Daily Kos struggles to understand how the hell to blog about Sarah Palin:
Flogging this rumor in light of what seems to be pretty solid counter-evidence is just squandering whatever credibility we have. In the words of Janor Hypercleats, "They's laughin' at you, boy." There is so much more that we could be highlighting regarding Palin; we don't want that to be tarred with "from the same people who smeared Palin's teenage daughter..."There's even a poll about whether this attempt to back slowly out of the sewer is helping -- and the vote is split 72-27.
Nice to see that their main concern is preserving their own credibility so they can carry out other, more effective, attacks. Because the whole point of appearing to be decent and feminist is to be able to push your political agenda.
পোস্টগুলি
১০৯টি মন্তব্য:
this surprises you why?
Hey, AS, how about you do some historically accurate (no using Wikipedia) blogging about VP's, their experience, and how it plays out both during the actual time (think Johnston stealing the election for Kennedy) and in retrospect.
-XC
Flogging
That is all they do at KOS, flogging. It is what the netroots are all about; spreading the message of hate. They have a place to flog others, each other, and themselves; self flagellation.
Flogging should be the new term to describe hate filled blogging.
ExPat: good question, and there is not much evidence, less any scholarly studies that shed much light--People normally don't care much about the VP pick unless it ends up like Senator Eagleton ( good man, BTW, who was thrown under the bus). Unfortunately in my 67 years on this planet, this firestorm is unlike any I have seen. So this may be a game changer--esp considering the latest tracking polls--Obama should be cleaning McCain's clock but is running even
"There's even a poll about whether this attempt to back slowly out of the sewer is helping -- and the vote is split 72-27."
Actually the poll question is: "Is this helping or should I delete this?"
Making a single "yes" or "no" response meaningless.
Their logical prowess remains intact!
Markos Moulitas is blowing the election for Obama.
When the tallying is completed of the landslide of states that voted for Sarah Palin is completed ... the Democrats need to take a good look at the bloggers who blew the election for them.
A sadder bunch of women haters and closet racists just couldn't be found.
One has to take note of the group-think.
The Kos Diarist is essentially saying "I think this is the truth but I'll delete it if the group thinks it harms our cause". That speaks volumes, doesn't it?
"we don't want that to be tarred with "from the same people who smeared Palin's teenage daughter..."
Too late.
Way, waaaaaaaayyyyy too late.
sammy,
I saw that yesterday. I wanted to indicate this is a terrible topic. But, I wasn't sure if that meant "yes" or "no." So I abstained.
Regarding Dkos: they seem to have a lot of level headed folks. I only scanned to comments, but there seemed to be huge numbers of folks suggesting this was a nutty and unworthy topic. That's encouraging.
Sully: not so encouraging.
It's a pity William Ayres isn't her OB/GYN because then this would all be a smear.
FWIW, Salon has not a single mention of this rumor. The Seattle Weekly, the Stranger, did run something about this on their blog, but they are nowhere near as grown up as Salon.
Sully's having quite a week, eh? Greasy polls and the comings and goings of various vaginas? My goodness!
salon:
http://www.slate.com/id/2199042/#kosandcass
oops thats slate not salon
It's so sad. The left, having jettisoned true political philosophy back in 1972, is rotten to the core with the anti-intellectual non-philosophy of identity politics.
Non-conformist and authentic individuals from lefty mascot groups, such as Clarence Thomas or Sarah Palin, strike at the very core of their self-image -- by their very existence. That is, they are offensive to leftists by just being alive and in public view.
I mean, when you haven't reasoned yourself into your political leanings -- when your beliefs revolve around the purely emotive and self-indulgent issues of gender or racial identity -- reason will probably not play a very crucial role in how you attempt to persuade others. Those who reason are inherently threatening to you.
I guess I shouldl quit being surprised at the depths the Fightin' Lefty Brigades will sink to, but I always am.
(By the way, I am an Obama supporter, in the (perhaps naive) hopes that he will follow through on his campaign tone of thoughtfulness and slap some sense into his utterly aimless and quasi-nihilistic party.)
Sully had a weasel-worded post, indicating that the pregnancy story "seems" to be false. He knows how to interject multiple caveats (i.e., allowing himself to say, hey, this could still be true) and wanting the McCain camp to put out a statement (that he'll never believe anyway).
Sully once again shows himself to be a pathetic journalist, despite having been an editor. He was too lazy to google, too lazy to email or call people. He fans the flames of a rumor and then casts aspersions at Palin for not debunking the claims.
Flogging this rumor in light of what seems to be pretty solid counter-evidence is just squandering whatever credibility we have
No worries. You don't have much to squander.
The recent attacks on Palin have been coordinated by the Left and Team Obama. The intent is vomit forth a negative narrative on Palin, at any cost, before the public has a chance to know her. Its a spoiling attack. And it shows how worried they are about her.
Too late.
This episode will make two weeks of talk radio. Sullivan is destroyed. I suspect that Time will get enormous pressure to fire him.
Every vile thing said about Palin will be broadcast into right leaning homes.
The culture wars have been reignited.
Now, a question.
The laughing journalists, the ridiculous rumor-mongering, Sullivan's stupidity.
Is there a movie character that embodies the shallow rumor mongering personality that could be used in an ad? What imagery could depict what has happened, and make the Obama campaign look sleazy?
These questions are being discussed in some media room somewhere.
Derek
Just watch Gossip Girls. Sullivan should just join the show and be done with it.
If KOS and Excitable Andy are the modern face of the modern socialist/democrat party - good.
I want KOS and Excitable Andy to lose. In fact, whenever I see a photo of Obama - I see Andy Sullivan. & I am disgusted.
The Times of London picked up this foul story yesterday and featured it on their website. Sullivan is a regular columnist for the Times. Anyone guesses who encouraged the Times to run with this despicable phony story?
Being a fan of divided government, I often split my ticket when I vote.
However, having read a few of the Kos diaries about Palin and her daughter, and having stepped into the muck of the comment threads over there, I'm so thoroughly disgusted by what's being taken seriously over there that I will almost certainly vote straight line Republican this time around.
I'm no stranger to the Kos Kidz and their antics, but the repulsive sexism on display just seems so far over the top, even for them! As my teenage niece would say, "Eww!"
If I understand the "thought" behind this rumor, a teenage girl was supposed to have stayed out of sight for a number of months and quietly gone through her pregnancy in such a way that no one -- no close friend, no jealous quasi-friend, no one -- ever found out about the deception.
Has Mr. Sullivan ever encountered any teenagers?
Jamie Irons
I am still waiting for the phoney contrite apologies. No one is demanding that these ferrets and weasels apologize.
Oh, sorry. Sheesh, what was I thinking. They only apologize to their own kind.
Fen--with respect, I do not believe team Obama had anything to do with this. It does, however, point out that they are saddled with their nutroots constituency. I don't like Obama, but could not bring myself to believe a father and husband would countenance such crap. that said, I really think he need to denounce this in the strongest possible terms even though I do not believe him responsible. That would be test of his leadership.
Doctor Irons--long time no see--as I recall you are a psychiatrist--when the dustt settles would love to see your professional take on all of this.
good to see you posting again. Its hell when work interferes with blogging.
Barrack Obama was actually fathered by his "grandparents" and does not actually have any black heritage. He has to take regular "black skin" treatments to look black. He's using his "blackness" for political gain.
It's true! I saw it on the internets. I can not be convinced it's false unless I have video of Obama's birth!
Oh crap, I think "the man" is going to come lock me away for spreading this conspiracy! BELIEVE!!
What's gone on is beyond poor judgment; it is unethical, unintelligent, irresponsible, anti-intellectual and adolescent (with apologies to actual adolescents). Althouse is dead ib noting that the Kos folks STILL don't get it, as illustrated by their concern more about their own credibility than what they actually did. And Kent is dead on in saying "Way, waaaaaaaayyyyy too late."
People familiar with reader_iam over the long haul are aware of my deep, deep skepticism of the whole concept of "citizenjournalism," though I don't bother to "talk" about it anymore and haven't for a while. This situation illustrates my objections in a nutshell, and is one of the "best" examples I've seen (and I've seen plenty, and from both sides of the 'sphere).
I'm still most appalled by Andrew Sullivan, in terms of how he promoted this, when he promoted it, on what basis and from what sources. Under no circumstances can he possibly have done any sort of reasonable due diligence before floating these rumors; given when he started spreading the manure, there was insufficient time, and in any case, it's clear he had no commitment to that.
This is a man with an actual, serious, professional background in journalism (at one time, anyway). He absolutely should have known better; at one time, he would have. And he is connected with an actual, serious mag; he is NOT "just" a blogger, and he has greater responsibility.
In my opinion, he ought to be suspended, REGARDLESS of whether this story were to be proved ultimately to be true (which I don't think it will)--see "how," "when," "what basis" and "what source."
In the event this is "proved" false, he should be fired. He can always run his own blog and be "private" in exercising his free speech, but for an actual magazine/site run by a so-called serious entity to support this and pay him is outrageous and irresponsible. Speculation is not analysis or even commentary, not matter how much so many in the blogosphere wish to confuse and use interchangeably those terms.
Regardless of how this turns out, I will do my utmost to never, never read Andrew Sullivan again. I have purged all feeds and internal bookmarks to him (yeah, I know, big f'n deal, but you can only do what you can do, you know). I personally wouldn't even consider linking to him again. And with the exception of one or two individual writers in feed, I will avoid the Atlantic online as well until I see what it does.
