…

Yes, slight “appearance of impropriety” in that Palin was related to the affected parties; but seriously, the man was a turd in human form. Palin did the right thing. But go ahead and run on the “Palin was too nice to wife beaters” platform. I’m sure McCain himself would donate to that PAC.

Here is a backward way of addressing Palin and civil unions… McCain will set the standard and Palin will stand with him… predisposed to accept some form of civil unions… if states were to drag the full faith and credit clause into play over gay marriage, then he would revisit (and support) a constitutional amendment… I also expect most undecided voters to be turned off by the efforts to put [gm and/or abortion] ahead of borders, immigration, terrorism, economy, etc.

heliotrope, great points.

Plus, Governor Palin and the MSM and leftists can’t deny this by her veto provided for domestic partnerships which the Legislature banned. She could have signed by the bill but consulted with the Alaska Attorney General and was told the legislation was unconstitutional..shock of shocks an Executive who makes sure laws are legal and doesn’t leave it to the Courts to decide……how refreshing…no wonder Liberals and the MSM leftists will scream.

As to the issue of abortion..when technology develops and you can determine if a child will be Gay or Str8..what will the liberals do then…..who are pro choice….will they some how find that they are pro life?

I mean give me a break…and to be shocked (the MSM is shocked some how that the Palins see their new born as a perfect child….and a gift from God…and will do all they can with their love as parents to help their child…that’s now shocking that is what people do!)

I love soon to be VP Sara Palin’s common sense no nonsense approach….its going to kill the libs that it took the GOP to elect the next Vice President of the United States and one day the first woman President of the United States….and her name is Sara Palin..not Hillary Clinton.

I’d almost kill for either picture.

I can’t wait to vote for her and McCain. I may even go to city hall and vote absentee.

I’m sorry, apparently you have mistaken gillie for someone who considers facts to be important.

#38 gillie:

Now, don’t let Robert confuse you. You have a wonderful story to fuel your outrage and it should keep you and your clan of caterwauling Cassandras just all nipple giggling for at least a month.

The whole article is interesting but there’s this:

As the investigation got under way in 2005, Wooten was in the midst of a bitter divorce from Palin’s sister, Molly McCann. The couple was fighting over custody of their two young children. Accusations flew from both sides.

• Wooten used a Taser on his stepson.
• He illegally shot a moose.
• He drank beer in his patrol car on one occasion.
• He told others his father-in-law would “eat a f’ing lead bullet” if he helped his daughter get an attorney for the divorce.

http://www.newsminer.com/news/2008/jul/28/scrutiny-wooten-raises-conduct-questions/

I think McCain is predisposed to accept some form of civil unions for gays. The Christian right has hit him hard on civil unions, but he has not backed off. Since civil unions are a state issue, I would expect him to say that it is not a federal issue and he would defer to the people of the states.

McCain did say that if states were to drag the full faith and credit clause into play over gay marriage, then he would revisit (and support) a constitutional amendment on marriage.

I suspect that the gay left and the MSM will try to make this and abortion their top talking points. I also expect most undecided voters to be turned off by the efforts to put these two issues ahead of borders, immigration, terrorism, economy, etc.

A few choice quotes:

Palin said she’s not out to judge anyone and has good friends who are gay, but that she supported the 1998 constitutional amendment [against gay marriage]. Elected officials can’t defy the court when it comes to how rights are applied, she said, but she would support a ballot question that would deny benefits to homosexual couples. “I believe that honoring the family structure is that important,” Palin said. She said she doesn’t know if people choose to be gay. Asked the same question, Murkowski [her Democratic opponent] said essentially the same: “I don’t know.”

I have a gay Republican buddy (I’m not a Republican) who says Palin is pro-civil union, which conflicts with the above. His info is usually good, so I will ask him how he got that.

Another interesting tidbit, on marijuana:

Palin doesn’t support legalizing marijuana, worrying about the message it would send to her four kids. But when it comes to cracking down on drugs, she says methamphetamines are the greater threat and should have a higher priority. Palin said she has smoked marijuana — remember, it was legal under state law, she said, even if illegal under U.S. law — but says she didn’t like it and doesn’t smoke it now. “I can’t claim a Bill Clinton and say that I never inhaled.”

Well, she’s down-to-earth.

Does anyone know the details of her views on gays?

I know she’s against recognizing same-sex marriages, but that she vetoed a bill to deny benefits to same-sex partners of state employees.

That leaves a wide range of possible views. Do we have any other clues?

do we credit the idea that [Katia] is switching her vote from McCain because his ticket includes an inexperienced person *might* become the presidency, and she would rather vote for an inexperienced person who *would definitely* become the president.

No… see #47, #49, #50, #51.

I was just trying to short-circuit any potential semantic argument

OK, why would there be one? I don’t understand. As I explained in the other thread, one sign that the haters of the Left (like Keith Olbermann) may well be a bit pathological, is that they are nutty enough to call mainstream-ish patriots like McCain “megalomaniac”.

I just wanted to comment on Katia. Does anyone not believe Katia is a Moby? Or, do we credit the idea that she is switching her vote from McCain because his ticket includes an inexperienced person *might* become the presidency, and she would rather vote for an inexperienced person who *would definitely* become the president.