Sarah Palin stumping for Saxby Chambliss

[Popeye]

So you're saying you got wolves eating your poultry and your stock,or moose or cariboo where you live. That's why you're so fascinated in the killing of the wolves right....

Relevance? Are you saying I must live among wolves in order to have an opinion on the subject? Does that apply as well to backers of Palin, such as yourself, who blindly defend everything she does, including her advocating of aerial wolf killing?

In Nov. 1996, Prop. 3 passed with 58.5% which effectively banned aerial hunting. In Nov. 2000, Alaska voters approved Prop. 6 by 53% restricting airborne wolf control to Department of Fish and Game personnel only. The Alaska legislature in 2003 reinstated the right of private citizens to engage in airborne wolf control. As Bunz pointed out, the most recent vote supported aerial wolf control with 55%.

My point with all those dates and figures is to show that this is far from a settled issue in the state and that many Alaskans disagree with Palin and the practice of aerial killing of wolves.

I realize Republicans and conservatives in general care little about the environment or wildlife. Your attitude reflects that.

The Truth About Sarah Palin

 

[XCALIDEM]

Relevance? Are you saying I must live among wolves in order to have an opinion on the subject? Does that apply as well to backers of Palin, such as yourself, who blindly defend everything she does, including her advocating of aerial wolf killing?

In Nov. 1996, Prop. 3 passed with 58.5% which effectively banned aerial hunting. In Nov. 2000, Alaska voters approved Prop. 6 by 53% restricting airborne wolf control to Department of Fish and Game personnel only. The Alaska legislature in 2003 reinstated the right of private citizens to engage in airborne wolf control. As Bunz pointed out, the most recent vote supported aerial wolf control with 55%.

My point with all those dates and figures is to show that this is far from a settled issue in the state and that many Alaskans disagree with Palin and the practice of aerial killing of wolves.

I realize Republicans and conservatives in general care little about the environment or wildlife. Your attitude reflects that.

The Truth About Sarah Palin

Popeye, since all your information comes from Keith Olberman, Rachel Maddow and any liberal bloggers site,then I will do you a favor and direct you to the right information.

Click here to learn about wildlife in Alaska. I recomend that you read pages 6-7. http://www.wildlife.alaska.gov/management/control/predator_management.pdf

 

[Popeye]

Popeye, since all your information comes from Keith Olberman, Rachel Maddow and any liberal bloggers site,then I will do you a favor and direct you to the right information.

Click here to learn about wildlife in Alaska. I recomend that you read pages 6-7. http://www.wildlife.alaska.gov/management/control/predator_management.pdf

First off, I don't get all my information from Olberman or liberal bloggers...that's your assumption. However you during the campaign, claimed that you watched Faux News almost exclusively...I think you said something to the effect that Faux only told the real truth about Obama or some other such nonsense.

Secondly it's interesting that you would put up a link to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game since they seemed to have been right in the middle of Palin's controversial use of $400,000 of taxpayer's money to "educate" the Alaskan public on aerial wolf killing.

Of course, this so called "education" came right in the middle of a contentious campaign in 2008 over the most recent initiative (ballot measure 2) on the ballot to ban the practice for private citizens. Obviously, it was a blatant attempt by Palin to influence the vote. Palin also, in the spring of 2008, tried to declare wildlife an "asset" of the State to make their management off limits to ballot initiatives.

Tim Barry, a spokesman for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, said the Legislature did make an appropriation of $400,000 so that the Board of Game could educate and inform the public about the states intensive management program.

http://newsminer.com/news/2008/aug/14/campaigns-over-alaska-ballot-measure-predator-cont/

http://dwb.adn.com/front/story/9253882p-9168881c.html

 

[Bunz]

So generic insults can't be made toward public figures?

It depends. But in your post being discussed it was the sexual reference directed towards minors that got you the infraction.

Profanity and sexual references towards public figures are frowned upon here. It is generally acceptable to negatively refer to thier intelligence, policies, personalities etc.
Politicians are fair game in this respect as long as profanity/sexual reference is left out. Calling them idiots, morons, crooks, and other things along those lines are generally fine. Calling them F_ing idiots is not.

 

[Bunz]

So the deletion was for an unfair attack? Is that right? I see plenty of unfair attacks on people that don't deserve it around here without deletion.

The deletion came as a result of the infraction I gave you. There was no re-deeming value in it, so I took it off the board.

They're obviously "public figures" inasmuch as you're aware of their existence. The genuine attacks on Bristol Palin were unfair and unwarrranted, and a disgusting example of anti-youth bias in the media. My statement was a sarcastic response to something that NoObamaNation said.

The minor children of candidates who have never made themselves public figures, and making attacks at them is not acceptable. If you see someone else make a similar comment about the child of another candidate, please report it and the same result will happen.

 

[Bunz]

And many will wail that the attacks on Bristol Palin were unfair simply because she's connected to their preferred political candidate, yet no similar objections will arise against O'Lielly's trashing of Jamie Lynn Spears. There is no legitimate objection to the anti-youth bias in the media among most of the detractors of the coverage of Bristol Palin.

A few things...you did not say Bristol Palin in your original post, you said Palin's kids, of which there are 5, including 2 younger girls Willow and Piper. They are off base, and for the record, I have been one of the most critical members here of Sarah Palin, and a vocal supporter of Obama. This has zero to do with any individual candidate.

Who is Jamie Lynn Spears?

 

[Bunz]

Big Rob,
Maybe this is just wishful thinking on my part, but I am envisioning a WH where Biden is a close advisor. You see, I think Hillary getting State was a compromise from the convention, he would rather her not be there, but that was what it would take to bring over her supporters. I think considering thier pasts, Hillary is much more likely to be the next Colin Powell.

 

[Agnapostate]

Children should be left alone...

That all depends on what you mean by "children." If you're referring to Bristol Palin, the attacks on her were unjust and hypocritical.

It depends. But in your post being discussed it was the sexual reference directed towards minors that got you the infraction.

It is not a "sexual reference." It was a satirical generic insult. The words "suck" and "blow" function as generic insults separate from a sexual context, just as the word "gay" functions as a generic insult separate from a homosexual orientation. I also notice that we've reverted from "children" to "minors." The fact of the matter is that two of the "children" involved, Track and Bristol, are legal adults. Another daughter, Willow, is a biological adult. Hence, the majority of Sarah Palin's offspring are not actually "children."

The infraction should be reversed.

Profanity and sexual references towards public figures are frowned upon here. It is generally acceptable to negatively refer to thier intelligence, policies, personalities etc.
Politicians are fair game in this respect as long as profanity/sexual reference is left out. Calling them idiots, morons, crooks, and other things along those lines are generally fine. Calling them F_ing idiots is not.

It was a satirical comment, as evidenced by the fact that it was a response to a statement condemning personal attacks against Sarah Palin's children.

The deletion came as a result of the infraction I gave you. There was no re-deeming value in it, so I took it off the board.

The minor children of candidates who have never made themselves public figures, and making attacks at them is not acceptable. If you see someone else make a similar comment about the child of another candidate, please report it and the same result will happen.

It was a satirical remark. I have also not attacked the minor children of candidates, and condemned the attack against Bristol Palin that was made when she was a minor, which I recognized as a form of anti-youth bias of the manner mentioned here.

A few things...you did not say Bristol Palin in your original post, you said Palin's kids, of which there are 5, including 2 younger girls Willow and Piper. They are off base, and for the record, I have been one of the most critical members here of Sarah Palin, and a vocal supporter of Obama. This has zero to do with any individual candidate.

Willow is not a "younger girl." Willow is a young woman who happens to be under the legal age of majority. Piper is a young girl.

Who is Jamie Lynn Spears?

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

The Right's double standard: http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/tucker/stories/2008/09/03/tucked_0903.html

 

[XCALIDEM]

First off, I don't get all my information from Olberman or liberal bloggers...that's your assumption. However you during the campaign, claimed that you watched Faux News almost exclusively...I think you said something to the effect that Faux only told the real truth about Obama or some other such nonsense.

Secondly it's interesting that you would put up a link to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game since they seemed to have been right in the middle of Palin's controversial use of $400,000 of taxpayer's money to "educate" the Alaskan public on aerial wolf killing.

Of course, this so called "education" came right in the middle of a contentious campaign in 2008 over the most recent initiative (ballot measure 2) on the ballot to ban the practice for private citizens. Obviously, it was a blatant attempt by Palin to influence the vote. Palin also, in the spring of 2008, tried to declare wildlife an "asset" of the State to make their management off limits to ballot initiatives.



http://newsminer.com/news/2008/aug/14/campaigns-over-alaska-ballot-measure-predator-cont/

http://dwb.adn.com/front/story/9253882p-9168881c.html

If you had read the pages that I told you, you would had learned that those practices, as inhumane as it may sound to us in lower 48, have been used for generations in Alaska. They have been done so that the people there can survive. If you read the report, it says that 80% of the food coming deer, caribou and moose is killed by predators as bears and wolves.

I think the same can be said about eskimos and whaling. These are things that have happened there for centuries, even before Alaska became part of the 50 states.

Aerial wolf killing has been used before in different years. This is not something that Sarah Palin introduced.

You're only repeating what the media has told you to say.

As far as I'm concern you can keep thinking whatever you want. However, if you're going to post something negative about someone make sure that you got the facts straight...

 

[Popeye]

If you had read the pages that I told you, you would had learned that those practices, as inhumane as it may sound to us in lower 48, have been used for generations in Alaska. They have been done so that the people there can survive. If you read the report, it says that 80% of the food coming deer, caribou and moose is killed by predators as bears and wolves.

I think the same can be said about eskimos and whaling. These are things that have happened there for centuries, even before Alaska became part of the 50 states.

Aerial wolf killing has been used before in different years. This is not something that Sarah Palin introduced.

I never said she had introduced wolf control...she has just ramped it up. She not only thinks Alaskans should be allowed to kill wolves from the air, but that they should be ENCOURAGED to do so...Palin's $150 bounty is but one example.

I notice you have no comment on the $400,000 "education" program, which took the form of a pamphlet sent out by the Alaska Board of Game which was inserted into newspapers just three weeks before the vote on ballot Measure two. The Anchorage Daily News referred to this way..."The timing of the state's propaganda on wolf control was terrible."

 

[XCALIDEM]

I never said she had introduced wolf control...she has just ramped it up. She not only thinks Alaskans should be allowed to kill wolves from the air, but that they should be ENCOURAGED to do so...Palin's $150 bounty is but one example.

I notice you have no comment on the $400,000 "education" program, which took the form of a pamphlet sent out by the Alaska Board of Game which was inserted into newspapers just three weeks before the vote on ballot Measure two. The Anchorage Daily News referred to this way..."The timing of the state's propaganda on wolf control was terrible."

Of course your comments are based on information provided by one of the most liberal newspapers in all 50 states...

 

[top gun]

Good Ol' Sarah Palin was stumping today in Georgia for Saxby Chambliss!!!

What a great reception she got from the crowd!!!!

Of course! There will always be a far right wing crowd that likes that sort of stuff. Hey it's the same whacked out group that buys into the crazy train talk of a Reverend Parsley or Hagee. Georgia it one of the last and quickly dwindling places for the far right.

I think Palin should drag her overall Party's national chances down whenever she gets the opportunity!

GO CARIBOU BARBIE... did she get another $180,000 clothing allowance or was she slumming it this time?