If You're As Sick Of Election Talk As Everyone Else, Just Mosey Right On By This Post

[redbrunja]

I got an email from move-on.org, which, while reading, made me go, "what the hell? I feel like I'm reading crazy liberal, leftist propaganda." I actually checked the sender's address before realizing that, horrifyingly, everything I was reading was true.

•  
• She was elected Alaska 's governor a little over a year and a half ago. Her previous office was mayor of Wasilla, a small town outside Anchorage. She has no foreign policy experience.¹
• Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.²
• She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000. ³
• Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.⁴
• She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change.⁵
• She's solidly in line with John McCain's "Big Oil first" energy policy. She's pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won't be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered species—she was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.⁶
• How closely did John McCain vet this choice? He met Sarah Palin once at a meeting. They spoke a second time, last Sunday, when he called her about being vice-president. Then he offered her the position.⁷
•  

 

1. "Sarah Palin," Wikipedia, Accessed August 29, 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin

2. "McCain Selects Anti-Choice Sarah Palin as Running Mate," NARAL Pro-Choice America, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17515&id=13661-10363509-VB8nvzx&t=1

3. "Sarah Palin, Buchananite," The Nation, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17736&id=13661-10363509-VB8nvzx&t=2

4. "'Creation science' enters the race," Anchorage Daily News, October 27, 2006
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17737&id=13661-10363509-VB8nvzx&t=3

5. "Palin buys climate denial PR spin—ignores science," Huffington Post, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17517&id=13661-10363509-VB8nvzx&t=4

6. "McCain VP Pick Completes Shift to Bush Energy Policy," Sierra Club, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17518&id=13661-10363509-VB8nvzx&t=5

"Choice of Palin Promises Failed Energy Policies of the Past," League of Conservation Voters, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17519&id=13661-10363509-VB8nvzx&t=6

"Protecting polar bears gets in way of drilling for oil, says governor," The Times of London, May 23, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17520&id=13661-10363509-VB8nvzx&t=7

7 "McCain met Palin once before yesterday," MSNBC, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=21119&id=13661-10363509-VB8nvzx&t=8

I also heard from mzminola and fam that she's pro-banning books.  For that alone I want her the hell out of public office.

 

Comments

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

I just hate this woman more and more.

[fairest1.livejournal.com]

I just -- I can understand and even admire those who go through with a pregnancy even after finding out their kid has severe birth defects.

Like this one couple, on finding out that their child had a condition that would result in them being born without a brain, decided that they could at least do something wonderful for the families out there whose newborns were mostly fine but needed organ transplants -- after all, a newborn can only accept a transplant from another infant, which makes things tricky.

But there are other parents who don't think that they could properly care for such a child, or that the kid wouldn't have the best life even if they didn't do everything right, so they have an abortion. I can get that. I can't fault them for it.

Overall, it needs to be a choice.

And then there's the part where she supports hunting down wolves with helicopters, which I think only can be considered reasonable if the wolves get helicopters and guns of their own.

*Butts into conversation*

[strange_quark]

But there are other parents who don't think that they could properly care for such a child, or that the kid wouldn't have the best life even if they didn't do everything right, so they have an abortion. I can get that. I can't fault them for it.

In Askenazim (Jews from Germany/Eastern Europe) communities, Tay-Sachs disease often leads to this kind of discussion. For whatever reason quite a few people of this descent are carriers of the gene, and if both parents are carriers there is a 25% possibility the child may have it. Parents will, therefore, get screening tests done on the child, and if the child has it some couples choose to abort.

It is a horrible, horrible disease. It presents at 6 months of age and the child will likely not live past the age of 4 or 5, and it will be a terribly pain-filled life. Some parents choose to spare their child that kind of torment. I don't understand what could possibly be so wrong with that.

And then there's the part where she supports hunting down wolves with helicopters, which I think only can be considered reasonable if the wolves get helicopters and guns of their own.

I fully support this proposition XD

Re: *Butts into conversation*

[fairest1.livejournal.com]

*nod* A lot of the pro-lifers don't seem to get the 'spare the child pain' thing. Then, they're the type who think it's a miracle when someone survives a horrible accident with such severe injuries that they can never live a vaguely normal life, hold down a job, or live without pain.

My father knows a guy who likes to go bow hunting. The man goes out and sits in a tree for hours with a bow and arrow every weekend or so. He only gets maybe one deer every two years, and if he's caught out of the tree, the deer have a good shot at spearing him back. I consider this a reasonable form of hunting. It's only a sport if there's a chance the animal can take out the hunter in the process.

Re: *Butts into conversation*

[strange_quark]

My roommate who's kind-of-ish pro-life was shocked when I told him that most women who get abortions already have children (I think it's something like 70% but I don't have numbers handy). It's like they just don't understand their issue, and I have a problem with that, because if you're going to have an opinion you should be prepared to back it up. Ad hominem attacks are not an acceptable defense of your position.

I have a friend who hunts, and he sometimes uses guns and sometimes uses a bow, but at least his family will eat what he and his father catch. It's not necessary to their survival, but at least something gets used and it's not a total waste. Besides, using an AK-47 on a deer isn't a sport, it's wanting to kill something in the most spectacular way someone can come up with, and I'm no PETA member but that's a little disturbing to me.

Re: *Butts into conversation*

[fairest1.livejournal.com]

PETA would be taken more seriously if they didn't get into things like boycotting wool and giving dogs vegan diets. It's a shame, because a solid organization just might be able to do something about shit like this.

I think a good rule of thumb is: If Gaston (from Beauty and the Beast) would say you're taking things too far and being unsportsmanlike, you need to scale back your methods.

Re: *Butts into conversation*

[strange_quark]

Also, if their VP didn't say things like "If one mouse died finding a cure for AIDS, I'd be against that cure." BALD. WITH ANGER.

God, I hate PETA. I agree that animals need to be treated humanely, but it is just too far with them. Mostly, their views on animal testing cheese me off, but then I do research.

... See, I think that if Gaston had access to helicopters and shotguns he'd be all for it. So I think that if Gaston would say, "that is an awesome idea!" you should be re-thinking it.

Re: *Butts into conversation*

[fairest1.livejournal.com]

And the part where their shelters have a history of killing healthy animals.

Yeah. It gets controversial to say things like that, thinking that the animals should get a bit more fresh air and exercise and better food (ie, with chickens -- if they don't get the chance to stretch their wings, there's not going to be any meat on 'em) and then get a quick death before becoming food.

Also: If you toss paint on a rich person's fur coat, wouldn't they be more likely to roll their eyes at whatever you have to say and go buy a new coat, resulting in the deaths of even more animals?

Well, I'm thinking of how Gaston tended to make the fight a bit more personal, going after Beast with just a knife . . . but yeah, either way, it's a stupid idea.

Re: *Butts into conversation*

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

You know, I ate Elk once.

It was killed by a man who goes out to a mountain with a group of other manly men, rides his bicycle up the mountain, hunts with a bow, and once an Elk is killed, rides up and down the mountain to pack it out.

By the way, Elk? Made the best hamburgers EVER.

Re: *Butts into conversation*

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I know. There are some many things were I am like, 'just kill me cleanly, please.'

Re: *Butts into conversation*

[fairest1.livejournal.com]

*nodnod* Agreed. And cases like this (http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/adults/saburido.asp) show people who can't really do much beyond giving people nightmares in an attempt to deter them from driving drunk and ask strangers for money to help cover medical expenses.

Kill me first, I say.

Re: *Butts into conversation*

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Word.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

I can't even imagine how much strength it takes to bring a baby to term you know is essentially dead, even so other babies can live.

My god.

[fairest1.livejournal.com]

*nodnod* Why I say, totally admire.

And it annoys the fuck out of me that because some judge ruled the baby was still alive (it was born without a brain), they were tied up in legalities until it died of natural causes and the organs couldn't be donated.

So overall I want to give the parents a hug and then go after the judge with a crowbar.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

I'll hold your coat.

Re: *Butts into conversation*

[fairest1.livejournal.com]

♥