Campaign 2008

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

Just because he was dirty doesn't mean that she wasn't.

 

Which is what the investigation should be about.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

I wish everyone would drop the "troopergate" thing already. The trooper in question, Mike Wooten, was apparently a real piece of shit who should've been fired. He made death threats, he tazed an 11-year-old kid, shoved his wife around, drank alcohol while driving his police cruiser, and committed various minor offenses. Why should this asshole have kept his job? I strongly disagree with Sarah Palin on, oh, 80% of the issues, but this ain't one of them. This guy should not have been wearing a gun and a badge, and anyone who tried to cover for him should've been punished too.

 

The sad fact is that he's still a State Trooper despite all the evidence showing that he shouldnt still be employeed, and yet they're trying to tear down Sarah Palin even though she more than likely did nothing wrong at all.

[At Home 0]

and yet they're trying to tear down Sarah Palin even though she more than likely did nothing wrong at all.

 

Shut up, Marvin.

[Guest]

I wouldn't go so far as to say she likely did nothing wrong, but trying to get that trooper fired is a-okay with me. Jingus is right.

[At Home 0]

Not because he divorced your sister. That's not okay.

[SuperJerk 0]

Politically, this is a loser for Democrats because, even though there might have been a cover-up and this investigation pre-dates Palin's nomination as VP, there's a strong case to be made that the Public Safety Commisioner was pushed out for other reasons. And, like Jingus said, the guy at the heart of the controversy was hardly a model citizen (the tazer incident being exhibit A). The Democrats will end up looking like their protecting a child-abuser.

 

This scandal is all smoke and no fire.

 

I'm also annoyed with all the dirt being dug up on Palin's church and its pastors. I thought it was a low thing to do when it was done to Obama, and it doesn't stop being a low thing to do when its done to Palin.

 

I don't think the Democrats need scandals to win. They just need to keep pointing out what a big, dumb idiot Palin is, and what a bigger, dumber idiot McCain is.

[At Home 0]

I've not heard one peep from Obama or Biden regarding this matter at all. It's being fluffed up in the media, but it's the latest snow day on the Alaskan mountain of evidence against her. There's an investigation going on about this, and it's not going to be some giant teeth-gnashing upset for the Democrats should her hands be clean of this.

[snuffbox 0]

Much like a largely insignificant crime in 1972, the problem here isn't the firing itself but this suspicion-inducing coverup.

[Guest Smues]

The Anchorage Daily News is covering this Troopergate shit like crazy, but I haven't talked to anyone that gives a shit about it. Palin supporters and non supporters alike.

[SuperJerk 0]

Much like a largely insignificant crime in 1972, the problem here isn't the firing itself but this suspicion-inducing coverup.

As of right now, this looks less like Watergate, and more like Whitewater.

 

Based on the original crimes, burglary of your oppenent's office to look for dirt and firing a public official over a child abuser fired aren't even in the same ballpark.

 

 

 

We got bigger things to worry about right now:

 

Poll: Racial views steer some away from Obama

One-third of polled white Democrats harbor negative views toward blacks...

 

Statistical models derived from the poll suggest that Obama's support would be as much as 6 percentage points higher if there were no white racial prejudice.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26803840/

[snuffbox 0]

Blindly believing in the child-abuse story is hard for me with the GOP ticket trying so adamently to keep the lid on. If you don't want to be suspected of something you probably shouldn't act suspicious as fuck.

[Jingus 0]

"Blindly believing"? Dude publicly admitted he did it.

[SuperJerk 0]

Here's what the Trooper admitted to:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...4111&s_pos=

 

Whether it was abuse or not (at best, its him showing horrible judgement for a law-enforcement officer), that's how it will strike the public, and that's why its a political loser for the Democrats to pursue this.

 

 

 

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

What democrats pursuing what?

 

It's Alaska that's looking into their own shit, and in the article posted...most of them are republicans. I find it hilarious that the GOP can't stop them from running their investigation.

[snuffbox 0]

The Liberal Media will repeat that it's a "Democrat witch hunt" or something until enough people believe it.

[Guest Vitamin X]

I don't think the Democrats need scandals to win. They just need to keep pointing out what a big, dumb idiot Palin is, and what a bigger, dumber idiot McCain is.

If there's anything to know about the American voting populace, it's that pointing that out will just make them feel comfortable voting for someone just like them.

 

but it's the latest snow day on the Alaskan mountain of evidence against her.

Good metaphor here.

[Lord of The Curry 0]

Now, I won't get up in arms for this but I 've a question for my American friends: is a township charing women to find out rape kit results common? 'Cause on CNN.com there's an article that Palin did when she was mayor.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

More common than you'd think, but still not common.

[panthermatt7 0]

The fact that the race is at all close is a fucking disaster. You have one side who has been thoroughly discredited, demoralized, and in disarray with a candidate that its own base doesn't particularly like, with a country that is going to shit in any of 18,130,982 ways, and the other side is energized and been running on all cylinders with a great candidate (even if not everyone in his base likes him) who gets accolades that I personally have never heard credited to any other politician, and has reality, history and momentum behind them, and the candidates are effectively tied, or worse yet, shows the shit side with a slight lead? That's fucking unfathomable. If you were to write a movie script with such a scenario, you would be laughed at by anyone you showed it to because it's too unrealistic.

 

And the Rethugs are energized now that the mooseburger, a genuine nutjob, has joined the ticket. The dems are in a fight that, by all rights, they shouldn't even have to say anything and still win. And the odds are showing better than even that they will lose.

 

Yes, it's still early so it may end up meaning little in the end, but I think it's extremely worrisome that the race is so close and even after all those great speeches at the DNC, the Rethugs were able to neutralize them simply by piling on more hate and lies. It's unconscionable to any decent, logical, ethical individual.

 

 

Could you take a step back, and look at it NOT from the left? Barack Obama is a guy whose time in the Senate featured two books about himself, and not a single authored bill. In the IL state senate, he voted 'present' more times than 'yes' or 'no.' I ask you as a former Obama supporter, who moved back to "undecided" as soon as his incapability to actually DO ANYTHING except talk became apparent: how in the HELL should this be a runaway election?

[At Home 0]

How in the hell should this be a runaway election?

 

 

[snuffbox 0]

Any guesses on how much legislation Abe Lincoln passed before he became president? Ike? Reagan?

 

 

[At Home 0]

Barack Obama is a guy whose time in the Senate featured two books about himself, and not a single authored bill.

 

Fact check on this, please. This has got to be bullshit. Looks like a quick google search reveals not zero, but 152 bills authored or co-authored.

[panthermatt7 0]

Any guesses on how much legislation Abe Lincoln passed before he became president? Ike? Reagan?

 

Yeah, but it wasn't their job to pass legislation, either. Reagan was a governor, Eisenhower a general. Are you really trying to compare a senator's legislative accomplishments to two people that weren't senators? I know you were only trying to draw an illustration, but it failed.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Could you take a step back, and look at it NOT from the left? Barack Obama is a guy whose time in the Senate featured two books about himself, and not a single authored bill. In the IL state senate, he voted 'present' more times than 'yes' or 'no.' I ask you as a former Obama supporter, who moved back to "undecided" as soon as his incapability to actually DO ANYTHING except talk became apparent: how in the HELL should this be a runaway election?

Obama has a PDF and just the other week published an entire book of policy ideas. What are you talking about?

[snuffbox 0]

You left out the legislator, the less experienced Illinois politician, and probably the greatest president in the history of the United States.

 

 

[At Home 0]

Nah, it's cool because he's an undecided voter.

[panthermatt7 0]

Barack Obama is a guy whose time in the Senate featured two books about himself, and not a single authored bill.

 

Fact check on this, please. This has got to be bullshit. Looks like a quick google search reveals not zero, but 152 bills authored or co-authored.

 

If I'm incorrect about his bill-writing stats, I apologize... I had read that in an article, which I thought was on msn.com. I read a lot of news throughout the day in my cubicled job, and I'm sure at least part of it is inaccurate.

[Guest C*Z*E*C*H]

I can see where Matt is coming from.

[At Home 0]

From the guy who backed Hillary to the very end and called Obama a careerist? No kidding!

[Lord of The Curry 0]

Why am I hearing techno music in this thread?