by publius
I didn’t have a chance to write about Palin today (unlike Eric, some people have to work), so I’ve been chewing it over this afternoon. The more I think about it, the more insane it seems. McCain might well have lost the presidency today.
Curiously though, the base is all in. Their enthusiasm seems odd given how much this group supposedly values national security and commander-in-chief qualifications. Why are they ignoring Palin’s very real flaws as a candidate and embracing her so passionately? The answer I think is what I’ll call “battered base syndrome.”
The battered base syndrome goes something like this — the GOP religious base has been so cavalierly ignored and exploited by the GOP elites that they’re hungry for even the slightest signs of acknowledgment. This may seem strange from a liberal’s perspective, but from the subjective perspective of many evangelical Republicans, the national GOP has been ignoring them and their agenda. (See, e.g., Bush’s refusal to take a stand on Roe during the debates in 2004). And the sense of grievance runs deep (and helps explain Huckabee’s rise).
With Palin, however, the social conservative base finally got what they wanted — acknowledgement. She’s truly in their camp, or at least they perceive her to be. And in their haste to celebrate — in their joy at finally being acknowledged (A true conservative! At last!) — they are ignoring everything else.
In particular, they’re ignoring what an atrocious, borderline insane selection this was. Most importantly, the Palin selection completely — 100% — undermines McCain’s strongest argument, which is that Obama lacks experience. That’s why people shouldn’t worry about Obama’s limited ability to attack McCain for picking an inexperienced candidate. This is looking at the problem backwards — the real limitation is now on McCain. With this selection, he cut the legs out of his own trump card.
It’s also another illustration of McCain’s obsession with tactics over strategy (I credit this observation to Hilzoy, who made it in an email — see Kevin Drum too). Look, the Palin choice dominated the news cycle — I was wrong earlier. The choice was so unexpected that it got tons of coverage and knocked Obama off TV.
But what about the long term? There’s no way she’s been properly vetted. Hell, the Post is reporting just today — within the first 24 hours — that the fired state official in Alaska has emails from Palin illustrating her involvement. (See also Mark Kleiman.) If that holds up, she’s been caught in a whopper of a lie before she even gets out of the first day. Who knows what else will come up? More broadly, who knows how she’ll answer the one million substantive policy questions she’ll get in the days ahead?
It’s just an enormous and short-sighted gamble. But that’s the McCain style I suppose — he’s just applying his foreign policy philosophy to the vice-presidential selection process.
McCain’s campaign can’t see past the next 24 hours, while Obama is probably laying the groundwork for his reelection campaign.
This is a huge story, and then it will becomes an unfathomable joke.
I’d feel kinda sorry for Gov. Palin, because she’s about to become a national punchline. But then I remind myself she’s anti-choice, anti-polar bear(!), and uber-pro-gun, and i’m just fine with her being a punchline.
McCain’s campaign can’t see past the next 24 hours, while Obama is probably laying the groundwork for his reelection campaign.
This is a huge story, and then it will becomes an unfathomable joke.
I’d feel kinda sorry for Gov. Palin, because she’s about to become a national punchline. But then I remind myself she’s anti-choice, anti-polar bear(!), and uber-pro-gun, and i’m just fine with her being a punchline.
I’ve long wondered whether the whole McCain candidacy is merely an exercise in GOP re-branding. Given the failures of Bush & Co and the state of the nation (80% say we’re on the wrong track) the GOP elites know they have little chance of winning this time. But by rallying around McCain they use the “maverick” to shake up their image a bit, and associate their brand with a war hero.
Now, the nomination of Palin helps keep the evangelicals in line for 4 more years, while also shaking up the image of the rich white male party. I’m not sure how many GOPers expect this ticket to win….they’re building the brand for 2012.
I’ve long wondered whether the whole McCain candidacy is merely an exercise in GOP re-branding. Given the failures of Bush & Co and the state of the nation (80% say we’re on the wrong track) the GOP elites know they have little chance of winning this time. But by rallying around McCain they use the “maverick” to shake up their image a bit, and associate their brand with a war hero.
Now, the nomination of Palin helps keep the evangelicals in line for 4 more years, while also shaking up the image of the rich white male party. I’m not sure how many GOPers expect this ticket to win….they’re building the brand for 2012.
This is what I don’t understand. Among my friends, we’ve been both laughing and dreading the possibility of Huckabee in the White House. But as bad as Huckabee seems to me, can anyone name one way in which Palin is better?
Huckabee was rather openly campaigning for the VP spot.
Huckabee helped McCain win the nomination, by staying in so long and splitting the vote.
Huckabee, as bad as he is, is Pareto superior to Palin. He’s probably better with the base, since a quarter of the base already voted for him. He certainly has more experience than she does. I just can’t see one way either from the point of view of electioneering or from the point of view of qualifications for the job that Palin is a better choice than Huckabee.
And yet she got the nod.
If McCain went for Palin, why on earth didn’t he go for Huckabee instead?
This is what I don’t understand. Among my friends, we’ve been both laughing and dreading the possibility of Huckabee in the White House. But as bad as Huckabee seems to me, can anyone name one way in which Palin is better?
Huckabee was rather openly campaigning for the VP spot.
Huckabee helped McCain win the nomination, by staying in so long and splitting the vote.
Huckabee, as bad as he is, is Pareto superior to Palin. He’s probably better with the base, since a quarter of the base already voted for him. He certainly has more experience than she does. I just can’t see one way either from the point of view of electioneering or from the point of view of qualifications for the job that Palin is a better choice than Huckabee.
And yet she got the nod.
If McCain went for Palin, why on earth didn’t he go for Huckabee instead?
I’m not sure that the maverick image is positive when it verges towards unpredictable.
I’m not sure that the maverick image is positive when it verges towards unpredictable.
Your coining of the term ‘battered base syndrome’ is misogynistic. Would you say the same thing if it was SAM Palin?!?
(Just prepping you for the next 2 months. I accept your thanks.)
And from a comment on Balloon Juice, there is a surreal quality about this that McCain being the greatest performance artist ever would explain. That would be so awesome, not only for destroying the GOP, but because performance art is…well…awesome!
Your coining of the term ‘battered base syndrome’ is misogynistic. Would you say the same thing if it was SAM Palin?!?
(Just prepping you for the next 2 months. I accept your thanks.)
And from a comment on Balloon Juice, there is a surreal quality about this that McCain being the greatest performance artist ever would explain. That would be so awesome, not only for destroying the GOP, but because performance art is…well…awesome!
McCain’s obsession with tactics over strategy
Oh, *well* put, hilzoy. Also reminding us that not all military experience is the same thing, at all.
McCain’s obsession with tactics over strategy
Oh, *well* put, hilzoy. Also reminding us that not all military experience is the same thing, at all.
If McCain went for Palin, why on earth didn’t he go for Huckabee instead?
She has lady parts. Makes her a big surprise. Plus the silly fantasy that she’ll lead Hillary supporters (not the bogus, Republican PUMAs who were gonna vote for him anyway) to vote for McCain.
If McCain went for Palin, why on earth didn’t he go for Huckabee instead?
She has lady parts. Makes her a big surprise. Plus the silly fantasy that she’ll lead Hillary supporters (not the bogus, Republican PUMAs who were gonna vote for him anyway) to vote for McCain.
McCain’s senior advisor– a young blonde named Nancy Fortenhemmer (sp?)– is on Larry King right now arguing with James Carville that arguments against Palin’s lack of national or foreign policy experience are “dismissive” and are typical of the Obama campaign’s attitude about women. Carville is arguing that she’s a pro-creationsim Buchananite and will not appeal to Hillary’s supporters. Nancy just keeps repeating “she’s the most popular governor in the country with a remarkable record of accomplishment.” That IS their main talking point and they’re going to repeat it ad nauseum.
The head– it hurts as it spins. The GOP is suddenly standing up for women in politics and making sure that GOP women will be making that argument. Seriously. McCain is trying to play identity politics– this is our territory and we need to play it as smartly.
The whole thing is quite nauseating. They’re going to try and portray any and all criticism of Palin as sexist in an attempt to appeal to Hillary supporters and independent women voters. It’s so fucked up it just might work.
Here’s to hoping that she falls on her face on her own accord.
McCain’s senior advisor– a young blonde named Nancy Fortenhemmer (sp?)– is on Larry King right now arguing with James Carville that arguments against Palin’s lack of national or foreign policy experience are “dismissive” and are typical of the Obama campaign’s attitude about women. Carville is arguing that she’s a pro-creationsim Buchananite and will not appeal to Hillary’s supporters. Nancy just keeps repeating “she’s the most popular governor in the country with a remarkable record of accomplishment.” That IS their main talking point and they’re going to repeat it ad nauseum.
The head– it hurts as it spins. The GOP is suddenly standing up for women in politics and making sure that GOP women will be making that argument. Seriously. McCain is trying to play identity politics– this is our territory and we need to play it as smartly.
The whole thing is quite nauseating. They’re going to try and portray any and all criticism of Palin as sexist in an attempt to appeal to Hillary supporters and independent women voters. It’s so fucked up it just might work.
Here’s to hoping that she falls on her face on her own accord.
Most importantly, the Palin selection completely — 100% — undermines McCain’s strongest argument, which is that Obama lacks experience.
That’s the key thing I hit upon. McCain’s one remaining club with which to beat on Obama was the experience factor — and he completely trashed that argument. My guess is, he reasoned that “If Obama hits her on experience, I hit him on experience right back.” The blunder is that McCain was going to hit Obama on experience no matter what, and now his best club is compromised. What a blunder!
The other factor that struck me is how the debate between Biden and Palin is going to look. This woman was a town mayor two years ago — Biden has been around the block many times. He will wipe the floor with her. His biggest challenge will be not looking cruel in what will otherwise be a very pathetic evening.
Most importantly, the Palin selection completely — 100% — undermines McCain’s strongest argument, which is that Obama lacks experience.
That’s the key thing I hit upon. McCain’s one remaining club with which to beat on Obama was the experience factor — and he completely trashed that argument. My guess is, he reasoned that “If Obama hits her on experience, I hit him on experience right back.” The blunder is that McCain was going to hit Obama on experience no matter what, and now his best club is compromised. What a blunder!
The other factor that struck me is how the debate between Biden and Palin is going to look. This woman was a town mayor two years ago — Biden has been around the block many times. He will wipe the floor with her. His biggest challenge will be not looking cruel in what will otherwise be a very pathetic evening.
The republic party will not nominate this woman VP. Given the consistent lack of judgment shown by John Bush, culminating in this fantastically ridiculous decision, they may not be entirely comfortable choosing him for the top spot.
The republic party will not nominate this woman VP. Given the consistent lack of judgment shown by John Bush, culminating in this fantastically ridiculous decision, they may not be entirely comfortable choosing him for the top spot.
I saw on TPM that, as Pubius referenced, the Washington Post has already dug up dirt on her regarding that guy she fired so she could appoint an officially reprimanded sexual harrasser. McCain got Obama’s speech out of the headlines, with a degree of success on that front that frankly stunned me. But I really think he has damaged his candidacy in the medium term here. Even if this move was all about winning one news cycle and branding the R party for future years, this seems to be rapidly becoming a fiasco for McCain. What are the Intrade odds on Palin not even making it to St. Paul at this point?
I saw on TPM that, as Pubius referenced, the Washington Post has already dug up dirt on her regarding that guy she fired so she could appoint an officially reprimanded sexual harrasser. McCain got Obama’s speech out of the headlines, with a degree of success on that front that frankly stunned me. But I really think he has damaged his candidacy in the medium term here. Even if this move was all about winning one news cycle and branding the R party for future years, this seems to be rapidly becoming a fiasco for McCain. What are the Intrade odds on Palin not even making it to St. Paul at this point?
She’ll make it to St. Paul. I completely agree that she undermines McCain’s entire strategy against Obama up to now and in that sense it’s an awesomely bad call. However, that damage is done. Even in the worst case–that she ends up being Dan Quayle without the experience–she only makes it more likely that McCain will lose. Pulling her from the ticket, on the other hand, would GUARANTEE that he would lose because it would call his competence into question by everyone, including his base.
She’ll make it to St. Paul. I completely agree that she undermines McCain’s entire strategy against Obama up to now and in that sense it’s an awesomely bad call. However, that damage is done. Even in the worst case–that she ends up being Dan Quayle without the experience–she only makes it more likely that McCain will lose. Pulling her from the ticket, on the other hand, would GUARANTEE that he would lose because it would call his competence into question by everyone, including his base.
Conspiracy theory time!
McCain was driven crazy in Vietnam, so he’s trying to bring the whole GOP down because he’s a Manchurian candidate. That would explain his whole campaign strategy and the Palin pick. He also really hates Bush for what happened in 2000.
Obviously Bush doesn’t want all his hard work to be wasted, so he and Cheney got together and hatched a plan to save the Republicans in the long term.
You guys know the government has weather-control devices, right? (We loaned them out to the Chinese, otherwise it would’ve rained on Obama) Okay. Well Bush and Cheney used the weather control devices to spawn a hurricane that would hit while their convention was going to start. That way they can engineer the nomination and have time to make sure McCain has an ‘accident.’
Now they’ll delay things a couple of days, but when the convention finally starts, it’ll be Palin/??? against Obama/Biden.
I’m still not sure if Bush and Cheney will use this opportunity to get rid of the 22 amendment and declare martial law. Otherwise, you’ll find this explanation rather neat, tidy, complete, and most of all 100% true!!!
Conspiracy theory time!
McCain was driven crazy in Vietnam, so he’s trying to bring the whole GOP down because he’s a Manchurian candidate. That would explain his whole campaign strategy and the Palin pick. He also really hates Bush for what happened in 2000.
Obviously Bush doesn’t want all his hard work to be wasted, so he and Cheney got together and hatched a plan to save the Republicans in the long term.
You guys know the government has weather-control devices, right? (We loaned them out to the Chinese, otherwise it would’ve rained on Obama) Okay. Well Bush and Cheney used the weather control devices to spawn a hurricane that would hit while their convention was going to start. That way they can engineer the nomination and have time to make sure McCain has an ‘accident.’
Now they’ll delay things a couple of days, but when the convention finally starts, it’ll be Palin/??? against Obama/Biden.
I’m still not sure if Bush and Cheney will use this opportunity to get rid of the 22 amendment and declare martial law. Otherwise, you’ll find this explanation rather neat, tidy, complete, and most of all 100% true!!!
The base is no doubt thrilled that McCain picked a mother of five for VP. But does anybody outside the base actually imagine modern American women can identify with or relate to a mother of five?
Moreover, some reporter (leftie or rightie, I don’t know) will pose this question: “Governor, do you plan to have more children?”
I am as liberal as anybody, but even I have trouble contemplating the possibility of a pregnant Commander in Chief. How ‘the base’ would view the possibility is anybody’s guess.
–TP
The base is no doubt thrilled that McCain picked a mother of five for VP. But does anybody outside the base actually imagine modern American women can identify with or relate to a mother of five?
Moreover, some reporter (leftie or rightie, I don’t know) will pose this question: “Governor, do you plan to have more children?”
I am as liberal as anybody, but even I have trouble contemplating the possibility of a pregnant Commander in Chief. How ‘the base’ would view the possibility is anybody’s guess.
–TP
I’ve been watching all day to see what talking points the GOP is going to use about Palin. Here’s one I just noticed in the past 15 minutes– any time a dem man says anything negative about Palin as a choice for VP call them “dismissive.” In other words, any man who has any criticism of Palin is going to be called “dismissive,” which apparently the GOP has decided is code for sexist.
First Nancy Fortenhemmer (sp?) from McCain’s camp said it about James Carville and now Kellyanne Conway just said the same to Paul Begala.
I’ve been watching all day to see what talking points the GOP is going to use about Palin. Here’s one I just noticed in the past 15 minutes– any time a dem man says anything negative about Palin as a choice for VP call them “dismissive.” In other words, any man who has any criticism of Palin is going to be called “dismissive,” which apparently the GOP has decided is code for sexist.
First Nancy Fortenhemmer (sp?) from McCain’s camp said it about James Carville and now Kellyanne Conway just said the same to Paul Begala.
A little simpler, MeDrew: On Monday McCain announces that he’s suffering from a degenerative brain disease that’s causing reckless behavior such as suddenly choosing an inexperienced person he’s only met once as his running mate. He withdraws from the nomination, throwing the convention into chaos. After much squabbling a strong and reassuring power emerges to unite the Republican faithful: Dick Cheney. He chooses Jeb Bush as his running mate, and the rest is Diebold.
A little simpler, MeDrew: On Monday McCain announces that he’s suffering from a degenerative brain disease that’s causing reckless behavior such as suddenly choosing an inexperienced person he’s only met once as his running mate. He withdraws from the nomination, throwing the convention into chaos. After much squabbling a strong and reassuring power emerges to unite the Republican faithful: Dick Cheney. He chooses Jeb Bush as his running mate, and the rest is Diebold.
Just in from Larry King Live:
Republican strategist Kellyanne Conway just said “This is really important, Larry. The air has been thick with the word sexism and I’d be careful if I were the other side not to say too much nasty about Sarah Palin.”
There. Barely took 12 hours for them to say that any criticism of Palin is sexist.
I need a stiff drink.
Just in from Larry King Live:
Republican strategist Kellyanne Conway just said “This is really important, Larry. The air has been thick with the word sexism and I’d be careful if I were the other side not to say too much nasty about Sarah Palin.”
There. Barely took 12 hours for them to say that any criticism of Palin is sexist.
I need a stiff drink.
Tony, She’s 44 and her last kid had Downs. 5 total I really think she won’t, and asking would be kinda rude too.
Tony, She’s 44 and her last kid had Downs. 5 total I really think she won’t, and asking would be kinda rude too.
They know the words, but don’t know the music….
Unfortunately, it’s a passable tactic if the questioner isn’t sharp. And of course, it can equally lead to an equally sexist position of not treating her as toughly as she should, because she’s a woman.
They know the words, but don’t know the music….
Unfortunately, it’s a passable tactic if the questioner isn’t sharp. And of course, it can equally lead to an equally sexist position of not treating her as toughly as she should, because she’s a woman.
How many times have we said this about some Republican, and how many times has it actually worked out that way? I think it’s really dangerous to underestimate her political skills. She must have done something to defeat the veteran politicians she had to to get where she is.
Besides, just as a matter of political strategy, it makes no sense to lower expectations and allow someone to be declared the winner by not drooling.
How many times have we said this about some Republican, and how many times has it actually worked out that way? I think it’s really dangerous to underestimate her political skills. She must have done something to defeat the veteran politicians she had to to get where she is.
Besides, just as a matter of political strategy, it makes no sense to lower expectations and allow someone to be declared the winner by not drooling.
Ahhh. Begala has an interesting talking point– he met her ONCE before choosing her as his VP. How reckless is that? She’s not even someone that McCain knows well, if really at all. It’s one thing to choose someone you know well, someone you can vouch for, but McCain himself can’t even vouch for her– he just doesn’t know her well enough.
Ahhh. Begala has an interesting talking point– he met her ONCE before choosing her as his VP. How reckless is that? She’s not even someone that McCain knows well, if really at all. It’s one thing to choose someone you know well, someone you can vouch for, but McCain himself can’t even vouch for her– he just doesn’t know her well enough.
There’s no way she’s been properly vetted.
She didn’t have to be vetted–she’s brimming with maverickiality.
There’s no way she’s been properly vetted.
She didn’t have to be vetted–she’s brimming with maverickiality.
McCain is trying to play identity politics– this is our territory and we need to play it as smartly.
Actually, cynical pearl-clutching identity politics have very much been GOP territory since at least the Clarence Thomas hearings.
Anytime a Republican woman or person of color is a subject of public debate, the right suggests that any criticism of her or him is sexism or racism.
McCain is trying to play identity politics– this is our territory and we need to play it as smartly.
Actually, cynical pearl-clutching identity politics have very much been GOP territory since at least the Clarence Thomas hearings.
Anytime a Republican woman or person of color is a subject of public debate, the right suggests that any criticism of her or him is sexism or racism.
Potpourri on a lazy Friday night
WARNING! POLITICS! McCain Ad Is Valentine to Obama on Big Day- Well, at first, I was impressed that the McCain camp were gracious enough not to get all political on…
Potpourri on a lazy Friday night
WARNING! POLITICS! McCain Ad Is Valentine to Obama on Big Day- Well, at first, I was impressed that the McCain camp were gracious enough not to get all political on…
Well, Ben, sometimes it is.
(Some of the attacks on Palin have already gone overboard into sexism.)
Well, Ben, sometimes it is.
(Some of the attacks on Palin have already gone overboard into sexism.)
But as bad as Huckabee seems to me, can anyone name one way in which Palin is better?
This was one of my initial reactions to this nomination (and I still think it’s a good one). But, in fact, there is one, very clear advantage that Palin has from McCain’s perspective: drilling.
Drilling our way to energy independence and cheap oil is one of the few policy areas in which McCain and the GOP have so far out-argued Obama and the Democrats (however weak the actual arguments for drilling-as-energy-panacea are). Palin is the only VP candidate in the mix who clearly underscores this issue. And it’s the one national issue on which Palin has anything like an unusual level of experience.
The McCain camp is putting an awful lot of eggs in the drilling basket.
But as bad as Huckabee seems to me, can anyone name one way in which Palin is better?
This was one of my initial reactions to this nomination (and I still think it’s a good one). But, in fact, there is one, very clear advantage that Palin has from McCain’s perspective: drilling.
Drilling our way to energy independence and cheap oil is one of the few policy areas in which McCain and the GOP have so far out-argued Obama and the Democrats (however weak the actual arguments for drilling-as-energy-panacea are). Palin is the only VP candidate in the mix who clearly underscores this issue. And it’s the one national issue on which Palin has anything like an unusual level of experience.
The McCain camp is putting an awful lot of eggs in the drilling basket.
McCain is gambling that he only needs the core conservatives and the religious conservatives in order to win the election, i.e the same constituency that came out in record numbers and gave W a second term.
He may not be wrong if he can energize that base.
McCain is gambling that he only needs the core conservatives and the religious conservatives in order to win the election, i.e the same constituency that came out in record numbers and gave W a second term.
He may not be wrong if he can energize that base.
My Wikipedia user page was vandalized by some idiot trying to spread the word about how conservative Palin is (apparently because I’d undone similar vandalism at the start of the Republican Party article). Why do we have to have morons on our side too?
My Wikipedia user page was vandalized by some idiot trying to spread the word about how conservative Palin is (apparently because I’d undone similar vandalism at the start of the Republican Party article). Why do we have to have morons on our side too?
KC- I find your theories intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
KC- I find your theories intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Iggy, there are significantly more Democrats and fewer Republicans than there were then, and Bush still had people outside the core at that point. McCain needs independents.
Also, do you really think Obama isn’t going to get turnout for him higher than Kerry did?
I’m not saying it’s a slam dunk, just that there’s no need for panic and that McCain can’t do it with the base alone.
Iggy, there are significantly more Democrats and fewer Republicans than there were then, and Bush still had people outside the core at that point. McCain needs independents.
Also, do you really think Obama isn’t going to get turnout for him higher than Kerry did?
I’m not saying it’s a slam dunk, just that there’s no need for panic and that McCain can’t do it with the base alone.
By the way, there’s an ongoing skirmish taking place on Pallin’s wikipedia page. After lots of scrubbing yesterday by someone calling him or herself “Young Trigg”, the kind of classic, pitched wiki warfare that one comes to expect in cases like this has set in.
One particular front has been the section on the current abuse of power investigation of Palin, which keeps disappearing and reappearing under a variety of different names.
By the way, there’s an ongoing skirmish taking place on Pallin’s wikipedia page. After lots of scrubbing yesterday by someone calling him or herself “Young Trigg”, the kind of classic, pitched wiki warfare that one comes to expect in cases like this has set in.
One particular front has been the section on the current abuse of power investigation of Palin, which keeps disappearing and reappearing under a variety of different names.
Nah. They’re going to use it as a “Get Out of Jail Free” card. Any time somebody questions her experience, honesty, judgement, etc. they’ll cry sexism. It’s not quite as good an all purpose distraction as being a POW, but it’s the best they could come up with.
Nah. They’re going to use it as a “Get Out of Jail Free” card. Any time somebody questions her experience, honesty, judgement, etc. they’ll cry sexism. It’s not quite as good an all purpose distraction as being a POW, but it’s the best they could come up with.
Here’s what scares me. LIVs. I have no idea how many of them exist but they are a dangerous unknown in this election. Check out some of the posts on the Perez Hilton website to see what these folks are saying about Palin.
I’m in the Denver media market and the local NBC affiliate’s 10pm news segment on Palin went like this: Dems say Palin has no experience, etc. Anchor: well, that’s debatable. Cue her experience [no joke, they said she had x number of years experience on the city council, x number of years experience as mayor without telling their viewers it was Wasilla, her hometown of somewhere between 5-8,000 people]. They explicitly overused the words “executive experience” and then found a high school classmate of Palin’s to interview who lives in Colorado. This moronic woman says Palin was smart, worked harder than anyone else, earned everything she’s ever received, blah, blah, blah. But here’s the kicker: she says Palin was ready to be Veep because she has 5 kids and any woman who can be governor and mom to 5 kids has to be ready to be the VP.
They end the segment with this woman saying she was leaning towards Obama, but now she’s looking seriously at McCain because she’s ready for a qualified woman to be VP.
It’s the media that will control and shape this election once again and that scares me silly.
Here’s what scares me. LIVs. I have no idea how many of them exist but they are a dangerous unknown in this election. Check out some of the posts on the Perez Hilton website to see what these folks are saying about Palin.
I’m in the Denver media market and the local NBC affiliate’s 10pm news segment on Palin went like this: Dems say Palin has no experience, etc. Anchor: well, that’s debatable. Cue her experience [no joke, they said she had x number of years experience on the city council, x number of years experience as mayor without telling their viewers it was Wasilla, her hometown of somewhere between 5-8,000 people]. They explicitly overused the words “executive experience” and then found a high school classmate of Palin’s to interview who lives in Colorado. This moronic woman says Palin was smart, worked harder than anyone else, earned everything she’s ever received, blah, blah, blah. But here’s the kicker: she says Palin was ready to be Veep because she has 5 kids and any woman who can be governor and mom to 5 kids has to be ready to be the VP.
They end the segment with this woman saying she was leaning towards Obama, but now she’s looking seriously at McCain because she’s ready for a qualified woman to be VP.
It’s the media that will control and shape this election once again and that scares me silly.
I’ve tried editing that article a couple of times today, but Wikipedia doesn’t handle having that many editors at once very well. Besides, it seemed pointless considering how quickly it’s changing. But then the forces of sanity probably do need reinforcements.
I’ve tried editing that article a couple of times today, but Wikipedia doesn’t handle having that many editors at once very well. Besides, it seemed pointless considering how quickly it’s changing. But then the forces of sanity probably do need reinforcements.
KC, dude, there’s no panic.
All I’m saying is that while McCain’s pick might look like the act of a crazy old geezer, there might actually be method to his madness.
And while I’m confident that Barack’s ground operation will be highly effective in getting out the vote, you should note that the rollers on the Republican side have been doing this very effectively for a while.
Let’s be clear: it doesn’t matter if there are more registered Democrats than Republicans, it only matters who actually turns out to vote. I didn’t think at the time there was a snowball’s chance in hell that W would get a second term. Boy, talk about being wrong.
KC, dude, there’s no panic.
All I’m saying is that while McCain’s pick might look like the act of a crazy old geezer, there might actually be method to his madness.
And while I’m confident that Barack’s ground operation will be highly effective in getting out the vote, you should note that the rollers on the Republican side have been doing this very effectively for a while.
Let’s be clear: it doesn’t matter if there are more registered Democrats than Republicans, it only matters who actually turns out to vote. I didn’t think at the time there was a snowball’s chance in hell that W would get a second term. Boy, talk about being wrong.
“LIVs” is low-information voters? That may not be widespread or easily googlable enough to use without explanation. I don’t think I’m unusually sheltered from political jargon.
“LIVs” is low-information voters? That may not be widespread or easily googlable enough to use without explanation. I don’t think I’m unusually sheltered from political jargon.
Oops – yeah they are low information voters. Like the gal I worked with who was beside herself when she went to vote because she forgot to bring her newspaper. You see she trusted the newspaper editor to tell her how to vote.
Oops – yeah they are low information voters. Like the gal I worked with who was beside herself when she went to vote because she forgot to bring her newspaper. You see she trusted the newspaper editor to tell her how to vote.
I hate the term “low information voters.” It’s patronizing and leads you into the wrong places.
Low involvement or low motivation, yes. But just putting information out there isn’t going to do the trick. You have to attack the motivation.
I hate the term “low information voters.” It’s patronizing and leads you into the wrong places.
Low involvement or low motivation, yes. But just putting information out there isn’t going to do the trick. You have to attack the motivation.
I think this is less complicated than you’re making it out to be. The simpler explanation is that conservatives/republicans don’t care about Palin’s inexperience because they don’t care that much about experience period. It’s not that they really perceive Obama as inexperienced in any important way; it’s just that they perceive this as a potent line of attack. And, disliking him for myriad other reasons, they take it.
Yglesias had a good post making this very point a while back: http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/07/the_flipflop_flap.php
At the most fundamental level there isn’t any internal cognitive dissonance in their position. But the inconsistent rhetoric does tip their hand, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it turns out to hurt them quite a bit.
I think this is less complicated than you’re making it out to be. The simpler explanation is that conservatives/republicans don’t care about Palin’s inexperience because they don’t care that much about experience period. It’s not that they really perceive Obama as inexperienced in any important way; it’s just that they perceive this as a potent line of attack. And, disliking him for myriad other reasons, they take it.
Yglesias had a good post making this very point a while back: http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/07/the_flipflop_flap.php
At the most fundamental level there isn’t any internal cognitive dissonance in their position. But the inconsistent rhetoric does tip their hand, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it turns out to hurt them quite a bit.
Tony, She’s 44 and her last kid had Downs. 5 total I really think she won’t, and asking would be kinda rude too.
Most women I know would have stopped short of 5, but most women I know are not fundamentalist enough to be lionized by ‘the base’.
Sure, asking if she plans to have more kids is ‘kinda rude’ — of any other woman applying for any other job. It’s even ‘kinda rude’ to ask of this woman — she’s a “nice” woman, I hear.
Still, if I were the sort of person at whom the dog-whistle ‘servant heart’ phrase is aimed, I might be happy to hear Governor Palin say she has no plan to stop producing little Christians. So maybe it’s not too rude a question.
— TP
Tony, She’s 44 and her last kid had Downs. 5 total I really think she won’t, and asking would be kinda rude too.
Most women I know would have stopped short of 5, but most women I know are not fundamentalist enough to be lionized by ‘the base’.
Sure, asking if she plans to have more kids is ‘kinda rude’ — of any other woman applying for any other job. It’s even ‘kinda rude’ to ask of this woman — she’s a “nice” woman, I hear.
Still, if I were the sort of person at whom the dog-whistle ‘servant heart’ phrase is aimed, I might be happy to hear Governor Palin say she has no plan to stop producing little Christians. So maybe it’s not too rude a question.
— TP
My take on low information voters is that it refers to people who get their information from friends, viral emails, the often inaccurate 30-second tv ads, etc. but never dig any deeper. So you have people who may be motivated to vote, but they believe Obama is a Muslim, who took the oath of office on a Koran, and never puts his hand over his heart when saying the Pledge of Allegiance. Oh and he’s an empty suit, too because he heard that somewhere. And that’s all they need to know to make up their minds.
There are too many people on the street talking today about how Palin is *more* experienced than Obama because she has executive experience and Obama has done nothing. They find the experience line of attack hypocritical coming from the Obama camp.
So those of us who spend way too much time thinking and reading about politics think there’s nothing to worry about because no one in his/her right mind would find Palin a credible selection.
What I’m trying to say is much depends on how the press frames this. If around the country, those LIVs, are getting all their information from local news like mine, then I think we have to work hard to counteract that bias. Just saying, is all.
My take on low information voters is that it refers to people who get their information from friends, viral emails, the often inaccurate 30-second tv ads, etc. but never dig any deeper. So you have people who may be motivated to vote, but they believe Obama is a Muslim, who took the oath of office on a Koran, and never puts his hand over his heart when saying the Pledge of Allegiance. Oh and he’s an empty suit, too because he heard that somewhere. And that’s all they need to know to make up their minds.
There are too many people on the street talking today about how Palin is *more* experienced than Obama because she has executive experience and Obama has done nothing. They find the experience line of attack hypocritical coming from the Obama camp.
So those of us who spend way too much time thinking and reading about politics think there’s nothing to worry about because no one in his/her right mind would find Palin a credible selection.
What I’m trying to say is much depends on how the press frames this. If around the country, those LIVs, are getting all their information from local news like mine, then I think we have to work hard to counteract that bias. Just saying, is all.
The experience argument was not getting any traction for McCain — it didn’t work for Hillary either. I think the main problem with the experience argument is that you can’t point to a model of “pre-presidential experience” that really works.
What I think is happening is that they are going to go for the “elite” thing as their big smear hope. You can’t have 5 kids and be an elitist, you can’t be married to an oil driller and be an elitist, you can’t shoot moose and be an elitist, etc. And, as much as we might not like it, regardless of how many houses McCain has or how expensive his shoes are or how he married into mob money, he is not smart enough to appear to be an elitist.
So, they’ve backed up the truck and they’re going with the “joe six pack” plus the “anti-science religionist” factions for the win.
The experience argument was not getting any traction for McCain — it didn’t work for Hillary either. I think the main problem with the experience argument is that you can’t point to a model of “pre-presidential experience” that really works.
What I think is happening is that they are going to go for the “elite” thing as their big smear hope. You can’t have 5 kids and be an elitist, you can’t be married to an oil driller and be an elitist, you can’t shoot moose and be an elitist, etc. And, as much as we might not like it, regardless of how many houses McCain has or how expensive his shoes are or how he married into mob money, he is not smart enough to appear to be an elitist.
So, they’ve backed up the truck and they’re going with the “joe six pack” plus the “anti-science religionist” factions for the win.
Excellent title. And the Huckabee comparison raises a point that I’ve been thinking about. Huckabee resonated with Christian conservatives by suggesting that they carry all the water, but in the end, the party ends up blowing them off. However, because there is a strong notion of acting as God’s instrument, so that it is not the person, but God acting thru the person and putting Palin up there is as good as having Huckabee if you believe that. It is sad, because, as David Kuo pointed out in Tempting Fate, for the Bush admin, if McCain/Palin become a reality, she is going to be used. As much as I am embarassed for Palin, I’m embarassed for evangelical Christians more.
Excellent title. And the Huckabee comparison raises a point that I’ve been thinking about. Huckabee resonated with Christian conservatives by suggesting that they carry all the water, but in the end, the party ends up blowing them off. However, because there is a strong notion of acting as God’s instrument, so that it is not the person, but God acting thru the person and putting Palin up there is as good as having Huckabee if you believe that. It is sad, because, as David Kuo pointed out in Tempting Fate, for the Bush admin, if McCain/Palin become a reality, she is going to be used. As much as I am embarassed for Palin, I’m embarassed for evangelical Christians more.
I meant:
It is sad, because, as David Kuo pointed out in Tempting Fate (the lay of the land) for the Bush admin, if McCain/Palin become a reality, she is going to be used (in the same way).
I meant:
It is sad, because, as David Kuo pointed out in Tempting Fate (the lay of the land) for the Bush admin, if McCain/Palin become a reality, she is going to be used (in the same way).
Do we really want to take a chance on another “Heckuva job, Brownie”. The possibility, or not-at-all negligible probability, of a small-town mayor stepping into the presidency on an emergency basis to have to deal with the coming China and Russia Neocon Cold War, North Korea resuming its nuke program, Iran obtaining all of its centrifuges, Pakistan turning dangerously unstable, and two wars going on in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Do we really want to take a chance on another “Heckuva job, Brownie”. The possibility, or not-at-all negligible probability, of a small-town mayor stepping into the presidency on an emergency basis to have to deal with the coming China and Russia Neocon Cold War, North Korea resuming its nuke program, Iran obtaining all of its centrifuges, Pakistan turning dangerously unstable, and two wars going on in Iraq and Afghanistan?
I think you’re wrong here publius. I think you are really underestimating her. And I think you are underestimating how much this has fired up the right. They were mostly resigned to losing. Now they have new hope (and change!). The more I think about it the more I think that the choice was genius.
And Democrats beating on the “how can she run a country when she has 5 kids, one with special needs” meme just reinforces a certain perception with voters: Democrats believe that someone in that position is some kind of victim and should be relying on the government to take care of them and their children. There’s no way a woman in that position should actually be out there not only working but succeeding. Her story strikes a chord with me as my mom raised 4 kids (one with special needs) while working and going to school and eventually becoming successful. Her story is going to strike a chord with a lot of people. Obama and Biden claim a blue-collar background – but she is the real thing.
And I’ve only heard her give one speech, but she did very well. Everything I’ve read so far indicates that she is one sharp cookie. People assuming that Biden is going to mop the floor with her are getting a little ahead of themselves IMO.
Trooper-gate is going to play out like this:
The guy is a real *ss and a danger to her family. Anyone would do all they could to minimize that danger. Wouldn’t you go to extremes to protect your family? The right will turn the scandal into a freaking asset. You watch and see.
I think you’re wrong here publius. I think you are really underestimating her. And I think you are underestimating how much this has fired up the right. They were mostly resigned to losing. Now they have new hope (and change!). The more I think about it the more I think that the choice was genius.
And Democrats beating on the “how can she run a country when she has 5 kids, one with special needs” meme just reinforces a certain perception with voters: Democrats believe that someone in that position is some kind of victim and should be relying on the government to take care of them and their children. There’s no way a woman in that position should actually be out there not only working but succeeding. Her story strikes a chord with me as my mom raised 4 kids (one with special needs) while working and going to school and eventually becoming successful. Her story is going to strike a chord with a lot of people. Obama and Biden claim a blue-collar background – but she is the real thing.
And I’ve only heard her give one speech, but she did very well. Everything I’ve read so far indicates that she is one sharp cookie. People assuming that Biden is going to mop the floor with her are getting a little ahead of themselves IMO.
Trooper-gate is going to play out like this:
The guy is a real *ss and a danger to her family. Anyone would do all they could to minimize that danger. Wouldn’t you go to extremes to protect your family? The right will turn the scandal into a freaking asset. You watch and see.
Oh – and the Obama camps very first response amounted to (was spun as anyway) belittling both her accomplishments and small town America. A twofer!
Oh – and the Obama camps very first response amounted to (was spun as anyway) belittling both her accomplishments and small town America. A twofer!
Attacking Palin is dangerous and a distraction. The target should be McCain. In choosing Palin he has provided incontrovertible evidence (a) that all his previous attacks of Obama were insincere, and worse (b) that he is not taking the Presidency seriously.
Obama has taken care in selecting a running mate who could take over if needed, and who could provide him with additional experience and judgement. Obama put his country first. And McCain? McCain has chosen someone he met only once, and who has never before even formed a view on foreign and national security issues. McCain is being reckless and immature, and in his choice is showing that he is putting his country last.
Attacking Palin is dangerous and a distraction. The target should be McCain. In choosing Palin he has provided incontrovertible evidence (a) that all his previous attacks of Obama were insincere, and worse (b) that he is not taking the Presidency seriously.
Obama has taken care in selecting a running mate who could take over if needed, and who could provide him with additional experience and judgement. Obama put his country first. And McCain? McCain has chosen someone he met only once, and who has never before even formed a view on foreign and national security issues. McCain is being reckless and immature, and in his choice is showing that he is putting his country last.
More dissent on the right…
Frum (echoing the Obama campaign):
If it were your decision, and you were putting your country first, would you put an untested small-town mayor a heartbeat away from the presidency?
OTOH – elsewhere on the Corner, lots of anecdotal evidence of people being so jazzed by the pick that they are donating to the McCain campaign or volunteering for the very first time.
More dissent on the right…
Frum (echoing the Obama campaign):
If it were your decision, and you were putting your country first, would you put an untested small-town mayor a heartbeat away from the presidency?
OTOH – elsewhere on the Corner, lots of anecdotal evidence of people being so jazzed by the pick that they are donating to the McCain campaign or volunteering for the very first time.
“As much as I am embarassed for Palin, I’m embarassed for evangelical Christians more.”–LJ
I’ve felt that way for decades.
OCSteve is likely to be right about how this will play. Or anyway, Republicans will spin like mad to have it play that way, evangelical Christians will feel like martyrs (we/they always do), and much of the “liberal” media will feel like they have to pay serious attention to all this. Obama’s speech attacking Bush/McCain seems to have vanished.
But Democrats have a very long history of thinking that some Republican bozo can’t be elected. I vaguely recall the Carter people being happy that they were going to face that idiot Reagan. And then there was the selection of that idiot Quayle, and that idiot from Texas who got roughly half the popular vote in 2000 and probably more than half in 2004 (even if you believe one or both elections were stolen). Democratic partisans are going to have to stop thinking that the majority of Americans just couldn’t possibly think differently from them.
Which I say as someone who despises mainstream Democratic politicians from a leftward perspective, but it does give one some emotional distance when you don’t like anybody who runs.
Palin’s choice does make a mockery of the experience argument, though there’s a part of me that isn’t totally unhappy about that. Clinton and BIden and McCain have experience and they all favored the Iraq War. Of course Palin has none and she also favored it. Really, though, what makes people think you have to be knowledgeable or wise or experienced to serve 8 years in the White House?
“As much as I am embarassed for Palin, I’m embarassed for evangelical Christians more.”–LJ
I’ve felt that way for decades.
OCSteve is likely to be right about how this will play. Or anyway, Republicans will spin like mad to have it play that way, evangelical Christians will feel like martyrs (we/they always do), and much of the “liberal” media will feel like they have to pay serious attention to all this. Obama’s speech attacking Bush/McCain seems to have vanished.
But Democrats have a very long history of thinking that some Republican bozo can’t be elected. I vaguely recall the Carter people being happy that they were going to face that idiot Reagan. And then there was the selection of that idiot Quayle, and that idiot from Texas who got roughly half the popular vote in 2000 and probably more than half in 2004 (even if you believe one or both elections were stolen). Democratic partisans are going to have to stop thinking that the majority of Americans just couldn’t possibly think differently from them.
Which I say as someone who despises mainstream Democratic politicians from a leftward perspective, but it does give one some emotional distance when you don’t like anybody who runs.
Palin’s choice does make a mockery of the experience argument, though there’s a part of me that isn’t totally unhappy about that. Clinton and BIden and McCain have experience and they all favored the Iraq War. Of course Palin has none and she also favored it. Really, though, what makes people think you have to be knowledgeable or wise or experienced to serve 8 years in the White House?
“The simpler explanation is that conservatives/republicans don’t care about Palin’s inexperience because they don’t care that much about experience period.”
Sorta, but not quite: They value experience, but it’s only regarded as an asset in people who want to do the right thing to begin with; Experience and competence in people who are trying to do the wrong thing only makes the wrong thing getting done more certain. While somebody with their heart in the right place, even if they’re incompetent, is at least trying to do the right thing, and might get lucky and succeed.
“The simpler explanation is that conservatives/republicans don’t care about Palin’s inexperience because they don’t care that much about experience period.”
Sorta, but not quite: They value experience, but it’s only regarded as an asset in people who want to do the right thing to begin with; Experience and competence in people who are trying to do the wrong thing only makes the wrong thing getting done more certain. While somebody with their heart in the right place, even if they’re incompetent, is at least trying to do the right thing, and might get lucky and succeed.
Did anybody already mention that she has foreign policy experience because her state borders Russia? (Faux News) 😉
Did anybody already mention that she has foreign policy experience because her state borders Russia? (Faux News) 😉
Or anyway, Republicans will spin like mad to have it play that way, evangelical Christians will feel like martyrs (we/they always do), and much of the “liberal” media will feel like they have to pay serious attention to all this.
I think, looking at it now, it was very wise for Obama to go to Saddleback as well as floating the faith-based initiatives that he did earlier. iirc, a lot of folks felt that Obama’s talk of this was a betrayal when it happened, but now, if it gives him some traction with that the evangelical community, it will be important, because the Christian right is really the only active GOTV portion of the Republican coalition. Donald points out how Dems have always thought we had a sure thing and been shocked when it didn’t work, and I think that it is the organizational strength of the Christian Right that has made that the case. (Despite the fact that Carter was a much better Christian than Reagan ever could have been) It might be very hard to swallow if Obama and Biden start talking about their Christian beliefs, but I think it might be necessary.
Or anyway, Republicans will spin like mad to have it play that way, evangelical Christians will feel like martyrs (we/they always do), and much of the “liberal” media will feel like they have to pay serious attention to all this.
I think, looking at it now, it was very wise for Obama to go to Saddleback as well as floating the faith-based initiatives that he did earlier. iirc, a lot of folks felt that Obama’s talk of this was a betrayal when it happened, but now, if it gives him some traction with that the evangelical community, it will be important, because the Christian right is really the only active GOTV portion of the Republican coalition. Donald points out how Dems have always thought we had a sure thing and been shocked when it didn’t work, and I think that it is the organizational strength of the Christian Right that has made that the case. (Despite the fact that Carter was a much better Christian than Reagan ever could have been) It might be very hard to swallow if Obama and Biden start talking about their Christian beliefs, but I think it might be necessary.
Democrats should remember that….
1) Anyone can be elected to anything. Apparently manifest underqualification easily morphs into a low bar over which the candidate sails (see Bush in 2000). Democrats cannot count on the mere fact of Palin being her undoing.
2) That being said, the Democrats cannot let the fact that Palin might go over well with the public (and she might indeed) paralyze them into inaction. Instead they’ve got to take an active, though careful, role in defining her with the public. The one great advantage they have is that outside very hardcore wingnut circles, the public currently has no strong view of Sarah Palin. Democratic spokespeople need to be involved in actively shaping the emerging view. Though they need to be careful in doing so.
3) The focus must still be on McCain. The most effective criticisms of the Palin pick (from left and right) have all focused on what it says about McCain’s judgment. This is an excellent theme to pursue.
Maybe the model here is Admiral Stockdale: a POW (just like McCain) who the public essentially concluded was so ridiculously poorly suited for the Vice Presidency that he raised questions about Ross Perot’s seriousness.
At any rate, especially after Denver, I have a lot of faith in the Obama campaigns political judgment. Palin was a surprise pick, but she was on a lot of shortlists. I’m sure that the Obama oppo research team has a pretty good sense of how to play this.
Democrats should remember that….
1) Anyone can be elected to anything. Apparently manifest underqualification easily morphs into a low bar over which the candidate sails (see Bush in 2000). Democrats cannot count on the mere fact of Palin being her undoing.
2) That being said, the Democrats cannot let the fact that Palin might go over well with the public (and she might indeed) paralyze them into inaction. Instead they’ve got to take an active, though careful, role in defining her with the public. The one great advantage they have is that outside very hardcore wingnut circles, the public currently has no strong view of Sarah Palin. Democratic spokespeople need to be involved in actively shaping the emerging view. Though they need to be careful in doing so.
3) The focus must still be on McCain. The most effective criticisms of the Palin pick (from left and right) have all focused on what it says about McCain’s judgment. This is an excellent theme to pursue.
Maybe the model here is Admiral Stockdale: a POW (just like McCain) who the public essentially concluded was so ridiculously poorly suited for the Vice Presidency that he raised questions about Ross Perot’s seriousness.
At any rate, especially after Denver, I have a lot of faith in the Obama campaigns political judgment. Palin was a surprise pick, but she was on a lot of shortlists. I’m sure that the Obama oppo research team has a pretty good sense of how to play this.
“Curiously though, the base is all in.”
All in?
It is shocking: The base seems to like this pick more than McCain himself.
I know this is condescending and, sorry, OCSteve, but these people really do drink the same Kool-Aid.
We’ve listened for weeks as the right railed about Barack Obama’s inexperience and their top of the ticket picks the most inexperienced choice he could.
It seems to me we are fighting over the last 10 percent of the electorate and — whether they are low-information or not — I’ve got to believe they can see right through this Campaign First move.
“Curiously though, the base is all in.”
All in?
It is shocking: The base seems to like this pick more than McCain himself.
I know this is condescending and, sorry, OCSteve, but these people really do drink the same Kool-Aid.
We’ve listened for weeks as the right railed about Barack Obama’s inexperience and their top of the ticket picks the most inexperienced choice he could.
It seems to me we are fighting over the last 10 percent of the electorate and — whether they are low-information or not — I’ve got to believe they can see right through this Campaign First move.
publius, your initial premise is wrong in that you expressed surprise because of the lack of foreign olicy knowledge, etc.
Your assumption is based upon the base being all concerned with national security. Actually, if that was the case the Republicans would have been kicked out in 2002 and 2004. The base really doesn’t care about national security, it is all about social “values” and there is where Palin comes off strong.
OCSteve is absoultely right in that there should be no effort to paint her as a bad mom, or anything like that. Some people will come to that conclusion, but many more will see it as an attempt to say women shuld stay home, which is hardly a progressive thought and actually is more a philospophy of the right.
And forget experience as an arguement against her. The point that should be brought forth, however is knowledge of the world and how it works, knowledge of the complexities of the middle east and eastern Europe and Asia.
The some subtle emphasis on do you really want her to be a heartbeat away type of stuff.
But for the most part, make McCain the focus. He obviously is being unserious about this whole thing. I actually would have been disappointed if Obama had picked a Kaine or a Chet Edwards. Other than Biden, the only pick that would have shown seriousness would have been a Dodd or Schweitzer.
publius, your initial premise is wrong in that you expressed surprise because of the lack of foreign olicy knowledge, etc.
Your assumption is based upon the base being all concerned with national security. Actually, if that was the case the Republicans would have been kicked out in 2002 and 2004. The base really doesn’t care about national security, it is all about social “values” and there is where Palin comes off strong.
OCSteve is absoultely right in that there should be no effort to paint her as a bad mom, or anything like that. Some people will come to that conclusion, but many more will see it as an attempt to say women shuld stay home, which is hardly a progressive thought and actually is more a philospophy of the right.
And forget experience as an arguement against her. The point that should be brought forth, however is knowledge of the world and how it works, knowledge of the complexities of the middle east and eastern Europe and Asia.
The some subtle emphasis on do you really want her to be a heartbeat away type of stuff.
But for the most part, make McCain the focus. He obviously is being unserious about this whole thing. I actually would have been disappointed if Obama had picked a Kaine or a Chet Edwards. Other than Biden, the only pick that would have shown seriousness would have been a Dodd or Schweitzer.
Zoe from Pittsburgh: “Republican strategist Kellyanne Conway just said ‘This is really important, Larry. The air has been thick with the word sexism and I’d be careful if I were the other side not to say too much nasty about Sarah Palin.’
“There. Barely took 12 hours for them to say that any criticism of Palin is sexist.
I need a stiff drink.”
I watched the Larry King replay, too, and felt the same way.
I hope this doesn’t offend our female contributors but I always think of the c— word anytime I have ever heard Kellyanne Conway. There. I said it. I wouldn’t be honest if I pretended otherwise.
For whatever reason, I’ve always been able to take Ann Coulter’s right-wing zealotry a lot better.
More from Zoe: “Begala has an interesting talking point– he met her ONCE before choosing her as his VP. How reckless is that? She’s not even someone that McCain knows well, if really at all.”
Thought the same thing. About time Begala brought something to the table.
Using that talking point, I’d address McCain’s decision as impulsive.
Impulsive.
Hot-headed.
Forgetful.
This man could be prez.
Zoe from Pittsburgh: “Republican strategist Kellyanne Conway just said ‘This is really important, Larry. The air has been thick with the word sexism and I’d be careful if I were the other side not to say too much nasty about Sarah Palin.’
“There. Barely took 12 hours for them to say that any criticism of Palin is sexist.
I need a stiff drink.”
I watched the Larry King replay, too, and felt the same way.
I hope this doesn’t offend our female contributors but I always think of the c— word anytime I have ever heard Kellyanne Conway. There. I said it. I wouldn’t be honest if I pretended otherwise.
For whatever reason, I’ve always been able to take Ann Coulter’s right-wing zealotry a lot better.
More from Zoe: “Begala has an interesting talking point– he met her ONCE before choosing her as his VP. How reckless is that? She’s not even someone that McCain knows well, if really at all.”
Thought the same thing. About time Begala brought something to the table.
Using that talking point, I’d address McCain’s decision as impulsive.
Impulsive.
Hot-headed.
Forgetful.
This man could be prez.
This is the time to go after McCain’s perceived strengths. Just imagine a real national security crisis, such as the Cuban missile crisis. Who would you trust – the level headed Obama working together with the experienced Joe Biden, or the reckless McCain assisted by Sarah Palin? If this argument can be made McCain’s remaining advantages over Obama will be gone, and the election will be effectively over.
This is the time to go after McCain’s perceived strengths. Just imagine a real national security crisis, such as the Cuban missile crisis. Who would you trust – the level headed Obama working together with the experienced Joe Biden, or the reckless McCain assisted by Sarah Palin? If this argument can be made McCain’s remaining advantages over Obama will be gone, and the election will be effectively over.
There are publicly-funded programs to assist Down Syndrome children and families. Will the Palins take advantage of them? Or are these programs considered pork-barrel spending needing to be cut? (Or both?) I’d love to nail down McCain’s and Palin’s position on that.
Then, on the drilling front, am I correct in thinking that every citizen of Alaska benefits financially* from every barrel pumped out of the ground? And here she is promoting more drilling. What a surprise. Smells like conflict of interest to me.
*In a way that we upstate New Yorkers were never compensated when they took our trees and our bluestone, and continue to take our water. Not that I’m bitter or anything.
There are publicly-funded programs to assist Down Syndrome children and families. Will the Palins take advantage of them? Or are these programs considered pork-barrel spending needing to be cut? (Or both?) I’d love to nail down McCain’s and Palin’s position on that.
Then, on the drilling front, am I correct in thinking that every citizen of Alaska benefits financially* from every barrel pumped out of the ground? And here she is promoting more drilling. What a surprise. Smells like conflict of interest to me.
*In a way that we upstate New Yorkers were never compensated when they took our trees and our bluestone, and continue to take our water. Not that I’m bitter or anything.
“*In a way that we upstate New Yorkers were never compensated when they took our trees and our bluestone,”
You know, I’m pretty darned certain that the New Yorkers who actually owned the land those resources were under got compensated, the way it usually happens in states where the federal government hasn’t confiscated 90% of the landmass. I also suspect that Alaskans would trade getting most of their state back for that compensation, quite gladly.
“*In a way that we upstate New Yorkers were never compensated when they took our trees and our bluestone,”
You know, I’m pretty darned certain that the New Yorkers who actually owned the land those resources were under got compensated, the way it usually happens in states where the federal government hasn’t confiscated 90% of the landmass. I also suspect that Alaskans would trade getting most of their state back for that compensation, quite gladly.
The choice proves–if more proof were needed— that McCain is a
‘shoot first ask questions later’ person; a loose cannon, not a maverick. Regardless of her strengths and skills— if she’s got any— Gov. Palin is likely to prove very quickly that she’s not ready for the major league. And, someone (Cindy?) should tell John not to keep glancing at Palin’s ass when she’s speaking. It doesn’t make a good impression on TV.
The choice proves–if more proof were needed— that McCain is a
‘shoot first ask questions later’ person; a loose cannon, not a maverick. Regardless of her strengths and skills— if she’s got any— Gov. Palin is likely to prove very quickly that she’s not ready for the major league. And, someone (Cindy?) should tell John not to keep glancing at Palin’s ass when she’s speaking. It doesn’t make a good impression on TV.
“…the way it usually happens in states where the federal government hasn’t confiscated 90% of the landmass.”
Who did they “confiscate” it from, Brett?
How does one achieve a right to own land, exactly, anyway, in your view, prior to it being owned by someone in the first place?
“…the way it usually happens in states where the federal government hasn’t confiscated 90% of the landmass.”
Who did they “confiscate” it from, Brett?
How does one achieve a right to own land, exactly, anyway, in your view, prior to it being owned by someone in the first place?
If I may coin a phrase here, I think this is Rumsfeld politics: You knock the other guy off the news with the nominee you have, not the nominee you’d like to have.
If I may coin a phrase here, I think this is Rumsfeld politics: You knock the other guy off the news with the nominee you have, not the nominee you’d like to have.
Palin’s kids don’t belong in the conversation, in my opinion.
I can remem ber a whole bunch of crowng about how McCain’s ampaign wasw over, dead, gone, imploded etc a couple weeks back.
i can’t remember what the issue was. And it isn’t over.
palin won’t kill McCain’s campaign. The assumptin that she will is rooted in the assumption that voters are rational and the media is fair.
The douvle standard is still a huge force in our socisty. Democrats have to have expericne to be respected: R’s don’t. Democratic women can ve dismissed and sneered agt and must not claim sexism: r women, no matter how loony are above criticism from sexist pigs who criticize them.
McCian wll gfet most of the the fundamentalist and evangelical vores, most of the hater, selfish, mean, scaredycagt votest and the racisst votes.
that’s a pretty big coalition. And none of those people, who vote from the worst of thier characters or from the absence of respect for facts, are going to give a hoot if Sarah Palin is qualified or not.
Palin’s kids don’t belong in the conversation, in my opinion.
I can remem ber a whole bunch of crowng about how McCain’s ampaign wasw over, dead, gone, imploded etc a couple weeks back.
i can’t remember what the issue was. And it isn’t over.
palin won’t kill McCain’s campaign. The assumptin that she will is rooted in the assumption that voters are rational and the media is fair.
The douvle standard is still a huge force in our socisty. Democrats have to have expericne to be respected: R’s don’t. Democratic women can ve dismissed and sneered agt and must not claim sexism: r women, no matter how loony are above criticism from sexist pigs who criticize them.
McCian wll gfet most of the the fundamentalist and evangelical vores, most of the hater, selfish, mean, scaredycagt votest and the racisst votes.
that’s a pretty big coalition. And none of those people, who vote from the worst of thier characters or from the absence of respect for facts, are going to give a hoot if Sarah Palin is qualified or not.
So the sum total of McCain’s personal contact with Palin is that he met her at the National Governor’s Association meeting, had a phone conversation with her Sunday, and then met her on Thursday to offer her the job. This seems unforgivably reckless to me. Sure, pick a relatively unknown person if you’re convinced that’s the best choice — but it ought to take some serious convincing, and he’s had months and months and months to make this decision.
Actually, this goes beyond reckless and impulsive; it feels cavalier. It has the same feel of cocky, “don’t bother me with facts, I know what I’m doing” leadership as W.
All hail McCain. W2.
So the sum total of McCain’s personal contact with Palin is that he met her at the National Governor’s Association meeting, had a phone conversation with her Sunday, and then met her on Thursday to offer her the job. This seems unforgivably reckless to me. Sure, pick a relatively unknown person if you’re convinced that’s the best choice — but it ought to take some serious convincing, and he’s had months and months and months to make this decision.
Actually, this goes beyond reckless and impulsive; it feels cavalier. It has the same feel of cocky, “don’t bother me with facts, I know what I’m doing” leadership as W.
All hail McCain. W2.
Uh, Brett, the federal government did not confiscate Alaska, they purchased it. Are the citizens willing to give up their free money and buy it themselves? Can you give us a link to this mass movement?
And of course it is not just the landowners in Alaska that get compensated, but everyone (who has lived there more than a year).
And in the case of the water, no they were not adequately compensated for losing their homes and towns to the reservoir. Eminent domain, you know.
Uh, Brett, the federal government did not confiscate Alaska, they purchased it. Are the citizens willing to give up their free money and buy it themselves? Can you give us a link to this mass movement?
And of course it is not just the landowners in Alaska that get compensated, but everyone (who has lived there more than a year).
And in the case of the water, no they were not adequately compensated for losing their homes and towns to the reservoir. Eminent domain, you know.
What’s most interesting is that all the hoohah — both pro and con — about Sarah Palin is based on almost NO INFORMATION about her views on the critical economic and foreign-policy issues facing the country.
It reinforces the image of McCain that scares me most: an impulsive personality who acts first (generally choosing the most belligerent option available) and thinks later. The fact that he’s not even met with Palin more than a couple of times illustrates how little concern he has about the long-term and/or unintended consequences of his actions.
When voters find out more about Palin, they well may conclude that she’s a more level-headed person than McCain. But do people really vote for VP?
Apparently, the GOP plans to use Palin’s sex as a get-out-jail-free card tn answer any criticisms of her (the same way McCain uses his POW status). And it will be hard for Dems to argue against it, since Hillary Clinton provided the perfect setup when she gave so much time and importance to breaking a glass ceiling for women rather than to being the person with the right temperament and policies for the job.
I’m extremely depressed by the lack of seriousness shown by this pick (and the brainless reaction to it by the pundopes).
What’s most interesting is that all the hoohah — both pro and con — about Sarah Palin is based on almost NO INFORMATION about her views on the critical economic and foreign-policy issues facing the country.
It reinforces the image of McCain that scares me most: an impulsive personality who acts first (generally choosing the most belligerent option available) and thinks later. The fact that he’s not even met with Palin more than a couple of times illustrates how little concern he has about the long-term and/or unintended consequences of his actions.
When voters find out more about Palin, they well may conclude that she’s a more level-headed person than McCain. But do people really vote for VP?
Apparently, the GOP plans to use Palin’s sex as a get-out-jail-free card tn answer any criticisms of her (the same way McCain uses his POW status). And it will be hard for Dems to argue against it, since Hillary Clinton provided the perfect setup when she gave so much time and importance to breaking a glass ceiling for women rather than to being the person with the right temperament and policies for the job.
I’m extremely depressed by the lack of seriousness shown by this pick (and the brainless reaction to it by the pundopes).
It certainly appears that thus far much of the press (the New York Times, say) isn’t going after the Trooper story. It really is a scary story, though: she demands her ex-brother in law be fired from the state troopers, she smears him with her sister’s allegations (bad ones if true, mind, but unsubstantiated, and divorcing couples aren’t the most reliable witnesses), she then fires the head of the state troopers because he won’t follow her orders over doing his job, she then appoints an officially reprimanded sexual harrasser to replace him, and he lasts two weeks in the job. And she lies about firing the head of the state troopers, and lies about when she knew about the sexual harrassment, and documents come out exposing both lies. It’s like a soap-opera version of the Bush administration. But, as we learned for example from Wayne Dumond, IOKIYAR.
It certainly appears that thus far much of the press (the New York Times, say) isn’t going after the Trooper story. It really is a scary story, though: she demands her ex-brother in law be fired from the state troopers, she smears him with her sister’s allegations (bad ones if true, mind, but unsubstantiated, and divorcing couples aren’t the most reliable witnesses), she then fires the head of the state troopers because he won’t follow her orders over doing his job, she then appoints an officially reprimanded sexual harrasser to replace him, and he lasts two weeks in the job. And she lies about firing the head of the state troopers, and lies about when she knew about the sexual harrassment, and documents come out exposing both lies. It’s like a soap-opera version of the Bush administration. But, as we learned for example from Wayne Dumond, IOKIYAR.
What’s most interesting is that all the hoohah — both pro and con — about Sarah Palin is based on almost NO INFORMATION about her views on the critical economic and foreign-policy issues facing the country.
It reinforces the image of McCain that scares me most: an impulsive personality who acts first (generally choosing the most belligerent option available) and thinks later. The fact that he’s not even met with Palin more than a couple of times illustrates how little concern he has about the long-term and/or unintended consequences of his actions.
When voters find out more about Palin, they well may conclude that she’s a more level-headed person than McCain. But do people really vote for VP?
Apparently, the GOP plans to use Palin’s sex as a get-out-jail-free card tn answer any criticisms of her (the same way McCain uses his POW status). And it will be hard for Dems to argue against it, since Hillary Clinton provided the perfect setup when she gave so much time and importance to breaking a glass ceiling for women rather than to being the person with the right temperament and policies for the job.
I’m extremely depressed by the lack of seriousness shown by this pick (and the brainless reaction to it by the pundopes).
What’s most interesting is that all the hoohah — both pro and con — about Sarah Palin is based on almost NO INFORMATION about her views on the critical economic and foreign-policy issues facing the country.
It reinforces the image of McCain that scares me most: an impulsive personality who acts first (generally choosing the most belligerent option available) and thinks later. The fact that he’s not even met with Palin more than a couple of times illustrates how little concern he has about the long-term and/or unintended consequences of his actions.
When voters find out more about Palin, they well may conclude that she’s a more level-headed person than McCain. But do people really vote for VP?
Apparently, the GOP plans to use Palin’s sex as a get-out-jail-free card tn answer any criticisms of her (the same way McCain uses his POW status). And it will be hard for Dems to argue against it, since Hillary Clinton provided the perfect setup when she gave so much time and importance to breaking a glass ceiling for women rather than to being the person with the right temperament and policies for the job.
I’m extremely depressed by the lack of seriousness shown by this pick (and the brainless reaction to it by the pundopes).
Who knows what else will come up [about Palin]?
Probably not too much. My impression is that she is popular and pretty clean.
More broadly, who knows how she’ll answer the one million substantive policy questions she’ll get in the days ahead?
This is more problematic for her. But we must remember that people who get all their news from tv will grade her on an extreme curve, like they did with Bush. If reporters are ‘tough’ on her, those people – who hate the press anyway – will feel sympathetic to her. TV takes everything out of context and makes it all Personal. As you all may remember, Bush got a LOT of protection and sympathy for years preciesely because he was so clueless.
Who knows what else will come up [about Palin]?
Probably not too much. My impression is that she is popular and pretty clean.
More broadly, who knows how she’ll answer the one million substantive policy questions she’ll get in the days ahead?
This is more problematic for her. But we must remember that people who get all their news from tv will grade her on an extreme curve, like they did with Bush. If reporters are ‘tough’ on her, those people – who hate the press anyway – will feel sympathetic to her. TV takes everything out of context and makes it all Personal. As you all may remember, Bush got a LOT of protection and sympathy for years preciesely because he was so clueless.
The Obama campaign should let the media go after Palin on the issues. What Obama should, IMHO, do is at every opportunity remind people why he chose Bide. He said all along that the number one criteria is that that person should be able to assume the mantle of the Presidency from day one.
He can talk about how, in this uncertain world, we can never be assured of what may ahppen and he loves the country too mucj to pick a running mate that would need time to l”learn” the ropes and develop a knowledge base of both the world and the cuntr. He need never mention McCain or Palin.
The Obama campaign should let the media go after Palin on the issues. What Obama should, IMHO, do is at every opportunity remind people why he chose Bide. He said all along that the number one criteria is that that person should be able to assume the mantle of the Presidency from day one.
He can talk about how, in this uncertain world, we can never be assured of what may ahppen and he loves the country too mucj to pick a running mate that would need time to l”learn” the ropes and develop a knowledge base of both the world and the cuntr. He need never mention McCain or Palin.
The more I think about this the more I think the best option would be just to ignore her except as a way to parry any “Obama has no experience” attacks. It seems the Obama campaign has sort of taken this approach in its first ad.
The more I think about this the more I think the best option would be just to ignore her except as a way to parry any “Obama has no experience” attacks. It seems the Obama campaign has sort of taken this approach in its first ad.
What Obama should, IMHO, do is at every opportunity remind people why he chose Bide. He said all along that the number one criteria is that that person should be able to assume the mantle of the Presidency from day one.
yes. yes. yes.
What Obama should, IMHO, do is at every opportunity remind people why he chose Bide. He said all along that the number one criteria is that that person should be able to assume the mantle of the Presidency from day one.
yes. yes. yes.
“Moreover, some reporter (leftie or rightie, I don’t know) will pose this question: “Governor, do you plan to have more children?””
I eagerly await Jesurgislac’s response to this one.
“Moreover, some reporter (leftie or rightie, I don’t know) will pose this question: “Governor, do you plan to have more children?””
I eagerly await Jesurgislac’s response to this one.
Picking her exhibits the McCain isn’t taking the *job* of Vice-President seriously. He is using it politically.
That is crappy. Which is not the same as “it won’t work”.
In any other time I would have felt a little bit of schadenfreude at how much racism was being exposed in the Democratic Party earlier, and how much sexism is being exposed already in the responses to Palin (if you think the charge of sexism in the responses is just Republican spin you are severely deluding yourself).
But the chance of getting McCain out of that squelches any feeling of schadenfreude I might normally have.
Instead I’m just sad.
Picking her exhibits the McCain isn’t taking the *job* of Vice-President seriously. He is using it politically.
That is crappy. Which is not the same as “it won’t work”.
In any other time I would have felt a little bit of schadenfreude at how much racism was being exposed in the Democratic Party earlier, and how much sexism is being exposed already in the responses to Palin (if you think the charge of sexism in the responses is just Republican spin you are severely deluding yourself).
But the chance of getting McCain out of that squelches any feeling of schadenfreude I might normally have.
Instead I’m just sad.
The current skirmish on Sarah Palin’s Wikipedia article is about photos. So many photos of her with troops on her one visit to Kuwait had been packed in that the article made her look like a military leader. It’s being toned down to a more proportionate level now.
The current skirmish on Sarah Palin’s Wikipedia article is about photos. So many photos of her with troops on her one visit to Kuwait had been packed in that the article made her look like a military leader. It’s being toned down to a more proportionate level now.
Uh, Bedtime, try substituting a few other groups and comparable slurs in there and see how it sounds.
Uh, Bedtime, try substituting a few other groups and comparable slurs in there and see how it sounds.
Here is the local newspaper’s account(s) of the event. It made the front page.
Does anyone know if the stylized flag pin she’s wearing has any special significance?
Here is the local newspaper’s account(s) of the event. It made the front page.
Does anyone know if the stylized flag pin she’s wearing has any special significance?
Warren Terra: “It’s like a soap-opera version of the Bush administration.”
Just what we needed.
Isn’t America tired of this bullshit?
johnnybutter: “My impression is that she is popular and pretty clean.”
First time I can remember disagreeing with you, jb.
Troopergate may be nothing — or it may be explosive. How can we possibly know?
Guliani was poupular. Huckabee was popular. I’m just not sure how you measure the popularity of an Alaskan governor.
Seems to me we have another candidate with the Saddleback stamp of approval and that’s about it, for now.
Warren Terra: “It’s like a soap-opera version of the Bush administration.”
Just what we needed.
Isn’t America tired of this bullshit?
johnnybutter: “My impression is that she is popular and pretty clean.”
First time I can remember disagreeing with you, jb.
Troopergate may be nothing — or it may be explosive. How can we possibly know?
Guliani was poupular. Huckabee was popular. I’m just not sure how you measure the popularity of an Alaskan governor.
Seems to me we have another candidate with the Saddleback stamp of approval and that’s about it, for now.
Yeah, I know, KC — this woman brings out the worst me.
Yeah, I know, KC — this woman brings out the worst me.
Apparently, the GOP plans to use Palin’s sex as a get-out-jail-free card tn answer any criticisms of her (the same way McCain uses his POW status)
Of course they will: the GOP of 2008 is a party looking at the possibility of an electoral debacle, and subsequent years of marginalization: they’re desperate, and will game any and every factor they can – they have to.
And of course, claims of “victimization” always play well out in Jesusland: with Sarah Palin, the Repubs get a twofer: they can whine (or bluster) about her being “victimized” on both religious and sexist “grounds”!
Personally, I’m not sure it will work out as they are expecting: Obama and the Dems have made an enormous effort to make sure that this election is all about issues and policy: the GOP’s attempt to shift the focus onto intangibles (like “values” or whatever) may or may not work. And if it doesn’t: it’s years in the wilderness for the Republicans (an area where Gov. Palin does have experience!)
Apparently, the GOP plans to use Palin’s sex as a get-out-jail-free card tn answer any criticisms of her (the same way McCain uses his POW status)
Of course they will: the GOP of 2008 is a party looking at the possibility of an electoral debacle, and subsequent years of marginalization: they’re desperate, and will game any and every factor they can – they have to.
And of course, claims of “victimization” always play well out in Jesusland: with Sarah Palin, the Repubs get a twofer: they can whine (or bluster) about her being “victimized” on both religious and sexist “grounds”!
Personally, I’m not sure it will work out as they are expecting: Obama and the Dems have made an enormous effort to make sure that this election is all about issues and policy: the GOP’s attempt to shift the focus onto intangibles (like “values” or whatever) may or may not work. And if it doesn’t: it’s years in the wilderness for the Republicans (an area where Gov. Palin does have experience!)
There’s something here that virtually ALL conventional bloggers and commentators have missed, but I found it on a blog I’ll bet none of you have ever heard of:
“By another act of destiny, the news cycle was abruptly taken away, freezing the moment forever without the normal second day destruction.”
Just hang in there. Everything is working perfectly for the election of Barack Obama.
There’s something here that virtually ALL conventional bloggers and commentators have missed, but I found it on a blog I’ll bet none of you have ever heard of:
“By another act of destiny, the news cycle was abruptly taken away, freezing the moment forever without the normal second day destruction.”
Just hang in there. Everything is working perfectly for the election of Barack Obama.
I think that Ben Alpers is correct when he says Palin’s contribution to the GOP ticket will be “Drilling our way to energy independence and cheap oil”.
I watched Maria Bartiromo do a long interview with Palin, in which Palin took every question as an opportunity to make her talking points:
1. Alaska stands ready to produce energy
2. Alaskans love them some big oil companies and know how to manage the “relationship” so that the money comes in but the environmental values are preserved.
3. Palin has great access to the oil companies, and they get along fine.
4. It’s just irrational not to exploit Alaska’s energy resources to the hilt; environmental opposition is inexplicable.
5. America needs energy production.
6. Did I mention how much I and Alaska love big oil?
I think that Ben Alpers is correct when he says Palin’s contribution to the GOP ticket will be “Drilling our way to energy independence and cheap oil”.
I watched Maria Bartiromo do a long interview with Palin, in which Palin took every question as an opportunity to make her talking points:
1. Alaska stands ready to produce energy
2. Alaskans love them some big oil companies and know how to manage the “relationship” so that the money comes in but the environmental values are preserved.
3. Palin has great access to the oil companies, and they get along fine.
4. It’s just irrational not to exploit Alaska’s energy resources to the hilt; environmental opposition is inexplicable.
5. America needs energy production.
6. Did I mention how much I and Alaska love big oil?
I don’t know, but my mother said it called attention to the fact that McCain wasn’t wearing a flag pin, and she wondered why no one was mentioning that.
I don’t know, but my mother said it called attention to the fact that McCain wasn’t wearing a flag pin, and she wondered why no one was mentioning that.
Whatever else she does for John McCain, she just lost him VA, and possibly NC. National security males will come to see Obama and Joe as the more solid choice. Game over. Now I can relax until January.
Whatever else she does for John McCain, she just lost him VA, and possibly NC. National security males will come to see Obama and Joe as the more solid choice. Game over. Now I can relax until January.
“I hope this doesn’t offend our female contributors but I always think of the c— word anytime ”
I’m not a female contributor, but it offends me.
“I hope this doesn’t offend our female contributors but I always think of the c— word anytime ”
I’m not a female contributor, but it offends me.
Btb–
On the c-word, you ought to work on just clearing that thing out of your head altogether, just on selfish grounds alone. If you’re thinking words like that, you never know when it might pop out.
Btb–
On the c-word, you ought to work on just clearing that thing out of your head altogether, just on selfish grounds alone. If you’re thinking words like that, you never know when it might pop out.
The first poll results on her are encouraging – looks like women are less impressed than men.
Surely it’s not good for the Republican convention that they are going to be consumed by debate over her and the campaign’s message, because the old message is surely not going to work anymore.
The McCain camp seems to feel that any publicity is good publicity, but I doubt it…
The first poll results on her are encouraging – looks like women are less impressed than men.
Surely it’s not good for the Republican convention that they are going to be consumed by debate over her and the campaign’s message, because the old message is surely not going to work anymore.
The McCain camp seems to feel that any publicity is good publicity, but I doubt it…
Good advice, Donald.
I should have used more discretion and need to find a better way to vent my overall frustration about life right now.
Good advice, Donald.
I should have used more discretion and need to find a better way to vent my overall frustration about life right now.
Moreover, some reporter (leftie or rightie, I don’t know) will pose this question: “Governor, do you plan to have more children?”
And I’m pretty sure I know what the answer will be. She’s leaving it up to God. If God chooses to bless her with another child, then she and her husband will be happy to accept that blessing. If God doesn’t give them another child, they still have the five wonderful children God already gave them.
Moreover, some reporter (leftie or rightie, I don’t know) will pose this question: “Governor, do you plan to have more children?”
And I’m pretty sure I know what the answer will be. She’s leaving it up to God. If God chooses to bless her with another child, then she and her husband will be happy to accept that blessing. If God doesn’t give them another child, they still have the five wonderful children God already gave them.
Trooper-gate is going to play out like this:
The guy is a real *ss and a danger to her family. Anyone would do all they could to minimize that danger. Wouldn’t you go to extremes to protect your family? The right will turn the scandal into a freaking asset. You watch and see.
You’re completely missing the point. Even if she she comes out of it ok, every single minute that the news story is about Troopergate is a minute taken away from what the McCain campaign wants to talk about. This is the *total opposite* of what a VP candidate should do
She makes it ok to talk about McCain’s biggest liability – his age. She disarms the only effective (if maybe not game-winning) attack his campaign had – experience. She may even tip National Security voters to the Obama camp. What’s more, she does nothing whatsoever to change the strategy the democrats unveiled this past week: attack the policies not the man (or woman).
How is a VP choice that demands a total change of strategy on the eve of the convention, while confirming to the other side that theirs is the correct strategy, a good VP choice? How is a vp choice that takes discussion away from the head of the ticket a good vp choice?
She’ll help with the values base, but they can’t win it this time. She’ll get some more women, but I just cannot see her winning the battle for women against the Democratic Party when she is an example of blatant tokenism and is anathema to the values of HIlary Clinton.
Trooper-gate is going to play out like this:
The guy is a real *ss and a danger to her family. Anyone would do all they could to minimize that danger. Wouldn’t you go to extremes to protect your family? The right will turn the scandal into a freaking asset. You watch and see.
You’re completely missing the point. Even if she she comes out of it ok, every single minute that the news story is about Troopergate is a minute taken away from what the McCain campaign wants to talk about. This is the *total opposite* of what a VP candidate should do
She makes it ok to talk about McCain’s biggest liability – his age. She disarms the only effective (if maybe not game-winning) attack his campaign had – experience. She may even tip National Security voters to the Obama camp. What’s more, she does nothing whatsoever to change the strategy the democrats unveiled this past week: attack the policies not the man (or woman).
How is a VP choice that demands a total change of strategy on the eve of the convention, while confirming to the other side that theirs is the correct strategy, a good VP choice? How is a vp choice that takes discussion away from the head of the ticket a good vp choice?
She’ll help with the values base, but they can’t win it this time. She’ll get some more women, but I just cannot see her winning the battle for women against the Democratic Party when she is an example of blatant tokenism and is anathema to the values of HIlary Clinton.
You think the sexism thing is going to work? Wait’ll you see – the media or someone will go over the line, and the Dems will go out of their way to defend her. They’ll look like the good guys, while she’ll just be what she is: a sympathetic but unqualified candidate.
You think the sexism thing is going to work? Wait’ll you see – the media or someone will go over the line, and the Dems will go out of their way to defend her. They’ll look like the good guys, while she’ll just be what she is: a sympathetic but unqualified candidate.
OCSteve, you’re doing a benefit analysis.
Sure, she’s jazzing the base. She also believes in outlawing abortion in cases of rape, and that’s not going to jazz many others. I’ve spoken to three women, all housewives, all between 35 and 45, and all who had contempt for Obama (one was even under the impression he had done lewd things with a man in a limo back in the late 80s), and all three reacted immediately to my questions about Palin pointing out how selfish it was for her to run as VP given that she has 5 kids and an infant with Down’s Syndrome. This criticism isn’t going to come from Democrats or the MSM. It’s going to come from the target demographic. It’s the most salient feature of the candidate from their point of view. The impression is going to be that she doesn’t take her responsibilities as a mother seriously.
The nutjobs at NRO are really thrilled that she pronounces it “nuk-u-lar” and EYE-RACK. These are really no longer people to be taken seriously in the least. I really don’t care what Limbaugh or the NRO or RedState thinks, and neither should any of this. I think the mistake the anti-Bush crowd has made has been to assume that these types were the influence-makers. These elections have been won and lost in the middle, not on the fringe.
Wonder what Buckley would have thought of his own mag’s abuse of English.
OCSteve, you’re doing a benefit analysis.
Sure, she’s jazzing the base. She also believes in outlawing abortion in cases of rape, and that’s not going to jazz many others. I’ve spoken to three women, all housewives, all between 35 and 45, and all who had contempt for Obama (one was even under the impression he had done lewd things with a man in a limo back in the late 80s), and all three reacted immediately to my questions about Palin pointing out how selfish it was for her to run as VP given that she has 5 kids and an infant with Down’s Syndrome. This criticism isn’t going to come from Democrats or the MSM. It’s going to come from the target demographic. It’s the most salient feature of the candidate from their point of view. The impression is going to be that she doesn’t take her responsibilities as a mother seriously.
The nutjobs at NRO are really thrilled that she pronounces it “nuk-u-lar” and EYE-RACK. These are really no longer people to be taken seriously in the least. I really don’t care what Limbaugh or the NRO or RedState thinks, and neither should any of this. I think the mistake the anti-Bush crowd has made has been to assume that these types were the influence-makers. These elections have been won and lost in the middle, not on the fringe.
Wonder what Buckley would have thought of his own mag’s abuse of English.
From today’s Washington Post editorial:
“Not long ago, no less a Republican strategist than Karl Rove belittled Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine as a potential running mate for Barack Obama, noting that picking him would appear ‘intensely political’ because Mr. Kaine’s experience consisted of only three years as governor preceded by the mayoralty of Richmond, which Mr. Rove called ‘not a big town.’
“Using Mr. Rove’s criteria, Ms. Palin would not fare well. Her executive experience consists of less than two years as governor of her sparsely populated state, plus six years as mayor of Wasilla (pop. 8,471).
“Absorbed in Alaska’s unique energy and natural resource issues, she has barely been heard from in the broader national debates over economic policy and health care.
“Above all, she has no record on foreign policy and national security — including terrorism, which Mr. McCain posits as the top challenge facing America and the world.”
Rove, Conway and the right-wing machine would have delighted in bashing Kaine’s inexperience.
From today’s Washington Post editorial:
“Not long ago, no less a Republican strategist than Karl Rove belittled Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine as a potential running mate for Barack Obama, noting that picking him would appear ‘intensely political’ because Mr. Kaine’s experience consisted of only three years as governor preceded by the mayoralty of Richmond, which Mr. Rove called ‘not a big town.’
“Using Mr. Rove’s criteria, Ms. Palin would not fare well. Her executive experience consists of less than two years as governor of her sparsely populated state, plus six years as mayor of Wasilla (pop. 8,471).
“Absorbed in Alaska’s unique energy and natural resource issues, she has barely been heard from in the broader national debates over economic policy and health care.
“Above all, she has no record on foreign policy and national security — including terrorism, which Mr. McCain posits as the top challenge facing America and the world.”
Rove, Conway and the right-wing machine would have delighted in bashing Kaine’s inexperience.
Apparently, the base has so passionately embraced Palin, they’ve forgotten to update their website to reflect that she’s their nominee:
Schedule for Day 2 of the convention:
http://www.gopconvention2008.com/schedule/reform.aspx
Speakers will include:
* Former New York City Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani
* Gov. Jon Huntsman (Utah)
* Gov. Sarah Palin (Alaska)
* Former Gov. Mike Huckabee (Ark.)
* Former Gov. Tom Ridge (Pa.)
Schedule for Day 3 of the convention:
http://www.gopconvention2008.com/schedule/prosperity.aspx
Speakers will include:
* Mrs. Cindy McCain
* Republican Party’s Vice Presidential Nominee
* Gov. Bobby Jindal (La.)
* Former Gov. Mitt Romney (Mass.)
* U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman (Minn.)
* U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (Texas)*
* U.S. Rep. Mike Pence (Ind.)*
Hee hee.
Apparently, the base has so passionately embraced Palin, they’ve forgotten to update their website to reflect that she’s their nominee:
Schedule for Day 2 of the convention:
http://www.gopconvention2008.com/schedule/reform.aspx
Speakers will include:
* Former New York City Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani
* Gov. Jon Huntsman (Utah)
* Gov. Sarah Palin (Alaska)
* Former Gov. Mike Huckabee (Ark.)
* Former Gov. Tom Ridge (Pa.)
Schedule for Day 3 of the convention:
http://www.gopconvention2008.com/schedule/prosperity.aspx
Speakers will include:
* Mrs. Cindy McCain
* Republican Party’s Vice Presidential Nominee
* Gov. Bobby Jindal (La.)
* Former Gov. Mitt Romney (Mass.)
* U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman (Minn.)
* U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (Texas)*
* U.S. Rep. Mike Pence (Ind.)*
Hee hee.
I advise everyone who wants to see Obama become president to lay off the topic of children and Down syndrome completely and totally, starting this minute.
Sarah Palin’s unfitness to be president has precisely nothing to do with her being a woman or a mother.
She’s not qualified because she has almost no relevant experience: (mayor of her small hometown, governor of a state with fewer people than Columbus, Ohio), and the fact that in her short career she’s already managed to demonstrate a bent for abusing executive power and then covering it up. As if we need another four years of that in the executive branch.
McCain has chosen someone he doesn’t know and hasn’t worked with, who has no qualifications for the job. It calls his judgment into question. It’s a reckless move, one that’s made the Republican ticket a risky choice.
I advise everyone who wants to see Obama become president to lay off the topic of children and Down syndrome completely and totally, starting this minute.
Sarah Palin’s unfitness to be president has precisely nothing to do with her being a woman or a mother.
She’s not qualified because she has almost no relevant experience: (mayor of her small hometown, governor of a state with fewer people than Columbus, Ohio), and the fact that in her short career she’s already managed to demonstrate a bent for abusing executive power and then covering it up. As if we need another four years of that in the executive branch.
McCain has chosen someone he doesn’t know and hasn’t worked with, who has no qualifications for the job. It calls his judgment into question. It’s a reckless move, one that’s made the Republican ticket a risky choice.
publius, my sexy little taclado:
The battered base syndrome goes something like this — the GOP religious base has been so cavalierly ignored and exploited by the GOP elites that they’re hungry for even the slightest signs of acknowledgment
I can’t give you ‘ignore.’ yes, Bush piped-down on abortion in 2004, but the Republicans worked the negative with the astonishing success of the non-issue of ‘gay marriages.’ the red counties freaked.
but I think your provocative observations add up to something more disturbing, which is that in Palin Republicans have all but abdicated the traditional role of Commander in Chief to the president’s advisers.
The fact is that it is okay with the nation that Cheney, et al tell Bush what to do.
For over a hundred years, our nation has been slowly but surely handing over the job of governance to professionals.
At best, our democracy now functions as an oversight mechanism for the performance of the professional class, those not accountable to The People, but to their representatives.
but the cat may very well be out of that bag too. I submit that Palin is an unintended admission of that it is.
publius, my sexy little taclado:
The battered base syndrome goes something like this — the GOP religious base has been so cavalierly ignored and exploited by the GOP elites that they’re hungry for even the slightest signs of acknowledgment
I can’t give you ‘ignore.’ yes, Bush piped-down on abortion in 2004, but the Republicans worked the negative with the astonishing success of the non-issue of ‘gay marriages.’ the red counties freaked.
but I think your provocative observations add up to something more disturbing, which is that in Palin Republicans have all but abdicated the traditional role of Commander in Chief to the president’s advisers.
The fact is that it is okay with the nation that Cheney, et al tell Bush what to do.
For over a hundred years, our nation has been slowly but surely handing over the job of governance to professionals.
At best, our democracy now functions as an oversight mechanism for the performance of the professional class, those not accountable to The People, but to their representatives.
but the cat may very well be out of that bag too. I submit that Palin is an unintended admission of that it is.
Nell, right on!
That’s almost all you need to say, and the pick looks laughable. Add to it her rabid right-wing beliefs (anti-choice, creationist, global warming denying, etc.), and she’s just plain toxic to everyone but the lunatic 28-percent-ers.
Nell, right on!
That’s almost all you need to say, and the pick looks laughable. Add to it her rabid right-wing beliefs (anti-choice, creationist, global warming denying, etc.), and she’s just plain toxic to everyone but the lunatic 28-percent-ers.
“McCain has chosen someone he doesn’t know and hasn’t worked with, who has no qualifications for the job. It calls his judgment into question. It’s a reckless move, one that’s made the Republican ticket a risky choice.”
That should be the Democratic Party’s talking points on right there.
“McCain has chosen someone he doesn’t know and hasn’t worked with, who has no qualifications for the job. It calls his judgment into question. It’s a reckless move, one that’s made the Republican ticket a risky choice.”
That should be the Democratic Party’s talking points on right there.
If this and this get picked up by the cable news networks, she’ll be off the ticket in two weeks, maybe less.
If this and this get picked up by the cable news networks, she’ll be off the ticket in two weeks, maybe less.
The links Ugh provided are provocative, but Nell’s point stands: How are Democrats going to benefit if they do anything remotely construed as attacking motherhood?
Motherhood.
There aren’t many sacred things in 2008 America, but that’s one of them.
Her temperment, inexperience, ambition will be there to see. Let voters decide.
The links Ugh provided are provocative, but Nell’s point stands: How are Democrats going to benefit if they do anything remotely construed as attacking motherhood?
Motherhood.
There aren’t many sacred things in 2008 America, but that’s one of them.
Her temperment, inexperience, ambition will be there to see. Let voters decide.
I had a thought before bed last night, but was too tired to share. So here goes.
Why does McCain think this will get female voters in love with Hillary? We have the real Hillary over here and she’s made it pretty clear who she supports. The PUMAs harping about the primaries don’t really matter, because so very few people are actually that crazy.
The more I talk to the women I know, the more outrage I hear about this choice. Most of my family supported Hillary, and a few aunts were just going to stay at home in Nov. period. But the condescending, insulting nature of this pick has set them off. They don’t want a woman president. They want Hillary Clinton president.
If McCain picked Sen. Snowe or Sen. Hutchinson, they probably wouldn’t be as pissed. But picking a pretty face who stands for the opposite of everything Hillary does says that McCain thinks women are dumb enough to vote for the ticket with ovaries.
I’m giddy with anticipation for when Hillary starts to tear into her. Not only do we have the real deal, Hillary Clinton knows how to go for the jugular. I’m glad that she’ll be going after the Repubs again, ‘cuz watching a Clinton take them on is fun stuff.
I had a thought before bed last night, but was too tired to share. So here goes.
Why does McCain think this will get female voters in love with Hillary? We have the real Hillary over here and she’s made it pretty clear who she supports. The PUMAs harping about the primaries don’t really matter, because so very few people are actually that crazy.
The more I talk to the women I know, the more outrage I hear about this choice. Most of my family supported Hillary, and a few aunts were just going to stay at home in Nov. period. But the condescending, insulting nature of this pick has set them off. They don’t want a woman president. They want Hillary Clinton president.
If McCain picked Sen. Snowe or Sen. Hutchinson, they probably wouldn’t be as pissed. But picking a pretty face who stands for the opposite of everything Hillary does says that McCain thinks women are dumb enough to vote for the ticket with ovaries.
I’m giddy with anticipation for when Hillary starts to tear into her. Not only do we have the real deal, Hillary Clinton knows how to go for the jugular. I’m glad that she’ll be going after the Repubs again, ‘cuz watching a Clinton take them on is fun stuff.
To elaborate a bit, I think its too dangerous for Obama or Biden to attack Palin. We get the charges of sexism and attacking motherhood. Hillary as a surrogate solves that problem (on motherhood, sure only one kid, but who’s going to say that Chelsea hasn’t turned out great?), plus she’s a better attack dog than either of them.
I’d really like to see the Republicans accuse Hillary Clinton of sexism for taking on Palin. I’m not a religious man, but maybe its time to start praying for that.
To elaborate a bit, I think its too dangerous for Obama or Biden to attack Palin. We get the charges of sexism and attacking motherhood. Hillary as a surrogate solves that problem (on motherhood, sure only one kid, but who’s going to say that Chelsea hasn’t turned out great?), plus she’s a better attack dog than either of them.
I’d really like to see the Republicans accuse Hillary Clinton of sexism for taking on Palin. I’m not a religious man, but maybe its time to start praying for that.
Um. ?
Um. ?
Danny, unfortunately I remember that the Democratic National Convention’s website schedule had the same problem for a day or two after Biden was announced.
Danny, unfortunately I remember that the Democratic National Convention’s website schedule had the same problem for a day or two after Biden was announced.
“They don’t want a woman president. They want Hillary Clinton president.”
Obama’s acceptance speech was a clarion call and, as it should have, wound up overshadowing Hillary Clinton’s.
Watching it again, though, made me realize how good it was and how far Clinton has come. Who would have ever thought she could give a speech better than her husband?
“They don’t want a woman president. They want Hillary Clinton president.”
Obama’s acceptance speech was a clarion call and, as it should have, wound up overshadowing Hillary Clinton’s.
Watching it again, though, made me realize how good it was and how far Clinton has come. Who would have ever thought she could give a speech better than her husband?
Hmm, Ugh, I see that McCain is fuzzy and Palin is sharp in the photos.
Hmm, Ugh, I see that McCain is fuzzy and Palin is sharp in the photos.
Clicked on Ugh’s link — it’s clear the GOP is going to paint this as THE All-American ticket.
And whoever yesterday said that SNL must be dying to get Tina Fey to play Palin, boy, were they right.
Clicked on Ugh’s link — it’s clear the GOP is going to paint this as THE All-American ticket.
And whoever yesterday said that SNL must be dying to get Tina Fey to play Palin, boy, were they right.
What’s with the Tina Fey/Palin thing? They don’t look anything alike.
What’s with the Tina Fey/Palin thing? They don’t look anything alike.
btfb — I’m not offended about the c-word, and in fact have had it on my mind recently, hoping McCain can be provoked into using it again (this time on camera!)
Haven’t seen this mentioned yet, but another major handicap for Palin: that gawdawful screechy voice. Holy hell, it’s annoying. Or maybe my ears are just sensitized by a lifetime of singing…
btfb — I’m not offended about the c-word, and in fact have had it on my mind recently, hoping McCain can be provoked into using it again (this time on camera!)
Haven’t seen this mentioned yet, but another major handicap for Palin: that gawdawful screechy voice. Holy hell, it’s annoying. Or maybe my ears are just sensitized by a lifetime of singing…
Wouldn’t the counterpoint be that this the All-American ticket of the 20th Century? And it’s time to look to the future?
Wouldn’t the counterpoint be that this the All-American ticket of the 20th Century? And it’s time to look to the future?
I’m dreaming of a scene like the one in Annie Hall
Palin: Well, as we’ve seen with way Hillary’s supporters have been disrepected by the Democrats
Biden: Excuse me, but I don’t think that is the case.
Palin: Well, I am a woman, so I think I am more than qualified to talk about this
Biden: Well, I have Hillary right here and I’d like to bring her out to answer you on this. (to HRC) Tell her.
Hillary: I heard, I heard what you were saying. You, you know nothing of my work. How you ever got picked for vice-president, let alone any national office, is totally amazing.
I’m dreaming of a scene like the one in Annie Hall
Palin: Well, as we’ve seen with way Hillary’s supporters have been disrepected by the Democrats
Biden: Excuse me, but I don’t think that is the case.
Palin: Well, I am a woman, so I think I am more than qualified to talk about this
Biden: Well, I have Hillary right here and I’d like to bring her out to answer you on this. (to HRC) Tell her.
Hillary: I heard, I heard what you were saying. You, you know nothing of my work. How you ever got picked for vice-president, let alone any national office, is totally amazing.
Hillary made one of the few sane comments I have seen anywhere on the left yesterday:
“We should all be proud of Governor Sarah Palin’s historic nomination, and I congratulate her and Senator McCain. While their policies would take America in the wrong direction, Governor Palin will add an important new voice to the debate.”
I wish people had been 1/100 as outraged when Obama didn’t select Clinton as VP. I am disgusted by all the “what kind of mother” comments and mockery of anyone having 5 children I read yesterday. Nancy Pelosi has 5 children.
Didn’t we learn anything? It breaks my heart that the Republicans will defend Palin against sexist when the Democrats did nothing for Clinton.
Do I have to add that I am campaigning hard for Obama?
Hillary made one of the few sane comments I have seen anywhere on the left yesterday:
“We should all be proud of Governor Sarah Palin’s historic nomination, and I congratulate her and Senator McCain. While their policies would take America in the wrong direction, Governor Palin will add an important new voice to the debate.”
I wish people had been 1/100 as outraged when Obama didn’t select Clinton as VP. I am disgusted by all the “what kind of mother” comments and mockery of anyone having 5 children I read yesterday. Nancy Pelosi has 5 children.
Didn’t we learn anything? It breaks my heart that the Republicans will defend Palin against sexist when the Democrats did nothing for Clinton.
Do I have to add that I am campaigning hard for Obama?
“My impression is that she is popular and pretty clean.”
First time I can remember disagreeing with you, jb.
I’m not saying *I* like her, but that she’s popular in AK and is a good-government type, for the most part. I wouldn’t count on ‘troopergate’ to sink her. I’m not saying her popularity is warranted, just describing the situation as I see it.
“My impression is that she is popular and pretty clean.”
First time I can remember disagreeing with you, jb.
I’m not saying *I* like her, but that she’s popular in AK and is a good-government type, for the most part. I wouldn’t count on ‘troopergate’ to sink her. I’m not saying her popularity is warranted, just describing the situation as I see it.
Jon Stewart last night compared her to Tina Fey, Megan Mullally, and a Generic Sexy Librarian from Cinemax.
Jon Stewart last night compared her to Tina Fey, Megan Mullally, and a Generic Sexy Librarian from Cinemax.
I think we all need some perspective. Obama beat the real Hilary Clinton in the primary of the party that adored her. Let’s not panic over some pro-life, anti-polar bear nutjob with zero big-stage experience. There’s going to be a media frenzy for about a week, but it won’t be long before buyer’s remorse sets in in the McCain camp. They’ll be lucky if she just proves to be a lost opportunity rather than an albatross.
This is the vice-presidential selection equivalent of the Britney Spears ad: fun for a while, looks awful a few weeks down the road.
I think we all need some perspective. Obama beat the real Hilary Clinton in the primary of the party that adored her. Let’s not panic over some pro-life, anti-polar bear nutjob with zero big-stage experience. There’s going to be a media frenzy for about a week, but it won’t be long before buyer’s remorse sets in in the McCain camp. They’ll be lucky if she just proves to be a lost opportunity rather than an albatross.
This is the vice-presidential selection equivalent of the Britney Spears ad: fun for a while, looks awful a few weeks down the road.
LJ- I would give my firstborn child to have Biden bring HRC out at the debate.
LJ- I would give my firstborn child to have Biden bring HRC out at the debate.
I have to agree with that. That kind of criticism just isn’t thinking it through.
I have to agree with that. That kind of criticism just isn’t thinking it through.
By the way, let’s not be sexist ourselves by underestimating Palin. There’s a reason she got the nickname “Barracuda.” Ignoring that will surprise some people in a nasty way.
By the way, let’s not be sexist ourselves by underestimating Palin. There’s a reason she got the nickname “Barracuda.” Ignoring that will surprise some people in a nasty way.
Hmm, Ugh, I see that McCain is fuzzy and Palin is sharp in the photos.
Is it just me or is that image just, uh, unprofessional? I mean, I’ve got better pics than that with my lame PowerShot digital camera that were taken by some random dude in India. Atrios says it makes it look like they’re starring in sitcom (though he was beaten to the punch).
Really. Maybe they’re going for the Jon Lovitz “Yeah, that’s the ticket!” with that picture. My god, this one’s even worse. (though obviously will change)
Hmm, Ugh, I see that McCain is fuzzy and Palin is sharp in the photos.
Is it just me or is that image just, uh, unprofessional? I mean, I’ve got better pics than that with my lame PowerShot digital camera that were taken by some random dude in India. Atrios says it makes it look like they’re starring in sitcom (though he was beaten to the punch).
Really. Maybe they’re going for the Jon Lovitz “Yeah, that’s the ticket!” with that picture. My god, this one’s even worse. (though obviously will change)
The links Ugh provided are provocative, but Nell’s point stands: How are Democrats going to benefit if they do anything remotely construed as attacking motherhood?
Exactly.
It’s not as if 2008 America respects mothers or wants to help mothers or support mothers – you’re the only developed country in the world without mandatory paid maternity leave – but even the most conservative anti-healthcare anti-welfare pro-forced pregnancy Republican, who sees nothing wrong with Rush Limbaugh making nasty jokes about Chelsea Clinton, knows that the correct religious reaction to motherhood is a misty-eyed sigh.
The links Ugh provided are provocative, but Nell’s point stands: How are Democrats going to benefit if they do anything remotely construed as attacking motherhood?
Exactly.
It’s not as if 2008 America respects mothers or wants to help mothers or support mothers – you’re the only developed country in the world without mandatory paid maternity leave – but even the most conservative anti-healthcare anti-welfare pro-forced pregnancy Republican, who sees nothing wrong with Rush Limbaugh making nasty jokes about Chelsea Clinton, knows that the correct religious reaction to motherhood is a misty-eyed sigh.
Let’s keep in mind that she’s not only from a small state, she’s from a state with dynamics entirely different to those of the 48 states. She’s from the American equivalent of a Gulf emirate. What’s her economic answer – send us all cheques from the oil company like they get up there? Let’s get Schweizer (sp?) on the case – the lady’s a petrodictator, without the foreign experience.
Let’s keep in mind that she’s not only from a small state, she’s from a state with dynamics entirely different to those of the 48 states. She’s from the American equivalent of a Gulf emirate. What’s her economic answer – send us all cheques from the oil company like they get up there? Let’s get Schweizer (sp?) on the case – the lady’s a petrodictator, without the foreign experience.
The republicans are kidding themselves if they think her gender is going to disarm Obama and Biden. They’re democrats for God’s sake, they’ve spent their whole careers working with and often disagreeing with capable, powerful women in a professional manner.
Let’s take a step back. John McCain has made this election less about national security and more about women’s issues. Think about that. He could mother theresa on his side, it makes no difference – that’s a debate the democrats win without breaking a sweat.
The republicans are kidding themselves if they think her gender is going to disarm Obama and Biden. They’re democrats for God’s sake, they’ve spent their whole careers working with and often disagreeing with capable, powerful women in a professional manner.
Let’s take a step back. John McCain has made this election less about national security and more about women’s issues. Think about that. He could mother theresa on his side, it makes no difference – that’s a debate the democrats win without breaking a sweat.
If she promises us all annual Alaska-size oil checks I will totally vote for her. Buy my vote, please!
If she promises us all annual Alaska-size oil checks I will totally vote for her. Buy my vote, please!
I see a lot of hubris in many of the comments on this and other threads on this website.
Operating from within D party sensibilities and assumptions, the feeling that Palin’s nomination is unserious is generalized to a conclusion that it will necessarily play out that way and therefore Ds have little to worry about.
It seems to me already clear that her nomination is being very well received by the media and as a hugely energizing factor in the R party at large. Motivation cannot be underestimated as a factor in politics, and Rs just got a jolt of it.
Complacency from the D side, with self-assured comments about how “obviously foolish” this pick is, will not win this election.
I pray that a lot of the people posting here who seem so smug and satisfied that this is a terrible choice will come to realize that media and voters may not see things their way.
Her nomination as R-VP has to be taken seriously, and opposed in a thoughtful and strategic manner.
Sitting in ivory towers or on high horses will not win Ds this election.
I see a lot of hubris in many of the comments on this and other threads on this website.
Operating from within D party sensibilities and assumptions, the feeling that Palin’s nomination is unserious is generalized to a conclusion that it will necessarily play out that way and therefore Ds have little to worry about.
It seems to me already clear that her nomination is being very well received by the media and as a hugely energizing factor in the R party at large. Motivation cannot be underestimated as a factor in politics, and Rs just got a jolt of it.
Complacency from the D side, with self-assured comments about how “obviously foolish” this pick is, will not win this election.
I pray that a lot of the people posting here who seem so smug and satisfied that this is a terrible choice will come to realize that media and voters may not see things their way.
Her nomination as R-VP has to be taken seriously, and opposed in a thoughtful and strategic manner.
Sitting in ivory towers or on high horses will not win Ds this election.
I have to laugh when I see conservatives – on this blog and in the conservative media – trumpet her performance on Friday. Talk about low expectations when you’re relishing in a candidate’s introductory speech to crowd of campaign supporters. Folks, if you were worried that she might flop on day 1, you’re going to need a strong prescription to get through the next two months.
I have to laugh when I see conservatives – on this blog and in the conservative media – trumpet her performance on Friday. Talk about low expectations when you’re relishing in a candidate’s introductory speech to crowd of campaign supporters. Folks, if you were worried that she might flop on day 1, you’re going to need a strong prescription to get through the next two months.
This wasn’t a nomination as much as it was an act of vandalism. Like when gang members leave a “tag” on the side of a building – to indicate their territory. The gun-loving Christian Coalition just left some graffiti on the wall of American culture.
This wasn’t a nomination as much as it was an act of vandalism. Like when gang members leave a “tag” on the side of a building – to indicate their territory. The gun-loving Christian Coalition just left some graffiti on the wall of American culture.
redstocking,
glad to see you again. I have to register disagreement when you say
Hillary made one of the few sane comments I have seen anywhere on the left yesterday:
There was a great post by someone that I read about how this pick angered him/her because this pick was basically a big F-you to the historic nature of what Obama did. That sense of anger is what is driving a lot of this, and I tend to think of it as part of the gameplan for McCain, take advantage of the wikipedia like nature of Obama support (in that it is decentralized and its inclusivity means you are not going to get the kind of message discipline that you see from Republicans) and try to get people to go too far. The image I have is going to a memorial service and after a heartfelt testimony to the deceased, the next person starts doing a standup routine and when people get sullen, they say ‘whatsamatter, did someone die or what? badda-boom’.
Also, following up on KCinDC’s observation about what Jon Stewart said, one of the key weapons is ridicule. Pretending that the comedian deserves some sort of special consideration in spite of the fact that they shat all over the whole purpose of the service concedes way too much. Yet full bore anger is often masked by ridicule and it is often hard to not draw outside the lines. I agree that one needs to say, as many times as needed ‘hey, that’s not right, that’s too far’, but meeting that anger with anger about how this proves how sexist the world and the Democratic party is is precisely the reaction that McCain backers want. I mean, Pelosi does have 5 children, but the youngest was 18 when she was elected. In your anger to knock down one crack about children, you end up blurring what seems like a real distinction.
Again, I really hope you’ll stick around for this, I think your perspective will be hugely helpful for all of us in the run up to the election.
redstocking,
glad to see you again. I have to register disagreement when you say
Hillary made one of the few sane comments I have seen anywhere on the left yesterday:
There was a great post by someone that I read about how this pick angered him/her because this pick was basically a big F-you to the historic nature of what Obama did. That sense of anger is what is driving a lot of this, and I tend to think of it as part of the gameplan for McCain, take advantage of the wikipedia like nature of Obama support (in that it is decentralized and its inclusivity means you are not going to get the kind of message discipline that you see from Republicans) and try to get people to go too far. The image I have is going to a memorial service and after a heartfelt testimony to the deceased, the next person starts doing a standup routine and when people get sullen, they say ‘whatsamatter, did someone die or what? badda-boom’.
Also, following up on KCinDC’s observation about what Jon Stewart said, one of the key weapons is ridicule. Pretending that the comedian deserves some sort of special consideration in spite of the fact that they shat all over the whole purpose of the service concedes way too much. Yet full bore anger is often masked by ridicule and it is often hard to not draw outside the lines. I agree that one needs to say, as many times as needed ‘hey, that’s not right, that’s too far’, but meeting that anger with anger about how this proves how sexist the world and the Democratic party is is precisely the reaction that McCain backers want. I mean, Pelosi does have 5 children, but the youngest was 18 when she was elected. In your anger to knock down one crack about children, you end up blurring what seems like a real distinction.
Again, I really hope you’ll stick around for this, I think your perspective will be hugely helpful for all of us in the run up to the election.
Indeed, picking Joe Biden as running mate was even more outrageous than choosing a patently unqualified recently elected governor of a small, distant state who has never shown any interest in national issues. What shameful sexism by the Democratic Party!
Indeed, picking Joe Biden as running mate was even more outrageous than choosing a patently unqualified recently elected governor of a small, distant state who has never shown any interest in national issues. What shameful sexism by the Democratic Party!
Sitting in ivory towers or on high horses will not win Ds this election.
but the view is so much better, when i sit on my horse at the top of my tower!
Sitting in ivory towers or on high horses will not win Ds this election.
but the view is so much better, when i sit on my horse at the top of my tower!
There’s a reason she got the nickname “Barracuda.” Ignoring that will surprise some people in a nasty way.
Gwangung, I love ya, but this is overthinking. She got her nickname from playing high school basketball pointguard. If the Republicans had nominated Allan Iverson, you wouldn’t say ‘be careful, cause his nickname is ‘the Answer'”
There’s a reason she got the nickname “Barracuda.” Ignoring that will surprise some people in a nasty way.
Gwangung, I love ya, but this is overthinking. She got her nickname from playing high school basketball pointguard. If the Republicans had nominated Allan Iverson, you wouldn’t say ‘be careful, cause his nickname is ‘the Answer'”
I just cannot understand why they made this choice with this Troopergate thing going on. Whether or not she is vindicated in the end, what use is it introducing a total unknown with a current investigation going on? The media frenzy will be intense. If the Rezko case when going to be heard in court in September, say, could you imagine someone choosing Obama as their VP right now?
Given what’s been going on in Alaskan politics, deservedly or not her white as the driven snow image is going to be damn muddy by the end of the week. What use is she as a VP answering questions about Troopergate in every appearance?
I just cannot understand why they made this choice with this Troopergate thing going on. Whether or not she is vindicated in the end, what use is it introducing a total unknown with a current investigation going on? The media frenzy will be intense. If the Rezko case when going to be heard in court in September, say, could you imagine someone choosing Obama as their VP right now?
Given what’s been going on in Alaskan politics, deservedly or not her white as the driven snow image is going to be damn muddy by the end of the week. What use is she as a VP answering questions about Troopergate in every appearance?
Obama’s non-selection of Clinton is 100% understandable, although they can hardly say it openly. She got almost as much of the vote as him, has a ex-prez husband, and trails a massive retinue of Dem Party heavy hitters. Nobody who wanted to be their own master in the Oval Office could take such a person as their VP.
I don’t know what she would have even wanted the position, if she did. She already spent 8 years in the White House without calling the shots – surely she’s the boss or nothing at this point.
Obama’s non-selection of Clinton is 100% understandable, although they can hardly say it openly. She got almost as much of the vote as him, has a ex-prez husband, and trails a massive retinue of Dem Party heavy hitters. Nobody who wanted to be their own master in the Oval Office could take such a person as their VP.
I don’t know what she would have even wanted the position, if she did. She already spent 8 years in the White House without calling the shots – surely she’s the boss or nothing at this point.
The media frenzy will be intense
not sure about that. she is a Republican, after all. and a woman. and McCain was a POW.
it might seem unseemly to dig too deeply into the affairs of such marvelous people.
The media frenzy will be intense
not sure about that. she is a Republican, after all. and a woman. and McCain was a POW.
it might seem unseemly to dig too deeply into the affairs of such marvelous people.
I just cannot understand why they made this choice with this Troopergate thing going on.
For the sake of argument, let’s assume she’s completely clear. They still have to spend time during the investigation and after she’s cleared to explain things away, and even then some people will dislike the hint of corruption.
Now if she’s guilty, then McCain is boned. He picks someone unqualified and condescends to half the country, then looks stupid for picking a corrupt person.
The only explanation I can come up with is that McCain was desperate to steal Obama’s momentum and he took the first woman who would take the job. No vetting, no getting to know her, no nothing. Some would say the campaign knows something we don’t about the investigations, but I seriously doubt it. In fact, I doubt that most of the McCain team even knew she was involved in a current scandal.
The recklessness and egotism is almost as frightening as what would happen when McCain dies in office.
I just cannot understand why they made this choice with this Troopergate thing going on.
For the sake of argument, let’s assume she’s completely clear. They still have to spend time during the investigation and after she’s cleared to explain things away, and even then some people will dislike the hint of corruption.
Now if she’s guilty, then McCain is boned. He picks someone unqualified and condescends to half the country, then looks stupid for picking a corrupt person.
The only explanation I can come up with is that McCain was desperate to steal Obama’s momentum and he took the first woman who would take the job. No vetting, no getting to know her, no nothing. Some would say the campaign knows something we don’t about the investigations, but I seriously doubt it. In fact, I doubt that most of the McCain team even knew she was involved in a current scandal.
The recklessness and egotism is almost as frightening as what would happen when McCain dies in office.
byrningman: You’re completely missing the point.
Sorry, but no – you are. For better or worse, this is my tribe and I know how they think. The convention next week is going to blow Obama into the old news category. The announcement already has. The timing was genius – evil genius if you like, but it was genius. Obama is going to have to bide his time for the week or do something stupid. Based on their first response, I’m betting on something stupid.
Look – I’ll never vote for the ticket, but their political acumen has shot up a lot IMO in the last two days. Yeah – this has Rove’s fingerprints all over it. Even when something is evil I can say “well played sir”.
Bedtimeforbonzo: I know this is condescending and, sorry, OCSteve, but these people really do drink the same Kool-Aid.
No problem – see above.
Ara: The nutjobs at NRO are really thrilled that she pronounces it “nuk-u-lar” and EYE-RACK. These are really no longer people to be taken seriously in the least.
Seriously? They won the last 2 elections. Stole them if you like – but they won the WH. You don’t take them seriously?
Nell and Jes – Thank You. A Lot.
I have to shut up I guess. I see you folks as playing Five Card Monty and thinking you have a chance to win.
byrningman: You’re completely missing the point.
Sorry, but no – you are. For better or worse, this is my tribe and I know how they think. The convention next week is going to blow Obama into the old news category. The announcement already has. The timing was genius – evil genius if you like, but it was genius. Obama is going to have to bide his time for the week or do something stupid. Based on their first response, I’m betting on something stupid.
Look – I’ll never vote for the ticket, but their political acumen has shot up a lot IMO in the last two days. Yeah – this has Rove’s fingerprints all over it. Even when something is evil I can say “well played sir”.
Bedtimeforbonzo: I know this is condescending and, sorry, OCSteve, but these people really do drink the same Kool-Aid.
No problem – see above.
Ara: The nutjobs at NRO are really thrilled that she pronounces it “nuk-u-lar” and EYE-RACK. These are really no longer people to be taken seriously in the least.
Seriously? They won the last 2 elections. Stole them if you like – but they won the WH. You don’t take them seriously?
Nell and Jes – Thank You. A Lot.
I have to shut up I guess. I see you folks as playing Five Card Monty and thinking you have a chance to win.
byrningman: I just cannot understand why they made this choice with this Troopergate thing going on.
There are even more damaging rumors circulating than Troopergate….
byrningman: I just cannot understand why they made this choice with this Troopergate thing going on.
There are even more damaging rumors circulating than Troopergate….
Sebastian: “Moreover, some reporter (leftie or rightie, I don’t know) will pose this question: “Governor, do you plan to have more children?””
I eagerly await Jesurgislac’s response to this one.
I’m not a governor, but I plan never to have children.
…sorry.
FWIW, Sebastian, I was brought up to understand that the question “Do you intend to have children” or “to have more children” was rude and intrusive: should not be asked, and does not deserve to be answered.
Sebastian: “Moreover, some reporter (leftie or rightie, I don’t know) will pose this question: “Governor, do you plan to have more children?””
I eagerly await Jesurgislac’s response to this one.
I’m not a governor, but I plan never to have children.
…sorry.
FWIW, Sebastian, I was brought up to understand that the question “Do you intend to have children” or “to have more children” was rude and intrusive: should not be asked, and does not deserve to be answered.
farmgirl: “btfb — I’m not offended about the c-word, and in fact have had it on my mind recently, hoping McCain can be provoked into using it again (this time on camera!)”
Well, now that you mention it, it is interesting that McCain condones calling Hillary Clinton a bitch and then turns around and picks Sarah Palin as his veep — I guess that offers him redemption.
Or: Hillary Clinton is a bitch because she’s Hillary Clinton, and Sarah Palin may be up for sainthood in another news cycle or two if the right wing has its way.
farmgirl: “btfb — I’m not offended about the c-word, and in fact have had it on my mind recently, hoping McCain can be provoked into using it again (this time on camera!)”
Well, now that you mention it, it is interesting that McCain condones calling Hillary Clinton a bitch and then turns around and picks Sarah Palin as his veep — I guess that offers him redemption.
Or: Hillary Clinton is a bitch because she’s Hillary Clinton, and Sarah Palin may be up for sainthood in another news cycle or two if the right wing has its way.
Truly. It’s simply not good strategy not to take your opponent seriously.
However, while a lot of the Democratic supporters won’t take her seriously (being less disciplined than the Republicans), I don’t think Obama team will underestimate her. They may not make her a central focus, but I don’t think they’ll take her lightly.
Truly. It’s simply not good strategy not to take your opponent seriously.
However, while a lot of the Democratic supporters won’t take her seriously (being less disciplined than the Republicans), I don’t think Obama team will underestimate her. They may not make her a central focus, but I don’t think they’ll take her lightly.
Jes — I must be a very petty person, because I would *love* to see the media waste its time tracking down that rumor. If the Edwards story rated, that should too.
Jes — I must be a very petty person, because I would *love* to see the media waste its time tracking down that rumor. If the Edwards story rated, that should too.
OCSteve: Nell and Jes – Thank You. A Lot.
Huh. So when I get mad at people who are being sexist about a Republican, you thank me.
Didn’t notice any thanks from you when I was getting mad at people who were getting sexist about a Democrat.
Attack Palin on the issues. Attack Clinton on the issues. That’s politics.
Attack them for being female? That’s sexist.
OCSteve: Nell and Jes – Thank You. A Lot.
Huh. So when I get mad at people who are being sexist about a Republican, you thank me.
Didn’t notice any thanks from you when I was getting mad at people who were getting sexist about a Democrat.
Attack Palin on the issues. Attack Clinton on the issues. That’s politics.
Attack them for being female? That’s sexist.
I think OC was thanking you for backing him up on the Down’s syndrome angle.
I’m gobsmacked at the link you gave earlier. Is discussing that here discussing the issues? If you think it is out of bounds, I won’t pursue it, but I’m wondering what you and others think.
I think OC was thanking you for backing him up on the Down’s syndrome angle.
I’m gobsmacked at the link you gave earlier. Is discussing that here discussing the issues? If you think it is out of bounds, I won’t pursue it, but I’m wondering what you and others think.
The convention next week is going to blow Obama into the old news category. The announcement already has. The timing was genius – evil genius if you like, but it was genius. Obama is going to have to bide his time for the week or do something stupid.
‘Genius’? Pretty obvious really. In fact, McCain seems to have been so determined to own the news on Friday that he made a very poor pick for VP for the sake of some short-term coverage.
Of course the republican convention is going to own the news this week, it always was. Now, however, they have to decide if they press on with the ‘experience’ theme and flop, or regear their message and basically start the campaign all over again – it’s clearly not going to be as successful as the dem’s convention.
Meanwhile, Obama is doing what he always intended to do. 40M people watched him on Thursday, the overwhelming number of which were surely quite impressed. Now’s he pressing the flesh on the ground in the battlegrounds to capitalise on that while the rest of America tries to figure out who the hell Palin is.
Palin can’t make people forget Thursday. Obama-Biden are now in the position of not having to prove themselves: suddenly they are the safe choice. Palin has enormous pressure on her now – by dint of the scrutiny on her, she’s carrying a national election, without any preparation.
Oh, and the Obama campaign is probably feeling very happy that they made the choice they did this week. Attack the policies not the person, and shore up the women’s vote. Their game plan does not change, McCain is starting from scratch.
The convention next week is going to blow Obama into the old news category. The announcement already has. The timing was genius – evil genius if you like, but it was genius. Obama is going to have to bide his time for the week or do something stupid.
‘Genius’? Pretty obvious really. In fact, McCain seems to have been so determined to own the news on Friday that he made a very poor pick for VP for the sake of some short-term coverage.
Of course the republican convention is going to own the news this week, it always was. Now, however, they have to decide if they press on with the ‘experience’ theme and flop, or regear their message and basically start the campaign all over again – it’s clearly not going to be as successful as the dem’s convention.
Meanwhile, Obama is doing what he always intended to do. 40M people watched him on Thursday, the overwhelming number of which were surely quite impressed. Now’s he pressing the flesh on the ground in the battlegrounds to capitalise on that while the rest of America tries to figure out who the hell Palin is.
Palin can’t make people forget Thursday. Obama-Biden are now in the position of not having to prove themselves: suddenly they are the safe choice. Palin has enormous pressure on her now – by dint of the scrutiny on her, she’s carrying a national election, without any preparation.
Oh, and the Obama campaign is probably feeling very happy that they made the choice they did this week. Attack the policies not the person, and shore up the women’s vote. Their game plan does not change, McCain is starting from scratch.
lj, it’s a tough call.
On one level, it makes a lot of sense, particularly taking into account the TX episode. But it becomes conjecture to a great degree.
Probably more worth discussing is to what extent it would impact the election. Obviously, she would have to leave the ticket, and it would be difficult for McCain to get a replacement. I don’t think either Pawlenty or Romney would accept any more.
lj, it’s a tough call.
On one level, it makes a lot of sense, particularly taking into account the TX episode. But it becomes conjecture to a great degree.
Probably more worth discussing is to what extent it would impact the election. Obviously, she would have to leave the ticket, and it would be difficult for McCain to get a replacement. I don’t think either Pawlenty or Romney would accept any more.
Jes: “There are even more damaging rumors circulating than Troopergate….”
Troopergate, like Whitewater, is a tangled story that isn’t easy to put in a sound bite. But the “even more damaging rumors” as Jes called the link he provided is easy to understand and would indeed be an Edwards-type shocker.
Dems shouldn’t touch it at all. If it’s true, that’s one story the media won’t ignore.
Jes: “There are even more damaging rumors circulating than Troopergate….”
Troopergate, like Whitewater, is a tangled story that isn’t easy to put in a sound bite. But the “even more damaging rumors” as Jes called the link he provided is easy to understand and would indeed be an Edwards-type shocker.
Dems shouldn’t touch it at all. If it’s true, that’s one story the media won’t ignore.
I myself do not think the fake pregnancy story meets ObWi evidentiary standards, but it might be something you could take outside.
I myself do not think the fake pregnancy story meets ObWi evidentiary standards, but it might be something you could take outside.
I’m gobsmacked at the link you gave earlier. Is discussing that here discussing the issues? If you think it is out of bounds, I won’t pursue it, but I’m wondering what you and others think.
Well, the only confirmable facts barely even constitute circumstantial evidence. And it would take a very, very arrogant and very stupid) Republican to ignore it when accepting VP nomination if it was true.
But: Apparently, this gossip/rumor was current in Anchorage back in June. If so, then it’s something that McCain and his team ought to be aware of – because even if it’s completely untrue, the rumor has potential to be damaging: like the claim that Barack Obama is a Muslim.
I’m gobsmacked at the link you gave earlier. Is discussing that here discussing the issues? If you think it is out of bounds, I won’t pursue it, but I’m wondering what you and others think.
Well, the only confirmable facts barely even constitute circumstantial evidence. And it would take a very, very arrogant and very stupid) Republican to ignore it when accepting VP nomination if it was true.
But: Apparently, this gossip/rumor was current in Anchorage back in June. If so, then it’s something that McCain and his team ought to be aware of – because even if it’s completely untrue, the rumor has potential to be damaging: like the claim that Barack Obama is a Muslim.
It’s simply not good strategy not to take your opponent seriously…I don’t think Obama team will underestimate her.
I think that’s exactly right. We can dismiss Palin out of hand and we may be right about it. Obama and his people are way to careful for that, though. I trust them to adjust their plan as necessary but not make her a martyr. The convention showed that the gameplan is attack the policies, not the personalities.
We’re going to see Hillary and other female Dems congratulate Palin for her achievements, but explain how McCain and her policies are an absolute disaster and are just more of the same.
That’s probably the biggest reason I’m so confident about things: we’ve got the best and brightest people around to take advantage of McCain’s missteps and we’ve got the best messengers to communicate this. Obama has been outstanding at staying focused on the big picture in the past, and there’s no reason to think they’re going to get cocky and/or lazy all of a sudden.
It’s simply not good strategy not to take your opponent seriously…I don’t think Obama team will underestimate her.
I think that’s exactly right. We can dismiss Palin out of hand and we may be right about it. Obama and his people are way to careful for that, though. I trust them to adjust their plan as necessary but not make her a martyr. The convention showed that the gameplan is attack the policies, not the personalities.
We’re going to see Hillary and other female Dems congratulate Palin for her achievements, but explain how McCain and her policies are an absolute disaster and are just more of the same.
That’s probably the biggest reason I’m so confident about things: we’ve got the best and brightest people around to take advantage of McCain’s missteps and we’ve got the best messengers to communicate this. Obama has been outstanding at staying focused on the big picture in the past, and there’s no reason to think they’re going to get cocky and/or lazy all of a sudden.
I suspect that if true, the lie to prevent an abortion would be more noble than deliberately hiding and falsifying facts, at least with the Christian right. I’d also point out that the ModerateVoice article has another picture (that has been apparently scrubbed from the state website) and some other points.
Justin, that’s a good thought, but I may wait a bit, unless more people say they do want to discuss it.
I suspect that if true, the lie to prevent an abortion would be more noble than deliberately hiding and falsifying facts, at least with the Christian right. I’d also point out that the ModerateVoice article has another picture (that has been apparently scrubbed from the state website) and some other points.
Justin, that’s a good thought, but I may wait a bit, unless more people say they do want to discuss it.
Geraldine Ferraro is on On the Media defending Palin on the experience front, though at least she followed it by saying that Palin has to follow McCain’s positions.
Argh, and now she’s talking about how 95% of blacks were voting for Obama, and refusing to say who she was supporting for president.
Someone send her on a long vacation, please.
Geraldine Ferraro is on On the Media defending Palin on the experience front, though at least she followed it by saying that Palin has to follow McCain’s positions.
Argh, and now she’s talking about how 95% of blacks were voting for Obama, and refusing to say who she was supporting for president.
Someone send her on a long vacation, please.
I suspect that if true, the lie to prevent an abortion would be more noble than deliberately hiding and falsifying facts, at least with the Christian right.
“If true,” it’s a little weird to characterize it as “the lie to prevent an abortion.” What it would have been a lie to prevent would be scandal, not abortion; it isn’t as if abortion is the only option for dealing with an unplanned pregnancy.
Other than that, though it would be a fascinating story if true, I’d rather leave it alone until/unless there’s some clear evidence.
I suspect that if true, the lie to prevent an abortion would be more noble than deliberately hiding and falsifying facts, at least with the Christian right.
“If true,” it’s a little weird to characterize it as “the lie to prevent an abortion.” What it would have been a lie to prevent would be scandal, not abortion; it isn’t as if abortion is the only option for dealing with an unplanned pregnancy.
Other than that, though it would be a fascinating story if true, I’d rather leave it alone until/unless there’s some clear evidence.
With defenders like this…
With defenders like this…
Jes: LJ is correct. It was an honest thank you. I appreciate you backing me up on that – a lot. It seems so tough for you and I to find common ground … Anyway I appreciate it a LOT.
Jes: LJ is correct. It was an honest thank you. I appreciate you backing me up on that – a lot. It seems so tough for you and I to find common ground … Anyway I appreciate it a LOT.
I read about the parentage issue in a comment thread this morning but thought that that simply sounds to be too fishy to bring up here.
I agree that it should be the media looking into it, not the Democrats. What I would look into though would be remarks/comments/statements by Palin regarding teen pregnancy etc. That may yield ammo for a serious hypocrisy claim. That would imo be the only thing that could be used here (agaisnt her) while “staying clean”. If the story turns out to be true, the target should again be the Son of Cain. Not for “choosing someone who does things like that” but for “choosing someone without doing even the most basic background checks” (like sending some gumshoes up there to look for possibly damaging rumors).
I read about the parentage issue in a comment thread this morning but thought that that simply sounds to be too fishy to bring up here.
I agree that it should be the media looking into it, not the Democrats. What I would look into though would be remarks/comments/statements by Palin regarding teen pregnancy etc. That may yield ammo for a serious hypocrisy claim. That would imo be the only thing that could be used here (agaisnt her) while “staying clean”. If the story turns out to be true, the target should again be the Son of Cain. Not for “choosing someone who does things like that” but for “choosing someone without doing even the most basic background checks” (like sending some gumshoes up there to look for possibly damaging rumors).
Jeez loueez, who are we, the National Enquirer? I could care less if she claimed her daughter’s child, it’s none of anyone’s business. What looks overwhelmingly like the abuse of power by interfering in the police department’s disciplinary procedures bothers me – suggests strongly that she’s still got a small-town, small-state politics mindset. Hardly White House material.
Also, she’s got contemptible positions on reproductive rights, education, science, the environment, and no positions on anything else. There’s more than enough material for legitimate criticism.
That said, I expect the Democrats will be content to let her extremist record speak for itself, and continue which their pre-existing game plan.
Jeez loueez, who are we, the National Enquirer? I could care less if she claimed her daughter’s child, it’s none of anyone’s business. What looks overwhelmingly like the abuse of power by interfering in the police department’s disciplinary procedures bothers me – suggests strongly that she’s still got a small-town, small-state politics mindset. Hardly White House material.
Also, she’s got contemptible positions on reproductive rights, education, science, the environment, and no positions on anything else. There’s more than enough material for legitimate criticism.
That said, I expect the Democrats will be content to let her extremist record speak for itself, and continue which their pre-existing game plan.
I’m calling it here. I haven’t yet declared I will vote for Obama. Now I do. I will.
But it’s over. McCain has won this. Obama has made too many missteps. Biden was an awful VP pick. McCain pulled it out in the last few days.
Obama’s biggest mistake was refusing to debate McCain when he challenged him to the town hall debates.
You all seem to think that in the coming debates Obama/Biden will win. BS. I’ve yet to see Obama do well off script, and Biden sticks his foot in his mouth more often that not.
McCain can think on his feet (believe it or not) and after a couple of days reflection I think that Palin was a genius choice.
You’ve lost. I’ve lost. The country has lost.
It’s over – we just have to wait a couple of months to acknowledge it.
Yes – I am totally serious. No – I don’t want to debate any of this. This is just my opinion and my prediction.
Three Card Monty. Bookmarked for post-election day – either to eat crow or gloat…
I’m calling it here. I haven’t yet declared I will vote for Obama. Now I do. I will.
But it’s over. McCain has won this. Obama has made too many missteps. Biden was an awful VP pick. McCain pulled it out in the last few days.
Obama’s biggest mistake was refusing to debate McCain when he challenged him to the town hall debates.
You all seem to think that in the coming debates Obama/Biden will win. BS. I’ve yet to see Obama do well off script, and Biden sticks his foot in his mouth more often that not.
McCain can think on his feet (believe it or not) and after a couple of days reflection I think that Palin was a genius choice.
You’ve lost. I’ve lost. The country has lost.
It’s over – we just have to wait a couple of months to acknowledge it.
Yes – I am totally serious. No – I don’t want to debate any of this. This is just my opinion and my prediction.
Three Card Monty. Bookmarked for post-election day – either to eat crow or gloat…
Wow, dude, I think you’re really letting less than 48 hours of coverage of one fresh story blind your perspective.
Wow, dude, I think you’re really letting less than 48 hours of coverage of one fresh story blind your perspective.
OCSteve: Seriously, no reason to be so pessimistic. Obama is up 6-8 points depending on what poll you read.
OCSteve: Seriously, no reason to be so pessimistic. Obama is up 6-8 points depending on what poll you read.
OCSteve: Jes: LJ is correct. It was an honest thank you. I appreciate you backing me up on that – a lot. It seems so tough for you and I to find common ground … Anyway I appreciate it a LOT.
Eh. I agree with you when I think you’re right. I viciously attack you like a rabid pit bull when I think you’re wrong. It’s quite simple.
At this point I feel I should offer tea and cookies, or some other neutral topic for discussion that isn’t quite so British. I made Pandagon peanut butter cookies the other day: they’re excellent, if rabidly feminist.
OCSteve: Jes: LJ is correct. It was an honest thank you. I appreciate you backing me up on that – a lot. It seems so tough for you and I to find common ground … Anyway I appreciate it a LOT.
Eh. I agree with you when I think you’re right. I viciously attack you like a rabid pit bull when I think you’re wrong. It’s quite simple.
At this point I feel I should offer tea and cookies, or some other neutral topic for discussion that isn’t quite so British. I made Pandagon peanut butter cookies the other day: they’re excellent, if rabidly feminist.
OCSteve: Yeah, I stand behind what I said, even though they won the last two elections. I think the country is in a different place. George Bush became president at a time when I think people felt we more or less could do no wrong. There was an aura of American invincibility, that’s what made most people not fear these stupid policies. I think that aura has worn off, and these are at this point the only people left who continue to operate under the assumption of American invincibility.
I do think I’m saying something that’s contentious and debatable, but I think it’s true. And here’s where it becomes relevant: McCain isn’t going to win this election by galvanizing the Christian right. The Republican base just isn’t strong enough for him right now, particularly when the Democratic base is so energized. And so I’m not paying too much attention to how excited wingnuts get. I’m not scared of them this election cycle.
OCSteve: Yeah, I stand behind what I said, even though they won the last two elections. I think the country is in a different place. George Bush became president at a time when I think people felt we more or less could do no wrong. There was an aura of American invincibility, that’s what made most people not fear these stupid policies. I think that aura has worn off, and these are at this point the only people left who continue to operate under the assumption of American invincibility.
I do think I’m saying something that’s contentious and debatable, but I think it’s true. And here’s where it becomes relevant: McCain isn’t going to win this election by galvanizing the Christian right. The Republican base just isn’t strong enough for him right now, particularly when the Democratic base is so energized. And so I’m not paying too much attention to how excited wingnuts get. I’m not scared of them this election cycle.
I hope for Palin’s family’s sake that she drops out within 2 weeks, maybe even before she is officially nominated at the convention (whenever that ends up being).
I have seen other references to the rumors Jes linked to. Speaking as someone who has borne 2 children and has some experience with labor, midwives, obstetricians, etc., Palin’s story *is not believable*. I have no idea what really happened, but the story she tells — her water broke in Texas, she flew back to Alaska so the baby would be born there (at least 8 hours), she was back to work in 3 days — is flatly incredible.
This story *cannot* be true.
a) Commercial airlines will not transport a woman who is more than 8 months pregnant.
b) Unless there are complications, labor is shorter after baby #1. The first time you can generally daudle getting to the hospital; when the baby is born en route it’s pretty much always the second or later. To start an 8-hour trip after labor has begun with your fifth child is *insane*, because you *will* have that kid on the way unless something goes radically wrong.
c) no responsible obstetrician or mother-to-be would let her be out of touch with a hospital late in a pregnancy with a high-risk child. Knowing ahead of time the baby had Down’s, it would be whacky-irresponsible not to be within half an hour of a hospital with a neonatal ICU at all times for the final month.
d) to summarize (before I go cut up tomatoes): if Palin’s story is true, she could only have gotten on that plane Against Medical Advice given in the *strongest* terms. Or else she concealed her condition from her medical team, in a grossly risky way.
I’m not saying that the baby-substitution story is true, but the official story *cannot* be true.
I hope for Palin’s family’s sake that she drops out within 2 weeks, maybe even before she is officially nominated at the convention (whenever that ends up being).
I have seen other references to the rumors Jes linked to. Speaking as someone who has borne 2 children and has some experience with labor, midwives, obstetricians, etc., Palin’s story *is not believable*. I have no idea what really happened, but the story she tells — her water broke in Texas, she flew back to Alaska so the baby would be born there (at least 8 hours), she was back to work in 3 days — is flatly incredible.
This story *cannot* be true.
a) Commercial airlines will not transport a woman who is more than 8 months pregnant.
b) Unless there are complications, labor is shorter after baby #1. The first time you can generally daudle getting to the hospital; when the baby is born en route it’s pretty much always the second or later. To start an 8-hour trip after labor has begun with your fifth child is *insane*, because you *will* have that kid on the way unless something goes radically wrong.
c) no responsible obstetrician or mother-to-be would let her be out of touch with a hospital late in a pregnancy with a high-risk child. Knowing ahead of time the baby had Down’s, it would be whacky-irresponsible not to be within half an hour of a hospital with a neonatal ICU at all times for the final month.
d) to summarize (before I go cut up tomatoes): if Palin’s story is true, she could only have gotten on that plane Against Medical Advice given in the *strongest* terms. Or else she concealed her condition from her medical team, in a grossly risky way.
I’m not saying that the baby-substitution story is true, but the official story *cannot* be true.
I don’t know why but I share OCSteve’s pessimism. It has nothing to do with what Obama and his team have done (or will do) but at each new “crazy” thing from the GOP campaign, my forebodings get worse. Paradoxically the worst surge of doom expectation came while listening to the downloaded Dem convention speeches (my confidence dropping the more the better the speeches got).
Call it the Rincewind Syndrome. Once nothing can go wrong anymore, the disaster will strike. I am just not sure what will happen. Just a Diebold or a new and improved 9/11* or (and here I am sure some people are working on it while I type it) Obama, Biden, Clinton etc. taken out** right before the election.
*or the US or proxy comitting something similar abroad like nuking Iran or getting into a shooting conflict with Russia (in both cases of course “in self-defense”)
**as in blown up, assassinated, murdered…
I don’t know why but I share OCSteve’s pessimism. It has nothing to do with what Obama and his team have done (or will do) but at each new “crazy” thing from the GOP campaign, my forebodings get worse. Paradoxically the worst surge of doom expectation came while listening to the downloaded Dem convention speeches (my confidence dropping the more the better the speeches got).
Call it the Rincewind Syndrome. Once nothing can go wrong anymore, the disaster will strike. I am just not sure what will happen. Just a Diebold or a new and improved 9/11* or (and here I am sure some people are working on it while I type it) Obama, Biden, Clinton etc. taken out** right before the election.
*or the US or proxy comitting something similar abroad like nuking Iran or getting into a shooting conflict with Russia (in both cases of course “in self-defense”)
**as in blown up, assassinated, murdered…
byrningman: I could care less if she claimed her daughter’s child, it’s none of anyone’s business.
Well, in principle, yes: the only people this should matter to (stipulating solely for the sake of argument that the story is true) are the Palins themselves.
But the same is true of Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, or John Edwards and Rielle Hunter: these were also matters that were none of anyone’s business except the people involved in them.
Of course, IOKIYAR.
Doctor Science: I’m not saying that the baby-substitution story is true, but the official story *cannot* be true.
Yes, I wondered about that…
byrningman: I could care less if she claimed her daughter’s child, it’s none of anyone’s business.
Well, in principle, yes: the only people this should matter to (stipulating solely for the sake of argument that the story is true) are the Palins themselves.
But the same is true of Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, or John Edwards and Rielle Hunter: these were also matters that were none of anyone’s business except the people involved in them.
Of course, IOKIYAR.
Doctor Science: I’m not saying that the baby-substitution story is true, but the official story *cannot* be true.
Yes, I wondered about that…
I’ve only seen two groups of people really excited about this pick: Christian right-wingers and the NRO neocon crowd. I think these two groups have something in common that explains this, and I think it is a very dangerous kind of thing for any political group to have.
Both Christian right-wingers and neocons take the mentality toward problem-solving that problems can be reduced to a couple of simple rules (cut taxes, outlaw abortions, bully small nonconforming states). When given a complicated subject, they don’t want to analyze all the real world implications, the possible consequences, and the probability distributions over those consequences. They want to find the principle that fits. Problem solving is a simple matter of pattern matching for them, not calculation. They may been speaking about experience for the sake of the McCain camp, but they show their true colors now: neither of them really cares about experience. Neither of them care as much about the candidate, as competence for them doesn’t come down to the candidate’s individual abilities, but rather to their conformism. What they do care about is ideology. And they care deeply about ideological purity. They care about how tightly a candidate conforms to certain rules — their rules. And it stands to reason that they should be this way, considering that it’s the only way you could get excited about a candidate you don’t know anything about.
They didn’t need to hear much. They just needed to hear that she was willing to toe the line on their rules, and they were excited. Because that’s what a good leader is to them.
When I was younger, I played an awful lot of chess, and the interesting thing about chess is that you start off being taught a number of rules about where to position your pieces, what kinds of positions are better than others, and so forth. And then as you get better, you discover that rules aren’t nearly as useful as calculation, because chess positions are too complicated, because there are too many exceptions, and there are too many situations in which one must assess what to do when principles conflict. So I think learning how to be a good chess player is a matter of moving from principles to calculation. I think this sort of thing is also true about deciding what kind of actions to take — practical reasoning of all kinds, from moral to political. You began at the principles stage, and you progress to the calculation stage. My thesis about the NRO mindset, about conservatism as a movement, is that these people are stuck at the principles stage.
There is of course a lot of downsides to this, not the least of which is that you end up making very stupid decisions. But there is another problem here too that’s more germane right now. I can’t for the life of myself figure out why, if McCain wanted a woman, Kay Bailey Hutchinson wasn’t the nominee. She’s got all kinds of credibility on national security. Her qualifications to be president would never come into question. She would really bolster McCain’s angle about experience, and she would be no less historic than Palin would. But reading around I found this to be true about Hutchinson: for some reason the conservatives really don’t like her. Not sure why this is. It probably has to do with some fact about her voting record. And here you see the downsides of this “principles” mentality: you find yourself preferring somebody you know next to nothing about, because they toe the line, to somebody that you know an awful lot about, who happens to be imperfect by your standards. Well, picking unknown quantities is a recipe for disappointment. And I find it ironic that conservatives have always complained about the disappointments of judicial nominees. Well, the longer a public record anyone has, the less likely they are to be ideologically pure. So if you’re going to seek out ideological purity, you’re going to be selecting away from experienced candidates and gravitating towards neophytes. And, because the risk is higher with something unknown, you are probably a lot more likely to face deep disappointment.
I’ve only seen two groups of people really excited about this pick: Christian right-wingers and the NRO neocon crowd. I think these two groups have something in common that explains this, and I think it is a very dangerous kind of thing for any political group to have.
Both Christian right-wingers and neocons take the mentality toward problem-solving that problems can be reduced to a couple of simple rules (cut taxes, outlaw abortions, bully small nonconforming states). When given a complicated subject, they don’t want to analyze all the real world implications, the possible consequences, and the probability distributions over those consequences. They want to find the principle that fits. Problem solving is a simple matter of pattern matching for them, not calculation. They may been speaking about experience for the sake of the McCain camp, but they show their true colors now: neither of them really cares about experience. Neither of them care as much about the candidate, as competence for them doesn’t come down to the candidate’s individual abilities, but rather to their conformism. What they do care about is ideology. And they care deeply about ideological purity. They care about how tightly a candidate conforms to certain rules — their rules. And it stands to reason that they should be this way, considering that it’s the only way you could get excited about a candidate you don’t know anything about.
They didn’t need to hear much. They just needed to hear that she was willing to toe the line on their rules, and they were excited. Because that’s what a good leader is to them.
When I was younger, I played an awful lot of chess, and the interesting thing about chess is that you start off being taught a number of rules about where to position your pieces, what kinds of positions are better than others, and so forth. And then as you get better, you discover that rules aren’t nearly as useful as calculation, because chess positions are too complicated, because there are too many exceptions, and there are too many situations in which one must assess what to do when principles conflict. So I think learning how to be a good chess player is a matter of moving from principles to calculation. I think this sort of thing is also true about deciding what kind of actions to take — practical reasoning of all kinds, from moral to political. You began at the principles stage, and you progress to the calculation stage. My thesis about the NRO mindset, about conservatism as a movement, is that these people are stuck at the principles stage.
There is of course a lot of downsides to this, not the least of which is that you end up making very stupid decisions. But there is another problem here too that’s more germane right now. I can’t for the life of myself figure out why, if McCain wanted a woman, Kay Bailey Hutchinson wasn’t the nominee. She’s got all kinds of credibility on national security. Her qualifications to be president would never come into question. She would really bolster McCain’s angle about experience, and she would be no less historic than Palin would. But reading around I found this to be true about Hutchinson: for some reason the conservatives really don’t like her. Not sure why this is. It probably has to do with some fact about her voting record. And here you see the downsides of this “principles” mentality: you find yourself preferring somebody you know next to nothing about, because they toe the line, to somebody that you know an awful lot about, who happens to be imperfect by your standards. Well, picking unknown quantities is a recipe for disappointment. And I find it ironic that conservatives have always complained about the disappointments of judicial nominees. Well, the longer a public record anyone has, the less likely they are to be ideologically pure. So if you’re going to seek out ideological purity, you’re going to be selecting away from experienced candidates and gravitating towards neophytes. And, because the risk is higher with something unknown, you are probably a lot more likely to face deep disappointment.
But it’s over. McCain has won this. Obama has made too many missteps. Biden was an awful VP pick. McCain pulled it out in the last few days.
Really? Really?!!? Dude, I’d love it if you would explain further, but understand if you don’t want to. But “in the last few days,” includes, what, the Palin pick and the “Congrats Obama” ad? I really find that hard to believe. Could McCain win? Of course, but to declare it over now, just, wow, I don’t know.
But it’s over. McCain has won this. Obama has made too many missteps. Biden was an awful VP pick. McCain pulled it out in the last few days.
Really? Really?!!? Dude, I’d love it if you would explain further, but understand if you don’t want to. But “in the last few days,” includes, what, the Palin pick and the “Congrats Obama” ad? I really find that hard to believe. Could McCain win? Of course, but to declare it over now, just, wow, I don’t know.
Long time lurker, first time poster.
I really want to know how our military men and women feel about McCain picking this woman who is literally “a heartbeat away” from being Commander in Chief of the US armed forces.
How do ya’ll think career military men and women like Colin Powell, Chuck Hagel, Petreus, Clark, etc feel about McCain’s pick? How do think their female couterpoints in the military feel?
My guess: PISSED!
Long time lurker, first time poster.
I really want to know how our military men and women feel about McCain picking this woman who is literally “a heartbeat away” from being Commander in Chief of the US armed forces.
How do ya’ll think career military men and women like Colin Powell, Chuck Hagel, Petreus, Clark, etc feel about McCain’s pick? How do think their female couterpoints in the military feel?
My guess: PISSED!
More idiots on “our side”: Andrew Sullivan made a joke about the fact that two of Palin’s daughters have names of witch characters from TV series, and Alan Wolfe took it seriously and included it in a blog post. Disturbingly enough, Jonah Goldberg seems to be right here.
More idiots on “our side”: Andrew Sullivan made a joke about the fact that two of Palin’s daughters have names of witch characters from TV series, and Alan Wolfe took it seriously and included it in a blog post. Disturbingly enough, Jonah Goldberg seems to be right here.
You know, the Democrats have long carry the stigma of being wimps. I wonder if the Republicans have their own Achilles heel. I wonder if their loyalty is going to undo them yet again, and if, after this election, if McCain loses, we might see moves towards a more independent Republican party. If someone similarly unqualified as Palin were the Democratic pick the week before the convention, I’m sure the story over the weekend would be about Democrats galvanizing to force the candidate to choose a different nominee. Instead, on the Republican side, they just all as a group march collectively off a cliff together. Why did the Republicans lose both houses in ’06? It was because they couldn’t show a lick of independence or defiance towards their boob president. How might this damage the party now? Well they might be marching in line right behind McCain to electoral defeat. Palin is so bad (intelligent design? No global warming? No abortions even in case of rape?) that she might taint the Republican Party for a little while.
As a side note about Palin, since there’s no there there, the good things about her are things you find out about in the first five minutes of hearing about Palin. I have this feeling that because she’s such a vapid candidate, we’re going to see the most positive news stories come out first, and then the more people find out, the more negative these stores are going to be. I don’t think this is a candidate, despite the Republicans’ wild dreams, who was going to become more and more likable, the more people know her. The trend line on news stories is very important, and I’d much rather have somebody who started off negative and ended up surviving despite an initial outcry than someone who is being talked up, but then doesn’t live up to expectations.
You know, the Democrats have long carry the stigma of being wimps. I wonder if the Republicans have their own Achilles heel. I wonder if their loyalty is going to undo them yet again, and if, after this election, if McCain loses, we might see moves towards a more independent Republican party. If someone similarly unqualified as Palin were the Democratic pick the week before the convention, I’m sure the story over the weekend would be about Democrats galvanizing to force the candidate to choose a different nominee. Instead, on the Republican side, they just all as a group march collectively off a cliff together. Why did the Republicans lose both houses in ’06? It was because they couldn’t show a lick of independence or defiance towards their boob president. How might this damage the party now? Well they might be marching in line right behind McCain to electoral defeat. Palin is so bad (intelligent design? No global warming? No abortions even in case of rape?) that she might taint the Republican Party for a little while.
As a side note about Palin, since there’s no there there, the good things about her are things you find out about in the first five minutes of hearing about Palin. I have this feeling that because she’s such a vapid candidate, we’re going to see the most positive news stories come out first, and then the more people find out, the more negative these stores are going to be. I don’t think this is a candidate, despite the Republicans’ wild dreams, who was going to become more and more likable, the more people know her. The trend line on news stories is very important, and I’d much rather have somebody who started off negative and ended up surviving despite an initial outcry than someone who is being talked up, but then doesn’t live up to expectations.
I don’t think this questions Obama’s decision to go with Biden at all. There’s a reason why women prime ministers and presidents tend to come from the right: most people who wouldn’t vote for them purely on the basis of their sex are found on the right, but that can be countered with party tribalism. On the other hand, the republicans right now would be assaulting an Obama-Clinton (or Sebelius etc.) ticket as weak on national security, an ‘affirmative action’ ticket, a ‘Muslim-constrating’ ticket, whatever.
Thankfully Obama is still in the dominant position here; McCain has abandoned his positions and is coming to fight on Obama’s ground. He still might win, but it’s a very tall order. Palin is going to have to be awesome, and it’s hard to think of any September/October surprises that won’t play to the Dems’ favour now.
I don’t think this questions Obama’s decision to go with Biden at all. There’s a reason why women prime ministers and presidents tend to come from the right: most people who wouldn’t vote for them purely on the basis of their sex are found on the right, but that can be countered with party tribalism. On the other hand, the republicans right now would be assaulting an Obama-Clinton (or Sebelius etc.) ticket as weak on national security, an ‘affirmative action’ ticket, a ‘Muslim-constrating’ ticket, whatever.
Thankfully Obama is still in the dominant position here; McCain has abandoned his positions and is coming to fight on Obama’s ground. He still might win, but it’s a very tall order. Palin is going to have to be awesome, and it’s hard to think of any September/October surprises that won’t play to the Dems’ favour now.
The base is “all in” b/c they have to be. There are a lot of Repugs out their pretending to be thrilled with her “great executive experience.”
The base is “all in” b/c they have to be. There are a lot of Repugs out their pretending to be thrilled with her “great executive experience.”
“So when I get mad at people who are being sexist about a Republican, you thank me.”
No, he thanks you for saying that people should lay off the Down syndrome thing.
“Five Card Monty”
That’s “Five Card Monte.”
“So when I get mad at people who are being sexist about a Republican, you thank me.”
No, he thanks you for saying that people should lay off the Down syndrome thing.
“Five Card Monty”
That’s “Five Card Monte.”
More interesting than you think.
More interesting than you think.
It’s usually “three-card Monte”.
It’s usually “three-card Monte”.
everybody should read this
http://philosoraptor.blogspot.com/2008/08/ham-sandwich-mccains-actual-choice-for.html
everybody should read this
http://philosoraptor.blogspot.com/2008/08/ham-sandwich-mccains-actual-choice-for.html
”
Sebastian: “Moreover, some reporter (leftie or rightie, I don’t know) will pose this question: “Governor, do you plan to have more children?””
I eagerly await Jesurgislac’s response to this one.
I’m not a governor, but I plan never to have children.
…sorry.
FWIW, Sebastian, I was brought up to understand that the question “Do you intend to have children” or “to have more children” was rude and intrusive: should not be asked, and does not deserve to be answered.”
Great Jes. Ummm. I was quoting a rather more liberal commenter there…. You might want to direct your attention to that person…
”
Sebastian: “Moreover, some reporter (leftie or rightie, I don’t know) will pose this question: “Governor, do you plan to have more children?””
I eagerly await Jesurgislac’s response to this one.
I’m not a governor, but I plan never to have children.
…sorry.
FWIW, Sebastian, I was brought up to understand that the question “Do you intend to have children” or “to have more children” was rude and intrusive: should not be asked, and does not deserve to be answered.”
Great Jes. Ummm. I was quoting a rather more liberal commenter there…. You might want to direct your attention to that person…
OCSteve: “Obama’s biggest mistake was refusing to debate McCain when he challenged him to the town hall debates.”
I do think he should have called The General’s bluff.
OCSteve: “Obama’s biggest mistake was refusing to debate McCain when he challenged him to the town hall debates.”
I do think he should have called The General’s bluff.
“a ‘Muslim-constrating’ ticket”
Officer, I swear I’ve never constrated anyone in my life.
“a ‘Muslim-constrating’ ticket”
Officer, I swear I’ve never constrated anyone in my life.
“It’s usually ‘three-card Monte’.”
And many is the time I’ve enjoyed watching the tourists being taken in Times Square, while I spotted the shill.
Briefly. Hanging around and just watching for too long isn’t good for the health.
“It’s usually ‘three-card Monte’.”
And many is the time I’ve enjoyed watching the tourists being taken in Times Square, while I spotted the shill.
Briefly. Hanging around and just watching for too long isn’t good for the health.
Hartmut: “I don’t know why but I share OCSteve’s pessimism. It has nothing to do with what Obama and his team have done (or will do) but at each new ‘crazy’ thing from the GOP campaign, my forebodings get worse. Paradoxically the worst surge of doom expectation came while listening to the downloaded Dem convention speeches (my confidence dropping the more the better the speeches got).”
I wondered why this thread was up to 172 comments when I finally got home from work — some great stuff.
But, geez, Hartmut, geez, OCSteve, I had a god-awful day at work, a god-awful month, where the $1,000 I made is only $3,000 short of what I need pay our monthly nut — working on commission is a bitch in a bad economy — my schizo boss is anything but a calming force, and now I’m even more depressed.
Guys, from where I sit, this is still Obama’s race to lose.
I don’t think I’ve seen it anywhere yet on the ObWi pages that Barack Obama’s acceptance was viewed by some 34 million viewers in America — more than the veiwership of a New York Giants/New England Patriots Super Bowl, for Pete’s sake, more than the Academy Awards, even more than the American Idol season finale.
I’m sure there were some curious Republicans watching but have to believe the majority consisted of fired-up Democrats and impressed Independents.
We have the better candidates. We have the better platform.
Is this country really dumb enough to vote for four more years of Republican rule — more tax cuts for the rich and Big Oil, more war, more people being cut off from health care, more bull?
Hartmut: “I don’t know why but I share OCSteve’s pessimism. It has nothing to do with what Obama and his team have done (or will do) but at each new ‘crazy’ thing from the GOP campaign, my forebodings get worse. Paradoxically the worst surge of doom expectation came while listening to the downloaded Dem convention speeches (my confidence dropping the more the better the speeches got).”
I wondered why this thread was up to 172 comments when I finally got home from work — some great stuff.
But, geez, Hartmut, geez, OCSteve, I had a god-awful day at work, a god-awful month, where the $1,000 I made is only $3,000 short of what I need pay our monthly nut — working on commission is a bitch in a bad economy — my schizo boss is anything but a calming force, and now I’m even more depressed.
Guys, from where I sit, this is still Obama’s race to lose.
I don’t think I’ve seen it anywhere yet on the ObWi pages that Barack Obama’s acceptance was viewed by some 34 million viewers in America — more than the veiwership of a New York Giants/New England Patriots Super Bowl, for Pete’s sake, more than the Academy Awards, even more than the American Idol season finale.
I’m sure there were some curious Republicans watching but have to believe the majority consisted of fired-up Democrats and impressed Independents.
We have the better candidates. We have the better platform.
Is this country really dumb enough to vote for four more years of Republican rule — more tax cuts for the rich and Big Oil, more war, more people being cut off from health care, more bull?
Great link, KC.
And then there’s this from the same TPM post: Palin, who also recently said she didn’t like Hillary’s “whining,” reportedly apologized to Green after the whole thing blew up into an uproar.
This is the same Sarah Palin who applauded the same Hillary Clinton in her intro speech yesterday.
If Mrs. Palin has trouble handling an interview at some rinky-dink Alaskan radio station, I wonder how she would do with the White House press corps.
Great link, KC.
And then there’s this from the same TPM post: Palin, who also recently said she didn’t like Hillary’s “whining,” reportedly apologized to Green after the whole thing blew up into an uproar.
This is the same Sarah Palin who applauded the same Hillary Clinton in her intro speech yesterday.
If Mrs. Palin has trouble handling an interview at some rinky-dink Alaskan radio station, I wonder how she would do with the White House press corps.
Jes: “I made Pandagon peanut butter cookies the other day: they’re excellent, if rabidly feminist.”
Not fair to mention when a certain someone has a Saturday night sweet-tooth.
Jes: “I made Pandagon peanut butter cookies the other day: they’re excellent, if rabidly feminist.”
Not fair to mention when a certain someone has a Saturday night sweet-tooth.
“I don’t think I’ve seen it anywhere yet on the ObWi pages that Barack Obama’s acceptance was viewed by some 34 million viewers in America”
It says here:
Etc.
“I don’t think I’ve seen it anywhere yet on the ObWi pages that Barack Obama’s acceptance was viewed by some 34 million viewers in America”
It says here:
Etc.
ara, AFAIK Kay Hutchinson is pro-choice.
ara, AFAIK Kay Hutchinson is pro-choice.
“Is this country really dumb enough to vote for four more years of Republican rule — more tax cuts for the rich and Big Oil, more war, more people being cut off from health care, more bull?”
That’s different from 2004 how?
Sure, Obama is a better candidate than Kerry, though perceived as less “experienced.”
He’s also still viewed as Not One Of Us by lots of light-skinned folks, and thus all threatening and scary, and the Republicans still know how to smear and lie, and the mass media still loves to swoon and repeat those lies endlessly.
I don’t want to be pessimistic, but as I keep saying, after watching Richard Nixon win two terms, Reagan win two terms, G. H. W. Bush win a term, and G. W. Bush win two terms, I find it impossible to ever again be confident that the Democrat will win just because the Republican has crazy or bad ideas or a dubious history, or has crazy underlings, or strikes me as dangerous or incompetent, or because the Democrat is clearly, in my view, superior.
I’ve been there for seven damn elections.
YMMV.
“Is this country really dumb enough to vote for four more years of Republican rule — more tax cuts for the rich and Big Oil, more war, more people being cut off from health care, more bull?”
That’s different from 2004 how?
Sure, Obama is a better candidate than Kerry, though perceived as less “experienced.”
He’s also still viewed as Not One Of Us by lots of light-skinned folks, and thus all threatening and scary, and the Republicans still know how to smear and lie, and the mass media still loves to swoon and repeat those lies endlessly.
I don’t want to be pessimistic, but as I keep saying, after watching Richard Nixon win two terms, Reagan win two terms, G. H. W. Bush win a term, and G. W. Bush win two terms, I find it impossible to ever again be confident that the Democrat will win just because the Republican has crazy or bad ideas or a dubious history, or has crazy underlings, or strikes me as dangerous or incompetent, or because the Democrat is clearly, in my view, superior.
I’ve been there for seven damn elections.
YMMV.
“If Mrs. Palin has trouble handling an interview at some rinky-dink Alaskan radio station, I wonder how she would do with the White House press corps.”
Sorry to keep taking a different slant here, but that’s the same press corps that’s so ruthlessly and consistently held McCain’s feet to the fire, right? The same White House press corp that so thoroughly questioned the Bush White House during the run up to the Iraq War, right?
“If Mrs. Palin has trouble handling an interview at some rinky-dink Alaskan radio station, I wonder how she would do with the White House press corps.”
Sorry to keep taking a different slant here, but that’s the same press corps that’s so ruthlessly and consistently held McCain’s feet to the fire, right? The same White House press corp that so thoroughly questioned the Bush White House during the run up to the Iraq War, right?
Great Jes. Ummm. I was quoting a rather more liberal commenter there…. You might want to direct your attention to that person…
Well, Sebastian has me pegged pretty good, but I notice he does not address the question himself. Like the masterminds back of the McCain campaign, he figures that “mother of five” is an unanswerable selling point, just like “POW”. So Sebastian is content, like an in-house Karl Rove, to try to sic one liberal against another over “motherhood”. It is a clever tactic, and one has to admire it as such.
On t’other hand, the POW schtick has worn thin for McCain, and there is every hope that the mother-of-five schtick will backfire on Palin.
Especially if she answers the “rude question” as per Roger Moore’s suggestion at 1:39PM: by saying that she and her husband will leave that up to God. Even evolution-denying god-botherers are perfectly aware of the how-to of sex and the mechanics of contraception. Certainly, sensible people are — however steadfastly they pay lip service to prolific mothers (and ex-POWs).
My hope is precisely that a friendly right-wing reporter (not an antagonistic left-wing one) will ask Palin the rude “Do you plan to have more children” question, hoping to elicit a base-energizing response. As an unabashed liberal, I would love to hear Palin’s answer. Seb’s too, for that matter 🙂
–TP
Great Jes. Ummm. I was quoting a rather more liberal commenter there…. You might want to direct your attention to that person…
Well, Sebastian has me pegged pretty good, but I notice he does not address the question himself. Like the masterminds back of the McCain campaign, he figures that “mother of five” is an unanswerable selling point, just like “POW”. So Sebastian is content, like an in-house Karl Rove, to try to sic one liberal against another over “motherhood”. It is a clever tactic, and one has to admire it as such.
On t’other hand, the POW schtick has worn thin for McCain, and there is every hope that the mother-of-five schtick will backfire on Palin.
Especially if she answers the “rude question” as per Roger Moore’s suggestion at 1:39PM: by saying that she and her husband will leave that up to God. Even evolution-denying god-botherers are perfectly aware of the how-to of sex and the mechanics of contraception. Certainly, sensible people are — however steadfastly they pay lip service to prolific mothers (and ex-POWs).
My hope is precisely that a friendly right-wing reporter (not an antagonistic left-wing one) will ask Palin the rude “Do you plan to have more children” question, hoping to elicit a base-energizing response. As an unabashed liberal, I would love to hear Palin’s answer. Seb’s too, for that matter 🙂
–TP
“Like the masterminds back of the McCain campaign, he figures that ‘mother of five’ is an unanswerable selling point,”
Sorry to be critical here, but this is another form of mind-reading. You don’t, in fact, know what Sebastian is or isn’t figuring, and making declarations about things you can’t know about the inside of someone else’s head is not, I suggest, either wise or polite.
And you might not like it if someone did it to you.
Disagree with whatever Sebastian, or anyone, writes all you like, but declarations that you know what someone thinks are, I suggest, best avoided.
“Like the masterminds back of the McCain campaign, he figures that ‘mother of five’ is an unanswerable selling point,”
Sorry to be critical here, but this is another form of mind-reading. You don’t, in fact, know what Sebastian is or isn’t figuring, and making declarations about things you can’t know about the inside of someone else’s head is not, I suggest, either wise or polite.
And you might not like it if someone did it to you.
Disagree with whatever Sebastian, or anyone, writes all you like, but declarations that you know what someone thinks are, I suggest, best avoided.
I suspect the left progressive response is beyond the Republican’s wildest dreams. I am very worried about this. It would be a travesty if the Republicans are the party defending their candidate against sexist attacks. The Democrats are vulnerable here.
People need to drop that fake pregnancy story immediately. I would imagine most women would not appreciate people comparing their bellies with those of their teenage daughters. They also need to refrain from discussing Palin’s childbirth decisions. When women are vetted for public office, I assumed they are not grilled on their childbirth stories. These attacks are creepy.
TP wrote: ” Even evolution-denying god-botherers are perfectly aware of the how-to of sex and the mechanics of contraception. Certainly, sensible people are –” Have we decided to write off the anyone- who- had -more-than -two children vote? I have had 4 children, and the only time I didn’t practice birth control was the 4 months I was trying to get pregnant and my 4 pregnancies.
Her strong selling point is that she has proved that being mother of 5 can be combined with being governor. When asked about whether that is a problem, she laughed about neanderthals who actually believed that.
I guess I should be amused by all the people who hated Hillary Clinton who no relish her bashing Palin.
Think strategically. Handle her with care. She sounds like the woman Daniel Boone. I read that for years her family only ate the fish they had caught and the game they had shot. The media are falling in love with her.
I suspect the left progressive response is beyond the Republican’s wildest dreams. I am very worried about this. It would be a travesty if the Republicans are the party defending their candidate against sexist attacks. The Democrats are vulnerable here.
People need to drop that fake pregnancy story immediately. I would imagine most women would not appreciate people comparing their bellies with those of their teenage daughters. They also need to refrain from discussing Palin’s childbirth decisions. When women are vetted for public office, I assumed they are not grilled on their childbirth stories. These attacks are creepy.
TP wrote: ” Even evolution-denying god-botherers are perfectly aware of the how-to of sex and the mechanics of contraception. Certainly, sensible people are –” Have we decided to write off the anyone- who- had -more-than -two children vote? I have had 4 children, and the only time I didn’t practice birth control was the 4 months I was trying to get pregnant and my 4 pregnancies.
Her strong selling point is that she has proved that being mother of 5 can be combined with being governor. When asked about whether that is a problem, she laughed about neanderthals who actually believed that.
I guess I should be amused by all the people who hated Hillary Clinton who no relish her bashing Palin.
Think strategically. Handle her with care. She sounds like the woman Daniel Boone. I read that for years her family only ate the fish they had caught and the game they had shot. The media are falling in love with her.
Being mother of five for 20 years is certainly comparable to being a community organizer for a few years.
Being mother of five for 20 years is certainly comparable to being a community organizer for a few years.
The media are falling in love with her.
Links please? Who’s falling in love?
The media are falling in love with her.
Links please? Who’s falling in love?
Being the mother of four has so destroyed my brain that I can’t provide links:)
Being the mother of four has so destroyed my brain that I can’t provide links:)
Redstocking Grandma,
Well, I can find you some links. I urge you to give this youtube a listen.
In this clip, Palin laughs as two radio personalities call the 70 year-old, cancer surviving, grandmother, republican president of the Alaska senate a “cancer” and a “b****.” Really, really lovable, that lady.
Redstocking Grandma,
Well, I can find you some links. I urge you to give this youtube a listen.
In this clip, Palin laughs as two radio personalities call the 70 year-old, cancer surviving, grandmother, republican president of the Alaska senate a “cancer” and a “b****.” Really, really lovable, that lady.
“It would be a travesty if the Republicans are the party defending their candidate against sexist attacks. ”
The “Republicans” don’t have volition or agency. Neither do “the Democrats.” Only individuals do, and those who speak for organizations. Could you be more precise as to who you’re referring to, please?
“I guess I should be amused by all the people who hated Hillary Clinton who no relish her bashing Palin.”
Which people are you referring to, specifically? Could you explain how you know what they feel and think, please?
Thanks!
“Being mother of five for 20 years is certainly comparable to being a community organizer for a few years.”
Anything is comparable to anything. Could you, again, be more specific as to what you mean, please? I can kinda guess, but I’d prefer not to, as it isn’t wise.
Thanks again.
“It would be a travesty if the Republicans are the party defending their candidate against sexist attacks. ”
The “Republicans” don’t have volition or agency. Neither do “the Democrats.” Only individuals do, and those who speak for organizations. Could you be more precise as to who you’re referring to, please?
“I guess I should be amused by all the people who hated Hillary Clinton who no relish her bashing Palin.”
Which people are you referring to, specifically? Could you explain how you know what they feel and think, please?
Thanks!
“Being mother of five for 20 years is certainly comparable to being a community organizer for a few years.”
Anything is comparable to anything. Could you, again, be more specific as to what you mean, please? I can kinda guess, but I’d prefer not to, as it isn’t wise.
Thanks again.
No wisecracks. I will be serious. I was feeling a bit worried during August about Obama’s fall in the polls. After the Democratic convention, I was feeling much more optimistic. We escaped from the endless media claptrap about the Clinton/Obama enmity. Then I was rather shocked how completely the Palin selection drove Obama’s speech off the news.
I thought I had resolved most of my anger about the sexism and misogyny of the primary campaign and have been working hard for Obama locally since Hillary’s concession. But some of the attacks on Palin have reopened those old wounds. I find it infuriating to feel compelled to defend her from sexist attacks when I am utterly opposed to the Republican ticket. I don’t expect to find progressive blogs repeating ancient bromides on how can someone be a good mother and pursue a demanding career, on how she should have waited until her kids were older, etc.
No wisecracks. I will be serious. I was feeling a bit worried during August about Obama’s fall in the polls. After the Democratic convention, I was feeling much more optimistic. We escaped from the endless media claptrap about the Clinton/Obama enmity. Then I was rather shocked how completely the Palin selection drove Obama’s speech off the news.
I thought I had resolved most of my anger about the sexism and misogyny of the primary campaign and have been working hard for Obama locally since Hillary’s concession. But some of the attacks on Palin have reopened those old wounds. I find it infuriating to feel compelled to defend her from sexist attacks when I am utterly opposed to the Republican ticket. I don’t expect to find progressive blogs repeating ancient bromides on how can someone be a good mother and pursue a demanding career, on how she should have waited until her kids were older, etc.
Redstocking Grandma,
Is this sexist?
How about this?
There are plenty of women out there asking the same questions. The nice thing about us Democrats is we have lots of strong women, and they feel pretty much the same way that I do. That the laughability of this nomination should not get a pass just because she’s a woman.
Redstocking Grandma,
Is this sexist?
How about this?
There are plenty of women out there asking the same questions. The nice thing about us Democrats is we have lots of strong women, and they feel pretty much the same way that I do. That the laughability of this nomination should not get a pass just because she’s a woman.
I’m also wondering who’s been a mother of five for 20 years. Are we talking about Palin’s qualifications in 2028 now? She has been a mother of four for 7 years, though, and a mother for 19.
I’m also wondering who’s been a mother of five for 20 years. Are we talking about Palin’s qualifications in 2028 now? She has been a mother of four for 7 years, though, and a mother for 19.
Yeah, but that’s certainly separate from the motherhood related barbs and all that.
Yeah, but that’s certainly separate from the motherhood related barbs and all that.
RG, if you’re going to be infuriated by blog comments, it might be a good idea to avoid reading them until after the election, especially if you’re going to ascribe anything you read in them to “progressive blogs” as a whole.
RG, if you’re going to be infuriated by blog comments, it might be a good idea to avoid reading them until after the election, especially if you’re going to ascribe anything you read in them to “progressive blogs” as a whole.
The most sexist attitudes towards Palin are going to come from the very demographic they meant to court.
The most sexist attitudes towards Palin are going to come from the very demographic they meant to court.
Really? I’ve seen some pretty stupid, sexist comments from so-called liberals already….
Really? I’ve seen some pretty stupid, sexist comments from so-called liberals already….
I think that’s what Ara meant, gwangung. A lot of sexist comments are coming from women. Or maybe that’s not sexist? I’m truthfully not sure. Did you look at all at the article I linked to by Jane Smiley? She eviscerates Palin.
I think that’s what Ara meant, gwangung. A lot of sexist comments are coming from women. Or maybe that’s not sexist? I’m truthfully not sure. Did you look at all at the article I linked to by Jane Smiley? She eviscerates Palin.
Well, that’s not what I meant. I’ve seen comments on other blogs saying “Well, who’s going to take care of the kids?” from men who look to be from the liberal side of things. Don’t you think that’s pretty sexist?
Well, that’s not what I meant. I’ve seen comments on other blogs saying “Well, who’s going to take care of the kids?” from men who look to be from the liberal side of things. Don’t you think that’s pretty sexist?
Don’t you think that’s pretty sexist?
Absolutely, I do. But what about when Jane Smiley asks it?
Don’t you think that’s pretty sexist?
Absolutely, I do. But what about when Jane Smiley asks it?
I don’t expect to find progressive blogs repeating ancient bromides on how can someone be a good mother and pursue a demanding career, on how she should have waited until her kids were older, etc.
It’s not progressives who think a woman’s place is in the home. It’s the ‘covenant marriage’ types. The home-schooling types. The anti-choicers. In short, the fundies who call themselves the base of the GOP. They are the ones among whom I would sow discord with rude questions.
Hillary Clinton is a serious person. Nancy Pelosi is a serious person. Sarah Palin, frontierswoman, might even be a serious person. Sarah Palin, GOP candidate for VP, is a joke. I want to let the GOP base in on the joke.
–TP
I don’t expect to find progressive blogs repeating ancient bromides on how can someone be a good mother and pursue a demanding career, on how she should have waited until her kids were older, etc.
It’s not progressives who think a woman’s place is in the home. It’s the ‘covenant marriage’ types. The home-schooling types. The anti-choicers. In short, the fundies who call themselves the base of the GOP. They are the ones among whom I would sow discord with rude questions.
Hillary Clinton is a serious person. Nancy Pelosi is a serious person. Sarah Palin, frontierswoman, might even be a serious person. Sarah Palin, GOP candidate for VP, is a joke. I want to let the GOP base in on the joke.
–TP
I doubt that the people who sold John McCain on Sarah Palin had as their sole priority winning the presidency. Otherwise I would have to agree that it was a very dumb move.
However I think Palin represents a perfectly sensible decision by Certain Persons to beat an early retreat to friendlier (fundie and hypernationalist) political territory. They’d probably be thrilled if the Obama campaign got greedy and followed them onto that territory (in which case, naturally, Obama would get his ass handed to him). But my guess is that that’s not something they’re counting on, and it’s not something Obama will do.
My guess is that various people (other than McCain) have decided that while winning the white house is already a long shot, losing control of the base, and in particular not having the base turn out for downticket races, would be totally unacceptable and unthinkably catastrophic. Losing the white house is bad, but it looks likely, and in any event plan A isn’t working. Losing the white house and also dropping under 41 in the Senate, as unlikely as that looks right now, would be absolutely devastating. It would mean the end of an era.
Palin seems like an excellent choice if your worry is that that McCain’s candidacy is endangering the unity or enthusiasm of the evangelical voting block. It seems especially prudent from the POV of folks like Rove and Schmidt, whose personal power is based on their ability to deliver votes. The corporate wing of the GOP can, if necessary, survive without the evangelical unity. The functionaries and strategists and apparatchiks who run campaigns for people like McCain cannot.
Unlike OCSteve, Hartmut, and RG I don’t think, based on current evidence, that Palin will be enough to save the presidency, but OTOH… Ooh look! Mavericky! Photogenic! A beauty queen with a gun! I wouldn’t want to underestimate the pliability of the american media.
I doubt that the people who sold John McCain on Sarah Palin had as their sole priority winning the presidency. Otherwise I would have to agree that it was a very dumb move.
However I think Palin represents a perfectly sensible decision by Certain Persons to beat an early retreat to friendlier (fundie and hypernationalist) political territory. They’d probably be thrilled if the Obama campaign got greedy and followed them onto that territory (in which case, naturally, Obama would get his ass handed to him). But my guess is that that’s not something they’re counting on, and it’s not something Obama will do.
My guess is that various people (other than McCain) have decided that while winning the white house is already a long shot, losing control of the base, and in particular not having the base turn out for downticket races, would be totally unacceptable and unthinkably catastrophic. Losing the white house is bad, but it looks likely, and in any event plan A isn’t working. Losing the white house and also dropping under 41 in the Senate, as unlikely as that looks right now, would be absolutely devastating. It would mean the end of an era.
Palin seems like an excellent choice if your worry is that that McCain’s candidacy is endangering the unity or enthusiasm of the evangelical voting block. It seems especially prudent from the POV of folks like Rove and Schmidt, whose personal power is based on their ability to deliver votes. The corporate wing of the GOP can, if necessary, survive without the evangelical unity. The functionaries and strategists and apparatchiks who run campaigns for people like McCain cannot.
Unlike OCSteve, Hartmut, and RG I don’t think, based on current evidence, that Palin will be enough to save the presidency, but OTOH… Ooh look! Mavericky! Photogenic! A beauty queen with a gun! I wouldn’t want to underestimate the pliability of the american media.
“I don’t expect to find progressive blogs repeating”
Once again: blogs don’t say anything. Blogs have no thoughts. Blogs are just places where different individuals write things.
Individuals of all different views. There’s no editor. Talking about what “blogs” do or don’t do, based on what some individuals have done, makes no sense.
If you want to criticize someone, or someones, go right ahead. But the goldarn blog ain’t saying a darned thing.
“I don’t expect to find progressive blogs repeating”
Once again: blogs don’t say anything. Blogs have no thoughts. Blogs are just places where different individuals write things.
Individuals of all different views. There’s no editor. Talking about what “blogs” do or don’t do, based on what some individuals have done, makes no sense.
If you want to criticize someone, or someones, go right ahead. But the goldarn blog ain’t saying a darned thing.
I’m thinking that OCSteve has been commenting here for about 3 years and when he started, I seem to remember him as being a ‘if we could just get the government off the backs of the people, we could solve our problems’, so the transition to, ‘no way ideas are going to win, evil genius will trump them everytime’ eeyore democrat does my heart good. Now, if we can get Obama elected, and complete the transition to post gridlock progressive, I think we will be finished
A plethora of smileys with that.
I’m thinking that OCSteve has been commenting here for about 3 years and when he started, I seem to remember him as being a ‘if we could just get the government off the backs of the people, we could solve our problems’, so the transition to, ‘no way ideas are going to win, evil genius will trump them everytime’ eeyore democrat does my heart good. Now, if we can get Obama elected, and complete the transition to post gridlock progressive, I think we will be finished
A plethora of smileys with that.
OCSteve,, you’re giving me the creeps with your constant references to ‘monty.’ stop it.
and Obama whipped Clinton on health care with the mandate thing. everybody had been saying how knowledgeable she was on the subject–he went toe to toe.
in the end, she abandoned the substance and started in the 3AM phone smears. I guess you missed it. He won the debates and in turn the campaign.
byrningham, very interesting points. thanks for taking the time:
Of course the republican convention is going to own the news this week, it always was. Now, however, they have to decide if they press on with the ‘experience’ theme and flop, or regear their message and basically start the campaign all over again – it’s clearly not going to be as successful as the dem’s convention.
so do you think they think they can win on Energy? Drilling?
I’m in a bubble in the Bay Area, do most Americans disagree with Obama and Paris Hilton, who both see drilling as a stop gap?
I don’t see how they can win on that issue. there’s only so much oil.
It has to be about dividing women.
while I agree the Democrats have carried the water for women, Hillary did not make that point. And so McCain pounced.
Now, today, with Palin, the Republicans are successfully distinguishing among Women rights advocates those who do support abortion from those who don’t, a credible distinction which flies in the bay area.
and of course, women are not known for loyalty. so we’re stuck with the extremists whose ideological blindedness prevents them from seeing the Life in a fetus.
next, they start trotting out the stories about how Muslim men treat their women like shit and stories about the “great work” Condi has done on sex trafficking.
yea, houston….
OCSteve,, you’re giving me the creeps with your constant references to ‘monty.’ stop it.
and Obama whipped Clinton on health care with the mandate thing. everybody had been saying how knowledgeable she was on the subject–he went toe to toe.
in the end, she abandoned the substance and started in the 3AM phone smears. I guess you missed it. He won the debates and in turn the campaign.
byrningham, very interesting points. thanks for taking the time:
Of course the republican convention is going to own the news this week, it always was. Now, however, they have to decide if they press on with the ‘experience’ theme and flop, or regear their message and basically start the campaign all over again – it’s clearly not going to be as successful as the dem’s convention.
so do you think they think they can win on Energy? Drilling?
I’m in a bubble in the Bay Area, do most Americans disagree with Obama and Paris Hilton, who both see drilling as a stop gap?
I don’t see how they can win on that issue. there’s only so much oil.
It has to be about dividing women.
while I agree the Democrats have carried the water for women, Hillary did not make that point. And so McCain pounced.
Now, today, with Palin, the Republicans are successfully distinguishing among Women rights advocates those who do support abortion from those who don’t, a credible distinction which flies in the bay area.
and of course, women are not known for loyalty. so we’re stuck with the extremists whose ideological blindedness prevents them from seeing the Life in a fetus.
next, they start trotting out the stories about how Muslim men treat their women like shit and stories about the “great work” Condi has done on sex trafficking.
yea, houston….
Tony; Especially if she answers the “rude question” as per Roger Moore’s suggestion at 1:39PM: by saying that she and her husband will leave that up to God. Even evolution-denying god-botherers are perfectly aware of the how-to of sex and the mechanics of contraception.
In fact, a wide-eyed, dazzled look and a reference to being blessed with little miracles is one of Miss Manners suggestions for how to react to rude, intrusive questions about how many/how many more children you plan to have.
br: Absolutely, I do. But what about when Jane Smiley asks it?
Good grief. A sexist attack on a woman does not become less sexist because it’s carried out by a woman.
Tony; Especially if she answers the “rude question” as per Roger Moore’s suggestion at 1:39PM: by saying that she and her husband will leave that up to God. Even evolution-denying god-botherers are perfectly aware of the how-to of sex and the mechanics of contraception.
In fact, a wide-eyed, dazzled look and a reference to being blessed with little miracles is one of Miss Manners suggestions for how to react to rude, intrusive questions about how many/how many more children you plan to have.
br: Absolutely, I do. But what about when Jane Smiley asks it?
Good grief. A sexist attack on a woman does not become less sexist because it’s carried out by a woman.
Is this country really dumb enough to vote for four more years of Republican rule — more tax cuts for the rich and Big Oil, more war, more people being cut off from health care, more bull?
Unfortunately my opinion on that is: enough to move the election close enough to the point where voter purges, Diebolding etc. can decide the outcome. If a party can rely on 1/4 to 1/3 of the electorate/people eligible to vote being motivated* morons (although civilized countries are usually able to keep it at just 1/7**), keeping participation low (the US is particularly successful here) will do the trick for that party.
That it needs an Obama*** to come just within reach of winning even when the general situation for the “holding team” is as abysmal as it seems to me, it says a lot about the US (and not much positive). Or why else would the citizenry of a country allow itself to be run by the equivalent of the Marketing Division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation?
*or at least “motivatable”
**no scientific number but I find it surprising how often there is an “1 in 7 believe” for typical “Aaaaaaarrrgh!” positions (like “Hitler was right about the Jews”, “the church was right about witches”) or “can’t find xyz on a map”.
***i.e. someone with exceptional charisma, organizing talent etc.
Is this country really dumb enough to vote for four more years of Republican rule — more tax cuts for the rich and Big Oil, more war, more people being cut off from health care, more bull?
Unfortunately my opinion on that is: enough to move the election close enough to the point where voter purges, Diebolding etc. can decide the outcome. If a party can rely on 1/4 to 1/3 of the electorate/people eligible to vote being motivated* morons (although civilized countries are usually able to keep it at just 1/7**), keeping participation low (the US is particularly successful here) will do the trick for that party.
That it needs an Obama*** to come just within reach of winning even when the general situation for the “holding team” is as abysmal as it seems to me, it says a lot about the US (and not much positive). Or why else would the citizenry of a country allow itself to be run by the equivalent of the Marketing Division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation?
*or at least “motivatable”
**no scientific number but I find it surprising how often there is an “1 in 7 believe” for typical “Aaaaaaarrrgh!” positions (like “Hitler was right about the Jews”, “the church was right about witches”) or “can’t find xyz on a map”.
***i.e. someone with exceptional charisma, organizing talent etc.
In fact, a wide-eyed, dazzled look and a reference to being blessed with little miracles is one of Miss Manners suggestions for how to react to rude, intrusive questions about how many/how many more children you plan to have.
Miss Manners makes an emphatic distinction between ethics and etiquette, and makes no bones about the value of disingenuousness in the latter. Transparently phony excuses and trasparently insincere sentiments are the key ingredients of etiquette. My point is that transparent insincerity on Palin’s part would undermine her with her base, however much it comports with Miss Manners.
–TP
In fact, a wide-eyed, dazzled look and a reference to being blessed with little miracles is one of Miss Manners suggestions for how to react to rude, intrusive questions about how many/how many more children you plan to have.
Miss Manners makes an emphatic distinction between ethics and etiquette, and makes no bones about the value of disingenuousness in the latter. Transparently phony excuses and trasparently insincere sentiments are the key ingredients of etiquette. My point is that transparent insincerity on Palin’s part would undermine her with her base, however much it comports with Miss Manners.
–TP
“Nielsen said that 38.4 million people watched Obama’s speech as it was carried live by 10 commercial networks: ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox News Channel, MSNBC, BET, TV One, Univision and Telemundo.”
Gary, thanks.
Oatmeal in tow, I was making a point to log on just now to make that correction, which had been haunting my tired, old brain, which somehow confused the 38 million with the 34 million number I saw on the news — 34 million is the number of drivers AAA says will be on the road (more than 50 miles from home is what they use) for Labor Day weekend, another drop from last year.
Whether it’s 38 million or 40 million who watched Obama’s speech, I think that shows a helluva lot of interest — not just curiosity — about his campaign.
—-
Must say you have to be impressed with John Kerry these days.
First he gave a rock ’em, sock ’em speech at the convention and now he’s picking up where he left off as an Obama surrogate on “This Week” this morning.
Kerry: “John McCain wanted Tom Ridge. John McCain wanted Joe Lieberman. Rush Limbaugh and the right wing vetoed those picks.”
—
In retrospect, I think one of the mistakes John Kerry made was his vice-president selection, hindsight being what it is. But: Did Johb Edwards really have more experience than Sarah Palin?
—
The Sunday shows have pretty much concluded that George Bush will not make his speech at the Republican National Convention on Monday, D-day for Hurricane Gustav.
I’d say no George Bush would be a plus for the GOP.
“Nielsen said that 38.4 million people watched Obama’s speech as it was carried live by 10 commercial networks: ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox News Channel, MSNBC, BET, TV One, Univision and Telemundo.”
Gary, thanks.
Oatmeal in tow, I was making a point to log on just now to make that correction, which had been haunting my tired, old brain, which somehow confused the 38 million with the 34 million number I saw on the news — 34 million is the number of drivers AAA says will be on the road (more than 50 miles from home is what they use) for Labor Day weekend, another drop from last year.
Whether it’s 38 million or 40 million who watched Obama’s speech, I think that shows a helluva lot of interest — not just curiosity — about his campaign.
—-
Must say you have to be impressed with John Kerry these days.
First he gave a rock ’em, sock ’em speech at the convention and now he’s picking up where he left off as an Obama surrogate on “This Week” this morning.
Kerry: “John McCain wanted Tom Ridge. John McCain wanted Joe Lieberman. Rush Limbaugh and the right wing vetoed those picks.”
—
In retrospect, I think one of the mistakes John Kerry made was his vice-president selection, hindsight being what it is. But: Did Johb Edwards really have more experience than Sarah Palin?
—
The Sunday shows have pretty much concluded that George Bush will not make his speech at the Republican National Convention on Monday, D-day for Hurricane Gustav.
I’d say no George Bush would be a plus for the GOP.
Tony: My point is that transparent insincerity on Palin’s part would undermine her with her base, however much it comports with Miss Manners.
I’m not at all sure that Palin’s base would realise she was being transparently insincere. In fact, I’m not at all sure she would be insincere. I don’t really care. John McCain hasn’t been asked if he and Cindy plan to adopt more children: Barack Obama and Joe Biden haven’t been asked if they have/would like to have more children: nor how their feelings for their children will affect their ability to do their job.
(Insofar as Dick Cheney’s job included being rabidly homophobic in public to win votes from the Christian right, his feelings for his daughter did prevent him from doing his job. And yet I don’t recall that anyone – even the Christian Right – asked him about this before he took office, and I only recall one interview that even brought it up, during the past 8 years.)
Tony: My point is that transparent insincerity on Palin’s part would undermine her with her base, however much it comports with Miss Manners.
I’m not at all sure that Palin’s base would realise she was being transparently insincere. In fact, I’m not at all sure she would be insincere. I don’t really care. John McCain hasn’t been asked if he and Cindy plan to adopt more children: Barack Obama and Joe Biden haven’t been asked if they have/would like to have more children: nor how their feelings for their children will affect their ability to do their job.
(Insofar as Dick Cheney’s job included being rabidly homophobic in public to win votes from the Christian right, his feelings for his daughter did prevent him from doing his job. And yet I don’t recall that anyone – even the Christian Right – asked him about this before he took office, and I only recall one interview that even brought it up, during the past 8 years.)
Seriously? They won the last 2 elections.
And, as Gary notes, quite a few before that. All but three, in the last 40 years.
Handle her with care. She sounds like the woman Daniel Boone.
IMO this is exactly right.
Even for people who disagree with her on every available political position, Palin is apparently engaging and personable.
For many, many, many socially conservative people who were previously ready to sit this one out, Palin is catnip.
Asking whether she is going to have more kids is insane. It not only doesn’t matter, it SHOULD NOT matter. Women have children and raise families while holding positions of significant executive responsibility EVERY DAY. Anyone who wants to get on the other side of that is an idiot. Sorry, they just are.
IMO Palin was an astute choice. She will bring disaffected social conservatives back into McCain’s camp, and that will mean a lot of votes for him.
Criticisms of Palin should focus on matters of substance. Her experience or lack thereof is certainly fair game, as are her actual positions on issues.
Her gender should not come into it at all.
Making fun of her kids’ names or any other aspect of her lifestyle might be kind of entertaining as an in-joke here on a predominantly liberal blog, but if that becomes the thing that she is criticized for publicly, it will only solidify her value to McCain.
Those are the things that make her appealing to the folks whose votes she will attract. Attack them, and they will come out in droves.
There’s no point in discussing whether that’s good, bad, stupid, smart, well- or ill-informed, or whatever. It is what it is.
Folks may think social conservatives are boneheads and dupes, but they’re not. They just value different things.
And they vote.
If you want Obama in the White House, you have to take Palin very seriously. Her nomination for VP might be tactics rather than strategy, but tactics win wars.
Thanks –
Seriously? They won the last 2 elections.
And, as Gary notes, quite a few before that. All but three, in the last 40 years.
Handle her with care. She sounds like the woman Daniel Boone.
IMO this is exactly right.
Even for people who disagree with her on every available political position, Palin is apparently engaging and personable.
For many, many, many socially conservative people who were previously ready to sit this one out, Palin is catnip.
Asking whether she is going to have more kids is insane. It not only doesn’t matter, it SHOULD NOT matter. Women have children and raise families while holding positions of significant executive responsibility EVERY DAY. Anyone who wants to get on the other side of that is an idiot. Sorry, they just are.
IMO Palin was an astute choice. She will bring disaffected social conservatives back into McCain’s camp, and that will mean a lot of votes for him.
Criticisms of Palin should focus on matters of substance. Her experience or lack thereof is certainly fair game, as are her actual positions on issues.
Her gender should not come into it at all.
Making fun of her kids’ names or any other aspect of her lifestyle might be kind of entertaining as an in-joke here on a predominantly liberal blog, but if that becomes the thing that she is criticized for publicly, it will only solidify her value to McCain.
Those are the things that make her appealing to the folks whose votes she will attract. Attack them, and they will come out in droves.
There’s no point in discussing whether that’s good, bad, stupid, smart, well- or ill-informed, or whatever. It is what it is.
Folks may think social conservatives are boneheads and dupes, but they’re not. They just value different things.
And they vote.
If you want Obama in the White House, you have to take Palin very seriously. Her nomination for VP might be tactics rather than strategy, but tactics win wars.
Thanks –
Is this country really dumb enough to vote for four more years of Republican rule — more tax cuts for the rich and Big Oil, more war, more people being cut off from health care, more bull?
Yes.
And if that surprises you, I have to ask what planet you’ve been on for the last 40 years.
Thanks –
Is this country really dumb enough to vote for four more years of Republican rule — more tax cuts for the rich and Big Oil, more war, more people being cut off from health care, more bull?
Yes.
And if that surprises you, I have to ask what planet you’ve been on for the last 40 years.
Thanks –
I would hope concerns about firing city employees for petty reasons (and lying about it), raising taxes for dubious projects and leaving a city in debt would classify as substantial.
I would hope concerns about firing city employees for petty reasons (and lying about it), raising taxes for dubious projects and leaving a city in debt would classify as substantial.
I would hope concerns about firing city employees for petty reasons (and lying about it), raising taxes for dubious projects and leaving a city in debt would classify as substantial.
Me too.
Thanks –
I would hope concerns about firing city employees for petty reasons (and lying about it), raising taxes for dubious projects and leaving a city in debt would classify as substantial.
Me too.
Thanks –
I would hope concerns about firing city employees for petty reasons (and lying about it), raising taxes for dubious projects and leaving a city in debt would classify as substantial.
I would hope that they are considered substantial, and more worth discussing than issues about how Palin’s going to cope with childcare if she’s Vice President.
I would hope concerns about firing city employees for petty reasons (and lying about it), raising taxes for dubious projects and leaving a city in debt would classify as substantial.
I would hope that they are considered substantial, and more worth discussing than issues about how Palin’s going to cope with childcare if she’s Vice President.
“Asking whether she is going to have more kids is insane. It not only doesn’t matter, it SHOULD NOT matter. Women have children and raise families while holding positions of significant executive responsibility EVERY DAY. Anyone who wants to get on the other side of that is an idiot. Sorry, they just are.”
Since I haven’t spoken to the substance of this, I’d like to get behind what Russell says here (as is usually the case).
Frankly, I agree that there have been plenty of sexist, tasteless, stupid remarks made by various folks on this blog in the wake of Palin’s nomination, and I wish people would think a bit more before typing. If you want to be a sexist jerk with your best buddies, in private, the rest of us won’t know about it, but you’re in public here, illusions to the contrary otherwise, so consider that, at least.
“Asking whether she is going to have more kids is insane. It not only doesn’t matter, it SHOULD NOT matter. Women have children and raise families while holding positions of significant executive responsibility EVERY DAY. Anyone who wants to get on the other side of that is an idiot. Sorry, they just are.”
Since I haven’t spoken to the substance of this, I’d like to get behind what Russell says here (as is usually the case).
Frankly, I agree that there have been plenty of sexist, tasteless, stupid remarks made by various folks on this blog in the wake of Palin’s nomination, and I wish people would think a bit more before typing. If you want to be a sexist jerk with your best buddies, in private, the rest of us won’t know about it, but you’re in public here, illusions to the contrary otherwise, so consider that, at least.
Russell, Gary, or anybody else: not many American women I know in real life have 5 kids. None, that I know, are leaving it up to god, or even to chance, whether to have more. Maybe I hang around with the wrong kind of women, but they all view having kids as a choice. Sarah Palin strongly stands against allowing women certain kinds of choice. She is prepared (nay, eager) to judge other women’s choices. Why are her own so sacred?
–TP
Russell, Gary, or anybody else: not many American women I know in real life have 5 kids. None, that I know, are leaving it up to god, or even to chance, whether to have more. Maybe I hang around with the wrong kind of women, but they all view having kids as a choice. Sarah Palin strongly stands against allowing women certain kinds of choice. She is prepared (nay, eager) to judge other women’s choices. Why are her own so sacred?
–TP
Tony,
To follow up, it’s not that she’s just willing to judge other women’s choices. She’s willing to limit them through legislation.
Tony,
To follow up, it’s not that she’s just willing to judge other women’s choices. She’s willing to limit them through legislation.
To follow up on my comments above re the baby-substitution rumors:
There was a big to-do on DailyKos about this yesterday, and I was persuaded by the evidence there that Palin is indeed the mother of the baby. However, it’s also clear that she repeatedly took risks AMA, and she’s very lucky she didn’t have an obstetric disaster.
Combined with her personnel problems as Governor and even as small-town Mayor, where she fired the police chief and the library director for “not fully supporting her efforts to govern”, I now suspect that she’s what Robert Altemeyer calls a “double high” authoritarian. No wonder McCain calls her a soul mate.
To follow up on my comments above re the baby-substitution rumors:
There was a big to-do on DailyKos about this yesterday, and I was persuaded by the evidence there that Palin is indeed the mother of the baby. However, it’s also clear that she repeatedly took risks AMA, and she’s very lucky she didn’t have an obstetric disaster.
Combined with her personnel problems as Governor and even as small-town Mayor, where she fired the police chief and the library director for “not fully supporting her efforts to govern”, I now suspect that she’s what Robert Altemeyer calls a “double high” authoritarian. No wonder McCain calls her a soul mate.
She is prepared (nay, eager) to judge other women’s choices. Why are her own so sacred?
They are as sacred as anyone else’s, and for the same reasons.
Look, it’s not anyone’s business how many kids someone has. And we all want to keep it that way. Trust me on this.
I also do not think we want to travel down the path of claiming that childrearing is an impediment to holding responsible public positions. People can, and do, raise families of all kinds of sizes, while effectively carrying out responsible public careers. Please, please, please let that one be.
Palin is apparently a strong social conservative. A desire to limit other people’s choices may well come with that. The best response to that is to insist that everyone deserves to make the choices that are best for them, not to denigrate the choices that Palin has made.
If there is demonstrable incompetence or ineffectiveness in her resume, that’s fair game. But leave the family angle out of it. There is no, absolutely no, upside to it.
The reason there’s no upside is because it is, and ought to be, out of bounds.
Thanks –
She is prepared (nay, eager) to judge other women’s choices. Why are her own so sacred?
They are as sacred as anyone else’s, and for the same reasons.
Look, it’s not anyone’s business how many kids someone has. And we all want to keep it that way. Trust me on this.
I also do not think we want to travel down the path of claiming that childrearing is an impediment to holding responsible public positions. People can, and do, raise families of all kinds of sizes, while effectively carrying out responsible public careers. Please, please, please let that one be.
Palin is apparently a strong social conservative. A desire to limit other people’s choices may well come with that. The best response to that is to insist that everyone deserves to make the choices that are best for them, not to denigrate the choices that Palin has made.
If there is demonstrable incompetence or ineffectiveness in her resume, that’s fair game. But leave the family angle out of it. There is no, absolutely no, upside to it.
The reason there’s no upside is because it is, and ought to be, out of bounds.
Thanks –
I tend to agree that the story is out of bounds — tho that doesn’t stop me from hoping somebody in the media pursues it out of morbid curiosity and the GOP ticket ends up looking like a daytime talk show outttake. Altho that might be a selling point with much of the electorate.
That said, I think Dr. Science has missed some possibilities:
the story she tells — her water broke in Texas, she flew back to Alaska so the baby would be born there (at least 8 hours), she was back to work in 3 days — is flatly incredible.
a) Commercial airlines will not transport a woman who is more than 8 months pregnant.
If you don’t tell them, and show up in a good maternity dress and are really careful about how you walk when in front of the gatekeepers, you can probably get away with it. Alaska, home of libertarianism, right?
Also, they actually will allow it with a doctor’s note.
b) Unless there are complications, labor is shorter after baby #1…. To start an 8-hour trip after labor has begun with your fifth child is *insane*
Even for a later child, water can break a day or more before full labor begins. If this was her pattern with her first 4 kids, she could have fairly reasonably figured she had a day or so this time too. Not great judgment, but not crazy, or biologically impossible.
c) no responsible obstetrician or mother-to-be would let her be out of touch with a hospital late in a pregnancy with a high-risk child. Knowing ahead of time the baby had Down’s, it would be whacky-irresponsible not to be within half an hour of a hospital with a neonatal ICU at all times for the final month.
I agree. But did she know? IIRC, sonagram and amnio are still optional neonatal procedures.
I tend to agree that the story is out of bounds — tho that doesn’t stop me from hoping somebody in the media pursues it out of morbid curiosity and the GOP ticket ends up looking like a daytime talk show outttake. Altho that might be a selling point with much of the electorate.
That said, I think Dr. Science has missed some possibilities:
the story she tells — her water broke in Texas, she flew back to Alaska so the baby would be born there (at least 8 hours), she was back to work in 3 days — is flatly incredible.
a) Commercial airlines will not transport a woman who is more than 8 months pregnant.
If you don’t tell them, and show up in a good maternity dress and are really careful about how you walk when in front of the gatekeepers, you can probably get away with it. Alaska, home of libertarianism, right?
Also, they actually will allow it with a doctor’s note.
b) Unless there are complications, labor is shorter after baby #1…. To start an 8-hour trip after labor has begun with your fifth child is *insane*
Even for a later child, water can break a day or more before full labor begins. If this was her pattern with her first 4 kids, she could have fairly reasonably figured she had a day or so this time too. Not great judgment, but not crazy, or biologically impossible.
c) no responsible obstetrician or mother-to-be would let her be out of touch with a hospital late in a pregnancy with a high-risk child. Knowing ahead of time the baby had Down’s, it would be whacky-irresponsible not to be within half an hour of a hospital with a neonatal ICU at all times for the final month.
I agree. But did she know? IIRC, sonagram and amnio are still optional neonatal procedures.
“And if that surprises you, I have to ask what planet you’ve been on for the last 40 years.”
I guess it didn’t come over that way but I was asking that rhetorically.
Nevertheless, I still feel it’s Obama’s race to lose.
“And if that surprises you, I have to ask what planet you’ve been on for the last 40 years.”
I guess it didn’t come over that way but I was asking that rhetorically.
Nevertheless, I still feel it’s Obama’s race to lose.
Crafty:
She definitely knew she had a DS child, and had decided to keep it.
What I have recently heard — on a conservative women’s site — is that it was her 8th month and she really really wanted to go hear this speech in TX. Her docs advised against it and she went AMA.
She started leaking amniotic fluid but wasn’t in full labor when she got on the plane back to AK. She officially said “she wanted the baby to born on Alaskan soil” but that’s total bull.
My guess is that she knew that if she let a doc in TX look at her she’d be in the hospital hooked up to monitors inside & out before you can say “boo” and she’d be there for *at least* a couple of days. Chances were that she’d have the baby in an unfamiliar hospital, with unfamiliar docs, without her family.
So she took a gamble and flew back to Alaska. I would be *really* surprised if she had much medical advice at all for that decision, and if she did she disregarded it. I don’t think she could get a doctor’s note saying it was OK, either — that’s a hell of a long flight, and obstetricians are *really* twitchy about risk.
Crafty:
She definitely knew she had a DS child, and had decided to keep it.
What I have recently heard — on a conservative women’s site — is that it was her 8th month and she really really wanted to go hear this speech in TX. Her docs advised against it and she went AMA.
She started leaking amniotic fluid but wasn’t in full labor when she got on the plane back to AK. She officially said “she wanted the baby to born on Alaskan soil” but that’s total bull.
My guess is that she knew that if she let a doc in TX look at her she’d be in the hospital hooked up to monitors inside & out before you can say “boo” and she’d be there for *at least* a couple of days. Chances were that she’d have the baby in an unfamiliar hospital, with unfamiliar docs, without her family.
So she took a gamble and flew back to Alaska. I would be *really* surprised if she had much medical advice at all for that decision, and if she did she disregarded it. I don’t think she could get a doctor’s note saying it was OK, either — that’s a hell of a long flight, and obstetricians are *really* twitchy about risk.
“Palin is apparently a strong social conservative. A desire to limit other people’s choices may well come with that.”
A desire to limit other people’s choices comes with being a politician. If you think being a social liberal doesn’t come with a desire to limit other people’s choices, you’re pretty selective about what you’re willing to admit is a restriction on other people’s choices.
“Palin is apparently a strong social conservative. A desire to limit other people’s choices may well come with that.”
A desire to limit other people’s choices comes with being a politician. If you think being a social liberal doesn’t come with a desire to limit other people’s choices, you’re pretty selective about what you’re willing to admit is a restriction on other people’s choices.
If you think being a social liberal doesn’t come with a desire to limit other people’s choices, you’re pretty selective about what you’re willing to admit is a restriction on other people’s choices.
You talking about guns? I wasn’t, and I’m not interested in doing so.
The issue on the table was discussion of Palin’s family. The choices she is likely to want to restrict are, likewise, to do with families.
You are correct, social liberal policies restrict folks choices as well. People who are socially liberal think that the things they want to restrict are harmful, and that the restrictions are, therefore, net/net a good thing. People who are socially conservative, ditto.
Both are motivated by fundamental convictions about what things are important, and what things are good. Those convictions are, generally, pretty firmly rooted. We’re not going to change each other’s minds, the best we can hope to do is to learn to live with each other.
So yes, many public policies involve some kind of restriction on other people’s choices. I think the ones that Palin would like to impose are not good. I’d like to see her defeated.
I think talking about how many kids she has, and whether her parental responsibilities will prevent her from serving as VP, will not serve that end. It will make her into a victim, and motivate folks who are so inclined to support her.
Plus, unless someone can actually demonstrate irresponsibility on the job due to parental responsibilities, it’s not any of our business how many kids she has.
Thanks –
If you think being a social liberal doesn’t come with a desire to limit other people’s choices, you’re pretty selective about what you’re willing to admit is a restriction on other people’s choices.
You talking about guns? I wasn’t, and I’m not interested in doing so.
The issue on the table was discussion of Palin’s family. The choices she is likely to want to restrict are, likewise, to do with families.
You are correct, social liberal policies restrict folks choices as well. People who are socially liberal think that the things they want to restrict are harmful, and that the restrictions are, therefore, net/net a good thing. People who are socially conservative, ditto.
Both are motivated by fundamental convictions about what things are important, and what things are good. Those convictions are, generally, pretty firmly rooted. We’re not going to change each other’s minds, the best we can hope to do is to learn to live with each other.
So yes, many public policies involve some kind of restriction on other people’s choices. I think the ones that Palin would like to impose are not good. I’d like to see her defeated.
I think talking about how many kids she has, and whether her parental responsibilities will prevent her from serving as VP, will not serve that end. It will make her into a victim, and motivate folks who are so inclined to support her.
Plus, unless someone can actually demonstrate irresponsibility on the job due to parental responsibilities, it’s not any of our business how many kids she has.
Thanks –
“A desire to limit other people’s choices comes with being a politician. If you think being a social liberal doesn’t come with a desire to limit other people’s choices, you’re pretty selective about what you’re willing to admit is a restriction on other people’s choices.”
I won’t entirely disagree, but I think you’re still overly limiting. Both conservative and liberal politicians desire to both expand and limit people’s choices in various areas. Occasionally they even agree. But mostly they tend to want to expand and limit people’s choices in different areas.
Libertarians also want to expand choices, but only in one particular way, and they bridle and disagree with expanding people’s choices in other fashions.
Some examples would be by, say, making available various kinds of help via laws or governmental initiative; you’re free to disagree with those ideas, but many of them are, nonetheless, about expanding people’s choices, such as say, the choice to have mental or physical health treatment they couldn’t otherwise afford, housing they couldn’t otherwise afford, or from which they might be discriminated against, etc., and so on.
But, sure, politicians of most ilks also want to limit various choices, too. Most folks agree on limiting people’s ability to choose to kill their neighbor by their own initiative, for instance.
Other choices are more controversial, and that’s where we get that whole “let’s try to agree by democracy and compromise,” and all that, stuff.
“A desire to limit other people’s choices comes with being a politician. If you think being a social liberal doesn’t come with a desire to limit other people’s choices, you’re pretty selective about what you’re willing to admit is a restriction on other people’s choices.”
I won’t entirely disagree, but I think you’re still overly limiting. Both conservative and liberal politicians desire to both expand and limit people’s choices in various areas. Occasionally they even agree. But mostly they tend to want to expand and limit people’s choices in different areas.
Libertarians also want to expand choices, but only in one particular way, and they bridle and disagree with expanding people’s choices in other fashions.
Some examples would be by, say, making available various kinds of help via laws or governmental initiative; you’re free to disagree with those ideas, but many of them are, nonetheless, about expanding people’s choices, such as say, the choice to have mental or physical health treatment they couldn’t otherwise afford, housing they couldn’t otherwise afford, or from which they might be discriminated against, etc., and so on.
But, sure, politicians of most ilks also want to limit various choices, too. Most folks agree on limiting people’s ability to choose to kill their neighbor by their own initiative, for instance.
Other choices are more controversial, and that’s where we get that whole “let’s try to agree by democracy and compromise,” and all that, stuff.
My guess is that she knew that if she let a doc in TX look at her she’d be in the hospital hooked up to monitors inside & out before you can say “boo” and she’d be there for *at least* a couple of days. Chances were that she’d have the baby in an unfamiliar hospital, with unfamiliar docs, without her family.
Well, her husband went with her to Texas, I gather, so she’d have had him by her side at least.
I agree with your analysis – I think the point at which she must have lied is when she claimed she’d got her doctor to okay the flight. I can’t believe a doctor – any doctor – would okay a flight for a pregnant woman after her waters broke unless it was a Medevac.
My guess is that she knew that if she let a doc in TX look at her she’d be in the hospital hooked up to monitors inside & out before you can say “boo” and she’d be there for *at least* a couple of days. Chances were that she’d have the baby in an unfamiliar hospital, with unfamiliar docs, without her family.
Well, her husband went with her to Texas, I gather, so she’d have had him by her side at least.
I agree with your analysis – I think the point at which she must have lied is when she claimed she’d got her doctor to okay the flight. I can’t believe a doctor – any doctor – would okay a flight for a pregnant woman after her waters broke unless it was a Medevac.