Memo to media: The Obama-Ayers connection hasn't been debunked either, because the likes of the NYT and the rest of the "in the tank" outlests will paper over it.

Nobody cares.  Obama worked with a radical on educational projects for the betterment of the community.  The number of times they actually collaborated is questionable, and it doesn't say anything about Obama anyway since Ayers' past actions have nothing to do with educational goals.  The man was a professor and part of mainstream society.

Meanwhile, McCain picked a radical to be his VP nominee, because he wanted to shore up the base and appeal to women voters.

Which is worse?

MissDee-

Can you explain why President Bush protected Osama bin Laden by undermining U.S. Delta Forces in Tora Bora?

I can definitely prove a connection between McCain and Bush.  McCain openly admits his reverence for Bush.  Does that mean McCain would also act against U.S. interests to protect Islamic terrorists?

Bush undermining U.S. Delta Forces in Tora Bora?

Kyle my friend, have you joined the BDS conspiracy theorist club?

Way to debunk Kyle's post!

Oh, wait, you did nothing of the sort.

MissDee, 

Brab is right.  For one candidate to call another candidate essentially a terrorist, or at best a terrorist sympathizer, is incredible.  Is that what McCain/Palin has come too, resorting to scraping the bottom of the most sleazy bag of political tricks they can find. It is shameful.

If you or anyone actually believes that Barack Obama is a terrorist, or buddies around with them condoning their actions because their paths once crossed, then I suggest you vote for McCain/Palin.  If in your heart of hearts you believe that, then nothing will really change your mind.  I don't.

I prefer to evaluate both candidates on their recent associations and judgements, and considering McCain chose Sarah Palin, whose candidacy is nothing more than a political stunt and a bad joke, he has shown his judgment, and I am not impressed.  In fact, I am disguisted.

It's sort of cliche that "this campaign is the dirtiest ever", but I think it's definitely true this time.  The ramp-up to the final weeks has been marked by bizarre campaign stops, as mentioned here:http://www.americablog.com/2008/10/sit-down-boy.html

The McCain "terrorist" yell is questionable.  From the video it's hard to tell if McCain heard it or not, but I think it's arguable that McCain wouldn't have done anything either way ("How do we beat the bitch?" as an indicator).  The Palin "Kill him!" moment was hard to decipher as well, since it wasn't clear if the person was referring to Ayers or Obama, and if the latter was it literal or figurative.

But in the incident listed above, that is atrocious.  If Palin did anything less than walk out on these people, then she's participating in angry mob-like activities.  The only place to go from here is to call for Obama's lynching.

The "Sit down, boy" declaration is indicative of what the McCain campaign is essentially saying to Obama, so in that sense it's actually quite telling, and disturbing. Of course they can't say it, but in my opinion that is what they really believe, especially McCain. 

I agree with you, this is the dirtiest campaign in memory, even more than Bush/Rove......and that is even more disturbing.

tommy, you and brab are both exactly right.  What is most disturbing is that the messages being trumpeted to these crowds is designed to inflame these hateful outbursts.  Paling is not just participating in angry mob-like activities, she is inciting them.

"Sit down, boy"??? Are you serious? How can anyone claim this election isn't about race after a comment like that? 

"Sit down, boy"??? Are you serious? How can anyone claim this election isn't about race after a comment like that?

The answer is that no serious person can.  Which excludes most, if not ALL, of the lying fascist racist violent sociopathic killers supporting Liar McCain-Liar Palin.

Black talk radio host Warren Ballantine not only talked about this on his radio show, he has encouraged all of his black callers to call in to Liar McCain's campaign and hold them accountable for their racist words and racist actions! 

Tommy,

I disagree that this campaign has been as dirty as the last two.  McCain has actually thankfully shown some restraint in not personally bringing up Wright and Ayers.  Now McCain and Palin have told a great deal of whoppers as independent fact-checking confirms, but at least up until recently, they haven't gone as ad hominem as the Bush campaigns did.  I think the desperate use of it now is just an attempt to throw everything out there as they feel they have nothing to lose, but their integrity.  I think they are going to lose either way, but it appears they don't really mind losing ugly.

Tommy,

I disagree that calling out Obama on his relationship with Ayers is scraping the bottom of the barrel. We are learning how Obama has covered up his association with Ayers and going to great lengths to hide their association with the Annenburg Challenge in Chicago.

Obama is a closet radical who has never done anything except get himself elected and avoid taking a stand on issues. Has he ever crossed party lines? Has he ever authored significant legislation? Has he ever championed reforms?  All he has really done is write two autobiographies and give a great speech. He has no track record so his associations are legitimate avenues to try to discern what type of President he will be. 

Palin and McCain should attack him on this issue. If he is to be President, lets see him defend himself and his relationships with anti-Americans like Ayers and Wright. So far all I see is obsfuscation, avoidance, and deflection.

AA,

What radical ideas is Obama proposing, or advocating, that his "association" with Ayers reflects?

AA wrote:

>>Obama is a closet radical who has never done anything except get himself elected and avoid taking a stand on issues.

All full of hatred these days, huh AA? Talk about desperation. Calling Obama names doesn't amount to any cogent argument and doesn't change what is true about Obama. He doesn't need to defend himself against false claims. As I pointed out yesterday, both CNN and AP have judged the statement that Obama is "paling around with terrorists" false.

You want to make Obama defend against false claims because it will help McCain get elected. That is the only reason you bring up this garbage.

Oh, and if Obama should have to defend against a non-existent friendship with Ayers, should McCain have to defend against  a *real* relationship with G Gordon Liddy?

<sigh!> some people never learn, no matter how many times you hit them in the head with bricks...

Tonight's Hannity's America featured more of these absurd lies about Obama and Ayers in Hannity's infomercial for idiocy, including an amazing interview with legendary anti-Semitic crackpot Andy Martin:

LIE: "My view is that the community organizer was really a sham event. Bill Ayers was testing him."(Andy Martin, Hannity's America, October 5, 2008, "Obama and His Friends: History of Radicalism")
TRUTH: Bill Ayers had nothing to do with Obama's community organizing job. It's pure lunacy to imagine that Ayers was "testing" Obama.

LIE: Obama's "community organizing is a grand scheme perpetuated by none other than William Ayers."(Sean Hannity, Hannity's America, October 5, 2008, "Obama and His Friends: History of Radicalism")
TRUTH: Obama's community organizing was not a vast conspiracy for revolution devised by Bill Ayers.

LIE: "They live half a mile from William Ayers, the unrepentant terrorist" and "Just a half a mile from those homes is Louis Farrakhan."(Hannity's America, October 5, 2008, "Obama and His Friends: History of Radicalism")
TRUTH: It's true, of course, that Obama lives in this same neighborhood, as do tens of thousands of other people who presumably are also guilty by geographical association. The logic of this argument would be, if you live half a mile from a sex offender, then you agree with child molesters.

LIE: Obama and Ayers "appeared together at various public engagements...it would seem that they are more than just a little bit friendly."(Sean Hannity, Hannity's America, October 5, 2008, "Obama and His Friends: History of Radicalism")
TRUTH: Appearing on a speaking panel is not a sign of friendship. There is no evidence that Obama had any role in ever inviting Ayers to speak.

LIE: In 1995, Ayers and Dohrn "hosted a political coming out party for a young Barack Obama."(Sean Hannity, Hannity's America, October 5, 2008, "Obama and His Friends: History of Radicalism")
TRUTH: This was an event for Alice Palmer, not a "coming-out party" for Obama. Obama was invited by Palmer to the event.

But long before tonight's Hannity, the right-wing has been spreading a series of lies about Obama and Ayers.

LIE: "Bill Ayers is an unrepentant terrorist."
TRUTH: Bill Ayers is not, and apparently never was, a terrorist. The conventional definition of a terrorist is someone who tries to kill innocent people for political purposes. As Factcheck.org noted, In fact, nobody died as a result of bombings in which Ayers said he participated as part of the Weather Underground. (Factcheck.org)

LIE: "I'm sure he's very patriotic, but his relationship with Mr. Ayers is open to question....Because, if you're going to associate and have as a friend and serve on a board and have a guy kick off your campaign that says he's unrepentant, that he wished he'd bombed more. And then, the worst thing of all, that I think really indicates Senator Obama's attitude, is he had the incredible statement that he compared Mr. Ayers, an unrepentant terrorist -- an unrepentant terrorist, with Senator Tom Coburn. Senator Coburn, a physician who goes to Oklahoma on the weekends and brings babies into life.' (John McCain, April 20, 2008, ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos)
TRUTH: Obama was not friends with Ayers. Ayers did not kick off Obama's campaign. And Obama was not comparing Ayers' actions with Coburn. Obama was pointing out that he works with people even when he disagrees with them.

LIE: "Obama's oldest friend in politics is a murderer and unrepentant terrorist. Why are they friends?"(ExposeObama.com email, Sept. 7, 2008)
TRUTH: Ayers isn't Obama's oldest friend in politics.

LIE: Ayers was "Obama's boss."(Jerome Corsi, p. 147)
TRUTH: The chair of a foundation board is not the boss of the members.

LIE: Jerome Corsi claimed Alice "Palmer would never have introduced Obama to the Hyde Park political community at the Ayres-Dohrn home unless she saw an affinity between Ayers and Dohrn's radical leftist history, her own history of far-leftist politics, and the politics of Barack Obama."(p. 137)
TRUTH: The event wasn't held primarily for Obama. It was Palmer's own announcement that she would run for Congress. Obama was there as Palmer's endorsed successor for her Senate seat, but there's no evidence that he had any role in deciding to hold it at Ayers' home.

LIE: Jerome Corsi claims about Obama: "either he did not know Ayers and Dohrn are still radical leftists--in which case he is implausibly naive--or Obama did know, which would confirm he joined with Ayers and Dohrn because Obama too continues to believe, albeit silently and secretly, in the Far Left's radical agenda."(p. 140)
TRUTH: Obama probably knew Ayers was a leftist, but he didn't care. Obama believes in the notion of a free society, where you work with people you disagree with.

LIE: "Even today, Ayers appears to hold the same radical political beliefs he did in the Weather Underground, and Obama had to know that was also the case when he first met Ayers in 1995."(Jerome Corsi, p. 147)
TRUTH: Corsi doesn't explain how Obama "had to know" Ayers' views on politics when he first met him. Telepathy? Mind-reading?

LIE: David Freddoso calls Obama's distant connection with Bill Ayers "a remarkable relationship for a presidential nominee to have."(p. 122)
TRUTH: It reality, it's not remarkable at all. The notion that people should resign from foundations and refuse to speak in public in order to avoid any connection to a former radical never convicted of a crime is absurd.

LIE: "The major media simply have not reported on Obama's two years at New York's Columbia University, where, among other things, he lived a mere quarter-mile from former terrorist Bill Ayers."(Tony Blankley, September 24, 2008)
TRUTH: Thousands upon thousands of people lived near Bill Ayers in Manhattan. Obama didn't know Ayers.

LIE: Mr. Ayers founded CAC and was its guiding spirit. No one would have been appointed the CAC chairman without his approval. (Stanley Kurtz, Wall Street Journal)
TRUTH: Kurtz has no evidence to support his claim. Ayers was one of several people involved in starting the group, and was not its guiding spirit. According to the New York Times reporting, Obama was recruited by other CAC leaders who knew him through the Joyce Foundation.

LIE: Mr. Obama and Mr. Ayers worked as a team to advance the CAC agenda. (Stanley Kurtz, Wall Street Journal)
TRUTH: Kurtz has no evidence that Obama and Ayers worked as a team. Ayers attended six meetings of the group along with Obama.

LIE: "Obama is hanging around with Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright. By the way, Bill Ayers advertised himself as being a communist with a small c just when he was beginning to
partner with Obama on the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. (Stanley Kurtz, Hudson Institute, Washington DC, October 1, 2008)
TRUTH: Contrary to this McCarthyist attack, there's no evidence that Obama ever knew that Ayers supposedly called himself a communist, nor is that a good reason for Obama to end his work on school reform and charitable activities.

LIE: "who provided Obama with the only executive experience he has ever had in his young life? Bill Ayers, unrepentant domestic terrorist, communist revolutionary... (Joseph Farah, World Net Daily, October 2, 2008)
TRUTH: Ayers did not provide Obama with the Chicago Annenberg Challenge job. And Obama has also had executive experience in community organizing, running a voter registration drive, as well as running his campaigns. The New York Times reported, "In fact, according to several people involved, Mr. Ayers played no role in Mr. Obama's appointment. Instead, it was suggested by Deborah Leff, then president of the Joyce Foundation, a Chicago-based group whose board Mr. Obama, a young lawyer, had joined the previous year."(Scott Shane, New York Times, October 4, 2008)

LIE: "Barack Obama is friends with Ayers, defending him as quote 'respectable and mainstream.'"(American Issues Project ad, August 2008)
TRUTH: David Axelrod described them as "friendly," not friends. Obama didn't call Ayers respectable and mainstream (although Ayers now is); Obama's campaign on his website posted an op-ed in the press that described Ayers that way.

LIE: "I can't understand why somebody who wants to be president of the United States, I'll be perfectly honest with you, would want to associate or not condemn the actions of people in the past."(Paul Ragonese, April 27, 2008, Fox News' Hannity's America)
TRUTH: Obama has condemned the past actions of Bill Ayers and called him somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago. (April 16, 2008 debate)

LIE: About Bill Ayers, "Barack Obama really couldn't bring himself to say 'you know, I really don't like that guy.' That was too much for him to say. He had to talk about what a decent guy he is and what a good professor."(Jim Geraghty, "Hype: The Obama Effect")
TRUTH: There is no record of Obama during the campaign calling Ayers "decent" and "a good professor." In fact, Obama really did bring himself to criticize Ayers, denouncing him during a Democratic debate as "somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago."

LIE: "Obama was feted at a fundraising event" at Ayers' home.("Hype: The Obama Effect")
TRUTH: Obama never had a fundraising event at Ayers' home.

LIE: Barack Obama and Bill Ayers had a close working relationship...the two of them were running the foundation together. (Stanley Kurtz, Fox News Channel's Fox and Friends, September 29, 2008)
TRUTH: Kurtz has no evidence of a "close working relationship" beyond attending a few meetings together. The notion that Obama and Ayers were the only ones running the Chicago Annenberg Challenge is absolutely false.

LIE: "The most important smoking gun is that Barack Obama was funding Bill Ayers' radical educational projects."(Stanley Kurtz, Fox News Channel's Fox and Friends, September 29, 2008)
TRUTH: This is false. Obama was the president of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, not its dictator. There's no evidence that Obama made any funding decisions. Moreover, it would have been completely unprofessional for anyone, including Obama, to ban Bill Ayers from receiving funding for educational projects because of alleged radical activities decades earlier which Ayers was never convicted of. Kurtz has no evidence that projects were judged based on anything other than their merits. This is a pure smear by association.

LIE: Emails "give us strong evidence that there may have been a cover-up in Bill Ayers' role choosing Barack Obama."(Stanley Kurtz, Fox News Channel's Fox and Friends, September 29, 2008)
TRUTH: This is a fabrication. The email Kurtz is referring to shows absolutely no kind of cover up. In fact, it shows exactly the opposite. In his blog, Kurtz quotes the entire email Ken Rolling wrote to CAC founders Warren Chapman and Anne Hallett and notes that Sam Dillon, Education Reporter for the New York Times, was working on an article. Rolling wrote about Dillon, He is trying to understand how Barack got 'picked' for the CAC board, by whom, why, etc. - I have avoided that question head-on though I believe Barack was Debbie Leff's/Joyce nomination." This email reveals no kind of cover-up, and the New York Times article found several sources that said Obama was not picked by Ayers.

LIE: "There is a secret group in the Obama-Biden campaign tasked with shutting off any leaks from the record that links Barack Obama to his longtime adviser and mentor Bill Ayers, professor of education at the University of Illinois and unrepentant Weatherman terrorist and fugitive from the 1970s....There is a substantial independent report from a major Democratic source that confirms Diamond's suspicions. The source confirms the unit is led by Bill Ayers himself and likely includes Tom Hayden and other members of 'Progressives for Obama.' Most critically, the Democratic source says this unit has direct access to media adviser David Axelrod of the Obama-Biden campaign."(John Batchelor, Human Events, September 12, 2008)
TRUTH: There is no "secret group." Hayden reports, "I am not part of any effort, personal or organized, trying to protect Obama against any leaks." The notion that Ayers is leading the "unit" is laughable. According to the University of Illinois library, "all papers have been available since August 26" about the school reform group that Ayers and Obama worked on. Diamond, the source cited for the existence of the "unit," declares, "I have no evidence of such a unit." Diamond added, "I told Batchelor that I would not speak to Human Events yet he made up a quote from me and placed it in his article."

Crossposted at ObamaPolitics.

How can someone who takes no stand on issues be a radical?

He's a middle-of-the-road radical.

Cutting edge of Middle of the Road.

Memo to media: The Obama-Ayers connection hasn't been debunked either - missdee

That depends on what you mean.  The fact that they have had contact on some educational and charitable matters hasn't been debunked because it hasn't been contested.  If you're talking about the nutjob right's attempts to claim they had a relationship of some sort, you know, an association, then you're wrong.  That's been debunked.

A reasonable person with all of the facts about Ayres, Obama and the extent of their common dealings, would look at the whole of it and shrug it off.  The fact is, there's nothing there except right-wing desperation.

Hey Bill,

What about all thos millions Obama funneled to Ayers through the Annenburg Challenge?

I'm of the opinion that it won't be shrugged off once people learn how Obama has sought to coverup this connection.

Can you document that a single dime ended up in Ayers' pocket?  Nope, it all went to the program.

And, as a further note to your silliness, it was largely through the efforts of Ayers that Chicago received some of the Annenberg Challenge money.  There would have been easier ways for Ayers to skim some of that money if he'd chosen to, and there is no evidence he did choose to.

It's incredible you guys won't give up when this case you're trying to build is so weak.

One last note:  We've gone completely off topic.

Memo to missdee: the Palin-terrorist organization connection hasn't been debunked either. Todd has been a member of a secessionist organization who's founder has clearly stated that he hates america with a passion and wants to destroy the union of 50 states. But the conservative press will just keep papering over that terrorist tie.

"Memo to missdee: the Palin-terrorist organization connection hasn't been debunked either. Todd has been a member of a secessionist organization who's founder has clearly stated that he hates america with a passion and wants to destroy the union of 50 states. But the conservative press will just keep papering over that terrorist tie."

Not only is the corporate conservative Republican press papering over Todd Palin's association with the secessionist organization, they are, in some cases, attacking any person or group who talks about it or tries to talk about it.

Memo to media: The Obama-Ayers connection hasn't been debunked either, because the likes of the NYT and the rest of the "in the tank" outlests will paper over it.

Memo to everyone: Miss De Boat's claims of intelligent thought are debunked every time she posts her drivel here at MMFA.

Miss Dee wrote:

>>Memo to media

Oh, by the way, Miss Dee, hate to burst your view of the world, but apparently Palin has connections to the Iranian government:

"Imagine if the Obamas had hooked up with a violently anti-American group in league with the government of Iran."

link

Memo to MissDee,

It seems the only people that care about that supposed "connection" are you and AA.  We already know who you are voting for.  Keep it up, you have a lot of time to fill between now and the election.  You haven't gotten any traction so far, because you don't seem to realize that your argument isn't quite what you thought it was and it does not translate well to people who are not partisan wackos.

If the cowardly "reform" Governor of Alaska would just have a press conference she could clear this issue up, you betcha!

YouTube Documentary concerning the TOPIC AT HAND:

Sarah Palin: The rape kit controversy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCx7A2lwCWE

Thanks Robert. That video is even more damning than the Boehert article. For those who didn't see the video, take a look. Its professionally done, and not full of hype, as a lot of youtube videos are.

The video makes the claim that Palin fired the former police chief, and then hired a new police chief who fought with the leglslature for six months as the legislature passed a bill prohibiting the practice of charging victims for rape.

Its frustrating to talk to a rightie. Rightie... "Palin didn't charge for victims rape kits. Thats a lie" A) We've got the documentation that proves she did. Rightie..."Palin didn't charge for victims rape kits. Thats a lie".

Or

"Obama "pal-ed around with terrorists". A) No thats been debunked. He was on a committee with Ayers, thats all. Rightie..."Obama pal-ed around with terrorists"

Its like a bad comedy skit. 

The fact that it works doesn't speak very well for their followers.

Or the Monty Python bit, "The Argument Clinic." "it's not an argument, it's a contradiction."

No it isn't.

That parrot is deceased.  It's expired.  It is no more. 

It is an exparrot!

I've often though of this place as "The arguement Clinic, Part Two."

As for Sarah Palin, when one considers her past deeds, associations, and media responses as a whole, the writing is on the wall: if elected, she will unleash a surge, intensifying the little known war on contraception to disturbing new levels. 

Wasilla paid for rape kits before Palin took office.  She cut that funding and signed the budget documenting it.  Rape protocol for first responders is crystal clear: give emergency contraception to the victim immediately, as its effectiveness in preventing pregnancy diminishes with each passing hour; then collect any evidence of the perpetrator’s seminal fluid, hair, and skin cells on the victim’s body.  Rape kits contain these instructions and supplies.

The McCain/ Palin campaign denies Palin knowingly burdened rape victims.  Yet the evidence indicates she wanted to be sure nobody received emergency contraception under her watch.  She belongs to Feminists For Life, a group that actively tries to deter women from taking Plan B, which is the best type of emergency contraception now available.  In two easy links from Feminists for Life’s home page, one finds volumes of misleading information designed to scare women and convince them the drug induces abortion.  (It does not.) 

Palin hedged Katie Couric’s query whether she condones or condemns Plan B: “Personally I would not choose to participate in that form of contraception.” This implies she thinks something is wrong or harmful about the drug, though it is simply a high dose of regular birth control pills. 

It was downright irresponsible of her to stigmatize the drug.  Many people do not know that Plan B is the safe, proven treatment for rape survivors and women who experience birth control failures. Thousands are buying Palin’s designer glasses and copying her hairstyle. Lord knows how many will shun this crucial treatment as a result of one sound bite alone.

Palin’s hedgy answer and reference to “that form of contraception” is also telling. “That form” is one of several hormonal methods of birth control.  If Palin reviles Plan B, she also disapproves of the regular birth control pills, IUD, Depo Provera, Nuva rings and patches that millions of Ameican women rely on. 

That is precisely why she hedged. It is too early to go public.  Her group’s role in the covert war on contraception is to spread stigma and misinformation in the hopes of winning converts.  You see, there are two kinds of Feminists for Life members: those who oppose all contraceptives and those who oppose the methods they consider “abortifacients,” a scientific sounding term the group will not define.  It is code for all of the most effective, hormonal methods. 

