Moderator:Mrs.Palin,Contrary to early reports that the Republican Party was going to keep it's strong-some refer to it as a -'total' -ban on abortions in this year's platform,that appears not to be the case.If I may refer to page 52 of that document,there is no specific language stating that the party opposes an abortion ban in cases of rape,incest,or the fear of the mother's life.My question to you,Mrs.Palin,do you personally feel that your party's language is strong enough in this area?Why?Why not?
Sarah Palin:Thank you for your question.I have long been an an opponent of any and all abortions.I ran on this issue in my very first election.Let's be perfectly clear on this:abortion is murder.All abortion.The language of our-the Republican-platform is very very strong.There is no need,absolutely no need,to include phrases and clauses into our stance.It is very clear as stated on it's own.Republicans are against abortion.We are for 'Life.Liberty,and the pursuit of Happiness',as I believe all good Americans are.
In fact,our party has done more than our fair share to save the unborn.Almost all laws-or attempted laws-to stop this genocide have come from within the Christian right:the Republican Party.
I praise my opponent,Senator Biden,for also being pro-life.I question-however-his audacity.While spouting verbiage of support,Mr.Biden,a supposed good Catholic,waffles letting millions of innocents die because in policy,he continues to look the other way.My opponent allows abortion.As Jesus himself said,"He who is not with me,is against me."Pardon my bluntness,Mr.Biden,but I feel your stance is just more of the Washington bluster.
Moderator:Senator Biden...a rebuttal?
Senator Biden:Thank you.First off,I would like to congratulate my opponent for the chance to debate her,today.It's about time that the Republicans brought a female pitbull-even one wearing lipstick- into the fight.But since Ms.Palin so graciously brought MY LORD,JESUS into this debate,I do not think that I would be remiss in quoting my savior,as well.Asked if it was lawful to pay the tax Jesus said:"Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and give to God what is God's."Now,if this isn't Jesus supporting the separation of church and state,I don't know what is.See,here is where Governor Palin and I disagree.I feel that the Republican party is more responsible for this abortion debacle than they are willing to admit.They say they feel strongly on this issue,but play politics constantly with it.Most Democrats feel as their Republican brother's do,that abortion should not be used as birth control.But as is painfully obvious to most Americans,'abstinence only' does not always work.And with big business/Wall Street pushing out more and more sex provoking images to sell shampoo,the sexual labios of some very very good kids is being put to the test daily.It just keeps getting harder and harder to'just say no'.
But that is not the main issue,here.I am constantly amazed,Governor,that the party that is constantly spouting it wants less and less government,is pushing for more.
Your party's exclusive no exception abortion policy is an abomination to us Democrats.How can you tell a husband that he has NO RIGHT/NO CHOICE in whether his wife lives or dies?If the decision has to be made between a mother's life or that of the unborn child's-how dare you say that the government's rights supercede that of the families?
That's what this debate is about,the familes right in a crisis situation to make the painful decision.The government is too big when it gets that final say.And until the G.O.P. moderates it's position on this matter,there can be no compromise.We can not allow your big government interference to have the ultimate authority on a familes life or death situation.Live Free or die,Mrs.Palin.Live Free or die.
Moderator:Rubuttal,Goveror?
Sarah Palin:You're having a bad hair day,senator.I already said that the Republican platform on abortion in no way mentions,'in cases of rape,incest or because of the mother's health'.That's not mentioned anywhere.You're barking up the wrong tree,senator.In most cases it isn't the size of the dog in the fight,but it's the size of fight in the dog.You,you're neither-you're best bet is to put your tail between your leg and hightail it out of here.
14 comments:
The Palin question I wish to ask is this:What will she do if she becomes pregnant?Will she continue to travel,travel,travel?Or will she have a secret abortion all the while protesting against
Dear Anon...good questions...but she would probably gloery in being pregnant and 2nd in command.
It seems my worries of her not being ready for her new post are true.Her handliers are blowing this 'pig in lipstick' thing way out of proportion because she can't handle this mild jab herself.She is allowed near photographers but not reporters because she is not capable of handling the situation herself.This means that she is too weak and soft-at least at this point-to stand up for herself.
Hillary would have either blown the comment off or given as she received.
That Mrs.Palin has had to have other people(mostly men)stand up for her honor ..well...
Another point that I question,she is a supposed strong Christian...according to most conservative Christian sects they believe the man should be in control of the wife in the marriage(the wife should obay the husband in all matters)does that mean that if her husband tells her to attack China that she is in a catch twenty two?Sin by not obeying her husband...or against her wishes-obey her husband..either way,we are voting for her not her hubby.
I do not know what the whole fuss about the pig/lipstick is all about.She is the one that called herself a 'pitbull with lipstick'.If Joe Biden called himself,for instance,a 'fighter',would anyone question Sarah Palin making fun of that remark?
And John McCain is keeping her on a short leash.Why do they always campaign together.Whay does she not got out on her own...like Michelle Obama,for instance?Why does she not take reporter's questions?
Because as a pitbull with lipstick she isn't qualified for her job to be.She's eye candy.
A crash course on national politicing probably will make her presentable,but it is very telling that she isn't as of now.
Well, by your own definitions etc. since you are a "strong christian" do you rule over your wife and she has to do everything you tell her to do?
Hi,Dharma,no,my wife and I are more like an equal/team.But her 'brand' of conservative Christianity,I believe,may not have such a liberal view of the Bible...
Isn't all of that personal interpretation?
Yes..my point,exactly.But..if you are going to run on religion...like Ms.Palin is...you have a right-nay- a duty-to ask the hard qusestions about where she stands.She says she is a fundimentalist..most of this sect believe the husband is the boss...this maynot be the truth in her case...but since she is partially running a faith based campaign...don't you think the question should at least be asked?
First of all I was not under the impression that she was "running on religion". Her religion, just like W and Romney and Obama, is just a part of who they are. I am sure that Obama's questionable religious affiliations trouble you as well. If they did not or do not, shouldn't they? I mean, if we are going to be fair. How about his former preacher that "god damned" America? As a staunch citizen weren't you offended by that?
Let's be fair across the board. If you are going to make the religion of the candidate first and foremost then you must do it for all of them. Biden, Obama and McCain too.
I was not under the impression that any of them were running on a ticket of religion. I also find it very amusing that all the so called "religious" people like to make religion an issue. Those of us who don't care would rather look at more important issues like the state of the country, education and taxes.
I only make religion an issue when the candidate does.I will not blame Obama for something his minister said.I have read the whole context of the speech,and though i don't agree with his language,it is not as damning as people make it out to be.
On the other hand,Ms.Palin has said 'religious things'-like it is God's will that she is on the ticket.She is making a religious issue out of her political running,not me.
As a quazi-religious person myself,I often mistrust people running on their religion-like you said,it should be just a part of whom they are.But-like George Bush -using his /her religion as an excuse for questionable actions-should be questioned:"I'm attacking Iraq because I believe God wants me to' is less reassurring than,"I am attacking Iraq because they have atomic weapons"...even Bush knew that.
Her views are not in line with mine on many issues.Drilling for oil off our coasts/using Nuclear power/breaking unions/total abortion ban/Pro=Iraqi war(though I believe we were wrong going in,the troops are making things hopeful)negitive campaigning she is ,in my opinion,just not the right person for the job.
What do you like about her politically?
http://www.alternet.org/election08/98343
I don't like anything, but like I said before... I read both sides and study them before I jump on any bandwagon.You only imply that I like her because you do not want to even look at the other side and study the issues. You are part of the "love fest" that is swooning over Obama. As I do not like anything about her, I also have to add that I also do not like Obama at all. I find him to be very smug, cocky and condescending. yhe also has a very large ego and high opinion of himself.
No, I do not like him at all. I do not care for the politics of either side. How's that grab you? Too bad that there is not another better choice out there.
Like they say, it is the lesser of two evils to vote for this year. A very sad election year indeed.
I like Obama.I've listened to his 'bluster' quite often and what you consider smug,arrogent,and uppity,I consider confident,and a belief he can effect change.He not only speaks well,but actually says something.He has fair balanced good ideas that sound like they can work...there is thought between his ears.compassion.Feel free to call it a love fest,but I believe in the man.
After seeing Sarah Palin's interview on ABC I have learned that while she says she has nothing against homosexuals,she does not mention that she is against same sex marriage and insurance benefits.She says she is pro-choice in the case of jeapordy to the mother-but not rape or incest[well,that is some movement],she also used Barack Obama's position on needing to have less teenage pregnancies.
She was for the money for the bridge to nowhere..but,maybe not the bridge itself.
She is against earmark money,but did not say she was against no bid contracts like Halliburton/Blackwater etc..she could have meant that.
She said some things I did agree with..but it didn't change my mind...I will try to be more open minded,but I can't promise.
Can't ask for anything more than that. I may be a registered Democrat, but to me that is just on paper. I can not ever say that I am one way or another until I always hear all sides and issues. That is why my mind is always open. I read a great deal every day. I am looking forward to the debates.
Post a Comment