The Ugly New McCain - Page 3

independent_thinker2002 · 09-17-08, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anjire

Palin has zero "pants on fire" and zero "false".

It seems Palin is more of a help to McCain for Truthfulness then Biden is to Obama.

True, but will she be a detriment when it comes to knowledge of various national issues?

Anjire · 09-17-08, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by independent_thinker2002

True, but will she be a detriment when it comes to knowledge of various national issues?

Personally, my first impression of Sarah Palin I couldn't help but think of Dolores Umbridge.

Zyphlin · 09-17-08, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aps

I think Palin's number will increase shortly. Her allegations that she said thanks but no thanks to the bridge to nowhere is an outright lie.

It is not an "outright lie"

That was her final stance on it. It would be an "outright lie" if she said "I have always been agaisnt the Bridge to Nowhere". Show me where she stated that.

aps · 09-17-08, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zyphlin

It is not an "outright lie"

That was her final stance on it. It would be an "outright lie" if she said "I have always been agaisnt the Bridge to Nowhere". Show me where she stated that.

The implication is that she refused the money for that bridge. She received the money and then kept it. Her saying that she said no thanks to Congress (no thanks to the $$) is an outright lie, IMO.

Anjire · 09-17-08, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aps

The implication is that she refused the money for that bridge. She received the money and then kept it. Her saying that she said no thanks to Congress (no thanks to the $$) is an outright lie, IMO.

What would be very telling is if a good chunk of the money she kept was reallocated to her bridge to Wasilla.

independent_thinker2002 · 09-17-08, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zyphlin

It is not an "outright lie"

That was her final stance on it. It would be an "outright lie" if she said "I have always been agaisnt the Bridge to Nowhere". Show me where she stated that.

You know, it's funny Zyph. She uses weasel words in her speech, and then the watercarriers for her go on the MSM and make outlandish claims. It happens on both sides. The night of the convention, I heard the spin doctors claim that she was always against the Bridge to nowhere and that she sold the jet for a profit on eBay. While you are technically correct, the perception is what matters. I think people aquire these perceptions through the deluge of spin doctors on each side. It seems to me that both sides are misrepresenting Palin's words. One side to tear them down, the other to build them up. It's no wonder people have trouble figuring out the truth.

Zyphlin · 09-17-08, 01:43 PM

Perhaps thats the case IT, and I won't deny it. I have said, numerous times on this forum, that the impression she was against the bridge from the outset or turned down the money is dishonest. But I ALSO have opposed those that say its an "outright lie" because it is NOT...her words are not a lie. You can't take a spin doctors words, and claim it is Palin's. You can't take a paraphrase of her, and claim its her words. You can't take her words, draw your conclussion, and then claim she lied based on how you percieved the words to mean. Those things aren't her words, her words are her words.

And yes, both sides do spin the thing. And can continue to spin it. The left wants to say "Well she kept the money", you can spin that right back that saying the money in and of itself wasn't the problem the problem was that much money into a SINGLE project that helped a small amount of people...she instead got the money for her state (something a governor SHOULD be trying to do because that money is already there in the Governments pot and if you don't get it, its going to be wasted elsewhere) and instead of putting it all into one giant project that was unneeded spread it out through numerous projects to help more people and put better use to the tax payers dime. Notice being against "pork barrel projects" does not necessarily mean "against recieving tax payer money".

But see, that's not my issue that she spun things or maybe gave the wrong impression. I've stated as such. My issue is with statements like a "blanket lie" which is wrong, and more importantly the fact that so many on the left will rail and crusade again Palin and McCain, holding them to standards they don't even get close to holding their own candidates to. Yes, I will defend Palin when she's attacked by extreme over exaggerations, because those that are doing the attacking generally have shown themselves to be extremely partisan in their attacks, doing it not based off principles but party ideology. But I have also been quick to agree with those that have given a more accurate assesment to McCain and Palin's acts, or those that have honestly held both parties to the standards their railing against.

independent_thinker2002 · 09-17-08, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zyphlin

Perhaps thats the case IT, and I won't deny it. I have said, numerous times on this forum, that the impression she was against the bridge from the outset or turned down the money is dishonest. But I ALSO have opposed those that say its an "outright lie" because it is NOT...her words are not a lie. You can't take a spin doctors words, and claim it is Palin's. You can't take a paraphrase of her, and claim its her words. You can't take her words, draw your conclussion, and then claim she lied based on how you percieved the words to mean. Those things aren't her words, her words are her words.

And yes, both sides do spin the thing. And can continue to spin it. The left wants to say "Well she kept the money", you can spin that right back that saying the money in and of itself wasn't the problem the problem was that much money into a SINGLE project that helped a small amount of people...she instead got the money for her state (something a governor SHOULD be trying to do because that money is already there in the Governments pot and if you don't get it, its going to be wasted elsewhere) and instead of putting it all into one giant project that was unneeded spread it out through numerous projects to help more people and put better use to the tax payers dime. Notice being against "pork barrel projects" does not necessarily mean "against recieving tax payer money".

But see, that's not my issue that she spun things or maybe gave the wrong impression. I've stated as such. My issue is with statements like a "blanket lie" which is wrong, and more importantly the fact that so many on the left will rail and crusade again Palin and McCain, holding them to standards they don't even get close to holding their own candidates to. Yes, I will defend Palin when she's attacked by extreme over exaggerations, because those that are doing the attacking generally have shown themselves to be extremely partisan in their attacks, doing it not based off principles but party ideology. But I have also been quick to agree with those that have given a more accurate assesment to McCain and Palin's acts, or those that have honestly held both parties to the standards their railing against.

I wasn't attacking your stance. I was just pointing out how misconceptions happen. When I said, "it's funny" it was because those particular spin doctors were trying to build her up and in actuality, they now have helped give the perception that she was lieing.

aps · 09-17-08, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zyphlin

Perhaps thats the case IT, and I won't deny it. I have said, numerous times on this forum, that the impression she was against the bridge from the outset or turned down the money is dishonest. But I ALSO have opposed those that say its an "outright lie" because it is NOT...her words are not a lie. You can't take a spin doctors words, and claim it is Palin's. You can't take a paraphrase of her, and claim its her words. You can't take her words, draw your conclussion, and then claim she lied based on how you percieved the words to mean. Those things aren't her words, her words are her words.

And yes, both sides do spin the thing. And can continue to spin it. The left wants to say "Well she kept the money", you can spin that right back that saying the money in and of itself wasn't the problem the problem was that much money into a SINGLE project that helped a small amount of people...she instead got the money for her state (something a governor SHOULD be trying to do because that money is already there in the Governments pot and if you don't get it, its going to be wasted elsewhere) and instead of putting it all into one giant project that was unneeded spread it out through numerous projects to help more people and put better use to the tax payers dime. Notice being against "pork barrel projects" does not necessarily mean "against recieving tax payer money".

But see, that's not my issue that she spun things or maybe gave the wrong impression. I've stated as such. My issue is with statements like a "blanket lie" which is wrong, and more importantly the fact that so many on the left will rail and crusade again Palin and McCain, holding them to standards they don't even get close to holding their own candidates to. Yes, I will defend Palin when she's attacked by extreme over exaggerations, because those that are doing the attacking generally have shown themselves to be extremely partisan in their attacks, doing it not based off principles but party ideology. But I have also been quick to agree with those that have given a more accurate assesment to McCain and Palin's acts, or those that have honestly held both parties to the standards their railing against.

Okay, on my way home, I read a great article in Newsweek that debunked a statement Palin made at the RNC. Here's the quote, and I have provided the article. I have also provided several other websites that substantiate the facts Jonathan Alter (clearly an Obama supporter) state in his article.

Quote:

"Listening to him [Obama] speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform—not even in the state Senate"

Jonathan Alter: A Reality Check on 'Change' | Newsweek Voices - Jonathan Alter | Newsweek.com

Factcheck admits that it cannot define what Palin meant by "major law," but it shows the lack of honesty behind that statement. Perhaps she made the statement without knowing the entire facts, but, to me, that would not be indicative of a good VP candidate--not making sure your facts are correct before asserting them in a public forum.

What the facts show is that Obama authored legislation while in the Illinois senate. He has also co-sponsored legislation in the US Senate.

FactCheck.org: GOP Convention Spin, Part II

McClatchy Washington Bureau | 03/27/2008 | Police interrogation law showed Obama's skill in Illinois senate

Charles Peters - Judge Him by His Laws - washingtonpost.com

Palin's statements are dishonest, at best.

Anjire · 09-17-08, 10:35 PM

Hmm..

Looks like Obama my have chalked up another one in the false category possibly the pants on fire...

We will see how his claim to have been instrumental in the stimulus package bill plays out.

And I believe John McCain issued a retraction regarding his campaigns "lipstick" complaint against Obama.