Under Palin, Wasilla Charged Rape Victims for Evidence Kits

During the first four years that Sarah Palin was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, the town's police department charged women who had been raped with the cost of "rape kits," the $300 to $1,200 exams necessary to collect evidence of the sex assault. A May 20, 2000, article in The Frontiersman, Wasilla's hometown newspaper, provides the details:

Wasilla Police Chief Charlie Fannon does not agree with the new legislation, saying the law will require the city and communities to come up with more funds to cover the costs of the forensic exams.

In the past we've charged the cost of exams to the victim's insurance company when possible. I just don't want to see any more burden put on the taxpayer, Fannon said.

According to Fannon, the new law will cost the Wasilla Police Department approximately $5,000 to $14,000 a year to collect evidence for sexual assault cases.

Ultimately it is the criminal who should bear the burden of the added costs, Fannon said.

The policy was changed by an Alaskan state law that was written specifically to prevent Wasilla from continuing to charge women for the evidence necessary to prosecute their attackers, according to the bill's author Eric Croft (D-Anchorage).

Since 1976, Alaska has ranked every year in the top five for rapes, with a rate currently 2.2 times the national average, according to the state's Health and Social Services department.

In a 2006 gubernatorial debate, Palin said that she opposes abortion even in cases of rape or incest.

The candidates were pressed on their stances on abortion and were even asked what they would do if their own daughters were raped and became pregnant.

Palin said she would support abortion only if the mother's life was in danger. When it came to her daughter, she said, "I would choose life."

Update: "It was more than a couple of cases, and it was standard practice in Wasilla," Peggy Wilcox of the Alaska Public Employees Association told USA Today for a story filed Thursday morning on this policy. "If you were raped in Wasilla, this was going to happen to you."

Comments

Palin isn't even mentioned in this story and you are just slandering her with inuendo and conjecture. This is such gutter nonsense. Dumb Rogers, haven't you been bit in the ass enough with this stuff?

Or are you hoping the hateful hoard returns to drive up the hit count?

BTW, when are you going to run a story about Husseins failed commnity activism or the massive murder rate in Husseins home precinct? Or a story about Obamam's laughable awnser on abortion when he said it was up to 'women' to consult their 'pastor' and 'spouses' when the vast majority of abortion are perfomed on unwed girls.

And I am still waiting on a story about Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, or the philandering Rev. Racist Wright. Guess you are still stuck on Palin and the womb.

I've been trying not to comment on these... but this is some seriously weak tea, sir, except for the last bit which is a statement of policy.

With this standard of scrutiny, I'm not sure there are very many non-politicians that would survive, let alone any of the Presidential nominees, from any party.

Yeah, I agree the connection to Palin is a bit fuzzy, but something sticks out here: Palin fired the former Chief of Police in 1997 because "she felt [the police chief and the librarian] did not fully support the changes that she wanted to make as the newly elected mayor." The police chief quoted here is the replacement that we can assume offered "full support in [Palin's] efforts to govern the City of Wassalia" (see link below). Yes, the previous chief probably charged victims for rape kits as well, but if that were a problem, I'd have hoped Palin -- so ready to fire people who don't work with her on important issues -- would have put her foot down with the new chief before he started telling the press that it was a budgetary issue that the department couldn't afford....especially when Palin explicitly says (among other things) she fired the previous chief for not making more budget cuts.

If by a bit fuzzy, you mean total fabricated crap, then yea....A bit fuzzy.

Aw, c'mon Rex. Sarah Palin appointed Charlie Fannon as Police Chief. In a town that was at that time just over 6,000 people, it's not like something this important and controversial escaped the notice of the Mayor. Palin, who is infamous for firing and/or punishing anybody who disagrees with her in the slightest degree on policy issues, did not step in and act to stop the disgraceful policy of forcing rape victims to pay for their own examinations and rape kit tests (is there anywhere in the country where a shooting victim has to pay for the forensic tests on the bullet, or the poisoning victim has to pay for the chemical analysis of the salmon mousse?).

