Comments for SCANDAL: A Reporter Accuses Palin of Racism -- and Gives Us a Glimpse Into His Own Prejudices »
Posted By Karlyc 1 year, 1 month ago in NewsOver the weekend Sarah Palin accused Barack Obama of "palling around" with terrorists--a reference to his longstanding friendship and professional association with Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, husband-and-wife Chicago college professors who are unrepentant about their activities in the Weather Underground gang.
According to an "analysis" by Douglass Daniel of the Associated Press, "[Palin's] attack was unsubstantiated." Palin said she got her information from the New York Times, and we suppose it says something that this isn't good enough for the AP. Odder still is Daniel's claim that Palin's statement "carried a racially tinged subtext that John McCain himself may come to regret."
Read Full Story at online.wsj.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 198
-
33%
Karlyc1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This article presents a good analysis of the tactic of Obama and his followers to accuse his critics of being racist, rather than presenting the facts about his policies.
Reply
"Daniel does no reporting to back this up. He accuses Palin of racism because in his mind, terrorist implies Muslim, Muslim implies dark-skinned, and dark-skinned implies black."
"This exercise in free association scarcely qualifies as analysis. Nonetheless, let us consider it step by step:
"Terrorist implies Muslim. It is certainly true that America's terrorist enemies today are Muslims who justify their actions in Islamic terms. The terrorist fringe of the 1960s far left, by contrast, has withered away (or "sold out," in the parlance of the times). But there is nothing distinctively Islamic about tactics like bombing and kidnapping, which were used by outfits like the Weather Underground in their time "-
67%
mesodude1 year, 1 month ago
-
63%
kennrich2221 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Republicans love to bait the Democrats with this racist crap. It is the ultimate distractor, they make it look like Obama is accusing everyone who disagrees with him of racism. It's more Republican bull. Ignore. Get them the hell out of office while there is still something left to the country. They just use the poor and the ignorant by supporting stupid positions like prolife, flag burning bans, and anti-gay sentiments to line up these voters and then they adopt policies that only benefit the rich and corporations and they screw over their the poor, dumb bastards that vote for them. Just look at the last 8 years of war on the poor and the middle class. I don't have to go far to show you what these sons of bitches have done to this country! If you are not rich and you vote for McCain and Palin, you are an idiot.
Reply-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user
-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
50%
BB641 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If the banking failures are truly only a Republican caused problem, where are the congressional hearings? Where is the rage from little Nancy and Harry? That's easy. Freddie and Fanny were huge money pits for the DNC operatives. Silence is a very good indication that this is a DNC caused problem.
Reply-
67%
dunkirk1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ROFLMAO, so you;re saying the Dems did this all the while the Repugsa controlled the govt?? So I want to elect someone who cant see a monay scam happening whe4n they control ALL legislation??? Its more the other way around, the Repubs HELD ALL THE Power (you always said the Dems have no power did tht change??) so now that the failed policies of the REPUIBLICANS are being shown fo rwhat they are you trty spinnig it into a Dem problem?? ROFLMAO.
Reply-
30%
BB641 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm not saying the GOP has some accountability here but the problems with the banking started when the anti-red lining of the 70's became part of the mainstream lefty policies. Again I ask, if the DNC wasn't hiding something why wouldn't there be hearings already? This deal was little more than a cover up.
Reply-
80%
quackpot1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The start was a good one, but some time during the past seven-plus years of republican control of congress and administration, it accelerated to become too fast to be sustained.
Reply
Good start + push too hard = fall on the face = disaster of a finish.
Hint: look at the BIG SHOVE, not the start. -
83%
hamy1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Um...what about when the republicans were in charge just a year and a half ago? Why didn't they stop it? If it was stoppable for the democrats, why didn't the republicans stop it before? It can't be about filibusters because they threatened to take away the filibuster last time the democrats didn't agree with them. It must have to do with their OWN money.
Reply
Your point is moot.
-
-
-
71%
mesodude1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"If the banking failures are truly only a Republican caused problem, where are the congressional hearings? Where is the rage from little Nancy and Harry? "
Reply
A) Republicans controlled Congress from the early 90s til a couple of years ago and a Republican President has been in the White House for the last 8 years. If the shoe fits...
B)You really have NO idea what your Congress is doing, do you? -
80%
donald511 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Remember the "Do Nothing" Repug Congress that did nothing after the Enron and Worldcom debacles? Hastert putting the House on only a 4 day work week, and doing nothing after either the Foley Pedophile or Abramoff scandals!
Reply
Lehman testifying yesterday and getting torn up!
Forget that the Bush DoJ doesn't even back up congressional subpoenas to boot?
-
-
53%
antibrainwasher1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The republicowards would have us talk about anything at all but the reality of economic collapse from unfettered unregulated republican ignorance and greed.
Reply
Any topic but the murder of 5000 american soldiers for a neocon lie.
Republislime swiftboating is all they have left, with no ideas or any viable candidates, all they have is hate mongering, fear mongering, racism, religious zealotry, ignorance and greed.
Republicowards are incapable of examining their bankrupt morality and psychopathetic irrationality, the house of cards is falling, the ship is burning, and the cowards will never admit its reaganomic trickel down voodoo rich richer economics that have destroyed the economy, and neocon lies that have murdered 5000 soldiers for a lie. -
-
100%
GWHayduke1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The reality of Bush induced failed policy usurps qualifications for anyone who would support those policies. Continued failure at every turn has taken its toll on this country. McW wants to prolong the misery.
Reply
Seriously, what definable good has come from the W administration's policy making?
Unless, of course, your wealth ranks in the top 5% in the US, are you better off now than you were when the fraternity boy Prezudint took office?
There is a place in this world for smart people and that is leadership.
There is a place in this world for slack jawed neophytes as well, unfortunately the Oval Office is not one of them.
-
-
41%
Endoscopy1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Poor mesodude. he can't remember from one day to the next.
