Specs Thing

Two noteworthy Sarah Palin reactions over at the Hot Blog: (a) “Wow. And I thought Lieberman was a bad idea. Two years in as Gov. of Alaska. Parent of a 4-month old special-needs child. Had her sister’s ex fired. This is who America wants to be a heartbeat away from the presidency of our oldest president ever? Thanks, crazy old guy. Game over. ” — David Poland. (b) “At least she’s hot.” — In Contention‘s Kris Tapley.


Sarah Palin, Tina Fey, Peggy Hill from the “King of the Hill” cartoon.
  • Michael

    Well, at least Poland’s not an elitist.
    Do you want the Republicans to be in touch with the common man or not? She’s about as close as they’ve come in…ever, I think. She’s qualified enough to be the Dem nominee for president, if you think that two years running a state has equivalence to six years being 1 of 100. It’s a very good choice, I think…
    Still voting for Obama, though.

  • coxcable

    Ain’t no denying. She’s absolutely adorable. Who would have thought McCain would take Bush’s best attribute … his sweet wife Laura… and put that into play in this candidacy?
    Very interesting tactic. And yes, very Maverick-y.
    To paraphrase Schwarzenegger, “I like you, Sarah. I’m going to kill you last.”

  • Mgmax, le Corbeau

    Hilarious to read the usual gang of dweebs attacking her as ugly and a stupid choice.
    Fact is, McCain just screwed you good. He may or may not win but he sure got a lot closer.
    1) He locked up his conservative base. A woman whose commitment to pro-life values meant she kept her Down’s baby and is raising him happily. That won’t mean anything to you, but it’s to evangelicals what his POW status is to military folks.
    2) He just stole a chunk of the female independent vote. How much? Remains to be seen. But that tingle that goes up Chris Matthews’ leg when he sees a black man running for president? A lot of women are going to feel it when they see her up against The Other Old White Senator in a debate. (Pretty revealing that both candidates basically picked their opponent as a running mate, actually.)
    3) Americans like to elect governors. She has two years of executive experience? And between them, all four candidates in the race have… two years of executive experience. She’s the only one in the race who’s been more than a talker and self-promoter.
    4) It’s the price of gas, stupid. They must have powerful polling that they can win, or at least were doomed to lose, if they didn’t tackle that head-on. And they will. It’s going to be an energy election and at the moment that looks like a fairly practical candidate against a pie in the sky one promising that a zillion new technologies will sprout out of nowhere by electing him.
    5) “Four more years of the same.” Yeah, she really looks like Dick Cheney. Significantly neutralized, if not dead.
    6) It’s the pork, stupid. Now against Obama’s shockingly vague promise to cut taxes and start a bazillion new programs and shrink the budget and grow the economy, we have the woman who actually fought pork in her own state. It will be thrilling to hear Ted Stevens being slammed– by Republicans, in the same breath as Robert Byrd. (Oh, and thanks a lot, Ron Paul, you phony sack of shit.)
    7) “Biden will rip her to pieces.” Yeah, like Rick Lazio took Hillary down.
    8) And finally, most deliciously, everyone’s who’s thrown the R-word at any criticism of Obama? Get ready to have the S-word thrown at you for every criticism of Palin. This is going to be fun.

  • Count Thread

    Wait a sec– did Wells just quote Dave Poland approvingly?
    Terrible political acumen, bringing bitchy movie bloggers together, film at 11:00.

  • Monument

    Maybe I’m just incredibly cynical but it’s hard to see this as anything but desperate manipulation. Her main value to the McCain campaign is her gender, it certainly isn’t her experience.

  • BurmaShave

    I know Poland is special needs himself, but he really didn’t need to include that fact in his reasoning. Kind of sickening, maybe even a little fascist, and it killed the rest of it. I’ll leave my movie blogger political analyzing to Wells.

  • http://livingincinema.com Craig Kennedy

    She seems like a female Quayle to me. A conservative, attractive empty vessel we all laughed at until his ticket was elected.

  • Count Thread

    “Her main value to the McCain campaign is her gender, it certainly isn’t her experience.”
    Unlike his opponent, he doesn’t need experience in his Veep, *he* has it.
    Instead he just chose a fresh conservative, a fighter against the corrupt Republicans in her own state, and someone who a very large segment of the population can identify with (as long as we’re playing identity politics here, two parties can play at that game).
    Oh, and yeah: good speaker, too.

  • Count Thread

    “She seems like a female Quayle to me. A conservative, attractive empty vessel we all laughed at until his ticket was elected.”
    FYI, Dan Quayle had been in Congress for *twelve years* before he was tapped to be VP. That’s six times the congressional experience Barack Obama had before he chose to run for president.
    Who’s the empty suit?

  • BurmaShave

    Except, by picking her, McCain just agreed this election isn’t about experience.

  • Richardson

    “He just stole a chunk of the female independent vote. How much? Remains to be seen.”
    I would say it will float somewhere just above zero percent. Any woman who is pro-life already wouldn’t vote Obama, any woman who is strongly pro-choice won’t vote for McCain/Palin, so the bump can not exceed the small number of women who are pro-choice but are willing to vote for somebody who is aggressively pro-life.
    “”Four more years of the same.” Yeah, she really looks like Dick Cheney. Significantly neutralized, if not dead.”
    I notice that conservatives have been trying to kill that one for months now by repeating, “Hey, Bush isn’t running again, McCain is running now, stop trying to run against Bush.” I suspect that this will fail to stop “four more years” just as much as that argument did.
    Like it or not, political arguments have less to do with facts than impressions, and a huge majority of people in the country feel, for loosely connected reasons certainly fueled by Democrats, that McCain will continue to govern as Bush did. McCain hasn’t done much to distance himself from Bush, but I don’t see how nominating Palin helps him distance himself from Bush any more, just because she doesn’t look like Dick Cheney.

  • Gus Petch

    It’s a good pick. The experience argument against Obama was never going to have much traction anyway — Obama has rightly countered that many great Presidents assumed office with little experience. The main case against Obama McCain needs to make is (a) he’s an extremist, (b) he’s surrounded himself with angry, kooky people, and (c) he’s repeatedly demonstrated contempt for ordinary Americans. Obama has no good counter to those arguments.

    From what little I know about Palin, she’s sharp enough and charismatic enough that she won’t do Quayle-style harm to the ticket. She’s a bold pick — a great counter to Obama’s selection of the ultimate Washington insider. She’s a staunch conservative, so she helps cement the Republican base. She’ll help McCain enormously with energy issues, and, by extension, economic issues in general. And of course there’s the potential that she’ll help close the gender gap in the Republicans’ favor; I don’t know how much difference Palin will make to women voters, but this year it seems like a smart gamble to try to exploit the excitement about Hillary’s run and the disappointment/bitterness about her loss.

    p.s. Now that I typed that in, I see that I’m repeating much of Mgmax’s post. So… What Mgmax said.

  • FeydAway

    She’s a really good pick. MGM hits most of the points. Obama went after her experience in his press release this morning. That’s a bad move for him, and I think an expected move from the McCain campaign. She’s more experienced than him, and she’s not the candidate for Prez. If he hits her on inexperience he’s crapping all over himself.

  • Richardson

    “FYI, Dan Quayle had been in Congress for *twelve years* before he was tapped to be VP. That’s six times the congressional experience Barack Obama had before he chose to run for president.
    “Who’s the empty suit?”
    You guys are the ones who are trying to argue that experience is the only thing that matters. People don’t criticize Dan Quayle because of inexperience, they criticize him because he frequently said stupid things and was, in general, a poor speaker and a bad arguer. He could’ve been in the Senate for 100 years, but he’d still be an “empty suit”.
    And, if experience is so important, then how is a woman with less than one term as the governor of Alaska ready to be president?

  • FeydAway

    To Burma:
    No he didn’t. Because she has EXECUTIVE experience. She also ran her own business.
    To Richardson:
    How can you say political arguments have less to do with facts than impressions (a truth I agree with), and then dismiss the clear IMPRESSION a young female VP gives to the ticket? I’d point out that you’re wrong, but since you so obviously contradict yourself, I don’t need to.

  • George Prager

    The arrogance of power. Once again, it’s all about him. You’d have to go back to Nixon’s choice of Agnew to find a lamer pick (their experience level is about the same). Seems like a nice lady, though. Her speaking voice kind of reminds me of Mira Sorvino’s in MIGHTY APRHODITE.

  • Richardson

    “Obama went after her experience in his press release this morning. That’s a bad move for him, and I think an expected move from the McCain campaign.”
    That’s pretty misleading; the actual quote is “Experience is being taken off the table considering you’re putting someone within a heartbeat of the presidency with the thinnest foreign policy experience in history.”
    The point is that continuing to attack Obama on experience becomes hypocritical, the point was very clearly not attacking her on experience.

  • George Prager

    My New York Reagan Democrat parents were hoping for Joe Lieberman. They like McCain, but I think this woman reminds them too much of their youngest son’s ex-mother-in-law. They hated her.

  • BurmaShave

    FeydAway, remind me of McCain’s executive experience?

  • Richardson

    “and then dismiss the clear IMPRESSION a young female VP gives to the ticket?”
    I know you’re used to spinning facts into whatever straw men you want them to be, so they’re easier to criticize, but it comes off as kind of stupid to make things up that I didn’t say when people can easily read what I did say.
    All I said was, the number of pro-choice women in the country who are willing to vote for a pro-life candidate but haven’t already decided to do so is a pretty small number. So I don’t think that nominating a pro-life woman is going to be a huge draw among independent female voters, the way Max thinks it will.
    If Max was talking about the ” IMPRESSION a young female VP gives to the ticket”, I didn’t see it; can you point that out to me? Or point out where I dismissed that impression?

  • corey3rd

    it is funny that after our last 2 VPs, we’re supposed to believe that the position has zero power. Really? Al and Dick just sat in their offices making sure the big guy was breathing? we can’t treat the VP position as merely a window dressing.
    Plus the revenge on her ex-brother-in-law won’t be pleasing to many guys who fear a woman with power going after their balls and jobs.

  • buster

    Am I the only Obama supporter that thinks this a genius move?? Call it transparent, desperate, whatever, it’ll bring votes. This isn’t a meritocracy for christ’s sake, it’s not about who’s most qualified, it’s about who can muster up the most votes across the right combination of states. Game over? That might be right. McCain may have just sealed the deal. I’ll tell you what sounds desperate–the false bravado of these quick dismissals of the McCain-Palin ticket.
    And as pro-life as I am, I’d be careful questioning anyone’s judgment in deciding to rear a child with down’s syndrome … you guys sound like you’re one step away from condoning infanticide.

  • FeydAway

    Richardson: “but I don’t see how nominating Palin helps him distance himself from Bush any more, just because she doesn’t look like Dick Cheney.”
    That’s an argument that the impression she gives does not separate McCain from the ‘like Bush’ impression. Your words, not mine.
    Max said she would gain the ticket a chunk of the female INDEPENDENT vote. YOU brought in the pro-life/pro-choice thing. They are two separate debates. There are pro-life Democrats and pro-choice Republicans and there are both in the middle. It’s not about that. It’s about her being a woman and how that helps McCain distance himself from Bush.

  • Mr. Buckles

    Mgmax,
    You need to check your head. No one can contest the character it takes to raise a special needs child whether it be autism or Down’s Syndrome. However, McCain already had that base locked up. What are you talking about? Perhaps this is about how much it might energize them.
    If this is a play to get Hillary supporters who were disaffected, well, this is pretty thin. I guess it’s this equation then, if you show them tits, they (pumas) will come?
    To me, this choice just neutralizes one of your weapons of attack – experience, being fit to lead. How serious as a septegenerian can you be about experience as a prerequisitte if you name someone with such scant experience?
    She’s against pork yet she comes from a notoriously corrupt state with corruption running under her nose (Stevens was indicted at a federal level). I just don’t think there’s a lot of there there.
    McCain’s campaign is about going negative and using fear as a cudgel. He’s been on the lowroad all summer and by ceding experience, he’s signaled he will stay there.
    We’ll see how this plays (she might be a great presence and speaker), but on the surface, this calls into question McCain’s judgment once again.

  • corey3rd

    the big problem is that she’s Catholic and McCain is trying to appease the mega-church snakehandlers. I can assure you that these folks still don’t trust Catholics and that Pope.

  • Teacher’s Pets

    Can I post now? Oh, goody….

  • George Prager

    I feel like I’m watching a mid80s Goldie Hawn movie.

  • buster

    errr, that should say “as pro-choice as I am…” kinda flips the whole thing around, doesn’t it…

  • Teacher’s Pets

    Mgmax, you really think the fact the she doesn’t resemble the bald, sneering, hunchbacked old codger currently in office negates by itself the “four more years of Bush” argument?
    Uh, hate to break it to you, but McCain doesn’t look like Bush either, but somehow typically shallow Americans have managed to look past that glaring, important difference….

  • Mgmax, le Corbeau

    Go read National Review Online’s The Corner over the last few days and tell me McCain had movement conservatives and evangelicals sewn up, especially when pro-choicers like Tom Ridge were being thrown about.
    Granted, a lot of that is probably blowing off steam, much like KossersMove Onanists on the other side, but you can’t know much about that side and not know that McCain is widely suspected and disliked.
    Which is why McCain was the best GOP candidate for the center under the circumstances, of course– and a nod back to that base in his VP pick was the logical extension of that.
    And Richardson, really, all the polls show a lot of undecideds out there, more than usual. And at least half are women. Again, I’m not saying he won the election with this move, but I’m saying he made a brilliant play toward doing so.

  • FeydAway

    Burma:
    Don’t get me wrong…I agree. That’s why I always wondered why Obama never responded to the experience attacks with, “I have as much executive experience as you.” Maybe the military experience trumps it, or maybe it’s all about impression again.

  • Mgmax, le Corbeau

    “the big problem is that she’s Catholic and McCain is trying to appease the mega-church snakehandlers. I can assure you that these folks still don’t trust Catholics and that Pope.”
    On other hand, Catholic union workers in the Great Lakes, who are exactly who Biden is supposed to appeal to, might look on the choice fairly favorably, dontcha think?

  • Richardson

    “That’s an argument that the impression she gives does not separate McCain from the ‘like Bush’ impression.”
    No, it’s an argument that the impression that she gives is not enough to overcome the more-defined, more-ingrained impression that McCain is like Bush. that impression has been around all year, and reinforced with numerous statements from both McCain and Bush, and, of course, that great hug picture.
    And here’s the other thing — you’re basically saying she has to make up for the gap in any recognizable difference between McCain and Bush. So they’re going to use her to go after people who want “change”. Problem is, that’s *another* impression that they have to overcome — the impression that Obama is the candidate for change. And that’s a pretty ingrained impression.
    the thing is, “impression”s are not inherently equal; one impression does not automatically topple another. They’re trying to over-write one strongly-defined, deeper ingrained impression with a much looser, not-yet-defined one. I’m merely saying, I don’t think that will work.
    “Max said she would gain the ticket a chunk of the female INDEPENDENT vote. YOU brought in the pro-life/pro-choice thing. They are two separate debates.”
    How so? “Female independent” means a woman who is not tied to either party. Therefore, female independents include women who are pro-life and women who are pro-choice. Those are the only two options to be, so it’s reasonable to break down “female independent” into those two categories and think logically about them for a moment. pro-life independents are the people who think Republicans don’t go far enough — maybe she’d attract some of them, but they wouldn’t be “stolen” from Obama, so max’s statement wouldn’t apply to them. so that leaves pro-choice. Any woman who is strongly pro-choice won’t switch over just because it’s a woman who’s espousing pro-life arguments. So, again, nobody stolen from Obama there.
    So the only female independent vote left is women who are pro-choice, but not aggressively so. They’re the only people who might go to Obama but might go to McCain. And I don’t believe that a pro-life woman is the way to “steal” most of those votes from Obama.
    So, yes, I brought pro-life/pro-choice into it — because on any list of issues which are important to women, that’s generally in the top two or three.

  • Richardson

    “And Richardson, really, all the polls show a lot of undecideds out there, more than usual. And at least half are women.”
    I agree. but the flaw in your logic is that you are assuming that these women will blindly vote for her simply because she is a woman, and I haven’t seen any evidence (even anecdotal) to suggest such a thing.
    On the other hand, I have seen quite a few polls which list ‘abortion rights’ as an important issue for all women [both ways -- pro-life or pro-choice]. And I’m not sure an aggressively pro-life woman is the way to appeal to moderate independents.
    it’s funny that, if Obama moves left, you say “Oh, he’s going to lose the centrist votes”. But if McCain moves right — far-right, really — you don’t see that as any sort of problem with appealing to centrists. Funny in that “Max has absolutely no perspective on his own party” sort of way.

  • dangovich

    She’s adorable, hot, cute?

    I guess, if you’re into that whole Stepford Wives thing.

  • George Prager

    Does anybody remember the electrifying Gore/Kemp debate? Get ready for the sequel.

  • Mgmax, le Corbeau

    I no longer respond to direct attacks on my character or vision here, Richardson, as I decided that they too rarely bear even the slightest resemblance to reality.
    Substantively, I will say that I think you are mistaken on how the electorate feels about abortion. The electorate basically holds contradictory views– they think abortion should be legal, and they support almost any restriction that tends to come up.
    My guess is, you’re about to hear a whole lot about a certain 2003 bill Obama played a significant role in, and about “aborted” delivered babies being left to die in hospital closets. Without getting into the merits of that issue (which I’m sure will quickly sink into demagoguery), I wouldn’t be so sure that one’s a clear winner for your side, and settled.

  • http://livingincinema.com Craig Kennedy

    Count Thread, are you really going to ignore my broader point just to defend Dan Quayle?

  • ketut

    Boys make passes at girls who wear glasses.
    McCain – Keeping the O in GOP.

  • Richardson

    “I no longer respond to direct attacks on my character or vision here, Richardson, as I decided that they too rarely bear even the slightest resemblance to reality.”
    It’s nice when you feign moral superiority for taking the high road, but it’s directly contradicted by all the times you have made posts solely for the purpose of insulting people based on their political beliefs.
    “The electorate basically holds contradictory views– they think abortion should be legal, and they support almost any restriction that tends to come up.”
    That would be debatable, and could lead to a long tangent, but it’s easier to just point out that that’s completely immaterial and hiding the issue, since she is no-bones hardcore pro-life.
    “I wouldn’t be so sure that one’s a clear winner for your side, and settled.”
    I don’t want to say you’re wrong, but the thing about that is that, in order to really drive that issue, somebody in McCain’s campaign is going to have to use language that paints them as aggressively pro-life. And I’m confident in Obama’s ability to counter attacks with facts — once you bring in “protecting the mother’s health”, the public opinion pendulum swings back to the left.

  • VictorLazlo

    Do you Republicans really think the only reason women love Hillary is because of her gender? DO they think the only reason black people love Obama is because of his race?
    THis choice answers that question. It’s a replay of the GOP running Alan Keyes agaisnt Obama.

  • George Prager

    “the big problem is that she’s Catholic and McCain is trying to appease the mega-church snakehandlers. I can assure you that these folks still don’t trust Catholics and that Pope.”
    Dudesters: She’s not Catholic. She’s a Pentecostal. (i.e. snake-handler).

  • Richardson

    “DO they think the only reason black people love Obama is because of his race?”
    Obviously you haven’t been here long; every conservative poster, to a man, has made that argument and stood by it. we’ve even had it break down multiple times where they refused to acknowledge that it was even possible that such a belief could be even a little bit racist on the face of it.
    So, short answer: yes. Yes they do.

  • Stephe96

    My 2 cents: she’s a great pick for McCain. The GOP now has more experience at the bottom of their ticket than the Democrats have at the top. I would’ve figured Romney for VP but the more I learn about Palin the more I like her.

    I really think the election will come down to Obama’s:

    a) woeful lack of experience

    b) zero accomplishments

    c) his appalling lack of judgment in choosing friends and/or associates – Rezko, Wright, Ayers.

    Oh well…either way, this election sure just got a lot more interesting!

  • Mgmax, le Corbeau

    “every conservative poster, to a man, has made that argument and stood by it.”
    Res ipso loquitur.

  • Dan Revill

    Ketut, awesome.
    I was thinking that this may fuel a whole lot of Young Republican wet dreams in the foreseeable future. As some have pointed out, she is an attractive woman.
    It’s a very shrewd and clever move that could either pay off big time or totally backfire.
    Of course, as a foreigner, I don’t get a say in the end. It still wouldn’t switch me to McCain from Obama. II gotta respect McCain for actually being a maverick during this campaign for the first time it seems.

  • Geoff

    Where is Shelly Runyon when you need him?

  • VictorLazlo

    Richardson: Very sad
    My Dad voted for Eisenhower, JFK, Lyndon Johnson, McGovern, Carter and Clinton.
    I voted for Clinton, Gore, Kerry.
    Black folks have been voting for white people since we were freed!
    And why didn’t Chisolm, Sharpton, Jackson or Keyes take off if the only requirement was a bronze complexion?
    The media at large GREATLY underestimates the intelligence of black voters.

  • VictorLazlo

    Steph96, without going wikipedia or google explain the “REZKO” scandal.
    ANd then explain to me how its as bad as the Keating 5 debacle.

  • corey3rd

    The original pundit who talked about her being Catholic had to correct himself. A snakehandling-breeder will appeal to the base that was slipping away from McCain.
    The firing of the brother-in-law will be an issue. However McCain knows how to snowblind the press as seen with his twisting the truths about how he hid his wife’s drug bust from public knowledge.
    But what is getting me is how many people are downplaying the power of the VP position. Nobody wants to talk how she matches up with Dick Cheney.
    Palin’s nomination has secured Hillary Clinton that Supreme Court position if Obama wins. She’s going to be begged to hardcore stump for him and that is the prize at the end for her.
    And Vietnam declared that it did not torture POWs in the Hanoi Hilton. Do you think Osama’s driver is going to go far in politics when he’s released from Gitmo? How many years was he tortured?

  • Richardson

    “And why didn’t Chisolm, Sharpton, Jackson or Keyes take off if the only requirement was a bronze complexion?”
    The only argument I’ve seen to counter this — and, being fair, it wasn’t anybody here — is that they were too black to appeal to white people.
    it’s one of those things which is completely absurd on the face of it, but how, exactly, can you argue with “black people are only voting for him because he’s black”. There’s no argument or logic there to counter.

  • Richardson

    “Res ipso loquitur.”
    Yay! We agree! The statements, including your own, speak for themselves. What a nice way to end this argument.

  • buster

    Obviously you haven’t been here long; every conservative poster, to a man, has made that argument and stood by it. we’ve even had it break down multiple times where they refused to acknowledge that it was even possible that such a belief could be even a little bit racist on the face of it.

    Victor, I don’t recall everyone “to a man” saying the only reason blacks are voting for Obama is because of his race. In fact, Richardson is deliberately twisting and transposing the argument against the idea that those not voting for Obama are racist (as Wells asserts). It’s an outright LIE.

  • JHRussell

    Palin is a brilliant pick with more executive experience than the 3 men on the 2 tickets combined.
    If Obama thinks this takes the experience issue off the table, he should go for it, because it will be slapped back into his face with the fact that she has more relevant exec/admin experience than HE has…the Obama attacks on Palin today are ludicrously thin – they are knocking the fact that she was mayor of a “small” town under 10k population (tell me again which city BO was mayor of?) and that she has less than 2 years in the governors office (again, remind me which state BO was governor of?)…well, I am waiting…
    Not only will she be the first female VP, she has the inside track to be the first female Pres in 2016…

  • Joel
  • Geoff

    This whole “executive” argument for Sarah Palin is cute.

  • Richardson

    “In fact, Richardson is deliberately twisting and transposing the argument against the idea that those not voting for Obama are racist (as Wells asserts)”
    No, I’m not. Here’s one quick example of the sort of thing I’m talking about:
    “George Will… pointed out that he truly believes for every person who doesn’t vote for Obama simply because he’s black three or four people WILL vote for Obama simply because he’s black.”
    That’s a post from three days ago.
    I think the lengthier arguments I’m talking about pre-date you as a poster.
    But, hey, if you’re willing to stand up and say that black people are voting for Obama for a variety of reasons, congratulations. You will become the first conservative poster here to do so.

  • christian

    So do the conservatives here trust Sarah Palin to immediately lead the free world if McCain were to bow out of the job for health reasons?

  • JHRussell

    “This whole “executive” argument for Sarah Palin is cute.”
    Not an argument – an undeniable fact.
    Also undeniable fact – Barack Obama has never held an executive or administrative position in business or government in his life. If elected, he will be the most inexperienced Presdent in our lifetimes if not in 200+ years.

  • JHRussell

    “So do the conservatives here trust Sarah Palin to immediately lead the free world if McCain were to bow out of the job for health reasons?”
    Yes, a hell of a lot more than I trust Barry Obama in the job…

  • George Prager

    “With all due respect again to Governor Kaine, he’s been a governor for three years, he’s been able but undistinguished. I don’t think people could really name a big, important thing that he’s done. He was mayor of the 105th largest city in America. And again, with all due respect to Richmond, Virginia, it’s smaller than Chula Vista, California; Aurora, Colorado; Mesa or Gilbert, Arizona; north Las Vegas or Henderson, Nevada. It’s not a big town.” –Karl Rove, August 10, “Face the Nation”

  • Ghost072

    Wow. This has to be the most ridiculous VP nomination I have ever seen. Let’s break it down, shall we?
    McCain’s camp says that Barack Obama is not ready to lead, because he only had 7 years in the Illinois legislature and 3 years in the Senate. So, McCain picks a nominee who 18 months ago was the mayor of a town with the population of 9,000. McCain’s age was already an issue in the backs of the minds of a lot of Americans – and just got a lot bigger.
    This is not to mention the fact that the choice reeks of desperation and pure and simple identity politics. McCain could have chosen so many other women with far greater qualifications, but instead he picks one who gleefully cites her PTA experience as a qualification. Her husband works for BP and she has simmering scandal brewing that she improperly used her political power to settle a personal matter. Gee, who does that remind you of (besides the Keating Five-era John McCain, that is)?
    I cannot wait to see this decision blow up in the cynical faces of those running McCain’s campaign. The idea that some 18 month governor is going to satisfy Clinton supporters is ludicrous and insulting and it will not work.
    Say hello to President Barack Obama.

  • George Prager

    BizarroWorldJHRussell says …
    Deval Patrick is a brilliant pick with more executive experience than the 3 men on the 2 tickets combined.
    If Bob Dole picked George W. Bush to be his VP in 1996, would JHRussel have gushed about his “experience?” It’s amazing how obtuse some people can get while spinning for their guy.

  • JHRussell

    Prager, what the hell are you talking about? What do your examples have to do with anything I have said?
    Face facts, libs: Obama blew it by skipping over Clinton, and he is now going to pay for it with defections of Hillary supporters for the GOP ticket…it won’t take very many of those defections to break what is otherwise a deadlocked election…

  • Ghost072

    18 months ago, Sarah Palin was the mayor of Wasilla, Alaska. In the four years before that, she served two terms on the Wasilla City Council. A TOWN OF 9,000 PEOPLE. Oh and she also served simultaneously on the Wasilla PTA. I almost forgot that. But hey – at least she’ll deliver Alaska’s 13 electoral votes! LOL…
    And to think that some dimbulb rightie was on CNN today saying that “Barack Obama cannot match up to Sarah Palin’s wealth of experience.”
    This almost feels like a bad Hollywood script; Hard-scrabbling POW grandpa chooses a woman young enough to be his daughter (or sunset affair, she isn’t much younger than Cindy) and she fixes the government with lessons learned working for the PTA. A wholesome family film, I’m sure.
    Are you righties kidding here, or what? This choice is absolutely the stupidest thing McCain could have done and you’re actually trying to convince us that you think it is a good idea? Good luck with that…

  • FeydAway

    We can debate all we want about how much of the female independent vote Palin will pull.
    But, the bottom line is the electoral line. The states truly in question are: Colorado, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Virginia.
    I would argue that Palin locks down Ohio (which was already being slightly projected Rep). I don’t think she is enough to pull Penn or NH. Virginia could be close, as will Minnesota. It may come down to both of those.

  • Josh Massey

    So in a matter of a couple of hours, both Poland and Wells have listed her having a Down’s Syndrome child as among her negatives.
    And I thought conservatives were supposed to be the ruthless, back-stabbing, heartless ones…

  • George Prager

    The key word is obtuse. Look up Deval Patrick on wikipedia. I doubt you would say “This guy is experienced!”
    HIllary supporters won’t go for Palin because she is anti-abortion and they don’t want their hopes for a woman president to be realized by a conservative Republican. Did Margaret Thatcher open doors for women in Britain? They probably won’t elect another woman prime minister for another 100 years. You’re also going to have defections on the GOP side for Obama (or Barr) because of this pick.

  • Richardson

    JHRussell – can you elaborate a little bit about what makes Sarah Palin an attractive candidate to all of the Hillary supporters who will defect for the GOP? Such as, which policies does she support which are important to Hillary supporters?
    Because I certainly don’t want to leap to the conclusion that you’re saying they’re switch their vote solely because Palin is a woman, but you’re not giving me much to go with.

  • George Prager

    “So in a matter of a couple of hours, both Poland and Wells have listed her having a Down’s Syndrome child as among her negatives.”
    Did they really list that as one of her negatives? If so, it is because she should be home taking care of him, not gallivanting around Dayton with William Frawley.

  • Chapman Carruthers

    Stylish rims. Fantastic manicure. Love the fur coats she wears to her speaking engagements. And the pist pump. Oh my. The first pump. Carrie Bradshaw, come on down. The white house is waiting, and the staff is well prepared to handle your special needs child. They have eight years of experience dealig with two others.

  • Richardson

    “So in a matter of a couple of hours, both Poland and Wells have listed her having a Down’s Syndrome child as among her negatives.”
    Personally, I’m just wondering how a person with a newborn baby with Down’s Syndrome has the time to be running for / acting as Vice President. Any newborn’s parent is going to be stretched thing as it is, but a special needs child takes up even more of your time.
    It’s amazing to me that she will, essentially, be handing off a baby with Down’s Syndrome to full-time employees and still be running on “family values”, and NOBODY will ever call her on it publicly.
    God bless America. No writer could write stuff that funny.

  • corey3rd

    John McCain is no William Frawley. St. Fred Mertz is sacred!
    And Alaska only has 3 Electoral votes.
    Also doesn’t help that she considered hunting with helicopters and semi-automatic rifles as a fun activity.

  • JHRussell

    “JHRussell – can you elaborate a little bit about what makes Sarah Palin an attractive candidate to all of the Hillary supporters who will defect for the GOP? Such as, which policies does she support which are important to Hillary supporters? Because I certainly don’t want to leap to the conclusion that you’re saying they’re switch their vote solely because Palin is a woman, but you’re not giving me much to go with.”
    First, Obama already has a huge problem with the Hillary supporters, particularly the women – there is a large gender gap for him in the polls that was there before Palin was picked, and I think that there will continue to be a gap through election day for female Hillary supporters who feel they wuz robbed by Obama not once but twice – he could have picked her as a running mate and nothing that McCain could have done today would have mattered, but he did not, and I think Palin will attract some Hillary voters…it won’t take many to put McCain over the top…
    This is not rocket science, folks.

  • Richardson

    So, they’re going to switch their vote solely because she’s a woman? got it, thanks.

  • Ghost072

    “First, Obama already has a huge problem with the Hillary supporters, particularly the women – there is a large gender gap for him in the polls that was there before Palin was picked”
    I’m still waiting for the second part of your point, because the first one is weak. Obama has lead McCain by between 10 and 20 percentage points since the campaign started. He lead 52% to 36% as recently as August 10, 2008. Of course, he is bound to get a sizeable bounce in Clinton supporters based on the DNC Convention and both Hillary and Bill’s speeches, too.
    But besides those inconvenient facts, do you honestly think Clinton women are so stupid that they vote for a woman who stands in direct contrast to everything they believe in November? If so, you might want to do a little research on past presidential elections, particularly the final voting results of spurned primary candidate supporters (here is a hint, without fail, they come back in full when it is time to vote, and there have been larger deficits than what Obama is experiencing right now). This is GOP wishful thinking, nothing more.
    “This is not rocket science, folks.”
    Indeed. I have yet to see anything scientific about your postulations.

  • Nick Rogers

    I see more Nia Vardalos in that picture of Palin.

  • Mgmax, le Corbeau

    My God, the sexism toward working women in this thread is breathtaking. It’s especially appalling that every liberal poster, to a man, has made that argument and stood by it.
    “So do the conservatives here trust Sarah Palin to immediately lead the free world if McCain were to bow out of the job for health reasons?”
    Every bit as much as anyone else in the race besides McCain, yes.
    For the record, I would not say that either black people would vote for Obama purely because of race– though how could you really tell if they were or weren’t?– or that women would vote for McCain-Palin because of her alone. But would I be surprised if they’d give the ticket another look because of her, versus if he’d picked another white senator? Not in the least. Richardson claims everyone has already decided this election and in fact they’ve decided it on abortion; I would very much like to see a link to the poll that supports this rather curious interpretation of the race.
    “But besides those inconvenient facts, do you honestly think Clinton women are so stupid that they vote for a woman who stands in direct contrast to everything they believe in November?”
    No, Clinton women who have beliefs in direct contrast surely won’t. Ones who have beliefs that overlap in places with Palin’s beliefs, however, are another matter. That’s who’s in play, and as I noted before, polls indicate there are more than usual of them out there. And, of course, if the ranks of both independents and Democrats have increased in the last few years, where does that mean they came from? And could conceivably go back to?
    “Also doesn’t help that she considered hunting with helicopters and semi-automatic rifles as a fun activity.”
    Really? Which states that McCain thinks he could win do you think it hurts in? Pennsylvania? Minnesota?
    “Personally, I’m just wondering how a person with a newborn baby with Down’s Syndrome has the time to be running for / acting as Vice President. Any newborn’s parent is going to be stretched thing as it is, but a special needs child takes up even more of your time.”
    Compared to what, two black pre-teens on the south side of Chicago? God knows there’s a group that’s never at risk. But you go right ahead and make an argument about how Republican women shouldn’t be working or running for office. That’ll go over big with Hillary voters.

  • Mgmax

    Hilarious to read the usual gang of dweebs attacking her as ugly and a stupid choice.

    Fact is, McCain just screwed you good. He may or may not win but he sure got a lot closer.

    1) He locked up his conservative base. A woman whose commitment to pro-life values meant she kept her Down’s baby and is raising him happily. That won’t mean anything to you, but it’s to evangelicals what his POW status is to military folks.

    2) He just stole a chunk of the female independent vote. How much? Remains to be seen. But that tingle that goes up Chris Matthews’ leg when he sees a black man running for president? A lot of women are going to feel it when they see her up against The Other Old White Senator in a debate. (Pretty revealing that both candidates basically picked their opponent as a running mate, actually.)

    3) Americans like to elect governors. She has two years of executive experience? And between them, all four candidates in the race have… two years of executive experience. She’s the only one in the race who’s been more than a talker and self-promoter.

    4) It’s the price of gas, stupid. They must have powerful polling that they can win, or at least were doomed to lose, if they didn’t tackle that head-on. And they will. It’s going to be an energy election and at the moment that looks like a fairly practical candidate against a pie in the sky one promising that a zillion new technologies will sprout out of nowhere by electing him.

    5) “Four more years of the same.” Yeah, she really looks like Dick Cheney. Significantly neutralized, if not dead.

    6) It’s the pork, stupid. Now against Obama’s shockingly vague promise to cut taxes and start a bazillion new programs and shrink the budget and grow the economy, we have the woman who actually fought pork in her own state. It will be thrilling to hear Ted Stevens being slammed– by Republicans, in the same breath as Robert Byrd. (Oh, and thanks a lot, Ron Paul, you phony sack of shit.)

    7) “Biden will rip her to pieces.” Yeah, like Rick Lazio took Hillary down.

    8) And finally, most deliciously, everyone’s who’s thrown the R-word at any criticism of Obama? Get ready to have the S-word thrown at you for every criticism of Palin. This is going to be fun.

  • George Prager

    Mgmax’s transformation into a concern troll is complete. He should’ve kept to his word and quit the site.

  • Mgmax, le Corbeau

    I never said I was quitting. I said I was disgusted.
    The day when comments didn’t work, though, was the best day on here in a long time.

  • Ghost072

    “No, Clinton women who have beliefs in direct contrast surely won’t. Ones who have beliefs that overlap in places with Palin’s beliefs, however, are another matter.”
    Yes, but how many Clinton voters do you think overlap with the idea that abortion should never be legal, not even in cases of rape or incest? How about equal pay for equal work, do you think they overlap on that issue? What about healthcare for children? What about SCHIP? I think when these women hear who Palin really is, they will run for the hills.
    That is, of course, in addition to the fact that McCain has given up his one and only advantage in this election: experience. Now, his supporters are actually saying things like “Palin has more executive experience than Barack Obama.” I have news for those people: she has more executive experience than John McCain, too – all 18 months worth.

  • George Prager

    Just hoping this GILF doesn’t become the VPILF.

  • http://livingincinema.com cjKennedy

    She seems like a female Quayle to me. A conservative, attractive empty vessel we all laughed at until his ticket was elected.

  • christian

    Mgmax is just posting his thoughts like yours Prager.
    Deal.

  • Richardson

    “Richardson claims everyone has already decided this election”
    That’s just a lie.
    “and in fact they’ve decided it on abortion”
    That’s a lie too.
    “But you go right ahead and make an argument about how Republican women shouldn’t be working or running for office.”
    You’re either deliberately lying (when you spin that far, it’s just a lie) or you’re so stupid you can’t read.
    But let me say all the same things again, just for the hell of it, because expressing my own facts simply and then watching you lie about what I actually said amuses me.
    1) After you said this move would “steal” (your word) all the undecided women from Obama, I pointed out that pro-life women wouldn’t vote for Obama (not stolen) and pro-choice women wouldn’t vote for this woman (not stolen), so the only possible undecided women this could steal would be women who are pro-choice, but not strongly so.
    To which I would only add, you’re *still* arguing that her sole appeal is that she’s a woman; you haven’t offered any policies or anything else that would attract or sway any voters to her. Just “she’s a woman — that gives Republicans a big chunk of the undecided women!”
    2) I don’t understand how any parent of either party has enough time to run for Vice President while raising a newborn with Down’s Syndrome.
    But, yeah, that’s *exactly* the same thing as “Republican women shouldn’t be working”.

  • Chapman Carruthers

    >>>the sexism toward working women
    Max, you KNOW I read your posts while I’m jerking off in the bathroom. It really bothers me — and takes me out of my zen prefontaine-like trance — when you make statements that even I can’t support. Like the above. Sexism towards working women? Really? Seems like they were comments directed at a (singular) working woman (singular) and her (singular) individual (singular) circumstance.
    Because of her, I hope McCain wins. She looks like the sort that would blog in her free time. And give us, the people, updates on Angelina’s babies. And where Ted Nugent vacay’s on weekends. And how to make table decorations out of spent machine gun casings. And decor tips for the inside of our ice fishing houses. I imagine there’d be a red, white, and blue motif with lots of little crosses mixed in, and a fuzzy, pink doormat.

  • SpinDozer

    ‘Am I the only Obama supporter that thinks this a genius move?? ‘
    Probably. We’ll see how she performs in the next week. From what I can tell her biggest accomplishment/character-defining issue has been selling the former Guv’s plane on ebay. Aside from weakening the experience “advantage” arguement, her nomination will bring more focus on McCain’s age. As an unknown quantity, she still has the opportunity to impress, but at this point, I’d say …Ferarro.

  • JHRussell

    “I’m still waiting for the second part of your point, because the first one is weak. Obama has lead McCain by between 10 and 20 percentage points since the campaign started. He lead 52% to 36% as recently as August 10, 2008. Of course, he is bound to get a sizeable bounce in Clinton supporters based on the DNC Convention and both Hillary and Bill’s speeches, too.”
    You are not very well informed.
    Read the polls of Hillary voters – I don’t have it in front of me, but something like 27 percent of them said they will vote for McCain or not vote at all…Obama has only gotten about half of them to say they will vote for him….this represents a huge opportunity for McCain and the women who will not vote for Obama.

  • plastiqueelephant

    Damn it, strikes me this will stifle the bump Obama woulda got from that incredible speech yesterday. People will wait and see, and I gotta say this strikes me as a pretty great move. This is an election which will be decided by razor thin margins, she doesn’t have to get lots of independents and disaffected women, just an extra 5% of each group might do it. Damn it all to hell, and read what evangelicals are saying… this fires up the base big time. It’s a hail mary, sure, but it’ll be a jump ball in the end zone….

  • Richardson

    And, as for the only point you even tried to make, Max:
    “Compared to what, two black pre-teens on the south side of Chicago? God knows there’s a group that’s never at risk.”
    I see several differences there, such as:
    1 – an infant takes up much, much more parenting time than two pre-teens, black or white
    2 – a child with Down’s Syndrome is an ENORMOUS commitment, such a huge amount of energy and time that I wouldn’t think anybody could seriously make the comparison if they knew what they were talking about at all
    3 – Michelle Obama has agreed to pick up the slack and be around the house more to make up for Barack not being around as much
    4 – Republicans are the ones who run on “traditional family values” and try to portray themselves as “typical folks”, which seems at odds with leaving a baby with special needs at home to be raised by a nanny

  • Richardson

    “You are not very well informed.”
    Russell – it seems disenguous to say this and then make an argument which he had already deflated, but which you deleted in order to make it seem like he hadn’t already countered the only point you have to make.
    If the Republicans’ big hope is that this woman brings in distraught Hillary voters, then that’s good, because it means they’ve already lost. At least Max is trying to argue that it’ll bring in “undecided” voters — that, on paper, at least makes some sense.

  • George Prager

    Does this mean that Cindy McCain won’t be giving any speeches anytime soon (besides standing in front of a microphone and saying that she has always been proud of America)?

  • Mgmax

    Go read National Review Online’s The Corner over the last few days and tell me McCain had movement conservatives and evangelicals sewn up, especially when pro-choicers like Tom Ridge were being thrown about.

    Granted, a lot of that is probably blowing off steam, much like KossersMove Onanists on the other side, but you can’t know much about that side and not know that McCain is widely suspected and disliked.

    Which is why McCain was the best GOP candidate for the center under the circumstances, of course– and a nod back to that base in his VP pick was the logical extension of that.

    And Richardson, really, all the polls show a lot of undecideds out there, more than usual. And at least half are women. Again, I’m not saying he won the election with this move, but I’m saying he made a brilliant play toward doing so.

  • Mgmax

    “the big problem is that she’s Catholic and McCain is trying to appease the mega-church snakehandlers. I can assure you that these folks still don’t trust Catholics and that Pope.”

    On other hand, Catholic union workers in the Great Lakes, who are exactly who Biden is supposed to appeal to, might look on the choice fairly favorably, dontcha think?

  • JHRussell

    “If the Republicans’ big hope is that this woman brings in distraught Hillary voters, then that’s good, because it means they’ve already lost. At least Max is trying to argue that it’ll bring in “undecided” voters — that, on paper, at least makes some sense.”
    The “big hope” is that they will win over a majority of the undecidedds PLUS some percentage of disaffected Hillary voters…it won’t take much to tilt the election…
    You libs make me laugh – you are tied up in knots over Sarah Palin when you should still be on Cloud 9 over Barry’s speech last night…McCain took all the wind out of Obama’s sails today…I love it.

  • Richardson

    “The “big hope” is that they will win over a majority of the undecidedds PLUS some percentage of disaffected Hillary voters…it won’t take much to tilt the election…”
    so, again, you’re saying that the plan requires them to convert former Hillary supporters. And you genuinely believe that they will have no trouble swallowing an aggressively pro-life woman, simply because, hey, she’s got a ‘gina!
    I wish I were optimistic enough to believe that the Republicans were depending on Hillary’s supporters for victory.
    “McCain took all the wind out of Obama’s sails today”
    I didn’t say it here, but I’ve said it elsewhere — the thing about this announcement that strikes me as definitely, no-question brilliant is that the media (and us folks too) should *all* be talking about Obama right now, but he managed to time this perfectly in order to steal a lot of that coverage. In that way, it’s certainly a brilliant move.

  • George Prager

    I’m not tied up in knots at all. I was just talking with a friend about how great Obama’s speech was last night. Debating the merits of Sarah Palin on HE is a good way to kill time at work, though. She does seem like anice lady, but, as Andrew Sullivan says, picking her as VP is deeply unserious.

  • Mgmax, le Corbeau

    Oh Richardson, you’re so wound up in knots it’s crazy. Another thing I’m not responding to any more is the type of argument that runs “You said all the kids are into smack– in fact, I found one kid in Iowa who isn’t! So you’re a LIAR!” That you think abortion’s a bigger deal in this election than I do, and that you think it’s a bigger help to your side than I do, is hardly going to strike anyone who’s read this thread as libel.
    Some women are very firm on it. Others aren’t. I think there could be enough of the latter, some of whom supported Hillary, to sway the election if they see a future in Palin and still feel burned about Hill. Wow, that was some nutty rightwing wingnuttery! I musta just got my talking points from Rush O’Coultery!
    I hope you’re right about teens being easier than infants, though. Just as a personal matter, considering the ages of my own kids. But I ain’t countin’ on it.
    Plus, I just want the first person with a name out of Monty Python elected. (Not counting Carol and Grover Cleveland.)

  • Richardson

    But, I should add — Obama giving a great speech? that’s not news; every speech he gives is great. There’s not really much to talk about there, especially for people who were already proBama; nothing new there.
    McCain’s veep is much more interesting to talk about because she’s fresh.

  • Mgmax

    I no longer respond to direct attacks on my character or vision here, Richardson, as I decided that they too rarely bear even the slightest resemblance to reality.

    Substantively, I will say that I think you are mistaken on how the electorate feels about abortion. The electorate basically holds contradictory views– they think abortion should be legal, and they support almost any restriction that tends to come up.

    My guess is, you’re about to hear a whole lot about a certain 2003 bill Obama played a significant role in, and about “aborted” delivered babies being left to die in hospital closets. Without getting into the merits of that issue (which I’m sure will quickly sink into demagoguery), I wouldn’t be so sure that one’s a clear winner for your side, and settled.

  • Richardson

    “is hardly going to strike anyone who’s read this thread as libel. ”
    I love your “aw shucks” manner of backing away from blatantly twisting my words, as if you didn’t do it. Anybody reading can easily see that your purported versions of what I said were so far bent that ascribing them to me was simply untrue — so thanks for backing off on that pointlessness.
    “Some women are very firm on it. Others aren’t. I think there could be enough of the latter, some of whom supported Hillary, to sway the election if they see a future in Palin and still feel burned about Hill.”
    I don’t understand why you spent so much time arguing against me saying almost exactly that if our disagreement is simply over the number of them — which, apparently, it is, since this is what I said, except that I said there aren’t enough to sway the election (IMO).
    Actually, we’re a little off — I would definitely disagree with the idea that some women aren’t firm on abortion. I have never met a woman who did not know exactly what she felt on abortion. However, as I said above, and I think you would agree, some women feel that it is the most important issue, and some don’t care as much about that as many other things.
    However, the thing about *that* is that, as far as I can tell, Palin only stands for two things; she’s pro-life and pro-drilling in the Arctic. What else does she stand for? I’m talking specifics, not “she hates big government!” What makes her likely to appeal to undecideds?
    “I hope you’re right about teens being easier than infants, though.”
    Hold on, hoss. I did NOT say easier. Don’t get your hopes up. The challenges multiply once they can walk, and then multiply again once they can talk. It’s a completely different kind of thing.
    All I said was the time commitment is significantly different — a 12 year old girl can sleep through the night, where a four month old baby will wake up crying at least once five nights out of seven (as a generalization, of course).
    “Plus, I just want the first person with a name out of Monty Python elected. (Not counting Carol and Grover Cleveland.)”
    How is it that we’ve never had a Jones?

  • George Prager

    Interesting:
    In 1999, Palin was a Buchanan supporter:
    http://www.thenation.com/blogs/jstreet/350730/sarah_palin_buchananite

  • George Prager

    D.Z. in rehab or something?

  • http://martiansattackingindianapolis.blogspot.com/ Josh Massey

    Democrats, 1980: “Reagan is going to overturn Roe v. Wade!”
    Democrats, 1984: “Reagan is going to overturn Roe v. Wade in his second term!”
    Democrats, 1988: “Bush is going to overturn Roe v. Wade!”
    Democrats, 2000, “Bush is going to overturn Roe v. Wade!”
    Democrats, 2004, “Bush is definitely going to overturn Roe v. Wade this time!”
    Democrats, 2008, “McCain is going to overturn Roe v. Wade!”

  • http://livingincinema.com cjKennedy

    Count Thread, are you really going to ignore my broader point just to defend Dan Quayle?

  • LFF

    McCain you dirty, dirty old man. I like you more everyday.

  • George Prager

    Republicans, 1980: “Reagan is going to overturn Roe v. Wade!”
    Republicans, 1984: “Reagan is going to overturn Roe v. Wade in his second term!”
    Republicans, 1988: “Bush is going to overturn Roe v. Wade!”
    Republicans, 1992, “Bush is going to overturn Roe v. Wade!”
    Republicans, 1996, “Dole is going to overturn Roe v. Wade!”
    Republicans, 2000, “Bush is going to overturn Roe v. Wade!”
    Republicans, 2004, “Bush is definitely going to overturn Roe v. Wade this time!”
    Republicans, 2008, “McCain is going to overturn Roe v. Wade!”

  • http://martiansattackingindianapolis.blogspot.com/ Josh Massey

    Well, almost, Prager. What Democrats don’t seem to get is that the Republicans will never get rid of Roe v. Wade – they have millions of votes invested in it. As do the Democrats. It’s a cheap political point for both sides, and it serves everybody very well right where it is.
    I hate politicians, by the way.

  • Mgmax

    “every conservative poster, to a man, has made that argument and stood by it.”

    Res ipso loquitur.

  • Aladdin Sane

    Ketut, awesome.

    I was thinking that this may fuel a whole lot of Young Republican wet dreams in the foreseeable future. As some have pointed out, she is an attractive woman.

    It’s a very shrewd and clever move that could either pay off big time or totally backfire.

    Of course, as a foreigner, I don’t get a say in the end. It still wouldn’t switch me to McCain from Obama. II gotta respect McCain for actually being a maverick during this campaign for the first time it seems.

  • Richardson

    Massey – I would agree that what voters don’t seem to get is that both parties are invested in the status quo.
    But I would also say that, if Bush has the chance to name another Supreme Court justice, he still *could* overturn Roe vs. Wade. It’s not as if he’s had any actual opportunity to do so, yet. He certainly packed the Court against it to the best of his abilities.
    And, if he did so, it would be very bad in the short term, but very good for whoever the next Democrat to run was.

  • George Prager

    Republicans, 2012: “Romney is going to overturn Roe v. Wade!”
    Republicans, 2016: “Romney is going to overturn Roe v. Wade in his second term!”
    Republicans, 2020: “Bush is going to overturn Roe v. Wade!”
    Republicans, 2024, “Jindal is going to overturn Roe v. Wade!”
    Republicans, 2028, “Kirk Cameron is going to overturn Roe v. Wade!”
    Republicans, 2032, “Dr. Dre is going to overturn Roe v. Wade!”
    Republicans, 2032, “Dr. Dre is definitely going to overturn Roe v. Wade this time!”
    Republicans, 2036, “Hilton is going to overturn Roe v. Wade!”

  • Ghost072

    “Russell – it seems disenguous to say this and then make an argument which he had already deflated, but which you deleted in order to make it seem like he hadn’t already countered the only point you have to make.”
    Thanks Richardson, you saved me the trouble of responding to that ridiculous post. I’ve seen some intellectually dishonest arguments in my time, but JHRussell is truly “special” in that regard, at least from what I’ve seen so far. I may not agree with much of what Mgmax says, but at least he makes cogent arguments and doesn’t parrot long debunked right-wing lies. What’s next, Al Gore said he invented the internet? How about Barack Obama has a terrorist uncle, or John Kerry shot himself to get a purple heart? Some people have NO shame.

  • Richardson

    “but at least he makes cogent arguments and doesn’t parrot long debunked right-wing lies”
    Well, let’s say “doesn’t only…”

  • George Prager

    Republicans, 2040: Supreme Warrior Zorg declares that all females shall enter the punishment huts during their “curse!”

  • spoiled

    So do the conservatives here trust Sarah Palin to immediately lead the free world if McCain were to bow out of the job for health reasons?

  • Ghost072

    Here is a link that discusses one of the studies done on party defection that debunks the idea that primary anger carries over to general elections. There is a more recent study that I read as well, but I am having a hard time finding it right now.
    http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/06/23/clinton_voters/

  • Ghost072

    “”but at least he makes cogent arguments and doesn’t parrot long debunked right-wing lies”
    Well, let’s say “doesn’t only…””
    Well, I’ll just leave at this: In my experience, he doesn’t and that is the way I try to judge others.

  • Richardson

    I’m just saying, if you’re gonna stick around, write that appraisal in pencil.

  • http://livingincinema.com Craig Kennedy

    Most annoying thread that didn’t have DZ in it. Ever.

  • JHRussell

    “Here is a link that discusses one of the studies done on party defection that debunks the idea that primary anger carries over to general elections. There is a more recent study that I read as well, but I am having a hard time finding it right now.”
    So your “evidence” is of the support for single digit losers like Mo Udall and Scoop Jackson? I don’t think either of them had 50 percent of the votes, or anywhere near 18 million primary votes…but if this salon.com op/ed evidence helps you sleep at night, go right ahead…
    I believe you can throw out all these “rules” of past trends in disaffected voters in a year that has the first Afro American major party candidate and first GOP female Veep running…Hillary supporters are angry, and it won’t take very many of them to either vote for McCain or just sit at home on their hands to tilt this election…

  • Mgmax, le Corbeau

    Boy, Richardson, I have NO idea what it is that so offends you in this thread. Seems to me that you just confirmed exactly what I was claiming, yet you’re convinced that there’s some tiny difference in the parsing of some distinction which makes me a lowdown lyin’ skunk.
    Whatever. On November 4th, we’ll find out which of us was right. And have long since forgotten the whole argument.

  • JHRussell

    Mgmax, it seems it is “you and me against the HE world” on this stuff…what I take from this thread full of lib hysteria: they are scared, and they are lashing out with their frustrations…and I LOVE it…
    I am not even a Republican – I have never been a member of any party…I am a bona fide independent, a swing voter, with libertarian roots (Perot got my vote in ’92), and I live in one of the key swing states, too. So I am the very voter that John McCain is courting, and his pick of Palin has completely won me over (he already had my vote, but now I am really fired up for this election).

  • Mgmax

    My God, the sexism toward working women in this thread is breathtaking. It’s especially appalling that every liberal poster, to a man, has made that argument and stood by it.

    “So do the conservatives here trust Sarah Palin to immediately lead the free world if McCain were to bow out of the job for health reasons?”

    Every bit as much as anyone else in the race besides McCain, yes.

    For the record, I would not say that either black people would vote for Obama purely because of race– though how could you really tell if they were or weren’t?– or that women would vote for McCain-Palin because of her alone. But would I be surprised if they’d give the ticket another look because of her, versus if he’d picked another white senator? Not in the least. Richardson claims everyone has already decided this election and in fact they’ve decided it on abortion; I would very much like to see a link to the poll that supports this rather curious interpretation of the race.

    “But besides those inconvenient facts, do you honestly think Clinton women are so stupid that they vote for a woman who stands in direct contrast to everything they believe in November?”

    No, Clinton women who have beliefs in direct contrast surely won’t. Ones who have beliefs that overlap in places with Palin’s beliefs, however, are another matter. That’s who’s in play, and as I noted before, polls indicate there are more than usual of them out there. And, of course, if the ranks of both independents and Democrats have increased in the last few years, where does that mean they came from? And could conceivably go back to?

    “Also doesn’t help that she considered hunting with helicopters and semi-automatic rifles as a fun activity.”

    Really? Which states that McCain thinks he could win do you think it hurts in? Pennsylvania? Minnesota?

    “Personally, I’m just wondering how a person with a newborn baby with Down’s Syndrome has the time to be running for / acting as Vice President. Any newborn’s parent is going to be stretched thing as it is, but a special needs child takes up even more of your time.”

    Compared to what, two black pre-teens on the south side of Chicago? God knows there’s a group that’s never at risk. But you go right ahead and make an argument about how Republican women shouldn’t be working or running for office. That’ll go over big with Hillary voters.

  • christian

    So I am the very voter that John McCain is courting, and his pick of Palin has completely won me over (he already had my vote, but now I am really fired up for this election).
    Yeah, you’re independent.
    Which war and tax break are you for?

  • Ghost072

    “what I take from this thread full of lib hysteria: they are scared, and they are lashing out with their frustrations…and I LOVE it…”
    For an “independent” you sure seem to ready at all times with the current right-wing talking point. Case in point, this comment, which basically echoes everyone from the right that I’ve heard today. I have news for you, the only person scared in this race is John McCain and that is exactly why he selected Sarah Palin. John McCain basically said today, “I’m in trouble and I cannot beat the “change” theme,” so he reached for a candidate that he barely knows, a choice which completely undermines his most effective criticism of Obama.
    He won the news cycle, that is for certain, but this choice is such an obvious political ploy – from the “maverick,” no less – that I believe most Americans will see through it and reject it. Next, the RNC Convention will be simulcast with a hurricane descending on Louisiana, which will be another not-so-subtle reminder of why this bunch needs to go.
    BTW, how long before someone splices together a video of McCain laughing at the “How do we beat the bitch” comment, or we are reminded of McCain’s pet name for Cindy. It’s starts with “C” but I doubt that Palin would approve.

  • bfm

    “No one can contest the character it takes to raise a special needs child whether it be autism or Down’s Syndrome” – I agree, but the child is only 4 months old! A baby with Down’s is not significantly different from a baby without. Where the challenges and character really kick in are down the track. But I guess she won’t be the carer who has to deal with that. As Richardson says, how can that possibly constitute family values?

  • Ghost072

    “So your “evidence” is of the support for single digit losers like Mo Udall and Scoop Jackson? I don’t think either of them had 50 percent of the votes, or anywhere near 18 million primary votes…but if this salon.com op/ed evidence helps you sleep at night, go right ahead…”
    Are you under the impression that you are paid by the point you miss? Are you trying to be obtuse, or does it just come naturally. Nevermind, I know the answer to that already, Mr. “Independent.”
    I know you read the paragraph that mentioned Scoop Jackson and Mo Udall because you paraphrased from it, but then you failed to mention two candidates named Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford, even though they were mentioned in the same paragraph. In other words, you once again deliberately ignored a key piece of information, because it didn’t fit your demagogery. Intellectual dishonesty at its finest. Here is the paragraph, in case anyone is interested:
    “Atkeson used this treasure trove of polling data to see whether voters who had initially backed one of the losing 1976 Democrats (such as Scoop Jackson and Mo Udall) in the primaries changed their assessment of Carter after he became the de facto nominee. As Atkeson writes in an unpublished paper, “Differences between the winner and loser backer groups [in the primaries] began to decline sharply in August after both party conventions … In October, during the heart of the general election period, winning and losing Democratic factions had become very similar in their evaluations of Carter.” The same pattern emerged on the GOP side in 1976, despite the stark differences between Ford and Reagan, both ideologically and stylistically. Atkeson noted that while Carter’s popularity among Democrats increased during the campaign, “Reagan supporters showed an even more dramatic improvement in their overall evaluation of Ford.”

  • Mgmax

    I never said I was quitting. I said I was disgusted.

    The day when comments didn’t work, though, was the best day on here in a long time.

  • spoiled

    Mgmax is just posting his thoughts like yours Prager.
    Deal.

  • Mgmax

    Oh Richardson, you’re so wound up in knots it’s crazy. Another thing I’m not responding to any more is the type of argument that runs “You said all the kids are into smack– in fact, I found one kid in Iowa who isn’t! So you’re a LIAR!” That you think abortion’s a bigger deal in this election than I do, and that you think it’s a bigger help to your side than I do, is hardly going to strike anyone who’s read this thread as libel.

    Some women are very firm on it. Others aren’t. I think there could be enough of the latter, some of whom supported Hillary, to sway the election if they see a future in Palin and still feel burned about Hill. Wow, that was some nutty rightwing wingnuttery! I musta just got my talking points from Rush O’Coultery!

    I hope you’re right about teens being easier than infants, though. Just as a personal matter, considering the ages of my own kids. But I ain’t countin’ on it.

    Plus, I just want the first person with a name out of Monty Python elected. (Not counting Carol and Grover Cleveland.)

  • Chapman Carruthers

    >>> I am a bona fide independent, a swing voter, with libertarian roots (Perot got my vote in ’92), and I live in one of the key swing states, too.
    Oooh, libertarian. Did you hear that? He’s a (pause for dramatic effect) libertarian. Well, color me impressed. The only people I know that have publicly stated they’re libertarians are misguided college kids, deathly paranoid the gov was coming to steal their dime bags, and closet republicans who long, no yearn, to be eye fucked by an entire room of suits at a republican fundraiser.
    How different. Now very novel. Swinging to whichever party suits your fancy. What is it you stand for exactly? ‘Cause after the comment that the ‘Pubs won your vote with the Palin nonsense, I’m beginning to think you don’t stand for anything.

  • D.Z.

    Mgmax: “He just stole a chunk of the female independent vote. How much? Remains to be seen.”
    Well, that depends on whether she’s as in touch with women on the issues of economy and health care as Hillary. If she’s for the same type of privatization and debt espoused by the rest of the GOP, she’s a goner. You have to remember that Obama was in another cynical race against a black Republican candidate named Alan Keyes, and still won by a landslide.
    “A lot of women are going to feel it when they see her up against The Other Old White Senator in a debate.”
    Again, that assumes that she can branch out to her demo the same way Obama can with his demo.
    “It’s going to be an energy election and at the moment that looks like a fairly practical candidate against a pie in the sky one promising that a zillion new technologies will sprout out of nowhere by electing him.”
    Well, that depends on whether she can sound convincing when they use the Exxon Valdez card on her.
    “we have the woman who actually fought pork in her own state. ”
    She also fought employment. http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=8854318
    “Yeah, like Rick Lazio took Hillary down.”
    Hillary’s been in tougher campaigns.
    “On other hand, Catholic union workers in the Great Lakes, who are exactly who Biden is supposed to appeal to, might look on the choice fairly favorably, dontcha think?”
    Only if she can win them over with new jobs and explain why outsourcing isn’t so bad.
    “Richardson claims everyone has already decided this election and in fact they’ve decided it on abortion; I would very much like to see a link to the poll that supports this rather curious interpretation of the race.”
    Even if they’re divided on abortion, they’re united on birth control and ovarian cancer vaccinations. So McCain and Palin will have to explain why they supported nutjobs who are for women being impregnated against their will and against protecting teen girls from cancer.
    “That’s who’s in play, and as I noted before, polls indicate there are more than usual of them out there. And, of course, if the ranks of both independents and Democrats have increased in the last few years, where does that mean they came from?”
    But that’s still not going to be their priority as much as the economy and the war.
    “Compared to what, two black pre-teens on the south side of Chicago?”
    They seem fine to me.
    Monument: “Her main value to the McCain campaign is her gender, it certainly isn’t her experience.”
    Well, Republicans like affirmative action when it means more money for them, so…
    Count Thread: “Unlike his opponent, he doesn’t need experience in his Veep, *he* has it.”
    If ripping off old people can be considered experienced, sure.
    “FYI, Dan Quayle had been in Congress for *twelve years* before he was tapped to be VP. That’s six times the congressional experience Barack Obama had before he chose to run for president.”
    Quayle still couldn’t net George I a second term, so I’m not sure about your point here.
    Gus: “The main case against Obama McCain needs to make is (a) he’s an extremist, (b) he’s surrounded himself with angry, kooky people, and (c) he’s repeatedly demonstrated contempt for ordinary Americans. Obama has no good counter to those arguments.”
    I imagine his counter would be that its the Republicans blaming other people for their own weaknesses.
    “She’ll help McCain enormously with energy issues,”
    Assuming she’s not a “keep ruining the environment by drilling oil, even though we’re running out and funding terrorists” Republican, sure thing.
    Feyd: “Because she has EXECUTIVE experience. She also ran her own business.”
    So if she has executive and business experience and she’s supporting Republican incompetence, that’s not really experience, is it?
    “How can you say political arguments have less to do with facts than impressions (a truth I agree with), and then dismiss the clear IMPRESSION a young female VP gives to the ticket?”
    I imagine because the impression it gives is desperation to win over an alienated group, much like those idiot execs at UPN.
    George: “My New York Reagan Democrat parents were hoping for Joe Lieberman. ”
    Well, Joe’s neither a Democrat nor “bipartisan” like Reagan.
    buster: “Game over? That might be right. McCain may have just sealed the deal.”
    Only if she can be the female Obama.
    “And as pro-life as I am, I’d be careful questioning anyone’s judgment in deciding to rear a child with down’s syndrome … you guys sound like you’re one step away from condoning infanticide.”
    While I think that’s punching below the belt, too, I imagine
    the intention behind the argument was to suggest that she’s too busy caring for him to be able to govern effectively.
    Stephe: “The GOP now has more experience at the bottom of their ticket than the Democrats have at the top.”
    If they’re so experienced, then they wouldn’t be responsible for one of the worst economies in decades.
    “I really think the election will come down to Obama’s:
    a) woeful lack of experience”
    What did Bush know about Muslims before he invaded Iraq again?
    “b) zero accomplishments”
    Was Bush successful in any business?
    “c) his appalling lack of judgment in choosing friends and/or associates – Rezko, Wright, Ayers.”
    *cough* Charles Keating, Osama, and Carriles *cough*
    Russell: “they are knocking the fact that she was mayor of a “small” town under 10k population (tell me again which city BO was mayor of?)”
    Dunno, but he’s worked in Chicago, which is in fact a larger city, so….
    “and that she has less than 2 years in the governors office (again, remind me which state BO was governor of?)…”
    Which state did McCain govern?
    “Not only will she be the first female VP, she has the inside track to be the first female Pres in 2016…”
    They said that about Lizzy Dole, too, once…
    “Also undeniable fact – Barack Obama has never held an executive or administrative position in business or government in his life.”
    Except for his law and community service work, sure.
    “Obama blew it by skipping over Clinton, and he is now going to pay for it with defections of Hillary supporters for the GOP ticket…it won’t take very many of those defections to break what is otherwise a deadlocked election…”
    PUMAs wanted *Hillary* to be nominated, not just any woman. And they’re not going to vote for someone who they don’t know anything about, just because she’s a woman.
    “and I think Palin will attract some Hillary voters…it won’t take many to put McCain over the top…”
    Well, they weren’t enough to stop Obama from being nominated, so I think people are misjudging their clout.
    “Read the polls of Hillary voters – I don’t have it in front of me, but something like 27 percent of them said they will vote for McCain or not vote at all…Obama has only gotten about half of them to say they will vote for him….this represents a huge opportunity for McCain and the women who will not vote for Obama.”
    Only if they will avoid the choice of not voting.
    “The “big hope” is that they will win over a majority of the undecidedds PLUS some percentage of disaffected Hillary voters…it won’t take much to tilt the election…”
    The undecideds are going to need more than a pretty face to win them over. If that really helped, then Edwards would’ve won 2004 for Kerry.
    “You libs make me laugh – you are tied up in knots over Sarah Palin when you should still be on Cloud 9 over Barry’s speech last night…McCain took all the wind out of Obama’s sails today…I love it.”
    I think it’s more like McCain lost all his hot air by admitting that he can’t cut it with the electorate as well as Obama.
    “I am not even a Republican – I have never been a member of any party…I am a bona fide independent, a swing voter, with libertarian roots (Perot got my vote in ’92), and I live in one of the key swing states, too.”
    Real libertarians wouldn’t be endorsing a guy who thinks spying on Americans and torturing people is acceptable.
    George: Ironically, Buchanan likes Obama.
    http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/08/29/pat-buchanan-gushes-over-obama-speech-hell-freezes-over/#comments
    And no, I’m just busy right now.

  • http://livingincinema.com cjKennedy

    Most annoying thread that didn’t have DZ in it. Ever.

  • MathewM

    Wow, DZ finally figured out how to log into the new system or did it just take him 24 hours to write that last post… If only the world outside of the HE bubble cared.

  • Mgmax

    Boy, Richardson, I have NO idea what it is that so offends you in this thread. Seems to me that you just confirmed exactly what I was claiming, yet you’re convinced that there’s some tiny difference in the parsing of some distinction which makes me a lowdown lyin’ skunk.

    Whatever. On November 4th, we’ll find out which of us was right. And have long since forgotten the whole argument.

  • Chapman Carruthers

    DZ, back in glorious fashion! Now, where did I put my rosetta stone…

  • MathewM

    I think Palin is an inspired and not entirely calculated choice. She’s not afraid to go against the grain much like McCain. It’s all politics sure but she seems like the real deal if you actually do some research on her. I like that she has convictions whether I agree with all of them or not. That’s true female empowerment unlike Hillary who probably doesn’t believe half the shit she says.
    Whether or not Palin will help McCain win is yet to be seen. The fact that lefties are getting their panties knotted up about her is a good sign. However I asked my conservative wife if she felt anything about the nomination and she wondered how Palin could do a good job as VP and also take care of her family. It remains to be seen if conservative women will embrace her.
    Obama was smart in choosing Biden. Biden is a prick but he’s a safe choice because he has experience and he’s as white as snow. Biden also probably sees running as Obama’s wing man as his liberal guilt punishment for all of the off color remarks he’s made over the years.

  • Mgmax, le Corbeau

    Ye gods, D.Z. Never has someone responded to so many points he missed the point of.
    “Oooh, libertarian. Did you hear that? He’s a (pause for dramatic effect) libertarian. Well, color me impressed. ”
    God I hate posts like that. I hate that sneering tone, that’s what the one day without comments was a blessed relief from. Grow up a little, kid, and maybe you’ll figure out that there’s some merit or at least understandable human motivation behind nearly every position, and real people who deserve a little more than undergraduate sarcasm. Especially if you’d like them to, y’know, vote for somebody.

  • MathewM

    I honestly didn’t think anyone read DZ’s posts. I just measured it. The content is all the same.

  • spoiled

    So I am the very voter that John McCain is courting, and his pick of Palin has completely won me over (he already had my vote, but now I am really fired up for this election).

    Yeah, you’re independent.
    Which war and tax break are you for?

  • SpinDozer

    ‘Especially if you’d like them to, y’know, vote for somebody.’
    eww, post-graduate sarcasm, verrry sexy. I like-it!

  • Mgmax

    Ye gods, D.Z. Never has someone responded to so many points he missed the point of.

    “Oooh, libertarian. Did you hear that? He’s a (pause for dramatic effect) libertarian. Well, color me impressed. ”

    God I hate posts like that. I hate that sneering tone, that’s what the one day without comments was a blessed relief from. Grow up a little, kid, and maybe you’ll figure out that there’s some merit or at least understandable human motivation behind nearly every position, and real people who deserve a little more than undergraduate sarcasm. Especially if you’d like them to, y’know, vote for somebody.

  • christian

    At least McCain met Palin once before. Now he can vouch.

  • JChasse

    We all know so much….

  • spoiled

    At least McCain met Palin once before. Now he can vouch.

  • JHRussell

    Why do libs immediately resort to ad hominem attacks when they get frustrated, when their emotional points are defeated by rational logic? A suggestion: present your opinions without resorting to childish name calling…it is a much more effective and persuasive way to put forward your points without sounding like a jackass.
    You libs amuse me…its as easy as shooting fish in a barrel on HE…

  • George Prager

    “rational logic”? As opposed to irrational logic? Someone on this board has quite a subjective opinon feeling about themselves.

  • JHRussell

    “”rational logic”? As opposed to irrational logic? Someone on this board has quite a subjective opinon feeling about themselves.”
    Libs push their twisted, subjective, and usually irrational “logic” every time they open their mouth (or write on this blog)…
    Or are you admitting that libs have zero logic behind their facts and opinions, just subjective and irrational emotion?
    Either way – I win!

  • George Prager

    Someone on this blog really needs a self-esteem boost reassurance pat on the back!

  • D.Z.

    Russell: “Libs push their twisted, subjective, and usually irrational “logic” every time they open their mouth (or write on this blog)…”
    Yes, we should do something rational, like deny global warming or evolution.

  • Richardson

    Question for the max-fans – how do you claim he is contributing anything to the conversation when he literally just said above that he sees no difference between my statement “of course there are independent female voters” and his statement “Richardson claims there are no independent voters” ?

  • D.Z.

    Richardson: Well, that’s not what he said, for one thing. And for another, his contributions don’t involve petty bickering.

  • free pc games

    really great share! thanks a lot
    affiliate review
    free pc games download