Gateway Pundit has revealed all the details. The name of the Sarah Palin E-mail hacker/lamer is David Kernell, and he is (not surprisingly), the son of a Tennessee Dem State Rep.
What's interesting about this hacker situation is, nothing incriminating or even embarrassing was found by the hacker. I mean, how many of us can have our Emails hacked into without a single juicy tidbit revealled?
The democrats yell, Drill Drill Drill, but can't seem to strike anything oily on Palin. lol
I live in Australia so the outcome of this election doesn't quite have the same bearing for me (other Aussies) as it does for those of you in the US. However, fallout from various political and economic events do affect Australia, so I am watching this election with some interest.... and what has me concerned, if McCain and Palin get in, are the abuse of power allegations leveled against Sarah Palin. It's said that where there's smoke there's fire, and it is concerning that Palin could become President if anything happened to McCain, and given his age and war injuries, etc, one could not be confident that he would remain President for the duration of the 4 year term.
To be quite frank, however, I no more like the what I'm hearing/reading of McCain, either... and were I eligible, neither he or Palin would get my vote. There's something slimy about the pair of them, and my conscience would not allow me to cast a vote for someone whose intergity and honesty I very much doubt.
Oh well, it's all out of my hands... an opinion doesn't count as a vote.
Interesting take. The thing is, the apparently sliminess of Palin is (so far) just rumors and accusations, all those lawyers the DNC sent up to Alaska can't seem to find anything to back up the claims.
On the other hand, Obama has a long track record, he is the 2nd biggest recipient of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac "contributions", and is also a huge recipient of money frome their PACs. His leadership experience seems limited to the local chapter of ACORN, which is well known for it voter fraud activities. He began his political career in the living room of a man who bombed the pentagon and police stations, which (in fairness) he did go to prison and do his time for, but to this day maintains that his only regret is that he didn't kill more US military members and police officer.
Sorry, but I can't support a man whose good friend regrets that he didn't kill me and my fellow servicemembers, vets, as well as my friends who are police officers. I also don't understand how anyone else can.
So the fact is that the BIPARTISAN commitee (10 republicans, 4 democrats), who started the investigation BEFORE she was even announced, must have had some cause to investigate. And that ever since she was picked, the story as to why she fired him keeps changing (drinking in his patrol car, insubordination, going to DC without authorization [to get more funds to fight sexual assault] etc). The whole thing smells like a cover up, the GOP is going everything in their power to make sure the investigation gets stalled, so nothing will come out until after the election. We have a right to know if there was an abuse of power before we cast our votes.
If she really has nothing to hide, why the stalling? Hell, she even said she welcomes the investigation, and now she flips on it.
That on top of the fact that she keeps repeating the same lies over and over like a broken record (after they've been totally debunked): the bridge to nowhere (that she supported at first, and then withdrew her support after the goverment pulled the plug, and kept the money for other projects), then the one about selling the plane on ebay (listed it on ebay, failed to sell, sold privately at a $600k loss), saying she's a reformer when she puts high school friends in top positions (love of cows is suddenly a qualification), is anti-earmarks when she clearly requested them (that's called hypocrisy, you can't say "I hate earmarks" and then request them and say it's ok afterwards), and so on...
I'm not an American....and have yet even to get to the US to visit [next year].... so I'm just an outsider looking in. [The USA, like it or not is one of the most globally influential entities on the planet so it/they warrant observing].
I share the [common] extra-US opinion of Bush that he was/is 'not good'.
I can't even for the life of me recall who Obama's running mate is. [must be memorable], but the other three...
McCain just seems like 'more-of-the-same', but older.
Obama is non-white [ish] which 'could' just be a refreshing change....maybe giving a little more validity to those who are [still] racially vilified in spite of protestations to the contrary [I remember the raised fists of protest at those Olympics [where the third [and white] person on the podium was an Aussie, BTW]]. He's young...and that. too could be a 'plus'.
Palin is a bit of a 'worry'....pro gun and anti abortion sounds like two 'extremist' attitudes I'd be loathe to support.
So....what's it all down to?
Mister/ forgettable....Mister Old Fart...Mister Quasi-minority....or Miss Token Sheila with 'tude?
I kinda liked Clinton ....the one with the cigar...not his Missus.
Whomever you end up with I hope it's someone you want/deserve....rather than someone that you are simply 'stuck' with...
Uh...you did know that McCain's campaign is run by a bunch of lobbyists, several of which were paid by Fannie Mae, right?
Your link is right, McCain has no room to point that particular finger, but have you ever read anything from me about McCain being some great candidate? Nope.
To me this election is a wash, we are left with what we have. I was waiting to see who McCain would choose as a running mate to see if there was any hope to salvage 2012. He gave us that hope in Sarah Palin, but that only means McCain will get my vote, it doesn't mean he'll get my support.
Not sure what hope is there, she clearly has no foreign policy experience (seeing another country from your porch doesn't count, I'm sorry). And where's the difference between getting the vote but not support? Why vote for someone you don't support? I don't understand that.
All we have is the candidates on the table. You can't sit there and tell me that you wont' support Palin for VP due to lack of experience, but you'll support Obama for president with no foreign policy experience either. Over the next 4 years, Palin will get that experience. If McCain dies while in office, then yes, she'll have to be ready to step up, but that is "if", if Obama is elected then we'll be stuck with an empty suit with a race card up his sleeve and a "for sale" sign on his back... and still no foreign policy experience. In fact, no policy making experience at all. You can belittle Palin's experience all you want, but in the end she has more than Obama.
But all that aside... I've read the polices and issues of Obama. They have nothing to do with "change" but everything to do with "throw money at it". There is nothing about him that anyone should want in the Oval Office. True, McCain isn't a prize himself, but between the two, I'll take the old geezer over the young know-nothing, do nothing who has no discernible ability to think for himself.
someone that gets it!
Edit button doesn't work, so I'll just answer the other question here....
The difference between voting for someone and supporting someone. Supporting a candidate is getting out and helping with the campaign, contributing money, time and effort, talking to people about the issues of the candidate and otherwise helping them gain votes other than just my one.
Why vote for someone I don't support? I am voting for someone I support. The ticket is McCain/Palin. Ok, I don't support half the ticket, but I do support the other half. I don't support either half of the Democrat ticket at all. I have read up on all the candidates that will be on the ballot in Wisconsin, and considered two of them when making my decision (Barr/Root and McCain/Palin). We only get to vote for the names that are on the ballot, so it is a matter of who comes closest to what I consider important in a candidate, not who is everything I consider important. McCain/Palin comes closest.
Of course, we'll see how the next few weeks go.
Due to the system, which like a building that was beautiful for it's time when it was first built but is now choked with weeds and is an eyesore by comparison to the latest architectural possibilities, "stuck with" is the likely result of any US Presidential election.
I better not bitch without offering solutions, but they've been offered before. Nevertheless....
First and foremost. Congress has a far greater responsibility for what happens in the US than the President does. And lobbying is also a huge problem where special interests with large sums of cash become major shareholders in the people who make laws. That all spells to me - term limits for Congressional members. If anyone wanted some real change and didn't just want to quack all day about it, that's where real change would start - in my opinion.
Second. And this one, I admit I have a hard time seeing how to implement, but we need a better way to pick our candidates. Right now the only person in history that's ever come close to making a run for Pres that was independent was Ross Perot. How did he do it? Well, he was a billionaire, of course. Being nominated for President is now directly tied into how much cash you can leverage to sell yourself for all the months you have to sell yourself. Lots of those guys that drop out of the race are forced out because they aren't receiving enough funds to get their message out, so they cut their losses instead of racking up huge debt. And the ones that get the money...you think they borrowed it? Well yeah...borrowed it with promises to pay it back in support of this legislation or that legislation. In other words, they have to sell their office to lobbyists to get support before they're even elected. How to fix? Well the first step is admitting that it's a huge problem. Solution #1 above would fix some of it because lobbyists would know they'd only own their "boy/girl" for a finite period of time and if that "boy/girl" sold out, they would most certainly get turned over in a subsequent campaign.
Third. Manage the damn media. All media needs to be held accountable for the slanted BS they sling. And they aren't doing it to be righteous...they're doing it to sell commercials, keep viewers tuned in, and to stir up hate and discontent. If everyone in America stayed positive and got along with each other, what the hell would there be to report other than weather? There are lots of lemmings in the world, and they are keeping the media business afloat. Surf these forums for plenty of examples. People opening their mouths to let garbage spew out that they didn't think of themselves...they got it from somewhere. Trace where they got it from, and at the root, you'll find the media.
That's all for now...I must adjourn to work.
Be well.
P.S. To all: The sky is not falling.
No, I refuse to support Palin because of her anti-woman stance on issues that are very important to me (as a woman) and that she's so far right religiously and seems to let those beliefs influence her decision making, that is something I *cannot* and will not support.
See, you choose the same way I do then. You look at the candidate's issues and decide based on who comes closest to your views.
Other than she doesn't support the bigoted idea that one human can own another, and therefore is free to kill it at will, I don't see how she is "anti woman" at all, maybe you can explain that one to me.
As far as her religious views influencing her decisions, that is a legitimate concern if you don't agree with her religion. But remember, Barack Obama's religion is nothing but bigotry where "If God is not for us and against white people," writes Cone, "then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill gods who do not belong to the black community."
So which scares religious influence scares you more?
Fourth: Take all the money out of elections: Corporate and private. All contributions would go to a single fund from which all candidates would be funded. The Supreme Court said this isn't kosher because it denies "free speech" (free bribes more like it) well, the simplest patch for that would be a simple public listing of all funds donated with one catch: no listing for whom and "telling" automatically results in confiscation and fines. It would also probably shorten "election season".
Does anyone realize that McCain and Obama have been collecting pay and benefits for being Senators while all they've done is run for another office (Hillary and the others to a slightly lesser extent). McCain started this campaign with election reform and when he said that, I perked up. That disappeared fast, didn't it?
Now then, as to the "do nothing and do less" Congress. If one party or the other lacks a sufficient majority, nothing gets done especially when there's a veto hanging which neither party can (or will) over ride. The system was designed this way. It was done (Senate = House of Lords) to put a limit on "pendulum swings". Unfortunately, Ideology of the current administration has prevented them doing anything due to the polarization the current administration has engendered and sponsored.
The future will be the same if one group tries to ram it's ideology and goals down the throat of the other and engage in name calling and vilification.
That's what I can see as wrong. There'll be others who see things differently. That's OK, and I'll fight to the death for your right to do just that. That's what all of us should be about: That and removing from power people who stifle or prevent that.
Amen to that, Brother... Amen...
Oh yes, and the sky IS falling. Ask the uninsured and the homeless or soon to be homeless.
And PLEASE, would some code genius fix the &U%&$ edit button? Please?
I'm sure Palin feels the same way, but Obama has said "I join a church to worship God, not to worship a pastor" so that argument can be thrown at Palin too, whose church thinks they can "pray the gay away" and strike down an angry hand and destroy America...so that's really not a smart example to try to use.
As for her anti-woman stance, check this out.
Ahhhhh......There's me Starkers! I posted for you on the "Pirate" thread, boyo. Love them Aussie Pirates!
I agree with your post. The motivation for naming Palin seems rather thin and seedy to me...i.e. Obama didn't choose Hillary (a blunder in my eyes, but maybe he asked and she said, "Thanks but No Thanks" LOL) so he'd pick up some female votes if he did. Yuuuck. I doubt if it was because of her "Qualifications".
BTW has Zu infected your typing hand, Laddy?
Doc
Unfortunately Jafo....this is always the outcome. The peoples vote doesn't matter. Amd I've yet to see any candidate I'd invite into my home. None of them are worthy of running this country. And nothing against POW's...but simply being a POW does not in any way, shape or form qualify you to run a country...he just got caught...sucks to be him.
Palin is a no body...but hey...she's starting a new hair fad...and her stand against nature and the environment is appauling.
McCain is knockin on the pearly gates and contradicts himself all the time.
Obama...well...I think he just wants to be the first black muslim president...ain't that a kicker...aren't we fighting aginst these people? And they better start measuring him up for a body bag...there's already been one plot against him.
None of them has any experience in running a country...no one does...I don't care what they've done in the past or do in the present...its all on the job training with advisors and handlers telling you what to do. And they're experience with economics right off the bat is a joke...spending millions for a job that pay 400 thousand a year...so they're already in debt.
But the biggest problem in this country is apathy. When you see what either of these parties offers up for a candidate its sad....if this is the best they have offer why bother getting out of bed to vote. Just get a bunch of monkey's together and throw darts at a board and call me in the morning.
What we really need is a complete overhaul of government and for people to get they're collective heads out of the sand. I'd much rather see younger people in government that actually and realistically have a stake in the future with no ties to big oil or any other major corporations...just a plain old human being with no party affiliation...just common sense. And people need to stop referring to them as Dem or Reps....there's no difference! A crook is a crook!
And no more voting yourself a raise!!!! You work for US! You want a raise...ask US! If this isn't the biggest joke I've ever seen I don't know what is.
Basically its all circling the bowl and soon you will hear the giant sucking sound as it all goes down the crapper. I say bring on the depression! Oh wait!....its already on its way!
Bebi: You are just so right, there aren't words to express it. I read that budget thing re: Palin and Rape Kits. Good G-d!
I cannot fathom the cold, sadistic, uncaring and uncompromising hatefulness that could produce such an action. I'll tell you one thing: If anyone thinks that a personality that could believe and do such a thing is capable of compromise (the key to our system), then welcome to her. I will never vote for her or the person who can physically stand next to her! I would fight to defend her right to believe and express her opinion, but to have such a heartless and cruel set of values? Puts her beyond my comprehension. It seems the Ideology people find great reasons and justifications to be cruel and sadistic to others, forgetting this: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Reply to WebGizmos:
You are so right, my friend.
Beli Bulma:
That is a cop out and the lie of a coward who can't stand for his convictions.
Every time he sat in that congregation and said, "Amen" to the sermon, he was testifying to God that he agreed with what was said. So, he either lied to his God for 20 years, or he is lying about what he believes now.
Either way, he's a lying coward and apparently will do and say anything to win... even betray his God. If he would betray his God what makes you think he wouldn't betray his country?
That's what I thought, you don't mean women's rights, you only mean abortion... which seems to be the only right for women you and the writer of your link actually respect.
The right to own other human beings and kill them at will. Yeah, real "enlightened" of you.
Please. I'm so sick of hearing about McCains tortured sob stories. Yes, the man was a POW, yes he endured some horrors. How does that make him the best person to do the job again?... From messiah1
This is one of the many problems our country has now. First off, you probably have never been in the service, so what gives you the right to make this kind of statement. I served in Vietnam myself and did it because then like today I feel that if i want to enjoy what America has to offer i should do my part and help defend her. You as with so many others seem not to realize what John McCain and some 55,000+ other people (Who Died) did for you and me.
I never reply to what i read here, but your statement really PI%$^&.... me off
The writer is me, that is my blog. And you're damn right, it's MY body (or any other woman's body) an no other person has the right to tell me what I can or cannot do it with. If your sister/daughter/niece was brutally raped and became pregnant because of it, would you further punish her by forcing her to have that child? THAT is inhumane.
And abortion wasn't the only issue I was concerned with, watch the video. Equal pay, health care, paid family medical leave, etc, all of which McCain (and thus Palin) seem to vote against.
And if you want to talk nonsense about Obama's former pastor (and his cop out) you should really research the crap Palin's church/pastor is spewing.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