Reply
CRA was passed by the compassionate Democrats and signed by Carter. That compassion was for the poor minorities who wanted to get a house of their own. Then under Clinton in 1992 the compassionate Democrats passed the upgrade to CRA and it was signed by Clinton and took effect in 1995. This compassionate act expanded the CRA from minorities to everybody. Lots of compassion for the poor. Banks were graded by the CRA for expansion and growth and they looked at bad mortgages as a cost of doing business. So the sub prime mortgages went from $48 billion to $1 trillion at present. Housing prices increased sharply with all the new demand. That is a lot of compassion. Uh oh. Getting a bunch of foreclosures. Empty houses increasing till today over 14% of homes are vacant. Oops the housing prices fell sharply. The bubble burst.
http://mysite.verizon.net/vodkajim/housingbubble/
Oh my, all that paper in loans is based on the current sale price of the real estate. My goodness look at all of the banks in trouble because of all those mortgages are red ink now. Crash go banks. Takeovers by the dozen. Big firms bailed out. Fannie and Freddy federalized. Massive bailout.
Who warned it was coming? McCain
Who fought it in 2003, 2005, and 2006? Democrats
Thank you liberals.-
43%
dunkirk1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Signed by carter?? In the 70's?? Hmmmm AND since then we;ve had Rayg8n, Bush I and Dumya. So what your saying is after 20 years of REPUBLICAN rule they seemed incapable of changing it?? But wait you say it was a DEM Congress blocking it?? Hmmmm but we;ve had Repuiblicna control of Congress since 92 thats 14 years. Oh but CLinton was Pesident?? Dam that leaves us with 6 years of REPUBLICNA DOMINATED government and they couldnt address it?? AND you say they fought it in 2003,2004 and 2005?? When the REpublicans dominatesd the govt and the bill couldnt make its way OUT OF A REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED COMMITTEE?? ROFLMAO
Reply-
-
67%
dunkirk1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ROFLMAO, exactly how did Dems stifle reforms in a REPUBLICAN controlled congress?? please be specific, the REPUBLICNAS HAD the majority which means they had more votes and controlled the committees. It would seem the stifling being done was by teh REPUBLICANS in quashing oversight.
Reply
-
-
25%
Endoscopy1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Poor dunkirk forgot Clinton who put it on steroids.
Reply
Signed by carter in 1977 for minorities only. Updated to everybody in 1992 by Clinton. Updates went into effect in 1995. At that point there were $48 billion in sub prime loans. Then it skyrocketed to $1 trillion today.
What happened in 2003, 2005, and 2006?
Democrats went to the wall to defend Fannie and Freddy.
Why couldn't the Republicans do anything. Threat of filibuster kills anything in the senate.
So liberals thank your senators for stopping this bad (in their eyes) legislation. Thank them for the mess we are in now.-
75%
djn3nunez31 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Not surprisingly given the higher degree of supervision, loans made under the CRA program were made in a more responsible way than other subprime loans. CRA loans carried lower rates than other subprime loans and were less likely to end up securitized into the mortgage-backed securities that have caused so many losses, according to a recent study by the law firm Traiger & Hinckley (PDF file here).
Reply
Finally, keep in mind that the Bush administration has been weakening CRA enforcement and the law’s reach since the day it took office. The CRA was at its strongest in the 1990s, under the Clinton administration, a period when subprime loans performed quite well. It was only after the Bush administration cut back on CRA enforcement that problems arose, a timing issue which should stop those blaming the law dead in their tracks. The Federal Reserve, too, did nothing but encourage the wild west of lending in recent years. It wasn’t until the middle of 2007 that the Fed decided it was time to crack down on abusive pratices in the subprime lending market. Oops.
http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blo...-
75%
hyperbola1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That information has been available for awhile now, but the sock puppets prefer to scream about other things.
Reply
The fact of the matter is that the bad debts at Fanny and Freddy are less than half of the size of the $700 trillion bailout. The real problem is the ponzi scheme leveraging (and not only in housing) done by Wall Street in unregulated "investment" banks, insurance businesses and hedge funds. At Lehmann Bros. for example, the leveraging was over 30-fold, i.e. they were gambling with debts over 30-fold greater than their capital.
The real problems are not F and F but things like the growth of "credit default swaps" at AIG from $1 trillion in 2001 to $62 trillion in 2008. -
Neutral
Endoscopy1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ROTFLMAO
Reply
That act is where the sub prime loans came from. The rules were lax ALL the time. Always trying to blame Republicans when it is a Democrat fault. Compassionate loans are a Democrat process not a Republican one. CRA did away with the rules except that banks were graded for the CRA rating if they wanted to expand and open branches.
Conservative NEVER have thought that compassion belongs in finance, only liberals. Why can't you take the heat when your side makes a mistake. That is right, liberals never do anything wrong.
The CRA was enhanced by Clinton and went into effect in 1995. In 2000 Clinton asked Congress to reform Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. Bush has called for reform since 2001. 17 times in 2008 alone.
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/09/bush-cal...
Read it and weep. There are several sites with similar information. Of course that makes the liberals in the wrong so they will just say it is a lie. Clinton has said the problem was caused by Democrats.
-
-
-
-
50%
willottica1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thank you, republicans, for your "attempts" to take oversight power AWAY from government and give it into the hands of a privately-owned, unaccountable corporation. Maybe if you had tried to fix the system in place, instead of completely re-inventing the wheel, you might have come up with a bill that could pass.
Reply
"But we tried!" you cry. Or maybe you came up with a bill so offensive and implausible that it was guaranteed to fail, thus preserving the illusion of trying to do the right thing while ensuring that unregulated greed could proceed unchecked.-
-
25%
Endoscopy1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The CRA changed the rules for giving covered people mortgages.
Reply
They could not demand 20% down.
They could not check credit history.
They could not check earnings.
