Yep…Sarah Palin is just a good ol’ girl.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14805.html
RNC shells out $150K for Palin fashion
By JEANNE CUMMINGS | 10/22/08 9:24 AM EDT Updated: 10/22/08 9:24 AM EDT
The Republican National Committee has spent more than $150,000 to clothe and accessorize vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and her family since her surprise pick by John McCain in late August.
According to financial disclosure records, the accessorizing began in early September and included bills from Saks Fifth Avenue in St. Louis and New York for a combined $49,425.74.
The records also document a couple of big-time shopping trips to Neiman Marcus in Minneapolis, including one $75,062.63 spree in early September.
————–
Wow…talk about putting lipstick on a pig. I wonder, if she loses, does she have to reimburse the campaign?

ds0490, apparently it’s not helping either. according to wall street journal/nbc news poll out yesterday:

Forty-seven percent view Palin negatively, compared with 38 percent who see her in a positive light.

Fifty-five percent of voters say Palin is not qualified to be president, up from 50 percent two weeks ago.

maybe she could still win miss usa… just not the whitehouse in the usa. she might loose, but hey, she’ll look good doing it, right? also,

The poll found 52 percent of voters favor Obama compared with 42 percent for McCain

rawstory.com/news/2008/Palin_children_traveled_at_state_expense_1022.html
I wonder if she will now reimburse the state of Alaska for hauling her kids around at taxpayer expense?

ds0490, apparently it’s not helping either. according to wall street journal/nbc news poll out yesterday:

Forty-seven percent view Palin negatively, compared with 38 percent who see her in a positive light.

Fifty-five percent of voters say Palin is not qualified to be president, up from 50 percent two weeks ago.

maybe she could still win miss usa… just not the whitehouse in the usa. she might loose, but hey, she’ll look good doing it, right? also,

The poll found 52 percent of voters favor Obama compared with 42 percent for McCain

“I wonder if she will now reimburse the state of Alaska for hauling her kids around at taxpayer expense?”
don’t count on it.
however, i heard that she has said that she is donating her wardrobe to charity when she’s done campaigning. i can just picture those outfits on a hanger at the salvation army. i have a better idea. she should auction her wardrobe off to conservatives, and then donate the money to the u.s. treasury.

Looks like al Qaeda has made their Presidential preference known.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D93VA3B80&show_article=1
“WASHINGTON (AP) – Al-Qaida supporters suggested in a Web site message this week they would welcome a pre-election terror attack on the U.S. as a way to usher in a McCain presidency.
The message, posted Monday on the password-protected al-Hesbah Web site, said if al-Qaida wants to exhaust the United States militarily and economically, “impetuous” Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain is the better choice because he is more likely to continue the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“This requires presence of an impetuous American leader such as McCain, who pledged to continue the war till the last American soldier,” the message said. “Then, al-Qaida will have to support McCain in the coming elections so that he continues the failing march of his predecessor, Bush.”
SITE Intelligence Group, based in Bethesda, Md., monitors the Web site and translated the message.
“If al-Qaida carries out a big operation against American interests,” the message said, “this act will be support of McCain because it will push the Americans deliberately to vote for McCain so that he takes revenge for them against al-Qaida. Al-Qaida then will succeed in exhausting America till its last year in it.” “

It sounds like that al-Qaida article is saying that even radical Islamists know that McCain will stand up for America and Obama would do nothing or little.
Maybe (MAYBE) that’s what Biden was saying…you won’t know that what Obama is doing is the right thing (maybe he was saying that if we are attacked, Obama will do nothing, but that – in Obama’s opinion – would be the right thing to do, although not many would agree

MzEllen, please stop making these completely unfounded and unfair attacks on Obama. You haven’t a shred of evidence in anything that Obama has done or said to support your assertion that he would do nothing or little to “stand up for America” in the event of an attack.
It’s McCain and the Republicans who have waved the white flag of surrender at Al-Quaida. They took their eye off the ball in Afghanistan, the real central front in the war on terror, and charged into Iraq, where there was no Al-Quaida presence. We have been mired down there ever since. More than 4,000 Americans are dead, and thousands more mutilated and maimed. Our economy has been wrecked by a stupid and unnecessary war in which we are spending billions and billions of dollars every month and creating more terrorists around the world every day. And bin Laden is still at large.
Bush-McCain have played right into the hands of the Islamic extremists with every move they’ve made. How is THAT standing up for America? McCain thinks war is the answer to everything. It is a LAST RESORT, and Obama knows that. If he’d been in charge, we would not be in this horrendous mess.

While only God can judge a soul, it is fairly obvious that she is unsaved.
Logic says that if al-Quaida wants McCain to retaliate a war, then they are against Obama, who they think would not.
McCain thinks war is the answer to everything.
Please stop making these completely unfounded and unfair attacks on McCain. If he thought war is the answer to everything (your word), there would be armed troops on Wall Street.

“there would be armed troops on Wall Street.”
hahaha! you do have a sense of humor. i was beginning to wonder!
however… mcnutty isn’t prez yet. if he gets the authority, we just might see operation “stock and awe”. no telling what he’s going to do next. maybe he’ll do the smart thing and suspend his campaign again.
“Logic says that if al-Quaida wants McCain to retaliate a war, then they are against Obama, who they think would not.”
that’s pretty shallow logic. either would retaliate, and they know it. the question then becomes, who would be less effective? answer: mccain.

answer: mccain.
that would be your opinion, yes. Thus the need for an election.

my opinion, correct. but as long as mccain gives him a place to hide (pakistan) and has no clear plan to work with the pakistani government with either soft power or with military power, bin laden has time and resources to plan a new attack (i don’t think that bin laden has given up yet). he characterized the government as “destabilized” when it wasn’t and then propped up the militant dictator that later overran that government). he has come out publicly against incursions across the border even to get bin laden, calling pakistan our ally.
while mccain has had differences with bush on the tactics of the war in iraq, he has been all for it in every other measure. he, like bush, took his eyes off of bin laden for the biggest, costliest military distraction from capturing/killing the terrorists that attacked the united states. that’s a huge mistake and shows a lack of good judgment in national security. taking the war to iraq was ineffective.
again, you might disagree. it might be your opinion that we will kill bin laden in iraq.

again, you might disagree. it might be your opinion that we will kill bin laden in iraq.
Iraq was not mentioned.

i did. and i did because i question mccain’s effectiveness when it comes to national security with regard to the middle east. mccain is rattling sabers with iran, pushing for drawn out war in iraq, unwilling to go after bin laden in pakistan. he can’t even keep the different factions straight.
if you think, like al qaeda is telling you, and like mccain says, that the front of this war against terrorists who attacked the united states is in iraq, then by all means vote for mccain.

I have said here that getting into Iraq was a stupid thing to do. What we are left with is what we are left with – and the problem is how best to get out of it.
If Bin Laden is in the area of the Pakistan/Afghanistan border, what does McCain say about that area?
~~
“We have to double the size of the Afghan army. We have to have a streamlined NATO command structure. We have to do a lot of things. We have to work much more closely with the Pakistanis.”
“But most importantly, we have to have the same strategy (as in Iraq of a U.S. troop buildup).” (Oct. 7)
~~
“There have been 20,000 additional troops, from 32,000 to 53,000, and there needs to be more. It’s not just the addition of troops that matters … Pakistan is a very important element in this.” (Sept. 26)
~~
“Our commanders on the ground in Afghanistan say that they need at least three additional brigades – and our commanders in Afghanistan must get them,” McCain said.
Both candidates say they will get more troops into Afghanistan/Pakistan.

nice post,I like the post thank you