Life Style

Sunday digest

Sept 14 2008

Writen By: Guerilla Media Xchange and Bilia

McCain And Palin Proud of Iraq war. Is It a war really to be proud of?

During an August 5, 2007 GOP Presidential debate televised on ABC Television, John McCain stated that, “it’s naive to say that we will never use nuclear weapons.”  This objectively terrifying comment fell by the wayside as McCain plummeted in the polls and seemed an electoral afterthought after Giuliani, Romney and even Huckabee ascended as leading candidates.  Now that the maverick Senator from Grand Canyon country has risen from the ashes to stand as the Republican candidate for President, this statement assumes a new and exigent relevance to the American people.

Even the most cursory examination of McCain’s pathology clearly indicates that he is both practically and ethically predisposed to do so.  When asked about whether evil exists and, if so, how should it be addressed at the Saddleback Forum, John McCain answered without hesitation “yes” and “it must be defeated.”  Trust me.  He was talking in terms of military might, not effectual fervent prayer.  This is classic John McCain.  He tends to see things in black and white.  He has neither the time nor the patience for nuance.  As evidenced by the summary selection process by which he selected his running mate (not to mention his second wife Cindy), the former bomber pilot assesses the situation in short order and takes instantaneous action.  Factor in a temper so volatile that McCain’s fellow GOP Senator and longtime friend Thad Cochran felt compelled as a matter of conscience to warn the voting public of his volcanic demeanor and you can see disaster looming just over the horizon.  

Try as he may to assume the role of heir apparent to the Reagan legacy, make no mistake – McCain is no Ronald Reagan in matters of war and peace.  For all Reagan’s public bluster, his actions proved time and again that he was committed at his core to winning the Cold war through economic and ideological means.  In McCain’s case, it is just the opposite.  At his core, he is still at war with both himself and his former captors.  His attempts to dialogue about reconciliation with our enemies are at best strained.  Yet his eyes dance with a manic glee and he is never at a loss for words when discussing the success of the surge.  It is instructive to ask yourself how many times McCain has mentioned the word “war” while on the campaign trail.  Then ask yourself how many times he has uttered the word “peace” during this same period.  The result of this accounting is as lopsided as it is valid in predicting McCain’s bloody path as President.

As if this preexisting appetite for destruction wasn’t enough cause for concern, consider that the Bush administration has shepherded the development of a new generation of what they call “usable nukes.”  According to former UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter, these new weapons are far more limited in scope than their Cold War predecessors.  The existing policy governing their use provides that in the event of an imminent significant loss of American troops in the field, usable nukes may be delivered to stop advancing enemy forces.  As Ritter points out, the potential consequences of letting the nuclear genie out of the bottle are disastrous.  Our enemies would almost certainly retaliate in kind and we could expect the unthinkable – a nuclear attack on our nation’s soil.  To most Americans, the concept of usable nukes is oxymoronic at best.  To John McCain, this concept represents a more efficient means to achieve a swifter victory.  

Moving on to McCain’s better-half, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, we are presented with a commensurately combustible ingredient for our Armageddon goulash.  Despite the fact that this self-styled “pit bull with lipstick” has been portrayed as a paragon of Christian orthodoxy, Palin is steeped in a particular brand of end-times theology that views a nuclear holocaust as not only inevitable, but a fulfillment of God’s plan for Christ’s return.  Her pastor has spoken and written extensively on this topic, going so far as to proclaim that Alaska has a crucial role as a refuge for those believers caught up in the coming conflagration.  As an Evangelical Christian, I have met, confronted and ultimately walked away in abject disgust from far too many such types.  

Alaska Women Reject Sarah Palin Rally in Anchorage

Let me be clear – this cultic teaching has absolutely nothing to do with Christ’s call to his people to live in peace with their fellow man and love their neighbors as themselves.  Quite the opposite, it is little more than a cheap charade to justify all manner of nonsense from radical societal separation along racial lines to a cottage literary industry that has spewed forth reams of mediocre futuristic fiction.  Theology notwithstanding, it lends definition to Palin’s world view — a view that can be distilled down into the bumper sticker sloagan “kill’em all and let God sort it out.”  

The unpalatable truth that cries out for telling is that end-timers like Sarah Palin share a uniquely disturbing similarity with the most maligned factions in the Islamic community.  No less than Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has made it clear that he envisions a horrific conflagration with the West as the catalyst for raising the legendary “Twelfth Imam” out of the well in which he has been hiding for over a millennium.  Upon the Imam’s return, the world will be shown the true path of Islam and order will be restored.  The thought of two theological dead-enders like Palin and Ahmadinejad attempting to negotiate a peaceful outcome to the ongoing Iranian nuclear dispute is inconceivable.  More likely, they would end up locked in mortal combat to see which one of them could best hasten God’s will for the destruction of humanity.    

And in the mind of John Mccain as president is more wars

A McCain/Palin victory this November puts in play personal pathologies and theological imperatives that bring our nation closer to a nuclear holocaust than ever before.  Paraphrasing McCain’s own broadside to Barack Obama’s patriotism, American voters must ask themselves the following question: whether a McCain/Palin administration would rather win a war they are losing than avert nuclear annihilation of a significant segment of humanity.  In all honesty, I can’t answer this question in the negative with any degree of confidence.  And that is one among many reasons why I cannot in good conscience give them my vote.



Palin: Wrong Woman, Wrong Message

»by: Gloria Steinem, The Los Angeles Times

    Sarah Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Hillary Clinton. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger.

    Here’s the good news: Women have become so politically powerful that even the anti-feminist right wing – the folks with a headlock on the Republican Party – are trying to appease the gender gap with a first-ever female vice president. We owe this to women – and to many men too – who have picketed, gone on hunger strikes or confronted violence at the polls so women can vote. We owe it to Shirley Chisholm, who first took the “white-male-only” sign off the White House, and to Hillary Rodham Clinton, who hung in there through ridicule and misogyny to win 18 million votes.

    But here is even better news: It won’t work. This isn’t the first time a boss has picked an unqualified woman just because she agrees with him and opposes everything most other women want and need. Feminism has never been about getting a job for one woman. It’s about making life more fair for women everywhere. It’s not about a piece of the existing pie; there are too many of us for that. It’s about baking a new pie.

    Selecting Sarah Palin, who was touted all summer by Rush Limbaugh, is no way to attract most women, including die-hard Clinton supporters. Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Clinton. Her down-home, divisive and deceptive speech did nothing to cosmeticize a Republican convention that has more than twice as many male delegates as female, a presidential candidate who is owned and operated by the right wing and a platform that opposes pretty much everything Clinton’s candidacy stood for – and that Barack Obama’s still does. To vote in protest for McCain/Palin would be like saying, “Somebody stole my shoes, so I’ll amputate my legs.”

    This is not to beat up on Palin. I defend her right to be wrong, even on issues that matter most to me. I regret that people say she can’t do the job because she has children in need of care, especially if they wouldn’t say the same about a father. I get no pleasure from imagining her in the spotlight on national and foreign policy issues about which she has zero background, with one month to learn to compete with Sen. Joe Biden’s 37 years’ experience.

    Palin has been honest about what she doesn’t know. When asked last month about the vice presidency, she said, “I still can’t answer that question until someone answers for me: What is it exactly that the VP does every day?” When asked about Iraq, she said, “I haven’t really focused much on the war in Iraq.”

    She was elected governor largely because the incumbent was unpopular, and she’s won over Alaskans mostly by using unprecedented oil wealth to give a $1,200 rebate to every resident. Now she is being praised by McCain’s campaign as a tax cutter, despite the fact that Alaska has no state income or sales tax. Perhaps McCain has opposed affirmative action for so long that he doesn’t know it’s about inviting more people to meet standards, not lowering them. Or perhaps McCain is following the Bush administration habit, as in the Justice Department, of putting a job candidate’s views on “God, guns and gays” ahead of competence. The difference is that McCain is filling a job one 72-year-old heartbeat away from the presidency.

    So let’s be clear: The culprit is John McCain. He may have chosen Palin out of change-envy, or a belief that women can’t tell the difference between form and content, but the main motive was to please right-wing ideologues; the same ones who nixed anyone who is now or ever has been a supporter of reproductive freedom. If that were not the case, McCain could have chosen a woman who knows what a vice president does and who has thought about Iraq; someone like Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison or Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine. McCain could have taken a baby step away from right-wing patriarchs who determine his actions, right down to opposing the Violence Against Women Act.

    Palin’s value to those patriarchs is clear: She opposes just about every issue that women support by a majority or plurality. She believes that creationism should be taught in public schools but disbelieves global warming; she opposes gun control but supports government control of women’s wombs; she opposes stem cell research but approves “abstinence-only” programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions; she tried to use taxpayers’ millions for a state program to shoot wolves from the air but didn’t spend enough money to fix a state school system with the lowest high-school graduation rate in the nation; she runs with a candidate who opposes the Fair Pay Act but supports $500 million in subsidies for a natural gas pipeline across Alaska; she supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, though even McCain has opted for the lesser evil of offshore drilling. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger.

    I don’t doubt her sincerity. As a lifetime member of the National Rifle Assn., she doesn’t just support killing animals from helicopters, she does it herself. She doesn’t just talk about increasing the use of fossil fuels but puts a coal-burning power plant in her own small town. She doesn’t just echo McCain’s pledge to criminalize abortion by overturning Roe vs. Wade, she says that if one of her daughters were impregnated by rape or incest, she should bear the child. She not only opposes reproductive freedom as a human right but implies that it dictates abortion, without saying that it also protects the right to have a child.

    So far, the major new McCain supporter that Palin has attracted is James Dobson of Focus on the Family. Of course, for Dobson, “women are merely waiting for their husbands to assume leadership,” so he may be voting for Palin’s husband.

    Being a hope-a-holic, however, I can see two long-term bipartisan gains from this contest.

    Republicans may learn they can’t appeal to right-wing patriarchs and most women at the same time. A loss in November could cause the centrist majority of Republicans to take back their party, which was the first to support the Equal Rights Amendment and should be the last to want to invite government into the wombs of women.

    And American women, who suffer more because of having two full-time jobs than from any other single injustice, finally have support on a national stage from male leaders who know that women can’t be equal outside the home until men are equal in it. Barack Obama and Joe Biden are campaigning on their belief that men should be, can be and want to be at home for their children.

    This could be huge.


    Gloria Steinem is an author, feminist organizer and co-founder of the Women’s Media Center. She supported Hillary Clinton and is now supporting Barack Obama.

I am excited about Mccain ‘s pick, his own opposition, covered in a white cloth as a Republican. Great Job Mccain and your Camp for puting all of us at risk.

Sarah Palin and the Alaska Independence Party. AIP – Part 1
Comments from Americans: “wow… this is scary scary stuff. Unfortunately, you have to really listen to this guy to get the full importance of what is being said.

he wants to sue the USA in World Court in order to get Alaska to become its own country and gain all the profits of Alaska’s oil. He says Sarah Palin has successfully infiltrated the RNC in order to further these goals.

SCARY stuff. Pay attention People.”

Americans comments on this: “This guy says “We don’t say we’re Americans, we say we’re Alaskans”.

“I’ve never heard Sarah Palin say she was American, but have heard her talk about being Alaskan quite a bit. She was a member of this party for years until she successfully infiltrated the RNC for political gains.

Now let’s see what Glen Beck says about Mrs Anti-America, here.”

Sarah Palin and the Alaska Independence Party. Palin addresses AIP convention

Sarah Palin and the Alaska Independence Party2. AIP convention



This blog has nothing to do with the Obama Campaign or any content in this article, is solely my personal opinion.

Every American voter has  the right to question, the integrity of leadership. Half members of my family supporting John McCain, and so far the Sarah Drama, has left them in a big doubt of McCain’s judgement. 

 Tucker, you should know in every household, there may be a republican, independent, undecided or a democrat. And we discuss all issues together on the same kitchen table, and reach the common ground. This is not about Obama or McCain winning the election, this is about the American people voting for honest leadership for the safety of this country.

I used to think Tucker Bounds was a smart guy, but this interview just proves to me how the McCain campaign runs on ignorance. All they do is twist and lie, lie lie lie. They take pride in doing that. Shame Shame. Very good at putting fears in Americans, so they do not get to the truth of their twists. Distasteful.

The McCain Camp put out ads to smear Obama, as a Muslim,and that he is a celebrity, and that he is too inexperienced to be a commander in chief? and yet now they are trying to convince the Americans that, it is ok for them to pick a VP candidate who is so inexperienced to be a stand in for McCain 72, in case of emergency. This  leaves me with my mouth open, to listen to Tucker defend Sarah ‘s foreign experience,as I have followed McCain and his Camp questioning and criticizing Obama from day one . The Karl Rove did not just destroy John Kelly with the lies and smears, but destroyed McCain himself in 2000. Lies and twists are Karl Rove and Tucker ‘s breakfast. I have never met  shameless people like this group( McCain camp) in my entire life. What they do not know is this year’s election is different. They do not get it that, this election is not about Obama, but the American people including all educated young American people, that are just as sophisticated and highly intelligent to know  smears, truth and lies, and so far the McCain camp proves to be very dam stupid in the face of the nation, when they continue to twist stories just for political gains. Instead of complaining about the majority of the American people who are questioning Sarah’s ethics, The McCain Camp jumped on an innocent guy Obama, and blamed him for all the rumours coming forward. As much as I understand that Obama is on the top ticket of the democrats, voters have a right to question their candidates. Be it Obama/Biden or McCain/ Palin.

Americans have the right to know the truth about candidates coming forward to lead them. If that is problem with Sarah Tucker then she should step down.

 Obama did not stop anyone to go through his personal records, including his school transcripts, because he had nothing to hide from the American people. People went to Kenya to dig his information, Obama never hired lawyers to intervene in the vetting process, I am puzzled, to see how the McCain camp jump on blocking the information about Sarah who is a heart beat away from becoming the president. Voters have a right to know the product that is being sold to them. Why employ lawyers, to block investigations. Is there anything she is hiding, and if she is clean, why intervene in the investigation. I blame Senator  McCain and his Campaign for putting Sarah Palin on the sport for political gains. Just to win an election. And they can not come out angry at voters who are just trying to know Sarah Palin. I think that is irresponsible and not fair to the American people, especially the majority that only rely on MSM for information.

IT leaves a lot of Questions unanswered to the American people.

You brought your VP  for purpose of wining Hillary voters, well, sorry it back fired.

Not this year guys, you are reading a wrong book.

It is amazing to hear the McCain camp selling  Sarah from a small town, as the experience candidate and say it over and over to the American people, when you have been  attacking your opposition as an experienced. What is your message guys?

The notion that Sarah has  foreign policy experience, simply because Alaska is close to Russia is laughable and a big joke. You wanna twist you stand, be my guest, American are not that stupid any more, to let your twists and lies die, without verification. American voters will work with you Tucker.

Actually , McSame and this Tucker guy looks very desperate to win an election. Well Tucker your tactic of trying to win Hillary’s voters didn’t work, it just exposed your candidate ‘s lack of good judgement. He would rather put his country at risk to win an election.

Not this year guys, the Karl Rove tactics will not work .

You started this fight. Are you forgetting your 72 years old candidate  pouncing on Obama not having enough experience, and that he is a celebrity? Now you are calling Sarah a rock star of the McCain Campaign? Shame on you guys.

Enough of your smears and lies. Never again. This should be a lesson. This year ‘s election is not about Obama, but the American people that you have lied to from year after year. Enough of your twists, lies and smears.


Palin “bridge to nowhere” line angers many Alaskans

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (Reuters) – It garnered big applause in her first speech as Republican John McCain’s vice presidential pick, but Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s assertion that she rejected Congressional funds for the so-called “bridge to nowhere” has upset many Alaskans.

During her first speech after being named as McCain’s surprise pick as a running mate, Palin said she had told Congress “‘thanks but no thanks’ on that bridge to nowhere.”

In the city Ketchikan, the planned site of the so-called “Bridge to Nowhere,” political leaders of both parties said the claim was false and a betrayal of their community, because she had supported the bridge and the earmark for it secured by Alaska’s Congressional delegation during her run for governor.

The bridge, a span from the city to Gravina Island, home to only a few dozen people, secured a $223 million earmark in 2005. The pricey designation raised a furor and critics, including McCain, used the bridge as an example of wasteful federal spending on politicians’ pet projects.

When she was running for governor in 2006, Palin said she was insulted by the term “bridge to nowhere,” according to Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein, a Democrat, and Mike Elerding, a Republican who was Palin’s campaign coordinator in the southeast Alaska city.

“People are learning that she pandered to us by saying, I’m for this’ … and then when she found it was politically advantageous for her nationally, abruptly she starts using the very term that she said was insulting,” Weinstein said.

Palin’s spokeswoman in Alaska was not immediately available to comment.

National fury over the bridge caused Congress to remove the earmark designation, but Alaska was still granted an equivalent amount of transportation money to be used at its own discretion.

Last year, Palin announced she was stopping state work on the controversial project, earning her admirers from earmark critics and budget hawks from around the nation. The move also thrust her into the spotlight as a reform-minded newcomer.

The state, however, never gave back any of the money that was originally earmarked for the Gravina Island bridge, said Weinstein and Elerding.

In fact, the Palin administration has spent “tens of millions of dollars” in federal funds to start building a road on Gravina Island that is supposed to link up to the yet-to-be-built bridge, Weinstein said.

“She said ‘thanks but no thanks,’ but they kept the money,” said Elerding about her applause line.

Former state House Speaker Gail Phillips, a Republican who represented the Kenai Peninsula city of Homer, is also critical about Palin’s reversal on the bridge issue.

“You don’t tell a group of Alaskans you support something and then go to someplace else and say you oppose it,” said Phillips, who supported Palin’s opponent, Democrat Tony Knowles, in the 2006 gubernatorial race.

A press release issued by the governor on September 21, 2007 said she decided to cancel state work on the project because of rising cost estimates.

“It’s clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island,” Palin said in the news release. “Much of the public’s attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here.”

(Editing by Daisuke Wakabayashi and Sandra Maler)


‘Troopergate’ inquiry hangs over campaign

Inquiry: Ex-commissioner brings up undisclosed e-mails that he says mentioned trooper.

Alaska’s former commissioner of public safety says Gov. Sarah Palin, John McCain’s pick to be vice president, personally talked with him on two occasions about a state trooper who was locked in a bitter custody battle with the governor’s sister.

In a phone conversation Friday night, Walt Monegan, who was Alaska’s top cop until Palin fired him July 11, told the Daily News that the governor also had e-mailed him two or three times about her ex-brother-in-law, Trooper Mike Wooten, though the e-mails didn’t mention Wooten by name.

Monegan claims his refusal to fire Wooten was a major reason that Palin dismissed him. Wooten had been suspended for five days previously, based largely on complaints that Palin’s family had initiated before Palin was governor.

The events surrounding Monegan’s dismissal currently are under investigation by the state’s legislature. Palin has acknowledged that a member of her staff phoned a trooper lieutenant in an effort that could have been perceived as pressure to have Wooten dismissed and that her husband and other officials also had contacted Monegan about Wooten.

She has insisted, however, that she did not authorize the phone call and was not aware of it. She has said she doesn’t believe any of the contacts amounted to pressuring Monegan. She suspended one of her aides after the recording of his discussions of Wooten with the trooper lieutenant became public.

“The Governor did nothing wrong and has nothing to hide,” the McCain/Palin campaign said in a statement, blaming the issue on the campaign of the Democratic nominee, U.S. Sen. Barack Obama. “It’s outrageous that the Obama campaign is trying to attack her over a family issue. As a reformer and a leader on ethics reform, she has been happy to help out in the investigation of this matter, because she was never directly involved.”

But the trooper controversy has been swirling around Palin for weeks, long before Palin was launched Friday into the bright lights of the national campaign.

Monegan, however, said that Palin raised the subject of Wooten with him herself on two occasions after becoming governor — once on the phone soon after she took office and once in person not long after that.

Monegan also said that the governor’s husband, Todd, talked to him several times about Wooten and that three top officials in her administration contacted him.

Monegan also disclosed for the first time that Palin sent him two or three e-mails that referenced her ex-brother-in-law and his status with troopers. Monegan declined to provide the e-mails because of the ongoing investigation.

