By The pick of Senator Biden for Barack Obama’s VP candidate I did find to be strange since Obama claims to be a person of change in Washington and then goes on to find the biggest Washington insider to be his VP. McCain’s VP pick on the other hand I found to be surprising and it is impossible now to know how it will turn out, but in the short term it was a great decision considering all the media attention it is currently taking away from Obama.
I did have to chuckle at the Obama campaign’s claims that she is inexperienced when she has at least if not more experience then Obama does. As an Alaska Governor she has been to the Iraq War theater just as many times as Barack Obama has to visit Alaska National Guard troops last year. Here is video of her during her trip and get this they even have a clip of her firing an M4 with the troops:
Could you imagine Barack Obama trying to fire an M4?
I also found it very condescending of the Obama campaign’s mocking of her achievement of being elected governor of a small town in Alaska which only further supports the stereotype of the liberal elitism against small town Americans that Obama has been accused of before.
Since this is a Korea blog, I thought it would interesting to point out that Governor Palin recently proclaimed Korea-Alaska Friendship Day in her home state:
WHEREAS, the state of Alaska honors the commitment of the Republic of Korea to the citizens of Alaska to continue strong international relations with the re-establishment of the Korea Consular Office in Anchorage.
WHEREAS, the Republic of Korea has been an important trading partner with the state of Alaska for almost four decades, accounting for over $700 million of the state’s exports in 2007.
WHEREAS, Korean air carriers, Korean Air and Asiana Airlines, provide vital air cargo links between Alaska and Korea and between Asia and North America.
WHEREAS, Alaska celebrates the contributions of over 7,000 Korean citizens and Korean-American citizens who add to our state’s rich and diverse cultural heritage.
WHEREAS, the state of Alaska thanks the Republic of Korea for the excellent public service provided to Alaska by Consul Hee-chul Kim, Consul General Ha-ryong Lee, and Alaska Honorary Consul William Bittner.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Sarah Palin, Governor of the state of Alaska, do hereby proclaim June 20, 2008, as:
Korea-Alaska Friendship Day
in Alaska, and encourage Alaska and Korea citizens to celebrate the strong ties of friendship, culture, trade, and education between the state of Alaska and the Republic of Korea. [State of Alaska]
Bottom line though is that Obama picked a Washington insider while McCain picked an outsider for VP. Does any of this really matter? Probably not, because people vote for the President, not the Vice President. What it has done is energize the McCain campaign and conservative voters who were suspicious of McCain and given McCain lots of free media attention for the public to hear his message. This will only increase interest in the Republican National Convention this week where McCain will probably have more viewers interested in hearing what he has to say do to this pick.
What McCain says during the convention to the people of America is what will decide people’s votes for him or not. This pick has just caused more people to be interested to hear what McCain has to say next week which where the real success of this pick lies.
1:37 pm on August 30th, 2008 1
GI Korea, as much as I respect you and your blog, I sometimes feel that if Mccain had chosen a tree stump as his running mate you would praise the choice all the same. This woman out of nowhere would literally be one prostate pollip away from leading the free world if Mccain won and something were to happen to him.
Reply
2:53 pm on August 30th, 2008 2
Without all the bio info, Palin just feels right. Visually, she and McCain are good match. Just by looking at her photo, I like her. Being photogenic is a big plus in politics. Let’s look at Bidden — well…he has experience and wisdom and other things that old people are supposedly embued with. But photogenic? Place Joe Biden along side Obama and I don’t get the same feeling of a good match when I look at them side-by-side. They both come across as career politicians with their polished shark teeth gleaming in the sun.
I think McCain made a good choice. He has a photogenic wife and now a photogenic running mate.
Her “feel” as coming from Alaska gives her the “feel” of an outdoor, independent and strong frontier woman. A pioneer image that comes with being from Alaska. (This is the stereo-type that the mind’s eye captures when you mention Alaska — same as all Hawaiians dance the hula nonsense — but none the less true as a very positive image.) Then look at her life-style and you see she does epitomize this image — NRA member, outdoors background, hunting, fishing, etc.
Then we come to her bio info. She is as American as apple-pie — well…sort of in an independent, head-strong, liberal thinking, strong-willed women. She is a person that made some life choices when young and has stuck by them. What’s more in the background you have a family that is apparently non-conventional — again fitting the independent Alaskan image. Unless she has some skeletons hidden in the closet, I immediately like her and her family.
She is a woman of principle — not just talk. As a pro-life advocate, she has just given birth to a child with symptoms of Down’s Syndrome. It is easy to talk the talk, but difficult to walk the walk. This decision for her family must have been one of the most difficult things imaginable, but no one can dare deny her as a woman who will stand by her convictions. As a mother of five children — including Trig, her newest addition — I dare any Democrat to take a pot shot at her.
On the issue of Iraq forget about the photo ops of her in Iraq and NRA stance. Her son 19-year old son Track is heading to Iraq in Sept 2008. Ask any mother who sends their son off to war about the gut-wrenching feeling. There is no greater statement if she comes out and says she supports the troops in Iraq than this. Don’t you think that as Governor, she could have pulled some strings for her eldest son? Some would reflect on Bush Jr. during the Vietnam War period and how she handled this. She didn’t flinch — and stands as a woman who walks the walk. And every mother in America who has/had a son or daughter in Iraq/Afghanistan or any past war will immediately identify with this woman.
Some idiots compare Obama graduating from Harvard while she graduated from a podunk college in Idaho. But so what? My nieces graduated from those podunk colleges in Idaho too. And so did the majority of American college graduates!!! Not everyone is blessed with the brilliance of Obama. But educational excellence does not lead to Presidential brilliance. Clinton graduated from Yale and proceeded to having sexual slurpies in the Oval Office. Bush graduated from Harvard and well…forget this line of thought. Anyway, Palin’s educational record reflects the same experience of most of America — and makes it easy to identify with this woman.
Read her bio. Unless some deep hidden secret comes out, she has a whole group of positives going for her. Yes, there is the claim of lack of experience, but let’s look at the Democratic Presidential candidate who only shows up for 50 percent of the votes as Congressman and simply votes the party line — not his conscience. His VAST experience from 1998-2004 as an Illinois Senator and US Senator from 2005 to present. Obama could compete with Palin on experience levels — only Obama’s running for President. Of course, against Bidden she loses hands down for political acumen. But does she really need all that background as VP? Dan Quail is used as an example as a flunky VP — but seriously, Quail’s political experience/history is closer to Obama’s than Palin. Bottomline: She doesn’t have any national political experience, but this doesn’t necessarily make her a negative.
Sure Palin was only on the small town City Council, elected its mayor and then became governor. Who gives a damn? Abraham Lincoln and a whole group of the frontiersman image — which she projects — came from the same HUMBLE political background. If you don’t think this is a BIG PLUS — think again. Americans eat this stuff up.
But others claim that she may have to sit in the Oval Office seat if McCain bites the bullet over some catastrophy like old age. Look at Cheney with his bypass surgery — and that is one I did NOT support for VP. But the truth is that it is NOT a great determiner. Look at Harry Truman, who people hated at the time, but now is revered as probably one of the greatest Presidents because he made some hellishly tough decisions — which were ultimately right, but at the time political suicide — dropping the nukes and firing MacArthur. From her short performance as Governor, I believe she could grow into the shoes. The difference between she and Obama is that Obama does NOT have time to grow into the shoes. He will be wearing them if elected — and that scares the living bejeezus out of me.
Some say that she will not gain Hillary Clinton’s followers, but I say do you really want them? The second thing I say is that as women they will look at her as an archetypal woman reflecting the modern values. The liberal side will see traits in her that reflect their lifestyles. The conservative side will see in her the life values that they cherish. She has something for everybody.
Reply
6:28 pm on August 30th, 2008 3
Palin has just as much experience as Obama in government, but she has a couple year executive experience running a state while Obama has none. She’s also head of the state’s National Guard, again vs. Obama’s zero military leadership. And unlike Obama, she has accomplished a great deal in her two years of governor of Alaksa. You can’t name any significant legislation with Obama’s name on it b/c there just isn’t any. Anyone who complains about Palin’s experience and points to Obama instead is a complete hypocrite.
Reply
6:53 pm on August 30th, 2008 4
Can you say history again? SPLIT TICKET!!!! It has happened before (once?) but Obama and a female (true woman not hillary who pees standing up). I said it first…
>.<
John
Reply
7:19 pm on August 30th, 2008 5
Sarah Palin and North Korea…
John McCain’s pick for vice-president, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, doesn’t have a clear record on North Korea policy that I can find. However, as GI Korea points out, she is well aware of South Korea-U.S. ties having proclaimed Korea-Alaska Friend…
7:25 pm on August 30th, 2008 6
Richardson since when does VP canidate= Presidential? And it is ironic since NOW the republican canidate after ENDLESS attacks in his ad campaigns of the Obabma camp about “experience” (Hypocrisy?) is now having to answer himself. And to get back on track you should realize that the argument would be a Biden vs. Palin instead when it comes to VP “experience”.
Reply
7:57 pm on August 30th, 2008 7
VP does not equal Pres, but you need to read your own pundits; there has been a lot of speculation on the left of the what-if-McCain-dies sort, making Palin’s experience central. That’s why its NOT Palin vs. Biden; the left and media aren’t framing it that way (almost no comparison of those two at all, yet).
Bottom line; Palin has as much govt experience as Obama, but a qualitative advantage (exec/mil leadership, actually has accomplishments to her name rather than inspiring-yet-hollow speeches).
So yes, it’s entirely hypocritical of those who criticize her experience but support Obama. This is sort of a trap for Obama supporters to fall into, and they are.
Reply
8:49 pm on August 30th, 2008 8
Obama has already made a claim that he finds automobile trade deficit between South Korea and US unfair and the possibility of FTA is remote, considering how he thinks the US is on the unfair side.
But he does not mention anything in regard to the trade deficit between the US and Japan. Japan sells a heck lot more cars in the US than South Korea. Japanese consumers have no interest in buying American cars (they love them German cars however), while Koreans are indirectly buying American company car called GM-Daewoo.
I am afraid that Obama is one of those typical asia-blind biased politician who knows nothing about what is happening in Asia… and that he will just maintain the good-ole cozy relationship with Japan while occasionally slash at China and completely ruin relationship with South Korea (you anti-Koreans will probably love this then).
That’s my two cents… but I don’t know crap about politics… so I maybe wrong.
Reply
8:51 pm on August 30th, 2008 9
The shameless method of argumentation employed by some of of the people on this thread is hilarious. It was the Republicans who kept bringing up the experience issue, and yet Democrats are not allowed to bring the issue up themselves in response when it is perfectly valid?
No doubt, Palin’s defenders would rather engage in circular logic because they prefer to ignore more meaty issues:
1. Troopergate.
2. Palin is a big oil candidate (as is McCain).
3. Palin would have creationism taught in schools and probably doesn’t even believe in evolution (or a woman’s right to choice).
4. She recently refused to classify polar bears as an endangered species and even defended the decision in the New York Times. Is this the kind of person who is going to lead a “green revolution” such as McCain describes?
5. Palin admitted as recently as 2007 that she had not been paying attention to the Iraq war and therefore didn’t know much about it, and yet proud supporters of the US military such as GI Korea think she would actually be a good Commander in Chief?
If people can do nothing but bad-mouth the Dems’ campaign strategies and arguments, rather than actually articulate why Palin is qualified to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency, and why her track record in Alaska shows her policies and positions would be good for the country, then they must think people are stupid not to see that that is just more of the same old hot air. And they say liberals are “elitist” and look down on ordinary voters? Ha!
Reply
8:55 pm on August 30th, 2008 10
“I am afraid that Obama is one of those typical asia-blind biased politician”
Did you know that Obama actually lived in Indonesia for several years in his youth? Your statement is absurd.
Reply
9:14 pm on August 30th, 2008 11
Indonesia isn’t South Korea…
Look at all the hatred going on between Asian countries of late.
Just because he lived in Indonesia does not make him unbiased toward Asian nations. In fact, biase is probably more so than someone from outside the Asian influence.
Reply
9:36 pm on August 30th, 2008 12
IAAFM, when you actually have something of substance to say, rather than uninformed wild speculation, come back and talk to me.
Meanwhile, from the Alaskan political blog “Mudflats”:
“Governor “Squeakyclean”….or not.
“Sarah Palin’s sister Molly married a guy named Mike Wooten who is an Alaska State Trooper. Mike and Molly had a rocky marriage. When the marriage broke up, there was a bitter custody fight that is still ongoing. During the custody investigation, all sorts of things were brought up about Wooten including the fact that he had illegally shot a moose (yes folks this is Alaska), driven drunk, and used a taser (on the test setting, he reminds us) on his 11-year old stepson, who supposedly had asked to see what it felt like. While Wooten has turned out to be a less than stellar figure, the fact that Palin’s father accompanied him on the infamous moose hunt, and that many of the dozens of charges brought up by the Palin family happened long before they were ever reported smacked of desperate custody fight. Wooten’s story is that he was basically stalked by the family.
“After all this, Wooten was investigated and disciplined on two counts and allowed to kept his position with the troopers. Enter Walt Monegan, Palin’s appointed new chief of the Department of Public Safety and head of the troopers. Monegan was beloved by the troopers, did a bang-up job with minimal funding and suddenly got axed. Palin was out of town and Monegan got “offered another job” (aka fired) with no explanation to Alaskans. Pressure was put on the governor to give details, because rumors started to swirl around the fact that the highly respected Monegan was fired because he refused to fire the aforementioned Mike Wooten. Palin vehemently denied ever talking to Monegan or pressuring Monegan in any way to fire Wooten, or that anyone on her staff did. Over the weeks it has come out that not only was pressure applied, there were literally dozens of conversations in which pressure was applied to fire him. Monegan has testified to this fact, spurring an ongoing investigation by the Alaska state legislature. But, before this investigation got underway, Palin sent the Alaska State Attorney General out to do some investigative work of his own so she could find out in advance what the real investigation was going to find. (No, I’m not making this up). The AG interviewed several people, unbeknownst to the actual appointed investigator or the Legislature! Palin’s investigation of herself uncovered a recorded phone call retained by the Alaska State Troopers from Frank Bailey, a Palin underling, putting pressure on a trooper about the Wooten non-firing. Todd Palin (governor’s husband) even talked to Monegan himself in Palin’s office while she was away. Bailey is now on paid administrative leave.
“As if this weren’t enough, Monegan’s appointed replacement Chuck Kopp, turns out to have been the center of his own little scandal. He received a letter of reprimand and was reassigned after sexual harrassment allegations by a former coworker who didn’t like all the unwanted kissing and hugging in the office. Was he vetted? Obviously not. When he was questioned about all this, his comment was that no one had asked him and he thought they all knew. Kopp, defiant, still claimed to have done nothing wrong and said to the press that there was no way he was stepping down from his new position. Twenty four hours later, he stepped down. Later it was uncovered that he received a $10,000 severance package for his two weeks on the job from Palin. Monegan got nothing.”
************
Reportedly the results from the official investigation are due on Oct. 31st. Interesting timing that I personally do not think McCain’s advisors paid due attention towards.
In any case, can anyone imagine the same type of shenanigans happening in the White House?
Embarrassing, and downright scary.
Reply
10:04 pm on August 30th, 2008 13
“Could you imagine Barack Obama trying to fire an M4?”
Ah yes, no elitism there, I see.
It’s funny that Republicans really see elitism as such a devastating charge, and liking arugula but not Nascar or whatever is supposed to magically make you out of touch. Yet Democratic voters make up half the electorate, and let’s face it, do a lot of Republicans in Congress drink Pabst Blue Ribbon every night?
Reply
1:57 am on August 31st, 2008 14
I see GI Korea has seen all the same political talk shows the rest of us have seen, and stole their talking points
. Here’s my question, how is she going to campaign and possibly be second in line to the presidency with an infant? It was obviously a campaign move by McCain and nothing else, which is just desperation on his campaigns part because he has no real platform. The Iraqi government wanting us out annd the “time horizon” for troop withdraw has taken all the air out of his position on Iraq, and that leaves as his supporters… rich white dudes. So pick a woman and see if you can steal Hillary’s support.
Reply
2:03 am on August 31st, 2008 15
I believe Obama has talked about trade issues with Japan (beef in particular):
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/15/us/politics/15check.html?_r=3&scp=2&sq=korea&st=nyt&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
He probably doesn’t complain about Japan not buying enough American cars because American car makers still lag behind Toyota and Honda in quality car-making, and even if they were sold cheaply in Japan, its unlikely they’d be popular.
Reply
2:06 am on August 31st, 2008 16
Oh, and my two cents on Palin:
There’s no way in hell I’d vote for someone who supports teaching “creation science” in schools. If she thinks that BS has the same credibility as real science, she’s far too stupid to be placed within a heartbeat of the presidency.
Reply
2:06 am on August 31st, 2008 17
Slightly off-topic and just to bring it down to the non-elitist level…
She’s kinda hot! GOT MILF? She’s got that dirty librarian thing going doesn’t she? I can just imagine the whole whipping off of the eyeglasses and the head swish to let the hair down.
Reply
7:34 am on August 31st, 2008 18
Alaska – Gorea friendship treaty???? She just lost my vote.
Reply
7:41 am on August 31st, 2008 19
Could you imagine Barack Obama trying to fire an M4?
Depend on how many real Americans are standing in front of him. In the end, Obama, like Kerry and Gore want to destroy America.
Gore wants all Americans eating grubs and living in caves (while liberals lord over the ignorant masses in lavish oppulance)
Kerry and the liberals of his ilk, sold America out during the Vietnam war. He is a Hanoi Jane but just a bony ugly version. A coward and a liar. GWB2 is 1000x times the hero!
And now Obama…. Islomo-facist!
Why do democrats hate America?
Reply
7:50 am on August 31st, 2008 20
Looks like McCain’s choice for VP has just won him the election.
Reply
9:50 am on August 31st, 2008 21
I have to say that I was slightly impressed by her news conference presenting her as the VP nominee. She came off as exactly what she is…a housewife who became Governor. Politically, she reached out for Hillary’s women voters and presented her family as a counter to Biden’s. Me thinks that the Obama camp is sweating bullets about right now, afterall…what are they going to attack her about that will not blow up in their faces?
IMHO…Obama will do his best to destroy America if he is let into the White House.
Reply
1:37 pm on August 31st, 2008 22
#19, been asleep the last 8 years?
Reply
1:45 pm on August 31st, 2008 23
Just Kidding. But honestly if she wins Tina Fey will another personality to mock with material.
Reply
3:48 pm on August 31st, 2008 24
She actually kind of looks like Tina Fey.
Reply
8:03 pm on August 31st, 2008 25
“Looks like McCain’s choice for VP has just won him the election.”
Laughable and so far from the truth. Palin was not vetted and while people might be interested in her now, they have already discovered her “good side”. Now the people get to do what McCain should have done and vet her, but now that vetting will be done in public. It’s already looking pretty bad for her. McCain needed to change the story for the weekend and he did. The problem with that strategy is that she is still around and her numbers aren’t looking too hot.
From USA Today,
“39% say she is ready to serve as president if needed, 33% say she isn’t, and 29% have no opinion.
That’s the lowest vote of confidence in a running mate since the elder George Bush chose then-Indiana senator Dan Quayle to join his ticket in 1988. In comparison, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden was seen as qualified by 57%-18% after Democrat Barack Obama chose him as a running mate last week.”
Palin is going to be a problem. Exciting the far-right anti-science, anti-choice, pro-gun, pro-Big Oil base is not what McCain needed. It was an impulsive reaction to a highly sucessful Dem convention. Again, McCain and Palin might have stolen the headlines from Obama for the weekend, but those headlines will come back to haunt this ticket once we know more about her.
Reply
8:14 pm on August 31st, 2008 26
“Could you imagine Barack Obama trying to fire an M4?”
No and I am so thankful for that.
Reply
9:25 pm on August 31st, 2008 27
The left should have picked HRC. She could have won. The left fell for a smooth talker. Not the first time that has happened. The last time it was the German People.
As for me, I’m voting for Big Mac and the “hottie” VP. If Mac should crok (God forbid) she can hand the kid to his Daddy and do a better job than B-O. I’m no rich white boy either. However I do own one house. Two shotguns. Two rifles. One car–a Mitsubishi.
There is simply no contest.
Reply
10:30 pm on August 31st, 2008 28
Why is the question of her infant being brought up? Billions of women get up every morning and head to the fields, offices, or wherever to do whatever job is needed to survive. The little infant is packed on their backs, left with grandma, put in a preschool, or whatever.
The point is that billions of women go to work — with the infant or not — but the point is that they do their jobs from the most menial to the executive levels.
Infant Trig may have significance in discussions of pro-life convictions of Palin and the strength and support of her family, but he doesn’t have a damn thing to do with the job. From the African woman with the baby on her back to the Korean woman who leaves the child with Grandma to the female SSgt who drops her kid off at preschool — they get their jobs done and make provisions for their child while they are working. Palin has been — and will be — no different from the billions of women in this world.
All those Democrats who bring this up are chauvanist pigs — whether they are female or male. Sorry those comments just pissed me off.
Reply
10:34 pm on August 31st, 2008 29
“The left should have picked HRC. She could have won. The left fell for a smooth talker. Not the first time that has happened. The last time it was the German People.”
GI, I can’t believe the kind of scum that visit this site. I would keep a tighter leash on them if you want your (sometimes
) thoughtful analysis to be taken seriously.
Reply
10:42 pm on August 31st, 2008 30
Kalani…
Trig (her infant son) has Downs and will require more attention. Calling Dems chauvanist pigs is a little much. It’s a vaild concern that GOP strategists have brought up as well. No one is saying that this is a huge problem for her. They’re just highlighting that it could be difficult to balance the needs of a Downs child with her highly unlikely role as VP.
I don’t think that this will be a problem though. In two months she’ll be back in Alaska with her family anyways.
Reply
10:53 pm on August 31st, 2008 31
The point is that Trig may need special care — but he doesn’t need his mother there twenty-four hours a day. At this stage in life and for the next three-four years, a nanny or special care provider can give the needed attention for this child — with Mommy coming home after work to provide his daily supplement of motherly love. As a VP, her salary most certainly can afford this care. I’m saying it is NOT a factor at all — and should never have been brought up in the first place to try to score some cheap points.
Reply
11:12 pm on August 31st, 2008 32
Scott@12,
I agree with you that Troopergate could get sticky. But I wonder if someone with the qualifications to get into the Governor’s seat would be so petty and stupid — after winning over the incumbent Republican and former Democratic governor on corruption issues — as to jeopardize her position over a feud with the brother-in-law? Yes, one of her staffers did make some calls and she has been suspended. But the investigation is on-going.
But may I bring one thing up for thought — forgetting of the brother-in-law for a moment — but Monegan was in power under the old corrupt administration (now on trial for corruption). Because he was severed WITHOUT A COMPENSATION PACKAGE, could he have been at the center of other embarassing charges (not specified and best kept hidden)? Is it a possibility that formal charges against him could lead to a real bucket of worms dealing with the grass-roots folks who are there to administer “law-and-order”? Yes the timing for investigation results are not a good for the McCain-Palin effort. I say let it play out and let the chips fall where they might.
But if I might make a parallel as to the LMB BKK allegations that ran right through the Korean Presidential election. Perhaps the voters like in Korea can see through — or atleast believe it is a political ploy) — and simply disregard the results even if it is negative.
Reply
1:01 am on September 1st, 2008 33
# 27, you are very impressive, and your knowlege on McDonalds menu items is tremendous. You must be from Texas, right?
Reply
2:18 am on September 1st, 2008 34
Those of you who are excited to see the McCain/Palin team win this fall should make sure to take care of the two things you can do:
(1) Register to vote, and cast that ballot. Republicans Abroad and Democrats Abroad are both interested and actively signing up voters regardless of party affiliation (or no affiliation at all). Military members can ask their Voting Assistance Officer for help and get hooked up that way.
(2) Donate to the campaign. Taking the fight to the other side costs money, as we know, and Senator McCain also has to compensate for the fact that all the media are deep in the tank for Senator Obama — that means the Republican campaign has to communicate all that much harder. If you’ve never before contributed to a political campaign (I have to admit, I sent John Edwards some money in 2004) now is the time. Anything will help.
Reply
4:02 am on September 1st, 2008 35
“Taking the fight to the other side costs money, as we know, and Senator McCain also has to compensate for the fact that all the media are deep in the tank for Senator Obama.”
While some might prefer Obama, they are a lot harder on him. They let McCain get away with everything just like always. He has always been the Media Darling.
I agree though. Everyone needs to make sure to register and vote.
http://www.democratsabroad.org/
Reply
5:30 am on September 1st, 2008 36
That Alaska State Trooper thing is based on *rumor* and is still under investigation.
On the other hand, we *know* Obama’s pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., is a blatant racist and was Obama’s ‘guide’ or whatever for ~20 years. There is no conceivable way that Obama did not know who he was in bed with. Then he lied about it.
Talk about getting away with it and being a media darling; you must blind or stupid to miss that, or of the same ilk so it doesn’t matter to you.
Reply
6:35 am on September 1st, 2008 37
I liked the cartoon in today’s International Herald Tribune with John McCain introducing Sarah Palin saying,”An inexperienced,anti-choice,pro-gun,creationist,drilling zealot–isn’t that what women want?”
Reply
6:47 am on September 1st, 2008 38
Weak argument as usual. Changing the story to Obama is all the GOP has got. For once, speak with substance and show us why McCain/Palin should be elected. Otherwise, stop dancing around like you have something to say. Wait. Keep dancing and make the election even easier for Obama.
If you can’t see how far the Media has gone NOT to show McCain as the goon he is, then there is no reason to have this discussion.
Reply
6:58 am on September 1st, 2008 39
The Clam clams up when a Wright wrong is mentioned!
Reply
7:24 am on September 1st, 2008 40
Are you kidding? How did I “clam” up? Comparing illegally firing state employees with a pastor makes no sense.
This thread was about Palin, not Rev. Wright.
Reply
7:53 am on September 1st, 2008 41
Actually, while the main topic of the post McCain’s pick, it is also about nominees and VP picks in general. Obvious to most.
As for the questions of moral integrity and character, I agree that comparing unsubstantiated rumors of firing employees does not compare to Obama’s proven ~20 year record of following a racist reverend (as Obama’s personal guide, in fact).
You can’t talk about Palin’s experience w/o highlighting Obama’s, which is quantitatively about the same and qualitatively less.
You can’t bring up ‘troopergate’ w/o calling the Wright skeleton out of Obama’s closet, with is entirely damning.
That leaves you with petty complaints about Palin’s beliefs. Good luck with that, you’ll need it (aside from all the help the mainstream media will offer up, that is).
Reply
9:09 am on September 1st, 2008 42
Before I decided to vote for Obama I would want to know why Obama attended schools in a foreign country during the “FORMATIVE YEARS”? What was the school’s curriculum? What is his true religion? Wright’s so called church seems to preach more racial hate than peace and love of fellow man. Why did Obama choose to start attending this type of ritual in the first place?
Reply
5:34 pm on September 1st, 2008 43
“…unsubstantiated rumors of firing employees…”
While it does not suggest guilt in the least, she has hired counsel. About 4 months too late in my opinion.
The Wright thing is out of the closet, pal. The GOP blew that chance in the primaries. If they weren’t so intent on disrupting the Dems, then they could have sat on that until now. That would have been a serious game-changer. Now, it’s old news. That was poor management.
“That leaves you with petty complaints about Palin’s beliefs.”
There is nothing petty about my extreme disagreements with her far-right beliefs.
Reply
5:51 pm on September 1st, 2008 44
So it doesn’t matter to you, and presumably the rest of his supporters, that for ~20 years Obama followed a blatantly racist reverend? It already said a lot about Obama (who said he could no more denounce the reverend than his own gramdma – and then denounced him!) It says just as much for his supporters. You can just attempt to sweep that unappetizing fact under the rug, say it’s in the past, and hope people just forget about it?
Well, you can hope it goes away in one hand, crap in the other, and see which one fills up first!
Wright is a *huge* issue for Americans that aren’t, you know, racist.
Reply
6:22 pm on September 1st, 2008 45
I’m not going to allow you to trap me into this conversation and force me to agree with loons like you. I didn’t say people would forget about it. If you would read the text, you would see that I said it was released at a bad time and that people have already made up their mind about what to think regarding Wright. I’m not comdemning or condoning Wright, but I know that Obama will be a much better President than McCain and that’s why people are looking past Wright. If McCain brings it up again (he will) it’s just going to show everyone that McCain has no platform other than the anti-Obama one. That is not a winner.
So what do you think Obama took away from Wright? Do you think Obama is “racist” like you so callously called me? Or can we move on to a real discussion and quick kicking sand in hopes of distracting people from what a dangerous president McCain would be.
Reply
6:50 pm on September 1st, 2008 46
#45
I’m curious as to your views as to what makes McCain “dangerous”. I’ve heard this repeatedly applied to Obama from the Republican side, but I’ve never heard the “dangerous” remark before from the Democrats. Yes, they disagree with all he stands for, but that is different from the “dangerous” appelation with all its implications.
I’m not looking for an argument, just an explanation of this view.
Reply
7:55 pm on September 1st, 2008 47
So it’s ok with you that Obama’s personal guide and pastor for ~20 years was a racist? Knowing that isn’t enough of an issue to not vote for him? You don’t wonder what sort of person would keep going back for ~20 years of that? I just want to be real clear about that. And if that’s not enough, one has to wonder what would be? It’s an issue that isn’t going to just quietly go away, no matter how much you wish it.
Reply
9:16 pm on September 1st, 2008 48
Simply put, he has displayed his ability time and time again to be rash, impulsive and has the tendency to take things very personally. GOP lawmakers are the ones who have made most of the claims that he would be dangerous.
From Cochran (R) and Santorum (R):
“The thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine. He is erratic. He is hotheaded. He loses his temper and he worries me.”
“John was very rough in the sandbox. Everybody has a McCain story. If you work in the Senate for a while, you have a McCain story. . . . He hasn’t built up a lot of goodwill.”
So, between his cavalier attitude towards Russia (removal from G8), his thoughtless jabs at Iran (“Bomb Iran” and his cigarette comment), his Vietnam-era Domino theory ideas of fighting wars and his public display of anger and hot-headedness, he would be so dangerous to us and our allies.
And that’s just one element of that danger. I have not even mentioned the economy and how he would alienate even more allies. Dem officials won’t say that he’s dangerous because he starts to whine and cry about his time as a POW.
The GOP likes to say that Obama is dangerous because of his New Deal/Great Society ideals. Obama is dangerous to far right-wingers because they disagree with him on gun control, health-care and abortion. McCain is dangerous because he is trigger happy.
Reply
9:19 pm on September 1st, 2008 49
Richardson
It might come back briefly, but for now IT IS GONE.
You know how this game works. Most voters have moved on and see other issues as a little more pressing. You know, the issues that effect THEM.
Reply
9:19 pm on September 1st, 2008 50
And you avoided my question.
Reply
9:28 pm on September 1st, 2008 51
Clam,
Thanks…I’ll check this angle out.
Reply
10:00 pm on September 1st, 2008 52
I think the Hitler comment pissed off the Obama youth. Whats wrong with Texas I wonder. It isn’t the only state where you can own guns, cars and homes. I was stationed there for a few years. Left in 2002 bound for 2ID. Learned why they called it the “no smile zone”.
Reply
10:33 pm on September 1st, 2008 53
Nothing in any of Obama’s policy positions suggests that he’s been politically influenced by Rev. Wright.
Take a look at McCain, and you’ll find more policy positions that are influenced by radical religious groups.
Reply
10:54 pm on September 1st, 2008 54
James…
Dead on! And Palin is a direct influence of that bloc.
Retired…
Yeah, Texas doesn’t have more guns, cars, homes, violence, criminals or murder yet they use the death penalty more than any other state. They have executed more than 400 people since ‘76. That’s just under 1/3 of total executions in the entire country during the same time period.
Reply
11:37 pm on September 1st, 2008 55
I would have more respect for the Left if they would not find fault with every last thing their political opponents do. It’s just more of the “gotcha” politics that Obama isn’t supposed to be playing. “Troopergate” is nothing more than speculation at this point. This is not the change we were promised.
Reply
12:16 am on September 2nd, 2008 56
What world are you living in? What has every McCain ad been about?
Tell me, Knickerbokcer. Go to their official Youtube sites and tell me.
Obama’s page is full of substance about what he wants to do to help people, why he wants to do it and how he will do it. The most viewed and commented-on videos are the ones that have nothing to do with McCain or “gotcha” politics. They all have to do with issues that people are concerned about. Of the 1195 videos there are less than seven Obama ads directly attacking McCain and the GOP.
McCain’s page is the opposite. His videos are either all attacks on Obama or full of nonsensical and unrelated POW garbage. Of the 255 videos on there, 47 are direct attacks on Obama. So, 1/5 of his internet campaign is devoted only to playing “gotcha” politics.
But you “would have more respect for the Left if they would not find fault with every last thing their political opponents do.”
Want to rephrase?
While Troopergate might be speculation at this point, there still are valid reasons to be slightly concerned of wrongdoing. Pointing that out is not the same as “gotcha” politics. She might have abused her power. That’s not something to start making excuses for.
Reply
5:27 am on September 2nd, 2008 57
I think the Clam and James may be the same individual and both (he/she) seem to be a little: (can I use the “R” word on this forum?
Reply
6:34 am on September 2nd, 2008 58
Try again, pal.
What is the “R” word? Am I lost?
Reply
7:06 am on September 2nd, 2008 59
Palin is a young rising star very much like Obama. The Left should acknowledge her record, without speculation about unconfirmed events, then move on. Instead, they choose to demonize her. The woman is an impressive person by any measure. To deny that is to belittle the achievements of someone who is clearly an accomplished American woman.
Reply
8:11 am on September 2nd, 2008 60
clam; Are you saying that you disagree with the execution of the Law? If so, than I see that we have a basic disagreement in our thinking. Therefore your logic can not be trusted. A basic assumption can then be made. If your against it, logical and clear thinking Americans should be for it. Thanks for clearing that up for me. I require no further information from you.
Reply
8:23 am on September 2nd, 2008 61
If I may, can I ask just one question? What one thing of note has Obama accomplished in his lifetime? Name just one thing.
Of course you can do the same for Sarah, but she is not running for president.
The great orators of the 20th century do not have a very good track record as far as world affairs go. He is writing a lot of checks with his mouth, does he have the bones to cash them?
Reply
8:26 am on September 2nd, 2008 62
Clam@48,
Checked out the “hot-headed” and “dangerous” angle:
Comment by Sen Thad Cochran (R — Miss) based on an event one year after McCain came in office in 1987 during a meeting with Sandinistas. But he also said that he’d observed McCain engaging in a physical tussle with a Sandinista while on a diplomatic mission led by Sen. Bob Dole and others in the fall of 1987. “McCain was down at the end of the table and we were talking to the head of the guerrilla group here at this end of the table, and I don’t know what attracted my attention,” Cochran said. “But I saw some kind of quick movement at the bottom of the table and I looked down there and John had reached over and grabbed this guy by the shirt collar and had snatched him up like he was throwing him up out of the chair to tell him what he thought about him or whatever. I don’t know what he was telling him but I thought, good grief everybody around here has got guns and we were there on a diplomatic mission. I don’t know what had happened to provoke John, but he obviously got mad at the guy and he just reached over there and snatched him.”
Diplomatic? Definitely not. But I’d sure like to know what would make a US Senator grab a Sandinista by the shirt. Must have been good…and I’d like to know the rest of the story which Cochran knows nothing about. Sounds very flaky story as Cochran was on the same “diplomatic” mission and he didn’t know what caused this “diplomatic flap”? Give me a break. This whole story comes off sounding like political back-stabbing during the Republican nomination process. Cochran doesn’t get many points — and McCain certainly comes out looking like someone who doesn’t take crap from anyone. But maybe he’s mellowed in 21 years.
But fast-forward to after McCain’s nomination and we see that they supposedly buried the hatchet. Cochran said McCain had included him on a recent campaign visit to Mississippi. He told the Sun Herald that McCain is the best man for the job. Big change in the story, huh? As I said, this whole thing was simply politics.
As to the remarks by former Sen from Penn and arch-conservative Rick Santorum, supporter of Mitt Romney, it shows that there is a real bone of contention with McCain from the far-right. Santorum has said he would support whoever wins the Republican nomination for president in 2008, with the exception of John McCain. “I don’t agree with him on hardly any issues. I don’t think he has the temperament and leadership ability to move the country in the right direction.” He criticized McCain for voting against the Bush Tax cuts — he was one of only two Republicans to do so. Santorum pointed to McCain’s opposition to conservative positions on drug re-importation, federally funded embryonic stem cell research, immigration, the questioning of terror detainees and other issues, and said he has a “big fear” of a McCain presidency.
BUT…fast forward to after McCain achieved the nomination. The same Rick Santorum on 21 Aug 2008 stated in the Philadelphia Inquirer:
Of all the issues confronting the United States today, none is more important than our nation’s security. Although these issues don’t dominate our news as they once did, we cannot forget that without a safe and secure country, all other issues don’t matter.
McCain is clearly the candidate with the capacity, judgment, experience and will to confront America’s enemies. He’s served our country honorably – heroically – in war. I served eight years with him on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and I can assure you he knows our military. Importantly, he also knows our enemies. He understands their capabilities and their aims. He will not sugarcoat the human or financial commitment and cost needed to defeat this enemy.
The most important social issue is life. Yes, I often wished McCain would have joined me on the Senate floor in debating Barbara Boxer on issues like the partial-birth-abortion ban. In the end, with the exception of embryonic stem-cell funding, he always voted for life and stood for the culture of life. In short, he’s been a reliable vote on life issues, which are critical to conservatives.
Many conservatives have given McCain poor marks for his involvement in the Gang of 14. I was in leadership pushing hard for a showdown with the Democrats on using the “Constitutional Option” to end their filibuster of judicial nominations. The Gang of 14 broke the impasse, and it probably was for the best. I was the one counting votes on that issue, and I was much less certain of success than others. In the end, the Gang deal resulted in numerous confirmations of qualified conservative jurists.
On judges, McCain has repeatedly made clear that he will, as his Web site states, “only nominate judges who understand that their role is to faithfully apply the law as written, not impose their opinions through judicial fiat.” Sounds good to me.
Yes, I disagreed with McCain’s opposition to President Bush’s tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. But I give him credit that he now thinks we must make those tax cuts permanent to boost our now-struggling economy.
And, yes, McCain has been a thorn in the side of many of us who supported important appropriations earmarks for our states. But he’s always objected with principled consistency.
This is but one example of McCain’s character – the kind of character I want in the person who answers 3 a.m. phone calls at the White House.
Reply
9:08 am on September 2nd, 2008 63
Pete:
“R” word? If you mean “Republican,” you’re right in my case. I’m a registered Republican voter. I supported McCain back in 2000, but since then he’s embraced the religious nutcases he once criticized and his straight-talk express has derailed. If I vote at all this year, it will be for a third party candidate, not Obama.
Having said that, I still find that most of the attacks on Obama are ridiculous BS that has nothing to do with his policy positions. The liberal attacks on Palin you now denounce are the same kind of mudslinging crap McCain’s campaign has been engaging in for a while now.
Ancient Soldier:
Obama hasn’t spent his whole life doing nothing. He studied and earned a law degree from a respectable school, working as at lawyer for a firm that specialized civil rights litigation and neighborhood economic development. He spent years as an Illinois state senator, sponsoring more than 800 bills. He also served as a U.S. senator since 2005, with a place on the Foreign Relations Committee. That’s more political and foreign policy experience than some past presidents have had.
I don’t agree with most of his policy views, but I don’t see how one could make the ludicrous claim that he has done nothing in his career or that he is somehow less qualified than Mrs. Palin.
Reply
9:39 am on September 2nd, 2008 64
James,
I too am a Republican but I’m also undecided as to what I’m going to do on November 4th. Vietnam made me a Republican.
As far as Obama goes, I don’t know that going to Harvard and being active in Civil rights would make him a good president. What bugs me about Obama is he sounds like someone that is making a lot of promises that he won’t be able to keep. He can’t do any of the things he promised without a lot of help that might not be there for him. However he is a great, probably one of the best orators I’ve had the opportunity to listen to in my lifetime, which spans a good bit of the last century. When I hear him speak, no matter the substance of his words, I’m ready to go right out and carry his banner…then common sense sets in and I return to rationality.
With McCain, I don’t know if someone with the reputation as a hothead would make a good president either. However, on the world stage, one would have to argue that McCain has the better experience. Still, I’d hate to be the country that pissed him off if he was president. And what would he do for our economy and the price of a gallon of gas? I see no answer to these questions.
To sum it up, I wish we had some better choices from both parties. For me, the jury is still out on Palin, but she is not the presidential candidate. My questions were serious, not slanderous. Like you, and for the first time in my adult life, I may not vote either. I’m wondering if the Green Party has a candidate this time around. Guess I’ll have to check.
Reply
10:17 am on September 2nd, 2008 65
PS: to my last post. I just visited the Green Party web site and ran, did not walk away from it. UGH
Reply
8:16 pm on September 2nd, 2008 66
Been to Iraq? Says who? In July 2007, she had to get a passport before she visited members of the Alaska National Guard stationed in Kuwait, according to her deputy communications director, Sharon Leighow. She also visited wounded troops in Germany during that trip AND had a stopover in Ireland’s Shannon Airport!.
Reply
9:32 pm on September 2nd, 2008 67
Can any of the military experts on this site answer this question:
Where is Palin’s spider hole?
Talk about MIA!
Reply
10:18 pm on September 2nd, 2008 68
Until the vetting process is complete about three months too late, she’ll be temporarily sprucing up Cheney’s old hiding place and studying FP so she’ll be able to reach the absurdly low bar set for her in the debates.
The GOP has realy turned this whole thing into a joke.
Reply
10:55 pm on September 2nd, 2008 69
#66 I didn’t say she went to Iraq. Read again closely and click the link.
King Baeksu she doesn’t need a spider hole. She is speaking tomorrow at the convention.
I am curious if you all now believe the children of candidates are now fair game? I personally find attacking the Palin’s family quite disgusting which even Obama agrees with.
Ancient Soldier, of course Obama is making a bunch of promises he can’t keep, that is what politicians do, he is just particularly skilled at sounding good doing it.
Reply
11:00 pm on September 2nd, 2008 70
“I personally find attacking the Palin’s family quite disgusting which even Obama agrees with.”
That, my friend, is a bald-faced lie.
Obama and Biden have both made public statements in the past few days that candidates children are off-limits during political campaigns.
Reply
11:19 pm on September 2nd, 2008 71
That is what I am referring too. Obama agrees that the attacks on Palin’s family are disgusting. So why is the left continuing to do so?
Reply
11:35 pm on September 2nd, 2008 72
The Democratic Party is a big tent. It’s called democracy.
Anyway, why has Bristol Palin’s self-desribed “f**kin’ redneck” fiance been invited to the GOP convention, if children are supposed to be off limits?
Use your kids as PR props, and expect to take some hits.
I do have to say that I am pleased and proud that Obama and Biden are taking the high road here, and are behaving in such a restrained and classy manner.
Reply
11:50 pm on September 2nd, 2008 73
I have seen Obama’s young kids on the campaign trail so does that mean you endorse slanderous attacks against his kids then in the name of democracy? Chelsea Clinton appeared plenty while Bill and Hillary were both running for office and no one was launching slurs against her.
You have been complaining about the lies and distortions for the past two months from the Korean left in regards to the US beef protests but since now the slurs are against someone you politically disagree with you consider it democracy in action. I guess the beef protesters can claim their slurs are democracy in action as well.
Reply
11:59 pm on September 2nd, 2008 74
GI, fundie Republicans like Sarah Palin want to impose their “family values” on all Americans, including denying women their right to choice. Democrats, on the other hand, are not trying to impose their values on other conservative women’s bodies at all.
Thus, when the staggering hypocrisy of Palin’s “family values” is paraded before the whole world, because no one can deny that she has been a negligent mother here in her pursuit of power, I’d say that’s going to offend a lot of people and bring out the sharks.
On the other hand, I really don’t think Obama can be accused of preaching hypocritical “family values,” so that’s why no one’s really tried to make an issue of his two daughters, even if they were used to some extent for PR purposes at the recent Dem convention.
If you can’t see the difference here, then I’m afraid we’ll just have to disagree.
Reply
12:05 am on September 3rd, 2008 75
“King Baeksu she doesn’t need a spider hole. She is speaking tomorrow at the convention.”
Then I can assume you will explain why she hasn’t made any appearances then? The GOP is hiding her.
Also, let’s flash back and remember what McCain said about the Clinton’s and Janet Reno. Short memory, huh GI?
Reply
12:08 am on September 3rd, 2008 76
Anyway, this is all academic because Palin is already toast. There must be 12 different Palingates on the go right now. McCain is merely trying to think of the best way to let her go without seeming too mean or cynical.
Personally, I hope she stays in the race, because Obama’s polling numbers have been going up and up all week.
Yes, we can!
Reply
2:25 am on September 3rd, 2008 77
@72
Really, that “f_ckin’ redneck” remark is just an image. Some of the best people I’ve known have referred to themselves as “f_ckin’ rednecks”. These folks didn’t have a prejudiced bone in their bodies and were solid, church-going folks that I’m proud to have called “friends.”
Just because they say so doesn’t mean that they accept the traditional images associated with “rednecks” — uneducated, beer guzzling and living in filthy cramped mobile homes. Come on, guy.
Admit it…even you have a little “redneck” in you too. It’s just a fun-loving image.
I roll in the aisles listening to Jeff Foxworthy, Bill Engvall and Ron White — though Larry the Cable guy’s slapstick humor escapes me. Because I spent so much of my life wearing cowboy boots and have a love of country music, I’d say I might also be a bit of a “f_ckin’ redneck” too.
BUT THE KEY POINT IS THAT THE KIDS OF THE POLITICIANS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN CONSIDERED OFF-LIMITS. Even Obama said that if someone on his staff brought this stuff up, they’d be fired. Chelsea and the Bush twins drunk-driving escapades were human interest stories, but never taken as political.
Reply
2:38 am on September 3rd, 2008 78
Kalani, I’m not against rednecks and I have an uncle from Colorado who’s a repo man and certfiably maroon around the collar (he breeds doberman pinchers in his backyard and keeps a rifle in the cab of his pickup truck).
However, I would humbly suggest that this Levi chap would probably best be kept out of the national spotlight for now, considering that he knocked up a 16-year-old girl and it is still not clear if that was or was not statutory you-know-what at the time of conception.
From a strictly marketing POV, it doesn’t really help sell the GOP brand of “family values” and all that, does it?
Just my two won.
Reply
2:42 am on September 3rd, 2008 79
Source: http://www.adn.com/palin/story/513880.html
Reply
4:00 am on September 3rd, 2008 80
“BUT THE KEY POINT IS THAT THE KIDS OF THE POLITICIANS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN CONSIDERED OFF-LIMITS”
Will you address the Clinton-Reno remark then?
Reply
4:24 am on September 3rd, 2008 81
Being a non-political type, please bring me up to speed on this “Clinton-Reno” remark? Did somebody say that Clinton secretly have children with Reno?
Reply
4:39 am on September 3rd, 2008 82
John McCain cracking wise a decade ago:
“Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?
Because her father is Janet Reno.”
Look, GOP hypocrisy and “having it both ways” is too obvious to even have to address.
So let’s just look at the basic fact of recent events:
In choosing Palin, McCain decided that good marketing was more important than good governance.
Is this the type of man we really want leading our proud nation? Heck, even the marketing folks he hired didn’t do a very good job, did they?
Reply
6:18 am on September 3rd, 2008 83
You can’t seriously believe that McCain’s remark is anyway equivocal to the current bashing of Palin.
Also to claim she is a negligent mother is especially bad taste. How do you know she is a negligent mother? I have known many people who were good parents but for whatever reason one of their kids made a poor choice and got into trouble. Palin’s daughter made a poor choice and the family is dealing with it the best way they can.
Good marketing instead of good governance is the same argument that critics of Obama are making. So if you believe she is not qualified for VP then Obama is definitely not qualified for President.
Your best argument is the abortion issue, because it is at least an issue and I can respect someone who disagrees with her over it.
Reply
6:41 am on September 3rd, 2008 84
On checking that “joke” it appears that McCain SUPPOSEDLY told this remark to a gathering of Republicans in June 1998 — not the public in general — and it seems that the media hasn’t reported this in print.
Even one of the McCain-condemning blogs said: “Also, why were journalists so reluctant to report the content of the joke?” (Tommy Christopher)
Thus it appears that this is just “hearsay” hullaballoo that even if said, was NOT said during a political campaign where the children comments are off-limits.
A “joke” (even if in bad taste) at a political dinner ten years ago is not what we are talking about. The bottomline is that (1) this “joke” was NOT made DURING A POLITICAL CAMPAIGN when one’s children are off-limits and (2) this “joke” can’t be verified as being said in the first place.
To be truthful, once I read that this was allegedly said at a political dinner and not in a political campaign, I simply stopped looking.
Reply
7:21 am on September 3rd, 2008 85
Kalani, the joke was reported in Salon (it was at a Republican fundraiser), and the story explains why the media didn’t quote it generally — they thought it was too nasty. I’d give the link here but this post might not get through. Anyway, I personally don’t care, was just clarifying what it was.
GI, are you aware of how Palin gave birth to her newest-born son? Find out the story, tell it to your wife and then watch her face drop in shock.
Obama has experience and qualifactions up the yingyang. He had more people in his State Senate district (over 200,000) than the number of people who voted for Palin for Governor (130,000). He was the head of Harvard Law Review — that’s executive experience. He ran a national campaign with over 2,000 staffers, a multimillion dollar budget and got 18 million votes. That’s executive experience, and a whole lot more impressive than running a town of 6,000 or 7,000 people and trying to ban books at the local library.
There are literally a dozen different Palingates and I’m too lazy to go through them all. She’s toast, dude. Marks my words.
I look forward to seeing Obama debate McCain, and Biden debate Palin. We don’t need to talk about experience. When people see Obama and Biden crush their opponents through sheer force of reason and argument, that’ll be all she wrote. Game over.
Bring it on y’all. Professor Obama is more than ready.
Reply
7:37 am on September 3rd, 2008 86
Obama was never a Governor and has had no elected executive experience. You have to go back to his college days to find executive experience. It is also absurd to claim that running for president qualifies you to be president. Your argument is unconvincing. Palin is every bit as qualified to be VP as Obama is to be President.
McCain picked her knowing the issues with her which leads me to believe he is going to stick with her regardless. It is a gamble which he probably calculated he had to do to be able to beat Obama.
For someone so eager for debates then please explain why Obama has been avoiding debating John McCain if he is so intellectually superior?
Reply
7:53 am on September 3rd, 2008 87
“McCain picked her knowing the issues.” Not according to the Washington Post.
“It is also absurd to claim that running for president qualifies you to be president.” Well, he won, and knocked out some pretty tough competition, so clearly he knows how to execute decisions that work. Meanwhile, Palin left Wasilla in debt and is mired in controversies as Governor. Does the name Jack Abramoff ring any bells to you?
“please explain why Obama has been avoiding debating John McCain…” Because he hasn’t had to, he’s leading in the polls and has nothing to gain by doing so until the time is ready. It’s called choosing your battles wisely — something Bush and McCain could stand to study about it bit more, I’m afraid.
Meanwhile, Obama is going on Fox on Thursday night to take on O’Reilly, while McCain just jumped into the whambulance and ran away from Larry King because he was too afraid of a few softball questions about Palin. Who’s the tough guy now, eh?
Reply
8:11 am on September 3rd, 2008 88
BTW, the last thing I want to say about McCain and his team is that last Thursday night was an incredibly important historical event in US history, and seeing Obama up on stage at the Democratic Convention in Denver is the kind of thing that should make all Americans feel proud — to see that we’ve come this far after our troubled history of racial intolerance and everyting else. Meawhile, all McCain was interested in doing was cancelling out that profound historical moment with his cheap marketing gimmick literally the next day. And he was in such a hurry to do it that we can see very clearly where his priorities lie. I thought it was a smart marketing move, but a pretty cheap and tacky character move. I was not impressed at all, and I’m quite happy to see that he’s paying the consequences for his rashness now. Thank god we’re seeing how he handles pressure now, before it’s too late.
Reply
8:29 am on September 3rd, 2008 89
My, reading through here I am now convinced that Obama is the anti-christ and McCain is the devil incarnate. Personally I don’t like either of them, so for me, if I vote at all, it will come down to the issues and stance of the parties.
As far as Palin’s daughter being pregnant at 17 goes, so what? My daughter was pregnant at 17, married the father who was a year older, went on and worked herself through college with a dual major and now is the head of HR for a major corporation. Her being pregnant means nothing to me. I hate to say it, and I wish it wasn’t so, but teen pregnancy is more common in “modern” America these days. I do not agree with it. What does mean something is that her mother and father stood with her on this just as my wife and I stood with our daughter. It is a non-issue. How can anyone expect to get political gain from ranting about raging teenage lust? Some kids control it, and some do not. At least she did not choose abortion.
Someone talked about choice. We all have choice. We can choose between murdering someone we don’t like or choosing not to. Thank goodness most of us choose not to. Those that choose to do so go to jail and/or are executed. What is the difference between that and killing a conceived baby? There are tens of thousands American families that would love to adopt a baby. Stop abortion and push adoption. It is the only real answer. However I differ with Palin’s view. I do believe abortion should be legal for rape, incest and the health of the mother. I take this stand because if a woman becomes pregnant from rape or incest, it is her mental health that is in question. But it should definitely never be used as birth control.
A note about Rednecks: I are be one and I are be living in a small town in the Texas Hill Country. And I be proud of it. And I be a’flyin’ my flag every chance I get. And I done finished with spending 22 years serving my country so all us folks can sit around and rag about the politicians. We can rag but it won’t do no one no good. Whatever gonna happen gonna happen and it matter little much what any of us have to rant about. However, I must admit I like to help folks that be knocked down and then get kicked around with a bunch of exaggerated non-truths. So even though I don’t like him, I am leaning toward my Republican roots. Not so much for the man, but for the ideals of the party.
Reply
8:03 pm on September 3rd, 2008 90
“Stop abortion and push adoption. It is the only real answer.”
Not really. Effective s.e.x education and contraception would obviate the need for either abortion or adoption.
Anyway, we don’t need an “anti-government” party pushing government onto people’s bodies or into their bedrooms.
Thanks, but no thanks!
Reply
10:25 pm on September 3rd, 2008 91
Mr King Baeksu
Seems to me that you can educate till your blue in the face, but sometimes when young juices get to flowing, all the education in the world goes out the window. Are our kids somehow smarter today and more receptive to education than they have been since the beginning of time? Sure, the kids that are preinclined to do the right thing will go on and do the right thing, but for sure, no matter what you do, they arn’t all going to toe the policical or recommended line. Kid, and adults, are going to have unprotected sex for as long as there are human beings on this planet. Nothing will change that. And young girls from 14 to 40 are going to continue to get “accidently” pregnant.
When that happens, and you know it will, what do we do? Kill the baby before it’s born?
I don’t know where the anti-government comment came from. But as a taxpayer, I sure do get tired of funding projects caused by a government that has outgrown itself.
As you said…”Thanks, but not thanks!”
Reply
3:51 am on September 4th, 2008 92
Well, I’ll give Palin credit for one thing after seeing her speech at the RNC Convention in St. Paul: She didn’t try to fool people with a bunch of gobbledygook about “compassionate conservatism” and “I’m a uniter, not a divider” like a certain someone else did back in 2000.
She may have cemented her standing amongst the hard right with her speech, but that may be about it. This race will be fought over the undecided center, however, and I can’t see how her speech will have appealed to many moderate voters.
