Fantastic retort Ruby. There is a blind desperation in the McPalin campaign at the moment, answering all charges with claims of either sexism or didn't you know he was a POW.

The attempt to not just hijack debate, but blast it of the rails of meaningful policy discussion is frightening. (Un)fortunately, it might be the teetering US economy that finally brings discussion back to the issue that matters, policy. In this, I look forward to the Pres and VP debates in earnest.

Good rejoinder.

The fact of the matter is that it is impossible to have a rational debate/argument with the said turpentine character.

Like all right-wing ideological hacks the turps doesnt use the usual formal literary rules and customs for making an argument. Which is quite strange when you think of it because, when it suits them, those on the right of the culture wars are usually big on defending the use of reason and proper use of formal grammatical and sentence construction.

You know---back to basics as the necessary foundation of education---especially re the teaching of English literature and language. Using the proper rules of grammar for the Queen's English etc.

All of his posts without exception, are a grab bag on one liners, out of context quotes, distortions, exagerrations, hype, sheer silliness and just plain old dumb ignorance.

He would be thrown out of any halfway decent University philosophy 101 class and given an F grade in English sentence construction and logical argument.

Meanwhile please check out Between Jesus and the Market: the EMOTIONS That Matter In Right Wing America by Linda Kintz.

Palin is not apppealing to anything rational---just pure nativistic primitive emotion. A book which describes an emotionally based (patterned) mindset that firmly believes that it alone expresses or possesses the truth and that everyone else, including liberal and progressive Christians and all members of other faith groups are the enemy, and agents of the anti-christ.

Strangely enough most of those on the right who usually argue for the use of reasoned judgement (and even attend gab-fests in support and praise of reason) are now loudly cheering for this expression of raw nativistic emotionalism. Emotionalism which has a deep reservoir of anger and frustration behind it.

Anger and frustration which is more often than not quite justified, and looking for some suitable scapegoats to dump on.

But scapegoat politics is not the answer.

Hamad has misrepresented Hilary and labelled as 'non-issues' things which Hilary and Palin agree upon, eg 'abortion','gay-marriage' and 'capital punishment'.

There's really nothing subtantially different between Obama-Biden and McCain-Palin. The really sad thing is that over 90% of African_American vote along racial lines and almost all Muslims in the US chose Obama because he was a former Muslim.

Obama was the only presidential candidate that had no problems with funds and Hilary had to dig deep into her pockets to keep her campaign going.

This is not surprising as Obama have close ties to an African-American lawyer who is a strict orthodox Muslim and a top Saudi adviser. Khalid Al-Mansour (Don Warden before conversion) is a fund-raiser for Obama

http://www.newsmax.com/politics/obama_sutton_saudi/2008/09/03/127490.html

Philip Tang,

Clinton and Palin absolutely do NOT agree on the issue of abortion. Don't even go there. It's a ludicrous statement.

As I stated the issue of LGBT rights goes much deeper than simply 'gay marriage'.

And I did not say Capital Punishment is a non-issue. Only that it has not played a major role in this election.

Please do not misinterpret my words. How have I "misrepresented" Clinton when I used her own words and policy statements as research for the article?

The world is not black and white. You do not have to stand on the complete opposite side of any spectrum to another person in order to have substantially different viewpoints

Wow it's refreshing to read an article that actually provides relevant, substantial evidence for the claims it makes. Well done!

I really would love to read a referenced article outlining how exactly Palin is a change in GOP policy and not just....but but SHES A WOMAN.

I would love to see an argument from a Palin supporter on why she'd make a good VP. All you ever see /hear from them are articles about why she's popular and how dreadful those awful lefties are for criticising her. (E.g. check out Albrechtson and Sheridan in the Australian and on the ABC - not a word in favour of Palin, just laying into her critics.)

And if they can't defend her at the very least they should explain why it would be ok to have another Bush-type populist in the White House and how it will be better than last time.

Cazza,

Palin would make a great VP for a number of reasons.

1) She actually has some experience in executive office. Obama has none.
2) She represents faithfully the views of a very large proportion of the electorate. Rather than a minority of liberal elites.
3) She isn't bound by the PC nonsense that those on the left of politics are bound to.

Ruby,

Your suggestion that Terpstra was being sexist for having his post titled "Girl Power is Back" is simply vacuous. Its right up their with the morons who use the word womyn. The suggestion that Terpstra was metaphorically patting Palin on the head is utter nonsense. What really is instructive is the abuse, sexist abuse, from across the left and in particular by leftist women, who have singled out Palin's looks and her mothering capacity, amongst other things, in their frenzied attacks on her.