It is stretching credulity to say that she was not aware of the policy - especially as she presented herself to us by pointing out that a small town mayor was just like a community organizer "except that you have actual responsibilities."

Palin can't have it both ways (no matter how many times a day she tries to). Either she was responsible as mayor of a small hamlet for every policy under her mayorship (including the rape kit charges), or she was lying last week about her role as mayor (which would put her post-nomination lie-to-statement ratio pretty near 100%).

There are no reasonable alternative conclusions.

Remember, she was the Mayor who decided to "save" money by cutting programs that helped pregnant teenagers build successful lives after having their babies, only to treat her own minor daughter's sexual escapades and resulting pregnancy as something noble and godly, and, by some wild coincidence, as a handy "values" campaign issue.

The only thing that still surprises me about the extremist fundamentalist, hypocritical, lying sleazeball who is now the Republican vice-presidential candidate is that the press are only uncovering one or two new scandals and obvious lies a day. They must be slackers.

Give me a break...

Of course, this is more revealing of just how honest a politician Palin is, for the expert muckrakers of the Progressive to have dredged up so little!

I mean, what mayor knows the costing of law enforcement items? As responsible, aren't city counsels, or city managers the point of contact for these issues and funding? This is nothing more than desperation! And look at the stooges who scurry to justify why Palin might be a poor choice for VP (read comments, above).

Never mind Biden, right? Law school plagiarist, presidential debate speech plagiarist, a liar about his educational standing, a liar about his college degrees, taking credit for the work of others ... a very, very, very bad choice of VP by the collectivist elite of the DNC (they're 'super' you know).

It is stretching credulity to say that she was not aware of the policy -- especially as she presented herself to us by pointing out that a small town mayor was just like a community organizer "except that you have actual responsibilities."

Exactly. Palin appointed Charlie Fannon as police chief after firing his predecessor. She fired many other town officials at the onset of her mayorship. Fannon's policy on charging rape victims for their own evidence kits was such an issue in Alaska that the state legislature passed a bill to stop it, four years into her mayorship.

Palin's running on her record in government. This rape kit policy is a significant part of that record in Wasilla. It boggles my mind that anyone would consider this "seriously weak tea." Palin either knew and approved of the repulsive policy or she was unaware of it. Neither one reflects well on her performance there.

I'm no Palin fan (I think she's a nut), but I don't see anything suggesting Palin created this inane policy. What was the policy before Palin took office?

I think it would be important to note if this was her doing, or if you could cite her support of the (disgusting) charge-the-victims policy.

"I think it would be important to note if this was her doing, or if you could cite her support of the (disgusting) charge-the-victims policy."

I grew up in a society where the government teamed up with the insurance industry and established the legal limits that industry would charge the 'victims' of disabling trauma, disease and failing body. Of course, they also established limits on their liability, so that they could deny healthcare under a myriad of circumstances.

Here, we have an example of that common and cavalier attitude which government so often displays; along with other organizations (insurance) that have no inherent empathy or any other caring emotion, only a vague, callous disregard.

It is much the same everywhere, and where the system displays their lack of caring for the individual, because they are so wrapped-up in pretending that they are caring for the *majority*!

Indeed, that's what is happing right here, right now! Leftist Progressive Democrats are using the reality of the system, and nitpick some incidental occurence (which happens in the cities their figureheads 'lead') to victimize as being responsible for something they were NOT!?!

Leftist Progressive Democrats put themselves into the position of the police in this small Alaska town, and are charging the VICTIM they have created to CHARGE with something they shouldn't have to stand!!!

Even in your putative criticism of this issue, you misdirect by trying to infer that she might have been responsible, we should find out ...

Goosestepping, vote for a yellow dog first, Democrats and inveterate liars.

It's not Sarah Palin's responsibility as mayor to know what her own police department is doing... I mean, why would ultimate responsibility for law enforcement in Wasilla fall on the person in charge of the executive branch of Wasilla - Mayor Sarah Palin?

Happy Opposite Day, Charlie Brown!

