The Palin Problem

« Return to Article

Discuss

  • Posted By: Pallisor @ 10/07/2008 3:01:38 PM

    Harley,

    Stop whining. No one here suggested you couldn't post your opinion, and no one here is going to up and leave as you order them to because they oppose yours. You're getting your @ss kicked here today not because of your political position, but because you act like a 13 year old. We've seen this before with you. You think you can run over people whenever and however you wish without getting called on it. Wrong. When you behave like a yapping Pomeranian that's gotten away from its owner, someone will eventually step on your leash.

    BTW, you keep telling certain people that you "own them." The only thing you own is that massive, blabbering mouth of yours.

  • Posted By: wendy027 @ 10/05/2008 10:41:22 AM

    The usual elite liberal media bias we come to expect from this rotten mag. Many times one can substitute Obama for Palin and it would read much the same.

    Unfortunately, for the Obama backers Palin has more experience and a broad record of achievement where Obama has none.

    While Obama was community organizer Governor Palin was cutting taxes and balancing a cities budget. Palin was making executive decisions while Obama was organizing a soup kitchen.

    While Obama has been running for President Governor Palin has cleaned up corruption in her own party by first defeating an incumbent Governor in a primary. She cancelled the former administrations oil royalty contract and signed a new one that increased the royalties paid.

    What was Obama doing about the notorious corrupt Chicago democrat machine while a state senator? Best we can tell is that he was doling out political favours in the time honoured Chicago political tradition and feathering his nest with Rezko money.

    The contrast is stunningly clear.

    • Posted By: regulator @ 10/07/2008 2:48:54 PM

      To compare Sara P to Obama... it is simply an intellectual dishonesty. If we are looking for good-look and poise then voter should look towards Hollywood ....

  • Posted By: aaronflentge @ 10/07/2008 2:47:31 PM

    "BTW both John McCain and John Glenn were cleared of any charges by a congressional panel 20 years ago"

    OJ Simpson was acquitted 13 years ago but that doesnt mean he was or was not guilty.

  • Posted By: Blackdogjoy @ 10/07/2008 2:41:20 PM

    BOYCOTT Palin and anyone who fosters hatred

  • Posted By: Blackdogjoy @ 10/07/2008 2:40:50 PM

    boycott Palin! No more

  • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 10/07/2008 1:39:33 PM

    I remember not too long ago, the promise that was the "New Politics" and of "Hope." Like everything Obama says, its all for show, not meant to mean anything but just to get him elected.
    Voter fraud thanks to ACORN.
    Using the same excuse for Wright, Rezko and Ayers just doesn't fly.
    Obama doesn't know anything about the people that helped him in his political career, yet his supporters still think he is smart. That Harvard degree really did come in a cracker jack box.

    • Posted By: News and Notes @ 10/07/2008 2:39:53 PM

      That hope, change, unity crap from the primaries seems like a 100 years ago.

  • Posted By: Nins @ 10/07/2008 1:50:44 PM

    The GOP is grasping at straws. They have nothing substantive against Obama, but boy are they good at making up lies. This is the leading Karl Rove tactic for years, and if America falls for this again we should be ashamed of ourselves. Not to mention the obvious fact that this is all a smokescreen to keep the focus off of the fact that Palin and her Alaska associates are in contempt of court for refusing to testify in the Troopergate hearings. After Nixon and Clinton, Americans are to some extent jaded, but really, would you want a VP who refuses to attend hearings in her own defense, and instructs her employees not to testify? That smells like guilt. It surely doesn't give the impression that she has done no wrong and has nothing to hide.

    This year, the GOP offers you an angry old man and a woman who, while personable, is desperately uniformed about national and international issues. Both of them are far right politically. McCain used to be a maverick, but since 2004 he's voted 90% with Bush. McCain's policies are not original or reformist, despite how he's tried to co-opt Obama's popular message of change. Please go to the websites of both of the candidates and read their platforms. Obama's Blueprint for Change has more good ideas than McCain's plan. Compare them yourself. Obama's basic premise is that tax dollars should be spent to make America stronger and to improve the lives and well being of our people. For example, he uses education programs to train a new technology workforce, contributing to energy independence, creating jobs and improving the economy. When you read McCain's plan you will find no over-arching design to get America back on track. Instead you'll find more tax cuts for the wealthy, de-regulation of the health care industry, and a stated intent to overturn Roe v. Wade.

    I'm a Republican. Although I embrace some forward-thinking social values, in the past I've rarely voted Democrat. My thinking was that since Republicans grow robust economies, by voting Republican I'd be endorsing a plan that would grow wealth for our nation, and then we'd be able to afford social programs. It was a good strategy for a couple decades, but I have to say that the tenure of W. Bush has changed my mind. Not only is there nothing fiscally responsible about today's GOP, the insidious alignment of the party with religious intolerance has really turned me off.

    On the other hand, the intelligent luminous thought of Barack Obama has ignited my patriotism. I want a President who puts America first and can get the economy back on track. In my mind, values voting takes a back burner when we are faced with a meltdown of the economy. It is time for a change, a real change. The Republicans have controlled the Presidency for 28 of the past 40 years, but they have fallen down on the job. The Democrats have a stellar candidate this year, and I am voting for Obama.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDofbll86dY&feature=iv&annotation_id=event_922988

    • Posted By: HolyRoller @ 10/07/2008 2:39:36 PM

      ninny, ninny, ninny....surely as a Conservative Christian Republican...hahahahahaha...sorry I had to laugh, that got stuck in my throat....you realize you have discarded all your proffessed values...to vote for the UnAmerican Idol.....oh I forgot...you are nothing but a LIAR....Liar Liar..Pants on Fire.....did you know...I always look forward to your comments....laughter IS the best medicine

      Allah Akbar Ya'll

      NOBAMA!!!

    • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 10/07/2008 1:54:06 PM

      Oh no NIns with her cut/paste jihad from the Kos. How's work going Nins? How much do you get per post?

  • Posted By: rachelbee @ 10/07/2008 1:31:31 PM

    To: DanfromAlabam - You can't even spell "loser" correctly! Now, who is the loser, really?

    • Posted By: danfromAlabam @ 10/07/2008 2:37:39 PM

      Well, I guess anyone who has nothing better to contribute than to be a spell checker! Ah-Hmmm

  • Posted By: Pallisor @ 10/07/2008 2:34:20 PM

    Hopeful08,

    You don't get it, do you? Why would anyone associate himself with people whose behavior he now claims he abhors? If he does actually "detest their behavior", (and his actions prove otherwise), why did he associate with them in the first place?

    Obama continues to get himself checkmated with this. People typically associate themselves with people they have things in common with. An unrepentant terrorist? Yes, Obama knew all about him, but chose to be chums with him anyway. Why? The maniacal Rev. Wright? Yes, I sat there for 20 years and I hated much of what he preached!

    Obama to his sheep: Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!

    BTW, both John McCain and John Glenn were cleared of any charges by a congressional panel 20 years ago.

  • Posted By: Pallisor @ 10/07/2008 2:34:07 PM

    Hopeful08,

    You don't get it, do you? Why would anyone associate himself with people whose behavior he now claims he abhors? If he does actually "detest their behavior", (and his actions prove otherwise), why did he associate with them in the first place?

    Obama continues to get himself checkmated with this. People typically associate themselves with people they have things in common with. An unrepentant terrorist? Yes, Obama knew all about him, but chose to be chums with him anyway. Why? The maniacal Rev. Wright? Yes, I sat there for 20 years and I hated much of what he preached!

    Obama to his sheep: Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!

    BTW, both John McCain and John Glenn were cleared of any charges by a congressional panel 20 years ago.

  • Posted By: Gunny Highway @ 10/07/2008 2:13:10 PM

    Wow! I must have hit a nerve with Harley is Here: Was it pimple-faced twit, with low esteem, or was it piss-ant? Do your research. Was LtCol North a criminal when he helped plan the operation that ultimately captured the terrorists who killed a U.S. citizen on the Achille Lauro? The democrats were pissed that the NSA actually came up with a plan that did not, break a non-punitive bill, and actually helped President Reagan's foreign policy efforts...which I might remind all, was working.

    As for my qualifications, they'll stand on their own. I have dealt with the media most of my adult life and I've been a teacher. In fact, I have also worked as a military media consultant in two major media markets. But, I will say the integrity of the media has been so degraded, reporters will make you believe that what they saw is a fact, when truly, much of what is said is slanted and most people will never see the whole picture to make valid, unbiased decisions. I will continue to support anyone's First Amendment Rights, even if it's based on immaturity, low self-esteem and a twisted sense what is right and wrong. That's why we have libel and slander laws. Again, I feel sorry for Harley is Here. He/She obviously hasn't had much of a life. I kind of enjoy being targetted. It only means I'm being effective in what I say or do. Harley is Here: God love you! I'm sure someone has to! But, get your facts straight. Spend more time in research than character assassination. You have the potential to be a fairly intelligent person. Incidentally, what do you have against attractive women. I guess you liked Hilary and her friend Janet Reno. By the way, I didn't once refer to Nancy Pelosi's good looks and she's more my age group. She's still a scofflaw and a robber baroness. Semper Fi, Y'All!