Furthermore your statement that "Palin’s views oppose Clinton’s on every single major issue, including the issue of women’s rights" is clearly not correct. Your attempts to suggest that Palin and Clintons similar views on the death penalty and gay marriage are irrelevant is clearly not true. This was a sweeping statement that you should have been more careful about.

So lets focus on Palins policies. Her conservative agenda is shared by huge numbers of Americans, they are not some kind of aberation. Furthermore, it is clear from the ongoing surge in support for Palin, that the self-serving PC agenda, and the blatant hatred of the lifestyles of rural Americans by the so called progressive has had a huge impact on the outcome.

The very idea that because Palin is a woman she should be speaking for women is as sexist as it gets. The corollary is that black men should speak for black men and so on.

There is currently a massive reaction to the rights based agenda that the left has been pushing for the last 30 years. In particular the idea that women are so badly off that they need their own policies and representaives is starting to wear thin.

Paul.L states "So lets focus on Palins [sic] policies". Please, lets. What are they in relation to the economic meltdown? What are they in relation to foreign policy? What are they in relation to health care reform? What are they in relation to energy security?

Go to Obama's website, a full view of policies (whether or not you agree, they are there). Biden has detailed policies on his website also. Palin has been thrust to the front of the campaign by the GOP, so what are her policies (in detail)?

And please put aside references to "liberal elite" etc... Just talk policy details.

A well argued defence against Terpstra's shallow and empty attack.

As pointed out by others, it's good to see the discussion focus on policy for a change. Palin will never be elected if journalists do their job properly and hold her to account and make her expand on her policy positions across the board. Her glib one-liners might get her through the usual sound bite interview but they won't hold up to proper scrutiny for very long.

Terpstra's reference to Michael Moore was totally unnecessary and unsubstantiated. If you're going to drag someone's name into an argument to make a point, you need to do a lot more than simply toss it out there and hope the reader gets on side. It's lazy and cowardly journalism. Now that he has seen fit to cast this slur, Terpstra could perhaps follow it up with a proper rebuttal of Moore's position on the forthcoming election.

And by the way, can we please put to bed once and for all that dreadful term quoted from the Women Against Sarah Palin website - 'cosmeticize'. Where the hell did that come from? And why would any self-respecting female candidate want to 'cosmeticize' anything, let alone a political campaign in which she herself was a serious contender. I know it was used in reference to Palin's relationship with the Republicans, and it probably is an apt term in that particular context, but I felt the implication was there to be drawn for female candidates more broadly, which I consider quite demeaning. People like Terpstra might think a woman's role is to 'pretty' up the campaign, but most of us aspire to something much better for our female politicians.

I just received an email from a good friend in Anchorage (Alaska's largest city). Part of what he had to say was a forward from another friend of his, which as he said seems to sum up the Palin "phenomenom". It read as follows:

^^^^^^^^^^

I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight.....

* If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're "exotic, different."
* Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers: a quintessential American story.

* If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
* Name your kids Willow, Trig, and Track: you're a maverick.

* Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.
* Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating: you're well grounded.

* If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST

CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

* If your total resume is: local weather girl (sports caster), 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with fewer than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.

* If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.
* If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian.

* If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.
* If while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant, you're very responsible.

* If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America's.
* If you're husband is nicknamed "First Dude", with at least one DUI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.

OK, much clearer now.

^^^^^^^^^^

Thank you Paul for at least trying. However, I fear you've mostly reinforced my point.

"1) She actually has some experience in executive office. Obama has none."
True - but if executive experience is such an important requirement, surely picking someone with only a year or so experience of governing a tiny state is hardly the best option.

"2) She represents faithfully the views of a very large proportion of the electorate. Rather than a minority of liberal elites."
Presumably you are talking about issues such as guns, religion, homosexuality and abortion. Even if we accept your view that these are held by a 'very large proportion' of the electorate, we have already seen in George W Bush that this is hardly a good indication of effective executive power. And none of these issues are particularly important when it comes to the economy, health care, foreign policy or defence.

"3) She isn't bound by the PC nonsense that those on the left of politics are bound to."
Now you've simply reverted to attacking the opposition again

Fancy getting worked up about the politics and political aspirants of another country. Now, that's really silly!

