Palin-Drone
BySarah Palin gave her first TV interview since her VP nomination last night. Not everyone was convinced she performed badly. The New York Post described “war mom” Palin (her son is headed to Iraq, don’t you know) as “poised and self-confident” during a “gaffe-free session.”
Others beg to differ. The The New York Times’ Allesandra Stanley compared Palin’s performance to that of “a student trying to bend prepared answers to fit unexpected questions.” While Slate’s Jack Shafer concluded: “Never mind about her not being ready to be president. She wasn’t even ready for this interview.”
I didn’t see the interview. But this excerpt pretty much sums up the criticisms.
Sadly, I doubt it will do much to dint her popularity. Since Palin’s ordinariness is one of her greatest strengths, I can already imagine a swathe of the US electorate watching at home, equally bamboozled by Charles Gibson’s questions and nodding their heads as Palin parrots the War on Terror talking points.
40 Comments
September 12th, 2008 at 10:41 am
It seems pretty typical to me. Politicians and pundits ALWAYS seem to try and bend talking points and prepared answers to certain sticky questions that nobody wants to get caught in. McCain does this, Obama does this and Hillary (my fave) certainly did this all the time.
I think she did fine. Not great and not horrible.
September 12th, 2008 at 11:33 am
She was about as horrible as it gets. Inarticulate, unthinking, phony, aggressive. My wife couldn’t sleep last night she was so terrified of this idiot becoming president.
And if she had said “Charlie” one more time…
September 12th, 2008 at 11:39 am
Did you see that movie Idiocracy? I didn’t like it because I thought the premise was so dumb.
I think I might give it another whirl. It is seeming more prescient by the day.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
As bad as Obama during a debate talking about the capital gains taxes?;) as well as his special foreign policy ideas towards Pakistan? Let’s get real. On one ticket we have a VP (Biden) who is more qualified that the P nominee. On the other ticket we have an unqualified VP with a reformed “maverick” as the P nominee. This whole thing is a disaster and I blame this insipid celebrity/ personality obsessiveness on the American people, who had the brilliance of voting for George Bush because he’d be a great guy to have a beer with. I am surprised, however, at how many bright people I know explain away Obama’s lack of experience and corrupt Chicago formative years. Well, I guess he would be a great guy to have as your professor in college so that’s why we should have him be our president. Unbelievable.
September 12th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
As a supporter of Hillary Clinton, you can’t be so averse to a little suspected corruption?
As for experience, I don’t worry about that with Obama because he has availed himself so well in his books, his policy proposals and his speeches (at least all the ones I have seen). He knows exactly what he is talking about and has concrete solutions for the problems we are facing. Concrete solutions that sound like they might work.
And yes, I’ll admit it, as a thinking human being I empathize with him. I like the guy.
This is hardly comparable with the delusional cult of personality/religious hysteria we see on the republican side.
The whole point of the Obama campaign is to move away from this nonsense.
September 12th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
Yes, Obama has great policy proposals. Let’s attack nuclear Pakistan and raise capital gains taxes because it’s “fair” even though raising them has been proven to generate less tax revenue. I’ve watched all the primary debates and I thought he was befuddled (yet charming) in most of them.
His book…. I suspect it’s marketing of an image, like most political biographies. I am not impressed. Do you like how he treated Alice Palmer and other candidates to win State Senate? Did he talk about that in his book? Do you think he had good judgement to give Rezko contracts to housing authorities that subsequently crumbled, and in one case even killed a child? And by the way, what exactly were his great accomplishments as a community organizer, state senator and U.S. Senator?
Honestly, I’d love to believe in the guy and I once did for about two weeks. I thought, oh, he’s such a good ethical guy…. even without much experience he will just know what the right thing to do is once in office. But once I started doing research on him (at the request of a very good friend from Chicago) I was very disappointed. The fact that the media and Democrats do not ask Obama tough questions on his past…. and worship his personality…. well IMHO this has certainly become cultish and it is blind to say only the Repugnicans are the cultish ones. I haven’t seen dems or the media be nearly as tough on Obama in regard to experience as they are now on Palin (the VP!) which is just insanity.
Hillary… we all know her baggage. She was fully vetted when she started running for the nomination. Too bad Obama wasn’t. But Hillary had her record and experience to stand on.
September 13th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Perhaps you will be proven right, but I choose to believe in him. For me his books were way more than the marketing of an image, they were deeply insightful and showed a man who has spent his life learning and thinking about how things can be fixed. Which is about as far as you can get from what we have now and what McCain/Palin are promising.
As for Pakistan, when he said:
“If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will…”
I can’t say I disagree with him. It is hardly invading a nuclear power. And I suspect he only said it to appear tough. We all know how much Americans love a tough guy.
And the capital gains tax… whatever… if it doesn’t work out, he can reverse it. Perhaps he has ideas on how to change the laws so this won’t happen. Either way, we have more important things to worry about at the moment.
I think the press are so tough on Palin because, you know, she’s an idiot. You only have to listen to her for a few seconds and that becomes perfectly clear. Perhaps they are trying to make up for not exposing Bush’s idiocy 8 years ago.
September 13th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Question… his invasion into the state senate via conquest of Alice Palmer doesn’t bother you? Is this a man of integrity? The Rezko housing authority doesn’t bother you?
I mention capital gains tax just because it was clear during the debate that he didn’t understand it, nor how to pay for his health plan.
And, what exactly did Palin say that was so idiotic during the Gibson interview and elsewhere?
September 13th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
I think its very amusing to see how everyone reacts to Palin, especially her first interview with GIbson. We are told over and over that if Palin wants the 2nd highest executive office in the land, she should be prepared to handle tough interviews.
Of course when Obama first came on the scene and announced his intentions to seek the highest office, the media wasn’t in such a rush to grill him on his experience on foreign affairs. Yet it was clear once he claimed the nomination that he was woefully lacking in this regard.
How clear was it? So clear that his campaign organized a field trip to Europe and the Middle East so that he could undergo the short training that surely is all one needs for the job.
How did the media respond? Complete adulation, they clawed all over each other in order to get a ticket on that trip and to be along side Obama.
I am wondering. If Palin announced tomorrow that she’s taking a 3 week trip to Europe, with the express intent of shoring up her foreign policy credentials, how many seconds would go by before her critics burst out laughing?
This is all you need to know in order to understand why Obama is doing so poorly in the polls. The general public, outside of the two liberal coastal areas, are frankly fed up with this kind of high brow elitism.
The fact is that Gibson, in looking to catch Palin in a gotcha question, gaffed twice on his own. First he misrepresented comments she made about the war and G-d. And second he assumed to have caught her bewildered when asking her about whether she agreed with the Bush Doctrine.
As Charles Krauthammer skillfully pointed out in the Washington Post today, there is no single definition of the Bush Doctrine, and he would know since he was the first person ever to put the term to use (in print). Gibson it turns out, was using a now defunct version of the doctrine.
In the end it is all the same. Americans, many of whom Obama failed to capture the support of during the primary, end up seeing a media and a candidate that is so in love with their own point of view and so ready to dismiss that of others, that they are reflexively running to the other side.
Before you go insulting the voter, its worth pointing out that the biggest swing in the past 2 weeks has been the independent vote. Isn’t that the vote that Obama and liberals have been claiming all along to be considering the best interests of?
Like I said, it’s all quite amusing.
To Cretin’s comment:
“And the capital gains tax… whatever… if it doesn’t work out, he can reverse it. Perhaps he has ideas on how to change the laws so this won’t happen. Either way, we have more important things to worry about at the moment.”
More important things than the economy? Oh, I thought that was the liberal cause of the day. It might interest you to know that JFK knew how important it was to keep capital gains taxes low:
“The tax on capital gains directly affects investment decisions, the mobility and flow of risk capital… the ease or difficulty experienced by new ventures in obtaining capital, and thereby the strength and potential for growth in the economy.” – JFK
You see, America is only as powerful as it is competitive in the marketplace. If you strangle the investor, they have no motivation to pump money into the economy. With many growing economies in the emmerging markets, its a lot easier today than ever for them to take their money elsewhere, say to Dubai, India or China.
But like you said, uhm, “whatever”. It’s not that important, and maybe as you said, Obama has other ideas on how to fix it. But probably not since he hadn’t a clue that low capital gains taxes lead to increased tax revenue. LOL. Glad you really thought it out. Now about Palin, were you the one just calling her the idiot?
CJ (ex-NY’er [native born], ex-Democrat)
September 13th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
I am sorry for my ignorance, I always thought there was a little more to the economy than the issue of capital gains tax. I guess I am an idiot.
September 13th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
Ali, I didn’t see your little comment up there. This Rezno business doesn’t bother me as I don’t know anything about it. Sounds like you are right about the press not doing its job. But if he only has one black mark in his past, then that still makes him a pretty good bet to me.
If you didn’t think Palin sounded like an idiot then I really don’t know what to say to you. I can’t be bothered defining idiocy.
I do not believe for one second that he didn’t understand capital gains tax.
CJ, you are nuts. To become a Republican after the recent record of the party makes you either evil, stupid or a contrarian. I suspect the latter, as you seem capable of stringing a sentence together and you show some compassion for the voter. Well congrats to you, if your insidious party wins, I hope you regret your foolishness.
Over and out. I am putting my head in the sand as I can’t take it any more.
September 13th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
“And, what exactly did Palin say that was so idiotic during the Gibson interview and elsewhere?”
How about the fact that her much touted “insight” into Russia comes from its proximity to an island in her state? She says she can see it! She apparently doesn’t understand the difference between sight and insight. Nevermind that she had no idea what Bush’s anticipatory self-defense policy is. She can’t even speak English properly — “vigilant against”? Durrrrr — how long will it be before she uses the word “misunderestimate”? After eight years of having a reckless, unblinking dimwit in office, I can’t believe that even Republicans, nevermind Democrats and independents, aren’t looking at Palin and saying to themselves, “FUUUUUUUUCK! Not another one!”
September 13th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
I don’t mean to suggest that capital gains tax is the only issue of importance when it comes to the economy. However I do know that it is of paramount importance, greater than most other economic policies. You suggest that if it doesn’t work out (raising them) that Obama can just reverse them. Unfortunately it’s not that easy.
The tax law is written by Congress. Once passed it will not be so easily reversed. Take the Bush tax cuts as an example, qed.
You (amongst others) say that Rezko doesn’t bother you. Fair enough, just one black mark, right? What about William Ayers? What about ACORN? What about Obama’s effete stint as a community organizer, where upon leaving his only lasting impact was negative? What about Alice Palmer being removed (along with everyone else) from the Democratic primary ballot (using very shady challenges to the signatures of the hard working poor that Obama claims to represent). In Chicago no less, leaving only one choice for a party nominee in a district that always votes Democrat. What about that? Is that the new kind of politics that we’re all looking for?
The media never does its job, that’s why you should take your head out of the sand and carefully evaluate who it is you are promoting for the next president of the United States.
And to think that you have the temerity to question my reasoning for supporting McCain/Palin, when you yourself have failed to perform any due diligence on your candidate of choice.
September 13th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
“Nevermind that she had no idea what Bush’s anticipatory self-defense policy is.”
Oh dear, and apparently neither do you. Once again, there is no single version of the “Bush Doctrine”, nor is there any official doctrine by that name. As Charles Krauthammer opined so succinctly in today’s Washington Post, Gibson is using the outdated version of this popular term. How does Krauthammer know? Oh, because he coined the term ~4 months prior to 9/11.
I refer you to the following:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
As far as Palin’s exposure to the importance of Russia in regards to U.S. national defense, I challenge you to explain how Obama has any more foreign policy credentials than Palin, while noting that he’s at the *top* of the ticket. If foreign policy is the great litmus test for this job, then Senator McCain has Obama beat.
Finally, I hope that such trivial matters, such as Palin’s use of the English language, or Obama’s miscount of the number of states in the union (there are 50, not 57) are not the defining issues of this election.
September 13th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
William Ayers? So you think he is a terrorist?
ACORN? So you think he is a scary radical?
“Obama’s effete stint as a community organizer.” So you think he is an ineffectual wimpy buffoon?
Alice Palmer? So you think he’s a fraud and a cheat?
I don’t believe you believe these things. You are too clever.
Now, head back in sand. For good.
September 13th, 2008 at 5:50 pm
Do I believe Obama is a fraud for using corrupt political tactics to essentially guarantee himself as the only choice for his district? Uhm, yeah I do. What else explains that kind of behavior.
A better question is why do you think it doesn’t matter? How does it jibe with how you described your reaction to his books?
Do I think Obama is a terrorist? No, but we know it is a point of fact that at least one of his friends is a former terrorist. Do you think Obama, if he wasn’t already a U.S. Senator, could even get a Pentagon security clearance with his connections? Have you ever applied for government jobs that require classified security vetting? It is not hyperbole to say he would never receive such clearance. Yet you want us to believe that he should be president.
Do I think Obama is ineffectual? Do you have any evidence otherwise? Can you detail a set of accomplishments that would befit someone who seeks this office?
September 17th, 2008 at 1:29 am
I don’t like Palin in the least but Gibson blew it on the Bush Doctrine question. Krauthammer (who apparently coined the term) counts 4 of them; Froomkin counts 6 (Bush Doctrine 1.0 was Unipolar Realism (3/7/99–9/10/01); Bush Doctrine 2.0 was With Us or Against Us (9/11/01–5/31/02); Bush Doctrine 3.0 was Preemption (6/1/02–11/5/03); Bush Doctrine 4.0 was Democracy in the Middle East (11/6/03–1/19/05); Bush Doctrine 5.0 was Freedom Everywhere (1/20/05– 11/7/06); and Bush Doctrine 6.0 (11/8/06 to date) is the “absence of any functioning doctrine at all.”) and the media is covering up for Gibson’s gaffe in the clip you showed.
Regards,
Inna
September 18th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
We don’t really have to worry about how she answers questions, whether they were good questions etc. It seems she has no intention of answering questions she doesn’t like – even if they come from a State Senate investigation. Cheney all over again.
September 18th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
“We don’t really have to worry about how she answers questions, whether they were good questions etc. It seems she has no intention of answering questions she doesn’t like – even if they come from a State Senate investigation. Cheney all over again.”
That’s funny. Sounds like a Senator who on his campaign tour scoffed at the press pool with the following comment:
“Guys, I mean come on. I just answered like eight questions.”
- Barak Obama after being questioned by the press about Tony Rezko
Full story was printed here at the Chicago Sun-Times on March 7th, 2008:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/huntley/830209,CST-EDT-hunt07.article
Do you folks even stop to consider that the things you are criticizing Palin about are either exactly applicable to Obama or in some respects far more applicable? The lack of irony in these comments is really breathtaking.
September 19th, 2008 at 12:52 am
Ok CJ, let’s assume you are not just a troll (or a racist), and you are genuinely scared of Obama. What do you believe is his primary objective in all this? Do you think he wants to set up a criminal gang in the White House? Get Farrakhan & Ayers into the oval office and plot the destruction of whitey? Something like we have now in fact, only an evil black commie version?
Palin is nothing like Obama. She is an idiot, he is not. She represents fear, ignorance and hate; he represents hope, understanding and unity. I say this with no irony whatsoever. I am hoping you’ll become so breathless, you’ll suffocate.
I am not interested in your links to evidence against Obama. (None of them make any sense anyway). I don’t care what you think of him, because with every persnickety, anal, pompous comment you make, I can tell, more and more, that you decided not to like him before you began your research to ‘out’ him. Anyone with this mindset can demonize anyone or anything.
I, on the other hand, began thinking McCain was a decent guy and a damned good alternative to what we have now. I thought it was … well not a win-win situation exactly, but not a win-lose one either. Through McCain’s actions I have now learned that he is a dishonorable, incompetent, opportunistic, idiotic liar. Someone who disagreed with the current administration so much, he chose a female version of Bush as his running mate. Bush bankrupted the economy, failed to catch Bin Laden after 7 years and trillions of dollars and decimated just about everything he touched. Oh yes, mustn’t forget, he’s a war criminal too. He sanctions torture. You want more of the same?
You have to be a troll. Or a racist.
And you kept me up past midnight you bastard.
September 19th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Cretin,
What you wrote is just horrible. You hardly commented on CJs points and then you call him a troll, and worse, a racist. You are not just out of line, you are being absurd. What did CJ write that was racist? Or does critiquing Obama and the actions and words of Obama supporters make one a racist?
If it is hard to critique Obama’s character and history without being called a racist, it’s really hard to have dialogue. And dialogue, real dialogue, could actually change a few opinions, and a few votes! For example, if someone could really tell me in an intellectual and respectful way why the Alice Palmer situation doesn’t matter, or why the Rezko housing authority fiasco doesn’t matter, perhaps I’d hear a side that I didn’t think of before and might consider voting for Obama. But this is not happening for some reason. And name calling is not going to add to your cause, CR, it will only limit dialogue. I’m afraid if such dialogue is halted, McCain is going to win by a landslide. Because people will just shut up, not talk and not share out of fear of gratuitously being called an evil republican or a “racist”. I’d prefer dialogue, real dialogue….
September 19th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Perhaps CJ isn’t a racist. He doesn’t sound like one. But most of the people in this country who hate Obama are. They see he’s black, they hear he’s Muslim, then they work from that position to do all they can to discredit him.
The “Alice Palmer situation” and the “Rezko housing authority fiasco” pale into insignificance next to the crimes of the current administration. An administration CJ supports.
I am not saying they don’t matter. I am saying they don’t matter very much. Not when you consider what is at stake. Obama cannot be an angel. He wouldn’t have got where he is today if he had been. But I am very thankful he did what he needed to do to get where he is.
You dislike Obama because you liked Hillary. I know how you feel, I came to dislike Hillary quite a lot over the primaries. However, I seriously doubt I would have clung to this resentment in the face of a McCain/Palin administration. You have to put things in perspective.
CJ infuriates me beyond belief. He seems so bright, but his position makes no sense. Perhaps he is rich and selfish? If he is a genuine conservative I don’t know why he is supporting the Republicans in their current incarnation. This is why I keep thinking he has to be a troll. Or something worse.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
Ultimately, I don’t care about Troopergate and I don’t care about Alice Palmer and Rezko — I really don’t. I care about policy, and the thing that really drives me crazy about this thread is how little it is mentioned. I care that Palin, who has a decent chance of inheriting the Presidency due to McCain’s age, is pro-life even in the case of rape and incest, pro-guns, pro-censorship, pro-abstinence education (oh so effective, right?), and generally seems to support eroding the separation of church and state. Because I believe in Obama’s policies — like not supporting the absurd gas tax holiday that both Clinton and McCain supported this summer — I’m going to vote for him, shady, unsupported (as far as I can tell, help me here) allegations from the past be damned.
Maybe Palin looked like an idiot to me in her interview because I already thought she was an idiot based on her political views. Maybe she is actually brilliant in some way that I fail to see. Scary, since maybe she’ll actually have a shot at overturning Roe v. Wade.
Is whatever Obama did to first get elected to State Senate so important that we are willing to let policy be completely sidelined, as it has been in this absurd discussion? Maybe we should all just go vote for Nader on principle; I’m sure he’s running agin, isn’t he?
September 20th, 2008 at 9:05 am
Oh, no time for a real response! But I appreciate not being considered a racist by CR:) But I think it’s equally unfair to call the rest of Americans who do not support Obama as racist. This is a really dangerous attitude. Also, I reread the entire thread. Does CJ support Bush? I couldn’t find evidence of that…. Are you assuming that he supports Bush?
I have lots of reasons for not supporting Obama. And so do other Americans. At this point I’m not going to say much more though…. it’s’ about time to say good bye to this thread. But all these assumptions we are making about one another during this election – it’s a bit sad. A lifelong friend of mine, a democrat and Chicago native, is voting for McCain in this election and just lost a 20 year friendship because of this. Again, this behavior is dangerous. Obama skeptics will not want to talk if they have to fear the people in their own party.
And Mrs. Cretin, Yeah, I hear what you are saying about policy. I am sure many in this thread have taken a long look at it but it hasn’t come up much here. With Obama I do look long and hard at his resume as much as his policy proposal, because his resume is short. I feel I needed to look at his history to gain trust for him and the belief that he will be able to deliver.
Also, everything that you just wrote about Palin is either false or an exaggeration. For example, she does not support abstinence-only sex education. She believes that birth control/ condoms should be part of the curriculum. On abortion, despite her hardline ideology, she has stated that the people should decide. And she certainly doesn’t believe in the separation of church and state. And she has not advocated that creationism be taught in science class! She supports science being taught in science class, including Darwin. I am not a Palin fan myself. I prefer experience;) But I’m just saying….
September 20th, 2008 at 10:24 am
Does CR support Bush? I assume he does, as he turned to the Republican party which has Bush as its leader and he supports McCain/Palin, a team as redoubtable as Bush/Cheney. I’d like to know what he (or she) does think. What made him turn? Was is 9/11? I don’t get it. Which is why it makes me so mad. I wish he/she would explain.
I believe in many of the tenets of conservatism. Small government, fiscal conservatism (not getting the country into massive amounts of debt), and cultural conservatism. I want no socialist revolution or Sharia law over here. I trust Obama on all these fronts. I do not trust his opponents.
Obama has had a lot of experience when it comes to institutional failures, and understands that government handouts don’t solve them. For example, he wants to reward good teachers with higher salaries and fire bad teachers. I support him as a centrist. Every time I hear someone calling him a radical, I just wince. All the conservative values that mean a damn, he supports.
I don’t think I could lose a friend over their supporting McCain over Obama, but I would lose a lot of respect for them.
September 20th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
“Also, everything that you just wrote about Palin is either false or an exaggeration.”
Help me here, because we obviously get our information from different sources. What exactly about someone who has said some of the things listed below makes her not pro-abstinence education, pro-life even in the case of rape, etc.? For the record, I don’t consider “creation science” to be science.
Palin on Sex Ed:
In an Eagle Forum Alaska questionnaire , Palin gave this response to the following question: “Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?” Palin: “Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.”
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-73417
Palin on “Creation Science:”
Palin was answering a question from the moderator near the conclusion of Wednesday night’s televised debate on KAKM Channel 7 when she said, “Teach both. You know, don’t be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it’s so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both.”
http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/story/8347904p-8243554c.html
Palin on abortion:
In November 2006, then gubernatorial candidate Sarah Palin declared that she would not support an abortion for her own daughter even if she had been raped.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/01/palin-on-abortion-id-oppo_n_122924.html
Palinon gun control:
“I am a lifetime member of the NRA, I support our Constitutional right to bear arms and am a proponent of gun safety programs for Alaska’s youth.â€Â
http://www.ontheissues.org/Governor/Sarah_Palin_Gun_Control.htm
Palin on censorship (granted, this one is shakier than the others since there are no direct quotes):
http://news.bostonherald.com/news/2008/view.bg?articleid=1117009&srvc=2008campaign&position=15
September 20th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
Thanks,
I’ll check out all the links that you posted – if I am wrong I would like to know. My source came from a radio program that I like and trust, but perhaps I have some more research to do.
September 22nd, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Oh, 28 comments. Wow!
Anyways, if anyone is still reading this, I read all of Mrs. Cretin’s links and just have a few comments and a few things to add in regard to Palin.
SEX ED: She clarifies her position on sex-ed 2 weeks after she made that comment about “explicit sex education” whatever that means. She does support educating children on contraceptions.
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-sexed6-2008sep06,0,3119305.story
ABORTION:
This is sketchier, and I think how DC Media Girl addressed this topic on the radio program that I listened to was very misleading. She quoted Palin as stating “the people should decide”. But it seems this quote relates to the prospect of what if Roe vs. Wade is overturned. This is of course scary to me. Obviously, there needs to be a new amendment in the constitution that protects a woman’s body. However, this doesn’t really seem to be of interest to either Dems or Republicans. Unfortunately so. I feel both Dems and Repubs use the issue of abortion to their own advantage. It works well for both that this is a hot topic.
CREATIONISM:
The creationism thing doesn’t seem to be a big deal to me. In the same article that you linked to, Palin clarifies about the topic of creationism in science class: “I don’t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum.” This is exactly how we addressed this issue in the multicultural Montessori school that I worked in years ago. When Darwin was taught in class, students (Navajo, Mormon and Hispanic) naturally brought up their parents’ viewpoints on creationism and discussion was allowed. I think allowing for students to express their cultural background is acceptable, although of course no religious viewpoints should be expressed by the teacher.
CENSORSHIP: She never banned any books. Period.
GUN CONTROL: I know very little bit about this topic but have very liberal viewpoints. Thanks for your link!
Ya know, I don’t really agree with many Palin’s conservative and religious veiws – but so far she has never tried to legislate her beliefs. And honestly, is she that much worse than say any other potential Repulbican candidate in terms of conservative values? What other Republican do people think would have been a better running mate for McCain? Despite all that I dislike about Palin, I do admire her fight against corruption and waste. But for some reason people prefer to mock her, and compare her to a flight attendant or school teacher. I don’t think this would be happening if she were male.
September 22nd, 2008 at 6:03 pm
We have to keep commenting on this thread. Berger is not providing any new posts. So here goes…
“…is she that much worse than say any other potential Republican candidate in terms of conservative values? What other Republican do people think would have been a better running mate for McCain?”
This does not say much for the Republican Party. If you think Palin is as good a pick as they have within their entire ranks I hope to god you won’t be voting for them! She is, after all, so stupid the party won’t even let her hold a press conference in case she speaks.
I would never compare her to a school teacher. At least not a very good one. Flight attendant, I can kind of see that, though I wouldn’t want her as mine. The voice and that fake smile would put me off my sludge.
If she were male, she’d be George Bush. Though he has not been compared to a flight attendant as far as I know, he has been compared to a lot worse. An attack on Palin because she is an idiot is not an attack on all women, it’s an attack on Palin because she is an idiot.
September 22nd, 2008 at 7:22 pm
I thought Lieberman was favored by McCain, and I would’ve applauded that choice. It would have said something about McCain’s integrity and his ability to not let his party be mainly organized around the pro-life/pro-choice divide. I agree that it’s a shame people are comparing Palin to typical female stereotypes, but I think that on the whole she is being mocked because she is so scarily similar to Dubya, and after eight horrible years, I’m beyond mocking — I’m ready to eviscerate.
September 22nd, 2008 at 9:23 pm
OMG, that’s so funny. I call Obama the democrat’s version of Bush. He sure knows how to steal an election;)
I would have loved Lieberman as a VP choice, too. Unfortunately, he doesn’t have the “presence” to compete with someone like Obama. Palin does. And we know how Americans vote – personality.
September 22nd, 2008 at 10:31 pm
If this new ad of McCain’s works:
http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/clout_st/2008/09/mccain-ad-takes.html
You could get what you seem to want. 4 more years of total misery for the entire nation, maybe even WW3, and another shot for Hillary. A politician with enough corruption in her past to fill entire books.
Perhaps it will please you to know that I’d vote for her in 2012. Her policies are very much like Obama’s after all. And I don’t care what sex a candidate is.
September 23rd, 2008 at 6:07 am
When is Paul coming back? My head hurts.
September 23rd, 2008 at 9:38 am
I find it interesting that the two people who are critical/skeptical of Obama provide facts and arguments to back up their points and the people who support Obama offer vague descriptions, links to articles that don’t support their point views, and right out ad hominem attack, (CJ is a racist!).
BTW the article you link about the Mcain ad, just proves that Obama is associated with three corrupt people, instead of four in Chicago! That’s a huge difference. /sarcasm.
Although I’m not as articulate as CJ, I am also a former Democrat. I will vote for Mcain and I find Obama to be an empty suit (at best), who doesn’t even speak well. Have you heard him speak off the cuff? He tends to use a lot of “uhs” and often sounds befuddled. Not that it matters….just keep in mind that Bush isn’t the only one who has problems speaking publicly,
Despite what you think of Palin she leads from the center and knows how to work with the Democrats. I can understand you don’t like her policies and that’s all there is to your argument, that and nasty comments about her appearance. If it was proved to you that she had the IQ of 150 you would still call her an idiot.
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:07 pm
I am so shocked and upset by you people. Intelligent well meaning people voting for McCain/Palin with all there is at stake in this election. It is beyond my comprehension.
The “undecideds” in this race clearly are racists. Nobody in their right mind could dispute that if Obama were white, he’d be way up in the polls. Or that those menacing ads of McCains have no racial subtext. Even Hillary used his race with her – “he’s not a closet Muslim, as far as I know.” I shouldn’t have accused CJ of being racist I’ll admit, he gave no provocation for this. I was a bit mad when I wrote that comment and wasn’t thinking straight.
I didn’t send that link to back up my position. Just to show McCain’s latest sleazy ad. He has no chance if he’s talking about the issues, so he’s back to demonizing Obama. Obama, like every other candidate in history, has a few skeletons in his closet. So what? Why aren’t you banging on about the Keating Five or friggin’ troopergate if this is the kind of thing you care about? Obama’s murky past just isn’t that murky, I have checked, I have researched, (thank you CJ, I performed my due diligence), and my conclusion? His past just isn’t that murky.
He wasn’t playing cricket when he got Alice Palmer taken off the ticket, I’ll grant you that. It was a bit sly. But it was also within the rules. There were allegedly a lot of false signatures on those ballots, so what he did wasn’t necessarily even that questionable. All other accusations against him relate to shady acquaintances from his past. Nothing damning has ever been proved, it’s all a load of hearsay. Well I have had shady acquaintances in my past, and guess what? I am not shady. Who the hell hasn’t? Certainly not his opponents.
I don’t provide evidence because it is fruitless. If I sit here and google for a few hours I’ll no doubt find lots of links to back up my position. You can find evidence to back up any position. I can’t be bothered playing that game, life is too short. One thing is for certain though, nobody has been able to provide me with any links to convincing evidence against him.
Palin? You think it’s okay for her to be president as early as next January? You think that because the best candidate with the best policies and an actual vision for the future of this country has the usual skeletons in his closet we should vote for Bush 2 and Bush in drag? Please, somebody help me, I am losing my mind here?
By saying I am attacking Palin’s appearance you are suggesting I am being sexist. I said I hated her false smile; I have been saying that about Bush for 8 years. So if you must make leaps like this, please suggest I am a misanthrope, not a misogynist.
One last thing I should clarify. I can see how it might get a bit annoying, my calling Palin an idiot over and over and never justifying this insult. Let me try and define idiot as I use the term. Here’s an example:
Biblical literalist = Idiot
There you go. If you need anything else, let me know and I’ll try and come up with some more examples. I am not referring to her IQ. There are no doubt plenty of psychotics with very high IQs. Though if Sarah Palin’s is 150+ I’d still happily eat my hat.
September 24th, 2008 at 7:52 am
I can’t let this go…
‘The “undecideds†in this race clearly are racists.’
LOL. That is so absurd.
September 24th, 2008 at 8:13 am
Okay, I’ll rephrase that a little. Many of them clearly are. And if racist is too strong a term, let’s just say their uneasiness has a lot to do with Barack’s perceived ‘otherness.’
September 24th, 2008 at 9:54 am
Rephrase it? I’d retract it. Then maybe apologise. But I wouldn’t have said it in the first place.
Cretin old son you have been royally licked. Despite the marital tag-team approach, you’ve been hung out to dry. Not even your most ardent admirer (and I count myself among them) should tell you otherwise.
Get out of the house, chuck a ball around a little bit, take some photos… your race is run, sir.
September 24th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
I ain’t going nowhere.
I hope I am wrong about the undecided voters, I really do, a lot depends on them. I actually found this article which gives me hope that Ali is right:
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/state/article818181.ece
I’ll apologies to CJ, no problem. Sorry.
That article also gave me hope that all Hillary supporters are not as, erm, passionate, as Ali.
As for as my being licked goes. I said a dumb thing, so that means Palin is a good candidate for the presidency, Obama is a shady backstabbing inarticulate crook and the Republican party, who have proven themselves to be disastrous on just about every front over the past 8 years deserves our votes?
I’ll concede to losing the debate if someone will just speak some sense to me. Why did CJ & Petitedove become Republicans when the Republican party lost its moral center and became a mouthpiece for the religious right? And what is the psychology of these Hillary women who can drop all Hillary stood for just because Hillary herself is not doing the standing? I’m off point, I know, I am rubbish at debating, but these are the questions that keep me posting. If someone will answer them for me, make me understand, I’ll go outside, I promise.
September 24th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
On second thoughts, you’re right Beau, I concede. Life it too short for this. I should have argued more coherently.
Goodbye.