1. I can see your point. However, it needs to be the same rules for Obama. If his wife speaks for his campaign, she is fair game. If he puts his family on television (was it Entertainment Tonight?) and in one of the celebrity magazines, they become fair game. Obama can't complain and tell the media to leave his wife alone if she is going to get out front.

2. I just get the double standard feeling off that (if it were a man, it would be no problem) as well as the idea of a working mother. Just my gut feeling.

Off-topic, I really miss Tim Russert.

If so, I'll go ahead & call that one a mistake beforehand. It isn't going to resonate outside urban areas, I'll bet my hat (and considering how rapidly my hair is vanishing lately, that's a pretty serious risk for me to take).

You'd think a true social and economic liberal would be proud to wear marxism as a badge of honor. Power to the working class, baby!

Well it may solidify that base, right? And I wonder if a majority of community organizers aren't women? I dont know but Im guessing there.

As for the vote, what is with the "Others: 5"?

Solidify that base? I bet they are out of their boots for Obama already.

You mean there is a real job title out there called "Community Organizer?"

I would hate to be in their shoes.

I think Guliani(sp) was the most convincing speaker of the night. He has me questioning my Obama vote....well not really but it was very entertaining if you are pro-McCain or on the edge.

Ron Paul, I imagine. But the networks would rather not indicate that, lest it give him any attention.

1. No problem from me there. Obama's wife is more fair game even to me, because she would be the first lady.

2. Perhaps there is. If you tell me the dad stays at home with the kid and is the primary care taker of that child though, I would not say a thing about her. If all that guy does is race a snowmobile every now and then perhaps that is true and good for them. I just get a vibe that isn't exactly how things are, and if there is no nanny then big sis/soon to be mom has already done a lot of child care in her days.

Hit & Run: 2008 Convention > Palin: Long on 'tude, Short on Specifics - Reason Magazine

From Reason's Matt Welch

Yup.

Of course...

I have to say that I was shocked by the whole mocking of community organizers. Community organizations are the entities that provide the services the Republicans don't want government to provide. Most of these are affiliated with churches. That's why Obama and Bush aren't that too far off on faith-based grants.

I thought her speech was good to fire up the base--both the Republican and Democrats. Problem is that if it comes down to a battle of the bases, and Dems get their turnout, then they win. I don't think her speech did much to get independent voters.

I thought she had some good attack lines, and I'm an Obama supporter, but she kept going at it. I agree with other commentators that said she was getting very personal in her attacks. I don't think that's a way to gain new voters.

Also, I think people will see how disingenuous to while about people attacking you on legitimate things (but claiming it's one illegitimate thing) and then attacking back with ten times the force. I don't think that's going to work either.

And Harry Reid just referred to Palin's speech as "shrill"

REALLY?! Are you freaking kidding me, Reid?! Hillary Clinton is just waiting to take the Senate Majority Leader from your ass.

She didn't write that part of the speech. Its nothing less than expected and probably not the true Sarah Palin according to her 80+% approval rating in Alaska. But hey, you do what you gotta do.

Guess we'll find out in November. I think she will have a big appeal in small towns across flyover country...and that's where Bush won the last election.

yes, SFL, in some cities community organizer and community help organizations, including churches, are a large source of outreach. I dont know if it's the same in all cities over a certain pop. but in this one there are certain, Burroughs, lets call them, that have very important community organizers, who sometimes evolve into running for local office(s). Looking back at the laughter about the position and the mocking tone, I can imagine there were some households that were fired up for the wrong reasons, there. However, that is admittedly not who the speech was aimed at and therefore Im not sure that the reaction of that group is of much, iff any, concern.

Didn't that used to be called community volunteer work? I didn't know it had evolved into a full-time position.

I realize we're scraping the bottom of the barrel with you, but you do know what a classic economic liberal is, right?

who do you think organizes the places to go and things to do? Just handing the homeless guy on the corner a dollar isn't what we're talking about here. The organizations that get grants, how do you think they get those grants...the applications and phone calls dont happen on their own, donations dont come in on their own, etc. Its more than you can know, as are most jobs from the outside looking in....

That goes to my point about it being a turnout election. If John McCain's strategy is to win like Bush did in 2004, I think he loses. The electorate is not the same now as it was then with the high odds that certain groups who have low turnout rates will have higher turnouts.

Just curious, do you see those offended by the community organizers (I think they try to demonstrate what his experience was for the commander-in-chief job; however, they should have done better with that) or involved, McCain/Palin voters anyways?

