It's the values that she doesn't share with liberals that frighten us. We (speaking for myself and a few others) see her as invoking Hillary Clinton and yet the only thing in common she has with Hillary Clinton is that thing between her legs.

She's against abortion. Period.
She's against gay rights. Period.
She's for abstinence only education.

Those three issues alone place her in the "Too Scary to Vote for" column.

Most liberals are for choice, or at least a limited version there of.
Most liberals are for gay rights, or a progression there to.
Most liberals are for comprehensive sex education to reduce abortion and other negative impacts of poor teenage decision-making.

We know Hillary Clinton, and you Ms. Palin are no Hillary Clinton. Or Ferraro, or anywhere close to any other woman on left she wants to invoke for support.

__________________

Obviously, the sarcasm went right over your head...


Let me spell it out for you.
You think liberals should embrace her.
You toss out some reasons why...

Obviously "liberals" and "conservatives" have different view-points on the issues.
I was mocking the fact that you obviously side-stepped ACTUAL ISSUES in your pretense as to why liberals should embrace her.
The things you listed do NOT provide any real reason for why there should be a real difference in "embracing" between most warm-blooded mammals.

Quite frankly, all you did was give us reasons to believe she's not some accidental clone of Dick Cheney...


I swear.
BOTH you and Bhkad should forever restrict yourself from ever trying to tell another person what THEIR opinion is.

What you listed is NOT "core values" for liberals.
Furthermore, if liberals and conservatives are at different ends of the spectrum, and those are "core values" for liberals, what does that mean regarding what the "conservative" position is on that issue.

That gets back to the sarcasm, which again went over your head...


I swear. Do you hear yourself talk?
Do you think that if Sarah held EVERY SINGLE VALUE that she currently holds, and just put a "Democrat" sign above her head, that Democrats would embrace her?

Lieberman me once, shame on you...
Lieberman me twice, shame on me...

< end sarcasm >

You might as well put a "dog" sticker on a Siamese cat and insist that the dog show MUST admit your "dog" and give it top prize cause it's got four legs and a tail.



....


Seriously. You NEED to STOP thinking that you understand "the left", much left "the looney left". You do NOT understand "swing voters" either...

But it appears that Palin's aggressive oratory - which had GOP conventioneers on their feet - did not did not fundamentally change the character of the race among women voters who watched the speech live on television, the pollsters say. "We saw no electoral movement," pollster Anna Greenberg says.

The speech helped reinforce support for John McCain among those who were leaning toward voting for the Republican, but did not appear to influence those who described themselves as undecided or leaning toward Democratic nominee Barack Obama. The swing state focus groups included a mix of undecided voters, and weak supporters of either Obama or McCain.

Palin's favorability among the 22 women who viewed the speech in the battleground state jumped 10 points to 39 percent, says Greenberg. But there also emerged, she says, "very significant questions" about Palin's experience, especially on economic issues, and particularly among unmarried women.

Palin's Speech Didn't Move Undecided or Democratic Women Voters - Yahoo! News

Okay. Let's get to the truth of the matter.
She's alive, she can speak, and she's willing to put an "(R)" next to the name. That's why YOU support her.
If Lassie could orate and pledge Republican, you would give McCain support for having her up on the stage with him.

But as for "liberals" and "swing voters", you haven't any real clue as to WHY they are "liberals" or "swing voters".
Dabateman just gave three great points regarding liberals, but I'm sure you aren't interested in listening and are already thinking of just repeating yourself and insisting that other people think in a way they explicitly tell you they don't...


No.
She doesn't.

The funny thing about this is that you, bhkad, and cnredd have been shown what YOUR OWN PEOPLE are saying about her (when the mics are thought to be off...).
What YOUR OWN PEOPLE have said about people like her in the past.
And you don't seem to get that the "liberals" and "swing voters" have a memory on these things.
We SEE your "flip-flopping".

Honestly? When I heard McCain nominated her, my sarcastic side wondered if McCain were playing a joke on the Republican party...
Intent on exposing the hypocrisy by the inevitably expected "Oh my GAWD this stuff that we criticized just a few years ago tastes AMAZING with the *Republican* label on it" switcheroo...

Sorry, but no.
She doesn't have us "scared"...

__________________
"No man is happy without a delusion of some kind. Delusions are as necessary to our happiness as realities."
...Christian Nestell Bovee

You make an excellent point...which actually shows a ton of hypocrisy...

Throughout the primaries, the public heard time and time again that millions were voting for Hillary because she empowers women...

She was a symbol of glass ceilings cracking...she was an example to the female youth...She was showing girls what one can do if they put their mind to it...she was the one who countered the 'ol boys' network...

And by your answer, what your saying is that all of these are a bunch of lies and the REAL reason they voted for her was simply because she was a Liberal who held Liberal positions...

Which is pretty much what the Right has been saying since Palin was first nominated...

"All of the things the Left has been touting about women (ceilings, empowerment, role model, etc.) gets thrown out of the window the second you change the "D" to an "R""...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

True. And she's going to be sitting in the Whitehouse whereas Hillary couldn't manage that task.

No, she's against abortion as her own personal choice. She's never enacted or even advocated any legislation that would restrict the rights of other women. Period.

That's totally false. While governor of Alaska, she refused to enact or support legislation that would have restricted state employees from sharing benefits with their partners because she said it was unconstitutional. She doesn't believe in gay marriage but she has never made any attempt to limit the rights of gays. Period.

Wrong on that count again. She may be for it but she has held to her campaign promises not to push that agenda in schools. Why do you have to misrepresent the woman on all counts?

Well I definitely can smell the fear when she's mentioned. All the blatant lies betray the terror.

Funny you should say that. How comes it that you guys can't respect her choice to lead her life in a prolife way while not interfering in your life and choices? Seems to me liberals only respect choices that fall in lockstep with their agenda.

I'll agree with this. Although it doesn't seem like a "progression" when you can't even respect a woman who has personal religious beliefs but does not enforce them through her office. Damn, there goes that whole "choice" thing again.

So where has she hindered this at all? Come on, let your facts support this conviction you have against the woman.

And thank God for small favors...

You're right. She is light years above as evidenced by the fact that she didn't ride someone else's coat tails to power, hasn't indulged victim politics, and is actually a stand up woman with conviction, compassion, and dedication to a tight moral code. Definitely, she is no Hillary Clinton.

Plus she's something else that Hillary and Ferraro aren't: She's friggin HOTTT.

I'm sorry, but then she is a hypocrite at best. So, I am supposed to hear what she says, and then look at her record to know that she is not going to push her views on me, . If she comes right out and says it, she alienates that conservative block that she is pandering to. When she does not, she alienates moderate liberals that may actually feel like she does, but are not hearing that she has no intention of pushing her pals' views on us. Sorry, you can't have it both ways,

I have to ask... what does that have to do with anything? Next thing you know, I'll be accused of hating her because I'm jealous she's prettier than me, . That of course was a hypothetical, .

Oh for the love of ...

Did you think "she's got ovaries" was the ONLY reason why people liked Hillary?

She EMPOWERS women, by specific actions.
Like being pro-choice.

And when somebody turns around and tries to stick a pro-life female candidate up there, you think that somehow "she's got ovaries" should be the swaying factor?
And that if it isn't, then it's "hypocrisy"???




Another poster who just doesn't get it...
Being female was NOT the only issue.
There would be NO WAY that you could just "change the "D" to an "R"" with Palin.
She IS Republican. Conservative.

It's like calling a dog a cat and demanding that somebody else overlook their allergic reaction to "Sparky" because they claim to love female cats...

Now that she's John McCain's vice presidential candidate, Palin's abortion policy (among others) is undergoing renewed scrutiny. The Alaska Republican has long declared herself pro-life. And her credentials on the topic make her the belle of the ball among religious conservatives. But Democrats and abortion rights advocates say her stance, specifically her unwillingness to grant her own child a choice to end a pregnancy induced by rape, is drastically at odds with public opinion -- even among many Republicans.

"This is absolutely outside the mainstream. Even in South Dakota they rejected [outlawing abortion in cases of rape] in '06 because it has gone too far and everyone can identify that in a case of rape or incest a woman should have the chance to make the decision with their family or doctor," said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro Choice America. "Women voters are going to reject both her and John McCain, and I think we see it specifically because we reach out to Republicans and independent pro-choice women. They live in the suburbs and exurbs. They are very much part of the mainstream America. And woman in general will reject that ticket."

Palin makes no secret of her abortion views. A member of the group Feminists for Life, she told the Alaska Right to Life Board in 2002 that she "adamantly supported our cause since I first understood, as a child, the atrocity of abortion." In an Eagle Forum Alaska questionnaire filled out during the 2006 gubernatorial race, Palin again stated that she is against abortion unless a doctor determined that a mother's life would end due to the pregnancy.

Palin On Abortion: I'd Oppose Even If My Own Daughter Was Raped

Now I will acknowledge that talking about HER DAUGHTER invokes a completely unspecified field.
Was she talking as a MOTHER (governing her underage daughter), or a POLITICIAN (governing a city/state)?
There is reason for concern, and I expect that she will hopefully straighten things out.
However, I can't help but think that this "uncertainty" over people NOT KNOWING what she stands for is one reason she is a bad choice. I can only hope that McCain knows, although he's only met her once (in person) before selecting her...

By the way, as has been pointed out, Palin backed abstinence-only education during her 2006 gubernatorial race. In an Eagle Forum Alaska questionnaire, Palin gave this response to the following question:
Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?

Palin: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.

Palin backed abstinence-only education - First Read - msnbc.com


I think you're missing a bigger picture.
She HAS these positions.
She HAS NOT HAD TIME to "enforce them through her office".
The question of WHAT her intentions are, and what lines she does and does not draw, are VERY much up for question.

Quite frankly, she doesn't have a recorded history to really call upon to judge "by her actions" what her intentions are...


Calling Dr Kinsey Scale...
( J/K )

But seriously, she is hot.

Wait...what? How does "these are my personally held views but you have a right to yours" even come close to being hypocritical? Oh the smell of desperation is thick on the liberal front these days.

No, you are supposed to hear what she says, see what she does, and respect her personal choices like you would ANYONE else. But since she's got that damning little "R" beside her name, I guess she just doesn't deserve that decency, huh?

Please show me where she's pandered. I would like specific citations from speeches and or penned policies that she has enacted.

So then, you confess that her personal choices are not something you respect. Totally understood.

Why do you hate all the pretty girls?