For the record: Palin's selection as VP did not make me more likely to vote for the Republican ticket (or the Democratic one, for that matter). I'm pretty much where I was before either VP pick. There is much to admire about Palin (whether one agrees with all her positions, which I don't, or not) and much to respect about her accomplishments, but I think it's "too soon." (Some of you may remember my musing on opening wines before their time). It's unfortunate that this election is marked (marred) by having two of the four candidates past their time (I'm not talking age here) and the two others before their time (again, I'm not talking age here). I accept that this is where we find ourselves, but I do not accept that I'm obliged to validate either ticket, or the overall situation.
Anyway, the latter bit is mostly to emphasize that my reaction to what I've seen go on the past couple of days, and especially to the likes of Andrew Sullivan, has not a wit to do with some sort of passion for Palin Now!, but rather something far more important, in the scheme of things and in the long run. (And it also might answer questions raised by two, maybe three, people here over the last however-many threads about what this female centrist/swing thinks about the veep choices, and the overall tickets.)
What an utterly pathetic, shameful place in which we find ourselves. In terms of journalism and information gathering and disseminating. In terms of the political blogosphere. In terms of candidates, and in terms of this election. Not just because of this, but it's certainly the icing on the cake.
My contempt is close to knowing no bounds.
I think the left (where I am on social issues) is making a big mistake in rushing Palin straight on.
Hillary Clinton's campaign maybe gave them wrong ideas about how female candidates can be treated. But Clinton was/is a special case. No one likes her, no one shows her any deference and if someone attacks her, many folks feel just fine jumping in and piling on. Despite her status as a former first lady, no one, male or female, treats her like a ... lady (and she's probably fine with that).
Palin is a very different kind of figure and the middle american swing voters are not going to countenance straight on attacks, especially on sexual ethics issues. The more fuss raised and the more negative it is, the more McCain voters they're going to create.
The only safe way to diss Palin is ... treat her like a lady. Say empty nice platitudes about her that make it clear she's out of her depth "she's very thorough", "she's certainly a hard worker" "I don't know where she gets the energy!" and otherwise ignore her.
I'm mostly neutral about Palin and don't care if she did the wild thing before she got married and/or is passing herself off as the mother of her grandchild. I _am_ alarmed at possible ties with Dominionist Joel's Army crazies (nb I think most practicing Christians are fine people but Dominionists give me the heebie jeebies).
Don Pedro N., you wrote:
(By the way, I am an Obama supporter, in the (perhaps naive) hopes that he will follow through on his campaign tone of thoughtfulness and slap some sense into his utterly aimless and quasi-nihilistic party.)
I can't really criticize this hope, as very early on in the Obamphenom I cherished a similar vague hopefulness; I even voted for him in the California primaries and sent him some money (which I would now like back!).
But I have come to think Obama is less a potential reformer of the Democratic party's malady than a symptom of it.
Jamie Irons
Scary people.
Fen,
You and other conservatives routinely spread BS lies.
E.g. "...and Team Obama"
Such is so common that nobody objects. At least the nasty kos diaries are packed with kos commentators disparaging the unfounded character assassination.
In addition to the kos folks strongly disparaging this diary in the comments, it looks like this diary was kept away from (removed from?) the rec list. But, the counter-diary was on the rec list.
It is also prudent to note that the most nutty left folks are against BHO--think noquarter.
Maybe you vitriol spreading right wing types could learn how to self police from dKos--especially if you genuinely oppose spreading deceitful lies, regardless of party--though there is no evidence of this, as Fen and others are showing us this morning.
I believe that we are witnessing an historical event not seen since 1884, in which a national election, and the course of history, is influenced by an intemperate remark by a supporter. James G. Blaine's supporter, the Rev. Dr. Samuel Burchard, made this fatal statement: “We are Republicans, and don't propose to leave our party and identify ourselves with the party whose antecedents have been rum, Romanism, and rebellion.” That slur energized the Irish vote in New York, and cost Blaine the presidency.
Don Pedro:
(By the way, I am an Obama supporter, in the (perhaps naive) hopes that he will follow through on his campaign tone of thoughtfulness and slap some sense into his utterly aimless and quasi-nihilistic party.)
And if he doesn't?
1jpb: I do NOT do such things, I have objected in the past, and I am one of those swings/centers your candidate needs.
How does MY reaction grab you?
and mine as well
Because the whole point of appearing to be decent and feminist is to be able to push your political agenda.
Ann, the whole point of everything at Kos is to push their political agenda. And draw ad hits.
reader,
I was careful to specifically address "vitriol spreaders".
Roger,
Thanks for your generous welcome.
Some human behaviors, I fear, are too crazy even for psychiatry to approach!
;-)
(The sad fact is, psychiatry understands, and can coherently explain, precious little.)
I must say, though, that one place one might turn for a serious and intelligent attempt to analyze such antics is our friend Neo-Neocon's blog, should she decide to take this problem on.
Jamie Irons
1jpb,
"Regarding Dkos: they seem to have a lot of level headed folks. I only scanned to comments, but there seemed to be huge numbers of folks suggesting this was a nutty and unworthy topic."
My best friend (God's honest truth) is a member of Daily Kos. He's tried to get me to sign up, but I have told him that while I am sure there are good people like him on there, there are also a substantial percentage who are absolutely vile.
His counter argument? That it is unfair to judge the majority because of the behavior of the minority. My counter-counter argument? It isn't clear which is the majority, and besides, why would I ever choose to be in a place where there are so many jackasses when it is easy enough to not be? Kos could very easily get rid of the jackasses, as he does get rid of the Republicans who sign up. He chooses not to, and the only way to take that is he wants them around. He wants their votes, he wants their money, he wants their willingness to do dirty work. It is fair to assume that Kos members tolerate them for the same reason.
My buddy doesn't like that argument too much. But you and I both know that if someone was hanging around with white supremecists, he and other Kossites would be all over them. Yet he surrounds himself with communists, anarchists, conspiracy mongers, and the outright sleazy. Why? Because either he secretly, like Kos, wants to, or because there does not exist a liberal forum that doesn't have all of them.
This is why we usually stick to talking football and kids rather than politics.
1jbp: I know that. Your response is, however, well, nonresponsive. My point was not that I though you were attacking me. (I didn't.) You're worried about equivalencies between left and right. Why not be more concerned about effects on the actual process--on actual voters who find what's gone on highly objectionable? Why not be concerned more about the excesses of your own side, in which one assumes you're invested, on account of you want it to be the successful one? Otherwise, you just look as if you're deflecting, as if you just don't "get it". Why should anyone, especially centrists/mods, respect on throw in with people who "don't get it" so egregiously?
enigmaticore,
Can you prove this:
"Yet he surrounds himself with communists, anarchists, conspiracy mongers, and the outright sleazy."
From my reading for a year or so, most folks look reasonable over there.
I don't know what it takes to get kicked out. I know Big Tent Democrat (Armando) at talk left was kicked out. Do you know folks who were kicked out? Can I read their past comments, so I can judge what they were doing? Full disclosure: I've been kicked out of myDD and talkleft.
reader,
I've called this Trig thing BS since I first heard about it. I had one of the earliest comments here where I linked to Cole who called this extreme BS, as he told BHO supporters to stop pushing it.
I'm clean.
Does anyone else see the irony that we are discussing this on LABOR DAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Waaaaaah!
1jpb: Fen, You and other conservatives routinely spread BS lies. E.g. "...and Team Obama"
Boy are you naive. This was a coordinated spoiling attack by Team Obama. Did you not notice the new drive-by posters all parroting the same talking points?
Such is so common that nobody objects.
Oh please. When CBS deliberately uses forged documents to throw the election to the Right, get back to me and I'll take you seriously.
Maybe you vitriol spreading
How is accusing Team Obama of coordinating this spoiling attack "vitriolic"? Hyperbole much?
if you genuinely oppose spreading deceitful lies, regardless of party--though there is no evidence of this, as Fen and others are showing us this morning.
Ha. You've been here spreading deceitful lies about Palin for the last week. So don't lecture me, fricking Wormtongue.
I stand by my "vitriolic attack" - Team Obama coordinated this spoiling attack on Palin. Its the same thing he's done to Hillary.
Excellent post at 9:55, reader. Nothing there I can really disagree with.
reader: You're worried about equivalencies between left and right. Why not be more concerned about effects on the actual process--on actual voters who find what's gone on highly objectionable? Why not be concerned more about the excesses of your own side, in which one assumes you're invested, on account of you want it to be the successful one?
Exactly. Don't define your standards by what the other side does, or worse, by what you "believe" the other side does.
There is no Tu Quoque: A is not excused simply because B is just as bad as A.
My contempt is close to knowing no bounds.
Mine, too.
Your whole comment was magnificent. Outstanding. And absolutely correct.
Fen--my only problem with your suggestion that TO is orchestrating this is this: I don't think they, or anybody else, conrols the netroots faction. And while they have done some foolish things, his is so far beyond the pale as to not be believable. YMMV of course. The larger issue is that TO how has to ride the whirlwind they created. As you say--pass the popcorn.
Reader: What you said.
I, too, am one of those swing voters Obama needs -- an Independent who used to be a Democrat and who has yet to vote for a Republican in a national election. A couple of days ago I posted, someplace in the comments on this blog, that I probably won't vote for McCain. My mind, and my vote, has now been changed: not by the Palin choice, but by the vicious, sexist, irrational, unhinged reaction of such a large swathe of the Left. I used to try to give such folks the benefit of the doubt. I'm done with that. For the first time in my life I will vote Republican in the fall -- and the Kossacks and their ilk have themselves to thank for the loss of my vote and, I suspect, of millions like me.
(The sad fact is, psychiatry understands, and can coherently explain, precious little.)
This seems to be a pretty good effort by a psychiatrist using a psychiatrist's tools to analyze the world at large. He has been on hiatus lately though. Dr. Sanity does it too. She has linked to Althouse on the Sara Palin topic, and discussed it at length too.
"Can you prove this"
I think we have more than proven the conspiracy monger and outright sleazy portions with the whole Palin pregnancy ordeal; they were more than well enough on display.
I guess to satisfy you on the reds I would have to go swimming over there for a bit.
Here's an example that disproves Kaus' optimism about self-correction at cocooned sites: remember the movie blogger, Jeffrey Wells, who called for a new blacklist for Hollywood conservatives like Jon Voight?
He's now banned all conservative viewpoints in what even he calls a Stalinist purge:
http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2008/08/stalinist_purge.php
Not surprisingly, his site quickly became a cesspit of the ugliest anti-Palin sexism.
A pro-Anarchist piece on Kos, here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/30/222824/523/955/580779
Another, here:
http://ramo.dailykos.com/storyonly/2004/8/12/42549/0195/94/43655
Another, here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/5/24/12483/4416
Another, here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/5/5/192936/0591
And in each of these, it isn't just the poster, but then the commenters.
That took about 10 seconds of looking.
That the same "talking points" keep getting raised by the nutroots is not evidence that the Obama campaign sent them the same memo. There's very little so-called evidence, and that's why the nutroots keep repeating themselves.
@ Michael Ferris:
"The only safe way to diss Palin is ... treat her like a lady. Say empty nice platitudes about her that make it clear she's out of her depth "she's very thorough", "she's certainly a hard worker" "I don't know where she gets the energy!" and otherwise ignore her."
Is the only safe way to diss Obama to treat him like full-fledged adult? "He's so articulate" "And he's clean!" "I understand he even GAVE UP illegal drugs!" and otherwise ignore him?
Or do you NOW see how you're perpetuating the problem?
"I know Big Tent Democrat (Armando) at talk left was kicked out. Do you know folks who were kicked out?"
I don't know anyone who was kicked out, excepting for that Lee guy who was kicked out for telling them to stop burying their heads in the sand regarding John Edwards.
From where I sit, it looks like the way to get booted off of Kos is to write things critical or damaging to liberal Democrats. Beyond that, anything goes. Especially if it attacks Republicans, regardless of truth or propriety.
Obama is between the proverbial rock and a hard place right now. If he doesn’t say something against these smears he can be accused of condoning them. On the other hand, since the MSM has generally ignored them, he can be accused of bringing them to general attention if he says anything at all about them even if it’s to condemn them.
And Reader, a brilliant comment @9:55. Everyone should read it.
Susan: you were expecting profiles in courage from Senator Obama? silly wabbit, courage is for gov Palin.
Senator Eagleton ( good man, BTW, who was thrown under the bus).
Considering that George Romney's offhand remark about being "brainwashed" put an end to Presidential campaign four years previously, Eagleton should have known that his psychiatric hospitalization and electroshock therapy was material information. And yet he said nothing about it to McGovern.
In those days, VP candidates were not routinely vetted in advance, and McGovern was under severe time pressure to pick one.
From the WaPo: Governor George W. Romney of Michigan was a leading contender for the 1968 Republican presidential nomination until September 4, 1967, when he told Detroit television newsman Lou Gordon that he had been "brainwashed" by American generals into supporting the Vietnam war effort while touring Southeast Asia in 1965.
Though Romney tried in earnest to explain himself, he became the target of blistering press and partisan attacks. Romney's candidacy never recovered from the furor he created with his statement.
Democratic nominee George S. McGovern's presidential hopes virtually evaporated when it was revealed shortly after the party convention that his newly chosen vice presidential running mate, Missouri U.S. Sen. Thomas F. Eagleton, had been hospitalized on three occasions for depression and had undergone electroshock therapy.
Eagleton had kept the explosive information from McGovern at the convention, but too many Missouri politicians and others knew about his secret for it to be kept under wraps. An anonymous tip about Eagleton's past to the Detroit Free Press began the chain of events that eventually brought the Democrat's episodes to public view.
Zeb Quinn,
Yes, I admire the efforts of people like ShrinkWrapped, whom you cite, and others in psychiatry and allied mental health fields, to try to elucidate our politics. There is some validity to this, and much virtue in effectively deploying whatever rhetorical weapons one has at one's disposal to counter the insanities and inanities of the left (former leftist speaking here who, like a former smoker, has become quite down on his former vice).
But what is being deployed is rhetoric (nothing wrong with that) not science. I was speaking purely of the limitations of psychiatry as a science. These limitations are not trivial.
If one is skeptical the claims of global warming "science," take that skepticism à la treizième puissance, as the French are reputed to say, in considering the claims of psychiatry.
Jamie Irons
FLS: I know full well the story--I was in my thirties when I broke and I followed. My point was this: Senator Eagleton was a good public servant and suffered an illness for which he was treated. It did NOT affect his ability to serve his constituency--Or is it your view that anyone who has taken Prozac or someother antidepressant is not fit to be president? Is that your argument? He was treated by the protocols of the day. Your response, cut and pasted as it was, ignored the larger question.
