Hurricane Sarah
Who told you, baby?
Exactly three days ago I predicted that Governor What's Her Name would spell doom for McCain. I wrote:
So, Sarah, enjoy the media honeymoon – which I predict will crash about the same time Hurricane Gustav makes landfall.Looks like I was within the half-hour margin of error. Greg Sargent has the most nitid round-up of Day One of Hurricane Sarah: It's worth pondering the totality of what happened today, in a mere half day... * The news that Palin once backed the Bridge to Nowhere went national. * It emerged that Palin has links to the bizarro Alaska Independence Party, which harbors the goal of seceding from the union that McCain and Palin seek to lead. * The news broke that as governor, Palin relied on an earmark system she now opposes. Taken along with the Bridge to Nowhere stuff, this threatens to undercut her reformist image, something that was key to her selection as McCain's Veep candidate. * The news broke that Palin's 17-year-old daughter became pregnant out of wedlock at a time when the conservative base had finally started rallying behind McCain's candidacy. * Barely moments after McCain advisers put out word that McCain had known of Bristol Palin's pregnancy, the Anchorage Daily News revealed that Palin's own spokesperson hadn't known about it only two days ago. * A senior McCain adviser at the Republican convention was forced into the rather embarrassing position of arguing that McCain had known about the pregnancy "last week" -- without saying what day last week he knew about it. * It came out that Republican lawyers are up in Alaska vetting Palin -- now, more than 72 hours after it was announced that she'd been picked. * Palin lawyered up in relation to the trooper-gate probe in Alaska -- a move that ensures far more serious attention to the story from the major news orgs. What else will come out today? After all, there are still six hours left until September 2nd... Can't wait until tomorrow!
September 1st, 2008 at 9:35 pm
I don’t know Marc – your predictive powers have left a little bit to be desired in this election cycle and there’s McCain’s firm backing of “soulmate” Palin, noted here where he reaffirmed his support:
http://tinyurl.com/67egsn
September 1st, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Also, I thought everything we said about Palin from here on out was supposed to be funny. Your detailed list is more like…sad.
September 1st, 2008 at 9:53 pm
Things just keeping getting better and brighter for the McCain-Palin dream team.
September 1st, 2008 at 10:22 pm
I am not a prude, nor a censorship buff, but making repeated references to the daughter who is pregnant is beneath you, Marc. And I say that cause I love you, dude. Not judging you, cause I have said some stupid things on here as well, but referring to “the pregnancy” is a little like white Republicans poking fun at Obama’s “unforgiveable blackness.” Somewhat cheap.
September 1st, 2008 at 11:00 pm
This has at least provided some entertainment in certain quarters, like Larry Johnson threatening to kick Andrew Sullivan’s ass.
This is all fucking theatre anyway. Americans need to start becoming active participants in political life, which is very much more than electoral nonsense.
September 1st, 2008 at 11:49 pm
As an ex-Republican, I must tell you that the slogan “Country First” is code for “Republican Party First.”
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:38 am
It’s only a matter of time before McCain announces that he’s 1000% behind his Veep pick. Phuket, Thailand !!!
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:43 am
“It came out that Republican lawyers are up in Alaska vetting Palin — now, more than 72 hours after it was announced that she’d been picked.”
So it’s out, eh? I can’t wait for the juicy details. They must be at TPMcafe link supplied. So I click. What do I get?
“Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC said that Republican lawyers are currently doing a vet of Sarah Palin up in Alaska.”
Wow, so Mitchell said that. Wow. Yeah, OK, but what are the juicy details, then? So I click on the supplied video.
And it turns out that Andrea Mitchell only said “there are reports that</i …..” GOP lawyers have traveled to Alaska to vet Palin.
Is this anything like those “reports that” the city of Gori had been utterly devastated by Russian tanks, and that BP’s pipeline through Georgia had been cut by Russian bombers? Can I have something more … reality-based, please?
OK, so there’s no juice after all. But Marc, you promised. OK: Can I at least have some salt? No, not that — I asked for salt, not something merely salacious. That’s too easy. Anybody in Red State America who isn’t dealing with unwed teen pregancy somewhere in their extended family, if not much closer to home, doesn’t have much family.
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:43 am
David,
Marc only pointed out that McCain’s advisor lied about knowing about her pregnancy, that Palin didn’t even know until a couple days ago, and that it could hurt her standing with the social conservative Republican base — which is the only group that solidified around McCain because of her pick. It further proves the point that McCain didn’t vet her and that he just chose her on a whim because she’s a woman and first-pick Lieberman was too caustic.
AConcernedCitizen,
We all got that years ago, but thanks for the insider tip. The people on the right have trouble separating “country” from “just us,” and “evil” with “Democrat.” Somehow fumbling and allowing the largest terrorist attack on US soil to occur automatically makes them love this country more than the other guys that call them out on their shit.
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:56 am
Barely moments after McCain advisers put out word that McCain had known of Bristol Palin’s pregnancy, the Anchorage Daily News revealed that Palin’s own spokesperson hadn’t known about it only two days ago.
Rewritten for improved accuracy: “Barely moments after McCain advisors put out word that McCain had known of Bristol Palin’s pregnancy, the Anchorage Daily News reported that Palin’s own spokesperson claimed he hadn’t known two days ago, and that he had no evidence for it.”
But that’s so … stenographic. Let’s go back to wild speculation based on assumptions that government spokesmen never lie, and are never kept in the dark.
September 2nd, 2008 at 1:41 am
MT on 8/30: “I’m with those who say this move might be just crazy enough to work.”
Aside from the unfortunate use of the word “crazy”, i.e. apparently implying that anyone who would choose the Palin gambit needs psychiatric care (and I’m sure Bill Bradley, who has had beers with Steve Schmidt can vouch that Schmidt is more than likely as well adjusted as the next political operative) I have to say that I give you credit for clinging to the notion you launched on first blush. Sounds like you really NEED this thing to turn out the way you predicted and you’ve stuck to your guns, debunking any suggestions that Palin might be..uh…beyond the pale. So far, you get points for effort – lots of points.
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:07 am
Michael – parsing Andrea Mitchell aside (who isn’t the only reporter on the “post-vetting” story) how do you square the fact that Palin, among other things, fired an employee for not responding to her leaning on him in a family-feud matter and lied to cover up the fact that she’d leaned on him – or that her anti-”Bridge to Nowhere” bona fides are bullshit.
Granted her ex-brother-in-law was an asshole, but the commissioner in question looked into the matter after not just Palin, but Palin’s husband, pressed him and found that the complaints had already been dealt with adminstratively and it would be a violation of at least his interpretation of regulations if he fired the guy at the governor’s behest. This was a popular official who had a good record trying to do his job according to the rules as he saw them. He was replaced by someone with a more questionable record. But worse, Palin lied about having pressured the official. (coverup not the crime, etc.) If it was legitimate to fire him for not responding to the Governor’s “suggestion” that he be fired, why cover up the fact that the “suggestions” were made. This isn’t the action of a “goo-goo” who wants to clean up bureaucratic abuse of government. This is someone who abused their office, certainly by the firing and the denials if not the original request (which might well have been reasonable by the Governor’s lights and wouldn’t be at scandal level without the subsequent series of actions.)