For a veteran military man, McCain’s sense of strategy and tactics certainly seems to be wanting. Demonizing the entire national media certainly doesn’t help, either!
Reply
4:45 am on September 4th, 2008 93
Like I said before – looks like McCain’s pick for VP just won him the election. I still feel a little bad that neither party considered Jenkins – the man with all the foreign relations experience. Speaking of Republican rednecks was Billy a Republican – I think Jimmy said he was a Democrat.
Reply
4:57 am on September 4th, 2008 94
And the National Enquirer is investigating an extra maritial affair with her husband’s business partner.
Reply
5:18 am on September 4th, 2008 95
“And the National Enquirer is investigating an extra maritial affair with her husband’s business partner.”
It’s already out but their site is down right now. Somebody must have invoked the Patriot Act!
Ahmurica the Bootyful — entertaining the rest of the world since 1776!
Reply
8:16 am on September 4th, 2008 96
The tackiness and innuendo attacks on Palin are funny, and from her performance last night I believe she threw them back in the face of the attackers. You hear stories that she might have done this and she might have done that. Now rumors of an affair that I doubt ever happened. Probably the next rumor will be that she is a closet lesbian just like the rumors about Hillary. It sounds like she is a target of the Office of the Democratic Rumor Monger. The attacks she made on Obama were directed at the things he has said and continues to say while running for president. She said nothing about him based on rumor or innuendo. She never even mentioned the fact that a Chicago machine convicted felon helped him buy his million dollar mansion. So all in all, I rate her performance as commendable and I believe she left her the democratic tick ODF. (Out der flappin’) I can’t wait to hear the formal democratic response to what she had to say.
I believe Pete has it right. She has brought the presidency back to the Republican Party unless there is some factual information that comes out to discredit her in the future. I don’t see it happening though. I think Obama might be in real trouble. I had been hoping for a good clean race for the Whitehouse, but when it gets down and dirty it is more fun.
May the best team win…..
Reply
9:45 am on September 4th, 2008 97
“She said nothing about him based on rumor or innuendo.”
No, she just flat out lied about his record, even better. Obama has helped pass bipartisan legislation in the Senate on ethics reform and weapons control, despite what Gov. Palin claimed in her speech.
And her snide dismissal of his record of community organizing in Chicago smacked of coded racial politics if you ask me. I wonder if she thinks she has more experience than Martin Luther King, Jr., too?
Personally, I was disappoined that Gov. Flick didn’t tell the nation about all the books she wanted banned at Wasilla Public Library. That would be a very interesting list, I’m sure.
By the way, she left Wasilla $22 million in debt by the time she was done there. No wonder Bush & Co. like her!
Reply
10:01 am on September 4th, 2008 98
“She never even mentioned the fact that a Chicago machine convicted felon helped him buy his million dollar mansion.”
Show us a reliable source for that “fact” or spare us the talk about innuendo, please.
Reply
10:19 am on September 4th, 2008 99
“[Palin's] snide dismissal of his record of community organizing in Chicago smacked of coded racial politics…”
How so?
Also, your bring up of MLK doesn’t seem to wash either. Last time I checked, MLK’s activism had a profound national, social, and historical impact. One can’t really say that of Obama’s community organizing days in Chicago.
Reply
11:18 am on September 4th, 2008 100
Mr King Baeksu
Would you trust the word of the ultra left CBS News as it pertains to Tony Rezko? Not much innuendo here that I can see. This was before Rezko was convicted of fraud in his trial. (He was convicted and I believe is now awaiting sentencing) The truth of the matter is, as will be illustrated by CBS News below, Obama has no record of leadership in any form. I agree that he is probably one of the most intelligent people in politics, but it takes more than intelligence to be president. Sometimes ya gotta have a little horse sense. The only horse sense I see in Obama is his ability to Whinny. And why are the Dems comparing Obama to Palin? Obama is running against McCain, not Palin. This just shows that the Dems are developing an inferiority complex when as it pertains to Obama’s experience against McCain’s. So they compare him against Palin, who still has more experience in government that does Obama. So, if he is compared to Palin, maybe the Dems should switch the ticket and make him the VP candidate. Hillary and Biden both agree that Obama is not ready for prime time. What you hear now is just spin to cover up their earlier statements about Obama’s lack of experience.
CBS News correspondent Dean Reynolds reports:
Obama’s long association with a now-indicted developer named Tony Rezko could also be a liability. An Obama fundraiser from the early ’90s, Rezko goes on trial for fraud next week. But his unsavory reputation was well known for years.
And it raised eyebrows when Obama and Rezko’s wife, Rita, bought property next to each other on Chicago’s south side on the very same day in 2005 – even though by then, Tony Rezko was under federal investigation.
(My Note: and is it a coincidence that this property bought by Rezko’s wife adjoined Obama’s property. And is it a coincidence that the house he bought came with said adjoining property and could not be purchased without said property being sold at the same time? If you don’t believe me, check the property records for the sail. They are on public record. Added by Ancient Soldier)
No one has charged Obama with wrongdoing, something he has been quick to point out.
“Nobody has indicated that in any way … was I connected with any of the things that he did,” Obama said.
For good measure, Obama has given some $150,000 in Rezko-related campaign contributions to charity. But government watchdogs scratch their heads.
“So, what we’re left with is a question of, you know, really, what was he thinking? The warning signs to stay away were very clear,” said Cindy Canary of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform.
And Obama didn’t heed them?
“Sen. Obama was very slow to walk away from Tony Rezko,” she said.
Could it come back to haunt him?
Also, MLK was a real American Hero that is respected by all responsible Americans no matter their political affiliation. He had substance and was a good orator. And he had excellent leadership ability. Still it goes without saying, Obama is no Martin Luther King Jr.
As far as his national political record goes, how’s this from the same CBS Reporter? I wonder if this is related to the lies you say she told about Obama.
“Republican, Independent or Democrat, he was very willing to ask anyone for help on an initiative he may be pursuing,” Brady said.
That includes a bill requiring police to videotape interrogations. Obama overcame opposition from the governor, the police and members of both parties to pass the bill.
But there was something else about his time in Springfield.
In more than 4,000 votes, Obama voted “present” – that’s the yellow button on the right of a state Senate voting apparatus – some 129 times.
That’s a cop-out, say his critics.
“That’s not ‘yes,’ that’s not ‘no,’” said Sen. Hillary Clinton while debating Obama. “That’s ‘maybe.’”
Obama even voted “present” on a bill involving sexual abuse that he had sponsored himself – saying he discovered legal questions after its introduction.
And yet voting “present” in Illinois can be used to avoid making a choice.
Reply
11:18 am on September 4th, 2008 101
“How so?” Let’s see, before a largely all-white and socially conservative audience, she constrasted her experience as mayor of a mostly white suburb in Alaska with Obama’s experience as an organizer in a largely black inner city neighborhood in Chicago, and did so an extremely ocndescending and insulting manner.
No, I doubt the message was lost on many in her audience, or on others viewing at home to whom such subtle coded rhetoric was directed.
You missed my point about MLK and Palin’s attitude towards community organizing. In any case, Obama already made history last Thurday night in Denver, and when he becomes President will also have “a profound national, social, and historical impact.”
BTW, more lies from Palin’s speech: Obama will not raise taxes on ordinary Americans, he will actually lower them for all except the wealthiest 5% of the US population. And the Bridge to Nowhere? She actually supported it at first, but then flip-flopped after it became an embarrassing national symbol of pork-barrel politics — but still decided to keep the federal money earmarked for it to spend elsewhere in Alaska. Now, that’s what I call reform!
Reply
11:34 am on September 4th, 2008 102
“BTW, more lies from Palin’s speech: Obama will not raise taxes on ordinary Americans, he will actually lower them for all except the wealthiest 5% of the US population. ”
As far as taxes go that is a laugh. Yes, he will raise taxes on the wealthy and so what will the wealthy do? You know, it is the wealthy that control most of the consumer goods in this country. Why, they will raise the prices for the goods we have to buy. It’s a sneaky way to say your cutting taxes, but it does not wash with anyone that thinks about it for a few minutes. We still pay for it no matter how you try to spin it.
Reply
12:54 pm on September 4th, 2008 103
Were the individuals in attendance for Gov. Palin’s speech mostly white?
Undoubtedly.
Were the vast majority of those white individuals of a socially conservative bet?
I’d bet a singularly large fortune on it.
Was Obama’s community organizing experience done in mostly African-American enclave?
Clearly.
Was Sarah Palin’s stint as mayor in a mostly white enclave?
Again, clearly.
In answering in the affirmative to all these questions, however, it doesn’t in any way follow that the comparisons Palin was making between her and Obama was a cynical play at race politics.
In case it has eluded you, King Baeksu, having a former mayor of white exurb in Alaska address a largely white, politcally and socially conservative group while criticizing a black presidential candidate with experience in a largely black community doesn’t make it any any way the equivalent of a Ku Klux Klan rally.
There’s reading the tea leaves of racial politics then there’s unabashedly imbibbing from the tea cup of racial politics. I’m afraid, your royal highness, you’re guilty of the latter.
Reply
4:36 pm on September 4th, 2008 104
Obama does not have executive experience, period.
Running for an office that would give him that experience still is not that experience. Perhaps some of the leftist commenter don’t know what that is; it’s being the decision maker who is ultimately responsible for an organization. Obama has not had that, while Palin is Gov of the nation’s largest state. Going after her background is extremely foolish for the Dems as their candidate’s experience is less than hers on that score.
A couple of the more prolific commenters on the left in this thread (and in general) are fine with giving Obama a pass on serious character issues (e.g., Wright), while going after Palin on unsubstantiated allegations, or manufacturing racial undertones in what is actually a very fair comparison given comments from the left (esp the media), as above. They don’t even recognize the blatant hypocrisy. No matter what the evidence or fact, no matter what you say, those folks will never get it, which as far as I’m concerned sums up the modern (post 60s) Dem party.
So far reactions to Palin’s address at the convention have been extraordinary; not a home run, a grand slam. This of course is making those on the left even angrier as they just don’t understand it (i.e., ‘how could American’s be so stupid?’).
I hope the keep underestimating the right, and keep the overinflated image of their own intelligence; it’s lost them the election the past two cycles.
Reply
4:58 pm on September 4th, 2008 105
Richardson…Your comments are right on target. As a slight aside, I like to paraphrase from Jay Leno a while back.
“The Democrats are leading in all the polls so I wonder how they will screw up and lose this election? They are good at losing the big ones.”
I guess we have the answer to that question. I never saw an elitist choke so hard before. Obama must have caught something in his throat while leaning so far to the left. The dems are sure getting petty. Next they’ll be saying that “Ha Ha, My VP can beat up your VP” How silly the dems are becoming when the world is in such a mess, trying to put spin what Palin said to make her look bad.
Joe Biden really surprised me with his comments today about what Palin didn’t say. Last night was an introduction. She bared her fangs and went after Obama. That is in a Vice Presidential Candidate’s job description, don’t ya know? I guess it hurts because he was overlooked and basically ignored in her speech. And they want to complain? They need to do a playback on both Biden’s and Obama’s speeches from last week. Such whinin’.
Now I would have to say that it is the Republican’s election to lose. The dems be ODFen. (Out der flappin’)
Reply
5:13 pm on September 4th, 2008 106
While I was impressed with Gov. Palin’s address and have great personal admiration for Sen. McCain, and moreover agree with some of the opinions that Richardson has expressed concerning the behavior and mindset of Democrats and the American Left in general, I’m still pretty confident that in this election cycle the Democrats have it pretty locked down.
I don’t disagree that the selection of Palin has in many ways changed the dynamics of this race. Seeing grassroots conservatives and moreover evangelicals get this fired up for a McCain candidacy is something that I think many reasonable and fair minded people wouldn’t have predicted. I’m also aware that after winning his against Sen. Clinton, Sen. Obama’s poll numbers have relatively peaked if not downright anemic. Futhermore, Obama’s continuing problems with blue collar/lunch pale voters is something that should seriously worry Democratic strategists. But I don’t think that at the end of the day the above factors portend defeat for Obama come November.
One only has to look at two important structural facts concerning this election to see why it will be hard for anybody to defeat a Democrat this coming November.
1) Poll after poll indicates that a good majority of Americans are simply dissatisfied with Republican rule. In many polls, the generic Democrat beats the generic Republican hands down. Moreover, anybody who has remotely followed some of the special congressional elections that have taken place should realize that things would not seem to bode all that well for Republicans. Only in a situation where displeasure with Republicans is so acute could once heavily and reliably Republican districts turn blue (See Denny Hastert’s former district)
2) While this factor could most likely change drastically with the Palin nomination and ensuing speech, the fact of the matter is that Republicans have simply not been able to raise the sort of war chest in comparison to their Democratic counterparts. For good or bad, money is the oil that keeps any electoral campaign running. And frankly, Republicans don’t seem to have as much of it this time around.
Reply
6:00 pm on September 4th, 2008 107
Gaetano Calebrisi,
I agree that this cycle *should* easily belong to the Dems, when it comes to the actual candidates rather than the generics, it’s a whole different game. The Real Clear Politics blog has an aggregate of polls with Obama +4.4, or 1.4 if you discount the possible error (or even +7.4 the other way – nah). The latest poll, by CBS, has both at 42 percent, the rest presumably undecided. My guess is that the race will tighten as new, post-Palin, poll numbers roll in.
I wonder what will happen when Palin asks for supporters to contribute to the $$$ chest?
Currently it’s still the Dems race by a sliver; but it’s theirs to lose.
Reply
6:04 pm on September 4th, 2008 108
From Zogby (the only one to get 2000 correct, I believe);
http://zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1547
Reply
6:15 pm on September 4th, 2008 109
Richardson, I’m well aware of the cornucopia of polls that clearly show how incredibly tight this race is at the opening bell the general election.
That being said, I still believe that there is plenty of time for Democrats to get their ship in order.
While Palin knocked it out of the park the previous night she and McCain still have a arduous, trap-infested road ahead. Any gaffe, misstatement, or miscalculation would, in my opinion, have far more drastic consequences for Republicans than Democrats. This being due to acute anti-Republican sentiment that I mentioned earlier.
That all being said, however, I think that only thing one can say with certainty concerning this election is that nothing is certain. I think it would be best for all to simply sit back await the results.
Reply
7:53 pm on September 4th, 2008 110
Richardson, McCain and Palin both have their own preacher problems, is that a road you’d really like to go down? Palin actually thinks the current Iraq war is some sort of “mission from God.” What is it, like the 13th century?
You have to look at the electoral college when talking about polls. Obama’s already got over 300 at the moment and you only need 270 to win. But keep on selectively quoting out-of-date polls if that’s what makes you feel better!
G.C., do you know what the term “code” means? I’m going to ignore your hysterical rhetorical spin for the benefit of everyone’s sanity here.
It’s funny how certain facts I mention, like how Palin’s “executive experience” included leaving Wasilla $22 million in debt, or how her speech is not going to woo swing voters because it was too extremist, are simply ignored by GOP supporters on this thread. Keeping your head in the sand is not an effective campaign strategy, I’m afraid.
Reply
8:24 pm on September 4th, 2008 111
Comparing McCain’s and Obama’s “preacher problems” is exactly the sort of logical disconnect I was speaking of, thanks for another fine example. Compare a few weeks from an outsider to ~20 years at your own peril. Should cause a terminal case of cognitive dissonance.
You’re also trying to assign electoral votes a tad early;
http://www.270towin.com/
Expect the blue to fade in the near future.
You’d be better off with yours in the sand, compared to where it’s obviously at now.
Reply
9:00 pm on September 4th, 2008 112
On Swing Voters:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/110017/Intense-Political-Week-Brings-Decline-Swing-Voters.aspx
Reply
9:15 pm on September 4th, 2008 113
McCain actively sought out Pastor Hagee’s endorsement, the same guy who blamed Katrina on God’s wrath against h.o.m.o.s.e.x.uals and thinks the N.a.z.i.s are a fine bunch of folks. After a media firestorm, McCain finally distanced himself from Hagee and in his defense said, “I don’t endorse all the views of those who endorse me.”
It would seem to me that if such a rationale is valid for GOP candidates the courtesy might be extended to Dem candidates as well (and anyway Obama never sought Wright’s ensorsement as candidate for president), but of course we all know that Republicans have mastered the fine art of “having it both ways,” haven’t they?
By the way, show me a statement by Wright that is clearly and unquestionably “racist” as you assert. I’ve seen white members of Trinity interviewed about Wright’s alleged racism and they said it was absurd. Mass emails from Karl Rove’s minions don’t count, either.
Reply
9:17 pm on September 4th, 2008 114
GI, you have an extremely aggressive spam filter, and as a result many of my comments don’t get through.
Reply
10:03 pm on September 4th, 2008 115
[...] very well judging by her speech the other night. She is definitely the anti-Obama. However, like I said before the majority of people vote for who they like for President not the Vice-President. Governor Palin [...]
5:40 am on September 5th, 2008 116
King Baeksu,
I’m well aware of what “code” means. There is, however, a huge difference between using “coded language” and taking bits and pieces of circumstantial facts and evidence and then extraploting into case arguing that a GOP vice-presidential nomineee was stoking the flames of racial politics.
Again, having a white person criticize the experience of a black man to a group of largely white conservatives doesn’t necessarily equate to a racial smear campaign.
Listen, it’s obvious that the GOP is going to use some sort of race-baiting tactic during this campaign. However, to label all attacks on Obama as race-baiting only serves to devalue true instances when it actually occurs.
And frankly, if anyones being hysterical here I believe it’s you Baeksu. After all, it’s you who is the one that finds mendacious motives in every nook and cranny of the GOP campaign.
Reply
5:48 am on September 5th, 2008 117
The McCain campaign intends to keep Sarah Palin insulated from the press. In a bubble. She will stick with scripted speeches and refuse to answer reporter questions for the duration of the campaign. No Meet The Press or Face the Nation. No press conferences. No impromptus. That is their plan.
Reply
7:38 am on September 5th, 2008 118
TC…didn’t I here mention someplace about a debate or two between Sarah and Joe? I wonder how they will script that.
Also, can you please direct me to the Republican web site that details the Republican Strategy Plan for the marketing of Sarah Palin? I’d sure be interested to read it. I wonder, does the same site sell tea leaves? Only time will tell if there is truth or exaggeration of rumor to your statement.
IMHO, I don’t think the country can get much worse economically than it is right now. So I’m really curious, not only about who wins the election, but about how this country will be one year from today.
I know I’m new here but I’m happy I found this place. This is the best good humor thread on the web.
Reply
7:48 am on September 5th, 2008 119
Herr Kernig Baeksu
You challenged me to prove my statement about Rezko and his shady dealings with Obama was not innuendo. I did that. What, no comment? And how about that Illinois voting record…It really shows how decisive he is. Wow, what a guy…. Experience on how not to make a decision and shady dealings cover up just gushing out of him everywhere.
So tell me…what was it about troopergate?????
Reply
7:48 am on September 5th, 2008 120
“After all, it’s you who is the one that finds mendacious motives in every nook and cranny of the GOP campaign.”
That’s true, and they’ve certainly earned their reputation for dirty campaigning over the years. (Remember McCain’s “illegitimate black baby” back in 2000? No wonder he didn’t want Bush at the RNC.)
But I don’t think that makes me hysterical. I’m merely a cold-eyed realist. And I do think that the contrast between “wholesome suburban hockey moms” and “ghetto welfare queens” is an effective symbolic contrast at the subliminal, lizard-brain level.
But if you want to keep on defending Palin’s tasteless put-down of Obama’s social service, go right ahead, my friend.
Reply
7:53 am on September 5th, 2008 121
AS: “No one has charged Obama with wrongdoing, something he has been quick to point out.”
If that’s all you got, you’re wasting my time.
If McCain’s people try to raise this issue, Obama’s people only have to say two words in reply: “Keating 5.”
That’s exactly why no one’s talking about this so-called issue anymore.
Reply
8:27 am on September 5th, 2008 122
GI Korea, my apologies for jumping into your blog like this, I read it a lot but don’t comment much. Just wanted to say that until now, I was considering McCain while waiting for his VP pick, and was very disappointed he chose Palin. She has zero foreign policy experience. She lied about the “bridge to nowhere” in her speech, which she was on the record as having supported. McCain calls her a “reformer,” but he named her three times on his “pork project” lists. She supports a total ban on abortion, and says she’s “open” to teaching the Biblical story of creation in science classes (you or others might agree with the former, but the latter is plain stupid). We don’t have to get into her family life, because it isn’t relevant.
There were many good, experienced Republican women he could have picked, like Kay Bailey Hutchinson, but decided to go against his own principles and pander to the Christian Right (with all due respect to Christians).
Many Republican are insulted by his choice–Reagan’s speechwriter Peggy Noonan was caught on a live mic calling it “bullshit,” and here’s a bunch more on record questioning his judgment, which the Obama campaign will happily use in their campaign:
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/obama_surrogates_urged_to_ment.php
Remember, Palin said in an interview she doesn’t even know what a VP does. I hope she never finds out.
Reply
10:59 am on September 5th, 2008 123
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122057381593001741.html
Reply
11:01 am on September 5th, 2008 124
Here’s another good one
http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2008/09/05/gov-palins-fight-against-the-alaska-establishment/
Reply
11:51 am on September 5th, 2008 125
While Palin is avoiding the press and hiding out in Alaska, Biden is busy taking on AIPAC and getting things done:
http://www.planetarymovement.org/go/newsflash/biden-raises-the-bar/
We’ll see if Palin’s got what it takes to play with the big boys on Oct. 2, and how well her theological approach to geopolitics washes with the American public.
Reply
1:01 pm on September 5th, 2008 126
Clam
Whats your point? BO does great with a teleprompter. Um-ah, not so umm, well without a um-ah teleprompter.
The R-VP would be a stronger, tougher, and more intelligent President than the Dem-Presidential candidate.
Unlike some others, I do not think he is “well spoken”. I think he reads well, and would make a great actor. Thats about it.
Apologies for using so few words to get my point across. I have other things to do.
Can’t believe this thread is still going. As it is clearly so pointless.
Get ready for M.D.S.
Reply
2:23 pm on September 5th, 2008 127
The RCP average of polls shows a 1.2 percent drop for Obama (to +3.2)… since yesterday.
Reply
5:03 pm on September 5th, 2008 128
The polls include Palin’s speech and following day reaction. Not very good. As I said, McCain will get a two point bounce.
Reply
5:09 pm on September 5th, 2008 129
Oh and Retired,
The thoughts that come out of BO head are far and away more intelligent than anything anyone in the GOP has offered in years (except for maybe Paul). He might have a few pauses in there, but he could speak for two minutes with pauses and say more than McCain could in two hours.
“The R-VP would be a stronger, tougher, and more intelligent President than the Dem-Presidential candidate.”
Why do you even say these things? Since the woman lies about nearly everything and it is proven, I find it interesting that you say she would be a good President. I said interesting, not surprising.
Anything to distract yourself from McCain and the GOP’s non-platform platform, right?
Reply
8:29 pm on September 5th, 2008 130
Clam,
I just love pullin the strings of the Left when I get bored
By the by, you never did give me one reason to vote for BO.
JUST ONE. Better yet, one sentence. A speech is a speech, not a reason.
Oh, and tell me one lie, JUST ONE mind you, that my girl has made. Educate me.
We’ve not found a cure for B.D.S yet.
Now we are starting a S.P.S. I thought the Left was all about women and non-whites, and non-rich. WTF over—
Oh, and this just in, Oprah will not have Palin on her show untill AFTER the election. I just wonder WHY? Could it be a race thing? Just askin.
Oprah a racist? If not, then what? She is NOT a member of N.O.W.
Reply
12:59 am on September 6th, 2008 131
Retired, Palin has lied repeatedly about her opposition to the “bridge to nowhere” (there are dozens of sources on this, including Alaskan newspapers).
She’s also under investigation for abuse of power as governor, and should be considered innocent unless proven otherwise, but this points to a lapse of good judgment on McCain’s part to choose a VP who might be found guilty of ethics violations.
As I said up there, I was considering McCain, so don’t say I’m part of the “left.” You should be concerned that “your girl” (interesting choice of words there) is not fit for the nation’s second-highest office. Apparently many prominent Republicans agree–check out the link on my comment above.
Reply
2:34 am on September 6th, 2008 132
“She’s also under investigation for abuse of power as governor”
Not only that, but McCain’s people are now trying to meddle with the investigation.
Is this the kind of “reform” America needs?
Reply
2:48 am on September 6th, 2008 133
A lot of people have talked about “executive experience” on this site.
So let’s look at how the two rival presidential campaigns have been managed by their respective executives over the past year and a half.
On the one hand, Obama has led an extremely disciplined campaign, knocking out the ruthless Clinton dynasty along the way, and has raised so much money that he’s decided he doesn’t even need federal matching funds.
On the other hand, McCain’s campaign was so mismanaged that he couldn’t even pay his staffers a year ago, and his inability to properly vet Palin now has the whole nation in a tizzy. In fact, it can even be argued that he’s no longer in charge of his own campaign, which has been hijacked by Rove and the evangelical hard right despite his best intentions.
So I ask the members of the military on this site in all honesty: Whom would you rather have for your Commander-in-Chief?
Reply
4:11 am on September 6th, 2008 134
Do you really need to ask? Really?
There is no contest when it comes to McCain, a retired hero, vs. Obama. None.
BTW, though it’s been pointed out to you before, running a campaign is not executive experience as an elected official or a CO. Being able to speak well and being a darling of the media also is not substantive.
Reply
4:22 am on September 6th, 2008 135
R, yes, you’re right, Obama’s 12 years of experience as an elected public official mean nothing at all.
My mistake.
Reply
7:14 am on September 6th, 2008 136
Per King Baeksu:
“So let’s look at how the two rival presidential campaigns have been managed by their respective executives over the past year and a half.
On the one hand, Obama has led an extremely disciplined campaign, knocking out the ruthless Clinton dynasty along the way, and has raised so much money that he’s decided he doesn’t even need federal matching funds.”
Two things wrong with this statement.
1) Using presidential campaigns as a metric for how well an individual will be as POTUS is misguided. According to this line of argument, George W. Bush should have been a stellar, Washington-Lincoln-Roosevelt caliber executive. After all, in 2000 and 2004 the Bush campaigns were tightly managed, well oiled, well funded, disciplined machine. Moreover, according this line of reasoning, David Axlerod, Obama’s chief campaign strategist, is qualified to be president. In the end, it is he who has largely been responsible for devising and implementing the strategies that led to Obama’s primary victory.
2) King Baeksu brings up Obama’s decision to forgo public financing as if it is some sort of strength. In some ways it is. But in a larger sense, this decision on the part of the Obama campaign actually makes him look like a hypocrite, and not the sort of agent of change that he makes himself out to be. To declare early on that you would accept public financing and then later renege on the pledge once the advantages disappear is at the very least disingenuous.
Reply
8:02 am on September 6th, 2008 137
“So I ask the members of the military on this site in all honesty: Whom would you rather have for your Commander-in-Chief?”
Like Richardson said, do you really have to ask. McCain wins hands down. I could elaborate my reasons, but I don’t feel the need. They are too obvious.
Also, I keep hearing he had executive experience running his campaign. I think I can sum up the total of that experience in just a few word. The Dems told him to hire David Axlerod, and from there on it was “Yes Mr. Axlerod, No Mr. Axlerod.” Just like in the Whitehouse it will be “Yes Mr. Biden, No Mr. Biden”.
And as far as a man of his word goes, BO flunks. He put the F in flipflop.
Reply
8:47 am on September 6th, 2008 138
Even if running a campaign were legit experience, Obama flunks the test. He has pissed away the millions he’s received. Even with the overwhelming support of the media, he’s achieved far less than his opponent and spent far, far more. Remember how he boasted about all those small checks he’s received from grassroots supporters? I’m guessing they don’t appreciate seeing it pissed away on coronation ceremonies.