  • Posted By: NewsWkDickG @ 10/07/2008 1:11:28 PM

    It is interesting and yet disturbing, really even scary, to see what is happening today on the political stage, with so much of it being strictly theatrical and totally scripted and obviously intended to misrepresent (deceive), and then to see the differences in the public???s reactions to those creative performances. Consider the confusing fact that the presidential race is even close, with what the Bush-Cheney administration has done over the last eight years and the drastically negative impact that it has had, and it is then really hard to understand. Possibly, as some say, it is a reflection of racial bias but really that can???t explain all of it. Take Senator McCain and not only his obvious, when all of the camouflage is put aside, commitment (and history) to continue with more of the same (Bush-Cheney) and the failed Republican policies/attitudes that are aimed to patronize Special Interests and a select few, but also McCain???s desperate and irresponsible selection of Sarah Palin for his running mate. Now you may like her personality, find her good looking, a real ???cutesy??? and even agree with a few of her views but there can be no denying that she is extreme, bazaar and, most importantly, totally unqualified and just aggressively trying to disguise her inexperience and simply push a bold and belligerent presentation to manipulate public opinion. Her whole purpose is apparent as an ???attack dog??? as she boldly criticizes with exaggerated and mostly irrelevant accusations while totally avoiding the real issues. Being a ???hockey mom??? and a ???pit bull with lipstick??? may make her interesting but it sure doesn???t qualify her to be vice-president or, most totally not, to be president. That should then be completely scary, yet many still rationalize that she is acceptable. It isn???t as if she is applying to be a next-door neighbor and come over for a barbecue, she wants to help and maybe even individually run the country. The real truth should be apparent to anyone that is willing to check their emotional ties, prejudices and biases, including their political affiliations, that we simply can???t withstand any further focus on Special Interests and a select few, that we can???t survive continuing with the same philosophies, that whether poor or middle class or upper middle class we are currently loosing substantially, and we desperately need real change (not just someone who claims to be a ???Maverick??? but actually never did more than just adjust in his own best interests). If too many of us are sold on ignoring the facts, the truth, on accepting the subterfuge offered, we may just end up with more of the same, with literally continuing in the same direction we are currently going. This country can???t take that, this country desperately needs real, drastic and honest change! And really, common sense dictates that those who have taken us to where we are today should be prosecuted and not congratulated by electing other

    • Posted By: NewsWkDickG @ 10/07/2008 1:54:33 PM

      (finishing above with what was chopped off):

      "and not congratulated by electing others who supported them!"

  • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 10/07/2008 1:50:09 PM

    Axelrod told Politico's Ben Smith in February: "Bill Ayers lives in his neighborhood. Their kids attend the same school. ... They're certainly friendly, they know each other, as anyone whose kids go to school together."

    Too bad Obama's kids are too young to have gone to school with Ayers' kids.

    Another Obama lie!

  • Posted By: rachelbee @ 10/07/2008 1:34:55 PM

    To: danfromAlabam -- You can't even spell "loser" correctly. Hah! Who is the real loser, really? PS - this is a great article. Palin is trying to pull the wool over our eyes like W did when he ran in 2000 by trying to appeal to people with low IQ's. Do we really want alcoholic "Joe Six-Packs" to be deciding our next president?

  • Posted By: act1940 @ 10/07/2008 1:23:17 PM

    Did Joe 6-pack cover the $60,000 perdiem for champagne Josie and her family? Seems to me she making fun of Joe 6-pack as that is probably his yearly salary.

  • Posted By: marksgershenson @ 10/07/2008 12:58:30 PM

    Barack Obama has opened up a nine-point lead over John McCain, 51% to 42%, in the latest Gallup Poll Daily tracking. That matches Obama???s largest lead of the campaign to date.

    This goes in agreement with Rassmusen report's poll that I posted earlier. If McCain does not win tonight's debate, it will become curtains for him.

    Electoral College projections now show Obama leading 217-163. However, when ???leaners??? are included, Obama leads 300-174. A total of 270 Electoral Votes are needed to win the White House.

    Voters now trust Democrats more than Republicans on all ten key issues tracked regularly by Rasmussen Reports. Other polling shows that voters overwhelmingly believe the United States is the best nation in the world.

    • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 10/07/2008 1:20:39 PM

      Actually we need to vote out every incumbent in Congress this year and in 2010. Both GOP and Democrats do squat for the people, they all are too busy lining their own pockets to give a damn about the people.
      The only reason voters trust the Dems more right now is because the news is feeding them a line of crap.
      Dodd and Frank are the ones that had the most in starting this mess. McCain at least stood up in the Senate 2 years ago with a Bill for more regulation....but that little fact doesn't do much for your case so you choose to forget it.

    • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 10/07/2008 1:17:40 PM

      That's nice...didn't you say the polls didn't matter back when McCain was in the lead?

      So just selective polling is that all?

  • Posted By: act1940 @ 10/07/2008 1:20:35 PM

    Did Joe 6-pack cover the $60,000 perdiem for champagne Josie and her family? Seems to me she making fun of Joe 6-pack as that is probably his yearly salary.

  • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 10/07/2008 12:59:57 PM

    I knew all the Obama supporters had to be here hatin' on Palin....they definitely aren't in the factcheck boards trying to defend Obama/Biden's lies.

  • Posted By: News and Notes @ 10/06/2008 1:12:57 PM

    This election cycle reminds me of the book "Brave New World". The news media controls what candidate we are supposed to support, and knocks of Hillary, the most qualified candidate in 40 years. The public gets dumbed down by the media and elites. Now we are stuck with two horrible candidates, and the public is walking around like zombies. If Obama loses, I can;t wait to see Nancy Pelosi lifted by her surgically altered buttocks and thrown from the Speaker's chair, along with Reid and Dean

    • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 10/07/2008 12:58:54 PM

      More like 1984....but I like the BNW comment. KoolAid is the Soma for the masses it seems.

    • Posted By: HAL--- @ 10/06/2008 1:19:14 PM

      Being "First Lady" for 8 years does not "qualify" someone for the office of President of the US. As for Pelosi, I have news for you...Dems are going to gain seats come this election cycle. Here's Obama resume since you are cluless about qualifications:
      http://obamasresume.org/

      • Posted By: News and Notes @ 10/06/2008 6:50:57 PM

        I hope to God the Democrats gain more seats in the senate and the house, but the democratic leadership is far left and arrogant. Hillary is uniquely qualified to be president. She was one of the youngest women ever in the top 100 lawyers in the country. She was an active listener and observer for twenty years while her husband held higher office in Little Rock and Washington DC. She has been in the Senate 8 years, and has already been named one ot the 10 most powerful senators. She was re-elected tot he senate in 2006 by a 2 to 1 margin. She has achieved what no woman before her ever did. She is a tireless fighter and advocate for ALL Americans. Her depth and knowledge of issues is phenomenal. Her leadership and negotiating skills are top notch. Those are the qualities that make the best president in history

      • Posted By: cobalt6 @ 10/06/2008 2:27:31 PM

        Hillary is more qualified than Obama any day!

        • Posted By: pumapurr @ 10/06/2008 3:03:16 PM

          Yes. It took the combined thuggery of Axelrod, the DNC, and the MSM to keep her down. And just barely.

          Now they're trying the same thing in the general election-- control the media, and game the system with Chicago-style voter fraud on a national level. But they don't control We The People. Not yet.

    • Posted By: cobalt6 @ 10/06/2008 1:22:51 PM

      Great Comment !!!

  • Posted By: Hopeful08 @ 10/07/2008 12:57:26 PM

    Re: Commonthinking's dislike of the "hocky mom" comparison: I couldn't agree more. Why is it that Republicans have been allowed to label Palin's inability to string words together into a coherent sentence, her horrifying lack of knowledge about international affairs, current events, or the economy, and her inability or refusal to simply answer questions as "normal" or "folksy" or how "hockey moms" and "Joe six-pack" think and speak? I, for one, am incredibly insulted by the comparison. I am as middle-America "Joe Six-pack" as anyone else, and I know that my friends and I are actually intelligent, informed and articulate. It is very unfair to all of us to cover Palin's shortcomings by pretending that they are just a symptom of her being "an average American." And to be very clear here, I am absolutely NOT referring here to HOW she speaks ??? I am referring to her shameful lack of content when she speaks.

    I am similarly distressed by the very bad message that all of this sends to our children. Like everyone else, I want my children to work hard in school, to do well and get good grades. I want them to get into the best collage they can, and I hope and pray that it will be a top school like Harvard or Yale or Stanford. I dream of a better life for them where they are successful and accomplished and that they will achieve great things. And yes, I even tell them that they can be anything in the world that they want to be, even president of the United States. I am horrified that in the current political culture, we now label people who do those things as "elite" and, apparently, automatically unqualified to be President. When did we decide that people who excel and achieve are to be punished for it? Putting aside the fact that I actually want my President to be VERY smart and VERY accomplished and VERY good at public speaking and VERY good at answering questions (I never would have thought those things would be considered shortcomings in a President), it seems to me that criticizing Obama as "elite" because of his education and accomplishments sends entirely the wrong message to our youth. Aggrandizing Palin's shortcomings and pretending that they somehow make her a good candidate likewise sends the wrong message. If you don't agree with Obama's policies, fine. If you think that McCain's time in the Senate and experience in war make him better qualified to be President, that makes sense to me and I respect your position. But don't let's pretend that Palin brings anything substantive to the party, is in any way qualified to be President (if need be) or presents a role model that we would actually want our children to emulate.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse