The Palin Controversies Keep Coming

[Justin]

On the note of the AIP. I don't think this matters for a really important note. In 1990, Walter Hickel  and Jack Coghill was elected governor and Lt. Gov of the state under the AIP ticket. It seems in the 1990's, they were NOT a fringe party but rather party that voiced the concerns of Alaskans who felt shafted by both parties. I don't see this as an issue period. People joined the AIP because they wanted to look for an alternative party that would be essentially pro-alaksan and pro-political bickerong and corruption.

[Justin]

I'll let her go on 3. ...but I don't buy the explainations for 4.  Things look a little weird for 1 and 2, as well.

Can you care to explain why a lot Alaskans elected two AIP members under the AIP ticket to the executive mansion in 1990 or shall we pretend that never happend?

[Justin]

Can you care to explain why a lot Alaskans elected two AIP members under the AIP ticket to the executive mansion in 1990 or shall we pretend that never happend?

...but is that right for the rest of America?

So you are saying, that it's wrong for Alaskans to support a party that seemed to be able to put thier interests first rather than political bickering of both the Alaskan GOP and the Dems. The AIP in power did no damage to the Alaskan political scene and at the end the day simply faded into the night as thier purpose was surved as a warning to both parties to stop thier shenanigans. The AIP itself, let's not forget, was HIJACKED by nationalistic (here nationalistic is in regards to pro-Union) leadership that used the AIP as base for getting real reforms. William Hickel himself disagreed with the AIP platform regarding a secession referendum. Many peple simply used the party as a political tool to get a job done. That's why I don't see the AIP problem as a big deal.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well as a Roman Catholic, if she left that's fine, she can say that. I pray for her immortal soul as the next person. But if you are going to turn this into an accusation of anti-catholicism, I would warn you about going down this road.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I never said anything about Wright at all. I have been on a 4 year hiatus from this board. So don't go around throwing things about that you have no clue about what I thought. I as a Huckabee supporter agreed with Huckabee's stance on the Wright issue. I gave Obama the benefit of the doubt on reverend Wright, the same ought to go to Gov. Palin.

[Justin]

#2-  I don't see how that refutes my arguement, seeing how there are others that link Obama to Wright.

I'm not letting you get away with this. This amounts to a Tu quoque fallacy and you know it. You also made the isinuation that I supported the lambasting of Obama over the Wright-Phleger controversy.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You have heard of the Reformation, right? You know that guy Martin Luther who left the church over reasons of theology... You may have heard of it or him...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But using infants as aircraft fuel is an objectively and intrinsically evil act. I would have a moral obligation not to support that party because of that stance. Just as I am not a Democrat for that reason. However there are matters that are not intrinsically or extrinsically immoral (to use Aristotelian terms here) that are open up to legitimate debate and support. Asking for a referendum on secession may not be prudent but it is neither extrinsically evil nor intrinsically evil. Also the AIP in the 1990's softened its stance on adherence to the party's platform as changed into a reform-type party.

[Justin]

I am just saying that there were tons of choices of churches and she made a special type of choice that implicates certain trains on to her.

You want say that about Mexican immigrants who have recently converted from the Catholic faith to the pentacostal or other low church groups. It's happening at a big rate here in the US and especially by mexican immigrants. I mean effectively what you are saying is that anybody who becomes an evangelical or a pentacostal has certain "mindsets". Is that the train of thought *you*
want to entertain? Shall we entertain what trains of thought WASPs who convert to the Catholic faith? Or how about Jews who abandon Judaism for the Christian faith or vice versa. Can you be anymore stereotypical or what?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have no real stance on the issue of secessionism or anything like that. I'm a guy who supports popular sovereignty on issues that are open to debate like taxes or health care, etc. If the people want it, they should be able to have it. And if the party wishes to minimize or make optional a peice of thier party platform that deals with a matter of legitimate public discourse, that their right.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My side? What is my side? You see the C right? I'm not a Republican. I ove the fact that you can pidgeon hole me based on the fact that i have interjected myself here. How arrogant of you. And guess you are still engaging in a Tuquoque fallacy by trying to legitimize your actions in this case by pointing to the sins of others. Care to take that plank out of your eye first before to take mine?