After watching Governor Palin and a number of McCain surrogates1 launch a new strategy over the last few days of trying to accentuate Obama’s associations with William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and Tony Rezko, I figured that a Keating Five counter-punch was coming soon.
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) on Monday is launching a multimedia campaign to draw attention to the involvement of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in the “Keating Five” savings-and-loan scandal of 1989-91, which blemished McCain’s public image and set him on his course as a self-styled reformer.
On the one hand, this is something of a blast from the past. On the other, it is a blast from the last time we had a major crisis in the finance sector and the last time that the federal government had to get involved in fixing it. It isn’t exactly the kind of thing that McCain should want to be in the middle of the national conversation at the moment.
McCain will try to counter the story by casting it as his Road to Damascus moment in terms of lobbyist and his rebirth as The Maverick. Still, in terms of the political narrative, this is not the kind of thing that McCain needs to be filtering into the story at this point in time.
It seems exceedingly unlikely that Ayers, Wright and Rezko are going to start resonating now when they haven’t to this point (it should be noted: none of these are new stories and have been in the mix for roughly a year). Given that fact, the “guilt-by-association” card was a dangerous one for the McCain camp to play given that they had to know that the Keating Five was the obvious counter-play.
I don’t think, by the way, that the Keating Five story is some super counter-attack that will lay waste to McCain’s campaign. However, it is more than enough to cause some voters to pause and wonder what McCain was up to during the Savings and Loan crash and to then draw parallels to the current financial bailout. Given that early voting has begun in a number of states, this isn’t good timing for McCain.
In terms of AyersWrightRezko: all that tactic will do is give hardcore McCain supporters and talk radio hosts another reason to dislike Obama. That simply isn’t going to be enough to win this election, not by a longshot.
To summarize: AyerWrightRezko isn’t new and isn’t likely to cause many to change their minds at this point. However, Keating hasn’t been a major focus to date and introducing it is a wildcard in the wake of the financial crisis. McCain’s campaign has made what may turn out to be a serious tactical error by taking this path.
James Joyner has a good write-up on this general story as well.
One of the responses from the debate that I have been to go back to is the following from Biden. I was confused by it at the time, and wanted to see the transcript.
The question:
IFILL: What has this administration done right or wrong — this is the great, lingering, unresolved issue, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — what have they done? And is a two-state solution the solution?
The answer (with the bolded part being the subject of this post:
BIDEN: Gwen, no one in the United States Senate has been a better friend to Israel than Joe Biden. I would have never, ever joined this ticket were I not absolutely sure Barack Obama shared my passion.
But you asked a question about whether or not this administration’s policy had made sense or something to that effect. It has been an abject failure, this administration’s policy.
In fairness to Secretary Rice, she’s trying to turn it around now in the seventh or eighth year.
Here’s what the president said when we said no. He insisted on elections on the West Bank, when I said, and others said, and Barack Obama said, “Big mistake. Hamas will win. You’ll legitimize them.” What happened? Hamas won.
When we kicked — along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, “Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don’t know — if you don’t, Hezbollah will control it.”
Now what’s happened? Hezbollah is a legitimate part of the government in the country immediately to the north of Israel.
The fact of the matter is, the policy of this administration has been an abject failure.
And speaking of freedom being on the march, the only thing on the march is Iran. It’s closer to a bomb. Its proxies now have a major stake in Lebanon, as well as in the Gaza Strip with Hamas.
We will change this policy with thoughtful, real, live diplomacy that understands that you must back Israel in letting them negotiate, support their negotiation, and stand with them, not insist on policies like this administration has.
The response is a jumbled mess. He is referring to the period after the Hezbollah/Israel conflict in 2006, although he has the narrative rather confused.
Some of the problems:
-The US never kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, with the help of the French or not. That is simply nonsense. One might think that he means they were kicked out of Israel, but apart from the initial cross-border raid that sparked the conflict, I am fairly certain that the fighting consisted mainly of bombardments from Lebanon into Israel, with any actual fighting taking place in southern Lebanon. Beyond that, neither the US nor the French were involved at that point.
-It is true that the French participated in a peacekeeping force after the end of the conflict.
-The mission was a UN one, not a NATO one. Indeed, it was an enhancement of an existing mission that was started in 1978 (UNIFIL).
-Hezbollah was already a member of the Lebanese government prior to the conflict, so it wasn’t as if some failed policy of the Bush administration led to that outcome. (Indeed, I noted Hezbollah’s status as a political party here, in one of the few (only?) instances in which I favorably quoted John Bolton).
Really, Biden’s answer makes no sense, and had Palin said anything along those lines, she would have been skewered.
Here’s an honest truth that based on a couple of posts I’ve made here you’ll find surprising.
I think it makes more sense than you’re giving it credit for (though not much). I think that you have the wrong incident that he was talking about. I think he substituted the word Hezbollah for Syria, and was talking about 2005 when the Lebanese people, along with backing of US and French diplomatic corps, forced Syrian forces out of Lebanon.
Now, putting in any forces we control, whether US, NATO, or UN was never an option in this case. It’s possible, but doubtful, that he ever mentioned anything along these lines publicly. I’m pretty sure that Obama was probably too smart to say something that off the wall.
Which brings the real problem with a Biden vice presidency. I always thought that Obama picked Biden because he wanted a traditional party stalwart, but was fearful of allowing the Billary two headed monster into his inner circle. Anybody that has ever had to work with an uncontrollable, unpunishable subordinate knows the special kind of chaos they can create.
If Biden has shown anything in this election he’s shown that he doesn’t give a flying fig about what the Obama folks think. He says what he wants when he wants. Thirty years of being called ’senator’ have ingrained his infallibility into his DNA. An Obama win will give Biden a standing invitation to all of the Sunday talk shows where he can give his own special form of commentary of the days events. And only 1 person necessarily comes out looking good in a Biden tale, and it ain’t Obama.
You once made a post about different types of Veep picks, concluding that Biden was a governing pick. I’m guessing before this is over Obama will be looking in Dante’s Inferno to see which level of Hell is reserved for unfaithful vice presidents.
Comment by Buckland — Sunday, October 5, 2008 @ 7:02 pm
No. impossible, dr. Taylor. She would not have been skewered. She would have been gently criticized in some categories, and then she would have been defended by a throng of R’s who think it perfectly legitimate to have someone on the ticket who knows nothing about foreign policy. and they would have sighed and put their hands over their heart in great admiration because she mentioned a proper name like hezbollah at all. “ahhh….see? she’s smart. she said Hezbollah.”
okay, i’m just being silly. and at the time of the debate when biden said that i made one of those scooby-doo noises. “errr??” thanks for recapturing that.
The real question - while he no doubt is being Joe Biden - is he being the best Biden he can be? (see January 8, 2007)
Comment by RandyB — Monday, October 6, 2008 @ 8:28 am
Thanks for the post. This went over my head when watching the debate. I think the moral of the story is to hope that both Obama and McCain manage to find competent Secretaries of State.
The MOE is +/- 2%, making Obama’s seven point gap rather substantial.
These numbers are far more significant than the previously noted Minnesota polls. While not impossible, it is extremely difficult to envision a McCain victory if he loses Ohio.
If they could vote to keep or replace the entire Congress, 59% of voters would like to throw them all out and start over again. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that just 17% would vote to keep the current legislators in office.
And, I have no doubt that if we had a national referendum, that there might be a support to actually push the reset button. However, the real question is whether the voters will toss out their own reps en masse. This strikes me as rather unlikely.