These go to the heart of Palin being sold as a “good government” reformer. It’s also a fact that Palin’s experience as governor of Alaska sets her apart from most other governors, in that she had windfall oil profits to tax and was actually able to rebate her citizenry – which means that she hasn’t dealt with the tough budget/tax management issues most governors have and that tests their effectiveness probably more than any single other issue. Of course it could be argued that she’s brilliant for imposing a windfall oil profits tax – I’d buy that. But how does that square with the McCain/antitax fundamentalist critique of Obama’s proposal to tax windfall oil profits ? There are some blatant contradictions and ethics issues here that the McCain campaign can only skate through if the press decides as one to turn their backs on their job.
If things are that “crazy” and the Palin pick “works”, we’re in even deeper shit than I already have believed. At that point I’m gonna order a DVD of the collected sermons of Rev. Wright – I’m sure Larry Johnson could supply one -and I’ll hole up in my bunker with a supply of good whiskey and decent cigars.
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:22 am
“…. how do you square the fact that ….”
One typically “squares a fact” with something else, and ideally only when you have an actual fact to square that thing with. Grammatically, you lack the latter, and evidentially, you lack the former.
AFAIK, her Troopergate problem is still in the investigation phase. So in the meantime, how do you square the fact (?) that you believe in “innocent until proven guilty” with the fact that you’ve called this possible abuse of power a fact, in advance of any certain knowledge? Is this some sense of the word “fact” that, like your use of the word “scrubbed” (as applied to a missing climate change-related administrative order on a website being reorganized), doesn’t need to be held to any standards of evidence?
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:37 am
“Sounds like you really NEED this thing to turn out the way you predicted and you’ve stuck to your guns, debunking any suggestions that Palin might be..uh…beyond the pale.”
I don’t think I’ve debunked much of anything, frankly. What I believe I’ve done is show how many in the liberal commentariat who are otherwise top-drawer uberparsers are rushing sloppily to judgment on Palin, paraphrasing hypotheses into statements of fact, and reasoning onward from them. They should slow down. Some of the apparent red meat could be poisoned.
A more careful look at the Palin record tends to show not stark black-and-white everywhere, but much that is grey — and precisely where you’d expect a competent politician would leave things grey. Which says something for her competence as a politician.
And that, more than anything, is my point: don’t underestimate her. If the “crazy” Palin pick “works”, energetic Obama activists (and that would include you, reg, more than anyone else here) have some work cut out for them. Retiring to a bunker with a box of cigars is not an option. Nor need it be, even in the event of loss: most likely, a McCain-Palin winning ticket would still have to enter the White House facing a Congress more solidly Dem than we’ve seen in a long time. And a hard-charging Obama-Biden team could do a lot to seat more Dems in Congress even in the process of losing by a narrow margin.
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:09 am
“I don’t think I’ve debunked much of anything, frankly”
Nor do I…I was opening the gates of irony.
“Square the fact”
Yeah, my grammar sucks. I should have said “account for the fact” but I was thinking, if not writing clerarly, in terms of “squaring” the fairly strong evidence against Palin in “Troopergate” with where my comment was going – McCain’s guys maintaining the credibility of her “good government” image. Your comment would suck less and demonstrate more seriousness and credibility if you didn’t focus on my perennially crappy grammar and addressed that obvious question that I eventually managed to ask with at least reasonable coherence – i.e. can you square those facts – which are on much better evidence than your serial speculations on the varieties of “grey” in various “affaires Palin” – with the Palin “goo-goo” image of cleaning up Washington which, preposterous as it may seem to me, is the primary virtue on which she’s being sold as allegedly bolstering the “maverick” McCain.
That’s pretty clear in the context of my entire post – and you don’t even take a swing in her defense except to note that, you know, everybody’s innocent until proven guilty. That’s nice, but you don’t submit one iota to back up your allegation that my case is as lousy as my grammar, when in fact it hinges on very strong documentary evidence that she lied in claiming that she hadn’t had a hand in pressuring the official.
“Retiring to a bunker with a box of cigars is not an option.”
Also, I don’t need you to suggest what my options or the “work cut out for me” are or are not. I was being ironic, which makes you sound more than a bit sanctimonious. And the whole exchange has gotten, as I’m sure others will attest, more than a bit tedious.
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:24 am
Incidentally, I’m well aware of the positive impact of the Obama campaign on down-ticket races – primarily because they’ve followed through on the Howard Dean-initiated “50 state strategy” and put organizers even in deep red states to help swing congressional districts by firing up the grass-roots and developing meticulous GOTV networks. But as bad as Bush has been on domestic issues – tragic even, as in Katrina – the President has enormous leeway in foreign policy and congress is notoriously weak (has been complicit in weakening itself really) in providing a counterbalance. I don’t have much confidence in even a somewhat strengthened Democratic majority to be able to harness McCain as much as I expect would be needed, and certainly not to be able to execute an alternative strategy to the neo-cons who have McCain surrounded. This is the area of my worst fears regarding a McCain presidency. He really is, at this point, somewhat to the right of the current “Condified” and somewhat “DeCheneyized” incarnation of the Bush administration in some key foreign policy areas. And I think that’s reflective of his temperment as well as his ideology and advisory clique, which IMHO disqualifies him as a competent C in C.
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:46 am
Resuming analysis of Marc’s claims:
“The news broke that as governor, Palin relied on an earmark system she now opposes.”
She actually opposes earmark spending now? A total 180 degree turn on that?!
Gee, that’s odd — somewhere in my researches for one of my comments posted on the last thread (probably one of those still circulating in moderation limbo), I linked to a decidely pro-earmark op-ed by one of her staffers, explaining, earlier this year, how and why earmark funding for Alaska would have to be reduced.
But now she’s actually flatly opposed to earmarks? Those morons! How do they think they can get away with such a colossal flip-flop!?
The juicy details must be at the link Marc supplies. So I click. And what do I find?
I find that, in her acceptance speech, she bragged about fighting abuses of earmarks, not that she opposed all earmarks. Which I already knew. Which any American who was listening closely to her speech also knows. And which might actually be more than half-true.