God, Henry the fifth was right.
1jpb said...
Fen,
You and other conservatives routinely spread BS lies.
E.g. "...and Team Obama"
It is impressive to me how successfully Obama has snowed his followers into believing he is above the dirty political tricks that come with regularity now. This is the same guy who used the Chicago machine to get his opponents off the ticket through sleazy tactics prior to running for state office. One of his team, when interviewed by CNN, said that Obama was "unhappy" about doing it but he did it anyway, didn't he? His political upbringing was as part of a well-oiled machine and to think he has changed is to be willfully blind.
And the larger question, to make it clear to you, is this: Someone who has had depression is not qualified to be vice president or president. Deal with that question please. Dont give me a lot recycled WAPO stories.
More evidence one the conspiracy monger and sleaze fronts:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/1/4231/18477/878/581881
The new great hope-- Palin is part of a plot to secede Alaska from the union!
One might even say they are questioning her patriotism.
But it's ok, right? Because 'most' of the people over there are not like that. They just all tolerate being around people like that, which is no big deal. It is Republicans that they cannot tolerate.
That last sentence just came to me. I had never quite put together why it bothers me so much that they have those fruit loops running amok there. It is because, if we give them the benefit of the doubt as to why they allow that crap, it still means they are more tolerant of anarchists, communists, sleaze mongers and conspiracy freaks than they are of Republicans or right-leaning independents. There is something extremely wrong with that.
It did NOT affect his ability to serve his constituency
As I've said before, it's not the "crime" it's the coverup. Had he been open and upfront about his medical history with McGovern they could have handled it. His concealment of his electroshock made it a "secret" that the media was eager to reveal, fatally damaging McGovern's campaign.
This is the same guy who used the Chicago machine to get his opponents off the ticket through sleazy tactics prior to running for state office.
Verifying that your opponents played by the rules is not a sleazy tactic. How can Republicans possibly object to being required to follow the rules? Aren't they the ones who strike ineligible people off the voting rolls?
Again, Ann, this story was all over the net, emanating from partisan sites of both sides and nonpartisan sites. You are joining with the con's in pasting libs for this.
And, anyone can get an account on Kos and post. So cons can be over there posting abhorrent comments. So don't go tarring an entire movement the way you are doing.
I'm glad we finally have a picture to deal with it. Hopefully, it will go away and we can get back to vetting this candidate as Quick Draw McCain recklessly did not do.
As far as caring for the new born impaired child under these circumstances, I wonder about that but will withhold criticism on that score. There are plenty of men who have abandoned families for success and we don't have everyone's story.
Besides, Sarah Palin is so flawed on the merits of being a national leader, or one heartbeat away fro the Presidency, we don't need this cheap crap to win.
Ann, don't you think it is time to end the vow of cruel neutrality?
BREAKING: http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/09/01/politics/horserace/entry4404184.shtml
"You are joining with the con's in pasting libs for this. "
And Lord knows in your eyes that is a bigger sin than posting unsubstantiated smears, so long as said smears are against Republicans.
This was a smear coming from the political opponents of Sarah Palin. Period. And they deserve to be pasted for it.
FLS: dont give me that crap--do you believe that being treated for depression disqualifies one to be President? Thats a yes or no answer--And consider that Abraham Lincoln was widely believe to be depressed. Yes or No--hell even a lawyer can handle that one, cant you?
Trust me FLS--it wasnt the eagleton thing that damaged his campaign--it was McGovern himself--were you even alive then?
McCain's biggest problem was that the Republican base can't stand him. Further, the Republican brand has been so damaged he couldn't run to the right to placate them. Now, thanks to KOS and Sullivan and their ilk trashing Palin, the Republican base sees it as their God given duty to vote for McCain. The polls are now tied and this election looks a lot like 2004 and 2000 rather than the Democratic landslide that by all rights should be happening right now. Way to go Kos. I hope Rove keeps sending you those checks.
This is probably the story that Peter Hoh linked to, but:
Guess what? Bristol IS pregnant, right now: Palin confirms daughter's pregnancy.
I'm going to enjoy watching the nutroots deflate.
do you believe that being treated for depression disqualifies one to be President?
No. Concealing a material fact about one's medical condition shows a failure of judgment that disqualifies one to be President.
This is much more trenchant criticism.
"trenchant," get it?
Ah yes, Team Obama is pure as driven show. They didn't encourage folks to attack media outlets that ran pieces critial of Obama....
Why do the details of Obama's Annenberg failure scare them so? He's from Chicago - we expect him to pay off buddies. He's a Dem - wasting $100M on failed education ideas is small potatoes.
So, why is Annenberg a problem?
Got it FLS--that lawyer thing keeps popping up doesnt it.
If depression is not a disqualification for the presidency, why should Eagleton have disclosed it? He felt he was cured. It did not, according to your own view, disqualify him.