Giuliani did a masterful job of painting Obama’s ineptitude on the Russian invasion of Georgia, noting Obama’s initial moral equivalency between the two nations, then Obama issuing a statement that the U.N. Security Council would be the appropriate vehicle, then changing his mind again when he was informed that Russia has veto power, and finally changing his position three days later to agree with McCain’s initial position.

no, not really....BUT I wonder how many are women and they were courting the Hillary disenfranchised vote (for a while anyways).

I still think the election is Obama's to lose, but I've got to hand it to whoever McCain's new handlers are...they've played things perfectly and given someone who I didn't think had a chance in hell to win, a 50-50 shot.

It depends on the community. Some places it is volunteer work. The work I do in my community, as a former community organizer, was volunteer in nature. Some organizers are full-time paid jobs (well "paid," they don't make much money). But they do provide valuable services to the community.

Like Flasch said, it's not simply handing a guy on the street corner a dollar. It's helping people find jobs, helping people get medical care, keeping kids in school, ensuring that proper legal services are provided to those that need it. It's organizing members of the community so that they can help themselves. And, most of the time, it's not a governmental agency.

Frankly, whether you agree with Obama or not, there was something noble in his initial decision to work as a community organizer. It's thankless work that is filled with limited success.

Now, maybe I'm taking it too personally, but the dissing of community organizing was offensive. An organizer does have responsibilities. He/she can't simply hire an administrator to do the work for you. An organizer can't fire people just because they disagree with you. An organizer can't work to ban books. And they do exist in towns large or small.

(

Obama is counting on first time voters to win this election, and to quote James Carville from a few years ago, "What do you call a candidate who is counting on first time voters? A loser."

He (McCain) expresses the same views wether he is in scranton or San Francisco..........Does that help?


In general, this one (Palin) is TROUBLE for the opposition. She was spot on all the way through with one little stutter when talking about energy in Alaska.

Somebody mentioned just speaking to the base. Definately did that, but also hit issues on all the important swing states where, if picked up could mean a victory.

For somebody that was in a lot of heat this past week, she really stepped up and delivered with poise under pressure, very good speaker.

So you're saying as an organizer, Obama wrote grant proposals and made phone calls and collected donations, correct?

I suppose I've known several "community organizers" then, but it was all volunteer work. Guess I've never lived in a place big enough where they needed someone doing it full-time and getting paid for it.

You are fighting a losing battle man. The conventional thought is now tgat the all-mighty "experience" recently changed to "executive experience" is somehow a great gauge for performance in the white house.

I'm not entirely sure how much trouble she is for the opposition if the media continues its vetting. She lied about being against the "Bridge to Nowhere." She was for it before she was against it. In fact, she even kept the money after she was against it.

She also hired one of Jack Abramoff's lobbyists to make lobbying trips to DC for, you guessed it, earmarks. She herself made the trip. In fact, Alaska was listed frequently on the McCain Pork list.

Her current ethics troubles continue to be a political nuisance.

With her aggressive attacks, she basically opens the doors for the dems to take the gloves off.

And I'm still not sure she answered people's questions regarding her ability to be vice-president (or even if she knows what the job entails).

How the fuck did people in Massachusetts elect this asshole in the first place?

American Red Cross.

Yeah ole Levi looks really "happy" up there like any one involved in a shotgun (literally) wedding is. His little sexual escapades get him a 17 year old wife, new born baby and a job scraping crab guts off his future father-in-laws fishing boat in the middle of the Bering Strait for the next 50 years. Now, that is the type message that needs to be made into an ad to reduce unwanted teenage pregnancies

good point. I guess I think of them as more of a national organization rather than a local one, even though they do a lot of local blood drives in my community.

I guess the United Way too. Even though there's been a lot of controversy about how its funds are distributed and how much some people on staff make.

Good example. Community organizers are everywhere, and not just in the urban communities. In many places they are the difference for some people between being on the street, having lights, having a job, being thrown out of school, etc.

(As you can see, I'm riled up. I'm usually a lurker, but this just got to me. I haven't been this angry at a convention speech since Pat Buchanan's address in 1992).

As for Rudy, I thought he kept Palin's speech from being more powerful, as they had to skip the video.

He was a different guy in MA - the kind of guy who was my top choice for President - intelligent, wonky, pragmatic rather than idiotic. Than he decided to take to the extreme and run from the Right as some sort of new age messiah - and got his ass kicked. Now he comes across as an asshole.

