As you know, the nation dodged a bullet last week — at least, a rumored bullet — when John McCain didn’t go off his rocker and choose Mark Sanford as his running mate.
Even though his status as a likely choice was the figment of fevered imaginations on the WSJ editorial board and elsewhere on the libertarian fringe, they mentioned him often enough, and their pulpit was bully enough, that I still worried a tiny bit right up to the last. In that corner of my mind, I pictured myself turning into Paul Greenberg, the Arkansas editorialist who has spent years of his life explaining to the country what a mess Bill Clinton is.
I didn’t want that role.
Anyway, having that perspective, I was curious as to what the Alaska press would tell us that we didn’t know about Sarah Palin. Editor & Publisher anticipated that curiosity on my part, but its first offering in that vein is pretty vanilla. The closest thing to a local insight provided by the Daily News-Miner in Fairbanks — going by the E&P excerpt, was this:
There was also some pandering right from the start.
“I told Congress `Thanks but no thanks on that bridge to nowhere,’ ”
Palin reported to the crowd in Dayton, Ohio. “If our state wanted a
bridge, I said, we’d build it ourselves.”
But the state kept the bridge money. That’s because
Alaskans pay federal gas taxes and they expect a good share to come
back, just like people do in every other state. We build very little by
ourselves, and any governor who would turn that tax money down likely
would be turned out of office.
That’s it? The woman’s been governor for two years and that’s all you’ve got to tell us that we didn’t know? That could have been written by somebody in Washington, for Pete’s sake! E&P says that’s the first installment in a series; let’s hope later installments get into some substance. It’s not like I’ve got time to browse Alaskan Web sites.
Anyway, until I read something out of Alaska in the vein of what I wrote about the Sanford rumors, I’ll assume McCain did all right choosing Sarah Palin.
Related Posts
The Anchorage Daily News goes a tad further in the local-insight department, but still doesn’t tell us anything we hadn’t already heard:
Even though they don’t seem to be Gov. Palin’s biggest fans, the ADN was still far more celebratory, with their "Palin Makes History" headline, than we would have been had it been Sanford. It’s a little hard to say exactly what we would have said in such an unlikely scenario, but my initial instinct would have been something along the lines of "McCain Goes Off His Rocker: Rumors that POW experience unhinged him prove sadly true…"
In case you’re wondering, Juneau didn’t break new ground, either.
Interesting… still can’t get a peep out of Brad as to whether this is the right time for Sarah Palin (mother of infant and pregnant teen) to enter the national political scene.
Let’s hear what Big Daddy Brad would counsel his daughter to do if faced with a similar situation. Stay with the current job that keeps you close to home to be with the infant and teenager or hit the road for the next two months to four years?
The troopergate scandal is going to be very interesting. If it’s merely a garden variety ethics lapse, something fairly common to virtually all GOP lawmakers, then it will probably blow over quickly and the MSM will do their duty and continue to ignore it like they always do for McCain.
On the other hand, if this turns out to be a genuine violation of the law then we have something that could actually damage the McCain run for the White House. After all, it’s pretty hard to ignore an actual felony indictment. Let’s just see where the goes but I don’t think it should be dismissed out of hand.
If Palin had gotten her wish(Alaska secedes from the union),would anyone have noticed?
“Alaska First-Alaska Always”
I just realized that I’m on the same political career path as Sarah Palin. I’ve been a PTO President. I’ve run for local office. All I need now is two things: become mayor of Blythewood and then move up to be Governor of South Carolina for 18 months.
Next stop: The White House!
Note to self: Prepare wife for required pregnancy in about six years.
Let’s compare Sanford and Palin:
Experience:
Sanford – 6 years U.S. House of Representatives, 6 years Governor of a state with about 4.3 million people.
Palin – Mayor of town smaller than Cayce; less than 2 years Governor of state with 600,000.
Ethics:
Sanford – No scandals that I know of. Sanford is a good family man by all accounts. I’ve seen him attend his young children’s soccer games. He has a good balance between family and public service.
Palin – Troopergate. She is running for VP thus abandoning 5 month old child with special needs and pregnant teen daughter at a time when they need her most. In effect she’s choosing self interest before family.
Oh yeah.. I also was a co-captain of my varsity basketball team in high school and could DUNK — take that, Palin!
My resume is stacking up pretty well with hers.
Palin says she’s the reform candidate.
1. She’s being investigated for trooper gate.
2. Her husband is a former Oil Company employee.
3. She took money from Vesco, the lobbist front company for the oil companies that were shut down by the FBI. And, Vesco Financed Ted Steven Federal indictment.
4. She’s a member of the Alaska Independence party who want to succeed from the USA. Sorry, we in SC tried it years ago, got the T-Shirt, and it was full of holes.
