Gov. Palin on the issues

[MrLabGuy]

Originally Posted by Krimson X

Michael Savage is not Reuters or The AP.

Sure but he links what he wants you to see. Just like Thinkprogressive.

I wonder how they left out her ACTUAL stated position on teaching birth control in public schools.

I guess they overlooked that link to a source. As they did on several of those issues. You see, providing only the information which makes your case is delusional and meant to mislead others to believe the case you've made. Science is full of theories which ignored facts to prove a specific outlook or belief.

[Krimson X]

Originally Posted by MrLabGuy

I wonder how they left out her ACTUAL stated position on teaching birth control in public schools.

I guess they overlooked that link to a source. As they did on several of those issues. You see, providing only the information which makes your case is delusional and meant to mislead others to believe the case you've made. Science is full of theories which ignored facts to prove a specific outlook or belief.

I see where the problem is. In 2006 she had an abstinence-until-marriage sex education position while running for govenor, but is now for teaching birth control in school. Just your typical flip flop. (Join the crowd)

http://www.tri-cityherald.com/tih/story/308161.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,5768481.story

What other "several of those issues" did they get wrong?

[MrLabGuy]

Originally Posted by Krimson X

I see where the problem is. In 2006 she had an abstinence-until-marriage sex education position while running for govenor, but is now for teaching birth control in school. Just your typical flip flop. (Join the crowd)

http://www.tri-cityherald.com/tih/story/308161.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,5768481.story

What other "several of those issues" did they get wrong?

Dude...She as is Obama a political candidate. So are you saying that your precious Thinkprogressive was being honest stating a position she MIGHT have had in 2006 while leaving out a VERY clear position in 2008?

Besides the title of the article in the tri-cityherald was titled
Palin's position on sex education remains "murky".

As in unclear. Now I realize they meant that to mean that her position is still unclear; however, I argue that her recent statement is VERY clear.

The 2006 one however is not so clear.

Question: Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?

Answer not quite so clear cut: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.

I'm for birth control but I'm not for some of the explicit sex education proposed in San Francisco which wants to teach alternative lifestyles.

Also in 2006 she stated she was pro-contraceptives which also was not clear.

So...Yes she could have been more clear in 2006 but she was absolutely clear in 2008 and that information was omitted.