Remember that clever line in Sarah Palin's convention speech about the fact that she put her predecessor's corporate jet on eBay? Well, turns out she didn't actually sell it on eBay - it did not sell there, so had to be sold via other means.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/5/112059/2716

That's technically not a lie, but now McCain IS lying about it. Today McCain said:

You know what I enjoyed the most? She took the luxury jet that was acquired by her predecessor and sold it on eBay -- made a profit.

And as the above article points out, that fancy corporate jet was used not just for the governor but for transporting prisoners to Arizona (Alaska has a shortage of prisons it seems) and other things.

The lies just keep piling up! I can't believe they are getting away with all this crap!!! If you don't read the Daily Kos or watch the Daily Show, you'd never know!!!!

Andrew

If there is ANY left wing smear sites in the world it's the daily kos...plain and simple.
Just so you know where this story is coming from.
Scraping the bottom of the barrel again here.

Broadway, how is this story inaccurate? Are you saying you believe Palin really sold the jet on eBay and that the Daily KOS is making this all up? I guess the Chicago Trubune made up the story too?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-palin_planesep05,0,3470364.st ory

Must be nice to live in that delusional bubble you live in! If you don't like a fact, just say the source is biased, facts be damned.

Andrew

OK.

But they are not the one's that are lying about it.

Not that it makes any difference to you.

Maybe the Daily KOS fabricated the quote from John McCain on the campaign trail, too?

Andrew

Both McCain and Palin are perfect. Sean Hannity said they were. Foxnews said they are. And all the right wing media outlets like CNN and NBC News and every other newspaper owned by a corprate giant said so.

Which is exactly why we have Kos!

You know Broadway, if she didn't have such a batch of lies to debunk, there would be far less DailyKos material. Of course the members of that site (and I am one) are gonna pick her story apart. That's what we are supposed to do.

Nobody wants liars in the White House right?

She opened the door on this by making a false claim and then playing off of it to boost the perception of her qualifications.

Somebody wrote the speech, but SHE SAID IT. Was up to her to filter the bullshit and she didn't do that.

It's not rational to say it's bottom of the barrel, just because it's from DailyKos. Sorry, that out isn't available.

Also, "scraping the bottom of the barrel" implies we've got a pretty solid candidate to begin with, and that this information really is all about diminishing that.

This is not the case.

What we do have is a candidate, who says she is solid, but not known to be solid. From there, we take what we are given and see if it works.

Clearly it's not working all that well as the number of false and manipulative statements made by Palin is pretty high.

If this were published amidst a lot of solid information, and the importance of it were magnified to a greater degree than warranted, it would then be a smear.

This isn't a smear, given a fairly high number of questionable events surrounding Palin.

>>She took the luxury jet that was acquired by her predecessor and sold it on eBay -- made a profit

If McCain said that you got him, not Palin...she said the truth..."I put it on Ebay" but BIG DEAL...grasping at straws here...but the real question is how did buy find out about the plane?

Broadway: If McCain said that you got him, not Palin...she said the truth..."I put it on Ebay" but BIG DEAL...grasping at straws here...but the real question is how did buy find out about the plane?

LOL!!! That's the "real question" because you don't want to answer the actual one related to the election. The cute eBay line is memorable and supposed to symbolize the kind of "maverick wisdom" Palin had as governor, yet she gave the impression that she had sold the plane on eBay, even if what she said was technically correct. Take a poll of listeners to that speech, and I can assure you, they'd remember "she sold the plane on eBay."

The fact that her line was misleading and McCain is outright lying about it just goes to show that they can't run on the truth: they have to make things up, because they sound good. Like this rubbish about how Governor Palin is supposedly some sort of fiscal disciplinarian eschewing Federal Pork when it turns out she has gone after earmarks as much as - if not more than - anyone else. Great campaign theme, based on lies.

I'm sure it must distress you to no end, Broadway, that the Daily Kos prints so many factual stories like this one!

Andrew

I heard about the ebay story on one of the cable news channels, so it's out there in the mainstream.

I took the "eBay" line as a joke.

Who cares how it was sold as long as there were no improprieties in the transaction process.

Well, it sold for a loss. And a loss, in most circles, doesn't mean the same thing as a profit. But that wasn't her fault. The previous guy paid too much for it to begin with. ( Or so CNN says - those biased bastards )

>>Who cares how it was sold...

a bit of wisdom from Eugene...wow...

Hey Broadway, Fox News is a pretty good smear channel for the left. Just thought I would point that out.

>>Fox News is a pretty good smear channel

fair and balanced like millions of Americans believe and watch for.