Monegan said he believes his firing was directly related to the fact Wooten stayed on the job. “It was a significant factor if not the factor,” Monegan said.

No one from the McCain campaign ever contacted him to vet Palin as a candidate, Monegan said.

Who did they contact? “We don’t talk about the vetting process,” said Maria Comella, Palin’s vice president campaign press secretary.

What role Palin played in seeking her ex-brother-in-law’s dismissal is the governor’s first brush with scandal in a political career that has been premised on reforming Alaska’s corruption plagued Republican party and raises questions not only about her willingness to use her office to further a personal goal but also about her administrative abilities.

Palin’s replacement for Monegan, Chuck Kopp, was forced to resign just two weeks after he was appointed because of a sexual harassment complaint that had been filed against him when he was the chief of police in Kenai.

Palin, in a news conference announcing Kopp’s resignation July 24, said she was unaware that the Kenai city council had reprimanded Kopp as a result of the complaint and would not discuss how her staff had vetted Kopp before naming him to replace Monegan three days after Monegan was fired.

Palin apologized for the chaos that the Monegan dismissal and the Kopp resignation had caused. “This has been a tumultuous week in the Department of Public Safety, and as your governor, I apologize,” she said at the news conference.

Alaska’s legislature is spending up to $100,000 “to investigate the circumstances and events surrounding the termination of former Public Safety Commissioner Monegan, and potential abuses of power and/or improper actions by members of the executive branch.”

The investigation is supposed to wrap up by Oct. 31, just days before the Nov. 4 general election.

Palin will be deposed along with others in the governor’s office and former administration officials, said state Sen. Hollis French, a Democrat and former state prosecutor from Anchorage who is serving as the project director for the investigation. The special counsel just this week was trying to arrange Palin’s deposition, French said.

French said Palin’s new role as vice-presidential candidate won’t change the investigation.

“I think it raises the profile but it doesn’t really change the mission or the work,” the senator said.

Before she was governor, Palin pushed for a trooper investigation of Wooten over a number of matters, including using a Taser on his stepson, illegally shooting a moose, and accusations of driving drunk. At one point, Palin and her husband hired a private investigator.

Troopers did investigate, and Wooten was suspended for 10 days, later reduced to five. That took care of it, Monegan said. But the Palin administration and Todd Palin wouldn’t let go, he said.

Palin initially said that, after she took office in December 2006, she broached the subject of Wooten with Monegan just once, when they discussed her security detail. She said that she told Monegan that Wooten “had threatened to kill my dad and bring me down.” She said she thought that was the end of it.

Monegan said Palin called him on his cell phone one night in January 2007 about Wooten, but it wasn’t related to her security detail. He said he had already met with Todd Palin about Wooten, whom he hadn’t heard of before, and had looked into the family’s complaints only to learn they already had been investigated. Palin seemed frustrated that nothing more could be done, he said.

“For the record, no one ever said fire Wooten. Not the governor. Not Todd. Not any of the other staff,” Monegan said Friday from Portland. “What they said directly was more along the lines of ‘This isn’t a person that we would want to be representing our state troopers.’ “

Palin again brought up Wooten in February 2007 as they were walking together to wish a state senator a happy birthday, Monegan said. He said he told Palin he had to keep her at arm’s distance on the matter and she agreed.

A Palin political rival, Andrew Halcro, was the first to publicly mention the Wooten matter in connection with Monegan. He titled his blog post: “Why Walt Monegan got fired: Palin’s abuse of power.”

“This is a governor who really built her name by stepping on the back of sinners — Randy Ruedrich, Greg Renkes, Frank Murkowski,” Halcro said in an interview Friday, referring to the Republican Party chairman, the former attorney general and the former governor. “And now her administration seems to be taking the same approach as the people that she criticized.”

More of the story came out on July 17, when the Public Safety Employees Association, with Wooten’s permission, released the investigative file concerning the complaints brought against the trooper by the Palin family and others.

The personnel investigation began in April 2005, long before Palin became governor and months before her October 2005 announcement that she was running. The investigation into Wooten wrapped up in March 2006, before she was elected.

Troopers found four instances in which Wooten violated policy, broke the law, or both.


Next Page »