Hillary supporters Unit #3 ..yes we are still here!

[LakeAriel]

"she would not be where she is know if she was." unquote..Got Disney



Case closed.

 

[Dolce27]

Begone! You were never a Hillary supporter.

Neither was LakeAriel and gmboy95.

 

[jacksonsmom]

Neither was LakeAriel and gmboy95.

 

[Planogirl]

Since when do we tell non-Hillary supporters to leave this thread? I remember us telling the trolls and pot-stirrers to get lost though...

Kikifan and moon, you would actually leave this thread because you disagree with one poster? Frankly, that surprises me. I don't like the sign either but disappearing makes no points at all.

Sigh... I thought that this thread might be different.

 

[jacksonsmom]

Since when do we tell non-Hillary supporters to leave this thread? I remember us telling the trolls and pot-stirrers to get lost though...

Kikifan and moon, you would actually leave this thread because you disagree with one poster? Frankly, that surprises me. I don't like the sign either but disappearing makes no points at all.

Sigh... I thought that this thread might be different.

Only one person actually told someone to leave, Robinb. No one told anyone to leave. Dolce27 was making a point saying some others here were never Hillary supporters either.

What people have to remember is on this thread, unlike the Republican or the OS threads, you will have mixed opinions and some of you may not agree with. I personally loved GotDisney's sign and thought it was clever. Again my opinion, you may agree or you may not.

I am not going to stop saying I support McCain just because there are some people on here who don't understand that. just like I can't understand how someone can support Obama, but hey it's your choice, and I am not going to get myself all worked up over someone's choice on a message board.

 

[Planogirl]

Only one person actually told someone to leave, Robinb. No one told anyone to leave. Dolce27 was making a point saying some others here were never Hillary supporters either.

What people have to remember is on this thread, unlike the Republican or the OS threads, you will have mixed opinions and some of you may not agree with. I personally loved GotDisney's sign and thought it was clever. Again my opinion, you may agree or you may not.

I am not going to stop saying I support McCain just because there are some people on here who don't understand that. just like I can't understand how someone can support Obama, but hey it's your choice, and I am not going to get myself all worked up over someone's choice on a message board.

I agree with much of what you said. I don't like the sign but support GotDisney's choice to display it. I don't like McCain and Palin but support others' decisions to support them. But it was always like that on this thread. We could disagree but still get along and discuss the political situation without too many hard feelings.

If Robinb told someone to leave, I'm willing to bet that the person was trolling. I'm all in favor of stamping out trolls.

 

[jacksonsmom]

I agree with much of what you said. I don't like the sign but support GotDisney's choice to display it. I don't like McCain and Palin but support others' decisions to support them. But it was always like that on this thread. We could disagree but still get along and discuss the political situation without too many hard feelings.

If Robinb told someone to leave, I'm willing to bet that the person was trolling. I'm all in favor of stamping out trolls.

I found it works much better if you just ignore and don't feed the trolls

But Tigger Woods was just sharing a funny David Letterman video of Obama (come on even some OS have to find that video funny!) . I don't really think that was trolling, per say. I guess maybe some would, I don't know anymore.

I do like that most on here can agree to disagree and still get along.

 

[Dolce27]

I was also talking about Palin running as POTUS. Se was chosen now even thought there were dozens and dozens of Reps (both male and female) more deserving that her. ence has nothing to do with her pick In four years she will have VP cred. Experi. And VPs almost always get their party nomination if they want it. That if McCain isn't retired before finishing his first term

(I'm copying this post but my comments aren't directed to moon alone.)

You know, her background is just the same as a couple of others that had been on McCain's shortlist and no one had problems with them. She was announced and the media and the Obama campaign went bezerk! Stuff began coming out about her and 99% of it was debunked as lies (book banning, teaching of Creationism in the school, rape victims paying for rape-kits, ect..) and sadly most of you still believe those lies. There is nothing wrong with Palin and she’s been a great governor for her state.

In fact, she's comparable to Obama on lack of experience on many issues but you won't admit that will you? But it’s still the truth. Obama’s foreign policy experience is a joke. And the entire world got to watch that joke this summer while he was off making a spectacle of himself while the Senate (remember, he still has a job in the Senate that he was elected for but seems to keep forgetting about) was in session.

You know, people are funny. You scream “I want change! I don’t want Washington politics.” So, who do we have running?