Since the entire state of Alaska was discussing outlawing the practice of forcing victims to pay for the rape kit, it could not have been something that had slipped under her radar, especially if the new state laws were going to add expense to the city's budget (a huge focus of her mayorship, as her firing of the previous chief attests). Aside this, Palin should have known her police department's position because police departments fall under the mayor's "executive" reach -- mayors are executives, not judicial or legislative. A police chief, including the one interviewed in the article, answers directly to the mayor, and Mayor Palin (again, refer to the previous chief's termination letter) expected a high level of communication with her police chief, since it was a big reason she fired the previous chief for. The problem isn't that the policy was in force -- nobody's blaming Palin or Wassalia for that, and Rogers' other post shows Wassalia was far from unique -- the problem is that when the law was going to be changed, Palin's Wassalia argued against it. The assumption that Palin would keep around a police chief who acts independently and in contrast to Palin's values is inconsistent with the way she handled her relationship with the police department.

"It's not Sarah Palin's responsibility as mayor to know what her own police department is doing..."

See? The Leftist effort is to mock reality as a misdirection of it. It has already been established that this practice predated Palin's term as mayor. It has been acknowledged that the practice ended during her term of office.

If this were Biden, he'd be taking credit for that FACT - "I ended the evil besetting our great collective!". You goosesteppers would be shouting and hooraying agreement if that were the case! However, since it is a Republican, you have to turn yourselves into some of the nastiest, purposefully stupid idiots it would be possible to find, in order to defame and revile for votes.

"I mean, why would ultimate responsibility for law enforcement in Wasilla fall on the person in charge of the executive branch of Wasilla - Mayor Sarah Palin?"

Of course, all the leftist, statist Democrats know that such responsibility is assigned to city managers or councils. It would be the responsibility of those entities to inform the mayor of any such problem with city costs in expenditure of resources.

Indeed, since the state took the leadership to provide funding in these cases, perhaps it was by coordination with other Alaska towns and cities which were forced into this contretempts due to the fact that the convicted can't be made to pay for the civil costs of their crimes? Perhaps Palin did have some input to the state in ending this unfair circumstances forced on small, local towns and cities?

No, that thought wouldn't dare enter the closed, blinkered mind (or even notice) of a yellow-dog-democrat hatemonger intent on dehumanizing the target identified for destruction by the supreme leader of the party ... pay attention! Follow orders! Get along!

"Happy Opposite Day, Charlie Brown!"

When will your party's Krystalnacht happen? Will the party issue batons? Can we burn some cars, too?

'It boggles my mind that anyone would consider this "seriously weak tea."'

Because of the reason I gave you. If you won't vote for Palin over this, then you just plain won't be voting. It's an excessively-powerful argument; it proves all politicians shouldn't be President. Which is probably true, but taken to the logical conclusion is something you can't really act on.

Are you seriously going to suggest that Obama holds up under this standard of scrutiny?

If you won't vote for Palin over this, then you just plain won't be voting.

I agree with that. I don't think this alone represents a reason not to vote for Palin. It's just one data point among many to consider as the media and public vet her over the next 50+ days.

14 days... and the McCain camp still hasn't let Palin be interviewed - not even by Fox News. FREE SARAH PALIN!

Finally! The good news: Palin sat down with Chuck Gibson at ABC. The bad news: she didn't have any idea what the Bush Doctrine is.

The premise of "The McCain-Palin Ticket Is Going Change The Way The Bush-Cheney Team Has Run Washington For 8 Years" would be a lot more believable if Palin actually knew what it is she's supposed to be changing.

Yea Bourne, she is such a dumb dumb....Too bad you can't go and provide her with your vast knowledge of world affairs....What with her only being the governor of Alaska and V.P. in waiting, while you are a third grip on some back lot and all....

Hilarious.....

"... the media and public vet her over the next 50+ days."

Are you really this dim? What do you mean the "media vet her"?

Unreal, since the "media" have been reporting inconsequential smears for the Leftist Progressives! The exact same smears that you are producing!!!

No ... you actually take everyone else for being the dimwits, don't you? You know that the media is in the tank for Obama, but prestend that they are the cause of the Democrat/Progressive IDIOTIC ERRORS!

You demonstrate, with your stoogish repetition of DNC libel, being a member of the university trained 'journalists', that their intent is to defame and revile Palin for whatever scum your yellow-doggish-democratism can convince the 'media' to repeat ... and if it doesn't work out in your lying favor ... then it is the 'media's' fault for 'vetting her'.

No wonder your scumlike idiocy is going down the shitter counterclockwise (in the Northern hemisphere ...)!

You are sure making it difficult to find things to compliment you for ... you are about 90% into the intransigent liar category, already ... I can sure tell you don't believe in God ...

"Are you seriously going to suggest that Obama holds up under this standard of scrutiny?"

He has, for the most part, as have his competitors -- Obama, Biden, and McCain. Everybody in the election been scruitinized for at least a year (or more, depending on the size of the target on their back in Washington), for better or worse, but the media has a lot of catching up to do with Palin with the election only being a few weeks away. I'm not defending the media in any way -- they can blow a lot out of proportion -- but if they didn't report we wouldn't know anything at all. Liberals take away what they believe, Conservatives take away what they believe, and we interpret that the stuff we don't like comes from a hostile anti-my-guy bias.

Rex, assuming I'm as ignorant as you wish I were - so what? I'm not the one running for Vice President Of The United States Of America. Sarah Palin is.

Your argument seems to be - "Yeah, Sarah Palin's an idiot, but you're not so bright either." That's a weird argument. Personally, I wouldn't ever make that case about one of my leaders.

I'm not claiming "vast knowledge of world affairs," but I know what the Bush Doctrine is. It fundamentally changed US Foreign Policy, and it was well covered in the weeks and months after 9/11. It gave the US the moral authority to begin the Iraq War.

If Palin didn't know the names of every single world leader, the press would jump on her, but I wouldn't. If Palin didn't know the exact number of troops in Afghanistan down to the man, I probably wouldn't fault her that. It's gonna take her time to memorize all the details, and I'll give her that. But the Bush Doctrine isn't a small detail, and it's astonishing that she'd never heard of it.

As usual, you've devolved to personal attacks (I wish you believed in your arguments strongly enough to try to win on the merits instead of resorting to name-calling), so this is my last post in this thread. But before I go, I'll let you know that I actually know grips who are familiar with what the Bush Doctrine is. And if hard-working blue-collar guys who carry heavy stuff for a living can find time to learn the basics of current events, I would expect the same of folks running for Vice President Of The United States.

Actually I think Palin is a super star, I'm not going to underestimate and those that do, do so at their own peril. The Bush Doctirine was a loaded question by Gibson and she knew it, she let Gibson tell his version instead of getting caught in the trap. That was smart way to handle it.

McCain may not have a policy of preemptive strikes, or accountablity of countries harboring terrorists that mirrors the Bush. And Palin didn't want to give ammunition to the wackos that think the Bush Doctirine is a code word for nazi genocide.

BTW Bourne, I actually collect a salary from by one of the top global finacial firms to watch the news and to make judgements on world affairs. It is what I do, everyday, all day long.

If I were to be interviewed there is a chance I would make a slip or have a brain fart and forget something for a milli second, I know it's hard to beleive but sometimes people actually make minor errors. I'm sure you were just as concerned when Obama said he had traveled to all 57 states.

Or his claims that he had never heard Rev. Racist make the comments he did, or etc, etc.

Lot easier to hate on a woman, isn't it?

I actually collect a salary from by one of the top global finacial firms to watch the news and to make judgements on world affairs. It is what I do, everyday, all day long.

that sounds like a fascinating job, rex. what company do you work for?

He's never going to tell you that, Kraut. He made it up.

how do you know?

It's doubtful he works for a 'top global financial firm.' He can't even spell it. Put it this way, Kraut, I'll wire $1000 from my PayPal account to you if you can verify that Rex is telling the truth. He has to give you his name, this made-up company he works for and his title. Call the company and verify that he works there, and I'll give you the thousand dollars.

i'll take it! rex, help me out here!

