I watched Palin's speech, and here's my review of the first 70% of it. She was likable, but less so than I anticipated. She was a little feistier than I had expected, which impressed me. Some of the applause, especially early on seemed a little forced from the crowd...they really want to love her. Her speech was occasionally rousing, but did not sell me. In letter grades; I expected a C out of her, I thought she needed a B+ to win people over, and I felt she delivered a C+.
Then she jumped the shark with a statement that received a kind of stunned turned rigorous applause from the audience. Here's the transcript copied from the CNN transcript.
Al Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America ... he's worried that someone won't read them their rights?
This is the epitome of what's wrong with the Bush administration. Yeah, the war's unpopular and so is the recession. But illegal wiretapping, torture, and who knows what else are why we have already lost to the terrorists. They don't win when they kill a few Americans, they win when they destroy our way of life, and nothing is more sacred to that way of life than freedom, our constitution, and the rule of law.
Palin, evidently, does not believe in that, and I am now 100% against her. Sarah Palin knows nothing about America, and I dearly hope she is not our vice president.
She was good tonight, but I'd hardly say she hit it out of the park. She did a good job at speaking to her base and getting the arena pumped up.
However, and this has been for the last two days of the convention, the only thing the Republicans have right now is a "not Obama" campaign. They don't have any ideas on how to change anything other than to cut taxes right now. So all they can do is attack rather than lay out plans for what can be done to make things better right now.
I totally agree with Rose. The idea of an executive who has the power to detain anyone they choose for any reason they imagine, or not even give a reason, not allow them a trial and just jail them indefinitely. That is truly terrifying.
We are supposed to have a government with checks and balances in order to avoid this sort of abuse of power.
Saddam Hussein got his day in court. Nazis got their day in court. Mizlovech got his day in court. These were all terrible people. But they were all granted their day in court. And I think that as Americans that's something that we should not deny anyone in the world. After all, would we as American citizens be OK with an American citizen being detained indefinitely with no charges brought against them? Even if they were an alleged murderer?
Anyway, I give it a B-. she spoke well and got the base riled up, but ultimately all she had to say is, "NoBama".
I watched her speech tonight as well and thought it was excellent. I didn't agree with all of it, and of course much of it was the usual rhetoric -- e.g.how McCain has been fighting the Washington establishment for his whole career bla bla bla -- guess what folks? He IS the Washington establishment! As well as his whole campaign team, who consist primarily of lobbyists for all of the biggest global corporations and even middle-eastern countries!
But I agree with Robroy on the fact that she hit it out of the park tonight. I switched over to PBS after the speech to see their talking heads' reactions, and boy were some of them seething because they knew it too! Gwen Ifill was spinning like a top from the get-go, trying to make it out how the whole speech was Obama-bashing (how DARE they!!!).
OK, back to the regularly-scheduled topic now in 3 . . . 2. . . .
I was actually thinking more about it last night and this morning and I know that the #1 issue with voters is the economy, right? So far, the only thing I've heard from the convention is Obama will raise your taxes. Which, is only true for the top 2% of the country.
No actual solutions on what to do about the economy.
However, and this has been for the last two days of the convention, the only thing the Republicans have right now is a "not Obama" campaign. They don't have any ideas on how to change anything other than to cut taxes right now. So all they can do is attack rather than lay out plans for what can be done to make things better right now.
I'm starting to hear this refrain a bit. It's almost as if the republicans are running on the ticket of being different than Bush/Cheney. Excuse me?
So, if Obama is running as "not-Bush" and McCain is running as 'not-Obama"...where does that leave us as voters?
I disagree. Obama is not running as not-Bush. He's actually put forward quite alot about what policies he will have and what sort of things he will do to bring about change. Kerry was running not-Bush. I always hated him as a candidate. He had very little substance to his campaign.
Although I guess it could be said that McCain is running as not Bush/Not Obama.
I realized today why I wasn't as impressed with Palin's speech as I thought I needed to be (that's the C+ grade I gave it prior to declaring her dead to me). The problem is she seems kind of bitter, and I get the impression that she clings to her religion and guns because of it. Maybe it's her small town roots...I don't know.
I realized today why I wasn't as impressed with Palin's speech as I thought I needed to be (that's the C+ grade I gave it prior to declaring her dead to me). The problem is she seems kind of bitter, and I get the impression that she clings to her religion and guns because of it. Maybe it's her small town roots...I don't know.
I realized today why I wasn't as impressed with Palin's speech as I thought I needed to be (that's the C+ grade I gave it prior to declaring her dead to me). The problem is she seems kind of bitter, and I get the impression that she clings to her religion and guns because of it. Maybe it's her small town roots...I don't know.
Where are you getting the bitter thing from? I don't pick up that vibe from her at all.
If anyone is bitter in this political season, it's Hillary, and maybe Bill even moreso.
Ya know redmondjp, when you make me explain my joke, it really ruins things.
FWIW, she actually did come across a little bitter in her comments about the media. I think that's understandable though, given the swirling vortex of media attention she has fallen into.
Nice video. It very clearly demonstrates the massive hypocrisy of several influential right-wing pundits. I'm young still, but I doubt I've ever seen as rapid of a double-speak maneuver as this Palin deal.
I'm young still, but I doubt I've ever seen as rapid of a double-speak maneuver as this Palin deal.
The maneuver is called a feint. The worst case scenario for the Republicans would have been a unified Obama/Clinton ticket. But both of those candidates have been criticized for not having a lot of experience. By a series of leaks, McCain hints that he is vetting various people with CEO experience, and that spooks Obama to go with someone who has been around a long time and yet doesn't overshadow Obama with actual executive experience. With the bait fresh in Obama's mouth, McCain goes in with Palin to pick up still angry Hillary supporters with a strong and outspoken female and solidifies his own base at the same time.
The phrase used on the right for this is "Rove, you magnificent bastard."
I'm young still, but I doubt I've ever seen as rapid of a double-speak maneuver as this Palin deal.
The maneuver is called a feint. The worst case scenario for the Republicans would have been a unified Obama/Clinton ticket. But both of those candidates have been criticized for not having a lot of experience. By a series of leaks, McCain hints that he is vetting various people with CEO experience, and that spooks Obama to go with someone who has been around a long time and yet doesn't overshadow Obama with actual executive experience. With the bait fresh in Obama's mouth, McCain goes in with Palin to pick up still angry Hillary supporters with a strong and outspoken female and solidifies his own base at the same time.
The phrase used on the right for this is "Rove, you magnificent bastard."
I'm sorry, but that's laughable. Biden was picked because of what was and is going on with Russia right now. It became obvious very quickly that he needed someone with Biden's Russia experience with the escalation that is going on there.
The rumors have been much more that he wanted Lieberman and the religious right threatened a revolt if he didn't pander to them. I don't buy your above scenario for a second.
Even Rove himself said that adding her to the ticket "was not a governing decision but a campaign decision". Quite the vote of confidence for her as a leader, huh? Could be argued that perhaps McCain is more concerned with winning an election than having a qualified running mate?
I'm young still, but I doubt I've ever seen as rapid of a double-speak maneuver as this Palin deal.
The maneuver is called a feint. The worst case scenario for the Republicans would have been a unified Obama/Clinton ticket. But both of those candidates have been criticized for not having a lot of experience. By a series of leaks, McCain hints that he is vetting various people with CEO experience, and that spooks Obama to go with someone who has been around a long time and yet doesn't overshadow Obama with actual executive experience. With the bait fresh in Obama's mouth, McCain goes in with Palin to pick up still angry Hillary supporters with a strong and outspoken female and solidifies his own base at the same time.
The phrase used on the right for this is "Rove, you magnificent bastard."
That's hilarious! Wait, was that not a joke? Oh...then it's really sad.
It's not a feint. Leaks from McCain's inner chamber suggest Palin was essentially off the short list until a few weeks ago. If it were all part of a brilliant plan, the leak would have said "Obama played into our hands" rather than the other way around. Instead, McCain was desperate to pick off PUMAs, and that's where Palin came from.
Also, I wasn't thinking of McCain when I mentioned double speak. I think her pick was right in line with his style, which is high risk/high reward and often times reckless. No, the double speak and hypocrisy is from the right's pundits, not the candidate.
- "Where's the experience" has become "7K people is a large city...in Alaska".
- "Women need to take it" has become "hey, lay off her family - who she conveniently uses as a prop when it suits her".
- The "moral right" who judges the parents when the child sins has turned into the "everybody has premarital babies and shotgun weddings" right.
