• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Palin: I snuck to Canada for healthcare

It's pretty clear the Liberals missed the point and if you hate me go ahead.

Here is something else to confuse the Liberals. The facts about when Canada started down the road to Socialized medicine get ignored, so what a bout this.

Sarah Palin never snuck into Canada.

This is a misquote.

What she said was:

How does a 5 year old sneak into Canada and is she a hypocrite because her Mom and Dad took here there as Canada was just moving to Socialized system?

By the Way Russia says today that Alaska is still their territory and I say it was until it became a State officially, but that's just an opinion. And I know about the territory thing. What shocks me is that there is a liberal out there who could actually figure it out.

I thought the point was that she's a lair. At 5 she most likely didn't remember **** about it. And even if she did, she used the same "brother story" for two different occasions with two different locations for the emergency visit. Why would she say they took him to Juno in one story and Canada another time? Because she's a liar.
 
I thought the point was that she's a lair. At 5 she most likely didn't remember **** about it. And even if she did, she used the same "brother story" for two different occasions with two different locations for the emergency visit. Why would she say they took him to Juno in one story and Canada another time? Because she's a liar.

:roll::roll::roll:
 
How does a 5 year old sneak into Canada and is she a hypocrite because her Mom and Dad took here there as Canada was just moving to Socialized system?
More importantly, how does this illustrate some sort of hypocricy on Palin's part, especially given that the examples of prominent people from countries with socialized medicine coming to the US for care they could not otherwise get are ignored?
 
I thought the point was that she's a lair.
This will be impossible for you to prove -- but then, the accusation is enough when a (R) is involved.
 
This will be impossible for you to prove -- but then, the accusation is enough when a (R) is involved.
I think I did prove it, you simply ignored it in the quote for some odd reason. :roll:
 
I think I did prove it, you simply ignored it in the quote for some odd reason. :roll:
A lie requies that the person in question intentionally made a false statement, and specifically requires that the person knew the statement was false.
Thus, you havent proven anything.
 
A lie requies that the person in question intentionally made a false statement, and specifically requires that the person knew the statement was false.

Would you say that Ms. Palin knows the difference between Canada and Alaska, and the difference between a train and a ferry?

If no, her conflicting stories can be excused due to ignorance.

If yes, her conflicting stories indicate she knowingly made a false statement.
 
Would you say that Ms. Palin knows the difference between Canada and Alaska, and the difference between a train and a ferry?

If no, her conflicting stories can be excused due to ignorance.

If yes, her conflicting stories indicate she knowingly made a false statement.
I am not fully privy to the supposed contradictions in the stories you mention, but it is entirely possible that these contradictions do not constitute a lie.
 
I am not fully privy to the supposed contradictions in the stories you mention, but it is entirely possible that these contradictions do not constitute a lie.

good
please explain the contradictions
i am curious to know the explanation which will reveal this not to be a lie told by the chillbilly
 
good
please explain the contradictions
i am curious to know the explanation which will reveal this not to be a lie told by the chillbilly
You'll need to specify the statements in which the supposed contradiction took place.
 
You'll need to specify the statements in which the supposed contradiction took place.

so then, you did not even know of the circumstances you opined about

i don't need your observations any more, knowing that

dismissed
 
so then, you did not even know of the circumstances you opined about
i don't need your observations any more, knowing that
dismissed
Actually, you do, as I said:

A lie requies that the person in question intentionally made a false statement, and specifically requires that the person knew the statement was false.

Now, if you want me to look at what she said and tell you if that constituttes a lie, you then need to show me what she said. That she may have contradicted herself, as noted, above in no wy necessitates that she lied, as it is possible to contradict yourself w/o knowingly making a false statement.

Or, you can skulk away.
 
Actually, you do, as I said:



Now, if you want me to look at what she said and tell you if that constituttes a lie, you then need to show me what she said. That she may have contradicted herself, as noted, above in no wy necessitates that she lied, as it is possible to contradict yourself w/o knowingly making a false statement.

Or, you can skulk away.

Obviously you haven't read the thread, so go do your homework and find the evidence you seek right in this thread.
 
Obviously you haven't read the thread, so go do your homework and find the evidence you seek right in this thread.
I guess you aren't really interested in discussing the topic - instead, you just want to fling partisan allegations and insults, as is typical of your breed.

Oh well.
 
See post #55 :roll:
 
The lengths some people will go in an attempt to smear someone with whom they disagree politically is simply astounding.
 
Ok, lessee....

From Post 55:
Version 1:
"My first five years of life we spent in Skagway, Alaska, right there by Whitehorse: Believe it or not, this was in the 60's, we used to hustle over the border for health care that we would receive in Whitehorse," Palin told the crowd.

"I remember my brother, he burned his ankle in some little kid accident thing and my parents had to put him on a train and rush him over to Whitehorse and I think, isn't that kind of ironic now," Palin added. "Zooming over the border, getting health care from Canada."

Version 2:
"Palin drew from her Skagway past to illustrate her point. Her brother burned his foot badly jumping through a fire and her mother had to take him down to Juneau on the ferry to the hospital.

"'All these years later, that's still what people have to rely on here in some instances,' she said."
Apparently,the focus here is the mode of transportation?
:roll:

Now, I said:
A lie requies that the person in question intentionally made a false statement, and specifically requires that the person knew the statement was false.
Where is the intentional false statement?
How does this show that Palin knew the one (or both) of the statements was false?

There's no proof of a lie, there's a difference in the two stories - for all any of us know, the trip could have been made by car, with Palin being worng both times she recited the story. That doesn't mean she lied.

Its amazing the length you people will go thru to smear people you just don't like. Why does Palin scare you so much?
 
Re: Blogs abuzz about Palin's use of Canadian health care

i know....but it was purchased long before that.
 
Re: Blogs abuzz about Palin's use of Canadian health care

i know....but it was purchased long before that.
I must be missing something.
 
Re: Blogs abuzz about Palin's use of Canadian health care

I must be missing something.
someone in this thread said alaska was russian territory until 1959. it wasn't. but i don't expect him to own up.
 
Ok, lessee....

From Post 55:
Version 1:


Version 2:

Apparently,the focus here is the mode of transportation?
:roll:

Now, I said:

Where is the intentional false statement?
How does this show that Palin knew the one (or both) of the statements was false?

There's no proof of a lie, there's a difference in the two stories - for all any of us know, the trip could have been made by car, with Palin being worng both times she recited the story. That doesn't mean she lied.

Its amazing the length you people will go thru to smear people you just don't like. Why does Palin scare you so much?

the focus here is on the lie

she indicated her brother's burned foot was treated in canada
and another time indicated that it was treated in juneau

and yes, the mode of transport was different in each presentation, depending on the destination

her brother must have burned his foot a lot
 
the focus here is on the lie

she indicated her brother's burned foot was treated in canada
and another time indicated that it was treated in juneau

and yes, the mode of transport was different in each presentation, depending on the destination

her brother must have burned his foot a lot

The focus here should be on who said what. The first quoted text is a direct quote from Sarah Palin. The second quoted text is someone else recounting what Sarah Palin said, and not a direct quote by Sarah Palin. I'm sure you trust the second source implicitly, as it supports your "gotcha" moment. A more honest person would be more prudent.
 
the focus here is on the lie
she indicated her brother's burned foot was treated in canada
and another time indicated that it was treated in juneau
Yes... but a contradiction of facts doesn't necessarily constitute a lie.

Can you show that she intenionally made a false statement?
Can you show that she knew the statement she was making was false?

Absent those things, there is no lie.
 
Re: Blogs abuzz about Palin's use of Canadian health care

someone in this thread said alaska was russian territory until 1959. it wasn't. but i don't expect him to own up.

By the same logic, the territory that was northern Mexico remained part of that country until the late 19th/early 20th century rather than 1848.
 
Back
Top Bottom