jrl503:

Oh, by the way--Is talking about Sarah Palin's water breaking sticking to the policies and issues? Maybe you should follow your own advice.

Ummm...I referenced Palin's water breaking to illustrate my point that it's very easy to raise questions about things unrelated to issues and policy to raise doubts in a reader's mind without any evidence. I thought I had made that obvious by closing the paragraph with, "Easy to ask these types of questions: tough to refute them. And very easy to sow doubts, as you did in your post. I prefer to stick to issues and policies." However, I realize upon re-reading it that I may have been unclear. I don't really think that Palin was trying to kill Baby Trig, but it's easy to ask insidious questions that might leave an uninformed person with that opinion.

Listen, I read your posts elsewhere on the board and found them to be generally thoughtful and insightful. My objections were to your referencing the homeless as "these people," which was probably innocent phrasing, but gave me the impression that you were lumping all the homeless as drug addicts in a sort of "well, it's no use trying to help those people because they are all lazy and drug-addicted and worthless" way. This may not have been your intent and if not, I apologize for jumping on it. It was very late when I was reading your post and I may have been overly reactionary.

I still think that issues and policies should trump conspiracy theories and past associations. All four candidates have skeletons in their closets. Anyway, hope this clears up any misunderstanding.