This was the compassion the Democrats had for the covered people. They really wanted to make sure those people could get a house. Such compassion.
Create the housing bubble and watch it pop.
You obviously didn't see the videos on youtube of the House committee discussing the issue. The issue was NEVER the legislation in front of them. It was an attack on the person bringing in the report that there was a problem with Fannie and Freddy. The Democrats attacked him and told him they thought he was lying. It was a vicious attack by angry Democrats. Barney Frank was one of the worst. He earned his pay from Fannie and Freddy that day. "There is absolutely no problem with Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac."-
75%
djn3nunez31 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Community Reinvestment Act, passed in 1977, requires banks to lend in the low-income neighborhoods where they take deposits. Just the idea that a lending crisis created from 2004 to 2007 was caused by a 1977 law is silly. But it’s even more ridiculous when you consider that most subprime loans were made by firms that aren’t subject to the CRA. University of Michigan law professor Michael Barr testified back in February before the House Committee on Financial Services that 50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision and another 30% were made by affiliates of banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations.
Reply
http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blo...-
Neutral
Endoscopy1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You are ignoring what happened to the act in 1992. It was put on steroids by the Clinton Administration in 1992 and went into effect in 1995. You also ignore a cause and effect. It is not the foreclosures that are the problem. They only sparked the real problem. The housing bubble burst.
Reply
http://mysite.verizon.net/vodkajim/housingbubble/
Do you think about what you write?
"requires banks to lend in the low-income neighborhoods where they take deposits.
That is the place where the people who can afford a 20% down with no more than 2 weeks pay for the mortgage right? This is the heart of where the compassionate sub prime loans were born.
1995 $48 billion sub prime loans from minorities and today $1 trillion from everybody. Lots of loans and the housing industry could not keep up with demand and up shot the price of homes. In 2006 the foreclosures were starting to climb. The bubble was bursting. Down it came. Lots of empty homes now. 14.3% of homes in the US are vacant. Mortgages value to banks are based on the current resale value of the real estate. 20%+ drop in prices of homes. mortgages turned from black ink to red ink in two plus years and the institutions that held the paper backed by mortgages had the money disappear out of them.
The CRA rating of loans required in poor neighborhoods cause the sub prime loans.
It was saturation of those more able to pay that caused the riskier loans.
It was the riskier sub prime loans that caused the foreclosures to increase.
It was the high foreclosure rate starting a little before 2006 that caused the housing prices to fall.
The fall of the housing prices caused the papers issued backed by mortgages to go from black to red ink.
It was the loss of money in the papers for mortgages that caused the crash of the institutions.
Is that cause and effect simple enough for you?
-
-
-
-
60%
most_reasonable1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
John what did they do to you?
Reply
Remember when you were running for president elect in 2000 and the GOP machine claimed that you had sired a black child out of wedlock?
How the dirt smear of the GOP hurt you and caused you to proclaim that there is a "special" place in hell for those who partake in such evil.
Now it is your turn to stand as the flag bearer for the GOP, and while you claimed to be a "maverick" you have accepted the same dirty politics of the GOP hate mongers that attacked you. Your financial advisers (you rightlyfully claim no expertise beyond that of GWB are the same cast of characters like Phil (Americans are a bunch of Whiners) Gramm. The man behind the GOP efforts to dismantle all of the oversites on banking.
There you go again McSame, spouting the failed policies, and hate so previlent of the Bush administration. No wonder they call you McSame.
John WHAT DID THEY DO TO YOU? -
75%
djn3nunez31 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with subprime crisis
Reply
Fresh off the false and politicized attack on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, today we’re hearing the know-nothings blame the subprime crisis on the Community Reinvestment Act — a 30-year-old law that was actually weakened by the Bush administration just as the worst lending wave began. This is even more ridiculous than blaming Freddie and Fannie.
The Community Reinvestment Act, passed in 1977, requires banks to lend in the low-income neighborhoods where they take deposits. Just the idea that a lending crisis created from 2004 to 2007 was caused by a 1977 law is silly
http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blo...-
100%
Endoscopy1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I responded to your foolishness above. CRA ratings are required for banks to grow and expand. They therefore looked at bad mortgages as a cost of doing business. The problem is nobody knew what would happen when there were too many of them.
Reply -
-
-
-
50%
cassysue1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I find the bobbleheads for obamma to be so very amusing, if it were not for the dire consequences of their abject stupidity... IT WAS BARNEY FRANK AND COMPANY who are at the bottom of this mess. The refused to allow the freddy may and mac to be controlled, less they stop giving the bad loans to minorities. IT was Janet (baby killer) Reno who insisted that the loans be made regardless of what the potential down side was, because it helped the deamoncrats to get more support from their "minorities"
Reply
Well bobble heads you got what you wanted, America spiraling down to disaster.
THIS IS NOT CONJECTURE IT IS FACT.
Per obamas ayres connection... it has just come out that obamma was ayres bag man for dispersing a grant of 60,000,000 not to the schools that it was supposed to go to, but to every left wing marxist organization he could find.. so yet another lie by obamma.\
Seems that lying, and vote stealing (acorn being just one of the tools) has become the mainstay of the deamoncrats. AND BOBBLE HEADS.. I DETEST GEORGE BUSH AND THE REPUBLICANS TOO, BUT THE MORONS IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY ALWAYS BUT THE WORST OF THE WORST UP AGAINST THE REPUBLICANS.
-
-
-
70%
Candida1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Karlyc,
Reply
You and your friends remind me of a dog with a bone. You just won't let it go. This is a non-issue from the get go.
I agree with you that it's doubtful that the remark was racist. It's the same kind of remark as the pig with the lipstick. Just because it conjures up certain images in some people's minds, it doesn't mean that that's how it was meant.
In my view, Sarah Palin's comment was not racist. It was ordinary, run of the mill slime.-
-
40%
StillUnashamed1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Don't know how this ended up here. It was meant as a reply to Will1313 below.
Reply
This is where my earlier comment was supposed to be. Don't know how my first comment got there and don't know how this comment got here. (I added this paragraph after I posted by hitting edit.) -
50%
BB641 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually you're both wrong. She was explaining the feelings of protection the mother of a hockey player has for her child. While funny, most normal parents feel that way about their kids. The pig comments from Barry are typical of a liberal. Attack your opponent and then run away claiming you misspoke or were misunderstood. I'm sure before the day was out he was claiming it was a racist attack too. His hope & change message rings very much like the old liberal crap of the 60's right along with his promises of higher taxes for all.
Reply -
-
-
-
-
71%
willottica1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
lol, he's not a terrorist anymore. Hasn't committed a terrorist act in over 30 years... and even when he committed so-called "terrorist" acts, they never met the accepted definition of terrorism, which is the targeting of innocents. The weathermen were all about property damage, and their bombs never injured anyone but their own.
Reply-
60%
nostalgia1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
October 20, 1981 -- long after the Weather Underground had ceased to exist -- former Underground member Kathy Boudin and her soon-to-be husband, David Gilbert, were accomplices in the robbery of a Brinks armored car in Nyack, New York. In the course of that heist, one Brinks guard and two Nyack police officers were murdered
Reply-
40%
willottica1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Boudin and Gilbert? Where is the Ayers in that story? Where is Obama?
Reply
They have nothing to do with it! A guard and 2 police do not count as civilian casualties, thus these two are criminals and cop-killers, but still not terrorists.
Do you know what a terrorist is? Can you SAY terrorist? Clearly, you can, but can you use it properly in a sentence? I don't think so.
Btw, uncredited quotations like that are a form of plagiarism.
-
-
50%
Georgia501 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
willotica,
Reply
1. By Ayers' own admission, he has never stopped being a terrorist and has no regrets or remorse.
2. Obama was 40 years old when Ayers himself stated he only wished they could have done more bombings.
3. The "accepted definition" of terrorism is actually Ayers' own definition of terrorism. I know you'll find this to be an astonishing fact, but in civilized nations, we do not let criminals define criminality. A terrorist is not someone who targets innocents, but someone who executes violence to advance a political or ideological agenda a) outside the color of law, b) outside the auspices of a sovereign nation, and c) a+b + not attempting to expel a foreign invader.
4. Ayers stated that he had no problem with innocent victims of his bombs.
5. Never killed anyone? True. Filth like you don't police officers to be human beings. Do the survivors of Edward O'Grady and Waverly Brown have your permission to feel otherwise? Pretty pleeeeezzzze....
You people are pathetic.-
-
100%
willottica1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Are those the people who died in the attack on the Armored Brinks truck? An event that was not a bomb (read my post) and did not involve Ayers?
Reply
Look, you can colour Ayers by association with fellow members of the Weathermen. This is completely fair because he was also a member. However, to paint Obama with association with Ayers who is guilty of those deaths by HIS association is taking your associative guilt thing a little too far.
Was Obama ever a member of the Weather Underground? No. Did he ever support or advocate their acts? No.
What is the point of the second ammendment? To allow protestors to fire warning shots against tyranny? I'm not claiming that the guard and the police officers who were killed were tyrants. In fact, they have little to do with Ayers at all. What I'm questioning is why should we defend the second ammendment, if anyone who attempts to use it is labeled a terrorist and a traitor? These are things to think about.
-
-
-
-
-
-
50%
JaimieM1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yes you are correct. They cannot stand it when an article exposing their biases and supporting Sarah Palin comes out. The same persons try to raise hysteria to divert the fair- minded people reading the article. They get very hysterical over the fact such articles are popular.
Reply-
redtomatoComment removed: Spammer
-
-
-
65%
kobzikov1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You picked this "article", Karlyc. If you wanted to talk about Obama's policies, I imagine you wouldn't have submitted anything by James Taranto who has a penchant for not talking about anyone's policies, but can engage in politics of slime and subterfuge at great lengths.
Reply
There is little doubt in my mind that both Palin and McCain are racists and I go by both their policies and what they said. So since you are itching to talk about policies, let's discuss Palin's policies toward Native Alaskan Tribes. Please explain to me, how is opposing native lifestyle, tribal Sovereignty and voting rights for Native Alaskan Tribes does not amount to racism?
http://community.freespeech.org/palin_opposes_alas...
And please take all the time you need to defend the non-racist policies.-
67%
techsupport1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This article is highly significant. Why has no one brought up Gov. Palin's consistently poor record on Native Alaskan issues? What does she have against these people? Considering the language component, it seems evident it's more than just the her belief that they interfere with her sacred sport hunting and fishing...
Reply
Maybe you should post this article to a separate thread, Kobzikov!-
Neutral
kobzikov1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
techsupport, unfortunately the articles that I submit have a tendency to not get a very high rating, nor do they usually feature a lot of discussion even from my friends.
Reply
And I doubt that I have anyone else to blame for it except myself, since I don't promote the stories aggressively enough, though currently I don't have enough time to fully participate on the boards and post and promote most of the articles that I find important. So currently I limit my participation to commenting and propping worthy articles that my friends submit whenever I'm not too busy with school.
So if you can dedicate the time to promoting the article and giving it attention that it needs, then I'd be glad if you posted it instead of me. User participation on the topic is more important to me, then having my name as a submitter. I can still submit it, but I doubt that it will make it to the front page.
-
-
-
71%
looter1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ahahahaha.. I can't help laughing... The Gallup poll says Obama is leading by 9 points, Fox poll says Obama leading in all battleground states. Palin's racist idea is to wake up extreme right is not going to work. Because even those extreme right people are facing the harsh realities of the economy, wars and above all outright lies by McCain and Palin. Lets face it buddies, Barrack Obama is the next president and right now, McCain and Palin or any other Christian extremists or Islamic Extremists can't do anything about it.
