Us Magazine - 80% Say Palin Would Make Good VP

[morpheus]

She seems very nice, she's likeable, she says wonderful patriotic things...that's what it takes to be elected in America.

In 2000 we voted for Bush because he's "someone I can have a beer with". Now, we love Palin because she's a "regular hockey mom".

Can we please go back to being governed by technocrats with a law degree or a PhD in economics? Somehow, I don't think that my hockey mom neighbor, and the funny dude I had a beer with last night...I don't think they're right to run a country.

 

[Shogun]

Usmagazine.com | Us Weekly's hottest celebrity news, photos, fashion, and videos from Hollywood


here.. GO AHEAD and take a peak as US magazine. I tellya... nothing says "deep political analyzing" quite like



Us Weekly Magazine - Celebrity News
Advertisement
Hawaii Sweepstakes


PHOTO GALLERIES
25_home.jpg
Us' 25 Most Stylish New Yorkers of '08

See who made the list!
brit-kids-home.jpg
Birthday Boys: Sean & Jayden Spears!

See how Britney's babies have grown
fw-home.jpg
Front Row at Fashion Week!

See Halle, J.Lo sparkle inside the tents!

*

Hollywood Dropouts
*

VMA Best Dressed

Wedding Channel
1. AMY B 00:17
2. AMY B 00:18
3. AMY B 00:18
Us Extra
Us Extra
TV Sweepstakes

Click here to see how you can visit the set of a FOX drama and catch Bones Wednesdays.
Style of the Day $firsttout->field_tout_content_hed[0][value]
Vote Now
Leighton Meester & Kat DeLuna
Gossip Girl’s Meester wore Chloé on MTV’s TRL in NYC. DeLuna rocked the same sheath at a concert in Mannheim, Germany.
files/fapl-home-alba.jpg
Arresting Styles Arresting Styles
When bad clothes happen to good people
Celebrity News
Breaking News
Jennifer Lopez Drops Out of Project Runway Season Finale
After the singer suffers a foot injury, Tim Gunn agrees to fill in
6 Comments
Jennifer Lopez and Tim Gunn
Kelly Ripa and Tyra Banks
Tyra Banks, Kelly Ripa Among Us' 25 Most Stylish New Yorkers

Check out the complete list
5 Comments
Angelina Jolie in Changeling
Video
Watch Angelina Jolie's New Movie Trailer

Check out a preview for her upcoming abduction drama Changeling
37 Comments
Sheryl Berkoff and Rob Lowe
Rob Lowe: Second Nanny Terrified My Kids, Used "N-Word"

He and his wife fire back at Laura Boyce in shocking new court papers
8 Comments

* Barack Obama to Star on Saturday Night Live
* Sarah Palin "Didn't Blink" When Offered The VP Nomination
* Rep: Tara Reid Not Engaged!
* Lindsay Lohan Remembers 9/11
* Katy Perry's Beau: I Don't Want Her Kissing Girls!
* America Ferrera Slams The Hills, Gossip Girl
* Laila Ali Has Baby Boy
* Christina Applegate to Present at Emmys
* VIDEO: Watch a Model Prep for New York Fashion Week
* VIDEO: Gina Gershon Spoofs Sarah Palin
* Kanye West Arrested
* Lauren Conrad Lands a Three-Book Deal
* Obama Jokes About "Lipstick on a Pig" Remark on Letterman

More Celebrity News
WATERCOOLER POLLS
Image
Who's your favorite star of The Women?
Debra Messing
Meg Ryan
Eva Mendes
Jada Pinkett Smith

Submit View Results

Image

Does Gossip Girl make girls mean?
Yes
No

Submit View Results
Advertisement
Tyra's Sexy Style
See this New Yorker's chic looks - for day and night!
See Photos
RECENTLY ADDED GALLERIES

Stars at the Toronto Film Fest

Fall TV Preview

McCain-Palin on the Trail
News From Trusted US Weekly Partners
Fox News
Fox News
Pop Tarts: 'Great Kisser' Eva Mendes Plays Other Woman
FOX411: Robert Kennedy Jr. Movie in Turmoil
Neil Sean: Ryan Phillippe Upset Marriage to Reese Failed
Paparazzi Duped by Jamie Lynn Spears Look-Alike
Fellow Critic Hits Roger Ebert During Film Festival
Huffington Post
Huffington Post
OJ Faces All-White Jury
Huffington Post News OJ Faces All-White Jury
Huffington Post News Jamie Lynn Spears Decoy Punks The Paparazzi
Just Jared
Just Jared
Jessica Alba — She’s A Peach!
Cristiano Ronaldo Shops ‘Til He Drops
Britney Spears’ Little Red Door
Cameron Diaz Pumps You Up
Jessica Simpson Dishes on Dave
Inside Us
710-home.jpg
Anna Nicole's Baby Turns 2!

* subscribe to Us
* gift subscriptions
* customer service
* renew your subscription

Advertisement

* Subscribe
* Media Kit
* Home
* News
* Photos
* Style
* Entertainment
* Celebrities

* Copyright 2008, Us Weekly.
* Subscribe to Us Weekly Magazine
* Privacy Policy
* Terms of Use
* Subscriber Services
* Site built by: ExpandTheRoom

* Wenner Media Websites: Us Weekly
* Rolling Stone
* Men's Journal

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

Fuck the American middle class if Obama doesn't win. Fuck me caring about politics anymore. If the American poor want the GOP running things, let em have them. I'll be ok either way.

I'll suffer because wages will go down, gas will go up, cost of evething else will go up, debt will go up, inflation will rise, death tolls in Iraq will go up,


And we won't be any safer.

