I was referring to everyone thinking we are “mad.” They obviously don’t think we are that crazy. Let’s make the assumption that Ashley and others are right and killing wolves is 100% wrong. Then I’d rather be wrong in that way, then in a country that advocates the cutting of little girl’s genitals (for instance). And as for Republicans not giving aid, well that is just wrong. Maybe they do not do it to the people you like or agree with—but there is plenty out there. Bush gaves more than Clinton ever did with his PEPFAR program (I know liberals hate it.) We could throw statistics back and forth, but you are stereotyping Rep in a big way.

Bill Clinton turned out to be quite moderate and pragmatic. For instance, he worked with Congress on welfare reform. I just can’t stand all the yuckiness (now that’s a big word) with Monica, and assorted women—ugh. I’m probably just as open-minded as you and happy to see others opinions—why else would I be on this site? Do you think I think I’m going to change a liberal’s mind on here? I have two gay uncles that I love and support, numerous friends that are pro-choice (and have had abortions), atheists friends (I’m not). But you know Obama has my respect because of his family and ethics (not most of political idealogy), and few on this site give Sarah Palin that credit. So maybe I’m the open-minded one?!

DeB, I don’t think she was ready, but again…I don’t think Obama is either. I know his accomplishments, and though they are applaudable, it didn’t make him ready. A Harvard degree and being a constitutional lawyer does not make you “shoo-in” for the Pres. Let’s face it—people voted for Obama because of “change,” his ability to speak, and potentially his “freshness.” He had little else to show, and neither did Sarah Palin. Now, in defense of Obama (gasp!)—I think he is doing something that a good leader does—surrounding himself with experienced people that know more than he does. And he keeps speaking—people love that. Though saying, “I screwed up” is kind of surprising. Didn’t they teach him better English at Harvard? Of course, I think he said that to identify with “the folks.”

It’s good your honest, but I thought liberal, open-minded people were against bias. Isn’t that what women have fought against for so long? So you disagree with her views, but she also just bugs you, I’m guessing. Like Bill Clinton turns my stomach (not because of his politics, though). It’s tough to see the good points in people, when you hate them so much.

C’mon of course we think, we just don’t think like you. Though I would venture to say—without—the safety of a computer, we would probably agree on some things. Having discussions like hunting and conservation (along with taxes, global warming, etc.) are always going to have two sides. And as for science, just because a majority of scientists say something—it doesn’t make it true. Sometimes—like with Darwin—many scientists liked his theory and went along with it. There are lots of holes, things that can’t be explained, etc.—but the majority of scientists just go along. It’s easy. As for everyone thinking America has gone mad? What? Most people want to come here—read Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s recent book and find out who is “mad” in the world. We are not perfect, but even the mean Republicans pay our taxes (unline some Dems—ha), send money all over the world, and try to do what is right. Some people think killing some wolves to preserve the moose/caribou is the right thing—there are statistics that can prove their way and statistics that prove yours. Again, somewhere in the middle.

I’ve got to say, Sarah Palin keeps em’ talking, huh? I would say it is completely understandable that the staff keeps writing on Palin. She is a woman, after all.

I HAVE read some of that before I posted that last night. You are looking at one side of the issue. I’m trying to show you there are TWO. I haven’t even read any thing Palin said about it (except here). There are lots of people in AK who feel it is necessary to contain the wolves. I’m sure the answer is somewhere in the middle. But most on here don’t want to read the side opposite their opinion—period.

I’m not offended, and I certainly agree that these women can say what they want. But I would venture to say that most of these women would like to be thought of as “thinking objectively” and not those that just spout idealogy and slanted viewpoints all the time.

They hunt wolves in this way for CONSERVATION, since wolves and bears kill 80% of the moose and caribou in AK. This allows Alaskans to hunt more moose and caribou for food. (I’m sure there are some that hunt for different reasons, but this is the reason Gov. Palin supports it.) Secondly, I want to say this without being unkind. But I live in Nashville and have for 24 years. I’ve seen Ashley Judd around and know someone that had met her. She seemed spoiled and very “affected” at young age, able to be idealistic and probably got where she is in Hollywood because of her mom and sister. Her mom is conservative and worked her way up, Ashley didn’t have to. It’s kind of embarrassing to me how she is so passionate, but doesn’t seem to be well informed.

Sure—I’ve seen some in the other direction—but when it comes to Sarah Palin, there are few positives articles or maybe I missed them…

What’s incredibly amazing about this article is the title “Sarah Palin Snubs…” This is such a slant form the WOW staff and it sets the tone. They could have said, ” SP supports Rick Perry….” C’mon WOW staff, get some objectivity!

DeB, I never said that. I did say that the women on here should have given her credit for being a working woman with a family, and her accomplishment of becoming a governor with a high approval rating. It is one thing to be against her politics (which most on here are), but it’s another to not be able to get past that and say she accomplished at least something. She does not have to support a woman anymore than any of us should. It goes against what we should fundamentally believe—we vote for those despite skin color or gender.

Marjorie, What you are saying is absolutely not true. I grew up in a family like you mention—evangelical—which only means that you are verbal about your faith and make it your mission to tell others. “So yes indeed a very large part of the republican base truly do believe it is their mission on earth to earn their mansion next door to Jesus’s by conquering over the sinning ways of the liberal heathens. Hot button terminology and carefully placed symbolism like “gay marriage = Sodom and Gomorrah”, “abortion = baby murder”, “anti-war = treason”, “Obama = black Muslim president” could very easily make them believe it is their Godly duty to use their guns to do so. I’ve heard the idea spoken by people.” To answer what you said above—a Christian who is truly following Christ doesn’t try to “conquer sin”—we tell others about Christ. Granted, there is a small fringe who may use your terms above, but very few (just like on the liberal side). In our church, NONE of what you said above is every spoken. We welcome all people regardless of who they are and what they’ve done. We introduce them to Christ and from there—it’s up to them to follow Him. And Palin also never used any of those terms. This is a gross stereotype, the same kind I would think you wouldn’t want made of liberals. Let’s keep it objective, instead of inflammatory.

Liz so right about small business—it’s time to cut taxes for absolutely everyone. Even if it is a laudable program—such as contraception—it doesn’t encourage jobs—okay maybe a few. But serve that up as a separate program and see if that is where the American people want to spend their money—not hidden in this “stimulus.” Govt. spending has not proven to get anyone out of a recession; it’s always cutting taxes. So DO the projects that will improve infrastructure, etc. and add jobs and cut taxes. You have to cut taxes on those that SUPPLY jobs (higher income) in order for them to SUPPLY more jobs. Have you ever gotten a job from a poor person?!

HI Belinda, I agree with Liz on this. Pres Obama IS the leader of this country and his administration should have put the bill forth, instead of letting the Dems put out this bill with so much junk in it. And contrary to what lots are saying on this site, it’s not the health care people care about—it’s honey bee research and stuff like that. Of course he’s confident, but I venture to say he’s a bit cocky too. After all, he did tell the Rep Eric Cantor “I won. I trump you on that.” We teach our children to be better sports than that. I know this bill will not be perfect, but i’d like him to work hard to represent all Americans (including the 57M that didn’t vote for him) in some respect. In his defense, he has done some of this. We’ll see how the bill ends up. But you have to admit that there is some junk in this bill, why can’t they separate out the programs that won’t generate many jobs and bring them up at another time?