Obama: a far left socialist nut job that looks like he should belong in jail with all his underhanded dealings and with all his associates that have questionable and/or criminal backgrounds. He is a pathological liar who “owns” everything that he had no part with (I cannot believe that in last Friday’s debate he “owned” something that was McCain’s when he’s in the debate with McCain!) who has yet to keep a promise to the people of Illinois and why the heck do you think he’ll keep a promise for you when he changes his stance to suit his audience? So, option 1: an inexperienced politician who lies (more than what you falsely accuse Palin of doing) and doesn’t understand how to run the country, is too arrogant to listen to those who actually know something and is actually worse than Washington politics – he’s sleazy, scummy Chicago politics.

Then you have Palin whose major sin seems to be that 1) she’s not a liberal 2) she’s pro-life (which is not a bad thing in my opinion. I think pro-choice is murder) 3) she likes her guns. 4) she’s not liberal.

The truth is: you don’t know enough about Palin yet. The media has been doing more smears against her than honest journalism to present her to the American people. Transcripts have been found of the interviews with her and intelligent remarks that she made on topics such as foreign policy hit the cutting room floor. I wonder why that is – could it be because the liberal media doesn’t want her to seem intelligent? One interview she was even edited out mid-sentence because the full statement was a well thought out answer while the first part of it, where she was setting up her full response, alone came out as clueless. Yes, she’s green, although she does have more experience in stuff than what the left will give her credit for, BUT she is showing a willingness to get out there and learn and she doesn’t have the ego to think she already knows it all – unlike Obama who is also green. Voting “present” while working on his next job promotion did not give the man experience. So stop being hypocritical with the candidates! At least the Republican’s “green” candidate is only running for the VP instead of the top job!

So, you want change? You want someone who is not a sleazy Washington insider? Well when that one person came along you cry “Inexperienced! McCain’s about to kneel over and she doesn’t have enough experience to run this country.” (funny, until Palin came on the scene no one discussed McCain dying - it was Obama that was going to kneel over after Hillary poisoned him) Well, anyone who is going to represent true change isn’t going to have this Washington insider experience (or being a prodigy of the Chicago political slime machine) that you are crying out about wanting but at the same time not wanting. So, which is it? Experience = Washington insider or Change = someone still green but with intellect and a willingness to learn? You can’t have it both ways.

Yes, there are platform reasons to not agree with Sarah Palin such as if you are pro-choice you’re not going to like her pro-life stance. But for the most part you guys aren’t being logical like that – you’re involved with all the insane hype. All the false accusations about the woman. All the misrepresentations about the woman.

From the original OS – that’s expected. They slammed Hillary, they gave her no respect. The in the tank for Obama media dissed Hillary, misrepresented her all the time and did anything to make her look bad and Obama look good. We all knew that. We were all (the original HS on this thread) were over here venting how unfair it was to Hillary. But, I’ve discovered, Hillary had one thing going for her: she’s a liberal. So, despite her horrible treatment, it’s now been proven that treatment wasn’t that bad because she was a liberal.

Sarah Palin is a conservative and she’s being treated ten times worse than Hillary Clinton was treated. It saddens me to see those of you former HS (that are now OS) who know how one-sided and biased the media can be and how volatile the OS can be in attacks and how much someone can be misrepresented, since we all watched that happen to Hillary, and now you sit back and ignore it as it happens to Palin just because she’s a conservative.

To the former HS now OS: I honestly don’t care if you vote for Obama but stop being a hypocrite. Stop believing the hype about Palin and continuing on with the smears. Stop making crass statements such as: she’s inexperienced and she’s one heart beat away from the Presidency. Well, Obama is just as inexperienced. He’s learning facts about stuff – as we all saw in last week’s debate – but he’s not experienced. He still doesn’t fully understand things and you could tell in his broad text book answers he gives to questions that he doesn’t have a full comprehension and won’t until he actually has to begin dealing with foreign policy.

Palin will quickly catch up to Obama on that – and yes, it’d be the same for her. She’ll learn just as much from advisors as Obama’s been learning and she’ll soon be advised enough to stand up and give broad text book answers that she wouldn’t have full comprehension for until she actually has to begin working in foreign policy. Just. Like. Obama. Stop being hypocrites. Stop being vile and attacking her. You don’t have to agree with her platform and choose to not vote for her and McCain, but being Hillary supporters, of all people, you should actually research the truth and not be vilely attacking her because you know first hand how biased the media is and you know first hand how many lies the Obama campaign smears about their opponents and you know first hand how vile the original OS can be in their attacks and how they feed off partial truth and run with it and don’t always care about facts. You know this first hand.