PS, Any GOP'er who complains about liberals talking about "bitter" people should have some problems with bitching about "east coast liberals".

100% agree it is a good move and shows he is willing to talk to the other side unlike McCain who has canceled two scheduled interviews on CNN. And I think that maybe what Obama is aimimg to show the swing voters he is willing to talk even to on the conservative rights "Politburo" channel Fox.

Sounds like a good abstinence commercial to me...unless you happen to be a fan of 'The Deadliest Catch.'

I'm guessing that's sarcasm. I'm just pointing out that there are many organizations that are very helpful and their workers get paid, albeit less than they would likely get in the private sector.

It sucks when you are penalized for being too socially active and not focusing enough on yourself.

Nope...big fan of the Red Cross

Used to be a volunteer and donor for the United Way too...but quit after some of organizations top officers' questionable practices came to light. dola edit - plus, I never felt entirely comfortable about how some local companies, who were always big donors, seemed to put a lot of pressure on their employees to donate.

Yes, to me and my wife she came off as being very condescending, smug, and negative. Yes, a real bitch. I guess the Dems can lay into her as much as they want since she can take a punch and apparently throw one to.

I don't see the bridge to nowhere being an issue with anyone but staunch liberals. From what I have read, she supported the idea of a bridge to the remote islands as a potential infrastructure improvement. Once things got going, it didn't equate to a good idea. Hence the line "about that bridge to nowhere, thanks, but no thanks". About the keeping the money part, tell us more about that. Did she pocket some cash? Did money go into a general fund? Did something happen outside of the norm?




This is not a community organizer. This is a major national not for profit charity.

Community Organizers are different. If interested, just google and read up on it. There is a lot of good info out there. Sure it is a lot of volunteer based work and generally trying to organize commuinities like neighborhoods, etc. to solve common problems versus individuals trying to solve problems independently.

I understand. In college, I probably did more community service in 5 years than most people do in their entire lifetime. Considered joining the Peace Corps but then 9-11 hit and had me afraid to leave the US. I guess that's part of Obama's appeal for me. I connect with most of his .....young, smart kid, does some stupid stuff, goes to college, gets tough degree, sees people much worse off and wanted to help. He went one way, I sometimes wish I did(until I see that direct deposit 2 times/month).

I think it is great he is going to talk to Bill O'reilly. The timing is the only reason they are getting him anyway. Why complain abou it? It may be the last chance anyone gets to really press him with some decent / difficult questions.

My wife agrees. She had commented that she felt that palin was selfish to have a baby at 44 thus raising the chance of complecations. And yes the baby is a total prop very sad actually.

Holy sh*t! Not like there is anything judgmental here...

So eager to prove me wrong, I see.

The soul of organizing is people. An organizer might be paid or work as a volunteer. The group could start as part of a master plan hatched in a smoke filled room or out of a 'spontaneous' community reaction to a crisis like a toxic waste dump. They might base their work on house by house prayer groups or cells of clandestine conspirators. The ultimate goal could be the preservation of Hopi language and culture or the overthrow of the real estate tax based system for financing public education. Organizers can differ on strategy, tactics, even on what seem to be base values. However, all organizers believe in people, in the ability of regular folks to guide their lives, to speak for themselves, to learn the world and how to make it better.

I think Red Cross falls into that "Google" definition.

Have you ever worked for a LOCAL chapter of the Red Cross..or a LOCAL chapter of Habitat for Humanities? The national organization is made of local community organizers that get the job done, regardless of its national status. There is no difference.

By the way, I didn't HAVE to look anything up. I've lived that life.

CAT man the correct term for us is Pinkos!

T'anks. Noted. :D

Looks like Biden is throwing some crumbs to the kook left.

Obama might pursue criminal charges against Bush

That's a fruitless campaign.

Not trying to prove you wrong, it's just that an organization that is National is driving policy, etc. Of course National or local it can be charity, etc.

Maybe it would be more helpful to identify what Barrack Obama did specifically and what kind of commuinty group he worked with. He was not head of the United Way, Red Cross or Habitat. So putting that out there in the context of this thread is potentially misleading.

Actually in many cases community organizing is a way for people get some exposure and maybe move up to city government, etc. See if I phrase it that way, it makes it look like Palin's Mayor job is far superior to the entry level community organizer.