There is one hallmark of this war. Its leaders often use “the A

word,” abortion, when, in reality, they take away someone’s contraception.  Sarah Palin takes this artifice to a new level.

Woah woah woah...i haven't posted here in a couple years, since when did Tommy start defending Progressive ideology, and reality?  Wasn't he a wingnut a year or two ago?  Glad this site has helped one conservative recover from their sickness :D

He's strongly turned off by WPE Bush and McCain's loss of integrity and dirty campaigning.

However, you don't want to get him going on taxes.

Welcome back!  I must confess I don't remember your moniker; were you someone else before?

As far as Tommy goes, he was never a wingnut (which I would characterize as someone totally unreachable by logic; there have been many of those here, MissDee being a recent example).  He's an independent conservative who has always had moments of lucidity and even humor.  They're relatively rare, though, so we cherish them.

Geraghty didn't even try to disprove it. Instead, he got lost in the weeds reading minutes from legislative hearings and became wildly impressed that the town of Wasilla never came up in the hearings

Geraghty didn't complete his due diligence on this matter either.  Wasilla wasn't mentioned by name but a very explicit and finite location that includes Wasilla was mentioned:

LAUREE HUGONIN, Director, Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and
Sexual Assault, came forward to testify. She clarified that
while it may be true that Deputy Commissioner Smith may not have
found an instance where law enforcement has forwarded a bill,
hospitals have. It has happened in the Mat-Su Valley, on the
Kenai Peninsula, and in Southeast, and that is why the bill is
being brought forward. It is important to keep the word
"indirectly" in there or to state "not charge health insurance."
"Unfortunately, Representative Brice, if you just say victim,
there are still agencies who take it that means sending me the
statement. They don't consider my insurance as being the
victim." It is important to encapsulate that indirectly. She
reemphasized that often it is DFYS that is bringing children
forward and billing Medicaid, and DFYS has that arrangement with
Medicaid.

http://www.legis.state.ak.us/basis/get_single_minute.asp?ch=H&beg_line=0603&end_line=0887&session=21&comm=HES&date=20000323&time=1503

The only incorporated towns in the Mat-Su Valley are Wasilla, Houston and Palmer:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=mat-su+valley,alaska&ie=UTF8&z=7

http://ww1.matsugov.us/IT/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=11&Itemid=15

Check here (http://www.wasillaproject.com/index/) for a very well-done video entitled "Sarah Palin: The Rape Kit Controversy."  It thoroughly debunks the so-called debunking.  The rape kit controversy is true.  Palin knew just what was going on.  We can only hope that Sec'y Albright was right when she said that there is a special place in hell reserved for women who do not help women.

Only it will be the lying right wing fascist racist theocratic white supremacist violent hate hag Liar Sarah Palin who will be going to that special place in hell.  As will each and every one of the inhumane sorry excuses for people who think like her and support her. 

Of course there's a signing statement on those budgets saying that the policy doesn't apply to her or her family. (j/k)

This is a good overview of the story that needs wider viewing that it's had currently:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCx7A2lwCWE
There is more info here: http://www.wasillaproject.com

http://wasillaproject.com

Maybe the media can interview some of these people.

Yeah, but the corporatist conservative Republican Party controlled news media wants Liar McCain-Liar Palin to get eected, so they won't.  If they did interview any of these people, the conservative media would trash each and every one of them.

Thanks Eric. I posted about this subject on my blog over the weekend, including the Planned Parenthood ad, featuring Gretchen.

I have gotten the sense that people are very uncomfortable about even addressing the matter, as if it is somehow too salacious to consider.

Today, I included an update featuring a link to your article.

I appreciate your efforts in giving the story added weight and credibility. It certainly matters.

Liar McCain's other supporter, G. Gordon Liddy, advocated for right wing domestic terrorists when he advocated right wing racist white supremacist Neo-Nazi groups should shoot federal agents in the head in 1992.  McCain STILL considers Liddy one of his allies.

Also, Liddy allegedly plotted the murder of one of Nixon's political opponents, too.