Abortion will become illegal. Think of all those girls who will be forced to have all those kids. I guess the GOP likes that though, because then they'll recruit them in the militiary.

Poverty will go up, bank closings will increase, Fanny Mae & Freddy Mac, just like now, the profits will be privatized and the losses YOU will pay for.

I'm fed up. I'm going to let the Corporate Media win.

Fine, talk for a fucking month about Michelle Obama being proud of America but don't mention Palin's ties to the Alaska Independence Party.

Just to show you there are no hard feelings I'm being proactive and disinfecting your razor blades for you.

 

[AllieBaba]

Fuck the American middle class if Obama doesn't win. Fuck me caring about politics anymore. If the American poor want the GOP running things, let em have them. I'll be ok either way.

I'll suffer because wages will go down, gas will go up, cost of evething else will go up, debt will go up, inflation will rise, death tolls in Iraq will go up,


And we won't be any safer.

Abortion will become illegal. Think of all those girls who will be forced to have all those kids. I guess the GOP likes that though, because then they'll recruit them in the militiary.

Poverty will go up, bank closings will increase, Fanny Mae & Freddy Mac, just like now, the profits will be privatized and the losses YOU will pay for.

I'm fed up. I'm going to let the Corporate Media win.

Fine, talk for a fucking month about Michelle Obama being proud of America but don't mention Palin's ties to the Alaska Independence Party.

More proof that the left hates America and Americans.

And you wonder why we won't vote for your darlings. Fuck yourself, and why don't you take yourself and your one vote and move the fuck to Canada, where you can commisserate over your sad life with like-minded elitist, socialist, America-hating POS? Or move to Russia or China, where you can see what happens to a country when they let lefty loons who hate the citizenry take over?

 

[Navy1960]

About your last point, I think the idea is that he (and everyone else) wants to push hard to break our addiction to oil. People like you, the apologists....have used the same arguments the past 8 years, protecting oil companies...protecting our addiction, breaking environmental protection acts to drill in exclusive areas. What has it brought us? The point of taxing big oil is not to raise prices at the pump, its to inject some life into the fight for alternative energy sources. If oil becomes less profitable, perhaps companies will put forth at least half the effort to build new clean refineries and fund explorations and research into new sources. Its a kick in the ass to the status quo which has led us straight to nowhere.

Well unlike many environmentalists out there that have been a major factor in the high cost of energy in this country at the expense of the American people. I choose the welfare of the American people first, then the environment second, where as poeple of your ilk would rather see people lose their home, their jobs, and get crushed under the weight of foreign oil as you run about saving tree's and birds. However, one thing you don't understand is that the energy industry in this country can and does operate in a clean and safe manner.

One more thing, you seem not realize, do you think that by the snap of a finger we can just up and convert an energy sector based on fossil fuels to solar and wind, and hydro overnight? These technologies show great promise but are no where near ready to replace fossil fuels, like natural gas and oil. It's people like you that think this pie in the sky Obama plan is going to save us from sending money off shore to OPEC by suddenly switching to these technoligies , when in fact this short sighted appeal to the environmental wing of his party is going to do nothing but send more money overseas. Yes there is a difference between you and me, the difference is, i'm a realist and know that we need to use EVERY resource avalable to us Nuclear, our own resources, oil, natural gas, clean coal. etc etc. to have a bridge to these technoligies like wind and solar. I'm not sitting there saying it's okay let everyone starve for a bit it will be okay in the long run because we saved some woodpecker someplace that no one has seen in 60 years.

 

[Vintij]

Well unlike many environmentalists out there that have been a major factor in the high cost of energy in this country at the expense of the American people. I choose the welfare of the American people first, then the environment second, where as poeple of your ilk would rather see people lose their home, their jobs, and get crushed under the weight of foreign oil as you run about saving tree's and birds. However, one thing you don't understand is that the energy industry in this country can and does operate in a clean and safe manner.

One more thing, you seem not realize, do you think that by the snap of a finger we can just up and convert an energy sector based on fossil fuels to solar and wind, and hydro overnight? These technologies show great promise but are no where near ready to replace fossil fuels, like natural gas and oil. It's people like you that think this pie in the sky Obama plan is going to save us from sending money off shore to OPEC by suddenly switching to these technoligies , when in fact this short sighted appeal to the environmental wing of his party is going to do nothing but send more money overseas. Yes there is a difference between you and me, the difference is, i'm a realist and know that we need to use EVERY resource avalable to us Nuclear, our own resources, oil, natural gas, clean coal. etc etc. to have a bridge to these technoligies like wind and solar. I'm not sitting there saying it's okay let everyone starve for a bit it will be okay in the long run because we saved some woodpecker someplace that no one has seen in 60 years.

Your right about one thing, we are very different. You remind me of people in late 1800's, not knowing what extinction was and certainly not caring. The ignorance of humans has led to literally thousands of direct and indirect extinctions of not only animals but plants as well. For no good reason either. Its not like a fight for survival we are talking about, its complete and utter ignorance. Humans are capable of that you know. The dodo species was wiped off the earth for sport, led was not taken out of gasoline until 1986! I can name literally a thousand ways humans have been ignorant in the past, why do you have to add to that list? Why are people still ignorant after so many years of learning from our mistakes. Why is it so hard to understand that species belong to whats called an ECOSYSTEM, we belong to an ECOSYSTEM as well. When you wipe out a species, there is always a chance of disrupting the ecosystem and possibly even destroying it all together. Ask any Scientist and they will tell you that by 2100, about half of all species living today will be extinct and humans will be the biggest reason why. In the last 1,300 years, extinction rates have shot up to 500 times the average rate thanks to humans.