I visit and read the websites of many political, cultural and literary organizations on both sides of the political spectrum. Including those that publish traditional take home newspapers and magazines.

And yet none of them ever feature the kind of garbage that mister turpentine writes.

Why then does do the editors of this forum, who sometimes pretend to promote informed opinion, continue to publish turpentines garbage.

Ho Hum,

I personally feel exactly the same way about Ruby's stuff. This article is appaling, bar far one of the worst i've come across in a long time. Terpstra materials is far better written and argued, and thank god, much more concise. Four pages of self justification, do we really need that?

Then again, the editor is providing space for you to post your wacky opinions so perhaps we should all be a little less judgemental.

"Wacky opinions"? You right there?

Terpstra's article boiled down to "woman, good; Lefties bad".

I agree with Ruby - the fact that Palin's a woman should be irrelevant, but it's not. Clinton's a woman who drew women supporters on the basis that 1. she's a woman, and 2. she had policies on women that they agreed with. To say that Clinton and Palin's supporters are interchangeable because they're women is sexism - you're discriminating based on gender - or rather, saying women can't differentiate between the two because they're all women.

Terpstra conflates all of their two opinions to be the same, when obviously they're not, yet:
"Terpstra materials is far better written and argued"? My eyebrows are down my neck, they're lifted that high. If it's the worst "bar far one" that you've come across, you haven't been reading for very long - maybe just this one and Sukrit Sabhlok's article? Try any of the AGW-denialist articles...

Thanks Chade, you summed up my thoughts exactly. My bruised ego aside, Paul L, you are actually aware that when writing articles such as this, one is expected to actually back up one's arguments with evidence, correct?

Now I am aware that you are going to take issue with anything I write because we seem to have very opposing viewpoints (though I am sure Terpstra could take one or two of our quotes out of context and argue that we were the same person, if the mood took him), but really I am shocked at how anyone could think that saying that Clinton and Palin agree on the issue of abortion is a well argued point.

I'm sure I could have written a much more concise article, if I had decided to ignore the issues and refused to provide evidence to substantiate my arguments.

Is that what it takes to impress you?

-Ruby

Mssrs Terpstra & Tang should get along well. Newsmax should provide them with a vivid hall of reflections, shielding them from the real world, so easily outshone by their incurable narcissism.

Fellas, through Newsmax you can buy yourselves a USS Ronald Reagan Hat, make thousands writing business letters from home, watch out for bad medical advice & vote for McCain & Palin.

I expect that Sarah Palin is a tool of the powerful insiders that people Turps and Tang supposedly disdain. Interesting to read below on the phenomenon of Ms Palin:

“This is Your Nation on White Privilege”
Tim Wise
[excerpts]
“White privilege is being able to be a gun enthusiast and not make people immediately scared of you.

“White privilege is being able to have a husband who was a member of an extremist political party that wants your state to secede from the Union, and whose motto was “Alaska first,” and no one questions your patriotism or that of your family, while if you're black and your spouse merely fails to come to a 9/11 memorial so she can be home with her kids on the first day of school, people immediately think she’s being disrespectful.

“White privilege is being able to make fun of community organizers and the work they do--like, among other things, fight for the right of women to vote, or for civil rights, or the 8-hour workday, or an end to child labor--and people think you’re being pithy and tough, but if you merely question the experience of a small town mayor and 18-month governor with no foreign policy expertise beyond a class she took in college--you’re somehow being mean, or even sexist.

“White privilege is being able to convince white women who don’t even agree with you on any substantive issue to vote for you and your running mate anyway, because all of a sudden your presence on the ticket has inspired confidence in these same white women, and made them give your party a “second look.” "

http://www.redroom.com/blog/tim-wise/this-your-nation-white-privilege

© 2008 Red Room Omnimedia Corporation.

Fact Check challenges many of the myths sold by Ruby Hamad and other extreme leftwing groups (below):

We’ve been flooded for the past few days with queries about dubious Internet postings and mass e-mail messages making claims about McCain’s running mate, Gov. Palin. We find that many are completely false, or misleading.

Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn’t cut it at all. In fact, she increased funding and signed a bill that will triple per-pupil funding over three years for special needs students with high-cost requirements.

She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term.

She 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.

Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a "courtesy" when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state.

Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum.

Oh Ben-Peter. How sneaky you are. Let me go through your points again:

1. I did not claim that Palin cut special needs funding. I was aware that allegation was false and did not mention it in either of my articles.

