Third Party & Independents Archives

Palin Ups Chances of McCain Beating Obama

I applaud John McCain’s choice of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his vice president nominee. In many ways this choice was far more impressive than Barack Obama’s selection of Joe Biden. Better yet, the McCain selection will make the general election campaign far more interesting and competitive.

I say this on the basis of looking at contradictions that the choices raised. Here we have Obama proclaiming endlessly that he was running against the politics of the past, but then he picks an extremely long term senator that is clearly a member of the status quo establishment. Moreover, Obama has kept boasting that he does not take money from lobbyists, but Biden has taken plenty. And then there is the claim of great judgment by Obama for his opposition to the Iraq war, but Biden played an important role as a Democrat in supporting the Bush war.

Palin is a much, much better match with McCain. One relatively small contradiction is that she favors more drilling for oil in Alaska’s pristine areas, while McCain has opposed that. But beyond that Palin brings something to the game that none of the other three principals does: She is the only one with real executive experience. And in comparison to the other three she has far more solid accomplishments fighting political corruption. Indeed, while Obama talks a good game, Palin is the only one that showed the courage to personally go after high level corrupt politicians – even better, she did this against office holders in her own party. I am impressed. Finally, the whole narrative about the Obamas pulling themselves up from nothing to achieve great things is matched by the Palin story.

During the Democratic convention there was endless talk by the bloviating pundits about their sadness that women have not made it to the top of the political pyramid, even as they kept blabbering about how terrific Hillary Clinton performed. Now McCain puts a woman in exactly the position that so many Democrats wanted Hillary to be in, with a chance to make it to the White House – a very good chance if all the talk about McCain serving just one term (or dying in office) has any chance of happening.

In sum, the selection of Biden was a betrayal to some very important positions and claims of Obama. In contrast, except for one relatively minor position, the selection of Palin was in sync with McCain’s political philosophy and positions. The more leftist, progressive side of the Democratic Party has no reason to be thrilled with Biden (who voted for a bankruptcy law that screwed middle class people). But the most conservative wing of the Republican Party has plenty of reason to be thrilled with the Palin selection.

Though Palin may not be sufficient to draw very many women Democrats to vote for the McCain ticket, it may be just as important because it cause many women Democrats to not vote for the Obama ticket. But like most conventional thinkers you are waiting for me to rebut the criticism that Palin has no foreign policy experience. Excuse me, but we have had a few presidents that were governors – think Carter and Clinton – who also had no particular foreign policy experience. So Democrats ought to be cautious in making this criticism of Palin. If McCain wins, she would have ample time and opportunity to become smart about foreign policy. And, oh yes, also remember a former governor Reagan that did pretty well when it came to foreign policy. Enough said.

Posted by Joel S. Hirschhorn at August 29, 2008 4:14 PM
Comment #260126


And our current president was also a Governor with little foreign policy… Oh, er…

I think that just saying that one way or the other doesn’t really mean much, how many presidents have ever, really, had foreign policy experience? Obama certainly doesn’t, but McCain does. If Palin were to have to ‘take over’, she would have McCain’s staff and however long he was in office to give her more experience than Obama would have on day one…

But I agree, I think this was a great choice on a large number of issues, most importantly it helps reiterate his ‘Maverick’ name that even Democrats accepted until he dared run against Obama. ‘Conventional wisdom’ would have said to do one thing but he wen’t a different way, with the one choice that points to him looking for those willing to take on the bad republicans and weed them out of office. One can imagine that this would be a requirement for most of his staff once elected…

Posted by: Rhinehold at August 29, 2008 4:32 PM
Comment #260134

Ups his chances? Palin is totally under-qualified to be the president should something happen to McCain. And since he is ancient, this is a serious consideration. However, Palin likely does put a firm lock on the Evangelical Vote for McCain due to her far right religious and anti-abortion stance, though.
In my view, the threat of the Republican ticket doing away with abortion rights for women definitely will not appeal to the women who wanted to vote for Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 29, 2008 4:47 PM
Comment #260142

Liberals have no idea the tidal wave this is going to be to Obama’s campaign.

Sarah is so straight and so good and so likable, plus, she and has a spine made out of titanium, you watch and wait. McCain could not have picked a better running mate.

Posted by: Yukon Jake at August 29, 2008 4:56 PM
Comment #260148

She is a creationist. That alone puts her decision-making skills, and intellect under serious question. This choice reeks of desperation for McCain, trying to pull Hillary suppporters away from Obama and toward a woman that is anti-choice, and against equal pay for equal work. Does McCain really think female Hillary supporters will flock to a stepford wife?

Posted by: pops mcgee at August 29, 2008 5:00 PM
Comment #260155

The democrats are already trying to do damage control. They are talking about her lack of experience even though she has more than Obama! What a joke!
Now I’m seeing accusations on the web that Palin got picked because she’s sleeping with McCain. The Democrats must really be panicking if they feel the need to go this far! It’s all over for Obama!

Posted by: Republicwin at August 29, 2008 5:09 PM
Comment #260187

So now that it has been determined that experience is no longer a necessary qualifier I guess we can remove that equation from the debate. I am assuming that it is also fair to say that Obama is a quick study. So by the analogies presented in this thread Obamas current experience at the state and federal level combined with what he will learn from Joe Biden over the next few months should, by way of the criteria presented here, make him more than a capable president.

Posted by: RickIL at August 29, 2008 6:14 PM
Comment #260189

This is an absolutely masterful stroke of political jujutsu.

I’ve never seen anything like it. Pure genius.