I am not saying that we should protect every single animal and plant on the planet, I am saying that it is not worth it to drill in protected areas for a few billion barrels of oil which will run out within 10 years anyway. Why risk killing of a species to make a few bucks? You people are prolonging something that is obviously and indefinitely inevitable. People with half a brain know this and you should too. Oil will run out no matter how much you drill, it is not a renewable source of energy and I have not seen any peer reviewed work stating that it might be. Therefore, why not start now. Start the transition from oil to other forms of energy, not with the snap of a finger but with a gradual change.

The funny thing is you act like jobs will be lost, yea by creating new markets that did not exist before and expanding them on a global level....how are jobs going to be lost? Explain that to me.

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

I am not saying that we should protect every single animal and plant on the planet, I am saying that it is not worth it to drill in protected areas for a few billion barrels of oil which will run out within 10 years anyway. Why risk killing of a species to make a few bucks? You people are prolonging something that is obviously and indefinitely inevitable.

Hold on, friend.

New data coming.

People with half a brain like myself,

*snickers*

know this and you should too. Oil will run out no matter how much you drill, it is not a renewable source of energy and I have not seen any peer reviewed work stating that it might be. Therefore, why not start now. Start the transition from oil to other forms of energy, not with the snap of a finger but with a gradual change.

We have enough oil in the Green River shale that can be recovered with current tech to support current growth for the next few centuries.

The new data: FuturePundit: Shell Oil Shale Extraction Technology Economically Viable?

The funny thing is you act like jobs will be lost, yea by creating new markets that did not exist before and expanding them on a global level....how are jobs going to be lost? Explain that to me.

You mean like the subsidized pipe-dream known as biodiesel?

Gov't shouldn't be subsidizing capital markets it props-up failures and draws away resources that could be spent on successes.

 

[Vintij]

Hold on, friend.

New data coming.



*snickers*


We have enough oil in the Green River shale that can be recovered with current tech to support current growth for the next few centuries.

The new data: FuturePundit: Shell Oil Shale Extraction Technology Economically Viable?


You mean like the subsidized pipe-dream known as biodiesel?

Gov't shouldn't be subsidizing capital markets it props-up failures and draws away resources that could be spent on successes.

As I said before, there is no PEER REVIEWED literature on any that and even if we decide to spread fossil fuels out, how is this going to be done and meet new environmental green house cap standards already passed into law? How can you stay below the cap, by introducing new ways to create more green house gas? You cant.

 

[AllieBaba]

Your right about one thing, we are very different. You remind me of people in late 1800's, not knowing what extinction was and certainly not caring. The ignorance of humans has led to literally thousands of direct and indirect extinctions of not only animals but plants as well. For no good reason either. Its not like a fight for survival we are talking about, its complete and utter ignorance. Humans are capable of that you know. The dodo species was wiped off the earth for sport, led was not taken out of gasoline until 1986! I can name literally a thousand ways humans have been ignorant in the past, why do you have to add to that list? Why are people still ignorant after so many years of learning from our mistakes. Why is it so hard to understand that species belong to whats called an ECOSYSTEM, we belong to an ECOSYSTEM as well. When you wipe out a species, there is always a chance of disrupting the ecosystem and possibly even destroying it all together. Ask any Scientist and they will tell you that by 2100, about half of all species living today will be extinct and humans will be the biggest reason why. In the last 1,300 years, extinction rates have shot up to 500 times the average rate thanks to humans.

I am not saying that we should protect every single animal and plant on the planet, I am saying that it is not worth it to drill in protected areas for a few billion barrels of oil which will run out within 10 years anyway. Why risk killing of a species to make a few bucks? You people are prolonging something that is obviously and indefinitely inevitable. People with half a brain know this and you should too. Oil will run out no matter how much you drill, it is not a renewable source of energy and I have not seen any peer reviewed work stating that it might be. Therefore, why not start now. Start the transition from oil to other forms of energy, not with the snap of a finger but with a gradual change.

The funny thing is you act like jobs will be lost, yea by creating new markets that did not exist before and expanding them on a global level....how are jobs going to be lost? Explain that to me.

Ok, and thank YOU for proving his point.

And please stop saying you have half a brain, we know. We feel guilty enough for allowing you to make an ass of yourself.

 

[Navy1960]

Your right about one thing, we are very different. You remind me of people in late 1800's, not knowing what extinction was and certainly not caring. The ignorance of humans has led to literally thousands of direct and indirect extinctions of not only animals but plants as well. For no good reason either. Its not like a fight for survival we are talking about, its complete and utter ignorance. Humans are capable of that you know. The dodo species was wiped off the earth for sport, led was not taken out of gasoline until 1986! I can name literally a thousand ways humans have been ignorant in the past, why do you have to add to that list? Why are people still ignorant after so many years of learning from our mistakes. Why is it so hard to understand that species belong to whats called an ECOSYSTEM, we belong to an ECOSYSTEM as well. When you wipe out a species, there is always a chance of disrupting the ecosystem and possibly even destroying it all together. Ask any Scientist and they will tell you that by 2100, about half of all species living today will be extinct and humans will be the biggest reason why. In the last 1,300 years, extinction rates have shot up to 500 times the average rate thanks to humans.

