If you want to argue with the language of the Washington Post feel free. You’re yelling at me because I’m not yelling at them.
But I don’t spend all my time yelling at FOX. I’d rather discuss the issues.
I’m done with this one.

Here we go again:
“Line item veto cutting funding (or increases of funding if you want) for housing and support for teenage mothers.”
There’s the link, to my first comment on the subject. Can you read the words inside the parentheses?
The question concerned her priorities, and it still does.

I didn’t read your first reference to it. But now that I have, that even makes you more of a liar, because you knew that the Post story — titled “Palin Slashed Funding for Teen Moms” — was bull and you still linked it as if it wasn’t.

Nowhere in that story does it say that Palin almost TRIPLED the funding of Covenant House Alaska over FY 2007! Nowhere in the story does it say that the amount Palin authorized was still greater than the organization’s total expenses for 2007! Why not? Because the Post writer Paul Kane (or his editors) would reveal their anti-Palin mania if they gave the full context and said “She only nearly tripled funding for teen moms instead of nearly quadrupling it!”

As I wrote yesterday, I didn’t even touch the second half of the com-Post story, which implied the reason why Palin “slashed” funding for Passage House — a service of Covenant House, a Christian-centered center for runaway youth, NOT only pregnant girls — was because of her objection to funding “explicit sex-ed programs.” Passage House has NOTHING to do with sex-ed, explicit or otherwise! McCain was slimed even worse; Kane wrote that he “opposed funding to prevent teen pregnancies” period! A decent high school newspaper editor wouldn’t let that slide by without elaboration!

This is the epitome of “making stuff up,” JAR. Take an increase in funding, and find a way to make people think it’s a decrease. Give the false impression that the non-existent “decrease” is due to her stance on “explicit sex-ed.” Print without explanation or context that John McCain “opposed funding to prevent teen pregnancies.” And don’t contact the actual person who runs Covenant House Alaska (or report that anybody else did), who said for the record to a New York Times reporter that Governor Palin DIDN’T, DIDN’T, DIDN’T cut the state’s funding to the agency.

And you think that saying “or increases of funding if you want” gives you a mulligan when you know good and well your intent in linking the report was to further a lie? What a WEASEL you are!

Cutting funding for housing for teenage mothers: not a good way to advocate for women. Let’s just just call it un-compassionate conservatism.

Say it with me, dunce…

“A $3.9 million dollar budget increase is not a cut in funding.”

One of these days, you’ll learn to actually understand the written word.

Palin is a member of Feminists for Life.

Feminists for Life has spearheaded efforts to make sure pregnant and parenting college students, who have the highest abortion rates in the nation, get tangible help like medical referrals, child-care and assistance in completing their education.
Palin, a mother of five, recognized the need to do more than say she opposes abortion and joined the organization.
In August 2006, she told the Anchorage Daily News, she recognized the struggle young women face in an unplanned pregnancy saying, “no woman should have to choose between her career, education and her child.”
For Palin, there is no inconsistency between advocating for women and taking a pro-life position.

Cutting funding for housing for teenage mothers: not a good way to advocate for women. Let’s just just call it un-compassionate conservatism.

I didn’t say that, you did.
I don’t believe the ends justify the means, that is a meme of the Left.
You’re projecting again!

The question concerned her priorities, and it still does.

– By all means, keep asking that question. Do it while you’re playing handball in the closet with the light turned off.

I await your searing reasoning….

contradicts what Palin said in her contemporaneous press release.

The problem is that the press release wasn’t contemporaneous, even though it appears so through the lenses of hindsight.

There was some haggling back and forth between Alaska and Congress (actually, they’ve been haggling over this for over a decade). The project was A Big Deal® up there, which is why Gov Palin supported its going through as she ran for Governor. However, when Congress backed off on the funding they promised, she did make the decision to decline the appropriated funds for the bridge project.

I having a hard time understanding what is so difficult about this. She did exactly as she says she did.

The question concerned her priorities, and it still does.