Randy...my point regarding Eugene...like Nazareth...can anything good come out of it...well of course yes!

>>the Daily Kos prints so many factual stories

the site of record for extreme...that's very extreme liberial ideology...and no less.

Broadway: the site of record for extreme...that's very extreme liberial ideology...and no less.

So are you saying the truth is "extreme liberal?" Because I haven't seen you show where anything Daily Kos posts is inaccurate. Actually what they do mostly is point to other media. For example, with this factual story about Palin's jet, they pointed to the Chicago Tribune as a source. How is it not true? What fact did they distort or get wrong?

Numerous sources have shown where Fox News routinely distorts facts or gets them wrong, in a routine bias to the right.

Andrew

>>saying the truth is "extreme liberal

nope...truth is truth...just the true facts please.

>>Chicago Tribune as a source

most daily newspapers slant liberal so their just rehashing their agenda's.

>>Fox News routinely distorts facts

if so, so much of America would not tune in...a whole lot more than the daily kos...hit piece city.

She "sold" the bridge, though.

http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/politics-17/122089918743630. xml&storylist=politics

"most daily newspapers slant liberal so their just rehashing their agenda's."

More bullshit from Broadway. In fact, just the opposite is true.


http://mediamatters.org/reports/oped/

http://blogs.tampabay.com/media/2007/09/media-matters-s.html

Broadway, I repeat: what was factually incorrect about the "eBay jet" story? What fact was distorted or misreported? What was "slanted?" Did Palin really sell the jet on eBay and the "liberal media" just made up the story? What are the "real facts" if the Chicago Trubune was wrong?

It seems to me you cannot admit what it is plain and obvious and must resort to cries of "liberal media bias!" to try to hide the truth.

You know who has a lot of viewers? Jerry Springer. You think that's all true true too just because a lot of people watch? Keith Olbermann has a million viewers a night now to "Countdown." Does that mean a million people can't be wrong and everything Keith says must be true, because a lot of people watch?

Andrew

Maybe the doorknob named Broadway will believe the Alaska Daily News from a year ago:

http://community.adn.com/node/109650

or maybe the New York Times?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/25/us/25jet.html

Also, nobody here yet has noted that Mrs. Reynolds, the buyer's wife, a "homemaker" contributed $1000 to the 2006 campaign of Alaska Speaker of the House John L. Harris (R), the "broker" who arranged the sale of the 2.1 million dollar jet (at a $500,000 loss) to Reynolds

I've also read that Reynolds contributed to Palin's campaign in 2006.

"...Mr Reynolds paid only $2.1m for the aircraft, and now wants $50,000 from the Alaskan taxpayer to cover maintenance costs."

"Originally from Texas, Reynolds, "the man who wants to change the economic landscape of Valdez", claims to have "killed more than 300 species of game around the world". His offices in downtown Valdez display a small sample of his trophy kills: "stuffed lions and elephants and such". Thanks to "quietly expanded eligibility requirements", Valdez is now a HUB (Historically Underbuilt Business), which allows local businesses to apply for "non-competitive government contracts". As Reynolds himself says, Valdez is now a "very lucrative investment","

He now uses the plane to fly wealthy hunting clients to Russia to kill big animals.

"For about $10,000, an outdoorsman -- a rich outdoorsman -- can buy passage between Anchorage and Petropavlovsk, a trip of about 4 1/2 hours, Reynolds said.

The Russian Far East is a popular destination for hunters and anglers, and the timing for a charter air service to take them there couldn't be better, Causey said.
"We have a horrible time flying with firearms now," he said. "One of the enormous appeals of this is not having gun problems."
Hunters won't face the delays, limitations and scrutiny that come with flying commercially with guns, Causey said.
They'll also get to Russia more quickly by flying from Anchorage, and Reynolds says he's worked things out with Fish & Game to have agents come to his hangar on Carl Brady Drive to inspect the heads and racks hunters bring home."


From the Belfast Telegraph today:

McCain then repeated the eBay claim during a Wisconsin campaign stop.

"You know what I enjoyed the most? She took the luxury jet that was acquired by her predecessor and sold it on eBay -- and made a profit!" McCain declared.

Or is that a biased source too, Broadway?

And what "profit"? there was a $500,000 LOSS!

The only thing here is the effort of trying to smear Palin with trumped up data/spin that won't hold. Feeding frenzy here among the liberal press.

So you are saying that YES she did sell the jet on E-bay for a profit?

Anyone who says otherwise is a Liberal and a liar?