Obama’s failure is simple: He should be moving heaven and earth to convince people he’s ready to lead. Commercials about how many houses McCain has are a waste of his time and other people’s money.
Reply
10:58 am on September 6th, 2008 139
I am really impressed with Obama’s vision to put together a transition team this early in the race. My only hope is that he has also bought “just in case” insurance on them. You know, just in case he trips over his twanger and falls on his kisser and loses the election. The Insurance would be to pay the wages for the team that never worked. I think I’ll buy some stock in paper towels just in case he needs them to wipe the egg off of his face.
Of course, this is only wishful thinking on my part. I do not know what the future holds. I guess I’ll rely mostly on fate. Whoever is meant to win, will win I guess.
As a person, I really think that Obama is a hell of a smart senator. With more experience in world affairs he might make a good president someday. But today, the world is in too much of a mess to elect a man to be president that is not yet dry behind the ears. I would say the same thing about Palin if she was leading the Republican ticket.
Reply
5:31 pm on September 6th, 2008 140
Clam
Investigations are not “convictions”. Try again.
Maccain will be elected. He will serve one term. SP will run for President in 2012, HRC will oppose her, and lose. “The One” will go down in history as an also ran, which is not meant as a put down. I could never do it. My hat is off to all, and my vote is for John. As a Veteran and retired military, I see no other option.
Reply
7:48 pm on September 6th, 2008 141
“Clam
Investigations are not “convictions”. Try again.”
Try again? Take a look at #43 tough guy. McCain is going to lose this election by a pretty large (EV) margin. Stop lying to yourself…
Reply
8:08 pm on September 6th, 2008 142
Here is a list of the rumors and smear against Palin:
http://explorations.chasrmartin.com/2008/09/06/palin-rumors/
So far no confirmation yet if she had prior knowledge of 9/11 or was involved in the JFK assassination.
Reply
8:50 pm on September 6th, 2008 143
Half of those “debunked” items were not sourced. It provided very little insight. Furthermore, I think people are a little more concerned with her ability to lie with no problem. I know she’s a member of the party that has mastered it, but she has proven that she can lie with the best.
If the McCain camp would let her speak to the press, I’m sure the list would get longer. Either way, the hits just keep pouring in each and every day.
Reply
9:31 pm on September 6th, 2008 144
Mr. Clam? Can you please sell me some of your tea leaves…or have you smoked em all already? (no no don’t say thet, don’t forget, I did say please.) It sure must be nice to see the future so well.
Nobody can see the future, but like Retired above, I too am retired military. In fact, I’m retired Infantry. John also gets my vote and my support for him will not waiver, win or lose. If he wins, I will be elated. If BO wins I’ll start going to church again.
Reply
10:58 pm on September 6th, 2008 145
“Mr. Clam? Can you please sell me some of your tea leaves…or have you smoked em all already.”
Save it, buddy.
Why wait to start when Obama wins? I think your blind support for McCain because he is a vet is enough to start going to church now. If McCain wins, you won’t have any time for church because you’ll be dealing with one of the number of wars he’ll most likely start.
Reply
12:22 am on September 7th, 2008 146
If BO wins, (God forbid) I will be comforted my one thought; even the most experienced have made mistakes. Sooo, I will be (sadly) amused as BO stumbles along, one baby mistake after another. The press will eat it up. I can only imagine who he will push under the bus to insure his legacy. Who has passed under so far; white grandmother, twenty year (so called) preacher. One of his half brothers (do we know how many HALF brothers he has)?
As far as the issues go, the only thing I hear for BO is raise taxes on the rich. Yea, that will help creat new jobs! As to defence well, I’ve spent 11 years in overseas assignments, compaired to BO’S — what? I got him beat in the experience area. At least I was in charge of a Platoon.
Sorry clam, not possible for me to be impressed by someone with 0 leadership experience. No international experience (a speech in Europe doesn’t count). So how can this (new-born) talk of changing anything. You have to know what’s going on before you can change it.
Wow, that was fun. Got to get back to real life now. The grass in my yard needs cuting. My guns need cleaning. Wash my car. Yep. The past eight years have been hard. I went to Iraq then retired and bought a house. I voted for Mccain in 2000. I’ll vote for him again SOON.
Reply
1:23 am on September 7th, 2008 147
“Sorry clam, not possible for me to be impressed by someone with 0 leadership experience. No international experience (a speech in Europe doesn’t count). So how can this (new-born) talk of changing anything. You have to know what’s going on before you can change it.”
So you have to be part of the problem in order to change the problem, huh?
“The past eight years have been hard.”
So, you want to make it an even dozen I guess?
Reply
1:26 am on September 7th, 2008 148
Why can’t the Left just say they don’t believe in Palin’s stand on abortion or energy or some other real issue? Why does someone immediately have to become the devil because he or she is on the opposing ticket? I’ll tell you why—it’s the politics of personal destruction. The same old game from the self-proclaimed agents of change. Palin wasn’t on the ticket for more than a few moments before they started fabricating dirt and smearing this woman and her family.
Reply
2:01 am on September 7th, 2008 149
First of all, the GOP only has one campaigning style and that is “the politics of personal destruction”. The Dems (like usual) took the high road and did not stoop to it in 2004. They lost. The GOP has failed time and time again to offer sound leadership and the Dems aren’t going to allow them to slip in again.
Secondly, it’s pretty clear that we don’t agree with her wingnut views. When a new person comes on the scene it is natural that people are going to start looking into her life. Once they did, they found it to be riddled with bad decisions, questionable ethics and fabricated stories. McCain did not vet, so the public has had the oppurtunity to do so. Reducing that process to “personal destruction” and calling all the bad stuff “smears” is just not going to fly. Palin does not get a pass because she is new, or a “hockey mom”, or liked by the Right. McCain already got that pass because he was a POW which for some reason makes all questions regarding his character “out of line”.
Look, the press (for once) has stood up to McCain. He has gotten a pass for his entire career, but sometimes even your “base” has to report grim news. Scrutiny of a record or a self-imposed nickname is not a “smear”. I know the GOP likes to amount even the slightest shred of journalism to elite, biased, left-wing propaganda, but the fact is that the media did their job (for once) and vetted Palin in public. Not all that surfaced was credible, but it certainly and justly tarnished the fabriacted image that she and McCain tried to present.
McCain walked into this one and now he’s whining that the media is biased and liberal because they didn’t buy into his bogus narrative. Welcome to reality.
Reply
3:20 am on September 7th, 2008 150
That page has provided much more sourcing than you, hypocrite. And you seem to accept any and all unsourced criticisms of Palin as well – again hypocritical. Typical Dem.
Reply
3:35 am on September 7th, 2008 151
Typical? I provided sources for everything in this thread that needed to be sourced, and you have no proof that I have accepted any of the criticisms as truth.
All I have said is that there are legitimate concerns over McCain’s judgement and Palin’s character. Don’t start lying to cover your own shortcomings. Typical Republican.
Reply
3:47 am on September 7th, 2008 152
Perhaps some of have a tad higher standard than you when it comes to needing proof of Troopergate, Clameolouge. You’re shifting into deep troll territory with the unconvincing feign of innocence.
Reply
4:54 am on September 7th, 2008 153
I am not the only one treading the troll waters. That being said, I am finished with this thread. Look forward to next time…
Reply
6:26 am on September 7th, 2008 154
Kalani – did you know that a Trojan Horse virus pops up when I attempt to go to your site?
Reply
6:37 am on September 7th, 2008 155
The question of BO’s loyality to the USA has never been fully answered. Do the american people really want to entrust the country to a smooth talker, but untried patriot?
Reply
6:51 am on September 7th, 2008 156
I know I said I wouldn’t continue with this thread, but…
“The question of BO’s loyality to the USA has never been fully answered. Do the american people really want to entrust the country to a smooth talker, but untried patriot.”
What an absurd “issue”. And how does one become a “tried” patriot? Do you have to serve in the military or be POW so you can pretend that you are more partiotic than other people?
Reply
9:24 am on September 7th, 2008 157
“Using presidential campaigns as a metric for how well an individual will be as POTUS is misguided. According to this line of argument, George W. Bush should have been a stellar, Washington-Lincoln-Roosevelt caliber executive.”
Except that Bush didn’t actually “win” in 2000. He merely got an early Xmas present from the Supreme Court.
Well, if you all think McCain has run a good campaign so far (which is why I brought up the comparison, not to suggest that simply running a campaign makes one qualified to be president), that only proves that unquestioning loyalty is your only criterion. You can take the man out of the military, I guess, but you can’t always take the military out of the man.
Again, if I were an undecided voter looking for reasons to vote for McCain and reading this thread for help, the only real message I would take away is “He’s a hero, he’s got my loyalty and I don’t need to explain anything else.”
Guess that explains why McCain’s people have said they’re not running on the “issues.” Ya gotta love democracy!
Reply
2:56 pm on September 7th, 2008 158
“Except that Bush didn’t actually ‘win’ in 2000. He merely got an early Xmas present from the Supreme Court.”
Listen Baeksu, I’m not going to get into a quagmire with you about the controversial outcome Bush v. Gore. All I’ll say is that while what Rove, Baker, Bush, Harris and Co. did during the recount was in many ways dirty, mendacious, and certain instances unconscionable, it still doesn’t make Bush’s victory in 2000 in any sense illegitimate.
Finally, if you want to play the game of qualifying Bush’s victory in 2000 due to procedural and legal chicanery then the same can be said of Obama’s victory of Clinton. Do I need to mention the ruckus that ensued over the Michigan and Florida delegates during the primary? Does it also need to be mentioned the strong-arm tactics employed by Jesse Jackson Jr. towards black super delegates to get them to line up behind Obama?
The list goes on Baeksu.
Reply
3:10 pm on September 7th, 2008 159
“What an absurd “issue”. And how does one become a “tried” patriot? Do you have to serve in the military or be POW so you can pretend that you are more partiotic than other people?”
I guess John is not a patriot after all, huh? Also, all the dems did during their convention was talk about the issues, right? Ha ha. This gets funnier by the day. They never attack the Repubs.
My fellow Americans…(gee whiz, I liked the sound of that. Ya think I should run for p…..nah, I’m too honest for that.) no point in trying to have a discussion or a debate with the dems on this thread. They have a unique quality of always being right. I wish I was that smart. Every prediction they make will come to pass so I guess that makes them Psycho…Or is that psychic? I always get the two mixed up. The rest of us seem to be members of the evil empire because we support John McCain.
I guess I’ll just take my evilness and go in a corner and clean my handguns, my assault rifles, my single shot 50 cal sniper rifles and my BB gun. After that I’ll fix some SOS and have a good supper. Maybe have a can of chocolate powder and some hot water for desert later on.
Reply
3:28 pm on September 7th, 2008 160
“I guess John is not a patriot after all, huh?”
I did not say that. He’s no more patriotic than any of us. And don’t we all think it’s a little silly to be debating who is more patriotic anyways? I mean, talk about a non-issue.
Reply
3:31 pm on September 7th, 2008 161
Clam, for the first time I am in total agreement with you.
Reply
3:38 pm on September 7th, 2008 162
McCain can’t run on the issues because Obama is constantly changing his stand on everything: campaign finance reform, gun control, born-alive abortions, nuclear energy….. He’s taken conflicting stands on each. Voters do like him and that’s because the entire election this year (and, arguably, every four years) is about personalities and character issues like trust.
I said it before and I’ll say it again: Obama is wasting his time by ignoring the trust factor. He has got to do more than slam McCain or Palin on character. That doesn’t make people think he’s ready to lead and he comes across as an old style negative political candidate. Even the way he came out and immediately criticized Palin for being a small town mayor played right into his weakness of being perceived as an Ivy League elitist. Stick to issues — preferably, his own.
Reply
5:02 pm on September 7th, 2008 163
“McCain can’t run on the issues because Obama is constantly changing his stand on everything:”
That’s right, blame the other guy instead of looking in the mirror. McCain is a hostage to the right and has flipped on a whole range of far more important issues, like supporting Bush’s tax cuts and abortion, and then there’s Palin’s Kerry-like “I was against the Bridge to Nowhere after I was for it.”
“he comes across as an old style negative political candidate.”
Man, you and I do not live in the same world at all. Let me guess, I suppose you also think the GOP is now the party of “change.” Yeah, maybe they’ll toss some of their loose change at you if you vote for them!
Reply
6:35 pm on September 7th, 2008 164
We all see what we want to see in a politician, and we all vote accordingly. What the King and Clam and other dems on this thread see in BO is what they believe in, and right or wrong, that’s the opinion they have and they are going to stick to it. And they should, this is America.
A few that have posted here are still undecided and waiting to see how all the new stuff settles out. I was one of the undecided until a couple of days ago.
Then there are those of us who really believe that the experience of the GOP ticket is what the nation needs and right or wrong, we are going to stick to it. We believe that Palin is a forward looking choice for the GOP and one that will set well with the voters. None of the Dems are going to convince me or other strong GOP members to vote for Obama and none of us are going to convince them to vote for our ticket.
I see no point in some of the things I’ve said in some of my posts, but for the most part, I’ve argued against trying to predict the future and exaggerating the past deeds and misdeeds of the candidates. Whoever wins will, believe it or not, be the winner. Then we’ll see where the country goes next. It’s kind of like dying. I know I’m going to die before too many more years, and I am curious about what comes next. I’m not in a big hurry to find out and I’m not going to argue with anyone on their point of view, because no one really knows.
At least in politics we can see a result that we’ll recognize. I sometimes wonder in the whole scheme of things…Does any this really mean anything?
Reply
6:48 pm on September 7th, 2008 165
Here is some red meat for everyone to debate:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080907/pl_politico/13228
Reply
7:32 pm on September 7th, 2008 166
Is anyone surprised? Besides, I look at the composites. I’ll wait for a few days before worrying. Gallup is the only one to have a McCain lead though.
Reply
7:41 pm on September 7th, 2008 167
GI, maybe you should start an occasional Open Thread as the election nears. You could top it off with some particulary irksome stories to get the blood flowing. I usually don’t get too much contact with the other side, especially the older vet and established GOP crowd, this is nice. As angry I appear get at some people on here, it’s actually quite refreshing.
Just a thought…
Reply
7:46 pm on September 7th, 2008 168
The RCP aggregate of polls puts Obama at +0.8, or a drop of ~3.6, so far.
Reply
8:08 pm on September 7th, 2008 169
-which gives McCain about a 6 point bounce. That’s about right. It should be close for a couple weeks because the late GOP convention. That’s normal. Obama should break away again soon.
Reply
8:49 pm on September 7th, 2008 170
My grandfather was a dedicated Republican from Evergreen, Colorado (I remember several ’signed’ Xmas cards from Ron and Nancy on the living-room mantleplace), and when I was a lad, I asked him the difference between a Democrat and a Republican. He replied, “The Democrat says, ‘We need a new school.’ The Republican replies, ‘How are we going to pay for it?’”
Excluding the neocon foreign policy of recent years and pandering to the religious right, I would have much less of a problem with the Republicans if they could actually stick to their traditional core philosophy of fiscal conservatism. But in fact, they would rather practise a form of corporate welfare whereby ordinary people have helped fund the wildest excesses of Wall St. and a belligerent foreign policy. At least the Democrats have been far more interested in fiscal responsibility in recent years (Clinton did balance the budget, after all). Frankly, I find myself baffled over why middle-class voters are so interested in supporting GOP candidates who only want to use their tax dollars to help big oil, Wall St. and the military-industrial complex make more money.
Does all that talk of guns and faith really help your bottom line?
The big corporations have made out like bandits over the past 8 years, which is precisely what Bush and Cheney were chosen to do. Well, good for them, but doesn’t anyone else care that our country is now nearly bankrupt? Where have the real Rebublicans disappeared to? Are you really satisfied voting for such total fakers?
Reply
3:13 am on September 8th, 2008 171
The Clam, 5 Sep:
The Clam, 7 Sep:
Uh-huh, right.
Reply
5:27 am on September 8th, 2008 172
I know. I saw that. Sulk…
Reply
5:41 am on September 8th, 2008 173
“I know I said I wouldn’t continue with this thread, but…”
Flip flop- flip flop -flip flop
I will say it here first “down-low-gate”. This is the blockbuster revelation that Obama has had many gay lover, and they are getting murdered. MURDERED!! Don Young, Larry Bland, Nate Spencer.. how much more innocent blood must be spilt to satisfy the Obama lust for power.
http://www.rense.com/general81/enq.htm
Reply
7:17 am on September 8th, 2008 174
“Down-low-gate” is an old story. The guy making the charges was all over Youtube earlier this year (there are even parody videos, given the absurd nature of the “shocking revelations”). But there’s no there there, which is why the mainstream media won’t touch it with a ten-mile pole. I also recall that he was receiving payments from “interesting” sources. In any case, the guy’s story is ludicrous and doesn’t add up: Something about meeting Obama randomly in Chicago when he was in the State Senate, and doing coke with him in a limo and then getting busy. But ask yourself, why would a state senator do coke with some random gay hustler he’d just met when it would obviously be death to his career?
Just because you want to believe something, Shattered, doesn’t always make it true. But I do think it’s cute the way you state malicious slander as “truth.” A class act, you are!
Reply
7:31 am on September 8th, 2008 175
By the way, how do all you patriotic Republicans feel about the fact that Palin (and her husband) was apparently a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, which as its name suggests wants to secede from the Union?:
http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=_NK2sFJebGc
6 minutes in:
“Our current governor, we mentioned at the last conference, the one we were hoping would get elected, Sarah Palin, did get elected. There’s a joke, she’s a pretty good looking gal, there’s a joke goes around we’re the coldest state with the hottest governor. (laughter) And there was a lot of talk about her moving up. She was an AIP member before she got the job as a mayor of a small town — that was a non-partisan job. But to get along and go along — she eventually joined the Republican Party, where she had all kinds of problems with their ethics, and well, I won’t go into that. She also had about an 80% approval rating, and is pretty well sympathetic to her former membership.”
Reply
7:35 am on September 8th, 2008 176
King, I have to agree that the stories in the “National Enquirer” are so much bunk. They forgot the one true story though.
That’s the story where Obama meets with the invading little gray aliens and plans to help them in their bid to overthrow humanity. All they have to do in return is help him get into the Whitehouse. That one is real scary. (excuse me while I go throw up)
There is enough real criticism to go around for each of the candidates without the need to add crap like this to the debate.
Bring it on “National Enquirer”. At least you’re good for a laugh or 10.
It is early yet, but McCain has clearly gotten a bigger bounce than was expected. It will be interesting to see how it all works out. Come on John, kick em while they’re down. The dems would do it to you…
Reply
7:50 am on September 8th, 2008 177
King, I watched the video and laughed at most of it. I tried to source Palin’s involvement and found nothing to back it up. I kind of doubt the veracity of this guy’s statement and even his jokes.
IMHO I’ll have to give this video about as much credibility as the “National Enquirer”
Reply
7:50 am on September 8th, 2008 178
Oh, and here she is addressing the 2008 AIP Convention:
kr.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwvPNXYrIyI
“We have a great promise to be a self-sufficient state,” she claims.
Well, then, give back the $223 million in federal tax money that you kept from the Bridge to Nowhere!
Reply
7:52 am on September 8th, 2008 179
AS, she is addressing the 2008 convention in the second video, and says, “I share your vision.”
Straight from the moose’s mouth, my friend!
Reply
7:57 am on September 8th, 2008 180
This story has legs. Run, Caribou Barbie, run!
If Charlie Gibson doesn’t ask her about AIP later this week, we’ll know the fix is in.
Reply
7:57 am on September 8th, 2008 181
King, I’d like to watch it but your link does not work…not even with a cut and paste.
Reply
8:01 am on September 8th, 2008 182
AS, it works, I just did it. I had to drop the http:// part to get through the spam filter.
Alternately, just copy and paste “Sarah Palin and the Alaska Independence Party. Palin addresses AIP convention” and it should come right up.
Reply
8:05 am on September 8th, 2008 183
Some of the viewer comments:
“No mention of America. This woman is a Secessionist.”
“She was an AIP member before she got the job as mayor…” -Vice Chairman of the AIP, Dexter Clark
“She’s a registered member. Sorry, but McCain picked a secessionist for a running mate.”
“Google it, and you’ll be surprised. She was a member until 1996, and the founder of that, a guy named Vogler, said that they are Alaskans, not Americans, and have no use of America. They want to be like Canada, a free north American country. How can we have a vice president who doesn’t even want to be American? How could anyone defend this? McCain is not qualified to be President.?
Reply
8:17 am on September 8th, 2008 184
Now the AIP is denying that Palin was ever a member on their site:
http://www.akip.org/
Gee, why is that not surprising?
However, they do clearly state on their front page that her husband WAS a member (up until 2002 apparently):
“Todd Palin was registered as a member but never participated in any party activities aside from attending a convention in Wasilla at one time.”
OK, this fact seems indisputable: A one-time secessionist could very well be living in the White House.
God bless Alas — I mean, America!
Reply
8:20 am on September 8th, 2008 185
I got it to work…and I do have a couple of comments.
First, she refers to the AIP as a competing party with the words “competition is so good and as it applies to political parties as well.” It sounds like she is talking to someone outside of her party to me, but that might be a gray area. I think her statement is much clearer in the next comment, especially when it is put in context.
And yes, I agree with her statement of “I share your vision.” Of course you have to put it into context with the rest of the sentence. In whole it reads, “I share your vision of UPHOLDING THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS GREAT STATE.”
So if she shares that vision, how can she possibly advocate succession?
Reply
8:28 am on September 8th, 2008 186
I just thought I’d put these comments here to show how silly the statemant was about her being a “card carrying member” of the AIP.
Since the following is a press release, it is not copywrite material.
Press release with corrections from the AIP Chairman, Lynette Clark.
Most recently I have pulled the entire record regarding the Alaskan Independence Partys’ 1994 Convention file. I went through all the video, audio and paper records for that function. Something I should have done earlier before making the statement that Governor Palin was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party. For that I humbly apologize to Governor Palin, and, to both national and local press, and media.
I, foolishly, repeated and accepted as fact what an officer of this membership shared with myself, and husband Dexter Clark, over a year ago. My statement was incorrect regarding the Governor’s membership. What was correct was that Todd Palin was a member, that Sarah as a candidate for Governor appeared at the AIP Convention in 2006, and sent a welcoming DVD to the membership at the 2008 AIP statewide convention. Those truths do not take away my fault in mis-speaking regarding her membership. For that I do take full responsibility. I hold Governor Palin in high regard, I believe she is far and away the best individual Alaska could have as Governor, and as a woman, mother and wife is one of the best examples walking!
Thank you and again, I apologize to all.
Lynette Clark, Chairman
Alaskan Independence Party
September 3, 2008
Reply
8:29 am on September 8th, 2008 187
“It sounds like she is talking to someone outside of her party to me”
It sounds to me like she is a POLITICIAN!
It also sounded to me like she said, “I said thanks, but not thanks to the Bridge to Nowhere.”
A bald-faced lie!
It is the job of the press to sort out the truth in this matter. Are they up to it? We shall see. In any case, she is married to a secessionist sympathizer. That should be troubling enough to any patriotic American.
Reply
8:31 am on September 8th, 2008 188
“What was correct was that Todd Palin was a member”
“What was correct was that Todd Palin was a member”
“What was correct was that Todd Palin was a member”
Reply
8:34 am on September 8th, 2008 189
AS, that press release could be genuine or it could be moose manure. McCain’s people are already up in Alaska trying to squelch the Troopergate investigation (as reported by Newsweek).
Things are not always what they seem.
Reply
8:56 am on September 8th, 2008 190
King, I agree that things are not always what they seem.
Do you remember “Billy Beer?” I know that is ancient history and has no bearing here, but I did laugh about Billy and he had no influence on my decision to vote in that election.
Ronald Reagan’s son was accused of being a drug abuser. It did not sway me from voting for him, even though that information was dragged through the mud over and over again to try and hurt Reagan. .
Frankly, as long as he did not break any laws, or advocate the overthrow of the United States, I don’t much care what Todd joined or didn’t join. We are all allowed to make bad decisions from time to time. The question is, what do we do when we discover our decision was a bad one? I was a contributing member of the Obama campaign early on before I saw the light. Does that make me a bad Republican? As I said, all of us are entitled to make a bad decision once and awhile. I made one is supporting Obama so I rethought my options and am now a staunch Republican supporter like I should be.
I did go stand in a corner in shame for supporting Obama, but I thought it was going to be between him and Mitt. I do not care much for Mitt. When McCain became the obvious choice, I was back where I belong.
Reply
9:06 am on September 8th, 2008 191
AS, McCain doesn’t even know the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite, yet he very clearly wants to follow the neocon agenda of confronting Iran with force if necessary. Some people are saying that if we launch any sort of strike against Iran, that could very well be the last straw for the Islamo-terrorists and bring about the detonation of a nuclear device in a major US city.
I am seriously afraid of this man, and everyone else should be, too.
Reply
9:14 am on September 8th, 2008 192
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28157
And None Dare Call It Treason
Patrick J. Buchanan
08/22/2008
Who is Randy Scheunemann?
He is the principal foreign policy adviser to John McCain and potential successor to Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski as national security adviser to the president of the United States.
But Randy Scheunemann has another identity, another role.
He is a dual loyalist, a foreign agent whose assignment is to get America committed to spilling the blood of her sons for client regimes who have made this moral mercenary a rich man.
From January 2007 to March 2008, the McCain campaign paid Scheunemann $70,000 — pocket change compared to the $290,000 his Orion Strategies banked in those same 15 months from the Georgian regime of Mikheil Saakashvili.
What were Mikheil’s marching orders to Tbilisi’s man in Washington? Get Georgia a NATO war guarantee. Get America committed to fight Russia, if necessary, on behalf of Georgia.
Scheunemann came close to succeeding.
Had he done so, U.S. soldiers and Marines from Idaho and West Virginia would be killing Russians in the Caucasus, and dying to protect Scheunemann’s client, who launched this idiotic war the night of Aug. 7. That people like Scheunemann hire themselves out to put American lives on the line for their clients is a classic corruption of American democracy.
U.S. backing for his campaign to retrieve his lost provinces is what Saakashvili paid Scheunemann to produce. But why should Americans fight Russians to force 70,000 South Ossetians back into the custody of a regime they detest? Why not let the South Ossetians decide their own future in free elections?
Not only is the folly of the Bush interventionist policy on display in the Caucasus, so, too, is its manifest incoherence.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates says we have sought for 45 years to stay out of a shooting war with Russia and we are not going to get into one now. President Bush assured us there will be no U.S. military response to the Russian move into Georgia.
That is a recognition of, and a bowing to, reality — namely, that Russia’s control of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and occupation of a strip of Georgia cannot be a casus belli for the United States. We may deplore it, but it cannot justify war with Russia.
If that be true, and it transparently is, what are McCain, Barack Obama, Bush, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel doing committing the United States and Germany to bringing Georgia into NATO? For that would commit us to war for a cause we have already conceded, by our paralysis, does not justify a war.
Not only did Scheunemann’s two-man lobbying firm receive $730,000 since 2001 to get Georgia a NATO war guarantee, he was paid by Romania and Latvia to do the same. And he succeeded.
Latvia, a tiny Baltic republic annexed by Joseph Stalin in June 1940 during his pact with Adolf Hitler, was set free at the end of the Cold War. Yet hundreds of thousands of Russians had been moved into Latvia by Stalin, and as Riga served as a base of the Baltic Sea fleet, many Russian naval officers retired there.
The children and grandchildren of these Russians are Latvian citizens. They are a cause of constant tension with ethnic Letts and of strife with Moscow, which has assumed the role of protector of Russians left behind in the “near abroad” when the Soviet Union broke apart.
Thanks to the lobbying of Scheunemann and friends, Latvia has been brought into NATO and given a U.S. war guarantee. If Russia intervenes to halt some nasty ethnic violence in Riga, the United States is committed to come in and drive the Russians out.
This is the situation in which the interventionists have placed our country: committed to go to war for countries and causes that do not justify war, against a Russia that is re-emerging as a great power only to find NATO squatting on her doorstep.