What most Americans probably don’t know: estimates of earmark spending vary wildly depending on your definition of “earmark”. They range from as low as $23 million (White House numbers) up to McCain’s claim of $60billion. According to most definitions of “earmark”, I’ll bet this includes virtually all of our aid to Israel, hilariously leaving “staunch-Israel-ally” McCain in the position of cutting off that aid, if he’s serious about his “veto-all-earmarks” position. So he’s wa-a-ay further out on a limb than Palin on earmarks. But then, why hasn’t the press called him on that? Right now, I guess they’re too busy trying to sniff out who Bristol’s boyfriend is, even though such gumshoeing and speculation that can only backfire and engender sympathy for Palin. As Brad Delong would moan, Why oh why can’t we have a better press corps?
This is so dumb. It’s the kind of dumbness that comes of assuming your opposition is dumb. I.e., the most dangerous kind of dumbness, in politics.
I’m reading some commentariat claiming Palin ran on a “bridge-to-nowhere platform“. When I try to substantiate that, however, the worst I can find is that she had something like an unwritten plank of her platform to the effect that she wouldn’t oppose the funding that had already been fought for by Alaska’s congressional delegation, and that the whole “bridges to nowhere” thing had been distorted and blown out of proportion. (There’s a grain or two of truth in that last it seems, at least in the case of the Gravina Island airport bridge.) So how does this pandering here and there somehow turn into her whole “platform”? It looks like it’s being done through the kind of hysterical exaggeration — calculated or heartfelt? — that some of us would prefer to think is a virtual monopoly of the Right.
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:48 am
It now looks like Palin is trying to stall and/or challenge the validity of the investigative body she’d previously agreed to cooperate with fully. There’s something more than a bit awesome in the hubris and hypocrisy of the contemporary GOP. Here’s Palin’s lawyer on the guy heading the “Troopergate” investigation: “Our concern is that Hollis French turns into Ken Starr and uses public money to pursue a political vendetta rather than truly pursue an honest inquiry into an alleged ethics issue.”
Yeah, they’re are concerned about one of those Kenneth Starr deals. Really. They are. This is as funny as Lindsey Graham characterizing the Alaska GOP as a foe Palin allegedly faced down that’s as formidable as Putin and the Russians. I’m not sure if these guys are giving a whole new life to irony or they’re killing it.
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:50 am
URL ? Just go to Talking Points Memo and follow the bouncing balls as they update this stuff. They are pretty scrupulous in providing the related links. HuffPo also has a special Sarah Spread that’s more gossipy but with lots of links to the breaking stories.
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:10 am
” … you don’t even take a swing in her defense … ”
You know this because you’ve seen every swing? Reg, do me a favor and write Marc about taking a couple of comments of mine on the previous thread out of moderation. I’m not going to write it all again.
If you’re referring specifically to her Troopergate crisis, I’ve hardly taken that up at all and I probaby won’t go much further with it than what now follows:
Note that the investigation is due to issue a final report mere weeks before the election. That’s awfully late to replace your VP candidate, but maybe the contingency is already folded into the McCain game plan: if the news is very bad, it will at least lend itself to a bait-and-switch strategy: bait with Palin until late, then switch — most likely to one of the moderates he reportedly preferred. McCain will have the plausible excuse that he couldn’t have known how deep the problem was. He’d get points with Cultural Conservatives for trying, at least, and maybe they’d forgive him making a safer choice if apparently forced at the last minute. The moderate Republicans, conservative Dems and independents who still lean toward him despite the choice of Palin (recognizing her as a partisan calculation only, a necessary evil) will feel relieved, and be more likely to turn out.
Maybe. My bet (and, I assume, McCain’s bet) is still that Palin will be found to have done nothing strictly illegal. She might at worst only have to admit making the kind of mistake that many voters would find ethically questionable, but morally not so bad, as well as personally understandable. AND I bet that the fallout won’t hurt her image much with anyone planning to vote McCain-Palin anyway.
After all, this is classic small rural state stuff — as the Clintons and Mike Huckabee would probably both tell you, citing where they’ve stepped in similarly tangled messes. If she just tells voters that she now understands that she’s in the big leagues, where this kind of thing won’t wash, and she knows it, and regrets what she did, I doubt she’ll suffer much.
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:38 am
On the Vetting angle… Wizbang reported three months ago that McCain’s vetter was in Alaska… put that in your huffpo pipe and smoke it..
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:41 am
you guys are somthin’ else. You must be scared shitless to be investing so much energy into this.
RCL… yesterday was September 1st. No 20 point lead for the Obamamessiah. Awwww, too bad.
The RNC hasn’t even finished and they are in a statistical tie. ROFL.
September 2nd, 2008 at 5:07 am
The crazed, left-wing attack machine–the national equivalent of reg on this blog–went ballistic when they saw a good looking and pro-life woman on the Republican ticket. Nothing that they said is changing minds about Palin, though, but it does show the deep hate and low tactics of the Obama surrogates–and, behind the curtain, Obama approves their messages.
September 2nd, 2008 at 5:43 am
McCain may well be the right of Cheney by some measure, but those sort of characterizations are seldom helpful in predicting political outcomes.
It maybe more cynical than gracious of McCain to cite Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton as pathbreakers for Palin, but we need to be objective in looking at what actually happened here.
The Palin nomination is McCain’s desperate attempt to put as much distance as possible between himself and the contaminated Republican brand without actually leaving the party.
We should celebrate that as the victory it represents. Some will argue the bar should be much higher, but, experience shows, it just isn’t. Liberals need to build on what incremental successes we have, since those are the only type likely to come along.
McCain’s decision was rash and desperate and bad. But progressives should take heart that we made him do it, with some gale force tailwinds courtesy of the gratuitous misadventures of GW Bush.
McCain could have gone looking for an immigrant hater to sooth the Lou Dobbs-Bill O’Reilly crowd. Or a kill’em all militarist with Vietnam or Iraq War I experience to get Sean Hannity hot and bothered and amp up the fear of Muslims as voting day nears.
But he didn’t go that way. Sure, it’s noted that Palin handles snakes AND assault rifles, but those biographical details always come after her gender and outsider status as identifiers.
She may be petty enough to have a state employee fired over a family squabble, cynical enough to vote for the bridge to nowhere before voting against it and clueless enough not to warn McCain about her daughter’s situation, but she still represents the GOP on the run from itself.
And as a liberal who’s been watching the Republicans make Democrats do exactly that for decades, I’m going to draw the maximum joy out of watching S.S. McCain swirl down the toilet, weighed down not by the candidate himself nor, certainly, by Palin, but by 8 years of the most undeniable failure of leadership in generations.
And while I’m gloating, I won’t assume Obama is prepared to do any more for liberals than Bill Clinton was. I do hope, however, that this time around, the movement is stronger, more vital, more disciplined and more organized.
Katrina vanden Heuvel makes this point very well in an Aug. 29 interview on Bill Moyer’s show (pbs.org). She retells the story of FDR’s response to some liberals who had come in and told him he owed them this and that. He told them to “go out and make me do it.”