2. I did not claim she had a list of books she wanted banned from the library. However, she DID fire the librarian shortly after the incident in question. Which is exactly what I wrote. The fact that she fired the librarian is enough to raise alarms in many people’s heads. Perhaps if she were not currently under investigation for improperly firing others, then this little tidbit of information would not be so concerning.

3. I did not claim she was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, nor did I even mention the fact that her husband was as I did not think it was relevant (which is probably how the rumour got started).

4. Likewise I did not mention the name “Pat Buchanan” once in either of my articles.

5. I did not say she “pushed for teaching creationism”. I said “she favours teaching creationism alongside evolution”. In other words, she thinks that creationism has a place in a science class. I think most of the developed world has long since come to the conclusion that creationism belongs in either religious studies or perhaps a mythologies class.

I am aware there are many myths circulating about Sarah Palin and I do not condone or listen to them. I think there are plenty of legitimate reasons to dislike her political positions without resorting to making stuff up.

I also think you are extremely intellectually dishonest Ben-Peter and I expect an apology for the way you attempted to associate me with these untruths.

Thanks.

-Ruby

I agree Ruby that there are many myths about Palin. What I do know is you are correct that Palin:

believes creationism is science.
represents a political party that continues to be hostile to women's rights, including equal pay for equal work. And still is hostile - look at the vilification of Hilary.
asked a public librarian if she would have a problem banning books, then fired the woman within a week.
has made victims of rape PAY for their own rape kits.
has no experience (Paul L) outside of Wasilla as far as governing is concerned so why her when there are far more qualified candidates such as Condeleeza Rice.
supports abstinence-only education - that is sex education without the sex.
believes women and their doctors incapable of making decisions about their fertility and health.

Therefore, I highly recommend people who support the GOP that instead of slagging people who don’t see Palin through rose-coloured glasses; that they disprove any of the above. And good luck.

It is not about Palin’s gender.

It is all about her political AGENDA.

Wow this is so George W. Bush .. "you're either with me or against me" type rant.

So if anyone has a different point of view, it seems unacceptable to just leave it alone and that person to their point of view, it has to be attacked and vilified immediately, why?

What hard cases you all appear to be, lighten up - it's a democracy for goodness sake, people are entitled to their points of view even if you don't like it, even if they're "wrong". Do you think spiteful rants will change anyone's mind, you just reinforce why they think that way and about you - or is this more about self promotion?

Talk about a civil war being the worst kind of war, you're all so violent in your hatred of each other it's not a discussion any more.

re rpg's comment:
"Talk about a civil war being the worst kind of war, you're all so violent in your hatred of each other it's not a discussion any more."

I'm puzzled by your idea of violence. Would it extend to certain radio commentators? Consider the below:

http://mudflats.wordpress.com/2008/09/14/alaska-women-reject-palin-rally-is-huge/

"The rally was organized by a small group of women, talking over coffee. It made me wonder what other things have started with small groups of women talking over coffee. It’s probably an impressive list. These women hatched the plan, printed up flyers, posted them around town, and sent notices to local media outlets. One of those media outlets was KBYR radio, home of Eddie Burke, a long-time uber-conservative Anchorage talk show host. Turns out that Eddie Burke not only announced the rally, but called the people who planned to attend the rally “a bunch of socialist baby-killing maggots”, and read the home phone numbers of the organizers aloud over the air, urging listeners to call and tell them what they thought. The women, of course, received many nasty, harassing and threatening messages."

I think it's a shame that America doesn't have anti-vilification laws. Do you think they should apply here, rpg?

part 1
1. Palin was Chosen as VP to please the Super Conservatives, she is like Dick Cheney "she can look you in the eye and tell you black is white."
2. to please religious people, especial the white evangelical base, God and the Vice-Presidential Candidate
A $30 billion gas pipeline in Alaska was "God’s will," the war in Iraq was a "task that is from God." She's argued for creationism to be taught in schools, alongside evolutionary biology, and she'd rather do away with sexual education completely
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,577440,00.html
Sarah Palin's churches are actively involved in a resurgent movement that was declared heretical by the Assemblies of God in 1949.
http://www.alternet.org/rights/97939/weird_theology_in_wasilla%3A_a_look_inside_sarah_palin%27s_pentecostal_church
She is a Cristian Taliban!
3. She support Bush's wars and believes That The Iraq War Is A Task ‘From God"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/02/palins-church-may-have-sh_n_123205.html
4. She is a sex symbol! "Sarah Palin: babies, guns, Jesus, hot damn!" http://www.alternet.org/sex/98657/sex_is_mccain%27s_political_weapon/?page=2
5. to please women and win votes from Hilary Clinton's supporters.
she never mentioned health care, women's economic issues like equal pay etc
6. Palin does not care for ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION, she denies Man-Made Global Warming, Palin Is Suing To Lift Protected Status For Polar Bears, Palin Established Illegal Fly-By Wolf Hunting Bounty, Palin’s First Statewide Campaign Was Fueled By Veco. Palin’s Inauguration Was Sponsored By BP and she Believes It Is ‘God’s Will’ To Build A Natural Gas Pipeline.
7. Palin does not care for taxpayers money, she strongly supported the Bridge to Nowhere " $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents"and campaigned on the issue while running for governor of Alaska in 2006 "We need to come to the defense of Southeast Alaska when proposals are on the table like the bridge …," Palin said.
8. She is against abortion but she does not care teenage mothers. Palin reduced funding for Covenant House Alaska by more than 20 percent, cutting funds from $5 million to $3.9 million. Covenant House is a mix of programs and shelters for troubled youths, including Passage House, which is a transitional home for teenage mothers.

continue
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

part two

9. Palin's Troopergate Scandal: She used her public position to punish her former brother in law. 85% of Alaskans Believe She Lied
Troopergate.
http://newsone.com/elections/article/sarah-palins-troopergate
10. She was against some publications and tried to remove them from the library, one of them received the following awards:
* 1971 Caldecott Honor Book
* Notable Children's Books of 1940--1970 (ALA)
* Best Books of 1970 (SLJ)
* Outstanding Children's Books of 1970 (NYT)
* Best Illustrated Children's Books of 1970 (NYT)
* Children's Books of 1970 (Library of Congress)
* Carey-Thomas Award 1971--Honor Citation
* Brooklyn Art Books for Children 1973, 1975
* Beginner Books.
11. Sara Palin's Shocking Animal Cruelty
If Sarah Palin ran the United States like she has run Alaska, it would indeed be a terrible day for animals
http://www.alternet.org/story/9891/sara_palin%27s_shocking_animal_cruelty/
I supposed Republicans are in very difficult position and they chose as VP a person like Palin.

Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Sarah Palin is a great leader. Greater than Obama. Just look at her resume! Some selective illiterates, however, are pretending to ignore the facts (available online):

Sarah Palin,44, Governor of Alaska: Chair of the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission; Chair of the National Governors Association Natural Resources Committee; Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission; Mayor of Wasilla, AK; President of Alaska Conference of Mayors; Wasilla City Council member.Executive experience: Governor for two years; mayor for 10 years.

Barack Obama, 48, Junior Senator: Illinois state senator; senior law lecturer at University of Chicago Law School; ACORN community organizer. Executive experience: None.

Question: Why does a conservative woman have to work twice as hard as a left-wing man?

See:www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.1155/pub_detail.asp

Well in this case Ben-Peter she's only got half the nous.

Goodness me, Paull, thought you had more historical insight than to back Palin.

To me as a historian, Paull, Palin is just the one that'll keep America on the same wrong track ever since it became Pax Americana.

The woman is so similar in style to Georgie Boy Bush, reckon she'd be glad to have Dick Cheney along as well, and even Rumsfeld who managed much of Saddam's lost war against Iran.

As a historian with Honour's in his old age, Paull, and one with Marksman printed in his paybook during WW2, would like to give this huntress lady a test with rifles at three hundred metres - but in any case nothing to do with true historical insight which I would say this lady sadly lacks.

Cheers, BB, Buntine, WA.

The balloon deflates

How could a 72-year-old man with bouts of cancer choose someone who appears to be completely unqualified to become president?

Senior Republican Senator and member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,Chuck Hagel has voiced doubts about Sarah Palin's qualifications for the vice-presidency.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7623771.stm

Lyda Green, a Republican and president of the state senate (Alaska) said that "She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?"

Wall Street Journal columnist and former Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan and former John McCain adviser, Time columnist, and MSNBC contributor Mike Murphy said"they went for this, excuse me, political bullsh#t about narratives. Every time the Republicans do that, because that's not where they live and that's not what they're good at, they blow it."