Scheunemann’s resume as a War Party apparatchik is lengthy. He signed the PNAC (Project for the New American Century) letter to President Clinton urging war on Iraq, four years before 9-11. He signed the PNAC ultimatum to Bush, nine days after 9-11, threatening him with political reprisal if he did not go to war against Iraq. He was executive director of the “Committee for the Liberation of Iraq,” a propaganda front for Ahmad Chalabi and his pack of liars who deceived us into war.
Now Scheunemann is the neocon agent in place in McCain’s camp.
The neocons got their war with Iraq. They are pushing for war on Iran. And they are now baiting the Russian Bear.
Is this what McCain has on offer? Endless war?
Why would McCain seek foreign policy counsel from the same discredited crowd that has all but destroyed the presidency of George Bush?
“Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence … a free people ought to be constantly awake,” Washington warned in his Farewell Address. Our Founding Father was warning against the Randy Scheunemanns among us, agents hired by foreign powers to deceive Americans into fighting their wars. And none dare call it treason.
Reply
9:42 am on September 8th, 2008 193
“Bomb Syria” Woolsey advises McCain:
kr.youtube.com/watch?v=S6pRZmrsSus
Hey, guys, who wants to stationed in Iran next?
Reply
9:48 am on September 8th, 2008 194
That is interesting and I do respect Pat Buchanan. I don’t always agree with him but I do respect him. I guess that now I’m going to have to do more research. That is the fun part of all this, the research. That was always the fun part of my former career as a writer. I did note that according to Buchanan both Obama and McCain took the same stance on this issue with Georgia. I really want to know what Randy Scheunemanns connection is to McCain.
But for now I’m going to have to let it rest, darn it. My other life in interfering with my computer life. You know, doctors, wives and such.
BTW, as an aside, did you hear about Mississippi and Alabama? The gun stores in those two states have completely sold out of guns and ammo. I talked to a friend in Mississippi and asked him what was going on. He said, and I quote, “Well, we don’t want happening to us what happened to Georgia. We don’t like the Russians being on our doorstep.”
So it goes for September 08, 2008, 106 years and one day since the birth of my Father.
Reply
10:03 am on September 8th, 2008 195
AS, I have noticed that Obama is positioning himself aggressively on foreign policy issues and confronting terrorism, because that’s what he’s got to do to be taken seriously and get elected. But make no mistake, he is no neocon.
With people like Woolsey and Scheunemann calling the shots for McCain, the main result I see if he becomes President is that the world will hate us even more than it already does, in some cases even lethally.
The way I see it, Palin is just a diversion to take everyone’s eyes off the real program — a program so scary, it’s no wonder they don’t want us to see it.
Reply
11:16 am on September 8th, 2008 196
“Overall, religion continues to be the most politically divisive factor in the United States. Gallup found, for example, that nearly two thirds (65%) of highly religious American white voters would vote Republican, no matter what their interests in other issues are. They are one-issue voters and their political behavior explains to a large extent why relatively poor people and those of the middle class in the U.S. continue to vote for far right policies which mainly profit the rich. And that one single issue is an unhealthy desire to infuse religious dogma into the law of the land, no matter what the U.S. Constitution says about the division between Church and State and the requirement not to have a religious litmus test for any public office [Article 6, clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution says: ... “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”]. The constitution says one thing, but the churches say another. That explains why candidate McCain felt obliged to pander to the American religious right movement.
“Since economic studies show that when Democrats were in the White House, lower-income American families experienced slightly faster income growth than higher-income families, and that the reverse was true when Republicans were in control, one would expect the Democrats to be favorite in this year of economic hardship. That is if people vote rationally their economic interests rather than voting along religious lines.”
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10098
Reply
11:33 am on September 8th, 2008 197
What’s wrong with Georgia being in NATO? Isn’t acting “on behalf of client regimes” the entire point of NATO? I think that’s called a “coalition. I thought you Obama people were into coalition-building and diplomacy.
Reply
7:21 pm on September 8th, 2008 198
“What’s wrong with Georgia being in NATO?”
Does NATO really want to get sucked into providing security for a country with unresolved territorial and border issues?
Reply
9:36 pm on September 8th, 2008 199
Then why does Obama want Georgia in NATO if it’s such a bad idea? He and McCain both had the same stance on the situation there…unless Obama changed his mind in the last couple of weeks.
Reply
10:46 pm on September 8th, 2008 200
There were a couple of good op-eds last week in the NYT by former British diplomats who argued persuasively that the first step for Georgia should be admission into the EU, and that NATO inclusion should not be seriously considered until Georgia has resolved its own internal sovereignty issues. If Georgia were included in NATO today and Russia had invaded like it did in August, NATO would have had no choice but to enter into conflict with Russia or else risk losing NATO credibility. Do we really need WWIII at this point in history?
Then there is this observation by Putin:
“If my guesses are confirmed, then that raises the suspicion that somebody in the U.S. purposefully created this conflict [the August 7-8 Georgia-Russia conflict] with the aim of aggravating the situation and creating an advantage…for one of the candidates in the battle for the post of U.S. president.”
–Vladimir Putin, Russian Prime Minister and former President (August 28, 2008)
GI, since this is a military-focused blog we would like to know how you feel about the fact that McCain is surrounding himself with extremely hawkish neocon foreign-policy advisors, who have made public statements that they are committed to “regime change” in Iran and have gone so far as to label the Iranian Republican Guard a “terrorist organization” (a position Obama opposes, for the record).
Since McCain would be the leader of the US military, we think it would be important for you to vet his foreign policy advisors, so that members of the US military who read this blog can make a more informed decision when voting in Nov.
We have seen in Iraq that democracy cannot succeed when imposing it by force upon other nations that are not yet ready for it. And yet, it seems that the neocons have not yet learned this crucial lesson, and remain committed to remaking the Middle East for the primary purpose of securing access to oil resources in the region, and appeasing the Zionist lobby in the US.
Surely this is not a path that we want to continue on for the next four years.
We await your informed assessment of this very important area in the US Presidential race.
Reply
11:11 pm on September 8th, 2008 201
“We’re not gonna give ‘em hell — we’re gonna tell the truth and they’ll think it’s hell”:
http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=OOekhhuN99A
Reply
1:03 am on September 9th, 2008 202
“If Georgia were included in NATO today and Russia had invaded like it did in August, NATO would have had no choice but to enter into conflict with Russia.”
Isn’t it even remotely possible that NATO membership for the tiny democracy would actually deter Russian aggression? Isn’t that the whole point of NATO?
Reply
2:59 am on September 9th, 2008 203
“Isn’t it even remotely possible that NATO membership for the tiny democracy would actually deter Russian aggression?”
More to the point, if Georgia had been in NATO, would it not have felt more secure in bombing South Ossetia at an earlier date than it did, given that NATO would have been there in the wings to counter any Russian reponse? Does NATO really want to put its seal of approval on such aggressive member actions, and then have to back it up by force if necessary?
What does “Russian aggression” mean anyway? Randy Scheunemann was recently interviewed on NPR and he couldn’t even admit that Georgia was the actor who had initiated hostilities in the recent conflict there. You seem to be following the same line of reasoning, but the facts tell us otherwise.
Reply
3:49 am on September 9th, 2008 204
Its so great that America has a new hero. Sarah Palin. The democrats did what I expected, they backstabbed Hillary to keep her out of the white house. Look at all the Democrats that are running to McCain. Now a new hero has steped forward. SARAH PALIN. Thank you baby Jesus for bringing the world such a great hero.
http://www.palin4pres2012.com/
Sarah Palin: CHANGE WE CAN BELIVE IN!!
Reply
3:53 am on September 9th, 2008 205
The mainstream media would not touch the John Edwards cheating story either. I did not slander, I gave proof of what I belive.
Reply
5:15 am on September 9th, 2008 206
“I did not slander, I gave proof of what I belive.”
Shouldn’t you be in church or something?
Reply
5:26 am on September 9th, 2008 207
Shattered, you have some issues, buddy.
And how can she be a “hero”? She wasn’t even a POW!!!
Reply
7:18 am on September 9th, 2008 208
And how can she be a “hero”?
Already Democrats want to “bash” Palin because they can’t imagine a world where a woman is VP. Hillary almost broke that glass, but the Democratic machine stopped her. Now Palin is carying the tourch. Palin will be a hero to many for breaking the glass.
The Clam, what do you see when you look into a little girls eyes? I see all the possibilites that GOD can offer. EVEN PRESIDENT OF THE MOST POWERFUL NATION ON EARTH. Don’t crush that little girls dreams because you hate women or wish that women are lower then men. Your wishes will never come true.
Sarah Palin: CHANGE WE CAN BELIVE IN!!
Reply
7:34 am on September 9th, 2008 209
“Already Democrats want to ‘bash’ Palin because they can’t imagine a world where a woman is VP.”
I have just one word to say to you, genius: Ferraro.
Reply
7:57 am on September 9th, 2008 210
Shattered,
It’s like a bizarro world with you.
“Don’t crush that little girls dreams because you hate women or wish that women are lower then men. Your wishes will never come true.”
Watch it, douche bag. As King Baeksu said, the Dems were there over twenty years ago. Don’t try take credit for something that the Left fought many years for. Having a woman in the VP slot does not allow the swine in the GOP to lecture us about equality. We fought you guys to get where we are today. You might have “forgot”, but we did not.
I know name calling is childish, but you sir are a lying douche.
Reply
8:00 am on September 9th, 2008 211
King, this is quoted from your own post from Pat Buchanan
“If that be true, and it transparently is, what are McCain, Barack Obama, Bush, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel doing committing the United States and Germany to bringing Georgia into NATO? For that would commit us to war for a cause we have already conceded, by our paralysis, does not justify a war.”
If we are to believe Pat Buchanan’s essay as you intended us to do, then we must believe this part of it as well. So, it seems to me that you are arguing against your own party on the issue of Georgia being voted into NATO. This makes Obama as pro war with Russia as are the rest. But as was stated, I don’t believe this was a pro-war move. I believe it was meant to be a little more on the détente side of things to prevent Russia from moving into Georgia. Kind of too late to stop them in Georgia now so it seems like a moot point to me. However, there are other former members of the SU that are asking for NATO membership for that same reason. I believe that strong consideration should be given to admitting them if they qualify in all aspects, particularly human rights. I hope I’m wrong, but it looks like we are headed back to the cold war anyway. If we are, let’s protect as many of the small countries of the world as we can before we get there. They have the same right to freedom as does the rest of the world. And it looks like Obama agrees with this sentiment.
Fanaticism runs rampant on both sides of this debate. If cooler heads prevail, would most of you agree that the word “HERO” is almost the most misused word in the American language? A person does not become a “HERO” simply by being famous. You actually have to do something to earn that title. Of the four people running for president, only one has really committed heroic acts. Although that should not automatically qualify him for president, it does display his strength of character. There are no words to describe how bad it can get in war. You have to live it to know how it feels. And although I have lived the experiences of war, I cannot even begin to feel what John McCain must have gone through as a POW.
But don’t vote for him if you are dedicated to other principles. It is your choice. I am a Republican. I own guns, don’t believe in abortion as a means of birth control, and don’t believe that taxing the rich will be good for the poor. They’re going to pay anyway, and probably more than the rich. I don’t think we want to open the can of worms that Obama’s taxation plan would leave us with. Tax the profits of the rich so they can raise prices for the poor. Next year the rich have a larger profit so tax them again and raise the prices the rest of us have to pay. I don’t know how far that cycle would go on until someone stopped it but, I don’t want to find out.
Reply
9:06 am on September 9th, 2008 212
AS, at this point I’m agnostic on Georgia being included in NATO. Probably in the long-term it would be OK after it has revolved its own borders but not before then. However, I posted that article mainly because it addresses Scheunemann’s role in McCain’s campaign. That is what the focus should be on, and I am particularly troubled by his views on the Middle East. Over 4,100 US servicemembers have been lost in Iraq, how long is this going to continue?
Obama’s plan is merely to rescind Bush’s tax cuts on those making over $250,000 a year, and I seem to recall that McCain was also against making Bush’s tax cuts permanent until he had a sudden change of heart, cough, cough. You seem to be arguing for some sort of trickle-down theory of economics and I don’t buy it. The current deficit is over $9 trillion and reports are that servicing just interest on that is $500 billion a year (China alone has over $1 trillion in US treasury securities and obviously interest must be paid on that). That is going to have to get eaten by taxpayers sooner or later — if not by you then by your descendents. At the same time, federal bailouts such as of Bear Stearns and Fannie May/Freddie Mac are also being funded by US taxpayers, and are the result of loose regulation, meaning in effect that the fat cats leading these failed organizations were raking in the big bucks at taxpayer expense. No doubt, there is much worse to come, and McCain’s plan to make Bush’s tax cuts permanent will add something like another $5 trillion to the US debt. How is he helping improve the economy if US taxpayers are throwing away $1 trillion a year just on interest payments? I can see how that helps the banks and financial institutions, but cannot see how that helps ordinary taxpayers at all. Short-term fixes may in fact have much more serious long-term consequences. This is precisely why McCain does not want to talk about economic issues, because he is merely a shill for the big corporations at the end of the day.
Reply
1:19 pm on September 9th, 2008 213
the Clam-Lets destroy this bitch! We Dems gave a woman a shot! She FAILED!!!!
KB-What right does a women have being conservative!
Sorry gents, your glass wall will come down.
Ronald Reagan-Tear Down this Wall
Sarah Palin-CHANGE WE CAN BELIVE IN!!
Reply
1:43 pm on September 9th, 2008 214
“I know name calling is childish, but you sir are a lying douche.”- The words of the clam
What is the lie! Clam! Damn your eyes! You sir have lied!
I looked up the word “douche” the clam.
To douche is to introduce a “stream of water into the body for medical or hygienic reasons”
I dont know why you called me that, but your are right I am pure like water, unless you feel H20 is evil, and I am trying to help you (cure you), and other fools, and sometimes helping simple people makes them angry (and childish).
A douche, is medicine to an “intestinal bacteria in the vagina”. That is what a douche is inteneded to cure, a bacteria like you.
People like you look to other simple minded people who will nod their heads in agreement with your insults. But the strong and honest will stand tall.
Sarah Palin-CHANGE WE CAN BELIVE IN!!
She stands tall! Why do you hate her and the dreams of so many daughters of the proud nation of The United States of America!
Its time for change and CHANGE WE ALL (EVEN WOMEN MR CLAM!!) CAN BELIVE IN!
Reply
1:53 pm on September 9th, 2008 215
King,
First, I’m not an economic genius so I can’t say that I really know who has the best plan in this regard. As bad as it is today, I would hope that they both have the ability and desire to make it better if elected. I do like McCain’s ideas about gaining energy independents through drilling and alternate forms of energy. The idea is great. Will it work? I have no idea. The point I was trying to make with my comments about taxes was applying plain old horse sense to the plan that Obama talked about in recent speeches.
There are other issues that strike a little closer to home for a retired professional soldier such as me. Other soldiers may not agree with me but that is the great thing about America. We can believe as we wish and attack each other on the issues at hand but we can still walk down the street and have a cup of coffee and ogle the opposite sex if we wish to. Okay, I’m a dirty old man….and I love it.
If even one service member looses his/her life in armed conflict as a result of hostile action, to me it is one too many. That being said, let me say this.
I am a Vietnam Veteran. As we said in the Nam, “Don’t mean nothing” because that is ancient history. I only state that here to make a comparison to what I am about to say.
I came out very strongly against us going into Iraq. It sounded to me like we were becoming the world’s police force. I’m against that as well. Iraq talked tough, but after we took Kuwait back from them I believe their bark was worse than their bite. I believe George Jr. wanted to get even with them for trying to assassinate his father. But even if that is wrong thinking, I was still against us going in and I could find no connection to Sept 11th. In contrast I was all for the decision for us to go into Vietnam because I was dumb, young and stupid. I was a lifer and I’m proud of my service but it was my goal in the Nam to keep as many Americans as I could alive and able to return home. Although I love old glory and even today would lay down my life to protect her, she was not in my thoughts in Nam. Pure and simple, peoples lives where on my mind in Nam and nothing else. When we left Nam it was with dishonor. We had the end in sight and our politicians made us turn and run. So be it, I’m over it now.
Here is the comparison. As I said I was against going into Iraq. But we did go, and we did lose lives. Too many lives. But we should not turn and run from it as we did in Nam. For or against the war, I believe we need to stay until there is real peace in the region. We owe that to the men and women whose lives were lost doing something they believed was right. The end is in sight. Let’s not put the type of burden on Iraq’s heroes shoulders that most Vietnam Veterans carry to this day.
You might also be surprised that I am against fighting Iran as well, or any other country for that matter. That is if the situation stays as it is right now. However, the first time they make a provocative move towards their neighbors or any other country, or start waving nukes around with threatening language, we should go in and make a parking lot out of the country. Since they have stated that they plan to eliminate Israel from the face of the earth I would not blame Israel if they took defensive action against them to keep from being nuked. I would be in favor of supporting Israel if that were to occur.
Reply
3:16 pm on September 9th, 2008 216
So, you are a douche? Nice.
“She stands tall! Why do you hate her and the dreams of so many daughters of the proud nation of The United States of America! Its time for change and CHANGE WE ALL (EVEN WOMEN MR CLAM!!) CAN BELIVE IN.”
Seriously, stop pretending the the GOP is the champion of civil rights. It’s a pretty bogus and offensice claim.
Who was it that said something like this?
“Lets destroy this bitch.” Hmmmm… Oh yeah, it was McCain’s campaign staff in reference to Hillary. The Palin pick was a political pick and nothing more. Open your eyes and stop flattering yourself and your party.
Reply
5:45 pm on September 9th, 2008 217
Ancient Soldier — HERE!!! HERE!!! 100 percent same attitude as you.
The point people seem to miss is that if you’re an ex-military man who made a career of it like McCain, you KNOW that war is not glory and glitz — it is more about protecting each others back. It is a last resort when diplomacy and all other methods of rational process. War is insane…and must only be used if there are no other options. Like Ancient Soldier, I spent 4 1/2 years in the Southeast Asia War Games and foolishly believed in what I was doing and like Ancient Soldier still harbor some venom for the politicians who lost the war. The US won every major battle but lost through political negotiations.
Like Collin Powell, I believe the US has no business in “nation building.” But like Powell, once committed to war, it is no longer an issue for a soldier. His duty is to protect the US national interests as dictated by the Commander-in-Chief. I can’t even fathom what those brave soldiers, sailors and airmen are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan as the last time I was playing in the area the Iran-Iraq War was going on. This is a new type of war with new rules — with embedded press watching over your shoulders to snap your picture the first time you screw up. Instant war coverage — uncensored and sometimes untrue. But there does seem to be a light at the end of the tunnel. But it’s still going to be a long row to hoe.
To pull out with the US’ tail between its legs would place upon the US the same mantle it was forced to wear after Vietnam. America would be regarded as a second-rate piss pot beaten by a disorganized rabble waving AK-47s and using IEDs against the high-tech US military super-power. Read some history and see how it played in the international press for years and years. America as a power had fallen from grace — and it would be years before Vietnam was forgotten.
This is what Obama offers. Pull out because the Iraq War is expensive and it costs American lives. There is no mention of winning the war — or even finding a solution with HONOR. He just wants out. This is why I believe he would not be a suitable Commander-in-Chief.
Reply
6:07 pm on September 9th, 2008 218
Kalani,
As an aside, I knew a Kalani in Alaska back in the early 60s, but that was just the last half of his last name. I’ll murder the spelling but it was something like Kelooeokalani. He was from Hawaii and one of the best NCO’s I ever knew when I was coming up through the ranks. It’s an unusual name so I thought I’d ask. Hope being off topic doesn’t get me in trouble here; I’m having too much fun.
You’re right; I am also in full agreement with you on the war angle. I’m proud to be a Vietnam Veteran, but tired of the onus that title brings with it. Still, in memory of my many friends that did not return, I carry that burden with pride.
Reply
6:36 pm on September 9th, 2008 219
@218 Off topic, like your friend, who I don’t know, my name comes from the end piece of a long moniker too. God how the haoles can butcher the Hawaiian language and pronunciation.
Back on topic, however, one thing I keep hearing coming up from the Republicans is them touting Palin’s “military” command experience as a Alaska National Guard “commander-in-chief.” I wish they would stop that because that is a very weak point. She did little to nothing with them.
Instead, they should play up her position as a simply Mom whose son is going to Iraq — something every parent can identify with whether or not they have sent a child to war. But thus far, I haven’t heard anything from the Republican PR folks on this — perhaps they are waiting to when he actually deploys this month.
Reply
6:42 pm on September 9th, 2008 220
Kalani said: “There is no mention of winning the war — or even finding a solution with HONOR.”
I could go on a long spew about our inability to stake out exactly what winning the war means over there. It’s been like a long football game with constantly receding goal posts. But, that’s going too far off topic for this thread.
What is on topic is the recent promotion of General Craig Campbell.
Reply
7:27 pm on September 9th, 2008 221
“Back on topic, however, one thing I keep hearing coming up from the Republicans is them touting Palin’s “military” command experience as a Alaska National Guard “commander-in-chief.” I wish they would stop that because that is a very weak point. She did little to nothing with them.”
I also felt this was a little flakey. She does have some executive experience at state level which is more than Obama has. You have to admit, she is great PR for the GOP. And the “mother” angle is the one true point that no one can poke holes in. I have a SSG daughter-in-law in Army Aviation stationed in Iraq even as we speak. She is on her second tour and my son has been to Bosnia. I also have a grandson in Korea and another in Navy Boot. Therefore I really can identify with her on those points. But then Joe Biden has to have that credit as well. He has a son in Army JAG going to Iraq at the same time.
Also she really does get a lot of credit for breaking up the good-ol’-boys in Alaska. I had three years up there before Nam and even back then the State was rampant with corruption. You should have seen the kickbacks and such during the recovery period after the big earthquake on March 27, 1964. If it hadn’t been so pitiful it might have been funny.
The bridge to nowhere is also a big joke. When she was Madam Mayor she did not have all the facts on the bridge and at that time she supported it. When she became Governor she did have all the facts and then was not only against it, but saved the state many millions by turning it down. Makes sense to me. I don’t see it as being as big a deal as our Democratic friends want to make it. But that’s okay too. They have to have something to talk about.
Either way, I find myself voting more for principles than for people. There is more American interest in this election than I have ever seen in my life and my first vote was for Ike’s second term. Maybe this time….just maybe…the American people will hold whoever is elected to their plans and promises for the future. I do know we are all fed up with business as usual in DC. And I hope that this time I can truly vote for someone I support instead of the lesser of two evils.
McCain/Palin…I hope you’ve really got it right this time. It is my belief that your ideas for change are the right ones and that they will work. I hope you don’t forget them when you get to the Whitehouse.
Reply
8:20 pm on September 9th, 2008 222
Ancient Soldier and Kalani, I appreciate your thoughts on war but I fundamentally disagree about the Vietnam War. It was unwinnable, plain and simple. The Vietnamese forces we were fighting against were driven by nationalism, which was a far greater motivation than anything the US had to offer, especially for its soldiers. I suppose we could have kept bombing the whole country until nothing was left and won that way, but at least saner minds finally put a stop to that way of thinking. I should also say that my father was an anti-war activist in Austin in the late ’60s and his activities caused my mother to divorce him, so this conflict also affected me personally. This is not a merely academic issue with me.
I understand the “Pottery Barn Rule” with regards to Iraq and I do think Obama offers a responsible phased withdrawal. We should also note that Iraqi PM Al-Maliki essentially agrees with Obama’s position, so I don’t see any dishonor here. In fact, the comparison between Iraq and Vietnam doesn’t work at all for me, so in my opinion all this talk of “cutting and running” in Iraq is a misframing of the nature of the Iraq conflict. Iraq simply needs to provide better internal security for itself, that’s all.
In the end, Obama offers a more moderate and less belligerent US foreign policy. McCain does not. Ancient Soldier, your talk of going after Iran if they “do something bad” frightens me. I believe that belligerent US foreign policy is what whipped up Islamo-terrorism against us. A more moderate US foreign policy will breed greater good will towards us across the planet. A more belligerent US foreign policy, such as what McCain has to offer, will only continue to breed resentment against us around the world.
In other words, Obama offers a proactive approach to improving our standing in the world, while McCain offers a reactive approach towards the same goal.
I believe there’s only one wise choice here.
Reply
10:53 pm on September 9th, 2008 223
Sarah Palin has her own action figure! Children around the world are rejoicing!
http://www.sarahpalinactionfigure.com/
America and the world need REAL CHANGE. CHANGE THEY CAN BELIVE IN.
Not the failed politics of GORE-KERRY-HUSSAIN OBAMA.
The Clam, don’t piss on a childs dream.
Reply
10:58 pm on September 9th, 2008 224
Shattered, aren’t you the guy who has repeatedly made racist comments against Koreans on this site?
All you’re doing is embarrassing people who support the GOP ticket with your childish antics.
Reply
10:58 pm on September 9th, 2008 225
Hillary said the glass ceiling has 18 million cracks and the Clam is busy tryng to glue that ceiling back to the way it was. The Clam, Palin will bring change to the White house no matter how much you and your haters try and stop her.
Its time for real change: Palin!
Reply
11:10 pm on September 9th, 2008 226
Shattered, if you are such a supporter of women why do you refer to and demean former comfort women as “whores”?:
“The Korean government has been payiing former whores that are now too old to turn tricks to protest in front of the Japanese embassy for years.”
http://rokdrop.com/2008/06/21/will-new-us-beef-import-regulations-hurt-korean-pride/#comment-175195
They were not even “whores,” they were s.e.x slaves. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
Reply
11:37 pm on September 9th, 2008 227
Don’t feed trolls.
Reply
12:06 am on September 10th, 2008 228
@ 222
“It was unwinnable, plain and simple.”
I and history disagree.
The Tet offensive is widely viewed as a turning point in the war despite the high cost to the communist (32,000 killed and about 5,800 captured). The Communist were forced out of all the towns and cities, except Hue, within a few weeks. Nevertheless, it emphasezed to Johnson that Victory would require a greater COMMITMENT than the American people were WILLING TO INVEST. From jan 31, 1968 till the end of the peace talks the communist losses numbered 75,000, and morale was faltering, even among the party Leadership. Source: U.S. Library of Congress.
Know what frightens me. Lefties that think they can be nice and sit down and talk people into peace. Iran doesn’t WANT peace. I assure you, America is willing to talk peace. I hope America is WILLING to fight for it also. You clearly are not.
You are correct about one thing: there is only one wise choice here. Mccain.
But, maby America needs a spanking. So if BHO becomes the puppet president for Joe Biden (good old boys club) I will watch with sad amusement as they weaken our great country for four years. The backlash after THAT will be worth the wait!
Reply
12:23 am on September 10th, 2008 229
“Know what frightens me. Lefties that think they can be nice and sit down and talk people into peace.”
Vietnam and Iraq were both neocolonial wars of aggression. We had no business invading those two sovereign nations. War = Peace. Doubleplus Good. Whatever, buddy.
“Iran doesn’t WANT peace. I assure you, America is willing to talk peace.” Correction: Obama is willing to talk with Iran, and McCain isn’t.
Reply
12:25 am on September 10th, 2008 230
Off topic;
I see a few Vietnam Vets are here. When i was returning to Iraq in 04 after leave, i saw this older fellow that was lookin me over. I could tell he wanted to say something, so I stopped pacing about the airport. He came over and thanked me for my service. we talked. Turned out he was in WWII. I thanked him for his service.
I don’t believe I have ever said that to a Vietnam Vet. I would like to do so now.
and add that I am proud of what you did over there. Thats all. I hope that came out ok.
Reply
12:37 am on September 10th, 2008 231
@229
I was mistaken when I called you a Lefty KB. Even the Left has SOME intelligence.
You don’t even try. Makes you kind of pointless.
I have to rejoin the real world now. But don’t worry. I’ll be back.
BK, I almost hope you get your Biden puppet. Four years of that kind of failure would doom the left for at least rest of MY life.
Reply
12:44 am on September 10th, 2008 232
“You don’t even try.”
You’re right, I would have never tried to invade Iraq. I would have focused on Afghanistan instead, since that’s where Bin Laden was and still apparently is.
Of course, we all know that the reason Bush didn’t go that route is because having Bin Laden alive and at large is far more useful for the neocons than having him dead.
Reply
12:45 am on September 10th, 2008 233
“I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.”
Obama, Oct. 2002
Reply
2:55 am on September 10th, 2008 234
JoeC- Good point. I agree.
Retired-There are plenty of smart lefties. Look at Obama, he is full of cunning and trickery.
Back to topic-With McCain on top of the polls, he is looking like a real “comeback kid”. Its good to see the good guys win.
Biden by far is the most anti-woman politician (besides Obama) on the ticket.
Meet Joe Biden: the Anita Hill lyncher! htt p://www.feministing.com/archives/010594.html
Its time for real change people! CHANGE WE CAN BELIVE IN!
WE CAN DO IT!!
Reply
5:19 am on September 10th, 2008 235
Kalani – Like Collin Powell, I believe the US has no business in “nation building.”
If post WWII is an example – the US does have some responsibility to nation build. If we don’t do it then some other country will.
Kalani – when I go to yuour web page I a trojan horse virus pops up – any reason?
KB “Vietnam and Iraq were both neocolonial wars of aggression. We had no business invading those two sovereign nations. War = Peace. Doubleplus Good.”
Your knowledge of the Vietnam conflict seems to be lacking.
Reply
7:03 am on September 10th, 2008 236
“Your knowledge of the Vietnam conflict seems to be lacking.”
South Vietnam was a US puppet state. The Gulf of Tonkin Incident has been proven to have been staged (in order to justify US escalation in the Vietnam conflict), thus, it was a provocation by the US against the North, i.e., an act of war. We bombed the hell out of North Vietnam and Cambodia, and conducted a proxy war against Laos as well. That’s three separate nations whose sovereignty was violated by the US.
US involvement in the Vietnam War has been characterized as part of the “containment” doctrine, whereby we were defending “liberty” against the spread of communism.
In fact, the primary objective of the US was to make an example of Vietnam to other countries in the region. For what purpose? To show that the US was serious about imposing US-dominated free-market capitalism around the world, and to show what would happen to those who resisted that program and decided to follow their own alternative economic and political models (like Indonesia under Sukarno, for example). In other words, the Vietnam War was by “globalization” by military means, just as the Iraq War is today. However, Vietnamese nationalism trumped the US globalist project in that country (well, at least for a few decades), while Iraq is still an open story. Modern Iraq is an artificial construct, which is why sectarianism rather than nationalism is dominant there, and thus comparisons to Vietnam only go so far. Basically, we should have never gotten involved there, because as I said above, you cannot impose democracy upon other nations until they are ready for it themselves.
Reply
8:38 am on September 10th, 2008 237
@ 236
ALERT! ALERT! Conspiracy Nut Alert! You are fun KB. Not original, but fun.
Bottom line is that if America were trying to do what you seem to think—it would have been done.
You likely don’t believe we landed on the moon either. Oh, and tell us of the “little green men”. I’m not bored with you yet. I wonder what Biden’s meal ticket thinks about that?
Reply
9:57 am on September 10th, 2008 238
“Conspiracy Nut Alert!”
Yes, there was indeed a conspiracy and it was called Op-Plan 34A:
http://www.npr.org/templates/dmg/dmg.php?prgCode=ATC&showDate=02-Aug-2004&segNum=6&NPRMediaPref=RM
Reply
11:11 am on September 10th, 2008 239
“South Vietnam was a US puppet state. The Gulf of Tonkin Incident has been proven to have been staged (in order to justify US escalation in the Vietnam conflict), thus, it was a provocation by the US against the North, i.e., an act of war. We bombed the hell out of North Vietnam and Cambodia, and conducted a proxy war against Laos as well. That’s three separate nations whose sovereignty was violated by the US.”
Actually King, South Vietnam was a French territory before they got beaten and retreated from the country. Our only involvement was with a few observers of the 1st SF Group. I think we had about 150 observers over there.
Some of your facts are wrong and some of your information is twisted to make the Dems look good.
1. Gulf of Tonkin. A wholly owned adventure of LBJ so he would have a reason to send conventional combat troops to Vietnam and escalate the war. And Ummm, I think he was a Democrat.
2. General Vo Nguyen Giap: Ever hear of this guy? He was the commander of the North Vietnamese Armed Forces during the Vietnam War. I can’t quote him exactly because he spoke no English and I doubt if many here speak Vietnamese but what he said was:
We (the North Vietnamese Government) were only 6 months away from total capitulation when the Americans withdrew from Vietnam. The Americans had beaten us on every battlefield. It was our effort in America that won the war for us.
3. He went on to brag about how the planned efforts of planted protesters in the United States had won the war for North Vietnam.
As I said in an earlier post the Vietnam War is what turned me into a staunch Republican. Mr. Johnson was a fellow Texan, but he forgot his roots and made a mess of our county both in Vietnam and in CONUS. He gave America a black eye that we still wear. It was from this Democrat that we earned our present reputation of being a weak giant all around the world. You can’t wave your distorted judgments about Vietnam around here because history proves you wrong. And I have to admit, Nixon was no better. He ended the war through a cease fire, a cease fire that in truth was surrender. That should never have happened and we cannot allow it to happen again.
Reply
11:24 am on September 10th, 2008 240
Palin for the world!
“I wouldn’t even call it a Palin movement, I’d call it a sleeping giant that has been awakened,” Baron, 56, said at a rally here Tuesday. She described its members as a silent majority of women in Middle America who “are raising our families, who work if we have to, but love our country and our families first.”
Washington post.
Reply
11:39 am on September 10th, 2008 241
“Yes, there was indeed a conspiracy and it was called Op-Plan 34A:”
Right on Mr King, you’re right…and even though this has no bearing in this thread, might I add that Op-Plan 34A was the brain child of the Johnson Administration and supported by the Democratic Leadership of the time. Shame on you Democrats, you got us into a war in Vietnam. After all these years, I’m surprised that I even remember how to spell the name.
I guess you know almost all of the Conspiracy stuff about Palin has been debunked. But I have to give the Democrats “E” for Effort. They tried to smear her name but it backfired.
And this stuff about Pigs with Lipstick. If Obama had been smart he would have ignored the Repub comments. Instead he had to make it into an issue by giving it legs. How silly is that?
Reply
11:58 am on September 10th, 2008 242
“Our only involvement was with a few observers of the 1st SF Group.”
You’ve got to be kidding me. Considering that you are completely ignoring CIA involvement in South Vietnam since the ’50s, I’m not going to waste a bunch of time debating the Vietnam War when you make such disingenous statements. And it doesn’t make a difference to me whether Kennedy and LBJ were Democrats, I would still be against that war.
Reply
12:04 pm on September 10th, 2008 243
“I guess you know almost all of the Conspiracy stuff about Palin has been debunked.”
No, it hasn’t. Troopergate, Perdiemgate, the list is long.
“And this stuff about Pigs with Lipstick.”
Nice shot at innuendo. Obama was referring to McCain’s sudden new commitment to “change,” not Palin.
Reply
2:34 pm on September 10th, 2008 244
No, it hasn’t. Troopergate, Perdiemgate, the list is long.
“So you admit that there is a smear campaign against Palin. Good to know.”
“And this stuff about Pigs with Lipstick.
Nice shot at innuendo. Obama was referring to McCain’s sudden new commitment to “change,” not Palin.”
No innuendo intended. To clarify my statment, I think the Repubs touching that was wrong. I agree that Obama was not attacking Palin. What I meant was, if Obama had ignored it, that probably would have ended it. Instead he had to defend himself which makes a lot of folks take a second look. Had he ignored it completely it would have gone away. I think it was beneath his dignity to respond and I also believe he hurt himself by doing so. I watched him give his talk at the High School in VA and when he addressed it his voice got all whiney. He almost acted like he had a guilty conscience. As I said, I do not believe he was attacking Palin. I can’t understand why he gave such a stupid attack legs.
I thought I said that in fewer words up above. I’m basically very lazy and don’t really like to type long posts. Now I’m tired…think I’ll go take a nap.
As far as Vietnam goes, I’m through talking about that here. It is off the subject, dear to my heart and I don’t want to lose my cool. Some of us can read stuff in books and papers and trumped up reports and honestly believe they know the truth. Others can live the truth. Nuff said!
Reply
3:34 pm on September 10th, 2008 245
Obama is winning women 49%-44%…
http://www.gallup.com/poll/108022/Candidate-Support-Gender.aspx
Reply
4:15 pm on September 10th, 2008 246
Democratic Leadership of the time. An now the democrats are bring up “Pigs”. Who remembers the Bay of Pigs? Another Democratic Leadership failure and probably the reason most S Fla Cubans are Republicans.
Reply
4:54 pm on September 10th, 2008 247
Reuters is reporting that a Wash Post/ABC poll currently gives McCain a 12-pt advantage among white women voters.
Reply
5:46 pm on September 10th, 2008 248
Polls say that Sarah is just plain popular. She feels the pain of the common man.
Polls say that Biden is out of touch. A failed man from the past.
36 years in the Senate, Biden is the ultimite insider. Change wont happen with Obama and Biden.
CHANGE WE CAN ALL BELIVE IN! SARAH!
Reply
6:01 pm on September 10th, 2008 249
The latest Obama scandal – lipstickGate.
Charges of sexism leveled against the Obama camp.
Reply
7:32 pm on September 10th, 2008 250
And no sources of course…
knickerbocker,
Obama has rarely been far ahead and McCain breaks the surface every few weeks or months. Only post-convention did Obama really wallop him. This explains why the McCain camp is swinging so hard right now. They are terrified of another slide. They’ve gotten air before and been unable to stay on the surface. They’ll slide again before the debates and will not be able to make up the difference.
Still, this is what the GOP always does. They start pouring it on after Labor Day. It’s just their MO.
Reply
7:48 pm on September 10th, 2008 251
All I can say is, I hope these petty issues like lipstick or other stupid things on either side that may happen between now and November 4th do not make or break this election for Obama or McCain.
I also hope the American people recognize the person that is best for America. I believe that person to be John McCain.
Sarah has nothing to do with my feelings today, except that I believe she was a good choice for the NUMBER TWO slot. If elected, I doubt if she will see much of the oval office. I also know that if there are enough likeminded people that McCain will be the next President. If not, he won’t. Either way, I hope there are big changes coming to our political system. The current crowd in DC, with few exceptions, need to be sent packing and the first one to go should be Harry Reed, right behind that pervert republican from Idaho.
Reply
8:24 pm on September 10th, 2008 252
“The latest Obama scandal – lipstickGate. Charges of s.exism leveled against the Obama camp.”
Actually, it’s being debunked on all the major networks, and blowing back in McCain’s face.
Shattered, you can wipe the lipstick off your face, but you’re still a clown.
Reply
8:48 pm on September 10th, 2008 253
Ha! Nice, KB.
Reply
9:31 pm on September 10th, 2008 254
clam quit trolling my comments. Links get stuck in the spam filter, I cant help it if you don`t read or know how to google.
Reply
9:35 pm on September 10th, 2008 255
KKKLam has just the kind of `politics as usual` thinking that needs to change in America. Obama and the Obama-bots like KKKlam see everything through the eyes of division. I think McCain and Palin are going to bring well needed change to washington. Its time for change WE ALL can belive in.
Reply
10:45 pm on September 10th, 2008 256
Anyone care to comment on this?
http://www.michiganmessenger.com/4076/lose-your-house-lose-your-vote
Lose your house and lose your vote? Sounds like GOP election trickery to me.
Reply
4:09 am on September 11th, 2008 257
More scaremongering by the libby lefty democrats.
Reply
4:52 am on September 11th, 2008 258
“More scaremongering by the libby lefty democrats.”
Oh, Republicans would never do that. Willie Horton? McCain’s “illicit black baby”? No siree, the GOP always plays above the board.
Back to reality. It’s a fact that blacks are more likely to be denied the vote in the US:
1. “In 2002, Congress passed the amiably titled Help America Vote Act, presumably to thwart the recurrence of butterfly ballots and dimpled chads. To ensure that voters won’t face problems at their polling place, each state is required to maintain an electronic “statewide voter registration list,” to be linked to every precinct. States were also mandated to keep their lists current, eliminating the people who die or move away. One method is to mail letters to everyone on the rolls and expunge the names on those letters returned because the addressee could not be found. But black families tend to move more, especially in cities, and few think to notify election officials. When Ohio purged 35,427 returned names in 2004, a review found that the addresses were in “mostly urban and minority areas.” [2] Here too, getting back on the rolls can be like mending a mistaken credit rating.”
2. “In a 6–3 decision in April written by John Paul Stevens, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, the Supreme Court upheld a 2005 Indiana law requiring voters in that state to produce a government document with a photograph at the polls. In practical terms, this meant a passport or a driver’s license. Since less than a third of adults have a passport, the Indiana case focused largely on how many adults lack a license to drive. During oral arguments, several justices pressed the plaintiff’s lawyer for an answer. For reasons I cannot fathom, he kept using the number 43,000, for a state whose voting-age population is 4.6 million. In fact, the Federal Highway Administration, in an easily obtained report, says that 673,926 adult residents of Indiana have no license, which works out to a not trivial 14.7 percent of the state’s potential electorate. Had that percentage been stressed, we can conjecture that Justices Stevens and Anthony Kennedy might have shifted their position.
Requiring a driver’s license to vote has a disparate racial impact, a finding that once commanded judicial notice. To apply for the state ID card that Indiana offers as an alternative, moreover, nondrivers must travel to a motor vehicles office, which for many would be a lengthy trip. While licenses do not record race, Justice David Souter cited relevant studies of the race of license-holders in his dissent, which was joined by Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In one survey, made by the Department of Justice in 1994, black residents of Louisiana were found to be four to five times more likely not to have the official photograph needed for an identifying document. (Not to mention access to a car; recall how many couldn’t leave as Katrina approached.) A Wisconsin survey published in 2005 was more precise. No fewer than 53 percent of black adults in Milwaukee County were not licensed to drive, compared with 15 percent of white adults in the remainder of the state. According to its author, similar disparities will be found across the nation.”
3. “Proportional to the population, the United States leads the world in putting people behind bars, and currently has 2.3 million in its jails and prisons. Among inmates, black men and women outnumber Hispanics by more than two to one and whites by nearly six to one. This is another reason why a much higher ratio of black citizens will be unable to vote this year, because they are among either the 882,300 who are currently incarcerated or the two million who have served sentences but continue to be disenfranchised. According to Restoring the Right to Vote , a report by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School, 13 percent of black men cannot cast votes; in three states 20 percent cannot because they are locked up or formerly were.
Some states specify felonies that condemn the citizen to disenfranchisement for life. Alabama includes soliciting a child by computer, possession of obscene matter, and treason. Yes, some crimes are heinous; but completing a sentence is supposed to signify that a debt has been paid. Indeed, a desire to vote can be seen as showing a willingness to accept a citizen’s obligations. Virginia takes an especially harsh view of drug offenses, which is mainly why so many black Americans are imprisoned there, not least because it’s so easy to make such arrests. Released offenders must wait seven years before they can file a petition for their vote, which must be accompanied by seven documents and several supporting letters, plus another to the governor detailing “how your life has changed” and specifying “why you feel your rights should be restored.”"
Source: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21771
Reply
5:06 am on September 11th, 2008 259
The fact that Obama or McCain is up or down shouldn’t matter since this isn’t a horse race.
Nonetheless, KB questioned my sources for the current 12-pt lead among white women voters in favor of McCain. I cited Wash Post, ABC and Reuters, but here’s one of many links:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUKN0941498020080910
Obama is slipping. You’ve got to remember he lost 9 of the last 14 primaries. Now he’s making a huge mistake by not answering if he’s ready to lead. His selection of Biden only underscored his weakness in that department.
Reply
5:16 am on September 11th, 2008 260
Losing the right to vote is not scaremongering. It’s the loss of the most basic right of our nation. This election is already riddled with GOP tampering, but of course, they will call it scaremongering.
States to watch closely: NV, CO, OH
Reply
5:28 am on September 11th, 2008 261
“Losing the right to vote is not scaremongering. It’s the loss of the most basic right of our nation.”
Amen. Over 4,100 US citizens have died in Iraq in the name of democracy.
Let’s hope we can show the rest of the world we really mean what we say.
Reply
7:12 am on September 11th, 2008 262
But here are the facts of those killed in action in Iraq. And Bloomberg is totally anti war.
http://www.myantiwar.org/view/123302.html
“July 9 (Bloomberg) — Four thousand U.S. service members have died in U.S. President George W. Bush’s “war on terror” in Iraq and
Afghanistan 5 1/2 years after American forces ousted the Taliban in December 2001.
A total of 3,596 have died in Iraq since the March 2003 invasion that removed Saddam Hussein from power. Some 2,957 of that number were killed in action, according to the latest Department of Defense figures. “
Actually, for me, the wounded and the disabled figures from Iraq and Afghanistan are worse than the KIA’s. Not simply because the numbers are greater, but because their pain will be with them for life, both mental and physical.
So it doesn’t matter if the number is 4,100 or that actual KIA number in Iraq of 2.957, it is still too many. You don’t have to fudge the numbers KB. The real ones are bad enough. In a population of over 150,000 over a 5 year period, there are going to be a number of deaths that have nothing to do with war. Look at cities this size and compare the figures. Still, the actual numbers of those killed as a result of hostile action are deplorable.
I’ve stated before I was against going to war in Iraq but now that we have, me need to end it responsibly. Otherwise there will be a blood bath there when all the people that supported us are systematically murdered by extremists and Osama’s friends.
This is also one of the reasons why I support the McCain/Palin ticket. I believe McCain will end the war responsibly. And fewer lives will be lost as a result. And as strange as it may seem to a couple of “republicans” here that think they have “talking point” to pound this site with, I support this ticket because of McCain and the Republican Ideals. Although I agree that Palin has brought excitement and renewed interest to the republicans, she has nothing to do with my choice for president.
I’m not too crazy about fanatics on either side of the debate.
Reply
7:20 am on September 11th, 2008 263
My apology. The above number in my last post are outdated.
Reply
7:45 am on September 11th, 2008 264
King,
Since I have egg on my face I searched for more accurate numbers.
These are the latest number I could find. They are dated September 3, 2008
Official DoD Count of:
Troops Killed in Iraq: 4147
Troops Killed in Afghanistan: 582
Wounded in Action: 33077
Even though some of those killed were non-combat related, the numbers are still deplorable.
This makes me even a stronger advocate for the McCain/Palin ticket. I do believe they will get it right. I am glad that since reinforcements were sent to Iraq, that the KIA rate has fallen dramatically. That leads me to believe that we are headed in the right direction.
Reply
8:26 am on September 11th, 2008 265
OK, AS, please tell me how McCain will “end the war responsibly” (your words), since he has repeatedly said on record that pulling out amounts to “surrender.” It seems to me that he has an open timeline for staying in Iraq, whereas the Iraqi government itself is on the side of Obama’s proposal for immediate phased withdrawal. If McCain disagrees with the Iraqi government on this matter, then it would seem that he has a neocolonial mindset that is at odds with the Iraqi government.
I believe that it is the neocon agenda, which McCain supports, to maintain a large US military presence in the Middle East at all costs. Part of this is to maintain access to oil and hegemony in the region, and part of this is due to the Zionist orientation of the neocons. The neocons constantly speak of how Iran is a threat to Israel, hence their fixation on Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program. But what they don’t say is that if Israel stopped screwing the Palestinians and went forward with implementing a two-state solution, that would go a long way towards easing enmity towards Israel in the Middle East. The reason Israel is so hated in the Middle East can largely be explained by its behavior towards the Palestinians.
McCain doesn’t even know the difference between a Shia and a Sunni and has repeatedly conflated Al Qaeda and Iran. I do not believe he has a genuine interest in the complexities of Middle East, beyond blindly following the neocon agenda for that region. So I really do not see how you think he would be better able to solve the problems in the Middle East and Iraq in particular than Obama would. I think Obama’s fundamental approach is to seek political solutions there, whereas McCain’s fundamental approach is to seek military solutions. However, all agree at this point that a military solution in Iraq is impossible, and that only a political solution will be effective for long-term peace there.
Below is an op-ed piece by Obama on Iraq that appeared recently in the NYT. The burden of proof is on you to show how my framing of the situation above is wrong, and how McCain’s approach is superior and would be more effective.
My Plan for Iraq
By BARACK OBAMA
Published: July 14, 2008
CHICAGO — The call by Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki for a timetable for the removal of American troops from Iraq presents an enormous opportunity. We should seize this moment to begin the phased redeployment of combat troops that I have long advocated, and that is needed for long-term success in Iraq and the security interests of the United States.
Skip to next paragraph
Enlarge This Image
Paul Hoppe
Related
Times Topics: Barack Obama
Times Topics: Iraq
Reach of War
Go to Complete Coverage »
Readers’ Comments
Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
Read All Comments (734) »
The differences on Iraq in this campaign are deep. Unlike Senator John McCain, I opposed the war in Iraq before it began, and would end it as president. I believed it was a grave mistake to allow ourselves to be distracted from the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban by invading a country that posed no imminent threat and had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. Since then, more than 4,000 Americans have died and we have spent nearly $1 trillion. Our military is overstretched. Nearly every threat we face — from Afghanistan to Al Qaeda to Iran — has grown.
In the 18 months since President Bush announced the surge, our troops have performed heroically in bringing down the level of violence. New tactics have protected the Iraqi population, and the Sunni tribes have rejected Al Qaeda — greatly weakening its effectiveness.
But the same factors that led me to oppose the surge still hold true. The strain on our military has grown, the situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated and we’ve spent nearly $200 billion more in Iraq than we had budgeted. Iraq’s leaders have failed to invest tens of billions of dollars in oil revenues in rebuilding their own country, and they have not reached the political accommodation that was the stated purpose of the surge.
The good news is that Iraq’s leaders want to take responsibility for their country by negotiating a timetable for the removal of American troops. Meanwhile, Lt. Gen. James Dubik, the American officer in charge of training Iraq’s security forces, estimates that the Iraqi Army and police will be ready to assume responsibility for security in 2009.
Only by redeploying our troops can we press the Iraqis to reach comprehensive political accommodation and achieve a successful transition to Iraqis’ taking responsibility for the security and stability of their country. Instead of seizing the moment and encouraging Iraqis to step up, the Bush administration and Senator McCain are refusing to embrace this transition — despite their previous commitments to respect the will of Iraq’s sovereign government. They call any timetable for the removal of American troops “surrender,” even though we would be turning Iraq over to a sovereign Iraqi government.
But this is not a strategy for success — it is a strategy for staying that runs contrary to the will of the Iraqi people, the American people and the security interests of the United States. That is why, on my first day in office, I would give the military a new mission: ending this war.
As I’ve said many times, we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. We can safely redeploy our combat brigades at a pace that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 — two years from now, and more than seven years after the war began. After this redeployment, a residual force in Iraq would perform limited missions: going after any remnants of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, protecting American service members and, so long as the Iraqis make political progress, training Iraqi security forces. That would not be a precipitous withdrawal.
In carrying out this strategy, we would inevitably need to make tactical adjustments. As I have often said, I would consult with commanders on the ground and the Iraqi government to ensure that our troops were redeployed safely, and our interests protected. We would move them from secure areas first and volatile areas later. We would pursue a diplomatic offensive with every nation in the region on behalf of Iraq’s stability, and commit $2 billion to a new international effort to support Iraq’s refugees.
Ending the war is essential to meeting our broader strategic goals, starting in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the Taliban is resurgent and Al Qaeda has a safe haven. Iraq is not the central front in the war on terrorism, and it never has been. As Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recently pointed out, we won’t have sufficient resources to finish the job in Afghanistan until we reduce our commitment to Iraq.
As president, I would pursue a new strategy, and begin by providing at least two additional combat brigades to support our effort in Afghanistan. We need more troops, more helicopters, better intelligence-gathering and more nonmilitary assistance to accomplish the mission there. I would not hold our military, our resources and our foreign policy hostage to a misguided desire to maintain permanent bases in Iraq.
In this campaign, there are honest differences over Iraq, and we should discuss them with the thoroughness they deserve. Unlike Senator McCain, I would make it absolutely clear that we seek no presence in Iraq similar to our permanent bases in South Korea, and would redeploy our troops out of Iraq and focus on the broader security challenges that we face. But for far too long, those responsible for the greatest strategic blunder in the recent history of American foreign policy have ignored useful debate in favor of making false charges about flip-flops and surrender.
It’s not going to work this time. It’s time to end this war.
Reply
8:51 am on September 11th, 2008 266
I see the Russians have deployed some bombers to Venezuela for ‘an exercise.’ What potential enemies does Venezuela have that would require long range strategic bombers?
None of the candidates have commented on it yet. Maybe, out of deference to the 9/11 ceremonies.
The analysts are saying that may be a tit for tat response to our military relief aircraft and ships to the Georgian Republic. So, I guess it’s our turn. Do we surface some nuclear subs in the Baltic Sea?
Which of the candidates do you think would consider that to be the best response?
Reply
9:11 am on September 11th, 2008 267
“Which of the candidates do you think would consider that to be the best response?”
I’m not a military man but I’m sure McCain would choose the more confrontational option. Remember when he threated to toss Russia from the G8?
Do US presidents really make decisions on these kinds of low-intensity military exercises? Don’t their military staff usually recommend the best options?
Let’s not forget that it was our meddling in Georgia that set off all this nastiness with Russian in the first place.
Reply
9:33 am on September 11th, 2008 268
Per Obama:
The differences on Iraq in this campaign are deep. Unlike Senator John McCain, I opposed the war in Iraq before it began, and would end it as president. I believed it was a grave mistake to allow ourselves to be distracted from the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban by invading a country that posed no imminent threat and had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. Since then, more than 4,000 Americans have died and we have spent nearly $1 trillion. Our military is overstretched. Nearly every threat we face — from Afghanistan to Al Qaeda to Iran — has grown.
I have repeatedly stated I agree with Obama on the above paragraph.
Per Obama:
In the 18 months since President Bush announced the surge, our troops have performed heroically in bringing down the level of violence. New tactics have protected the Iraqi population, and the Sunni tribes have rejected Al Qaeda — greatly weakening its effectiveness.
But the same factors that led me to oppose the surge still hold true. ”
However, it sounds like this is Obama’s bridge to nowhere. He agrees the surge worked and is working, but he is still against it because it stretches the effectiveness of our armed forces. That does not make sense.
Per King:
I believe that it is the neocon agenda, which McCain supports, to maintain a large US military presence in the Middle East at all costs. Part of this is to maintain access to oil and hegemony in the region, and part of this is due to the Zionist orientation of the neocons. The neocons constantly speak of how Iran is a threat to Israel, hence their fixation on Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program. But what they don’t say is that if Israel stopped screwing the Palestinians and went forward with implementing a two-state solution, that would go a long way towards easing enmity towards Israel in the Middle East. The reason Israel is so hated in the Middle East can largely be explained by its behavior towards the Palestinians.
KB This is pure bullcrap. I’m beginning to believe that you are not even an American to espouse crap like this. And if you are one, you must be of the Hanoi Jane persuasion. Tell me, do you say a few Sig Heils every morning before breakfast? I can’t believe you even put this here. And I’m further surprised that I chose to comment. It won’t happen again, I assure you.
Reply
9:36 am on September 11th, 2008 269
“Do US presidents really make decisions on these kinds of low-intensity military exercises? Don’t their military staff usually recommend the best options?”
The Joint Chiefs can and will offer options an recommendations, but ultimately it is up to the Commander in Chief to decide. That’s the question. Do you make the next move, or do you avoid playing the game at all?
What I referred to as tit for tat can result in a high level game of Chicken called Brinkmanship. An international test of resolve and determination. A tough guy contest with global consequences. Played out to its most dangerous levels and you have something like the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Reply
9:42 am on September 11th, 2008 270
AS, indignation is not sufficient to recommend me to the McCain position.
http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_Law
Reply
10:20 am on September 11th, 2008 271
KB:
Guess I screwed the pooch again. My reference should have been in the other direction to the communist workers party or the present ACLU (American Communist Liberties Union.) Either way I’ve got it covered through the whole gamut of politics. There is free speech in this county and that is the only acknowledgement I’ll give your post. I usually refrain from personal attacks but I actually feel sorry for you. Were you dropped on your head as a small child? Or did you spend your childhood in an education camp in one of the countries that is hostile to the US? Surely you do not carry a US Passport. I’d be afraid for your life if you spouted that stuff at a convention, Republican or Democratic. True Americans make up the membership of both parties, so you wouldn’t get very far either way.
Reply
10:36 am on September 11th, 2008 272
I’m not a communist. Communism doesn’t work because it fails to account for what drives human nature.
The neocons have a generally bad rep around the world and for good reason. I believe I stand on the majority side of world opinion in regards to my disgust for them.
It has been estimated that upwards of a million Iraqis have been killed because of our invasion. Think about that number for a minute and then ask yourself where your indignation should really be directed.
Provoking Iran and possibly earning a nuclear explosion in NYC in response is not very “patriotic,” but you’re entitled to your opinion.
I’m not a nationalist but I think I’m patriotic in the sense that I hope my country can do better, and be a force for greater good in the world.
We still have a long ways to go.
Reply
11:13 am on September 11th, 2008 273
272
and we will NOT get there by TALKIN to those that wish us harm. That is what they want.
I know you will not understand this but, sometimes you just have to kick some butt. No half measures. BO doesn’t understand this, and that makes him a dangerous man.
The best reason to vote Republican—the Democrates. Got to get back to the “real world” now.
I’ll jump back in to hear your anger and rage when I have the time to waste.
Reply
11:55 am on September 11th, 2008 274
“It has been estimated that upwards of a million Iraqis have been killed because of our invasion. Think about that number for a minute and then ask yourself where your indignation should really be directed.”
Come on KB, you’re stepping on your twanger again. Have you forgotten about Sadam’s gas attacks on his own people? Where is your indignation for that kind of activity? Or did we make all of that up too, just like we made up the holocaust?
“I’m not a nationalist but I think I’m patriotic in the sense that I hope my country can do better, and be a force for greater good in the world.”
I just wonder what country that is. With your hate of the Jewish State, you might be from Iran. You sure agree with their warped rhetorical nonsense.
Contrary to Retirded above, whom I totally agree with, I do have a lot of time to waste while being stuck at home most of the time. I am no longer able to do physical combat, but words can be pretty good too. Bring it on…
Reply
2:36 pm on September 11th, 2008 275
That figure of a million Iraqis killed from the war is an outright lie. It’s one of many estimates and it’s by far the only one with a number anywhere near a million. Other estimates from sources like Iraq’s own Health Ministry and the U.N. are as much as 90% lower.
Reply
4:52 pm on September 11th, 2008 276
Back to Palin:
From Rasmussen:
All Voters:
39% very favorable
17% somewhat favorable
14% somewhat unfavorable
26% very unfavorable
Moderates:
20% very favorable
15% somewhat favorable
26% somewhat unfavorable
35% very unfavorable
3% not sure
That’s not a winning number. Biden has a 70% favorability rate. It seems like the Palin trend is slowly fading to a cliche.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/premium_content/political_tracking_crosstabs/september_2008/crosstabs_vice_presidents_september_9_2008
Reply
5:34 pm on September 11th, 2008 277
“Have you forgotten about Sadam’s gas attacks on his own people?”
That happened back in the ’80s during the Iran-Iraq War, so according to your logic, the moral blame lies on Pappy Bush for not marching all the way to Baghdad during the Persian Gulf War in 1991. And didn’t we actually support Saddam during the Iran-Iraq War? More specifically, you may want to review Rumsfeld’s role in helping Saddam develop his weapons program during this period before casting moral aspersions on those who were against both Iraq Wars. I was arrested protesting the Persian Gulf War in 1991 in SF and am damn proud of it.
“With your hate of the Jewish State”
You go too far, sir. Just because I think the Palestinians deserve their own state does not make me anti-Israel.
I hope your analysis of Obama’s record is more objective than it is of mine.
Reply
6:07 pm on September 11th, 2008 278
According to reports, in Palin’s interview with Gibson on ABC, she supports inclusion of Georgia in NATO (despite having outstanding border issues) and would also support a military response to stop Russian aggression in Georgia if necessary.
She also said this: “For Russia to have exerted such pressure in terms of invading a smaller democratic country, unprovoked, is unacceptable.”
The key word here is “unprovoked.” This woman clearly has no idea what she’s talking about. Doesn’t she know that McCain’s top foreign policy advisor was actually a lobbyist for Georgia, and probably has his hands all over Georgia’s attack on South Ossetia? Is this woman even in the loop here?
At the same time, she says she hopes we do not get involved in another Cold War with Russia, apparently without realizing how inflammatory her uniformed comments are.
I’m very afraid of this woman.
Reply
6:14 pm on September 11th, 2008 279
She also has no clue about Bush’s doctrine of “preemption.” This could very well be your next Commander-in-Chief, folks!:
GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?
PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?
GIBSON: The Bush — well, what do you — what do you interpret it to be?
PALIN: His world view.
GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war.
PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made. And with new leadership, and that’s the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.
GIBSON: The Bush doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?
Reply
6:14 pm on September 11th, 2008 280
KB, you’re good. You must have a graduate degree or possibly a PhD from Spin University. You even try to spin your own words when you see no one is buying your allegations.
According to you Sadam’s attack on his own people that happened back in the 80s is okay because he was at war with Iran at the time. I know the details of that war and how at one time we supported Iraq’s effort against Iran. That did not give Sadam the right to murder innocent people to test his deliver method for chemical agents. But I could go on and on with the atrocities that he and members of his family committed and were committing right up to the time we invaded. Do a search for the Iraq Soccer Team under Sadam’s son and see what you find. Still, I don’t think we should have gone to war with him. And again, since we did, we now need to finish the job.
I just had a weird thought. What does any of this have to do with Sarah Palin? I guess I’m about as far off topic as one can get.
But anyway, I also believe the Palestinians should have their own country. Yet why is it that every time they are on the verge of finalizing a deal they do something stupid to mess it up? Or terrorists do something and the Palestinians get blamed for it. Why do they lob SRMs into innocent and peaceful Israel villages. Either way it’s all the same.
And as far as you being anti-Isreal goes here are your words: “I believe that it is the neocon agenda, which McCain supports, to maintain a large US military presence in the Middle East at all costs. Part of this is to maintain access to oil and hegemony in the region, and part of this is due to the Zionist orientation of the neocons.”
That sounds like it came right out of an anti Isreal training manual, as does the rest of the gobbledegoop in the same paragraph.
Reply
6:34 pm on September 11th, 2008 281
“That sounds like it came right out of an anti Isreal training manual, as does the rest of the gobbledegoop in the same paragraph.”
Whatever, dude. Just because I state a fact which is that the neocons are hard-core, hawkish defenders of Israel does not make me anti-Israel.
And if you’re going to talk about speaking “right out of the training manual,” check out how during her interview with Gibson on ABC, Palin just endorsed Israel’s right to attack Iran with full US support.
She’s already reading from the neocon script very well, isn’t she?
Reply
6:44 pm on September 11th, 2008 282
After reviewing her comments with Gibson on ABC, it is clear that on foreign policy matters, Palin is an extreme hawk and supports confrontation with Russia and Iran amongst others.
Are we able to wage 4 different wars at once around the world?
This could very well be your next Commander-in-Chief, folks.
Reply
7:55 pm on September 11th, 2008 283
Biden does not have a 70% favorability rating. Not even close. (Today’s gaffe when he admitted that Hillary could’ve been a better running mate won’t help either.)
Palin and Biden are both hovering around 50%, which is actually not all that high compared to previous VPs, including Cheney:
http://www.pollingreport.com/A-B.htm
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/palin-biden-less-popular-than-cheney.html
Reply
9:31 pm on September 11th, 2008 284
Knicker,
Those are stats are old. The last week has been damaging to Palin as she and McCain have continued to repeat too many proven lies.
Reply
10:49 pm on September 11th, 2008 285
Clueless:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z75QSExE0jU
Reply
3:51 am on September 12th, 2008 286
Clam,
That’s not what I’m reading. I see rising numbers for Palin and falling numbers for Biden:
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/articles/2008/09/10/palin_outshines_biden_in_favorability_head_to_head_polling/?rss_id=Boston+Globe+–+National+News
Reply
10:11 am on September 15th, 2008 287
Biden Stumps in Palin’s Shadow
Democrats Split on Running Mate’s Ability to Energize Base
ht tp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/13/AR2008091302456.html
The Obama-bots and clueless KKKlams out there are weeping while they read the news. They are running scared from the inevitable. Yes a WOMAN can do it.
Palin: Its time FOR REAL CHANGE! YES WE CAN DO IT!
Reply
1:47 pm on September 15th, 2008 288
[...] 2008. Support the RNC! Sponsored by: GOP.com/08Elections/ • Found on Ads by Google McCain Picks Palin as Vice President Candidate The pick of Senator Biden for Barack Obama’s VP candidate I did find to be strange since Obama [...]
10:45 am on September 16th, 2008 289
Democrats in a hole, and still digging
Why becasue of Palin. PALIN IS AMERICA. PALIN MAKES AMERICA THE BEST!
ht tp://clivecrook.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/democrats_in_a_hole_and_still.php
THANK YOU BABY JESUS FOR PALIN TO SAVE AMERICA.
Reply
7:29 pm on September 16th, 2008 290
knickerbocker,
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/palins-favorability-numbers-eroding.html
Seems the Palin fad is fading and soon she will be a cliche. Now we can get back to reality and focus on issues. That was fun.
Reply
7:55 pm on September 16th, 2008 291
Great link!
According to that website McCain and Palin are assured to win. Funny things about KKKlams, they just keep digging and digging themselves deep in the mud.
THANK YOU BABY JESUS FOR BRINGING THE WORLD THE GREAT AMERICAN PALIN.
Reply
7:56 pm on September 16th, 2008 292
Oh and the so called “poll” was done by the DailyKos. KKKLam get your head out of the mud.
Reply
8:52 pm on September 16th, 2008 293
Clam – lets see if I have this right. If it’s on the big 3+1(NBC,CBS,ABC+CNN)or on the internet it must be true, correct?
Instead of spending so much time trashing the McCain/Palin ticket, why don’t you try and convince me and other hayseeds here why we should vote for Obama. How will his presidency make my life better and the US more secure? Keep is simple cuz I’m a simple guy, donchya know.
Reply
9:50 am on September 17th, 2008 294
Palen has won the love and trust of the GI KOREA Blog readers, next AMERICA and then the WORLD.
BABY JESUS, THANK YOU FOR YOUR GIFT OF PANIN.
America will lead the world again thanks to Palin.
Reply
1:49 am on September 18th, 2008 295
By your logic Mr. Shattered, you are a racist pig who for some reason believes that Jesus has given the world another dishonest politician no better than Bush. And did you forget that McCain is on the top of the ticket, not your token love goddess? I don’t know about GI Korea readers, but I certainly have a lower opinion of the ticket knowing that someone like you supports it.
Reply
6:35 am on September 18th, 2008 296
@295
Actually I took Shattered comments as satirical humor of Saturday Night Live…who else could spell Palen/Panin/Palin all in one comment?
But you do have a point. I get a lot of emails from Korea War vets (I’m stuck on their mailing lists) and I noticed the same thing about the focus shifting to Palin. Everytime the Democrats bring up a “heartbeat away from the Presidency”, these old vets get into a fever pitch of foaming at the mouth … talking like Palin is the savior of the Republican Party. Don’t get me wrong — I like Palin, but we’re losing sight of who’s really the important #1 in this race.
I get a little peeved that Palin seems to be hogging the spotlight — not intentionally, but because of the press coverage splashes it all over the news. I want to hear what Obama and McCain have to say about this latest financial crisis in the US and other key issues.
The polls are very close and I think there are a lot of folks out there like me who really don’t want the distractions of Palin’s or Bidden’s views overshadowing McCain’s and Obama’s views.
Reply
1:25 pm on September 18th, 2008 297
I had become somewhat active here but I quit commenting because of crackpots like Shattered.
I let it be well known that I support McCain/Palin but not to level of a religious awakening or voodoo or some other crackpot ideas. Like Kalani, I too would like to hear more of the discussion centered not on what candidates might or might not have done a long time ago that has nothing to do with today, but more about what said politician can do for this world today. This financial mess is hurting all of us one way or another.
People who take points out of context and try to argue them as fact don’t do me any favors nor do the ones who are sure they know the future. I’ve let myself be sucked into those conversations a time or two here but ended it when I saw I was being stupid. They purposely try to mislead others through half truths and outright lies. I’m always ready to listen to reason but I have not heard any reasoning why I should vote for a wet behind the ears 1st term Senator to be President when we have a man running that has the REAL experience necessary in all areas to do the job. McCain is not my first choice from the Republicans but the people of this nation think he is and I think he is one of several Republicans that can do the job. It has been seldom if ever that the Vice-President has been used in that capacity. Vice-Presidents typically are ambassadors to the word and serve at the president’s behest. That is the purpose the president has a cabinet of advisors. There has never been a president that had all the answers to everything. The really good presidents are good judges of people and hire the right advisors to guide them in their weak areas.
I make mistakes and I’ve made a few on this thread but when I or someone else caught them I apologized for them and or made corrections. I have not seen that from any Obama supporters here. I sometimes wondered if it were possible that only the Obama supports know the truth about the world while the Republicans just tell lies and exaggerations. People that try to use dogmatic principles to get others to vote for their candidates loose more voters than they gain.
Reply
4:38 pm on September 18th, 2008 298
Excellent points all around and I’m glad that someone took it to Shattered.
Kalini,
I took a look back at some of Shattered posts and I have to agree. There is no way that he/she is being serious. It’s almost like they are mocking their own party. And the “Baby Jesus” comments are a little much, no?
AS,
Why not vote for McCain? Because he can not change a thing, has proven he doesn’t want to and has clearly lost that independent edge he once had in 2000. The far-right has destroyed his legacy and turned him into their puppet.
If you don’t vote for Obama that’s your choice and most people on this site have already made their mind up, but counting him out because he’s “wet behind the ears” isn’t totally fair. If you disagree with his stances, so be it. But many believe that it’s time to pass the torch from the older generation to the people who will be in charge for decades to come. And while I’m sure a “kool-aid” reference might be thrown into a response, you can’t reduce the nation’s in-with-the-new desire for our country. We know that McCain is not a good leader -that’s clear, but the jury is still out on Obama honestly. I believe he will be an exceptional leader and even if he falls short of my expectations, he will still far exceed what is certain to come from McCain.
With that in mind, may I ask if you voted for Reagan or Carter? This is Reagan v Carter 2008 and the tables have turned. I just hope we don’t miss the oppurtunity.
Reply
6:22 pm on September 18th, 2008 299
Error on page
Reply
6:25 pm on September 18th, 2008 300
Done, but with errors on page
Reply
6:27 pm on September 18th, 2008 301
Clam,
First let me say that I think from time to time plants jump up on this thread to stir the pot just for the purpose of stirring and redirecting us from having intelligent conversations. I may well be one of those plans but I can tell you I’m not. However I have no proof to offer you. I can say that I am a fairly well educated military retiree. I also do not believe you are here for nefarious reasons. I say this only because I grow weary of commenting to some things here because of the way words are taken out of context and twisted to make an inaccurate point.
That being said let me continue.
At least you don’t use the worn out 4 more years of the same argument that has about burned me out. I would not say that the far-right has destroyed McCain’s legacy, but they sure have put a big dent in it. For me I support the McCain/Palin ticket more because I more strongly believe in Republican ideals and principles for our nation. I disagree on many of his points however; the presidency is much bigger than an Obama or a McCain. This presidency to be exact represents if we will continue to survive as a nation in the years to come. Frankly, I don’t think either of them should be in the running.
Having trouble posting…to be continued on next post
Reply
6:57 pm on September 18th, 2008 302
I’ll post the rest if this thing ever lets me. I am giving up for now. it is 2000 hrs CDT.
Reply
7:42 pm on September 18th, 2008 303
“I more strongly believe in Republican ideals and principles for our nation.”
This is the root of the current problem. Both you and I believe in the ideals of our party. Both you and I will vote and argue for our party because they reflect our principles. Both you and I are correct in our logic. The root of the current problem is that the fanatical and most vocal supporters of each ticket are not loyal to a party. They are not loyal to ideals, issues and principles, but to personality and manufactured falsehoods from flag-pins to green screens. However, these are the fence voters who decide elections. These voters are courted over and over again by the candidates and the Media and they continue to belittle the efforts and ideals of each party.
Reply
9:13 pm on September 18th, 2008 304
I agree with the Shattered!
Reply
9:15 pm on September 18th, 2008 305
The chickens are coming home to roost! The ultra left wing liberals are running with the devil!
Reply
6:03 am on September 19th, 2008 306
I am getting an error on page notice in the lower left of my screen. I don’t know if it will let me post or not, but on the off chance that it does, let me see if I can continue.
I do not think that Iraq is or should be an issue in this election, even if Obama insists that the surge was a waste of time and money. From a military point of view the surge worked and in so doing it saved countless lives. The problem with the surge is that it was initiated years too late. Had it been done at the outset, many more lives could have been saved… but that is being an armchair quarterback.
I honestly don’t know what will happen if Obama wins or McCain wins. Obama may fall flat on his face and McCain may do the same. I do give Obama points for being a great orator. But a great orator does not necessarily a good president make. Neither does being a war hero and a former POW. What it does do is prove to me that John McCain has been faced with making hard choices in his life and he has a record of usually making intelligent choices even under extreme pressure. Obama has no record of doing anything under pressure. The presidency is a pressure cooker.
You may find it surprising that I am all for turning this country over to a younger generation. It is time to put us old farts out to pasture. I simply do not believe that Obama is the man to lead that generation.
Obama/Biden have resumed the lead in most of the polls and I have come to believe that it is still their election to lose. If they do, I hope it is over politics and not dirty tricks.
The addition of Palin to the Republican was a stratigic move that brought life to the ticket. It has worked so far and the coming debate will tell us if the magic is still there. I honestly do believe that Biden has some reservations about the debate. How will he do it? A full attack will gain her sympathy but if he lollygags around he’ll look weak. And she could come out of it with egg all over her face. I’m looking forward to it.
Reply
6:08 am on September 19th, 2008 307
Mr or Ms or Cousin It Shattered, do you know how to cure crabs?
Get a can of lighter fluid, a match and an ice pick. Spread the lighter fluid on the effected area, set it on fire and when the crabs run from the fire stab them with the ice pick.
Thought this might be need to know information for you.
Reply
9:17 am on September 19th, 2008 308
“I’m always ready to listen to reason but I have not heard any reasoning why I should vote for a wet behind the ears 1st term Senator to be President when we have a man running that has the REAL experience necessary in all areas to do the job.”
“For me I support the McCain/Palin ticket more because I more strongly believe in Republican ideals and principles for our nation.”
AS, I’m making one last pass through here.
To address your last point first. The Republicans, at least traditionally have been characterized as fiscally as socially conservative.
Fine, I can at least appreciate that. However, since Reagan the Republicans have been the exact opposite of fiscally conservative, running up massive deficits, whereas Clinton actually balanced the federal budget. Today we see outrageous corporate social.ism on Wall Street, what with all the bailouts. Thus, it can be argued that over the last twenty-five years, the Democrats have been far more Republican than the Republicans at the national level, as far as sticking to the key principle of fiscal conservatism.
Meanwhile, on the social front, the Republicans are also actually the exact opposite of socially conservative, since the party now takes its marching orders from the radical right. The party of no-government actually wants to insert government into our bedrooms and onto women’s bodies. These so-called social conservatives are actually extreme radicals.
Is it no wonder that Ron Paul refused to endorse McCain? Ron Paul sees that McCain-Palin are not representing true Republican values.
You may not like Obama’s liberal social values but on the fiscal front he will certainly prove to be more fiscally conservative than John McCain (who wants to just keep extending tax cuts for the rich forever). Obama has economic advisors like Warren Buffett and Robert Reich, who served as a very capable Secretary of Labor under Bill Clinton.
In the end, have you noticed that McCain has co-opted all of Obama’s main messages, from change to the need for reform of our economic system? Obama was talking about the looming dangers of subprime mortgages two years ago, while McCain has only been able to admit that the financial system is in crisis two days ago?
Why vote for a follower when you can have the real thing? And then next time around, go ahead and vote for a Republican ticket if and when they actually are the real thing!
Obama/Biden ‘08!
Reply
10:05 am on September 19th, 2008 309
Then KB, we will just have to agree to disagree.
My life is almost over. My hopes and prayers are for the future of this nation and the human race overall. It has nothing to do with making life better for me, but that one day all of our descendents can live in peace.
I believe history will treat this time in the evolution of mankind as crucial to the survival of the race. That is, if we are to survive at all. Each day brings rogue nations closer to having the capacity, the inclination and the weapons to destroy life as we know it. They must be stopped.
I don’t have the answers to any of this but collectively as a race of people, I hope the world is able to figure it out before it is too late. No matter who the new leader of the free world becomes, he or she will carry a heavier burden on their shoulders than before in history. I hope whoever it is will be up to the job.
Reply
10:06 am on September 19th, 2008 310
BTW, AS, I was born in Nebraska. This is what Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska(R) told the Omaha World-Herald yesterday:
WASHINGTON — Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska is the nation’s most prominent Republican officeholder to publicly question whether Sarah Palin has the experience to serve as president.
“She doesn’t have any foreign policy credentials,” Hagel said Wednesday in an interview. “You get a passport for the first time in your life last year? I mean, I don’t know what you can say. You can’t say anything.”
The McCain campaign has cited the proximity of Alaska to Russia as evidence of her international experience.
Hagel scoffed at that notion.
“I think they ought to be just honest about it and stop the nonsense about, ‘I look out my window and I see Russia and so therefore I know something about Russia,’” he said. “That kind of thing is insulting to the American people.”
Hagel offered a couple of caveats on his assessment of Palin: Experience is not the only qualification for elected officials — judgment and character are indispensable.
Washington experience isn’t the only kind of experience, Hagel said, and he noted that many White House occupants have been governors with no time inside the Beltway.
“But I do think in a world that is so complicated, so interconnected and so combustible, you really got to have some people in charge that have some sense of the bigger scope of the world,” Hagel said. “I think that’s just a requirement.”
So is Palin qualified to be president?
“I think it’s a stretch to, in any way, to say that she’s got the experience to be president of the United States,” Hagel said.
Reply
10:14 am on September 19th, 2008 311
http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/negative-campaigning/22757/mccain-palin-peak-obama-biden-climb-why-this-week-is-the-game-changer/
Reply
10:26 am on September 19th, 2008 312
“Each day brings rogue nations closer to having the capacity, the inclination and the weapons to destroy life as we know it. They must be stopped.”
Obama is concerned about this issue too and has proven himself willing to cross party lines to make the world a safer place:
http://obama.senate.gov/press/070111-lugar-obama_non/
Something like 80% of the world would prefer an Obama Presidency. Would not the US and consequently the world be safer if we were better liked?
Did you see on the news that McCain just dissed the President of Spain and now that whole country is pissed at him?
Meanwhile, Obama was welcomed as a hero when he recently visited Europe, and even British PM Gordon Brown broke tradition a while ago and voiced support for Obama. Let us not forget that Britain is our staunchest ally in Europe.
Who do you think will be able to help foster and create a more positive and hence safer environment for the world?
Reply
10:33 am on September 19th, 2008 313
Here’s the type of “transparency” and “reform” the Palins believe in:
http://mudflats.wordpress.com/2008/09/18/todd-palin-refuses-to-testify-shocking-shocking-i-say/
Reply
2:16 pm on September 19th, 2008 314
BK
As I said above, we will just have to agree to disagree.
Reply
12:19 pm on September 20th, 2008 315
The Party’s Over
By Patrick J. Buchanan
19/09/08 “CS” — – The Crash of 2008, which is now wiping out trillions of dollars of our people’s wealth, is, like the Crash of 1929, likely to mark the end of one era and the onset of another.
The new era will see a more sober and much diminished America. The “Omnipower” and “Indispensable Nation” we heard about in all the hubris and braggadocio following our Cold War victory is history.
Seizing on the crisis, the left says we are witnessing the failure of market economics, a failure of conservatism.
This is nonsense. What we are witnessing is the collapse of Gordon Gecko (“Greed Is Good!”) capitalism. What we are witnessing is what happens to a prodigal nation that ignores history, and forgets and abandons the philosophy and principles that made it great.
A true conservative cherishes prudence and believes in fiscal responsibility, balanced budgets and a self-reliant republic. He believes in saving for retirement and a rainy day, in deferred gratification, in not buying on credit what you cannot afford, in living within your means.
Is that really what got Wall Street and us into this mess — that we followed too religiously the gospel of Robert Taft and Russell Kirk?
“Government must save us!” cries the left, as ever. Yet, who got us into this mess if not the government — the Fed with its easy money, Bush with his profligate spending, and Congress and the SEC by liberating Wall Street and failing to step in and stop the drunken orgy?
For years, we Americans have spent more than we earned. We save nothing. Credit card debt, consumer debt, auto debt, mortgage debt, corporate debt — all are at record levels. And with pensions and savings being wiped out, much of that debt will never be repaid.
Our standard of living is inevitably going to fall. For foreigners will not forever buy our bonds or lend us more money if they rightly fear that they will be paid back, if at all, in cheaper dollars.
We are going to have to learn to live again without our means.
The party’s over
Up through World War II, we followed the Hamiltonian idea that America must remain economically independent of the world in order to remain politically independent.
But this generation decided that was yesterday’s bromide and we must march bravely forward into a Global Economy, where we all depend on one another. American companies morphed into “global companies” and moved plants and factories to Mexico, Asia, China and India, and we began buying more cheaply from abroad what we used to make at home: shoes, clothes, bikes, cars, radios, TVs, planes, computers.
As the trade deficits began inexorably to rise to 6 percent of GDP, we began vast borrowing from abroad to continue buying from abroad.
At home, propelled by tax cuts, war in Iraq and an explosion in social spending, surpluses vanished and deficits reappeared and began to rise. The dollar began to sink, and gold began to soar.
Yet, still, the promises of the politicians come. Barack Obama will give us national health insurance and tax cuts for all but that 2 percent of the nation that already carries 50 percent of the federal income tax load.
John McCain is going to cut taxes, expand the military, move NATO into Georgia and Ukraine, confront Russia and force Iran to stop enriching uranium or “bomb, bomb, bomb,” with Joe Lieberman as wartime consigliere.
Who are we kidding?
What we are witnessing today is how empires end.
The Last Superpower is unable to defend its borders, protect its currency, win its wars or balance its budget. Medicare and Social Security are headed for the cliff with unfunded liabilities in the tens of trillions of dollars.
What we are witnessing today is nothing less than a Katrina-like failure of government, of our political class, and of democracy itself, casting a cloud over the viability and longevity of the system.
Notice who is managing the crisis. Not our elected leaders. Nancy Pelosi says she had nothing to do with it. Congress is paralyzed and heading home. President Bush is nowhere to be seen.
Hank Paulson of Goldman Sachs and Ben Bernanke of the Fed chose to bail out Bear Sterns but let Lehman go under. They decided to nationalize Fannie and Freddie at a cost to taxpayers of hundreds of billions, putting the U.S. government behind $5 trillion in mortgages. They decided to buy AIG with $85 billion rather than see the insurance giant sink beneath the waves.
An unelected financial elite is now entrusted with the assignment of getting us out of a disaster into which an unelected financial elite plunged the nation. We are just spectators.
What the Greatest Generation handed down to us — the richest, most powerful, most self-sufficient republic in history, with the highest standard of living any nation had ever achieved — the baby boomers, oblivious and self-indulgent to the end, have frittered away.
Reply
3:29 pm on September 20th, 2008 316
KB,
That piece seemed to be talking of the Democratic controlled Congress, the Bill Clinton years, the liberal left and the excesses of the baby boomers who led the country to excesses — Democratic left idea of robbing the piggy-banks now and leave future generations bankrupt.
Are you sure you chose the right piece for your defense? Pat Buchanan is a conservative, anti-war type by his own definition.
Reply
3:40 pm on September 20th, 2008 317
“That piece seemed to be talking of the Democratic controlled Congress, the Bill Clinton years, the liberal left and the excesses of the baby boomers who led the country to excesses — Democratic left idea of robbing the piggy-banks now and leave future generations bankrupt.”
I find it rather odd that Kalani would accuse the Democrats in Congress, Bill Clinton, and the liberal left of leading the country to “excesses”.
Last time I checked, GWB not once vetoed a spending bill when his party controlled congress.
Reply
5:50 pm on September 20th, 2008 318
Kalani,
You clearly did not read the article then. You saw Buchanan’s name on it and chose to read it thinking it was an anti-left piece. He might have said that the left wants the government to bail us out (What did Bush do?) but it is the careless GOP that got us here. In case you’ve missed it, Buchanan has been slamming the GOP recently and wants nothing to do with its current leaders.
I would suggest you edit your previous comment:
That piece seemed to be talking of the GOP controlled Government, the Bush years, the far-right conservatives and the excesses of the baby boomers who led the country to excesses — Republican right idea of robbing the piggy-banks now and leave future generations bankrupt.
Have you even been awake the past years?
Reply
7:27 pm on September 20th, 2008 319
Kalani — Bill Clinton balanced the budget and Dubya broke the bank!
Real conservatives are now up in arms. Here’s another plaintive cry from the conservative ranks:
Why Experience Matters
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: September 15, 2008
Philosophical debates arise at the oddest times, and in the heat of this election season, one is now rising in Republican ranks. The narrow question is this: Is Sarah Palin qualified to be vice president? Most conservatives say yes, on the grounds that something that feels so good could not possibly be wrong. But a few commentators, like George Will, Charles Krauthammer, David Frum and Ross Douthat demur, suggesting in different ways that she is unready.
The issue starts with an evaluation of Palin, but does not end there. This argument also is over what qualities the country needs in a leader and what are the ultimate sources of wisdom.
There was a time when conservatives did not argue about this. Conservatism was once a frankly elitist movement. Conservatives stood against radical egalitarianism and the destruction of rigorous standards. They stood up for classical education, hard-earned knowledge, experience and prudence. Wisdom was acquired through immersion in the best that has been thought and said.
But, especially in America, there has always been a separate, populist, strain. For those in this school, book knowledge is suspect but practical knowledge is respected. The city is corrupting and the universities are kindergartens for overeducated fools.
The elitists favor sophistication, but the common-sense folk favor simplicity. The elitists favor deliberation, but the populists favor instinct.
This populist tendency produced the term-limits movement based on the belief that time in government destroys character but contact with grass-roots America gives one grounding in real life. And now it has produced Sarah Palin.
Palin is the ultimate small-town renegade rising from the frontier to do battle with the corrupt establishment. Her followers take pride in the way she has aroused fear, hatred and panic in the minds of the liberal elite. The feminists declare that she’s not a real woman because she doesn’t hew to their rigid categories. People who’ve never been in a Wal-Mart think she is parochial because she has never summered in Tuscany.
Look at the condescension and snobbery oozing from elite quarters, her backers say. Look at the endless string of vicious, one-sided attacks in the news media. This is what elites produce. This is why regular people need to take control.
And there’s a serious argument here. In the current Weekly Standard, Steven Hayward argues that the nation’s founders wanted uncertified citizens to hold the highest offices in the land. They did not believe in a separate class of professional executives. They wanted rough and rooted people like Palin.
I would have more sympathy for this view if I hadn’t just lived through the last eight years. For if the Bush administration was anything, it was the anti-establishment attitude put into executive practice.
And the problem with this attitude is that, especially in his first term, it made Bush inept at governance. It turns out that governance, the creation and execution of policy, is hard. It requires acquired skills. Most of all, it requires prudence.
What is prudence? It is the ability to grasp the unique pattern of a specific situation. It is the ability to absorb the vast flow of information and still discern the essential current of events — the things that go together and the things that will never go together. It is the ability to engage in complex deliberations and feel which arguments have the most weight.
How is prudence acquired? Through experience. The prudent leader possesses a repertoire of events, through personal involvement or the study of history, and can apply those models to current circumstances to judge what is important and what is not, who can be persuaded and who can’t, what has worked and what hasn’t.
Experienced leaders can certainly blunder if their minds have rigidified (see: Rumsfeld, Donald), but the records of leaders without long experience and prudence is not good. As George Will pointed out, the founders used the word “experience” 91 times in the Federalist Papers. Democracy is not average people selecting average leaders. It is average people with the wisdom to select the best prepared.
Sarah Palin has many virtues. If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she’d be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness.
The idea that “the people” will take on and destroy “the establishment” is a utopian fantasy that corrupted the left before it corrupted the right. Surely the response to the current crisis of authority is not to throw away standards of experience and prudence, but to select leaders who have those qualities but not the smug condescension that has so marked the reaction to the Palin nomination in the first place.
Reply
9:32 pm on September 20th, 2008 320
I’m not too smart on the politics thing. But I did read the article and agree that Buchanan — like a lot of other conservatives — is not all that enamored with McCain. However, this doesn’t mean that he is now voicing a Democratic viewpoint as you seem to assert. Given the tone of this article and Buchanan’s past articles I’m pretty sure that Buchanan will NOT vote for Obama.
“Seizing on the crisis, the left says we are witnessing the failure of market economics, a failure of conservatism. This is nonsense.”
Buchanan is old-fashioned conservative for fiscal responsibility from the Reagan mold (which Democrats somehow paint as a something else). However, the Reagan-style economics as Governor of California resulted in a state surplus that allowed me to pursue a college education for free — and then came the Democrats that spent all the surplus and drove the state to the point of bankruptcy — a state that even a movie actor with an accent gets to become Republican Governor to try to straighten out the decades of excess.
“A true conservative cherishes prudence and believes in fiscal responsibility, balanced budgets and a self-reliant republic. He believes in saving for retirement and a rainy day, in deferred gratification, in not buying on credit what you cannot afford, in living within your means.”
No, I do not believe in the Democratic form of economics. They promise the sky — anything you want and simply tax and tax and tax to give everybody what they want. I watch the Democrats try to paint the Republicans as the bad guys, but I remember Bill Clinton’s Social Security Tax on us elderly and I resent him. I resent Al Gore’s 1993 tie vote-breaker to overturn the repeal of the tax. But I also resent McCain’s 2003 turnaround vote to repeal the tax as well. Yes, I remember some of the fine details. But in the end, I do not believe any of the Democratic promises — like Hillary Clinton’s health plan as the only non-elected White House non-official granted the power over the American people’s lives. Years later, after more empty promises, retirees are now to the point where their life savings are being eaten up by health insurance that amounts to upwards of $500 a month. No, I don’t believe in the Democrat promises for the future.
No, I do not believe in the Democratic way to balance the budget. Clinton did it by gutting the military turning America into a shadow warrior. All Clinton could do was shoot cruise missiles and never commit troops — fighting his clean-hands wars. When he did commit troops, it was against the advice of the military that turned into giving the American military a black eye (1993 Somalia) or involving the military in ineffectual international intervention (1995 Haiti). If looked at closely, Clinton emboldened the terrorists to acts of unspeakable violence against the US military (Oct 2000, USS Cole) — and, only in my opinion, the attack on the US itself. George Bush came in and had to rebuild from scratch a military that had been seriously weakened by Clinton.
When he first came to office, Bush was going to reduce the carriers and create a new vision for the military for the 21st century. Then came 9/11 and reality set in. The new vision didn’t work so well with terrorists fighting in 19th Century conventional wars. The carriers stayed, but the new weapons programs were mind-boggling expensive because the cuts from eight years of Clinton economics simply compounded the expenses. Even though, JCS Gen Shinseki instituted a more strategically deployable and mobile force with the controversial Stryker and the Global Positioning Strategy. We are seeing the results today — and for Korea, fruition hopefully in 2012.
But I also watched with dismay as the US under Bush mouthed a “win-win” policy that turned into a “win-hold” policy and finally into the “win-lose” policy — actually a direct result of the failed Democratic defense policies from the previous administration. The defense of America by the rebuilding of the military atleast is on the mend with new weapons systems coming on line under the force of Donald Rumsfeld — even if you hate his guts — and George Bush’s new vision for the military he promulgated in 2000. It has been expensive — but mark this to the Democratic policy failures to defend America for the future. Democrats were more worried about funding their failed social programs that penalize the majority for the sake of small groups. Yes, some of the programs the Democrats pushed were worthy causes, but I’m talking about the overall Democratic package.
Admittedly the “war on terror” has resulted in a horrific strain on military manpower and we need to get out of nation-building business — something we shouldn’t have gotten into in the first place. However, the Democratic solutions to the problem is simply to run away with America’s tail between its legs leaving the mess unfinished — despite all the fancy rhetoric of Obama that is exactly what he is espousing about the costs in human lives and expense. I support McCain that there has to be a successful CONCLUSION to the war.
I’m sorry. My mind is made up as to who I will vote for. Like others, McCain back in 2000 was my first choice over Bush, but he’s changed on a few issues that wouldn’t have made him my first choice this time around. However, still the Republican ideals are what I feel closest to and I will vote Republican. You may vehemently disagree with my views and dissect them as pure foolishness — but they are still my opinions set in semi-hardened concrete. I will vote for McCain.
Oh, as one born-raised in Hawaii (ethnically part-Hawaiian) and who attended the University of Hawaii when his parents were there, I do NOT recognize Obama as calling Hawaii his “native” state. Just because you’re born in Hawaii, don’t mean you’re Hawaiian. It ain’t blood that makes you a Hawaiian, it’s your heart…and Obama is from somewhere else — Indonesia or wherever — but not Hawaii. Yes, Hawaii will vote Obama because Hawaii has ALWAYS been Democratic — but I for one don’t call Obama one of Hawaii’s native sons.
I’m out of here.
Reply
9:50 pm on September 20th, 2008 321
Kalani, I will defer to your knowledge on military matters since that is obviously your area of expertise. In Clinton’s defense, I will only say that with the end of the Cold War, there was a general consesus that the “peace divide” meant reduced defense spending, did it not?
I will also note that we cannot have a strong military without a strong economy. McCain wants to just keep cutting taxes and in the long-run this since seriously irresponsible. If the Dems are “tax-and-spenders,” many have been observing these days that the GOP are “borrow-and-spenders.” At least the Dems have an attitude of “pay-as-you-go,” which will lead to a stronger economy and hence a stronger military in the long run.
There can be no doubt that the Republican Party is going through an identity crisis at the moment (see two sample articles immediately posted above), which means that many people think that it is in trouble. I seriously hope you guys can sort these issues out and make yourself a leaner, meaner party of principle and virtue such as my now passed grandfather was a proud member of.
I would have been OK with the McCain of 2000 winning this year’s election, but he is no longer the man he used to be.
In any case, I hope we can all agree that we all hope for a better, stronger America. Let the best team win!
It’s up to the American people to decide, is it not?
Peace.
Reply
9:53 pm on September 20th, 2008 322
Edit: “peace divide” should have been “peace dividend.”
Reply
2:46 am on September 21st, 2008 323
“Obama is from somewhere else — Indonesia or wherever — but not Hawaii.”
-tacky.
Reply
2:47 am on September 21st, 2008 324
Palin, rymes with Stalin (as in Josef) is a NAZI. She wants to ban books. Do you want her to take over if JM passes while in office??
Reply
3:41 am on September 21st, 2008 325
KB.
“In any case, I hope we can all agree that we all hope for a better, stronger America. Let the best team win! It’s up to the American people to decide, is it not?”
Agreed. That’s why I volunteered to help the non-partisan voter registration at Shinjang Mall for Andy Jackson. Fighting over views on this blog is one thing but getting out to vote is another. Even with the rainstorm there were over 24 people that they got registered/provided absentee ballots. Get out and vote — it’s the American way.
Reply
7:45 am on September 21st, 2008 326
Mr. Kalani, #320, 325 excellent posts. You put into words what i have been feeling from the beginning and you express yourself so much better than I do. Thank You!
KB…The same goes for # 321.
I think we can all agree that the upcoming election is bigger than any one person running for president. I would hope that for once this election may finally be of the people, by the people and for the people. I too believe in the principles of my father’s Republican Party, and I also believe that there are enough likeminded Americans still living in this country that believe as I do and that together we can bring these principles back to the forefront.
Both candidates have given me pause due to each of them flip-flopping on many issues, blowing things out of context, and making the race for president seem more like a mud wrestling match. Like Kalani, it is times like this when time I have to reach back and look for more than just a mere candidate. No elected president is going to do anything to save this nation, but a united, principled people might. I don’t care how pretty they look when addressing a crowd with a lot of neat sound bites and catch phrases or how stern they talk in defense of this nation, if they aren’t ready to “reach” across the aisle and work with ALL Americans, the next presidency will be just another ho-hum flop in American politics. We cannot afford for this to happen and we cannot allow it to happen.
My gut tells me that we are at a turning point in Geopolitics. The world is on the brink of something we can’t even put a name to. I don’t know what is right or wrong, what are the right moves or the wrong moves, but I do believe that if we don’t tread carefully right now we may be plunged back into anarchy. People will rebel over lose of homes and income, medical care for their children and even the food they have a right to expect. Nations will rise up against nations, each blaming the other for the mess we are in and wanting what the other has. World markets will no longer exist and we’ll be groveling in the dirt for our existence like we did so many years ago. Global war will ensue on a level never seen by the human race and if there is even an inkling of truth in the bible, we my burn ourselves out of existence. Yes, the cold war is behind us, but the Nukes area still in the silos.
Do I sound like a conspiracy theorist? I’m not! I don’t believe there is any specific conspiracy in mind or in motion to advocate the destruction of the human race lessen we are all inadvertently members of that conspiracy. So I leave you with one thought….
VOTE EARLY AND VOTE OFTEN….(oh…and vote Republican)
And have a great day everyone.
Reply
2:32 pm on September 21st, 2008 327
Someone needs to rewiew their Soviet and German history.
Reply
6:00 am on September 22nd, 2008 328
Post-convention swing state polls are tipping toward Sen. John McCain, the TV pundits are waxing about “The Palin Factor,” and Sen. Barack Obama’s California supporters are freaking out about a race Democrats were uncommonly confident about only a month ago
ht tp://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2008/09/22/MNPP130KA7.DTL
The KKKlams out there are crying. This could be the year of the woman. 18 Million cracks and Palin breaks the celing, even though millions of women hating Demorcrats will do nearly anything to stop her.
Thank you BABY JESUS.
Reply
7:38 am on September 22nd, 2008 329
I’m not crying, pal. And like usual, you’re clueless:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/todays-polls-921.html
Try looking at composites before going into one of your unfounded rants.
By the way, you might want to look at what the KKK stood for. You’re pointing the finger the wrong way, douche.
Reply
7:58 am on September 22nd, 2008 330
Shattered, I’ll wager you a bottle of baekseju that Palin pees her girdle during the debate with Biden!
Reply
8:02 am on September 22nd, 2008 331
…
Reply
8:03 am on September 22nd, 2008 332
“Uh, excuse me, Gwen?”
Reply
8:03 am on September 22nd, 2008 333
… (wink, wink)
Reply
8:04 am on September 22nd, 2008 334
“I said thanks, but no thanks!”
“God bless, America!”
Reply
8:39 am on September 22nd, 2008 335
This must be good humor day at the old homestead.
Whatever will be….will be… until something changes it.
Reply
9:48 am on September 22nd, 2008 336
“By the way, you might want to look at what the KKK stood for.You’re pointing the finger the wrong way, douche.”
Defending the KKK and claiming I don’t “understand them” Calling me a douche -tacky.
Get your head out of the mud KKKlam. Women can do the job too.
ht tp://www.flickr.com/photos/bhenak/2871439594/
Reply
10:06 am on September 22nd, 2008 337
“Try looking at composites before going into one of your unfounded rants”
Huh? You mean I should blindly follow a fantasy baseball Obama-bot statistican. You are a simpleton.
Reply
3:33 pm on September 22nd, 2008 338
Glad to see it’s staying clean.
Douche: German for a “Shower”. We probably all “douche” one way or another every day, men and women…unless we like to bathe or just plain stink.
This makes as much sense as the other recient comments.
Reply
5:13 pm on September 22nd, 2008 339
Shattered,
If you want to argue numbers, we can do that. But leave the unnatural Palin obsession and odd references to a horribly racist organization behind. Not once has anyone said anything racist or sexist on this thread. I know most GOPers have been femininsts for like two weeks now, but that doesn’t mean you can walk around calling everyone else sexist. Scrutinizing Palin’s record and her wingnut policies is not sexist; it’s smart.
I really don’t even want to give you any ammo and I’m sure you’ll respond with something to the likes of “Palin is the last hope of America” or “I want to kiss Baby Jesus and Sarah Palin at the same time” or maybe your super bizzaro and creative “KKKlam is a racist because he’s supporting an African American for President” or something equally illogical. So, for the sake of time and blood pressure JUST LET IT GO!
538 pulls their numbers from all the major polling organizations. When Obama was down, it reflected it. And now that’s he up, it is reflecting that.
AS: Douche also mean deception (in French). Perfect for our old pal, Shattered.
Sarah Palin and Shattered love being clean!!!
Reply
7:12 pm on September 22nd, 2008 340
Now I see why Shattered is so pro-woman these days.
She’s too much of a girly-man to take me up on my bet.
You go, girl!
Reply
9:26 pm on September 22nd, 2008 341
Calling people a douche and using the term women as a pejorative is sexist.
Also, if you want somebody to LET IT GO, then I suggest you avoid insulting them at the same time. But I see that letting it go, is not your real goal.
Reply
5:53 am on September 23rd, 2008 342
This was a good thread off and on for awhile, but now it’s time I pulled the plug and let it all go down the drain with the douche water…
Unless another thread of this type comes along…well, I’ll see you all to either gloat or glower on November 5th.
It had it’s fun spots.
Reply
3:35 am on September 24th, 2008 343
Wake up, people!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kvv_5Q4EfNI
Reply
10:45 am on September 24th, 2008 344
Wake up people, I have a link from YOUTUBE! Damn you! Its YOUTUBE! YOU CANNOT ARGUE! Sounds like the norks and king jong il.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Stupid democrats think that youtube runs America. They have no idea about working Americans.
Reply
5:20 pm on September 24th, 2008 345
“They have no idea about working Americans.”
I’m from a working-class background and the Democrat Party has always been the home of unions, genius.
Palin does fewer interviews than Kim Jong-il. John McCain is suspending his campaign and is afraid to debate Obama on Friday.
John McCain can run but he can’t hide.
Reply
5:21 pm on September 24th, 2008 346
YouTube is our friend:
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=S27yitK32ds
Reply
11:28 pm on September 25th, 2008 347
After watching this video, she gives new meaning to “Shock and Awe.” You would think after these past weeks, she would have at least come up with a coherent response to this question.
If John McCain really puts our national security before politics, why is she second in line to be Commander in Chief? What must our allies and adversaries be thinking now?
Reply
12:25 am on September 26th, 2008 348
I meant this video.
Reply
3:43 am on September 26th, 2008 349
JoeC, all joking aside, her argument that because Alaska is “next to two foreign countries” makes it (and her) more “international” somehow merely reveals how provincial many Americans can be.
In Europe, being surrounded by half a dozen different countries is nothing special. Ditto for Asia or Latin America.
The fact that she thinks this is some kind of special advantage or qualification says far more about her own limited worldview than anything else.
Reply
5:38 am on September 27th, 2008 350
From the current issue of The New York Review of Books (“Is This a ‘Victory’?” by Peter W. Galbraith):
“Although the Bush administration would never say so, it has in effect adopted the decentralization strategy long advocated by Senator Joseph Biden and now also supported by Senator Obama. Biden’s plan would devolve almost all central government functions—including security—to Sunni or Shiite regions with powers similar to those now exercised by Kurdistan. Until late 2006, the Bush administration tried to defeat al-Qaeda with a US-backed Shiite-dominated Iraqi army. The approach failed and the US Marines even concluded that Anbar, Iraq’s largest Sunni province, was lost to al-Qaeda. While the Sunnis have yet to set up a region (as allowed by Iraq’s constitution), they now have, in the Awakening, a Sunni-commanded army. And it has defeated al-Qaeda.”
“John McCain says that partly because of his persistent support of the surge, we are now winning the Iraq war. He defines victory as an Iraq that is a democratic ally. Yet he advocates continued US military support to an Iraqi government led by Shiite religious parties committed to the establishment of an Islamic republic. He takes a harder line on Iran than President Bush, but supports Iraqi factions that are Iran’s closest allies in the Middle East. He praises the Awakening and but seems not to have realized that the Iraqi government is intent on crushing it. He has denounced the Obama-Biden plan for a decentralized state but has said nothing about how he would protect Iraq’s Kurds, the only committed American allies in the country.
“George W. Bush has put the United States on the side of undemocratic Iraqis who are Iran’s allies. John McCain would continue the same approach. It is hard to understand how this can be called a success—or a path to victory.”
Source: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21935
Reply
7:16 am on September 27th, 2008 351
I have a long spiel about why we would have gotten a better outcome with the Baker Iraq Study Group plan that what we can look forward to now.
Since it would be way off topic here, I’ll save it for later.
Reply
12:13 pm on October 5th, 2008 352
[...] McCain Picks Palin as Vice Presidential Candidate [...]
8:15 pm on October 18th, 2008 353
From The Wall Street Journal:
Palin’s Failin’
What is it she stands for? After seven weeks, we don’t know.
By PEGGY NOONAN
“Sometimes the leak is so bad that even a plumber can’t fix it.” This was the concise summation of a cable political strategist the other day, after the third and final presidential debate. That sounds about right, and yet the race in its final days retains a feeling of dynamism. I think it is going to burst open or tighten, not just mosey along. I can well imagine hearing, the day after Election Day, a lot of “You won’t believe it but I was literally in line at the polling station when I decided.”
John McCain won the debate, and he did it by making the case more effectively than he has in the past that Barack Obama will raise taxes, when “now, of all times in America, we need to cut people’s taxes.” He also scored Mr. Obama on his eloquence, using it against him more effectively than Hillary Clinton ever did. When she said he was “just words,” it sounded like a bitter complaint. Mr. McCain made it a charge: Young man, you attempt to obscure truth with the mellifluous power of your words. From Mrs. Clinton it sounded jealous, but when Mr. McCain said it, you looked at Mr. Obama and wondered if you’d just heard something that was true. For the first time, Mr. Obama’s unruffled demeanor didn’t really work for him. His cool made him seem hidden.
There is now something infantilizing about this election. Mr. Obama continued to claim he will remove wasteful spending by sitting down with the federal budget and going through it “line by line.” This is absurd, and he must know it. Mr. McCain continued to vow he will “balance the budget” in the next four years. Who believes that? Does even he?
More than ever on the campaign trail, the candidates are dropping their G’s. Hardworkin’ families are strainin’ and tryin’a get ahead. It’s not only Sarah Palin but Mr. McCain, too, occasionally Mr. Obama, and, of course, George W. Bush when he darts out like the bird in a cuckoo clock to tell us we are in crisis. All of the candidates say “mom and dad”: “our moms and dads who are struggling.” This is Mr. Bush’s former communications adviser Karen Hughes’s contribution to our democratic life, that you cannot speak like an adult in politics now, that’s too austere and detached, snobby. No one can say mothers and fathers, it’s all now the faux down-home, patronizing—and infantilizing—moms and dads. Do politicians ever remember that in a nation obsessed with politics, our children—sorry, our kids—look to political figures for a model as to how adults sound?
And click here to order her new book, Patriotic Grace.There has never been a second’s debate among liberals, to use an old-fashioned word that may yet return to vogue, over Mrs. Palin: She was a dope and unqualified from the start. Conservatives and Republicans, on the other hand, continue to battle it out: Was her choice a success or a disaster? And if one holds negative views, should one say so? For conservatives in general, but certainly for writers, the answer is a variation on Edmund Burke: You owe your readers not your industry only but your judgment, and you betray instead of serve them if you sacrifice it to what may or may not be their opinion.
Here is a fact of life that is also a fact of politics: You have to hold open the possibility of magic. People can come from nowhere, with modest backgrounds and short résumés, and yet be individuals of real gifts, gifts that had previously been unseen, that had been gleaming quietly under a bushel, and are suddenly revealed. Mrs. Palin came, essentially, from nowhere. But there was a man who came from nowhere, the seeming tool of a political machine, a tidy, narrow, unsophisticated senator appointed to high office and then thrust into power by a careless Franklin D. Roosevelt, whose vanity told him he would live forever. And yet that limited little man was Harry S. Truman. Of the Marshall Plan, of containment. Little Harry was big. He had magic. You have to give people time to show what they have. Because maybe they have magic too.
But we have seen Mrs. Palin on the national stage for seven weeks now, and there is little sign that she has the tools, the equipment, the knowledge or the philosophical grounding one hopes for, and expects, in a holder of high office. She is a person of great ambition, but the question remains: What is the purpose of the ambition? She wants to rise, but what for? For seven weeks I’ve listened to her, trying to understand if she is Bushian or Reaganite—a spender, to speak briefly, whose political decisions seem untethered to a political philosophy, and whose foreign policy is shaped by a certain emotionalism, or a conservative whose principles are rooted in philosophy, and whose foreign policy leans more toward what might be called romantic realism, and that is speak truth, know America, be America, move diplomatically, respect public opinion, and move within an awareness and appreciation of reality.
But it’s unclear whether she is Bushian or Reaganite. She doesn’t think aloud. She just . . . says things.
Her supporters accuse her critics of snobbery: Maybe she’s not a big “egghead” but she has brilliant instincts and inner toughness. But what instincts? “I’m Joe Six-Pack”? She does not speak seriously but attempts to excite sensation—”palling around with terrorists.” If the Ayers case is a serious issue, treat it seriously. She is not as thoughtful or persuasive as Joe the Plumber, who in an extended cable interview Thursday made a better case for the Republican ticket than the Republican ticket has made. In the past two weeks she has spent her time throwing out tinny lines to crowds she doesn’t, really, understand. This is not a leader, this is a follower, and she follows what she imagines is the base, which is in fact a vast and broken-hearted thing whose pain she cannot, actually, imagine. She could reinspire and reinspirit; she chooses merely to excite. She doesn’t seem to understand the implications of her own thoughts.
No news conferences? Interviews now only with friendly journalists? You can’t be president or vice president and govern in that style, as a sequestered figure. This has been Mr. Bush’s style the past few years, and see where it got us. You must address America in its entirety, not as a sliver or a series of slivers but as a full and whole entity, a great nation trying to hold together. When you don’t, when you play only to your little piece, you contribute to its fracturing.
In the end the Palin candidacy is a symptom and expression of a new vulgarization in American politics. It’s no good, not for conservatism and not for the country. And yes, it is a mark against John McCain, against his judgment and idealism.
I gather this week from conservative publications that those whose thoughts lead them to criticism in this area are to be shunned, and accused of the lowest motives. In one now-famous case, Christopher Buckley was shooed from the great magazine his father invented. In all this, the conservative intelligentsia are doing what they have done for five years. They bitterly attacked those who came to stand against the Bush administration. This was destructive. If they had stood for conservative principle and the full expression of views, instead of attempting to silence those who opposed mere party, their movement, and the party, would be in a better, and healthier, position.
At any rate, come and get me, copper.
Reply