More at HER Expense, Plus Other Nifty News

UPDATE: This is incredibly good, and quite funny...

*****

Well, Palin apparently hasn't quite been able to shed her beauty pageant days. As we know, image is everything in some cases.

The International Herald Tribune reports this today (which just cracked me up!):

Who was the highest paid individual in Senator John McCain's presidential campaign during the first half of October as it headed down the homestretch?

Not Randy Scheunemann, McCain's chief foreign policy adviser; not Nicolle Wallace, his senior communications staffer. It was Amy Strozzi, Governor Sarah Palin's traveling makeup artist, according to a new filing with the Federal Election Commission on Thursday night.

I just had to imagine how that money might have been better spent, say on more debate coaching, more sessions on international affairs. And, of course, the totals are not in. Palin's staff bought her more clothes when they landed in Nevada.

In case you are wondering what this makeup artist makes, it is (drum roll) $22,800.00 for the first two weeks of October alone. Wow. Her hair stylist made $10,000.00 for the first half of October.

That's Ms. Joe Sixpack alright, that little Maverick. I will keep the truly snide comments to myself because you are probably thinking the same thing.

As we were loading and unloading 6,000 lbs. of dog/cat food yesterday in 90-degree weather, I had my hair in a long braid. On my feet were an old pair of tennis shoes. The rest of my expensive attire included jeans and a t-shirt. By the time we finished, I was absolutely soaked with sweat.

So who is really Ms. Joe Sixpack? Me, the progressive dem voting for Obama. What irony. That $2500.00 jacket Palin was wearing? Well, that could pay for about 1,000 male cats to be neutered, 900 female cats, or 250 large dogs.

I guarantee you won't ever be seeing this 'gal' in a $2500.00 jacket. I have some really cool jackets--experienced jackets--from the thrift store, though. Great price, great value.

*****

This next part is far more serious. It involves terrorism and murder.

We have all heard (and heard, and heard) about William Ayers and his Weatherman days. Fortunately, no one died in those attacks. At one point after the first several bombings, the Weatherman notified targets so the people could evacuate. Still bad, but apparently Palin has trouble with some important distinctions here.

When asked if she believes bombers who target abortion clinics (dozens of clinic Doctors and other workers HAVE died or HAVE been seriously injured) are domestic terrorists, Palin responds like this (1:27sec., Palin's statement and other short material):



The moral (if there is one) of the story? If you bomb someone I like (the capital and the pentagon), you are a domestic terrorist. If you bomb someone I don't like, you are probably not a domestic terrorist.

Ah, the logic of Palin. This clearly puts Palin waaaaaay out on the fringe of America--not something unexpected. It also gives a tacit nod to those that commit these heinous crimes against abortion clinics and other targets.

Just keep saying to yourself, "Palin chooses life. Palin chooses life. Palin chooses life." Ignore the static.

No matter how one feels about abortion, rational people conclude that more violence is not the answer.

*****

Defenders of Wildlife have put out a new add on Palin (30 sec), this time on the polar bear which, as you know, she is suing to remove from the endangered species list. I wrote about it previously.

Here's the add:

*****

Finally, a bit of badly needed humor from Will Ferrell and Tina Fey c/o Saturday Night Live, 'Bush Endorses McCain'. A real gem. (About 6:45.)

P's Dead Lake: Wasilla's Land Use Lobotomy

As you may know from reading my blog, I am considered a lay expert in land use. I found this article in salon.com very instructive not only about Wasilla but what P did and did not do in this regard.

We know about her feelings regarding the ecological balance between species which involves aerial slaughter of wolves AND bear sows and cubs so that more caribou and moose are available for tourist hunters. We know about her attacks and litigation on the endangered species act listing of the polar bear.

We know she is fighting the listing of the beluga whale in Alaska.

We know she is fighting the listing of three seal species in Alaska.

We know she opposed legislation that would have watched out for water quality in the face of a mine (Pebble Mine) in Alaska.

We know she supports drilling in ANWR, and has lied about the project's alleged 2,000 sq. ft. foot print (this really cracks me up... common parlance for someone trying to make a project look small).

We know she doesn't believe that humans are causing global warming/climate change. She recently has allegedly softened on this, but I don't believe it. You cannot smile and cheer at "Drill, baby, drill," and simultaneously support use of carbon based fuels. 430K years of carbon levels in ice don't lie.

We know she advocates for nuclear power and "clean coal" (no such thing). She has experience with neither, and no experience of knowledge whatsoever on the various radioactive waste streams.

We know she defeated a wind project in her state.

This is a woman McP suggests is a world expert on energy (and even if you consider oil alone, it is not true). This is a woman he says he will put in charge of our energy planning. Swell. This is a woman with NO science background and no interest in environmental science and a woman who also lied about the science findings on the polar bear which was discovered by a persistent scientist through an open records act request (they originally wanted to charge him in excess of $450,000 for the materials--some transparency!).

I deal with slugs like P all the time. They could care less about the environment and pay experts to help them through the process--read lie.

The fact that her town is a land use mess speaks volumes about her approach to the environment in which she, herself, lives... a standard she would certainly not hesitate to insist is likewise suitable for us all.

So, if you eat, breath or drink water you cannot possibly support this candidate.

BTW: The ESA is in serious trouble. I will be posting and hope you all will take action.

Palin's Belief: God Has a Place but Honesty Doesn't

There are things in this world--odd things--that test our ability to weigh right and wrong, that help us to decide which way to go on an issue. Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin, currently the short term governor of Alaska (pop 670K), is turning out to be an inconsistent, self-serving puzzle if ever there was one.

Palin's religious beliefs were formed in the pentecostal Assemblies of God church where she was re-baptized at 12 years of age having left the Roman Catholic Church. Today she attends Wasilla Bible Church a church that teaches the inspired inerrant (read literalism) Word of God. This means, whether Palin has vocally admitted it or not, she is a creationist if she does, in fact, agree with her church's Statement of Faith.

As an unambiguous advocate of teaching creationism (the Biblical Genesis origins of life), and of teaching the non-science of "Intelligent" Design, Palin is living this part of her faith and suggesting others do likewise even if they are not religious, not Christian, and not literalist.

A creationist believes everything is created by God as set forth in the Genesis creation stories. All of God's creation was (is) holy. All of God's animal creations at risk through the Biblical flood were, of course, saved by humans as they were packed--in pairs of two for "unclean" animals and in three pairs of two for "clean" animals (clean/unclean standards according to Leviticus) into the Ark. For some interesting reading, peruse her baptismal Church's (Assemblies of God) thinking on the Ark.

So her faith informs her of two things: 1) All things are created by God and are holy, and 2) these Godly creations needed saving by humans during the flood.

Today, global warming is causing early and rapid loss of arctic ice flows, including in Alaska. An estimated 25% of the world's population of polar bears live in Palin's Alaska state of 670K or so people. Polar bears are dependent on ice for their survival. It is now well documented that their survival--the ice--is melting under their very paws--and fast.

Instead of working to save the polar bear's themselves, and their environment, Palin is working to save the oil industry. Palin has filed a lawsuit to overturn the bear's endangered listing under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), an act signed into law by Republican Richard Nixon.

Not only does Palin take this course, she takes it in favor of petroleum interests (not mentioned as being sacred in the Bible), and objects based on economic interests [a topic absolutely nowhere addressed, literally, in the Bible]. Of course the Bible also does not address global warming and melting of ice flows which points to the problematic approach of Biblical literalism. The Bible also does not address the literal need for honesty in Governors, though it does address honesty and, as you might predict, it certainly suggests honesty in all things is good. Conflict of interest as a Governor dealing with issues of the family's bread winner isn't a topic of the Bible, either. Literalism does have its limits.

As an aside, polar bears had to be on the Ark. They cannot spend 40 days in the water.

The governor has called a special session of the Legislature to possibly rewrite the Petroleum Profits Tax. Her proposals could have a multi-million dollar impact on her husband's employer. BP could also become a major player in the natural gas line project.

-- KTUU News

Palin's husband, Todd, works as a North Slope oil field production operator for British Petroleum (BP). In other words, her family's bread and butter comes from the energy (read, in this case, oil and gas) industry. It also explains her fervent desire to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).

In order to make her ESA objection on the polar bears, Palin clearly obfuscated (actually, she lied) scientific assessment (a dishonest act) indicating the need for the adopted listing was not warranted on this basis. In case you are unfamiliar with this process, the science needed to prove listing is rigorous. In the last eight years, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) hasn't exactly gotten better about doing their work, more liberal about listings, or more lax on the science. In fact, it is generally viewed by the scientific community that the USFWS (like other environmental and health agencies) is understaffed, underbudgeted, has shifted decidedly to the political right, and, like the Environmental Protection Agency, the US Department of Agriculture and other federal agencies, has been as anti-science as these agencies have ever been under any president.

In a potential breech of ethics, Palin cited green-washed studies funded in part by oil companies. Read here and note the source, which is not green media but corporate media. USFWS documentation has indicated concern for more bears seen in open seas.

"Even the Bush administration can't deny the reality of global warming," she said. "The governor is aligning herself and the state of Alaska with the most discredited, fringe, extreme viewpoints by denying this."

"She's either grossly misinformed or intentionally misleading, and both are unbecoming." "Alaska deserves better."
--Both quotes, Kassie Siegel, Center for Biological Diversity

"Essentially, she lied," said University of Alaska professor Rick Steiner, who wrangled with the Palin administration for months to obtain the documents. "She came out and said, 'our scientists agree the polar bears are fine and should not be listed'" when that wasn't the case, said Steiner, a conservation specialist who studies climate change. The McCain-Palin campaign did not make the governor available for comment.
-- ABC NEWS, August 31, 2008

Now mind you, I am an Episcopalian, non-creationist, who believes in evolution and abhors any notion of theocracy, was trained in the sciences and believes public education should be free from all religious factors, influences and interferences. I really don't care WHAT you believe in terms of faith--it's alright with me. You can worship purple pepper shakers if you like, or be an atheist. But shove your rhetoric and belief on me or the American people--or students--yes, I will take you to task. Government and religion must always have a bright, bright line between them. And no, the founding fathers did not support Christianity in the Constitution. In fact, they went WAY out of their way to prevent just that.

So, Sarah Palin, keep your religious beliefs out of the secular society you represent and specifically out of politics. And if you find you are unable to do this and unwilling to leave politics, at least be consistent under your own creationist, literalist faith. If you are proud of it, don't lie about it, don't hide it and live consistently with it. You are not doing any of these things right now.

For some great and interesting reading on polar bears, read this article.

Phot0 Credit: ABC News

This or This? Palin's Compassion Runs To Killing

OR

GOP Vice Presidential candidate Palin objects to the listing of polar bears as endangered. The bear's habitat is literally melting away due to global warming and the species is a candidate for listing under the endangered species list.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


OR


GOP Vice Presidential candidate Palin supports gunning down of wolves from airplanes (they run them nearly to death then shoot them) to attract hunters and preserve caribou FOR more hunters. Palin announced she would pay a $150 bounty for each left foreleg brought in from a wolf kill. Palin is obviously another "compassionate" conservative.

There's a lot more wrong--very wrong--with the choice of Palin for VP. But to animal advocates--those that work to do no harm--this is completely over the top. And anyone that knows the animal advocacy folks knows you shouldn't fool around with them. Most Americans will find her views repugnant.