April 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30    

« It's the network, stupid | Main | Then and now »

Aug 29, 2008


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Love it--great move!!


At first glance, Palin seems to be someone who won't cause the GOP's base to go ballistic. But, it's a fact that every time McCain tries to play the youthful inexperience card on Obama, the response will be "Palin". McCain is also gonnna need to explain how his superior experience and judgment convinced him that this person is ready to sit in the Oval Office.

The subtext of this choice, however, is that of all the GOP heavyweights -- in the Senate, in governors' offices, in Cabinet posts, and especially his primary campaign foes -- either none were willing to run with McCain or had to be eliminated because they wouldn't pass the base's litmus test. It's more evidence of the mess the GOP is in now.


Of the four candidates, Palin is the only one I actually like.


Everytime Democrats try to bring up Palin's lack of experience, McCain will fire back with Obama who is the candidate. Everytime McCain brings up Obama's lack of experience, the Obama campaign will waste time and money attacking Palin, who isn't heading the ticket.

Further, if Obama wants to make it about judgment instead of experience as he suggested last night, Palin's judgment versus Obama's is a battle McCain has no problem fighting. The McCain argument is going to shift by tying the two together. He will say that Palin's experience has prepared her to make the right judgments, while Obama's hasn't and then challenge Obama's judgment. From a purely strategic standpoint, the Palin pick and the experience argument will still favor McCain.

It is the person at the top of the ticket who takes the arrows, so if Obama wants to waste time with Palin, that's okay with McCain.


Obama doesn't need "to waste time with Palin". Her presence on the ticket will say it all: There's no one else in the GOP better qualified to back up an aging candidate or an aging president?

Of course, the answer is yes, but the GOP is so screwed up and so ideologically hamstrung that none of them are acceptable.


We will have either a black President or female Vice President. Identity politics are over.


Reminds me of the Dan Quayle pick years ago by Bush senior. The stategy move is better, because Quayle had nothing going for him, whereas Palin has solid props when it comes to the party line and more.
A brave move by McCain, but in some circles it just solidifies reasons to be against the ticket - two conservatives: "born again" conservative McCain and newbee yet untainted conservative Palin. It might revive the ticket but I have no doubt it will be bad for the country for them to be elected.
The Democrats will find it difficult to attack her, which is actually a good thing in my opinion. Somebody had to douse the fire with some cold water.

Britt Whitmire

Perhaps your worst job of polishing a turd ever, Sam. This choice is dreadful and clearly McCain is REACTING to Obama. Who is the political rookie, again?

She looks like Tia Fey and she plays like Harriet Miers. Please, Sam, take another bite at the apple and tell us how great Harriet Miers woud've been on the SCOTUS.

The pick was Romney and Mac just shit the bed.

But Rush just told me she hunts moose, so I have changed my mind.


I agree with Spags in that this is kinda a cool moment in American history though. I thought that last night prior to the AM bombshell.

Im not as scared of BO as some of my R brethren (or relatives for that matter). I dont like the idea of an all Dem run in DC but whatever will be will be. When, my taxes go up Ill just raise my prices, right?

Who cares what she looks like Britt? I was thinking more Megan Mullaly (sp) though. Oh, and you need some new eupha... eu... uph... sayings.


Britt, you couldn't be more wrong. You will soon find out. This pick was designed to appeal to suburban mothers who are swing voters and they will identify with Palin on a level well beyond what Hillary Clinton or Geraldine Ferraro ever did.

Come talk to me next week when a new set of polls come out.


I would rather the pick been designed to be the best VP available.

Ged Maheux

Ah yes, I forgot about the all-important "suburban mothers" demographic that are staunchly pro-life, pro-gun and hunt moose on the weekends. Yeah, they should identify perfectly with her. We'll check those polls as you suggest next week Sam and see where we are.

Eddie Corney

God Damn that is some brilliant shit!

She's a mother of five and her husband is a blue collar laborer from an ethnic minority!

Lib's can suck it!

Britt Whitmire

And she takes on big oil, so that's...umm...well...that's really something.

But she does have experience with state troopers so maybe that's why she feels so sympatico with hillary.

Britt Whitmire

And she digs windfall profit taxes which were previously only for socialist commies.

Yes, Jan Van de Velde. Yes, Dan Quayle. Yes, Harriet Miers. No, Annie Oakley.

And she pronounces it nu-cu-lar, which drives all the boys crazy!

Eddie Corney

And you a lib who's every notion of equality and minority rights and level playing field will be completely undermined by your inability to deal with a bright, conservative woman without resorting to sexual innuendo because liberal policies and philosophies melt in the face of a sustained, in your face counter attack.

Like I said, brilliant.


Chase that rabbit, Britt and see where it leads. The trooper in question admitted that he threatened to kill Palin's father. Governor or not, any person would question why such a person still had a job in law enforcement.

I have worked with enough women who are victims of domestic violence to know that this issue will cut in Palin's favor when the facts become known. Women will say "he deserved to be fired" and get on Palin's side whether she had any role in seeking his dismissal or not.

Go for it.

John Burns

She is a woman who thinks women shouldn't serve in the military.

That oughtta go over well.

John Burns

And Sam, when you say the "experience" thing will go right back to Obama, you are passing over the fact that Obama went through a grueling primary campaign and was elected to his nomination.

She just got picked out of nowhere. That's a BIG difference.


Brilliance or desperation? Seems to be McCain said he had his pick on Thursday only to reverse course a short time later. Could it be that no matter whom he asked to be VP they kept saying no? Would explain why Palin was not on anyone's radar - she was too far down the list. I would question her judgment for saying yes to McCain.


Palin is to change as Biden is to the status quo.

Tony Wilkins

I would have thought Romney for sure but what do I know. I'm already getting e-mail requests for yard signs and bumper stickers and the phone at the local GOP headquarters is ringing off the hook.
Britt, Eddie just told you off in front of your friend(s).

Dave Ribar

The choice of Gov. Quayle-in is a dreadful one. There are so many qualified major-league Republicans, how is McCain going to justify going so far down into the minor leagues for this pick? Can McCain really argue that his pick is more qualified than Senators Hutchison, Collins or Snowe, Secretaries Rice or Peters, or Ambassador Schwab?


This removes the experience arrow from the Republicans' quiver. Democrats (for obvious reasons) don't want the discussion to go there; with the choice of Gov. Quayle-in, the Republicans will now have to go mum on the issue.

(Actually, we shouldn't be too hard on Dan Quayle. By the time he was picked as VP, he had served 4 years as a Representative and 7 1/2 years as a Senator. He also helped to author the Job Partnership Training Act.)


Still voting R but reeks of gimmickery (sp?)

Joe Guarino

This reminds me a bit of when Clarence Thomas was nominated to the Supreme Court. Republicans are not applauded by the left when they nominate members of aggrieved victim groups. Thomas did not appear to possess the mindset that liberals would expect of a victim group member, so he was trashed. He turned out to be a fine Supreme Court justice, but no matter.

The above thread suggests to me that the same may happen to Sarah Palin.

BTW, I thought her speech today was outstanding-- with a pleasing tone, positive, enthusiastic, and striking all the right notes. She appears to have a strong public presence that will hopefully serve her well over the next two months. She could very well turn out to be our first female President if her future unfolds in a manner that today's appearance would suggest.


Dave, I still think the experience thing is in play- Obama heads the ticket, Palin doesn't.

John, there is no doubt Obama is a great campaigner and he beat Hillary Clinton fair and square and much to my delight. But Can He Lead? If the Obama campaign wants to make this about Palin and not McCain, I think that would be fine with the McCain campaign. The comparison will come down to accomplishments, and even though both resumes are thin, I believe Palin can name more than Obama.

Have a go at it.


Joe, agreed. That immediately occurred to me and I wrote about it in my first post on the Palin pick.

Democrats still play identity/victim politics and the idea of the first female VP being a conservative rattles their cages because they don't believe women are supposed to be conservatives. Expect the mud to fly and Palin to hold her own.

The smear will backfire.

Eddie Corney

"Would explain why Palin was not on anyone's radar - she was too far down the list."

You are obviously not a know it all ...

59 days ago


Eddie - one conservative writer two months ago still does not mean she was high on the list. this would have been akin to Obama picking Chet Edwards - yeah, Pelosi pitched him, but still would have been a dark horse, or in Palin's case, a dark moose. And where in my post did I suggest I was a know it all? Keep your unfounded accusations to yourself.


Joe Guarino: "Aggrieved victim groups"?? Are you saying all women are aggrieved victims? And many would question Thomas' success on the court. He's a success if you don't want justices to ask questions and wnat them to be right-wing tools. I suspect the latter is the real measure you're using.

Anyone who expects women to vote for Palin just because she's female is nuts. That makes no more sense than expecting men to vote for McCain or Obama because they're make. Palin's record, as tiny as it is, shows she is an ideologically committed rightie, which means she is anti-woman and anti-child. She's pro-life and that means she's wants to use the law and the courts to force all women to behave according to her own notions of morality.

As for the claims that Biden can't pull out the stops during a debate because Palin is a woman, well, that's just sexist.


"Palin's record, as tiny as it is, shows she is an ideologically committed rightie, which means she is anti-woman and anti-child."

Dumbest, most illogical statement made yet but exactly what I expected. She can't be a REAL woman unless she supports abortion. She hates children although she has five of them. Contrast this with Barack Obama who supports infanticide.


It's amazing to read the squeals of stuck Democrats with the Palin pick. Someone was wondering how Democrats would attack Palin, and I think that I have seen them all right here, and they are pathetic. Sure, Obama yell "inexperience" all that you want to. Just look in the mirror when you do. Sarah Palin was serving in political office when you were doing community organizing. Palin may be "inexperienced", but she actually has some accomplishments during her years. And, she has been on McCain's radar for a long time, but he didn't show that card until it was time. Now, we will see the Dems play the "gender" card, attacking her as a woman.

Palin is the All-American Woman. Her parents were teachers, she was an athlete, she has a career, and a mother of five. Oh, yeah, she has a funky hairdo and eyeglasses. Duh!

Eddie Corney

Newtogso: It's an inside joke about the owner of this blog.

What east coast liberals like Corbly fail to understand is that this election boils down to less than half a percentage point of voters in two western states, Colorado and New Mexico.

If a very bright, energetic and talented female from a western state can swing enough votes in either New Mexico or Colorado to put them safely in the McCain column, five million new college aged voters in Philly, Sacramento and Chicago won't make a difference.


" That makes no more sense than expecting men to vote for McCain or Obama because they're make."

Nor 95% of black people to vote for Obama because he is black, right? Oh...they are, aren't they? Never mind.


Sam, you're getting hysterical.

You're also making things up. I did not say Palin's positions means she's not a "REAL" woman.

I said that she's willing to use the force of government to compel other woman to behave in acordance with her own sense of morality. That -- taking freedom from people who don't agree with you -- as being pretty anti-woman. And the number of children she has bears no relevance on her qualifications for office.

No one on my side of the fence wants to force women to do things against their will. None of us want to take away a woman's right to live her life as she sees fit. The same can't be said for people on your side of the fence. They believe they have special insight into the ways of universe that gives them the right to dictate to everyone else.

This is a bad pick for McCain if for no other reason than the more he allies with the Christianist fanatics on the right the less he stands to win in November. Appeals to those people only serve to remind everyone else that they're the ones who elected Bush.


"The same can't be said for people on your side of the fence."

Who is saying that anyone wants to take away a woman's right to live her life as she sees fit? What some people want to do is be sure that an unborn human life has the right to live his/her life. A woman can live her life as she chooses, but she doens't have the right to murder her unborn. How do you draw a fine line between a non-human life one minute before delivery and one minute after? The law does speak to a woman murdering her child one minute after delivery doesn't it? And, you might read Roe v. Wade regarding third trimester abortions. Note from the ruling:

"For the stage subsequent to viability the State, in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother."

This seems to say that the state by law can limit a woman's right to abortion of her unborn child.


Sam, Sam.

Abortion is not murder and I do not need to "draw a fine line between a non-human life one minute before delivery and one minute after".

Asking for fine lines to be drawn is pretty ironic, since the pro-life crowd wants to take a blunt axe to a woman's right to make her own decisions.

I'm happy with the law as it stands. I just don't want religious fanatics -- who are convinced they are doing God's work -- to take over the government and force the rest of us -- who may have heard God say something else -- to march in lockstep with their whims.

Abortion is not a good thing. But taking away rights in the name of religious beliefs is considerably worse.

Other than that, I'm male, and whether a woman does or does not choose an abortion is none of my damn business.

Dave Ribar


Like the Thomas and Miers nominations, most people are left scratching their heads wondering "is this the best you can do?" As mentioned, the GOP has lots of highly qualified women. It also has many excellent minority candidates. Many of those candidates appear as if they would bring a lot more to the office than Gov. Quayle-in.

Is Sen. McCain that insecure or that desperate that he has to bring in someone with so little experience?


"Palin's record, as tiny as it is, shows she is an ideologically committed rightie, which means she is anti-woman and anti-child."

Do you think before you type these things? A mother of five children, including one disabled child, is "anti-child?" Shame on you.


Dave, I'm sure she loves her kids. But, in my book, it's pretty hard for a right-wing conservative to be considered pro-child in a political sense. Or, pro-parent for that matter. Her policies tell the tale.

Dave Ribar


Still shameful and way out of bounds.


How so, Dave? Am I supposed to be nicer to Palin than I would be to a man just because she's a mother with five kids? Will Putin and Ahmadinejad giver her a pass because of her gender?

From my point of view, what I said is simple political fact, and could equally be applied to any right-wing conservative.

Dave Ribar


I put your comments right down there with Sam's "infanticide" comment. Dumb, dumb stuff.

Ian McDowell

I guess this means Cleese, Jones and Idle turned him down.

If McCain wins, this will make the 2012 race even more interesting, since both candidates will be women.

Ian McDowell

This also means that we'll have either a black or a woman president by 2011.


If "terminating the life" of a fully-formed human life on eh technicality that it had not yet been delivered into the world is not murder, what would you call it? any way you slice it, abortion represents ending a human life. And, you can not say a fetus is not a human life; it is the child of a human.

What sets Sarah Palin apart from some that post here is that she is actually a happy, well-adjusted person who is comfortable in who she is and what she believes. It is amazing that someone would be so full of hate to call a person that has a right to human life belief as being anti-woman and anti-child. Amazing. I sincerely hope that people who believe and say such things never gain control of this country.

Finally, government tells us every day of the week what things can do and can't do. They are called laws, which we as a civilized society live by. I am surprised that someone who believes that government should be responsible for our lives would question government actually telling us how to live.


That's your right, Dave. And it's my right to believe that the policies of the conservative movement are fundamentally anti-woman, anti-child, anti-family and just plain fundamentally damaging to Americans.

You're certainly not arguing that Palin's status as a mother, by itself, makes her pro-woman, pro-child, and pro-family?


Stormy, I have no intent of arguing abortion with you or anyone else. I have my position and you have your position.

I will say that the words used to describe an act do not change its nature. If you choose to call abortion "murder", then, to be consistent, you need to call any taking of life murder, as well. That includes capital punishment, death in combat, etc., etc. They're all the same, after all. Only the motivation differs.

I do not argue that abortion doesn't mean ending something that is alive. But I do argue that no right exists to use the state to ban abortion.

And, as far as I can tell, I'm a pretty happy and well-adjusted guy.


"This is a bad pick for McCain if for no other reason than the more he allies with the Christianist fanatics on the right the less he stands to win in November."

So now we get to it. She's bad because she's a Christian, and all Christian's are fanatics. Where do Obama and Biden fit into that picture.

Being opposed to abortion is not an exclusively Christian position, nor does it make one a fanatic.

Obama refused to vote for legislation that would prevent abortions for fully formed infants, such when an abortion goes wrong and the child is still alive. That is infanticide and is morally repugnant and an act of barbarism unfit for the modern society that liberals claim to advance.

Judging by your last comment JC, your complaint isn't that she's a woman but a conservative. On this basis, your criticisms aren't unique to Palin. Supporting abortion and infanticide is the real "anti-child" position. It doesn't get any more anti-child than that unless you are Darlie Routier or Susan Smith. They apparently thought that children were disposable too when they aren't convenient.

Fred Gregory

A.F. Ticker on Gov. Sarah Palin ( RTWT )

Change we can live really with

"It would seem from Gov. Palin’s experience along with Sen. McCain’s continuing battle for change in Washington that they are the ones to bring actually change to Washington. All we have from Sen. Obama is talk of change. What we have in Gov. Palin and Sen. McCain is experience at bringing about real change. Now that is change that we can live with. As the saying goes, some folks sit around dreaming of making things happen. Some talk about making things happen. Others actually make things happen. So far the record shows that the McCain-Palin ticket has the edge in making things happen while the Obama-Biden ticket are still dreaming and talking about making things happen when it comes to change.

For REAL Change we can live with, vote McCain-Palin."


>>"She's bad because she's a Christian, and all Christian's are fanatics."

Sam, you're making things up again. That's not what I said. I really would appreciate it if you'd kindly stop putting words in my mouth.

And I challenge you to show me where I criticized Palin because she's a woman. (You must've been watching Fox or listening to Rush and polishing your technique.)

But, yes, I oppose her because she is part of the religiously-tinged conservative movement. I believe that members of that movement hold that their religious beliefs are the only valid beliefs. I believe that they hold that those beliefs give them sanction to control the behavior of others, much like Lenin and the Bolsheviks. (Replace "what Marx and Engels said" with "what God told me") I believe that if given the choice between protecting the Constitution and standing for freedom in America versus advancing their faith, they would choose, and have chosen, the latter. I believe that the policies of this movement inevitably bring great harm to the American people, and hence, are anti-woman, anti-child and anti-family.

Am I clear?

The comments to this entry are closed.