Third Party & Independents Archives

October 02, 2008

Palin - Biden Wash

The Vice Presidential candidate debate was a wash in this writer’s opinion. Sen. Biden had a command of the details and historical facts, too many of them in the first half of the debate, but, if his objective was to reflect the Bush years into a McCain presidency, he was successful. Gov. Palin alleviated fears and anxieties over her appearing to be an air head with a solid rehearsed bag of tricks, like avoiding the questions, reverting to taxes, and attack, attack, attack. She stood toe to toe with Joe, and her base will praise her for it till the cows come home and long after.

On substance, the only news headline coming out of the debate was Gov. Palin's agreement with Dick Cheney's interpretation that the Vice President has executive power both in the Executive Branch and the Senate beyond simply providing a tie breaker vote in the Senate. Whether Gov. Palin thought she knew what she was talking about Constitutionally or whether she was simply backing V.P. Dick Cheney's extra-Constitutional interpretation because she reveres him, was not evident. But, it was the headline news that will circulate tomorrow and throughout the campaign.

On energy and colloquialisms and down home talk, in other words, style, Gov. Palin commanded the stage as well as any professional actress could have. On foreign policy substance, history, facts, current events, and threats, Sen. Biden clearly won the contest. And Sen. Biden won technical points on answering the questions posed, where Gov. Palin dodged them changing the topic, and saying she would do that up front.

For voters looking for substance on policy, strategy, and experience, Sen. Biden was there for them. For voters looking for style, energy, and the ability to relate at a high school level, Gov. Palin was the plain talking winner. It was a wash in this regard. Each candidate lived up to or exceeded their base's expectations. How they fared with undecided and independent voters remains to be seen, and will come forward in the polling and research groups analysis in coming days.

Underneath the debate, however, was the ever present question, should the VP have to step into the President's seat, is this candidate ready and prepared? The answer on Sen. Biden, and polls will show this, is a clear yes. The answer on Gov. Palin will improve as a result of this debate, but, it is probably a safe bet that half or more voters will not believe she is ready or prepared for that role. And that is really the only question of true import when it comes down to deciding on a ticket only on the VP candidate.

Posted by David R. Remer at October 2, 2008 11:18 PM
Comments
Comment #265650

I will be out of touch for 9 days, but I would love to see how you guys will spin Sarah Palin back to status of Bumpkin.

She did a great job. Biden lied 10 times and arguably 6 more times. She will re-energize the base and claim more from the middle. Frank Lutz had a focus group of non-committed and she was declared winner, overwhelmingly. There were several in the group who made up their minds to vote McCain/Palin.

So let the spin begin.

Posted by: Oldguy at October 3, 2008 12:09 AM
Comment #265651

It’s interesting that you think that Governor Palin delivers her lines like a “professional actress.”

What does that make Barack Obama, when he delivers his lines?

Unlike Obama, Palin has actually had to GOVERN and has a record—albeit a brief one—actually doing so. Every single one of Obama’s lines and all of his positions have nothing to do with his record except for his record of running for office. He just says whatever he thinks is good for Barack Obama—kind of like a professional actress. I mean, actor.

It’s not for you, David, or anyone else, to say “what the polls will show.” Simply saying that the polls will confirm your own views is not terribly convincing. I know you’d LIKE them to confirm your opinions. Who wouldn’t?

The polls show what they do now, an Obama lead, something we all know. But the polls have changed before and it’s possible for them to change again. Whether they do or not is an open question.

Nobody who is concerned about something like the unitary executive theory is likely to be an undecided voter at this stage anyway, and I’d be extremely surprised if THAT of all things will dominate the headlines about this debate. One person out of maybe fifty probably even knows what is meant by the words “unitary executive” anyway.

I don’t celebrate that fact, but in a country where the education system is controlled by Democrats, you can’t expect the majority of voters to understand very much about civics or anything else. Unfortunately, this kind of ignorance is something Democratic politicians can very often bank on.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at October 3, 2008 12:10 AM
Comment #265652

Yeah, oldguy, let the spin begin.

I believe that we ALL know what would happen if Governor Palin had referred to Bosnians as “Bosniacs” like Joseph Biden did.

She’d be mocked relentlessly in the media, on Saturday Night Live, and everywhere else. Just as she’d be mocked if she’d ever talked about 57 states in the union like Barack Obama once did.

The Democrats, you see, are simply not held to any such standard. Or any standard at all.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at October 3, 2008 12:14 AM
Comment #265653

Great response LO, the actress comment stood out to me also. I wonder where Mr. Remer’s bias lays? If Palin’s an actress than Obama must be a street performer of some sort.

McCain needs more Palin in his campaign. He needs to do a better job of telling America what Obama is and he needs more Palin. Obama has surrounded himself with America haters, at best he’s naive and at worst he’s dangerous.

Posted by: andy at October 3, 2008 12:30 AM
Comment #265655

I didn’t realize they were going to show two seperate and different versions of the debate! You three obviously watched something different than I did, and more than half of the people responding to polls did.
This is what the NYT has to say..

TimesPeople

October 3, 2008 Editorial The Vice-Presidential Debate. We cannot recall when there were lower expectations for a candidate than the ones that preceded Sarah Palin’s appearance in Thursday night’s vice-presidential debate with Joseph Biden. After a series of stumbling interviews that raised serious doubts even among conservatives about her fitness to serve as vice president, Ms. Palin had to do little more than say one or two sensible things and avoid an election-defining gaffe.

By that standard, but only by that standard, the governor of Alaska did well. But Ms. Palin never really got beyond her talking points in 90 minutes, mostly repeating clichés and tired attack lines and energetically refusing to answer far too many questions.

Senator Biden did well, avoiding one of his own infamous gaffes, while showing a clear grasp of the big picture and the details. He left Ms. Palin way behind on most issues, especially foreign policy and national security, where she just seemed lost. It was in those moments that her lack of experience — two terms as mayor of a tiny Anchorage suburb and less than two years as governor — was most painfully evident.

Asked about Israel, Ms. Palin reeled off her support for “a two-state solution, building our embassy also in Jerusalem, those things that we look forward to being able to accomplish with this peace-seeking nation.” Asked about the possible use of nuclear weapons, she declared “nuclear weaponry, of course, would be the be-all, end-all of just too many people and too many parts of our planet.” On Iraq, all she had to offer was the false accusation that Barack Obama wants to surrender.

Mr. Biden directly challenged Ms. Palin’s debate prep on Afghanistan — pointing out that the commander there had disagreed with Mr. McCain’s call for an Iraq-style “surge” in Afghanistan. Ms. Palin tried to contradict him, but the most memorable part of her answer was that she got the general’s name wrong.

One can argue (and her supporters will) that Ms. Palin is a newcomer and can’t be expected to know all of the wonkish details, that what matters is the image she projects. Except, anyone who is running for vice president in these very dangerous times needs to have detailed knowledge.

When it came to domestic issues, Ms. Palin mainly relied on enthusiasm and humor, talking about hockey moms, soccer moms and Joe Sixpack almost as often as she used the word “maverick” to describe Mr. McCain or herself.

But she offered virtually no detail — beyond the Republican mantra of tax cuts — for how she and Mr. McCain would address the financial crisis or help Americans avoid foreclosure or what programs they would cut because of the country’s disastrous fiscal problems.

Ms. Palin’s primary tactic was simply to repeat the same thing over and over: John McCain is a maverick. So is she. To stay on that course, she had to indulge in some wildly circular logic: America does not want another Washington insider. They want Mr. McCain (who has been in Congress for nearly 26 years). Ms. Palin condemned Wall Street greed and said she and Mr. McCain would “demand” strict oversight. In virtually the next breath, she said government should “get out of the way” of American business.

There were occasional, disturbing flashes of the old, pre-campaign Sarah Palin. Asked about the causes of global warming, Ms. Palin suggested that man had some role — but she wasn’t saying how much.

In the end, the debate did not change the essential truth of Ms. Palin’s candidacy: Mr. McCain made a wildly irresponsible choice that shattered the image he created for himself as the honest, seasoned, experienced man of principle and judgment. It was either an act of incredible cynicism or appallingly bad judgment.

Posted by: janedoe at October 3, 2008 12:58 AM
Comment #265656

“Bosniacs” is the correct term, so no points there for you:

www.thefreedictionary.com/Bosniacs

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosniaks

Posted by: Marin at October 3, 2008 01:00 AM
Comment #265659

And then, there is this:
IFILL: Governor, you mentioned a moment ago the constitution might give the vice president more power than it has in the past. Do you believe as Vice President Cheney does, that the Executive Branch does not hold complete sway over the office of the vice presidency, that it it is also a member of the Legislative Branch?

PALIN: Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing through the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the vice president. And we will do what is best for the American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive and cooperative with the president’s agenda in that position. Yeah, so I do agree with him that we have a lot of flexibility in there, and we’ll do what we have to do to administer very appropriately the plans that are needed for this nation.

Does this make the hairs on anyone elses neck stand up????? She is Cheney, with lipstick!

Posted by: janedoe at October 3, 2008 01:08 AM
Comment #265661

Well, LO, looks like you got your answer. She might look a bit smarter.

Posted by: janedoe at October 3, 2008 01:14 AM
Comment #265662

Palin did well, better than most people expected. She fired off rehearsed lines, and when the questions didn’t fit, she simply refused to answer.

Biden did even better. Everyone was so focused upon Palin, they ignored Biden, and he hit it out of the park. He hammered on McCain very effectively, and demonstrated confidence and expertise.

Palin did well enough to not get fired. That’s good. Just not good enough to actually help the sinking McCain campaign.

By the way, no one on Watchblog has mentioned the withdrawal of McCain from Michigan. It gets worse. In Virginia, another key state, McCain’s campaign has 12 offices around the state. Obama has 60! What is going almost completely unnoticed is that Obama has put together one of the most effective organizational juggernauts in the political history of the country. Obama is a superb leader, in terms of his ability to create an effective organization. McCain, on the other hand, is floundering. The organizational skills are distinctly lacking.

A landslide of epic proportions is in the making.

Posted by: phx8 at October 3, 2008 02:13 AM
Comment #265663

David excellent analysis of the VP debate.

IMHO compared to the Couric interview Palin did a real good job. Fortunately she had all possible rules of debate tilted her way. I was pleased with her performance tonight as after viewing the Couric interview I was worried that the republicans would pull her off the ticket. It seems she has a good amount of debate experience based upon different clips showing on the news channel lately so that might explain the difference between tonight and the Couric interview. Either that or she finally got her dosage right.

As far as I am concerned if Palin is the level of knowledge and intellect a candidate for the second highest position in this country needs to motivate the repubs and they are able to live with it so be it. Seeing her try to debate with Joe Biden has caused me to rethink a few things and I now realize I will need to be active with the Dems in my little town to ensure she wont get the chance to be VP. If it wasn’t for sound bites, mis information and outright lies she didn’t have much to say and really doesn’t have any substance in her words.

What I don’t understand is how any self respecting conservative would vote for someone that so willfully would violate the constitution she would be sworn to uphold in order to establish a Cheney style dictatorship in the white house is beyond me. She warned you ahead of time guys, you may have got caught off guard by Cheney but not with her and McCain. It is truely more of the same and she was foolish enough to to say it out loud.

Not to long ago on Watchblog someone made the comment “a mile high and a inch deep”. That is my impression of Gov. Palin. In fact I believe some of the talk radio conservatives that post on this site have more knowledge of the issues facing this country than Gov. Palin has demonstrated to date.


Posted by: j2t2 at October 3, 2008 02:29 AM
Comment #265664

Yes, phx8, I did hear about McCain packing it in for Michigan. Shortly before that was announced, new polls were being shown, and he had really slid. He appears to be going in the wrong direction in several states, and it doesn’t appear that tonight was a bail-out for him.

Posted by: janedoe at October 3, 2008 02:49 AM
Comment #265665

She’s definitely a master of double talk. She sounded rather scripted to me, to the point she had to say she may not answer Gwen’s questions..

The thing that bothered me the most was that she’s another candidate that says “nukular”. Bush makes her look dumb, though.

Geezer and Gidget are starting to look like Dumb and Dumber.

Posted by: googlumpugus at October 3, 2008 02:49 AM
Comment #265666

Yep, you’re right goog. And it’s nothing but laziness and ignorance to mispronounce it. Guess we can be thankful that those two weren’t (aren’t) running mates ;)

Posted by: janedoe at October 3, 2008 02:55 AM
Comment #265673

That Bosniac thing. A real issue. It made me think about when Bernard Shaw realized Uranus wasn’t being pronounced correctly.

Posted by: Weary Willie at October 3, 2008 04:25 AM
Comment #265677

David:

Allow me to “litter” WB on the debate a bit:

1. Sarah appealed and re-energized the conservative base, although a VP candidate rarely helps the candidate . The key here is re-energize..getting them off the couch so to speak.

2. Biden did not step on his tongue as I predicted. Actually, he was terrific…I have always liked old Blow Hard Joe.

3. Sarah is no airhead. Her politics do not agree with the MSM and the perception of her being a dunce is now comicial

4.Conservatives like the old Eagle don’t want to get taxed to death under an Obama administration, and this will unfortunately happen.

5. Today will be the most significant day politicially since the 9/11 war vote. I am rooting for that amendment of 250 billion as the Old Eagle predicted yesterday.

See David? Even a broken clock is right twice a day!

Posted by: sicilianeagle at October 3, 2008 06:59 AM
Comment #265678

Eagle - for once I agree with you - Palin succeeded in re-energizing the base. I don’t think she did anything to convince people sitting on the fence that they should vote for McCain. It was a good forum for her - short answers and no follow-up questions (it was the follow up questions that were the disaster in the interviews). She may have stopped the slide in her numbers and caused the conservative pundits to stop calling for her withdrawal.

She had some factual problems as did Biden but according to this article Palin’s errors were more substantive. The one I thought was funny was her mistaking McKiernan for McClellan. Are we back in the Civil War? If she is going to make an error like that at least pick general that wasn’t a failure. I’ve been re-reading Grant’s memoirs (highly recommended) and that stuck out for me. Also, the expansion of the VPs power stuff was very Cheney-esque. Though I doubt that she really understood what she was saying.

The polls say Biden won this debate handily. Palin didn’t look as bad as her interviews (apparently her last interviews). She wasn’t the trainwreck I thought she would be. But when your expectations are so low they aren’t hard to exceed them.

Posted by: tcsned at October 3, 2008 08:12 AM
Comment #265679

Sic. Eagle,

On 1., I agree entirely.

On 2. I mostly agree. I found his reticence to engage holes in Palin’s remarks a bit less than expected, (her White Flag comment for example is one he could have responded to with immense intellectual force, but, chose to let it slide.)

On 3. I agree she is no airhead. But, her refusal to engage in discussion of areas where she was not well rehearsed spoke volumes as to what she doesn’t know much about, like the economy.

On 4. With the national debt and interest merging with growth of entitlement spending, I think it is a fool, whether conservative or liberal, who actually believes taxes should not go up. THEY MUST GO UP, or we as a nation go down for the count. Yes, spending must be cut too. But, this cut spending OR cut raise taxes is dialogue is deceptive and amateurish.

On 5. This Bill will pass because the nation’s credit and lending woes are piling up around the country higher with each passing day. Republicans will not choose to wear the credit crisis going into the elections.

We have a lot we agree on. We have some we never will agree on. I am very glad that you are back at WB to keep me on my toes.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 3, 2008 08:13 AM
Comment #265680

j2t2, thanks for positive feedback. One poll being touted indicates Biden won the debate 51% to 36%. It really does help to answer the questions instead of dodge them. And attacks did not win favor with independents and undecideds. Palin was poorly coached in that regard.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 3, 2008 08:17 AM
Comment #265682

Here are FactCheck.Org’s summary highlights of the debate:

* Palin mistakenly claimed that troop levels in Iraq had returned to “pre-surge” levels. Levels are gradually coming down but current plans would have levels higher than pre-surge numbers through early next year, at least.

* Biden incorrectly said “John McCain voted the exact same way” as Obama on a controversial troop funding bill. The two were actually on opposite sides.

* Palin repeated a false claim that Obama once voted in favor of higher taxes on “families” making as little as $42,000 a year. He did not. The budget bill in question called for an increase only on singles making that amount, but a family of four would not have been affected unless they made at least $90,000 a year.

* Biden wrongly claimed that McCain “voted the exact same way” as Obama on the budget bill that contained an increase on singles making as little as $42,000 a year. McCain voted against it. Biden was referring to an amendment that didn’t address taxes at that income level.

* Palin claimed McCain’s health care plan would be “budget neutral,” costing the government nothing. Independent budget experts estimate McCain’s plan would cost tens of billions each year, though details are too fuzzy to allow for exact estimates.

* Biden wrongly claimed that McCain had said “he wouldn’t even sit down” with the president of Spain. Actually, McCain didn’t reject a meeting, but simply refused to commit himself one way or the other during an interview.

* Palin wrongly claimed that “millions of small businesses” would see tax increases under Obama’s tax proposals. At most, several hundred thousand business owners would see increases.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 3, 2008 08:29 AM
Comment #265683

Chilling facts about the debate:
Palin on the Iraq war:
“Your plan on Iraq is a white flag of surrender.
To end the war in Iraq would be a travesty.”
This reflects McCain’s stubborn view on the Iraq war.
Truth is, not ending the Iraq war has been, and is a present day travesty for America.
$12 billion dollars a month to fund the war and rebuilt Iraq while America’s economy is in crisis is clear evidence McCain’s priorities are wrong.
McCain’s judgment is wrong.
Foreign aid should not supercede domestic needs.
McCain has stated that he will eliminate earmarks and that he has never once asked for a “pork barrel” project for his home state.
How can he continue to build “pork barrel” bridges in Iraq instead of building bridges in America and create much-needed jobs during this financial crisis.
McCain was fortunate, he came home alive from the Vietnam War.
4,175, and still counting, American troops came home in coffins from McCain’s Iraq War.
Close to 30,000 came back injured or maimed for life from McCain’s Iraq War.
Thousands of innocent Iraqui women and children were killed in McCain’s Iraq War.
How dare that John McCain should talk about victory in Iraq.
American troops have acted with bravery and honor in achieving their missions, but, how dare that John McCain should talk about victory in a war that was an invasion and illegal from the start.
Alternative avenues had not been exhausted to qualm Saddam Hussein.
McCain’s Iraq War is the biggest foreign and domestic policy blunder in America’s history.
John McCain is not only not qualified to be president and commander-in-chief, Palin’s remark, which reinforces his intention to continue on the same path makes him dangerous for the presidency of the United States.