Reply
-
-
41%
Karlyc1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There was even more:
Reply
"Getting back to Daniel and Palin, it seems his claim is that her speech was racist because it somehow called attention to Obama's race. To be sure, there are people who are prejudiced against Obama because he is black. Shame on them. People like them used to have a lot more influence on elections than they do now, both because they were more numerous and because in many parts of the country they disfranchised blacks (including through terrorism!)."
"Yet we'd venture that there are voters who are troubled by Obama's palling around with terrorists irrespective of his, or anyone else's race. Does the public not have a right to know because some part of the public may be racist?"-
64%
hyperbola1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My what whiners the wingers have become! Palin is such an ignorant incompetent that we should simply ignore any further stories about her failings.
Reply
Palin Goes Ballistic
The issue of John McCain's health has been somewhat muted thus far in the presidential campaign, possibly because no mainstream media talking head wants to appear to be picking on someone who is old and sick, not to mention frequently querulous. If McCain were to be elected and then die or become incapacitated, Alaska's Gov. Sarah Palin would become president. Many Americans who are particularly concerned by the issue of war and peace have also expressed reservations about Palin's worldview and the type of decisions that it is likely to produce.
... In short, based on what Palin has actually said, her foreign policy would be like that of George W. Bush, only worse. She would extend NATO up to the border of Russia and be prepared to fight Moscow if it objects; she would refuse to negotiate with any country that hates "what we stand for"; she would let Israel attack Iran; she would continue and expand attacks by U.S. forces inside Pakistan; she would move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, making peace with the Palestinians impossible; she would stay in Iraq indefinitely and expand the war in Afghanistan; she would support democracy promotion; she would base all American foreign policy in the Middle East on Israel's interests; and she would target "Islamic extremists" worldwide. She also believes that terrorists and other "bad guys" are out to get us because they hate our freedom, and she just might believe that a war that would end the world could be God's will. If a lot of it sounds like something we've heard before, it should.
http://www.propeller.com/story/2008/10/07/palin-go...-
38%
DropkickaLib1 year, 1 month ago
-
46%
nostalgia1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"issue of John McCain's health"
Reply
Have you beem under a rock?
Most reporters used computers to take notes from the three stacks of documents that were provided to each of them. The main stack, labeled "Records from Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona, 2000-present" were the main documents and are summarized below. The other two stacks were backup documents, including handwritten notes, lab results and insurance documents. In all it was 1,173 pages, in addition to 1,500 pages distributed the last time he ran for president.
The backup stacks included the statement of financial responsibility, assignment of benefits and authorization to release information, forwarded documents from the attending physician of the U.S. Congress, including lab results, clinical notes, pathology reports. Insurance details, doctor's orders and anesthesia reports. The documents went into great detail about his operations to remove melanomas and colon polyps.
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/...
There was also a conference call with a group of reporters and 3 of McCain's doctors
Did Obama release his medical records??
Obama (D-Ill.) released a one page summary of his medical records. The 276-word summary was written by Dr. David L. Scheiner, the Chicago doctor who has been Obama's personal physician since March, 1987. Obama has not had a check-up in more than a year.
Obama’s last medical checkup was on January 15, 2007
I wouldn't call a one page summary much of a "release"-
-
-
-
80%
willottica1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That's true, smoking causes everyone to sicken and die very early. Take George Burns, for example... why, he only lived to be 90-something. Clearly, without his chain-smoking he would have lived well into his hundreds.
Reply
But I can see why a reasonably fit 40-something not having a physical FOR OVER A YEAR (gasp!!!) would be reason for grave concern.
Do you hear yourselves? Do you really think that a candidate should have to release his private medical records which are none of your damned business?
"Oh my, it seems Obama had scrotal itch in 1992... well that's it! We can't have him as president, it might make a resurgeance, and he might scratch himself in public and embarass us all!"-
100%
GWHayduke1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
No point.
Reply
Just trying to attach a negative, for God's sake, ANYTHING negative to Obama.
Ramping up to Nov 4, Dkles is scrambling and for negative SOUNDING non-issues in an effort to minimize the reality that Obama's support is growing, while Palin's gross inadequacy is dragging McW into Republican oblivion.
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
most_reasonable1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I also find Palin's line of attack curious. She says Obama finds America so imperfect that he "pals around with domestic terrorists" (never mind all the facts to the contrary). Well, by her logic, Sarah Palin finds America so hateful that she's in bed with someone who as recently as a few years ago wanted to secede from the United States."
Reply
As McSame's chief financial adviser claims:.....Americans are a bunch of whiners. Me and my friends are doing very well than you.
-
-
-
-
-
57%
hyperbola1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
James Taranto!!! Come on wolfie, this guy has been supporting GOP corruption ever since Iran-Contra. Sounds like he is on the corruption gravy train with this kind of article.
Reply
Bush, McCain and the Old Iran-Contra Team
T he vetting of Sarah Palin for the McCain campaign by an Iran-Contra alumnus brought an epiphany. (See “ The Man Who Vetted Palin,” CounterPunch, September 8, 2008.) The American people’ s inability to control this crime spree we call the Bush administration is not because we’ re lazy, narcissistic or willfully blind to human rights violations, as much of the world now views us. It’ s because we’ ve been misidentifying this crime spree as “ the Bush administration.” What we’ re clearly confronting is the Iran-Contra Alumni Association masquerading as the Executive Branch, replete with domestic spying, dark ops, fake journalists, fake news reels, press intimidation, protester arrests, infiltration and torture. Their latest maneuver is the woman with zero foreign policy experience a heart beat from taking that 3 a.m. call. A call which, of course, they’ ll answer for her as they have done for Bush II.
http://www.propeller.com/story/2008/09/18/bush-mcc...
-
-
38%
Wolfie20071 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA
Reply
Neither can Daniel, so he changes the subject:
Whether intended or not by the McCain campaign, portraying Obama as "not like us" is another potential appeal to racism. It suggests that the Hawaiian-born Christian is, at heart, un-American.
