment there. From a practical standpoint, if you have national political aspirations, you don't want to belong to a church where an asshole like that is ranting. He may have stayed in the church out of inertia, or loyalty. I don't know. But it was a mistake.

But even the Rev. Wright thing is not enough to sink Obama's candidacy. Okay, he used bad judgment. But he did eventually disavow Wright.


They matter to YOU, and to other right wingers, because you're desperate for anything that might rescue McCain's sinking candidacy.

The rest of the electorate has responded with a collective......:lame2::gives::lame2:

I have to disagree with you friend.

The main issue in this election IS the associations that the candidates have. Barack Obama's associations with enemies of the state is very important as it points to the kinds of people he will put in place in the cabinet and on the Supreme Court.

I, for one, do not want a man as the Secretary of Education that feels sorry for not having bombed enough federal buildings and killed enough people in his younger days. I, for one, do not want a man who has preached the termination of the white race for 20+ years anywhere near Washington. Can you honestly tell me that is these are the kinds of men you want to run this country?

I, for one, do not want my faith in the American political system to be shaken by anti-American thugs who encourage people to vote early and vote often in the same election.

Immie

[GW in Ohio]

I have to disagree with you friend.

The main issue in this election IS the associations that the candidates have. Barack Obama's associations with enemies of the state is very important as it points to the kinds of people he will put in place in the cabinet and on the Supreme Court.

I, for one, do not want a man as the Secretary of Education that feels sorry for not having bombed enough federal buildings and killed enough people in his younger days. I, for one, do not want a man who has preached the termination of the white race for 20+ years anywhere near Washington. Can you honestly tell me that is these are the kinds of men you want to run this country?

I, for one, do not want my faith in the American political system to be shaken by anti-American thugs who encourage people to vote early and vote often in the same election.

Immie

Immie: Suggesting that Obama will make Bill Ayers Secretary of Education is flat-out, bat-shit crazy.

[stephanie]

Immie: Suggesting that Obama will make Bill Ayers Secretary of Education is flat-out, bat-shit crazy.

yeah well, keep lying to yourself..

[Immanuel]

Immie: Suggesting that Obama will make Bill Ayers Secretary of Education is flat-out, bat-shit crazy.

I'm not suggesting any such thing. I'm suggesting that he will appoint men LIKE William Ayers to positions such as Secretary of Education. Would you like a man like William Ayers as the Secretary of Defense? How about the Secretary of Treasury? How about Chief Justice of the Supreme Court?

I have no idea who he will appoint for any position, but it won't be reasonable America-loving individuals that is for sure. He will be "paying back" those people that got him where he is with prime appointments and William Ayers may just be Sec of Education next year. You never know.

Funny, how you jumped on that so quickly GW... maybe you have been thinking the same thing I was? I was thinking of the kinds of people he would nominate and using Ayers as an example in a place he might fit in. Sec of Education seemed like a good spot. It was an example. I think you have been thinking that was a perfect place for Ayers and hoping no one would bring that up.

Immie