Sarah Palin (Alaska Gov) McCain's VP
 

CHICAGO -- A Republican source told the Chicago Tribune Friday that Sen. John McCain has chosen Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate. Campaign officials would not confirm the report.

CNBC News also reported that a Republican strategist had told the network that Palin is the pick.

Countdown to the first person in the media to dismiss her for being in beauty pageants. A former football star wouldn't be dismissed, but she will be.

I'm very shocked.. and happy! She has always been a Libertarian leaning Republican and now McCain has my vote believe it or not!

She's great! She's a real woman who hunts moose and everything. LOL! She comes from as far away from DC as you can get! It also helps that my dead aunt lived in Wasila under Palin.

Well you are are a Republican so why would that be so difficult to believe?

:laugh: Well because I was still debating on who was getting my vote. I was going to vote Libertarian Party.

I would hope that alot of women would dismiss her for her strong anti-abortion record and gun toting ..I watched her speak and she is no Hillary Clinton.

Is that the same aunt that knew about Hillary killing Vince Foster? I smell a conspiracy here!

:laugh:

....

Looks like the McCain campaign wants to grab the women who are still pissed about Hillary losing the nomination. I know nothing about this woman, so I need to do some research before I make a decision about her. Not that I'd vote for McCain either way. But I hope he chose her because she's actually qualified & would be a good VP, not because she's a broad & might get him more votes. :cool:

BTW - It's McCain's 72nd birthday today. If that guy gets in & stays for 8 years (gulp) he'll be there when he's 80. Most people take their elderly parents' car keys away at that age, and some people are actually considering putting him into the most powerful position in the nation?

At least she is easy on my eyes compared to the other candidates :D

And a cancer survivor as well..Van Palin has only has 2 years experience as Governer and was a small town Mayor prior to that so I guess the Republicans can stop braying about Barack's lack of experience with her a 72 year old + cancer survivor's heartbeat away from the Presidency.

She is the only one of the four of them with executive experience. Given that they are all seeking to be in an executive office, that is significant.

and so is the upholding of Roe vs. Wade and numerous other important issues that will be undone by a McCain /Palin adminsration ..even moreso if he croaks midterm leaving her the Pres.You described yourself as a Democrat ..if you are thinking of voting the Repub ticket only because of her gender I don't get it I am a gay man and believe me if one of these self loathing Log Cabin Republicans ever found themselves on A GOP ticket(would never happen so in theory only)You can bet I'd be out pounding the pavement for the Democratic ticket.

This is exactly what the Obama camp is saying.. To me this is an insult to most of America, which consists of many "small towns".. we can't all be NYC you know. This just does not hold up IMO. Team Obama should have taken the high road it always pats itself on the back for traveling.

All politics aside, Palin can come be my "VP" anytime :D

You're actually going to say that.. I mean, really?

Actually, no. That aunt died of MS. The aunt that knows about Vince Foster is Assistant U.S. Attorney Samantha Spangler. You might Google her, she would actually be in a position to know.

Man...
 

I would like to "google" Palin, and I am sure she would indeed 'know' the position...


:laugh:

Not really, because she isn't running for president, she's basically running for the presidential internship position. You CAN have on the job training for that, whereas it's McCain vs. Obama. If Palin were the nominee for president, you'd have a point. Personally, the democratic ticket looks backwards to me. Whatever you think of Biden, he HAS the experience. Why he's playing second fiddle to a guy whose only national experience consists of 144 days in the Senate is beyond me.

Also, a major difference between Palin and Obama is that she has as much Executive experience as Obama has Legislative experience. Obama has never run anything for ANY length of time. As a governor, you run a state. As a senator, you run your own office and that's it. The two kinds of experience are worlds apart.

Well, you have to admit that it can be a baffling concept, since the Republican Party actively seeks to block both gay marriage and civil unions, they work to have sexual orientation removed from hate crime legislation, and they seek to block us from being able to adopt.

I think this is McCain's attempt at proving that he can be a candidate of change....I don't know anything about this lady, but I think he chose her more for the fact that she is a woman.

yes really..the truth will set you free:wavey:

If it walks and talks like a whackadoodle...

I really don't feel like getting involved in this same old argument.. but I will try to defend the position of gay republicans, yet again (and btw.. I am NOT a Log Cabin Republican). Actually, I'll let others voice the defense for once. These quotes come from two very liberal-minded blogs.

[M]any intolerant gay liberals really don’t care so much about how gay Republicans feel about “issues utterly unrelated to gay rights,” except to assume unfairly that their motivation is probably selfish (i.e., lower taxes) rather than not (i.e., national security, foreign policy, etc.).

The real source of their trouble is their singular focus on gay civil rights as an issue that ought to trump every other, so much so that they bear real feelings of betrayal and outright hatred for any one of “our own” who support politicians or even political parties on the other side of that issue. (No doubt that singular focus is easier when they just so happen to agree with Democrats on most every other issue.) [...]

The problem with the witch hunt at Manhunt, to slightly restate Jamie’s point, is too many on the gay left who believe that because of how the parties stand on gay rights, to be gay and Republican is a betrayal not to be tolerated, especially if you support individual politicians like McCain who have a rotten gay rights record.
- Chris Crain


And finally..


[C]ampaign rhetoric and partisan posturing aside, Obama is not perfect and McCain is not a homophobe…

Does our community have room for, as example, my gay African-American Democratic friend who is concerned that Barack Obama does not have adequate experience or maturity for this position? Is there a place for my gay Republican friend who thinks that McCain is a move in the right direction by the Republican Party and who wants to vote to support this improvement? What about women who believe that Hillary Clinton was treated grossly unfair by DNC operatives?

Or are gay activist correct in demanding that those who do not give unqualified support for the Democratic Party candidate are traitors and should be reviled and punished?
- Timothy Kincaid, Box Turtle Bulletin


It's simply not fair to assume that all Republicans think the same way.. that we all support the likes of Bush, etc.. Just as it would be insane of me to assume the same of Democrats. It's my party too, darn it!

I'm by no means a Log Cabin Republican.. however I am a Republican and nothing could be more untrue than to say I hate myself! In fact I am probably guilty of loving myself and my "gayness" too much! ;) Why sould I be a Democrat when I agree with almost NOTHING they stand for?

Riddle me this ..did you not at one time vote for George W. Bush?

Yes I did.. Do I regret it now.. YES YES YES! That was also a few years ago when I had many different views that have since changed.

well perhaps there is hope for you yet.

I suppose you missed almost all of my posts since I have returned a few weeks ago. I have spoken out against the war, called out the far right nut cases, expressed my disdain for the "religious right", etc..

I've done much growing and soul searching over the past few years and it has changed a lot of my views.. through all that I still find myself to be a Republican despite it all.. I'll never be a socialist Democrat.

Brandon.... I'm not someone who thinks the only important issue is gay rights. There are many and numerous issues that are important to me.

However -- despite everything the Log Cabin Republicans insist -- I still don't understand the concept of voting for politicians who are actively seeking to oppress you or make sure that you remain oppressed.

If it were just a matter of them being "less than supportive" on the issue, that would be one thing. But we're talking about politicians who actually CREATE legislation to deny us rights, and then spend time and our tax-dollars to push that legislation.

Is that really how you want your tax dollars to be spent? And is that really how you want them to spend their time, when there are so many other important issues they could be focusing on?

I think I did miss some of your recent posts it sounds to me like voting Libertarian like you had planned would be more consistent with your new views instead of backsliding into your old habits..there is a reason why the religious right is overjoyed with the choice of Palin as McCain's VP.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/po...ts_iceber.html

by Frank James

Among the names mentioned as potential vice presidential picks for Sen. John McCain has been Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the telegenic 44-year old mother of five.

Paiin, who earned the nickname "Sarah Barracuda" for her intensity as a high-school basketball player, a sobriquet some political opponents have kept alive, won election in 2006 as a reformer and was quickly seen as a rising star in Republican political circles. There was even a "Draft Sarah Palin for Vice President" movement or, at the very least, a website.

Palin has some awesome popularity ratings with Alaskan voters, something above 80 percent.

But now Palin is also caught up in a probe of her official conduct that probably nixes whatever long-shot chance she had to be on the McCain ticket. After all, she's only been a governor for two years.

Questions have arisen over whether Palin used her office to try and fire her ex brother-in-law from a state trooper's position. Palin asserts the charge is untrue but the Alaska Senate this week approved the hiring of an independent investigator to look into the charges.

Palin can take comfort in not having been implicated in the federal corruption investigation that has led to the indictment and conviction of some Alaskan politicians, like Sen. Ted Stevens who was indicted earlier this week.