We’re treated to the absolutely comic spectacle of Barack Obama, a man with absolutely zero qualifications to be president, saying that a sitting governor is unqualified to be VP. He can say it, and his cultish media worshippers will repeat it, but all it does is invite comparisons of her record with his. She’s not even heading the ticket and has a more distinguished record than he does. The media and the Obama campaign are not going to be able to sell such a transparent absurdity for very long.

And then we have a governor who rose to prominence taking on corruption in her own party. A strong and successful woman who will cause the far left-wing militant feminists to disgrace and discredit themselves when they begin launching their disgusting attacks. As they always do whenever a strong, independent woman doesn’t subscribe to militant socialist versions of what they call feminism.

After Obama’s angry and divisive speech last night, it’s wonderful to see REAL reformers, people with REAL accomplishments who can offer REAL unity and change take the stage.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at August 29, 2008 6:25 PM
Comment #260191

political jujutsu…funny and true.

I saw her name a week ago and when looking into her saw the same things. Our VP is better qualified the the Dems top pick. The only thing Obama may have is he’s a bit prettier but even that’s too close to call.

Posted by: andy at August 29, 2008 6:34 PM
Comment #260193


Exactly. McCain has just eliminated his strongest argument against Obama, the argument about experience. What does McCain have to run on now?

Posted by: pops mcgee at August 29, 2008 6:38 PM
Comment #260196

It’s the truth, Pops McGee, the experience argument is now history. So are all his claims to “superior judgment” when Palin is so clearly a rash, desperate pick. Seems to me like just killed his two main arguments for being deserving of the presidency.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 29, 2008 6:46 PM
Comment #260199
McCain has just eliminated his strongest argument against Obama, the argument about experience.

Nonsense. Both McCain AND Palin have more experience than Obama, and unless McCain were to die in very first weeks of office (which would undoubtedly delight Democrats—as hate-filled as they are), Palin would have FAR more experience than Obama by the time she assumed the presidency.

You can’t just gloss over that Obama is running against McCain, not Palin. Yes, it’s a closer call experience-wise between Palin and Obama than it is between McCain and Obama, but it doesn’t change Obama’s lack of qualifications to assume the presidency NEXT YEAR.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at August 29, 2008 6:50 PM
Comment #260201

Obama’s acceptance speech was watched by 38 million Americans- more than the opening ceremony for the Olympics. Even before the speech, Rasmussen and Gallup polls showed Obama ahead by 4% and 8%. The acceptance speech received rave reviews- Pat Buchanon and David Gergen, conservative commentators, swooned over the speech, and rightly so; and this put McCain into the panic mode.

That explains the timing of the announcement. Panic.

But why nominate a relative unknown, a lightweight by anybody’s standards? Again, panic.

The only hope is to attract the far right fundamentalists with a candidate who is, well, far right. At the same time, there is some wishful thinking that a female candidate might attract disaffected Hillary voters, although Palin’s far right views are highly unlikely to make much of a dent with Hillary supporters.

So! As a result of this desperate, ill advised choice, the GOP VP nominee is a person who would normally not be considered qualified for the presidency by almost anyone’s standards.

If it helps McCain at all, it will be the story’s ability to take attention away from Obama’s acceptance speech and the flawless Democratic convention as we enter the long weekend.

And please, guys. Pretending “executive experience” as the mayor of a town of 6,500 people counts as something significant is just pathetic.

Posted by: phx8 at August 29, 2008 7:00 PM
Comment #260202

When Democrats say that Palin lacks experience in relation to Obama, they CAN’T POSSIBLY be talking about his experiences governing, which are virtually non-existent.

I assume that they mean his experiences parting the Red Sea, turning water to wine, and rising from the dead after three days. Okay, I get it now.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at August 29, 2008 7:01 PM
Comment #260203

According to Air America, Palin also believes that abortion cannot be allowed even for cases of rape or incest.

If that is true, I sincerely think that she’s going to draw a lot fewer ‘Hillraisers’ than McCain had hoped.

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at August 29, 2008 7:04 PM
Comment #260204

Careful with those biblical references. God is sending a hurricane at the Gulf Coast just in time for the GOP convention. He is already mad enough at Republicans. Don’t make it worse.

Posted by: phx8 at August 29, 2008 7:06 PM
Comment #260205

The Palin choice just made McCain’s age and health a central issue. This is the move that will sink McCain’s campaign.

Posted by: pianofan at August 29, 2008 7:09 PM
Comment #260206

Preliminary MSNBC poll has Biden 65% as president and Palin at 34%. This is a preliminary poll and therefore not to be relied upon as anything more than a straw poll. Watch this weekend for some real polling results with reliability and validity statistics attached to them. If the same ratio holds up, McCain hurt himself big time with this attempt to sucker Hillary voters in.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 29, 2008 7:12 PM
Comment #260207

According to the Anchorage Daily News, here is the reaction of the leader of the state senate, a Republican:

State Senate President Lyda Green said she thought it was a joke when someone called her at 6 a.m. to tell her the news.

“She’s not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president? said Green, a Republican from Palin’s hometown of Wasilla. “Look at what she’s done to this state. What would she do to the nation?”

Posted by: phx8 at August 29, 2008 7:13 PM
Comment #260208

Republicans can’t seriously think that her executive “experience” really qualifies her to be VP, and President should the situation occur. Alaska is different than any other state in this country. They basically have a budget surplus every year from the oil companies. How hard is it to pay for a few highways and state troopers, when she isn’t trying to get them fired for a personal vendetta, when the state doesn’t have to worry about deficits? There are no state income taxes, or state sales taxes. So her executive “experience” compared to the highest office of this country is laughable.

And if executive experience is the best indicator of Presidential ability, then by that logic George W. Bush was a better President than Abraham Lincoln.

