Thursday, April 16, 2009

Gov. Sarah Palin's Indiana Speech

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 4:

Part 5:

Part 6:

Part 7:


MyOwnThoughts said...

When will someone ask Palin if she is so caring about the life of every baby- and special needs children are in the form of God- why did she risk the life of Trig by flying during labor with him?
I agree every life is special and I don't know any mom's (Except Palin) who would fly during labor or take such a risk with a full term special needs baby.

She should also realize that respecting a baby's father by not lying about him- is also following the word of God.

Sarah puts on a act- and holds herself above others. The way she puts people down makes her trashy, immature and self-centered. She just enjoys the glory of people thinking she is who she pretends to be- instead of watching her actions.

Anonymous said...

Like I've always said...Action talks & bullsh** walks!

Anonymous said...

Ahhhh, the beautiful sound of applause. She's addicted!! Gonna be another wake up call when she gets back to boos & hisses. More tantrums to come.....

I had to watch the videos one by one with much time in between. I'm headed for the Tums, Rolaids, & Pepto. Notice the travel agent stuff in the 1st one so she can come back & try to convince everyone she was doing AK work. Bleccccck..... word salad sally.


Anonymous said...

I hope Trig never grows up to know that his mother gave a public speech in which she talks about thinking about aborting him. That is not appropriate information to be given about any child in a public forum.

(Does Sarah have no female friends to confide in? That's the stuff you tell your girlfriends or family or a minister in confidence, not the world. More weird psychological boundary issues for Sarah Palin? Or will she do ANYTHING to try to get attention?)

Anonymous said...

I don't know who researched the "facts" in the speech, but....the largest island in North America is NOT Kodiak in Alaska (stated proudly at the 5:00 mark in clip #2)

It is Greenland, which is also the largest island in the world.
Granted it is owned by Denmark, which may have confused her, but it is still in North America.

Beyond that, there are 16 islands in Canada which are larger than Kodiak, one of them an island province - Newfoundland, which is 13 times larger than Kodiak!

I know geography is not HER strong suit, but one would think that such a blatant mistake (on such an easily checked fact) would have been caught long before the speech was delivered.

Sean Gerrity said...

And, of course, and as can be expected, so far the responses are from those who ignore the message itself, with a bias that causes them to only look for faults - it doesn't matter whether they are true faults or not, or mere assumptions, or even trivial, so long as they denigrate Ms. Palin, in order to attack her and her message.

In the 60's and 70's, our Viet Nam veterans were called "baby killers" by those of the same ilk of you who write these things, and these men and women were literally spit upon when they came home (also, nobody talks much about the millions of people who were slaughtered in Southeast Asia after we withdrew). Many of those of your ilk oppose the death penalty for criminals who have proven, very clearly, their own sometimes very sickening evil. The claim is that killing them is, among other things, contrary to their rights. Yet in this country, far more out of "inconvenience" than anything else, millions of babies, human beings, are killed every year through abortion, in many cases by the very people who would protest the death penalty in behalf of the worst of us. It is because of people like you, who have no courage to stand up against "mob opinion" (yes, there is a such thing as "democratic tyranny") and must even remain anonymous, that it takes a great deal of courage for Ms. Palin (and people like her) to stand up and speak for what she truly and, in a positive way, believes in.

Where are the constitutional rights of these children? They are human, with all of the chromosomes of any other human, and destined to be nothing else from the instant they start growing. When does an apple seed, once it starts the process of sprouting from the seed, become anything else other than a growing apple tree?

Where, constitutionally, is the balance between the "right" of the mother, more frequently than not to avoid such an "inconvenience" as bearing another human, weigh against the right of an individual to live, the most cherished "inalienable" right of all rights, and so irreversible, like the death penalty, when the ending of that life is executed. This is the message. This is the issue.

These children are what many of you don't have the courage to stand up and protect, since it is so unpopular among those with whom you associate, and contrary to a societal desire to have sex whenever one wants and not face the consequences of what sex is truly about to be begin with. Remember, many of you or your predecessors called our war veterans "baby killers," and spit in their faces. Yet in that war and all of them since, none of those veterans even came close to killing the millions of children that die every year in this country alone, through abortion, especially abortions of inconvenience. This is the ultimate hypocrisy.

Sean Gerrity (real name)

KaJo said...

Sean I'm A Sarah Fan Gerrity said: "And, of course, and as can be expected, so far the responses are from those who ignore the message itself, with a bias that causes them to only look for faults - it doesn't matter whether they are true faults or not, or mere assumptions, or even trivial, so long as they denigrate Ms. Palin, in order to attack her and her message."Of course. How mean and trivializing it is to point out misstatements in Palin's speech!

You can take comfort in this fact, though: the people interested in "truthiness" weren't mean enough to call them actual LIES, like what she and Ross were trying to feed Alaskans?

Nah, an ignoramus isn't a liar when she gets all confused about the state she's governor of (my gawd, at least she didn't refer to "climbing mountains, fording rivers, musk oxen circling").

Yeah, we should have overlooked all the mistakes, and concentrated on those dulcet tones, that hairdo, and those graceful hand gestures...

Sean Gerrity said...


You're response couldn't be much of a clearer example of my point. It doesn't matter who the messenger is, and you avoided the issue nonetheless.

What about the children?

Another "inconvenient truth."

Sean Gerrity

crystalwolf aka caligrl said...

Sean Gerrity:The queen Gino is so pro-life she slaughters innocent wolves, bears,polar bears, want to kill belugas and for a "fleeting moment" little Trig nestled safely in her womb.
Ok we got MEN like you to speak for innocents in the womb (thank god men like you can't have innocents in the womb!) but no one to speak for ones who can't speak either, wildlife.
So queen gino, pro death penalty, wolf killing, Queen gino pro-life herself...for a fleeting second thought of murdering her unborn, like she murders moose!
If you, Sean, had committed a heinous act that you should be punished by death in Alaska, your queen would be there, to pull the plunger,shoot the bullet, however they carry out the death penalty in Alaska...
All life is sacred, not just human life.
Besides her speech was little more than a infomerical for Alaska...!

AKPetMom said...

Mr. Garrity:
If women choose life over abortion, in many cases these women need help; reduced price childcare, Women Infant and Children programs to assist in feeding the child, subsidized rent programs to provide them with a low cost housing solution.

I'm fine with women choosing life over abortion.

It just seems that the same voices that would have us all "choose life" are all too often the same voices that would also choose to deny and form of governmental assistance to these same women once their children are born.

Many of the "rights to life" advocates are the same people that are labeling Obama as a dangerous Socialist now because he is trying to level the playing field for these same women that have chosen life over abortion.

Until women can rest assured that their born child will have the same support that it enjoyed in utero, women will be forced to terminate pregnancy due to economic constraints.

Alicia in Wasilla

Sean Gerrity said...

crystalwolf aka caligrl:

I don't recall saying I was a man. It doesn't matter. I've actualy met and spoken with those who have murdered other human beings and been sentenced to death. Yet when they speak about things such as this, and express the same view (which some have, both sexes), it doesn't make them any less wrong.

Does killing animals somehow make it okay to kill an "innocent in the womb," too? Is that your view, even and especially when it is only because the birth of that person is an inconvenient result of having sex? Once again, what about these tens of miilions who have been killed, and the millions more to die under just some circumstances? When do they have the same "inalienable" and greatest of rights that the rest of us have?

Sean Gerrity

Sean Gerrity

Sean Gerrity said...

Alicia in Wasilla:

I'm thankful that you are willing to actually address the issue. Your response saddens me, though, but I respect your view.

I live in an area where there are rich and poor people, and have been to places where poor people have nothing at all. Yet, like has been happening since mankind has been around, it has been people who love and raise children, not governments, regardless of economic conditions. It is sad to consider adverse economics as a reason to kill such innocent life. My experience, even in todays world, regardless of poverty or not, is that people (not governments) can and do find a way. Sadly, even those who have the resources, because of such things as career interests, still find cause to terminate such "inconvenient truths," based upon a possibilty that may occur in life that may never had really materialized.

With me it's a balance of constitutional rights in relation to others rights, and I believe that life itself, the greatest of rights (and the most irreversible when taken away without even due process of law that the rest of us enjoy), bears the greatest weight of all. I have believed this long before Sarin Palin ever came around - even before she was born.

Thanks for a response to the actual issue, though. I must go now...

Sean Gerrity

BS said...

I assume Sean is a man. Hey Sean - until you have a uterus and have to deal with all that goes with it - I don't want to hear your opinion. You have no standing in this case. I'm tired of being nice to people like you - you can go go hell.

Talk about BS said...


He (or, she, Seanine?) is alive and is human, thus has standing.

As to hell, it looks like you already either found it, or may be part of it, uterus or not.

You have appropriately nicknamed your self.

BS said...

Screw You.

Talk about BS said...

And risk having you kill my child?

No thanks.

BS said...

Now you're just being stupid. I'm not wasting any more time Goodbye.

things that make you go 'hmm' said...

Hey Sean,

How about the hypocrisy of this woman stealing your platform to get elected in 2012?

Why did she risk the life of Trig by flying during labor with him? From
"Palin’s flight landed at 10:30 p.m. Thursday. She and her husband drove to the Mat-Su Valley Regional Medical Center, and she checked in with her doctor an hour later.

Trig Paxson Van Palin was born seven hours later."

State to Whole Truth said...

Perhaps printing the whole article (below), arher than one sentence, brings it into a clearer context as to risk:

"Gov. Sarah Palin’s decision to make the eight-hour flight from Dallas to Anchorage has some people wondering about the possible safety hazards of flying while in the late stages of pregnancy.

The governor, eight months into her pregnancy, noticed amniotic fluid Thursday morning prior to giving a keynote luncheon address at the Republican Governor’s Energy Conference in Texas. After wrapping up the speech, Palin and her husband consulted with her physician about possibly flying home on an earlier flight. After being granted permission from her doctor, she and her husband proceeded with the trek home.

At that point, Palin was only having minor contractions and was not showing signs of active labor, Sharon Leighow, the governor’s spokeswoman, said on Monday.

After the baby was born, Palin told her staff members that her experiences from four previous pregnancies made her comfortable with the signs of active labor. She felt that neither she nor her baby were in any danger, and so she flew home as scheduled.

Most airlines have specific policies concerning air travel during pregnancy, especially during the final months. For women traveling in the final month of pregnancy, a “permission-to-travel” letter is required by her primary physician. However, most restrictions rely on an honor policy that leaves the decision to notify the airline in the hands of the passenger.

The governor did not feel the need to inform the airline of her condition, Leighow said.

Alaska Airlines is one of the few airlines that does not have a policy regarding flight during pregnancy.

“We leave the decision to fly up to our customers and their medical advisers,” according to Alaska Airlines representative Caroline Boren.

Palin told her staff that she would not have boarded the plane had she thought she or her baby were in danger.

Had Palin needed medical assistance during the flight, ground agents and flight attendants for the airline are highly trained to look for signs of distress or other concerns with a passenger’s condition, Boren said.

“Governor Palin was extremely pleasant to flight attendants and her stage of pregnancy was not apparent by observation as she didn’t show any signs of distress,” Boren said.

Flight crew members are not specifically trained to assist in labor during a flight. But had Palin gone into active labor while en route to Anchorage, the crew would have been prepared to offer medical assistance through a system known as Med Link, a medical advisory service that allows crew members to radio for medical help during the flight.

The flight would not have needed to land, barring any emergency with the delivery.

No medical assistance was necessary for Palin during the flight.

Palin’s flight landed at 10:30 p.m. Thursday. She and her husband drove to the Mat-Su Valley Regional Medical Center, and she checked in with her doctor an hour later.

Trig Paxson Van Palin was born seven hours later.

The governor confirmed Monday that early testing showed that Trig was born with Down syndrome. The syndrome is a chromosomal disorder caused by the presence of all or part of an extra 21st chromosome.

Trig is the governor’s fifth child. She told her staff members that Trig was the easiest delivery of all her children."

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

"And risk having you kill my child?"

First, It's not a child until it's born.

Second, No one is forcing anyone to have an abortion.

You so called pro-lifers are the biggest hypocrites I have ever encountered. Death penalty fine. Assassinating Doctors fine. Harassing women at Family Planning Clinics fine.

Apparently the only life you are 'pro' is unborn life,since you don't care one iota about them after they are born.

Life begins a conception and ends at birth.

You may not inflict your religious beliefs on everyone. That is unconstitutional.

Talk About BS said...


This "Silly"-ness makes no sense. Why is someone born prematurely at say, six months, a child, but one who remains in the womb on toward full term not a child, based on your logic? Who said an unborn person is not a child?

In China, abortions are apparently forced/coerced, if a woman exceeds what she is allowed to have. In our country, many men at least coerce (if this is not "forcing") their mates to abort, as they don't want the "burden" of supporting a child, either.

Religion never came up in this particular blog. Consitutional issues did, however. Whether or not one calls the unborn person a child, it's still a human being.