That’s what liberals have with Obama. If he squeaks by peeling away a layer of rural identity voters temporarily fed up with Republicans, he’ll govern accordingly. If, on the other hand, he roars into office in front of a new coaltion of organized, disciplined, liberal voters, he’ll have no choice but to govern that way.
September 2nd, 2008 at 5:44 am
Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s former pastor said, “”This ordinary boy [Obama] just might be the first president in the history of the United States to have a black woman sleeping at 1600 Pennsylvania legally.”
Rev. Wright also said, “If Senator Obama did not say what he said (about criticizing the sermons), he would never get elected. Politicians say what they say and do what they do based on electability, based on sound bites, based on polls.”
The Democrats’ “boy,” as Rev. Wright refers to Obama, who just can’t shake and will not honestly explain those twenty years of agreeing with the pastor on his views.
Palin’s daughter never said “God d***, America.
September 2nd, 2008 at 5:53 am
On the Vetting angle… Wizbang reported three months ago that McCain’s vetter was in Alaska… put that in your huffpo pipe and smoke it..
So, in other words, they did a piss poor job.
September 2nd, 2008 at 5:56 am
I have a feeling that neither party will be able to survive a loss in this election fully intact.
The GOP’s platform is already at odds with both McCain and Bush on key issues. To repeat, the GOP insiders who will be the only ones left standing when McCain loses, disagree with both him and Bush on key issues.
As for the Democrats, I have to say it’s very likely that I will be looking for a new party should Obama lose, unless his campaign is upended by something unforeseen. If Obama loses, it will surely be for the same reasons Gore and Kerry lost: trying to peel away the rural identity voter by doing things like voting for the FISA bill and wearing a flag lapel pin. We’ve yet to see Obama carrying a hunting rifle or some other lethal weapon, but don’t put it past him should the race tighten…
September 2nd, 2008 at 5:58 am
you guys are somthin’ else. You must be scared shitless to be investing so much energy into this.
No, we just argue substance over image.
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:05 am
Oh I’m lovin’ this season. Now you have GM in polling wonderland, clinging to his fantasy that McCain’s tied with Obama.
You might not want to check your facts, GM, they’re stubborn and you wouldn’t like them.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/
Averaging CBS, Rasmussen, CNN and Gallup polls, Obama leads by 4.5 percentage points. He’s up by as much as 8 percent (CBS). And McCain is up in no poll, anywhere.
More important, perhaps, the Bush disapproval numbers are rock steady in the mid-60s and in no poll do his approval ratings rise above 33 percent. Fox has Bush approval at 28 percent!
McCain is indeed tied and he’s just about to prove Saddam had WMD and ties to Al Qaeda, Katrina was the Democrats fault, God created the earth in 6 days, with no overtime pay, and the recession is just a chance happening that couldn’t possibly have anything to do with any Republican economic policy.
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:18 am
Marc -
I take back what I said the other day. You haven’t passed your peak as a prognosticator — you’re scaling new heights.
I’m sure the McCain people can spin this so that Sarah still appeals to a certain part of the base, maybe even gains in appeal, but so long as Obama plays it cool (which is after all his forte) this has got to be a net negative.
For instance, I used to think McCain had Florida in the bag, but I sure can’t see the Palin pick working with the crucial Miami-condo-Jewish-pensioneer voting bloc we hear so much about. They may be queasy about Obama, but Sara the creationist moose huntress is really gonna make them reach for the Rolaids. I think she puts the state in play — God bless her.
However, it works out, who can deny that, as entertainment, this election year has been the best ever.
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:19 am
Obama spokesman Mark Bubriski’s email to the Miami Herald: Palin was a supporter of Pat Buchanan, a right-winger or as many Jews call him: a Nazi sympathizer.
I don’t have to inject anything into this to make it sound bad–for Obama.
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:27 am
Thanks Woody. I forgot to include the Buchananite angle in my comments on Palin and the Florida Jewish vote.
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:33 am
One the plus side for Sarah — if this VP thing doesn’t work out, she can always run for President of Alasks once they secede.
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:57 am
Post-secession, Alaska could join OPEC — now how’s that for pandering?
I found a long audio file of a conversation about State Trooper Mike Wooten, on this page of Palin’s website. I listened to the whole thing.
I can’t claim to understand everything said, but it came off to me more as inappropriately casual and unprofessional (at least on Bailey’s side), rather than intimidating, sinister and high-handed But maybe that’s how business is conducted at the state level in Alaska.
Naturally, if there were many such calls, by several Palin staffers, some of them more problematic and high-pressure than others, I suppose “the Governor and Todd” (hey, I see TV series in that!) could have cherrypicked the phone records and selected their Mr. Mellow Dude Frank Bailey as representative of the deepest infraction to publicly deplore, and to publish on the website in some great show of transparency. Or — this is really about as bad as it gets, in which case I have to wonder if any newspaper will even bother to put the conclusions of the investigation on page 1.
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:23 am
Let he who thinks a Republican Pundit would not do to a Democratic VP pick what Marc has done to Palin, cast the first stone.
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:31 am
Of course this doesn’t mean the rumor mill shouldn’t be challenged.
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:31 am
Very beautiful words, Jim R.
If Palin were my candidate, I’d be concerned about the decision to strike out for 3 months on the campaign trail, leaving behind a special needs infant and a teen daughter about to give birth. Her daughter needs her parents’ presence and support now more than ever. I’d say the same thing if my candidate’s name were Sam Palin. The decision just doesn’t make sense.
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:52 am
If a Police Officer has used his position for personal disputes, rumor is he used a stunt gun on a member of the extended family and threatened to shoot another, the question becomes, is it proper for a Governor, who has personal knowledge of this and happens to be the person the head of State Police reports to, to pass it along to her subordinate and ask for a report back, even if it involves their own family?
And if an investigation was not done and no report was provided, then is it proper for the Chief Executive Officer (Governor) to demand one or leave? I assume there would be no disagreement if these incidents did not involve her own family?
Since I don’t know the detailsf, and neither does anyone else at this point I think, I pose this question given the assumptions mentioned here, no report and no action against the Police Officer from his boss, for your opinion.
This Governor was not a go-along to get-along, from all reports. People lost jobs and power. She has enemies for sure. In the meantime, it is a political season, and all game is worth taking pot shoots at.
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:07 am
“Very beautiful words,..”
Yes evets. The only difference between me and Jesus is when I walk on water, I sink down some.
Oh, and Marc. No similarity between your sin and the one this phrase was first used for, was intended.
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:12 am
>What else will come out today? After
>all, there are still six hours left
>until September 2nd…
I’m crossing my fingers for a revelation that McCain is the father…
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:04 am
Documents Suggest Palin Obsessed Over Retaliating Against Ex-Brother-in-Law
As a California-native city boy, my head is spinning.