Yeah, welcome to my world. Seems like such a simple couple questions, don't they?

Whee!

I'm always intrigued by what actually goes through a person's mind, such as it is, that makes them think they are invisible. Is it that they really think they can't be seen? Or is it that they, by not admitting that they are visible, will hope you don't notice that we can clearly see they're nuts?

Is it pride? Do they actually believe it? Or are they just spitballing various superpowers and hope they never get asked to show them?

Broadway, for what it's worth, I believe that you cannot actually fly. You don't HAVE to prove it. But someday, you may have a real chance to leap out a window and soar and land softly. Don't. The world you live in is effected by gravity / facts, just like ours is.

Nice cape though, Spiderpig.

"The world you live in is effected by gravity"

Ah, but remember;
Gravity is just a theory.
Just like evolution.

Hey, I think this thread has served it's purpose for the time being.

I'm gonna hijack it.

This quote " Ah, but remember;
Gravity is just a theory.
Just like evolution." made me remember something I have been dying to try out here.

It's only a couple steps long. But follow me for a second;

Each of our legally binding laws ( the man made ones ) can be cited with great specificity. As in, there are numbers or something like that assigned to each law.

I mean, when someone is convicted of a crime, there is, I don't know what you call it, an ordinance code that is specifically mentioned at some point. Speeding probably has one. Theft too. Perjury. Etc. You know, the usuals.

Does anyone dispute that?

More later.

No dispute.

I took the "eBay" line as a joke.


So Did I. I think you guys are reading into this stuff way too much.

You're right.

Let's keep it simple.

She could not sell the jet on eBay.

Once sold by a broker, it lost Alaska half a million dollars.

Now they transport their overflow criminals to out of state prisons in some less fashionable fashion.

Palin does not miss the jet since her new pal Cindy is picking up the personal aircraft tab.

Broadway, c'mon, do a little bit of research buddy. Andrew got it from an unimpeachable source. The Chicago Tribune is the most conservative large newspaper in the state of Illinois.

Mrs. Merkin, that was some good digging.

CJ, yes, I am with you so far.

>>reading into this stuff way too much

ABC,NBC,CBS,CNN,FOX,MSNBC,Congress would be all over this IF it was an issue...NOT.

No additional research needed.

>>little bit of research buddy

there is more to life here...

Huh?

ABC: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=5741424

Puff piece where I also learned she had her first child less than 9 months after she married. I guess abstinence only applies to other families. Not hers. The eBay jet is on page 3.


CBS: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=5741424

In a video tribute to Sarah Palin at the Republican convention, the voice-over boasted that she had "auctioned the governor's jet on eBay." Yesterday, John McCain stretched the story a little further.

"You know what I enjoyed the most?" McCain asked. "She took the luxury jet that was acquired by her predecessor and sold it on eBay -- made a profit."

That's not what happened."



I started alphabetically.
That "research" took 2 minutes. Literally.

"ABC,NBC,CBS,CNN,FOX,MSNBC,Congress would be all over this IF it was an issue...NOT."

It's status as an 'issue' may be debatable, but all we're asking is for you to simply get on the same page as the rest of us and get your damned facts straight. You can lead a conservative to the truth, but you apparently can't make him drink.

After watching "conservatives" make their case, I remain convinced that the facts really don't matter all that much. There is a higher truth to defend, and the facts be dammed getting there.

>>I guess abstinence only applies to other families

Let those who are sinless cast the first stone. The Biblical model is sex within marriage which is increasingly hard to do in todays society but still needs to be upholded as the benchmark thus less marital problems/baggage.
Being human is to sin/be hypocritical/double standards and we ALL DO IT!
Remember, when you point your finger at someone you have 3 fingers pointed back.

The jet issue still is not flying.

The "biblical model"?
"Upholded"?

Plus, I'm pretty surprised that Broadway the doorknob approves of any sex, especially pre-marital.

Once again, Broadway, you miss the point. Intentionally.

No one here is judging SP for her first child being older than her marriage. No one here is judging SP for her daughter's situation. She set an example, and her daughter followed it. They both had options, and made choices, not mandated by law. SP would like nothing more than to make others forced by law to make the same choices she did. Hypocrite.

There's the point. AGAIN.

CJ, no dispute. Please carry on.

If you read some of the Old Testament passages you will find some very x-rated scripture that has one person entering into another person who had sex with their dad when he was drunk. It's pretty lascivious stuff.

I'm trying to locate where Jesus says anything about a biblical marriage model. I'm just not finding it.

Just what part of the biblical model of marriage are you pulling from Dan?

" CJ, no dispute. Please carry on."

I really need to quit posting while Ambien is kicking in. I feel a little stupid now for over-hyping. And now that I am slightly more lucid, this may be a terrible idea to talk about.

It had to do with Roe V Wade and judicial opinions vs. actual laws. And not to be coy, but I just plain don't wanna go there today. You know?

So I'm sorry. Not a big deal.

Carry on.

>>biblical model of marriage

All kinds of references beginning in Genesis 1 to Ephesians 5 to 1 Cor 7 plus Deuteronomy 5:18...You must not commit adultery...just one of the 10 commandments

Another take on Sarah from a local...

http://frontpage.americandaughter.com/index.php

>>make others forced by law to make the same choices she did.

not forcing anyone to do anything here...accept maybe to encourage that life is a better choice to which the Palins are no hypocrites.

Adultery is not the same as premarital sex. Do the commandments prohibit premarital sex?

"Encourage" would suggest open dialogue and compromise, with the result being an informed opinion, and decision. SP has no intention of that, as shown by her desire to overturn existing law to fit her own views.

"Better choice" is subjective. Maybe for you, but not for me, which is the whole point of "choice".

My head hurts. Damn that wall.

The Bible talks a lot about fornication which covers premarital sex...some commentary...

Fornication is also mentioned many times in the New Testament (Matt. 5:32; 19:9; John 8:41; Acts 15:20, 29; 21:25; Rom. 1:29; 1 Cor 5:1, 6:13, 18, 7:2; 10:8; 2 Cor 12:21; Gal 5:19; Eph 5:3; Col 3:5; 1 Thess. 4:3; Jude 1:7; Rev. 2:14, 20-21; 9:21; 14:8; 17:2,4).

"The Greek word for 'fornication' (porneia) could include any sexual sin committed after the betrothal contract. …In Biblical usage, 'fornication' can mean any sexual congress outside monogamous marriage. It thus includes not only premarital sex, but also adultery, homosexual acts, incest, remarriage after un-Biblical divorce, and sexual acts with animals, all of which are explicitly forbidden in the law as given through Moses (Leviticus 20:10-21). Christ expanded the prohibition against adultery to include even sexual lusting (Matthew 5:28)

simply put...sex within marriage is best...the Biblical model...God's plan for man and woman...and generally produces better kids too.

---

quote:

not forcing anyone to do anything here...accept maybe to encourage that life is a better choice to which the Palins are no hypocrites.

---

---

quote:

simply put I THINK sex within marriage is best...the Biblical model...God's plan for man and woman

---

---

quote:

and I THINK generally produces better kids too.

---

Thank you, Missing KSKD!

We could make it even less of a challenge:

What if all of us flat out supported any candidate that stated a goal of making all religions illegal, except for Islam? Or Buddhism? Or Wicca? All Christians must convert and practice, or face jail. Any underground practice of Christianity, in any form, would be prosecuted to the full extent of the new law.

See how ridiculous that is, Broadway?

And don't come back with any "Christians were (or ARE) persecuted..." stuff. We're talking about a change in law, making that sort of thing required by law.

>>It's a flat out attempt to legislate others moral choices for them. This is perhaps the most offensive behavior I encounter. It's offensive because it's just selfish to the core.

Great words to quote about my feelings for someone who aborts an innocent human being...their child...whose body is sucked out of her womb on demand for her convience/birth control...very selfish if not homicide.

The Corporate Jet WAS PUT ON EBAY, and that is a fact!

Did it sell, no it didn't.

KSKD, that was brilliant. Thank you.

The smartest recent words in the abortion department were uttered by the Senator from Illinois in Denver two weeks ago:

"We may not agree on abortion, but surely we can agree on reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies in this country."

Prevention is the key. We've been able to do that quite easily for 40 years or more, various allegedly celibate church elders notwithstanding.

Eastwood- as mentioned before in the 1990s 200,000 less abortions did take place. Education and prevention were working.

Beano: The Corporate Jet WAS PUT ON EBAY, and that is a fact!

Did it sell, no it didn't.

That is not the impression most listeners got. Like this listener, a senator from Arizona:

You know what I enjoyed the most? She took the luxury jet that was acquired by her predecessor and sold it on eBay -- made a profit.

So either John McCain was lying or he too was fooled, like most of the American public surely.

Be honest: if the Obama campaign tried to pull this "technically speaking" crap the right-wingers would be all over them like they were in 2000 whenever Gore uttered anything that could possibly be misinterpreted.

Andrew

>>Education and prevention were working.

That, and fear of AIDS. There ought to be a Bristol Bill. Free condoms for anyone, no questions asked, nobody's Mom needs to know.

Forget condoms. Every dad should have their daughter on birth control. Then there's no question.

Forget condoms. Every dad should have their daughter on birth control. Then there's no question.

Especially if she dies of a blood clot from the pill.

Real Oregonian men always have a raincoat handy.

very selfish if not homicide.

Speaking of being selfish, aren't you doing that here?

>>selfish, aren't you doing that here

I would think the opposite remembering the most innocent...truely the least of these.

Of course you would!

Listen, not everybody thinks life begins at conception, as in the moment development begins, we consider that to be a person, in the sense of "the most innocent".

Many of us believe viability is where we start thinking about people.

Others still consider successful birth to be that dividing line.

That's the hard reality we live in, right here, right now, delivered straight up and rational. I'm not wrong on that. I do have the high ground and everybody knows it.

Now, here's the kicker Broadway:

I THINK isn't proof, nor does it carry any authority on this matter. We all think what we think, and are free to choose how we act on those thoughts and beliefs. THAT'S THE LAW OF THE LAND.

Your choices are yours. No question. If you respect those others make, you will find yours respected in like kind. Fail in that, and you will get hammered, repeatedly by those that value their freedom more than they value being nice, or polite.

Our choices are ours, and THAT SHOULD BE NO QUESTION TOO.

Failure to grok that is the selfish bit. Not materialistic type of selfish, but self-centered, unable to understand where others might be coming from kind of selfish.

The idea that you have accepted your faith as your highest authority does not mean it suddenly trumps others. Really, it means you run an extremely high risk of confusing conviction with truth. When you do this, you comprimise your ability to reason, and I've posted why before, and those posts remain unchallenged for YEARS.

You believe it to be absolutely true, try to live as if it's absolutely true, tell others --over and over, that it's absolutely true, but in the end...

it's just not known absolutely true. Really, it's just a choice you have made.

If it were, known absolutely true, then we would be discussing the merits of obedience instead of acceptance.

Get it?

To then support those that would make others beliefs illegal, given the unresolved matter of abortion, is SELFISH. Your current strong support of the Republican party is supporting people who would legislate others choices and their beliefs away, thus forcing them to live a lie.

Lie is in the commandments more than once. THAT'S A BIG DEAL. Think about that? Please do. It has serious implications for your faith as you have presented it here. Ask Chris, if you don't want to hear it from one of those liberal heathens, not afraid to just post it up like it is. (sorry Chris, I'll buy good Coffee!)

You just want your truth realized so that you can feel better about it. That's it!

If you have a problem with others choices, that's YOUR ISSUE, NOT THEIRS. We most often identify this bizzare manifestation of character as somebody with control issues. That's when you really, really want to control something, but are unable and quite unwilling to accept the reality that you just can't.

The ongoing tension surrounding that dilemma drives the control freak into an escalation of forces, in an ATTEMPT TO GAIN CONTROL by any means possible. Over time it gets bad, really bad as unresolved tension just builds and needs release.

It gets bad enough to support corrupt people, turn a blind eye to facts, lie, manipulate, abuse, and who knows what else. Not saying you do all those things, but you are on that path as sure as I'm here typing this post.

Again, that's YOUR NEED, YOUR ISSUE, NOBODY ELSES.

This is profoundly selfish, and is exactly why I find the behavior so damn offensive.

Don't put this anywhere but right on that face you see in the mirror in the morning.

Have a pair at least and face that. What you do with it, is also your deal, but stop the lies, manipulations and denial and just come clean. At least from there, you can resolve those tensions in a healthy way and do yourself some good.

Many here will respect you more for it, instead of looking on in wonder as you hide that crap behind dogma and the unborn.

Go ahead, look hard. The healing can start as soon as right now, today. Get up, go look in that real mirror and consider what you have seen here in the virtual one and think hard.

Peace, and I mean that post in the best of ways. You want to be decent, try to be decent, and are decent where this conflict within you does not trump what I see to be an intelligent and caring person.

broadway sez: remembering the most innocent

Just about everyone here has an issue or cause of some sort that is dear to them -- in fact some of them may be even MORE IMPORTANT in the eyes of God than the one you're pre-occupied with.

However we're not selfishly abusing the forum in the manner you are.



If I was a member of your Church's discussion forum and used the exact same method you're using here to "remember" my issues, I'd be banned pronto!


Read KSKD's post again, and reconsider how you respond in your posts. You are free to start your own thread to advocate your causes all you want.