- Alaska, the most socialist state in the union (they send citizens checks and collect by far the largest federal funding per citizen in the union), is being used as an example of smaller government.
Don't take this as a rant against McCain. I respect him, and I am not certain I won't vote for him in November. But the most vocal voices for the republican party in the media are who I am talking about when I point out how rapidly they have switched nearly every position they "hold dear". The same people who harped on how much of a flip-flop Kerry was. Pfft.
The rumors have been much more that he wanted Lieberman and the religious right threatened a revolt if he didn't pander to them. I don't buy your above scenario for a second.
Lieberman is well liked by conservatives for his positions on national defense, but on most other issues he is regarded as too liberal.
Here is one of many articles that describes the sudden reverse on the proper place for women that now seems to be the position of the left, and most of the media.
There has been a lot of talk of the number of years in each position when comparing Obama and Palin and the population of various constituencies. I look forward to a transition comparing the actual accomplishments made during those times to see what the candidates' proven capabilities and beliefs are. Frankly, I don't see any of the other three coming near to the accomplishments of McCain and that bodes well for his ability to build coalitions to get things done. I haven't heard of anything really that Obama has accomplished other than hold various job titles.
It's such a ridiculous move by McCain it boggles my mind. McCain is 72 and has had multiple bouts with cancer and this is who he thinks should be right behind him? This?
Look at the two VP choices made. Obama said, who could step in if need be? There were a couple choices and he picked Biden. He may not be your exact cup of tea, but it's pretty easy to make a case for him. John McCain was looking over his choices and Sarah Palin was the most qualified he could find? Seriously? If he wanted a women there were numerous to choose from... Hutchison, Snowe, even Carly Fiorina if he thought this country really needed some "executive" experience. But no. John McCain thought... Sarah Palin
It's an obvious hail mary pass.
Now, I'm not saying it won't work, but I am saying it's a sign of desperation. The media will continue to make this out to be a horse race, but that's to make money. The same day Noonan writes an article on how Palin could be a "transformative political presence" in the WSJ, she says "It's over" on a mic she didn't realize was on, while McCain adivsor Mike Murphy said it was a "cynical" choice.
Let's face it, McCain is betting that two things will happen here:
1. Conservatives will go "Yay! I am conservative. She's conservative. I'm OK with this ticket now" (Which I think the pick did quite well.)
2. Women will say "Yay! I am woman. I will vote for woman." (I'm not of the mind it works that way.)
And now I wonder if all those people who won't vote for a black man (the Bradley effect which Robroy seems to love so much :? ) are going to be enlightened enough to vote for a woman, even if she is "only" VP.
Palin's speech was fine. It fired up the base. Her main success was that you can't fact-check a speech live. (I can't believe she keeps bringing up the bridge to nowhere as an example of her great pork cutting.)
Whoops.
Swiftboating has various meanings to different people. I was using my definition to explain what I meant by "swiftboating from a thousand directions".
And remember, it was Kerry who had to change HIS story when the Swiftboaters called him on it. They did not retract a word. Not one.
Nor did they need to.
The thing about the Swift Boat campaign is that it didn't matter if they were telling the truth or not. They had $15-20 million, nearly 1/4 as much as Kerry spent on his entire campaign, to spread their side of the story. It was said enough times that eventually people just took it as truth - no different than the Iraq pre-war campaign in 2003. A lot of people I know still think Obama is either a Communist or a Muslim (or both, which is a rather odd combination) based on people repeating those lies often enough that it stuck.
Unfortunately, both Obama and McCain will certainly get hammered by the 527s, Obama more so (or perhaps more effectively). It's a bit ironic that McCain seems so willing to engage in this after getting "swift boated" in South Carolina in the 2000 primary.
A few facts are in order....1st...Kerry at any time could have ordered his full military file released and if his side were true....He was a lock to win the election. Kerry still has not ordered his full files released he has only released 7 pages of a 100 plus page file ....Why do you think that is?
I don't remember the exact numbers but of the approx 260 officers and sailors that served with Kerry 254 of them signed on to the Swift Boat sailors allegations.
I'm young still, but I doubt I've ever seen as rapid of a double-speak maneuver as this Palin deal.
The maneuver is called a feint. The worst case scenario for the Republicans would have been a unified Obama/Clinton ticket. But both of those candidates have been criticized for not having a lot of experience. By a series of leaks, McCain hints that he is vetting various people with CEO experience, and that spooks Obama to go with someone who has been around a long time and yet doesn't overshadow Obama with actual executive experience. With the bait fresh in Obama's mouth, McCain goes in with Palin to pick up still angry Hillary supporters with a strong and outspoken female and solidifies his own base at the same time.
The phrase used on the right for this is "Rove, you magnificent bastard."
I'm sorry, but that's laughable. Biden was picked because of what was and is going on with Russia right now. It became obvious very quickly that he needed someone with Biden's Russia experience with the escalation that is going on there.
The rumors have been much more that he wanted Lieberman and the religious right threatened a revolt if he didn't pander to them. I don't buy your above scenario for a second.
Even Rove himself said that adding her to the ticket "was not a governing decision but a campaign decision". Quite the vote of confidence for her as a leader, huh? Could be argued that perhaps McCain is more concerned with winning an election than having a qualified running mate?
You don't seem like the kind of person who would think everything Rove says is true.
She was good tonight, but I'd hardly say she hit it out of the park. She did a good job at speaking to her base and getting the arena pumped up.
However, and this has been for the last two days of the convention, the only thing the Republicans have right now is a "not Obama" campaign. They don't have any ideas on how to change anything other than to cut taxes right now. So all they can do is attack rather than lay out plans for what can be done to make things better right now.
I totally agree with Rose. The idea of an executive who has the power to detain anyone they choose for any reason they imagine, or not even give a reason, not allow them a trial and just jail them indefinitely. That is truly terrifying.
We are supposed to have a government with checks and balances in order to avoid this sort of abuse of power.
Saddam Hussein got his day in court. Nazis got their day in court. Mizlovech got his day in court. These were all terrible people. But they were all granted their day in court. And I think that as Americans that's something that we should not deny anyone in the world. After all, would we as American citizens be OK with an American citizen being detained indefinitely with no charges brought against them? Even if they were an alleged murderer?
Anyway, I give it a B-. she spoke well and got the base riled up, but ultimately all she had to say is, "Obama".
Actually...Palin is the only one on either ticket with Executive Experience (McCain has a little from his military days) Sarah not only has Executive Experience but she also has a record of Accomplishment including rooting out the crooks ...working across party lines...Hiring the best candidates she could find with out regard to their party affiliation...Cut Tax's....and Faced down the oil companies that were not paying their legit share that they owed the State of Alaska...She broke the Gas pipeline loose and the 40 billion dollar project is under way to connect the immense Natural Gas resources in Alaska To a Canadian pipeline and then down to the U.S...
SPECIFICALLY WHAT ARE OBAMA'S ACCOMPLISHMENTS ..I have asked this question over and over again without a response...Perhaps you have one....Maybe you will want to say he was a community organizer...WHAT DID HE ACCOMPLISH IN THAT POSITION ..He Boss said he did very little actual work...You could say he was a State Senator...WHAT BILL OR SIGNIFICANT PIECE OF LEGISLATION DID HE PASS....As a US senator he got elected and withing a year began running for president...NO SIGNIFICANT LEGISLATION AT ALL...In fact he was a Co Sponsor on approx 60 bills and NONE of them passed.
You don't seem like the kind of person who would think everything Rove says is true.
Regardless of where you are on the political spectrum, you are extremely naive if you do believe everything Rove says. Even the people who love what he does would believe with this, they would just defend it as doing what needs to be done.
SPECIFICALLY WHAT ARE OBAMA'S ACCOMPLISHMENTS ..I have asked this question over and over again without a response...Perhaps you have one....Maybe you will want to say he was a community organizer...WHAT DID HE ACCOMPLISH IN THAT POSITION ..He Boss said he did very little actual work...You could say he was a State Senator...WHAT BILL OR SIGNIFICANT PIECE OF LEGISLATION DID HE PASS....As a US senator he got elected and withing a year began running for president...NO SIGNIFICANT LEGISLATION AT ALL...In fact he was a Co Sponsor on approx 60 bills and NONE of them passed.
This probably isn't what you want to hear, but I rather like it when politicians don't get much done. The majority of day-to-day decisions in our country are run by a system called capitalism not our democratic republic government. Usually, when politicians start "getting stuff done" we all suffer.
That said, how meaningful are the accomplishments you demand? The senate and house are designed around voting on bills, who actually submits a bill is largely irrelevant (except it usually provides them an opportunity to pork-barrel the bill for their constituents). For Obama, McCain, and Biden what is important to look at is their voting records and perhaps their ability to form bipartisan compromise. The reason I say perhaps to bipartisanship is that even if someone highly bipartisan (McCain/Lieberman for instance) were president it's unclear that they would have the same power to advocate for bipartisanship that they held while in the senate.
Regarding accomplishments of all stripes; every candidates actual accomplishments are exaggerated by their supporters and dismissed by their opponents supporters. Yes, that even includes Palin's "executive experience".
This probably isn't what you want to hear, but I rather like it when politicians don't get much done.
I tend to agree. However, regarding Obama, I have two problems.
1. A politician that has a record of not getting much done (other than be elected) should not run on a platform of "change".
2. When I see what Obama wants to do, I am 180 degrees from him on virtually (if not literally) every issue.
I'm dead serious when I say two other politicians ran on Hope and Change and I wouldn't have voted for them either. They also ran on class warfare, and one was racially based. They are Lennin and Hitler.
They were not so obviously, before they gained power, the men we now know through the lens of history. Neither is Obama.
Obama is the most frightening choice for president that has been offered up to the American people as a major parties candidate in my lifetime and probably the history of our country.
I suppose I have removed all doubt about where I stand on the man.
Comments
Then she jumped the shark with a statement that received a kind of stunned turned rigorous applause from the audience. Here's the transcript copied from the CNN transcript.
This is the epitome of what's wrong with the Bush administration. Yeah, the war's unpopular and so is the recession. But illegal wiretapping, torture, and who knows what else are why we have already lost to the terrorists. They don't win when they kill a few Americans, they win when they destroy our way of life, and nothing is more sacred to that way of life than freedom, our constitution, and the rule of law.
Palin, evidently, does not believe in that, and I am now 100% against her. Sarah Palin knows nothing about America, and I dearly hope she is not our vice president.
Meanwhile, I think y'all will LOVE this:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-h ... 23477.html
Anyone else notice by taking the "L" out of her name, you can make the ticket "McCain/PAIN"
fun with the alphabet
However, and this has been for the last two days of the convention, the only thing the Republicans have right now is a "not Obama" campaign. They don't have any ideas on how to change anything other than to cut taxes right now. So all they can do is attack rather than lay out plans for what can be done to make things better right now.
I totally agree with Rose. The idea of an executive who has the power to detain anyone they choose for any reason they imagine, or not even give a reason, not allow them a trial and just jail them indefinitely. That is truly terrifying.
We are supposed to have a government with checks and balances in order to avoid this sort of abuse of power.
Saddam Hussein got his day in court. Nazis got their day in court. Mizlovech got his day in court. These were all terrible people. But they were all granted their day in court. And I think that as Americans that's something that we should not deny anyone in the world. After all, would we as American citizens be OK with an American citizen being detained indefinitely with no charges brought against them? Even if they were an alleged murderer?
Anyway, I give it a B-. she spoke well and got the base riled up, but ultimately all she had to say is, "NoBama".
I watched her speech tonight as well and thought it was excellent. I didn't agree with all of it, and of course much of it was the usual rhetoric -- e.g.how McCain has been fighting the Washington establishment for his whole career bla bla bla -- guess what folks? He IS the Washington establishment! As well as his whole campaign team, who consist primarily of lobbyists for all of the biggest global corporations and even middle-eastern countries!
But I agree with Robroy on the fact that she hit it out of the park tonight. I switched over to PBS after the speech to see their talking heads' reactions, and boy were some of them seething because they knew it too! Gwen Ifill was spinning like a top from the get-go, trying to make it out how the whole speech was Obama-bashing (how DARE they!!!).
OK, back to the regularly-scheduled topic now in 3 . . . 2. . . .
No actual solutions on what to do about the economy.
I'm starting to hear this refrain a bit. It's almost as if the republicans are running on the ticket of being different than Bush/Cheney. Excuse me?
So, if Obama is running as "not-Bush" and McCain is running as 'not-Obama"...where does that leave us as voters?
Although I guess it could be said that McCain is running as not Bush/Not Obama.
http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/ind ... oId=184086
Where are you getting the bitter thing from? I don't pick up that vibe from her at all.