One the one hand, I don’t know what to make of Palin’s piling certain charges on Mike Wooten, like his shooting of a moose cow out of season. Especially when Palin and her father reportedly butchered this same moose and made stew out of it. Wouldn’t that sort of make her an accessory after the fact? (No, actually, because, as was decided in McDermott vs. Johnson, Alaska Supreme Court Case 10016-A7 in 1982 … ha ha, you believed me for a second there, admit it now.)
On the other hand, Mike Wooten was in fact officially determined to have tasered his stepson, and to have drunk beer on the job (“Can I — *belch* — see your license, sir? …”), among other things definitely illegal. And he gets only a 10-day suspension? Which is then somehow knocked down to a mere 5 days, by the troopers’ union? And the union further defended him by pointing out that most of the charges were never verified? (“Drinking on the job. Using a trooper weapon on your own kid … They keep repeating it like it’s a bad thing ….”)
As I say, I’m just a California city boy. I don’t know exactly how such things work in my home state. But I somehow imagine that the governor of California wouldn’t have to intercede at all. Such an individual would not just be banned from the trooper recruiting office, but also banned from serving in any law enforcement role in the state, ever again. And that would be after he did some jail time. It would be just … an automatic process, something the governor might first learn of only by getting as far as page 5 in the Sacramento Bee, on a slow day at the capitol.
Which I think is why this issue is really no-win for the Dems, and that Obama strategists would probably prefer that this line of attack just die down. After all, unless Palin et al. actually did something illegal, if you run Palin off McCain’s ticket over this issue, how do you end up looking? What would it say about your priorities, to the average voter? Why would the Dems want to marry themselves to the image of Mike Wooten anyway? Might as well start talking about how Willie Horton was just a little mixed up, misunderstood ….
I’ve got this crazy idea about what to focus on instead: let’s make this race about ideas, about competing visions of hope and the future of America. Or something. Anything but this. How’s that sound? Oh, you couldn’t hear me because of some mud in your ears? I’ve got some Q-tips somewhere, hold on ….
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:17 am
MT: Which I think is why this issue is really no-win for the Dems, and that Obama strategists would probably prefer that this line of attack just die down.
Agreed. Kristol at the heat of his NYT column yesterday:
And, I would think we really don’t want her there. For my money the press and the GOP are welcome to her. I’ve read there are discussions as to whether she should withdraw. I pretty much hope she doesn’t, and Obama’s supporters choose to ignore her. Let this mess all play out in the GOP’s backyard. If you go walking through dog poop you can pretty much bet you’ll get some stuck to your shoe.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:42 am
“A month after Monegan was dismissed, Palin revealed that at least two dozens calls were made from her staff members to Department of Public Safety officials, also questioning Wooten’s employment. But she denied orchestrating the calls.” AP
Bailey in that long call which I also listened to: “She really likes Walt a lot, but on this issue…”
But that’s not the quote of the day. The quote of the day comes from that hotbed of Obamamania and Bush Hatred, The American Enterprise Institute’s website in the person of Democratic strategist and shill, David Frum who writes in his column:
“Ms. Palin’s experience in government makes Barack Obama look like George C. Marshall. ”
But that’s pretty obvious to any informed human being – hardly need Frum to make the point. What’s key is that he states clearly what we also probably already know:
“It’s generally believed that if Mr. McCain had felt free to choose any running mate he wanted, he would have picked either his friend Joe Lieberman or former Pennsylvania governor Tom Ridge.”
Wait a minute – this guy’s a maverick who puts country first over winning elections and he didn’t choose either of the two running mates he thought would be best from his perspective ? This issue of Palin is about Palin barely at all – it’s about John McCain and the elements of the GOP he’s in thrall to in his bid for the White House. Rush Limbaugh and the Focus on the Family types were Palin’s biggest supporters. The extremists pushed Big Bad John McCain to choose a veep nominee who is derided as a a serious choice by national security wonks among the GOP like Frum and Charles Krauthammer. But it’s got nutcases like Michelle Malkin and Kathryn Jean Lopez, the resident high school cheerleader at NRO, creaming in their pants. Big fall for Big John. All the way down…
It’s also about gambling vs. judgment in Presidential decisions we can expect. (Remember this is the guy who was pushing to invade Iraq…what…three or four days after 9/11 and who was one of Ahmed Chalabi’s biggest Beltway backers. And who sings ditties about bombing countries on the campaign trail.) McCain’s actually gambling his campaign by choosing to run, not against Barack Obama, but against the image of Barack Obama that GOPers have attempted to inflate AND deride of a hopelessly inexperienced identity politics “gimmick” candidate fueled by hollow rhetoric of “change.” But he’s doing that by trying to outdo Obama with his own “gimmick”, because apparently he is no doubt appalled that what he perceives, or at least has characterized as a shallow gimmick is working better than his staunch he-man, old white guy credentials.
In the process he’s entirely disarming himself on what were probably his most compelling arguments – an experienced congressman and then Senator with a considerable history against a much less experienced state senator and one-term Senator whose credibility hinged more on how convincing his presentation of himself, his beliefs and his agenda has been than a long record chipping away on the national scene.
So a man who had put himself forward as placing national security first in his decisionmaking priorities doubled down on everything his campaign had complained was weak about Obama by…matching those alleged weaknesses, and then some, in his “one heartbeat away” pick.
I didn’t help get a guy who was nothing but a celebrity elected governor of California, but I have trouble seeing Steve Schmidt’s – or anyone else’s – genius in this pick. Obama’s maintaining a solid lead in the polls. It’s hard to imagine that, given that the dozen or so questions about McCain’s VP are going to continue to hover over the GOP convention, the fact of an Obama lead won’t hold and it might even grow at precisely that moment when McCain and his Veep pick should be getting a bounce out of all the attention to their campaign this week. If McCain does get a bounce post-convention, it’s going to be undecided far-right types like Roper coming into the fold because he pandered to their nuttiness and ideological vanities and hobby horses, not because the all-important independents who swing are increasingly drawn to the magic of McCain/Palin. I’ll put my money on Obama slowly but surely picking those decisive votes up as the GOP Movie of the Week plays itself out. And I’ll bet that for every “crazy” person who gets a thrill out of the Palin pick, there’ll be a “soft” GOPer – the kind who don’t go nuts when they see Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins on C-Span – who either decides to sit this one out or holds their nose and votes for Obama/Biden because they feel that McCain’s showed a bit too much of his ass as a craven opportunist (and not a very competent one) or because with Palin he has bent too far in the direction that makes them uncomfortable with some aspects of their party and shown himself not to be his own man i.e. the guy who would have picked Lieberman or Ridge because, with apologies to Dave Chappele and Rick James, “I’m John McCain, bitch!.” These days it’s pretty clear who is whose bitch.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:52 am
Damn, that sure is a lot of bloviating not to have said anything.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:56 am
MT – I agree with you 100% about the issues and such, but then we know who would win the election hands down if that’s all this election was about. Apparently certain folks couldn’t see keeping it on what would be best for the country . The Palin pick – which will fade after it’s cast a cloud of questions and confusions among all but the most in-the-tank faithful during what should be the GOP’s home-run week. Then we’re back to the issues – except that the GOP strategists are going to have to make sure their VP candidate knows what she’s supposed to say (like not slipping and suggesting that windfall oil profits tax that worked so well in her state.) But, yeah, issues. I’m all for them. Have been for years. As for the “craziness” of Palin being some kind of magic – that “Hail Mary” or “poisoned pawn” that occasionally works – as you suggested. There’s no point in arguing it anymore because we’ll where this thing is heading – or at least trending – in the minds of those “center-swing” folk, who whether we like it or not hold our country’s fate in their hands, in a week or so of news cycles and polling. This is one area – trends among particular groups – where I tend to trust polls to shed light on what’s really going down out there and what impact subsets of the electorate might have on the outcome.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:31 am
ok…this is where we always manage to lose what should obviously be a victory..who “we” are is not well-defined but we are not McCain voters and we do not even comprehend the Palin choice BUT I just spook with to of my employees (yes, they all get complete health/dental insurance) and they were NOT going to vote but now WILL vote for McCain because they love Palin/hate Obama and think she is completely qualified to handle national, foreign, fiscal etc affairs..I don’t get it, never will but she is clearly motivating a large group of people who will turn out the vote…
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:34 am
I’m keeping an open mind. Who’s got the better qualifications for the Vice-Presidency? Palin or Obama?
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:38 am
bob -
David Frum, one of the standard-bearers of your conservative movement, says that compared to Palin, Obama has the experience of a George Marshall. Why don’t you just take his word for it and close your mind on this one.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:40 am
Big David Frum fan, are you?
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:45 am
For those who can’t understand why an unwed pregnanvy and a particualrly vicious divprce should matter – you haven’t been paying attention! This is the US Media we’re talking about, you know, the people who bring you the missing white girl of the week?
So look at this story: Sex, corruption, vindictive in-laws, wife beaters, and now, a loony fringe party that wants Alaska to secceed from the union. Hey – now we’ve got “Gone with the Wind!”
Sorry but McCain stepped in it badly and the weather even screwed him! Already media are asking the Eagleton Question – when does she withdraw?
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:53 am
Latest post-Dem convention CBS Poll: “Before the Democratic convention, McCain enjoyed a 12-point advantage with independent voters, but now Obama leads among this group 43 percent to 37 percent.” I suspect Palin will accelerate rather than diminish that trend.
bob – you asked whether I’m a big David Frum fan. Yes I am, just as John McCain and Sarah Palin are big Hillary Clinton fans, what with her appearing in his ads and being lionized in her speeches.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:54 am
oops – sorry you asked evets, but I’d used that same Frum quote.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:57 am
“Big David Frum fan, are you?”
Am now.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:58 am
Of course Obama says he’s more experienced:
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:59 am
“Well, my understanding is that Governor Palin’s town of Wasilla has, I think, 50 employees. We’ve got 2,500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. You know, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month. So I think that our ability to manage large systems and to execute I think has been made clear over the last couple of years,” Obama said.
***
Apparently, Obama thinks he can make the case if he omits the fact that she is the Governor.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:00 am
Some guy name Nicholas Wapshott in the (rightwing) New York Sun opinion pages makes a good point using McCain’s own words to nail it:
“Whatever we conclude about Mrs. Palin, picking her reflects above all on the quality of Mr. McCain’s judgment, which gives us a window into a McCain presidency.
“In his book, ‘Worth the Fighting For,’ the senator explained how he made decisions. ‘I make them as quickly as I can, quicker than the other fellow, if I can. Often my haste is a mistake, but I live with the consequences without complaint.’ Are we ready for a president who admits to reaching conclusions too hastily?”
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:04 am
Wow, according to naysaying pinko commie Charles Krauthammer, McCain’s selection of Palin is near suicidal. All aboard the McCain Express! Next stop–over the cliff….
Marc, you definitely called it. Watching the GOP implode has become incredible entertainment. Get yer popcorn, folks!
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:14 am
“she is clearly motivating a large group of people who will turn out the vote…”
That was the desperate gamble – motivating the sorta-nutty right base who held McCain in disdain for stuff like immigration reform and McCain-Feingold. My bet – and I think it will be substantiated by polling over coming weeks – is that she’ll turn off more undecideds than she’ll motivate “not voting for that not-right-wing-enough” John McCain. We’ve got one of those here and he’s at the margins of American politics – one of those high-minded types who calls Joe Biden “Bidet” and thinks “ObamaMessiah” is clever. Sure these creeps will come out, but they’re not nearly as representative of the real swing voters in this election as the “undecideds” who are moving toward Obama. These nutty, disgruntled-with-McCain types weren’t undecided – they were the GOP equivalent of Berkeley lefties who don’t think Obama feeds their biases enough (sure there are more of them, but not a lot more.) Very fringe. I don’t think I’m going out on a limb in predicting that polling trends among real centrist swing voters – who decide the election, usually in the last weeks – are going to decisively shift toward Obama/Biden. And I say Obama/Biden because that “after the slash” name became more indicative of who the candidate is and how trustworthy they are than if McCain had picked one of the guys he really wanted on his ticket but was too chickenshit to choose.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:26 am
Gallup Daily – Obama hits 50% for first time. 8 point spread.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:31 am
Bob Williams -
Actually on a more serious note, one advantage Obama (or Biden) has over Palin is that he’s studied and thought about issues of national importance far more seriously than she has. I know you’re not supposed to say this kind of stuff cuz it makes you out to be all pointy-headed and inauthentic, out of touch with the heartland, but it really is significant. Basic knowledge and thoughfulness is obviously not sufficient to qualify for Prez or Veep but it is necessary. I’m hoping that, after Bush, more voters will see this — not holding my breath, just hoping.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:34 am
One thing we know about Palin is that she’s a person of deep faith and would never trivialize her religion.
Ooops: “Alaska’s governor asked the audience to pray for…a $30 billion national gas pipeline project that she wanted built in the state. ‘I think God’s will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that,’ she said.”
Wow – gotta stop this. It’s too much fun, but too easy. Back to those issues MT rightly asked that we focus on. Leave The Candy Store !
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:34 am
The quote above was via Sam Stein at HuffPo.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:47 am
In a bow to “issues” get ready for Palin to become “Sarah Palin, Earmark Queen” in Democratic parlance.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2008/09/the_earmark_queen.html
Actually, I’m very sorry that all of this personal stuff is crowding out a more serious vetting of just what a bogus gimmick McCain is trying to foist on the electorate.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:48 am
Alaska Independence Party: “I’m an Alaskan, not an American. I’ve got no use for America or her damned institutions.” (removed yesterday from their homepage)
Sarah Palin, addressing AIP in 2008: “Keep up the good work!”