The fourth graf of that article gives a plausible explanation for Palin’s’ selection and continuing popularity:
Only half (49%) believe that the current Congress is better than individuals selected at random from the phone book. Thirty-three percent (33%) believe a randomly selected group of Americans could do a better job and 19% are not sure (see crosstabs).
Maybe that “random people could do better” idea is why Palin has been talking about representing Joe sixpacks and hockey moms so much.
Comment by Len — Sunday, October 5, 2008 @ 6:30 pm
Indeed.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Sunday, October 5, 2008 @ 6:40 pm
i kind of understand the populace’s anger, especially since it seems there was some real warrant for their concern about the bill. i, in contrast, blithely followed our elite’s lead, clucking my tongue at all these left and right-winged populist nutjobs who’d rather let the country go down a depression than do what’s sensible. but the more i hear about the entire deal, i’m beginning to have doubts i didn’t have at the time.
Since I’ve now come to view the congressional problem as systemic, I suspect the public frustration will continue to grow unabated, whatever the results of the elections.
It has been a bit difficult to get a good feel for Peggy Noonan’s view on Governor Palin. A few weeks ago, an unknown open mic seemed to indicate that Noonan was far from impressed with Palin. Then, on Thursday night after the debate, she was quite effusive in her praise of Palin’s performance (stating, amongst other things, that she “killed”). Her post-debate column was a bit of a mix. In that column she did ponder a not so complementary notion:
A question is at what point shiny, happy populism becomes cheerful manipulation.
She expanded on that populism note this morning on MTP:
MS. NOONAN: Oh, but some people are naturals. She is a natural. I, I will tell you, I, I feel increased concern about her, I think, what she thinks of populism, as her populist approach. There are two ways—you know, her stuff about “I’m Main Street, you’re not, you’re the elite. I’m not the East Coast, I’m Joe Six-Pack.” She actually says, “I’m the Joe Six-Pack candidate.” This left me thinking, “Gosh, would Lincoln say, ‘I represent the backwoods types?’ Would FDR say, ‘Yeah, the New York aristocracy deserves another moment in the sun. Vote for me.’” It—there’s something weird about it. But there’s also something, for me, concerning populism as a tactic is justified often in politics. “I need this program, the people want it.” Populism as a strategy, “We’re the good guys, you’re the bad guys,” is not good, and, and if that’s the road they’re going, that’s not a good road to be on. It’s not helpful to the country.
(She made a similar point in her column).
Really, Palin’s basic appeal is populistic, plain and simple. She isn’t from Washington, she is a working Mom, she is small towner, she isn’t an “East Coast elite” and so forth. She is “just like you” (well, some of you). The problem, of course, for the McCain ticket, is that that populistic appeal only is likely to influence certain segments of the base. I don’t think it will resonate beyond there.
One thing that also strikes me: one is an “outsider” only up and until the point that one wins. And, further, in the case of someone as inexperienced as Palin, one has to rely very heavily on “insiders” for information and advice.
Bring it back to her column, Noonan notes the following, connecting this populistic appeal to a means of deflecting criticisms of Palin:
I find obnoxious the political game in which if you expressed doubts about the vice presidential nominee, or criticized her, you were treated as if you were knocking the real America—small towns, sound values. “It’s time that normal Joe Six-Pack American is finally represented in the position of vice presidency,” Mrs. Palin told talk-show host Hugh Hewitt.
She also connects it to the current administration:
As for the dismissal of conservative critics of Mrs. Palin as “Georgetown cocktail party types” (that was Mr. McCain), well, my goodness. That is the authentic sound of the aggression, and phony populism, of the Bush White House. Good move. That ended well.
Indeed, there is a lot about Palin that reminds me of Bush, and that isn’t a compliment. Specifically that lack of specific knowledge is somehow a virtue (or, at a minimum, an unimportant fact).
Noonan is out promoting her book right now, and she’s given a lot of good interviews in the process. She was on the Daily Show last week, and she and Jon Stewart had a conversation that hit on a lot of these points as well– particularly with a lot of the “code speak” that these campaigns are using.
And I have to admit. It really shows that she wrote speeches for Reagan. You can almost hear her words coming out of his mouth when she speaks.
Comment by ALmod — Sunday, October 5, 2008 @ 1:36 pm
Specifically that lack of specific knowledge is somehow a virtue (or, at a minimum, an unimportant fact).
It’s interesting that you’ve shown lots of concern over the past month over Palin’s lack of specific knowledge. However Biden’s wholesale invention of facts isn’t interesting.
The one that I still find interesting was the whole Hezbollah comment by Biden in the recent debate. Forget the earlier Biden inventions (President FDR on TV in 1929, etc.), this one was kind of a trifecta in itself:
– Inventing the result of a conflict that never existed. Hezbollah was NEVER driven from Lebanon. It was formed in the early 80’s in Lebanon and has never left.
– Came up with a solution that no sane person would back. NATO troops are never going to Lebanon, not in the current configuration. There’s no interest in NATO allies to send troops there, and especially for American troops (and especially since the marine barracks bombing in ‘84). NATO troops don’t go where they’re not invited.
– Then criticized the Bush administration for not following his silly advice on an imagined conflict.
Biden has said several silly things, indeed, all 4 of the contenders have said things that come out wrong. However this comment was in a class by itself. He showed that he had no knowledge of the Middle East, no knowledge of the role of NATO, and absolute confidence in that lack of knowledge.
There’s an old saying (source unknown) on the order of “It’s not what you don’t know that kills you, it’s what you know that ain’t so”. Biden’s absolute knowledge of something that is so easily proved untrue is much more worrisome than Palin’s occasional vapid answers.
Comment by Buckland — Sunday, October 5, 2008 @ 3:45 pm
A couple of things:
The bottom line is that I blog about what is interesting me at a given moment. I am not all that interested in Biden, and I am interested in Palin, hence the disparity in coverage. And really, the bottom line is that I am hardly bound to “equal time” in terms of whom I critique
Part of why I am interested in Palin is that there is a very really chance that she should become the president, and I must confess I find that disturbing. Also, the odds she becomes president are higher than for Biden becoming president.
Further, I have a general sense of who Biden is, not so Palin.
Beyond that, I do think that Biden has spent some time thinking about these issues, I am not convinced that Palin has at all.
I have honestly been meaning to get back to the Hezbollah thing from the debate.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Sunday, October 5, 2008 @ 3:52 pm
The U.S. and France pushed for a U.N. resolution demanding the withdrawal of Syrian troops, and France deployed troops in Lebanon in the wake of that.
The U.S. would not send troops into southern Lebanon as part of an international peacekeeping force, as was being negotiated when Israel was demanding return of its troops and began its incursion. NATO agreed to only if Hezbellah agreed, but the force would not have included British or U.S. troops. Italy agreed to send troops.
He seems to have meant that the U.S. would not join France during the Cedar Revolution, but is also conflating it with the July War a year and a half later.
Comment by bluespapa — Sunday, October 5, 2008 @ 7:24 pm
Hmmm… I hope I don’t throw everyone off by responding to the actual post this thread started with, but here goes:
In my view, Palin’s performance in the VP debate was an utter disaster for the campaign.
How can I say that, when there has been so much praise slathered over it? Simple.
She wasted 90 minutes appealing to the people that were going to vote McCain/Palin anyway.
What is being sold as her solid performance by the GOP spin-doctors and the right-wing pundits was no such thing.
Anyone who has been following the campaigns with any more than a passing interest should be well-aware that John and Sarah have their Core vote wrapped-up.
Where they’re running into trouble is with Independents and Undecideds. Two groups who are notorious for hating BS. Which is all Palin had to offer during the debate.
I challenge anyone to quote me a specific answer to ANY question she was asked. Her supporters will trumpet her bravery (or is it “Maverickism”?) in openly defying the moderator. To me, that was pure bluster and misdirection.
Anyone looking for actual answers is likely to feel the same. So, for those of you who have already chosen the GOP ticket - I understand why you’ve deluded yourselves into thinking she performed well. She made you feel good about your positions - which I’m sure can be tough at times.
But for those of us who (oddly enough) expect to hear an actual answer to a definite question… she blew it.
There are a lot of us who don’t care how “folksy” a candidate is. There are a lot of us who don’t consider $200K in income as “middle class” (as Palin seems to). And there are a lot of us (I hope) who can see through her veneer.
She’s clueless. She’s unqualified. And you should have a problem with that. You should also have a problem with the fact that she didn’t even TRY to win over the votes you need to win.
My impression of the conversation back-stage after the debate:
Spin Doctors: Are you Effing kidding? You just set us back 6 months!
Palin: What’re you talking about? They LOVE me!
Spin Doctors: YEAH… the same people who loved you when you walked onstage still love you. The people who hated you when you walked onstage hate you even more (and now have more ammunition)… but the people who weren’t sure? With them you dug us a hole. They actively don’t like you now. They don’t trust you. You seem like a liar to them.
Palin: But I didn’t lie about anything!
Spin Doctor: No… you just failed to tell the truth on anything. On any… single… thing. She asked you questions that could have been homeruns for you. Weren’t you listening over the last 10 days? Are you aware that you didn’t answer a single question?
Palin: Uh huh…
Spin Doctor: Why the F didn’t you?
Palin: Our supporters don’t like to hear the truth.
Spin Doctor: But we’ve been rehearsing all week how to make the truth sound less horrific. And besides, didn’t you hear me tell you that our Base isn’t the issue? That we need to connect with the Undecideds?
Palin: Uh huh.
Spin Doctor: Then what the F?
Palin: People like it when I’m Folksy.
Spin Doctor: Ahh.. for F’s sake.
Palin: Didn’t you hear me say “… dog-gone-it Joe…” People eat that stuff up.
Spin Doctor: Nevermind…
So… a back-handed thanks to Gov. Palin for being so obvious in her obfuscation. And a whole-hearted “Wake UP” to the folks who missed it.
I make no claim on telling you who you should vote for, but for the sake of America, for the sake of our children, for the sake of your own piece of mind - at least do it with your eyes open.
Go to the campaign websites. Do some research. If after that it still doesn’t bother you that McCain’s policies don’t match his rhetoric - or only for an hour at a time - that’s on you.
But PLEASE stop this mindless parotting of the campaign and the pundits.
This is exactly how Dubya snuck into the White House, and we’ve all lived through the aftermath.
Don’t you want your candidate to be accountable? Go to sites like FactCheck.Org and Snopes.com to learn some facts about both campaigns.
I don’t expect (or want) everyone to agree with my viewpoint.
I just want us all to make informed decisions.
And in my opinion, anyone who says Palin did anything other than dodge, misdirect and sidestep during the debate wasn’t paying attention.
I feel like paraphrasing Jerry Seinfeld about his neighbor:
“Noonan!!”
I read that article, too, and there’s something about that woman (Noonan) that makes me….well, I’m not a fan. Something I’ve noticed about the character pushers. You know, the type of person who says that character and personality that make all the difference, and what we need now are people with good character. Despite stating the obvious, these folks also seem to lack in modesty of any kind. As does ol’ Peggy. Good grief, is she pompous. I saw her give a speech at the university of texas, and both my wife and i came away needing to wash our hands. she more-or-less put herself at the center of the reagan revolution. and, you know, she can turn a good phrase now and then, but aren’t there, oh, about 13,000 better writers in the u.s. now? is she really that good??!!
but that article, grrrr….. i don’t know. i need more than a wink from a veep. again, call me elitest.
“Don’t you want your candidate to be accountable? Go to sites like FactCheck.Org and Snopes.com to learn some facts about both campaigns.”
You may or may not have picked up on the rhetoric by now, but guess who is the new “liberal media.” You guessed it. The pundits have been trying their darndest lately to discredit and debunk the independent fact checkers. My particular favorite was the “debunking” of an “incorrect” fact checking of an NRA ad– which was done by the NRA and then later spoonfed to right-wing bloggers.
Comment by ALmod — Monday, October 6, 2008 @ 9:16 am
The poll, conducted last week among 1,084 likely voters, found that 55 percent support Obama, while 37 percent back McCain.
That’s a huge difference from the last Minnesota Poll, conducted in September, which showed the race dead even, with each candidate backed by 45 percent of likely voters.
The issue at hand in the poll is, not surprisingly, the economy.
On the one hand, Minnesota hasn’t gone Republican since 1972 and the Nixon landslide. Indeed, it was the only state to go against Reagan in his landslide of 1984.1 On the other, there was, at one point, a serious possibility that McCain could challenge Obama in Minnesota, given that the gap in 2000 was only two points (Gore won 48-46, of course Nader had 5%) and three points in 2004 (Kerry won 51-48).
Part of this is the normal shaking out of states that at one point seem to be in play, but end up not being such. However, it is also about two important dynamics in this campaign.
First, it shows (along with the Michigan retreat) that the McCain camp cannot hope to do anything other than to seek to repeat Bush’s electoral victories. As such, so much for the notion (which, really, has been dead for a while2 ) that McCain really is a Maverick in an electoral sense (i.e., that he had a real chance to appeal to moderates in some “blue” states and therefore win some of them).
Second, the gap in the Minnesota numbers above (and the already mentioned Michigan pull-out) show the way that the economic crisis is roiling through our politics, and acutely so in some states. This will not help McCain.
Comment by MSS — Sunday, October 5, 2008 @ 12:39 pm
Oops. Thanks for noting that and it is now fixed.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Sunday, October 5, 2008 @ 12:41 pm
It looks, at one month out, as if neither candidate will realize the potential that each seemed to have earlier of appealing to demogpraphics in the other party’s usual territory, and hence shaking up the map.
Instead, it is looking to be just as partisan as the last three presidential elections. The difference, of course, is that one party is in serious electoral trouble and so a partisan contest this time means the Democrat will turn some Republican states his way. Those are states that have been trending Dem, anyway, such as Virginia, Ohio, Colorado, and Iowa.
Comment by MSS — Sunday, October 5, 2008 @ 12:44 pm
I think that that is about right.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Sunday, October 5, 2008 @ 12:50 pm
[...] numbers are far more significant than the previously noted Minnesota polls. While not impossible, it is extremely difficult to envision a McCain victory if he loses [...]
Obama’s credentials:
– community organizer and attorney representing acorn, a socialist group which strong-arms banks and lending institutions with threats of law suit over discrimination if they don’t approve mortgages to unqualified recipients. acorn has deep ties to fannie/freddie and the 2008 financial disaster.
– 20+ year relationship with ayers, a convicted terrorist and community organizer
– 20+ year relationship with rev wright, the most prejudice and dispicable person, who openly screams how much he hates the USA.
During 2008 presidential campaign, obama constantly blames Bush and the Republicans for this financial mess when in fact Bush warned of this as early as 2001, but nobody listened. Greenspan warned of this in 2004, but nobody listened. In 2004 McCain warned of this and tried to rally Congress to pass a bill to provide more oversight over fannie/freddie, the Republicans supported the bill, the democrats, led by Dodd, Schumer, and Frank, fought it while insisting there was nothing wrong with fannie/freddie. Look up the FoxNews archives if you don’t believe this. CNN, ABC, NBC will never report this.
Even with all these facts, the Democrats still believe obama’s lies.
Why are Democrats so blind to all this?
Comment by socalitman — Monday, October 6, 2008 @ 2:53 am
OJ Simpson has been found guilty on 12 charges of armed robbery, conspiracy to kidnap and assault with a deadly weapon by a court in the US city of Las Vegas.
The former US football star and actor was accused of robbing two sports memorabilia dealers a year ago.
The armed robbery charges carry a mandatory jail sentence, and kidnapping carries a possible life term.
Only our legal system could aquit Simpson of butchering his wife and instead imprison him for stealing sports memorabilia.
If I didn’t see verdicts of both sorts every week, I’d be in tears over what has become of the rule of law in this country. Sadly I see it all the time and have become a little numb, if inwardly angry and spiteful.
Most of the judges in our country should be thrown off the bench in disgrace.
Comment by Western Man — Saturday, October 4, 2008 @ 2:16 pm
Only our legal system could aquit Simpson of butchering his wife and instead imprison him for stealing sports memorabilia.
Sadly, yes.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Saturday, October 4, 2008 @ 2:22 pm
WM,
Just curious, are judges in your area appointed or elected? (not speaking of Federal of course)
And do you know many people who have - on an informed basis - voted to elect, retain or not retain judges if that option is open to them?
I think it’s tough to keep up with this stuff. And I’m friends with a number of lawyers. I personally would never vote one way or another (judges are elected here in ILLINOIS) unless I was informed.
Not to excuse MY ignorance - but unless it makes the headlines how often is one exposed to how a particular judge conducts court?
And when the local Bar association makes a recommendation how many voters pay attention?
In short, on a state level, there often is a means of removing judges - but how often do the voters care enough to learn who should go?
Comment by RandyB — Sunday, October 5, 2008 @ 12:10 pm
hey, do you remember back in the day when i was the only white guy alive who believed that oj was innocent? and do you remember how we’d go on and on about it?
I do distinctly remember being on campus the day of the verdict and going over to The Drag to get some lunch and hearing the verdict over the radio and some guy (a white guy, in fact) tossing up his arms in the air and going “woo-hoo!”
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Monday, October 6, 2008 @ 9:23 am
Of all the things that I have blogged about of late, the posts about her have generated the most traffic and the most comments (not to mention the most arguments).
You are quite right about Palin. She is like a 7th grader in the school play. She would probably be a great actress. She has the ability to memorize lots of information. What she forgot during the debate, she read from her index cards. Sad part is that she probably do idea what she was saying - just repeating talking points.
Comment by Lonnie2000 — Saturday, October 4, 2008 @ 8:35 am
EVERYBODY REPEATS TALKING POINTS!!!!
THAT’S ALL POLITICIANS DO!!!!!
NOTHING ELSE, EVER!!!!!
WHAT PLANET DO YOU PEOPLE LIVE ON?!?!?!
Comment by Western Man — Saturday, October 4, 2008 @ 1:18 pm
WM:
True, all politicians spout talking points.
However, some do it more than others, and some at least spout their own talking points.
You noted before you are all about the honesty in this context–do you really think that Palin is, on balance, provided her own talking points or the ones that the campaign has coached her to say?
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Saturday, October 4, 2008 @ 1:29 pm
I think that ALL of these people are providing talking points that they have been COACHED to SAY. Palin included. I just think that since Obama has been planning to run for close to two years -and has had the same coach for all that time (DAVID AXELROD, WHO GOOGLES REALLY WELL), so maybe it’s a LITTLE less obvious. But SO WHAT? It’s still talking point, talking point, talking point. They’re just more “polished”. He’s also a better BS artist; we get really good at BS in law school, I can tell you that from experience.
Come on, Prof - you really, really think this race is about the candidates? You’re still clinging to those beliefs that the most worthy man is elected by a system that serves the people? It has nothing to do with any of that. It’s all about which way the wind is blowing. This “economic crisis” blew up, and for reasons that make no sense at all people turned to Obama in its wake. And the “crisis-ness” of this “economic crissis” is very much worthy of debate. And so is who caused it. There is certainly blame to spread around, as it involved LENDERS, BORROWERS, AT LEAST TWO PRESIDENTS AND AT LEAST THREE CONGRESSES. But who do people blame? The incumbent president, of course!
Tomorrow some other wind that has NOTHING to do with Barack or John might blow, and turn the tide for McCain. These FOOLS have far less to do with their own elections than they think they have. Our electoral system in its present form is nothing more than a glorified CRAPSHOOT, with the winner being the man left standing when CHANCE knocks everybody else down. You call a system where one news headline can change the political wind, a working system?
If I could tell you half of what I’ve seen in the last ten years in our courtrooms, you’d probably be speechless. Our laws mean nothing anymore. Our system is failing.
If you’re an American and you do not have a passport and a bailout plan - YOU NEED TO GET BOTH. This place could implode on itself within your lifetime and you need to be prepared by knowing where it will be safe to go, and how you will get there.
Comment by Western Man — Saturday, October 4, 2008 @ 2:10 pm
Let’s put it this way: I am naive enough to think that all of this is about elected the special person who will fix all things, or whatever.
Still, that doesn’t mean that one cannot critique given candidates. Of the four running: Obama, McCain, Biden and Palin is the clear that one of these things is not like the other, so to speak. I have no doubts that Obama, McCain and Biden have spent a great deal of time thinking about a wide range of policy issues. Palin has not, and that is clear.
I think that matters.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Saturday, October 4, 2008 @ 2:25 pm
We can critique all we want. But you know the sad truth? No one is listening to REAL criticism. No one has the patience. No one cares.
The election will go to the guy that luck does not blow down. That’s it. That’s all there is. Critiques of candidates may be fun as academic exercises for the tiny minority who are capable of such things, but they have no meaning or ultimate impact on the election. It’s luck, the timing of world events, who happens to be incumbent and with which party, and nothing more. Elections aren’t won by debates or by critiques of candidates. They’re won by chance.
To come to think of it - that makes my participation in said debate a waste of my time. Hadn’t really thought about it like that before, but now that I have -I shan’t bother you with my presence anymore. Good luck with your blogging, God bless all you people who still have a shred of hope in this system.
Maybe divine intervention will right what is wrong. It’s the only thing that can - and I’m not holding my breath.
Comment by Western Man — Saturday, October 4, 2008 @ 2:45 pm
Dr. Taylor -
While I readily agree with your first point, I am not so sure that I agree with the second. What is it about Gov. Palin that is so polarizing? Is there anything in her past record or current statements that puts her outside mainstream conservative thought? It seems that the visceral responses pf many who oppose her being on the ticket reveals more about them than it does about her.
Comment by ts — Saturday, October 4, 2008 @ 6:43 pm
She is polarizing insofar as it seems that people either really like her or really don’t.
At a minimum, she certainly has polarized my commenters!
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Saturday, October 4, 2008 @ 6:54 pm
I find it not at all surprising that Palin is so polarizing. To my mind Karl Rove has been the most polarizing and damaging “strategist” in memory - and I’ve had a genuine interest in politics since my 60’s HS days.
When McCain’s campaign was apparently floundering, Steve Schmidt, a Rove disciple, was given the nod to take more control. Since that time, IMO, the whole campaign has been more negative, more polarized, more patronizing to the base (to include the choice of Palin) and more likely to not only fail but leave a bitter taste in everyone’s mouth.
Palin - partially because she is attractive and folksy - will be utilized for some nasty negative attacks on Obama as well as other food for the base. Due to her previous disinterest in many worldly matters as Steve mentioned above, she will also be more susceptible to appearing a shallow Rove-bot transmitting familiar talking points & messages formulated by the Rove disciples now in command of the former “straight talk express.”
I don’t think it’s Palin as much as the Rovian practices and legacy.
Sadly, ISTM neither campaign seems interested in an “educational” thrust - one designed to win over the Independents through an appeal to common ground an logic (of all things).
Rather both camps seem hellbent on beating the other through motivational, get-out-the-base strategies which tend to be more hard edged, abusive, misleading and polarizing.
Just what we needed as our economy is on the brink of failure and our sole super- power status appears waning.
Comment by RandyB — Sunday, October 5, 2008 @ 11:39 am
Randy,
Valid points.
An interesting element of the Rovian approach is that base excitement for the GOP simply isn’t going to be enough this go ’round.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Sunday, October 5, 2008 @ 12:09 pm
Perhaps Schmidt and company were hoping for the ever popular October surprise. (however, the administration currently seems a bit too hamstrung by the financial calamity, practicle considerations and international pressure to try something like a shooting incident with Iran)
More likely, I guess, they are banking on some Hillary backers and independents coming over due to demographics. Further, they are probably hoping to get independent voters turned off through a battery of negative media presentations by Palin, talk radio and 527s revved up over Obama’s connection to Rev. Wright, William Ayers, Louis Farrakhan etc.
Finally, there are legitimate policy questions the GOP can and should present to independents concerning the economy.
The Democrats are doing themselves no favor beating their chest over Obama’s tax & spend class warfare economic platform.
It is not enough to blame our current mess on the incumbents and then steadfastly propose policy likely to exacerbate the situation. A truly transformational campaign would be modifying positions and explaining changes in policy in response to the emergency. However, it still appears both camps are basically clueless re management of the biggest financial crisis in a generation or two.
SO if everything remains static - you’re right the Dems win because their base is larger. But in these interesting times appealing to the base & banking on the status quo may prove incredibly shortsighted and certainly not in the national interest.
Comment by RandyB — Monday, October 6, 2008 @ 12:34 am
i think the most important thing to take away from this exchange, taylor, is that you worked western man down to a comment with only one all-cap word.
According to preliminary numbers, 172 Democrats voted in favor of the bill while 62 opposed it; and 91 Republicans voted for it and 108 voted against it.
For the last hundred years or so we’ve been managing forest fires with the policy that all forest fires should be extinguished.
Unfortunately, what that means a hundred years down the line is that in forests that used to have 100 stems per acre, there are now 1000; and there is so much deadfall and ground fuel that when someone drops a match, half of California burns. We often lack the ability to put out fires now. There is so much fuel, and they get so hot so fast that the best we can do is try contain them and hope they don’t destroy too many communities.
If routine fires were allowed to burn and clear out the surplus young trees, deadfall, and other clutter - we’d never have been in this place. When a brushfire started, it wouldn’t threaten the entire west. It would burn along the ground, clear out the deadfall, not reach the crowns of the trees. An occasional fire is natural, and part of the cleansing process that keeps the system healthy. Ironically - by trying to protect the forests by putting out fires, even those started by nature - we actually put the forests in greater danger than they had ever been before.
By not letting the economy burn - even if it means a mild to moderate depression - these guys are letting the deadfall accumulate. No one learns from their mistakes in this deal, and the country does not get better for it. No discipline is infused into borrowers, lenders, or the government, and we get to continue borrowing, borrowing, borrowing, taking from a font that we believe will never dry up.
It will. All this measure is going to do is make the economic fire that much more painful when it does happen.
I’m ashamed of my Congress for letting this stand. It was short-sighted and stupid.
Comment by Western Man — Saturday, October 4, 2008 @ 2:28 pm
Forty-six percent of the uncommitted voters surveyed say Democrat Joe Biden won the debate, compared to 21 percent for Republican Sarah Palin. Thirty-three percent said it was a tie.
I disagree with many of these polls statistics as they are focused on certain characteristics and no not represent the majority of people who fall in an income category of under $30,000 a year. History has proven how lower income voters make every effort to make their vote count. I am in this category and I am very undecieded but mostly because neither candidate has addressed the most critical issues to what we are concerned with. They seem to be way out of touch with what goes on in their own states as it concerns lower income voters and have not tackled issues of how the economy has an affect on people on small fixed incomes.
Today I found myself disgusted by major news outlets of their rehashing of the debate and the emphasis they are putting on OBama to the point that I find myself taking a closer look at McCain. I am democrat and from Illinois and when its all said and done I want a president that is for every American Citizen not just a certain group. Polls are interesting as in my 51 years I have never participated in a poll when it comes to politics, as my income group is seldom targeted yet statistics show that the largest amount of registered voters are actually in this target group. Polls seem not to break down the political affiliation from the start of polling and their are actually certain groups that just will automatically swing towards a certain political party despite what the candidate may or may not represent.
Comment by Marlene Stewart — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 8:22 am
Is it just me or does Frank Luntz’s whole charade just bug the hell out of you? These “televised” focus groups are just about useless.
The difference between this debate and the Couric interviews? Palin was not consistently called out for dodging questions that she obviously had not prepared answers for.
Couric would repeat questions to force Palin to answer or demonstrate her lack of knowledge. During the debate, Palin dodged the questions that the moderator thought the American people should hear the answer to. What a Maverick! Dodging the questions of the American people, just like Bush and Cheney! She then proceeded to charmingly deliver slogan after slogan in vague support of McCain and Bush’s already proven to fail policies.
She also mentioned that she would be the point person on energy. Hmm, a leader on energy who doesnt believe that man’s actions are causing global warming, and whose only expertise is in oil…thats just what America needs.
Comment by jesse — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 8:33 am
Biden seemed to be Biden last night, occasionally mangling facts to his advantage when necessary. OK, we can argue about what the constitution says about the Veep job, who provided leadership to get the US involved with the Bosniacs, or even how he was misquoted about clean coal technology.
But here’s one I have no concept of what he was talking about and I’d like a pointer to an appropriate history web page if anyone has one in their pocket:
When we kicked — along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, “Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don’t know — if you don’t, Hezbollah will control it.”
Does anybody have a clue what he’s talking about. I’m guessing he must be referring to the 2006 Israeli war with Hezbollah, but neither the US nor France were involved and Hezbollah wasn’t kicked out of Lebanon. And I can’t remember anybody talking about putting NATO in that mess (though I may have missed it).
The only other candidate that I can think of was the 1982 Israeli invasion of Southern Lebanon and 2000 retreat. However Hezbollah didn’t exist in 1982 and were instrumental in chasing Israel out in 2000 (not to mention that Obama wasn’t even near the national radar then).
Dr Taylor, you have any thoughts about this? To what was he referring? Usually his stuff has a grain of truth (FDR really did go on the radio on occasion) but this is way out there, even for him.
Or maybe I’m not remembering the incident he’s referring to.
Comment by Buckland — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 9:04 am
Clearly, the American people are biased against Republicans, which is just shameful.
CNN’S POLL on the debate differs dramatically from other polls, so take it with a grain of salt. Palin is running for V.P … let’s take a look at the qualifications, judgement, and experience of Obama, who is running for President. Obama had 25 years to fulfill the potential he displayed as a rising start at Harvard Law School … and, how did he live up to that potential? He chose to align himself with anti-American racist, Jeremiah Wright for TWENTY YEARS … along with Ferrahkan, Rezko, Ayers, and others. As a community organizer, he registered thousands of voters in Chicago … then, when he ran for the state legislature, he took away their votes, by disqualifying his opponent (a black woman) on a technicality. As a U.S. Senator, he voted present 160 times … he never called a meeting on the Afghanistan committee he chaired (although he NOW says we must shift all our military from Iraq to Afghanistan). He claimed Foreign Policy experience from a 9 day whirlwind photo op to 6 countries. And, he spent almost half of his tenure neglecting his responsibilities as a U.S. Senator, so he could run for President. Senator McCain served America honorably for 22 years in the military. He proved his love for America, as well as his honor, integrity and character, by refusing early release as a P.O.W., even while being tortured. He served America as a ‘contributing’ U.S. Senator, working across the aisle, for 20 years. Governor Palin will learn the details of the current national and international issues … but, what Obama never learned is Character. He can’t be trusted … ask Jeremiah Wright, Rezko and Ayers. The American people can recognize ‘real’ character and integrity in McCain and Palin, and that’s why she won the debate by 87% on the FOX text messaging poll.
Comment by Gina — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 9:14 am
Most of Palin’s answers lacked substance. I thought her overall style as “cheesy”. I don’t know about her supporters, but what I look for in a leader is intelligence and passion for the issues.
I didn’t get that feeling from Sarah Palin. Joe Biden has dedicated his life to helping people as a Senator and unlike Sarah Palin, he doesn’t need to read a magazine to know what’s happening in the world because it’s his job. It’s what he does and it was clear to me that he knows what’s going on whereas Sarah Palin has only recently been exposed to world events in order to prep for the debate. It’s very scary to think that this woman could step into the VP position knowing so little about foreign and domestic affairs as well as politics.
As a Democrat, I would have supported Joe Biden anyway, but after seeing the debate last night, I have complete confidence in him to step into the Presidency if he had to. After listening to Sarah Palin last night, my opinion about her hasn’t changed. She did not say anything to improve her image in my mind and it’s clear that she shows a lack of knowledge and interest in worldy matters, domestic issues and national politics.
Comment by Stella — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 9:17 am
I think Palin can stick the folksey stuff I think it’s rather condesending and I think it shows a lack of respect for people kind of like talking down to us .I don’t want a maverirck or an outsider in office . A maverick doesn’t care about the good of the people they do what they want an Outsider can’t get anything done because of lack of connections and because people can’t trust them .
Comment by william gonzalez — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 9:32 am
Let’s give credit where credit is due, Joe Biden did an outstanding job. As a woman (41), wife, and mother (of two), I have to say, Palin was charming, and funny but lacked substance. I will also say she is definitely on the right ticket. They are definitely change agents, McCain and Palin make up their own rules, and expect everyone else to be all right with it. Since when does a person decide in a formal debate that they can ignore the moderator and ask and answer their own questions? The media has never been tuff on Palin, I am so sick of listening to them make excuses for her. She is vying to be the next VP; this is not a beauty pageant! Mediocrity should not be acceptable!
Comment by Sandra — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 9:43 am
What I see is a strategic mistake. Our base the republican base is safe but we can’t win without independents and moderate to conservative democrats. How is McCain/Palin addressing that issue. Wasting energy on a safe segment is a mistake. We need to convince those on the fence and I’m still not sure that we are accomplishing that.
Comment by Jr — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 10:24 am
Stella, seeing you admitted to being a democrat, your statement was expected to favor the canidate of your party.
Bidens actions were typical democrat to defend a record of doing nothing to help americans. I do not see any additional police officers in the area where I live. he and Obama will raise taxes on americans, but wait, maybe they do not consider anyone making 250k a year or higher to be americans. All that Biden and Obama will do is dress the same ole pig up in a new dress and call it beautiful. heck they won’t even have to put lipstick on it. McCain and Palin are going for change, and by McCain picking Palin as a running mate only shows that. I would rather have an outsider start in washington that have a 30 year “good old boy” continue that same old crap he has always done. The definition to insanity is doing the same thing you have always done and expect a different result. thats what you call voting for Obama and Biden, insanity. At least McCain is bringing in a fesh face and different point of view that just may change something.
Comment by DaveinSouthCarolina — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 10:56 am
Gina, you are what is referred to as a blind partisan. You were going to vote Repub regardless of what happened in the debate last night. Palin showed a shallowness that would be breathtaking if it weren’t so serious. You think McCain has integrity? Maybe you aren’t aware of the Keating 5 scandal. Maybe you aren’t aware of how he dumped his beauty pagent wife for another beauty pagent wife …with money. I fail to see how Obama’s going to church for 20 years hurts his character. Don’t people go to church to worhip god? What does the preacher have to do with it? The facts are clear. The Repubs have had the White House for 20 of the last 28 years. Every single repub president left the country in staggering debt while rich people got even richer and middle incomes stayed stagnant. Reagan ran up a $200B debt. Bush I ran up a $300B debt and Bush II has a $400B bill and the bills just keep on coming. Only Clinton left some money in the bank for the next president. Palin’s dodgy behavior was pathetic. It only highlighted her woeful ignorance on issues that are effecting Americans every day. Any insurance actuarial will tell you McCain’s age and health raise serious issues about the likelihood of him finishing one term as president. Little Ms Palin sitting in the White House raises the hair on the back of my neck.
Comment by Cal — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 10:57 am
Buckland:
I was confused by that response (the Hezbollah one) as well.
And I haven’t had time to go back and look at it.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 11:08 am
check it out: you can view and respond to all the questions and responses to last night’s palin-biden debate on ameritocracy.com
Comment by jaydb — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 11:34 am
The CBS and CNN polls can be completely discounted. They are groups of people hand picked by the networks and news affiliates. Their outcome is known before the first question is asked during the debates. In doing these “insta-polls” the news divisions of these organizations have forfieted their credibility and integrity. They have turned their news organizations into propaganda machines. Edward R. Morrow must be spinning in his grave to see such behavior by American journalist.
Comment by Jack — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 11:35 am
how is change agreeing with the failed bush administration and bush policies?!?
vote obama/biden 08
Comment by icemusic — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 11:50 am
Republicans had a good chance to bring more minorities into the party, but they adopted the “Southern Strategy” instead. A little history lesson: Ronald Reagan announced his candidacy for president from, of all places, Philadelphia, MS while touting “states rights.” Philadelphia, MS was where three young men were brutally murdered by racist thugs who could not come to accept the fact that constitutional gurantees should be afforded to all Americans, not just white Americans. These three young men (two white one black) were trying to improve the lives of all Americans by taking a stand against bigotry and Jim Crow’s reign throughout the south. The familiar refrain at that time to oppose equal rights was “states rights.” Now, do you understand why Mr. Reagan does not get much credit in minority communities? Moreover, that region of our nation is solidly red, and minorities know their history all too well regarding Jim Crow and all that meant in their daily lives. That is why they avoid the new Republican party like the plague. The new Republican party is definitely not Mr. Lincoln’s party anymore. Perhaps the new Dixiecrat party is more appropriate. Here in Atlanta there are communities incorporating to ensure they will be Republican oasis in a sea of democratically controlled local governments. Heck, they want to even go so far as to de-annex a portion of the city of Atlanta and divide Fulton County into two separate counties as if Georgia does not have enough counties already. Their tactics are thinly veiled at best.
Comment by Corey — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 12:22 pm
Do you know what polls and pigs have in common?
They both smell like whatever they’ve been rolling around in.
Polls that have been rolling around in the democratic party always paint the democrats as being ahead, and the same is true for the (is there such a thing?) polls that roll around in the republican party.
They all stink, they’re all utterly useless and ultimately more damaging to our society than they are helpful.
If the pollsters all boarded a ship without lifeboats and it happened to sink, I wouldn’t shed a tear.
Comment by Western Man — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 12:28 pm
I think several people have said it very well, that Biden was articulate, on the message and connected with the working class people in this country. He is knowledgeable in foreign policy, and economics and that came across last evening. I would trust him to step into the oval Office if, God forbid, he would have to do that. I thought Palin repeated over and over again the same old bush mantra, got confused at times and didn’t fully answer the question put to her. I was also very concerned that she would want to expand the role of the VP; doesn’t know the constitution obviously. I also shudder when I think that if McCain should win and die in office, having this neophyte sitting in the Oval Office would be sad for our country. Shame on McCain for selecting this person as his running mate. He put politics ahead of the country and the country at further risk by doing so. And lastly, I have never trusted people who wink. They are always up to something and usually it is not good.
Comment by Hannah Stevens — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 12:32 pm
All Sarah Palin did was recite what she memorized for the debate. She ignored the questions because she came with her own agenda. If she had been pressured to respond to the questions, she would have stumbled. I thought the job of the moderator was to prompt candidates to answers to the questions being presented. Otherwise its just a stump speech. Sarah even said she wants to continue to talk (give speeches) to the American people. What about going on Face the Nation, Larry King, or other programs like these where you are giving questions and not allow to give your own agenda talk. Debates are not debates any more if candidates just come in and tell us what they want to tell us. It appears we Americans are reducing ourselves to mediocrity. That is why we have Bush and apparently some want to continue the route of being “just simply a six pack”. Blah! I prefer to reach for excellence and not accept mediocrity.
Oh, and CBS - WOW, there’s a trusted news source!!!
These are the same people who broadcasted memos about Bush being AWOL without doing a LICK of investigative journalism to see whether they were legit. Dan Rather took those forged memos on the air and threw his full confidence behind them.
We live in a SAD place when some jerk with an axe to grind can annoymously fax a forged, damning memo about a sitting President to a major news outlet and get it on the air the same day.
I don’t believe CBS’s polls, posted above. It’s just as likely that they either made those numbers up outright (and didn’t even conduct a poll) or altered the polling process in some way to skew the results.
Their news organization has the value of a communist rag in Soviet Moscow.
Comment by Western Man — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 12:34 pm
Face the Nation. Larry King. Gimme a break.
If Palin was interviewed by him, I’d boycott it anyway. Who cares what Larry King thinks; who cares what CNN broadcasts? Everybody knows what Ted Turner’s political affiliation is. Everybody knows what CNN’s agenda is.
Larry King is a front man for a liberal news media establishment. He has no honor. He has no dignity. He has no value to us as a journalist. He’s just a propagandist.
Face the Nation? Yeah. Resistance is futile! We will assimilate you! You will be reprogrammed to think the way we want you to think!
That show is garbage, again, unfit even for YouTube. I’d boycott that, too.
SO GO AHEAD!!! Tell me I’m a fascist. Tell me I’m pathetic. Tell me I’m stupid. Do all of those things that “smart” people do when folks like me get angry and hostile. I don’t care. I won’t be condescended to, and I won’t be told what to think. I’ll think for myself, thank you very much.
Comment by Western Man — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 12:41 pm
Actions not words bring change. Obama and Biden have been campaigning for this a lot longer than McCain and Palin. They have talked our ears off, but what has changed? Sorry, but the lack of a significant lead shows America just isn’t buying it. Even with the party lines. Half of independent voters just don’t either.
As for failed Bush policies. Clinton may have left a surplus, but he left a trail fo dead americans from terrorist actions: WTC bombimg, USS Cole, Black Hawk down, Oklahoma City, Olympic Park, US Embassy and training 9/11 pilots right here. Let’s not forget the good old days shall we?
Comment by Jim — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 12:44 pm
Oh brother Palin fans,
Even you can’t deny how well coached this woman was…shoot I could of filled in for Palin. Same ol lines…same ol bs…she might as well of repeated one of her speeches. All she proved?…She can present a well thought out speech. I have four friends in my circle alone…who are no longer voting Republican…in their words “its an embarrassment”. The truth is the working American is not stupid…and they won’t put up with “FLUFF” anymore….Period.
Comment by Jules — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 12:54 pm
And you don’t know how to use … properly.
Try completing your sentences and I’ll maybe think you have a brain.
Comment by Western Man — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 12:58 pm
I noticed in the comments at how divided the opinions are and how most already have their minds made up. The polls actually reflect this very mindset and I personally as woman find it offensive to use labels against either candidate. The problem with this election is all the blame and acqusations that are thrown around. We as human beings make mistakes what is important is admitting mistakes and not repeating them and this is not happening with our candidates. They completely stand behind their decisions even if a bill that was passed was not what was best for our country.
I wish someone would create a poll that required the pollsters to state income level, geographic area, religion, party affiliation, education level, define employment in the manner of business owner, self contract, work for company, disabled or student, and also ask do you consider yourself conservative, liberal or in between. Then target the top five issues they believe are an important influence in this campaign as it would create what I believe a more accurate poll and one that would inform the candidates what Americans want. It is hard for me to focus on global warming, bail out and the war which I have loved ones in Iraq right now fighting when I can no longer put food on my table. There are many people in our country who are now actually going hungry , our local food bank is begging for food as they have nothing to give out, utilities cost are higher than ones income I am basically hoping I do not lose my home during the winter. Polls are targeted at middle and upper class and the issues are mostly the same. In a debate just because one person has more experience in debating and a smoother style does not make that person more knowledgable than the other. I think Pallin was very nervous and misunderstood the mediator at one point that is no reason to call her names, and Bidin although I respect his determination in raising his children in a difficult situation that is no reason for me to vote for his side as well. I just wish their was more credible information out there to really know about why the candidate voted a certain way as of right now I think the debates should be completely call in with the people having the chance to ask questions on issues that are not being addressed.
Comment by Marlene Stewart — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 12:58 pm
No more McCain/Palin
Comment by Jules — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 1:00 pm
…I have no time post like some people…I don’t have time to edit voluntary comments…I have a very important issues on a daily basis…I actually get work done…unlike your party has in almost a decade…edit that if you would like.. Westereen… oops mispelled. I’m out
Comment by Jules — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 1:04 pm
There was a MASH episode where Klinger had gotten the answers to a test and wrote them down on various parts of his arms and legs. When test time came he gave all the answers in the order he had memorized them, only Hawkeye mixed up the questions. When the phone rings at 3:00 AM which answer will she give.
Comment by Ken Trautwein — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 1:31 pm
Many things have been said in favor of S.Palin but let’s be realistic here. yes she may connect with the average american and she is very well liked by some but would I want a attractive average person with an average judgement and no experience on foreing policy running the country when J. mccain checks out of this world? Really J. mccain is 72 yrs old he’ll be gone by Xmas. S Palin does not know anymore than her track record and Wasilla in Alaska so J Mccain is running by himself if you ask me.
Comment by Gio — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 2:38 pm
I can understand the foolish person believing that Biden won the debate last night because he appeared to have many statistics memorized. However, upon a fact check I performed myself working continuously over the last hours, I have found that in at least 35% of the sentences that Joe Biden spoke last night, there were, at best misstatements if not out and out lies or serious twisting of the facts. He looked presidential, but if he looks into the eyes of a foreign diplomat or leader and lies like he did last night looking right into the camera, he will go down as the worst Vice President in American history. Other countries well versed in history and political knowledge will laugh at the statements he makes.
Even though Sarah may not know all the facts, last night she came across as one willing to learn and study prior to making a statement about substantial topics. I cannot vote for a person who knowingly misstates the facts and tries to mislead people through convincing sounding verbage such as Biden used last night.
Comment by Bill — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 4:42 pm
It wasn’t the ‘liberal media bias’ or any other excuse Palin supporters might use to explain the Brits reaction to the debate.
A whopping 83% gave it to Biden.
They saw the same thing we did: a childish ex beauty pageant candidate who learned how to play one tune, just for the judges benefit. But had neither the desire nor the skill to reach beyond that for herself, or anyone else..
She’s simply not fit for this duty.
Comment by hazmaq — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 9:29 pm
Palin lacked substance and lost the debate, get over it. America watched and America saw. She might be a nice lady to have as a neighbor but she’s certainly not vp material, much less Presidential. Since when is blatant ignorance and outright evasiveness qualities to be proud of?
The fact that the bar had to literally be dropped on the floor, or the fact that the general public had such low expections of her speak volumes about the dept of her knowlegdge and readiness to lead this nation. No people, it’s not cool to be dumb.
What’s really sad is that it took a financial disaster for the people to finally see the neocons for what they are.
Comment by Jack — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 9:57 pm
Hey, has anyone heard about the new president nominee! Michael Douglas Carlin has set his mind to be kind and create world peace. With his book “A Prescription For Peace”, he has great ideas of saving the environment from another great depression. If you want more information about how Michael Douglas Carlin will save our world, go to http://www.mikecarlinforpresident.info.
Comment by Marti — Friday, October 3, 2008 @ 11:41 pm
By attending a debate, based on a widely agreed set of rules.
& during the debate if one of the party says that he or she
will not answer all the questions put to her. in this case
the VP. candidate Sara Palin , thinks she scored , must
be living in a world of her own. It reflects hollowness.
It would have been better to have gone on air through some network,& talk as she pleases, instead of attending the debate.
This attitude would never work, if she had applied for any other job, & I think to be a V.P. is a job. An ordinary person
would never have got away with this riducle. But then she has the might of the Republician party & its supporters behind her. I see her more of a “Projected Image” than as an ordinary( so called) hockey mom.
Comment by phil — Saturday, October 4, 2008 @ 12:46 am
I could care less about what the brits reaction to the debate was. Its really none of thier concern
Comment by DaveinSouthCarolina — Saturday, October 4, 2008 @ 7:41 am
You’re all smoking funny stuff.
Comment by Western Man — Saturday, October 4, 2008 @ 1:11 pm
My goodness, when did healthy debate result in the childish behavior I am witnessing on blogs. Name calling or critizing someone you have never met just results in angry words. Polls seem to bring out the worse in people as everyone wants their candidate to win or interjects their perceptions of the facts into a conversation. But for someone like me who has not made a choice as to who will get my vote this whole process is turning me off. I have voted in every election since I was legal age to vote and I am 51 now. I was reading that their are already promises from the electoral college on votes with Obama leading by a healthy margin. So would someone explain to me why we are voting as a candidate can win the popular vote and lose the election by electoral votes. It seems to me the candidates can quit fundraising and just court those who hold those votes as we are just wasting our time. I may simply not vote this year as none of our votes will really count anyways so whats all the polls and hype about?
“Today, the individual party candidates for Elector are seldom listed
on the ballot. Instead, the expression “Electors for” usually appears in fine
print on the ballot in front of each set of candidates for president and vice
president (or else the State law specifies that votes cast for the candidates
are to be counted as being for the slate of delegates pledged to those
candidates). It is still true, however, that voters are actually casting their
votes for the Electors for the presidential and vice presidential candidates of
their choice rather than for the candidates themselves.” retrieved at http://www.fec.gov/pdf/eleccoll.pdf dont take my word read it for yourself.
Comment by Marlene Stewart — Saturday, October 4, 2008 @ 1:49 pm
Here’s an honest truth that based on a couple of posts I’ve made here you’ll find surprising.
I think it makes more sense than you’re giving it credit for (though not much). I think that you have the wrong incident that he was talking about. I think he substituted the word Hezbollah for Syria, and was talking about 2005 when the Lebanese people, along with backing of US and French diplomatic corps, forced Syrian forces out of Lebanon.
Now, putting in any forces we control, whether US, NATO, or UN was never an option in this case. It’s possible, but doubtful, that he ever mentioned anything along these lines publicly. I’m pretty sure that Obama was probably too smart to say something that off the wall.
Which brings the real problem with a Biden vice presidency. I always thought that Obama picked Biden because he wanted a traditional party stalwart, but was fearful of allowing the Billary two headed monster into his inner circle. Anybody that has ever had to work with an uncontrollable, unpunishable subordinate knows the special kind of chaos they can create.
If Biden has shown anything in this election he’s shown that he doesn’t give a flying fig about what the Obama folks think. He says what he wants when he wants. Thirty years of being called ’senator’ have ingrained his infallibility into his DNA. An Obama win will give Biden a standing invitation to all of the Sunday talk shows where he can give his own special form of commentary of the days events. And only 1 person necessarily comes out looking good in a Biden tale, and it ain’t Obama.
You once made a post about different types of Veep picks, concluding that Biden was a governing pick. I’m guessing before this is over Obama will be looking in Dante’s Inferno to see which level of Hell is reserved for unfaithful vice presidents.
Comment by Buckland — Sunday, October 5, 2008 @ 7:02 pm
No. impossible, dr. Taylor. She would not have been skewered. She would have been gently criticized in some categories, and then she would have been defended by a throng of R’s who think it perfectly legitimate to have someone on the ticket who knows nothing about foreign policy. and they would have sighed and put their hands over their heart in great admiration because she mentioned a proper name like hezbollah at all. “ahhh….see? she’s smart. she said Hezbollah.”
okay, i’m just being silly. and at the time of the debate when biden said that i made one of those scooby-doo noises. “errr??” thanks for recapturing that.
Comment by mbailey@berry.edu — Monday, October 6, 2008 @ 3:48 am
The real question - while he no doubt is being Joe Biden - is he being the best Biden he can be? (see January 8, 2007)
Comment by RandyB — Monday, October 6, 2008 @ 8:28 am
Thanks for the post. This went over my head when watching the debate. I think the moral of the story is to hope that both Obama and McCain manage to find competent Secretaries of State.
Comment by Black Political Analysis — Monday, October 6, 2008 @ 10:47 am