"Katie Couric: Why, in your view, is Roe v. Wade a bad decision?

Sarah Palin: I think it should be a states' issue not a federal government-mandated, mandating yes or no on such an important issue. I'm, in that sense, a federalist, where I believe that states should have more say in the laws of their lands and individual areas. Now, foundationally, also, though, it's no secret that I'm pro-life that I believe in a culture of life is very important for this country. Personally, that's what I would like to see, um, further embraced by America.

Couric: Do you think there's an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution?

Palin: I do. Yeah, I do.

Couric: The cornerstone of Roe v. Wade.

Palin: I do. And I believe that individual states can best handle what the people within the different constituencies in the 50 states would like to see their will ushered in an issue like that."

I thought Federalism meant a strong central government and not states deciding each issue as they saw fit??

Originally Posted by samhass

It's not difficult to see that if Palin does poorly in the debates, it won't be her fault. Bless her heart. People are already excusing her because of the moderator.

I dont kinow where you get this from at all !! Except for maybe one person on here it has not been a big deal on this board, and as for a few bloggers out there...same type as blast away at Gov Palin on the left side each day...that is what they do.

How can you say that folks are making excuses for her ?

And the "bless her heart" comment, to me anyway, is sort of condescending...bet you wouldnt say that about a man !!!

John McCain, bless his heart, how could he have chosen Palin over all the other qualified candidates?????

It is my understanding that both campaigns had to approve the moderator and the book was first reviewed in June or July so I'm sure they knew about it.

Originally Posted by llaran

It is my understanding that both campaigns had to approve the moderator and the book was first reviewed in June or July so I'm sure they knew about it.

Not my understanding but it does not make any difference. I am sure she will do well..she is a professional.

Sam...playing off your ball...nor would it be difficult to see that if she blows the doors off at the debate...it will be because she was so well prepped and not because, "bless her heart" she's tough, can handle the media bias and connects with a broad section of middle America. Further, if she hits the ball out of the park, partisans will say Ifill laid down because she was intimidated by questions on her objectivity. Its a standoff either way.

Cabo, based on what I've seen so far, she doesn't stand a chance of doing well. Why didn't McCain pick Romney, Rice, Powell, or Hutchinson to name a few? My party threw it away with this election. I think the repubs want the democrats to win so they inherit the quagmire we find ourselves in right now.

Originally Posted by samhass

Cabo, based on what I've seen so far, she doesn't stand a chance of doing well. Why didn't McCain pick Romney, Rice, Powell, or Hutchinson to name a few? My party threw it away with this election. I think the repubs want the democrats to win so they inherit the quagmire we find ourselves in right now.

Where is the fight?!!! There is no fight from the republicans! Except here on TOTV....

Isn't Bless her/his heart something southernors say when they can't find anything nice to say?? Just what I have been told....

[QUOTE=Cassie325;163798]

Where is the fight?!!! There is no fight from the republicans! Except here on TOTV....





Some folks think that TOTV is the real world

Originally Posted by Bucco

Not my understanding but it does not make any difference. I am sure she will do well..she is a professional.

What is your understanding? I'm curious Bucco. You seem to think this is some kind of Democrat Conspiracy. So exactly, how do you think the moderators are chosen?

Originally Posted by chelsea24

What is your understanding? I'm curious Bucco. You seem to think this is some kind of Democrat Conspiracy. So exactly, how do you think the moderators are chosen?

PLEASE VERY CLEARLY explain what did I say that EVEN CAME CLOSE to what words you have put into my mouth.

The below as it is my last post in this thread must have been the one that convinced you.....

"Not my understanding but it does not make any difference. I am sure she will do well..she is a professional. "

Now please share what brought you to your conclusion ????

OR...was it this post by me...

"I dont care...I think she can be objective and hope there is nothing to make it doubtful...just seems like pretty poor spin on the debate ! "

Originally Posted by llaran

It is my understanding that both campaigns had to approve the moderator and the book was first reviewed in June or July so I'm sure they knew about it.

This is the post you were responding to Bucco. Read one post ahead of yours.
Were you not responding to this post?

That's what I meant. You said "not my understanding." I wanted to know exactly what your understanding is on how the moderators were chosen?

Originally Posted by chelsea24

This is the post you were responding to Bucco. Read one post ahead of yours.
Were you not responding to this post?

That's what I meant. You said "not my understanding." I wanted to know exactly what your understanding is on how the moderators were chosen?

It is not my understanding that the book was reviewed in June or July and that the McCain knew about it. Washington Post, I think, said it was "discussed" in the first few days of September and then subsequently she said she had not written about Sen Obama as of yet (which I would think would prevent the review you mentioned) and each article I read said that the McCain campaign was not aware !

I am not sure why you are all over me on this...I have said, especially yesterday after doing some reading, that I had no problem with it at all.

Originally Posted by Taltarzac

"Katie Couric: Why, in your view, is Roe v. Wade a bad decision?

Sarah Palin: I think it should be a states' issue not a federal government-mandated, mandating yes or no on such an important issue. I'm, in that sense, a federalist, where I believe that states should have more say in the laws of their lands and individual areas. Now, foundationally, also, though, it's no secret that I'm pro-life that I believe in a culture of life is very important for this country. Personally, that's what I would like to see, um, further embraced by America.

Couric: Do you think there's an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution?

Palin: I do. Yeah, I do.

Couric: The cornerstone of Roe v. Wade.

Palin: I do. And I believe that individual states can best handle what the people within the different constituencies in the 50 states would like to see their will ushered in an issue like that."

I thought Federalism meant a strong central government and not states deciding each issue as they saw fit??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal..._United_States

Black has turned white and white black with the old and new definitions of Federalist according to Wikipedia.