![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
False Internet claims and rumors fly about McCain's running mate.
Summary
We’ve been flooded for the past few days with queries about dubious Internet postings and mass e-mail messages making claims about McCain’s running mate, Gov. Palin. We find that many are completely false, or misleading.
Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn’t cut it at all. In fact, she tripled per-pupil funding over just three years.
She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term.
She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She’s been registered as a Republican since May 1982.
Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a "courtesy" when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state.
Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."
We'll be looking into other charges in an e-mail by a woman named Anne Kilkenny for a future story. For more explanation of the bullet points above, please read the Analysis.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2
Comments
factcheck.org is awesome! I love that site for getting all the good dirt! Thanks for posting this!
What political leader ever asks a 'rhetorical' question? Why on earth would she be 'testing the loyalty' of her employees? Say she ends up VP, or, God forbid, POTUS, is she going to start asking rhetorical questions in her State of the Union? And then to fire the librarian because she didn't feel she had the woman's support... Wow. Sounds like you have to be a yes man to work for her. I don't buy the rhetorical part one bit, I really don't. FactCheck even states it could go either way, so saying definitively yes or no is jumping the gun.
Todd Palin was an AIP member for, what, seven years? Um. Isn't that political suicide for his spouse? That's kinda like her not having her hands dirtied by Troopergate because Todd did it, not her. How many people would have voted for Obama if Michelle wanted a free Hawaii or Illinois? Not very many, I would risk guaranteeing. Maybe she wasn't a card carrying member, or maybe she was, who's to know at this point, but her husband was and that fact disturbs me since in most marriages, spouses DO tend to sway each other. Anyone remember President Clinton and her husband?
If these are the facts, I am so far from reassured, it's not funny.
There are things to be concerned about, very true. But really...SP could find the cure for cancer and you would still hate her and find something a way to make it an evil deed.
But hey, thanks for telling me how small minded I am. All those contradictory facts and stuff I keep hearing on the news should just be ignored, I guess.
Feminists rule! Wait... No, most of them are pissed with Palin. I'll get back to you on my new slogan.
I'm willing to take in new info and sometimes it impacts my opinion. (I'm not going to give myself too much credit because it wouldn't be deserved) Generally, even though I have a preference, I can still be somewhat objective. Somewhat....I AM still rooting for a team.
FactCheck I take to being close to gospel as they are non-biased and they carefully research tv ads, internet rumors, and statements made by the candidates. They catch all kinds of crap that politicans and thier people try to feed us.
You aren't even somewhat objective. No matter what is said, you will have the same opinion. You will either discount all of it or you will work to change it to support your current opinion. That's ok if you are upfront about and just say it. But you won't and that I don't respect.
I have already posted in my lj and elsewhere on lj what I DON'T like about Palin and what i'm not real happy with. I've posted long and often about why I don't like McCain or Obama - or at least why I wouldn't vote for them. I do like Biden, though.
However... I also don't like all the total bullshit lies that people post and if I see it, I'll correct it. The sad part is...some of the bs was printed in the Press...which they had to retract. They could have taken 5 minutes to research and they wouldn't have had that problem.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/realclearpoliti
It's like that same stupid crap of Obama being a Muslim (and what would be wrong with that even if he was? Like being Muslim is a bad thing?) If his supporters see that crap, they should correct the fuck out of whoever is posting it.
Cause here's my POV. If the husband was currently a member...that would be a BIG deal to me. Or even if he was a member a few years ago. Problem. Because I DO agree that a spouse can influence. All kinds of pillow talk going on.
What I find VERY funny is all the people who were tripping all over themselves saying that what M. Obama thinks/says/does isn't important are the same ones who are saying that it DOES matter about T.Palin.
So yes...does it matter? My answer is ... it can matter. What is it that the spouse is into? How current? How committed is the spouse that that idea/group? Does the candidate seem to be influenced?
I'll also disclose that as a Libertarian...I don't have a problem with sucession. But if you are going to be VP, you probably shouldn't want to suceed from the Union.
Edited at 2008-09-09 08:29 pm (UTC)
The difference between the characterizations of Michelle Obama and Todd Palin is that those against Michelle are ludicrously skewed and twisted smears, whereas Todd is, or at least was, a declared secessionist.
OK...he was a member of a sucessionist party 6 years ago and then he changed parties. So....ummmm....how much does that information change your vote? *grin* My guess is...not much.
For those who are staunch Republicans I'm guessing it doesn't change their votes much either.
The question is...will it change swing voters? I think it could have...if the media got the story right. But they didn't. They put it out there that Sarah Palin was a sucessionist and then had to retract. So now most people (I think) won't pay any attention to this story at all because they see the whole thing as a lie.
Obama is supposed to inspire me. He doesn't, really, but I will be voting for him.
As I said above, I don't give two shits if y'all (or not y'all, if you're not Alaskan? But you're using the flag) peace out of the country (or anybody else that matter), but the President and Vice President should.
But then, it's pretty rare that I would support defending any politician. None of them are worth the bother.
FactCheck catches 'em all out in shit. That's why I love FactCheck. (Although they need to step it up and check out more things, they have been slacking)
About the Pagan thing....I love Jason's blog...but he is reaching. He could make almost the exact same statements about ANY church/house of worship out there. I do agree that Evangelical churches like hers concern me. And I do agree that she brings her religion into her politics too much. That, I don't like.
I find that sad, but it's not my life.