Most troubling, however, is how allowing racism to creep into the discussion serves McCain's purpose so well. As the fallout from [Jeremiah] Wright's sermons showed earlier this year, forcing Obama to abandon issues to talk about race leads to unresolved arguments about America's promise to treat all people equally.
Wait, didn't the Jeremiah Wright controversy prompt Obama to give the most magnificently brilliant speech on the subject of race since Martin Luther King, or at least Abraham Lincoln? That's what it said in the papers, anyway.-
55%
hyperbola1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually wolfie, compared to Palin's goofy "preachers", Jeremiah Wright is a model of American patriotism. Can you match his record? Your posts here sound awfully anti-american. Are you American (or maybe an isreal-firster)?
Reply
Here is what Ronald Reagan's Asst. Secy. of Defense has to say about Wright - kind of puts in perspective the degradation of the GOP since then.
Rev. Jeremiah Wright, a True Patriot
In 1961, a young African-American man, after hearing President John F. Kennedy's challenge to, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country," gave up his student deferment, left college in Virginia and voluntarily joined the Marines. In 1963, this man, having completed his two years of service in the Marines, volunteered again to become a Navy corpsman. (They provide medical assistance to the Marines as well as to Navy personnel.)
The man did so well in corpsman school that he was the valedictorian and became a cardiopulmonary technician. Not surprisingly, he was assigned to the Navy's premier medical facility, Bethesda Naval Hospital, as a member of the commander in chief's medical team, and helped care for President Lyndon B. Johnson after his 1966 surgery. For his service on the team, which he left in 1967, the White House awarded him three letters of commendation. What is even more remarkable is that this man entered the Marines and Navy not many years after the two branches began to become integrated.
While this young man was serving six years on active duty, Vice President Dick Cheney, who was born the same year as the Marine/sailor, received five deferments, four for being an undergraduate and graduate student and one for being a prospective father. Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, both five years younger than the African-American youth, used their student deferments to stay in college until 1968. Both then avoided going on active duty through family connections.
Who is the real patriot? The young man who interrupted his studies to serve his country for six years or our three political leaders who beat the system? Are the patriots the people who actually sacrifice something or those who merely talk about their love of the country?....
(Lawrence Korb and Ian Moss are, respectively, Navy and Marine Corps veterans. Korb served as assistant secretary of Defense in the Reagan administration. )
http://www.counterpunch.org/korb04052008.html
-
-
-
-
stalemateComment removed: Retracted by user
-
anytimejoeComment removed: Spammer, Abusive22 Replies
-
ellsworth-tooheyComment removed: Hard Banned9 Replies
-
ellsworth-tooheyComment removed: Hard Banned1 Reply
-
-
ellsworth-tooheyComment removed: Hard Banned1 Reply
-
-
-
ellsworth-tooheyComment removed: Hard Banned6 Replies
-
60%
antibrainwasher1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks Eagle Eye, the republican shills employeed by Propeller/ AOL/ Time Warner/ right wing neocon conservative 100% repuiblican board controlled media empire are scamming the system, paying republican shills to moderate and projectile vomit their propaganda up to the top stories.
Reply
Classic repugnicoward lying scamming crap.
-
-
-
67%
not2needy1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It stinks, that's for sure. I was just told me that some people can refresh their profile page and it will boost their reads, or go in and out of their own articles over and over and it will boost the reads, but it only works for certain people, not everyone!
Reply
-
-
-
75%
donald511 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I laughed at her answer to Katie that she "supports all contraceptives" to "include the morning after pill" then she said she "supports life at its conception"! What a moron women, a truly failed beauty queen mentality!
Reply
International experience everytime Putin rears his head and flies over Alaska!
Heaven help us that McCain's judgement is so flawed to have made such a poor VP selection! I now feel sorry for Arizona!
-
64%
Eagle_Eye1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
1351 from 907 in just one hour and 35 minutes, any one else get this kind of read on their stories or are my Eagle Eyes playing a game on me?
Reply
It certainly got quiet in here???? No one care to post on this, any ideas?? Are people coming in and reading this one story and then leaving?-
-
63%
Eagle_Eye1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Proof is in the puddin all right!! It's at 1427 now after 2 hours from 907, that is 513 reads, geez most of us don't get that in a day.
Reply
I managed to keep that one window open for 23 minutes to update the count, but as soon as I refreshed this page I lost the ability to go in and edit the counts.
I've wasted enough time on this trash, just hope they have enough to trace it all and we'll see what happens.
I also noticed that the core group got real quiet here.... I could hear a pin drop.
It will be interesting to see what is here in the morning.....-
100%
nostalgia1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
EE
Reply
In case you haven't noticed, there is something very wrong with the Propeller
I read and propped the story last evening from the Home page
When I came to the discussion page it did not show that I had propped the story. I propped it again
This AM it was also not showing that I propped the story. I propped it again from this page
I just checked in another browser window - it is not showing on the Home page that I have ever propped the story
Your question should be - why is Propeller not addressing this issue
Why would they allow individuals to prop a story over and over - boost the stats?
Are all of these showing as different "props" - beats me
This has been going on for some time and I am surprised that Propeller doesn't correct whatever the probelm is
I just checked on every story I propped yesterday. I can prop each one of them again this AM
Seems you need to take up the issue with the powers that be at Propeller instead of claiming someone is "gaming" the system
Have you followed the stats on stories you support just as closely??-
75%
Eagle_Eye1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
nostalgia,
Reply
I have noticed that with the props, but this is "reads", this feature needs to go and we need to go back to our original way of rating stories from props and member participation. This is cheating, and why bother participating on a site where cheaters can just run amuck.-
80%
not2needy1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree. This site is supposed to be for the Propeller community, REAL MEMBERS, and just because someone happens to read the article off the internet, NOT PROPELLER, shouldn't affect the number of reads on Propeller.
Reply
If it's not the general public reading articles off the internet that's boosting the reads, rather than through Propeller, then there's something very stinky on Propeller. If they can't regulate the reads to the Propeller community and only credit the reads that are actually clicked on through the propeller submission, then the reads feature needs to go.
Anyone who hasn't been banned has the right to join Propeller, submit, comment, prop, and participate at will. But people who read articles just because they go to Huffington, Yahoo or WSJ etc, off the internet, reading the articles shouldn't count as a read on Propeller!
This is the understanding i am getting. Regardless of who reads the articles, from what source, and whether they are a member of propeller or not, their read counts on Propeller. I take issue with that,, if that's the case. -
-
-
-
-
-
-
55%
orndorffter1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
THIS WAS A VERY GOOD STORY TO READ. VERY INTERESTING. THE REPORTER WHO ACCUSES PALIN OF RACISM IS CORRECT. TO ME I BELIVE IN THE BIBLE, ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL. IT'S NOT THE COLOR OF ONES SKIN THAT MATTERS , IT'S WHATS INSIDE OF THE PERSON THAT MATTERS, CAN NOT JUDGE A BLACK PERSON UNLESS I BE JUDGED FOR JUDGEING ONE. BELEAVE ME WHEN I SAY I FEAR THE WORD OF GOD, SO HE SAID IT, ALL MEN CREATED EQUAL AND I DONT'T WANT HIM PASSING JUDGMENT ON ME ,BUT I DO THINK THERE ARE SOME WHO DOES TAKE ADVANTAGE OF GOV HELP.I'M SORRY IF I'M WRONG BUT I DO BELEAVE IT.
Reply -
Republicrat1844Comment removed: Retracted by user3 Replies
-
AbsolutelyNO2ObamaComment removed: Abusive2 Replies
-
AbsolutelyNO2ObamaComment removed: Abusive4 Replies
-
41%
retakeusa-961 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Whatttt......You mean Palin knows how to read a newspaper????
Reply
I am so surprise since it took her 6 years to graduate from
college and we still don't know what she majored in. Some
say it was basket weaving... I can believe that.....
According to an "analysis" by Douglass Daniel of the Associated Press, "[Palin's] attack was unsubstantiated." Palin said she got her information from the New York Times, and we suppose it says something that this isn't good enough for the AP. Odder still is Daniel's claim that Palin's statement "carried a racially tinged subtext that John McCain himself may come to regret." -
52%
ETproductions1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
People who live in glass houses should not throw stones. Obama knew and briefly met Ayers, a man who was engaged in violent protests against the Vietnam war back when Obama was 8 years old.
Reply
Sarah Palin was a member of the Alaska Independence Party in the 90s. She switched to the GOP to run for mayor of Wasilla in 1996. Tod remained a member till 2002. Before his murder in 1993 in an apparent plastic-explosives deal gone bad, AIP founder Joe Vogler said charming things like; "I'm an Alaskan, not an American. I've got no use for America or her damned institutions." Then there's "The fires of hell are glaciers compared to my hate for the American government." And "The problem with you John Birchers is that you are too damn liberal!"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Vogler
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/6/11852/0400
This is who you Cons want one heartbeat away from the presidency of the USA?-
56%
nostalgia1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You need to find better sources of information than Wiki and the Dailykos
Reply
Factcheck.org: She (Palin) was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She’s been registered as a Republican since May 1982.
The party's chair originally told reporters that Palin had been a member, but the official later retracted that statement. Chairwoman Lynette Clark told the New York Times that false information had been given to her by another member of the party after she first told the Times and others that Palin joined the AIP in 1994. Clark issued an apology on the AIP Web site
You need to stop spouting "facts" that have already been discredited as out and out lies-
hyperbolaComment removed: Spam
-
100%
donald511 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Nos, most people surely would not trust a source that Dick Cheney recommended...your factcheck.org. They do lean right, just another repug facade like the underfunded "No Child Left Behind"
Reply
The point is that at least palin's husband has had very recent business as a secessionist which you can't deny!
-
-
-
64%
nostalgia1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Douglass Daniel of the Associated Press"
Reply
That name was so familiar and I seemed to recall him being associated with another controversy. Then I remembered what he wrote when Tony Snow died.
He wrote Tony Snow's obituary for the AP
"The AP's Douglass K. Daniel, with the assistance of longtime Bush basher Jennifer Loven, felt it necessary, within hours of Snow's passing, to characterize him as "not always (having) a command of the facts," questioning reporters' motives "as if he were starring in a TV show broadcast live from the West Wing," and turning his briefings into "personality-driven media event(s) short on facts and long on confrontation."
And couldn't resist adding "Snow resigned as Bush's chief spokesman last September, citing not his health but a need to earn more than the $168,000 a year he was paid in the government post."
You can read it here:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/... -
53%
ljponejolic1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
obama is the most dangerous candidate for president this country has ever seen you really dont know what he stands for this is the biggest scam ever put on a society based on fredom and democracy to many people have died to make sure we have fredom we cant let someone like this take it away
Reply-
50%
antibrainwasher1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You mean like the freedom and life taken from the 5000 dead us soldiers you neocon cowards sent to die for a neocon lie?
Reply
You villiage idiots murder 5000 us soldiers for a neocon lie, and now you call Obama dangerous? You villiage morons want to bomb Iraq, which would make the current financial republislime cricis look like a blip, and you call Obama dangerous.
The only thing dangerous is republican ignorance and right wing extremism, which you bush voting inbred religicons call patriotism.
-
-
50%
Natureboy1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The author of this nonsense is a real sad sack - doesn't even understand what the AP IS, holy cow, just because he works for the Wall Street Urinal and Rupert Murdock pulls his strings, he assumes that the Associated Press is similar.
Reply
But the AP is a press ORGANIZATION to which any legitimate publication can belong - AP membership not only allows papers the right to print AP stories, it makes the paper's stories available to the AP.
So when you talk about the Associated Press, you are talking about THOUSANDs of separate news agencies, not one monolithic entity as the author supposes. I review and print AP stories daily for our paper - some stories are biased, IMO, but there is no UNIFORM bias, the cant is generally minimal but when present it runs in various directions, there is no propaganda agenda as there is with Faux News. -
58%
Eagle_Eye1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Propeller team desperatly needs to reasses thier system and the means of how a story is ranked on this site.
Reply
Please go back to the original format of member votes and comments to rank a story. That and only that reflects our community social news site, activity, interests and actions.
This form of "scandalas" posting is hurting "ALL" of us that consider this site to be our "Home", "Refuge", "Socialization" and part of our "World". You have lost me until our site goes back and reflects the actual "Users" participation, not "Reads".
I am very disappointed that this has happened and know it is not the Propeller team fault as they have worked very hard on keeping this site as corruption free as possible, but just like the real world, cheaters find a way to wreck it for every one being honest.-
60%
hyperbola1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree that member votes should be the ONLY criteria for giving stories priorities. Furthermore, I suggested to management a LONG time ago that the only way that the perception of fraud could be avoided was IF the identities of those casting the votes were to be publicly available for all participants to see.
Reply-
38%
Eagle_Eye1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"IF the identities of those casting the votes were to be publicly available for all participants to see."
Reply
hyper they are, the "props" are the votes for a story, but now they have worked around the props and are using the "reads" to game the system and push community motivated postings "props, comments" out by upping and using the "reads" it is really sad that we can't keep fraud out of our community. Even worse are the users perpetuating and supporting this fraud.
You can see who they are, the first string of comments tells a lot of who is involved in this.
Interesting that they all disappeared after we started watching this and posting the outlandish activity. all they do now is neg us.
-
-
17%
antibrainwasher1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You are talking about AOL owned by Time Warner, a right wing media for profit capatalist neocon republican organization if there ever was one.
Reply
You are asking Faux Noise to be fair and balanced. Not going to happen.
Look at it this way, its a way to ridicule the moron right wing extremist Teliban republicans while they regurgitate their Murcock generated talking points.
No better source for republiganda than propeller/AOL/ Time warner- the largest media group in the world, corporate owned, right wing extreamist zionist capitalist board controlled, for profit, by profit.
-
-
-
-
50%
BB641 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How can this reporter make claims that there was no evidence presented that Barry has some very questionable friends. Wright, Rezko and Ayers would cause a person to be rejected on a standard FBI background check. A antisemitic racist, a convicted felon and an unrepentant convicted terrorist. He's since "ended" his friendships with them, at least publicly. In Wright's case he's claimed he didn't know referring to white folks as whitey was wrong. In Ayers case he claims he didn't know him, even though it's clear they've been friends for years. Rezko, he's very typical of Chicago politics.
Reply
Once again, we see clear bias for Barry and attacks on a woman. Where's the NOW organization? A strong woman running and they support the other side. Once again, we see how corrupt the left truly is. -
57%
antibrainwasher1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
But she can eat raw moose testicles and not muss her lipstick. that's what we need for a VP, a Cariboo Barbie who calls herself a maverick, which is the last thing an actuall maverick would do......how many maverick's do you know who suggest book burning and creationism is just as american as apple pie, don't you know....
Reply -
45%
VocalOp1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Who cares what Palin, who accused Biden of looking back when referencing the past eight years under a Republican administration, while claiming that as "mavericks" she and John were looking forward, thinks. She's a liar, plain and simple. Stupid people say dumb thinks. What aren't the rest of you seeing?
Reply -
-
60%
mbreenm-381 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Perhaps AP was alluding to the fact that if Sarah Palin had actually READ the NYTimes story, she might have noticed its conclusion that Obama and Ayers "are not close" and that Obama has condemned Ayers' actions 40 years ago.
Reply
I also find Palin's line of attack curious. She says Obama finds America so imperfect that he "pals around with domestic terrorists" (never mind all the facts to the contrary). Well, by her logic, Sarah Palin finds America so hateful that she's in bed with someone who as recently as a few years ago wanted to secede from the United States. And just a few months ago she taped a friendly greeting to the secessionist party's convention. Those facts are not in dispute (the video is on YouTube).
So again, using Palin's logic, who is it who hates America? The guy who happens to be acquainted with someone who did some awful things 40 years ago because they are both involved in education reform, or the woman who has attended meetings and made cheerful videos for a party whose founder spoke of his "hatred" of the US and said he would "never be buried under their damned flag?"-
75%
most_reasonable1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
WINKY can't remember ONE of the magazines that form her opinion. She memorizes a few phases from the GOP spin writers and can't remember the punch line.
Reply
You're a fraud Sarah, aren't you?
YOU BETTCHA!!!!
And John, you didn't PICK Winky the GOP spin masters did.
"Please don't tell everyone that", "don't you see the blood cascading down down my chin every time I'm with her on tour?
"No chance, no commitment, no touch, and now no honor...sorry folks."
-
-
75%
quackpot1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
With the economy in a mess brought on by the past seven-plus years of Republican congress + Republican Administration disaster, you come up with a 30-year-old story to distract?
Reply
Just one tenth of the Bush economic policy of "PUMP PUMP PUMP the economy to implode" has caused about 1,000,000 times more destruction that Ayers could have ever imagined. -
-
20%
abntv1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Tomorrow morning..
Reply
The liberal, Obama loving media will declare him the winner of the debate..
They will go on to tell the american people how there is no way McCain can win the election.
They will more than likely continue this through the week.
Then the american people will wake up on Tues. morning and read that McCain and Obama are once again at a virtual tie in the polls. -
benighseComment removed: Spam
-
benighseComment removed: Spam
-
benighseComment removed: Spam
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.