Keep up the good work… to fringe political parties seeking to break up the United States of America? Way to go, John–great choice on #2! Yikes.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:49 am
If I were the editor of the National Enquirer I’d run a headline that was metaphorically true, yet would turn heads:
“Sarah Palin is Ted Steven’s Illegitimate Daughter”
Then I’d run the details on her “Bridge” flip-flop and her tenure as Pork Queen fleecing the feds (with Ted’s guidance no doubt) when she was mayor of some little dumpster of a town in AK.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:49 am
I’ve heard of the ‘God of the gaps’, but not the ‘God of the gas lines’. Could be she’s just ahead of me.
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:22 pm
“I think God’s will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that,’ she(Palin) said.”
Well it worked didn’t it reg? For you liberals, it’s all about style over substance.
On a serious note, the question that always gets asked, but rarely get a credible answer, is what exactly has Obama done in office? What has he ‘changed’? What has he ‘united’? What has he ‘accomplished’?
It appears to be a record of going along to get ahead, avoiding decisions(votes) on controversial bills, stepping up to the pork trough in DC with gusto, and spending more time running for the next higher office than doing what the voters were paying him for.
McCain’s record especially, and Palin’s it appears, have been the opposite. Their records are of reform, bucking the good-ole-boys, making tough decisions that would not necessarily please the status-quo, but was the right thing to do for the people, and generally making enemies in their own political party.
Obama, on the otherhand, is a darling of his own party, has NO record of bucking them(except now he knows they know he has to just long enough to win THE election) or any other way, including and especially the slop trough,
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:24 pm
McCain Campaign Manager Rick Davis: “”This election is not about issues. This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates.” (via TPM)
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:25 pm
“For you liberals, it’s all about style over substance.”
That’s a joke, right ?
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:30 pm
Obama has never bucked anyone in his party. Nor created dissension. In fact, if it wasn’t for Bill and Hillary Clinton supporting him in his quest, he would never have been the nominee. Palin isn’t worth talking about, because she’s a gimmick and a Ted Stevens-approved Pork Queen without a thought in her head useful to governing the USofA, but McCain has proved himself by picking Palin as a pander to the Limbaughish elements in his own party rather than the solid, credible men he wanted to choose between, a piddling little prick with no spine. Hopefully “But he was a POW…” hasn’t been recycled too many times already, because this was a lame, desperate act of almost absurd dimensions.
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:37 pm
Here, let me fix this for you:
“On a serious note, the question that always gets asked, but rarely get a credible answer, is what exactly has
ObamaG.W. Bush done in office? What has he ‘changed’? What has he ‘united’? What has he ‘accomplished’?”I love how Republicans sound like Democrats circa 2000-2004, when they talked about G.W. as an empty suit and substance-less. That’s the sound of desperation. Might as well hole up until 2016, Jimbo. Actually, considering how hosed up the GOP is, you might want to make that 2024.
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:40 pm
“I’m an Alaskan, not an American. I’ve got no use for America or her damned institutions.”
I believe it was those American institutions preventing her from developing the natural resources for her people she was referring to, and mad as hell at the time.
Damn. See what I mean? I want this woman. She’s hot with fire. I knew it was not just her looks that gave me a tingle up my leg, I’m not shallow. :}
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:44 pm
“On a serious note, the question that always gets asked, but rarely get a credible answer, is what exactly has G.W. Bush done in office? What has he ‘changed’? What has he ‘united’? What has he ‘accomplished’?”
That’s a joke right?
Mine was.
September 2nd, 2008 at 1:23 pm
MT – in defense of my use of the term “crazy people” as Palin’s most fervent base, I found this nugget in an M.Blumenthal “Nation” dispatch from the GOP convention, where he was querying folks about giving teens contraception info in the light of Bristol P’s delicate situation:
“But members of the Alaska delegation were forthright about their enthusiasm for faith-based abstinence-only programs and restricting abortion even in cases of rape and incest. One delegate, Grace Van Diest, told me she is so fervent about abstinence education that her three daughters are only allowed to go on dates with their father…”
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:06 pm
>her three daughters are only allowed
>to go on dates with their father
no, AL is *Alabama*
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:40 pm
I have to say that given Palin’s apparent flirtation with an Alaskan secessionist party, the crucial oil pipeline across her state, and Alaska’s obvious – as several GOPer spokesmorons have pointed out – critical, strategic position vis. Russian, McCain’s “We are all Georgian’s now!” position takes on a vital resonance. Does the “Alaska First” movement (which incidentally elected a previous governor, Walter Hickel under it’s banner, indicate a powderkeg of secessionist resentment such as swept south Ossetia, with the Russian bear poised to take advantage ? ‘Cuz we’d all be Georgians then – except better equipped to kick “Bear” ass.
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:50 pm
“Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is greate. When any sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.”
–Palin, 1984
“The Meaning of Life”
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Hey bb, most everybody writes dubious poetry when they’re 19. Here from Rebecca Mead, noting Obama’s youthful efforts in The New Yorker, 7/02/07:
In 1981, Feast, a literary magazine produced at Occidental College, published two poems by Obama, who was then a student there. The first, “Pop,” appears to be a loving if slightly jaded portrait of Obama’s maternal grandfather, with whom he spent a large part of his childhood. Free in structure and with a bold use of enjambment, it begins, “Sitting in his seat, a seat broad and broken / In, sprinkled with ashes, / Pop switches channels, takes another / Shot of Seagrams, neat, and asks / What to do with me, a green young man / Who fails to consider the / Flim and flam of the world, since / Things have been easy for me.” (snip)
Harold Bloom, who in fifty-three years of teaching literature at Yale University has had many undergraduate poems pressed hopefully upon him said, when reached by telephone in New Haven last week, that he was not familiar with Obama’s oeuvre. But after studying the poems he said that he was not unimpressed with the young man’s efforts—at least, by the standards established by other would-be bards within the political sphere. “At eighteen, as an undergraduate, he was already a much better poet than our former Secretary of Defense William Cohen, who keeps publishing terrible poetry,” Bloom said…And then there is Jimmy Carter, who is in my judgment literally the worst poet in the United States.”
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:51 pm
reg:
I like the detour to Obama’s poetry, but I think bunkerbuster is referring to Palin, Michael, of Monty Python fame.
From Sarah Palin’s attempts to get the Wasilla City Librarian fired for refusing to ban certain books, we can surmise that she would disapprove of her Python namesake for his role in creating that greatest of all films about religion, The Life of Brian.
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:09 pm
Got me with that – I assumed it was some high school effort by Sarah. I mean, it’s a very fine line between reality and satire these days. Forgive me for having become unable to make the distinction. One of the hazards of End Times…
September 2nd, 2008 at 5:47 pm
Leave it to the national media to glom onto a 17 year old’s pregnancy as the big story. And see the cover of US – coming to a supermarket checkout stand near you.