Indeed, Palin made her reputation in Alaska by combating ethically challenged colleagues which didn't make her popular with her colleagues but did lead to the resignation of an Alaskan attorney general whose conflict-of-interest problems she helped to spotlight.


But having an Alaskan on the ticket would likely bring constant attention to the state's corruption problems which, since the state is Republican run, don't help the GOP brand.

Palin has another problem. After Alaska's public-safety commissioner Walt Monegan was fired (Monegan has said he felt pressure to dropkick the trooper) Palin replaced him with the former police chief of the city of Kenai. But he quit after it became known that he received a reprimand after sexual harassment allegations were filed against him in his former post.

At the very least, that incident raises some questions about Palin as a chief executive and might take some of the thrill away for some women who might otherwise be excited about seeing her on the ticket.

Thus, a McCain-Palin ticket doesn't appear to be in the cards.

However probably not the same ones that are important to me (which is why there are multiple parties in the USA)

Actually the LCR's are very specific about the candidates they endorse.. they seek inclusive candidates mostly (Olympia Snowe, Arnold Schwarzenegger, etc..) Or at least those candidates who don't seem to have an "agenda" against the LGBT community. I do think it is possible to not be for gay marriage yet not hate us either.

Let's leave Bush out of this! ;)

I’ve long believed that the government should remain neutral on gay issues, neither discriminating against us nor offering us preferential treatment. Many gay activists, however, insist politicians reach out to us and identify us by name.

Bull****. If there's proof, let's see it. Put up or shut up. :rolleyes:
Also, a Google search produced nothing of note.

Scandalous! I lllllike it!:laugh: I do however think that the Dinosaur and the Barracuda has a catchy ring to it!

That would probably be because she is very strong in her pro-life views. And although Palin is against gay marriage she doesn't seem to have some agenda against gay people, like many of the "Bushies" do. As a matter of fact Palin blocked legislation that would have stopped the state of Alaska from granting benefits to the partners of gay state employees.

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

Matanuska Maid Dairy closure
When the Alaska Creamery Board recommended closing Matanuska Maid Dairy, an unprofitable state-owned business, Palin objected, citing concern for the impact on dairy farmers and the fact that the dairy had just received $600,000 in state money. When Palin learned that only the Board of Agriculture and Conservation could appoint Creamery Board members, she simply replaced the entire membership of the Board of Agriculture and Conservation.<12><32> The new board, led by businesswoman Kristan Cole, reversed the decision to close the dairy.<32> The new board approved milk price increases offered by the dairy in an attempt to control fiscal losses, even though milk from Washington was already offered in Alaskan stores at lower prices.<33> In the end, the dairy was forced to close, and the state tried to sell the assets to pay off its debts but received no bids.

That's possible. But, then again, maybe there are many issues we feel the same about. National security is a concern of mine -- and I find it laughable when folks act like Republicans are the only ones who can adequately protect our country.

Seriously, a Democrat isn't going to be lax on an issue like that either. Most especially not after 9/11.


Yes, there are Republican politicians who support gay rights -- and I'm always pleased to see that. Unfortunately though, the majority of people who vote Republican are also voting for the politicians who actively work against us. Obviously, or they'd never make it into office.


If we were treated as equals, it would be a different story. But we have a long way to go. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm not asking for preferential treatment. I want no more rights than what my brother has as a straight man.

He could meet a girl tonight, get married tomorrow, and it would be recognized and accepted in every single state in this country. They can file jointly on their income tax forms, they can share health benefits and insurance, etc.

Meanwhile, I've been with the same man for almost four years now, and we have none of those rights. Yet I pay taxes just like my brother does. I vote, I contribute to the economy, and so forth.

I guess I just don't see how that's fair, but I want to make it clear that I don't necessarily feel we need a stake in "marriage." It's really just a word, and the other little kiddies can keep their monopoly on it if they wish. Just so long as we're granted civil unions that provide us an equal amount of rights and protection.

I agree that Democrats care about the safety of our country.. I don't call anyone unpatriotic unless they really deserve it.. like William Ayers! lol.

I think thats the problem with our parties in this day and age. Both sides seem to be overrun with extremists. You have to either be Michael Moore or Jerry Falwell. I mean, come on.. are you freaking kidding me!!!


Fighting for understanding and change is the ONLY way we are going to change this.. You know.. "The good fight". ;)


agreed.