>> ^Januari:
This strikes me as dangerous ground... I don't trust McCain at all... but are you telling me Obama or any politicians hands are completely free of lobbyists?... not sure i can accept that either.


Obama has had plenty of dealings with lobbyists, that's a safe bet. Biden, too. I don't think he's considered the darling of K Street to the extent that McGrampa is.

>> ^Januari:
but are you telling me Obama or any politicians hands are completely free of lobbyists?...


"completely free" and completely surrounded by, are two vastly different things.

This is a great ad. I just wish MoveOn would've setup a seperate 527, using a different name. The name MoveOn doesn't carry much weight with non-progressives. And in most circumstances, is a big red-flag.

Maybe the MSM isn't required here... Just put it on a MoveOn campaign ad with some contextual text.

As they say, the truthiness will out.

Here's the e-mail being sent out to the MoveOn-a-nites:

"Yesterday was John McCain's 72nd birthday. If elected, he'd be the oldest president ever inaugurated. And after months of slamming Barack Obama for "inexperience," here's who John McCain has chosen to be one heartbeat away from the presidency: a right-wing religious conservative with no foreign policy experience, who until recently was mayor of a town of 9,000 people.

Huh?

Who is Sarah Palin? Here's some basic background:


She was elected Alaska's governor a little over a year and a half ago. Her previous office was mayor of Wasilla, a small town outside Anchorage. She has no foreign policy experience.1

Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.2

She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000. 3

Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.4

She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change.5

She's solidly in line with John McCain's "Big Oil first" energy policy. She's pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won't be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered species—she was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.6
How closely did John McCain vet this choice? He met Sarah Palin once at a meeting. They spoke a second time, last Sunday, when he called her about being vice-president. Then he offered her the position.7
This is information the American people need to see. Please take a moment to forward this email to your friends and family.

We also asked Alaska MoveOn members what the rest of us should know about their governor. The response was striking. Here's a sample:

She is really just a mayor from a small town outside Anchorage who has been a governor for only 1.5 years, and has ZERO national and international experience. I shudder to think that she could be the person taking that 3AM call on the White House hotline, and the one who could potentially be charged with leading the US in the volatile international scene that exists today. —Rose M., Fairbanks, AK

She is VERY, VERY conservative, and far from perfect. She's a hunter and fisherwoman, but votes against the environment again and again. She ran on ethics reform, but is currently under investigation for several charges involving hiring and firing of state officials. She has NO experience beyond Alaska. —Christine B., Denali Park, AK

As an Alaskan and a feminist, I am beyond words at this announcement. Palin is not a feminist, and she is not the reformer she claims to be. —Karen L., Anchorage, AK

Alaskans, collectively, are just as stunned as the rest of the nation. She is doing well running our State, but is totally inexperienced on the national level, and very much unequipped to run the nation, if it came to that. She is as far right as one can get, which has already been communicated on the news. In our office of thirty employees (dems, republicans, and nonpartisans), not one person feels she is ready for the V.P. position.—Sherry C., Anchorage, AK

She's vehemently anti-choice and doesn't care about protecting our natural resources, even though she has worked as a fisherman. McCain chose her to pick up the Hillary voters, but Palin is no Hillary. —Marina L., Juneau, AK

I think she's far too inexperienced to be in this position. I'm all for a woman in the White House, but not one who hasn't done anything to deserve it. There are far many other women who have worked their way up and have much more experience that would have been better choices. This is a patronizing decision on John McCain's part- and insulting to females everywhere that he would assume he'll get our vote by putting "A Woman" in that position.—Jennifer M., Anchorage, AK

So Governor Palin is a staunch anti-choice religious conservative. She's a global warming denier who shares John McCain's commitment to Big Oil. And she's dramatically inexperienced.

In picking Sarah Palin, John McCain has made the religious right very happy. And he's made a very dangerous decision for our country.

In the next few days, many Americans will be wondering what McCain's vice-presidential choice means. Please pass this information along to your friends and family.

Thanks for all you do.

–Ilyse, Noah, Justin, Karin and the rest of the team

Sources:


1. "Sarah Palin," Wikipedia, Accessed August 29, 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin

2. "McCain Selects Anti-Choice Sarah Palin as Running Mate," NARAL Pro-Choice America, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17515&id=13661-7654869-irR0vsx&t=1

3. "Sarah Palin, Buchananite," The Nation, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17736&id=13661-7654869-irR0vsx&t=2


4. "'Creation science' enters the race," Anchorage Daily News, October 27, 2006
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17737&id=13661-7654869-irR0vsx&t=3

5. "Palin buys climate denial PR spin—ignores science," Huffington Post, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17517&id=13661-7654869-irR0vsx&t=4

6. "McCain VP Pick Completes Shift to Bush Energy Policy," Sierra Club, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17518&id=13661-7654869-irR0vsx&t=5

"Choice of Palin Promises Failed Energy Policies of the Past," League of Conservation Voters, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17519&id=13661-7654869-irR0vsx&t=6

"Protecting polar bears gets in way of drilling for oil, says governor," The Times of London, May 23, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17520&id=13661-7654869-irR0vsx&t=7

7 "McCain met Palin once before yesterday," MSNBC, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=21119&id=13661-7654869-irR0vsx&t=8"

Tags for this video have been changed from 'mccain, bush, economy, psychology, pay bills, gas, political blah blah blah, dnc' to 'mccain, bush, economy, psychology, pay bills, gas, political blah blah blah, moveon' - edited by NetRunner

Dude, the "left" does NOT EXIST.

I wish that were the case.

you CANNOT group people into two halves.

You mean, like, the "haves" and "have-nots"?

Every time you say "the left" or "liberal" you sound like a fucking twat. Nobody knows what you mean by "left". Apparently to you it means "wrong", as in the opposite of "right". LOL.

Now now, no need to be profane or anti-fane. YOU may not know what a leftist is but a great many people do know what is meant by 'the left', leftist, socialist, etc. Obviously the term differs slightly from country to country. Both major parties in Britain are socialist; one is more conservative than the other.

The paradigm to replace "right" and "left" is "statist" versus "small-l" libertarian. It's not quite there yet, and in the meantime, "onservatism versus liberalism", or "right vs. left" will do.

I ask you this... where do you classify me? I like small government and nationalised healthcare. Yes you can have both. It doesn't

take much governmental apparatus to collect money and give it to hospitals.

You can have "both", but only for a very limited time, then it's over, and government balloons exponentially. Happens every single time it's been tried.

So am i "right" or "left"?

I don't believe gay marriage is the same as heterosexual marriage. I think abortion should be allowed, but restricted. I think

governments waste huge amounts of money. I think we need a government. I hate evil corporations. I agree with the principle of

property ownership. I love guns but I think they should be banned or at least restricted much more than they are in the USA. I served

in the RAF but I am a pacifist. But I would fight for my family. I opposed the war in Iraq for economic, constitutional and

humanitarian reasons. I hate the BBC, FOX, MOVEON, DISNEY, MTV, TYT, CONSERVAPEDIA, THE NATION, and i find DEMOCRACY

NOW intensely boring and annoying. I am agnostic about god.

SO fucking figure that out. Am I on the right? Or the left?

My interpretation? Generally speaking, I'd say you're left-leaning on most issues. You have an unexamined hostility towards capitalism and corporations, and while you're aware that government is wasteful and corrupt, you'd rather they wield the difference of power rather than 'the people'. You despise the major brands of media influence yet, like all artists, are frustrated because whether you support or oppose The Machine, you're still orbiting its imaginary center.

A pacifist is defined as "a person who believes in pacifism or is opposed to war or to violence of any kind." That being the case, you're employing a paradox by stating you'd wound or kill to defend your family. In other words, idealism ends when enemies present viable threats. What I find amusing is, if some wacko outside your window yelled, "I have a gun and I'm going to shoot you!" you wouldn't hesitate to grab your own gun, whether the wacko "proved" he actually had a gun or not. That's not paranoia, it's common sense. But when a wacko like Saddam announces he's got a gun, and he's proven in the past he'll use it indiscriminately, and all your neighbors also believe he will use the gun, the anti-war left would rather you just ignore the situation. WTF.

I think you have a young, unexamined yet comfortable worldview, and though you claim to chortle at "2 opposing sides" you tend to view things in black and white. Iraq good, USA bad. UN good, USA bad. War is always wrong. Torture is always wrong. Corporations are always evil. Those seeking "social justice" are always good and working for the best interest of all and NEVER for self-gain.

And as for your declaration that "inevitable genocide" is "unacceptable"... wow.

To leave Iraq before it's stabilized delivers it unto chaos. The left (statists) have made it clear they don't give a shit about any resulting genocide. Like spoiled children, they want what they want and that's that, don't care about anything else.

Based on your worldview, were I you I'd reach the exact same conclusions about the Iraq war that you have. The difference then, is that I'm taking into account all possible outcomes, not just the ones I'd like to see happen. Had we not taken out Saddam, he'd probably have died at a ripe old age and his thug sons would've taken over and Iraq would still be a backwards hellhole.

Think of it like this dude, although maybe you can twist words into comebacks, maybe you're not actually making a point, you're just "debating"... the way you have been trained to debate, i.e. with 2 sided arguments.

You and many others on the sift want 'wiggle room' for those times uncomfortable facts and logic make themselves known, and this wiggle room is usually provided by suggesting that "no labels apply" or that their unique views exist outside of categorization.
Liberalism is a starting point, not the finish line.

It's kinda like you live in a dictatorship and you have been brainwashed to think like that.

Once your eyes are opened and knowledge and experience received, you can't go back to being a leftist, because you won't be able to 'unsee' the inherent flaws in what amounts to an unworkable and unjust system even less fair than capitalism.

So you don't like "2-sided arguments"...all right then, have you ever gone beyond your own foregone conclusions and considered Iraq just might benefit in the long run, that the US has given them an opportunity to make their fledgling government work and given their people a real shot at self-determination? It's something the UN has never done for any country.

I'm not upset by opposing points of view, and once again, I never picked up a keyboard to change anyone's mind. We're all working thru the thing.

I can't help but think Moveon.org is launching this new attack ad in response to this one from McCain.

Early-adopters of anything are by definition "liberal". Web 2.0 has existed for what, only 4 years?

What do you have against PETA?

Also, on the whole, what's so bad about MoveOn?

if the guy who founded the site talks like that, it's not surprising this "liberal" influence persists... and it's not a bad thing. i just wish people wouldn't use these stupid polarising words.

Anyone subservient enough to just subscribe their brain to a single political "genre" is obviously not thinking enough and should be ignored (see conservapedia or malkin or 911truth or moveon or peta for details... across the spectrum extremism is retarded)

This is a parody of this MoveOn.org commercial: http://politics.videosift.com/video/Not-Alex

edit: making my grammer more gooder.

I find it absolutely hilarious that you find those 10 statements so offensive to call "troll". Just because he's not ultra left wing, doesn't mean he's a troll.

The last thing this site needs is MORE liberal bias over-sampling by banning anyone with an opposing political view. If you want that the Daily Kos and MoveOn are where you should be. Actually, even the mere thought of such a ban is disgusting in my free opinion.

"you're all stupid, horrible people for believing things I disagree with."
I've gotten this from the liberals on this site more times than I can count. Ban them all?

I feel less and less welcome on this site every day.

>> ^RhesusMonk:
Sweet moves, coach.
Also, check out what http://moveon.org/ is calling for him to do with all that book money he's making.



Thanks, Monk.

And yes, the suggestion that McClellan donate part of the proceeds of the book to the Iraq War vets is brought up by Russert in the second clip, to which McClellan states that it has been an intention from the beginning.

How much and to what extent, we'll have to wait and see.

No. 1 on a long list of why I love the sift: promptness. Sweet moves, coach.

Also, check out what http://moveon.org/ is calling for him to do with all that book money he's making.

I'm happy to move this to the front. I was confused by this category - I thought MoveOn would pick "the people's choice" as theirs...?