If anyone is bitter in this political season, it's Hillary, and maybe Bill even moreso.
Ya know redmondjp, when you make me explain my joke, it really ruins things.
FWIW, she actually did come across a little bitter in her comments about the media. I think that's understandable though, given the swirling vortex of media attention she has fallen into.
Google: bitter guns religion.
And then I'll welcome you to the U.S. presidential campaign coverage!
Nice video. It very clearly demonstrates the massive hypocrisy of several influential right-wing pundits. I'm young still, but I doubt I've ever seen as rapid of a double-speak maneuver as this Palin deal.
The maneuver is called a feint. The worst case scenario for the Republicans would have been a unified Obama/Clinton ticket. But both of those candidates have been criticized for not having a lot of experience. By a series of leaks, McCain hints that he is vetting various people with CEO experience, and that spooks Obama to go with someone who has been around a long time and yet doesn't overshadow Obama with actual executive experience. With the bait fresh in Obama's mouth, McCain goes in with Palin to pick up still angry Hillary supporters with a strong and outspoken female and solidifies his own base at the same time.
The phrase used on the right for this is "Rove, you magnificent bastard."
I'm sorry, but that's laughable. Biden was picked because of what was and is going on with Russia right now. It became obvious very quickly that he needed someone with Biden's Russia experience with the escalation that is going on there.
The rumors have been much more that he wanted Lieberman and the religious right threatened a revolt if he didn't pander to them. I don't buy your above scenario for a second.
Even Rove himself said that adding her to the ticket "was not a governing decision but a campaign decision". Quite the vote of confidence for her as a leader, huh? Could be argued that perhaps McCain is more concerned with winning an election than having a qualified running mate?
That's hilarious! Wait, was that not a joke? Oh...then it's really sad.
It's not a feint. Leaks from McCain's inner chamber suggest Palin was essentially off the short list until a few weeks ago. If it were all part of a brilliant plan, the leak would have said "Obama played into our hands" rather than the other way around. Instead, McCain was desperate to pick off PUMAs, and that's where Palin came from.
Also, I wasn't thinking of McCain when I mentioned double speak. I think her pick was right in line with his style, which is high risk/high reward and often times reckless. No, the double speak and hypocrisy is from the right's pundits, not the candidate.
- "Where's the experience" has become "7K people is a large city...in Alaska".
- "Women need to take it" has become "hey, lay off her family - who she conveniently uses as a prop when it suits her".
- The "moral right" who judges the parents when the child sins has turned into the "everybody has premarital babies and shotgun weddings" right.
- Alaska, the most socialist state in the union (they send citizens checks and collect by far the largest federal funding per citizen in the union), is being used as an example of smaller government.
Don't take this as a rant against McCain. I respect him, and I am not certain I won't vote for him in November. But the most vocal voices for the republican party in the media are who I am talking about when I point out how rapidly they have switched nearly every position they "hold dear". The same people who harped on how much of a flip-flop Kerry was. Pfft.
Lieberman is well liked by conservatives for his positions on national defense, but on most other issues he is regarded as too liberal.
Here is one of many articles that describes the sudden reverse on the proper place for women that now seems to be the position of the left, and most of the media.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1220582 ... inion_main
There has been a lot of talk of the number of years in each position when comparing Obama and Palin and the population of various constituencies. I look forward to a transition comparing the actual accomplishments made during those times to see what the candidates' proven capabilities and beliefs are. Frankly, I don't see any of the other three coming near to the accomplishments of McCain and that bodes well for his ability to build coalitions to get things done. I haven't heard of anything really that Obama has accomplished other than hold various job titles.
It's such a ridiculous move by McCain it boggles my mind. McCain is 72 and has had multiple bouts with cancer and this is who he thinks should be right behind him? This?
Look at the two VP choices made. Obama said, who could step in if need be? There were a couple choices and he picked Biden. He may not be your exact cup of tea, but it's pretty easy to make a case for him. John McCain was looking over his choices and Sarah Palin was the most qualified he could find? Seriously? If he wanted a women there were numerous to choose from... Hutchison, Snowe, even Carly Fiorina if he thought this country really needed some "executive" experience. But no. John McCain thought... Sarah Palin
It's an obvious hail mary pass.
