Revisionist history

[kallend 2,146]

On the 2006 Alaska Eagle Forum questionnaire, candidates for governor were asked "Are you offended by the phrase 'Under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance?" :

Palin's written response:

"Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I'll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance."


The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892, and didn't include the phrase "Under God" until 1954.

The Eagle Forum deleted the responses from their web site just last week. I guess they were embarrassed.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[akarunway 1]

Quote

On the 2006 Alaska Eagle Forum questionnaire, candidates for governor were asked "Are you offended by the phrase 'Under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance?" :

Palin's written response:

"Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I'll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance."


The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892, and didn't include the phrase "Under God" until 1954.

The Eagle Forum deleted the responses from their web site just last week. I guess they were embarrassed.

Founding fathers were quite old by then eh? LOL. Good one.

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[airdvr 210]

You can do better than this... I know

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[jclalor 12]

Good job doing your homework on this. All i can say is if Mccain is elected I will find religion and pray for his health on a daily basis because the thought of her as president chills me to the bone.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

You can do better than this... I know

Yes, they also contain her extreme right wing views on reproductive rights.

Why do YOU think the web page with her answers was removed from the Eagle Forum? Fortunately for us they were preserved elsewhere) and cached by Google. Fortunate for us, UNfortunate for them.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[lawrocket 3]

Both sides revise history for their benefit.

"The last 8 years" of a sagging economy was a pretty revisionist statement. 8 years ago, the economy WAS sagging - true. 4 years ago, the economy was HUMMING. In fact, things seemed to be going pretty well for a while there, didn't they?

The last two years have been getting rougher.

I heard anothe rbit of quasi-revisionist history that I think put the focus on a lot of things. "Things didn't really start going downhill fast until the Democrats took control of Congress." Uh, yeah. I don't think he fully appreciates the difference between "correlation" and "causation."

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Both sides revise history for their benefit.

"The last 8 years" of a sagging economy was a pretty revisionist statement. 8 years ago, the economy WAS sagging - true. 4 years ago, the economy was HUMMING. In fact, things seemed to be going pretty well for a while there, didn't they?

The last two years have been getting rougher.

I heard anothe rbit of quasi-revisionist history that I think put the focus on a lot of things. "Things didn't really start going downhill fast until the Democrats took control of Congress." Uh, yeah. I don't think he fully appreciates the difference between "correlation" and "causation."

Annualized stock market return over the past 8 years = 0.25%

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[lawrocket 3]

Yes. When you start with the year 2000, which had a -10.14 percent (S&P 500), 2001 (-13.04) and 2002 (-23.37). And we've STILL got growth. It was crashing before Bush even took office. (Note - 1991 - a hard year for the economy, right? 26.35 percent return. How do you reconcile that?) 1994 - negative 1.47 return.

How much did real estate grow during that time?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

On the 2006 Alaska Eagle Forum questionnaire, candidates for governor were asked "Are you offended by the phrase 'Under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance?" :

Palin's written response:

"Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I'll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance."


The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892, and didn't include the phrase "Under God" until 1954.

The Eagle Forum deleted the responses from their web site just last week. I guess they were embarrassed.

Oh well, so she's not real good with dates and numbers and history and stuff. But she knows how to raise her kids with good Christian ideals.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Both sides revise history for their benefit.

"The last 8 years" of a sagging economy was a pretty revisionist statement. 8 years ago, the economy WAS sagging - true. 4 years ago, the economy was HUMMING. In fact, things seemed to be going pretty well for a while there, didn't they?

The last two years have been getting rougher.

I heard anothe rbit of quasi-revisionist history that I think put the focus on a lot of things. "Things didn't really start going downhill fast until the Democrats took control of Congress." Uh, yeah. I don't think he fully appreciates the difference between "correlation" and "causation."

I see your font moving, just can't find anything to substantiate a sagging economy. DJI from 3500-9800 sagging? OK. Unemp 4%....hmmm, ok, pls do support your assertion.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Yes. When you start with the year 2000, which had a -10.14 percent (S&P 500), 2001 (-13.04) and 2002 (-23.37). And we've STILL got growth. It was crashing before Bush even took office. (Note - 1991 - a hard year for the economy, right? 26.35 percent return. How do you reconcile that?) 1994 - negative 1.47 return.

How much did real estate grow during that time?

Quit talking microcosms, please, counselor, make a complete argument so we can address it.