I am not saying that we should protect every single animal and plant on the planet, I am saying that it is not worth it to drill in protected areas for a few billion barrels of oil which will run out within 10 years anyway. Why risk killing of a species to make a few bucks? You people are prolonging something that is obviously and indefinitely inevitable. People with half a brain know this and you should too. Oil will run out no matter how much you drill, it is not a renewable source of energy and I have not seen any peer reviewed work stating that it might be. Therefore, why not start now. Start the transition from oil to other forms of energy, not with the snap of a finger but with a gradual change.

The funny thing is you act like jobs will be lost, yea by creating new markets that did not exist before and expanding them on a global level....how are jobs going to be lost? Explain that to me.

You act like this green technology is going to create massive jobs and save us all, do you know who is one of the largest producer's of solar cells? That would be "Sharp Electronic's" and yes they are in Japan, and battery technology? wonder who that might be? well that just happens to be "Toyota" ever look in your Ford Hybrid lately? The problem here, is that you think , that people like me see fossil fuels as a an unlimited resource and thats simply not true. Of course it's not, however, I do know for a fact our country has resources to bridge the gap between a fossil fuel based economy and one that is not based on fossil fuel. I unlike you would rather we be allowed to use them, rather than be held hostage by a small group of people that would rather their nation come to ruin than see any animal down to an single cell fungi die. The fact is the total number of species that are extinct far outnumber the ones that exist today. So you think that " natural selection" should be outlawed too I suppose? The point is, these green job's that are so touted by Barack Obama do exist today, in all the sectors he is talking about wind and solar, and the millions of jobs he is counting on replacing my friend are simply a fantasy. We do have existing technology that is safe , clean and is here now. We can't use that though , why because the environmental lobby has done everything they can to keep the nuclear power industry from growing in this country. They havs stopped the buliding of new refineries in the United States, hydro electric plants, coal fired plants, nuclear plants, the list is endless. Still you say well, thats okay as long as we save a few species. You know what I say? If allowed to build the bridge between these technologies, and allowed to do it safely , that money we send to Arab countries who have no thoughts for us other than our destruction , could be used for research and development and yes, even bring down the cost of fuel, and food. So what it takes 10 years, I heard the same thing 10 years ago when Bill Clinton put his little Veto on ANWR. Will take 10 years. The bottom line is you want to save the planet , you want to save animals, then you need to understand , in an environment where people are forced to choose between themselves and saving an animal, very few will choose the animal. It's time you and your environmental friends realized that no matter what technology you tout, people somewhere, somehow have to pay for it. It's people like me , who want our country to be able to pay for it with OUR money and our resources, instead of borrowing it from China and rougue countries just to save a few animals. Call it "Natural Selection" if you will.

 

[Vintij]

Ok, and thank YOU for proving his point.

And please stop saying you have half a brain, we know. We feel guilty enough for allowing you to make an ass of yourself.

If your going to respond. Make sense. You take the time to type a response, but have no time to explain what you are talking about, who you are talking about or why you are talking about it.

I would rather have half a brain, than a whole brain that is not ever used. Much like your situation.

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

As I said before, there is no PEER REVIEWED literature on any that and even if we decide to spread fossil fuels out, how is this going to be done and meet new environmental green house cap standards already passed into law? How can you stay below the cap, by introducing new ways to create more green house gas? You cant.

You wouldn't run by the SN TheNightOwl elsewhere would you?

BTW - If peer-review we as important as you claim you wouldn't idolize all the commies in your avatar because their system has been peer-reviewed by hundreds of millions to be an abject failure.

 

[sealybobo]

Usmagazine.com | Water Cooler Poll - After watching her speech, do you think Sarah Palin would make a good vice president?

Without even knowing her? I got this email from a woman this morning. I'm hearing more and more people say they are starting to not approve of McCain/Palin. All the lies they say, their positions on things, that horrible interview she gave. She exposed herself for not knowing what the fuck she is doing.

So many people have asked me about what I know about Sarah Palin in the last 2 days that I decided to write something up . . .

You may distribute it to your friends/email list with my name and email address attached, but I’m NOT willing to have it posted on a webpage with my name and email address attached (there’s too many kooks out there!)

Bottomline: the only thing Sarah Palin has in common with Hillary Clinton is her gender and good looks.

Anne

ABOUT SARAH PALIN

I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992. Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her father was my child’s favorite substitute teacher. I also am on a first name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more City Council meetings during her administration than about 99% of the residents of the city.

She is enormously popular; in every way she’s like the most popular girl in middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice and won’t vote for her can’t quit smiling when talking about her because she is a “babe”.

It is astonishing and almost scary how well she can keep a secret. She kept her most recent pregnancy a secret from her children and parents for seven months.

She is “pro-life”. She recently gave birth to a baby with Down syndrome. There is no cover-up involved, here; Trig is her baby.

She is energetic and hardworking. She regularly worked out at the gym.

She is savvy. She doesn’t take positions; she just “puts things out there” and if they prove to be popular, then she takes credit.

Her husband works a union job on the North Slope for BP and is a champion snowmobile racer. Todd Palin’s kind of job is highly sought-after because of the schedule and high pay. He arranges his work schedule so he can fish for salmon in Bristol Bay for a month or so in summer, but by no stretch of the imagination is fishing their major source of income. Nor has her life-style ever been anything like that of native Alaskans.

Sarah and her whole family are avid hunters.

She’s smart.

Her experience is as mayor of a city with a population of about 5,000 (at the time), and less than 2 years as governor of a state with about 670,000 residents.

During her mayoral administration most of the actual work of running this small city was turned over to an administrator. She had been pushed to hire this administrator by party power-brokers after she had gotten herself into some trouble over precipitous firings which had given rise to a recall campaign.

Sarah campaigned in Wasilla as a “fiscal conservative”. During her 6 years as Mayor, she increased general government expenditures by over 33%. During those same 6 years the amount of taxes collected by the City increased by 38%. This was during a period of low inflation (1996-2002). She reduced progressive property taxes and increased a regressive sales tax which taxed even food. The tax cuts that she promoted benefited large corporate property owners way more than they benefited residents.

The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration weren’t enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it with indebtedness of over $22 million. What did Mayor Palin encourage the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? or a new library? No. $1m for a park. $15m-plus for construction of a multi-use sports complex which she rushed through to build on a piece of property that the City didn’t even have clear title to, that was still in litigation 7 yrs later–to the delight of the lawyers involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it would be. She also supported bonds for $5.5m for road projects that could have been done in 5-7 yrs without any borrowing.

While Mayor, City Hall was extensively remodeled and her office redecorated more than once.

These are small numbers, but Wasilla is a very small city.

As an oil producer, the high price of oil has created a budget surplus in Alaska. Rather than invest this surplus in technology that will make us energy independent and increase efficiency, as Governor she proposed distribution of this surplus to every individual in the state.

In this time of record state revenues and budget surpluses, she recommended that the state borrow/bond for road projects, even while she proposed distribution of surplus state revenues: spend today’s surplus, borrow for needs.

She’s not very tolerant of divergent opinions or open to outside ideas or compromise. As Mayor, she fought ideas that weren’t generated by her or her staff. Ideas weren’t evaluated on their merits, but on the basis of who proposed them.

While Sarah was Mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire our highly respected City Librarian because the Librarian refused to consider removing from the library some books that Sarah wanted removed. City residents rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin’s attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew her termination letter. People who fought her attempt to oust the Librarian are on her enemies list to this day.

Sarah complained about the “old boy’s club” when she first ran for Mayor, so what did she bring Wasilla? A new set of “old boys”. Palin fired most of the experienced staff she inherited. At the City and as Governor she hired or elevated new, inexperienced, obscure people, creating a staff totally dependent on her for their jobs and eternally grateful and fiercely loyal–loyal to the point of abusing their power to further her personal agenda, as she has acknowledged happened in the case of pressuring the State’s top cop (see below).

As Mayor, Sarah fired Wasilla’s Police Chief because he “intimidated” her, she told the press. As Governor, her recent firing of Alaska’s top cop has the ring of familiarity about it. He served at her pleasure and she had every legal right to fire him, but it’s pretty clear that an important factor in her decision to fire him was because he wouldn’t fire her sister’s ex-husband, a State Trooper. Under investigation for abuse of power, she has had to admit that more than 2 dozen contacts were made between her staff and family to the person that she later fired, pressuring him to fire her ex-brother-in-law. She tried to replace the man she fired with a man who she knew had been reprimanded for sexual harassment; when this caused a public furor, she withdrew her support.

She has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in help. The City Council person who personally escorted her around town introducing her to voters when she first ran for Wasilla City Council became one of her first targets when she was later elected Mayor. She abruptly fired her loyal City Administrator; even people who didn’t like the guy were stunned by this ruthlessness.

Fear of retribution has kept all of these people from saying anything publicly about her.

When then-Governor Murkowski was handing out political plums, Sarah got the best, Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission: one of the few jobs not in Juneau and one of the best paid. She had no background in oil & gas issues. Within months of scoring this great job which paid $122,400/yr, she was criticizing her pay as too high in the press . I was told that she hated that job: the commute, the structured hours, the work. Sarah became aware that a member of this Commission (who was also the State Chair of the Republican Party) engaged in unethical behavior on the job. In a gutsy move which some undoubtedly cautioned her could be political suicide, Sarah solved all her problems in one fell swoop: got out of the job she hated and garnered gobs of media attention as the patron saint of ethics and as a gutsy fighter against the “old boys’ club” when she dramatically quit, exposing this man’s ethics violations (for which he was fined).

As Mayor, she had her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork from Senator Ted Stevens. Lately, she has castigated his pork-barrel politics and publicly humiliated him. She only opposed the “bridge to nowhere” after it became clear that it would be unwise not to.

As Governor, she gave the Legislature no direction and budget guidelines, then made a big grandstand display of line-item vetoing projects, calling them pork. Public outcry and further legislative action restored most of these projects–which had been vetoed simply because she was not aware of their importance–but with the unobservant she had gained a reputation as “anti-pork”.

She is solidly Republican: no political maverick. The State party leaders hate her because she has bit them in the back and humiliated them. Other members of the party object to her self-description as a fiscal conservative.

Around Wasilla there are people who went to high school with Sarah. They call her “Sarah Barracuda” because of her unbridled ambition and predatory ruthlessness. Before she became so powerful, very ugly stories circulated around town about shenanigans she pulled to be made point guard on the high school basketball team. When Sarah’s mother-in-law, a highly respected member of the community and experienced manager, ran for Mayor, Sarah refused to endorse her.

As Governor, she stepped outside of the box and put together of package of legislation known as “AGIA” that forced the oil companies to march to the beat of her drum.

Like most Alaskans, she favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. She has questioned if the loss of sea ice is linked to global warming. She campaigned “as a private citizen” against a state initiative that would have either a) protected salmon streams from pollution from mines, or b) tied up in the courts all mining in the state (depending on who you listen to). She has pushed the State’s lawsuit against the Dept. of the Interior’s decision to list polar bears as threatened species.

McCain is the oldest person to ever run for President; Sarah will be a heartbeat away from being President.

There has to be literally millions of Americans who are more knowledgeable and experienced than she.

However, there’s a lot of people who have underestimated her and are regretting it.

CLAIM VS FACT
•“Hockey mom”: true for a few years
•“PTA mom”: true years ago when her first-born was in elementary school, not since •“NRA supporter”: absolutely true •social conservative: mixed. Opposes gay marriage, BUT vetoed a bill that would have denied benefits to employees in same-sex relationships (said she did this because it was unconstitutional).
•pro-creationism: mixed. Supports it, BUT did nothing as Governor to promote it.
•“Pro-life”: mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down’s syndrome baby BUT declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life legislation
•“Experienced”: Some high schools have more students than Wasilla has residents. Many cities have more residents than the state of Alaska. No legislative experience other than City Council. Little hands-on supervisory or managerial experience; needed help of a city administrator to run town of about 5,000.
•political maverick: not at all
•gutsy: absolutely!
•open & transparent: ??? Good at keeping secrets. Not good at explaining actions.
•has a developed philosophy of public policy: no •”a Greenie”: no. Turned Wasilla into a wasteland of big box stores and disconnected parking lots. Is pro-drilling off-shore and in ANWR.
•fiscal conservative: not by my definition!
•pro-infrastructure: No. Promoted a sports complex and park in a city without a sewage treatment plant or storm drainage system. Built streets to early 20th century standards.
•pro-tax relief: Lowered taxes for businesses, increased tax burden on residents •pro-small government: No. Oversaw greatest expansion of city government in Wasilla’s history.
•pro-labor/pro-union. No. Just because her husband works union doesn’t make her pro-labor. I have seen nothing to support any claim that she is pro-labor/pro-union.

WHY AM I WRITING THIS?

First, I have long believed in the importance of being an informed voter. I am a voter registrar. For 10 years I put on student voting programs in the schools. If you google my name (Anne Kilkenny + Alaska), you will find references to my participation in local government, education, and PTA/parent organizations.

Secondly, I’ve always operated in the belief that “Bad things happen when good people stay silent”. Few people know as much as I do because few have gone to as many City Council meetings.

Third, I am just a housewife. I don’t have a job she can bump me out of. I don’t belong to any organization that she can hurt. But, I am no fool; she is immensely popular here, and it is likely that this will cost me somehow in the future: that’s life.

Fourth, she has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100 or so people who rallied to support the City Librarian against Sarah’s attempt at censorship.

Fifth, I looked around and realized that everybody else was afraid to say anything because they were somehow vulnerable.

CAVEATS
I am not a statistician. I developed the numbers for the increase in spending & taxation 2 years ago (when Palin was running for Governor) from information supplied to me by the Finance Director of the City of Wasilla, and I can’t recall exactly what I adjusted for: did I adjust for inflation? for population increases? Right now, it is impossible for a private person to get any info out of City Hall–they are swamped. So I can’t verify my numbers.

You may have noticed that there are various numbers circulating for the population of Wasilla, ranging from my “about 5,000″, up to 9,000. The day Palin’s selection was announced a city official told me that the current population is about 7,000. The official 2000 census count was 5,460. I have used about 5,000 because Palin was Mayor from 1996 to 2002, and the city was growing rapidly in the mid-90’s.

 

[Vintij]

You act like this green technology is going to create massive jobs and save us all, do you know who is one of the largest producer's of solar cells? That would be "Sharp Electronic's" and yes they are in Japan, and battery technology? wonder who that might be? well that just happens to be "Toyota" ever look in your Ford Hybrid lately? The problem here, is that you think , that people like me see fossil fuels as a an unlimited resource and thats simply not true. Of course it's not, however, I do know for a fact our country has resources to bridge the gap between a fossil fuel based economy and one that is not based on fossil fuel. I unlike you would rather we be allowed to use them, rather than be held hostage by a small group of people that would rather their nation come to ruin than see any animal down to an single cell fungi die. The fact is the total number of species that are extinct far outnumber the ones that exist today. So you think that " natural selection" should be outlawed too I suppose? The point is, these green job's that are so touted by Barack Obama do exist today, in all the sectors he is talking about wind and solar, and the millions of jobs he is counting on replacing my friend are simply a fantasy. We do have existing technology that is safe , clean and is here now. We can't use that though , why because the environmental lobby has done everything they can to keep the nuclear power industry from growing in this country. They havs stopped the buliding of new refineries in the United States, hydro electric plants, coal fired plants, nuclear plants, the list is endless. Still you say well, thats okay as long as we save a few species. You know what I say? If allowed to build the bridge between these technologies, and allowed to do it safely , that money we send to Arab countries who have no thoughts for us other than our destruction , could be used for research and development and yes, even bring down the cost of fuel, and food. So what it takes 10 years, I heard the same thing 10 years ago when Bill Clinton put his little Veto on ANWR. Will take 10 years. The bottom line is you want to save the planet , you want to save animals, then you need to understand , in an environment where people are forced to choose between themselves and saving an animal, very few will choose the animal. It's time you and your environmental friends realized that no matter what technology you tout, people somewhere, somehow have to pay for it. It's people like me , who want our country to be able to pay for it with OUR money and our resources, instead of borrowing it from China and rougue countries just to save a few animals. Call it "Natural Selection" if you will.

I find it very sad that the educational system in our country has failed you. You compare Darwins "natural selection" mechanism to todays modernization and ignorance of human beings. You fail to realize that 99.9% of all species died out NATURALLY, we are creating a situation in which species are dying out based on our own synthesized chemicals and sources that we manipulate to use as energy, as well as taking away the environment for species to thrive in an ecosystem. Its called indirect Artificial selection

Even now, we have enough nuclear weapons on the planet to destroy every species on the planet with the exception of the invincible bacteria which can grow in any environment. Is that natural to you? Did the most dominant species of all time (the dinosaurs) have the power to destroy every living species including themselves? No.

Just because we have the power to do something does not mean we should be irresponsible with that power. I am not an environmentalist, I am one of many millions of people who think this way. You seem to think it is a select few, but trust me you are the one who is in the minority.

You think that the world revolves around Americans, well there are literally dozens of countries already taking steps into reducing fossil fuel use and bringing about a profitable way to reproduce re-usable energy. In-fact the United States is the only nation not to have signed the global emission act. Its YOU and YOUR people who are the only ones on earth that think we have one option. The people who think we should deal with issues in the future, which is why we have such a huge fiscal deficit.

Please enroll in your local college and educate yourself on the difference between Natural Selection and Artificial Selection sometimes referred to as negative selection. You might learn that Humans have the ability to change evolutionary patterns of change by artificially selecting habitats and traits for ourselves and the species around us. Evidence is clearly in the domestication of breeds of dog. If we can change the evolutionary path of any species, we can obviously change the evolutionary path of our own, both in a positive and negative way.

You must realize that it is not impossible to make money on clean energy, besides there is an emissions cap that has already been passed into law which states we shall return to 2000 emission levels within the next 10 years. So all of your stupid fossil fuel ideas wont ever get approved because it would be against the law. Its not environmentalists that did that, its the federal government and research climatologists. Thank them.

 

[sealybobo]

I find it very sad that the educational system in our country has failed you. You compare Darwins "natural selection" mechanism to todays modernization and ignorance of human beings. You fail to realize that 99.9% of all species died out NATURALLY, we are creating a situation in which species are dying out based on our own synthesized chemicals and sources that we manipulate to use as energy.

Even now, we have enough nuclear weapons on the planet to destroy every species on the planet with the exception of the invincible bacteria which can grow in any environment. Is that natural to you? Did the most dominant species of all time (the dinosaurs) have the power to destroy every living species including themselves? No.

Just because we have the power to do something does not mean we should be irresponsible with that power. I am not an environmentalist, I am one of many millions of people who think this way. You seem to think it is a select few, but trust me you are the one who is in the minority.

You think that the world revolves around Americans, well there are literally dozens of countries already taking steps into reducing fossil fuel use and bringing about a profitable way to reproduce re-usable energy. In-fact the United States is the only nation not to have signed the global emission act. Its YOU and YOUR people who are the only ones on earth that think we have one option. The people who think we should deal with issues in the future, which is why we have such a huge fiscal deficit.

Please enroll in your local college and educate yourself on the difference between Natural Selection and Artificial Selection sometimes referred to as negative selection. You might learn that Humans have the ability to change evolutionary patterns of change by artificially selecting habitats and traits for ourselves and the species around us. Evidence is clearly in the domestication of breeds of dog. If we can change the evolutionary path of any species, we can obviously change the evolutionary path of our own, both in a positive and negative way.

You must realize that it is not impossible to make money on clean energy, besides there is an emissions cap that has already been passed into law which states we shall return to 2000 emission levels within the next 10 years. So all of your stupid fossil fuel ideas wont ever get approved because it would be against the law. Its not environmentalists that did that, its the federal government and research climatologists. Thank them.

Greedy rich people who want to get richer even if it means the middle class get poor think they are morally and ethically doing the right thing because of darwin's survival of the fittest theory.

That's how they justify every man for himself.

 

[SFC_TMC915]

Was the poll taken at the RNC?????

 

[Navy1960]

I find it very sad that the educational system in our country has failed you. You compare Darwins "natural selection" mechanism to todays modernization and ignorance of human beings. You fail to realize that 99.9% of all species died out NATURALLY, we are creating a situation in which species are dying out based on our own synthesized chemicals and sources that we manipulate to use as energy, as well as taking away the environment for species to thrive in an ecosystem. Its called indirect Artificial selection

Even now, we have enough nuclear weapons on the planet to destroy every species on the planet with the exception of the invincible bacteria which can grow in any environment. Is that natural to you? Did the most dominant species of all time (the dinosaurs) have the power to destroy every living species including themselves? No.

Just because we have the power to do something does not mean we should be irresponsible with that power. I am not an environmentalist, I am one of many millions of people who think this way. You seem to think it is a select few, but trust me you are the one who is in the minority.

You think that the world revolves around Americans, well there are literally dozens of countries already taking steps into reducing fossil fuel use and bringing about a profitable way to reproduce re-usable energy. In-fact the United States is the only nation not to have signed the global emission act. Its YOU and YOUR people who are the only ones on earth that think we have one option. The people who think we should deal with issues in the future, which is why we have such a huge fiscal deficit.

Please enroll in your local college and educate yourself on the difference between Natural Selection and Artificial Selection sometimes referred to as negative selection. You might learn that Humans have the ability to change evolutionary patterns of change by artificially selecting habitats and traits for ourselves and the species around us. Evidence is clearly in the domestication of breeds of dog. If we can change the evolutionary path of any species, we can obviously change the evolutionary path of our own, both in a positive and negative way.

You must realize that it is not impossible to make money on clean energy, besides there is an emissions cap that has already been passed into law which states we shall return to 2000 emission levels within the next 10 years. So all of your stupid fossil fuel ideas wont ever get approved because it would be against the law. Its not environmentalists that did that, its the federal government and research climatologists. Thank them.

You know what I find as sad here, the fact that people like you would rather you fellow man suffer to save a lesser form of life than your own. That's sad. but not surprising. I am completely aware of the Kyoto protocol of which the United States did not sign and I am completely aware of new CAFE standards as well. However, you really do need to learn a few things about where your energy comes from don't you? Do you think there is no fossil fuels involved in your daily energy needs? If so, then your living in a cave. I invite you to "knock" on that hard plastic shell on that computer your using to post these same lame environmental arguments I have heard since the 70's and thank your local oil company or petro-chemical company that produced it. You lack the courage of your convictions, if you were true to the environment, you would pitch that ipod, that computer and everything that brings the world to you today. The bottom line is this, in your so-called green nirvana to come, I got new's for you, people are making a profit on all the green technologies you so tout. You don't see your local solar company giving away solar cells to us all do you? or have you gone down to get your free Hybrid Toyota lately? What I advocate is very simple, , use existing technology and resources to bridge the gap between technologies. You and your kind don't want to do that because your too busy earning a paycheck saving the planet.

You tell me to go to a local college, when I am there do you want me to save the desk next to me for you? Why? , because you have no idea how the world works, and what is natural selection if it is not survival of the fitest . You want my honest opinion, you really need to do some research and not buy into the propaganda that your being fed by that professor of climate change Al Gore, you do know what his previous job was don't you?

 

[Vintij]

You know what I find as sad here, the fact that people like you would rather you fellow man suffer to save a lesser form of life than your own. That's sad. but not surprising. I am completely aware of the Kyoto protocol of which the United States did not sign and I am completely aware of new CAFE standards as well. However, you really do need to learn a few things about where your energy comes from don't you? Do you think there is no fossil fuels involved in your daily energy needs? If so, then your living in a cave. I invite you to "knock" on that hard plastic shell on that computer your using to post these same lame environmental arguments I have heard since the 70's and thank your local oil company or petro-chemical company that produced it. You lack the courage of your convictions, if you were true to the environment, you would pitch that ipod, that computer and everything that brings the world to you today. The bottom line is this, in your so-called green nirvana to come, I got new's for you, people are making a profit on all the green technologies you so tout. You don't see your local solar company giving away solar cells to us all do you? or have you gone down to get your free Hybrid Toyota lately? What I advocate is very simple, , use existing technology and resources to bridge the gap between technologies. You and your kind don't want to do that because your too busy earning a paycheck saving the planet.

You tell me to go to a local college, when I am there do you want me to save the desk next to me for you? Why? , because you have no idea how the world works, and what is natural selection if it is not survival of the fitest . You want my honest opinion, you really need to do some research and not buy into the propaganda that your being fed by that professor of climate change Al Gore, you do know what his previous job was don't you?

Again your mistakes are adding up. I would leave you alone if you did not keep making them.

First, I am not an environmentalist which is why I use all the tools which were designed for me to use in the way they are supposed to be used. EXCEPT, I drive a hybrid car and I do my part to stay under the emissions cap. Not much else. So how can you compare my standard of living, to anything at all. I am not preaching to save all the animals and save all the trees, I am preaching to leave them alone. Two vastly different points of view. Its you who is doing nothing at all to help stay under the cap. Not even the most insignificantly easy changes to your daily routine, why? Simple, because you believe that there are no repercussions to your actions. Much like a lot of people in this country. Which is the exact opposite of what scientists will tell you about the human impact on the environment.

Second mistake you made. A huge mistake. You said that I want to save "lessor life forms" than my own. Please explain to me what a lessor life form is? In-fact you will be laughed out of the building if you go up to any intelligent being and try to explain what a lessor life form is. What are the standards to be a higher form of life? If its longevity, well we homo sapiens have only been around about 100,000 years. Even roaches have been around longer than that. So we fail at that. Lets see, is it reproductive success? Well thats nice but 6 billion hardly matches up to the trillions and trillions of microscopic organisms that have lived since the dawn of the earth. So we fail at that. The only reason we are here is because of the micro-organisms on our body that feed off of us. We would not even be able to digest food, or dispose of waste let alone survive without them.

On top of that.

Black people have been called lessor forms of life only 80-100 years ago, women were lessor forms of life 200-500 years ago, The non english were lessor forms of life only 150 years ago. Jews have been called lessor forms of life only 65 years ago. Non-catholics were considered lessor forms of life from 1292-1550ad.

So don't spew your crap about lessor forms of life when you yourself were considered a lessor form of life less than a few hundred years ago. Its that backwards thinking that gets us nowhere. If it was up to you, we would destroy every ecosystem that we need to survive because they house "lessor forms of life".

I am not trying to offend you but some things that come out of your keyboard are really self indulgent.

 

[AllieBaba]

You think humans are a lesser life form. And it is offensive.

 

[Vintij]

You think humans are a lesser life form. And it is offensive.

Do I really have to explain my post in laymen terms? Because if thats what you got out of it, then yes I do.

Okay here it is, just for you Alliebaba

1. Navy used an ancient argument that people don't use anymore, basically justifying extinctions by classifying them as lessor life forms.

Laymen terms for Allie= the guy said fuck saving animals they are stupid and we are strong and its evolution.

2. I countered the argument with examples of so called "lessor life forms", meaning we have always mistakenly classified other things and even other people as lessor life forms, and he is wrong to continue down that path.

laymen terms for Allie=I told the guy that its stupid to say that cuz we used to say it before and we was wrong.

3. I didn't actually say that humans were a lessor form but compared to many many millions of other species, they are because they have not survived quite as long.

Laymen terms for Alllie= I told the guy that we been around only a bit, so we need to stop trying to be crazy and let the animals live cuz we might hurt the earth and our own selves.

There you go Allie, just for you.