Now, I'm not saying it won't work, but I am saying it's a sign of desperation. The media will continue to make this out to be a horse race, but that's to make money. The same day Noonan writes an article on how Palin could be a "transformative political presence" in the WSJ, she says "It's over" on a mic she didn't realize was on, while McCain adivsor Mike Murphy said it was a "cynical" choice.
Let's face it, McCain is betting that two things will happen here:
1. Conservatives will go "Yay! I am conservative. She's conservative. I'm OK with this ticket now" (Which I think the pick did quite well.)
2. Women will say "Yay! I am woman. I will vote for woman." (I'm not of the mind it works that way.)
And now I wonder if all those people who won't vote for a black man (the Bradley effect which Robroy seems to love so much :? ) are going to be enlightened enough to vote for a woman, even if she is "only" VP.
Palin's speech was fine. It fired up the base. Her main success was that you can't fact-check a speech live. (I can't believe she keeps bringing up the bridge to nowhere as an example of her great pork cutting.)
Whoops.
A few facts are in order....1st...Kerry at any time could have ordered his full military file released and if his side were true....He was a lock to win the election. Kerry still has not ordered his full files released he has only released 7 pages of a 100 plus page file ....Why do you think that is?
I don't remember the exact numbers but of the approx 260 officers and sailors that served with Kerry 254 of them signed on to the Swift Boat sailors allegations.
You don't seem like the kind of person who would think everything Rove says is true.
Actually...Palin is the only one on either ticket with Executive Experience (McCain has a little from his military days) Sarah not only has Executive Experience but she also has a record of Accomplishment including rooting out the crooks ...working across party lines...Hiring the best candidates she could find with out regard to their party affiliation...Cut Tax's....and Faced down the oil companies that were not paying their legit share that they owed the State of Alaska...She broke the Gas pipeline loose and the 40 billion dollar project is under way to connect the immense Natural Gas resources in Alaska To a Canadian pipeline and then down to the U.S...
SPECIFICALLY WHAT ARE OBAMA'S ACCOMPLISHMENTS ..I have asked this question over and over again without a response...Perhaps you have one....Maybe you will want to say he was a community organizer...WHAT DID HE ACCOMPLISH IN THAT POSITION ..He Boss said he did very little actual work...You could say he was a State Senator...WHAT BILL OR SIGNIFICANT PIECE OF LEGISLATION DID HE PASS....As a US senator he got elected and withing a year began running for president...NO SIGNIFICANT LEGISLATION AT ALL...In fact he was a Co Sponsor on approx 60 bills and NONE of them passed.
Regardless of where you are on the political spectrum, you are extremely naive if you do believe everything Rove says. Even the people who love what he does would believe with this, they would just defend it as doing what needs to be done.
This probably isn't what you want to hear, but I rather like it when politicians don't get much done. The majority of day-to-day decisions in our country are run by a system called capitalism not our democratic republic government. Usually, when politicians start "getting stuff done" we all suffer.
That said, how meaningful are the accomplishments you demand? The senate and house are designed around voting on bills, who actually submits a bill is largely irrelevant (except it usually provides them an opportunity to pork-barrel the bill for their constituents). For Obama, McCain, and Biden what is important to look at is their voting records and perhaps their ability to form bipartisan compromise. The reason I say perhaps to bipartisanship is that even if someone highly bipartisan (McCain/Lieberman for instance) were president it's unclear that they would have the same power to advocate for bipartisanship that they held while in the senate.
Regarding accomplishments of all stripes; every candidates actual accomplishments are exaggerated by their supporters and dismissed by their opponents supporters. Yes, that even includes Palin's "executive experience".
I tend to agree. However, regarding Obama, I have two problems.
1. A politician that has a record of not getting much done (other than be elected) should not run on a platform of "change".
2. When I see what Obama wants to do, I am 180 degrees from him on virtually (if not literally) every issue.
I'm dead serious when I say two other politicians ran on Hope and Change and I wouldn't have voted for them either. They also ran on class warfare, and one was racially based. They are Lennin and Hitler.
They were not so obviously, before they gained power, the men we now know through the lens of history. Neither is Obama.
Obama is the most frightening choice for president that has been offered up to the American people as a major parties candidate in my lifetime and probably the history of our country.
I suppose I have removed all doubt about where I stand on the man.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/communit ... The/gG5tCk