I’d actually canceled my subscription to this thread and didn’t have intentions of posting on it anymore. Unfortunately, I’m here. I’ll admit that I could careless about the OS. They’ve been vile since Day 1. That’s part of the reason I wound up being a full Hillary supporter. My intentions had been to join both the OS and the HS thread, I wanted Hillary as Pres nom and Obama as VP nom but I would have voted for Obama if he had won the nomination.

Gosh was I naive back then.

I was driven off the OS thread after one post by their hate. There wasn’t hate on this thread back then. I really liked each of you and no, I don’t have a problem with those of you who’ve decided to support Obama. That’s your vote and your decision. It does make me cringe to see some of you supporting him now as that man makes me go with his moral corruptness and far left socialist ideas but that’s your vote.

What has upset me with you is this total disrespect for Sarah Palin who, like I sated above, you don’t know too much about yet because 99% of what’s come out about her have been vile smears vs. the truth. I would have though better of you after having to deal with Hillary’s treatment by the media, Obama, and the original OS.

(Again, even though I quoted moon - I was addressing everyone. That was a lot of surpression that I needed to get out. I can take it from the original OS - I don't respect them and I am used to them being vile - but I do hate to see the same stuff coming from the original HS that I grew to like and respect on this thread.)

 

[Chuck S]

Sorry Dolce, but I disagree:

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/sarah_palin_rape_kit_wasilla.html

When Sarah Palin was mayor of Wasilla, the city billed sexual assault victims and their insurance companies for the cost of rape kits and forensic examinations.

Palin had been in office for four years when the practice of charging rape victims got the attention of state lawmakers in 2000, who passed a bill to stop the practice.

Former Democratic Rep. Eric Croft, who sponsored that bill, said he was disappointed that simply asking the Wasilla police department to stop didn't work. Croft said he doubts she was unaware of the practice.

Maria Comella, a McCain-Palin campaign spokeswoman, said Palin "does not believe, nor has she ever believed, that rape victims should have to pay for an evidence-gathering test." To suggest otherwise, she said, is a "misrepresentation of her commitment to supporting victims and bringing violent criminals to justice."

If she never believed they should have to pay, as the McCain/Palin campaign machine suggests, why did the practice continue for 4 years under her mayorial term? And why wasn't the practice stopped when the state acked the first time, instead of having to pass legislation? Do you think she was "unaware" of the practice, since she was in charge of the city budget? And why hasn't she addressed these questions personally, instead of using a campaign spokesperson?

It seems the OS aren't the only side putting spin and onesidedness into this election...hmmm?

 

[moon]

OK, I'm back! So my exile lasted less than 24 hours!

Truth is I had a little talk with DISUNC and a long, nice conversation with Got Disney yesterday and everything is fine with us. I do need a break from political threads, but I keep coming back to this one.

I just need to say this to Dolce.

When SP was chosen, I was actually a bit excited to see what happened. As I posted on that day, I couldn't wait to see her debate. However as the day progressed -and I told you this, Dolce- I found out she was a lifelong NRA member, and that was a dealbreaker for me. That's not a smear, that's the truth. Later on I found out more things which maybe arent that important to others, but they are important to me.

How many threads bashing SP have you seen me posting in, smearing her based on rumors?

I know enough about SP to not want her near the WH. Yes, she likes her guns, and that's enough for me.

I'm sorry if that makes you lose respect for me, Dolce, but that's the way I honestly feel, and I won't lie about it.

 

[KikiFan]

What has upset me with you is this total disrespect for Sarah Palin who, like I sated above, you don’t know too much about yet because 99% of what’s come out about her have been vile smears vs. the truth. I would have though better of you after having to deal with Hillary’s treatment by the media, Obama, and the original OS.

And how about the total disrespect from some of the people in this thread (and now from you) towards those of us who dislike Palin? That we don't know what were talking about or that we "get our info on the Dis" How about that disrespect?

You don't think I remember what what we went through with Hillary? I don't have dementia.

I've done research. I've read lots of sources. There is plenty of info out there about Palin's flaws. But interestingly, no matter what sources anyone brings all we get is "I'm willing to to give her benefit of the doubt" or "I don't trust those sources." or "I don't know enough to have an opinion on the matter"

I don't recall any of you giving Obama that "benefit of the doubt" or questioning sources as long as it fit with your view of Obama.

So yes, frankly I think a few of you in here are acting like hypocrites. You're using what happened to Hillary as justification to dismiss any criticism of Palin. As if the fact that she's a woman, automatically demands our loyalty.

I couldn't care less what's between a politicians legs. It's what's between their ears that matters to me.

You truly believe that McCain and Palin are the best candidate? Fine vote for them. Obviously it's your right. But don't drag Hillary's name into it, for PR or some sort of justification.

Even if you think Palin is a perfect candidate. Palin (and McCain's) positions are the antitheses of what Hillary believes in. To use her name to promote McCain's campaign is a slap in the face to her and to those of us who believed in, and fought for her. All you're doing is continuing to villanize her with her party and allow the Repubs to use her to beat up Obama.

You want to beat up on Obama? Go for it. There's plenty out there. But don't use Hillary to do it. Or at least don't patronize me and act like you've got any loyalty left to Hillary. Because the point you applaud that sign, you've lost all credibility.

 

[Dolce27]

OK, I'm back! So my exile lasted less than 24 hours!

Truth is I had a little talk with DISUNC and a long, nice conversation with Got Disney yesterday and everything is fine with us. I do need a break from political threads, but I keep coming back to this one.

I just need to say this to Dolce.

When SP was chosen, I was actually a bit excited to see what happened. As I posted on that day, I couldn't wait to see her debate. However as the day progressed -and I told you this, Dolce- I found out she was a lifelong NRA member, and that was a dealbreaker for me. That's not a smear, that's the truth. Later on I found out more things which maybe arent that important to others, but they are important to me.

How many threads bashing SP have you seen me posting in, smearing her based on rumors?

I know enough about SP to not want her near the WH. Yes, she likes her guns, and that's enough for me.

I'm sorry if that makes you lose respect for me, Dolce, but that's the way I honestly feel, and I won't lie about it.

Yes, I do recall you mentioning the NRA and that's not what I meant when believing all the hype. I respect your decision to not vote for Palin on that alone. But all I see on this message board anymore is hype about her. It hasn't been this bad with either McCain, Biden or Obama. The lies and the smears about her have been beyond anything any of the other candidates have received.

Again, while I quoted you on that last post of mine, I wasn't signaling you out. I know that there are legit platform views that are going to make some of you not like her. That's not what I went off about.

I'm tired of the statements such as "she's too inexperienced" when Obama is just as inexperienced.

And there were others on McCain’s short list that have similar backgrounds as her and no one had a problem (well, I guess the media as a lot of us weren’t paying attention) until it was Palin chosen. I just find a lot of things hypocritical.

You guys aren’t too bad but I’m seeing some of what the OS is spewing coming from you guys now. The OS – I could care less about as I’m now used to it. But it does get frustrating to see you guys, who I do like and respect, beginning to make some of the same statements. That’s what I went off about. And yes, I’ve had it bottled up for awhile now so I really went off.

 

[Dolce27]

And how about the total disrespect from some of the people in this thread (and now from you) towards those of us who dislike Palin? That we don't know what were talking about or that we "get our info on the Dis" How about that disrespect?

You don't think I remember what what we went through with Hillary? I don't have dementia.

I've done research. I've read lots of sources. There is plenty of info out there about Palin's flaws. But interestingly, no matter what sources anyone brings all we get is "I'm willing to to give her benefit of the doubt" or "I don't trust those sources." or "I don't know enough to have an opinion on the matter"

I don't recall any of you giving Obama that "benefit of the doubt" or questioning sources as long as it fit with your view of Obama.

So yes, frankly I think a few of you in here are acting like hypocrites. You're using what happened to Hillary as justification to dismiss any criticism of Palin. As if the fact that she's a woman, automatically demands our loyalty.

I couldn't care less what's between a politicians legs. It's what's between their ears that matters to me.

You truly believe that McCain and Palin are the best candidate? Fine vote for them. Obviously it's your right. But don't drag Hillary's name into it, for PR or some sort of justification.

Even if you think Palin is a perfect candidate. Palin (and McCain's) positions are the antitheses of what Hillary believes in. To use her name to promote McCain's campaign is a slap in the face to her and to those of us who believed in, and fought for her. All you're doing is continuing to villanize her with her party and allow the Repubs to use her to beat up Obama.

You want to beat up on Obama? Go for it. There's plenty out there. But don't use Hillary to do it. Or at least don't patronize me and act like you've got any loyalty left to Hillary. Because the point you applaud that sign, you've lost all credibility.

I’ve never said that you only get your “info on the DIS”. You don’t need to get this crazy info on the DIS – mainstream media has enough of it to go around. Seriously, if you don’t like Palin than you don’t like Palin. I’m not reaming anyone for not liking Palin. That wasn’t the point of my vent.

But seriously, Palin is being treated even worse than Hillary was with the misinformation, smear, and overall treatment by the msm and the OS.

You're using what happened to Hillary as justification to dismiss any criticism of Palin. As if the fact that she's a woman, automatically demands our loyalty.

Not even close. I don’t think a person should vote for anybody based upon gender or race so please stop taking my vent in a direction that I wasn’t going.

I’m not dragging Hillary’s name in for some “PR” whatever. I’m dragging Hillary’s name in, as a former Hillary supporter to other former Hillary supporters, stating hey! We saw this once already and now it’s happening ten times worse to another candidate mainly because she’s not a liberal. Please don’t get caught up in the hype because we know a lot of what’s out there about Palin is hype vs. truth. We’ve seen it already this election except now it’s been pushed up to whole other level.

And about Obma? KiKi, you saw my progression on this thread. I came into this election planning to vote for either Obama or Hillary. Then I saw how nasty his supporters were. Then I saw how nasty and underhanded Obama began playing games with Hillary. Then I began doing some research on him. And more research. I didn’t start out hating Obama. You saw my entire progression and a good chunk of mine and others research on him. You know that I was supporting Hillary but that I cannot support her backing Obama now. Obama and Hillary are not the same. At all.

Oh, and Palin isn't a perfect candidate... there's no such thing. I'm not disillusioned. And since Hillary is no longer in this election I had to decided who was the better choice of the candidates left. McCain won my vote.

 

[LakeAriel]

I voted for Obama. I did not like the way Hillary ran her campaign. Period. Neither did the majority. That said, had she been the candidate I would be supporting her 100%..Those of you who are voting for McCain/Palin because Hillary is NOT the candidate were never interested in her values or philosophies . The GOP candidates do not represent the views of Senator Clinton, the candidate you claimed to have been so supportive of.

There is nothing worse, IMO, then fakes. Some of you voted for her strickly because she was a woman, and if she were a mannequin you still would have chosen her. The loss of your votes is no loss at all in my opinion, because you never were Democrats in the first place.
( I am well aware there are exceptions, but none I have seen on here)
If you honestly just didn't like Obama you would not vote at all. You certainly wouldn't campaign for someone who made bombing Iran a song and chose a running mate who doesn't read a newspaper. (and needs to, badly )

 

[Dolce27]

I voted for Obama. I did not like the way Hillary ran her campaign. Period. Neither did the majority. That said, had she been the candidate I would be supporting her 100%..Those of you who are voting for McCain/Palin because Hillary is NOT the candidate were never interested in her values or philosophies . The GOP candidates do not represent the views of Senator Clinton, the candidate you claimed to have been so supportive of.

There is nothing worse, IMO, then fakes. Some of you voted for her strickly because she was a woman, and if she were a mannequin you still would have chosen her. The loss of your votes is no loss at all in my opinion, because you never were Democrats in the first place.
( I am well aware there are exceptions, but none I have seen on here)
If you honestly just didn't like Obama you would not vote at all. You certainly wouldn't campaign for someone who made bombing Iran a song and chose a running mate who doesn't read a newspaper. (and needs to, badly )

Some of us, like me, never claimed to be a Democrat and are Independents. And some of us had already leaned towards McCain before he chose a female running mate. So, sorry, being a woman has nothing to do with it. Oh, and Palin reads newspapers - she reads whatever she can get her hands on.

 

[LakeAriel]

Some of us, like me, never claimed to be a Democrat and are Independents. And some of us had already leaned towards McCain before he chose a female running mate. So, sorry, being a woman has nothing to do with it. Oh, and Palin reads newspapers - she reads whatever she can get her hands on.

