2008 U.S. Presidential Election Mega thread [Archive] - Page 27

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 04:31 AM

Second GOPer makes 'uppity' slip

What is it with those Georgia Republicans? As if Rep. Lynn Westmoreland's comments calling Barack and Michelle Obama "uppity" last week weren't enough, now a candidate hoping to join Westmoreland in Congress is accused of using the same word, commonly seen as a racial slur.

Retired Air Force Major General Rick Goddard, running against vulnerable Democratic Rep. Jim Marshall, described MSNBC reporter Ron Allen, who is African American, as "uppity" on a Macon radio show, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Goddard had just returned from the Republican National Convention where former House Speaker Newt Gingrich had "disarmed a very uppity newscaster who tried to question him on the capabilities and leadership of Governor Palin." The audio is available here.

"A member of the media dropped all pretense of objectivity during an interview with Newt Gingrich to arrogantly launch an attack on Gov. Sarah Palin's experience, to which Rick came to her defense and simply evoked a word -- that by definition -- described the reporter's demeanor as being superior, arrogant and presumptuous," Goddard spokesman Tim Baker told the AJC. "To try and smear Rick's character by suggesting that he meant anything other than the definition is ludicrous."

Judge for yourself whether the exchange between Allen and Gingrich was a reporter dropping "all pretenses of objectivity" by watching the video here.

Westmoreland said he didn't think the word "uppity" had any racial connotations, and Goddard, running in a district that is about one-third African American, maintains his own innocence. Still, other Republicans can learn from the goofs: Don't call anyone uppity.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/scorecard/0908/Second_GOPer_Makes_Uppity_Slip.html

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 05:20 AM

No more Mr. Nice Guy? I would hope so!

FARMINGTON HILLS, Michigan (AFP) - Barack Obama ripped into John McCain and Sarah Palin as never before Monday, accusing his Republican White House foes of "shameless" dishonesty with their claim to be "mavericks" ready to shake up Washington.

McCain and Palin were "lying about their records," the Obama campaign said after the Republican running mates advertised themselves in a television spot as the "original mavericks" who would stand up for hard-pressed voters.

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Obama_accuses_Republican_rivals_of_dishonesty_0908 .html

I am glad he is using the word "lie". It bugged me so much that Kerry and Edwards seemed to always avoid it. "President Bush is not being straight with the American people" - meh!

Corrina

09-10-2008, 05:28 AM

You guys have got to stop worrying about polls. They're not reliable.

As for journalists, yes, we need some mean, nasty curmudgeons around to stick the knife in people who should be telling the truth. Jon Stewart is as close as we've got right now, which is not good.

We need Hunter S. Thompson back.
We need Mike Wallace or Linda Ellerbee in the prime of their careers.

Or that Edward R. Murrow guy.

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 05:31 AM

You guys have got to stop worrying about polls. They're not reliable.

Well, with the exception of the 17 point swing within one week, and maybe the weekend thing, one would expect all the pools to at least have the same sampling errors each time around. So if there is a trend, that is at least a trend in a sub set of the population.

However, I think using less than 2000 people for a nationwide poll is bad science. I pretty much disregard those "750 likely voters" polls completely. But seeing the Rasmussen and Gallup trends day by day is showing something.

Infra-Man

09-10-2008, 05:42 AM

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 05:46 AM

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/umedia/20080910/cp.7147defaa192abc76ed5934be36a8344

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/uc/20080909/lcrmlu080909.gif

Infra-Man

09-10-2008, 05:47 AM

The McCain camp continues to pitifully grasp at straws: (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/a-piggish-debat.html)

Oy vey. Why are people making an issue out of a folksy colloquialism? Don't people understand how metaphors work?

If you look at the full context of his statement, Obama was comparing McCain's campaign and their links to the Bush administration's policies to a pig and McCain's co-opting of the change message to lipstick.

I also find it funny how the Republicans have always gotten away with saying intentionally mean-spirited, dunderheaded, assholes things and now have the gall to play the political correctness card.

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 05:50 AM

Oy vey. Why are people making an issue out of a folksy colloquialism? Don't people understand how metaphors work?

If you look at the full context of his statement, Obama was comparing McCain's campaign and their links to the Bush administration's policies to a pig and McCain's co-opting of the change message to lipstick.

I also find it funny how the Republicans have always gotten away with saying intentionally mean-spirited, dunderheaded, assholes things and now have the gall to play the political correctness card.

As I said weeks ago, they're taking the out of context quoting to a really dumb, juvenile level. I hope Obama's "they think you are stupid, but you're not stupid so you won't fall for it" will catch on.

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 05:52 AM

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/uc/20080909/lbs080910.gif

Adam C

09-10-2008, 05:52 AM

*waves*

Hello!

Now, are you sure you want that? :biggrin:

God...yes.

Adam C

09-10-2008, 05:53 AM

Hmmmn, maybe I should get back to journalism school and practice my drinking problem.

Or is it get back to drinking school and practice my journalism?

As a wise man once said...why not both?

Infra-Man

09-10-2008, 05:57 AM

As I said weeks ago, they're taking the out of context quoting to a really dumb, juvenile level. I hope Obama's "they think you are stupid, but you're not stupid so you won't fall for it" will catch on.

As Mencken wrote, "No one in this world has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby."

I hope they prove him wrong this year, but I felt the same thing about 2000 and 2004.

And if Mencken was around, at least he'd hate both candidates equally and write some funny, bitter, and biting stuff about them.

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 06:00 AM

As Mencken wrote, "No one in this world has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby."

I hope they prove him wrong this year, but I felt the same thing about 2000 and 2004.

And if Mencken was around, at least he'd hate both candidates equally and write some funny, bitter, and biting stuff about them.

Mencken said one of my favorite quotations ever....
"There is always an easy solution to every human problem--neat,
plausible, and wrong."

Infra-Man

09-10-2008, 06:08 AM

Mencken said one of my favorite quotations ever....

Hehehe, nice, and pretty damn true.

I think one of my favorite Menckenisms was about the Scopes trial. I need to grab by book for the exact quote, but it was how rather than thinking rationally, ignorant folks cling to their superstitions because the superstitions provide them with "irresistible reasonableness of the nonsensical."

Something about that combination of words just struck me as right on.

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 06:14 AM

If this was a race for "President of Europe", Obama would win 69% of the vote. McCain 26%.
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,577332,00.html

PatrickG

09-10-2008, 06:16 AM

If this was a race for "President of Europe", Obama would win 69% of the vote. McCain 26%.
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,577332,00.html

Shhh... Don't say that too loud.

I think the general American public would favor wiping out all life in Europe if they could be certain there'd be no consequences by the same margin.

Infra-Man

09-10-2008, 06:18 AM

Okay... saw this on a Fark thread just now and it's worth sharing:

Here's an example of stupidity for you: I have an Obama sticker on my car, next to an X-Men logo sticker that's been there for 3 years. Yesterday outside a Starbucks, a construction worker came up to me as I was getting in my car & called me a "Muslim-lover". I asked him what he meant and he said I must be a Muslim lover because I had an Obama sticker & a Malcolm X sticker (pointing to my X-Men logo). I was speechless.

Oh America... oh my... We've been blessed with a surplus of morons.

FalconX2000

09-10-2008, 07:26 AM

Hmmmn, maybe I should get back to journalism school and practice my drinking problem.

Or is it get back to drinking school and practice my journalism?

There is no drinking in journalism. Journalism is drinking.

Huh, maybe he'll actually do it.

Whatever else anybody might care to say about Franken, he's got more of a spine than a lot of the Dems currently serving in the Senate (*cough*Pelosi*cough*Reid*cough). So I hope to see him there next year.

People always seem to have more spine before they get into office.

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 07:46 AM

NBC poll shows Obama reclaiming a narrow lead. (http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/080909_NBC-WSJ_Released.pdf)

And Rasmussen has the same result. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll)

4thHorseman

09-10-2008, 08:00 AM

Okay... saw this on a Fark thread just now and it's worth sharing:

Oh America... oh my... We've been blessed with a surplus of morons.

God it feels so good to be apart of a nation with intelligent folk like this...

Matt Doc Martin

09-10-2008, 08:02 AM

And Rasmussen has the same result. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll)

Will Obama being behind or tied help him raise money and/or support? (i.e. motivate the democratic base more?)

Corrina

09-10-2008, 08:09 AM

A couple of YouTube videos:

This one is John McCain contradicting himself--basically clips of him saying one thing and later clips completely contradicting that:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLuqxXwG4nE

This is about Sarah Palin's record as mayor and as governor. I like that it sourced the quotes but I dislike the cheap shot near the end.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l40juADZacw

JKCarrier

09-10-2008, 08:42 AM

Yet another copyright/trademark violation from the McCain camp:

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080910/NEWS0106/809100339/1113/election0

The John McCain campaign improperly used one of Ohio's most recognizable trademarked symbols during its stop here. ID badges distributed to media members covering the Lebanon rally included the Ohio State University athletics logo - a large block-lettered red "O" with the words "Ohio State" spread across it in black.

"Nobody cleared that with us," said Rob Cleveland, the university's assistant director of trademark and licensing.

KevinTBrown

09-10-2008, 09:02 AM

Charles RB

09-10-2008, 09:04 AM

What I want to know is why the media isn't willing to be seen as a vicious attack dog?

The idea is, IIRC, that if they're too vicious they'll not get interviews and be accused of bias (and then get no interviews).

This is proven wrong by BBC's Newsnight, where Kirsty Wark and Jeremy Paxman have been attack dogs for ages and people still go on the show. Paxman once famously asked the same question of then-Home Secretary Michael Howard (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KHMO14KuJk)twelve times in succession because Howard kept dodging it.

And there's his clash with George Galloway... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD5tunBGmDQ) ("Don't try and threaten me Mr Galloway, please.")

The McCain camp continues to pitifully grasp at straws: (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/a-piggish-debat.html)

Oh Jesus.

PatrickG

09-10-2008, 09:19 AM

The idea is, IIRC, that if they're too vicious they'll not get interviews and be accused of bias (and then get no interviews).

This is proven wrong by BBC's Newsnight, where Kirsty Wark and Jeremy Paxman have been attack dogs for ages and people still go on the show. Paxman once famously asked the same question of then-Home Secretary Michael Howard (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KHMO14KuJk)twelve times in succession because Howard kept dodging it.

Obama went on O'Reilly!

Really, what it comes down to is that anyone who will avoid a potentially tense interview doesn't deserve to have their opinion expressed.

Good ideas and good people stand up to the weight of scrutiny.

Kid Kamikaze10

09-10-2008, 09:23 AM

The idea is, IIRC, that if they're too vicious they'll not get interviews and be accused of bias (and then get no interviews).

This is proven wrong by BBC's Newsnight, where Kirsty Wark and Jeremy Paxman have been attack dogs for ages and people still go on the show. Paxman once famously asked the same question of then-Home Secretary Michael Howard (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KHMO14KuJk)twelve times in succession because Howard kept dodging it.

And there's his clash with George Galloway... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD5tunBGmDQ) ("Don't try and threaten me Mr Galloway, please.")

Oh Jesus.

Nice anaylsis, Charles... But the question is....

Did you threaten to overrule him?

:biggrin:

TCJohnson

09-10-2008, 09:25 AM

Matt Doc Martin

09-10-2008, 09:26 AM

I am so nervous about this campaign.

You and a good part of Planet Earth.

4thHorseman

09-10-2008, 09:42 AM

Enough is Enough (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/)

Oh this had me chuckle.

KevinTBrown

09-10-2008, 09:50 AM

Enough is Enough (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/)

Oh this had me chuckle.

About FUCKING time!!!!! :smile:

Kid Kamikaze10

09-10-2008, 10:04 AM

About FUCKING time!!!!! :smile:

The Republicans are already trying to twist this one, I bet.

KevinTBrown

09-10-2008, 10:12 AM

The Republicans are already trying to twist this one, I bet.

I can't see how they can twist this:

"I don't care what they say about me. But I love this country too much to let them take over another election with lies and phony outrage and swift boat politics," he also said. "Enough is enough."

PatrickG

09-10-2008, 10:16 AM

They responded, accusing Obama of surrendering the high ground when he resorted to "schoolyard insults".

Personally, I think McCain's staff owes Palin an apology. They hear Obama talk about a gussied up pig and leap to the assumption that it's Palin.

Obama didn't imply Palin was a pig. He implied McCain's policies were like dressing up a swine.

It's McCain's people who lept to compare Palin to a pig.

rick

09-10-2008, 10:17 AM

And there's his clash with George Galloway... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD5tunBGmDQ) ("Don't try and threaten me Mr Galloway, please.")

Paxman, as that clip clearly shows though, falls too far in the other direction and very often ends up sounding like something from the tabloids.

There is nothing admirable about picking a fight with questions more appropriate for the tabloids then for the news.

Certainly, there are those out there who manage to ask the difficult questions without comming across as a total jackass.

Think Lara Logan or Jim Leher for example.

Hell, even Jon Stewart to a degree.

Kid Kamikaze10

09-10-2008, 10:24 AM

rick

09-10-2008, 10:31 AM

If you are talking about the African-American woman question... You might want to check out the context for that, because it has a bit more validity than a mere tabloid question.

But yeah... He did take it a bit too far.

I'm sure there probably is some validity to the question.

However there was no real way to make the case that the way the question was worded and used as an attack wasn't intentional and obvious.

Reporters do need to ask tough questions and they should only settle for the truth.

But you can't really use a clear attack such as this one, as an example of a fair, tough press doing their job.

And by the way, just what the hell is an "African-American" women doing holding office in the UK anyway? :smile:

Kid Kamikaze10

09-10-2008, 10:36 AM

I'm sure there probably is some validity to the question.

However there was no real way to make the case that the way the question was worded and used as an attack wasn't intentional and obvious.

Reporters do need to ask tough questions and they should only settle for the truth.

But you can't really use a clear attack such as this one, as an example of a fair, tough press doing their job.

And by the way, just what the hell is an "African-American" women doing holding office in the UK anyway? :smile:

You know what I meant... I slipped up!

:biggrin:

Charles RB

09-10-2008, 10:56 AM

Obama didn't imply Palin was a pig. He implied McCain's policies were like dressing up a swine.

It's McCain's people who lept to compare Palin to a pig.

Yes, that is interesting, isn't it?

The BBC report on it (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7608653.stm)points out the week before, Palin was joking the difference between hockey mums and pitbulls was one wears lipstick; I presume this is the basis the Republicans are using to claim Obama meant her. It's a crap basis.

However there was no real way to make the case that the way the question was worded and used as an attack wasn't intentional and obvious.

No, it seems pretty clear he was attacking Galloway there.

Alexx1

09-10-2008, 10:59 AM

So it's okay for McCain to use the phrase, which is a pretty common phrase in Washington politics, but when Obama uses it, it must be an insult directed towards Palin. These guys are wasting our time. I can't believe folks fall for this crap. The Republicans have nothing to run on so they must keep folks distracted with stupidity. That's all this is is another attempt to keep people from having to deal with and think about the realities of the situation.

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 11:17 AM

Paxman, as that clip clearly shows though, falls too far in the other direction and very often ends up sounding like something from the tabloids.

There is nothing admirable about picking a fight with questions more appropriate for the tabloids then for the news.

Certainly, there are those out there who manage to ask the difficult questions without comming across as a total jackass.

Think Lara Logan or Jim Leher for example.

Hell, even Jon Stewart to a degree.

I've never been impressed by Paxman, actually. His "terrier with a rat" approach painfully fails to be searching, and he never seems to use it on anything important. The attack on Galloway was shameful. If you want to watch him mildly discomfit Ann Coulter, go right ahead, but it's scarcely worth the bother.

What people overlook about Paxman is that he's at heart a smug defender of the system. The superficiality of the questions is no more wounding that a procedural motion, and the only thing of value it ever shows is that politicians aren't transparent. Amazing!

Once we've established that, of course, the only thing left to trust is the civil service, who all went to the same college he did.

Wait a sec. Should that have wound up as "the only thing left to trust is the people"?

Charles RB

09-10-2008, 11:21 AM

The attack on Galloway was shameful

Why? Where his points wrong?

Buzz Dixon

09-10-2008, 11:22 AM

The late Rondo Hatton was an actor in B-movies, but originally was a newspaper reporter in Florida. When his acromeglia progressed to the point where it deformed his features, he decided to make the best out of his bad situation by going to Hollywood. There he secured numerous bit parts in various low-budget crime features and horror thrillers.

This is the guy I'd like to see interview Sarah Palin.
http://www.nndb.com/people/745/000128361/rondo-hatton.jpg

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 11:25 AM

Will Obama being behind or tied help him raise money and/or support? (i.e. motivate the democratic base more?)

I think the current very tight race and back and forth is probably the best to keep people motivated.

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 11:30 AM

Enough is Enough (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/)

Oh this had me chuckle.

You should make the link to the actual entry, not the main blog. Your story has already moved 3 slots down.

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 11:33 AM

Why? Where his points wrong?

If we're talking about the buttonholing after the election, he didn't actually have a point. It would have been more honest to just punch Galloway in the face.

And if Paxman genuinely thought his anger was about unseating a black woman, he can get stuffed. Because what Paxman was truly upset about was some upstart member of the working class doing a better job of criticising the government than he was.

Because Paxman doesn't actually criticise the government, not in its actual workings, not in what it actually does. He's a middle-class hausfrau who wants to smack down anyone who isn't playing the game properly, or challenges his cultural superiority.

And yes, his points, such as they were, were wrong. Correct question: How does it feel to unseat a cabinet minister? If Paxman is focusing on her being black and female instead of being a cabinet minister, well then, who's racist and sexist?

I might point out that, had I still been living in Bethnal Green, I'd have voted for Galloway too, precisely to register my anger against the government. And maybe that might have been a more productive line of discussion.

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 11:36 AM

You should make the link to the actual entry, not the main blog. Your story has already moved 3 slots down.

"Pontius Pilate was a governor."

The top story is fine, too.

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 11:36 AM

Enough is Enough (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/)

Oh this had me chuckle.

But yeah, I am so glad he's calling a lie a lie. I got so sick of "distortions" and "not being straight" being used against Bush in 04.
He lied. He's a lying liar who lies. Say it!! Preach it!!

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 11:39 AM

But yeah, I am so glad he's calling a lie a lie. I got so sick of "distortions" and "not being straight" being used against Bush in 04.
He lied. He's a lying liar who lies. Say it!! Preach it!!

Dangerous strategy. You've seen what it's like round here when someone gets accused of lying.

It's impolite!

Charles RB

09-10-2008, 11:46 AM

Because what Paxman was truly upset about was some upstart member of the working class doing a better job of criticising the government than he was.

We are talking about the politician that most people don't listen to and is part of a minor political party that recently had a schism making it smaller, yes?

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 11:47 AM

Words of wisdom from an unexpected source:

The see-saw story of Sarah Palin should give the press pause. Feeding frenzies followed by fawning serve only to confuse. If the public is to make sound decisions, to sort what's real from what's manufactured, the media must do their job with greater consistency and greater care.

1. The media should redouble efforts to unearth facts and spend far less time on speculation and titillation. McCain, Palin, Obama, and Joe Biden all have records. It's the media's job to expose contradictions in them – and to keep doing so even when campaigns push back. It is not the media's job to speculate who will be leading next week or whether a candidate can parent and govern simultaneously.

2. The media need to reexamine the meaning of journalistic objectivity. It is not to give equal weight and space to each side of an issue. It is to report fully and fairly, to determine where the facts fall, and to write what's verifiably true – giving a say, but not equal space, to those who contest the facts without evidence.

Palin, for example, does not believe climate change has a human cause. The scientific consensus says otherwise. Should her views carry equal weight as the campaign grinds on? My journalism professors would have said "no."

3. The media should regularly explain what reporters do and why. In an era in which reporters are about as popular as $4-a-gallon gasoline, this is imperative. This spring I gave a workshop to some 50 university public information employees. I faced a long silence before anyone could tell me what the First Amendment protects.

Until the news media turn both tougher and fairer, provides contextual truth and not just balance, political operatives will hold the upper hand. And the public will move through election cycles like motorists peering into a thick fog.

"You may fool all the people some of the time; you can even fool some of the people all the time; but you can't fool all of the people all the time," Abraham Lincoln is reported to have said.

Only a vigilant media can keep Machiavellian calculations of contemporary campaigns from fooling enough people enough of the time to make such deceit the deciding factor in our elections.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0910/p09s01-coop.html

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 12:03 PM

Paul says McCain camp asked him for endorsement

At a press conference in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday, Ron Paul encouraged voters to back a third-party candidate for president. Noticeably missing was an endorsement of Paul's fellow Republican, John McCain.

Paul told reporters that he recently received a phone call from former Sen. Phil Gramm, who was McCain's campaign co-chair man until he resigned from the post earlier this year, and Gramm said, "You need to endorse McCain." Paul added, "The idea was that he would do less harm than the other candidate." A McCain spokesman did not respond to a request for comment.

Three independent presidential candidates appeared with Paul: Ralph Nader, Green Party nominee Cynthia McKinney and Constitution Party nominee Chuck Baldwin. Former Rep. Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party's nominee, was supposed to attend but apparently decided to hold his own press conference instead.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/09/10/paul/index.html

4thHorseman

09-10-2008, 12:08 PM

You should make the link to the actual entry, not the main blog. Your story has already moved 3 slots down.

Whoops, my bad:

Actually, found updated page about it (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/10/campaign.wrap/index.html)

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 12:19 PM

We are talking about the politician that most people don't listen to and is part of a minor political party that recently had a schism making it smaller, yes?

No, we're talking about a candidate from a scarcely existent political party managing to unseat a cabinet minister solely on the strength of opposition to the war.

We're also talking about one of the few politicians in the UK to get off his arse and seriously oppose the war.

And the only British politician to come to America and take the Senate to task about the war.

But you're right: Galloway has been marginalized by mainstream politics, and Paxman needed to marginalize his win, because the mainstream must be protected at all costs.

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 12:20 PM

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/09/10/paul/index.html

Sorry, I must have a terrible hangover. I don't remember any of that.

Kevinroc

09-10-2008, 12:21 PM

Huffington Post has a number of links about a seeming backlast against McCain/ Palin.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/10/gutter-politics-mccain-ca_n_125291.html

It's nice to start seeing them get called out for their half-truths and outright lies.

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 12:21 PM

Words of wisdom from an unexpected source:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0910/p09s01-coop.html

Not that unexpected. The Christian Science Monitor has always had a reputation for unblinking impartiality.

king mob

09-10-2008, 12:27 PM

If we're talking about the buttonholing after the election, he didn't actually have a point. It would have been more honest to just punch Galloway in the face.

I would have paid money for that.

And if Paxman genuinely thought his anger was about unseating a black woman, he can get stuffed. Because what Paxman was truly upset about was some upstart member of the working class doing a better job of criticising the government than he was.

Bollocks, Galloway left the working class as soon as he could. Paxman was bringing up Respect's campaign against Oona King and how Galloway found it difficult to condemn attacks against King that were racist and anti-semitic.

Because Paxman doesn't actually criticise the government, not in its actual workings, not in what it actually does. He's a middle-class hausfrau who wants to smack down anyone who isn't playing the game properly, or challenges his cultural superiority.

And yes, his points, such as they were, were wrong. Correct question: How does it feel to unseat a cabinet minister? If Paxman is focusing on her being black and female instead of being a cabinet minister, well then, who's racist and sexist?

Paul, you're wrong. Paxman can be an arse and he certainly plays up to the cameras but letting Galloway sit there and avoid questioning about an incredibly horrible campaign would have been remiss of him.

I might point out that, had I still been living in Bethnal Green, I'd have voted for Galloway too, precisely to register my anger against the government. And maybe that might have been a more productive line of discussion.

You would have wasted your vote on a man who doesn't deserve it (and whose voting record shows he doesn't care but will happily turn up on Celebrity Big Brother) & a party that's full of exactly the sort of unpleasant wanker that's taken the people of Bethnal Green for a ride.

George was my MP once many years ago, he was a charming, charismatic man but he was, and is, a complete two-faced lying bastard.

Matt Doc Martin

09-10-2008, 12:29 PM

I would have paid money for that.

Bollocks, Galloway left the working class as soon as he could. Paxman was bringing up Respect's campaign against Oona King and how Galloway found it difficult to condemn attacks against King that were racist and anti-semitic.

Paul, you're wrong. Paxman can be an arse and he certainly plays up to the cameras but letting Galloway sit there and avoid questioning about an incredibly horrible campaign would have been remiss of him.

You would have wasted your vote on a man who doesn't deserve it (and whose voting record shows he doesn't care but will happily turn up on Celebrity Big Brother) & a party that's full of exactly the sort of unpleasant wanker that's taken the people of Bethnal Green for a ride.

George was my MP once many years ago, he was a charming, charismatic man but he was, and is, a complete two-faced lying bastard.

hey now...this is the thread for dysfunctional AMERICAN leaders.

Corrina

09-10-2008, 12:33 PM

PatrickG

09-10-2008, 12:39 PM

This is the guy I'd like to see interview Sarah Palin.
http://www.nndb.com/people/745/000128361/rondo-hatton.jpg

Abe Vigoda?

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 12:43 PM

Paul, you're wrong. Paxman can be an arse and he certainly plays up to the cameras but letting Galloway sit there and avoid questioning about an incredibly horrible campaign would have been remiss of him.

Are we still talking about the buttonholing on the election night?

Because I saw that, and I wanted to punch Paxman myself.

Those questions might well be important. I would have thought the black eye to the government was more important.

It's also pure grandstanding -- as always, Paxman's dumbass questions were as effective as Michael Moore's.

You would have wasted your vote on a man who doesn't deserve it (and whose voting record shows he doesn't care but will happily turn up on Celebrity Big Brother) & a party that's full of exactly the sort of unpleasant wanker that's taken the people of Bethnal Green for a ride.

I would have been happy just to punish King for sucking up to Blair. And that's exactly what Galloway's election was about. Sticking it to the government, and sticking it to King. And quite right too.

As things stand with Labour, I'd consider voting Tory to send the message if I thought they'd get it (I would, of course, wind up voting Lib Dem). You know, like the rest of the country. And the same way that any Republican should vote for Obama.

George was my MP once many years ago, he was a charming, charismatic man but he was, and is, a complete two-faced lying bastard.
Perhaps. But that's not relevant. Paxman wasn't there to make a point about racism and sexism -- and if he was, he failed -- he was there to tear Galloway down for breaking with the way things are done.

Paxman's fawning book The Establishment tells us everything we need to know about how much he's caught up in the Old Boy racket and the Acceptance Society. He's like a character out of the early 70s. Bet he still quotes Monty Python routines at home, too.

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 12:44 PM

hey now...this is the thread for dysfunctional AMERICAN leaders.

Whoops!

What day is it again?

king mob

09-10-2008, 12:46 PM

No, we're talking about a candidate from a scarcely existent political party managing to unseat a cabinet minister solely on the strength of opposition to the war.

Yes, the anti-war vote was huge but these allegations (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4535885.stm) played their part.

We're also talking about one of the few politicians in the UK to get off his arse and seriously oppose the war.

True, but that's one of the few positive points about Galloway.

And the only British politician to come to America and take the Senate to task about the war.

Again true but how many British politicians have had to answer questions to the senate as a hostile witness?

But you're right: Galloway has been marginalized by mainstream politics, and Paxman needed to marginalize his win, because the mainstream must be protected at all costs.

Oh nonsense. This is one of the reasons why Galloway was maginalized.

http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l140/heatherboud1/george_galloway_and_transvestite.jpg

Dancing around with Z-List celebrities on Channel 4 was just the nail in his coffin as far as most people were concerned. Even Respect seem split (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/nov/08/otherparties.georgegalloway)as to whether they want Galloway involved with them.

Galloway isn't & shouldn't be a hero to the left, mainly because he's one of the last people involved in the tatters of the British left-wing that deserves any respect. He's a lost cause & yes he does give good speeches but he's shot himself in the foot time & time again.

king mob

09-10-2008, 12:53 PM

Those questions might well be important. I would have thought the black eye to the government was more important.

No, there were questions to be answered over Respect's campaign. Paxman should have pushed more on that respect.

I would have been happy just to punish King for sucking up to Blair. And that's exactly what Galloway's election was about. Sticking it to the government, and sticking it to King. And quite right too.

Voting out Labour stooges is fine; replacing them with incompetant egomaniacs is hardly 'sticking it to the government'.

king mob

09-10-2008, 12:56 PM

Whoops, Paul & myself are nicking this thread, sorry folks. Please return to your normally scheduled American election thread.....

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 01:00 PM

The CNN story on the front page today notes that just a year ago, McCain used the very same phrase about "lipstick on a pig" in reference to legislation that Hilary Clinton proposed.

It was good to see the big media doing a little fact checking.

Other politicians have also used the phrase in recent years, including Vice President Dick Cheney, Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington state, Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Rep. John Mica of Florida and Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado, among others.

Torie Clarke, a former McCain adviser, even wrote a book called, "Lipstick on a Pig: Winning In the No-Spin Era by Someone Who Knows the Game."

Still, the McCain campaign says Obama's use was intentional, and they want an apology.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/10/campaign.lipstick/index.html

Heh.

Can we say "jump the shark" without meaning Palin?
Being in the dog house?
Looking like something the cat dragged in?

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 01:08 PM

Oh, good grief. Even after Mike Huckabee took Obama's side on this:

But McCain's campaign is not about to let the issue go. They released a Web ad Wednesday that plays Obama's lipstick comments, then asks, "Ready to lead? No. Ready to smear? Yes."

KevinTBrown

09-10-2008, 01:13 PM

Oh, good grief. Even after Mike Huckabee took Obama's side on this:

As I said elsewhere: The Republicans way to run a campaign is thus: Distract, distract, distract. Issues? What issues? Distract, distract, distract.

FalconX2000

09-10-2008, 01:19 PM

"Pontius Pilate was a governor."

The top story is fine, too.

Unfortunately, it then starts to go down the line towards comparing Obama to Jesus.

Sorry, I must have a terrible hangover. I don't remember any of that.

lol.:biggrin:

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 01:24 PM

Yes, the anti-war vote was huge but these allegations (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4535885.stm) played their part.

Ms King denied her loyalty to Tony Blair had proved decisive in the constituency, which has a large Muslim population.

She would, wouldn't she. And that's exactly why she was voted out.

Again true but how many British politicians have had to answer questions to the senate as a hostile witness?

How many British politicians have stood up to American hegemony so much that they convened a witchtrial?

And I say all this with less than total respect for Galloway.

Oh nonsense. This is one of the reasons why Galloway was maginalized.

No it isn't, don't be silly. Even before he played pussycat with Rula -- I should be so lucky! -- the press was all over his shit. Paxman was just one of the baying dogs. I mean, really. Are you seriously going to claim that Galloway wasn't expelled from the Labour Party over Iraq? And that the party shouldn't be utterly ashamed that nobody else was?

Galloway isn't & shouldn't be a hero to the left, mainly because he's one of the last people involved in the tatters of the British left-wing that deserves any respect. He's a lost cause & yes he does give good speeches but he's shot himself in the foot time & time again.

Yeah, but this isn't about that, is it.

It's about Paxman being a made man of the status quo, whose role is to pretend to be the hardass so everyone can pretend that the UK really is a democracy, and real journalism is being done on the TV. Which it isn't.

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 01:25 PM

As I said elsewhere: The Republicans way to run a campaign is thus: Distract, distract, distract. Issues? What issues? Distract, distract, distract.

Didn't they see what playing the gender card for no reason did to Hillary's campaign?

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 01:25 PM

Unfortunately, it then starts to go down the line towards comparing Obama to Jesus.

One would hope that a Christian would emulate Our Lord and Saviour.

king mob

09-10-2008, 01:31 PM

She would, wouldn't she. And that's exactly why she was voted out.

How many British politicians have stood up to American hegemony so much that they convened a witchtrial?

And I say all this with less than total respect for Galloway.

No it isn't, don't be silly. Even before he played pussycat with Rula -- I should be so lucky! -- the press was all over his shit. Paxman was just one of the baying dogs. I mean, really. Are you seriously going to claim that Galloway wasn't expelled from the Labour Party over Iraq? And that the party shouldn't be utterly ashamed that nobody else was?

Yeah, but this isn't about that, is it.

It's about Paxman being a made man of the status quo, whose role is to pretend to be the hardass so everyone can pretend that the UK really is a democracy, and real journalism is being done on the TV. Which it isn't.

Paul, it's not fair to everyone else that this debate is detracting from the main thread. If you want to debate Galloway elsewhere then fine, but Scotland are beating Iceland & that's far more important than a wanker like Galloway.

Infra-Man

09-10-2008, 01:33 PM

Barack Obama's response to the lipstick kerfuffle (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zAbeu3v3Wc)

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 01:34 PM

No, there were questions to be answered over Respect's campaign. Paxman should have pushed more on that respect.

Voting out Labour stooges is fine; replacing them with incompetant egomaniacs is hardly 'sticking it to the government'.

I would have thought "We'd rather have George Galloway than you" says quite a lot.

Also: context, context, context! The man gets thrown out of the Labour Party for opposing the war. I'm thinking that voting him back into parliament as an independent says: you can't rely on the support of our community any more, because you're persecuting our people just the same as if you were the BNP, you schmucks.

Then again, so does voting for the BNP. That sends the message that the Labour Party has become a bunch of complacent middle class wankers who don't give a toss about the working class.

But they're still not listening, are they. Maybe they'll listen when they're beaten to buggery at the next election. But I doubt it. They'll just decide to become even more like the Tories. Because they are a bunch of smug self-satisfied middle class wankers.

And those are the issues Paxman should have in the crosshairs: not being some moral fingerwagging cheif choristor -- "Ooh, you naughty boy!"; but actually examining the political economics and the cui bono. And he does that about as much as Charlie Rose does.

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 01:37 PM

Paul, it's not fair to everyone else that this debate is detracting from the main thread. If you want to debate Galloway elsewhere then fine, but Scotland are beating Iceland & that's far more important than a wanker like Galloway.

I wasn't. I was talking about how Paxman is a smokescreen.

It was you who decided to take the distraction tactic of making it about Galloway.

The point is: for all the seeming aggression of what we know over here of the British media, it's still like being gummed to death by a dead sheep; it's just an animated dead sheep, and now with extra snarly sounds.

Charles RB

09-10-2008, 01:58 PM

The CNN story on the front page today notes that just a year ago, McCain used the very same phrase about "lipstick on a pig" in reference to legislation that Hilary Clinton proposed.

Ahhhh ha ha ha ha ha.

Also: context, context, context! The man gets thrown out of the Labour Party for opposing the war.

And I don't remember it getting as much attention as Robin Cook resigning over Iraq.

On top of which, Labour still won - or at least didn't lose - the 2005 election despite Iraq being an issue, and the Conservatives (who didn't oppose) made more opposition gains the Lib Dems (who did), while indie candidates didn't do much to wobble Labour.

And Galloway's party has gotten increasingly smaller and ignored since then.

He's not threatening the establishment or drawing attention to shit.

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 02:16 PM

He's not threatening the establishment or drawing attention to shit.

You may think so.

I'm pretty damn sure Paxman doesn't. Nor the Labour Party at the time. You might recall the other man they threw out of the party for not playing ball. Or Mo Mowlam stripped of her post for speaking the truth. The point is that Galloway wasn't an isolated incident. Nevertheless, in British politics, the idea that an INDEPENDANT can win an election against a fiercely-backed party politican is an important moment in history, as it was when Martin Bell won his seat.

It seems to me that there's a reason Paxman chose to overlook that.

Geez, if people who were alive for the British politics in question can't manage to remember the context or the significance, how can we expect the Americans with their far crappier mass media to do any better?

Michael P

09-10-2008, 02:19 PM

One would hope that a Christian would emulate Our Lord and Saviour.

The problem there being that, in modern parlance, Jesus was a filthy hippie.

FalconX2000

09-10-2008, 02:21 PM

One would hope that a Christian would emulate Our Lord and Saviour.

As a CBR memeber born in Rumbles, I shall start chanting "feats! feats! feats!" and dig up that cartoon that showed Obama running on water to get away away from the Wright Shark.

Sabrinaset

09-10-2008, 02:34 PM

Well, with the exception of the 17 point swing within one week, and maybe the weekend thing, one would expect all the pools to at least have the same sampling errors each time around. So if there is a trend, that is at least a trend in a sub set of the population.

However, I think using less than 2000 people for a nationwide poll is bad science. I pretty much disregard those "750 likely voters" polls completely. But seeing the Rasmussen and Gallup trends day by day is showing something.

I read a book on the science of polling a couple years ago, and they actually justify why they do it that way ... if only I could remember why.

And as far as why pollsters are deliberately undercounting the young this go-around when it looks like we may actually vote in large numbers this year, the only guess I have is that if the pollsters actually printed out polls showing that Obama was constantly far and ahead, well then, no one would pay for ... more polls to be done! So, it's in their best interests to make sure it looks close.

I think I've lost my idealism.

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 02:47 PM

The problem there being that, in modern parlance, Jesus was a filthy hippie.

and a filthy jew

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 02:49 PM

I read a book on the science of polling a couple years ago, and they actually justify why they do it that way ... if only I could remember why.

And as far as why pollsters are deliberately undercounting the young this go-around when it looks like we may actually vote in large numbers this year, the only guess I have is that if the pollsters actually printed out polls showing that Obama was constantly far and ahead, well then, no one would pay for ... more polls to be done! So, it's in their best interests to make sure it looks close.

I think I've lost my idealism.

Welcome to Club Grown Up.

We've got a room in the back for sighing with world weariness. The Main Lounge we reserve for cynical double-dealing, so if you feel yourself regressing to an adolescent demand that something should actually be good in life, please take a seat at the bar with the other drunken ranters.

Though of course we delight in such people populating the DJ booth and forcing a set of Clash albums on our delicate shell-likes. It's so ironic!

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 02:51 PM

Oh, and it's very interesting that Gallup -- the least impartial of pollsters -- has a five point difference from all the others.

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 02:59 PM

Another uncredited quote in Palin's speech:

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/09/10/palin_source/index.html

Strange bedfellows indeed

Remember when Sarah Palin said, "We grow good people in our small towns, with honesty and sincerity and dignity" during her speech at the Republican convention last week? Well, it seems that quote wasn't just the Norman Rockwell infused nostalgic musings of a Republican speech-writer.

The source of that quotation, as Tom Frank pointed out in an article in the Wall Street Journal, is actually notorious right-wing columnist Westbrook Pegler.

Pegler died in 1969, but not before compiling a less than illustrious resume. A staunch anti-Communist, by the end of his life, he'd adopted some extreme and racist positions. He grew to hate Franklin Roosevelt and even said that he regretted a would-be assassin of FDR had "hit the wrong man."

Then there's Pegler's staunch anti-Semitism, what Philip Roth called Pegler's "casual distaste for Jews." After being fired as a columnist by the Hearst family, Pegler wrote briefly for the far right wing John Birch Society, but according to the Politico's Ben Smith, Pegler was too anti-Semitic even for the Birchers. By the end of his life, Pegler was opining that it was "clearly the bounden duty of all intelligent Americans to proclaim and practice bigotry."

Of course, none of this is to suggest that Palin agrees with Pegler's more controversial positions. But it is odd that she would quote someone like Pegler in the age of The Google.

Sabrinaset

09-10-2008, 03:01 PM

Welcome to Club Grown Up.

We've got a room in the back for sighing with world weariness. The Main Lounge we reserve for cynical double-dealing, so if you feel yourself regressing to an adolescent demand that something should actually be good in life, please take a seat at the bar with the other drunken ranters.

Though of course we delight in such people populating the DJ booth and forcing a set of Clash albums on our delicate shell-likes. It's so ironic!

Oh, great. Now I gotta sit here with all the other old people!

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 03:10 PM

Oh, great. Now I gotta sit here with all the other old people!

Would you like a cup of cocoa, dear?

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 03:12 PM

Oh, good grief. Even after Mike Huckabee took Obama's side on this:

Bwa ha hah.... that ad did not last long:

at the request of CBS, YouTube has removed a McCain Web ad titled "Lipstick," which portrays Sarah Palin as the victim of Barack Obama's sexism. CBS sought the removal because the ad involves an unauthorized clip of CBS anchor Katie Couric saying, "One of the great lessons of that campaign is the continued and accepted role of sexism in American life."

The ad implies that Couric's comment was about Palin; in fact, Couric was discussing Hillary Clinton's campaign.

CBS spokeswoman Leigh Farris said, "CBS News does not endorse any candidate in the Presidential race. Any use of CBS personnel in political advertising that suggests the contrary is misleading."

The ad can still be viewed on McCain's Web site.

Sabrinaset

09-10-2008, 03:13 PM

Would you like a cup of cocoa, dear?

This place smells like Metamucil!

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 03:15 PM

This place smells like Metamucil!

Stop sniffing the couch and sit yourself down.

We have a lovely selection of Essential and Showcase collections for you to read.

the4thpip

09-10-2008, 03:23 PM

Stop sniffing the couch and sit yourself down.

We have a lovely selection of Essential and Showcase collections for you to read.

(claps hands)
Yayyy!

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 03:50 PM

(claps hands)
Yayyy!

You'll have to buy your own if you want to colour them in.

That's the second childhood room, second door on the right, and don't forget to pick up your Depends on the way.

Michael P

09-10-2008, 05:41 PM

I think I've lost my idealism.

Well, it's always in the last place you look.

Infra-Man

09-10-2008, 05:53 PM

Straight talkin' John McCain gets crooked with factcheck.org in a new ad

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/mccain-palin_distorts_our_finding.html

A McCain-Palin ad has FactCheck.org calling Obama's attacks on Palin "absolutely false" and "misleading." That's what we said, but it wasn't about Obama.

Our article criticized anonymous e-mail falsehoods and bogus claims about Palin posted around the Internet. We have no evidence that any of the claims we found to be false came from the Obama campaign.

The McCain-Palin ad also twists a quote from a Wall Street Journal columnist. He said the Obama camp had sent a team to Alaska to "dig into her record and background." The ad quotes the WSJ as saying the team was sent to "dig dirt."

Update, Sept. 10: Furthermore, the Obama campaign insists that no researchers have been sent to Alaska and that the Journal owes them a correction.

Definitely recommend checking out the Sliming Palin (http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html) article on factcheck.org. Nice examination of that Anne Kilkenny email that debunks a lot of the claim made against Palin.

KevinTBrown

09-10-2008, 08:33 PM

Supplied with but one comment: Watch this 8+ minute video featuring Keith Olbermann and tell me you don't agree.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26649407#26649407

Novaya Havoc

09-10-2008, 08:34 PM

KevinTBrown

09-10-2008, 08:42 PM

I agree that McCain-Palin are tying Obama in the polls -- or passing them -- in the Democrats' year!

McCain-Palin are going to slay. And it will be juicy retribution for attempting to kick the Clintionian working class out of the party.

Want to try that again?

Rassmussen has it Obama 48% McCain 47% when leaners are included.

Statistical tie, but Obama is in the lead.

I guarantee in a week Obama will be back to a 7 point lead.

Arrogantcur

09-10-2008, 08:47 PM

People always seem to have more spine before they get into office.

True that. *sigh* I mean I'd put decent money on Franken not turning into a compromiser or, worse, a backer-downer...but you never know.

This one is John McCain contradicting himself--basically clips of him saying one thing and later clips completely contradicting that:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLuqxXwG4nE

30-40 seconds of nothing but this would be a very effective Obama campaign ad. You don't even really need a voice-over!

I hope, I really hope, that somebody asks McCain the question about whether the country's better off than it was 8 years ago during his debates with Obama. There's no answer he could give that would make him look better than Obama. Barring that, I hope Obama asks that question himself.

The Daily Show went over McCain's shifting positions very well too:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZvehP7vV9s

Btw, if you crash your plane two times, that could be chalked up to bad luck. If you crash your plane three times, I begin to wonder. If you crash five times, then you haven't got the skills to fly in a warzone, shouldn't have ever been trusted with an aircraft in a place like Vietnam (like the guy said in Top Gun, "You don't own that plane, the taxpayers do!"), and you're better suited to dusting crops. :rolleyes:

The Dems might be too worried to say things like that, but I'm sure not.

Obama went on O'Reilly!

Really, what it comes down to is that anyone who will avoid a potentially tense interview doesn't deserve to have their opinion expressed.

Good ideas and good people stand up to the weight of scrutiny.

Quoted for TRUTH!!!

I am so nervous about this campaign.

You and me both, man (and the planet, like Matt Doc Martin says). I wish we could just fast forward to November, cause the tension is killing me.

They responded, accusing Obama of surrendering the high ground when he resorted to "schoolyard insults".

Suuuuure. Obama is the one who turned this into an exchange of insults. :rolleyes:

It's McCain's people who lept to compare Palin to a pig.

Very easy mistake. :wink:

As I said elsewhere: The Republicans way to run a campaign is thus: Distract, distract, distract. Issues? What issues? Distract, distract, distract.

They're good at it. I wish they sucked at it. That's what Palin is too: a distraction.

Picking Palin is McCain's saying "LOOK AT US! LOOK AT SARAH! LOOK AT HER LIFE STORY! LOOK AT HER FAMILY! LOOK AT HER BABY! DON'T LOOK AT THE STUFF THAT MATTERS!"

As a VP (or, heaven forbid, President), she'd probably be terrible either due to incompetence or due to being such an extremist and all around rotten person. But as a distraction? As somebody who gets paraded out there to get the spotlight on her rather than on Obama/Biden? Effective.

In other words, she is the Paris Hilton of politics. She doesn't really do anything important, and hasn't done anything important on the national stage, but a ridiculous amount of airtime is wasted on her.

Michael P

09-10-2008, 08:47 PM

Kevin, you neglected to include that the idea that Obama somehow hates the working class is horseshit.

KevinTBrown

09-10-2008, 08:53 PM

Supplied with but one comment: Watch this 8+ minute video featuring Keith Olbermann and tell me you don't agree.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26649407#26649407

Reposting the above because I don't want it to get lost.

TomStillwell

09-10-2008, 10:28 PM

Here's a pretty good video from Funny or Die.

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/03d0f10a32

Novaya Havoc

09-10-2008, 10:30 PM

Want to try that again?

Rassmussen has it Obama 48% McCain 47% when leaners are included.

Statistical tie, but Obama is in the lead.

I guarantee in a week Obama will be back to a 7 point lead.

Hey! I have a bridge to nowhere to sell you, courtesy of Gov. Palin.

Obama will pick up Iowa and maybe New Mexico compared to 2004.

McCain will take New Hampshire and either Michigan or Wisconsin (if not both).

That's how this is gonna roll.

Count the EV's.

Tages

09-10-2008, 10:41 PM

Dazzler

09-10-2008, 10:42 PM

Sexist....

Racist.

--Dazz

Arrogantcur

09-10-2008, 10:45 PM

Preface this by saying that I'm drunk posting. Now that I've gotten that out of the way...

Novaya, what the hell, man? :confused:

I'm really fucking baffled that anybody who supported Hillary--both a liberal and a Democrat, even if some of her positions were too centrist for my liking--could possibly support McCain/Palin.

I mean, I'd like to think you're just kidding but I'm sure you're not. This is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Even IF Palin herself absolutely loves gay people and wants to give them all sorts of rights and make life better for them (which I am not convinced is the case, not by a long shot), she's pro-war, she's anti-choice (or extremely pro-life, which is the same thing phrased differently), she's anti-environment, she's extremely hateful as we saw in the speech she gave at the RNC...I mean, seriously, how can you possibly support a candidate like that, even if (and this is a big IF, since she's very religious and the Bible contains all sorts of anti-gay stuff) she's accepting of the LGBT community (or whatever passes for that in Alaska)?

Tages

09-10-2008, 10:46 PM

Racist.

--Dazz

Nah.......

Kid Kamikaze10

09-10-2008, 10:57 PM

Reposting the above because I don't want it to get lost.

Holy s**t.

GO KEITH!!!! He's an a**hole at times, but dang it, he couldn't be anymore right.

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 11:07 PM

Racist.

--Dazz

Speciesist!

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 11:08 PM

Preface this by saying that I'm drunk posting. Now that I've gotten that out of the way...

Pist!

bloody ten characters

Dazzler

09-10-2008, 11:10 PM

Speciesist!

Oh damn. Now that hurts.

--Dazz

Michael P

09-10-2008, 11:12 PM

Holy s**t.

GO KEITH!!!! He's an a**hole at times, but dang it, he couldn't be anymore right.

"Sociological pornography."

I think I love this man.

Paul McEnery

09-10-2008, 11:12 PM

Oh damn. Now that hurts.

--Dazz

And cats are giving you evil looks, to boot.

Dazzler

09-10-2008, 11:16 PM

And cats are giving you evil looks, to boot.

Fuck them. I fucking hate cats.

4 srs.

(I go into seizures.)

--Dazz

FalconX2000

09-11-2008, 12:09 AM

In other words, she is the Paris Hilton of politics. She doesn't really do anything important, and hasn't done anything important on the national stage, but a ridiculous amount of airtime is wasted on her.

I am under the impression that Paris Hilton is actually alot smarter than is popularly thought, but delibrately cultivates her image in this way both for profit and her own amusement.

"Sociological pornography."

I think I love this man.

If he'd stop spoiling himself with people like Chris Kofinis, he'd probably improve his show overall.

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 12:16 AM

Evan Waters

09-11-2008, 12:18 AM

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 12:26 AM

Well, she is anti-abortion, pro-Creationism (this ALONE should disqualify her from being within a heartbeat of the Presidency), and spewed a whole lot of hatred at anyone left of center during her address at the GOP convention.

Okay, but my question was: since the ostensible distaste for Palin is that she hadn't done anything on a national level before her nomination, which is a criticism that had been used against Obama and poo-poohed...

What had he done nationally or globally affecting before his nomination?

I think if we're going to criticize her, it should be for the things you mention (provided one's against them in the first place), rather than just doing the "I'm rubber, you're glue" routine.

--Dazz

Paul McEnery

09-11-2008, 12:56 AM

Okay, but my question was: since the ostensible distaste for Palin is that she hadn't done anything on a national level before her nomination...
--Dazz

Not me. I can't stand the way she's a fundie whackjob with control issues. When Tom called her Anita Bryant 2.0 (well, Tom's mum, I think), that sums up what bothers me about her.

Valerie in 90210, or Cordelia in Buffy, that's what she looks like to me. Only, you know, their first seasons, and without the redeeming qualities. No, no, Heather Locklear in Melrose!

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 12:58 AM

Not me. I can't stand the way she's a fundie whackjob with control issues. When Tom called her Anita Bryant 2.0 (well, Tom's mum, I think), that sums up what bothers me about her.

Valerie in 90210, or Cordelia in Buffy, that's what she looks like to me. Only, you know, their first seasons, and without the redeeming qualities. No, no, Heather Locklear in Melrose!
The grossest part of that post is that it actually gave me an immediately recognizable reference point for what you think of her.

I watch way too much trash tv, obviously.

--Dazz

Paul McEnery

09-11-2008, 01:32 AM

The grossest part of that post is that it actually gave me an immediately recognizable reference point for what you think of her.

I watch way too much trash tv, obviously.

--Dazz

That's not the worst of it.

The worst of it is how long since any of that's actually been on the telly.

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 01:36 AM

That's not the worst of it.

The worst of it is how long since any of that's actually been on the telly.

It's been scientifically proven that every second of the day, somewhere in the world, Buffy's showing on a TV.

Okay, I made that up.

But it is true for I Love Lucy.

--Dazz

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 01:36 AM

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 01:38 AM

Not that it makes any difference to the issue at hand, but Novaya's a guy.

--Dazz

Danny Donovan

09-11-2008, 01:40 AM

Okay, but my question was: since the ostensible distaste for Palin is that she hadn't done anything on a national level before her nomination, which is a criticism that had been used against Obama and poo-poohed...

What had he done nationally or globally affecting before his nomination?

I think if we're going to criticize her, it should be for the things you mention (provided one's against them in the first place), rather than just doing the "I'm rubber, you're glue" routine.

--Dazz

Actually, I don't think that is the "distaste" at all, however I am coming late to the party and haven't read the other pages in this. This is McCain just doing what Obama did.

Obama was the "change-agent" new face, etc. etc. HOWEVER, He has achieved more than Palin has, who was a former sportscaster on some podunk local network, then became a mayor of a town the size of a postage stamp, and then was the Govenor of a state that has a major enequality of landmass to population.

At least Obama was the president of Harvard Law, a community organizer, and a senator from Chicago, which has a great deal of blue collar jobs being outsourced all over and few things coming to replace them. He worked closely with people helping them find jobs in his days as a community organizer which gives him a unique perspective on where our country is going now with a 6% (and rising) unemployment rate, and a housing market crash we have YET to see the worst of.

This woman, shoots moose. That's about it. And honestly, it's not like she's hunting Cheetahs or something. It's a moose. They pretty much just stand there looking at you for an hour. Or they do magic tricks with flying squirells I am always unsure about that.

But McCain's pick was the same as Obama's pick of Biden. EXCEPT, Obama took a good long time and looked over the options and decided after a long vetting process who would be his best chance at making up for whatever inexperiance he has.

McCain picked a person, seemingly at random, without looking at anything but the fact she was a woman, and no one knew who the hell she was, to be his balance.

It was all about 2 things. 1.) Pick a woman to grab anyone still mad about the fact Hillary lost. 2.) get someone young, that can capture the independents and doesn't make people think of the Cryptkeeper...)

She is NOT a good choice for a LOT of reasons. "inexperiance" is no where even on the top of the list. I for one, am SICK of "experiance" being so highly valued. Bush has "experiance" in government. His daddy was head of the CIA, VP, President, He was Governor of Texas, and what did THAT do for us?

It's like calling a Kennedy a washington outsider.

This woman is wrong on everything. She is another Bush religious fanatic, who wants to espouse their views and beliefs on hundreds of millions of americans whether they like it or not.

To be fair, if the top of the ticket was anyone else, you could say "oh she'd just be VP. that's a nothing job, you never have to worry about anything" but if you think Old Man McCain is going to live half way through his first term you're dreaming.

He's what? 76? The stress of the job is enough to do him in on the face, but with his temper? His blood pressure wouldn't be able to handle it. She'd be stepping in every six months.

Palin would finish off what Bush started. We would be finished.

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 01:41 AM

I fear all this Palin hate seems to be sour grapes and a disproportionate amount of vitriol is passed her way because she's stealing thunder.

--Dazz

Yeah well, that's just because you're not very well informed. There's a cure for that.

FalconX2000

09-11-2008, 01:42 AM

On that note, though, what had Obama done on a nationally (or globally) affecting level before his candidacy?

I fear all this Palin hate seems to be sour grapes and a disproportionate amount of vitriol is passed her way because she's stealing thunder. It also seems to be she's stealing thunder using the same perceived qualities that made Obama admirable. It almost seems the left is afraid of her more than McCain.

--Dazz

Off the top of my head...

He worked with Dick Lugar on a bill to secure loose nukes.

He is a member of the Foreign Relations Committee.

Of course, he not only opposed the Iraq War while running for reelection but listed out all the reasons why it would be detrimental to the United States overall and was proven right on every count.
- Saddam not imminent threat? Check
- Even a successful war will require an occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences? Check.
- Invasion of Iraq without clear rationale or international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East and encourage the worst, rather than best impulses or the Arab world and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda? Check.

He advocated striking high value Al Qaeda targets in Pakistan with or without their permission if Pakistan was unable to act. He was laughed at and derided. A few months later, the U.S. did exactly that and killed one of the terrorist group's top leaders.

He was calling for more troops to be sent into Afghanistan more than a year before the current higher intensity conflict there.

He advocated having direct talks between the President of the USA and hostile leaders to lay out their position and show them sticks and carrots. He was laughed at until it worked.

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 01:44 AM

Not me.

Not anyone. It's just Dazzler trying to turn a complex issue into a black & white one. Getting into that argument with him would just be another distraction of the fact that a male candidate with the views, lack of experience and lack of character that Sarah Palin brings to the ticket would be completely unacceptable to the American people for being to extremist.

And THAT is sexist.

FalconX2000

09-11-2008, 01:45 AM

Not anyone. It's just Dazzler trying to turn a complex issue into a black & white one. Getting into that argument with him would just be another distraction of the fact that a male candidate with the views, lack of experience and lack of character that Sarah Palin brings to the ticket would be completely unacceptable to the American people for being to extremist.

And THAT is sexist.

I keep thinking Dazzler is female. Its probably because of watching Jubilee in the old X-Men cartoon.

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 01:47 AM

Actually, I don't think that is the "distaste" at all, however I am coming late to the party and haven't read the other pages in this. This is McCain just doing what Obama did.

Obama was the "change-agent" new face, etc. etc. HOWEVER, He has achieved more than Palin has, who was a former sportscaster on some podunk local network, then became a mayor of a town the size of a postage stamp, and then was the Govenor of a state that has a major enequality of landmass to population.

At least Obama was the president of Harvard Law, a community organizer, and a senator from Chicago, which has a great deal of blue collar jobs being outsourced all over and few things coming to replace them. He worked closely with people helping them find jobs in his days as a community organizer which gives him a unique perspective on where our country is going now with a 6% (and rising) unemployment rate, and a housing market crash we have YET to see the worst of.

This woman, shoots moose. That's about it. And honestly, it's not like she's hunting Cheetahs or something. It's a moose. They pretty much just stand there looking at you for an hour. Or they do magic tricks with flying squirells I am always unsure about that.

But McCain's pick was the same as Obama's pick of Biden. EXCEPT, Obama took a good long time and looked over the options and decided after a long vetting process who would be his best chance at making up for whatever inexperiance he has.

McCain picked a person, seemingly at random, without looking at anything but the fact she was a woman, and no one knew who the hell she was, to be his balance.

It was all about 2 things. 1.) Pick a woman to grab anyone still mad about the fact Hillary lost. 2.) get someone young, that can capture the independents and doesn't make people think of the Cryptkeeper...)

She is NOT a good choice for a LOT of reasons. "inexperiance" is no where even on the top of the list. I for one, am SICK of "experiance" being so highly valued. Bush has "experiance" in government. His daddy was head of the CIA, VP, President, He was Governor of Texas, and what did THAT do for us?

It's like calling a Kennedy a washington outsider.

This woman is wrong on everything. She is another Bush religious fanatic, who wants to espouse their views and beliefs on hundreds of millions of americans whether they like it or not.

To be fair, if the top of the ticket was anyone else, you could say "oh she'd just be VP. that's a nothing job, you never have to worry about anything" but if you think Old Man McCain is going to live half way through his first term you're dreaming.

He's what? 76? The stress of the job is enough to do him in on the face, but with his temper? His blood pressure wouldn't be able to handle it. She'd be stepping in every six months.

Palin would finish off what Bush started. We would be finished.
You know, actually, I wouldn't argue much of that, except that honestly, the community organizer thing is a little bit deficient when talking about it making him qualified for a candidate for President. And for some reason, it's the second most referenced. Against the governor of a state, despite inequalities of land mass-versus-population, it sort of pales.

--Dazz

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 01:48 AM

Not anyone. It's just Dazzler trying to turn a complex issue into a black & white one. Getting into that argument with him would just be another distraction of the fact that a male candidate with the views, lack of experience and lack of character that Sarah Palin brings to the ticket would be completely unacceptable to the American people for being to extremist.

And THAT is sexist.

Have a cigarette, sweets, and calm yourself.

--Dazz

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 01:48 AM

I keep thinking Dazzler is female. Its probably because of watching Jubilee in the old X-Men cartoon.
Blasphemy!

But Jubes is pretty cool, in her own, I'm totally copying Dazzler sort of way.

--Dazz

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 01:49 AM

Not that it makes any difference to the issue at hand, but Novaya's a guy.

--Dazz

Sockpuppets have genders?

FalconX2000

09-11-2008, 01:49 AM

You know, actually, I wouldn't argue much of that, except that honestly, the community organizer thing is a little bit deficient when talking about it making him qualified for a candidate for President. And for some reason, it's the second most referenced. Being the governor of a state, despite inequalities of land mass-versus-population, it sort of pales.

--Dazz

If it requires Palin's governorship to beat Obama's community organizer roots, we're good as gold. He was also state senator for 8 years and U.S. senator for 3.

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 01:50 AM

Sockpuppets have genders?

Go ahead and report him as a sockpuppet.

--Dazz

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 01:51 AM

If it requires Palin's governorship to beat Obama's community organizer roots, we're good as gold. He was also state senator for 8 years and U.S. senator for 3.
True, but I'm just saying that the whole community organizer thing is a little dinky and should be moved down on the resume.

--Dazz

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 01:52 AM

You know, actually, I wouldn't argue much of that, except that honestly, the community organizer thing is a little bit deficient when talking about it making him qualified for a candidate for President. And for some reason, it's the second most referenced. Against the governor of a state, despite inequalities of land mass-versus-population, it sort of pales.

--Dazz

Jesus was a community organizer, Pontius Pilate was a governor.

Snark asside, it's not just the role you have, but also how well you play it. I'd rather have a talented senator than a crappy governor as president of the US any day of the week.

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 01:53 AM

Go ahead and report him as a sockpuppet.

--Dazz

Go ahead and report your mother as a sockpuppet.

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 01:54 AM

Go ahead and report your mother as a sockpuppet.

Lord have Mercy on us all.

--Dazz

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 01:55 AM

Lord have Mercy on us all.

--Dazz
God is dead.
Shouldn't you be out there giving somebody cancer?

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 01:57 AM

God is dead.
Shouldn't you be out there giving somebody cancer?

It's not time for work, yet.

But once it is, I start with the invalids and work my way down to third world babies.

--Dazz

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 01:58 AM

by Seth Grahame-Smith

The man who can't remember how many houses he owns cries "elitist!"

The man who said "The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should, and "I believe the fundamentals of this economy are strong," cries "economy!"

The man whose running mate denies manmade global warming cries "environment!"

The man with ZERO executive experience cries "executive experience!"

The man who chaired the committee that set a record for unauthorized appropriations cries "I'll make them famous!"

The man who voted with George W. Bush 90% of the time cries "change!"

The man who knowingly spreads malicious lies cries "honor!"

The man whose campaign is run by lobbyists cries "no more lobbyists!"

The man whose running mate has a pregnant, unmarried 17-year-old daughter cries "abstinence!"

The man who cheated on his ailing wife cries "family values!"

The man who can't tell Sunni and Shia apart cries "judgment!"

The man who picked the least experienced VP candidate in history cries "country first!"

The man who got caught in the Keating Five scandal cries "integrity!"

The man who joked about Chelsea Clinton being "ugly" cries "offensive!"

The man whose party mocks service cries "service!"

The man who supported abolishing the Department of Education cries "education!"

The man whose family was targeted by Karl Rove in 2000 cries "get me Karl Rove!"

The man who fought against the Bush tax cuts cries "permanent Bush tax cuts!"

The man who called Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson "agents of intolerance" cries "I love evangelicals!"

The man who cried "no Iraq timetables" STILL cries "no Iraq timetables!"

A man who touts his running mate as a "reformer" cries "get me more Bush veterans for her staff!"

A man who wants to overturn Roe v. Wade cries "I'm the candidate for women!"

...and America eats it up.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-grahamesmith/the-man-who-called-his-wi_b_125497.html

Kevinroc

09-11-2008, 02:00 AM

True, but I'm just saying that the whole community organizer thing is a little dinky and should be moved down on the resume.

--Dazz

You act like he went directly from community organizer to running for President. The fact is that it is the Republicans that are mocking Obama for this and acting like this is the only major thing he did before he ran for President.

Obama was the president of the Harvard Law Review. It was actually this job that got Obama his first book deal (as he was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review). Obama also taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School for a number of years.

Some of his "major" jobs were community organizer, editor at the Harvard Law Review, President of the Harvard Law Review, teaching Constitutional Law, State Senator, US Senator.

No wonder the Republicans want to say all he did was work as a community organizer. They don't want to bring up the fact that he actually knows and understands what the laws of this country are supposed to be (and that they themselves clearly do not know).

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 02:03 AM

You act like he went directly from community organizer to running for President. The fact is that it is the Republicans that are mocking Obama for this and acting like this is the only major thing he did before he ran for President.

Obama was the president of the Harvard Law Review. It was actually this job that got Obama his first book deal (as he was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review). Obama also taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School for a number of years.

Some of his "major" jobs were community organizer, editor at the Harvard Law Review, President of the Harvard Law Review, teaching Constitutional Law, State Senator, US Senator.

No wonder the Republicans want to say all he did was work as a community organizer. They don't want to bring up the fact that he actually knows and understands what the laws of this country are supposed to be (and that they themselves clearly do not know).

No, actually, I'm not acting like he went from community organizer straight to candidate to the presidential candidate. And it's not the Republicans playing that up, it's the Democrats. It just seems odd to me.
I'm saying that when the Obama camp discusses his career, it's almost invariably the second thing they mention, after being a senator. If they want to avoid people really, honestly making a failed connection in his career path, it should be moved down in the list under the things you mention.

--Dazz

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 02:07 AM

No, actually, I'm not acting like he went from community organizer straight to candidate to the presidential candidate. And it's not the Republicans playing that up, it's the Democrats. It just seems odd to me.
I'm saying that when the Obama camp discusses his career, it's almost invariably the second thing they mention, after being a senator. If they want to avoid people really, honestly making a failed connection in his career path, it should be moved down in the list under the things you mention.

--Dazz

It a reaction to the "elitist" smear. They're pointing out that his career choices contradict that accusation.

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 02:08 AM

It a reaction to the "elitist" smear. They're pointing out that his career choices contradict that accusation.

God, that was almost not bitchy. I didn't know you had it in you.

--Dazz

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 02:12 AM

God, that was almost not bitchy. I didn't know you had it in you.

--Dazz

You rarely bring out the best in me, Dazzler dearest.

Was that better? :tongue:

But seriously: How can you win against the Republicans with their schoolyard level taunts?
They reacted to the elitist claim by pointing out that Obama chose to pick a low-paying job that helped working class people when he clearly had easier options.
Now they make fun of that job. If Democrats now pointed out that he taught constitutional law, they'd paint him as something similar to an ambulance chaser. If they brought up being editor and president of the Harvard Law Review, they'd claim he's part of the liberal media AND something like an ambulance chaser.

It's Team McPalin's talent to take everything that is good and decent in the world and ridicule and vilify it.

FalconX2000

09-11-2008, 02:17 AM

True, but I'm just saying that the whole community organizer thing is a little dinky and should be moved down on the resume.

--Dazz

Not only was he good at it, but the community organiser job was probably the hardest one he's ever had. Its got crappy pay, you start off with nobody listening to you or believing in what you say and no matter how successful you're unlikely to get any recognition at all outside the neighbourhood you work. He chose to work there. He not only turned down better corporate jobs, but also more cushy community organiser jobs that would have had him holding teleconferences in fancy buildings. He wanted hands on work in a dirt poor district.

I personally consider it more important than the fact he was a civil rights attorney or president of the Harvard Law Review.

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 02:18 AM

John McCain must have known that if he picked Sarah Palin, much of the same criticism he'd fired off at Obama would bounce back at his own ticket. But he probably didn't expect the boomerang effect to include Palin's religion.

Palin spent over twenty years as a member of the Pentecostal Wasilla Assembly of God church. She left that church for a nondenominational one six years ago, however. The McCain campaign says she isn't Pentecostal, but has generic "deep religious convictions."

Though her former pastor, Tim McGraw, doesn't remember her speaking in tongues -- the act Pentecostals are famous for -- he did tell CNN that he recalls her attendance at his discipleship classes. And he thinks Republicans are shying away from discussing her beliefs. "I think there may be issues of belief that could be misunderstood or played upon by people that don't know," McGraw says.

The lack of discussion of details of Palin's religious beliefs is potentially worrisome, considering she has a history of blurring the line between religion and politics. The New York Times reported that Palin injected religion and hot-button social issues into a small-town mayoral race that had never seen that kind of tactic. She's called the war in Iraq "a task that is from God," and urged Alaskans to pray for a gas pipeline.

"I think God's will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas pipeline built. So pray for that ... I can do my job there in developing my natural resources. But all of that doesn't do any good if the people of Alaska's heart is not good with God," Palin said earlier this year.

Writing on the Wall Street Journal's Political Perceptions blog on Wednesday, Beliefnet.com Editor-in-Chief Steven Waldman said this quote set off some red flags:

Asserting that God endorses a particular energy strategy or public works project is exactly the sort of mindset the Founders feared. The vote-for-this-because-God-says-so approach means that those who oppose a particular policy are violating God's will -- and good Christians should view them that way... Such a politician may be impervious to reason, evidence or compromise. If God has blessed an idea -- and told you so personally -- what possible argument could dissuade you?

But Palin has a different view of what the Founders thought, one more in line with the Christian right's take than with historical fact. In a particularly revealing move, in 2007 Palin signed a proclamation declaring "Christian Heritage Week" in Alaska. In the proclamation, Palin seemed to signal her alignment with a particular brand of historical revisionism in which quotes from the Founders are cherry-picked to suggest that they intended the U.S. to be a Christian nation.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/09/10/palin_religion/index.html

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/uc/20080909/lpo080909.gif

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 02:19 AM

You rarely bring out the best in me, Dazzler dearest.

Was that better? :tongue:
Let's just say more of what I would expect. Familiarity is less jarring than the novel.

But seriously: How can you win against the Republicans with their schoolyard level taunts?
They reacted to the elitist claim by pointing out that Obama chose to pick a low-paying job that helped working class people when he clearly had easier options.
Now they make fun of that job. If Democrats now pointed out that he taught constitutional law, they'd paint him as something similar to an ambulance chaser. If they brought up being editor and president of the Harvard Law Review, they'd claim he's part of the liberal media AND something like an ambulance chaser.

It's Team McPalin's talent to take everything that is good and decent in the world and ridicule and vilify it.

Well, to play devil's advocate, isn't it both sides in the argument who take the opportunities to showcase their opponents' choices and paint them in the least flattering light? Don't kid yourself into thinking Democrats and Obama are above it. Changing opinions on an issue isn't thinking more fully on it, it becomes clear evidence of back-scratching...being a fresh face is fanastic, until there's a fresher face....and on and on. Being a war veteran is great until too many people respect it, and then there's jokes and derision about that service. Religion isn't to come into play too heavily until it's clear those votes are needed, and then the faith proclamations abound.

I personally think both camps are kind of slimy and capable of some pretty outright and subtle smears.

--Dazz

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 02:26 AM

Well, to play devil's advocate, isn't it both sides in the argument who take the opportunities to showcase their opponents' choices and paint them in the least flattering light? Don't kid yourself into thinking Democrats and Obama are above it.

--Dazz

Did you watch the speeches of the DNC?

Several speakers, including Kerry, Biden and Obama himself went out of their way to praise McCain for his service to the country and his strength during his POW years. Did ANY Republican speak about Kerry's service in Vietnam that way at the 2004 RNC?

Remember how the Republicans themselves treated McCain when he was up against Bush? "psssst... he's mentally unstable because he was tortured for years. psssst... he had a baby with a negro hooker". If McCain was a member of the Democratic Party and running for president this year, the RNC would have made fun of him getting shut down 5 times and call him a Manchurian candidate. The Democrats do no such thing, they're just FINALLY calling a lie a lie.

It's just not true that both sides are doing it, at least not to the same degree. The facts say something different.

Kevinroc

09-11-2008, 02:27 AM

Well, to play devil's advocate, isn't it both sides in the argument who take the opportunities to showcase their opponents' choices and paint them in the least flattering light? Don't kid yourself into thinking Democrats and Obama are above it. Changing opinions on an issue isn't thinking more fully on it, it becomes clear evidence of back-scratching...being a fresh face is fanastic, until there's a fresher face....and on and on. Being a war veteran is great until too many people respect it, and then there's jokes and derision about that service. Religion isn't to come into play too heavily until it's clear those votes are needed, and then the faith proclamations abound.

I personally think both camps are kind of slimy and capable of some pretty outright and subtle smears.

--Dazz

Obama is not running the kind of smears that the Republicans are.

Tell me you honestly think Obama would do something like this:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/staff/margaret_talev/story/52169.html

A new 30-second TV ad attacks Barack Obama's record on education, saying that Obama backed legislation to teach "'comprehensive sex education' to kindergartners." The announcer then says, "Learning about sex before learning to read? Barack Obama. Wrong on education. Wrong for your family."

Edit: This blatant smear was so disgusting that Time's Joe Klein (who has seen a number of presidential elections) called it "one of the sleaziest ads I've ever seen in presidential politics".

http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/09/apology_not_accepted.html

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 02:36 AM

Did you watch the speeches of the DNC?

Several speakers, including Kerry, Biden and Obama himself went out of their way to praise McCain for his service to the country and his strength during his POW years. Did ANY Republican speak about Kerry's service in Vietnam that way at the 2004 RNC?
That's kind of two different issues being used to reinforce the other, there.

Remember how the Republicans themselves treated McCain when he was up against Bush? "psssst... he's mentally unstable because he was tortured for years. psssst... he had a baby with a negro hooker". If McCain was a member of the Democratic Party and running for president this year, the RNC would have made fun of him getting shut down 5 times and call him a Manchurian candidate. The Democrats do no such thing, they're just FINALLY calling a lie a lie.
I also remember Democrats back in the day saying that McCain was the right kind of Republican, but now that he's the opponent, he's a lunatic with his finger on the button.

It's true that Obama hasn't made fun of McCain getting shot down five times, yes. But his supporters, some in this very thread, have made them. Is that the same, no, not exactly, but it gives me some insight into the thinking. The Democratic candidate doesn't have to do the slinging because his supporters will gladly do it for him, with a viciousness that rivals the Republicans. And, considering how jumpy same supporters are at anything that even remotely approaches criticism of their candidate...well, I find it worse. If that's how it is now, I can't imagine how it will be when Obama faces tougher, more intense, and less sympathetic scrutiny. Will everything said about Obama be racism in action? Will everything be an active undermining of the good and virtuous of the world?

It's just not true that both sides are doing it, at least not to the same degree. The facts say something different.
I don't know. I think they are the same degree in two different realms of play. The Republicans go for the outright jugular strike with nasty accusations...while it seems to me the Democrats go for the sneaky ass-kissy sidling up next to whoever's needed to assure the vote. Even if it flies directly in the face of previous statements and positional beliefs. And then nobody seems to notice.

--Dazz

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 02:38 AM

Obama is not running the kind of smears that the Republicans are.

Tell me you honestly think Obama would do something like this:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/staff/margaret_talev/story/52169.html

It's not November yet. And Obama still isn't in the red zone. I'll believe he's above it once the election's done and he's in the clear or not without having stooped. He is a politician after all.

I'm not going to believe he's saintly and a true usher of the new age of politics until I see the outcome of this election. That way, I won't be severely disappointed when he does get to that level, and I'll be incredibly impressed when he doesn't.
--Dazz

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 02:49 AM

That's kind of two different issues being used to reinforce the other, there.

I also remember Democrats back in the day saying that McCain was the right kind of Republican, but now that he's the opponent, he's a lunatic with his finger on the button.

It's true that Obama hasn't made fun of McCain getting shot down five times, yes. But his supporters, some in this very thread, have made them. Is that the same, no, not exactly, but it gives me some insight into the thinking. The Democratic candidate doesn't have to do the slinging because his supporters will gladly do it for him, with a viciousness that rivals the Republicans. And, considering how jumpy same supporters are at anything that even remotely approaches criticism of their candidate...well, I find it worse. If that's how it is now, I can't imagine how it will be when Obama faces tougher, more intense, and less sympathetic scrutiny. Will everything said about Obama be racism in action? Will everything be an active undermining of the good and virtuous of the world?

I don't know. I think they are the same degree in two different realms of play. The Republicans go for the outright jugular strike with nasty accusations...while it seems to me the Democrats go for the sneaky ass-kissy sidling up next to whoever's needed to assure the vote. Even if it flies directly in the face of previous statements and positional beliefs. And then nobody seems to notice.

--Dazz

I think there is a huge difference between what some guys on message boards say about McCain, and what is run in expensive ads with the statement "I am John McCain and I approve this message." It seems silly to compare the two.

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 02:54 AM

I think there is a huge difference between what some guys on message boards say about McCain, and what is run in expensive ads with the statement "I am John McCain and I approve this message." It seems silly to compare the two.

As silly as comparing what was said at the 2004 RNC and the 2008 DNC?

It does seem silly, I'll admit. But this isn't just about the message board: I live in probably the second most die-hard Obama-centric city in the United States. The things that are being bandied about on the playing field here could truly rival the most die-hard Republican diatribe. This campaign has prided itself of the utilization of the old-fashioned grass-roots campaign. When the talking points being used in the grass-roots organization are just as bizarre, unjustified, and untrue as the expense ads, and taken just as much as fact by the camps being preached to...it doesn't seem all that far away.

Although, I will say that it does make it easier to distance oneself from the fallout and give plausible deniability.

--Dazz

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 03:01 AM

As silly as comparing what was said at the 2004 RNC and the 2008 DNC?

--Dazz

Er, what?

How many cocktails have you had tonight then?

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 03:05 AM

Er, what?

How many cocktails have you had tonight then?

Not enough, obviously.

Am I wrong, or did you not talk about Obama, Kerry, and Biden praising McCain's service at the 2008 DNC, and reinforce the difference with how not one Republican at the 2004 RNC praised Kerry's?

Did you watch the speeches of the DNC?

Several speakers, including Kerry, Biden and Obama himself went out of their way to praise McCain for his service to the country and his strength during his POW years. Did ANY Republican speak about Kerry's service in Vietnam that way at the 2004 RNC?
Here, I mean.

--Dazz

BnL

09-11-2008, 03:45 AM

I also remember Democrats back in the day saying that McCain was the right kind of Republican, but now that he's the opponent, he's a lunatic with his finger on the button.

Well, in fairness, that was a different John McCain. In the past couple of years, he's just become another GOP stooge, voting with Bush 90% of the time.

Kevinroc

09-11-2008, 04:04 AM

Well, in fairness, that was a different John McCain. In the past couple of years, he's just become another GOP stooge, voting with Bush 90% of the time.

The way he's acting now makes me believe that whole era was a McCain lie meant to recover his reputation after the Keating Five scandal.

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 05:20 AM

Not enough, obviously.

Am I wrong, or did you not talk about Obama, Kerry, and Biden praising McCain's service at the 2008 DNC, and reinforce the difference with how not one Republican at the 2004 RNC praised Kerry's?

Here, I mean.

--Dazz

My confusion came from the fact that comparing two conventions of political parties in recent presidential races seemed to be as much of a leap in logic to you as comparing official campaign ads with comments of "civilians" on message board and among friends.

I just think our brains working in vastly different ways. Or, as I said, you had cocktails and I didn't.

Corrina

09-11-2008, 06:04 AM

Updates on Republican truthiness from www.factcheck.org:

Off Base on Sex Ed
September 10, 2008
A McCain campaign ad claims Obama's "one accomplishment" was a bill to teach sex ed to kindergarten kids. Don't believe it, on several fronts.
Summary
A McCain-Palin campaign ad claims Obama's "one accomplishment" in the area of education was "legislation to teach 'comprehensive sex education' to kindergarteners." But the claim is simply false, and it dates back to Alan Keyes' failed race against Obama for an open Senate seat in 2004.

Obama, contrary to the ad's insinuation, does not support explicit sex education for kindergarteners. And the bill, which would have allowed only "age appropriate" material and a no-questions-asked opt-out policy for parents, was not his accomplishment to claim in any case, since he was not even a cosponsor – and the bill never left the state Senate.

In addition, the ad quotes unflattering assessments of the Illinois senator's record on education but leaves out sometimes equally harsh criticism directed at McCain in the same forums.

Charles RB

09-11-2008, 06:17 AM

Hey! I have a bridge to nowhere to sell you, courtesy of Gov. Palin.

So you're admitting Palin did support a costly and pointless initiative, only to turn pretend she never did when it became unpopular? Yet wasted the money for it anyway?

Even IF Palin herself absolutely loves gay people and wants to give them all sorts of rights and make life better for them (which I am not convinced is the case, not by a long shot)

It's almost like the hardcore religious aren't known for being LGBT-friendly!

KevinTBrown

09-11-2008, 06:29 AM

Hey! I have a bridge to nowhere to sell you, courtesy of Gov. Palin.

Obama will pick up Iowa and maybe New Mexico compared to 2004.

McCain will take New Hampshire and either Michigan or Wisconsin (if not both).

That's how this is gonna roll.

Count the EV's.

So, how do you feel about her belief that she can "pray the gay people straight to make them 'normal'"....?

Infra-Man

09-11-2008, 06:49 AM

Human sacrifice, dogs and cats, living together... mass hysteria!

Bill O'Reilly defends Barack Obama over the lipstick on a pig kerfuffle... huh? Whawhohuh?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/10/bill-oreilly-defends-obam_n_125548.html

So that's Bill O'Reilly, Mike Huckabee, and John McCain's daughter saying that this is no big deal and that Obama wasn't comparing Palin to a pig. Huckabee and Meghan McCain I can understand--Meghan McCain because it seems like she's your average twentysomething whom I'll take at his or her word; Huckabee because even though I rarely agreed with him on policy issues, I've always liked him since hearing him on Wait Wait Don't Tell Me and seeing him on Real Time a ways back.

O'Reilly is interesting though. I'm calling NASA later today for satellite photos of our planet just to make sure it hasn't gone square.

Novaya Havoc

09-11-2008, 07:21 AM

So, how do you feel about her belief that she can "pray the gay people straight to make them 'normal'"....?

She's never said that reflects her values, just because her church has that program. That's projection.

Or does Obama now believe everything that Rev. Wright and Fr. Phleger say because they spoke at his church (excuse me -- former church)?

And how do you justify Donnie McClurkin -- a pray the gay away Reverend that Obama brought to speak at his very own campaign rally? Has Sarah Palin done that?

Pro. jec. tion.

KevinTBrown

09-11-2008, 07:38 AM

She's never said that reflects her values, just because her church has that program. That's projection.

Or does Obama now believe everything that Rev. Wright and Fr. Phleger say because they spoke at his church (excuse me -- former church)?

And how do you justify Donnie McClurkin -- a pray the gay away Reverend that Obama brought to speak at his very own campaign rally? Has Sarah Palin done that?

Pro. jec. tion.

But to take the "Republican philosophy", the church's views are her views...... I mean they wouldn't knowingly say something that isn't *gasp!* true, would they?!?!? :eek:

:biggrin:

Give me a fucking break. I was waiting for that type of response from you.

So if you really want to talk about the issues and not the distractions, go for it. But as Obama said, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

Charles RB

09-11-2008, 07:54 AM

So if you really want to talk about the issues and not the distractions, go for it

Oooh! Can one of those issues be how the Republicans have been lying about Obama's record so they can criticise him for inexperience and then lied about Palin's to pretend she didn't have less experience than him? And that they lied she was fiscally conservative when she's been happy to waste money & racked up a state deficit?

Oooh, and don't forget Troopergate, that's an issue - a potential VP fucking with the state police to get back at a relative's ex...

Matt Doc Martin

09-11-2008, 07:57 AM

KevinTBrown

09-11-2008, 08:06 AM

Oooh! Can one of those issues be how the Republicans have been lying about Obama's record so they can criticise him for inexperience and then lied about Palin's to pretend she didn't have less experience than him? And that they lied she was fiscally conservative when she's been happy to waste money & racked up a state deficit?

Yes, because how she's handled earmarks and what's been done with the money since then IS an issue to be discussed.

Oooh, and don't forget Troopergate, that's an issue - a potential VP fucking with the state police to get back at a relative's ex...

That's a personal thing that, IMO, has nothing to do with this election, but rather should be discussed in her state and as to whether she should remain governor there.

But the mere fact that she's constantly lied about the same things over and over again, even after being proven wrong, is not a "badge of honor". It does bring her credibility into question.

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 08:20 AM

But to take the "Republican philosophy", the church's views are her views...... I mean they wouldn't knowingly say something that isn't *gasp!* true, would they?!?!? :eek:

:biggrin:

Give me a fucking break. I was waiting for that type of response from you.

So if you really want to talk about the issues and not the distractions, go for it. But as Obama said, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

Please don't quote Novaya for the benefit of those of us who have her on ignore.

Charles RB

09-11-2008, 08:26 AM

That's a personal thing that, IMO, has nothing to do with this election, but rather should be discussed in her state and as to whether she should remain governor there.

I dunno, I wouldn't want someone to gain high office if they had a history of personally fucking with the police over such a vapid matter. It ties into her history of booting everyone who she didn't think was "loyal" - do you want someone like that in a position of power over the police, military and secret services?

Crowley

09-11-2008, 08:29 AM

True, but I'm just saying that the whole community organizer thing is a little dinky and should be moved down on the resume.

--Dazz

Community Oranizer in a city of nearly 5 Million.
Mayor of small town with a population of 9 Thousand.

I'm no mathematician here... but... dinky is pretty damn relative.

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 08:34 AM

Community Oranizer in a city of nearly 5 Million.
Mayor of small town with a population of 9 Thousand.

I'm no mathematician here... but... dinky is pretty damn relative.

It is, except that a community organizer doesn't organize 5 million people out of a 5 million people population.

--Dazz

Charles RB

09-11-2008, 08:34 AM

And I don't think community organisers have the same state backing and support as mayors, so that's more work for the organiser.

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 08:37 AM

And I don't think community organisers have the same state backing and support as mayors, so that's more work for the organiser.

That pretty much conjecture on your part.

--Dazz

KevinTBrown

09-11-2008, 08:39 AM

Community Oranizer in a city of nearly 5 Million.
Mayor of small town with a population of 9 Thousand.

I'm no mathematician here... but... dinky is pretty damn relative.

Correction: It was 5,000 when she was Mayor. :smile:

KevinTBrown

09-11-2008, 08:40 AM

Please don't quote Novaya for the benefit of those of us who have her on ignore.

Sorry, Pip. :redface:

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 08:41 AM

Correction: It was 5,000 when she was Mayor. :smile:

Do you have the numbers of the people Obama had under his supervision as the community organizer?

Honest question.

--Dazz

KevinTBrown

09-11-2008, 08:42 AM

It is, except that a community organizer doesn't organize 5 million people out of a 5 million people population.

--Dazz

Nor does the mayor help out 5,000 out of 5,000 people.....

Do you have the numbers of the people Obama had under his supervision as the community organizer?

Honest question.

--Dazz

And I've been looking, so far nothing.

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 08:47 AM

Correction: It was 5,000 when she was Mayor. :smile:

Nor does the mayor help out 5,000 out of 5,000 people.....
The number of people in a town and state have nothing to do with how that state is run (the land mass versus population thing is obsfucation), since no matter the population, it's run exactly the same as other states. With income and budget generally proportionate to other states, it's a bit of a disingenuous dodge to downplay the leading of a state as somehow lacking.
Unless she seriously tanked Alaska, which, according to all evidence, is actually doing pretty well.

And I've been looking, so far nothing.
Well, hm.

--Dazz

KevinTBrown

09-11-2008, 08:50 AM

Here's the group he worked with for 2+ years ('85-'87): http://www.dcpincorp.org/

I'm sure with a little more research, those numbers could be found. However, based on the fact that he worked for them for over 2 years, one can safely guess that he helped or tried to help numerous people.

Charles RB

09-11-2008, 08:56 AM

That pretty much conjecture on your part.

--Dazz

True. I'm basing it on the fact that mayors are an official part of the state apparatus, running the state's cities, whereas community organisers are not state employees; I did assume from this that the former would get more state support than the latter.

GozertheGozarian

09-11-2008, 08:56 AM

Nor does the mayor help out 5,000 out of 5,000 people.....

Especially when the city hires an administrator to do your job.

jesse_custer

09-11-2008, 08:57 AM

O'Reilly is interesting though. I'm calling NASA later today for satellite photos of our planet just to make sure it hasn't gone square.

Months ago he also called bullshit on the claim that Obama was a Muslim.

KevinTBrown

09-11-2008, 08:57 AM

By the way, excellent piece on Obama's time spent at DCP: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0703300121mar30,0,7797542.story

Quotable: Obama was expected to conduct 20 to 30 in-depth interviews a week with community members. Organizers called the process "learning who's who in the zoo." In laymen's terms, he was networking.

So, there's a number. How many did he actually help? No idea. But given those numbers, he possibly worked with/interviewed about 3,000 people. (Purely a guess.)

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 09:35 AM

Looks like McCain lied about knowing about Cindy's addiction to painkillers. (http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Whistleblower_breaks_15year_silence_to_allege_0911 .html)

My first boyfriend had been addicted to Percocet before I met him. Seems to be nasty stuff.

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 10:06 AM

http://wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/drill-herre.jpg

... I just doubt they'll find anything!

Infra-Man

09-11-2008, 10:17 AM

http://wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/drill-herre.jpg

... I just doubt they'll find anything!

http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/5420/pirv3.jpg

LtMarvel

09-11-2008, 10:22 AM

The number of people in a town and state have nothing to do with how that state is run (the land mass versus population thing is obsfucation), since no matter the population, it's run exactly the same as other states. With income and budget generally proportionate to other states, it's a bit of a disingenuous dodge to downplay the leading of a state as somehow lacking.
Unless she seriously tanked Alaska, which, according to all evidence, is actually doing pretty well.

Well, hm.

--Dazz
I disagree. Alaska is wealthy in oil taxes (so much so that every man, women and child gets a yearly rebate--even though there's no income, sales or property tax in AK). Alaska, I'm sure, has problems... But the degree of difficulty to run Alaska is small..

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 10:24 AM

McCain finds it tough without Palin

PHILADELPHIA - Republican presidential candidate John McCain cut short his first public appearance without running-mate Sarah Palin after chanting supporters of Democratic rival Barack Obama interrupted his speech.

After lunching with a roundtable of women at Philadelphia’s Down Home Diner, McCain shook hands with supporters and strode up to a podium to deliver a statement. But as he spoke, chants of “Obama, Obama, Obama” filled the room.

Reporters craned forward trying to hear the Arizona senator. Unfortunately for McCain — and possibly overlooked by aides who planned the event — a section of the diner opened up to a market where a crowd had gathered behind a cordon.

A large contingent of Obama supporters showed up, mixed with some who had bumper stickers reading “Democrats for McCain”.

“It’s time to leave the talk behind and start shaking up Washington and fixing our economy, taking care of the problems facing our families. We’re going to give a tax cut to every family with a child,” he said.

His words were barely audible.

McCain’s supporters shouted “John McCain”, “John McCain,” “John McCain”. The duelling chants nearly drowned out the presidential hopeful’s voice.

“Pennsylvania is a battleground state as we can tell,” McCain said.

Meanwhile Palin, the Alaska governor, was on a flight back to her state.
http://blogs.reuters.com/trail08/2008/09/10/mccain-finds-it-tough-without-palin/

Danny Donovan

09-11-2008, 10:46 AM

I also remember Democrats back in the day saying that McCain was the right kind of Republican, but now that he's the opponent, he's a lunatic with his finger on the button.

--Dazz

The John McCain of 2000 is not the same McCain of 2008. He fell victim to the same thing that ruined Colin Powell (who was a person I once respected on the other side of the aisle)

When he ran against Governor Bush in 2000, he actually had some manner of principals, now he seems to have folded into the neo-con tribe. He's spent the last 7 years becoming Bush Jr, Jr.

Paul McEnery

09-11-2008, 10:49 AM

It's been scientifically proven that every second of the day, somewhere in the world, Buffy's showing on a TV.

Okay, I made that up.

But it is true for I Love Lucy.

--Dazz

It has also been scientifically proven that if McCain/Palin got into the White House, the South Park boys would parody them as an I Love Lucy show.

But they would only get six episodes.

Paul McEnery

09-11-2008, 10:56 AM

It a reaction to the "elitist" smear. They're pointing out that his career choices contradict that accusation.

God, that was almost not bitchy. I didn't know you had it in you.

--Dazz

In the last reel, you will get mar-ried.

Crowley

09-11-2008, 10:59 AM

It is, except that a community organizer doesn't organize 5 million people out of a 5 million people population.

--Dazz

true, but a "community" in a 5 million city is often greater than 5 thousand in a small town.

Think about it this way... the town that Palin was Mayor of has .001% the population of Chicago.

So if a community organizer in Chicago in working with 1% of the population... that's significantly more people to manage.

4PointOh

09-11-2008, 11:41 AM

http://sonofbaldwin.blogspot.com/2008/09/gloria-steinem-on-sarah-palin-wrong.html

Chuck Dixon

09-11-2008, 11:47 AM

What else did you expect her to say?

Michael P

09-11-2008, 11:51 AM

Clearly, Gloria Steinem hates women.

Shisho

09-11-2008, 11:51 AM

As much as I love to read, and as often as I've been accused of being a loudmouth feminist (which I think is baloney, but whatever), I can't believe I've never actually read anything Gloria Steinem has written. I'm struck by how well she makes her point, how incredibly articulate she is. Whether you agree with her politics or not (and in this case, I do), that is just a very well-written piece. I'm going to have to make it a point to read more of her work in the future.

Kevinroc

09-11-2008, 12:00 PM

What else did you expect her to say?

To elect Sarah Palin because clearly just being a woman is enough.

4PointOh

09-11-2008, 12:07 PM

To elect Sarah Palin because clearly just being a woman is enough.

You say "sarcasm", but this is precisely what some people want us to do.

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 12:08 PM

In the last reel, you will get mar-ried.

http://mostlycloudy.net/~dnl2ba/images/forum/please%20stop/vader-nooooo.jpg

Kevinroc

09-11-2008, 12:14 PM

You say "sarcasm", but this is precisely what some people want us to do.

I put in the [sarcasm] because I wanted people to know I was being sarcastic on the issue. I am well aware there are people that think Palin being a woman is actually a legitimate reason to vote for her.

Never mind that I can never vote for anyone that thinks rape victims can't have abortions. That's a level of crazy I certainly want nothing to do with. (Don't even mention that rape victims need to buy their own rape kits under her reign.)

cedardryad

09-11-2008, 12:30 PM

I do hate how some women are being blinded by the fact that she is a woman. She is a wolf in sheep's clothing. I do hope people will smarten up and think twice before entering the voting booth.

the4thpip

09-11-2008, 12:33 PM

What else did you expect her to say?

Well, she could have made a joke about Palin's daughter, but that is more what McCain would do.

joe27

09-11-2008, 12:34 PM

She makes some good points. If you listen carefully you can hear Michelle Malkin shrieking about Palin Derangement Syndrome. Mind you she's been accusing a lot of people of suffering from that this week. I think she's just going through the phone book at this point.

Your Imaginary Pal

09-11-2008, 12:45 PM

Or perhaps McCain is following the Bush administration habit, as in the Justice Department, of putting a job candidate's views on "God, guns and gays" ahead of competence. The difference is that McCain is filling a job one 72-year-old heartbeat away from the presidency.
pretty awesome statement.

Palin has been honest about what she doesn't know. When asked last month about the vice presidency, she said, "I still can't answer that question until someone answers for me: What is it exactly that the VP does every day?"
cute

you know, I'm beginnng to make the comparisson of Palin to Professor Umbridge from the Potterverse, only not quite as bright.

4PointOh

09-11-2008, 01:16 PM

I put in the [sarcasm] because I wanted people to know I was being sarcastic on the issue. I am well aware there are people that think Palin being a woman is actually a legitimate reason to vote for her.

Never mind that I can never vote for anyone that thinks rape victims can't have abortions. That's a level of crazy I certainly want nothing to do with. (Don't even mention that rape victims need to buy their own rape kits under her reign.)

The irony is that those same individuals who think we should vote for Sarah Palin simply because, among other things, she's a woman, ALSO think we SHOULDN'T vote for Barack Obama simply because he's, among other things, black.

So which is it?

AaronJ

09-11-2008, 01:20 PM

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 01:48 PM

http://mostlycloudy.net/~dnl2ba/images/forum/please%20stop/vader-nooooo.jpg

That was pretty much my reaction, too.

But while vomiting into the air.

(sorry at work, so can't post more until later)

--Dazz

Charles RB

09-11-2008, 01:52 PM

mixed with some who had bumper stickers reading “Democrats for McCain”.

...."Democrats for The Other Party's Candidate"?

Not really Democrats then.

More, y'know, unaffiliated swing voters.

Buzz Dixon

09-11-2008, 01:53 PM

Sorry, Pip. :redface:And please don't quote the4thpip for those of us who have him on ignore.

Yue

09-11-2008, 01:56 PM

I thought this (http://www.phillymag.com/news/2008/09/11/the-real-wonder-woman-on-sarah-palin-america-should-be-very-afraid/) would interest you guys.

In an interview this morning about her three-week run at an Atlantic City casino, I offhandedly asked “Wonder Woman” Lynda Carter how she felt about the media calling VP candidate Sarah Palin the “new Wonder Woman.” I wasn’t expecting her no-holds-barred response:

Don’t get me started. She’s the anti-Wonder Woman. She’s judgmental and dictatorial, telling people how they’ve got to live their lives. And a superior religious self-righteousness … that’s just not what Wonder Woman is about. Hillary Clinton is a lot more like Wonder Woman than Mrs. Palin. She did it all, didn’t she?

No one has the right to dictate, particularly in this country, to force your own personal views upon the populace — religious views. I think that is suppressive, oppressive, and anti-American. We are the loyal opposition. That’s the whole point of this country: freedom of speech, personal rights, personal freedom. Nor would Wonder Woman be the person to tell people how to live their lives. Worry about your own life! Worry about your own family! Don’t be telling me what I want to do with mine.

I like John McCain. But this woman — it’s anathema to me what she stands for. I think America should be very afraid. Very afraid. Separation of church and state is the one thing the creators of the Constitution did agree on — that it wasn’t to be a religious government. People should feel free to speak their minds about religion but not dictate it or put it into law.

What I don’t understand, honestly, is how anyone can even begin to say they know the mind of God. Who do they think they are? I think that’s ridiculous. I know what God is in my life. Now I am sure that she’s not all just that. But it’s enough to me. It’s enough for me to have a visceral reaction. And it makes me mad.

People need to speak up. Doesn’t mean that I’m godless. Doesn’t mean that I am a murderer. What I hate is this demonization of everybody but one position. You’re un-American because you’re against the war. It’s such bullshit. Fear. It’s really such a finite way of thinking about God to think that your measley little mind can know the mind of God. It’s a very little God that way. I think that God’s bigger. I don’t presume to know his mind. Or her mind.

Paul McEnery

09-11-2008, 01:57 PM

That was pretty much my reaction, too.

But while vomiting into the air.

(sorry at work, so can't post more until later)

--Dazz

See?

You have so much in common.

DrewEdwards

09-11-2008, 02:09 PM

Lynda Carter = Awesome. :D

Shisho

09-11-2008, 02:18 PM

Apparently, the real Wonder Woman pwned (http://www.phillymag.com/news/2008/09/11/the-real-wonder-woman-on-sarah-palin-america-should-be-very-afraid) Ms. Palin. :)

My god, how I love Lynda Carter. *swoon*

Daaaaayyyyuum. That wasn't just pwned, that was pwned with a side of bitchslap. :smile:

Evan Waters

09-11-2008, 02:20 PM

Lynda Carter = Win.

Eliseu Gouveia

09-11-2008, 02:44 PM

Daaaaayyyyuum. That wasn't just pwned, that was pwned with a side of bitchslap. :smile:

And you call yourself a librarian...:cool:

MartinRedmond

09-11-2008, 02:44 PM

People dismissing her opinion because she's a b-lister in Hollywood shows how shallow their values in life are.

Evan Waters

09-11-2008, 02:45 PM

I'm actually wondering if Lynda didn't do the little bracer-cross after that.

K-DoG7p7

09-11-2008, 02:53 PM

is the Media really calling Sarah Palin the “new Wonder Woman.”??

DC should sue!

Paul McEnery

09-11-2008, 02:54 PM

People dismissing her opinion because she's a b-lister in Hollywood shows how shallow their values in life are.

Technically, they're dismissing her opinion because she's a Christian Republican.

Chiroptera

09-11-2008, 03:45 PM

Once again, Lynda Carter prooves: Once Wonder Woman, always Wonder Woman.

AaronJ

09-11-2008, 03:54 PM

Daaaaayyyyuum. That wasn't just pwned, that was pwned with a side of bitchslap. :smile:

See? Lynda is about the most lovable woman on Earth. :)

Sabrinaset

09-11-2008, 03:54 PM

If you listen carefully you can hear Michelle Malkin shrieking about Palin Derangement Syndrome.

Considering this is the third (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=236859) thread about Palin (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=237329) just on YABS alone, in just over a week, maybe Malkin has a point.

AaronJ

09-11-2008, 03:55 PM

Considering this is the third (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=236859) thread about Palin (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=237329) just on YABS alone, in just over a week, maybe Malkin has a point.

Malkin NEVER has a point.

Sabrinaset

09-11-2008, 04:10 PM

I'll try to make it easier for that rare person who is unable to comprehend the simple yet elegant idea that a stopped clock can still be right twice a day.

Considering the amount of Palin-hate I'm noting on YABS of late, evidenced by three threads about her in eight days, there is the possibility that there could be something approching a visceral level of emotion that might be coming into play here.

EMeadow

09-11-2008, 04:13 PM

Apparently, the real Wonder Woman pwned (http://www.phillymag.com/news/2008/09/11/the-real-wonder-woman-on-sarah-palin-america-should-be-very-afraid) Ms. Palin. :)

My god, how I love Lynda Carter. *swoon*

And then the commenters went after Mrs. Carter with a vengeance!

Great respect for a woman who STILL understands the relevance of the character she portrayed.

AaronJ

09-11-2008, 04:25 PM

And then the commenters went after Mrs. Carter with a vengeance!

Great respect for a woman who STILL understands the relevance of the character she portrayed.

Lynda is unique. She's one of a kind. She's the best.

I'll try to make it easier for that rare person who is unable to comprehend the simple yet elegant idea that a stopped clock can still be right twice a day.

Oh?

Considering the amount of Palin-hate I'm noting on YABS of late, evidenced by three threads about her in eight days, there is the possibility that there could be something approching a visceral level of emotion that might be coming into play here.

Maybe the hatred is due to what she has said and done?

Sabrinaset

09-11-2008, 04:29 PM

Maybe the hatred is due to what she has said and done?

I'm finding the blinding hatred of Palin from some posters here just as distasteful as the sycophantic love that at least one unnamed poster has.

AaronJ

09-11-2008, 04:32 PM

I'm finding the blinding hatred of Palin from some posters here just as distasteful as the sycophantic love that at least one unnamed poster has.

Look, I don't care either way. But she's not a good person. And her beliefs are not good beliefs.

Yes, she's cute. Yes, she was a mayor, and then governor. I really don't care.

Everything she believes in is opposed to what I believe in. And, seriously, "Foreign policy experience because of Russia?" Come on.

Lynda's right. 100%.

DavidAllred

09-11-2008, 04:43 PM

I'm finding the blinding hatred of Palin from some posters here just as distasteful as the sycophantic love that at least one unnamed poster has.

It does kind of make you wonder. The interesting thing is that as near as I can tell from checking fact-finders and such, none of her personal positions have come into play in her politics. By that I mean, she's not pushed her religious or abortion issues on the public. That doesn't mean she won't if given the opportunity at the big chair, but even if she did (and I have serious doubts she would ever), the nice thing about our system is that we have three branches of government.

You know, we've had our share of pro-life religious fanatics in the White House, and the only thing that's really come of it is a ban on partial birth abortion, which even most democrats agree was a good thing (see Biden for an example). Any battles over gay marriage will have to be settled in the Congress and Senate first anyway and pass with a 2/3 majority... that doesn't appear to be on the horizon for the next term, but I could be wrong.

All the jive about teaching creationism in school has already been debunked by fact checkers, so really when its all said and done one has to wonder what's really at stake here besides a truck-load of intolerance (and granted it can be hard to tolerate stupid t hings like no abortion even in the case of rape), but what I'm seeing from the Left isn't even a remotely rational response. It's irrational, emotional, and bespeaks of an overall "whine" of a kid who just had his all day sucker pulled out of his mouth.

Paul McEnery

09-11-2008, 04:45 PM

Malkin NEVER has a point.

There's the top of her head!

AaronJ

09-11-2008, 04:46 PM

It does kind of make you wonder. The interesting thing is that as near as I can tell from checking fact-finders and such, none of her personal positions have come into play in her politics. By that I mean, she's not pushed her religious or abortion issues on the public. That doesn't mean she won't if given the opportunity at the big chair, but even if she did (and I have serious doubts she would ever), the nice thing about our system is that we have three branches of government.

You know, we've had our share of pro-life religious fanatics in the White House, and the only thing that's really come of it is a ban on partial birth abortion, which even most democrats agree was a good thing (see Biden for an example). Any battles over gay marriage will have to be settled in the Congress and Senate first anyway and pass with a 2/3 majority... that doesn't appear to be on the horizon for the next term, but I could be wrong.

All the jive about teaching creationism in school has already been debunked by fact checkers, so really when its all said and done one has to wonder what's really at stake here besides a truck-load of intolerance (and granted it can be hard to tolerate stupid t hings like no abortion even in the case of rape), but what I'm seeing from the Left isn't even a remotely rational response. It's irrational, emotional, and bespeaks of an overall "whine" of a kid who just had his all day sucker pulled out of his mouth.

So what the hell does she believe in, in your opinion?

She's just a nice gal from Alaska who wants the best for everyone, and won't work to impose anything on anyone?

She has no actual, real resume, and on top of it, she has no tough beliefs? Is that what you're saying?

AaronJ

09-11-2008, 04:47 PM

There's the top of her head!

OK, I forgot that.

Dazzler

09-11-2008, 04:49 PM

See?

You have so much in common.

Is it love?

I think maybe.

--Dazz

DavidAllred

09-11-2008, 04:54 PM

So what the hell does she believe in, in your opinion?

She's just a nice gal from Alaska who wants the best for everyone, and won't work to impose anything on anyone?

She has no actual, real resume, and on top of it, she has no tough beliefs? Is that what you're saying?

Personally, I don't have enough information to decide. For the past eight days I've been convinced she is a dynamic speaker, but who carried the belief structure of a ten-year old. Then, it slowly comes out that Sarah Palin didn't try to ban all those books, that she didn't try to get creationism taught in science class, and that she didn't try to remove Alaska from the Union, and numerous other things that she didn't do.

So I'm left with the rest of rational America waiting on more information on her, while the irrational among us continue to paint with such a broad brush that it is hard to seperate fact from fiction.

Paul McEnery

09-11-2008, 04:57 PM

Is it love?

I think maybe.

--Dazz

You threw up a little.

That's usually the first sign.

AaronJ

09-11-2008, 05:27 PM

http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/13262.html

http://www.icv2.com/images/13262schoolgirlpalinfigLG.gif

Arrogantcur

09-11-2008, 06:07 PM

On that note, though, what had Obama done on a nationally (or globally) affecting level before his candidacy?

I fear all this Palin hate seems to be sour grapes and a disproportionate amount of vitriol is passed her way because she's stealing thunder. It also seems to be she's stealing thunder using the same perceived qualities that made Obama admirable. It almost seems the left is afraid of her more than McCain.

--Dazz

I just knew somebody was going to say this... :rolleyes:

Here's the thing about Palin. If she had, say, spoken at the RNC...and then spent some time in Washington...and THEN ran for President or Vice President, I wouldn't think she was so ill-equipped for the job. I still wouldn't vote for her, but I'd acknowledge that she'd had some experience.

Being Governor of Alaska for 1 year and 10 months or whatever it is does not prepare you to run a country full of states that are nothing like Alaska, states that A) contain much, much higher populations and B) different types of people than Alaskans. Being Governor of Alaska also means you have precious little foreign policy experience, if ANY.

Since 2004, Obama has been in Washington, in the Senate, and regardless of what the right may tell you he has not been sitting on his thumbs the whole time. He has been serving in one of the three branches of government and, yes, making decisions and casting votes that have affected the entire nation. Compare that to Palin, whose influence has always been limited to Alaska and portions thereof. Obama also knows how Washington works a lot better than Palin, and he knows it firsthand. He's been involved in discussions on foreign policy, environmental regulation, health care, and so forth, in the Senate.

If you would like me to sum it up in one sentence, then here it is: Obama would probably never say anything like "(Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had) gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers," because he is not as laughably ignorant about that sort of stuff as Palin.

Arrogantcur

09-11-2008, 06:23 PM

So, how do you feel about her belief that she can "pray the gay people straight to make them 'normal'"....?

For anybody who doesn't know what Kev's talking about:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2mAGZBbhjc

As soon as I read about that, I really wanted to get Novaya's reaction to it. As soon as I saw his or her sig after the Palin pick, I checked the "Divasparkles" blog and sure enough, there was Novaya talking about how Palin had done more for gay people than Obama ever had.

You know what's troubling? For the sake of argument, let's say that this claim were actually true. It would mean that Novaya, whom we all know is gay, is easily bribed. It would mean that as long as a candidate is LGBT friendly, Novaya doesn't give two shits about any of that candidate's other positions. It would mean Novaya is a one-issue voter. I hate to think how many others are the same way.

People should not be voting because of just one issue. I'd never vote for Rudy Giuliani, for instance, even though I happen to agree with him on gun control. They shouldn't be thinking "how will this person becoming President affect ME?" They should be thinking "how will this person becoming President affect the WORLD?" But they're too goddamn selfish. :mad:

Sabrinaset

09-11-2008, 06:25 PM

And now, for more stories in the news ...

Biden says Hillary might have been a better pick than him. (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/09/biden-hillary-a.html)

Bill says Obama will win handily. (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D934LQA80&show_article=1) Well, as long as Bill isn't "helping" him!

S.C. Dem chair sticks his foot in his mouth: Palins primary qualification is she hasn't had an abortion. (http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0908/SC_Dem_chair_Palin_primary_qualification_is_she_ha snt_had_an_abortion_.html?showall)

Words Obama may regret? (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/words_obama_will_regret.html)

BnL

09-11-2008, 06:31 PM

Tages

09-11-2008, 06:35 PM

The McCain campaign has now graduated in the realm of foreign policy from normal everyday idiocy to cartoon superidiocy (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080911/ap_on_el_pr/palin_interview):

Palin told Charles Gibson of ABC News that she'd favor including Georgia and Ukraine, both former Soviet republics, in NATO despite opposition by Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. Asked whether the United States would have to go to war with Russia if it invaded Georgia, and the country was part of NATO, Palin said: "Perhaps so."

"I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help," she said.

Pressed on the question, Palin responded: "What I think is that smaller democratic countries that are invaded by a larger power is something for us to be vigilant against ... We have got to show the support, in this case, for Georgia. The support that we can show is economic sanctions perhaps against Russia, if this is what it leads to."

She added: "It doesn't have to lead to war and it doesn't have to lead, as I said, to a Cold War, but economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, again, counting on our allies to help us do that in this mission of keeping our eye on Russia and Putin and some of his desire to control and to control much more than smaller democratic countries."

Can everyone stop with the lies that Georgia is a free country that was totally blameless in the recent crisis?

While we're at it, how about we take a good, hard look at why the McCain campaign is lockstep with the Bushies in their apparent goal of making the U.S. and NATO hostages to fortune for the sake of a corrupt third world strongman?

"I'm not saying I want another Cold War, unless I do."

Michael P

09-11-2008, 06:36 PM

And in the Charlie Gibson interview, she sounded like a Talking Vice-Presidential Candidate Doll. Push the button and hear one of eight canned phrases!

Linkara

09-11-2008, 06:47 PM

Personally, I don't have enough information to decide. For the past eight days I've been convinced she is a dynamic speaker, but who carried the belief structure of a ten-year old. Then, it slowly comes out that Sarah Palin didn't try to ban all those books, that she didn't try to get creationism taught in science class, and that she didn't try to remove Alaska from the Union, and numerous other things that she didn't do.

So I'm left with the rest of rational America waiting on more information on her, while the irrational among us continue to paint with such a broad brush that it is hard to seperate fact from fiction.

I think the thing is that people expect politicians to be corrupt or have some dark, horrible secret that will damn them in the eyes of people for the rest of their lives, but the fact is that Palin DOESN'T have that. The people who are so desperate to discredit her can't find anything legitimately wrong with what she's done in the past.

And while one can disagree with her political beliefs, she hasn't gone to extravagent lengths to force those beliefs on others.

Corrina

09-11-2008, 06:59 PM

Well, the Enquirer thinks she has a dark secret. I don't believe it, yet.

Mostly, I dislike her using her 'womb belongs to Jesus' as an in with the religious right wing of the Republican party. That's one of the very first things people on that side talked about--how she had a special needs kids and didn't abort, like one of those damned dirty liberals.

Most of the time, I feel that most candidates for President have qualifications that I don't. Obama & McCain & Biden have all had accomplishments that I'm pretty sure are beyond me.

But I feel pretty confident in my belief that I can do just as good, if not better, a job as VP than Sarah Palin.

And as someone who was carrying twins and had doctors who tried to strong-arm her into having an amnio to determine birth defects and refused to even do that because of the risks (there is a risk of miscarriage with an amnio), and as someone who has put the needs of her kids (who are special needs kids) above my career, I feel pretty damned morally superior to her as well.

She talks the talk. I'm not seeing her walk the walk.

Linkara

09-11-2008, 07:02 PM

Oh PLEASE. There's a seemingly endless supply of rational reasons to hate Palin.

Literally every part of her record that she references in her stump speeches are lies.

She didn't oppose the Bridge To Nowhere. Part of her gubernatorial campaign was based on her support for it.

The bridge actually went somewhere at that stage.

She didn't sell the governor's jet on eBay at a profit for the Alaskan people. It actually wound up costing them money to get rid of it.

Source?

She has no experience as "commander in chief" of the Alaskan National Guard. She's never been involved in any decision making, not even on occasions where they were deployed for state emergencies.

So what exactly did she do all day in her office?

She's not a reformer. She's facing an investigation for corruption.

An investigation that will turn up nothing, since she wanted the officer in question fired for legitimate reasons of abusing his position and the guy she directly fired wasn't doing his job by firing the officer.

She's not fiscally conservative. She wracked up $20 million in debt for the small town of Wasilla, when she was mayor.

No one's perfect, and that was her mayoral administration.

She's not opposed to earmarks. As governor, she hired lobbyists to secure more earmarks for her state.

So does every other state. When did she say she was opposed to earmarks? And even if she did try to acquire them, she wasn't in a position to STOP them, so she might as well use a resource that's available to improve the lives of Alaskans.

She's not opposed to wasteful spending and federal pork. She secured more federal funds for her state, per capita, than any other state, by far. She also kept the more than $200 million given to her for the Bridge to Nowhere, and spent it on, among other things, a road leading to the then-canceled bridge.

Source?

She's not an agent of change. Her blatant dishonesty, and the McCain/Palin platform both make her pretty much identical to Bush.

Yes, because as we know, people who have similar political beliefs ARE EXACTLY THE SAME IN EVERY WAY.

Her highly touted "executive experience" consists mostly of her abdicating all her executive power to administrators and surrogates.

Source and why is it bad to make sure that things get done even if she's not the one who's doing it?

She's used as a shield to deflect and distract from any valid criticism. If you have something negative to say about her, it MUST be sexism.

There's been ONE example I've found of it crying sexism when it shouldn't be and the other example I've seen is idiots who claim she should be taking care of her baby instead of being in office, which no one would be asking a man to do, which IS sexism.

She has invoked God in order to promote political policy (the War In Iraq is "a task from God." The proposed gas pipeline is "God's will.").

I don't think it's wise politically to do so, but if that's what she believes, then fine.

She gave her teenage daughter a choice (at least, according to her) about how to deal with her pregnancy, while wishing to deny that opportunity from others, even in cases of rape and incest.

Evidence?

She favors abstinence-only sex education and teaching creationism alongside evolution, regardless of the lack of the legitimacy of those things.

You know, when someone says "abstinence-only" sex education, do they mean that they teach that abstinence is the only 100% effective way to prevent such things in consensual relationships, or some bogus claim that they drive out any and all other kinds of sex education? Because I fail to see that kind of education ever occurring. And as for creationism, I want both a source and a definition of creationism in this context.

She charged rape victims for the cost of their own rape kits as mayor, until state law prohibited the practice.

While I'd appreciate a source on this one, I will admit that's scummy.

She inquired about how she could go about banning books in Wasilla. When the librarian resisted, she attempted to fire her, until a backlash caused her to back off. But she's still demonstrated a willingness to fire anyone who is not a yes-man.

Source?

She has hidden from the media, except under very controlled conditions, which casts doubt on her ability to stand up to scrutiny, and her knowledge of various issues of importance to the nation.

Or she doesn't trust the press to be objective, which I sure as hell don't.

And the part that makes it all so frustrating is that the media, for the most part, doesn't call her on any of this stuff. It'll get better ratings and sell more papers if the race is close, so the media consciously downplays all of Palin's obvious weaknesses.

Or they report it all the time, it's just they can't find any legitimately juicy scandals.