Posted by: pops mcgee at August 29, 2008 7:17 PM
Comment #260209

Palin was interviewed earlier this week by MSNBC’s Maria Bartolomo. Palin is suffering OIL envy. She accurately said 80% of Alaska’s state budget comes from oil revenues. Hence, her prejudiced and biased opinion that opening more oil leases in places like ANWR will bring down oil prices.

She is pedaling false information for political gain, just like the man who picked her. And if you watch the interview, you can see how she is not even aware of her own biases and prejudices on this issue.

One more thing. Does America really want a Woman President globe trotting around the world with 5 kids at home? It is an entirely different issue with with a Mom whose children are adults. But, I think having small children at home and seeking the White House would raise cultural issues regarding roles in the Evangelical and Hard Right wings of the Republican Party.

Being a work at home Dad all my daughter’s life while the wife worked outside the home, I don’t have any problem with this, as her husband has apparently done a fine job of raising the kids while Sarah went to work. But, then, I am not an Evangelical Christian with biblical sexual roles interfering or a white male Republican whose traditions have the woman at home with the kids.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 29, 2008 7:20 PM
Comment #260211

Pops McGee, one correction. Alaskans revenue come from oil leaving the ground, which Alaskans own. The oil and drilling companies just extract the oil for a profit, but, have no ownership rights to the oil in Alaska. Alaska’s oil reserves pay royalties to the Alaskan government (the people) upon extraction from the ground. Same for natural gas.

So, the Alaskan people do not profit from the oil companies directly. They profit from the perpetual high price and dependence upon oil for their state’s revenues. That is for sure. Hence, the 100% guarantee that Palin will want to insure oil and gas as America’s primary energy source as far into the future as the eye can see. To hell with the other 49 states and the rest of the world. Alaska benefits from oil and gas energy.

She tried to talk about alternatives in Alaska in her interview, but, carefully avoided any statements that such alternatives actually exist in Alaska. Sounded like paying lip service to hide the fact that Alaska has no need for alternative energy sources.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 29, 2008 7:26 PM
Comment #260212

phx8…seems the people of Alaska don’t feel the same as Green.

“state Sen. Lyda Green seemed to have a pretty good fix on what her Valley constituents wanted since her first election in 1994.

Recently, that’s changed.”

“Sen. Green didn’t share the governor’s enthusiasm for political reform”

Green is withdrawing from her re-election bid.

Posted by: andy at August 29, 2008 7:28 PM
Comment #260213

David, that characterization of what evangelical Christians want is nothing but a left-wing stereotype with no basis in fact. This notion that American Christian women don’t get educated and have careers outside of the home is utterly ridiculous.

What’s more, it’s a totally offensive assumption that comes from bigotry. Saying that evangelical women are all home with the kids is JUST as offensive as saying that all blacks are gang-bangers. Would you make that comment about Obama? No? Then why do you think it’s okay to make that comment about Palin?

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at August 29, 2008 7:29 PM
Comment #260221

Loyal Opp, you obviously have not studied the sociological research or demographics of the Evangelical Right. I forgive your ignorance on the topic. It is an another inconvenient truth, after all.

Of course, there are employed and industrious Evangelicals with children. But, that does not make the rule or even summarize the majority.

If you want to be insulted by Christian values regarding the role of women, take it up with Evangelical preachers, or the writers of the Bible, not me. I am all for women in the work force, if that is where they want to be.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 29, 2008 7:41 PM
Comment #260222

The visual is what strikes me. McCain looks like death next to her. Remember Kennedy/Nixon? Have Republicans learned nothing…or is it just Alzheimer’s?

Posted by: googlumpugus at August 29, 2008 7:44 PM
Comment #260230

I see you guys are continuing to try and smear Palin on experiance, even though she’s been involved in government far longer than Obama. She has a proven record of accomplishment while Obama has little to point to. Even Obama himself had to retract his campaign’s knee-jerk attack on her experiance!
Give it up guys, Obama is finished.

Posted by: Republicwin at August 29, 2008 8:13 PM
Comment #260235

Mark my word, from someone who has been around for a while, it’s all over but the shout, for BHO. Stick a fork in him, he’s done and the more you attack McCain’s VP, the better and more popular she will become. She is the answer to the conservatives questions about McCain. I think BHO was outsmarted by another old guy, hmmm.

You would think the nag group would be excited about a woman VP. So much for the women’s lib movement.

Posted by: Oldguy at August 29, 2008 8:25 PM
Comment #260239

If executive experience is the best indicator of Presidential ability, then by that logic George W. Bush was a better President than Abraham Lincoln.

Her executive “experience” of the 4th least populated state, with no state income tax, or state sales tax, does not compare to the office of the President of the USA. She has no experience in foreign policy. She doesn’t know anything about McCain’s Iraq policy.

You simply cannot compare her time as mayor of a town of 6000 people, to Obama’s time as a state senator of one of our largest states, and say she is more experienced. You cannot compare her year and a half of running a state with such a low population, to Obama spending the last 4 years in the Senate working on national legislation and his time spent on the foreign relations committee, and say she is more experienced. McCain has thrown away any future debate about experience in this election, he now has absolutely nothing to run on.

Posted by: pops mcgee at August 29, 2008 8:33 PM
Comment #260244

You simply cannot compare her time as mayor of a town of 6000 people, to Obama’s time as a state senator of one of our largest states, and say she is more experienced. You cannot compare her year and a half of running a state with such a low population, to Obama spending the last 4 years in the Senate working on national legislation and his time spent on the foreign relations committee, and say she is more experienced

Oh yes I can!
There’s a big difference between working for the people and spending all your time building yourself up for a presidential run. Palin went up against all kinds of corrupt politics. She is the agent of change that Obama can only talk about being.

McCain has thrown away any future debate about experience in this election, he now has absolutely nothing to run on.

No, he’s just letting you talk about experience and make fools out of yourselves. You know who agrees with me? Obama himself! He had to retract the attacks on Palin made by his campaign!

Posted by: Republicwin at August 29, 2008 8:46 PM
Comment #260246

For your info evangelical preachers wives have more of a job than most of the women in the work force. Their work is 24/7 just like their husbands and it takes an extra special women to be a preachers wife. Where ever you got your info from take it back to where it came from.

Posted by: KAP at August 29, 2008 8:55 PM
Comment #260249

“You would think the nag group would be excited about a woman VP. So much for the women’s lib movement.”

Hey, oldguy, “nag group”??? You’re living up to your moniker, buddy. FYI, as a member of said nag group, I’m not overwhelmed with McCain’s choice just because she has 2 X chromosomes, ok?

Some of her beliefs strike me as decidedly anti-female and will scare former Clinton supporters right back into the democratic pen. Nice work, McCain.

Posted by: pianofan at August 29, 2008 9:03 PM
Comment #260250

Palin should campaign wearing a shirt that says “Drill here, Drill now”.

Posted by: greaser at August 29, 2008 9:05 PM
Comment #260251


Yeah, Obama spent all his time working for the people as a Senator, State Senator, and community organizer, instead of working for the oil giants trying to drill ANWR.

You just don’t get it. McCain can’t talk about experience any longer because it will just be thrown back in his face with this pick. She could literally be a heartbeat away from the Presidency, and has no experience to deal with world leaders on the biggest stage.

This choice is also absolutely condescending to female Hillary supporters for the suggestion they would vote against everything they believe in because the other VP nominee is a woman. He could have chosen from a large group of more qualified female Republicans, but being pigeonholed by the religious right to find a woman who is against womens rights lead him to choose the most unqualified candidate in US history. To try and equate Sarah Palin to Hillary Clinton in order to sway female voters is the most absurd thing I have ever seen.

Posted by: pops mcgee at August 29, 2008 9:06 PM
Comment #260253

She attended Wasilla High School where she played point guard on the state champion basketball team. Her nickname was “Sarah Barracuda.”

Posted by: greaser at August 29, 2008 9:09 PM
Comment #260255


I don’t know what you’re talking about re: Clinton. I don’t expect a lot of her supporters to go to McCain. But he will pick up many independent women nonetheless.
Do you not realize that you are hurting your own candidate on the experiance issue? Why do you think Obama is avoiding it? True, she hasn’t dealt much with foreign policy issues, but neither has Obama.
Domestically, not only has Palin been in politics far longer than Obama, but she is a proven reformer. She stands political bullshit like the Bridge To Nowhere. Obama talks big about change, but his record shows him being a party hack.
By the way, check out her approval rating in Alaska. It will scare you…

Posted by: Republicwin at August 29, 2008 9:24 PM
Comment #260256

Mayor of Wasilla does not equal Mayor of New York City.

Governor of Alaska does not equal Governor of California.

Not all executive experience is the same, and executive experience alone doesn’t mean you are qualified to be President (see George W. Bush).

Posted by: pops mcgee at August 29, 2008 9:27 PM
Comment #260257

KAP, for your remedial reading training, I never made any reference to preacher’s wives, but, to what they preach. Let me know when your reading level is up to my commentary level, and we can discuss rationally a thing or two. When you reference topics never brought up as if they were, there is little to discuss but how to burn the straw man you introduced.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 29, 2008 9:29 PM
Comment #260259


After Obama’s angry and divisive speech last night, it’s wonderful to see REAL reformers, people with REAL accomplishments who can offer REAL unity and change take the stage.

Hee hee hee!

Yes, just keep repeating that over and over and over, sooner or later you may actually start to believe it. If nothing else it may serve to sooth all that pent up angst and envy.

Posted by: RickIL at August 29, 2008 9:32 PM
Comment #260265


And please, guys. Pretending “executive experience” as the mayor of a town of 6,500 people counts as something significant is just pathetic.

Well now I think maybe I can dispute that to a degree. I grew up in a town of 800. All the mayors while I lived there were probably more qualified than GW to be president. I am not sure what that means, but it must say something about her credibility. ; )

Sorry phx8. Just an attempt at a little levity. I find the whole notion of all these desperate folks trying to justify what is so obviously an attempt at gender pandering with an ex female mayor of a tiny village and short term governor as just too hilarious. What is even funnier is the attempts at qualifying her in the wake of all the seemingly endless threads claiming Obama inexperience. The hypocrisy is just too much to not find it sadly hilarious.

Posted by: RickIL at August 29, 2008 9:54 PM
Comment #260266


I assume that they mean his experiences parting the Red Sea, turning water to wine, and rising from the dead after three days. Okay, I get it now.

You forgot walking on water. Maybe if you folks were polite you could get Obama to redirect that hurricane away from the states before the convention. Damn this is fun! I’m starting to see why you folks enjoy tearing down people so much. ; )

Posted by: RickIL at August 29, 2008 10:01 PM
Comment #260267

Sarah Palin was a good choice, but there were better possibilities. Many people with very conservative religious views vote habitually for Democrats for other reasons. I don’t know who advised JMcC on this, but I think they were hoping for more than they might get out of it.

The first story on the local news here was the increased security in BHO’s neighborhood.

