Analysis: Palin's words carry racial tinge

Lynn wrote:

<quoted text>
That's a deal! I'm excited about it. No matter what, isn't it a great country...I mean we can talk, and disagree and communicate at will. At heart, we are all Americans. I think it's pretty fabulous.

Brooke 831 wrote:

<quoted text>
Okay deal - now the favor...
Since you and "KayeKiLa" are both in agreement about Palin and Obama, can you find a way to get through to her about the special ed funding????? I think she's pulling from older or obscure sites and I need to go babysit foster kittens.(no, I'm not a crazy cat lady!)

KayeKiLa wrote:

<quoted text>Here's another article about Palin cutting the budget....Pensito Review: Politics and Media Pensito Review: Politics and Media
Palin Cut Funding for Alaska’s Special Needs Children by 60 Percent
Jon Ponder | Sep. 5, 2008
The facts here show Governor Palin cut funding for special needs kids dramatically.
In 2007, before Palin assumed her office of governor, the State of Alaska FY2007 Governor’s Operating Budget for the Department of Education and Early Development Special Schools Component Budget Summary (this department provides services—not just school but services—for children with severe disabling conditions) includes approved and necessary budget increases to help special needs children. This budget was released in December, on the 15th to be precise, 2006.
In that budget, the budget actuals are (FY = Fiscal Year):
FY 2005 6945.30
FY 2007 Management Plan 7949.30
FY 2007 Governors 8265.30
Palin was elected governor in November of 2006, and assumed her position in January 2007.
When budget time rolled around in 2007, Sarah Palin—self professed advocate for special needs children, mother to a special needs child, aunt to a special needs child, and who promised in her acceptance speech last night that she was there for special needs children — slashed the budget. When she said she would be a “friend and advocate in the White House,” I guess she just meant in words, not with actual money for needed services.
Here’s what the State of Alaska FY2008 Governor’s Operating Budget for the Department of Education and Early Development Special Schools Component Budget Summary shows:
FY 2006 7949.30
FY 2007 Management Plan 3173.70
FY 2008 Governor 3156.00
You see right. Under Governor Palin, funds decreased from a planned budget of 8265.30 to 3156.0. That’s a 62 percent decrease. Actual consumed amount went from 7949.3 to 3156.00, where it lingers to this day. That’s a 60 percent decrease.
Update: There are several different versions of how these budgets were cut. Most reports say the cuts were less than 60 percent, but some of these have been criticized for not accounting for inflation, etc. A few sources say Palin increased the budget. As soon as one of the campaigns releases official numbers, we’ll post them here.

Becky Johnson wrote:

REALITY CHECK WRITES: "Interesting. So now the librarian didn't really care about the supposed attempts to ban books until her job was on the line. How moral."
BECKY: Your name is such a misnomer. For you take actual facts and twist them so they no longer bear any relation to reality. The librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons told Palin in no uncertain terms that she had no authority to ban books in the Wasilla public library! So she obviously did care about Palin's comments re: banning some books from the library (no list of these possible titles exists BTW). When Sarah Palin followed up by writing a letter of termination for the librarian, a group of concerned Wasilla citizens organized a petition drive and were able to convince Palin to change her mind. THIS is the REALITY that REALITY CHECK wants to hide.
re: Severity of Downs Syndrome. When I was pregnant, my doctor tested my fetus for Downs Syndrome. She told me that the test could not determine if the fetus was severely affected or only mildly affected. But, she cautioned me, in the vast majority of cases, the retardation is severe. Look at Palin's baby. You can see it's severely retarded. That is the norm with Downs, not the exception.
As for the forced marriage: how many parents of a pregnant teen insist they marry the father and bear the child? Very few. That is so last century. Teens today have access to birth control, abortion services, adoption services--both open and closed, and the option of raising the child by themselves. An early marriage because of a crisis pregnancy is a prescription for failure. This not only goes to Palin's judgment but also to what she would force American girls and women to do if she were in power.

SueJean wrote:

<quoted text>
No, but the poster I was responding to was talking about Palin's association with this particular "party" and I wanted to know if they, like Obama's associations ever bombed buildings.
It was just a question!!

Becky Johnson wrote:

JUST SICKENING WRITES: "I guess if it was up to YOU, we'd be living in the 1930-40's Germany. Where only the PERFECT babies were allowed to live. "
BECKY: Hardly. My comment is to Palin's judgment. She KNEW she carried a Downs baby, but unlike 80% of women in a similar situation, she opted to carry the baby to term. I have to give her credit for walking the walk. But to what end? A severely retarded child has been born who will need supervision for its entire life, including AFTER Todd and Sarah have died of old age. And what quality of life does that Downs child have? Won't it break Sarah's heart every day when her child does not thrive, does not grow and excel, and never learns to live independently? It seems she selfishly has used this child to promote her conservative "pro-life" agenda. I don't ever want her in the position where she could be making nominations for the Supreme Court.

Curtis wrote:

The real problem for McCain and Palin at campaign rallies is that the only ones coming out for them now are the wing nuts. The ones that bought into the McCain/Palin B/S that Obama is a terrorist and Arab or worse. The same ones that listen to wing nut talk radio. Not the kind of base that gets you elected or that is civil at rallies. McCain/Palin are reaping the rewards of their hate mongering.

angela239 wrote:

WASHINGTON (Reuters)- Democratic congressman John Lewis, a veteran civil rights leader, accused Republican John McCain and his running mate Sarah Palin on Saturday of "sowing the seeds of hatred and division" and said it reminded him of the segregationist era of Alabama Gov. George Wallace.
McCain, trailing Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama in the polls in an increasingly tense campaign, quickly hit back, branding Lewis's remarks "shocking and beyond the pale" and calling on Obama to immediately repudiate them.
The Obama campaign said while Lewis was right to condemn "hateful rhetoric" the Illinois senator did not believe McCain or his policy criticism were comparable to Wallace or his segregationist policies as governor of Alabama in the 1960s.
The issue of race has mostly been an undercurrent in the presidential contest between McCain and Obama, who would be America's first black president, and it remains unknown how much of a factor it will play in the November 4 vote. and the artiole link http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/i...

realist wrote:

<quoted text>
And would this be a partisan opinion he expressed?

Lynn wrote:

<quoted text>
You know, sometimes your language betrays you. The point is that Pelosi and the "other Dem Freaks" -- right, like Bush, were upset because they didn't have enough pork barrel for BOTH sides. More, less, who cares--Republicans and Democracts both voted for and against the initial and eventually passed bill. All of "our" candidates voted for it--of course, except for Ms. Palin who isn't in Congress. Right now your candidate wants to bail out homeowners who knowingly went beyond their means while the rest of us bought what we could afford. I suppose you don't know much about San Francisco Bay Area real estate not being from here, but let me tell you that a shack is $500,000, and anything worth living in is a lot more than that. So bank gives the loan to those who think property values will go up, they don't and now they're in a situation of being foreclosed upon. And McCain wants to bail them out while I work hard and buy a house within my means and pay my mortgage on time--I don't think that is what most Americans want. I could be wrong. But then guess that is why Obama is up in all of the national polls. He'd be even higher up if there wasn't a bit of racism in the mix. And you know, there is no setting out the facts to you because all you do is swear and spew nonsense and are totally unwilling to debate in a give and take fashion. But I guess it's pretty obvious you were never involved in a debate class.

Lynn wrote:

<quoted text>
You know, sometimes your language betrays you. The point is that Pelosi and the "other Dem Freaks" -- right, like Bush, were upset because they didn't have enough pork barrel for BOTH sides. More, less, who cares--Republicans and Democracts both voted for and against the initial and eventually passed bill. All of "our" candidates voted for it--of course, except for Ms. Palin who isn't in Congress. Right now your candidate wants to bail out homeowners who knowingly went beyond their means while the rest of us bought what we could afford. I suppose you don't know much about San Francisco Bay Area real estate not being from here, but let me tell you that a shack is $500,000, and anything worth living in is a lot more than that. So bank gives the loan to those who think property values will go up, they don't and now they're in a situation of being foreclosed upon. And McCain wants to bail them out while I work hard and buy a house within my means and pay my mortgage on time--I don't think that is what most Americans want. I could be wrong. But then guess that is why Obama is up in all of the national polls. He'd be even higher up if there wasn't a bit of racism in the mix. And you know, there is no setting out the facts to you because all you do is swear and spew nonsense and are totally unwilling to debate in a give and take fashion. But I guess it's pretty obvious you were never involved in a debate class.

blacktop wrote:

<quoted text>
SueJean you should never care what people think about your private life woman, nobody knows who you are, and if they do then so what, who cares, it's your life, only you have to live it... But you should never put a person down or call them names because they have different opinions than you, I'm speaking not for myself, because I don't care who says or thinks what about me, on topix or in person, I'm speaking about others who you looked down on when they were trying to have an adult conversation with you... You have to agree to disagree, as I said so many times in the past, on other threads, this forum can bring out the worse in some people including myself... LOL! I'll admit that all the way sweetheart, I know that I'm mean sometimes, and I'm woman enough and honest enough to admit that I can be an A$$hole:) I know that, but you can be just as much as an A$$hole as me.... From now on Sue, lets both be respectable towards one another as well as others when we post, lets try anyway.... And to show you that I'm not all that bad.... I Apologize to You SueJean.
GOOD NIGHT!
Thomaseenia "blacktop" Morningstar*

SueJean wrote:

<quoted text>
First off, where did I swear? I said p-issed. It's a slang term for mad and slang is not necessarily "swearing".
Secondly, I thought we were debating in a give and take fashion. The problem is, is that if I don't agree with what you are saying, then I am wrong and therefore I'm not "taking" what you say as fact. A debate is when both parties debating have their own opinions and they argue those opinions, but I guess you think that a debate is where I post my opinions, you disagree with them and then I'm supposed to concede. Sorry, it doesn't work that way.
You don't think what my candidate wants to do is the right way to go. I disagree with you. I think it will help a lot of people stay in their homes and therefore, keep a lot of people from going homeless.
You think that people got loans that they knew they couldn't pay for...therefore too bad if they can't pay for the homes, but they shouldn't be bailed out. While I agree that people knowingly got loans they knew they couldn't pay for, I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that the lenders gave loans to people without having to show documentation that they couldn't pay for those loans. Lenders should have been more responsible when handing out money. I personally have owned two homes (one being the home I just signed the papers on this past week in MS) and in both cases, I've had to show documentation to prove that I could pay for the loans. Let me also say that the first home I got was in 1999, so it was during a big lending time. I was never just "given" a loan as a lot of people were. In other words, I don't just blame the people...I put a big responsibility on the lending institutions.
Just because I don't AGREE with you and BUY what you are trying to sell me, doesn't mean that we are not debating. Fact is, we are debating because we are giving different views.

SueJean wrote:

<quoted text>
Also, would you please drop the racism crap. Why is it so hard for you to believe that there are people that like McCain based on his stances on the issues and NOT because he is white? I don't give a care what you think but I am one of many people that don't like Obama and NOT because of his race. Geesh, I mean, seriously, it's getting really old and it seems to be your ONLY argument!!

KayeKiLa wrote:

<quoted text> Here's another article - Although I must say there is some conflicting information. CNN reported that Palin cut funding to special needs schools by nearly 60% and considering the cuts to programs for special needs people during the past 30 years I can't take the risk of believing Palin.
Here's another quote: Palin Cut Funding for Special Needs Kids by 62% in Alaska! watch!
youtube.com — CNN Interview with McCain spokesperson on Palin's Special Needs Support and Advocacy Record. Interesting to see the VP Nominee feeds lies to the American people about her record. Hypocritical of her to cut Special Needs funding by 62% before she had her own special needs kid, and now she claims that she is and will be an advocate! Despicable!

Lynn wrote:

<quoted text>
You are one fine Lady Ms. Blacktop. I admire you. SueJean won't see your humanity here. I've tried with her. It's just not in her nature. She doesn't have that fine sense of humor that you do. But I see it in you. Seems some of us have lost that ability to laugh at ourselves in this crazy election. But those who can will survive. I think you're pretty terrific!