The woman I am referring to is Hillary..As far as Sarah reading the newspapers? I don't think so, you must have missed that interview.

Hillary is pro-choice, Mc Cain is not..

 

[Dolce27]

The woman I am referring too is Hillary..As far as Sarah reading the newspapers? I don't think so, you must have missed that interview.

Hillary is pro-choice, Mc Cain is not..

I'm not pro-choice either but there are other key issues that I focused on this election.

I know which interview you're speaking of. You're stating that she doesn't read newspapers because she refused to list a specific one and just made her point that she tries to read everything for a better view of what is going on in the world. Seriously, there are top newspapers that everyone knows of - yes, even Sarah Palin - that she could have lied about and said oh, I read that one if she really didn't read newspapers. I believe her statement: she's not partial to one or two particular publishing’s - she reads whatever she can to get a better view of what is going on in this world.

 

["Got Disney"]

Since when do we tell non-Hillary supporters to leave this thread? I remember us telling the trolls and pot-stirrers to get lost though...

Kikifan and moon, you would actually leave this thread because you disagree with one poster? Frankly, that surprises me. I don't like the sign either but disappearing makes no points at all.

Sigh... I thought that this thread might be different.

I thought so also....

Sorry Dolce, but I disagree:

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/sarah_palin_rape_kit_wasilla.html



If she never believed they should have to pay, as the McCain/Palin campaign machine suggests, why did the practice continue for 4 years under her mayorial term? And why wasn't the practice stopped when the state acked the first time, instead of having to pass legislation? Do you think she was "unaware" of the practice, since she was in charge of the city budget? And why hasn't she addressed these questions personally, instead of using a campaign spokesperson?

It seems the OS aren't the only side putting spin and one sidedness into this election...hmmm?

As for that it has been shown that there is more to that.....she actually increased moneys for women's rights and also that story has been proven to have been debunked...they even said that on the news...here is a link to one that leads to the other.....there are others that show it to be false but this link is a typical Obama campaign tactic....read down and you will find the info on this being false.

http://www.lifenews.com/nat4382.html

I voted for Obama. I did not like the way Hillary ran her campaign. Period. Neither did the majority. That said, had she been the candidate I would be supporting her 100%..Those of you who are voting for McCain/Palin because Hillary is NOT the candidate were never interested in her values or philosophies . The GOP candidates do not represent the views of Senator Clinton, the candidate you claimed to have been so supportive of.

There is nothing worse, IMO, then fakes. Some of you voted for her strickly because she was a woman, and if she were a mannequin you still would have chosen her. The loss of your votes is no loss at all in my opinion, because you never were Democrats in the first place.
( I am well aware there are exceptions, but none I have seen on here)
If you honestly just didn't like Obama you would not vote at all. You certainly wouldn't campaign for someone who made bombing Iran a song and chose a running mate who doesn't read a newspaper. (and needs to, badly )

Give me a break....we are not fakes.....we did not vote for Hillary because she is a woman......and no if she were a mannequin we would not vote for that and calling us stupid is what you OS do best...and so on...and any HS in here that are not in agreement with us is fine but if you agree with this crap that Areal is spewing than well ........

The woman I am referring to is Hillary..As far as Sarah reading the newspapers? I don't think so, you must have missed that interview.

Hillary is pro-choice, Mc Cain is not..

You never were for Hillary...you are one of the OS that have been nasty about her.....you have been one of the worse. I remember clearly....stop trying to be a pot stirrer in here....

And nothing wrong with being pro choice...I am not but find nothing wrong with anyone that is......I was rapped at age 13 by a 69 y.o man and had to go to court back than to get the approval to have an abortion.....back than the right was not available...so if anyone should hate someone that is not for choice it should be me....

What is wrong with people that have different view points should we all agree on the same things Do you think one person will run the US as POTUS....I say not. There have been so much debunked about Palin it is astounding.

 

[Chuck S]

[QUOTE="Got Disney";27917202]As for that it has been shown that there is more to that.....she actually increased moneys for women's rights and also that story has been proven to have been debunked...they even said that on the news...here is a link to one that leads to the other.....there are others that show it to be false but this link is a typical Obama campaign tactic....read down and you will find the info on this being false.

http://www.lifenews.com/nat4382.html[/QUOTE]

I don't see anything as false, when you go back to the ORIGINAL story in the Frontiersman in 2000:

Wasilla Police Chief Charlie Fannon does not agree with the new legislation, saying the law will require the city and communities to come up with more funds to cover the costs of the forensic exams.