5. She is trying to keep Alaska schools for teaching sex education. With a pregnant daughter and a questionable source 5 month old baby, her message seems to have failed at home.
6. She has 5 kids, a 5 month old, and a pregnant daughter. When does she have time to be VP or heaven forbid: President.
7. She never even had a Passport until last year.
8. McCain on NBC said part of her experience was working with the PTA.
9. With 4 bouts of melanoma cancer, McCain in the next 4 years is highly likely to be seriously ill in the hospital or worse. We get President Palin. No experience except in the PTA and as corrupt a person as McCain could find. Maybe next time McCain should let his Party fully Vet his selection before making his decisions.
I think McCain will probably select Mickey Mouse for Defense Secretary: because everyone knows the military is just Mickey Mouse. And, Donald Duck for head of FEMA: because, at least he can fly and swim!!
Interesting — Doug is waiting for “a peep” out of me on something that doesn’t strike me as a topic of interest.
Actually, as it happens, someone in my family (either my daughter or her husband) raised that very point over the weekend, and my response was to say that vice president is the PERFECT job for a busy mom: You get a nice salary, a house, servants to take care of it (I think; actually I’ve never really looked into what the veep gets in the way of perks), and best of all, no real responsibilities beyond breaking an occasional tie in the Senate.
It just occurred to me why some folks have been upset that I haven’t found great meaning in the Palin nomination. You may notice that I didn’t have a whole lot to say about Obama picking Biden, either. I guess I’m just one of those folks who votes on the basis of the guy who’s running for president.
And as I said before, McCain seems to be of a similar mind. He didn’t think it mattered so much who the veep was, since he’s confident in his own qualifications — which you can take as reassuring, or alarming hubris.
> which you can take as reassuring, or
> alarming hubris.
Or advancing senility…
Your avoidance of the basic question shows just how deeply invested you are in the McCain campaign. It’s a pretty simple question – would you advise your own daughter to make the same decision Palin has made? You — the guy whose wife felt it was necessary to stop and pick up a drunk co-ed — can’t be bothered to consider whether taking a five month old baby on the campaign trail is a good idea or not? How many days did your daughter wait before heading back to work after her babies were born?
Just do the McCain endorsement now and spare us all the charade of making a reasoned decision. You’ve been waiting eight years to pull the trigger on this one.
i hope that all you folks who are harping on palin campaigning with a young child would stop worrying as she will be surrounded by all kinds of staff as she also will be if her ticket wins. you can find a lot of women-many who have no choice because of economic necessity-working full time and more right here in columbia who have very young children without the “support system” palin will have available. i am more concerned with her apparent attitude change on earmarks, including the bridge to nowhere-in the last two years. the dittoheads call that flip flopping for political expediency. she also endorsed substantial tax increases; let’ see if she now becomes anti-tax.
… vice president is the PERFECT job for a busy mom …
-Brad
Brad, you TOTALLY miss the point on this one. We’re not just voting for a vice president we’re primarily voting for a person that has a 1/3 chance of becoming president. With McCain’s health and age issues that’s no small matter. If the only consideration was whether Ms. Palin could fulfill the duties of Vice President then your point would be valid. (If troopergate ends up with some type of conviction for Palin the word Vice in Vice President would have new meaning).
Brad, you started out with your canned mockery of Mark Sanford in apparent relief that he was not picked as VP. If the VP job is so unimportant why do continue to make such a huge issue out of it with Sanford? If Sanford was VP wouldn’t that get him out of SC? I’d think you’d be all for that?
George32,
There’s the difference. Some women have no choice but to pass their infants on to others. Palin had a choice and chose politics over parenting. I would assume that many of the women who have no choice would prefer to spend as much time as they can with their baby.
George, certainly baby Palin will have his basic needs attended to by servants but that misses the point. Sarah Palin is basically abandoning her young child and pregnant daughter to run for VP. As a “family values” woman shouldn’t her families needs be met by her, or perhaps her husband? But he’ll be off drilling for oil somewhere so the kids won’t see much of him either. This really is a family catastrophe.
Have I been wishing McCain was president instead of Bush for the last 8 years? You betcha. Do I know whom we will endorse for president? No. I do know that the choice won’t be easy for our board, but I’d much rather have this choice between good and better than the one we had 4 years ago.
It’s fine if you want to infer where I’ll end up from reading my blog; that’s one of the things the blog is for — to give people a better understanding of where I’m coming from than you can get from reading the paper. But you have to remember that a) I’m not the only member of the editorial board; and b) I have this sort of Zen thing where I REFUSE to make up my mind ahead of time. It might look like I know where I’m going on an endorsement, but if it looks really clear to you, it’s probably less so to me.
Yes, I’ve liked McCain for a long time, and I continue to like him this year. His good traits still look good, and the things that bother his detractors either are strengths in my eyes, or they don’t bother me.
But I like Obama, too. Maybe not for as long, but I like him.
As for the thing you keep bringing up about Gov. Palin’s personal life… I think those are very, very important issues for HER to consider. But they aren’t up to me. Personally, I wonder at anyone seeking one of these positions. Such people have opted not to have private lives. That is, by definition, WEIRD. When I say a candidate is OK, you should assume that I’m saying, “the candidate is OK, considering that he’s the sort of lunatic who would seek this job.” The fact that this is a young woman of child-bearing age (on the upper edge of that age, but still quite demonstrably there) just makes people react to this unnatural behavior in a whole new way.
All of us, other than the most self-hypnotized feminists, react differently about family issues when a young mother is involved. But if we say, “She shouldn’t do this because she has a baby that is more needy than most,” we’re making a judgment that I can’t recall making about any other candidate. And I guess, being the proverbial White Guy Oppressor, I’m not overeager to pass judgment one way or the other.
So it is that I’m neither inclined to elevate her as a Pro-Life Madonna, as some seem wont to do, nor condemn her as a terrible mother.
Since it’s so important to you, Doug, I’ll TRY to think about it and see whether I have anything relevant to say. So far, no.
Boy, Palin’s really got you guys running scared, doesn’t she?
> Boy, Palin’s really got you guys running
>scared, doesn’t she?
Yes. Absolutely. I’m scared for the future of our country if we keep dumbing down the office of President and Vice President.
Brad, what exactly are McCain’s good traits? Since many of us have pointed out, accurately in my opinion, why the conventional wisdom about McCain is bogus why don’t you remind us again just what it is about McCain you like. I really just don’t see it, maybe in 2000, but not this time around.
McCain’s decision to run ahead of his VP discovery crew and make an absurd decision; clearly calls into question his judgment. Obama had a group of respected people including Republicans Vet his selections, and he chose arguably the most experienced person in Washington: Biden.
McCain didn’t even let his Veting crew finish their work, before going off half cocked.
A very troubling trend that has characterized McCain ever since he came into politics. His decision making process could be dangerous for our country’s safety.
doug-
there are thousands (in the aggregate hundreds of thousands) of young men and women with very young children serving in quagmireland out of a sense of duty and perhaps one of responsibility to a greater cause than family comfort. some are also probably doing it because it might provide them future opportunities. how is palin different or should we be keeping these other young people home where they belong?
bill, it’s as I said before (if you sift through all my distracting stuff about babes and 60s sitcoms, occasionally you will find actual commentary), McCain didn’t see the need to augment his ticket with gravitas — unlike Obama, the McCain people will be quick to point out.
From their perspective, Obama had a weakness he had to address with the Biden pick; McCain didn’t have that weakness. And he’s the one who will be commander in chief.
From the Democrats’ perspective, McCain was being terribly flippant with this important decision, and while he might not care about what happens to the country if he dies, the voters certainly should.
Now, assuming that bud’s question about McCain’s good traits was not facetious, here is our endorsement of McCain. Here’s my column that went with that endorsement.
And just to round out the picture, here is our endorsement of Obama, and the column that went with that.
Bud,
I’ll save you the trouble of re-reading the endorsement.
It goes: Noun, verb, POW.
The rest describes a completely different person than we’ve seen since McCain was nominated. So much for integrity.
Gosh, Governor Palin is not playing business-as-usual with the Demopublican mossy backs in the legislature. She is using her personal popularity to bypass them and force reforms.
Sounds like Mark Sanford.
She is more successful, thanks in part to the federal prison making a new home for some of the establishment.
When Obama was 17 years old, he was cutting school, drinking beer, smoking pot, snorting cocaine – he describes it all in his autobiography.
Doug, seriously — do you think you’re being at all fair? Are you not succumbing to the temptation of wanting to be the cleverest critic, the one to dismiss with the greatest panache?
People criticize me here for not getting serious, so I get serious — I offer our carefully considered reasons for endorsing these two men, one of whom will be our next president. I think what I said deserves a little better than that.
And yeah, I enjoyed the “noun, verb and 9/11” gag, too. But when Biden said it, what he said was more than just clever — it had enough of the truth in it that Rudy’s run didn’t survive the opening contests. But the winnowing is done now, and while I can say without fear of contradiction that I’m as ready to have fun as the next guy, I take these endorsements very seriously. Deconstruct our reasoning if you will, but don’t advise others not to read it, on the basis of a clever quip.
It’s clear to me that McCain chose Gov. Palin to be his VP purely to pull in the far, frothing right. She has had no effective experience, and brings no new perspectives to the ticket. He is currently choosing his desire to be president over his desire to ensure that this country has competent leadership should he die or become disabled during his term. This choice raises grave doubts about him in my mind.
Brad,
I did go back and re-read your endorsement. Can you seriously claim that you have seen no difference in nominee McCain versus primary McCain? Every step he takes, every word he utters is now packaged, massaged, focus grouped, and spun.
He met Palin ONCE before last week.
Who’s making fun of the process, me or him?
I’ve just learned one fact about Palin that actually is positive in my view: In 2000, she served as co-chair for the Steve Forbes presidential campaign in Alaska.
Before Ron Paul, Forbes was the last candidate who I voted for with no reservations. He would have been a great VP pick this time around for McCain.
I’m with you on this one, Karen. His blind ambition is coming to fruition with this pick. Does he think that if he attaches all the right positions to a candidate — and SHE HAS A UTEROUS — that he can pull this off? What an insult. I mistrusted him for a while — and then, I would try with all my might…but it is just not adding up. AND, you can tell from every freaking photo that Palin’s heart is not really in this whole gig. She was bamboozled — it’s all about John McCain and getting his freaking foot in the door of that Oval Office. Nothing wrong with drive – but he’s (or we’ve) got to count the potential carnage along the way.
That’s right, Doug; I see the same guy. Don’t mistake the filter for the essence of what you’re looking at. Now you’re seeing him through the filter of his being the Republican nominee. Like Obama, he now carries the hopes and dreams of all the people in his party, and means there’s a filter in front of the subject. I was disappointed at what the Democratic Party filter did to Obama last week. He went from being The One to being This Year’s Nominee, and it diminished him. As I foreshadowed in the column, I suppose I’ll be similarly disappointed in McCain this week. I mean, if you’re McCain, what are you going to do — say what Brad Warthen wants you to say, or what all these people who are finally making you their standard carrier want you to say? (Yeah, I think he should try to please me, too — this election is, after all, about the independent voter — but what do you think is likely?) At least this time I’m prepared for it.
But yeah, I think he’s still the same guy I’ve admired for years.
Remember, Doug, that you embrace qualities in a candidate that militate against that guy being elected. You don’t have to worry about Ron Paul being a major party nominee, or Steve Forbes, either. They will remain pure in your eyes, because they will remain unelectable.
As for what Karen and Hillacrat are saying — yes, he picked her because she’s a woman (although I don’t think that’s how you spell that part of the female anatomy, Hills) and because she appealed to cultural conservatives in his base. She’s a political twofer. He did NOT pick her because she’d be a terrific president — maybe she would, but he doesn’t have enough evidence to believe that — because HE’S planning on being president, and he’s qualified.
As I’ve said a couple of times before, you can either take that as reassuring self-confidence or appalling, even narcissistic, hubris. But that’s how I see this pick.
Anyone Sen. McCain’s age who isn’t considering what his death will do to those he loves, is either a fool or very, very selfish.
Palin Supports Obama
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/2008/09/08/080908ta_talk_gourevitch
Is it possible McCain chose this woman knowing that she would remove all attention from him?
I’m amazed at the poisonous reaction to Palin’s nomination in the mainstream media — one journalist wrote that she had never seen anything like it.
The other thing is that it is curious that some who very loudly confess to be libertarian in philosophy, and who don’t like it when someone interferes with personal choices, suddenly wax very eloquent in interfering with those choices, even to the point of telling us what Palin’s husband is going to do.
It is evident that, if one agrees more with a person’s political stance, than one is willing to cut the candidate some slack. If not, then one is quite willing to throw all the mud available.
It is also curious that news media people like Quinn are saying that evangelicals won’t vote for Palin because we think mothers should stay at home. That flies in the face of the fact that groups like Promise Keepers have been encouraging husbands to let their wives develop professionally and be stay-at-home dads, if need be.
This is all continuing to push me, and I think others into the McCain camp.
On an aside, will someone explain to me why some people call their position “pro-choice,” when there are approximately 1.5 million babies per year who will never have the right to grow up and make any choices? How is that pro-choice? Very selective pro-choice, I must say.
I’m amazed at the poisonous reaction to Palin’s nomination in the mainstream media — one journalist wrote that she had never seen anything like it.
The other thing is that it is curious that some who very loudly confess to be libertarian in philosophy, and who don’t like it when someone interferes with personal choices, suddenly wax very eloquent in interfering with those choices, even to the point of telling us what Palin’s husband is going to do.
It is evident that, if one agrees more with a person’s political stance, than one is willing to cut the candidate some slack. If not, then one is quite willing to throw all the mud available.
It is also curious that news media people like Quinn are saying that evangelicals won’t vote for Palin because we think mothers should stay at home. That flies in the face of the fact that groups like Promise Keepers have been encouraging husbands to let their wives develop professionally and be stay-at-home dads, if need be.
This is all continuing to push me, and I think others into the McCain camp.
On an aside, will someone explain to me why some people call their position “pro-choice,” when there are approximately 1.5 million babies per year who will never have the right to grow up and make any choices? How is that pro-choice? Very selective pro-choice, I must say.
I’m amazed at the poisonous reaction to Palin’s nomination in the mainstream media — one journalist wrote that she had never seen anything like it.
The other thing is that it is curious that some who very loudly confess to be libertarian in philosophy, and who don’t like it when someone interferes with personal choices, suddenly wax very eloquent in interfering with those choices, even to the point of telling us what Palin’s husband is going to do.
It is evident that, if one agrees more with a person’s political stance, than one is willing to cut the candidate some slack. If not, then one is quite willing to throw all the mud available.
It is also curious that news media people like Quinn are saying that evangelicals won’t vote for Palin because we think mothers should stay at home. That flies in the face of the fact that groups like Promise Keepers have been encouraging husbands to let their wives develop professionally and be stay-at-home dads, if need be.
This is all continuing to push me, and I think others into the McCain camp.
On an aside, will someone explain to me why some people call their position “pro-choice,” when there are approximately 1.5 million babies per year who will never have the right to grow up and make any choices? How is that pro-choice? Very selective pro-choice, I must say.
I’m amazed at the poisonous reaction to Palin’s nomination in the mainstream media — one journalist wrote that she had never seen anything like it.
The other thing is that it is curious that some who very loudly confess to be libertarian in philosophy, and who don’t like it when someone interferes with personal choices, suddenly wax very eloquent in interfering with those choices, even to the point of telling us what Palin’s husband is going to do.
It is evident that, if one agrees more with a person’s political stance, than one is willing to cut the candidate some slack. If not, then one is quite willing to throw all the mud available.
It is also curious that news media people like Quinn are saying that evangelicals won’t vote for Palin because we think mothers should stay at home. That flies in the face of the fact that groups like Promise Keepers have been encouraging husbands to let their wives develop professionally and be stay-at-home dads, if need be.
This is all continuing to push me, and I think others into the McCain camp.
On an aside, will someone explain to me why some people call their position “pro-choice,” when there are approximately 1.5 million babies per year who will never have the right to grow up and make any choices? How is that pro-choice? Very selective pro-choice, I must say.
Sorry, I don’t know what is going on here. I just switched from Firefox to Internet Exploder and saw that part of what I wrote has posted three times. I’ll attempt and finish the rest:
This is all continuing to push me, and I think others into the McCain camp.
Kudos to Brad for refusing to take part in this evident “Crusade” to crucify those one doesn’t agree with. Obama evidently made a fool of himself, taking the opportunity to bash abstinence programs, all the while pretending that Palin’s daughter is off limits.
On an aside, will someone explain to me why some people call their position “pro-choice,” when there are approximately 1.5 million babies per year who will never have the right to grow up and make any choices? How is that pro-choice? Very selective pro-choice, I must say.
This is all continuing to push me,and I think others, into the McCain camp.
Kudos to Brad for refusing to take part in this evident “Crusade” to crucify those one doesn’t agree with. Obama evidently made a fool of himself, taking the opportunity to bash abstinence programs, all the while pretending that Palin’s daughter is off limits.
On an aside, will someone explain to me why some people call their position “pro-choice,” when there are approximately 1.5 million babies per year who will never have the right to grow up and make any choices? How is that pro-choice? Very selective pro-choice, I must say.
P.S. I had more links in here, but it won’t let me post them. I’ve had that problem for some days now.
Herb, I am glad to see you being offended by the Democrat media telling you how “fundamentalist preachers” think and what they will do, as if those agnostics, atheists, and social-climbing Christians have any clue.
Lee, it’s a little nerve-racking when we start agreeing on something, but I am not identifying with your tactics, or the sources (or lack of them) that you tend to use, I assure you.
But there is no denying the media bias on this one. Here’s good discussion of it. She is being borked, I would think.
Well, the link won’t work again. I’ll post it this way, in case anyone is interested: Here’s a good analysis of the rabid media coverage on Palin: http://www.getreligion.org/?p=3878#comments She is being borked, I think.
John Derbyshire from the National Review is the smartest conservative I know.. he has captured the essence of American politics 2008 in two paragraphs:
“Calm down, everybody, please. It’s only politics, for goodness sake. None of these gasbags is going to lower your taxes, eliminate a major gumment program, establish orderly and rational immigration, “defeat evil,” outlaw abortion, give five seconds’ thought to congressional term limits or the prohibition of public-sector unions, or do any of the other things that conservatives want done.
We stared down the U.S.S.R. till the thing fell apart from its own internal contradictions. That was the great conservative achievement of the later 20th century. Possibly there’ll be another one in the 21st century, but not for a few decades yet. In the meantime, government power will steadily increase, individual liberty will steadily decrease, our economy will get still more gummed up with litigation and regulation, more and more kids will attend college to less and less purpose, we shall lose a couple more tall buildings to crazy terrorists, we shall go trash a couple more no-account “countries” in retaliation, and the Republic will stagger along somehow, electing a Tweedledum or a Tweedledee to supreme executive office every four or eight years. This you can take to the bank.”
Herb, I NEVER lack documentation for the FACTS I post, most of which are shocking new information to the news-dumbed readers of The State. That is my only tactic: facts.
Glad to have you on board.
The Palin smears are out of control, but no more so than the media attacks on other Christians.
I congratulate Mr Warthen on putting these ideas out there for the public to comment on in this give and take of opinion and public policy.
Not sure why the flame queens are so quick to insult, disparage and dismiss the objections of fact that a stray reader may observe.
For the White Record, There are many Americans of African descent that I could, and have voted for public office, but Obama the marxist anti American is not one of them. His black pantherism is civic chilling, fingernails on the blackboard.
BUT Sara Palin as republican VP is outstanding, the future of conservatism. Birthing her special needs child and standing by her daughter to birth her child is character in crisis personified.
In the general election, Palin will carve out the Hillary feminists vote, for Palin is the epitome of the suburban soccer mainstream mom wife leader of modern social government . . .
and more, the American woman of African descent who sees a mother with 4 children, with a career and public service life still birthing a special needs child. . .
and now standing by her young engaged daughter, 17 years old and pregnant like Obama’s single mama before she later married the Kenyan Arab father Obama Senior she met in Hawaii,
Can only say, GO GIRL, and vote for a real Woman American to lead a Country First generation.
Palin for President. Top athlete, super mom, political executive and public servant–core American.
“Far, frothing right…”?
Frothing, Karen?
I think the Democratic Convention offers a lot more frothing than the Republicans ever do.
The left hereabout is frothing a lot about Sarah Palin, too.
“Sarah Palin is basically abandoning her young child and pregnant daughter to run for VP. … This really is a family catastrophe.”
Oh, sure, bud, the life of a vice president’s family is almost always a catastrophe.
UTEROUS?
I repeat: UTEROUS?
“If it’s merely a garden variety ethics lapse, something fairly common to virtually all GOP lawmakers…”
Fairly common to virtually all, bud?
Is that like to some extent pretty much just a bit absolutely completely and totally? Or just fairly unique?
When those on the left clutch at straws, they sometimes exceed their reach so far they lose their grip.
Keep trying to make fun of Palin, guys. You’re doing a great job of humiliating yourselves.
I heard y’all the 1st time. Rush Limbaugh and Brad spell it Uter-us. But that doesn’t make it right.
Feels more like SKEWER-US. !!!
NoWayNoHowNoMcCain.
P.S. Pass the chicken!
***Keep your ballot***
I’m going into hibernation until my birthday, Nov. 5. I can’t WAIT to see what y’all do with our futures.
Brad, thanks for addressing my question. However, I strongly maintain that the resons you endorse McCain are bogus in 2008. He simply is not the non-partisan, “country first” maverick you and the MSM portray him to be. He’s morphed into a pandering, neo-con, me-first fool. And a dangerous one at that. He even changed his long-held position that torture of enemy combatants is wrong. How much more proof do you need that he’s become a GOP partisan.
Here’s one of the passages from your earlier column about McCain:
“Henry’s one concern about Sen. McCain was his age. The rest of us were less worried — he seems unfazed by the strain of campaigning. But we agreed that should be a consideration in his choice of a running mate.”
The Palin pick is about as perfect a repudiation of why you picked him as anything I can think of. Whatever you think about Palin personally she is clearly not qualified to be president. So McCain has clearly thrown out any consideration for country in that pick and is just shamefully pandering to the far right-wing of the GOP and to a handful of disaffected Hillary supporters. There’s no consideration for the good of the country.
The hate-America crowd which composes core Democrats would have savaged any VP nominee of McCain’s. They already had the attack videotape in the can for Romney and everyone else, except Sarah Palin.
They are having to scramble, can’t find anything real to criticize, so they attack her being a woman, her age, her experience, her husband, her 17-year-old daughter, her baby with Down’s Syndrome. The Democrats and their media are slime.
Nazi Lee Muller has once again distorted the facts. Herr Muller suggests that because we America-loving Democrats question the wisdom of McCain’s choice for VP we are not good Americans. But what Nazi Muller doesn’t realize is that what makes America great is our freedom to question the decisions of others. Nazi Muller hates freedom. Nazi Muller hates the Constitution. Nazi Muller hates America.
Why can’t you see that Palin is more qualified by experience than Obama, bud?
Voting present as a habit in the Illinois Senate doesn’t make a man presidential material.
God speed McCain.
No, bud, Spaceman hates our freedom.
Like conservatives for the last 100 years, he hates that 11 year-olds don’t have the freedom to work in a factory, he hates that elected state legislatures don’t have the freedom to keep non-land-owners, blacks, and women from voting, he hates that companies are forced to maintain safe working conditions for employees, he hates that Boers in South Africa couldn’t keep Nelson Madela in jail forever because he, gasp, associated with communists who believed in equal rights for black Africans, he hates that companies have to pay minimum wages, he hates that states don’t have the freedom to impose poll taxes to keep riff-raff from voting.
You are right, Spaceman is a hater, first and always.
The brownshirt tactics being used against Sarah Palin are unAmerican.
Core Democrats don’t discuss issues; they attack people personally, usually with baseless lies.
First of all, their pary is on the wrong side of the issues, as history shows.
Secondly, most of them don’t know enough about the issues to discuss them intelligently. Even Obama stammers and talks in generalities, or he makes some grandiose promise citing as facts things which are not true.
For example, Obama says he “will reduce capital gains taxes on the small businessman”. Small businessmen don’t pay capital gains taxes. Their business income is taxed as personal income. Meanwhile, Obama promises to double the capital gains taxes on investors and on small businessmen who sell their farms and businesses. He is both ignorant and dishonest.
The top Obama managers have launched smear campaigns and lawsuits against many reporters. Thousands of his followers follow his example of hate and smear.
Guero is one such local ugly fabricator.
>Guero is one such local ugly fabricator.
I think Guero is just Roshing us…
On National Review Online, some of the Republican zombies are actually hoping that Bristol Palin and her boyfriend are on the stage tonight so they can be wildly cheered. Really. This is what we’ve come to. We want to cheer unmarried teenage pregnant mothers and fathers?
>Guero is one such local ugly fabricator.
I think Guero is just Roshing us…
On National Review Online, some of the Republican zombies are actually hoping that Bristol Palin and her boyfriend are on the stage tonight so they can be wildly cheered. Really. This is what we’ve come to. We want to cheer unmarried teenage pregnant mothers and fathers?
I think its funny that the Democrats and media bigwigs are attacking Sarah Palin for her “inexperience.” Let’s consider two things:
1) Sarah Palin has more executive experience than ALL the other the candidates combined (Obama, Biden and McCain)
2) Barack Obama has claimed a longer record of experience in the U.S. Senate. But during the past two years of his term, Sarah Palin has been hard at work as Governor of Alaska, while Obama has missed over 45% of roll call votes in the Senate.
I don’t know about you, but I’d rather have perceived inexperience a heartbeat away from the oval office than actual inexperience in the oval office.
Sarah Palin is also a natural born citizen of the United States.
Obama’s school records show him to be a citizen of Indonesia, born in Kenya to parents married in Kenya.
How well do you think Gov Palin would have done in a Presidential primary, either Republican or Democratic?
If one would not have considered voting for her in a presidential primary, why would one support her for VP in a situation where the likelihood of her stepping up to be President are probably pretty good?
Yes, p.m. far frothing right–as evidenced by your attack on a person for mispelling “uterus.” But of course, you and Lee never mispell anything, do you? And I haven’t attacked Palin; I’ve questioned McCain’s values for choosing her as his running mate. I continue to question those values in relation to that choice.
Since when did core Democrats start caring about moral values or family values?
Blaming Sarah Palin for the smear campain directed against her is like blaming a woman for “causing” a sexual assault on herself. It is mean and sexist.
This attack on Palin fits right along with the attacks on Dan Quayle for his campaigning on family values, and the attacks on Dick Cheney’s daughter.
Obama’s campaign manager even accused Hillary of “pimping Chelsea”.
Lee, I am not “on board” with anyone, and certainly not with an ideology. I want to hold the views I do because they are closest to the truth, as I understand it, and I don’t care then what anyone labels them, whether “conservative” or “liberal.”
Right now I think the Palin case is another example of the fact that there are a lot of assumptions being made about what people believe and will do, when quite frankly, there is almost no information to go on. What bothers me is that people make assumptions on the basis of ignorance, or they have information from one favorite source, rather than doing serious research.
I rarely misspell anything I put in caps for emphasis, Karen.
But you misspelled MISSPELL.
Thanks for making my point.
Herb, I take back my welcome to reality.
You slipped back into your condescending name-calling of those who correct you as being “ignorant”, which is hardly the correct word for those who are presenting you with the facts which are totally new and startling to you.
Lee, I didn’t call anyone “ignorant.” But there is a lot of speculating going on around here, starting with Doug knowing how the Palins are going to raise their children (and continually repeating himself) to Bud knowing what Palin believes about creation, when I’ve not been able to find anything that substantiates any of that. As for your insistence that Obama is not a US citizen, I think you are wasting your time, as this shows. I don’t think the Democrats are as dumb as you seem to think they are.
Herb,
Where did I say I know how the Palin’s are going to raise their children?
I only KNOW that Mrs. Palin has already made choices that will impact her entire family – which includes an infant with Down Syndrome and a pregnant teenager.
Do you really think she will be able to be around her kids as much as she would have had she remained Governor?
Give me the best case scenario for how much time she will spend with her kids over the next two months?
Give me the best case scenario for how the situation with her pregnant teenage daughter works out? She’s already been pulled from her high school. Now she needs to get married in the next couple months? Is Mom Palin going to get time to plan a wedding with her daughter? Will the teenage parents have to find a home? Will the teenage father have to give up his post-high school plans and get a job and raise a family? Will the teenage mother get to graduate with her friends? Will Mom Palin be able to be at the hospital when her first grandchild is born – the first baby is usually pretty unpredictable?
I don’t know how any of it will work out. But I can foresee a whole bunch of scenarios that could have been avoided.
Doug,
Please tell me if any of that is our business? Are you writing an advisory book on marriage or something?
Look, all of us make choices re children and career. You are either assuming that 1) Palin is going to neglect her duties as VP, or 2) you are assuming that she will neglect her personal care of her children and put it into the hands of nannies (and that it is your business to decide about that), or 3) you are assuming that her husband won’t stay at home and do the job of taking care of the kids, or 4) that it is unethical for him to do so. Or perhaps you are being sexist, that women shouldn’t work and dads shouldn’t stay home. Or maybe you are assuming all of the above. I don’t really know.
But I don’t think we really know about any of these. But I do know a couple in Stuttgart, both of whom are pastors, decided that Mom would be the pastor of the large, inner-city congregation, and Dad would stay at home with the little kids, and it works fine. Now maybe you will say that it doesn’t compare with the office of VP, but I think the time demands are pretty similar.
Couples find different ways of coping, but you have already decided how they are going to do it, and she hasn’t said.
Until she does, I suggest we keep quiet on whether the solution befits the qualifications of a VP. When we know, then we can vote accordingly.
Little Dougie spouted off:
“On National Review Online, some of the Republican zombies are actually hoping that Bristol Palin and her boyfriend are on the stage tonight so they can be wildly cheered. Really. This is what we’ve come to. We want to cheer unmarried teenage pregnant mothers and fathers?”
———-
I wonder if Dougie would prefer if she were banished to some expecting mothers home “to live with her aunt” like they did when he was 17 years old.
This guy just doesn’t get it… he’s set in his ways and nobody is going to tell him different. By God, it’s his way or the highway his his home!!! I feel sorry for his family who have to put up with his crap… I’m betting we only see the tip of the iceberg (don’t worry Doug, I’m looking for the source of that quote… I don’t want you to start screaming “plagiarism”).
Yes, Herb, you did call someone “ignorant”
“…What bothers me is that people make assumptions on the basis of ignorance….
just two posts above your denial.
Congratulations on your response to Doug, without the dismissive tone and name-calling. And you are right and sound reasonble.
Lee,
You may call it hair-splitting, but I don’t: there is a difference between labeling a particular action as foolish, or calling a particular position that someone holds as “based on ignorance,” and calling the person themselves a fool or ignorant. The latter assumes that every major thought and action of the person is foolish and ignorant, and I neither wanted to say that, nor did I mean that.
In reference to the context, I am saying that people are deciding what Palin thinks or is going to do, and they have no basis for either, because there are no facts out there for that.
I agree that even “based on ignorance” was probably too strong–Bud is not ignorant about evolution for example, but I have not been able to find any information on Palin that defines what she believes about Creation. To say that she believes the world was created 6000 years ago is pure speculation, unless he or others can bring up statements of hers to the contrary.
I will try and use words like “lack of knowledge” in the future, but I did not label the people themselves as “ignorant.”
When I say a person is acting on ignorance, I am observing their rather obvious lack of knowledge or head full of BS misinformation, and I correct them with the facts.
If they want to fly off into sputtering and name-calling, then they didn’t come to have a discussion.
Herb’s example of people accusing Sarah Palin thinking this or thinking that is a good example of speculation. Bud may not be ignorant about evolution, but he is ignorant about Palin, or more likely, just making it up.
Most socialists aren’t even honest enough to admit it. They call themselves “liberals”, and are usually ignorant of what real socialism, liberalism, and fascism are, much less what they are.