Former Mayor of New York Ed Koch, in 2004 he endorsed George W. Bush. Koch not only endorsed Bush, but campaigned for him in six states including Florida said about Palin ".. when her record is examined, she fails miserably with respect to her views on the domestic issues that are so important to the people of the U.S., and to me. Frankly, it would scare me if she were to succeed John McCain in the presidency."
http://www.alternet.org/election08/98228/8_more_stories_about_palin_the_public_needs_to_know/?page=3

An overwhelming amount of negative publicity and sometimes shocking information has come out about her and her relatively short political career.

Among undecided voters, the Palin pick makes 6 percent more likely to vote for McCain and 31 percent less likely to vote for McCain. About 59 percent of these undecided voters do not think Palin is qualified to be president
Palin now hampers McCain's efforts to expand beyond Republicans core base.

public opinion about Palin
Approve Disapprove No Opinion

9/11: 52 35 13 +17
9/12: 51 37 12 +14
9/13: 49 40 11 +9
9/14: 47 42 11 +5
9/15: 47 43 10 +4
9/16: 45 44 11 +1
9/17: 44 45 11 -1
9/18: 42 46 11 -4

Palin went from being the most popular White House hopeful to the least.

We are at the very begin.

ANTONIOS SYMEONAKIS
ADELAIDE

It is easy to see where Hamad is coming from. By selectively quoting, one can always make arguments for or against any issue.

Hamad labels Palin and prejudges her based on the label. Although Palin does not take a stand on certain issues, Hamad draws conclusion based on her faith and “guilty” by association with McCain.

“And where does Palin stand on this issue? First, she is a member of a fundamentalist Christian Church that openly prays for God to turn gay people straight”

When Hilary is openly against marriage of gays, Hamad suggests that she (Hilary) may be insincere in what she says.

“Openly advocating gay marriage is considered to be political suicide in the US (just ask John Kerry).”

Hamad has unfairly branded Palin as a religious simpleton, a type of Christian equivalent of a typical Muslim who believes in using the sword to further the cause of Islam.

Below are extracts of Palin’s interview with ABC

PALIN: You know, I don't know if that was my exact quote.

GIBSON: Exact words.

PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln's words when he said -- first, he suggested never presume to know what God's will is, and I would never presume to know God's will or to speak God's words. But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that's a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God's side…
.
.
.
GIBSON: But then are you sending your son on a task that is from God?

PALIN: I don't know if the task is from God, Charlie. What I know is that my son has made a decision. I am so proud of his independent and strong decision he has made, …
http://abcnews.go.com/politics/vote2008/Story?id=5782924&page=1

Ben-Peter: good to see that you've answered Ruby's quest.... oh, wait. You haven't.

From that last post, I can only conclude that you're only taking the piss.

Silly arguments Antonious.

Using your argument what's the outcome if the VP candidate in the Republican Party, a senior Democrat and longterm US senator, calls into doubt Obama's readiness for the Presidency?

And considering Obama's history of political donations from suspect financial instutions and his employment of senior Fannie Mae operatives, in his campaign ...

Obama has been a two term Senator: 8 Years
Palin has been a Mayor and Govenor and her accountable public service: 12 years ...

well you work it out.

You just don't get it do you?

The US election excludes or marginalises all you lefties. It's not a contest of idealogies nor rich vs poor nor advantaged vs disadvantaged.

It is a contest between two right wing groups. The rich Northern elites vs the rich Southern elites.

Neither give a large rat's bottom for the religious right or the left wing loonies or their other respective hangers on.

They are all only in it for control of the US economy, the real economy, the industrial military complex, and the benefits they can shower on their respective rich, well connected mates.

Given your views, if Obama was running in Australia and since he's so far right wing, you'd have to have vote John Howard and liberal.

Philip Tang
Three months before she was thrust into the national political spotlight, Gov. Sarah Palin was asked to address the graduating class of commission students at Wasilla Assembly of God.
Speaking before the Pentecostal church, Palin painted the current war in Iraq as a messianic affair in which the United States could act out the will of the Lord.
"Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God," "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan."

"Sarah Palin is a great leader. ... Just look at her resume." (Ben-Peter on Sunday.)

Um, yes I am looking at her resume. Mayor of a town of less than 10,000 people (a 2007 estimate puts the Wasilla population at 9,780). This means that Wasilla is smaller than the following Australian 'mega-centres' - Burnie, Broken Hill, Gladstone, Horsham, Mount Gambier, Mount Isa, Parkes, Taree, Ulverstone and Wangaratta. And I could go on. And for less than two years she has been governor of the state with the fourth smallest population in the USA. That puts its ranking as 47th out of 50 states. Its estimated resident population of 683,478 in 2007 means that there are fewer people in Alaska than in either the South Island of New Zealand, or South Dakota. And Alaska has fewer people than the Illinois district that Barack Obama represented as a state senator for eight years.

