• Gov. Sean Parnell made a mistake by declining to meet President Barack Obama today in Anchorage.
I understand that Parnell had a commitment that he made a month ago, but Parnell should have apologized to the Associated General Contractors and gone to meet Obama at Elmendorf. I’m sure the AGC would not have objected.
Parnell’s decision reflects poorly on Alaska. It’s an unwanted holdover from the partisanship of the 2008 vice presidential campaign. Parnell should be charting a different course.
Whenever our president stops in our state, it is a matter of common courtesy for our governor to provide an official welcome and show the hospitality that Alaskans are known for.
It doesn’t matter what party the governor belongs to or what party the president belongs to.
Parnell’s office said that had the president been here on Veterans’ Day, the governor would have met with him. But today Parnell had to speak to the AGC convention, according to his office.
No, he didn’t. Parnell should have changed his schedule. The contractors would have understood.
It WAS a bald faced lie. First reason is BECAUSE I SAID SO. I spent the late 1960s and early 1970s as first an Army ‘Clerk Typist’ and later as an ‘Admin Specialist’ so I happen to have some ‘expertise’ in that area.
State-of-the-art for a military typist was an IBM Selectric Typewriter (and later an IBM Selectric II Typewriter). They DID NOT have a ‘Variable Pitch’ typing solution but used a type ‘ball’ in either 10 pitch or 12 pitch BUT ALL LETTERS, Capital, Lower Case, Numerals, Special Characters, EVERYTHING were uniformly the same space when printed on paper. The documents that Dan Rather ‘found’ had a Variable Pitch Font that was NOT universally available for another decade after the period that the documents were supposedly produced!
Second, the widow of then Lieutenant George Bush’s Wing Commander, “though not a fan” of President Bush, said that the writing “style” of the documents did not appear like her deceased husband’s style of writing. The documents were forged and Dan Rather, when confronted by the obvious fraud involved, insisted that they had to be true because “he just knew they had to be true”.
Regarding Michael Moore, that disgusting piece of filth wouldn’t know the truth if it “bit him on the butt” so don’t quote that ragged so & so to me and expect me to give him ANY CREDABILITY!
Finally, on the issue of the Patriot Act; there are a few Republicans and even more Conservatives who agree with you on the Patriot Act. The first fault that I have with it was that ‘apparently’ it too was passed by BOTH parties even though few if any of them had bothered to read it. I haven’t been arrested yet and apparently, neither have you so what, precisely, are you complaining about? If you were complaining through the darkness, dampness, and mold to me in the next cell, I might agree with you but apparently the main persons ‘targetted’ so far have been Al Quaida and Taliban Fighters taken from the battle fields of Iraq and Afghanistan. Frankly, I don’t care if they had had to spend the next 90 years down there in the humidity of Guantanamo (and I wouldn’t care if they had thrown in a ‘weekly water boarding’ session while they were at it for the next 15 or 20 years).
Doug - The Dan Rather story was not "a bald-faced lie" as you claim. The story was NEVER DISPROVED. The corporate media is so biased that showing any negative stories about Bush's past at the time were forbidden, and Rather had the guts to do it anyway and they screwed him. The documents proved the story. They were NOT made up. Michael Moore showed the same documents in his movie. He got to them before they were covered up with black marks through the pertinent information. Bush was a WELL-KNOWN PARTY-BOY! It's ironic that everybody freaked out when Clinton "didn't inhale", but backed the Shrub wholeheartedly even though he was a known cocaine/alcohol addict. He was an alcoholic for DECADES, and the right wing still bulldozed his presidency through the Supreme Court. They needed a brain-dead person in the seat so they could pull off the invasions they'd been planning since the 90s. http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm Check out the signers of this new foreign policy Statement of Principles that was NEVER VOTED ON, and look at who got elected and appointed to where in the very next election. From the Project for a New American Century's site: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor." They sure got their "New Pearl Harbor", didn't they? How lucky for them, but incredibly unlucky for the 3,000 dead and the rest of us unsuspecting Americans who now have the pre-written, readily-passed Patriot Act over our heads now. It's not a conspiracy to strip us of six of ten Constitutional Rights and turn America into an invasive fascist empire though. It just happened to end up the way they've planned it since the 90s. :-) Read that PNAC site and try to tell me there's no correlation between what they said then and where we are now.