Now that said, it says a lot about how americans view mental illness. And you have to assume that mcgovern would have rejected him because of an illness treated and cured. doesnt say much about mcgovern, or you for that matter.
Maybe thats why Mcgovern lost 49 of 50 states to a scuzzball like richard nixon.
Holy shit. This statement that Palin's daughter is pregnant is true The McCain camp has released a statement.
Sounds like Ann Althouse owes a big apology. These people were on to something and, now that we have pictures of the VP nominee pregnant, it seems they were half-right.
I agree we should leave the young parents alone and focus on the question of Sarah Palin's opposition to birth control. Is she against it just for herself and family or for everyone?
Let's stick to the public policy. After Ann apologizes.
AlphaLiberal said... Besides, Sarah Palin is so flawed on the merits of being a national leader, or one heartbeat away fro the Presidency, we don't need this cheap crap to win.
Ah, the modern fighting liberal strikes again. With all of these flaws she would make a better president than anyone!!!!
Did not go to Harvard.
Is not a lawyer.
Actually worked hard for a living.
Has a family and is proud of being family oriented. Major flaw here.
Brought a handicapped child into the world. Anti-feminist flaw.
Good looking.
Has executive experience. Major flaw.
Can actually give a speech without stuttering.
Husband is blue collar versus intellectual idiot policy wonk.
Knows how to balance a budget.
Has energy experience. Oil instead of flatulence; major flaw.
Foreign policy experience. Big flaw. She knows Russians and Canadians instead of the French.
I used to think that Andrew Sullivan was just an excitable idiot. Now, after he enthusiastically picked up and ran with this disgusting rumor, I think he is a sleazy woman-hating scumbag.
I hope he encounters Todd Palin sometime and gets a punch in the nose.
At any rate, this is a foolish discussion, and I apologize for the OT subthread--No more on this for me. I just love to see the liberal mind operate.
To rebut rumors, Palin says daughter, 17, pregnant.
This is a test for Ann Althouse, to see if she can admit when she was wrong.
And, here's a better DailyKos post (one promoted to the front page):
John McCain Has No Business In The Storm Zone.
Damn straight. Diverting resources from rescue is unconscionable.
Enigmaticore,
Did you notice that your selected dKos diaries were outliers (on a site that has hundreds of thousands of comments), therefore not representative--they are not surrounding (as you put it) Kos?
Did you notice that you can't point to Rs being kicked out?
Ask yourself: why you write things that you yourself don't know to be true?
If I was guessing I'd say that you're knowingly spreading untrue right wing hyperbole. Your mind is weak, just like your untrue statements.
Ask yourself a followup: does it weaken your overall standing when you are caught making statements that you must later acknowledge were unsupportable hunches.
peter,
She considers herself a feminist.
AL, what does Ann need to apologize for?
The Kos posters were not "half right" in saying that Trig was Bristol's son, they were completely wrong. Bristol is 5 months pregnant now, which means she didn't even know she was pregnant when Trig was born.
That you would give any credit at all to these wild speculations even after this news is insane.
Roger, where do yo find your expertise about the liberal mind? DO you have any liberal friends you have respectful conversations with? Seek out their views?
More likely you foolishly form your views of liberals based on caricatures from Rush Limbaugh and his ilk.
Me, I come to place like this to talk with con's firsthand. And, have numerous con's in my family.
this may amaze you alpha, but I have many liberals who are friends--Now I take you point about "the liberal mind" and I am guilty of stereotyping there. The crap about Gov Palin not having her child is not a liberal meme. it comes from a small minority of netroot nuts. so I apologize for smearing all liberals because clearly they do not deserve it.
there, sir, is an apology.
joan: they said the daughter was pregnant and right for that. And that the mother faked a pregnancy, for which they were wrong.
Althouse should apologize for falsely assigning this rumor to Dems when it has, in fact, been all over the web in all types of sites. i linked to several examples in an earlier thread on this.
In the Reuters story I linked to above, we can see this is a tactic of the McCain camp, to blame the rumors on Dems.
Ann is echoing the McCain campaign on their false talking points. As we've seen over the years, she's a repeating station for the right wing, posing as a moderate. Same ol, same ol.
And, Alpha, I do not own a TV and do not listen to Rush or Air America. I do not need commenters to tell me how to think.
Thanks, Roger. That was a nice apology. Though I still think this thing has legs due to non-netroots, like National Inquirer types, some conservatives, and the like.
AlphaLiberal said...
Holy shit. This statement that Palin's daughter is pregnant is true The McCain camp has released a statement.
Sounds like Ann Althouse owes a big apology.
Apology for what? Sounds more like your ilk owe an apology.
Alpha--I happen to have a lot of respect for you based on your research on ric shinseki as army chief of staff--you were diligent enough to research it and apologize and I thought that said a lot about your character. Now, your politics suck of course :), but I hope we can continue to debate in good faith. We good?
