Sunday, October 5, 2008

A very thoughtful Op-Ed from Gail Collins


Published: October 3, 2008

The Republicans were euphoric over Sarah Palin’s debate performance, particularly the part in which she stood tall and refrained from falling off the stage. “There are conservatives and Republicans across America who are ... breathing a sigh of relief,” said Pat Buchanan on MSNBC, adding that “of the four debaters we’ve seen, she was the most interesting, attractive of them all.”

Palin did indeed answer each question with poise and self-confidence, reeling off a bunch of talking points that were sometimes totally unrelated to the matter at hand. When she was asked to respond to Joe Biden’s critique of the McCain health care plan, she announced: “I would like to respond about the tax increases,” cheerfully ignoring the fact that tax increases had never been mentioned.

After the recent Katie Couric unpleasantness, Palin told the viewers that this time they were getting a chance to hear her “answer these tough questions without the filter.” And, indeed, her answers were murky in the extreme. She railed repeatedly about government regulations getting in the way of the private sector, then announced that the financial rescue plan “has got to include that massive oversight that Americans are expecting and deserving.” She said that she didn’t want to discuss what caused global warming, only how to ease its impact.

She appeared to agree with Dick Cheney’s manic theory that the vice president is a member of both the executive and legislative branches, although it’s hard to tell since she began her answer this way: “Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing through the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the vice president. And we will do what is best for the American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive and cooperative with the president’s agenda in that position.”

When the moderator, Gwen Ifill, asked under what circumstances the candidates would consider bringing America’s nuclear weapons into play, Palin said: “Nuclear weaponry, of course, would be the be-all, end-all of just too many people in too many parts of our planet, so those dangerous regimes, again, cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons, period.”

It’s hard to remember that a month ago, very few people had ever heard of Sarah Palin. McCain sprung his vice-presidential selection on us at the last minute, possibly under the impression that the country felt things had gotten too boring lately, and would appreciate the excitement of having a minimally experienced political unknown serving as backup to a 72-year-old cancer survivor.

Since then, she has spent most of her time going from one Republican rally to the next, repeating chunks of her convention speech, which have grown more disjointed with every stop. (In an airplane hangar in Ohio recently, she told the people of Youngstown she was happy to be there because Alaska has, per capita, the nation’s most “small planes and small pilots.”)

For reporters hoping to question her, she has been determinedly unfindable, a Judge Crater from Juneau. And after the Couric debacle, you can bet your boots that the campaign is going to take Palin’s debate performance, declare victory and wrap her up until after the election.

This is all a terrible shame. For us, mainly. But also for Palin, whose intelligence and toughness may wind up buried under the legend of her verb-deprived ramblings.

Palin is, in many ways, a genuine heir to the women’s liberation movement of the 1970s, which tried to make sure that future generations of American women would grow up feeling they had every right to compete with men for all the best rewards and adventures the world had to offer. She never seems to have had a single doubt that she could accomplish whatever she set her mind to. When she got involved in politics, she used the time-honored male route of cultivating powerful mentors, then pushing them out of the way at the first possible opportunity. When she was governor, she did what very few female politicians do, and ignored all the subsidiary issues in order to put all her bets on one big policy payoff in the form of a new state energy policy.

Then, somehow, she concluded that her success in clawing her way to the top of Alaska’s modest political heap meant she was capable of running the United States.

This entire election season has been a long-running saga about the rise of women in American politics. On Thursday, it all went sour. The people boosting Palin’s triumph were not celebrating because she demonstrated that she is qualified to be president if something ever happened to John McCain. They were cheering her success in covering up her lack of knowledge about the things she would have to deal with if she wound up running the country.

When All Else Fails



Wait a minute, they have been lying since day one!

It's just going to get worse. I believe every time this idiot from
Alaska tells one of these talking point lies, she should be verbally eviscerated
for what she is, a faulty wired apparition that bleeped across the radar for a few weeks in 2008...
from Crooks and Liars:

Meanwhile, Sarah Palin brings up Bill Ayers at a campaign stop in Carson, California:

"Evidently there's been a lot of interest in what I read lately," she said. "I was reading today a copy of the New York Times. And I was really interested to read in there about Barack Obama's friends from Chicago. Turns out one of his earliest supporters is a man who, according to the New York Times, was a domestic terrorist, that quote 'launched a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and the United States Capitol.'"

Saturday's New York Times story, an investigation into whether Obama had a relationship with Ayers, concluded that the men were never close and that Obama has denounced Ayers' radical past, which occurred when Obama, who was born in 1961, was a child. It also found that he has downplayed their contacts.

"This is not a man who sees America as you and I see America," Palin said of Obama. "We see America as a force for good in this world. We see America as a force for exceptionalism. ... Our opponents see America as imperfect enough to pal around with terrorists who would bomb their own country."


Classy.

And from Firedoglake.com:

Governor Palin is out of the loop on the strategic decisions -- like not campaigning any more in Michigan. She's also not paying attention to what Steve Schmidt tells her about The New York Times. Unveiling McCain-Palin2.0, the Character Assassination Edition, Caribou Barbie had this to say:

“Well, I was reading my copy of today’s New York Times and I was interested to read about Barack’s friends from Chicago,” she said. “Turns out one of Barack’s earliest supporters is a man who, according to The New York Times, and they are hardly ever wrong, was a domestic terrorist and part of a group that, quote, launched a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol. Wow. These are the same guys who think patriotism is paying higher taxes.”

Of course, Steve Schmidt, McCain's campaign manager who used to work for Dick Cheney, has already called into question the journalistic integrity of The New York TImes:

“Whatever the New York Times once was, it is today not by any standard a journalistic organization,” Mr. Schmidt said. He added, “This is an organization that is completely, totally, 150 percent in the tank for the Democratic candidate, which is their prerogative to be.”

He added, “Everything that is read in The New York Times that attacks this campaign should be evaluated by the American people from that perspective.”

I wonder if Sarah's ringing endorsement -- "they are hardly ever wrong" -- applies to the February 21st New York Times?

Saturday, October 4, 2008

OK - THIS GUY IS FUCKING SCARY!!!

HEH HEH HEH HEH HEH HEH HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEHHHH!

Friday, October 3, 2008

The Sarah Palin Debate Flow Chart

From Wonkette.com

How Sarah Palin Survived Ninety Minutes Without Spontaneously Combusting

This is pretty much perfect, except maybe somewhere you could squeeze in, “That Joe person is crying about his dead family?! –> Shout Maverick several times,” which is something that happened.

On The Lighter Side

From Wonkette.com

Conservative Pundit Describes Boner He Got Watching Palin

Who regrets getting spayed now?There was nothing good about Sarah Palin’s debate performance last night, at all. But! Some party hacks are pretending to like it, or say she won, because of how well she avoided saying anything of substance. The “buzz word” regarding the key to her success (among no one) is that she spoke in very “folksy” tones, and they appeal to the Heartland. For the first time ever, our punditry is being lazy! “Folksy” is more of an Ann Richards thing. What Sarah Palin did was called “flirting.” And so far, at least one pundit on National Review’s The Corner blog has disclosed how much of a boner he got, in potentially the greatest Corner post of all time.

The key word here is “starbursts,” in a post called, “Projecting Through The Screen”:

A very wise TV executive once told me that the key to TV is projecting through the screen. It’s one of the keys to the success of, say, a Bill O’Reilly, who comes through the screen and grabs you by the throat. Palin too projects through the screen like crazy. I’m sure I’m not the only male in America who, when Palin dropped her first wink, sat up a little straighter on the couch and said, “Hey, I think she just winked at me.” And her smile. By the end, when she clearly knew she was doing well, it was so sparkling it was almost mesmerizing. It sent little starbursts through the screen and ricocheting around the living rooms of America. This is a quality that can’t be learned; it’s either something you have or you don’t, and man, she’s got it.

As our tipster pointed out, this sounds almost like a thrill running up Chris Matthews leg!

“It sent little starbursts through the screen and ricocheting around the living rooms of America.”

Remind us to use this once a day, forever.

Projecting Through The Screen [Corner]

Hmmmm, SO this is where Sarah Waits for a Debate.



from God is for Suckers. com

Ah, the Joys of Stupidity

3 October 2008 by Bob

Faithful See Virgin Mary’s Image in Toilet Bowl

Cincinnati,OH—Hundreds of people are being drawn to the Creation Museum by what they say looks like an image of the Virgin Mary in a toilet bowl. As many as 300 people, some weeping, gathered outside the third stall of the Museum’s men’s room. They prayed, they took photographs, and they said the rosary. The museum curator said the cause of the image was not immediately clear, but he plans on talking to the head of the janitorial staff, Benedict. Sarah Palin, in the Museum preparing for this evening’s debate, said it was comforting to know that God’s spirit was there in this time of turmoil for the nation.

Ever wonder what planet you’re on?…

Oh, and if you need a good reason to vote, consider this one

WASHINGTON — The next president will tip the courts, one way or another. Supreme Court openings are all but guaranteed, and that’s just the start: 44 trial and appellate federal judicial vacancies already await filling. There will be more. Consider this: President Bush has placed 316 judges on the bench during his two terms. One out of three federal judges now owes a lifetime-tenured job to the current president. Whoever replaces Bush will be likewise recasting courthouses, top to bottom.

Fundamentally Wired Wrong!



From Huffington Post:



Appearing on a friendlier news outlet, Gov. Sarah Palin said she was "annoyed" with the way Katie Couric handled their interview and complained that the CBS Evening News host failed to give her the opportunity to take a proverbial axe to Barack Obama.

In a portion of her sit-down with Fox News correspondent Carl Cameron, Palin claimed that Couric's questions -- which produced a series of staggeringly embarrassing responses -- put her in a lose-lose position.

"The Sarah Palin in those interviews was a little bit annoyed," she said. "It's like, man, no matter what you say, you are going to get clobbered. If you choose to answer a question, you are going to get clobbered on the answer. If you choose to try to pivot and go to another subject that you believe that Americans want to hear about, you get clobbered for that too."


For the record, Couric asked her, among other things, what type of news sources she turns to for information, which Supreme Court decisions she disagreed with, why Alaska's proximity to Russia gave her foreign policy experience, her opinion of the bailout package for Wall Street, and where she thought Vice President Dick Cheney erred. Which one of those questions was designed to trip her up (as opposed to, say, give viewers a better sense of her character and views) is tough to ascertain.

Later in her interview with Cameron, Palin offered a sense of what she thinks would have been a fairer set of questions. Unsurprisingly, they all would have provided her the opportunity to rail against Obama.

"In those Katie Couric interviews, I did feel that there were lot of things that she was missing in terms of an opportunity to ask what a VP candidate stands for, what the values are represented in our ticket. I wanted to talk about Barack Obama increasing taxes, which would lead to killing jobs. I wanted to talk about his proposal to increase government spending by another trillion dollars. Some of his comments that he's made about the war, that I think may, in my world, disqualify someone from consideration as the next commander in chief. Some of the comments that he has made about Afghanistan -- what we are doing there, supposedly just air raiding villages and killing civilians. That's reckless. I want to talk about things like that. So I guess I have to apologize for being a bit annoyed, but that's also an indication of being outside the Washington elite, outside of the media elite also. I just wanted to talk to Americans without the filter and let them know what we stand for."