In the past weve charged the cost of exams to the victims insurance company when possible. I just dont want to see any more burden put on the taxpayer, Fannon said.

According to Fannon, the new law will cost the Wasilla Police Department approximately $5,000 to $14,000 a year to collect evidence for sexual assault cases.

Ultimately it is the criminal who should bear the burden of the added costs, Fannon said.

If the mayor is responsible for the city budget, and reviewing all the department budgets so they may be included in her budget, then there had to be a line item in that department budget that showed this somewhere.

And as mayor, was she completely unaware that the state legislation was pending? If legislation were pending, would you not find out how your city funded these kits, especially when your police chief says it will increase your city costs by $5K to $14K per year?

That certainly seems like a reasonable thing for a mayor to look into. Or are you saying she, as a mayor, was completely unaware of pending state legislation that may have an impact city costs?

It is wrong to infer that she either supported or did not support the legislation, but it IS clear that she, as mayor, didn't have a clue as to how the police department, and her police chief, was handling the situation. It is also clear that she failed to investigate to see how state legislation may impact her city.

 

["Got Disney"]

I don't see anything as false, when you go back to the ORIGINAL story in the Frontiersman in 2000:

Barack Obama's Campaign Sought to Exploit Rape Victim to Attack on Abortion

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
September 29, 2008

Email RSS Printer

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A new scandal has erupted for the campaign of presidential candidate Barack Obama and it involves the issue of abortion. New reports indicate Obama's campaign asked an anti-domestic violence group to find a rape victim to attack John McCain and Sarah Palin on abortion or the so-called rape kit hubbub.

The controversy may cause some women voters to charge that Obama's campaign unfairly sought to exploit a rape victim for political gain.

The news web site Politico brings the scandal to light today and says it obtained an email about how the Obama camp contacted domestic violence groups to find a rape victim to use in its commercial.

Kiersten Steward, director of public policy at the Family Violence Prevention Fund and a former top aid to pro-abortion Congressman Maurice Hinchey of New York, apparently served as a liaison between the Obama camp and the groups.

"Obviously, this is a big ask and I haven't seen a script but presumably it will be a brief 'this is what happened to me, we need someone who will fight for women like me, these are the guys to do it,'" Steward wrote in a September 15 email Politico obtained.

The email went on to say the Obama camp would have a film crew in Washington to film the rape victim and the ad.

Politico contacted the Obama campaign and spokesman Bill Burton wouldn't comment on the potential ad or exploiting a rape victim to promote his candidacy.

"Choice is an important issue, and we're going to continue talking about it in battleground states through the election," Burton said in an email.

The statement makes it appear the ad would likely have challenged McCain and Palin on the issue of abortion while trying to appeal to women voters and former supporters of Hillary Clinton.

LifeNews.com contacted both the Obama and McCain campaigns for an update on the story and has not received a response.

Politico also found a rape victim whom the Obama campaign eventually contacted, but declined to appear in an ad -- Virginia resident Mikele Shelton-Knight, who is a victim rights advocate now.

Shelton-Knight said the potential subject of the commercial was never discussed but she indicated it could focus on the bogus rape kit controversy targeting McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

Palin has been falsely blamed for a policy of making women pay for rape kits when she served as the mayor of Wasilla, Alaska. However, the charge has been disproved.

Shelton-Knight told Politico that the criticism of Palin is unfounded and unfair because most cities across the nation had the same policy until a recent trend of trying to get government to pay for them.

http://www.lifenews.com/nat4364.html


At least since September 8 the extreme left has been pushing a lie that Governor, then Mayor, Sarah Palin "charged rape victims for rape kits" performed upon them in the Alaskan town of Wasilla.
The charge stems from a May 22, 2000 article in the local Wasilla paper The Frontiersman and has been spun from a comment made by the Wasilla Police Chief. This comment was somehow made into a Sarah Palin policy.
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Evidence of the incident, though, shows no involvement by Palin at all. Still, many Old Media outlets continue to keep illegitimately linking this rape kit billing claim to Sarah Palin, even though the truth is easily discovered. [/FONT]