Posted by: ohrealy at August 29, 2008 10:10 PM
Comment #260269

I agree with your comments to DRR. Have you ever noticed that when you disagree with a “progressive” the communication skills cease and the attacks begin. I perceive that DRR has had some bad experiences with Christians and that is why he reacts the way he does. Of course I am not attacking the messenger, I am simply doing the same thing as DRR and annalizing his comments. Remember “Pride goeth before the fall”.

As far as Palin is concerned, I am sure there are a lot of blue collar, gun totin, red blooded American men asking the question, does she have a sister who is not married?

Posted by: Oldguy at August 29, 2008 10:26 PM
Comment #260276

Oldguy said: “I am sure there are a lot of blue collar, gun totin, red blooded American men asking the question, does she have a sister who is not married?”

Sounds about right! Congratulations.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 29, 2008 10:52 PM
Comment #260277

Oldguy, and thank you for the compliment regarding progressive. I agree, advocating un-electing Democrats and Republicans who are ineffective, corrupt, or incompetent is a very progressive idea. I appreciate the reference. Makes me a trend setter in defining progressive to mean what it should. Progress.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 29, 2008 10:59 PM
Comment #260282


Thank you, I use the word “Progressive” because I don’t want to offend anyone by calling them a “Liberal”. Of course being a liberal does not necessarily lead to progress.

Posted by: Oldguy at August 29, 2008 11:14 PM
Comment #260290

I’m getting tired of hearing this little fibbie about Palin boldly opposing the Bridge To Nowhere. She was all for it until it became the laughingstock of the nation. She was quoted in 2006 in the Anchorage Times pushing the Bridge to Nowhere while the political climate was ripe. Now, she’s suddenly a crusader against pork. She can’t get through her first appearance as McCain’s veep choice without telling a whopper. The Bridge story is going to come back to haunt her.

Posted by: pianofan at August 29, 2008 11:43 PM
Comment #260291

Sorry, it wasn’t the Anchorage Times, it was the Anchorage Daily News on Oct. 22, 2006.

Posted by: pianofan at August 29, 2008 11:51 PM
Comment #260294

pianofan, just goes to show, it is nearly impossible to find a Republican politician these days who doesn’t have an inordinate amount of opportunism to hide in their past. Even if they have only been in public office for a couple years.

Equally applicable to Democrats in Congress. Sen. Biden is one Congress person who won’t be running for reelection. That leaves what, about another 450 or so to go? Voting out incumbents has never made more sense in the entire history of this nation.

Alaska has one less to worry about too! Well, maybe not. Being an opportunist, Palin surely will hold onto her Governor term when McCain loses. Wonder how Alaskans will feel about a loser for VP staying on as governor? Just fine, I suspect. They are a remote lot reaping the rewards of high priced oil. What’s to complain about, eh?

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 30, 2008 12:00 AM
Comment #260322

I posted this in the other thread, but it seems to make more sense here:

I keep seeing the statement that Palin has more “executive” experience than than Obama, Biden, or even McCain. Alaska has a population of 600,000 people. New York City has a population 10x that. Alaska’s tax code is very simple because there only a few industries. It’s population is very homogenously Republican. Palin does not deal with the executive trials anywhere near the complexity that a Guiliani, Romney, or Pawlenty does. If her executive-skill credibility relies on being governor of Alaska for two years, then there are plenty of more qualified candidates, including most CEOs.

The reason choosing Palin is so suprising is that she was vetted months ago and found unsuitable for many, many reasons, not limited to the current investigation of her abuse of power. No matter how you slice it, including her appeal to evangelicals, there were better candidates to choose from.

This leaves one reason for picking her: She’s “new and different” like Obama. Only Obama has had two years of campaigning during which we’ve learned about his judgement, capabilities, vision, etc., and we only have 6 months to learn about Palin, and that’s not enough time to learn anything except that she has a paper-thin resume.

The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that this choice was a big mistake.

And that’s why you see Obama retract a statement questioning her qualifications. The mistake is just so big, the pandering so obvious, the qualifications so non-existent, the partisanship so extreme that the smart thing to do is just get out of the way and let her implode. She’ll do great for a week or two, and then reality will sink in.

I’ll end with a quote from one campaigner’s missives:

“I believe that someday we are going to have a woman president, possibly during my life, and I’ve often thought the best way to pave the way for this was to first nominate and elect a woman as vice-president. But I think Mondale made a serious mistake when he picked Geraldine Ferraro as his running mate. In my view, he guessed wrong in deciding to take a congresswoman that almost nobody had ever heard of and try to put her in line for the presidency … I don’t know who among the Democrats might have been a better choice, but it was obvious Mondale picked Geraldine Ferraro simply because he believed there was a ‘gender gap’ where I was concerned and she was a woman.”

Ronald Reagan, “An American Life”. 1991.

Posted by: Max at August 30, 2008 3:07 AM
Comment #260325

A few things for you lower 48 humanoids -
#1- I live in Wasilla and I attend church with Sarah (not for a while now though I suppose) and I attend rotary with Lyda Green AND her husband Curtis. Lyda is a great gal who just happens to hate Sarah’s guts. Always has. They butted heads years ago and the wound never healed. Lyda isn’t running anymore because people got tired of hearing her prattle on about how terrible Sarah is when everyone loves her.

#2- You are an appallingly ignorant buffoon if you think a town of ANY size compares to running this state of only 600,000 people. I don’t fault you for this because unless you have lived in a state that is this big, your little brains can’t comprehend what it takes to make things happen here.

Hundreds of (don’t laugh at the quiant title) “villages” exist all across the state, but there are no roads or power lines or waterways to these places. AS governor, you are in charge of handling the education, fire, police, infrastructure, etc. in these areas that are so remote you literally can’t imagine it until you’ve seen it with your own eyes.

There are still dozens of places in Alaska where you could be dropped and walk 250 miles in any direction and not observe the signs of man. Running this state, and it’s amazingly difficult infrastructure is NOT akin to running a condensed city of millions. It is MUCH more challenging. The variations of natural disasters and weather phenomenon alone across the towns, cities, and villages of this state require almost constant attention. This summer we literally had flooding, volcanic ash plumes, forest fires, and a wave of in-city grizzly attacks - all at the same time as the normal problems of a city and surrounding area of 350,000 people, AND the added difficulty of negotiating the biggest commercial structure ever to be conceived and built in North America, the Gas Pipeline, and Oh yeah, she handled it all while pregnant or immediately post partum.

Sarah is a hell of a lady, you watch and see how fast America falls in love with her.

Posted by: Yukon Jake at August 30, 2008 4:30 AM
Comment #260327

Hmmm…Karl Rove calls McPain to tell him it’s a bad idea to select Joe Leiberman as his running mate. Two days later McPain announces Ms Palin for the position…even die hard republicans must cringe that Rove has selected their VP candidate…and, doesn’t Rove work for one of the NEWS media? I wonder what Palin owes Rove…or what Rove owes Palin…

Posted by: Marysdude at August 30, 2008 7:31 AM
Comment #260328

You may applaud Senator McCain for his VP pick; however, do you really think that Governor Sarah Palin is the best Candidate? For how many times in Our History have we elected a person to Office who is under investigation for Abuse of Power?

No, IMHO Senator McCain did America a disservice by chosing her. Because why others have waited until they were in office to bring scandal to Washington, it seems to me that the Republicans are now wanting to elect folks already proven to be in treouble with the Law.

And why I am not an Obama Supporter, I do believe that a 527 group or Individual could have a field day in the Public Opinion over the next 60 days driving home the point that she wanted her Ex-Brother-in-law fired. Since surely given the Power of VP does not one have to ask themselves what she would do to those who disagree with her?

Yes, you will have to ask David Remer and others how the U.S. Senate and House could open their own investigation on Day One if McCain is Elected. Or to what degree of the Law she is guilty of violating. But nevertheless, I want to hear how the Right is going to say they hold Moral Authority in this election when by the very nature of their candidates Coruption will follow them into the Whitehouse and Washington. For is this their Idea of Reform?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 30, 2008 7:33 AM
Comment #260331

Yukon Jake

Thank you for the info. I am from the lower 48 and I fell in love with Sarah as soon as I heard her speak. I had never really heard anything about her prior, except to hear Billy Crystal suggest her name as VP a few months ago. She is exactly the fire that McCain needed to draw together the conservative base and I believe she is what is needed for those Reagan Dems. She and McCain offer some people a real choice, rather than voting for a man who nobody ever heard of, a man who has only worked for about 140 days of his present voted position (all the rest of the time companying).

There is a difference between actively seeking the position for reasons of power and being called by the country to serve. With BHO it all about “I”, where are the people who worked with him standing up to praise the job he did? He is as corrupt as the political machine he came out of in Chicago.

If she Sarah is such a bad choice, and the libs think she is bound to loose, why do they say so much evil against her? You will notice on these pages, that if you are a conservative, you and anything you believe is attacked with such vigor. I have occasionally read the blogs on the pages and I am amazed at the vitriol of people who are the first to cloak themselves in the mantle of free speech.

I believe McCain has himself a winner and I believe BHO is finished.

Posted by: Oldguy at August 30, 2008 8:41 AM
Comment #260332


Good points. I see her as a likable female version of Cheney. Her ideologies are extreme right and she loves to hunt. Just what we need, another vice president with weapons. :)

In all reality and kidding aside I seriously doubt the GOP will be able to sell her to the country. There simply is not enough time to justify a person who came out of nowhere at the last minute while at the same time trying to strike down attacks on her credibility from the other side. They are going to have a very difficult time in presenting her as a person who is seriously ready to tackle world affairs.

Then there is the fact that McCain only talked with her one time previous to the selection. The latter reflects poorly on his judgment and ability to make well thought out informed decisions. After all he had at his disposal a whole plethora of much more experienced individuals, men and women alike, to choose from. To be honest I see this as nothing more than a novelty pick backed by the idea that it will attract extreme rights and some women. I think that in the end it will be seen as a huge blunder by McCain. But then I have never been impressed with his abilities. I think he has been using the maverick persona as a wall of false perception to hide his lack of true ability. Once the dust settles, the realities of the situation will be obvious.

Posted by: RickIL at August 30, 2008 8:45 AM
Comment #260333

Joel - you said Palin was the only one to have the courage to go after high-level politicians. She certainly is the only one on the GOP ticket to go after a high level corrupt politician. McCain has certainly done nothing about the most corrupt administration since Grant (not that Grant was totally to blame). He sat silent as they sold out our energy policy to oil companies, he sat silent when we were lied into a war, he sat silent as Bush blocked investigations into 9-11 and Katrina, he sat silent on torture, he sat silent on habeas corpus, he sat silent on illegal wiretapping, he sat silent on Scooter Libby, he sat silent on Karl Rove … he sat silent.

To infer that somehow this VP candidate is going to be a reformer is ludicrous. If she does wind up as VP she will not have a seat at the table. She is a lightweight - Hillary was a lot of things, not all of them positive but the one thing she is not is a lightweight. Palin is Dan Quayle in a dress. At least Mitt Romney had some conservative economic credentials (not that I agree with any of his principles). Can you honestly see Palin advising McCain on any issue?

Posted by: tcsned at August 30, 2008 8:54 AM
Comment #260336

A litte more insight into the bridge to nowhere

Posted by: RickIL at August 30, 2008 9:24 AM
Comment #260337

Governor Palin’s record of going against “heavy weights” is amazing and goes counter to your position. Many have sold her short and gone down in flames. She has been David going against multiple Goliaths and won.

Posted by: Tom Besly at August 30, 2008 9:27 AM
Comment #260342

Wow… just wow. I had no idea that the Palin selection would receive so much support. I guess much of America is not yet beaten down enough by 8 years of ineptitude, graft, cronyism, torture, death, bankruptcy, inflation, debt, and pilfering. Couple that with the fact that there are still some Americans who will not vote for a person of color, others who will vote solely on gender and I think there is indeed a distinct possibility that McCain will win.

I feel sorrow and regret for my children and their children. America was once a great power for good. A McCain win will surely signal the complete ascendency of the Rovian Era. The darkside is very close to winning the battle for the soul of America. What a complete transformation from what it once meant to be a conservative and a Christian!

Posted by: LibRick at August 30, 2008 9:55 AM
Comment #260343

It is good you worry about your children and your children’s children. Reports by the networks from independent budget experts indicate that Barack’s offer of multiple huge government programs AND cutting taxes for 95% of the people who pay taxes will cause upward spiraling deficits and an uncontrollable debt burden. It is just those you worry about that will have to cope when our generation spends us into a third world type economy. IMO if you add new programs, have the guts to add new taxes. If you have shortfalls add new taxes. Neither the Dems nor the Reps seem to have the will power to even suggest balancing the budget now….oh yes, in 10 years….maybe. I agree, our children and our children’s children are in jeopardy but your “fix” seems to be their greatest threat.

Posted by: Tom Besly at August 30, 2008 10:12 AM
Comment #260347


I recall a Democratic administration that didn’t fare too badly on more fair and practical policies than the current administration. Besides, I worry just as much for a nation of people who rushed to war against another nation of people who had little to do with an attack on America, yet who sit on a vast ocean of oil. I worry about a nation of people who, to this day, discount (or don’t count at all) the tens or hundreds thousands dead who died, if not by our hands, then as a result of our actions. Over our need to have security of a cheap energy source? I worry about my children when the leaders of our nation sit by as a city drowns and then the supporters of those leaders argue that the people ‘deserved it’ because they didn’t help themselves. I worry about a nation whose leaders bail out mutli-millionaires and huge companies with tax dollars taken from those masses going broke. A nation whose leaders decided to give tax breaks to the already wealthy and sit idly by as those wealthy ship jobs for the working class overseas. There’s more.

No political party is without fault. But the current administration is the worst I’ve ever seen. To reward that party with another 4 years is a vote for continuing those policies. Minor adjustments to our government is not enough. I’m ready for real changes. We must have a strong middle class or our society will perish. They can’t take 4 more years.

One more thing. This blog is pretty good about fact finding and researching and supporting what they espouse. Go find out which party has the better record on deficit spending and economic growth. Since the tax/spend issue is one that Republicans like to bring up every year. Go research. Then vote for the party that you find has done the best job historically.

Posted by: LibRick at August 30, 2008 10:50 AM
Comment #260353

I am too lazy but I am reasonably certain, when the same party controlled the presidency and both branches in the legislature, and outside of wartime, the Republicans would come out well. But I whole heartedly agree with you that both parties are really poor (pun intended) in this area. Promising too much government and demanding too little taxes is the formula to get elected and, as in these blogs, is trumpeted and celebrated as “the way to go” too much.

Posted by: Tom Besly at August 30, 2008 11:21 AM
Comment #260383

“Wow… just wow. I had no idea that the Palin selection would receive so much support. I guess much of America is not yet beaten down enough by 8 years of ineptitude, graft, cronyism, torture, death, bankruptcy, inflation, debt, and pilfering. Couple that with the fact that there are still some Americans who will not vote for a person of color, others who will vote solely on gender and I think there is indeed a distinct possibility that McCain will win.”

Librick: couldn’t agree more with you. I’m also mystified by the claim that Palin will pull Clintonite votes. In what parallel universe will this happen?

Those who hope that Clinton supporters will change their allegiance to Sarah Palin have been concentrating on the wrong end of Palin’s anatomy. Palin’s views should gag anyone to the left of Jerry Falwell. She opposes abortion (even in cases of rape and incest), fervently supports the NRA, questions that humans have anything to do with climate change, champions drilling up every last inch of the Arctic, and believes creationism should be taught in public schools.

Any Clinton followers who find common ground with Sarah Palin give rise to the suspicion that their preference of Clinton over Obama had more to do with her skin color than her politics.

Posted by: pianofan at August 30, 2008 2:11 PM
Comment #260387


Many thanks for the NY Times link. A good Palin summation without the 5-inch thick crust of hype.

Posted by: pianofan at August 30, 2008 2:39 PM
Comment #260531

Palin is SO good against corruption…so WHY hasn’t she spoken out against the corruption in the Bush administration?

Yeah, I know, that’s a truly naive question. Never mind….

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at August 31, 2008 2:31 PM
Comment #260548

Sorry, Joel, but the entire premise of your article is unsound and unjustified. Your article is wishful thinking. Here’s why with hard data:

“Does having Sarah Palin as his running mate make you more likely to vote for John McCain in November, less likely, or will it not have much effect on your vote?”
N=898 registered voters, MoE ± 4

More Likely 18%
Less Likely 11%
Not Much Effect 67%
Unsure 3%

Seems right leaning bloggers wishfully think Palin was a brilliant addition to the McCain campaign. General public is not so gullible as this poll demonstrates. (Polling

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 31, 2008 3:20 PM
Comment #260639

John, phx8 has just shared with us on the blue column that McCain’s campaign has gotten 8 rooms at the hotel in Wassilla… Seems they are wanting to do some vetting. Duhhhhhh….

Posted by: janedoe at August 31, 2008 10:24 PM
Comment #260655


Your own information that you post shows that 7% more people have been picked up, net, than before.

Sounds like a positive bump to me…

Posted by: Rhinehold at August 31, 2008 11:39 PM
Comment #260798

Palin has already become a liability to McCain. The embarrassment ensuing from further scrutiny of her record and her domestic complications are going to backfire on McCain more and more in the coming days - and further emphasize that McCain did not vet this choice thoroughly.

Expect to see McCain limit Palin’s appearances to Fox News where they’ll only lob slow-moving Nerf-balls right over the plate to her; also expect to see McCain lower her profile as quickly as possible after the convention. Already, Palin’s family troubles have caused the focus to switch from her professonal competence to her personal life. Not good for McCain’s campaign.

You gotta ask, how much scrutiny did Palin receive before she was chosen? You also gotta question whether McCain can make a well-thought-through decision. At this point, the Palin choice looks the same as some of the wiggy stuff my hyper border collie does on a daily basis. Fergus is a stellar dog, but man oh man, I don’t want someone with his deliberative powers running the country.

Posted by: pianofan at September 1, 2008 7:10 PM
Comment #260875


You gotta ask, how much scrutiny did Palin receive before she was chosen? You also gotta question whether McCain can make a well-thought-through decision. At this point, the Palin choice looks the same as some of the wiggy stuff my hyper border collie does on a daily basis. Fergus is a stellar dog, but man oh man, I don’t want someone with his deliberative powers running the country.

Good retort. And thanks for the laugh! I too have questioned McCains judgment over in the blue column on this issue. I also questioned the mothers judgment in regards to putting politics before her family. Surely if she were truly worried about her daughter issues she would not have accepted the position. The fact that they decided to go ahead with her as the pick in spite of what they knew about her daughter indicates naivete, or poor judgment. It also indicates that they were trying to hide the fact. A fact that would likely affect the votes of many people.

Posted by: RickIL at September 1, 2008 11:27 PM
Comment #260932

Ms. Palin may be a wonderful person and a good governor. It seems however, that she is woefully unprepared for National office. She is the governor of a state, this is true, but this doesn’t automatically qualify someone to be Vice President or President.

I’m very concerned given the state of the world, state of Mr. McCain’s age that this individual, smart and capable as she may be could be suddenly put into a situation that I think she is completely unprepared for. I don’t believe she’s ready to make decisions about sending people into harm’s way. I don’t know what the test for that is, but it seems to me she is much too early in her governmental career to be prepared to make such choices.

The analogy to me is this. If you were in need of triple bypass surgery, and you had a selection of surgeons to pick from, would you pick the recent med-school graduate over someone with a few more years experience to handle your operation? Of course this applies to Obama as well.

To me, McCain has gone back on his pledge relative to his VP pick. He said that he would pick the person most capable of being President. This selection is obviously a political pitch to the hard right conservative wing of the party. From that perspective, Ms. Palin is good on guns, good on abortion, good on gays, good on God (creationism). It fills a gap that McCain has had since he decided to run. I truly believe he has foresaken his independent constituents and has now made a plea for the evangelicals to bring him the election much the way they did for Bush in 2004.

It is a particularly strange choice in my opinion. There are many people much more qualified in the Republican party to be president than Sarah Palin. Kay Bailey Hutchison is miles more qualified. So is Susan Collins, so is Mitt Romney, so is Mike Huckabee, so is pretty much everyone in the Republican party.

Posted by: Dennis Sherrard at September 2, 2008 2:34 AM
Comment #261433

We watched Sarah Palin mouth all the words fed to her by the hardliners of the Republican right & shuddered to think this is all the once grand old party has left ! The remarks came across to us as smug , sarcastic ,strident in tone ,negative & self-serving and with little or no emphasis on the reality of the economic state of the U.S.A.’s 300 million plus people. Her assault on the character of Barack Obama , Joe Biden & even Harry Reid showed a huge lack of class & a nastiness that will come back to haunt her in the coming weeks.
Isn’t it of some concern , to those who have an awareness of the history of the Republican Party, that President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s family rebukes the current platform & openly endorses the Obama/Biden ticket ? Why do they do so ? Because it strives to be a sensible ,forward-looking & positive strategy to unify all the “American people” , not just the wealthiest , close-minded elitists who only represent the top 2 percent of those living in your United States .
By the way , I am a Canadian & I love the people of the United States of America, however ,I am very disappointed in John McCain & his “pitbull”, Sarah Palin’s performance last night. I will look for better things from them as the campaign moves along. I sincerely hope that an attempt to include ALL Americans in your vision of a brighter future for your country is forthcoming & the personal put-downs eliminated . The election can’t be won with divisive , insulting , partisan comments such as those put in Mrs Palin’s mouth last night by the troglodites behind the scenes with their myopic & narrow agenda .
Divide & conquer won’t work anymore folks ; it’s outdated & a fool’s game ! Americans in general & Republicans in particular are better than that .I encourage you to help each other “stand-up” , don’t keep knocking each other down !!!!

Posted by: Winston M . Sardine at September 4, 2008 10:33 AM
Comment #261580

Sarah Palin supports teaching creationism.

This is all I need to know

Posted by: Paul Johnson at September 4, 2008 8:40 PM
Post a comment