McCain is losing his “Base” – he got sore at TIME when asked to define “Honor”. Now he tells CNN no interviews with him or Palin untiil they stop being so mean. John doesn’t get it – maybe the boys and girls on the bus like him and bring him donuts, but this is the stuff they live for.
Sarah Palin is being defined as a flighty bimbo and that calls MCCain’s temperment and judgement into question. Plus the stories that he really wanted Joe Lieberman but couldn’t buck Karl Rove and the righties says it all.
September 2nd, 2008 at 5:49 pm
Can I change the topic for a second and comment on something the national media is ignoring – the clamp down on protestors at the convention. I know she’s no fave of yours Marc but when Amy Goodman gets manhandled and arrested for the “Crime” of committing journalism something is wrong. Think its worth a comment.
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:49 pm
How about this everyone? The trip to Ireland that McC’s spokeperson pointed to as international experience was…a stopover at Shannon Airport. Hell, I didn’t know I’d been to Ireland too! But in my family, you can’t claim it unless you left the airport….guess we-re just reality-based liberals.
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:56 pm
You don’t get it, richard. Just as Sarah Palin’s standing up to the Empire of Evil overseen by Ted Stevens and her own party in Alaska means that she’s tough enough to take on Putin (who she’s been keeping a careful eye on across the Bering Straits in her Alaskan National Guard Commander’s uniform), John McCain (did I mention he was a POW) has proven something very important about his character by refusing – in the wake of the torture of Tucker Bounds by Campbell Brown – to submit to interrogation in captivity by rogue journalist Larry King and the Axis of Cable. If he can refuse to talk to Kiing, he’s also strong enough to refuse to talk to Ahmadinejad, Raul Castro and Hugo Chavez.
McCain puts Country first. Which is why he’s shifted his interview schedule from a small cell at CNN to a joint appearance with Soulmate Palin on Jeff Foxworthy’s Country Music Television show.
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:20 pm
I agree with ric. The treatment of Goodman was uncalled for, and compare that to the (non) treatment of right wing screwballs in Denver last week. Unlike these morons (and whether you agree or disagree with her), Goodman doesn’t have a mean or threatening bone in her body. Reminds me of when Alexander Haig defended the rape and murder of four nuns in El Salvadore in the early 80′s by far right militiamen by suggesting that they deserved what they got.
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:43 pm
Yeah, Haig said they ran a roadblock.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:42 pm
reg wrote: “These nutty, disgruntled-with-McCain types weren’t undecided – they were the GOP equivalent of Berkeley lefties who don’t think Obama feeds their biases enough (sure there are more of them, but not a lot more.) Very fringe.”
As a Berkeley native and citizen for decades, I have to wonder, Reg. After Bush Sr. somehow won even with Dan Quayle on his ticket, I finally had to wake up to an unpleasant reality that moderate Republicans could never afford to ignore in keeping the coalition together.
The “mainstream” of Berkeley is quite fringe by U.S. standards. The fringe of that town that’s so far left of that mainstream as to scorn Obama is very small indeed, maybe a few thousand of the population. Yes, there are dozens of “Berkeleys” around the U.S., but I still don’t think these “fringes of fringes” add up.
I suggest a long, leisurely drive from San Diego to Seattle, to stop in at many towns along the way and chat up the locals. At the end, remind yourself: you just drove all the way through three Blue states. You’ll have to remind yourself of the aggregate political orientation, to shake off the impression that you just passed through some parts of Arkansas that were solidly in the bag for Mike Huckabee, and some parts of Wyoming where they scorned Mitt Romney as an unreliable and hypocritical flip-flopper on their various litmus test culture-war issues.
Yeah, with Palin, McCain loses some independents repulsed by Cultural Conservatives. But in any compensating gains toward the right, McCain doesn’t just get votes. He gets energy, enthusiasm, volunteer effort, and donations. Some independent who would otherwise have tossed McCain a vote would never give him those things. And it’s where McCain was weak before. Even if it doesn’t get him to the Oval Office, it probably helps the party further down the ballot.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:38 pm
Ooh, now this is juicy: Sarah Palin’s answers to an Eagle Forum questionnaire, gone missing on Eagle Forum’s site, but still available via the Wayback Machine.
I like this one: “Preserving the definition of “marriage” as defined in our constitution,” as part 2 of a three part answer to the question: “In relationship to families, what are your top three priorities if elected governor?”
The U.S. Constitution doesn’t define marriage. It doesn’t even mention marriage. I’d say this was either a chirpy ditzy beauty queen screwup or shrewdly calculated to leave Bircher-Right voters thinking she was still endorsing a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, as she reportedly had in 1998. (I don’t know if she does now.)
September 3rd, 2008 at 12:09 am
Oops, I’m wrong: actually the Alaska state constitution was amended in 1998 to ban gay marriage, and it does state that marriage will only be recognized between one man and one woman. The questionnaire went out out only to candidates in Alaska. So “our constitution” almost certainly meant “the Alaskan state constitution”, in Palin’s answer.
September 3rd, 2008 at 4:50 am
You stated the obvious about who Palin energizes – and yes they were the equivalent of Naderites in this particular situation, i.e. at least threatening to sit the thing out. Maybe Nader’s v. Obama ’08 isn’t as good an example as Gore ’00, when the Nader element actually hurt. But, no, energizing that part of the “base” in 2008 who would actually sit it out isn’t nearly as crucial in this election for McCain as building his centrist cred and moving those true “undecideds” in his direction based on the “trust/experience” factor that was his stronger suit. Maybe he gave up on that. If in the last two months of his campaign he decides to switch gears and remake John McCain as the candidate taking chances with something that’s new and exciting, I think he’s toast. For one thing, I don’t think this it’s sustainable. But there may be opportunities in failure here, as you suggest, by among other things pushing Palin to the front as a future star. Palin vs. Hillary in ’16 would be brutal. Hillary would have worse age/image issues – unfairly – than McCain and Palin would be about ten years younger than Hillary is now.
October 20th, 2008 at 9:19 am
[...] public links >> csp Hurricane Sarah Saved by titanita25 on Sun 19-10-2008 08-29-08 *CSP NEWS* DUI Fatalities Up in Colorado, Down [...]
March 9th, 2010 at 8:20 pm
Sawadee Kha! I’m about to go to Phuket and I’m quite excited about my trip. Already booked the flight to Bangkok and from there I’ll go explore around Chiang Mai and of course Phuket, I found your great website on Yahoo and it seems that you know a lot about Thailand. Could you kindly give me a hint where to stay in Phuket Town? I’ve heard there are a couple of fantastic resorts in the main city and in the south… Thank you in advance!