Shrugs. I just chalk this rumor up to the over-representation online of guys who don't get laid and therefore know very little about human reproduction. Women tend to be aware that the likelihood of having a Down's baby at 16 is so much lower than the likelihood at 44 as to make the rumor silly on a purely statistical level. (About 1 in 2000 for the teenager, 1 in 50 for the 40something.)
Roger, thanks for that. Though I forgot that particular instance.
As Gerry Spence said, a true argument is the most persuasive.
We shall spar again!
"Is the only safe way to diss Obama to treat him like full-fledged adult? ...
Or do you NOW see how you're perpetuating the problem?"
Two points:
1. who's perpetuating? my proposed tactics were not supposed to be morally edifying. I think said tactics (talking nice while infantilizing and/or trivializing Palin) is kind of scuzzy and I have no intention of doing so. I just think it's more likely to work than what the left bloggers are currently doing which could backfire easily.
2. race and gender get treated very differently. the best way to diss Obama is (I think) point out what a great candidate he'd be in 8 or 12 years (leaving the assumption unspoken that he's not so great now).
and with any luck I will kick your liberal butt! :)
Have a nice day alpha (seriously)--I have a hole to dig in my back yard to make a pond.. Digging holes is very theraputic
the Girl is PREGNANT
Peter Bella speaking in earnest ignorance:
"That is all they do at KOS, flogging. It is what the netroots are all about; spreading the message of hate. They have a place to flog others, each other, and themselves; self flagellation."
Have you actually been to that site? They have articles on scientific topics, policy developments, media coverage, rescue aid appeals, .
You don't know what you're talking about. You're just recycling talking points. Makes for a pretty weak argument.
But here's a front-page Kos post I can heartily recommend. (Note to McCain: We can see you checking out her bod.)
AlphaLiberal said...
"joan: they said the daughter was pregnant and right for that. And that the mother faked a pregnancy, for which they were wrong."
Actually they said that the daughter had been pregnant with Trig. They were wrong.
Your assertion disingenuous and cynical - at best. Only one apology needed here. And it isn't Ann's.
It is interesting that the Democrats are so terrified of this woman. It is difficult imagine that even drama queens like Sullivan would have gone so over the top and lost their minds like this had Romney or Lieberman been the pick. Some of that is the fact that she is a woman and the liberals really can't stand a woman who doesn't know her place on the liberal plantation.
But I think there is more to it than that. If there is one thing creatures like Sullivan or Kos have, it is a good sense of danger. Palin really has a chance to hurt the Dems not just this election cycle but for years to come. That is why they are trying to destroy her.
Fen, I don't know if we can say that the Obama campaign is responsible for this. But maybe an apt question would be, how can that be disproved without knowing the identity of the original poster? Perhaps someone with deep enough pockets should adopt the stance that the Obama campaign did this, and if they sue, go into discovery and force the unmasking of the original kossack, a la AutoAdmit.
Alpha said...
"But here's a front-page Kos post I can heartily recommend. (Note to McCain: We can see you checking out her bod.)"
Hell yes he was. Every straight man and gay woman in America was, or should have been. She's smokin' hot. But that isn't why she was picked.
FLS(11:29)
Verifying that your opponents played by the rules is not a sleazy tactic.
Have you seen John Kerry's DD-214 yet? I keep hearing the term "swift-boating" being tossed about as a slur...
Daily Kos is trash and has been ever since they went all gestapo on people breaking the Edwards - Rielle Hunter love child/affair story.
They've fallen a long long way the summer of '04.
Dr. Irons:
Beacause OF BOs inability to pull away in the polls despite enormous advantages; would you support an initial diagnosis of the Kos reaction to Sarah Palin as being symptomatic of paranoid projection triggered by intense cognitive dissonance?
Or are they just assholes?
Beacause OF BOs inability to pull away in the polls despite enormous advantages;
It's funny to hear an Althouse commenter say that because in right-wing land all that Obama possesses are DISadvantages:
Like being a black Muslim who educated in a madrassa, whose sole subjects were Quran and dhimmi-hating; who is a citizen of Kenya and Indonesia, not the United States; whose only friend as a coke-snorting lad was a Communist poet who moonlighted writing porn, and whose only friends as an adult are Marxist Leninist ex (but just how ex, no one is sure) terrorists and a sinister failed businessman Arab who tried to get ahead by donating to as many politicians as possible, and buying lots next door to their palatial manors which they obtained at substantial discounts due to his sinister aura.
Not to mention sitting in a pew for 20 years listening to an angry black man's anti-whitey rants, who filled the pulpit with Black Muslims, aggrieved Palestinians, and a wigger priest. With a wife who grew up wearing dashikis and Afros, knitting haji caps from thread the colors of Africa, while plotting how she would use her husband's Presidency to obtain long-delayed reparations for her fellow descendants of slaves.
Now you're asking why isn't a man like that much further ahead in the polls?
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন