Palin steps down as Governor of Alaska

[Michelle]

Palin is a great danger to the libertarian movement. She is a pig-ignorant creationist nitwit, who claims that the dinosaurs and humans walked the Earth at the same time, who tried to ban "bad" books from the library in Wasilla and when the chief librarian refused, tried to fire her, and who thinks that research of fruitflies is a ridiculous waste of time and money. The problem isn't only that she is so ignorant, but that she even doesn't know how ignorant she is and that she flaunts her ignorance. Let's hope that she'll disappear into oblivion, where she belongs. With such friends you don't need enemies.

Dragonfly,

I would say your comments are quite harsh but everything you say is true. Actually I think that pigs and hogs are among the most intelligent of vertebrates but I get your point. Bush was also among the more ignorant of our species. What comes to mind is an amendment to the Constitution adding a few criteria perhaps in the realm of science and economics, not to mention the meaning of the oath of office.

www.campaignforliberty.com 5July 3PM 165,638

gulch

I agree, Ron Paul is unfit for the presidency.

There's something really off about him. I can't put my finger on it, though.

[galtgulch]

Palin is a great danger to the libertarian movement. She is a pig-ignorant creationist nitwit, who claims that the dinosaurs and humans walked the Earth at the same time, who tried to ban "bad" books from the library in Wasilla and when the chief librarian refused, tried to fire her, and who thinks that research of fruitflies is a ridiculous waste of time and money. The problem isn't only that she is so ignorant, but that she even doesn't know how ignorant she is and that she flaunts her ignorance. Let's hope that she'll disappear into oblivion, where she belongs. With such friends you don't need enemies.

Dragonfly,

I would say your comments are quite harsh but everything you say is true. Actually I think that pigs and hogs are among the most intelligent of vertebrates but I get your point. Bush was also among the more ignorant of our species. What comes to mind is an amendment to the Constitution adding a few criteria perhaps in the realm of science and economics, not to mention the meaning of the oath of office.

www.campaignforliberty.com 5July 3PM 165,638

gulch

I agree, Ron Paul is unfit for the presidency.

There's something really off about him. I can't put my finger on it, though.

Michelle,

I thought this thread was about Sarah Palin not Ron Paul. If only the other Congressmen shared his dedication to adherence to the Constitutional limits enumerated in Article 1 Section 8. It is instructive to observe or to encounter people, usually democrats who are statists, whose interpretation of the "necessary and proper" clause at the end of Art 1 Sec 8 is that the government may simply ignore those limits to which the clause refers, instead that the govt may pass any laws it wishes to achieve whatever goals it wants.

It is maddening to try to argue with such characters who smile and laugh knowing that the establishment sees it their way not the way the Founders intended.

I know that there are 10000 youtube videos of Ron Paul's speeches and interviews. I haven't listened to them all by any means. It is painful for me to hear him speak at Liberty U and reveal that he was saved at 16 when he accepted Jesus Christ as his personal savior. Equally painful that he thinks the Theory of Evolution is just a theory implying that he accepts that a supernatural deity created all creatures in the Garden of Eden. Egregious to me is his position that a fertilized ovum is a person.

Still his judgment about the Federal Reserve is on target as is his advocacy of the Austrian school of economics. To me he would be infinitely preferable as president than the current crop of pretenders to that throne including our present usurper.

From your comments I assume that you haven't listened to many of Ron Paul's speeches or interviews. He was interviewed during the campaign by John Stossel who let him finish answering and threw many soft ball questions to give him a chance to explain himself.

http://www.whoisronpaul.name

Regarding his foreign policy he is not an interventionist but did propose that the Congress vote to declare war before going into Iraq rather than to delegate the authority (which is not an enumerated power) to the president. He is all about adhering to the Constitution.

www.campaignforliberty.com 5Jul 9 PM 165,733

gulch

Edited July 6, 2009 by galtgulch

[kiaer.ts]

Palin is a great danger to the libertarian movement. She is a pig-ignorant creationist nitwit, who claims that the dinosaurs and humans walked the Earth at the same time, who tried to ban "bad" books from the library in Wasilla and when the chief librarian refused, tried to fire her, and who thinks that research of fruitflies is a ridiculous waste of time and money. The problem isn't only that she is so ignorant, but that she even doesn't know how ignorant she is and that she flaunts her ignorance. Let's hope that she'll disappear into oblivion, where she belongs. With such friends you don't need enemies.

As to Miss Palin, I find it hard to take her talk of freedom seriously when she wants America to be subjugated to Christian moral standards. One does not call Pinochet a lover of freedom because he allowed Capitalism to flourish in Chile while he was busy torturing political enemies, and one should not call Miss Palin a lover of freedom, or a proponent of freedom, because she likes capitalism.

What, exactly are you talking about, Michelle? Can we have some specifics, rather than a vague description? To celebrate Obama (which of course I am sure was in jest) because one would not have Palin in office is absurd. And the library story was a smear, as Michael already stated above. Indeed, it is the constant smears and attacks which should result in libel charges (you can thank liberals for destroying libel and the possibility of maintaing a good name) which disgust her and the remainder of the decent people in this country who refuse to run for office. I bet you can't find one single substantial and specific charge against her worse than the fact that she is a pro-life Christian. Oh, and I am no real fan of hers, but I'd take her over any single democrat and most of the republicans I know.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

... but I still have one big question: Why are Objectivist oriented people so willing to 'fudge' (Michael's word) on the $64,000 question, namely do the conservatives acknowledge rational self-interest as the guiding light of morality or do they believe in selflessness?

David,

This is a problem. That's why I said in other contexts I would not support Palin. But look around. Rational self-interest is not Palin's explicit moral philosophy, but it is her political philosophy.

(Her personal morality does not exclude rational self-interest, but I do acknowledge that it is a mixed bag.)

Palin's acts have proven her political commitment to basically allowing folks decide things for themselves many times in her exercise of power, even when she has disagreed with what they do. She is not afraid to undo institutional damage to freedom and take apart old-boy structures, even if it means less privilege for her. And she is highly electable. I don't see the sum of these benefits in any single person on the national scene right now.

Who is around who is viable and has shown that they can and want to clean up President Obama's mess (and President Bush's for that matter)? He's going to leave behind a slew of new government agencies that will need to be dismantled. I think she will do a good job at it.

Warts and all, Sarah Palin is a stark contrast to career politicians of the "business as usual" stripe and, God help us, the "rational" people in the Obama administration.

Michael

[Selene]

Palin is a great danger to the libertarian movement. She is a pig-ignorant creationist nitwit, who claims that the dinosaurs and humans walked the Earth at the same time, who tried to ban "bad" books from the library in Wasilla and when the chief librarian refused, tried to fire her, and who thinks that research of fruitflies is a ridiculous waste of time and money. The problem isn't only that she is so ignorant, but that she even doesn't know how ignorant she is and that she flaunts her ignorance. Let's hope that she'll disappear into oblivion, where she belongs. With such friends you don't need enemies.

Dragonfly:

Would you have voted for Barry Goldwater?

If you would be kind enough to answer that question then I will dismantle your above statement allegation by allegation.

If you say yes as to voting for Goldwater, you would have been voting for someone who:

1) was going to destroy social security;

2) destroy the farmers of America by ending their tax subsidies;

3) subjugate Negros and keep them oppressed; and

4) destroy the planet by starting a nuclear war and I know this one is true because I saw it on TV

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtYpnGZr6TA

Adam

[Michelle]

Palin is a great danger to the libertarian movement. She is a pig-ignorant creationist nitwit, who claims that the dinosaurs and humans walked the Earth at the same time, who tried to ban "bad" books from the library in Wasilla and when the chief librarian refused, tried to fire her, and who thinks that research of fruitflies is a ridiculous waste of time and money. The problem isn't only that she is so ignorant, but that she even doesn't know how ignorant she is and that she flaunts her ignorance. Let's hope that she'll disappear into oblivion, where she belongs. With such friends you don't need enemies.

As to Miss Palin, I find it hard to take her talk of freedom seriously when she wants America to be subjugated to Christian moral standards. One does not call Pinochet a lover of freedom because he allowed Capitalism to flourish in Chile while he was busy torturing political enemies, and one should not call Miss Palin a lover of freedom, or a proponent of freedom, because she likes capitalism.

What, exactly are you talking about, Michelle? Can we have some specifics, rather than a vague description? To celebrate Obama (which of course I am sure was in jest) because one would not have Palin in office is absurd. And the library story was a smear, as Michael already stated above. Indeed, it is the constant smears and attacks which should result in libel charges (you can thank liberals for destroying libel and the possibility of maintaing a good name) which disgust her and the remainder of the decent people in this country who refuse to run for office. I bet you can't find one single substantial and specific charge against her worse than the fact that she is a pro-life Christian. Oh, and I am no real fan of hers, but I'd take her over any single democrat and most of the republicans I know.

Is there even one good reason why I should support her?

And you know damn well I'm not "celebrating Obama."

Edited July 6, 2009 by Michelle R

[Barbara Branden]

Michael:

"Palin's very existence to them is like a slap in the face for whining."

As well as commitment, pride and competency.

Her radically simple approach to issues as well as her ability to accomplish her goals while being a family

member, basically infuriates the "keepers of the ideal woman's image" because it includes the professional

excellence.

Her honestly and simplicity in communicating principles and solutions to problems is effective.

Adam

Adam,

If she does indeed step down then her record will show that she did not even serve one full term as governor of a state thus she would not have proven that she can govern.

That would be used against her if she throws her hat in the ring to try to get the Republican nomination for president.

It is not clear from her last fling that she has a deep enough grasp of economic facts and principles to be able to argue or discuss the fallacies in Obama's policies the consequences of which should be manifest in earnest during the next presidential campaign.

The pundits are suggesting even now that the recovery is starting to take place. However unemployment is growing, more foreclosures are imminent with resultant reduction in demand for all manner of goods and services which will cause more job losses, lowered demand for production, more layoffs and undoubtedly that will lead to more urgent government stimulation with Obama holding his foot down on the accelerator of the printing presses to make more paper currency.

I was born at the end of the last Great Depression which my parents lived through as young adults with two babies. Fortunately it was a deflationary depression and prices were low. The one already "baked in" for us will be an inflationary depression with rising prices and decreasing purchasing power of the dollar even for those who are still employed. Should be quite an experience to which I am not looking forward.

Please tell me I am incorrect in my outlook.

www.campaignforliberty.com 5 July Noon 165,606

gulch

Gulch, neither lack of experience nor total ignorance of economics kept Obama from being elected president.

Barbara

[Selene]

Michelle:

An accurate statement of her position on stem cell research is that is should not be funded by federal tax dollars.

I would extend that to about 80%, at least, if not 100% as I see nothing in the Constitution that specifically delegates that power to the federal government.

It would also include fruit flies, which she sarcastically made fun of spending your tax dollars on.

Adam

[Michelle]

Michelle:

An accurate statement of her position on stem cell research is that is should not be funded by federal tax dollars.

I would extend that to about 80%, at least, if not 100% as I see nothing in the Constitution that specifically delegates that power to the federal government.

It would also include fruit flies, which she sarcastically made fun of spending your tax dollars on.

Adam

I don't mean that she is actively scrambling to make it illegal, which is what my statement seemed to imply.

In fact, I could not find a satisfactory way to reply to Ted's comment. So, I simply changed it. I figure this will stimulate more of a discussion, anyhow.

[Selene]

Yeee Haaa~~!! You have to see this guy's pic.

http://www.gazetteonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll...994/0/FRONTPAGE

Updated July 04. 2009 10:11AM

Marion man already driving around with Sarah Palin 2012 poster

By James Q. Lynch

The Gazette

james.lynch@gazettecommunications.com

Photo

(James Q. Lynch/The Gazette)

Harlan Muth of Marion has been displaying a Palin 2012 poster on his van since last fall. Muth hopes the Alaska governor gets into the race for the Republican nomination for president.

Harlan Muth isn’t organizing Sarah Palin’s presidential campaign, but pledges as soon as someone does, “I’ll be with ’em.

In the meantime, the Marion maintenance contractor is turning heads with his “Sarah Palin 2012” poster prominently displayed on his van.

“It’s getting a fantastic response,” Muth, 63, said. “So many people give me the thumbs up or honk when they see it. Some people get out of their cars and ask me where they can get a poster.”

Muth, who spent 23 years in the Air Force before settling down in Marion, couldn’t find a Palin 2012 sign, so he had a local shop make one for him.

He put it on his van between the November 2008 election and Barack Obama’s inauguration. He plans to display it indefinitely.

“A lot of people have had their fill of Obama-ism,” he said, adding that after seeing his sign some people tell him they are beginning to regret their vote for the president. “They’ll say, ‘Isn’t it a shame what he’s doing?’”

Palin, who has decided to resign as governor of Alaska on July 26, is generating speculation she will use the attention she received as John McCain’s running mate last year as a springboard to her own presidential campaign. A number of draft Palin web sites have sprouted. Earlier this year Iowans received phone calls asking if they had a favorable opinion of Palin and whether they agreed with her on several issues. Palin’s SarahPAC said it was not responsible for the calls.

Video

Harlan Muth on Sarah Palin from GazetteOnline.com on Vimeo.

There’s no particular issue that attracts Muth to Palin. He wants to see her run because “she has her head screwed on straight.”

“Some of the others ought to take lessons from her,” he said, adding that as president, “she’d do it right.”

Not surprisingly, Muth’s sentiment isn’t shared by everyone. Some people driving by his house honk and scream at him when they see the sign.

“They’re too yellow to confront me, I guess,” he said.

Muth, who does home and commercial maintenance, says no one has turned him away when they’ve seen the poster on his van.

[kiaer.ts]

Palin is a great danger to the libertarian movement. She is a pig-ignorant creationist nitwit, who claims that the dinosaurs and humans walked the Earth at the same time, who tried to ban "bad" books from the library in Wasilla and when the chief librarian refused, tried to fire her, and who thinks that research of fruitflies is a ridiculous waste of time and money. The problem isn't only that she is so ignorant, but that she even doesn't know how ignorant she is and that she flaunts her ignorance. Let's hope that she'll disappear into oblivion, where she belongs. With such friends you don't need enemies.

As to Miss Palin, I find it hard to take her talk of freedom seriously when she wants America to be subjugated to Christian moral standards. One does not call Pinochet a lover of freedom because he allowed Capitalism to flourish in Chile while he was busy torturing political enemies, and one should not call Miss Palin a lover of freedom, or a proponent of freedom, because she likes capitalism.

What, exactly are you talking about, Michelle? Can we have some specifics, rather than a vague description? To celebrate Obama (which of course I am sure was in jest) because one would not have Palin in office is absurd. And the library story was a smear, as Michael already stated above. Indeed, it is the constant smears and attacks which should result in libel charges (you can thank liberals for destroying libel and the possibility of maintaing a good name) which disgust her and the remainder of the decent people in this country who refuse to run for office. I bet you can't find one single substantial and specific charge against her worse than the fact that she is a pro-life Christian. Oh, and I am no real fan of hers, but I'd take her over any single democrat and most of the republicans I know.

Is there even one good reason why I should support her?

And you know damn well I'm not "celebrating Obama."

In a perfect world, no. This is a far from perfect world, and she shines in comparison. I can't think of a more electable person with better character, although I wish I could. I do regret I was only 16 when Reagan ran for reelection.

[Dragonfly]

If you say yes as to voting for Goldwater, you would have been voting for someone who:

1) was going to destroy social security;

2) destroy the farmers of America by ending their tax subsidies;

3) subjugate Negros and keep them oppressed; and

4) destroy the planet by starting a nuclear war and I know this one is true because I saw it on TV

I'm not interested in hypothetical situations, like what would have happened if that had happened. I just have to watch and to listen to a few of Palin's videos to know that she's a blithering idiot, I don't need anyone else's opinion to arrive at that conclusion.

[Selene]

Dragonfly:

I appreciate your recasting my factual question into some "type" of hypothetical and then stating that you do not answer hypotheticals.

When you state that you just had to listen to a "few" of her videos, would that number be more than five (5) videos?

More than ten (10)?

Adam

Edited July 6, 2009 by Selene

[Dragonfly]

When you state that you just had to listen to a "few" of her videos, would that number be more than five (5) videos?

More than ten (10)?

I no longer remember the exact number, it won't be more than 10. Is that important? One video can be enough.

[Selene]

Your first statement:

"Palin is a great danger to the libertarian movement."

We disagree on that statement. The Libertarian Party is the great danger to the libertarian movement in the United States.

I speak from experience being one of the folks who got the party a permanent ballot line in NY State.

Palin appeals to conservatives, most of the folks who are well centered in religious communities. Her reach in the burgeoning home school movement which is attracting many more a-religious, libertarian, objectivist folk [e.g., Sherry (Texas) from this forum] is a major plus.

If that video of the small businessman is reflective of her political reach, it is another critical segment of the republican/libertarian base that we need to grow.

If the libertarian movement is going to get serious about electing folks we need to do a lot better than the Barr and the "bet master from Vegas". Moreover, even when we are saddled with that type of ticket, did I somehow miss the campaign that they did not run?

Palin is a plus for the libertarian movement?

Why are you so "afeared" of her?

Thought I would throw in some down home American corn pone language to edify you about how peculiar American politics is.

Adam

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I'm not interested in hypothetical situations, like what would have happened if that had happened. I just have to watch and to listen to a few of Palin's videos to know that she's a blithering idiot, I don't need anyone else's opinion to arrive at that conclusion.

Dragonfly,

I agree about the "would have happened" part. So in terms of "what did happen," did you look at her record in office?

Look at the facts. They might surprise you.

Michael

[Jonathan]

I haven't followed Palin's career very closely, and from having seen only a few video clips of her and heard only a couple of speeches, which were lacking enough in content as to not give me a sense of whether or not she is consistently quided by coherent principles, I don't think I'd be able to guess where she might come down on any given issue. With the little that I know of her, I could see her boasting about raising taxes to pay for one pet project or another just as easily as I could see her boasting about cutting taxes and spending in other contexts.

Does anyone know what her actual principles are, how consistently she applies them, and how strongly she would fight for something based on principle rather than on political expediency? For example, can anyone say with certainty where she would stand on the idea of completely privatizing all aspects of the oil industry in Alaska? Or, can anyone say if she might cut government funding for research into, say, spina bifida on the grounds that such research isn't the proper function of government, yet at the same time increase funding into research on Down syndrome because parents of special kids like Trig need help from heroic government representatives like her?

J

[galtgulch]

I haven't followed Palin's career very closely, and from having seen only a few video clips of her and heard only a couple of speeches, which were lacking enough in content as to not give me a sense of whether or not she is consistently quided by coherent principles, I don't think I'd be able to guess where she might come down on any given issue. With the little that I know of her, I could see her boasting about raising taxes to pay for one pet project or another just as easily as I could see her boasting about cutting taxes and spending in other contexts.

Does anyone know what her actual principles are, how consistently she applies them, and how strongly she would fight for something based on principle rather than on political expediency? For example, can anyone say with certainty where she would stand on the idea of completely privatizing all aspects of the oil industry in Alaska? Or, can anyone say if she might cut government funding for research into, say, spina bifida on the grounds that such research isn't the proper function of government, yet at the same time increase funding into research on Down syndrome because parents of special kids like Trig need help from heroic government representatives like her?

J

Jonathan,

Regarding Palin's adherence to principle, we know that she is so religious that when she discovered that she was pregnant with a potential human being with Down's Syndrome, she considered it to be a gift from God. Instead of doing what the vast majority of pregnant women do under those circumstances, which is to abort and try again, she chose as if she had no choice.

It was one thing before amniocentisis when one found out at the moment of birth but... I am most troubled by her decision based on her religious convictions which did not require her to give the matter any thought.

As an atheist myself from the first moment I gave the issue any thought at about the age of six, at the prospect of a Palin presidency, my reaction is to say, "Heaven help us!"

Now someone is bound to think that my choice, Ron Paul in the last election, is no better given his religious positions and policies. At least his candidacy sparked an intellectual movement among many but mostly the young who will read the books by Rand and Mises and are aware that the Emperor Obama is naked.

www.campaignforliberty.com 6 July 5PM 165,980, 10PM 166,120

gulch

Edited July 7, 2009 by galtgulch

[Selene]

"...we know that she is so religious..." <<<<<<<<<<This is a lie. I do not know that. Try getting off your fucking horse Doc,

And no more than we would dismiss your statements because you are so Ron Paul/C4Libertyist.

Adam

[Selene]

Folks:

You realize that she will only be 52 years old in 2016.

2012 is a year to steer clear of. Moreover, she is going to make a ton of money, provide her family with a great life in the most free state in the Union and put herself in a position to influence the selection and direction of the party, if she chooses to stay with the party.

Finally, she could never transfer her brilliant success as a mayor, mother and governor of Alaska to the lower 48.

Therefore, going on strike from running for office appears to be pretty clever positionally.

Adam

[Jonathan]

Now someone is bound to think that my choice, Ron Paul in the last election, is no better given his religious positions and policies. At least his candidacy sparked an intellectual movement among many but mostly the young who will read the books by Rand and Mises and are aware that the Emperor Obama is naked.

Well, from what I've seen, Ron Paul is eminently more qualified to hold high office than Palin. In fact, I can't think of many Republican politicians, other than perhaps John McCain, Norm Coleman and a few similar moderate-to-left asswipes, whom I wouldn't prefer over Palin. Not that I dislike her. I've heard her say some things with which I agree, and she said them with charm and enthusiasm. But if people want to elect a president who has a pretty face, is good on camera, and who sometimes says the right things while being charming enough to make viewers forget about the times that she said or did the wrong things, I'd rather have Michelle Bachmann, who, although she appears to share some of Palin's loopy views on certain subjects, seems to have about 50 to 75 IQ points over her.

Realistically, I don't see anyone among Republicans who would have a shot at taking down Obama, other than perhaps an oldschool heavyweight with massive name recognition, like Newt Gingrich, and only if he could stay on-message and avoid stupid scandals. Ron Paul is interesting, but he doesn't seem to know how to market himself at the next level.

J

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Does anyone know what her actual principles are, how consistently she applies them, and how strongly she would fight for something based on principle rather than on political expediency?

Jonathan,

I intend to do a study so I can present actual facts, but the post below that I made last year is the kind of thing I look for.

btw - I do not expect Sarah Palin to be 100% consistent on all issues. After all, she is a politician. But on the make-or-break issues, what I have seen so far has impressed me.

Michael

From the very beginning, when still a member of City Council, she opposed a bill that would restrict bar commerce even though she was a member of a church that advocated abstinence. In my mind, this sums up the theme of her approach to politics.

That's good to hear. What's your source for that?

Chris,

The original thing came from the Wikipedia article on her, but it was referenced. Below is the quote (from The Boston Globe, see the original here):

She ran for office for the first time in 1992 at age 28, when she won a seat on the Wasilla City Council, defeating a local telephone company worker, 530 to 310 votes, on a promise to bring "my progressive, competitive attitude" to government, according to a regional newspaper, the Frontiersman.

In the council, she spoke out against a push by the city police to shut Wasilla's bars at 2 a.m. instead of 4 a.m., to prevent drunken driving by patrons who came after Anchorage's bars closed at 2 a.m.

John Hartrick, a former councilor who supported the measure, said she he was surprised by Palin's opposition because she was then a member of the Wasilla Assembly of God, an evangelical church that preached abstinence from alcohol. "The Assembly of God was very much opposed to drinking, but yet Ms. Palin became the spokesman for the bar owners," Hartrick said. "I felt this was quite wrong because we weren't trying to shut the bars down; we would simply say if they could possibly go ahead and close two hours earlier it would be helpful and would prevent accidents."

That sounds like principled defense of freedom to me.

Michael

[Selene]

Jonathan:

Precisely.

It is probable/possible that she is taking a different path. Frankly, I think there is a better than even chance that O'Biwan gets re-elected in 2012.

This O'Biwan eight years may be seriously irreversible.

Adam

[kiaer.ts]

Regarding Palin's adherence to principle, we know that she is so religious that when she discovered that she was pregnant with a potential human being with Down's Syndrome, she considered it to be a gift from God. Instead of doing what the vast majority of pregnant women do under those circumstances, which is to abort and try again, she chose as if she had no choice.

The freedom to chose includes the freedom not to abort. Do you know what Palin went though? Or does your eugenicism preclude you from considering that perhaps she knew Down's Syndrome was a possibility before she conceived, and she went ahead any way?

You are a disgusting creep, and I would rather spend time with a happy Down's Syndrome child than you, you fixated moral cripple.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Ted,

Please...

Gulch is not a creep. He is totally wrong about the insinuation that Palin is such a slave to her religion that she is a moral automaton without choice, and I admit he is fixated, but there are far bigger issues than his errors for words like "moral creep."

I, too, understand Palin's choice and I know for a fact it was a rational and informed choice along with the religious element. In fact, it was a painful choice as she tells it.

You will not convince anyone to consider your views on a loaded issue like abortion by calling them names, nor will you convince any readers. And I believe these issues (abortion and mentally handicapped human beings) are very important. I have read some of your arguments on abortion at other places. I consider them to be quite good thinking, regardless of whether one agrees with them or not. (I personally tend to agree with you.) I believe they should be on the table. Name-calling keeps them off for many readers who might consider them.

Michael