How exactly does this level of "leadership" qualify her for being just a heartbeat away from the most powerful elected office on the planet?

Savage Pencil,

How does Obamas experience as a "community organiser" for a half dozen people and a dog on Chicagos south side; or as editor of a studentlaw journal make him eligible for the Presidency?

keith
It seemed that for you there are only two colors , the white for you and the black for all the others. But in real life there are billions of colors, except from the 100% black or white.
There are huge differences between democrats and republicans or between democrats and democrats or between republicans and republicans.
You try to avoid the details and put everything into the same basket.
For example from the last December 665.000 labors lost their job, last year labors pay increase was 2% lower from the annual inflation.
The average annual income per persons increased 2.78%.during Democrats and 1.64% during Republicans (from 1954-2007) and the 20% of poorer Americans improved their income 2.64% with the democrats and only 0.43% with republicans.
For the poor people, for the opened mind people, for the human rights and democracy, for peace, for international understanding and cooperation, Democrats are much better from Republicans.

Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Paul L, you ask:

"How does Obamas experience as a "community organiser" for a half dozen people and a dog on Chicagos south side; or as editor of a studentlaw journal make him eligible for the Presidency?"

Paul, The Harvard Law Review is not an insignificant "student law journal" see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_Law_Review

That article notes:

The Review is one of the most cited law reviews in the United States and considered by many to be the most prestigious. It is published monthly from November through June, with the November issue dedicated to covering the previous year's Supreme Court Term. The review has a circulation of about 8,000,[1] and also publishes online. In addition, it publishes the online-only Harvard Law Review Forum, a rolling journal of scholarly responses to the main journal's content.

As for his experience as a community organiser, he out-organised Hilary Clinton from the very first primary. I think if you look into his career as an organiser, you may find there's more to be appreciated there, also.

Still, it sounds like you'd rather vote for someone who identifies as a "maverick" (a motherless calf).

Here is Sarah Palin's big chance for a policy statement which shows insight into good governance and compassion toward ordinary Americans who are suffering the effects of the current financial crisis. Mind you, she'll have to match Barack Obama's rhetoric:

“It is wholly unreasonable to expect American taxpayer would or should hand this administration, or any administration, a $700 billion blank check with absolutely no oversight,” he [Barack Obama]added. “The American people have every right to certain protections and assurances from Washington.”

http://www.nytimes.com/?adxnnl=1&emc=na&adxnnlx=1222212107-MsR9rFHvixFzid2lJmYbEQ

Oh - and see also:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/24/us/politics/w24davis.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

"McCain Aide’s Firm Was Paid by Freddie Mac

By JACKIE CALMES and DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK
Published: September 23, 2008
WASHINGTON--
" One of the giant mortgage companies at the heart of the credit crisis paid $15,000 a month to a firm owned by Senator John McCain’s campaign manager from the end of 2005 through last month, according to two people with direct knowledge of the arrangement. The disclosure contradicts a statement Sunday night by Mr. McCain that the campaign manager, Rick Davis, had no involvement with the company for the last several years. ..."

Sir Vivor,

You say >> “The Harvard Law Review is not an insignificant "student law journal" “

Its relevance as experience for a candidate to the Presidency is almost entirely non existent. So what if he was elected by 80 third year students to be STUDENT president of the law review? The articles contained within the law review are partly student works and partly scholarly articles by academics. The Presidents’ job, as I understand it, is to be chief editor among the 80 or so sub editors. That is he chooses he articles to be published in conjunction with his editorial team. This isn’t even close to being as relevant to the presidency as the experience of running a small town council.

There may well be a case to argue that Obama is more of an intellectual than Palin, but there is JUST NO WAY that Obama has more experience in this type of role. Palin understands what it is to be boss and being ultimately and solely responsible for decisions which affect large numbers of people. And Palin is only VP candidate.

I keep hearing that Palin was ONLY mayor of a town of 10,000, and ONLY a governor of a state of 1,000,000. Obama simply DOES NOT have anything comparable. In any case, McCain is the Presidential candidate and he kicks Obama’s ass in experience

I am so horrified to hear that Palin is also backed by the US funny Fundi' Born Again Right Wing US Church.

