--- Begin Message ---
Open Debate Political Forum IMHO
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Today's topics:
* Sarah Palin had turbulent first year as mayor of Alaska town - 1 messages, 1
author
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum/browse_thread/thread/72db75ec39d8f403?hl=en
* Are Politicians Who Voted Against Self-Defense Fit For Office? - 4 messages,
2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum/browse_thread/thread/f460a04318988641?hl=en
* COMMON SENSE - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum/browse_thread/thread/9d2cc70064e1e6f2?hl=en
* Palin finally agrees to first tv interview - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum/browse_thread/thread/a616c650dd7f585a?hl=en
* Insanity - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum/browse_thread/thread/7140694fa0c9ddca?hl=en
* Suit filed to stop Cheney from destroying documents - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum/browse_thread/thread/fb89462d44df874e?hl=en
* OK, I'm scared now.......I'm starting to panic! - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum/browse_thread/thread/950adf643d617ddb?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Sarah Palin had turbulent first year as mayor of Alaska town
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum/browse_thread/thread/72db75ec39d8f403?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Sep 7 2008 9:29 am
From: James
Sarah Palin's first year as mayor
of Wasilla, Alaska, could easily have been her last as she became
embroiled in personnel challenges, a thwarted attempt to pack the City
Council and a bitter standoff with her local newspaper. Her first
months were so contentious and polarizing that critics started talking
of a recall.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2008163431_palin070.html
By Ken Armstrong and Hal Bernton
Seattle Times staff reporters
PREV 1 of 5 NEXT
AP
Sarah
Palin is shown in her office shortly after being elected mayor of
Wasilla. In her campaign, she had criticized the town's "current
tax-and-spend mentality" and its "stale leadership."
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin
AP
Then-Mayor
Sarah Palin, center, shown with the Wasilla, Alaska, City Council in
1998. Palin served four years on the council before running for mayor
in 1996.
FAYE PALIN / AP
Sarah Palin is sworn in as mayor of Wasilla,
Alaska. She would later say, "I grew tremendously in my early months as mayor."
Related
Palin church promotes gay-conversion eventMayor Palin
on police getting coffee (PDF)
Mayor Palin seeks positive examples of City Hall at work (PDF)
The police chief's first weekly report to Mayor Palin (PDF)
Former Wasilla mayor nominates Police Chief Stambaugh as an "employee of the
year" (PDF)
Mayor Palin's letter on why she fired Police Chief Stambaugh (PDF)
Archive | Palin embraced earmarks as small-town mayor, Alaska governorArchive |
McCain campaign's scrutiny of Palin called into questionArchive | Palin's swift
rise wins both admirers, enemiesArchive | Palin says 17-year-old daughter is
pregnant
Sarah Palin
1992: Wins City Council seat in Wasilla, Alaska
1996: Elected mayor of Wasilla
2002: Steps down after two terms because of term limits
2006: Elected Alaska's first female governor
At
last week's national convention, Republicans fought to turn a perceived
weakness of their vice-presidential nominee — a lack of experience —
into a signature strength, saying Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin had more
executive experience than both members of the Democratic ticket
combined.
Six years of her executive experience came as mayor of Wasilla, a
city north of Anchorage that had about 5,000 residents when she took
over. As much of Palin's hometown rallies with pride around her, 1,400
miles away — in a National Archives warehouse in Seattle — three boxes
of documents help capture the quality of her mayoral experience.
These records, from a federal wrongful-termination lawsuit, include
the minutiae of municipal governance, with memos to administrators and
personnel records stamped "confidential." The documents, combined with
accounts from her hometown newspaper, show how Palin's first year as
mayor could easily have been her last.
She became embroiled in personnel challenges, a thwarted attempt to
pack the City Council and a standoff with her local newspaper. Her
first months were so contentious and polarizing that critics started talking
recall.
Her first months also exposed threads that would later become
patterns — friends become enemies, enemies become friends and questions
get raised about why she fired this person or that person.
But the situation calmed, and rather than being recalled, Palin was
re-elected. She later acknowledged, "I grew tremendously in my early
months as mayor."
An unusual campaign
When Palin ran for mayor in the fall of 1996, she was 32 years old
and a four-year veteran of the City Council. Her opponent, John Stein,
had been mayor for nine years.
Stein, then 52, had a bachelor's degree in public management. In a
questionnaire published in the local newspaper, he said his hobbies
included shooting targets, gardening, photography and reading. Palin
had a degree in journalism and political science. She listed her
hobbies as: "Slaying salmon, hunting, 10-mile runs, the Iron Dog."
Asked about issues facing Wasilla, Stein wrote about "construction
of a city collector street grid" and an "architectural planning
process."
Palin wrote that people asking City Hall for help encountered
"complacency, inaction and even total disregard." She decried the
town's "current tax-and-spend mentality" and its "stale leadership."
She wrote: "New administration finally allows new input, fresh ideas
and ENERGY to work with the public to shape this city!!!"
To five of the city's department heads — including Irl Stambaugh,
the police chief — Palin's characterization was unfair. They wrote to
the local paper, saying: "If these allegations were true, and they most
certainly are not, why does Ms. Palin, as a member of the city council,
allow the practices to continue? Has she forgotten that it is the city
council's responsibility to set policy and it is the administration's
obligation to enforce that policy?"
In Alaska, municipal elections are officially nonpartisan. State law
tries to distance local government from the machinations of political
parties.
A Palin campaign ad displayed the slogan, "Positively Sarah."
"Endorsed by the NRA," it said. The ad encouraged people to vote for
"Conservative, More Efficient Government," and called Palin "ENERGETIC
... DETERMINED ... POSITIVE."
The ad pictured Palin with four state lawmakers — all Republicans,
pledging their support. More than 100 other supporters were also
listed, including the owners of the Mug Shot Saloon and the Wasilla
Bar, two taverns that stayed open until 4 or 5 a.m.
To Stein, the three-term mayor, this campaign had unusual overtones,
raising issues that had no bearing on local government. He would marvel
at how abortion became an issue — he was labeled pro-abortion — and how
some people noted that his wife's last name differed from his. He later
noted how Palin's backers included what he called the "Liquor Cabinet"
and Wasilla's religious conservatives.
In October 1996, about a third of Wasilla's registered voters went
to the polls. Palin collected 616 votes — 58 percent of the total.
"It's a new direction," she told the Frontiersman, the local newspaper.
Afterward, a TV station called her Wasilla's "first Christian
mayor." This prompted a letter from Stein, saying: "Really?" He listed
eight previous mayors, all Christian, and added: "With a name like
'Stein' some suspected that I must be a non-Christian, have
non-Christian blood or at least have sympathized with a non-Christian
sometime in my career. I'm proud of such a reputation but I, my family
and forbearers are of the Christian persuasion, too."
Department heads' fate
Right after the election, speculation set in about the fate of
Wasilla's six department heads, who served at the pleasure of the mayor.
Stambaugh, the police chief, had supported Stein during the
campaign. He'd also negotiated a contract with the previous mayor
saying he could be fired only "for cause." But whether a new mayor had
to honor that clause was in doubt.
Stambaugh had been appointed in 1993, back when the town's police
department was first created. Before that he had been a cop for 22
years in Anchorage, working his way up to the metropolitan police
department's third-highest post.
In 1994, Wasilla nominated Stambaugh to be Alaska's Municipal
Employee of the Year. He started with nothing, but, within a year,
assembled a trained staff of eight officers who would record 206
drunken-driving arrests.
In the summer of 1996, Stambaugh encouraged Wasilla and the Mat-Su
Borough, the regional governing body, to pass ordinances requiring bars
and liquor stores to close earlier than 5 a.m., the latest hour allowed
by state law. Because bars in Anchorage closed earlier, some people
drove to Wasilla to keep drinking, endangering themselves and others,
Stambaugh argued. He wanted Wasilla's bars to close at 2:30 a.m. on
weekdays and 3 a.m. on weekends.
The idea's supporters talked of reducing roadway fatalities.
Opponents talked of an encroachment on their individual freedom. The
borough's leadership rejected the proposal, and afterward so did the
Wasilla City Council, by a 3-2 vote. Palin was in the majority.
This same year, Stambaugh opposed a state legislative proposal to
lift some restrictions on Alaska's concealed-weapons law. Among other
things, it would allow concealed weapons in banks and even bars.
Stambaugh called the idea "ridiculous." "Bars, guns and booze don't mix
under any circumstances," he would later say.
The proposal passed the legislature, but Stambaugh and others asked
Alaska's governor, Tony Knowles, to veto it. The governor did — to the
dismay of the bill's proponents, which included the NRA.
The police chief
The week after Palin was elected, Stambaugh asked her if he still
had a job. "She answered that she was elected to make change,"
according to notes of Stambaugh's that he kept. "She went on to state
that the NRA didn't like me and that they wanted change."
In this meeting, his notes say, Palin said she'd heard that
Stambaugh and the town librarian had been seen at a recent Chamber of
Commerce meeting "acting sad and unhappy." Stambaugh told her that
wasn't true. In fact, they'd been making jokes.
A couple of days later, a story in the Frontiersman noted that Palin
was saying personnel changes were likely. "When asked how she would run
the city without experienced department heads, she responded, 'It's not
rocket science. It's $6 million and 53 employees.' "
The day Palin took office, she told Stambaugh she wanted him to stay
on provided he would support her as mayor, his notes say. He agreed.
She also asked him to drop the issue of bar hours. He agreed to that,
too. On this day, Palin fired the city's museum director, one of the
department heads.
Ten days later, Palin wrote to all the department heads, including
Stambaugh, asking for letters of resignation. She said she would then
decide which to accept. When Stambaugh declined to provide one —
pointing to his contract — Palin replied in a letter: "I will expect
your loyalty."
Stambaugh was 6-foot-2, 240 pounds. Because he'd heard that Palin
had felt intimidated by him during a meeting, he made sure to sit when
talking with her, and to use a soothing voice. By early December,
things had calmed down, and Stambaugh felt the threat of being fired
had passed.
"Positive" weekly reports
Palin kept a jar with the names of Wasilla residents. Once a week
she pulled a name from it and picked up the phone. How's the city
doing? she'd ask.
She wanted the police department to be just as friendly. On Dec. 17,
1996, she wrote to Stambaugh, saying some residents were concerned at
how officers stayed in their cars while patrolling. "Most businesses
would enjoy having them stop in, visit with patrons, drink a cup of
coffee, eat a meal, in general spread some sense of belonging and real
down-home community belonging," Palin wrote.
Stambaugh passed the word down, posting the memo with a handwritten note: "All
employees. FYI. Please help with this."
The day after Christmas, Palin sent a memo to Stambaugh and the
other department heads. "What a wonderful time of year!" she wrote. "As
we enter 1997, let's take this opportunity to start the new year off on
a positive note."
>From now on, the memo said, Palin wanted each department head to
send her a weekly report, due Friday, with an "update of activities"
and "at least two positive examples of work that was started, how we
helped the public, how we saved the City money, how we helped the
state, how we helped Uncle Sam, how we made operations run smoother, or
safer, or more efficient."
"Please use numbers when appropriate," she wrote, adding: "Staff, I
believe if we look for the positive, that is what we will ultimately
find. Conversely, look for the negative and you'll find that, too. ...
Wasilla has tremendous assets and opportunities and we can all choose
to be a part of contributing to the improvement of our community ... or
not. I encourage you to choose the prior because the train is a'moving
forward!"
"I realize this is an added chore, but at least it's a positive one!" she wrote.
Stambaugh already provided daily reports. He already provided a
monthly report. He already attended staff meetings with Palin and other
department heads every second and fourth Tuesday at 10 a.m.
But on Jan. 10 — the date that Palin's memo set for receipt of the
first weekly memo — Stambaugh complied with the mayor's directive,
sending her a one-page memo with lots of numbers and not a hint of
sarcasm. "Eleven accidents with no injuries were reported ... six
business alarms were reported ... three reports of fireworks complaints
were received ... four juveniles were cited for minor consuming."
The police chief also relayed two pieces of happy news. The
department "assisted 14 individuals by giving them rides or helping
them with their vehicles during the cold spell we experienced," his
memo said. Plus, the chief wrote, he was "pleased to report" that
Officer Sonerholm was able to return to full duty — "even though he is
still having some problems with his knee."
Stambaugh kept the reports coming. But on Jan. 30, he was on the
phone with the town's librarian — who said she'd just been fired — when
an assistant of Palin's walked up and gave Stambaugh an envelope.
Inside was a letter from Palin, saying Stambaugh, too, was fired.
"I do not feel I have your full support in my efforts to govern the City of
Wasilla," she wrote.
His firing was to be effective Feb. 13.
Stambaugh contacted a lawyer, who pressed Palin for details on how
the chief's support had fallen short. So the mayor listed examples.
Stambaugh had "made it clear" in a staff meeting that he believed the
weekly memo was a waste of time because the same information was
already available in other reports, she wrote.
"I wanted you to extract the relevant information because I wanted
your views as to what you thought was positive. Although you eventually
complied with my request, your response was disappointing."
Also: "When I met with you in private, instead of engaging in
interactive conversation with me, you gave me short, uncommunicative
answers and then you would sit there and stare at me in silence with a
very stern look, like you were trying to intimidate me."
She wrote: "You know when you have someone's full support, and you know when
you do not."
Stambaugh sued Palin and the city, saying he had been wrongfully fired.
Drama and backlash
For Palin, the firing of Stambaugh was only part of the drama that
unfolded in her first months as mayor. The Frontiersman and Anchorage
Daily News wrote one story after another about the turmoil.
After notifying the librarian that she was fired, Palin backtracked
and decided to keep her on. Palin had twice asked this librarian what
she thought about banning books, to which the librarian responded it
was a lousy idea, one she wouldn't go along with. Later, Palin told the
local paper that any questions she'd raised about censorship were only
"rhetorical."
Palin put in place what the local paper called a gag order,
prohibiting top city employees from talking to reporters unless she
cleared it first.
After Stambaugh and the museum director were fired, two of the four
remaining department heads quit. One, the public-works director,
accused Palin of undermining him by meeting secretly with contractors
and employees.
When three women who worked at the city's museum were asked to
decide among themselves which one should be let go, all three quit.
Palin tried to fill two vacancies on the City Council herself, even
though an ordinance said that wasn't her prerogative. It was the
council's. After the city attorney stopped Palin, the mayor said she'd
merely engaged in a ploy. "It was brilliant maneuvering I had to do to
deal with the impasse," she told the Frontiersman.
The Frontiersman ran blistering editorials, condemning Palin's
philosophy "that either we are with her or against her." The newspaper
accused Palin of mistaking the 616 votes she received as a "coronation."
"Wasilla residents have been subjected to attempts to unlawfully
appoint council members, statements that have been shown to be patently
untrue, unrepentant backpedaling, and incessant whining that her only
enemies are the press and a few disgruntled supporters of Mayor Stein.
... Palin promised to change the status quo, but at every turn we find
hints of cronyism and political maneuvering. We see a woman who has
long since surrendered her ideals to a political machine."
The newspaper's readers chimed in. "Mayor Sarah Palin behaves like a
petulant, spoiled teenager," wrote a woman who ran a flower shop. A
tool-and-die maker defended Palin, writing, "We didn't want 'business
as usual.' "
Some residents met and talked recall.
Moving beyond Wasilla
By the end of Palin's first year as mayor, things had settled down
and talk of recall had faded. She was re-elected mayor in 1999. In 2002
she ran for lieutenant governor and lost. In 2006 she ran for governor
and won.
As governor, she fired the state's public-safety commissioner under
circumstances that are now the subject of an ethics investigation.
Lyda Green, the Republican president of the Alaska State Senate, had
been one of Palin's biggest supporters back in 1996. But she's a fan no
more. Green recently told the Anchorage Daily News: "She's not prepared
to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or
president?"
But Palin had won other folks over. When she ran for governor, one
opponent ran an ad quoting one of those blistering editorials from the
Frontiersman. Vicki Naegele, the former managing editor who wrote the
editorial, defended Palin.
"As a community newspaper, we held her feet to the fire," Naegele
wrote. "This was one of those scorching editorials. I remember the need
for such harsh words diminished as the months wore on."
Palin herself said at that time: "If nothing else, the old
Frontiersman editorial points out the importance of administrative
experience at the chief executive level. I grew tremendously in my
early months as mayor, managing the fastest-growing city in the state,
and I turned my critics around."
On Saturday, Maria Comella, spokeswoman for Palin's campaign for
vice president, said of Palin's first year as mayor: "The bottom line
was that this was Gov. Palin challenging the good-old-boy network and
shaking up the status quo to get things done."
Stambaugh's wrongful-termination lawsuit was thrown out in 2000 by a
federal judge, who said that even if Palin's reasons for firing him
were political, she had that right.
After he was fired, Stambaugh spent a year in Bosnia, training
police officers under the auspices of the United Nations. He's now
retired.
Hal Bernton reported from Wasilla and Anchorage and Ken Armstrong from Seattle.
Do We Need Change, You're Damn Right We Do, And The World Needs Us To Change,
Now!!
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Are Politicians Who Voted Against Self-Defense Fit For Office?
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum/browse_thread/thread/f460a04318988641?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Sep 7 2008 9:44 am
From: Michael Ejercito
On Sep 6, 6:10 am, jimstaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Your Point?????????
>
The voting record is in these two links.
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/93/house/09300SB2165_05132004_004000T.pdf
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/93/senate/09300SB2165_03252004_020000T.pdf
We should publicize the names of those who voted nay.
Michael
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Sep 7 2008 10:18 am
From: jimstaro
Good for you, but Still What's the Point?????
Self Defense in the Hands of Incompetent Gun Owners!!!
Self Defense in the Hands of Immature Gun Owners!!!!
On Sep 7, 12:44 pm, Michael Ejercito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sep 6, 6:10 am, jimstaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Your Point?????????
>
> The voting record is in these two links.
>
> http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/93/house/09300SB2165_0513...
>
> http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/93/senate/09300SB2165_032...
>
> We should publicize the names of those who voted nay.
>
> Michael
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Sep 7 2008 10:24 am
From: jimstaro
And Self Defense Against What, in a civilized society, though fast
heading in the opposite direction, led by the lack of common sense!!
You want self defense join the civilian militia, the 'National Guard',
but they aren't National now doing Multiple Tours in the two
theaters!!
But they'll let you play around with the Semi's and Auto's if they
think your fit enough, as well as other WMD Ordinance!!
On Sep 7, 12:44 pm, Michael Ejercito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sep 6, 6:10 am, jimstaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Your Point?????????
>
> The voting record is in these two links.
>
> http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/93/house/09300SB2165_0513...
>
> http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/93/senate/09300SB2165_032...
>
> We should publicize the names of those who voted nay.
>
> Michael
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Sep 7 2008 7:48 pm
From: Michael Ejercito
On Sep 7, 10:18 am, jimstaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Good for you, but Still What's the Point?????
>
> Self Defense in the Hands of Incompetent Gun Owners!!!
>
> Self Defense in the Hands of Immature Gun Owners!!!!
Incompetent, immature gun owners like the NYPD?
What were they defending themselves against when they killed Sean
Bell?
Michael
==============================================================================
TOPIC: COMMON SENSE
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum/browse_thread/thread/9d2cc70064e1e6f2?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Sep 7 2008 10:28 am
From: YourFriend
COMMON PRAYERFUL SENSE: The topic that I would like to talk about this
month is: OVER DOWNSIZING U.S. MILITARIES.
For several Presidencies. Against GOD ALMIGHTIES prompting's. The
United States government has over downsized their militaries.
Every election year we have to make our new decisions. We have to
decide who we want to represent us to the nations of the world.
We have to decide who we want leading the policies, and approaches
which we have toward all of the nations of the world.
Some of these nations affect our day to day life's individually. Some
of these nations could drag us into war. One of these nations could
possibly wipe us off the map.
Some national issues are understood by the general population. And
some are not.
Some national issues, the government does not want you to be concerned
with. It might not be good for the economy. And it might not be good
to let the other nations know that we, the people, are concerned.
Downplaying some of the important issues is what the government does
with some very important and possibly grave international issues.
The government has downsized our military to the point that we are no
longer prepared to defend ourselves against real threats. Threats that
are a reality in the world today.
The government acts as though the terrorists are the only real threat
in the world, against us today.
While China has unrelentlessly increased its military size and
spending, year after year after year. Time and time again you hear
this on the news.
And you also continuously hear, year after year, about how China has
gotten its hands on some more of our defensive and nuclear secrets. As
though they did not already have a growing and growing stock pile of
those types of weapons themselves already.
For years and years we have been downsizing our military. For economic
purposes. While at the same time we have been buying all of China's
government owned, merchandise that we can afford.
China's military's are fat, and are still growing fatter every day.
While ours are thin.
How many possible reasons could there possibly be for China to
continually build up its military's?
The population and food and energy have been a major issue in China
for years and years and years.
Years and years ago they decided what they needed to do. There is an
old Chinese proverb that goes something like this: If you cannot beat
your enemy today, wait until you can, before you fight him.
There are other international issues that need to be considered before
we make our decisions for President again this year.
One of these issues can be investigated more thoroughly at:
http://members.aol.com/wetoldyouso/
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Sep 7 2008 10:48 am
From: jimstaro
"Against GOD ALMIGHTIES prompting's."
Say What, You Fruitcake!!!!!!!!!!!
On Sep 7, 1:28 pm, YourFriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> COMMON PRAYERFUL SENSE: The topic that I would like to talk about this
> month is: OVER DOWNSIZING U.S. MILITARIES.
>
> For several Presidencies. Against GOD ALMIGHTIES prompting's. The
> United States government has over downsized their militaries.
>
> Every election year we have to make our new decisions. We have to
> decide who we want to represent us to the nations of the world.
>
> We have to decide who we want leading the policies, and approaches
> which we have toward all of the nations of the world.
>
> Some of these nations affect our day to day life's individually. Some
> of these nations could drag us into war. One of these nations could
> possibly wipe us off the map.
>
> Some national issues are understood by the general population. And
> some are not.
>
> Some national issues, the government does not want you to be concerned
> with. It might not be good for the economy. And it might not be good
> to let the other nations know that we, the people, are concerned.
>
> Downplaying some of the important issues is what the government does
> with some very important and possibly grave international issues.
>
> The government has downsized our military to the point that we are no
> longer prepared to defend ourselves against real threats. Threats that
> are a reality in the world today.
>
> The government acts as though the terrorists are the only real threat
> in the world, against us today.
>
> While China has unrelentlessly increased its military size and
> spending, year after year after year. Time and time again you hear
> this on the news.
>
> And you also continuously hear, year after year, about how China has
> gotten its hands on some more of our defensive and nuclear secrets. As
> though they did not already have a growing and growing stock pile of
> those types of weapons themselves already.
>
> For years and years we have been downsizing our military. For economic
> purposes. While at the same time we have been buying all of China's
> government owned, merchandise that we can afford.
>
> China's military's are fat, and are still growing fatter every day.
> While ours are thin.
>
> How many possible reasons could there possibly be for China to
> continually build up its military's?
>
> The population and food and energy have been a major issue in China
> for years and years and years.
>
> Years and years ago they decided what they needed to do. There is an
> old Chinese proverb that goes something like this: If you cannot beat
> your enemy today, wait until you can, before you fight him.
>
> There are other international issues that need to be considered before
> we make our decisions for President again this year.
>
> One of these issues can be investigated more thoroughly
> at:http://members.aol.com/wetoldyouso/
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Palin finally agrees to first tv interview
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum/browse_thread/thread/a616c650dd7f585a?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Sep 7 2008 1:00 pm
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_Palin finally agrees to first tv interview._
(http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/07/palin-finally-agrees-to-first-tv-interview/)
Under _intense criticism_
(http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/05/scarborough-interview/) for _refusing to
talk to the media_
(http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/05/mccain-campaign-plans-to-keep-palin-away-from-the-press/)
, Gov. Sarah
Palin (R-AK) “is offering her first televised interview to ABC News _in the
coming week in Alaska_ (http://www.newsweek.com/id/157748) .” The campaign
said
that an interview “was offered to ABC’s Charlie Gibson several days ago and
that they expect it to happen in the latter part of the week in Alaska.”
Jesus was a community organizer and Pontius Pilate was a governor.
**************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog,
plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.
(http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Insanity
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum/browse_thread/thread/7140694fa0c9ddca?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Sep 7 2008 4:05 pm
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wouldn't new entitlement programs be an improvement over the serious money we
are serioulsy wasting in the Middle East? LK
Insanity
by DarkSyde
Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 06:10:44 PM PDT
Can someone tell me what it is conservatives are so afraid will happen if Obama
wins? They sure sound angry and terrified about the prospect, but why?
It can't be that they're afraid women will be suddenly awarded the right of
reproductive choice; women already have it and the GOP did nothing to change
that when given the chance of a lifetime. Fuel prices have tripled under the
Republican reign, they seem fine with it, and so we have to assume that that
worry is not a factor in the conservative calculus. Nor can they be
legitimately concerned that democrats will vastly increase federal spending, or
enact horrendously expensive new entitlement programs supported by taxes
socializing healthcare costs and bar the government from benefiting from the
cost saving magic of the free market. Nope, those horses have all fled the
barn, no use closing the door now
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sun, 7 Sep 2008 2:07 am
Subject: Insanity
Insanity
by DarkSyde
Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 06:10:44 PM PDT
Can someone tell me what it is conservatives are so afraid will happen if Obama
wins? They sure sound angry and terrified about the prospect, but why?
It can't be that they're afraid women will be suddenly awarded the right of
reproductive choice; women already have it and the GOP did nothing to change
that when given the chance of a lifetime. Fuel prices have tripled under the
Republican reign, they seem fine with it, and so we have to assume that that
worry is not a factor in the conservative calculus. Nor can they be
legitimately concerned that democrats will vastly increase federal spending, or
enact horrendously expensive new entitlement programs supported by taxes
socializing healthcare costs and bar the government from benefiting from the
cost saving magic of the free market. Nope, those horses have all fled the
barn, no use closing the door now. ?
Maybe they're worried democrats will be vacationing, sound asleep at the
switch, while the intel community frantically tries to warn them of a vast,
pending terrorist attack that could kill thousands of innocent Americans. Some
might even be concerned that democrats will exploit such a tragedy for personal
political gain and still fail to capture or kill the criminal masterminds that
planned it. Others might speculate Obama will respond by foolishly attacking
the wrong nation on a false premise and get us embroiled in a trillion dollar
bloody boondoggle that wrecks out military readiness, destroys our
international credibility, and gets thousands of US soldiers and untold
hundreds of thousands of innocent bystanders killed or maimed for life. Worst
case scenario: after all that misery and money, weak willed democrats will roll
over and hand a date for US failure to the insurgents in Iraq.
Then again, maybe conservatives are thinking closer to home. What if
progressive economic policies wrecked the economy, rocked Wall Street, caused
hundreds of thousands of people to lose their homes and jobs, and turned over
our national economic future to the tender mercies of fundamentalist Sunni
Monarchs and the communist Chinese? Or expand government intrusiveness making
toilet paper out of the US Constitution? Maybe, in their darkest fears, they're
afraid democrats would foolishly go on vacation and ignore their
responsibilities while a massive hurricane lumbers into the US coast at a slow
jog and sinks a major American city.
At least one source of conservative anxiety is imminently plausible: Democrats
might rescind tax breaks for companies that ship American jobs overseas, divert
corporate welfare from insanely profitable corporations to uninsured or sick
children, raise taxes on billionaires and oil companies, and create a more
equitable healthcare system. That such possibilities strike fear into the
corrupt soul of conservatism says a lot more about their decadent priorities
than the middle class values of their opponents.
I guess that's what confuses a lot of voters: Conservatives are worried that
Democrats might do the same astonishingly lousy job Republicans have done for
the last eight years. To avoid even the possibility that that might happen,
conservatives prescribe electing more members from the same crew who wrecked
the country, in what is clearly to any lucid external observer the ridiculous
and desperate hope that the same party will fix it all by continuing,
uninterrupted, the same policies that produced the damage in the first place.
In the alternate reality fabricated by the seamlessly integrated conservative
PR apparatus, this extension of the failed status quo is called change, in the
rest of the world it's one of the better known definitions of insanity. ?
?
Jesus was a community organizer and Pontius Pilate was a governor.
and Pontius Pilate was a governor.
Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest
fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Sep 7 2008 6:32 pm
From: Lobo
PREDATOR
<<Could it be because he sat in a white people hating church for 22
years, G-d
damning America? Could it be because he's a wimp that won't defend
America?
Could it be because he is afraid of God and guns? Or could it be that
every
negro politician for centuries has turned his city, his state, or his
nation
into a cesspool, proving the negro unfit for anything more than
following
orders?>>
Why, thank you, Predator! Thank you for giving us the frank lowdown on
why Obama is absolutely unacceptable to rightwingers as president of
the United States:
Because he's a "NEGRO"!
Unlike you, most hyper-conservatives are unwilling to stand up and
proudly proclaim to the world that they are, in fact, racist dimwits
with room-temperature IQs.
I commend you for your forthrightness and honesty, Sir! You are a true
paragon of morons; an exemplar of imbeciles nationwide! And as an
Obama supporter, and to the extent that you speak as a Republican for
your fellow Republicans, I sincerely and fervently pray that you are
somehow able to extend the expression of your stupefyingly idiotic
skinhead opinions beyond the confines of this Forum!
======================================================================
On Sep 7, 7:17 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 9/7/2008 2:07:50 AM Central Daylight Time,
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> Insanity (http://dailykos.com/hotlist/add/2008/9/6/21102/36119/main//)
> by _DarkSyde_ (http://darksyde.dailykos.com/)
> Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 06:10:44 PM PDT
>
> Can someone tell me what it is conservatives are so afraid will happen if
> Obama wins? They sure sound angry and terrified about the prospect, but why?
>
> Could it be because he sat in a white people hating church for 22 years, G-d
> damning America? Could it be because he's a wimp that won't defend America?
> Could it be because he is afraid of God and guns? Or could it be that every
> negro politician for centuries has turned his city, his state, or his nation
> into a cesspool, proving the negro unfit for anything more than following
> orders?
>
> **************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog,
> plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.
> (http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Suit filed to stop Cheney from destroying documents
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum/browse_thread/thread/fb89462d44df874e?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Sep 7 2008 8:23 pm
From: Stevo
Lawsuit: Prevent Cheney from withholding, destroying documents on his exit from
office
Nick Langewis
Published: Sunday September 7, 2008
ARTICLEURL
Historians and scholars are among those joining a lawsuit aimed at
preventing the Bush administration from destroying or withholding documents
related to the role of the "most influential vice president in U.S. history,"
Dick Cheney, in forming public policy, the Washington Post reports in its
Monday edition.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is expected to
file the suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Monday
to assert the requirement to preserve the documents in question under the
post-Watergate Presidential Records Act of 1978, contrary to loopholes
engineered and statements made during Cheney's time in office.
Expected to be named as defendants are Vice President Cheney, the executive
offices of Cheney and President Bush, the National Archives and chief archivist
Allen Weinstein.
"I'm concerned that they may not be preserved," said Stanley Kutler,
constitutional scholar and professor emeritus at the University of Wisconsin
Law School. "Whether they've been zapped already, we don't know."
"I think you'd have to be very worried about it," added former vice
president Walter Mondale. "Under Bush and Cheney, they've used every
opportunity to assert executive privilege."
"The Office of the Vice President currently follows the Presidential Records
Act and will continue to follow the requirements of the law, which includes
turning over vice presidential records to the National Archives at the end of
the term," Cheney spokesperson Jamie Hennigan said. One worry on the part of
Kutler and organizations such as the American Historical Association and the
Society of American Archivists, however, is that Vice President Cheney's famous
assertion that his office is not part of the Executive Branch, along with a
2001 executive order that seemingly narrows the scope of documents subject to
the 1978 law to possibly exclude legislative records and others deemed
"non-executive," will cause some documents to be withheld.
"It horrifies me as a citizen to think our government can operate in total
secrecy during the administration and then, after the administration, remain in
secrecy," said George Mason University professor and expected plaintiff Martin
J. Sherwin.
"When a vice president is sitting there in the West Wing and participating
at the highest levels in the work of the executive branch," added
constitutional scholar Joel K. Goldstein, "it's a little bit anomalous to say
you're not part of the executive branch."
More can be read at the Washington Post.
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Lawsuit_Prevent_Cheney_from_withholding_destroying_0907.html
, Stevo
==============================================================================
TOPIC: OK, I'm scared now.......I'm starting to panic!
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum/browse_thread/thread/950adf643d617ddb?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Sep 7 2008 9:37 pm
From: Stevo
At a time when we've gone through 8 years of the worst president in
American history, when over 80 % say we as a country we are going in the wrong
direction At a time when we're stuck in an unwinnable war, with no end in
sight. A war where more and more people say they want it to come to an end.
At a time where we see unemployment figures rising, businesses closing, people
losing their homes and their jobs at rates never seen before. You would
think that this should be an ideal time for the Democrats to win in spectacular
fashion.
But, instead -- I'm scared, scared almost to the point of panic..........a
full blown, self destuctive panic. I've never in my life felt this way
before ---- AND I DON'T LIKE IT!!! I don't know what I'll do. I don't like
the thoughts I've been having lately, nor do I like the nightmares.
Every recent poll seems to show a distinct movement towards McCain, since
his pick of Sarah Palin. I feel the election slipping away.
You can't make this stuff up! If a Hollywood screenwriter had suggested for
a movie or a TV show, that a presidential candidate would chose such an
inexperenced, unqualified novice to politics, as a potential president -- That
screenwriter would be laughed out of the business and be ridiculed for the rest
of his (or her) life.
But for reasons beyond my comprehension, the press and it seems like too
many of the voting public have "fallen n love" with Sarah Barracuda
Palin..............WHY?????
She is absolutely the worst possible person we could have as McCain's VP.
I hate to say it, but to me, it looks like a McCain win to me. And a McCain
win, means a Palin presidency. Because I don't think McCain will last very
long --- And that's probably their plan.
For the first time in American history, we will have a president most of the
people will know nothing about.
If that happens --- America is done for -- it's over! We lasted 230 years,
but if McCain takes the oath on Jan. 20, 2009, The United States of America
will be dead. We will be in full bwn Nazism, or Fascism, or both -- I don't
really know the difference. I only know that we will have lost our last hope
at keeping this country free.
It started when these thugs stole it from Al Gore, with the help from
SCOTUS, then Bush continued wiping his ass with the Constitution.....And now
McCain will finish off Lady Liberty as a present day Jack the Ripper would
dispose of a hooker.
Every night I pray to a God I only half heartedly believe in, that I'm
wrong. But I fear I'm not.
, Stevo
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open
Debate Political Forum IMHO"
group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com?hl=en
--- End Message ---
