Sarah Palin blamed by the US Secret Service for provoking death threats against Barack Obama

[Niels Bohr 72]

Palin also stated the truth that Africa is a country. I believe her as well. And, also she stated the truth when announced Alaska and Russia are in proximity due to their plane routes. Therefore, she is very good with foreign relations.

You know little or nothing about Palin, what she sis or said, or how intelligent or knowledgable she actually is because the media has underserved and decived you to get Obama elected. It's easy to make one side look bad and create animosity toward them if you have an electorate that is fed up with the status quo and unwilling to be critical about the information it is receiving because they are content to hear it is all good with the new guy.

Didn't your professors in the Ivy League teach you to discern sources and not take things at face value? Mine did, and I honor their good direction by doing just that.

LOL

Very good! I'm glad you're learning. However, you just contradicted yourself.

[panamania79 2]

Palin also stated the truth that Africa is a country. I believe her as well. And, also she stated the truth when announced Alaska and Russia are in proximity due to their plane routes. Therefore, she is very good with foreign relations.

I know at least SHE thinks so.

Palin also stated the truth that Africa is a country. I believe her as well. And, also she stated the truth when announced Alaska and Russia are in proximity due to their plane routes. Therefore, she is very good with foreign relations.

You know little or nothing about Palin, what she sis or said, or how intelligent or knowledgable she actually is because the media has underserved and decived you to get Obama elected. It's easy to make one side look bad and create animosity toward them if you have an electorate that is fed up with the status quo and unwilling to be critical about the information it is receiving because they are content to hear it is all good with the new guy.

Didn't your professors in the Ivy League teach you to discern sources and not take things at face value? Mine did, and I honor their good direction by doing just that.

LOL

Very good! I'm glad you're learning. However, you just contradicted yourself.

That shouldn't surprise you at all.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

You might be able to gather rebecca's sympathy by playing this card (and maybe she'll fall for it), but I'll address the two bolded parts like any other post:

1. charles really only steps away from defending similar ilk when it goes way over TOS. He's a cool guy, but he certainly marches with the same people as well.

2. The second bold is funniest of all. I guess the media and magazines made you plaster all the McCain / Palin shite all over your avatar and signature, right? Strangely, logic nor proof led you astray on your tear regarding Obama and ACORN, or Obama's nationality. If you're going to try and bullshit someone, VW, try bullshitting someone who doesn't actually read your posts. I've seen enough of your drivel, then post-drivel-whining spree, to have figured it out by now.

I'm not looking for sympathy, so let's first discard the notion that I need it. I'm looking for intelligence, and, so far, rj has shown far more of it than most today.

I talk to charles directly. If I want to know something about him, I show him the good graces of asking him directly, then I let him speak for why he posts as he does. I made my observation by what I see.

You were annoyed by my avatar and siggy. So what? I made points that you simply refused to consider. Simply reading posts doesn't mean you ever comprehended any of them, nor approached them with any objectivity. You protest the inclusion, but you have fallen for Obama. Where you always aim your insults is solid proof of that.

[Ling Ling 22]

Palin also stated the truth that Africa is a country. I believe her as well. And, also she stated the truth when announced Alaska and Russia are in proximity due to their plane routes. Therefore, she is very good with foreign relations.

You know little or nothing about Palin, what she sis or said, or how intelligent or knowledgable she actually is because the media has underserved and decived you to get Obama elected. It's easy to make one side look bad and create animosity toward them if you have an electorate that is fed up with the status quo and unwilling to be critical about the information it is receiving because they are content to hear it is all good with the new guy.

Didn't your professors in the Ivy League teach you to discern sources and not take things at face value? Mine did, and I honor their good direction by doing just that.

Come on now...you can't blame media bias for making her look like an idiot. She's a self-made woman.

Please, direct me to one interview where she appeared competent to run the local hardware store, let alone the country.

I'm not talking about edited content or gaffes...they all made gaffes. She had many opportunities to express herself,

and I believe she did.

[rebeccajo 14]

You might be able to gather rebecca's sympathy by playing this card (and maybe she'll fall for it), but I'll address the two bolded parts like any other post:

1. charles really only steps away from defending similar ilk when it goes way over TOS. He's a cool guy, but he certainly marches with the same people as well.

2. The second bold is funniest of all. I guess the media and magazines made you plaster all the McCain / Palin shite all over your avatar and signature, right? Strangely, logic nor proof led you astray on your tear regarding Obama and ACORN, or Obama's nationality. If you're going to try and bullshit someone, VW, try bullshitting someone who doesn't actually read your posts. I've seen enough of your drivel, then post-drivel-whining spree, to have figured it out by now.

What are you on about, SRVT?

Nobody's 'drivel' is going to be received by the reader if they can't articulate it without some regard for the listener. And that's not being politically correct. That's just being ....polite.

Has polite gone out of fashion?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I don't think she had intentions of causing his life to be in further danger by her remarks, but it is sad that it caused that.

I don't believe in reading others minds, but I do believe in extrapolating intent from actual actions. And her actions are clear and their impact couldn't be clearer - even to Sarah. I do believe she tried to get him killed.

She stated the truth...he does have dubious ties to terrorism....what people do from there is up to them.

Good grief. The assumption there is that this Bill Ayers is/was a dangerous terrorist during any associations with Obama. If he is/was such a danger at those times, we is not in Guantanamo? While he had belonged to a group that did some deplorable things back in the 60's, he is not a threat to anyone today which is why he a free man. Obama's associations were with Ayers, the Professor of Education at the University Chicago.

When Right Wingers simply roll their eyes back over the picture of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Huissen back in the 80's (a reminder of our close ties with Saddam as an ally even though we knew he was ruthless tyrant), or the fact that we supported Bin Laden's fighting forces back in the 80's with arms and training as nonconsequential in who those two historic 'evildoers' became, but jump on Obama's innocuous association with Ayer's, a true double standard is established.

[Ling Ling 22]

When Right Wingers simply roll their eyes back over the picture of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Huissen back in the 80's (a reminder of our close ties with Saddam as an ally even though we knew he was ruthless tyrant), or the fact that we supported Bin Laden's fighting forces back in the 80's with arms and training as nonconsequential in who those two historic 'evildoers' became, but jump on Obama's innocuous association with Ayer's, a true double standard is established.

Well said, indeed.

[Fandango 1,439]

A President launched his career in the home of a terrorist. This is true. Wiggle the bullshit any way you want, but the facts don't change.

In politics, aligning yourself with people of standards usually is the right thing to do...not forming "friendships" with terrorists, hate groups, and openly racists preachers.

There is a difference between controlling someone, and being selective about the caliber of people you surround yourself with...

It may be called a 'smear' tactic by the die hard democrats....because it usually would (imo) have caused great damage to the candidate's credibility, but in this instance it did not. However, that doesn't change the fact that there was nothing factually wrong with any of what was said.

This is beyond partisan bs imo because no matter who said what about whom...if it's TRUE it's TRUE. I would hope ANY opposing candidate knowing very concerning facts like these would abolutely bring them to light to the voting public, because most of the media certainly didn't, and this was most certainly 'need to know' info afaic.

Oh my god..

If you'd actually harp on relevant issues, you'd see Obama has political interests with money and corporations over American citizens. This is relevant, and this actually has something to do with the Presidency.

Last I checked Bill Ayers wasn't bombing #### around the time he met Obama, or any time after. Do these facts cross your mind? No. So the real facts here are you can't find useful ####### to harp on about so you spoon feed from conservative nutjob op-eds (October surprise?) to validate your choice.

And if aligning yourself was something to do in regards to people with standards, ask yourself why George Bush is aligned with the Bin Ladens. One could dig up anything and everything on Bush and McCain. However, I have to give credit to Democrats for actually staying away from that ####### on McCain, while Republicans and their sycophants simply could NOT actually talk about any legitimate issues this country is facing.

This scare horse sh!t worked for Bush last election. It's simply obvious you can't keep scaring people into voting for you.

First of all, please try to be respectful of my opinion because if you continue with your dismissive condescension, this conversation with me will be over. I will not poke fun at your opinion, and I expect the same respect in return.

Regardless of what Ayers was doing at the time he met Obama....his history didn't change. That and other ties that Obama had may not be relevant to you or obviously a majority of the people, but it was most certainly important to me. And again, these are facts that no one can dispute...the only thing that can be disputed is whether or not it's 'relevant' and I can certainly say for me and many others that it absolutely was. It is damning, and perhaps that's why supporters are so upset by them being brought to light, but it is what it is. And it has nothing to do with Bush's associations.

But ask yourself, if McCain had a link to terrorists and religious organizations with openly racists religious leaders....would you dismiss it so easily? I think not. You don't have to be honest with me, but at least be honest with yourself.

As for 'talking about the issues'...I find it ironic that you claim that the Repubs didn't, because I saw O's campaign as nothing but hot air and platitudes and empty of any real meat to the 'issues' we are facing today. I also find that the Dems also ran a campaign of fear, although in a slightly veiled way....'Change! cos otherwise we're in the crapper!'...can you really say that is not based in fear? Btw...Not all 'change' is good, and while it's a great slogan, there's no substance IMO behind it other than a great speech by a charismatic man. Tony Robbins is also a great speaker and a charismatic man, but that alone does not qualify him to be President, either.

So at the end of the day, for the sake of our country, I hope I am wrong about O cos I think he's very Carter-esque in his policies, Kennedy-esque in his wide-eyed ignorance, among other things. But to bring this back on topic, what was said by Palin was true and you cannot dispute that. Whether some nutcase hears the TRUTH and chooses to break the law and morality by deciding to kill someone, well the onus for that is on that individual.

Free will and all that jazz....

Oh, and had the Dems had similar information on McCain...shame on them for not educating the voting public!

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Has polite gone out of fashion?

Here, indeed it has. You are being attacked for being thoughtful and less than incendiary. I tried that, but it doesn't work. It is perceived as weakness. The message is not the object of the reader's comments; it is the way it is delivered and you cannot win unless you are always agreeable to the mob.

[panamania79 2]

I don't think she had intentions of causing his life to be in further danger by her remarks, but it is sad that it caused that.

I don't believe in reading others minds, but I do believe in extrapolating intent from actual actions. And her actions are clear and their impact couldn't be clearer - even to Sarah. I do believe she tried to get him killed.

She stated the truth...he does have dubious ties to terrorism....what people do from there is up to them.

Good grief. The assumption there is that this Bill Ayers is/was a dangerous terrorist during any associations with Obama. If he is/was such a danger at those times, we is not in Guantanamo? While he had belonged to a group that did some deplorable things back in the 60's, he is not a threat to anyone today which is why he a free man. Obama's associations were with Ayers, the Professor of Education at the University Chicago.

When Right Wingers simply roll their eyes back over the picture of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Huissen back in the 80's (a reminder of our close ties with Saddam as an ally even though we knew he was ruthless tyrant), or the fact that we supported Bin Laden's fighting forces back in the 80's with arms and training as nonconsequential in who those two historic 'evildoers' became, but jump on Obama's innocuous association with Ayer's, a true double standard is established.

[Fandango 1,439]

I don't think she had intentions of causing his life to be in further danger by her remarks, but it is sad that it caused that.

I don't believe in reading others minds, but I do believe in extrapolating intent from actual actions. And her actions are clear and their impact couldn't be clearer - even to Sarah. I do believe she tried to get him killed.

She stated the truth...he does have dubious ties to terrorism....what people do from there is up to them.

Good grief. The assumption there is that this Bill Ayers is/was a dangerous terrorist during any associations with Obama. If he is/was such a danger at those times, we is not in Guantanamo? While he had belonged to a group that did some deplorable things back in the 60's, he is not a threat to anyone today which is why he a free man. Obama's associations were with Ayers, the Professor of Education at the University Chicago.

When Right Wingers simply roll their eyes back over the picture of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Huissen back in the 80's (a reminder of our close ties with Saddam as an ally even though we knew he was ruthless tyrant), or the fact that we supported Bin Laden's fighting forces back in the 80's with arms and training as nonconsequential in who those two historic 'evildoers' became, but jump on Obama's innocuous association with Ayer's, a true double standard is established.

Ok, so was it no big deal that Rumsfeld shook SH's hand? Was it no big deal that we supported Bin Landen?

The double standard is indeed established!

[rebeccajo 14]

Has polite gone out of fashion?

Here, indeed it has. You are being attacked for being thoughtful and less than incendiary. I tried that, but it doesn't work. It is perceived as weakness. The message is not the object of the reader's comments; it is the way it is delivered and you cannot win unless you are always agreeable to the mob.

Well, you could always give it a go again, you know.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I don't think she had intentions of causing his life to be in further danger by her remarks, but it is sad that it caused that.

I don't believe in reading others minds, but I do believe in extrapolating intent from actual actions. And her actions are clear and their impact couldn't be clearer - even to Sarah. I do believe she tried to get him killed.

She stated the truth...he does have dubious ties to terrorism....what people do from there is up to them.

Good grief. The assumption there is that this Bill Ayers is/was a dangerous terrorist during any associations with Obama. If he is/was such a danger at those times, we is not in Guantanamo? While he had belonged to a group that did some deplorable things back in the 60's, he is not a threat to anyone today which is why he a free man. Obama's associations were with Ayers, the Professor of Education at the University Chicago.

When Right Wingers simply roll their eyes back over the picture of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Huissen back in the 80's (a reminder of our close ties with Saddam as an ally even though we knew he was ruthless tyrant), or the fact that we supported Bin Laden's fighting forces back in the 80's with arms and training as nonconsequential in who those two historic 'evildoers' became, but jump on Obama's innocuous association with Ayer's, a true double standard is established.

Ok, so was it no big deal that Rumsfeld shook SH's hand? Was it no big deal that we supported Bin Landen?

The double standard is indeed established!

Those two associations have long been down played by Right Wingers as unimportant. The double standard was established when they didn't apply that same line of thinking with regard to Obama.

[rebeccajo 14]

I don't think she had intentions of causing his life to be in further danger by her remarks, but it is sad that it caused that.

I don't believe in reading others minds, but I do believe in extrapolating intent from actual actions. And her actions are clear and their impact couldn't be clearer - even to Sarah. I do believe she tried to get him killed.

She stated the truth...he does have dubious ties to terrorism....what people do from there is up to them.

Good grief. The assumption there is that this Bill Ayers is/was a dangerous terrorist during any associations with Obama. If he is/was such a danger at those times, we is not in Guantanamo? While he had belonged to a group that did some deplorable things back in the 60's, he is not a threat to anyone today which is why he a free man. Obama's associations were with Ayers, the Professor of Education at the University Chicago.

When Right Wingers simply roll their eyes back over the picture of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Huissen back in the 80's (a reminder of our close ties with Saddam as an ally even though we knew he was ruthless tyrant), or the fact that we supported Bin Laden's fighting forces back in the 80's with arms and training as nonconsequential in who those two historic 'evildoers' became, but jump on Obama's innocuous association with Ayer's, a true double standard is established.

Ok, so was it no big deal that Rumsfeld shook SH's hand? Was it no big deal that we supported Bin Landen?

The double standard is indeed established!

I just got lost...........

[Fandango 1,439]

Word! Palin told the truth! Rejoice! Looks like Africa is truly a country. We've been fooled.

"If SP misspoke about Africa then everything else she says is immediately false' Is that what you're trying to say?