As a philosopher somewhat makes me go back to Socrates who made that famous statement - Out with the Gods and in with the Good.

Socrates also went on to express that - rather than just behind the eyes and ears, to really find the Good, let the thoughts run deep.

To be sure it's all about allowing historical insight to keep track on our foresight, which is certainly lacking these days of the slick quick message mobility.

In a normal world there would be such a thing as foresight bushbred. But we're talking America here so unhappily it ain't a normal world.

It'll be only a matter of time before people wake up to the facade of Palin. The rest-of-the-world already has a preference (by about 4 to 1) for the next US Prez. Many polls say she's already peaked.

Or maybe Paul L is right and intellect counts for nothing. After all, they elected bozo twice.

Is Palin a successful governor? NO!

Alaska is the most dependent on the federal government of all 50 states. Alaska is almost completely dependent on federal government handouts and oil company profits.

Washington sends Alaska more money per capita than any other state. Alaskans receive back from the federal government almost $2 for every $1 they send to Washington.

In 2007 Alaska received some 2.5 times as much as runner-up Hawaii and 15 times more than the national average.

Alaska has no income tax or sales tax. Almost 90 percent of Alaska's general budget comes from royalties and taxes on oil.

Palin is the chief executive of a very unusual state.

http://www.alternet.org/election08/98817/palin%27s_self-reliant_image_of_alaska_is_bogus/

Hey, Paul L,
Maybe Sarah Palin and Joe Biden can do a VP debate on Friday? It looks like John McCain would rather fight another day. If Sarah is Presidential material, waiting in the wings, well then, win lose or draw, a televised debate would publicise her intellect and executive skills.

Breaking News Alert
The New York Times
Wednesday, September 24, 2008 -- 3:10 PM ET

"McCain Seeks to Delay Presidential Debate

"Senator John McCain said that he would temporarily suspend
his presidential campaign on Thursday to return to Washington
to deal with the financial crisis and the bailout package
pending before Congress. Mr. McCain is asking Senator Barack
Obama's campaign and the Commission on Presidential Debates
to postpone the debate scheduled for Friday night."

http://www.nytimes.com/?emc=na

Paul L. on Wednesday, 24 September 2008 at 10:22:52 AM, says: "I keep hearing that Palin was ONLY mayor of a town of 10,000, and ONLY a governor of a state of 1,000,000".

Paul, you can't even get your facts right. Alaska's estimated resident population in mid-2007 was only 683,478. It is unlikely to have reached 700,000 yet as the Year 2000 Census population figure was 626,932. And Wasilla doesn't have even have 10,000 people yet either. Its population at the Year 2000 Census was only 7,028 people, which means that for all of the time Sarah Palin was mayor it was a fly-speck of a community. Wasilla Facts (see http://www.cityofwasilla.com/index.aspx?page=49) show that it has a 6-person council with an annual budget today of only $12,695,563. In terms of places to be mayor of ... it's Podunkville!

As for being the governor of Alaska, Paul L. states the following: "Palin understands what it is to be boss and being ultimately and solely responsible for decisions which affect large numbers of people". So how do you square her sense of 'responsibility' with her refusal to co-operate with the original investigation into Troopergate - the one which was approved unanimously by a majority Republican committee in the state legislature during the American summer, and which Palin initially welcomed in a spirit of transparency and accountability before she became the Republican Party's vice-presidential nominee.

Shocking Footage of Palin Praying With 'Witch Hunter"

Thomas Muthee, a Kenyan pastor gained fame within Pentecostal circles by claiming that he defeated a local witch, Mama Jane, in a great spiritual battle, thus liberating his town from sin and opening its people to the spirit of Jesus.
He prayed over Palin and called upon Jesus to propel her into the governor's mansion and protect Palin from "the spirit of witchcraft."
Muthee exclaimed, "We come against the spirit of witchcraft! We come against the python spirits!" Then, a local pastor took the mic from Muthee and added, "We stomp on the heads of the enemy!"
Jim Bramlett wrote, "Sarah is that standard God has raised up to stop the flood. She has the anointing."
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/100149/shocking_footage_of_palin_praying_with_%27witch_hunter%27/

Savage Pencil, Sir Vivor,
pray for Palin, pray to expel the bad spirit.

"Hampra katamra! Remove the the evil from the .. hole!" Sorry sir I forgot the spell!

On 2008 Palin run back of 'Witch Hunters"!

She could drive us to the dark ages!

Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide