[Vision2020] Obama to Name Sotomayor as Supreme Court Pick

[lfalen]

On rape kits see: l:fenews.com/nat4364.hlml.The rape kit law was in efect before she became mayor. There is no record to indicate that she either approved or disapprove of the law.
On alaska is a country and banned books you may want to check snopes.com/politics/palin/bannedbooks/.asp and snopes.com/info/inthenews.asp. I will give you credit for backing off of the banned book rumor, but you continued to criticize her for asking a question about the procedure. I see nothing wrong with following up on a request by a constituent. That is only good politics. Palin has stretched the truth on a number of occasions. I would criticize her for that, but she is not alone, Obama, Biden and McCain have none more than their share also. I think that they all should tell it like it is.
You have apparently drank the Obama kool-aid and can not find it in you to criticize him for anything.
I have not told any lies nor have I accused you of telling any. I have inadvertently posted material that was in error or was misleading  and so have you. If you are going to criticize people for something you can expect the  favor to be returned. If any apologies are owed, you owe me one, but I will fore go that.
Roger

-----Original message-----
From: "Saundra Lund" v2020 at ssl.fastmail.fm
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 13:54:06 -0700
To: "'lfalen'" lfalen at turbonet.com, "'keely emerinemix'" kjajmix1 at msn.com, "'Tom Hansen'" thansen at moscow.com, vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Obama to Name Sotomayor as Supreme Court Pick

> Roger Falen wrote:
> "I did fine one where you said Palin supported charging for rape kits. she did not."
> 
> No, Roger -- you are wrong again:  you simply cannot accurately state that Palin didn't support Wasilla's policy of charging rape victims for rape kits.  By continuing to repeat that baseless assertion, you are guilty of spreading rumors about Palin, at least according to yourself  :-)
> 
> Palin appointed a police chief who spoke out against legislation prohibiting municipalities from charging rape victims for rape kits.  That's fact.  Right or wrong, it's also fact that Palin had no qualms about getting rid of staff with whom she disagreed during that era.  And, it's also fact that as mayor, Palin approved budgets *for years* that showed those charges to victims and their insurance companies as revenue for the town.  Further, it's also fact that ***not once*** did she ever object to the policy while she was the town's top dog.
> 
> You can quibble back & forth until the cows come home about the interpretation of those facts, but what you cannot do is state as fact that she *didn't* support the policy.  Deafening silence from the town's top official for years on end while positively approving budgets including that revenue can reasonably be interpreted as tacit approval of or support for the policy.  Certainly, she is responsible for the fact that rape victims were charged -- and the town benefitted financially -- from Wasilla's practice while she was mayor.  The buck stopped with her, Roger.
> 
> It's indisputable that what I posted was no more "rumor" than your repeated assertions that Palin *didn't* support the policy.  You drank the Palin Kool-Aid (a decidedly odd move for someone who claims to be a libertarian) and want to convince yourself that Palin's tacit approval all those years means she didn't reaaallllyyyyy support the policy.  I didn't drink the Kool-Aid and believe the evidence reasonably tips the scale quite far in the other direction.
> 
> I believe Palin is responsible for what happened on her watch; I suppose I shouldn't be surprised you don't want to hold radical conservatives responsible for what happens during their tenures.
> 
> Truce?  Quit telling damn lies, Roger, about those who disagree with you and there will be no need for any truce.  You're the one who wrote:  "For someone who posted every rumor about Sarah Palin yo do not have much room to talk."  I've time & again proven your accusation to be false, yet you still refuse to apologize.
> 
> I was going to say, "Shame on you," but actually, I just find it pathetic that you are unable to apologize when you blow it like this.  It tells me a lot about your character . . . or lack thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> Saundra Lund
> Moscow, ID
> 
> The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing.
> ~ Edmund Burke
> 
> ***** Original material contained herein is Copyright 2009 through life plus 70 years, Saundra Lund.  Do not copy, forward, excerpt, or reproduce outside the Vision 2020 forum without the express written permission of the author.*****
> 
> 
> 
> 
>