"If I were to be interviewed there is a chance I would make a slip or have a brain fart and forget something for a milli second ..."

See, Rex? You attempt to agree with a Progressive stooge who is merely parroting partisan propaganda!

The "Bush Doctrine" is a Leftist owned slogan! There is no such thing as the "Bush Doctrine" and since it is the policy of the United States and directed by a lawfully elected commander in chief during a time of national emergency/war. It could more easily and accurately be called the "Clinton Doctrine" and since he so preempted in 3 regions: Bosnia/Serbia, Somalia and Haiti.

The term is used for encouraging hatred and revulsion for our commander in chief (Republicans), and to revile and dehumanize him for partisanship's sake and to gain party power for one segment of American, during wartime.

It is a term used to profit for just themselves alone in votes, while the entire nation is fighting for its continuing existence in the face of a religious war of domination! Indeed, the subversives actually support the idea that the terrorists and their nations of support should be further coddled into being 'nice', while they plot the utter genocide of millions of human beings, and then the destruction of the Great Satan who helps the Juden animals in Israel ...

Khadafi loves Obama and hates Palin ... and the Progressives love Obama almost as much as they love Fidel and are afraid of Putin ... love-hate for the socialist insane asylum trying to profit from sponsoring defeat and retreat ... war profiteers of the Democrat party ...

What disgusting, selfish people they are.

If Rex revealed his work to you, then you to 'Anon', they would almost certainly use the information to try and have Rex fired.

That's how they work, that's how they think ... the end-justifies-the-means to these partisan sociopaths.

Rex is really rather fair to them - he doesn't think they are sociopathic ... but he knows they would stab him in his work back in real life, for their partisan hatred ...

fired for what? he gets paid by his company to offer his opinions. all rex is doing here is the same thing he does at his job.

all i need is a business card and i win $1000! don't f this up for me, tadowe!

Actaully I am retired, but I do watch the news.

And I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night.

What?! You were lying?

Shocking.

Tell you what Anon, give me your name, phone number, where you work, the names of your children, and your social security number, you wire $1000 to my pay pal account. And then I will tell you what I do for a living.

Sound fair?

I'm not the one who lied when he claimed he "actually collect a salary from by one of the top global finacial firms to watch the news and to make judgements on world affairs. It is what I do, everyday, all day long" because he doesn't have the brain-power to win an argument with a key grip.

That was you.

If you can't walk the walk, don't talk the talk, you little bitch.

that was really pathetic, rex.
worse, you're screwing it up for conservatives like me who want to win this election by being honest. you're exactly what the liberals want~ a republican who lies and gets caught in his own stupid lie.
and as usual, everyone's left wondering~ why? why did you have to lie? it was totally unnecessary. you were afraid that no one would listen to you if you were just some cranky retiree, so you made up this ridiculous whopper... in order to try to trump a guy who bailed on this thread two f-ing days ago?
do me a favor~ don't tell anyone that you're a republican anymore. you've tainted what real conservatives like me stand for. and you've lost all credibility here as far as i'm concerned.

Sarah Palin as Govenor of Alaska, Wasilla Mayor, mother, daughter...in all roles she is sill of the female gender! What part of "rape" (from the 'act' to the 'kit' and beyond), goes unnoticed by any woman? With "Alaska having the nation's highest per-capita rate of forcible rape, with a disproportional number of rape and sexual assault victims being Native women"; one would think that as the Govenor (and Mayor) she would be concerned with the Health and Welfare of all citizens! How could she not be concerned with the enormous rate of (reported) rapes and sexual assualts upon women? Knowing that the rape kit is essential in the collection of DNA and crucial evidence, there's no way Sarah Palin should have allowed rape victims to be subjected to more humiliation by charging them to go through the "pay for your kit" process. My question is, "How many attacks went unreported because they couldn't bear the humiliation or afford to pay for the kit?" Obviously, she places priority to only those issues which encompass one of her loved ones, as she did with the firing of her ex-brother-in-law!

In a 2007 report, it was articulated that 1 in 3 Alaskan Native and American Indian women will be raped in their lifetime and there were 9.7 times more Native women sexually assaulted than other women in Anchorage from 2000 to 2003. The problem here might be that Ms. Palin doesn't recognize this as her problem because she's not of Native Alaskan or American Indian! Her lackadaisical attitude on this matter is on the line of discrimination.

isn't her husband a native?

Pierot stand-in motions, "... worse, you're screwing it up for conservatives ..."

How do you figure that? Rex proposes a-shelter-in-every-city and you think he is "conservative"?

Surely, you are one of the Yellow-dog-Democrats, huh? Why wouldn't he be the typical Leftist, Progressive liar trying to boost his ego at the expense of other's?

Blind, hueristic egoism ... that's the caliber of discussion the RSS crowd is imbued with ...

For example, Lena.

Here is the typical heuristic acceptance of a flawed premis: that Palin was aware that the cost of such examinations were charged to the victim, and willfully and callously refused to try and change the system.

With just a second's cursory examination, the entire theory would have been discarded *completely* ... if Palin had been a Democrat mayor.

That's how much we would be hearing about any accusations of imaginary wrongdoing if she were a Progressive Democrat thief who actually took the money for each kit!

Isn't Jefferson (Caught on Film) Democrat LA still in office unendicted?

Isn't Diane (I've Been Discovered) Feinstein still in office un-investigated?

Yet, here is a "woman" throwing stones at another woman for partisan politcs ... what hateful, disgusting, gangster-wannabes you Progressives just happen to be!

Steal BILLIONS if you are a Democrat, but you should go str8 to h-e-l-l if you might not know about charges to victims ...

"PROGRESSIVES UNITE TO WIELD THE BATON OF PROGRESSIVE HATE AND LIES WHILE WE PROTECT OUR THIEVES -- VOTE DEMOCRAT"

i am a lifelong registered republican, tadowe. never voted for a democrat, never will.
rex is a disgrace because he's a liar, and i don't want liars associated with my party.
there's been enough of lying of late in political ads, and it's going to backfire against us. the democrats are doing an excellent job of framing the republican party as liars who will say or do anything to hold on to power. the only way to keep democrats from taking over is to sweep out the corrupt a-holes and run (and govern) as the party of small + honest government.
you cannot tell the world you are a rich/famous/important person, then be unmasked as a liar and expect to have credibility. that goes for the leader of a party all the way down to plebs post on a website.

"rex is a disgrace because he's a liar, and i don't want liars associated with my party."

You are just another partisan to me. Rex doesn't claim to be a Republican, but arrogant Republicans can't help associating conservatism with partisanship. That's no different than zealot Democrats assume in their party arrogance, that *anything* to the right of Fidel Castro is "Republican".

It is unreal to me that Republicans lurk in this site, so that they can attack another who might be lying to some Democrat attack artist who makes them the subject of conversation. That's a Democrat tactic, you know, to start vilifying the person, the messenger, instead of addressing the points of the thread, or those presented in contradiction to those subjects raised. Yet, here you are agreeing with Democrat Leftists trying to make Rex the subject of the thread ...

Are you for real? Aren't you actually someone who claims to be a Republican, in order to assist in reviling conservative commentary? If not, why not stfu?

"... there's been enough of lying of late in political ads, and it's going to backfire against us."

Too rich! You are a Democrat sock puppet! What "lies" in which ads, Mr. Republican?

i am a registered republican. i have never voted for a democrat. i can't really have an argument with you about that.

"i am a registered republican. i have never voted for a democrat. i can't really have an argument with you about that."

Here, are you blind? Repeat:

What "lies" in which ads, Mr. Republican?

Look, you can always use some other name to pretend to be a Republican! Easy! What "internet face" is attached to "Kraut"? Indeed, dropping that nick would lessen the impression that you are some sort of bigot against German culinary preferences ... do we call a Korean a "Kimshi"?

Why not describe these hideous Republican ads?

"You are a Democrat sock puppet!

i am a lifelong republican and proud of it. i am not a partisan, but I belong to a party.

"What "internet face" is attached to "Kraut"? Indeed, dropping that nick would lessen the impression that you are some sort of bigot against German culinary preferences ... do we call a Korean a "Kimshi"?"

kraut is my last name.

www.ancestry.com

these things are not up for debate.

Kraut says, "these things are not up for debate."

One of my main contentions, in regards to Democrats (or any euphemism applicable) is that they inevitably misdirect when they can't answer. Of course, the tactic isn't exclusive to Progressives, but in practice Democrats are forced to use it because their "arguments" are baseless.

In that light, as a Republican, you claim that Republicans are lying in their political ads, but you refuse to describe these ads, and which you could easily link to, here. Twice now you've misdirected a request to support your claim.

Are you one of the BS, undercover Democrats, or will you identify the political ads in which you say Republicans are lying?

the subject is rex lying about who he is and what he does for a living.

if you're looking for ads where republicans (or democrats) obscure the truth, they're all available at factcheck.org

"the subject is rex lying about who he is and what he does for a living."

The subject is Rogers' attempt to revile Palin.

As for Rex lying? He's retired, and so he can say he reads the news on the internet all day long, he can legitimately claim to provide sage advice to "them" by emailing or calling friends who still work for the financial institution he gets a retirement "salary" from. Or any other way he can rationalize the statement he made. Whatever the case, it is inconsequential.

Yet for some arcane, Republican reason, you want to make him into the subject and make him into a liar!?! I think it is a tell, and you are revealing your stalking horse status as a Democrat.

"if you're looking for ads where republicans (or democrats) obscure the truth, they're all available at factcheck.org"

See? More misdirection! Link or you're the liar ... not Rex ...

Uh-oh... looks like someone got OWNED again!

Need some Kleenex, Tad?

1. sorry, sir. i'm a republican. i can't argue that with you.
2. i gave you the link. it's
factcheck.org
3. and the topic for me is rex lying. lying about working for "one of the top global finacial firms" "collecting a salary" "to watch the news and to make judgements on world affairs. It is what I do, everyday, all day long." that's why i posted in the first place - go back and look. i believed him and thought i would win some easy money from the doubter named "anon." instead, rex lied and hasn't been back since to justify it.
you are quite willing to point out the lies of the left yet so unwilling to hold our own party leaders (or even the lowly rex) to the same standard. that, good sir, is partisanship. they very partisanship you rant about.
that is not a game i play. i hold everyone to the same high standards. i make excuses for no one. if one of my own lies, cheats or steals, they are undeserving of my respect.

"1. sorry, sir. i'm a republican. i can't argue that with you."

You miss the point - I don't care. I'm not a Republican, and you can be anything you want to label yourself as being. I noticed that you crticized Republicans for lying, but still won't describe the lie or lies. That leads me to believe you are either lying about being a Republican, or lying about the lies for some other, obscure reason.

"2. i gave you the link. it's factcheck.org"

That's like saying, "Look it up yourself on Google". Whereas, knowing that some Republcan ads are lies, you are just too bored to say what they are? You can't say what they are about?

"3. and the topic for me is rex lying ... i believed him and thought i would win some easy money from the doubter named 'anon.'"

Whatever you might be, one thing is definite ... you are a sure winner in the Tender and Callow Fellow contest.

"Surely, you are one of the Yellow-dog-Democrats"

"You are a Democrat sock puppet!

"That leads me to believe you are either lying about being a Republican"

i am a republican, sir. always have been, always will be. you cannot scream or insult away that fact. it is not a matter that is up for debate.

nor is my name, nor is the fact that rex is a liar. by defending liars, you end up with the same amount of credibility as the liars you defend ~ zero.

if you are really interested, you can go to factcheck.org. on their font page are all of the tv ads for both sides. it's both fascinating and sad.
good luck to you.

Add a Comment

These HTML tags are permitted: <p>, <b>, <i>, <a>, and <blockquote>. A comment may not include more than three links. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA (for which the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply).