November 10, 2008

Greta Van Susteren interviews Sarah Palin.

You can watch it all here. It was a relaxing, friendly interview. I noticed:

1. Palin thinks bloggers probably live in their mother's basement and wear pajamas ... at least the bloggers who said maybe Trig was not her baby.

2. She worked terribly hard concocting some sausage and cheese food for the camera.

3. She thinks well of herself and ill of the media.

4. She had nothing at all to do with any of those clothes you've heard talk about, they were foisted on her, and she prefers her own clothes.

5. In Alaska, they have a diverse economy including cabbages as large as basketballs, and Greta would like you to know that in Wisconsin, the pumpkins are very large. That is, the 2 women got into competitive vegetables.

88 comments:

TheCrankyProfessor said...

Does no one wonder if the shopping spree is more like, say, the terrifying Rachel Zoe than anything else - buying out everything in the shop in a particular size and planning all along to return 80% of it?

Then again, maybe not. Maybe other people don't extrapolate from reality TV to the way political campaigns behave, even though the models are terrifyingly similar.

Zachary Paul Sire said...

I liked the part when she said God would let her know if she was destined for the White House. We need more of that kind of thinking.

Mark said...

Defend your man, Ann. It's only four years.

Michael said...

An excruciatingly sycophantic interview from beginning to end. Never a follow up, never a rebuttal. Just one open-ended question after another, with arah taking as much time as she wanted to disavow literally everything anyone ever said or wrote.

"Gosh...is any of it true?"

"No...no...no...no...none of it...really. Just take my word for it" (And about those medical records we've never seen...nada.)

Let's just hope God is holding that door closed.

halojones-fan said...

Fighting over vegetables, eh? I'd like to see the both of 'em fight over a nice, big zucchini.

In bathing suits.

In the mud.

awwwwww, YEAH.

Michael said...

mark: It's going to be 8 years...and then another 8 years...and then another 8 years...

Live with it.

Loser.

Michael said...

God just called and he/she's sick of Sarah using his name in vain.

Rose said...

Google “Martin Eisenstadt.” Amazing.

UWS guy said...

let's play with our food. Freud would say (Billary would back me up on this) rotund cabbage? Fulsome pumpkins. They both remind me of pregnant womens bellies! They're competing over which states women are more fecund.

UWS guy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Rose said...

Nice blog ya got there, Michael.

Michael said...

Source: CNN

WASHINGTON (CNN) – As President-elect Obama visits the White House, a new national poll suggests that the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is the most unpopular president in the six decades since presidential approval ratings were first measured.

Seventy-six percent of those questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Monday disapprove of how George W. Bush is handling his job as President.

That's an all-time high in CNN polling, or in Gallup polling dating back to World War II.

"No other president's disapproval rating has gone higher than 70 percent. Bush has managed to do that three times so far this year," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

"That means that Bush is now more unpopular than Richard Nixon was when he resigned from office during Watergate with a 66 percent disapproval rating."

Michael said...

rose, thank you.

Meade said...

"(And about those medical records we've never seen...nada.)
Let's just hope God is holding that door closed."

Michael's mother (calling down from upstairs): "Mikey, I laid a fresh pair of pajamas on your bed for when that pair gets all soaked in spittle again. Nitey nite, deary. Don't stay up too late talking to all your bloggy friends, 'kay? You know how hard it is for you to get going in the morning."

Michael said...

SPAM?

UWS guy

* Location: Central Valley : CA : United States

About Me

If you like wine, check out our companies website. The only patent wine preserver.
Interests

* Visit us on Amazon.com
* or on our home page www.ultrawinesaver.com

Michael said...

meade, anybody at this point who is still supporting Sarah, John or George is a fucking moron.

You can continue to suck and whine all you want, but it's time for you to get used to it: We have a new President.

YOU lost...WE WON.

Michael said...

Sarah Palin's dalliances with Wasilla's wackiest extremists
By David Neiwert Thursday Oct 09, 2008 6:00pm


Max Blumenthal and I recently spent several days on separate visits to Wasilla, Alaska, Sarah Palin's hometown where she was mayor from 1996 to 2002. We talked to a number of local residents and pored over a number of city documents, looking into Palin's associations with a far-right political faction in Wasilla. (We working thanks to a grant from The Nation Institute's Investigative Fund.)

The report is now complete and can be read in its entirety at Salon.com. You can also see above the video Max made of his interview with one of the faction's main leaders, a man named Mark Chryson, who headed up the secessionist Alaskan Independence Party during the same time period. It pretty much speaks for itself.

Essentially here’s what we found:

* That Gov. Palin, when a Wasilla city council member, formed an alliance with some of the more radical far-right citizens in Wasilla and vicinity, particularly members of the secessionist Alaskan Independence Party who were allied with local John Birch Society activists. These activists played an important role in her election as Wasilla mayor in 1996.
* Once mayor, one of Mrs. Palin’s first acts was to attempt to appoint one of these extremists (a man named Steve Stoll) to her own seat on the city council. This was a man with a history of disrupting city council meetings with intimidating behavior. She was blocked by a single city council member.
* Afterward, Mrs. Palin fired the city’s museum director at the behest of this faction.
* She fomented an ultimately successful effort to derail a piece of local gun-control legislation which would simply have prohibited the open carry of firearms into schools, liquor stores, libraries, courthouses and the like. The people recruited to shout this ordinance down included these same figures, notably the local AIP representative (who became the AIP’s chairman that same year).
* She remained associated politically with the local AIP/Birch faction throughout her tenure as mayor on other issues, particularly a successful effort to amend the Alaska Constitution to prohibit local governments from issuing any local gun-control ordinances.

In general, we found that not only did Mrs. Palin have numerous associations with these extremists, she actively sought to empower them locally and to enact their agendas both locally and on a state level.

We sent an e-mail to the McCain/Palin campaign asking for their reaction to these findings, and have so far received no response.

blake said...

Palin's a terrifying figure, apparently.

Meade said...

Well okay then, Michael. I guess I'd rather be a happy fucking moron than a lonely psychotic weirdo.

Theo Boehm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ShadowFox said...

This is some amazing stuff. Palin knows that she can say absolutely anything on Faux News and 4 million idiots will swallow it hook, line and sinker. Are they really that dumb or are the rest of us that biased toward reality? Apparently, Palin's own father is a part of the latter

Her father, Chuck Heath, said Palin spent part of the weekend going through her clothing to determine what belongs to the Republican Party.

"She was just frantically ... trying to sort stuff out," Heath said. "That's the problem, you know, the kids lose underwear, and everything has to be accounted for. Nothing goes right back to normal,"

Palin's father said his daughter told him the only clothing or accessories she personally had purchased in the past four months was a pair of shoes.

RNC lawyers have been discussing with Palin whether what's left of the clothing and accessories purchased for her on the campaign trail will go to charity, back to stores or be paid for by Palin, a McCain-Palin campaign official said Friday, speaking on condition of anonymity because the campaign hadn't authorized comment.

The McCain-Palin campaign said about a third of the clothing was returned immediately because it was the wrong size, or for other reasons. However, other purchases apparently were made after that, the campaign official said.


Now, if a third of the clothes has been returned, that means that the actual charges were $225,000, because RNC put only $150,000 on the FEC forms. Either way, any expense would have been illegal if Palin kept any of it, which is why she even has to return children's underwear.

The laws are quite clear--the candidates' own funds cannot be used on candidates' clothing (actually spelled out in the statute) and the party funds can only be used on party-sponsored events, not on the campaign per se. Which is why they had to say that the clothes had been bought for the convention.

Of course, Palin is too corrupt or too stupid to understand that. Which is why she got underwear and luggage--two things that clearly could not help her image at the Convention. It finally dawned on her that, to satisfy election laws, the expenditure could only be for something that the Party would own, not her. Too little too late!

None of it matters. Mike Huckabee was proclaimed the heir-apparent when he retired form AR governorship. By 2007, it was all forgotten--the media just did not see him as a sexy candidate. So he was billed as underdog and snagged a substantial portion of voters as the choice of the fundies.

If Palin is the fundies' choice for 2012 now, she'll be long forgotten by then. The campaign pros and money-men hate her, after the miserable performance that she offered over the past two and a half months. There are about half a dozen other Republican governors with stronger record and more plausible broad appeal. Although Romney and Huckabee are tainted from the 2008 campaign(Romney is a demonstrable liar and a fake, Huckabee has been labeled a "socialist"), they will still be given a chance. Plus you got governors of SC, MN, IN and AL that are quite palatable to the base and have some bipartisan appeal.

Forget Palin--she's old news!

UWS guy said...

haha. You cut and paste a whole article and you have the audacity to call my post "spam"?

Geoff Matthews said...

So Michael, instead of electing a VP with connections to secessionists, we elected a POTUS with connections to terrorists.

Am I supposed to feel better?

Mark said...

The irony of all the pixels expended on "old news" is delish.

Michael, why not just go the whole thousand, instead of employing that eight-plus-eight-plus-eight awkwardness.

UWS guy said...

unless you were being a mensch and giving my company's amazon page free publicity...in which case I say I found the fact that you're time was spent in charity to your fellow commenters commendable. For though it would have been far simpler to create a hyperlink to your cherished article you lovingly spent the time to put it in all it's glory for us to scroll down past!

UWS guy said...

obligatory "your".

iftheshoefits said...

All over this great land, countless bloggers and commenters continue to spend endless hours, writing massive tomes and shrieking at the top of their lungs, about how a defeated VP candidate doesn't matter anymore.

If she doesn't matter, then why spend so much time on her?

John Stodder said...

You can continue to suck and whine all you want, but it's time for you to get used to it: We have a new President.

YOU lost...WE WON.


Michael, I hate to break it to you, but Obama won. Not you. You had nothing to do with it. You are one of the many obstacles he had to overcome. Every word you write indicts you as a complete loser. Obama is a winner, in part because he plays the political game the right way. I'm surprised you call yourself a fan of his. You've obviously learned nothing from him.

You've got til Jan. 21, Michael, at which point both Bush and Bush Derangement Syndrome will be history and we can go back to civil, on-point debates in this country, debates in which good faith is assumed by all participants. I'm just so done with the left's trash-talking troll politics.

Freeman Hunt said...

Think of the dinosaurs, Michael. Just think of the dinosaurs.

Donn said...

JS,

As usual, nice comments. In this case, however, you are wasting your breath.

Donn said...

I do wonder why JS is one of the very few reasonable Democrat(?) commenters that post at Althouse.

Cabbage said...

My sexist brain is the size of Wisconsin.

John Stodder said...

I do wonder why JS is one of the very few reasonable Democrat(?) commenters that post at Althouse.

Are you implying there was foul play?

Actually, most of my Democratic friends and family members--who include a fair number of practicing political ops as well as those who just like to talk about politics but make their livings doing something else--would instantly recognize Michael and other bitter whackos of his type as a menace. These Dems have a few faults -- a bit too credulous about what's printed in the NY Times, for one -- but mostly they like to discuss and debate issues on a more practical level. They hated Bush more than me, and weren't above referring to him in vituperative terms, especially after Katrina. But the last thing any of these folks would do after Obama's victory was to trash talk the other side. They were too happy, too much moved by the enormity of it. They also realize he's got a very tough assignment, so they don't want to make the mistake of alienating Republicans who are willing to be part of whatever happens next.

Most of these people do shy away from some of the dirty little secrets on our side. They pretend not to know much about card check, for example, and have generally decided not to pay any attention to it. They see it as 'something the unions want,' which they should get because they worked hard to elect Democrats, not because it's right. Whenever I press the point, they suddenly remember they left the oven on.

But, basically, most of my Democratic friends are non-ideological. It's just their impression Democrats are smarter and have a wider scope of understanding when it comes to public policy. They associate Republicans with the past -- with social repression, genteel discrimination, a lack of concern for those who are not white, not straight, not male, too much faith in the invisible hand, and too little interest in really running the government effectively. I'm not saying I see things that way, but that's the general view. My friends were of the "I used to like McCain...Palin is unqualified" school of thought, not the "McCain is a warmonger and Palin is a Bircher" school of thought.

I don't have a clever conclusion to this. I wish my friends and family posted on blogs. Not everyone does yet. Odd, huh.

Strawman Cometh said...

1. Palin thinks bloggers probably live in their mother's basement and wear pajamas.
We all winced at this

2. She worked ...
How many times did you rewind to catch this?

3. She thinks well of herself and ill of the media.
Me too.
4. She had nothing at all to do with any of those clothes you've heard talk about, they were foisted on her, and she prefers her own clothes.
"I did not order the clothes, I did not ask for the clothes" This is more believable than "I think Africa is the United States of Africa",
5. In Alaska, they ..cabbages as large as basketballs, and Greta .. in Wisconsin, the pumpkins are very large.
I missed this too, but I like women with round fruit.

Alex said...

I have to wonder just what scares our leftie trolls so much about Sarah Palin? Didn't she just lose by a huge margin? Shouldn't they just pretend she doesn't exist? The way they carry on about her, they sense something big in 2012.

Donn said...

JS,

My question was more about why so many moonbats show up here, when to me Althouse seems one of the best "moderate" blogs in the blogosphere. I was surprised the other night when what seemed to be a moderate moonbat around these parts claimed to have been banned from two lefty sites.

Anyway, it would seem to me these fundie moonbats would hangout in more radical righty blogs.

The fact that you hang around with normal and reasonable people is obvious without any explanation needed, but I enjoyed your story nevertheless.

Theo Boehm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ShadowFox said...

Has anyone noticed that Palin's "folksy" Fargo accent is suddenly nearly all gone? What? No more "betcha"?

Theo Boehm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Theo Boehm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Theo Boehm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ShadowFox said...

I have to wonder just what scares our leftie trolls so much about Sarah Palin? Didn't she just lose by a huge margin? Shouldn't they just pretend she doesn't exist? The way they carry on about her, they sense something big in 2012.

Alex, it's not that I wish to defend the "trolls"--it's kind of hard to tell who is or who isn't a troll these days (hint: a troll is not necessarily someone you disagree with the most). And if you think I am a troll--well, they'll find a cure for what ails you, eventually.

I don't think most people hate Palin. Most libs did not hate W either--at least, not to the same extent as so many wingers hated the Clintons (and still do!). For the most part, they laughed at them.

Palin as a politician is comical--but there is nothing funny about someone like that even being in contention for a national office.

JS is right--screaming "warmonger!" at McCain would have accomplished very little. I can't say that I ever admired the man, but I was certainly intrigued by his candidacy in 2000. By 2004, I was deeply disappointed--the man had clearly sold his soul for the chance to be at the top of the ticket.

But Palin? As you might have noticed a rather substantial number of long-time Republicans, staunch conservatives, have turned away from the ticket because McCain picked Palin. First, they saw Palin as unsuitable. Second, as a consequence, they began to wonder about McCain's judgment and priorities because of his pick. That alone should tell you that this is not about ideology--the party that not only picks but fawns over the likes of Dan Quayle, W and Sarah Palin clearly is not interested in national priorities.

As to why people are still fuming over Palin, take a look at some side polls that are still coming out. Apparently, 64% of Republicans want to see her at the top of the ticket in 2012. So it's not about the "trolls" "sensing something big in 2012"--it's about the other side not having any sense at all!

LoafingOaf said...

Donn's favorite word is "moonbat" and he holds himself up as a "reasonable", "normal" person. If i encountered a person offline who was all "moonbats this" and "moonsbats that", I'd just laugh in his face.

Theo Boehm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Theo Boehm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
LoafingOaf said...

i watched Palin's interview. Of course, I'd already read Andrew Sullivan's blog and was aware of what her dad said about all the clothes (already posted above).

What was interesting about the interview was how Palin found opportunities to say "continent" in reference to Africa and tick off the countries that are in NAFTA.

Yes, Sarah, we know you googled it last week. Now you're showing off all your newly acquired knowledge! But you had between the convention and election day to demonstrate you had a clue about anything.....

LoafingOaf said...

Oh, I tuned into some of the right-wing radio programs today. Today, right-wing radio was busy telling their fellow conservatives that Arnold Schwartzenegger has no legit place in the Grand Old Party because he doesn't hate gay people and doesn't like people trying to strip them of their vested civil rights.

Keep it up, right-wingers. You can all move to Arkansas and home school your kids, but you're turning the rest of America OFF. P

John Stodder said...

A nation of Walter Lippmanns we are not.

I am ever-hopeful that we can breed more of them, and that more of them will come to sites like Ann's to hone their ideas. I think public policymaking has been trapped in an insider hothouse for too long, and that the brilliant people who choose to live their lives outside of politics need to be tapped. The best way I can think of doing that is through the various social networking tools, blogging, but also wikis, virtual conferences and so on. With all the stupid Michaels of the Web, don't lose track of all the intelligent commentary here and on a few other sites. For example, Megan McCardle. Like Ann, she sets a high bar in her writings, so her comment stream is often the most thought-provoking reading of the day. Volokh is another one. Unfortunately, I can't point to a liberal site that breeds mature commentary, but one will surely come along now that the dementer Bush is leaving the scene.

One of the best takes on Obama this year has come out of Wired magazine, which suggested -- perhaps wishfully, but with some basis -- that Obama would use some of the social media tools to help him devise solutions to the most intractable problems government faces -- affordable health insurance, what to do about entitlements, the future of energy, and above all the financial crisis. Do we really think Henry Paulson should decide these things in a roomful of his trusted aides? No, there should be a way to channel the wisdom of the crowds into the process. More than even the incentive to drift toward the middle in order to preserve Democratic gains in 2010 and 2012, I think if Obama truly involves people in thinking through our problems, and does so in a transparent way, we might come up with a wider range of policy choices, with merit rather than interest-group pressure as the deciding factor.

Reagan said "Government isn't the solution. It's the problem." He was right, but he didn't go far enough. Why is government the problem? It's not inherently evil, or incompetent. It's all the dung beetles who spend their lives crawling over and through our government(s), steering public policy toward their own ends. The internet provides our elected leaders, the ones who aren't already bought and paid-for, a way to get around the dung beetles. At that point, I sure as hell hope there are a few Walter Lippmans out there -- working as doctors, engineers, lawyers, snowmobile repairmen, whatever -- who can lend their expertise. If Obama really wants to make a mark on history, that's the route he'll take -- liberating public policymaking from the professional policymakers, and letting the people participate.

Eric said...

I'm amazed at the brainless frothing Palin brings out in the lefties. Most of the crap they forward to each other doesn't even pass the smell test, like that old joke that had all the red states with a lower average IQ.

If this is the reaction she gets, we should definitely run her in 2012. Normal people don't like to be associated with teh crazy - she should win handily.

LoafingOaf said...

we elected a POTUS with connections to terrorists.

Am I supposed to feel better?


You may not feel better, but I sure as hell feel better that we didn't elect that fraud from Wasilla who made stump speeches encouraging you to regard Obama as some sort of terrorist lover (not to mention how she went on about how she considers many parts of America not really part of America).

No one is obligated to like Obama. I don't like huge portions of his agenda. But the idea that he's a fan of terrorists is really unhinged. The American people didn't buy into that smear because they're not as stupid as you think they are. But you'll keep on with the talking point from that Wasilla fool that he's a huge fan of terrorism.

Obama spent much of his campaign pledging to hunt down the actual perpetrators of 9/11 more vigorously than the Republicans did. The Republicans no longer actually give a damn about capturing or killing the actual people behind 9/11. In fact, they laughed at Obama during the Democratic Party debates when he said that was a top priority for him.

LoafingOaf said...

I don't know how many of you tuned into right-wing radio today. But apparently Arnold Schwartzenegger is being purged from the GOP because he doesn't hate gay people. The religious right wing of the GOP is sure into purging everyone nowadays. Yet they still ask for my vote? LOLOL!!!

Arnold is one of my fave Republicans. If the "big tent" doesn't have room for him, that party can fuck off. Go home school your kids in the reddest counties you can find, but some of them will still turn out to be gay or bi because THAT'S JUST PART OF NATURE.

LoafingOaf said...

Yet they still ask for my vote? LOLOL!!!

And who do they ask me to vote for? An ignoramous (Sarah Palin) just because she didn't abort a Downs Syndrome baby, she looks hot with a gun, likes to shoot moose, and has so much clit (she don't need no balls...) she'll say Obama is a massive fan of terrorists.

Rudy Giuliani was a non-starter in today's GOP. Because he doesn't hate gays and isn't freakishly obsessed with abortion.

Expat(ish) said...

The reason SP is frantically going through all those clothes? Because she and her husband don't make enough money to pay for them. What'd she make last year - 200G's? Not that much money in Alaska, especially with five (well, four, one is off fighting) kids and all. Don'tcha know.

I have the interview Tivo'd, but I'm kind of looking forward to it. I suspect she is recovering from what has to be one of the most painful losses you can suffer. Public drubbing, ouch.

If it matters, I don't know anyone how might have voted for McCain who switched b/c of Sarah Palin. I do know some folks who voted Mac because of Biden. And, yes, the plural of anecdote is not data.

-XC

sg said...

It's interesting how Democrats and the MSM successfully reframed the whole VP qualification issue: the VP candidate has to be "ready from day one" to become president.

That's certainly ahistorical. Plus, Democrats have short memories of the qualifications of some of their own recent VP candidates.

For most of this nation's history, the main VP selection criteria was "ticket balancing," most importantly picking a VP from a different part of the country vs. the presidential candidate. Most famous and perhaps most significant historically was JFK picking LBJ, a guy he hated, so that he could take Texas. What does "ticket balancing" have to do with governing--or even being "ready from day one?"

It's been said that Mondale was the first "governing" VP pick. But it's interesting even Mondale reverted to "ticket balancing"--this time of a demographic sort--in picking three-term congresswoman Ferraro.

I don't recall Republicans making a big stink about Ferraro's foreign policy and national security qualifications. Nor with those of trial lawyer and one-term senator John Edwards. Were they qualified to be VP? Sure. President? Probably not.

So it seems to me that Sarah Palin was held to a standard that neither history nor Democrats themselves maintain, when they're in position to do the VP picking.

hdhouse said...

ohhhh how sweet. i get all goosebumpy. ohhh greta you nudge...you lil' imp, tossin' those softballs at perhaps the most ill-prepared vp candidate in history....

ya'betcha

MadisonMan said...

I don't know anyone how might have voted for McCain who switched b/c of Sarah Palin.

(Raises hand)

It wasn't the sole reason, but certainly one of the top ones.

Ann Althouse said...

"I don't know anyone how might have voted for McCain who switched b/c of Sarah Palin."

I might have voted for him if he had picked someone with a strong background and stuck to the experience argument.

Ann Althouse said...

Also, I support abortion rights. Apparently, the GOP has no interest in getting my vote.

Hoosier Daddy said...

I have to wonder just what scares our leftie trolls so much about Sarah Palin? Didn't she just lose by a huge margin? Shouldn't they just pretend she doesn't exist? The way they carry on about her, they sense something big in 2012.

Did McCain/Palin lose by a huge margin? I did some number crunching and Obama's win was essentially by the same margin as Bush/Dukakis in 1988 and I don't recall much talk about that being a landslide.

In recent memory the only true landslides were Johnson in '64, Nixon in '72 and Reagan '84.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Also, I support abortion rights. Apparently, the GOP has no interest in getting my vote.

Am I mistaken but didn't you vote for Bush over Kerry?

Ann Althouse said...

Yes, I voted for Bush. I considered the war the predominate issues, and I believed that Kerry wouldn't pursue victory but take us to defeat. I still believe that, and I'm still glad I voted for Bush.

SGT Ted said...

Also, I support abortion rights. Apparently, the GOP has no interest in getting my vote.

In the same vein, I support gun ownership rights. The Dems have no interest in getting my vote.

I liked the part when she said God would let her know if she was destined for the White House. We need more of that kind of thinking.

Is that like O! saying that when he is elected the sea levels will drop?

Hoosier Daddy said...

Palin as a politician is comical--but there is nothing funny about someone like that even being in contention for a national office.

Again, how anyone can make this statement with a straight face with Joe Biden as Obama's VP simply boggles the mind.

Palin gaffe - Ignorant fool, completely unsuitable for office. Go back to Wasilla.

Biden gaffe- Oh that Joe, what a funny guy he is! Pay no attention to the idiot with the hair plugs.

I mean for Christ's sake the man stood in front of an audience and told them that Hillary would have been a better pick for VP than himself. Yeah, that really instills confidence.

SGT Ted said...

An excruciatingly sycophantic interview from beginning to end. Never a follow up, never a rebuttal.

Just like an Obama presser. Except there was more than 8 questions for Sarah.

My God There's nothing more hypcritical than an O! fellator whining about soft ball questions from a reporter.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Yes, I voted for Bush. I considered the war the predominate issues, and I believed that Kerry wouldn't pursue victory but take us to defeat. I still believe that, and I'm still glad I voted for Bush.

Well at least abortion isn't a single issue for you and that you can prioritize.

SGT Ted said...

And of course Palin was inexperienced, but the guy who said we have 57 states and served 143 days in the Senate is mucho qualified.

Because of the hopey-changeyness I guess.

I'm still trying to figure that one out, because it does not make any sense whatsoever.

SGT Ted said...

Palin bashing is simply hip bigotry towards rural folk writ large.

mcg said...

I might have voted for him if he had picked someone with a strong background and stuck to the experience argument.

I don't believe that, but I believe you do :)

ShadowFox said...

I don't recall Republicans making a big stink about Ferraro's foreign policy and national security qualifications.

Well, your memory is suffering a convenient lapse. I recall very clearly the kind of attacks that Republicans made on Ferraro. And the ones in the media were the polite ones. In private, off the record, Ferraro was repeatedly referred to as the "Mafia Princess" and the whole ticket as "Wally and the Beaver" or "Fritz and Tits".

But the comparison is specious for an entirely different reason. Palin is not unqualified for lack of experience--although, clearly, she has had no experience that would prepare her for national politics. Her problem was that she has been utterly un-curious about either national or, indeed, domestic policy until a ripe age of 44. For someone aspiring to be presidential material, this is ludicrous.

The problem with the $150,000 revelation was that it exposed the fact that she had greater interest in freeloading than in understanding national policy.

There is a great difference between being anti-establishment and being anti-intellectual. The McCain/Palin ticket has demonstrated precious little of the former and plenty of the latter. On the contrary, Palin became the consummate member of the establishment in Alaska who replaced cronies of her gubernatorial predecessor with her own. Of course, in Alaska, no one cared. But this is not something that a national candidate should have on her record.

The biggest problem for McCain was that he blatantly lied. It was patently obvious even to the most willfully blind of Republicans that Palin's pick had little to do with her qualifications and and was designed squarely to appeal to the base. It is not the appeal that was offensive, but obvious lying about it. But even if we were to compare JFK/LBJ ticket to McCain/Palin, is there any similarity at all between Palin and LBJ other than the fact that both were pragmatic selections?

Palin will not be on the ticket in 2012. She won't even make it past the first two debates. And the problem is not just that she will be out of her depth. Being an lightweight was one of the problems that plagued Huckabee this year, but this is not why he lost the nomination. Huckabee lost because, outside of the religious fundamentalist base, he was seen as a political lightweight and a Big Government socialist. In another year, he would have had a closer run, but, following Bush's 8 years of ever-expanding government, this was a lethal weakness.

Palin may not be as economically weak as Huckabee, but the best she can boast is trying to run a state that is almost entirely on federal dole out, with essentially socialist policies that provide for income redistribution. While this may not be much of a challenge against Democrats, it likely will be exposed in the primary. SP's 2012 campaign will grind to a halt faster than Fred Thompson's in 2008. The fact that the rats jumping the McCain ship are denouncing her like the bubonic plague suggests that she may not even get past the exploratory committee.

Hoosier Daddy said...

And of course Palin was inexperienced, but the guy who said we have 57 states and served 143 days in the Senate is mucho qualified.


I'm still trying to figure that one out, because it does not make any sense whatsoever.


Evidently strong rhetorical skills in front of a teleprompter trumps actual accomplishments.

sg said...

Interesting election exit poll result:

Was McCain choice of Palin a factor in your vote?

Yes, 60% (56% for McCain, 43% for Obama)

No, 33% (65% for Obama, 33% McCain)

(cnn.com, http://tinyurl.com/5q8tsj)

The MSM have been painting the picture that Palin was "a drag" on the ticket.

The exit poll data (almost 18,000 respondents nationally) don't support that claim. Palin appears to have indeed helped McCain.

AJ Lynch said...

Mad Man and Althouse are fantasizing about reality IMO.

Mad Man you are just rationalizing if you think anyone here believes Palin was a top dealbreaker for you.

And Ann - Obama only trumps Mccain on experience in your dreams.

laura said...

I might have voted for him if he had picked someone with a strong background and stuck to the experience argument.

I don't believe that, but I believe you do :)


If McCain had actually still been a maverick instead of just calling himself one, he had a chance at my vote, too. Palin was definitely a dealbreaker.

William said...

Disturbing truths: Priests cannot be trusted with the moral guidance of young boys; bankers cannot be trusted to prudently manage money; journalists cannot be trusted to objectively report the truth. Ho-hum truth: A woman given carte blanche at Nieman Marcus will not shop for a sackcloth and ashes....I saw the Van Susteren interview. Sarah looked likable, grounded, and intelligent. That said, I am sure that some part of her heart broke when she packed those designer clothes in the return box.

Modern Otter said...

I can't believe how little notice the Governor's secessionist associations have attracted. So evidently advocating the breakup of the United States (or sharing a bed with someone who does) has become completely cool sometime between 1865 and now? Cooler even than the progressive (oops, sorry, socialist) income tax?

jdeeripper said...

Obama has a second term locked up already.

Delusional Republicans are wetdreaming over Palin/Jindal in 2012.

Republicans need to change their symbol from the elephant to the dinosaur.

The perfect symbol for the anti-reality, old, tired, out of date, creationist, anti-abortion, incompetent, paranoid wacko party.

I say that as someone who despises the Democrats, Howard Dean and the Obamadroids.

The Exalted said...

can anyone hazard a defense as to why palin's children would need the RNC to buy them underwear??

why the campaign required their undergarments to be $50 silk boxers from saks?

or why todd, who spoke once during the entire campaign that i am aware of (introducing cindy mccain at the convention) would need $20-$30K of clothing?

Arturius said...

can anyone hazard a defense as to why palin's children would need the RNC to buy them underwear??

I'm not sure I can defend the RNC setting up a clothing budget for the VP pick in the first place.

I think one thing has been overlooked in this manufactured story and that is, was Palin the one shopping for bling at Saks or some campaign flunky? I'll venture a guess it was the latter which, as evidenced by the shoddy campaign that was run, is par for the course.

Shawn Levasseur said...

They were comparing relative sizes of vegtables? Were carrots and onion rings involved?

John Stodder said...

I can't believe how little notice the Governor's secessionist associations have attracted.

If such "associations" weren't left-wing fever-swamp bullshit, they'd have been on the front page of the New York Times. If this tale was beneath them, you can probably dismiss it. Half of what they DID publish about her has turned out to be malarkey. This particular slander must have fallen below the Mendoza line.

Her problem was that she has been utterly un-curious about either national or, indeed, domestic policy until a ripe age of 44.

I'm always amazed when someone declares to have the ability to discern that someone they only know from brief staged events on TV is "utterly un-curious." In her case, I would suggest it is a sign of mental health and well-placed priorities that she spent most of her adult life paying attention to her children and her family business. But no one becomes the kind of civic activist who gets into a position to run for mayor and subsequently governor by being "uncurious." What I suspect you really are describing is her cheap-suit college education. But you don't want anyone to think you're an elitist, so you dress it up in psycho-babble.

And speaking of "uncurious," you should go read a little more about Alaska before making statements like this:

Palin may not be as economically weak as Huckabee, but the best she can boast is trying to run a state that is almost entirely on federal dole out, with essentially socialist policies that provide for income redistribution.

Nope. The so-called federal dole is more of a federal boot that keeps much of Alaska's land and resources off-limits. As is the case in much of the west, the locals would prefer to control their own destiny. However, the oil and gas that does get developed is owned by the state, to which royalties are paid. Rather than building up a gilded government empire like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait or pre-invasion Iraq, the state returns a portion of its royalty revenues to its residents. What you call a "dole" is more accurately termed a dividend. In the context of Alaska politics, the old-line GOP establishment (with the connivance of many Dems) used Alaska's wealth to reward cronies. Palin was elected to smash up that network. Her decision to increase the payments to residents was a small-government play, not a dole.

But if you're so opposed to the dole, I take it you've already written to Obama objecting to his idea of sending welfare checks disguised as tax rebates to people who don't pay income taxes? Or are you "uncurious" about that anomaly too?

Look, I didn't vote for Palin, and while I agree she probably helped McCain from losing his right flank, I don't think she was qualified to be a heartbeat away. But it's time to put the dumb myths about her to rest. She actually is a pretty good governor, crafty if not quite smooth, decently-motivated, and I don't think we know nearly as much about her yet as we're going to. Is she a big threat to Obama's re-election? Not as things look today, but I would not count her out.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

I don't know anyone how might have voted for McCain who switched b/c of Sarah Palin

It was the opposite for me and many other people that I know. I was NOT going to vote for McCain or for anyone in the Presidential race, for that matter, until he nominated Palin. Many people I talked to said the same thing. Of course, our area also went overwhelmingly for Ross Perot both times.

reader_iam said...

Mad Man you are just rationalizing if you think anyone here believes Palin was a top dealbreaker for you.

I believe it. He referred to that concern on a number of occasions.

Synova said...

The quote from her father seems entirely reasonable.

Has no one here *ever* unpacked from a trip?

Some staffer went shopping, some other staffer (probably the guy who told her never never never to mention Hillary) decided that she had to be well dressed in order not to embarrass the RNC when Todd showed up in his work clothes and steel toed boots and she turned up in her mukluks or that pink suit, and the staffer goes to the upscale shop and gets everything they need to wear including underwear and socks and doesn't swing by K-mart for the underclothes.

So Palin unpacks, unlike us normal people who let it sit for a month or two until we wonder what happened to our favorite T-shirt, and maybe she'll "pay for" a favorite outfit or two.

OH MY DOG!

Stephen Snell said...

John Stodder said...
"This particular slander must have fallen below the Mendoza line."


This entire comment thread pretty much has Mario's bat, Jose Offerman's glove, and Merkle's brains.

The lefties here either fear Palin or are just drawing down their reserves of bile b/c in 2 months NOTHING will be the fault of the President and Congress going forward. Or the dems get a twofer if they pay using a credit card but falsify the name (seems you can commit that kind of fraud with impunity if you're a dem).

Was it "incurious" of Obama to botch or fabricate the details of his relative's WW2 experience? To not know how many states the U.S. has (never mind Africa--this is dickish but it is the left's standard)? Is it "incurious" of PDS sufferers to avoid actually examining the woman's record as governor?

Considering the incompetence of the McCain campaign (I saw this first-hand in NV), Palin's late entry, and the savagery against her, that she never pulled an Eagleton (wasn't he the McGovern guy?) and is still smiling concerns the dems here, obviously. Give her 3 years to prepare without sloppy goofball handlers and based on her past bio, I think she might be quite formidable. Maybe not, but nobody here knows one way or the other or has much basis for idiocy like "she'll never get beyond an exploratory committee."

Would Michael die of dehydration from wetting his britches were he subjected to 5 minutes of the malice that Palin endured for 2 months? That's rhetorical, Michael, so no self-flagellation beyond what's on your regular schedule.

The Exalted said...

Some staffer went shopping, some other staffer (probably the guy who told her never never never to mention Hillary) decided that she had to be well dressed in order not to embarrass the RNC when Todd showed up in his work clothes and steel toed boots and she turned up in her mukluks or that pink suit, and the staffer goes to the upscale shop and gets everything they need to wear including underwear and socks and doesn't swing by K-mart for the underclothes.

nice try but clearly wrong. if this was the case, unattended staffers, the first defense out of ms. palin's mouth would be, "i didn't pick this stuff out, it was presented to me by the campaign"

its also refuted by the reported stories on the subject

Michael said...

Snell: "The lefties here either fear Palin or are just drawing down their reserves of bile b/c in 2 months NOTHING will be the fault of the President and Congress going forward."

Yeah, that's it.

Obama just kicks the living hell out of McCain and Sarah...and we're scared to death of her running again.

Can you name a single state she helped McCain win...that he wouldn't have won without her?

Or, better yet...how many would he have won with Tom Ridge?

Michael said...

The Widdle Dust Bunny voted for McCain ONLY because of Sarah.

McCain's years of experience had no effect...it was that widdle rascal from Alaska who pushed her into the voting booth.

And you wonder why Obama won by about 7,000,000 votes?

ShadowFox said...

I wonder why the rest of the brood takes you seriously, John.

Palin was elected to smash up that network. Her decision to increase the payments to residents was a small-government play, not a dole.

Surely you jest! She replaced "old-boy network" cronies with her own, many even less qualified for the positions than their predecessors. And the increase in the dividend was a clear popularity play, which, of course, succeeded.

What I suspect you really are describing is her cheap-suit college education. But you don't want anyone to think you're an elitist, so you dress it up in psycho-babble.

Please allow me to respond in my elitist, overeducated, Northeast manner--HORSESHIT! You can rationalize why Palin could not answer direct questions on the Bush Doctrine (there are too many of them to keep track of, right?), or much of anything else, but can you justify why she had nothing to say about newspapers and magazines she reads? Sure, she came back with a short list later, but how can one not come up with a single example of even a local rag??

To be honest, I paid no attention to her "academic" record--I had no idea what college(s) she went to until someone pointed to the list the weekend before the elections. And I really could not care less if she went to Yale and Harvard (W?).

Is this the best you can do, John? If the best you can come up with in defense of Palin is, "You are an elitist", why should anyone pay any attention to your pretentious blather?

Palin's anti-intellectualism may well be a political act, to go along with her small-town praise and "Real Amerika" shtick. But lack of intellectual curiosity is impossible to hide.

Even the Republican defenders of the clothing expense admit as much--the first reaction to the report of $150,000 RNC expenditure on clothing was, "The same people who complain about the clothes would have derided her as a hick or white trash without it." You know, the "lipstick on a pig" proverb comes to mind.