I wasn't sure after the Republicans telling everyone that small town america makes up the vast majority of people but that isn't treu at all according to the 2000 census. Urban is over 75%:
U.S. Population Living in Urban vs. Rural Areas - Census 2000 Population Statistics - Census Issues - Planning - HEP - FHWA

Problem with this is, they consider places like Knoxville, TN as urban. Its not.

Palin: PTA, to City Council, mayor, governor in Alaska.

Community organizer, to State Senate to US Senate in Chicago.

I'd argue the paths are very similar.

By the way here's the organization, you could've googled the info, the information's there.

Developing Communities Project (DCP) - Welcome

Yes, good point;)

Its a city with more than 500,000 people in the metro area. That's pretty darn urban by definition.

After reviewing the site, it looks like they have some noble projects. I also understand why they are not playing up any detail.

No idea, I didn't vote for him, in my mind he was a Republican version of Al Gore.

I didn't vote for him, because he came off as a snake-oil salesman.

IIRC, it went into Alaska's general fund.

Have you been to Knoxville?

Hell, most of the Atlanta metro area is something that stretches what I think of when I think of the word "urban". Then again, being from Jersey, I'm used to thinking of urban as NYC and Philly.

I think any city with more than 250,000 people in the city itself and more than 500,000 in its metro area should be considered urban. Once you get that many people in one small area, you are going to have "city" problems(traffic congestion, etc.). That's what makes it urban.

I have no idea, im saying that some community organizers do stuff like that. No clue what Obama did but I dont think the speeches last night demarked out whom from whom in regards to which community organizers they were mocking.

I found an article on CNN that talked about it. When Congress stripped the earmark, all it did was remove the requirement the funds be spent on the bridge but Alaska still got the cash, something like 233 million. Kind of a screwed up process isn't it?

It looks like the congressmen in Alaska were pissed that she nixed the process, since they were "working" for it for so long. The CNN article indicated she nixed it mostly because it was 300 million short of funding, ultimately saying they needed to reach a more fiscally responsible solution.

I don't think this makes her look bad at all, in the end she killed the deal. But I probably would not have put it in the speech either. Selling the jet on e-bay was enough to make her point and a much clearer example.

Yeah, except I'm going to go with State Senator of 5th largest state (12M) from 2nd largest Metro area >>>> Mayor of small town

SI

These next 2 days are going to be very intriguing in regards to political strategy (RNC Convention, Obama on Fox [which I still think is not very nice]) and I think the past 10 days will be looked at as the true lynchpin in regards to both campaigns going as negative as the campaigns past. It's a shame in my view and neither side will be more negative than the other but I think we'll see that going forward.

That has already been all but confirmed by O'Reilly himself. On yesterday's radio show, he said that he was pretty sure if he didn't take this opportunity, that he wouldn't get another chance. It's going to be far from a cakewalk for Obama, so I don't think it's all bad news for the Republicans.



Certainly some interesting developments on this one. Evidently, someone in the backroom of MSNBC secretly leaked an edited version of this conversation that inaccurately portrayed the comments. This will likely only further fuel the fire over the blatent bias being displayed by the major networks in recent weeks.

Declarations - WSJ.com



To be frank, this is a load of shit. The liberal side has floated this balloon and they'd be wise to stop quickly. There's a lot of working women who would create some heavy backlash over this kind of thinking by either party's supporters. Anyone bitching about Obama rarely seeing his children for the past 19 months? Perhaps Biden should take a job closer to home spending time with his real family rather than his Amtrak family? FWIW, I find both of the above comments about Obama and Biden to be without merit, much like the Palin family critiques are without merit. I'm a dad that takes care of their child the majority of the time while mom works. She appears to be doing just fine.

Overall, Palin was very impressive in her first outing. You may not like the message, but the delivery was spot-on and that kind of speech will put the Republican base into a tizzy. We'll see in the coming weeks what it does for the female and independent vote along with how she performs on the campaign trail. That speech and its delivery was better than Obama's and Biden's and I'm almost positive it will be better than McCain's speech. He doesn't have a chance to better that kind of a showing.

1. good for Fox. I think it too opportunistic for Obama and he shouldnt do it or have done it.

2. hmmm, ok. convenient that so far that's the edited moment of the year. I guess it's possible, anything is but liberal media bias I just dont buy...never will. Where the story or dirt is the vultures go (just like Fox putting on Obama).

3. We agree about Palin's speech although you'll be hardpressed to find anyone neutral to say it was "better" than Obama's but whatever, coulda been equal too but it's subjective anyways.

Wow, what are the odds. Two people from NJ living in Atlanta. Unheard of down here :lol:

So is FoxNews a bias network?

In light of Giuliani's speech from last night, let's revisit Giuliani from a year ago:

Of course, of course. :D

Yes. There are biased networks, radio stations and papers and internet sites but I believe that the both sides quantity balances out. So to say,

"Liberal media bias" is to insinuate that the scales are tipped one way or the other and I just dont believe that. I believe there are neutral places, lefty places, righty places and places tot he extremes...

now just to update the things that tick me off portion of this thread:

Palin said she knew nothing of the pressure to fire the trooper in troopergate but now there are emails from her personal account in such regard. I definitely want this to run its course and the truth to come out but it ticks me off when someone lies, either side.

I do not think Obama should go on the air, except in ads, during the RNC. The RNC didnt do it and he should not do it.

A pastor issue on either side is exactly the same and to be ignored in my view until it cant be anymore. Now if someone says something themselves that's different (Im not really happy about mixing religion and politics so I dont like the 'Iraq mission from god' stuff but Palin's not the only person to say or believe that and if you believe it I'd rather you say it than hide it....that general did).

Im sure there are a lot more but those are just riling me up this morning :)

Folks, the word to use in a sentence like this is "biased", not "bias". For whatever reason, most people don't seem to realize that there should be an 'ed' on the end.

Edit: See? Flasch gets it right!

I never insinuated anything. All I said was that the major networks contain a heavy dose of liberal bias. I don't think there's any question that is the case and apparantly you agree. I think FoxNews is just as biased, but it should be noted that they are the only big news network that leans right. CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS and their related cable affiliates are all leaning left, whether they admit it or not.

Edit: Corrected for Kodos.

I read a nice little article in my Virginia Tech magazine this summer regarding different perceptions of media bias in this, and in past, elections. I thought it did a good job in explaining how viewpoints on the existence of media bias can be so widely varied among viewers.

Virginia Tech Magazine - Through the Looking Glass

In that case, for the sake of your blood pressure, you may want to stop paying attention to election coverage.

no shit and I agree with Ronnie Dobbs that way way way at the top of the priority list is ratings bias and, mix that with the though, "if it bleeds it leads" and you get the inklings of where their "liberal media bias" thoughts come from, on the right. The rights been charge for a long time and the media has been looking for juicy stuff to write so theyve been a 'challenge' to the authoritah. It wont matter, it's a pillar of the right wing platform to argue liberal media bias so there will be no change there as a david v. goliath story is good to rile up the masses.

Media bias is a tough thing to gauge as it mixes with our own internal bias. I often get the feeling that stories I see and read give the "democrats good, republicans bad" feeling, but I also know that reading something I agree with won't have as much of an impact as reading something I disagree with.

Palin needed to convince voters that she was more than a pretty face and she did that well. It was a well-written speech, well-delivered -- right down to the staged "lipstick" line. I thought it was ad-libbed, too, but apparently it was not.

It was not without mistakes, however. The "Bridge to Nowhere" stuff was a bald-faced lie. She supported the earmark and pushed Congress not to rescind it. Congress, however, did, and designated that it be spent on other Alaska projects. Only after that was done and the issue was dead did she state mild opposition to the bridge.

Some folks have said that going after her family is fair game because they came down to the stage. Not yet; every nominee brings the whole clan to the stage to wave. If Bristol campaigns for her or starts appearing a lot, then I suppose it would be fair to question that. Or if Palin continues to focus her rhetoric on how great her family and its values are, then the other side probably has to ask questions.

Link?

the only reason why I think we crossed the "alot" line a while ago with Bristol's appearances was the initial statement from the family that it was a private matter and the 'kids' should be left alone...

1. then they fly out the boyfriend
2. then they announce theyre going to get married soon
3. then he's called a fiancee
4. then they have her wearing the tightest maternity dress (my wife) had seen

I dont know, if it's private than they should treat it as if they want it to be private but I feel, just my opinion, that all of a sudden flying Levi out, calling him a fiancee, and trotting him out told me how they truly felt.

So it appears we have Biden's first gaffe as mentioned earlier in the thread. These comments were in relation to pursuing criminal charges against Bush once the Obama ticket is elected...........


He has every right to say this, but why would you do this? The platform of change and unity from the Dem ticket goes right down the drain after a comment like this. If they want to do it, fine, but don't pretend that it's not a revenge/partisan situation. It's just as partisan as the Republican congressional attempt to oust Clinton from office.

Also, I hadn't seen the P-Diddy critique of Sarah Palin's selection mentioned in this thread. And I quote.............


1. When did it become a bad thing that there were no crackheads in a city or state?

2. The total percentage of the Alaskan population that is black is 4.7%. The total percentage of the population that is black of P-Diddy's current hometown (Alpine, New Jersey) is 1.5%. I think Mr. Diddy's stats about black people and where they live may be just a bit off.

Yet another situation where a celebrity would do more for the Democratic ticket by just shutting up instead of opening their mouth.

why is that a gaffe for Biden MBBF?? Not sure I follow.

You're right! That's why they call Alaska "America's mirror".

:rolleyes:

Attacks, praise stretch truth at GOP convention - Yahoo! News

You think it was a good idea to put that out there? I'm sure the liberal base will eat it up, but it certainly doesn't appear to jive with the unity platform that this ticket is pursuing at this point. On one hand, they preach unity while on the other hand, he all but guarantees that our leaders will spend a bunch of money on hearings and sessions that do nothing but keep our goverment from actually passing legislation. I didn't like it during the Clinton impeachment fiasco and I don't like it here.

Earmark reform is just a lot of empty BS IMO. Getting rid of earmarks doesn't lower the overall expenditures, it just shifts the decision making from the legislative to the executive branch.

idk - i don't necessarily follow it that far down the path. not sure he was committing to that

The Daily Show last night was on top form. First they juxtaposed GOP talking heads from a year ago (attacking Hillary Clinton on being a woman) and defending Palin during the last week (from attacks on her because she's a woman). A typical example was people a year ago saying Clinton was "whining" when she complained about the "boys" ganging up on her in the Democratic debates, and then the same people saying how disgraceful it was that anyone was attacking Palin now, and that they were doing so just because she was a woman.

Also good was comparing Bill O'Reilly's response to Jamie Spears' pregnancy to Bristol Palin's. Pretty much a word-for-word contradiction of himself. I'm sure he's not the only talking head to be doing a 180 this week.

That seems way beyond what he said. Is it really the Republican platform that if you're high enough ranking you shouldn't be held accountable to the law?

If you think that any conviction will come of that, I've got some ice cubes in Arizona to sell you. It's a waste of time and little more than political grandstanding, much like the Clinton impeachment hearings. Putting up the straw man argument that I somehow implied that anyone is above the law is an excellent diversion, but doesn't address the topic at hand.

For those that want to read the full article.........

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008...s2008.joebiden

One of the talking heads last night said two things related to this: 1) male delegates were asked to give up their seats to female alternates to make it appear that there were more women there; 2) The hockey-mom, lipstick line was good but planned. I don't remember which one it was, and flipped between MSNBC, CNN and PBS pretty liberally (being a good liberal, and all). I'm pretty sure it wasn't PBS. So I apologize for not being able to specifically reference my source.

In fairness, if they could have kept Bristol's pregnancy hidden, I have no doubt they would have. But once it became public, they had to treat it as if it were all on the level. Every member of Biden's family was on the stage. Ditto Obama, such as it is. Bristol belonged on the stage with her mother. In my judgment, any fiance does, too, regardless of the presence of a shotgun. Either or both not appearing on the stage implies they are trying to sweep it all under the rug. An even worse story, in my opinion.

Obama says this:


All they said was that if evidence of crimes being committed was discovered those responsible will be held accountable. They didn't call for hearings or investigations or a special prosecutor. Do you agree that if evidence of crimes is discovered that those responsible should be held accountable?

well I guess they couldve dropped the whole "private" charade and my brain would be able to put an equals sign after it...thats where Im having the discombobulation. You can't rewind the clock though so perhaps a pass is in order as youre right, all other families have been on stage too.

Is this a fair comparison? I've been hearing a number of attacks on Palin that are only made because she is a woman...things like she can't take care of her kids if she is a VP, and she shouldn't be running with young children, and the mocking comment that "religious women should expect to be subservient to their husbands". All the while, Palin hasn't yet played the victim card (she doesn't have to with everyone else throwing it around for her). I don't remember Clinton's criticisms that caused her to claim victim. Were they equally as gender-focused?