Where is your outrage at the President snubbing Germany's invitation to celebrate the fall of the Berlin Wall? Watch out, your pink is showing.
**************
Maybe if Dermot was GERMAN he would care. Think about it.
"This seems a bit crazy to me. What your telling me is that rude behavior is acceptable because you witnessed someone else’s rude behavior. If all of you friends jumped off of a bridge would you?..."
During the Clinton years my wife once told me, "Turn off the television! You don't have to sit there and curse at the TV..." She was right (and in a limited way, so are you). I am on my (proverbial) "Last Nerve" with the antics of this President! I dispise Barack Obama (and ALMOST everything he has done) but I can always "turn off the television" (or NOT go to any event where he will be appearing).
I don't owe him anything but to be a "law-abiding citizen" (which means I will not assault him physically or verbally). "Calling him out" when he says or does something that is "Reprehensible" BY SPEAKING THE TRUTH ABOUT WHAT HE HAS SAID OR DONE IS NOT ASSAULT!
Where is your outrage at the President snubbing Germany's invitation to celebrate the fall of the Berlin Wall? Watch out, your pink is showing.
axe2grind,
For the 8 years of the Bush Administration, I listened to "progressively" more leftwing hatred for GW. "Bush Lied and People Died" and "Bush Stole the Election(s)..." etc
*******************
This seems a bit crazy to me. What your telling me is that rude behavior is acceptable because you witnessed someone else’s rude behavior. If all of you friends jumped off of a bridge would you?
It is understandable for children to carry on this way for a time after they don't get something they desire but this is not how adults ought to behave. Instead of being caught up in the past there is more important things to worry about over the next few years. There are major challenges that face our nation that need the full attention of the great minds of both the left and the right. Save the negative campaign tactics for the next election.
Glad I'm not the Governor (because this "President" does not deserve the respect due to the Office of President) and I'd have a hard time being civil to him as well...
For the 8 years of the Bush Administration, I listened to "progressively" more leftwing hatred for GW. "Bush Lied and People Died" and "Bush Stole the Election(s)..." etc (when almost every single Democrat Politician accepted the then widely helf belief that the evidence presented by the CIA and DIA was true and valid).
Dan Rather printed a "Bald-Faced Lie" about Bush's Air National Guard Efficiency Reports and then insisted that it "had to be true because he (Rather) just felt it was true".
Then, there was "McCain would be Bush's Third Term" and then there was all of the "Palin Fired Walt Monighan Because He wouldn't fire her former Brother In Law".
"Civility was never high up on the right winger ajenda."
When arrogance, ignorance, and vulgarity are the "order of the day" for most Liberals and Progressives, what makes anyone think Conservatives are going to be prone, in any way, to be civil in return?
*********************
Explain that for me please? It seems to me reading the posts and looking at hearing the things that the conservative leadership says that most of the hate, regret, and animosity flows from the right.
"Civility was never high up on the right winger ajenda."
When arrogance, ignorance, and vulgarity are the "order of the day" for most Liberals and Progressives, what makes anyone think Conservatives are going to be prone, in any way, to be civil in return?
********************
Explain that for me please? It seems to me reading the posts and looking at hearing the things that the conservative leadership says that most of the hate, regret, and animosity is flows from the right.
When arrogance, ignorance, and vulgarity are the "order of the day" for most Liberals and Progressives, what makes anyone think Conservatives are going to be prone, in any way, to be civil in return?
Hey Parnell - you have gotten as far up the tree as you can by brown nosing the RNC. Now you have to actually convince real poeple who vote that you are competent.