Posted by: Steve Johnson at October 3, 2008 08:39 AM
Comment #265684

David:

I score this debate the reverse of the last one between Obama McCain.

Looked even which goes to Palin. When a relative newcomer to national politics can go toe to toe for 90 minutes with a 35 year vet, a tie is a win.

She did better than expected.

Posted by: Craig Holmes at October 3, 2008 09:08 AM
Comment #265686

I feel that Biden was the clear winner in this debate. He was poised, knowledgeable, authoritative, and quick to respond. I felt like Palin was reading rehearsed lines from an instruction manual and rarely got a feel that she truly understood with any great degree exactly what she was saying. She was clearly nervous, to be expected though, you could hear that little warble in her voice, especially in the beginning. She quite clearly avoided several issues entirely. She was a winner only in that she did not fall on her face. She apparently is believes in and is all for extended powers of the vp position. Imo not a good thing. Is she ready to step in to the big mans spot if needed? Definitely not. Maybe in another four years or so.

Posted by: RickIL at October 3, 2008 09:12 AM
Comment #265687

I think its shows what a sad state this campaign is in when just because her performance did not look like a Chevy Chase pratfall that they declare her the winner. “See - she actually spoke English - WE WIN!” There were only a couple of answers that descended into gibberish. She did nothing to separate their campaign from George Bush. She also tossed out my pet peeve comment “they hate our freedom” which is perhaps the most simple-minded explanation of the terror problem as well as being just plain wrong.

McCain has already conceded Michigan, is sinking in the polls, and is tied to the worst president in US history. I don’t think last night changed that. Lloyd Bentsen schooling Dan Quayle didn’t help Dukakis and a “reasonable” showing by Palin won’t change the outcome of this election.

Excellent review of the debate David.

Posted by: tcsned at October 3, 2008 09:14 AM
Comment #265689

j2t2

She warned you ahead of time guys, you may have got caught off guard by Cheney but not with her and McCain. It is truely more of the same and she was foolish enough to to say it out loud.

In my eyes this was the single biggest mistake she made. She affirmed everything I have come to detest about the Cheney/Bush presidency. Plus she led us to believe that she would continue in that order. Accountable for nothing and in control of all. Very scary ideology.

Posted by: RickIL at October 3, 2008 09:23 AM
Comment #265690

>PALIN: Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing through the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the vice president. And we will do what is best for the American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive and cooperative with the president’s agenda in that position. Yeah, so I do agree with him that we have a lot of flexibility in there, and we’ll do what we have to do to administer very appropriately the plans that are needed for this nation.

Does this make the hairs on anyone elses neck stand up????? She is Cheney, with lipstick!

Posted by: janedoe at October 3, 2008 01:08 AM

janedoe,

It would make my hair stand, if I thought she really understood what she was saying…now it really is standing up, because I don’t think she did understand…lol

Posted by: Marysdude at October 3, 2008 09:24 AM
Comment #265692

David:
Good analysis of the debate.

IMO, both executed perfectly on their objectives for the evening.

Biden, who was in a no-win situation, did beautifully. Biden’s bar was pretty high; he had to go against his normal style as a know-it-all blowhard that has tremendous depth on issues who, at times, can come across condescending and awkward when attempting to introduce humor. He also had to avoid the sexist minefield that was put out there by the Republican handlers; Biden had to get his point across without being professorial toward Palin.

Palin, on the other-hand, had a tremendously easier task at hand; step over the bar that was lowered to a level where she basically needed to show up and not use profanity. But she did well. She showed that she can learn to repeat talking points and stay to those talking points even though the original question had nothing to do with what she was talking about. When she did try and veer off course it was obvious that she didn’t know what she was talking about (ref: Cheney’s powers). She used her well rehearsed lines effectively.

But the net-net of this debate is that Biden did what he needed to do and Palin got a chance to stay on the ticket.

Palin didn’t sway any undecideds, she just gave a performance good enough to keep the conservative base from calling for her resignation. For Palin it was ‘Mission Accomplished!”

For Biden, according to a CBS poll (link) he DID sway undecideds. He showed that he was more prepared and Presidential.

Posted by: john trevisani at October 3, 2008 09:37 AM
Comment #265693

dude,janedoe

Does this make the hairs on anyone elses neck stand up????? She is Cheney, with lipstick!

I don’t think she has the knowledge or nerve to be a Cheney yet. But the fact that she aspires to be is scary enough to me. Maybe after this election season is over her and deadeye Dick can get together for some vp training sessions. He can teach her the finer details of obfuscation and human hunting. You know, just the necessities. I wonder if he knows how to field dress a liberal? ;-)

Posted by: RickIL at October 3, 2008 09:44 AM
Comment #265694

I think the debate boils down to two point:

1. After watching the debate would you want Palin as President?

2. Who is better equiped to manage two wars and the worse economic crisis in two generations?

I will say that she exceeded expectations. But when the bar is so low that it is resting on the floor steeping over it is not much of an accomplishment.

DCC

Posted by: DCC at October 3, 2008 09:46 AM
Comment #265695

Were do I start spinning Old Guy?

For since when does one go for an interview and refuse to answer the questions being asked by the Employer? Because why I could make a list of gaps in Governor Palin responses in the debate,two remarks sent me through the roof.

1) I agree with janedoe that Palin’s thinking of the VP Office is totally out of line with Normal Thinking.

2) Telling Americans that she knows how to make us energy independent without a plan. For as one who knows how to allow every consumer create their Fair Share of electricity for the National Grid (about 400kWh)and get paid for it, I wonder if she would care to debate me over Americas’ Energy Independence?

No, having listened to it on the radio first I was amazed at the body language and flirting of the eyes to the camera that I say on tv. So why I am sure if your bar was set at zero Governor Palin did a great job in answering the questions the way she was taught. However, IMHO she failed to past the test of a Leader of America.

For why Joe Six-Pack and Hockey Mom might make up a Fair Share of the Nation, I do believe that the Founding Fathers of America made the Argument of Class for a reason.

However, I would only rate Senator Biden at about 6 out of 10 in the debate.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at October 3, 2008 09:50 AM
Comment #265697

This is ridiculous.
Ever since her nomination, the right has been screaming that her critics and the MSM have been unfair to her and are sexist.
Now this debate
SHE WAS TERRIBLE IN THE DEBATE.
She managed to not have incoherent sentances like in her interviews, but as a DEBATE ON THE ISSUES.??
She gets an “F”
And all the pundits and even you guys are dancing around and saying — Gosh it was good, not great, but good and blah blah blah.
If it had been anyone else they would have been laughed out of the auditorium for their ridiculous performance.
This was not even a real debate format — there was no rebuttal, re-rebuttal and DEBATING of the issue — there was each side allowed to provide an answer (or non-answer in Palin’s case) and then move on.
I can’t belive how Milquetoast the MSM is being about this!
What a bunch of BS
That debate, CLEARLY shows that she is NOT EVEN CLOSE to being ready for dog-catcher let alone VP.
She has gotten this far (in Alaska Politics) by her looks and “folksy charm” — which only points to the lack of intelligence in the American Voting Public.
I would like someone to BE HONEST — don’t embarras yourself by trying to be nice in your comments about her performance last night — From a DEBATE standpoint for the Second-Highest job in the country it was a FAILURE!!! (except for those who count jumping over a bar placed in the basement as success)
Re: her position on VP power and expanding it — I too am of the belief that she didn’t even know what she was saying — If you listen to most of her comments they are all MOM and APPLE PIE platitudes, cliches’ and “right sounding” words strung together that are meant to sound good to Joe-Sixpack (Yea, Right-on) but if you read them — they usually end up as NONSENSICAL sentances that leave you shaking your head and trying to figure out what she meant, if anything.

Posted by: Russ at October 3, 2008 10:00 AM
Comment #265698

When you break it down without trying to score partisan points, both candidates did a great job and I am not surprised by eithers performance, or the reaction to their performance from the “other side.”

Biden was boring, but promoted his tickets message of bigger govt and the rich will pay for everything, very well.
Palin was nervous, but promoted her tickets message of less govt and working for the middle class, very well.

I still respect Biden and would be less concerned over the Dems win in Nov. if he was his partys presidential nominee.
I have more respect for Palin and would have no problem with her being vice president under McCain, but we all know that isn’t going to happen.

Senator Biden and Gov Palin, ignore the partisan points trying to be scored, you both did a great job in letting us know what kind of govt you believe in.
Thanks for a great debate.

Posted by: kctim at October 3, 2008 10:12 AM
Comment #265700

kctim:
“Palin was nervous, but promoted her tickets message of less govt and working for the middle class, very well.”

Nice try.

If you actually believe that statement, then i have bridge-to-nowhere to sell you.

Palin supports the ‘Trickle-down/on’ theory of economics. By definition, that means to support the upper-class (not the middle-class).

Posted by: john trevisani at October 3, 2008 10:18 AM
Comment #265701

“I don’t think she has the knowledge or nerve to be a Cheney yet. But the fact that she aspires to be is scary enough to me.”

RickIL Of course she is no Cheney, but what is worse a “wanna be” Cheney ideologically misguided and suffering from lack of knowledge or Cheney? To me Cheney knew the limits of the constitution yet chose to abuse them as he could. Palin appeared to be unaware or brainwashed into believing the constitution is on her side despite all evidence to the contrary. Either way one thing was made perfectly clear last night, it will be more of the same should McCain/Palin capture the white house.

This issue exemplifies the problem with followers of conservatism in my mind. Once they get something in their mind, whether it works or not, whether it is constitutional or not, it is fixed into their ideology and they either won’t change or are unable to change. And Palin is a follower not a leader of the brand of conservatism infecting the Country today and has done so much damage to the country the past 30 years.

Once again we have been warned, first time shame on you second time shame on me.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 3, 2008 10:28 AM
Comment #265702

John T
That is her partys message, I did not say whether I believe in the message or not.

They both got their message out and how people vote will depend on their position on the issues.
Trickle down, redistrubition of wealth or whatever, both let us know where they stand on the issue.

Posted by: kctim at October 3, 2008 10:38 AM
Comment #265703

All my family are democrats and Hillary fanatics, at times i think I’m the only independent in this whole county last year they were saying that Huckabee was the man for the Republicans for awhile it looked that way the MSM seemed to like him, of course i got the shakedown test i said i really liked Joe biden i always have admired biden and Obama was a very intelligent talented person and the only Republican that would have a slight chance was John McCain I got the look and wasn’t invited to Sunday diners till after that super Tuesday when McCain pulled ahead and Obama gained all those states I saw fear in their eyes sadly is wasn’t McCain fear only one aunt that i adore said she would consider it a honor to vote for him and i knew how much she loved Hilliary the rest seemed mad and quiet Last Night i saw Palin do the job that he picked her for to attract the folk votes and she played to that audience she has good street smarts and is very energetic, Biden is a very smart man and a very formidable opponent.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 3, 2008 10:40 AM
Comment #265704

“Once they get something in their mind, whether it works or not, whether it is constitutional or not, it is fixed into their ideology and they either won’t change or are unable to change”

Social Security and Income Tax to a ‘T.’ Great statement j2.

Posted by: kctim at October 3, 2008 10:40 AM
Comment #265706

Both candidates didn’t do a good job, one did, and he had to. Biden had a lot of knowledge and let it out, and did well in that he didn’t say anything that would haunt him.

Palin? You can’t look me straight in the face and say she did even an acceptable job. Winking and trying to connect with regular people will not get you into a government job unless you are the PR guy, and correct me if I’m wrong, that’s the Press Secretary’s job. On that note, she’d make a great Press Secretary.

I hate the cliches and themes every election takes, from “flip-flopper” to this “Main St. vs Wall St.”, “Joe Six-Pack”, etc.

She keeps on using them like they mean anything, here’s some advice, Main St. is doing much better than Side Street with the uneducated mother of 6 that works 2 jobs. Joe Six Pack was, is, and always will be, an idiot, who, when recited about being the regular person living in America, dumbs the rest of us down.

“Yea, my whole goal in life is to be a proud Joe Six Pack, work in my crap job, come home to a dysfunctional family and open a case. YEA.”

I wish to god this woman would use more words like patriotism, national unity, pride, responsibility, and how you can get your kids to read instead of watching Dancing with the Stars.

Posted by: Jon at October 3, 2008 10:53 AM
Comment #265707

The most significant thing about the debate is who is supporting Palin. If only 36% thought she won, but that 36% is in the conservative base of the Republican Party, the news is all good for McCain.

She’s a VP candidate who could bring those people out when the top of the ticket was going to leave them drowning their sorrows at home on November 4th. That, folks, is remarkable.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 3, 2008 10:59 AM
Comment #265709

“Social Security and Income Tax to a ‘T.’ Great statement j2.”

Thanks kctim your comment sems to prove my point. To think that just a few years ago Cons wanted to turn Social Security over to wall street and sadly some still do even as we are awash in wall street debacle frames the issue quite well.

As far as income tax it is easy to understand why “cut taxes” are so popular with everyone not just the cons. However to think that after so many years of the borrow and spend approach the cons turned into an artform the possibility of additional tax cuts for the rich is wise while the Country drowns in this debt again proves my point about the cons.
I appreciate your insight on this issue.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 3, 2008 11:20 AM
Comment #265710

kctim
She did not “get her partie’s message out
She got cliche’s, platitudes and meaningless jargon out
That was it
Nothing of substance, and in that case, You have just outlined the Republican parties position — NO substance
Just mantras, and platitudes, and a whole bunch of “mom and applie Pie” BS that is meant to excite the lowest common denominator — which, if these people had any intelligence, would be insulted by how they are being used.

You saying that Palin did well in the debate is an insult to intelligent, strong women of substance (in both parties) that are much more qualified, and much more prepared, have worked harder and are more deserving of being considered for this position.
SHAME on McCain and Shame on the Repubs for pulling this light-weight up from the depths and putting her in a position she neither deserves nor is ready for.
(I once held the suspicion that John did this to see just how low the Right wing would grovel and idolize and drool over someone so undeserving of the nomination — but I guess I was wrong — he hasn’t yet come forward and went “Gotcha” — just kidding and you guys FAILED!)

Posted by: Russ at October 3, 2008 11:34 AM
Comment #265711

J2
Lol, not even close to my insight on this issue, but you already know that. Good turnaround though. Touche
But, your view on those issues clearly demonstrates how two people can watch the same debate and come away with different opinions about how it went, based simply on where one stands on the issue.

Hopefully we will have a chance to discuss those issues when the Obama love fest on here is done after the election.

Posted by: kctim at October 3, 2008 11:43 AM
Comment #265712

Lee - I agree she said the things that got the hard-core base excited - as did McCain in his debate, the problem is that they are going to need more than 36% of the vote to win the election. They really aren’t doing anything to appeal to an independent voter. Most of that 36% are people who think George Bush is doing a good job so how good do you have to be to impress people like that?

Russ - I think she did get her party’s message out - cliches, platitudes, & meaningless jargon is about what they have after 8 years of Bush and 8 years of McCain selling out everything he said he believed in. It’s a Karl Rove message - it doesn’t have to have substance or even be true to work. It’s what Rush Limbaugh “ditto-heads” live for - it’s also what’s making the intellectual conservatives like George Will cringe.

Posted by: tcsned at October 3, 2008 12:01 PM
Comment #265713

Russ
You already held that view before the debate, while my view comes after the debate. Kind of hard to hear what people are saying when you have already made up your mind of what they will say.

At the end of the debate, I knew the message each candidate was trying to get out to the people. You can say she is nothing but a bimbo (big surprise) and that people who do not agree with your views are “the lowest common denominator,” all you want, but that does not discount the good job both candidates did.

Shame on McCain and the Republicans? After these two debates, shame on the Democrats for not having Biden at the top of their ticket. Nothing like playing second fiddle to a guy who doesn’t have half the qualifications or experience as you do.

Posted by: kctim at October 3, 2008 12:02 PM
Comment #265714

“Just mantras, and platitudes, and a whole bunch of “mom and applie Pie” BS that is meant to excite the lowest common denominator — which, if these people had any intelligence, would be insulted by how they are being used.”

Russ to be fair I think “lowest common denomintor” is a bit extreme for most of the conservative followers. Living and working between Central Oregon and now Colorado I spend quite a bit of time with these types and for the most part they are decent people. They are also well intended for the most part IMHO. I agree they are misguided and easily manipulated but by and large they are decent people especially the younger ones. The influence of talk radio weighs heavily upon them as that is a considerable source of their news and political information.

I do agree they are being used and should be insulted.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 3, 2008 12:06 PM
Comment #265716

tscned,
I have to disagree with you on something. While yes, McCain needs more than 36% of the vote to win, he was polling within shouting distance of Obama before Palin was even on the ticket.

The disaffection in the Republican Party is so thick you could carve it with a chisel. That translated into sufficient disinterest in all the party’s candidates in the primaries that McCain more or less swooned into the nomination.

Remember that Democratic Party vote totals were twice those of the Republican party in the primaries, so it is not irrelevant that Palin lights a fire under the people Republican Party leaders usually dismissively speak of, saying they have nowhere else to go. So, why aren’t Obama’s poll numbers twice those of McCain now?

Simple. He’s got real problems in his own party.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 3, 2008 12:35 PM
Comment #265718

Lee - I see your point. My problem with this is - yes they need to rally their base to not only vote but to encourage others to do so as well. It will help in this way. I’m not sure how many votes in McCain’s favor it will generate since most of these people hate Obama and are going out to vote against him as anything else. Voting against Obama is probably the biggest draw for McCain with the base. A person who is very excited about their candidate still only counts as one vote as does someone who is lukewarm about their candidate.

Posted by: tcsned at October 3, 2008 01:17 PM
Comment #265719

Who won the debate?

Partisans on both sides will claim victory.

Those on the left will smear Palin as they have done all this campaign long calling her an “actress” and “scary”.

Those on the right will point out The Biden Error/Lie/Hallucination List (UPDATED to 22).

Who won last night’s debate? Don’t know. According to CBS, their poll of undecided voters showed a 2 to 1 Biden victory. Frank Luntz’s polling of undecided voters showed a decisive Palin victory.

Two things are very sure.

1.) Those voting for Obama/Biden will vote for Obama/Biden. Those voting for McCain/Palin will vote for McCain/Palin.

2.) Those that are still undecided are idiots…and they are the one who will decide this election.

Now THAT’S scary.

Posted by: Jim T at October 3, 2008 01:23 PM
Comment #265720

one thing I thought was interesting is she twice mentioned diversity in her family. I wondered what she was talking and then realizrd to an Alaskan - diversity means both democrats and republicans. Kind of funny.

Posted by: Schwamp at October 3, 2008 01:30 PM
Comment #265722

kctim
Geez gosh darn there you go again
golly jee wilikers
if I keep talking like that will you begin to understand me??

Let me repeat, and it has nothing to do with how I felt about her before the debate (she didn’t change my mind because she didn’t DO or SAY ANYTHING)
SHE DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTIONS
In a response to saying “What will you and McCain do differently” her (stock) answer is “Gosh John is known as “The Maverick” and has taken shots from both sides — even his own party — so you know we are going to change things”
That is an answer??
Look who is NOT being honest about the performance by someone in the debate last night
Like I said — this BS pandering over her dismal performance is more sexist and insulting than anything the MSM could even dream up

Posted by: Russ at October 3, 2008 01:41 PM
Comment #265723

Excellent point Jim T - it’s hard for me to imagine that a reasonable, thinking person does not know who they will vote for in a month. I’m sure there are reasons but I can’t think of one.

Posted by: tcsned at October 3, 2008 01:42 PM
Comment #265724

Jim T,
Wow, thank you for that link to Biden’s hallucinations and misstatements. The left on this thread has gone on and on about Biden being the substantive expert with real depth of knowledge and understanding - but that is obviously not true.

Posted by: Yukon Jake at October 3, 2008 01:52 PM
Comment #265725

j2t2
re: Lowest common denominator et al
I have nothing against them, except how they allow themselves to be led around by BS.
and how the Republicans purposely take advantage of that.
I have many close friends that are conservative and who would/could be termed part of the lowest common denominator — they are good people and well intentioned (for the most part) — HOWEVER there appears to be a tendancy to not look to deep and not DARE look at anything that might contridict with peer opinions.
The Republicans play on that tendancy without any Shame.
McCains vile performance in the campaign so far demonstrates that exactly.
He is LYING thru his teeth and DENYING the facts when presented — amazing — he makes Bush/Cheney look like amateurs in that regard — he digs his heels in and adamently argues that he has maintained his 100% honesty and integrity — sorry but that was LONG gone.
the Obama/Biden exagerations are no where near the OUTRIGHT DECEPTIONS and VILE PERSONAL LIES that McCain HIMSELF (NOT some flunky in his campaign) have uttered.
why does he compromise his integrity so much?
Because he feels it works “among his base” and will get him elected.
This is the most contemptible campaign I have seen (and I am including Nixon now — and THAT is bad, and I voted for Nixon!!)
note about a new study out from Harvard

Bullock and others have also shown that some refutations can strengthen misinformation, especially among conservatives.

Political scientists Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler provided two groups of volunteers with the Bush administration’s prewar claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. One group was given a refutation — the comprehensive 2004 Duelfer report that concluded that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction before the United States invaded in 2003. Thirty-four percent of conservatives told only about the Bush administration’s claims thought Iraq had hidden or destroyed its weapons before the U.S. invasion, but 64 percent of conservatives who heard both claim and refutation thought that Iraq really did have the weapons. The refutation, in other words, made the misinformation worse.

A similar “backfire effect” also influenced conservatives told about Bush administration assertions that tax cuts increase federal revenue. One group was offered a refutation by prominent economists that included current and former Bush administration officials. About 35 percent of conservatives told about the Bush claim believed it; 67 percent of those provided with both assertion and refutation believed that tax cuts increase revenue.

In a paper approaching publication, Nyhan, a PhD student at Duke University, and Reifler, at Georgia State University, suggest that Republicans might be especially prone to the backfire effect because conservatives may have more rigid views than liberals: Upon hearing a refutation, conservatives might “argue back” against the refutation in their minds, thereby strengthening their belief in the misinformation. Nyhan and Reifler did not see the same “backfire effect” when liberals were given misinformation and a refutation about the Bush administration’s stance on stem cell research.

Bullock, Nyhan and Reifler are all Democrats.

Reifler questioned attempts to debunk rumors and misinformation on the campaign trail, especially among conservatives: “Sarah Palin says she was against the Bridge to Nowhere,” he said, referring to the pork-barrel project Palin once supported before she reversed herself. “Sending those corrections to committed Republicans is not going to be effective, and they in fact may come to believe even more strongly that she was always against the Bridge to Nowhere.”

Posted by: Russ at October 3, 2008 01:56 PM
Comment #265727

Okay, my turn to weigh in on last nights debate.

Joe Biden did great, and indeed, he won hands down. Last night he risked offending a good portion of America if he had chosen to go hard on Palin and her lack of experience. But Biden neatly sidestepped that by sticking to criticisms hammering John McCain’s policies (which are almost identical to Bush’s), and by contrasting his Senate record on the issues with his own and Obama’s stances on the issues.
Last night, Biden showcased what a solid command he has of so many of the issues, and how reassuringly ready he would be if America ever needed him to step into the presidential role.

Palin on the other hand, actually did far worse than I had expected she would last night. I thought she might even win the debate due to the fact that she had at one time worked on television. Now I’m left wondering how poorly she used to do as a sportscaster.
As David Remer mentioned in his article, Palin was clearly acting out the rehearsed lines, talking points and folksy platitudes that had been carefully crafted for her by McCain’s speech writers. However, David thinks she did as well as any professional actress would have. I don’t agree with that opinion. I think a professional actress could have done much better than the performance Palin gave last night. Her acting was at what I consider a strictly Community Theater Level.
Btw, I find her speaking voice incredibly whiney and annoying.

My husband and I laughed out loud when Palin announced to Glen Ifill and the nation:

“I may not answer the questions the way you want to hear, but I’ll talk straight to the American people and let them know my track record.”

We both thought that was simply hilarious! She might as well have said: “I’m reading from a script here people, and since I’m completely unable to think on my feet and make my canned lines match up with what’s being asked of me, I’m sure you’ll understand that I’ll often be entirely avoiding answering these questions Gwen will be asking.”
Which is frequently what Palin went on to do in “the debate with no follow up questions” that had been prearranged just for her.
Every time she veered off from her script, I noticed she stopped making sense entirely, and has a terrible tendency to throw the word “also” into her sentences as many times as she possibly can.
That made us laugh, and the other thing that kept cracking us up was her tendency to descend into the embarrassingly smarmy gee-whiz-you-betcha-Haaakey-Maaam-Joe-Six-Pack routine.
And then there was all the cutesy nose wrinkling and winking!!! Did any of you believe Palin would actually stoop so low? I certainly didn’t. In fact, the first time she winked, I thought ‘No, there is no way she just winked at the camera.’ And then she did it again, and I knew right then that this woman isn’t merely lacking in intelligence, but is in fact, a complete and total moron! I mean, wasn’t she trying to get women who wanted to vote for Hillary to vote for her? Who exactly did she think that winking was going to play to? Unbelievable. Truly, even though I saw her wink at the camera at least twice, it still beggars belief!
This woman truly is an insult to all women.

I see a lot of you here are discussing how Palin agrees with Dick Cheney’s absurd view that the vice president’s powers are whatever they decide they can be. I really wasn’t too surprised by that. The Republican Party is all for throwing out the Constitution, doing away with necessary checks and balances, and supporting an authoritarian mindset these days.
And that fact is just one of many reasons why they must not be reelected in November.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at October 3, 2008 02:08 PM
Comment #265730

Russ, did she stop there or was there more to her statement? I apologize, but I don’t remember her giving such a short reply to anything and I am not in a place where I can check that right now.

Posted by: kctim at October 3, 2008 02:17 PM
Comment #265731


I thought that Biden came off as a professional politician. It is a shame he didn’t appologize to the people of Delaware and America for representing special interests rather than all the people.

I thought Palin was obiously not up to speed on inside the beltway special interests politics.

Russ:
—-“which, if these people had any intelligence, would be insulted by how they are being used.”

I guess it takes intelligent people to vote for these self-proclaimed intellectuals who at this very time are telling us, hey folks we just screwed you out of another trillion in taxes but, it wasn’t our fault so make sure you punch our meal ticket again next month. Actually, there salaries have become pocket change compared to what they are pulling down from the special interests.

If the voters had any intelligence, 435 members of Congress and 36 or 37 members of the Senate, including John McCain, Joe Biden and Barrak Obama would be looking for a new job in the corporate world this fall. If they were ethical politicians, they would resign so the people can vote for some that might represent them.

Posted by: jlw at October 3, 2008 02:26 PM
Comment #265732

David

If you really want me to keep you on your toes, you should re-invite me to be a poster on the Red side.

I know how to shake up things while teaching the independants and lefties a thing or two.

:)

Then again, the race is close, and the Mighty Eagle just might be the difference!

Posted by: sicilianeagle at October 3, 2008 02:51 PM
Comment #265733
The thing that bothered me the most was that she’s another candidate that says “nukular”. Bush makes her look dumb, though

Let’s see, who else uses that colloquialism?

U.S. presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush, as well as Presidential Candidates Walter Mondale and Vice Presidential Candidate Sarah Palin, have all used this pronunciation

Yeah, bunch of dummies. Carter was even a nuclear engineer in the Navy (same program I went through).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nukular

They’re all obviously stupid.

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 3, 2008 03:01 PM
Comment #265734

“On Thursday night, Palin took her inexperience and made a mansion out of it. From her first “Nice to meet you. May I call you Joe?” she made it abundantly, unstoppably and relentlessly clear that she was not of Washington, did not admire Washington and knew little about Washington. She ran not only against Washington, but the whole East Coast, just to be safe.” David Brooks, NY Times

Frankly, I found it highly amusing listening to Poor Old Joe argue in favor of a man who just months ago he said was not experienced enough for the job in echoing the opinion of fellow candidate Ms. Clinton.

And, I found it refreshing to hear Sarah make Joe squirm on his support/non-support of the war in Iraq. Joe’s explanation of the Obama plan for national health care versus Mr. McCain’s was nauseous and, as defined by Factcheck, untrue.

Poor Old Joe had to defend the novice position of Obama of meeting with our adversary’s without any advance diplomatic preparations or conditions which was also soundly criticized by Ms. Clinton.

Poor Old Joe had to defend the $1 trillion in new spending proposed by Obama and the new taxes to pay for it.

Posted by: Jim M at October 3, 2008 03:05 PM
Comment #265735
By definition, that means to support the upper-class (not the middle-class).

bzzzt. It is not ‘by definition’. But thanks for playing.

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 3, 2008 03:18 PM
Comment #265736

GREAT
1 George Washington 4.92
2 Abraham Lincoln 4.87
3 Franklin Roosevelt 4.67
NEAR GREAT
4 Thomas Jefferson 4.25
5 Theodore Roosevelt 4.22
6 Andrew Jackson 3.99
7 Harry Truman 3.95
8 Ronald Reagan 3.81
9 Dwight Eisenhower 3.71
10 James Polk 3.70
11 Woodrow Wilson 3.68
ABOVE AVERAGE
12 Grover Cleveland 3.36
13 John Adams 3.36
14 William McKinley 3.33
15 James Madison 3.29
16 James Monroe 3.27
17 Lyndon Johnson 3.21
18 John Kennedy 3.17
AVERAGE
19 William Taft 3.00
20 John Quincy Adams 2.93
21 George Bush 2.92
22 Rutherford Hayes 2.79
23 Martin Van Buren 2.77
24 William Clinton 2.77
25 Calvin Coolidge 2.71
26 Chester Arthur 2.71
BELOW AVERAGE
27 Benjamin Harrison 2.62
28 Gerald Ford 2.59
29 Herbert Hoover 2.53
30 Jimmy Carter 2.47
31 Zachary Taylor 2.40
32 Ulysses Grant 2.28
33 Richard Nixon 2.22
34 John Tyler 2.03
35 Millard Fillmore 1.91
FAILURE
36 Andrew Johnson 1.65
37 Franklin Pierce 1.58
38 Warren Harding 1.58
39 James Buchanan

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 3, 2008 03:30 PM
Comment #265741

Rodney Brown,

You’d do us all a favor to source the list. Theodore Roosevelt, U.S. Grant, and Chester Arthur are better than their placement, Wilson, Johnson, and Kennedy not as good. It’ll be a century before their places are all settled in.

At least you got number one right. Most people really don’t, and too many now aren’t even sure who he was.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 3, 2008 04:13 PM
Comment #265742

List your source. :)

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 3, 2008 04:24 PM
Comment #265745

When you are losing on fund raising, losing the message, losing the debates, you have no choice but to start pulling your campaign out of key battleground states and concentrate the remaining resources where they will do the most good.

McCain’s campaign pulled out of Michigan and Virginia as Obama’s ground game structures continues to expand. That folks, is 60% of the election.

I am tickled when participants here declare “McCain will clearly be the winner”. I am curious, what will they do with those memories of what they said so surely, after he loses?

And Jim M, I was right about the polls. The polls now show that. Your comments are often so adamant about being wrong as if strong declaration of wrong somehow will make it right. I find the psychology of that behavior fascinating.

To have so much wishful thinking publicly stated in the declarative to be proven wrong again and again. Does this not take a toll after awhile? The power of defense mechanisms is truly awesome.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 3, 2008 04:39 PM
Comment #265747

Rodney,
I would like to see the source too. The ratings are mostly interesting in the way they reflect the values of the people who did the rating. For example, James Polk was listed as “near great” president. He led the charge to prosecute the Mexican-American War, and essentially stole large swaths of Mexican territory in an unjustified war. Now, many people would say it worked out really well, so Polk was “near great.” A few might point out that the criteria for greatness is not stealing the most, the fastest.

Benjamin Harrison ranked 27th? He died after one month in office! There are twelve presidents who did worse than die immediately after taking office? That’s pretty funny.

Posted by: phx8 at October 3, 2008 04:47 PM
Comment #265749

Federalist Society - The Wall Street Journal Survey on Presidents . not that I agree with it Phx8 the wiki one shows polk higher go figure.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 3, 2008 04:55 PM
Comment #265752

Correction: William Henry Harrison died one month after taking office. I don’t see him rated. My bad, Benjamin Harrison…

Posted by: phx8 at October 3, 2008 05:15 PM
Comment #265753

sorry Phx8 in that report it goes on in fine print to say.William Henry Harrison was president for a mere 30 days and James Garfield served for only six months. Many of our scholars thought their early deaths in office made it too difficult to evaluate them, so they are not included in this survey.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 3, 2008 05:22 PM
Comment #265755

David Remer writes; “And Jim M, I was right about the polls. The polls now show that.”

How pathetic to take your sense of right and wrong from polling data. David’s scoring system of life is interesting…being right as evidenced by others agreement somehow validates his self-esteem. Some children outgrow such silliness and become adults, others don’t.

My core beliefs don’t depend upon others for sustenance. Many walk thru life depending upon others for their perception of joy and happiness and in the end find emptiness in their own and others fickleness.

David, happiness is an inside job. I will celebrate what this country was and perhaps can be again when sanity is restored.

Posted by: Jim M at October 3, 2008 05:24 PM
Comment #265756

www.opinionjournal.com/hail/rankings.html

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 3, 2008 05:26 PM
Comment #265758

Jim M, how uninformed to not realize that American democracy is based on the greatest poll of all, Election Day. Polling data determines leadership of our republic. Your comment’s density and lack of relevant basic information about our democracy is, what’s your word, oh, yeah, ‘pathetic’.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 3, 2008 05:34 PM
Comment #265759

Lee, I’ll coincide Wilson to you but not Kennedy he did some gutsy things he brought us out of a small recession and stood up to Russia and America did prosper under his tragic short term to me as a 3rd grader when he died he was a uniter.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 3, 2008 06:02 PM
Comment #265761

I am ashamed to think that anyone could ever vote for a party that chooses an individual as uneducated Palin for their second in charge. She has no grasp of the major concepts in this election and she did nothing but recite answers from her 3 day seminar.

Joe six pack?? Hockey Moms?? That is not the solution.

Posted by: Daniel at October 3, 2008 06:14 PM
Comment #265762

David wrote; “I am ashamed to think that anyone could ever vote for a party that chooses an individual as uneducated Palin for their second in charge.”

David your shame means nothing to most of us who don’t judge our leaders by the school issuing their academic degree. Some would call that snobbery and elitism.

The embracing of shallow judgmental values are not unexpected from someone who discounts morals, ethics, honesty and caring in a candidate, and promotes a slick packaged puppet shyster adept at promising to impoverish the wealthy without enriching the poor.

For some, as their candidate rises in the poles their writing becomes proportionally more rabid. I suspect should Obama achieve a ten point lead the orgasmic slobbering will begin.

Should it happen that Obama wins, none will accuse liberals of being gracious winners.

Posted by: Jim M at October 3, 2008 07:17 PM
Comment #265764

>Shame on McCain and the Republicans? After these two debates, shame on the Democrats for not having Biden at the top of their ticket. Nothing like playing second fiddle to a guy who doesn’t have half the qualifications or experience as you do.
Posted by: kctim at October 3, 2008 12:02 PM

kctim,

By your criteria Cheney should have headed the Cheney/Bush ticket…oh, I forgot, he DID…be careful what you wish for…

All,

I’m not sure, but perhaps someone here can set me straight on this:

* I negotiate a contract

* My counterpart agrees with virtually every one of my demands…using a lectern, perhaps

* I practice according to my own demands for the contract

* When it is agreed that the contract shoud be activated, I change the rules again, by demanding that I not be held to the same requirements that I had agreed to

QUESTIONS: Is what I just did a Breach of Contract? Should I be held accountable for that breach? Should I have to pay anyone who was lost in any way for that breach?

I should think that the McCain/Palin camp should have to pay every one of the networks for an hour and a half of commercials they fore-fitted in order to show that freak show

*

Posted by: Marysdude at October 3, 2008 08:05 PM
Comment #265769
“I am ashamed to think that anyone could ever vote for a party that chooses an individual as uneducated Palin for their second in charge.”

I know many people with Ivy League degrees who are very nearly dunces, and I’ll also point out that Wall Street—which had a major role in creating our current economic crisis—is filled with such people. There are tons of very bright people who attend college in the Ivy League too, just as there are at less prestigious schools.

While it’s true that some people of modest backgrounds who don’t have family connections end up at Ivy League or other prestigious schools through their own abilities—people like Bill Clinton or Barack Obama, to give them their due—the overwhelming majority are the children of wealth and privilege.

Whatever you think of Palin, somebody who rose from modest circumstances and without family connections to become the governor of her home state is no fool. And education is something that never stops—it’s not just a piece of paper you hang on your wall.

You’ll learn more about governing in one month as a governor than you’ll ever learn by getting a graduate degree in political science.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at October 3, 2008 08:33 PM
Comment #265772

Well, I’m several hundresd miles from home and I was able to get online to check the spin. I was right, there is unlimited spin.

We does the left hate this woman so much? We have only known of her for a few weeks, but she is so hated and feared.

Is it because she represents the common person and doesn’t fit the elite mold? Is it because she is a self made woman, and was not endorsed by the main stream media, the women’s lib, and never attended a liberal college? Is it because she is a woman of faith? Is it because she loves her family and husband? Is it because she stepped up to the plate and actually took on political positions and has tried to better her country? Or is it because she decided to keep a child, whom she believed God gave her, instead of killing him by abortion.

She is my kind of woman, and I’m sure many americans feel the same way.

No, she doen’t know everything, she may not know all the names, places, and rules that DC insiders know, but the americann people don’t care. She represents us.

Posted by: Oldguy at October 3, 2008 08:59 PM
Comment #265774

>No, she doen’t know everything, she may not know all the names, places, and rules that DC insiders know, but the americann people don’t care. She represents us.
Posted by: Oldguy at October 3, 2008 08:59 PM

Old,

I’M an AMERICAN PEOPLE! Don’t leave ME out…I’m not impressed with someone who is so weak, she can’t even play by the rules SHE sets up. I have little respect for a candidate for the presidency who would ask such a one to run with him. Where is all that HONOR he touts as his strong point?

If she is asked to step up to the Oval Office during a McCain term, will her ‘down home’ style (with no substance) do the American people any good?

How can she represent us if she is so unfamiliar with the rules that she can’t select the ones that are best suited in a national emergency? I’m sure Putin or Kim will be impressed with her Joe Sixpack persona…

A soccer mom might make a good President, but if she insists on acting like one…probably NOT!!

Posted by: Marysdude at October 3, 2008 09:35 PM
Comment #265775

oldguy

No, she doen’t know everything, she may not know all the names, places, and rules that DC insiders know, but the americann people don’t care. She represents us.

Most Americans should and I have to believe do care. To not care and simply accept a candidate because they want to represent us is absurd and foolish at best. I do not hate her. I do not know her. I have been watching her with an open mind for five weeks now. She does not present the image of a person who is imo up to the task of running this country if needed. I am not sure she would be up to the task of being vp. She simply is not in the same league as more seasoned people who have been in the national scene considerably longer than her. Maybe she will be ready a few years down the road. Fact is we need leaders now, not a few years down the road. We have been without competent leadership for so long now that our country is currently paying a dear price, and will be paying for sometime to come. McCain simply made the wrong choice. That is not the fault of anyone but he and the GOP.

Posted by: RickIL at October 3, 2008 09:44 PM
Comment #265776

Rodney Brown,
I was expressing a personal opinion. Thanks for the link.

I also think Franklin Roosevelt ought to be listed twice. Once as a failure for two terms in the Great Depression, and once near the top of the “near greats” as the president who won W.W.II.
T.R. was an unmitigated Great president for his peacetime re-imaging of the office that had languished since the death of Lincoln. He took the presidency from an office that only really meant something in wartime and imputed to it powers to remake the social fabric of the nation. He was also the first president to broker a third-party peace accord, the ending of the Russo-Japanese War, for which he won an early Nobel Peace Prize. Had he defeated both Taft and Wilson in 1912 I have no doubt W.W.I either would not have happened or would have been a far more subdued affair.

He easily stands right up there with Washington and Lincoln. In my “Historical Periodic Chart” he occupies the same column as Andrew Jackson and Ronald Reagan. On that same chart we are now about to elect someone in the same column as Herbert Hoover (“The smartest Man in America”) and Zachary Taylor, who, along with his successor after only a year in office, John Tyler, were the death of the Whig Party.

It appears more and more likely that person will be Barak Obama.

Which gets me back to the point of this string- When Herbert Hoover was elected in a landslide that would continue tumbling for four years, the vice-presidential candidate on Al Smith’s ticket was a young governor struggling with a terrible handicap. Franklin Roosevelt would return in four years to win the presidency.

And that, Sarah Palin fans, is the rest of the story.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 3, 2008 09:59 PM
Comment #265777

MD, is Kim still a factor? i thought his head was scrambled i mean for real this time..

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 3, 2008 09:59 PM
Comment #265778

dude

I’M an AMERICAN PEOPLE! Don’t leave ME out

My initial thought was, who made this guy speaker for the American people. I am guessing he is speaking for the American people that hang out at Faux News, and are easily swayed by too much Limbaugh.

I am with you, the woman is simply not ready for the position she hopes to fill. I do not blame her. I blame McCain and whoever else in the GOP had anything to do with her selection. I think it speaks more to what most sensible people have realized for some considerable time now. Those folks running the GOP and leading this country are simply not up to the task at hand. They have screwed up so often and so badly that if the results were not so sobering it would be comical.

Posted by: RickIL at October 3, 2008 10:02 PM
Comment #265779

oldguy, I’d say there are more people than just “on the left” who don’t think much of Sarah. At least, that is what the polls are showing.
We’re just not impressed!! Her schooling and training leave much to be desired. She might have been able to schmooze her way into some of her jobs by winking and cutesy little catch phrases. The Vice President of the United States has standards a little higher than that!
I don’t think she represents most women in this country. I think her actions, attitude and great lacking in knowledge, is an embarassment. I don’t want to be represented by someone with the mentality and dialogue of a street walker!!!

Posted by: janedoe at October 3, 2008 10:04 PM
Comment #265781

Thanks lee,No doubt about it teddy was my hero what a tiger and progressive man he was, the Old GOP hated him and supported taft.he could have been no 3 or 4.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 3, 2008 10:10 PM
Comment #265782

And VV,,,,I’ve remembered a comment you made several days ago and keep forgetting to respond to it.
Her voice nearly puts me over the edge! It makes my teeth hurt….. ;)

Posted by: janedoe at October 3, 2008 10:11 PM
Comment #265784

Janedoe,
I don’t want to be represented by someone with the mentality and dialogue of a street walker!!!

Keep saying stuff like that. Be loud about it. Find as many venues as possible!

Republicans can’t buy>/strong> help like that these days.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 3, 2008 10:30 PM
Comment #265785

Argh! I hate this keyboard…

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 3, 2008 10:31 PM
Comment #265786

Some will argue that About FDR some even will say he provided a band aid more than a cure, I say the man was a genius overall in many respects, he understood the problem and the people he provided the moral and guts to provide comfort and combat the fear and he created programs that built a great deal of the infrastructure we enjoy today i could write volumes about him and his cousin teddy too FDR sealed and earned his place near the top.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 3, 2008 10:36 PM
Comment #265787

OldGuy, I see the words hate and fear typed by far more Righties than Lefties here. Perhaps it is a projection problem.

I think she is a fine person. I don’t think she is ready to run a nation, but, that is a far cry from hate and fear. McCain is going to lose according to the polls, so there really is nothing to fear anyway.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 3, 2008 11:09 PM
Comment #265788

Jim M said: “The embracing of shallow judgmental values are not unexpected from someone who discounts morals, ethics, honesty and caring in a candidate,

First, education, knowledge and wisdom are not shallow judmental values.

Second, I have great respect for Palin’s morals, ethics, honesty, and caring as far as I know them. She would make a great Nurse or Pastor of a Pentecostal Church if they allow women to do that. But, she is no where near ready to step into the Oval Office. I said that about Gov. Bush before he was elected to the office. I was right about him, and thankfully, it doesn’t appear we will have to prove me right about Palin and McCain. :-)

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 3, 2008 11:15 PM
Comment #265790

Lee, I don’t feel the need to find more venues, and I don’t need your permission to voice my beliefs.
What makes you think that your opinion is more worthy of hearing than mine?
Looks to me like you’re the one shouting.

Posted by: janedoe at October 3, 2008 11:35 PM
Comment #265795

Nope, janedoe, it ain’t YOU shouting, and believe it or not it ain’t Lee either…it’s Palin.

Well, she’s brought out that two year old hump about ‘O’ saying we are only ‘air strafing villages and killing civilians’ in Afghanistan. That statement, of course, is taken so far out of the context in which it was used as to be an absolute LIE…but McCain/Palin are so desperate after the debate, that ‘swiftboating’ is the only thing left to do.

She first made it on Faux News, and because the Faux folks didn’t challenge her (what would you expect), she was emboldened enough to repeat it elsewhere. Now, it will be another ‘joe six-pack’ or ‘soccer mom’ thingee, where she will bring it out as a constant reminder of how much like a barracuda she is.

‘O’ backers had better fall on this one quick, because wingers will cause it to grow a life if its own…kinda like black mold in a dirty bathroom…

Posted by: Marysdude at October 4, 2008 02:03 AM
Comment #265797

“I also think Franklin Roosevelt ought to be listed twice. Once as a failure for two terms in the Great Depression, and once near the top of the “near greats” as the president who won W.W.II.”

How unfair of you Lee, FDR got this nation through the worse economic crisis to date not started the worse economic crisis to date. It is easy to look back and say if he did this that or the other the depression would have been over sooner, however no one else at the time offered anything to cut short the depression other than more of the same thing that got us there. He held the nation together and gave many millions of people hope during those trying times. He is ranked where he should be Lee. Are you sure your political prejudices don’t preclude unbiased judgment of FDR? After all you put Reagan way to high up the list, what did he do in 8 years that could be compared to the big 3 Washington Lincoln and FDR? Or for that matter the big eight on this list. His legacy is a financially ill nation heading for another depression much like Hoover. Should unemployment continue to run amok perhaps the shantytowns will be called reaganvilles this time out.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 4, 2008 02:47 AM
Comment #265798

Yo, dude. Is this something that has just come out tonight? I’ve been in and out of the house today, and actually haven’t been living on the cable networks all day.
Bedtime now, but will check it out tomorrow…..and you are so right about the desperation. That’s what I was saying earlier. McCain is truly, and literally desperate to become President, and he doesn’t have much to lose at this point, what with his honor and sense of right and wrong completely gone. If we think they have been nasty before this, I think we need to be on guard.
And I’m really, really tired of people saying that “we” need to cut Sarah some slack. BULL***T.
Biden was way too nice to her last night, and she went into ankle biting mode pretty quick.
Letterman is having fun with McCain/Palin again…..need a laugh, so am going to get one.
‘night all.

Posted by: janedoe at October 4, 2008 02:48 AM
Comment #265803

We’re in big trouble, either way, because voters will most likely continue to reward Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates.
Oh well. Perhaps voters like it this way.
Apparently so.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 4, 2008 07:48 AM
Comment #265805

That’s the most important thing about being a historian is leaving their political leanings at home and being as Independent as possible such as president Washington warned about to the parties in a speech he gave. I recall a old CSpan program their was a college professor and they were at president Harding’s home He claimed Harding got a Bad Rap and was not aware of the corruption and should be giving a much higher rating than being a bottom feeder he went on to say that Harding brought civil rights and balanced the budget and was big big supporter of the Constitution and did many more good things, the author admitted on CSpan to being a card carrying Democrat, his went on to say that Harding was informed about a military person who was stealing and embezzling he asked this person to meet with him and was found trying to choke this thieve and was stopped by several aids, he went on to say that the historians should read the Harding papers and give him a new look.I have been trying to find the archives from CSpan i will continue to do so..

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 4, 2008 09:49 AM
Comment #265808

I am absolutely shocked that people will try and defend Palin. Education isn’t about getting a degree. In fact, I’ve met people without degrees who are very knowledgeable on a host of issues. From what I’ve seen, Palin is not that person. Her inability to answer questions properly makes me question her integrity as well. This whole ‘Joe Six Pack’ persona she has adopted should scare everyone. When she is dealing with world leaders, do you think they want to hear about her children’s hockey games? I still cannot understand how any conscious individual could vote for a party with her on the slate. Let’s not even mention all the high school friends who are now in charge of key positions in the Alaskan government.
I have a tremendous amount of respect for individuals who rise from modest backgrounds and achieve great success in their lives. That fact alone does make her a good candidate for the Republican party.

Posted by: Daniel at October 4, 2008 11:01 AM
Comment #265810

timmy:

My two year old son fought Mike Tyson to a draw when Mike Tyson was 20 years old.What do’es that say about Mike Tyson?What Do’es the debate last night say about Obama and Biden?

I think it says Mike Tyson won’t throw a knockout punch at a two year old. Gee, come to think of it, that IS the perfect analogy for the debate! ;-)

Posted by: jarandhel at October 4, 2008 11:46 AM
Comment #265814

“Biden was way too nice to her last night, and she went into ankle biting mode pretty quick.”

I agree janedoe, that was one area where I knocked off a few points on Biden’s debate scorecard. IMHO one of the big problems the dems have is they cannot seem to get down and dirty in a visible and proud of it way like the repubs have mastered.

To think that because she is a woman that he shouldn’t attack is a disservice to woman everywhere IMHO. Its like saying woman can be firefighters but you can’t put them by the fire. If Palin wants to be a politician then she also wants to be an equal in a debate or in any other part of the job.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 4, 2008 12:25 PM
Comment #265815

Daniel,

I agree this folksy BS from Palin is about as sincere as a crackhead/drunk pan-handling for change at the corner. It is entirely reminiscent of Bush’s “folksy cowpoke” image. He was a silver spoon, coke snorting, rich snob who never worked a day in his life. I lived in Dallas when he was given a “special deal” partnership in the Rangers and sold taxpayers on a new stadium with additional elite box/ luxury booth seats. His governorship was filled with payoffs to special interests. I would not buy a used car from this woman. I sure as hell won’t be voting for her or the “War Hero” from the Keating Five.

Bush saw sincerity in Putin’s eyes. Perhaps some American’s see something of value in Palin’s camera mugging, hokeyness. PT Barnum said there was a sucker born every minute.

Posted by: googlumpugus at October 4, 2008 12:32 PM
Comment #265819

“I should think that the McCain/Palin camp should have to pay every one of the networks for an hour and a half of commercials they fore-fitted in order to show that freak show” Posted by: Marysdude at October 3, 2008 08:05 PM

We can always count on Marysdude for a reasoned and thoughtful response and one that does not require childish name calling.

Why am I not surprised that liberals favor the old Washington hands over a fresh new candidate of the people without a prestigious law degree. After all, the folks on both sides who got us into the God-awful financial mess mostly had law degrees.

And all the “smart” wall-streeters, bankers, loan bundlers and other swindlers are just so much better than a common person with common sense.

I am reminded of the failed Air America radio show which was funded and populated with the best money could buy. These pointy-headed liberals couldn’t sell their supposed wisdom to the public and failed miserably against a man who, without the benefit of a college education, attracts over 20 million common Americans to his radio show every day.

No doubt those who hate conservatives will say that Rush is successful because his listeners have no brain. Why is it then that liberals claiming to be a majority in this country can’t produce a radio show that appeals to those who claim they do have a brain?

Posted by: Jim M at October 4, 2008 01:15 PM
Comment #265821

17 Lyndon Johnson 3.21

No way! He was one of the worst (but above G.W.Bush (43) who would be in the bottom 3).

Posted by: d.a.n at October 4, 2008 01:28 PM
Comment #265823

>We can always count on Marysdude for a reasoned and thoughtful response and one that does not require childish name calling.

Why is it then that liberals claiming to be a majority in this country can’t produce a radio show that appeals to those who claim they do have a brain?
Posted by: Jim M at October 4, 2008 01:15 PM

Jim M,

Wow! I didn’t know you cared…thanks…

The reason is we are a diverse crowd. We don’t all appreciate the same things in art or entertainment or politics…unlike Rushettes (better than ditto-heads?), who all seem to follow their hero in lockstep (kinda like a robot army).

Posted by: Marysdude at October 4, 2008 01:49 PM
Comment #265826

“After all, the folks on both sides who got us into the God-awful financial mess mostly had law degrees.”

So JIm M the logic we are to bring away from this is:
because some of the people responsible for the financial mess have law degrees then all must have law degrees. Therefore those with law degrees are not qualified for higher office. Palin doesnt have a law degree thereby making her qualified for higher office.

Its become clear to me now why the repubs and cons like Palin so much and are willing to turn a blind eye to her lack of knowledge.

I just can’t bring myself to agree with the premise though.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 4, 2008 02:15 PM
Comment #265827

Jim M,

The thing about your radio question is that it does not pertain just to radio…the same mindset and IQ that tends to listen to Limbaugh, also watch O’Reily with the same avid pleasure for lies, gross exaggeration and loud-mouthed soliloquy…you know what I mean…the ones who shout insults at people like Chelsea Clinton, and Barney Frank, with nothing to back them up besides loudness and an insulting demeanor. Ditto-heads (there I go again) love that stuff, else why would so many of them tune in to FOX HaHa News?

Posted by: Marysdude at October 4, 2008 02:16 PM
Comment #265829

Talk radio is a low tech medium. Better educated, more technically savvy youths and young adults abandoned AM talk radio for FM and the advantages of stereo, leaving the AM airwaves to the older, less technically aware, less educated portion of the population. In addition, repealing the Fairness Doctrine gave the ‘no-nothings’ a media where contradictory information could be screened out, and listeners could respond with ‘dittos’.

Even today, the media reflects the technological levels of the listeners. Technologically savvy liberals have taken the lessons learned from the Dean campaign, and used the internet to successfully fuel the Obama campaign.

What is happening is really very interesting, and barely commented upon by the media. Of course, the older technologies may adapt, but they can hardly be expected to advertise the new ones, just as the older, more tradition-oriented political philosophy of conservatism is less capable of adapting to the new technologies.

Two examples come to mind: first, the literal age of McCain compared with the age of Obama; and second, a comparison of the presidential candidates web sites.

Posted by: phx8 at October 4, 2008 02:30 PM
Comment #265832

>Yo, dude. Is this something that has just come out tonight?
Posted by: janedoe at October 4, 2008 02:48 AM

janedoe,

You can blame it on me being a little overweight, or my being older than the hills, or having the memory span of a male…but don’t you dare blame my forgetting to get you this link on me being a fat old man…

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/03/say-it-aint-so-sarah-pali_n_131841.html

Posted by: Marysdude at October 4, 2008 02:55 PM
Comment #265833

>Its become clear to me now why the repubs and cons like Palin so much and are willing to turn a blind eye to her lack of knowledge.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 4, 2008 02:15 PM

j2t2,

I’ve been digging through my mind for an apt description of Palin, and when I read your post I suddenly realized what it is…she lacks ‘depth’…she actually IS as shallow as she appears on the surface. She’s not stupid, and is no more ignorant than your next door neighbor, but she IS two dimensional. Thanks to you, I can now speak of her without trying to scratch through the chafe, to find the kernel.

Posted by: Marysdude at October 4, 2008 03:04 PM
Comment #265835

j2t2,

Come to think of it, isn’t that the problem with Cheney/Bush???

Posted by: Marysdude at October 4, 2008 03:10 PM
Comment #265836

Marysdude
Being a contractor an accountant may find me ignorant of accounting rules and methods and would be correct. It is specific knowledge that I’m missing it’s not that I am all around ignorant. Although I have some experience in dealing with accountants I still lack knowledge of accounting. I have years of experience of my little division of the contracting world. I have a good amount of knowledge of this same work. However I work with engineers that have little experience in the field yet have found they can do an excellent job because they have knowledge and are gaining experience.

I look at Obama as one of these engineers as he has some experience in his field and has demonstrated a good supply of knowledge and some expertise to the public. He acknowledges his mistakes because he has enough experience to know that is one way of demonstrating knowledge to others with more experience.
It appears to me that its a matter of knowledge that separates Palin from McCain Biden and Obama. She doesn’t appear to be a bad person even if you disagree with her politics. She has some experience at her chosen line of work. She has made rookie mistakes, which is to be expected, but fails to acknowledge these mistakes. That to me is why she doesn’t appeal to most lefties. Had she knowledge to go along with the experience she would acknowledge her “rookiness”. That separates her from Obama.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 4, 2008 03:40 PM
Comment #265838

j2t2, you hit the nail on the head. It is a humbling experience to cross that threshold where out of childhood and in adulthood, we acknowledge that we do not know everything, will never know everything, and to know as much as we can, we must accept and get comfortable with, what we don’t know.

Obama knows what he doesn’t know, and therefore is very capable of learning and if time does not permit learning, he will rely on the best judgment and expertise available to him (IF IT MAKES SENSE). I emphasize that last point, because there is a lot of expertise in the world that does not make sense. Meaning, does not follow from the basics of what one does know.

McCain offers nothing to contradict the appearance that he believes he does know all that he needs to know. That is very scary. That is GW Bush, all over again.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 4, 2008 03:54 PM
Comment #265840

dude……….. ROFLMAO !!!!
Get back to me when you figure that out…. ;) ;)
And, by the way,…..thanks for the link!

Posted by: janedoe at October 4, 2008 03:59 PM
Comment #265844

d.a.n.Said “17 Lyndon Johnson 3.21

No way! He was one of the worst (but above G.W.Bush(43) who would be in the bottom 3).” yes two presidents who took us into a unpopular war without a plan and walked away, excuse me Johnson expanded it to over 500,000 troops.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 4, 2008 04:21 PM
Comment #265847

Good observation and assessment j2t2. I agree with what you said, and there is a big difference between knowledge and intelligence. Throw wisdom into the mix and there’s another factor. I would argue for wisdom being the most important .
IMO, Palin’s strength would be in knowledge, and that would be limited. Add to that her attitude and cockiness, it creates a negative.

Posted by: janedoe at October 4, 2008 04:50 PM
Comment #265850

Gee, it is humbling to see how intelligent, educated, and, gosh darnit, deep y’all liberals are so sure y’all are. When I see my circle of conservative friends, however, they are just Ph.D.s, business owners, people who’ve worked hard all their lives, volunteered to help their communities, raised happy, productive children- you know the very dregs of society.

Then, too, when we drive through so many neighborhood represented by liberals, like Houston’s fifth ward, Inner city Detroit, whole shining cities like New Orleans or Philadelphia, they say nothing to us but civility and refinement, and we conservatives are quite naturally embarrassed by how shallow we’ve been. It’s nice to know that in Ohio they’ve gotten rid of the ridiculous impediments, like residency requirements and verification of address or citizenship, to signing up the urban outdoorsmen who inform even further our impression of how intelligent liberals are, further depressing our view of ourseves.

And, of course y’all are so gosh darn humble about how smart you are that we never would hear about things like that if we didn’t tune zombie-like to hear the rantings (and then go to the Internet to collect and check the sources of the news we hear) on our quaint sources.

When you have power back, of course, we know we won’t deserve to have a voice in the arranging of a society, since the people living in the beautiful communities mentioned above are so morally, ethically, and mentally superior to us. They will naturally be generous to us, even though their intelligence is so great they really have no need of us.

As a matter of fact the day may come when our embarrassment at out uselessness is so great we will leave and take what small minds we have to places where they could be put to good use.

Don’t worry. Y’all are so smart we won’t be missed.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 4, 2008 05:09 PM
Comment #265851

Oh yes, and while I’m being appropriately humble I am reminded that you are so civilized and intelligent that when liberals have the presidency and Republicans the Congress you are steamrolled by the Republican Congress (Senator Clinton on Gramm/Leach/Bliley), and when liberals have the Congress and Republicans the presidency you are steamrolled by the president (the credit rescue bill, war funding, etc.).

Your intelligence is so deep and your leadership so subtle.

I am constantly in awe.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 4, 2008 05:23 PM
Comment #265853

Lee,

Glad you know your place…

Posted by: Marysdude at October 4, 2008 05:45 PM
Comment #265856
Then, too, when we drive through so many neighborhood represented by liberals, like Houston’s fifth ward, Inner city Detroit, whole shining cities like New Orleans or Philadelphia, they say nothing to us but civility and refinement, and we conservatives are quite naturally embarrassed by how shallow we’ve been. It’s nice to know that in Ohio they’ve gotten rid of the ridiculous impediments, like residency requirements and verification of address or citizenship, to signing up the urban outdoorsmen who inform even further our impression of how intelligent liberals are, further depressing our view of ourseves.


When you have power back, of course, we know we won’t deserve to have a voice in the arranging of a society, since the people living in the beautiful communities mentioned above are so morally, ethically, and mentally superior to us. They will naturally be generous to us, even though their intelligence is so great they really have no need of us.


Thanks Lee, and you all wonder why your party’s arrogance and snobbery are brought into play so much !! Do you not get it?????
Of course, if you were trying to be humorous, I guess I missed it……….we’re so cerebral, you know…..

Posted by: janedoe at October 4, 2008 06:05 PM
Comment #265857

You betcha! (wink)

Posted by: phx8 at October 4, 2008 06:06 PM
Comment #265858

Okay, is it me, or were you all watching a different debate than I was…. for the first 45 minutes to an hour, I was in shock… I can not believe this woman is actually going through with this, knowing she is in NO WAY qualified. What an emabarrassment to herself, to her family, to republicans and to Americans. That “Oh Shucks” Im just a little ole redneck from Alaska front should be insulting to all of you. And how hypocritical, if it was Obama or his wife, was using street slang, because their from the south side of Chicago, you all would be tearing them down piece by piece. how about her not answering questions directly… was that scarey to you, or was it cute. We deserve direct responses to the issues we face today…forget her silly talking points, please tell me Americans are smarter than this….PLEASE! You should feel sorry for Biden, who I am sure if she was a male, probably would’ve tore her apart and called her out on her evasive, better yet dodging questions. But because she is a female….his hands were tied, because of course one wrong frown and silly people would’ve called him a sexist….. this is sad…..I pray that people are not this stupid to believe that this woman is qualified for anything other than a town or state with less than half a million people.

Posted by: rucrazy at October 4, 2008 06:18 PM
Comment #265859

rucrazy, I’m pretty sure you’re referring to only part of the comments on here.
You’ll get no argument from those of us making the rest !

Posted by: janedoe at October 4, 2008 06:31 PM
Comment #265860

Oh, I’m sorry. You see, I’m not intelligent enough to know it’s arrogant to know people who are not stupid.

I’d never really thought of Senator Biden’s approach to winning an argument, for example. If one needn’t get the facts right while one sounds authoritative one’s brilliance is so much harder to obscure.

I don’t know how to do that. Gosh I look up to you guys so…

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 4, 2008 06:44 PM
Comment #265861

“When I see my circle of conservative friends, however, they are just Ph.D.s, business owners, people who’ve worked hard all their lives, volunteered to help their communities, raised happy, productive children- you know the very dregs of society.”

Lee judging from your comment you must seem to think we are all drug addicted, bank robbing, tax evading, mental defectives currently serving time in one institution or another. Well that is simply not the case. We are just like you and most all of us in this country have worked hard all our lives and in some cases in our past lives. Not only that we volunteer, raise children, dogs and such . What a coincidence. Perhaps the only difference is our political persuasion.

“As a matter of fact the day may come when our embarrassment at out uselessness is so great we will leave and take what small minds we have to places where they could be put to good use.”

Interesting Lee where would you consider emigrating to? One thing you might consider is in most 1st world countries there are quite a few liberals. You might be jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire. Might make a nice article on the red column for conservatives thinking the worst. According to yahoo answers the most conservative country in the world is Saudi Arabia and second is the USA unless you count theocratic countries like Iran. Go figure.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071231084917AAeOzI7

Posted by: j2t2 at October 4, 2008 06:51 PM
Comment #265862

Lee,

Do all those PHD’s you know listen to Limbaugh or watch O’Reily? If not then obviously we are not talking about them…if they do, then they deserve to be talked about. The conservative right is populated by those who listen to Limbaugh and/or watch O’Reily…nuff said

Posted by: Marysdude at October 4, 2008 07:18 PM
Comment #265864

OK, most of the time I don’t listen to Rush myself. Hannity grates on my nerves and he is not nearly as good at giving his sources, but the fact of the matter is that we do hear things in those forums on which we can check sources, chase down corroborating sources, and find things like the internals of polls, all on things the major media sources will simply black out.

I don’t think liberals are stupid, but I do think they are too trusting of people who seem to me to think they are.

When Rush tells his audience what “liberals think” I know he is engaging in prejudice, and I’m happy to tell other conservatives as much. When liberals tell each other what conservatives think, or cite polls describing how conservatives are more bigoted than liberals, as has happened in this string, I don’t see, in this discussion, liberals feeling any embarrassment at all or any sign that a red flag has gone up in their mind. Did any liberal here ask for the internals on that poll? Not that I saw.

I grew up hearing my mother, who had protested in marches against segregation in rural Louisiana in the early 1950s, well before it was “cool” to do so, warn me of people who began sentances with “I’m not prejudiced, but…”. Inevitably they followed that preface with proof they are bigoted instead.

Don’t assume being liberal is a permanent, valid, preface to every statement about anyone that you, too, are not prejudiced.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 4, 2008 07:53 PM
Comment #265865

Thank you J2 for the link. I would have said Saudi Arabia and Was Thinking the USA ,Just Look at the Last 4-5 presidential elections the days of a Reagan or anyone for that matter winning 49 states are History In reflection i see the Paradigm shift and am positive we have come a long ways, sides will lose and sides will gain and in the reverse order it will come back around, in Optics i can make the Prism work to direct to light to the right axis, in politics the prism should be a butterfly or dragonfly prism to reflect all the light.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 4, 2008 08:06 PM
Comment #265866

I found this interesting. Hillary Clinton, while obviously not claiming she had won, did have good things to say about Palin’s debate performance. She, clearly, does not think the woman stupid.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 4, 2008 08:13 PM
Comment #265870

>I found this interesting. Hillary Clinton, while obviously not claiming she had won, did have good things to say about Palin’s debate performance. She, clearly, does not think the woman stupid.
Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 4, 2008 08:13 PM

Lee,

Hill’s my hero, so I’ll go along with that…Palin’s not stupid. Now that that is out of the way…she is shallow, mean spirited and not very nice…her honor and honesty are also in question.

Posted by: Marysdude at October 4, 2008 08:39 PM
Comment #265872

She accused Obama of being beyond naiive. Today she says he is paling around with terrorists.

Does anyone really believe this is anything other than what was programmed into her head? She’s a robot - no, a stepford wife.

Posted by: Schwamp at October 4, 2008 08:40 PM
Comment #265873
She, clearly, does not think the woman stupid.

Sorry Lee, but Hillary didn’t step into the stupidity issue at all. Her comment was that for her being around as short a time as she has, she did well. That’s falls way short of singing praises, and for sure, Hillary is a politician.

Posted by: janedoe at October 4, 2008 08:44 PM
Comment #265876

Sarah Palin did better than expected; at least she didn’t swallow her own tongue or something like that. However, in order to be able to do that, she had to literally and explicitly ignore questions for which she wasn’t prepared. I think that’s why we didn’t get a moment like the Couric interviews gave us; with Couric, Palin couldn’t avoid the questions for which she was unprepared. Here, she could just say “I don’t care what you want me to talk about, I’m going to reiterate my talking points about energy.”

While this meant she didn’t completely embarrass herself, it didn’t hide her overall unreadiness for the job. There were many questions in which I noticed the golden moment when she transitioned from “I don’t know how to answer Gwen… how do I get to a talking point” to “I’m on my script; now I can look at the camera.” She wasn’t really answering questions - she was working from a script.

Also, her refusal to answer the question about whether she thought gays couples should have equal legal rights as straight couples was painfully awkward. The look of disgust on her face in that section as she talked about how she “tolerates” gays told a lot more about what she thinks than her words said.

Biden did much better, in my opinion. He didn’t have any major gaffes (and “Bosniak” wasn’t a gaffe - that’s the correct term, even if you didn’t know it), and he was able to avoid the pitfall of appearing to condescend to his younger female rival. His early zing about the Bridge to Nowhere was well received in the left-leaning young crowd with which I saw the debate. His late fusillade against the McCain as a “Maverick” was strong - too bad he waited so long to deploy it.

I think the moment that has the greatest potential to be Biden’s either strength or undoing was when he got emotional talking about his son almost dying from the car crash that killed his wife and daughter. The moment was very powerful for me as a counter to the idea that only a “hockey mom” understands real people, but how will it play? The Conventional Wisdom is that a similar moment saved Hillary in New Hampshire, but also that a moment of tears killed Muskie’s campaign in 1972.

In my eyes, the debate was a win for Biden - he answered the questions, and he answered them well. He was also able to take a lot of shots at McCain that Palin couldn’t deflect.

On another note, it was very interesting to have the debate at my alma mater. We watched the debate on the other end of campus, at a special program for young alumni and students at the art school. It was very interesting to go through the police checkpoint, to see the McCain boosters outside the security perimeter, and to see the riot police getting prepared to handle the event.

We also had an interesting conversation on public transportation on the way back. The woman sitting next to us was in town just for the debate - she’s working for the Obama campaign. The really interesting thing is that she’s not even an American! She quit her job in her homeland of Denmark this summer to come here to work on Obama’s campaign. The passion behind this election is amazing.

Posted by: LawnBoy at October 4, 2008 09:55 PM
Comment #265879
The woman sitting next to us was in town just for the debate - she’s working for the Obama campaign. The really interesting thing is that she’s not even an American! She quit her job in her homeland of Denmark this summer to come here to work on Obama’s campaign. The passion behind this election is amazing.

I actually find that more disturbing than anything, this notion that Obama actually has foreigners, whose allegiances are not first and foremost to the United States of America, working for his campaign.

As for Biden choking up with emotion during the debate, I though it humanized him, which is a good thing, but I think we all know damned well what people would be saying if Governor Palin—or any woman—did that during a debate. It would be called a sign of weakness and female frailty—evidence that she isn’t tough enough for the job.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at October 4, 2008 10:58 PM
Comment #265880

LO,

Not necessarily - look what it did for Hillary in New Hampshire (at least, according to CW).

Posted by: LawnBoy at October 4, 2008 11:01 PM
Comment #265883

It should come as no surprise that McCain-Palin are now relying on smear and fear in a last ditch effort to win this election with unsubstantiated lies, despite McCain’s two-faced promise to run a clean campaign. First, because John McCain has nothing to run on except a failed policy of deregulation. Second, because he is desperate and knows that lies and smears work. Herman Goering once said that “…people can always be brought to doing the bidding of leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to greater danger.” Fear is a powerful motivator. And the radical right has learned from experience that if they repeat their lies enough people will begin to believe them. Moreover, the more outrageous the lie, the more likely people are to believe it. I for one find it very disturbing that John McCain would openly and proudly embrace the philosophy of one of history’s most notorious and despicable monsters!!!

Posted by: Robert at October 4, 2008 11:05 PM
Comment #265886
I actually find that more disturbing than anything, this notion that Obama actually has foreigners, whose allegiances are not first and foremost to the United States of America, working for his campaign.

I expected a response something like this, though I find it interesting that you phrase it in terms of “Obama has foreigners working for his campaign.” Do you the campaign made a mistake by accepting her efforts? If you were managing a campaign office for McCain and an enthusiastic European offered to do everything she could to canvas for McCain, would you turn her away?

It’s not like she was making national policy as a foreign agent - she’s helping people register to vote. Why would that be disturbing?

Posted by: LawnBoy at October 4, 2008 11:11 PM
Comment #265887

It’s not like she was making national policy as a foreign agent - she’s helping people register to vote. Why would that be disturbing?

Fear, desperation. It has been brought up earlier that we are in for the barrage to go into full gear with the nasty, vile, despicable blatant lies and full-blown deceit.
Falling poll numbers, people wising up about both McCain and Palin….absolute fear and desperation.
Hang on!

Posted by: janedoe at October 4, 2008 11:29 PM
Comment #265888

Lawnboy, to answer your question, yes. I certainly would have a problem with foreigners, whose first allegiances are to foreign states, and who will not be effected by our leaders’s decisions about matters such as taxation, civil rights, education, healthcare, etc., getting directly involved with the McCain campaign. Obama wants to serve—or claims to want to serve—the interests of Americans. Not the people of Denmark.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at October 4, 2008 11:31 PM
Comment #265890

LO - she’s registering voters, what possible harm can that cause - higher voter turnout? Is that a bad thing? She’s not voting. If you are worried about foreign meddling in the campaign what about all the money McCain campaign managers/advisors have taken from Georgia and Columbia to name a couple? That’s not from citizens of these countries being excited by a candidate it is foreign states paying these people large sums of money to be the mouthpiece for foreign governments. These people are now advising McCain and telling Palin what she believes. I don’t think there is any comparison.

Posted by: tcsned at October 4, 2008 11:46 PM
Comment #265892

It’s not so much the actions of one individual as it is the larger issue of who is directly involved in our political process and why.

When foreigners are here actively trying to sway our elections, that IS a problem.

Even more troubling is the brewing scandal, predictably hushed up by our media, related to Obama’s 200 million dollars in illegal campaign contributions from foreigners. The story here.

This is far, far more serious than connections between campaign advisers and foreign money. But if that’s a matter you’re genuinely concerned with, take a good hard look at George Soros.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at October 5, 2008 01:02 AM
Comment #265894

LO “hushed up by the media” yet the American Spectator is speaking out. So far all there is speculation and wishful thinking from the far right but little evidence of any wrong doing vy the Obama campaign. When you combine the sorry reputation of the right when it comes to election time lies and misinformation with the desperation emanating from the right as they desperately hope for the October surprise to propel their pathetic presidential candidates into office its hard to take this seriously. No wonder the media hasn’t jumped all over it, consider the source.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 5, 2008 03:00 AM
Comment #265895

Lee, what’s wrong with the fifth ward? Not the right color for you?

Posted by: googlumpugus at October 5, 2008 03:36 AM
Comment #265896

My wife said the best description of Palin’s debate performance I’ heard to date. I did not ask her if she’d seen it on TV, or thought it up herself…”Palin had a list of responses on her podium, and when a question was asked, she would put together her response from that list, i.e., Governor what do you think of Iran’s nuclear threat…well, by golly, (answers one and seven). Governor how would you change your policies because of the current economic crisis? Well, Joe Six Pack says (answers three and nine)”.

Mama doesn’t think Palin gave even one of her own views on anything except Alaska. Mama is registered at the polls as a Republican, and I would never ask, but I think Palin lost her vote.

Posted by: Marysdude at October 5, 2008 05:24 AM
Comment #265902
I actually find that more disturbing than anything, this notion that Obama actually has foreigners, whose allegiances are not first and foremost to the United States of America, working for his campaign.

Seeing as the current administration has made world policing their first priority it is fair that ‘foreigners’ are willing to assist with voter registration. With the low voter turnouts that plague American elections you should be honored that this lady is willing assist your nation in shoring up voters. Remember globalization is a good thing.

Posted by: Daniel at October 5, 2008 11:16 AM
Comment #265906

It’s more obvious than ever that the U.S. is in deep trouble, whoever wins the presidency.

We appear to have a choice between a crap sandwich, and a crap sandwich with a little relish on it to make it less revolting.

However, in my opinion, Sarah Palin truly borders-on (if not smack-dab 100%) being delusional, incompetent, ignorant, full-of-it, and dangerous.

That Katie Couric/Sarah Palin interview was very revealing.

And that Saturday Night Live spoof of Sarah Palin, almost verbatim, word-for-word, would be hysterically hilarious if it wasn’t for the fact that Sarah Palin could be a “heart-beat away from the Presidency”.

Yikes!

As an independent, this has nothing to do with partisan loyalties what-so-ever (especially since I used to be a Republican), but I’m shocked that any truly objective voter could watch that Katie Couric/Sarah Palin interview, and seriously think about risking having Sarah Palin for president should something happen to McCain, who ain’t no spring chicken.

Fortunately, most polls show voters’ think Sarah Palin lost. However, the real question is will McCain lose or win?

We will see.
We’re in big trouble either way, but Sarah Palin is such a herendous choice and potentially dangerous situation for the nation, it may be just enough to make me vote against McCain/Palin on 4-Nov-2008.

But Palin gets high scores for completely dodging the questions, and she will fit right-in at D.C. But lying, twisting the truth, and avoiding questions is no great feat. It seems to come natural for most (if not all) politicians these days. But why shouldn’t, when politicians are repeatedly rewarded for it, with perpetual re-election?

Joe Biden wasn’t much better with the facts.
One would think after 36 years in Congress, you’d see a much better command of the facts.

And McCain has been in Congress for 26 years, and you’d think he would have a better handle on the facts too.
But McCain’s command of economics is what is most impressive.
Impressively frightful.
Just a few days before an economic melt-down, he’s saying the economy is fundamentally sound.
If I hear McCain say fundamentally one more time, I’m going to … hhhhmmmmm, I don’t know - not vote for him?
But don’t worry, McCain has Greenspan’s book.

And Obama tells a few whoppers of his own.
And Obama has the worst voting record (“D-” ; grades.betterimmigration.com/compare.php3?District=IL&Category=0&Status=Career&VIPID=1162) when it comes to illegal immigration. Obama says people “get bitter, they cling to guns, or religion, or antipathy to people who aren’t like them, or anti-immigrant sentiment, or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations”, and then claimed afterward that “I said something that everybody knows is true.” But Obama’s grade is only slightly worse than McCain’s (grades.betterimmigration.com/compare.php3?District=AZ&Category=0&Status=Career&VIPID=33).

Any way, I got a kick out of John Vought saying only Obama and Biden tell lies. But, perhaps John Vought’s judgement is clouded by passion (www.youtube.com/watch?v=xr3wxTqL9nM)? You’d think by age 69, he’d understand that the differences between the two parties of the two-party duopoly are so minor, and both are so corrupt, it is a waste of time to argue over who is more corrupt.

And both McCain and Obama voted for the bail-out that socializes debt, punishes responsible banks and Americans.
That bail-out wasn’t necessary, and will simply make things worse, because most of the 8000+ banks nation-wide are sound, unless they have been cookin’ the books too?
Still, since when did principles become null-and-void?
Since when did the solution for massive debt, borrowing, money-printing, spending, pork-barrel, and waste become more of the same?

The lies, distortions, mistakes, and spin by all are rampant, and their voting records are pathetic (One-Simple-Idea.com/VotingRecords2.htm).

Regardless of who the next President is, this nation is in big trouble because too many voters will forget all about do-nothing Congress, and too many voters care aobut THEIR party more than their country, as they argue over who is more corrupt than the other, as if it really matters which gangrenous leg to amputate first.

At any rate, the voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, until that finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 5, 2008 12:16 PM
Comment #265911

20 John Quincy Adams,”’ this was one hot political event,also John Q probably had the highest IQ in that era the outcome of the vote went to the house where they voted and decided the outcome, John Q was very progressive and instituted a program of roads and canals and even a observatory, and he was a friend of the Native Americans his policies were shot down by many members of the congress.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 5, 2008 12:59 PM
Comment #265914

dude, you tell Mama (Mary) for me…..”way to go” !!!

This fear of other countries being “involved” in our election process is ridiculous, and why are you being so paranoid about a fruitless intervention? I’m thinking that it’s really pretty cool that those countries are once again WANTING to relate to us…to be part of an incredible body of people and ideals that once were held in awe. We lost that, folks….when Bush put his hand on the bible!!! It’s starting to come back.
Whoever these people are and from whatever countries they are from, their only contribution can be of support and encouragement. After all, many of our actions and reactions have an effect globaly, so why shouldn’t our leaders ( or potential ones ) not be of some concern? We certainly have no problems condemning other world leaders………..or commending when appropriate.
I still smell fear.


Posted by: janedoe at October 5, 2008 01:20 PM
Comment #265925

I don’t know any of for a fact, but I doubt this is the first campaign to enlist foreign help…for one thing campaigns cannot have enough help, they all need bush beaters, mailers, pollsters, etc., so if a volunteer knocks on the door, the guy in charge would be a fool to turn them away, even if they were Martians.

I don’t know if either Lafayette or Tocqueville ever actually worked on a campaign, but they certainly cast a huge influence on our politics…go figure…it’s just another ‘straw-man’…

Posted by: Marysdude at October 5, 2008 02:04 PM
Comment #265931

Dating back decades, America has seen Canadians participate in various ways in our election process. One name comes to mind, Robert Goulet, who mangled our Star Spangled Banner, volunteered his famous face for political ads.

There is nothing new in foreign citizens lending a hand in our partisan politics. In fact, all of our founding fathers were British citizens while undergoing their efforts to erect this nation. Talk about foreign participation.

The Constitution prescribes citizenship for certain elected and appointed offices, but levies no detriment upon foreign citizens participating in our political process.

If you think it is wrong, alter the Constitution. Support a Constitutional Convention, or at least an amendment. If that is too much work for you, then the issue isn’t that important.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 5, 2008 02:33 PM
Comment #265935

Of course persons living in other countries should be encouraged to campaign in our presidential election. It won’t be long before we will be in their countries begging for money.

That liberals love lawyers is not news. What other group of professionals would be better than lawyers to subvert our constitution? What other group of professionals is better prepared to rape and pillage the public treasury. What other group of professionals is better able to cover-up malfeasance, theft, and plundering?

Only a lawyer legislator could render our tax code into legalistic gibberish requiring 55,000 pages of obfuscation.

At this point, we have government checks flowing to the poor, retired, and disabled. With an Obama administration government checks will begin flowing to middle-class American’s as well. When over 80% of all Americans are getting some form of government assistance or out-right check, our political class will have achieved their goal of complete dominance and guaranteed re-election.

Never in the history of the world has anyone on the government teat refused to re-elect or support those providing the milk.

And, never in the history of the world has a government who has enslaved its people with government milk survived for long. These schemes, identified as many assorted “ism’s” always collapse under their own weight or end in revolution.

Posted by: Jim M at October 5, 2008 03:14 PM
Comment #265936

What a hate filled comment, Jim M
At this point, we have government checks flowing to the poor, retired, and disabled.

Posted by: janedoe at October 5, 2008 03:44 PM
Comment #265939

janedoe, Keep the checks flowing to the poor, retired, and disabled…I support that, never said I didn’t. Now read the rest of what I wrote.

Posted by: Jim M at October 5, 2008 04:36 PM
Comment #265945

>And, never in the history of the world has a government who has enslaved its people with government milk survived for long. These schemes, identified as many assorted “ism’s” always collapse under their own weight or end in revolution.
Posted by: Jim M at October 5, 2008 03:14 PM

An example, Jim M, if you don’t mind…

The reason I ask is…one of those ism’s is a country we attempted to destroy for several years…Viet Nam…they now have a stronger economy than ours.

One of those countries that employs an ism is the country that almost single handedly supports our national debt.

The Soviet Union failed, but not because of their ism, but rather because we outlasted it in a protracted ‘cold war’.

But there may be some I’m not cognizant of…

I’m not trying to sell an ism for America, but if I were you, I wouldn’t undersell it either.

Posted by: Marysdude at October 5, 2008 06:52 PM
Comment #265946

Jim M

What other group of professionals would be better than lawyers to subvert our constitution?

No one is better than the GOP.

Posted by: RickIL at October 5, 2008 07:24 PM
Comment #265947

RickIL,

I’m pretty sure there are legal-beagles in the GOP, but the two main architects of the demise of our Constitution are actually not lawyers though…are Cheney/Bush, or Bush/Cheney attorneys?

Posted by: Marysdude at October 5, 2008 07:43 PM
Comment #265952

Good rant Jim M. Sometimes it just feels good to get it out huh?

“What other group of professionals would be better than lawyers to subvert our constitution? What other group of professionals is better prepared to rape and pillage the public treasury. What other group of professionals is better able to cover-up malfeasance, theft, and plundering?”

Bankers and Insurance Co executives come to mind Jim M.

“Only a lawyer legislator could render our tax code into legalistic gibberish requiring 55,000 pages of obfuscation.”

Oh yeah and accountants

“At this point, we have government checks flowing to the poor, retired, and disabled. With an Obama administration government checks will begin flowing to middle-class American’s as well.”

Government checks come from income taxes as well as Medicare/Medicaid, SSI , SUI etc, contributions from those that are know getting these checks from the government Jim M. and some of them are middle class as well especially retired military collecting 2 or 3 checks for their service to the government both in and out of the military.

BTW you failed to mention my personel favorite, the corporate welfare doled out by the government.

“Never in the history of the world has anyone on the government teat refused to re-elect or support those providing the milk.”

I couldn’t find this under fact check Jim M but when I did a logic and reality check I noticed that it would be impossible to prove this as the voting booths were private the last time I voted. To say that everyone getting SS checks or medicare checks is voting for Bush or his replacement McCain is illogical, because these people are getting checks doesn’t mean they agree with the politics of their representative. Now if you are trying to imply the dems are responsible for all these programs and the receipiants always vote democratic well… that doesnt sound logical either. Have you received an SS check Jim M? did you vote democratic all the time because of it? Seems I will have to file this comment in the useless conservative rhetoric file until you can back it up a bit.

“And, never in the history of the world has a government who has enslaved its people with government milk survived for long. These schemes, identified as many assorted “ism’s” always collapse under their own weight or end in revolution.”

Jim M what comes to mind is the fact that most European countries have “enslaved its people with government milk” yet they prosper not revolt. Canada also comes to mind and once again they prosper not revolt. What examples were you thinking of when you made this statement?


Posted by: j2t2 at October 5, 2008 09:30 PM
Comment #265954
the two main architects of the demise of our Constitution

The damage they did will be nothing compared to what is coming.

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 5, 2008 10:03 PM
Comment #265957

Rhinehold, You’re right. Because the will compound it with more of the same. Principles have been thrown out-the-window. The collapse of the debt-pyramid will be hastened by more massive debt, borrowing, money-printing, pork-barrel, spending, waste, and socializtion of that debt to boot. It’s a sad day when the majority of Americans have finally fallen for the myth that we can all live at the expense of everyone else.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 5, 2008 10:43 PM
Comment #265958

Yes, what is coming next will be even worse than what I previously predicted. What was needed was fiscal responsiblity. Instead, we have chosen to be more fiscally irresponsible.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 5, 2008 10:45 PM
Comment #265959

>The damage they did will be nothing compared to what is coming.
Posted by: Rhinehold at October 5, 2008 10:03 PM

Rhinehold,

Do you really think McCain/Palin will win this thing?
We won’t have to worry quite so much if ‘O’/Biden win…

I will agree with you about one thing…the Constitution, as we’ve become familiar with it, is on its last legs. The American people have neither the will nor the desire to protect it.

No party can save it, but the democrats won’t attack it as the GOP has. To the GOP, it’s just a god-damned piece of paper…

Posted by: Marysdude at October 5, 2008 10:50 PM
Comment #265974

Oh Geez,

Gimme a break here.

We’ve been “shredding the Constitution” since 1776.

This will be nothing compared to what is coming. Did you steal that line from a movie promo?

How about a little pragmatism here folks? Some solutions rather than hand wringing?

The problem is everyone agrees the economy is terrible, but few do more than criticize those attempting to take real action. I think Paulson and Bernake are at least trying to do something reasonable. Inaction would be positively stupid.
No, this won’t likely be the end all solution, but at least it isn’t sitting on one’s collective hands moaning about doom and gloom.

Posted by: googlumpugus at October 6, 2008 04:34 AM
Comment #265975

Looks like Palin was able to sway a few women, left coast liberals no less.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJxIYQKmM0M

“America, this is what a feminist looks like.”

Wow, that’s gotta sting. I sure hope all those dumb women don’t screw up yet another democrat presidential bid. You’d really start running out of scapegoat’s, not to mention voters, if you started blaming women too. But they must be dumb to support Palin though, right? C’mon you can admit it.

Posted by: andy at October 6, 2008 05:45 AM
Comment #265984

googlumpugus,

I explained the plan I thought would resolve the issue WITHOUT costing taxpayers another 700B. In fact, the amount of bailouts that have been issued by this democratic congress is easily near 1.8 Trillion dollars and they want us to believe they are the party of fiscal responsibility?

The check will be due someday. We may be able to pass it off to our children or grandchildren, but some day it will come due. And IMO this is what is wrong with this country, no one wants to go through the work and effort necessary to make themselves financially sound. Borrow borrow borrow, credit cards, leases, etc. What do people OWN. When does anyone give up something they want in exchange for being financially sound?

The democrats with a willing president will do what they have always done and what helped get us where we are today, use economic policy to try to create an equality, as they see it, within the country. Those that work hard to make themselves financially sound will be told that they have to give up that money that they sacrificed for in order to give it to someone who never says no to the latest product that comes down the pike.

Fair? The Democrats have no understanding of the word. Liberty and Freedom? Similarly foreign.

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 6, 2008 09:38 AM
Comment #265989

>Those that work hard to make themselves financially sound will be told that they have to give up that money that they sacrificed for in order to give it to someone who never says no to the latest product that comes down the pike.

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 6, 2008 09:38 AM

Rhinehold,

Oh, WAAH! Have you been sleeping for the last eight years? Just how much hard work and sacrifice have these nice Republicans you talk about been making? How successful do you have to be to create the hole we’ve corporate welfared ourselves into? Cry on someone elses shoulder, while the Democrats try to dig us out.

Posted by: Marysdude at October 6, 2008 10:03 AM
Comment #265990
googlumpugus wrote: Some solutions rather than hand wringing?
HMMMMmmmm … who was it on this blog spouting rosy predictions and trivializing most (if not all) warnings, and making fun of David Walker’s (former U.S. Controller and head of the GAO) warnings?

The 10+ Abuses hammering most Americans…
The 17+ Painful Consequences …
Solutions…

Today, when what we needed most is fiscal responsibility, we get more massive debt, borrowing, money-printing, pork-barrel, rampant spending, and waste in the form of a $700+ Billion bail-out, which most likely is only the 1st in a series of bail-outs, as California, New York State, and everyone and their cat and dog line-out for a bail-out too. Cha Ching!

It’s insane.
The 1st bail-out BILL (H.R. 3997) failed in the House.
Guess it wasn’t sweet enough.
After sweetening the BILL up (H.R. 1424) with over $100 Billion of pork-barrel, it then passed.
Amazing.
When fiscal responsibility is more important than ever, Congress is still sneaked all sorts of pork-barrel and earmarks into BILL H.R. 1424.

The National Debt Clock ($10.2 Trillion) is growing so fast, they are having to add another digit to the counter. And that isn’t really all of the federal debt. Always excluded is the $12.8 Trillion borrowed and spent from Social Security, leaving it pay-as-you-go, with a 77 Million baby-boomer bubble approaching.

People are worried about getting more easy credit, when they should perhaps be worried about a more fundamental issue. What good is a line of credit if the U.S. Dollars they are borrowing ain’t worth the paper they are printed on?

The U.S. Dollar has already been falling fast against all international currencies since year 1999. The National Debt has grown from $5.5 Trillion in year 1999 to $10.2 Trillion today!

Based on the post-1998 inflation measurement method, a U.S. Dollar in 1999 is now only worth 76 cents in year 2008.

By the pre-1983 inflation measurement method, $1 in year 1999 is now only worth less than 42 cents (One-Simple-Idea.com/DebtAndMoney.htm#Measurement).

Year: _ Pre-1983 ____ Value
_______ Inflation ___ of $1.00
_______ Rate __________________
2000: ___ 10.0% _____ $1.00
2001: ___ 07.8% _____ $0.92
2002: ___ 09.0% _____ $0.84
2003: ___ 08.0% _____ $0.77
2004: ___ 09.5% _____ $0.70
2005: ___ 11.0% _____ $0.62
2006: ___ 10.0% _____ $0.56
2007: ___ 11.7% _____ $0.49
2008: ___ 15.6% _____ $0.42

So, who wants to now trivialize the falling U.S. Dollar?
Americans may want to go out and buy some wheelbarrows, because it may soon require a wheelbarrow of U.S. currency to only buy a loaf of bread.
Destroy the currency with more massive debt, borrowing, money-printing, and inflation, and it won’t matter how big or numerous the bail-outs are, because the U.S. Dollar won’t be worth the paper it is printed on.

The U.S. is in imminent danger of Banana Republic style hyperinflation, as evidenced by the falling U.S. Dollar relative to all major international currencies, and the rapidly rising costs of most (if not all) major necessities and commodities.

“Highly placed sources in banking and business circles in Europe and South America warn that unless the U.S. government moves quickly to control the spending which is ballooning its deficit, America is in imminent danger of South American Banana Republic style hyperinflation.” - Jack Anderson

Hyperinflation will be more devastating than a credit crunch. Hyperinflation will wipe out the middle-class by destroying the value of cash, savings, incomes, bonds, Social Security, and other paper instruments. But, how does it affect stock markets? With the Federal government just having added $5.2 trillion in Fannie/Freddie liabilities of which about $600 billion will likely default, the Federal Reserve having now polluted its balance sheet by some $700 billion worth of toxic mortgage bonds with a 41.6% default rate ($291 billion in likely defaults), an $85 billion bailout for AIG, and, now, the Administration asking for some $700 billion more to bail out more financial firms, it seems clear that the winds of hyperinflation are upon us.

What will be the comparative effect of this addiction to money-printing and the resulting hyperinflation upon index funds, like DIA, QQQ, and SPY, versus bonds and cash?

Hyperinflation has happened before and it can happen again.
Today, we have the perfect ingredients for hyperinflation.
Hyperinflation has occurred in the following countries in the last 150 years:

  • Weimar Republic of Germany 1920 – 1923 (1/466 billionth of starting value),

  • Zimbabwe 2003 - present (6 quadrillionth of the starting value and continuing to fall),

  • Former Soviet Union 1993 – 2002 (1/14th of starting value),

  • Argentina 1975 – 1983 (1/1,000th of starting value),

  • Austria 1921 – 1923 (about 1/4 of starting value),

  • Bolivia 1984 - 1986 (1/1,000 of starting value);

  • Bosnia-Herzegovina 1992 – 1993 (1/100,000th of starting value),

  • Brazil 1960 – 1994 (1 trillionth of starting value), Chile 1971 – 1973 (1/3rd of starting value),

  • China 1947 – 1955 (1/10,000th of starting value),

  • Greece 1943 – 1953 (1/50 trillionth of starting value),

  • Hungary 1945 – 1946 (100 quintillionth of the starting value),

  • Hungary 1922 – 1923 (1/4 of starting value),

  • Israel 1976 – 1986 (1/16th of starting value),

  • Japan 1934 – 1951 (1/362nd of starting value),

  • Poland 1990 – 94 (1/10,000th of starting value),

  • U.S.A. (Confederate States of America) 1861 – 1865 (1/90th of starting value, and then, by the end of the Civil War, the Confederate Dollar depreciated to zero).

  • It also happened in the ancient Roman Empire, when the silver and gold coinage of that day was progressively debased with base metals, in order to fund wars, giveaways to the Plebeians, and various other adventures. There are many additional examples that I have not bothered to cover here.

The arguements in favor of the $700+ Billion bail-out (which won’t be the last) are a credit-crunch, job-loss due to business that can’t operate without credit, people who can’t buy homes, cars, and more stuff because they can’t good credit.

OK. Maybe.

But which is worse?
Some (not all) businesses and people being weened off of their addiction to credit, or crashing the U.S. Dollar?
What will be the point of working at all, if the money you earned that day won’t even buy a slice of bread?

Not all depressions are characterized by deflation.
There are two types of depressions (one with deflation and one with inflation).
Hyperinflation can be worse than deflation, because hyperinflation destroys the currency.
Imagine what effect that will have, when oil is currently traded in U.S. Dollars?
Imagine earning $150 per day, but a gallon of gasoline costing $30.
Think it can’t happen?
Continue these bail-outs, and growing the debt, borrowing, money-printing, and rampant spending, and see what happens.
Based on some basic math, it isn’t far-fetched.

At minimum, the U.S. dollar will fall by the amount by which the Federal balance sheet is corrupted by the toxic mortgage paper.
Most frightening is the prospect of giving Henry Paulson, the prior Chairman of Goldman Sachs, one of the key contributors to the toxic mortgage instruments that have caused the credit crunch, controls the $700 billion bail-out, probably without sufficient transparency and accountability.

It will cause more inflation.

We can also expect that the U.S. dollar will lose another 75% of its value within the next 2-to-3 years.
Cash in the form of government and/or corporate bonds, money in CDs, money-market funds, and other bank accounts, will be hit the hardest.
The general index fund type of investments, such as DIA, SPY, QQQ, and the like will also be very bad investments.
Stocks, in general, do not do well in a highly inflationary environment, but non-financial and retail stocks might do better than cash or bonds.
The best investments will be gold, silver, and stocks from companies whose assets consist of modern plant & equipment, land, especially productive land and farms, and other hard assets and necessities that will retain value, and still have demand.

The joint mismanagement of the American economy by sequential administrations, corrupt incumbent politicians in BOTH the Democrat and Republican parties, have almost (if not completely) guaranteed that we are now totally dependent upon the whims of the Asian governments and loans. When other nations finally realize that loaning the U.S. money is like throwing it in a black-hole, the U.S. Dollar could begin to lose value very quickly.

The U.S.A., with more jobs in government than in all manufacturing, and a severely mismanaged economy, it is no longer producing much except for some agricultural products, some technology, and internal servcies. However, we can’t all service each other, and not produce anything else. The continued trade deficits, the continued falling U.S. Dollar, massive debt, borrowing, and excessive money-printing to merely pay the $430 Billion per year in interest alone on the $10.2 Trillion National Debt will exacerbate the hyper-inflationary spiral.

It may take a few more years, but it will happen, unless some hard choices are made now.
Unfortunately, few (if any) in do-nothing Congress has the discipline.
There are ideas and solutions to mitigate damages.
There are many things that could be done, but they require leadership, competence, and an educated electorate.
However, Congress is where good ideas and solutions go to die, and the majority of the electorate doesn’t even know what the current inflation rate is.
Based on Congress’ track record, the propesity for corruption and incompetence, and the fact that the deterioation is so far advanced, there will be pain and misery no matter what we do now.

The new plan, the bail-out from this severely incompetent Administration and a severely corrupt and incompetent Congress, to buy toxic mortgage debt from the irresponsible financial firms who caused the credit crisis, is not going to stop avert the pain and misery on the way, and it may very well be the last turd we crap in our nest, finally snapping the bough that our over-flowing nest precariously rests upon.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful (see illustration: One-Simple-Idea.com/TheProblemWithPoliticians.jpg).

Posted by: d.a.n at October 6, 2008 10:05 AM
Comment #265992

Rhinehold, Most (if not all) incumbent politicians in BOTH parties, and the current administration (which is so severely incompetent it boggles the mind), and the electorate (which repeatedly reward incumbent politicians with 85%-to90% re-election rates), ALL got us here.

There is no peer pressure in Congress. A large number of Republicans voted for the $700 Billion bail-out too.

Trying to place blame on one party or the other only fuels the circular partisan warfare and distracts voters from real solutions. Voters had better start showing more love of their country than THEIR party, or they will make the current situation much worse by allowing more rampant debt, borrowing, money-printing, spending, waste, and crashing the U.S. Dollar due to the resulting hyperinflation.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 6, 2008 10:15 AM
Comment #265993

googlumpagus,
Lee, what’s wrong with the fifth ward? Not the right color for you?

I think my next article is going to be on prejudice, and baiting comments like this one, which are intended to imply that people holding one set of beliefs or another must inherently be bigoted, are why.

I used the Fifth Ward specifically because it is an area which has suffered deeply from the transfer of leadership for the advancement of people of color (not just blacks, but the whole range of minorities) from the people of those communities to white Democrats in the 1950s and ’60s. The Fourth and Fifth Wards are areas with high crime rates, substantial residential and commercial decay, and terrible rates of illiteracy and economic debility. Eighty years ago, though, in the midst of the brutally bigoted white culture of Houston in the 1920s, the Fifth Ward was the flower of black society. The area fourished with Physicians, Lawyers, black-owned businesses, and a whole, healthy business and leadership infrastructure.

I use this example because it is TYPICAL of the carnage resulting from Democratic “support” of the minority community. As an example, here is a quote from an article by a Huntsville, Texas, area retired black college professor, Dr. Naomi Lede-

“In the first waves of the century, black businesses catered to a black consumer market. They were primarily sole proprietorships. Corporate businesses were insurance companies and banks. Many of these businesses disappeared as the walls of discrimination became more relaxed.”

Dr. Lede and I don’t always agree on things, but this is a simple statement of fact. How could the loss of the business and professional infrastructure of black communities have netted a positive impact on community pride?

In a book Dr. Lede (pronounced LeDay) wrote about one of my personal heroes, Samuel Walker Houston, there is a photograph of the wedding celebration of Constance Houston, held in a prosperous black neighborhood, photographed by a prosperous black photographer. Constance lived in the Fifth Ward because her father, Joshua Houston, Jr., Samuel’s brother and a prosperous blacksmith in his own right, had moved the family to that safe neighborhood to get them away from the persistent threat posed by the racial hatred in the lower classes of Huntsville’s white community. (The Houston family was held in very high regard among the prosperous and educated classes in Huntsville.) Constance Houston’s home now holds landmark status.

These people are heroes to me, for their persistence in the face of oppression, for their assurance that personal pride, committment to education hard work and community solidarity, and insistence on personal responsibilty could lift a despised community to triumphant self-sufficiency, and for a kind of courage few of us have ever had to know.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 6, 2008 10:26 AM
Comment #265999
Oh, WAAH!

Just as I would expect. I make a statement of truth about our society and you act as if it is a ‘whine’. Tell me, do you have 11 trillion dollars in your bank account to pay off our debt? How much do you think it is going to cost our grandchildren to bail us out? What kind of suffering are they going to have to go through to pay for our excesses?

Have you been sleeping for the last eight years?

No. But apparently you were sleeping for the decades before.

Just how much hard work and sacrifice have these nice Republicans you talk about been making?

What Republicans did I talk bout? Where in my comment were republicans mentioned?

How successful do you have to be to create the hole we’ve corporate welfared ourselves into?

Right, because it’s ‘corporate welfare’ that has us in the position we are now. Sad.

Cry on someone elses shoulder, while the Democrats try to dig us out.

The Democrats are digging, but it is not ‘out’. The bailouts of this congress has just increased our debt by over 20%. Thanks a bunch.

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 6, 2008 11:10 AM
Comment #266001

Rhinehold,

The dirty secret is that the bailouts are not done. Aaahnohld is hinting at gettin a mere seven billion for Cahlifohnnia.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 6, 2008 11:18 AM
Comment #266002

True, Lee.

Now we have reinforced that there is no penalty for being irresponsible, why should anyone have to pay for their mistakes?

What’s a few more billion, eh?

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 6, 2008 11:21 AM
Comment #266003

Oh, and this I don’t get…

59% say that they would like to vote out the entire congress (though there will be a high re-election rate).

over 50% say that Republicans are in control of congress

58% say that Reagan is right, there is too much government in our lives.

52% say that they are going to vote for Obama.

Don’t the above numbers say that Americans are just idiots?

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 6, 2008 11:23 AM
Comment #266008

What those numbers say, Rhinehold, is that Americans really feel powerless. Because they feel powerless their answers to questions are disconnected from the sort of rational sobriety that come with a sense of responsibility.

Personally I’d love nothing better than to throw rhetorical bombs and race through these shallow waters to condemn the “enemies” I may think I have, but I have a sense, still, that my words can make a difference. That means attempting to guide people I expect to be reasonable past the shoals of folly.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 6, 2008 12:28 PM
Comment #266026

Oil falls to 8-month low below $90 a barrel
10.06.08, 10:27 AM ET


United States - * Oil falls to lowest since February
* Credit crisis fallout seen hitting oil demand

* Iran says $100 is too low, market oversupplied” OK so now what Iran shut off the valves ? one thing the speculator’s and bulls and OPEC and Big OIL can’t stop is the bear, Buffet was right for the most part. it is supply and demand. ” Now folks don’t get all warm and fuzzy and complacent like we did in the 1990s and from 2000 to 2005 it will go back up .so we can’t drop the ball. I kind of like ole T boone.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 6, 2008 04:44 PM
Comment #266039

Lee,

Ok, the fifth ward is a high crime neighborhood. Which of the wards isn’t? Which inner city neighborhood isn’t? Do you think poverty might have some correlation with that? By the way, Sheila Jackson Lee isn’t a white Democrat. Why is it a Republican can’t win there, Lee? Please explain that to us dumb ole’ Libruls.

Ya ever think that might have sumptin ta do wit racism? Ask GHW Bush what happened in the sixties when he supported LBJ’s black civil rights at the Houston Convention. It was all dem nasty ole white dems. The Republicans were pure as the driven snow on this issue. Iffin dem folks woulda just accepted equal but separate, they’d be all fine now. Yeah, right. Get a friggin grip. Poverty looks ugly. It doesn’t speak to intelligence, ethics, or humanity. Yet you think this is an example of what Democrats did to the neighborhood. What percentage of Harris County is democrat, Lee? What the hell have you Republicans been doing the last 40 or 50 years? Sitting on your hands? Which local Republicans are your Heroes in that regard? I half expect you to say some of my best friends are….

It was your baiting that this is some Liberal debacle rather than the continued red-lining by Republicans which led to my honest and fair question. Which by the way had nothing to do with the failure of Freddie or Fannie ( I read this somewhere recently, though I don’t recall where). Redlining wasn’t about making bad loans, It was about failing to make good loans in racially mixed neighborhoods. More good Republicans hard at work.

Again I ask, what is so wrong with the fifth ward? How exactly did it get there? Rather than just baiting that Liberals did it, how about some actual facts and proof? Were White Republicans less racist than Democrats, Lee?

Posted by: googlumpugus at October 6, 2008 08:04 PM
Comment #266041

Mea Culpa, D.a.n.

But I wouldn’t describe my predictions as “rosy”. A Recession isn’t exactly rosy.

I simply poo-pooed a depression and denied this was the fall of Rome. It still ain’t Rome, and hoping economists prevail over politicians, it won’t be a depression.

Posted by: googlumpugus at October 6, 2008 08:24 PM
Comment #266042

Good come back, Rhinehold.

On the Nukular thing you, nuked me!!!!

Posted by: googlumpugus at October 6, 2008 08:45 PM
Comment #266043

BTW, I quoted you on this site, without attribution:

http://www.ablankpaper.com/2008/10/dear-sarah-palin/#comment-742

Posted by: googlumpugus at October 6, 2008 08:48 PM
Comment #266044

Rodney Brown,

I’m with T.Boone Pickens, too.

Posted by: googlumpugus at October 6, 2008 08:53 PM
Comment #266046

Thank You Goog, I like his plan too it’s very sound and doable, the heavy beast of burdens diesels that move everything from shipping to buses and farm to trucking and Freight Trains would run just fine on CNG and burn 80% cleaner, the wind generators Don’t have to be the ugly dangerous plane prop type anymore, I’ve seen some great designs that are safer and more efficient and more appealing to the eye.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 6, 2008 09:42 PM
Comment #266047

Now Don’t laugh this young Man is really up to something.. www.popularmechanics.com/technology/industry/4224763.html

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 6, 2008 09:57 PM
Comment #266048

googlumpus, not tomorrow, not when the new president takes office. Not even by the 2010 mid term elections. But, a depression, contrary to wishful positive thinking, is not beyond the realm of possibility.

The FDR reforms and earlier Fed Reserve system were designed to provide protections against internally caused economic decline. And just as our protections against a depression were insufficient to forestall the aftermath of the 1929 stock market crash, our current protections against a heavily and growing national debt and absolute dependence upon foreign economies, are drastically insufficient to protect us going forward.

This is not rocket science. A couple million families will experience economic depression this year alone, as they lose jobs, homes, and are forced to file bankruptcy under a law that will not forgive their debts even though their plight was not of their own making.

These families lacked savings, and had accrued enormous debt well beyond their annual income. Our nation is rapidly approaching that same precondition for depression. We crossed the threshold into depression territory when we crossed over from a manufacturing economy to a service economy. Services are not necessities in an economic decline, like food, housing and transportation are.

In a manufacturing economy, one only need export to stave off depression even if one’s own consumer base is busted and can no longer afford discretionary spending. In a service economy, demand from a cash strapped consumer base can drop like a lead bowling in hot water.

We have magnitudes more Americans working in service jobs today than was the case in the 1930’s, as a proportion of our workforce. And that workforce drives consumption.

We are facing growing millions of Americans retiring healthy and broke just a few years after retiring, and millions more facing nothing in the way of savings for retirement beyond their first year or two of unemployment. Remove senior citizens from the consumer marketplace, and incur significant recessionary layoffs of 15% or more of the work age population, and a depression becomes very possible.

And that’s just for starters. Then there is the decay and destruction of social infrastructure and mass relocation of a a couple percent of our population due to global warming and climate change effects as early as within the next 4 decades. Combined with the poverty and inordinate high taxes to service the debt of the baby boom generation in retirement, the risk grows dramatically higher.

As we fuss and fit over what politician rubbed elbows with whom when they were 8 years old, we fail to prepare our future for such onslaughts of neglect and rejection of discipline.

The possibility of a depression which makes the 1930’s appear like a Sunday picnic, is growing more real with everyday of politics as usual. The politics of political parties were never meant to govern our nation. But they now govern, nonetheless. And they govern for their own election cycle advantage, not the nation or her future.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 6, 2008 10:22 PM
Comment #266049

Rhinehold, those polling numbers fail to show their distribution. Those praising Reagan are likely most Republicans and some independents. Those choosing Obama are likely most Democrats and some Independents. These are not the same individuals producing the disparate numbers.

I think Wikipedia might have a crash course in elementary probability and statistics to help you understand samples and populations in polling.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 6, 2008 10:31 PM
Comment #266055

David,

I agree with that analysis, but I’m still hopeful we’re not that stupid. I could be wrong.

Posted by: googlumpugus at October 7, 2008 03:39 AM
Comment #266056

>I agree with that analysis, but I’m still hopeful we’re not that stupid. I could be wrong.
Posted by: googlumpugus at October 7, 2008 03:39 AM

I don’t know, goog, we are a pretty stupid bunch:

* We allowed Reagan to convince us that unions were the Devil’s spawn…

* We allowed Reagan to convince us that regulating American business was tantamount to giving our country to the Commies…

* We allowed Reagan to convince us that printing money was a good way to cover our national debt…

* We allowed BushI to convince us we could buy arms from one world terrorist nation and give them to another world terrorist nation, when it was against our own law, and that it was actually okay.

* We allowed a fool to lie us into a less than honorable war in the Middle East, when it was another country in the Middle East that was the threat to our national security…

We allowed Phil Gramm to convince us that deregulation of the money market was our route to economic salvation, at a time when our economy was on the mend for the first time in thirty years…

How stupid do we have to be to convince you that we are in deep doodoo?

Posted by: Marysdude at October 7, 2008 05:18 AM
Comment #266060

dude

How stupid do we have to be to convince you that we are in deep doodoo?

We as a nation are without a doubt up to our chins in quick sand. I don’t think people are necessarily stupid. I think that mostly we Americans are great apathetic procrastinators. Most of us tend to ignore harsh reality until it bites us in the ass. It is the result of complacency born of foolish assumptions that our government will just automatically do right by us.
Now that the once safe world of investment is disintegrating around them, the complacent fools are waking up and screaming foul. And you are right, they have a decade of right wing policy to thank and point to.

Posted by: RickIL at October 7, 2008 09:07 AM
Comment #266063

Great Comment David,Your insight is Spot on, and also since we have become import grand central for China, excuse my slang but it was my friends Rocky’s statement and he was right, plastic dog poop and vomit. also it’s been scary quiet over their.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 7, 2008 09:31 AM
Comment #266068

CNG, Compressed natural gas. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressed_natural_gas

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 7, 2008 09:50 AM
Comment #266083

goo, I remain hopeful as well. I believe we may be witnessing a sea change in our political system that just might, might, mind you, turn out to be a revolution at the election polls. With some luck and good timing, our government could still rescue the situation of our future from severe losses in quality of life for the middle and poorer classes without bankrupting the faith and credit of the American dollar.

But, time is growing extremely short as that window of opportunity closes ever more quickly. This financial credit freeze is a wake up call for America’s citizens, politicians in office, and public servants in our government agencies. The potential of arriving at consensus to take responsibility for our future challenges is, I think, much greater than a future depression.

Like you, though, time and will tell, and I could be proved wrong in hindsight. We shall see; well, those of us under 60 will see. If a majority of Americans get adamant and vocal about taking responsibility for our future, we have a real chance of salvaging our future.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 7, 2008 03:21 PM
Comment #266084

Rodney, thanks. And yes, that is another very huge unknown quantity in the future variables, the actions and demands of our foreign creditors. Not to be dismissed lightly, at all.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 7, 2008 03:27 PM
Comment #266086

googlumpugus,

You, esteemed person of indeterminate sex, are brilliant at implying that other’s intentions are driven by race! I would love to meet you face to face (which I can do because we both live near Houston). You are as smart as they come.

Let’s suppose, though, that the cultural assumption liberals are immune to racism is false. Let’s assume outcomes reflect intent in public policy. Is that not what we assume when Republicans vote for people to repesent their own districts in Congress? Do we not assume largely Republican districts do well in Congress because reflect the goals of their districts?

As a matter of fact we do. What we see Republicans saying they are trying to do is improve the business climate and the tax climate and reduce overall governmental impediments to business? Well, given the goals stated by Democrats in Congress, one might wonder what the heck that has to do with why Republican districts do well. Why don’t they try to get more housing assistance for their districts? Don’t Republicans need housing? Why don’t they try to get more free medical care in their districts? Don’t Republicans need medical care? Why don’t they try to get more food assistance for their districts? Don’t Republicans need food? Yes. As a matter of fact Republicans need all those things, but Republican representatives, and their handlers, and their constituents all know they can get all those things themselves, on their own, without the help of the borough, county, ward, state, or federal governments.

Minorities not trained into helplessness by political parasites are every bit as capable. Blacks from Jamaica who settle in America live, on average, better than the average white family. Mexicans who immigrate from Mexico do not quite so well, largely because of often compromised immigration status, but they do much better than second-generation families who have been exploited for the political potential of their helplessness.

In fact the attitude of Democrats toward their constituents appears to be the same as that of drug dealers toward their clients. Get them hooked, then give them what they want till it kills them. The general atmosphere in the community will be so generally self-destructive as a result of the addiction to infusions of “aid” that more needy addicts will constantly be available.

This analysis has nothing to do with race, but race is certainly a good way for the dealers to keep the victims of “aid” addiction looking the other way, while white victims of the addiction are usually just considered trash.

As to people like Sheila Jackson Lee, (She is a pale shadow of Mickey Leland, even as he was a paler shadow of Barbara Jordan in the same district.) where is her great leadership role in the Democratic Party? Where are the forty-three long-serving members of the Congressional Black Caucus in party leadership? Why do black members hold only 12.5% of committee chairmanships, (Homeland Security, Ways and Means [for now], and Judiciary) for example, when their membership is 18% of the Democratic members, especially since they have served, on average, longer than many white members? Does the party not trust them?

I’m not saying it’s all racism on the part of the Democratic Party, but race certainly provides convenient identity boundaries to exploit. And, as far as the party leadership is concerned, exploitation IS what it’s all about.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 7, 2008 04:05 PM
Comment #266104

Lee, methinks you do not know small rural town America, very well. Jobs are lean, and in a small town, one learns very quickly not to rock the boat of those who control the jobs. In Republican rural areas, Republican’s stronghold, that fact of life is undeniable.

To this day, millions of Americans fear revealing they are NOT Republican in rural America, for this very reason. There are Republican districts where putting a Democratic campaign poster on your fence, will get your fence and poster vandalized. I know this is true, because it happened to a Democrat in my area just a week ago.

I now have one up for a challenger to our Representative who happens to be Democrat. I have a 20 guage shotgun too, and driveway alarm which is triggered when anyone approaches the sign and fence. So far, no alarms here. But, these are facts of life in a great many rural areas of America.

I would guess the same would be true in predominantly Democratic districts of rural areas. It’s not as much a partisan thing as it is a social thing, where communities hang tight together out of a sense of being more self-reliant regarding security issues. Rural law enforcement is often a long way off in time of need. Not like the cities.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 7, 2008 05:47 PM
Comment #266107

David Said,”In Republican rural areas, Republican’s stronghold, that fact of life is undeniable.” True true my uncle had to run as one back in the 1980s or do nothing, like he told me he got his foot in the door.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 7, 2008 06:06 PM
Comment #266128

Lee, I’d be willing to meet you for a beer or soda, if you like, assuming you are not looking for a fight. I can be e-mailed at gerg6111@hotmail.com. I live in NW Houston.

It isn’t that I believe Republicans are racist, it’s that they use subtle racism in elections. So do Democrats. I agree with your sentiments about Leland, Jordan and Lee. Most Republicans I meet here are either rednecks, or rich and often both.

I am 51 years old, Lee. It is my life experience as a white man, that racism is a large part of how people vote and think in politics. It amazes me in the 30+ years I’ve lived in Texas, the number of random white people that spew racist sentiment to me, assuming I’m in agreement. They weren’t that different in Ohio or Kentucky, to be sure, though I was much younger then. I usually don’t spout my political views with those I don’t know. Maybe it’s because I wear cowboy boots sometimes.

You should also know I’m not a raging Librul. I voted for Ford and GHW Bush, although, I’ve become more and more disappointed with the Republican party over the years. My father was for Goldwater. I was for Nixon, though too young to vote. He was a disappointment and eye-opener for me.

Posted by: googlumpugus at October 8, 2008 12:31 AM
Comment #266132

Lee,
The truth is I believe people are people. There is dead weight in every race. I don’t think, however, one can discount the impact of racism. My family, being from Appalachia, has a direct knowledge of a dependent class of white “hillbillies” that are despised by locals. Similar bigotries exist there.

While I agree “welfare” can be destructive, usually there are other much more complex issues involved. You don’t resolve these issues by simply throwing money at it, but without money you won’t resolve them either. Listen to Whoopie Goldberg’s story. I just don’t buy the bootstraps Republican party agenda. It appeals to a segment of the voters, but is only about gaining political power, not resolving problems.

Bill Cosby is dead on right when he says black Americans do have cultural issues today, that only they can fix.

The truth is, today, class is as big a divider as race. Unfortunately, most poor people are divided by rampant racism and disenfranchised to boot. That doesn’t bode well for resolution of that issue.

Democrat rhetoric isn’t anymore sincere or effective. It really isn’t about conservative or liberal rhetoric to me. It’s about effective government that levels the playing field to a reasonable degree. Both parties are paying lip service to one segment of their electorate, and serving a wealthy segment, to the detriment of the rest of us.

Posted by: googlumpugus at October 8, 2008 12:53 AM
Comment #266157

Googlumpugus,

Bullseye! You hit it on the nose. Yes, both parties are paying lip service.

Look, I’ll admit to being prejudiced, even on things such as race. As with any problem that can cause harm, such as addiction, excessive debt, etc., nothing does more damage in the long run than failure to admit the problem. The key intellectual discipline in dealing with my own prejudices is knowing how I think a healthy neighborhood will function. That is not a black or white thing.

Healthy neighbors lift each other up. They don’t sit around feeling helpless or victimized if saviors are not shipped in from elsewhere, and they don’t pop in like missionaries in Malaysia delivering steel axes as if to prove how worthless the labors (and lives) of stone axe makers were.

The ideal of our system is that we are largely self-governing and self-realizing. That means we improve peoples lives most by standing shoulder-to-shoulder with them and showing them how they can lift themselves and their neighbors up, not by showing them we can provide for them at some level they could never achieve themselves.

My illustration of the missionaries above is a case in point. Villages where people had made their economy and their cultural sense of worth on the intensive and subtle skill of stone axe making were devastated by the “gift” of a tool they could not match. Their intergenerational ties were founded in the transmission of this skill and industry. Missionaries had seen all the labor that went into making axes as a waste when their “superior” device would free people for more “productive”. (In case you’re wondering, yes, I can see the irony in where this is going given my statements on productivity and government.) The missionaries didn’t consider, however, how impotent this revelation would render these people they were “saving”.

Our help to distressed communities should not encourage those communities, whatever their color, to think they could not get by without us yet that is exactly what we have done to them so far.

Googlumpugus, you asked earlier who my white Republican heroes might be. Frankly, I don’t think of things that way. My heroes are not people who reach down from above to shine the light for us poor blind folks. They are people like my daughter, who doesn’t care to go to the church youth group on the days when they are taking in a movie, but loves to go when they are working on someone’s house or clearing out trash from a vacant lot. They are folks like my friends the Kesslers who have spent many weeks traveling to do construction work as volunteers in Mississippi and Texas areas damaged by Katrina, Rita, and now Ike.

Our strength does not come from a better class of puppet master, people who can pull the right strings from above and make our lives better. It comes from you and me and all the other people we can encourage to see strength and capability in themselves- capability and strength enough to give to others.

This is a strength the parties don’t think they can afford to let us see in ourselves.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 8, 2008 09:54 AM
Comment #266162

David,

Maybe I live amid a better class of ruralite. Fact is, though, I’d lived in Dodge for a decade before I knew where to vote in a Republican primary. There wasn’t any point anyway. Then suddenly, you didn’t HAVE to be a Democrat and we could boot out the bully who had been sherriff for years and the crook who was county commissioner.

As I noted in writing a couple of weeks ago, my current commissioner is a Democrat and even we Republicans are grieving palpably at his impending retirement. Shoot, the Republican Party of Walker County ENDORSED him!

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 8, 2008 10:25 AM
Comment #266223

Lee, of course there some rural communities which are mixed, even open, and highly politically tolerant. It is a truism in sociology that a bell curve represents the array of potentialities amongst human groups.

You are fortunate to live in a community which is not dominated by the blackmail of one political party in control of jobs and community opportunities.

My own community is changing as well. Democrats and independents didn’t even try to run in my County in the past. This year, several have dropped into the race, and receiving more support than even they thought they would. They won’t win this year. But, they have brought people together into a political unity, aware of each other’s numbers being much larger than anyone suspected, previously. That is how change occurs.

This will always be a conservative County of cow and horse ranchers. But, it is also a very fast growing County in terms of population moving from San Antonio. That is having the effect of bringing more liberals and independents into this county than Republicans and conservatives. I view this as very healthy over the long run.

I know this is what happened in Nevada, which has thrown that state into the hotly contested category. Similar phenomenon has occurred in Colorado. I believe after this election, all the analysts will have to buy entirely new political maps. That is how huge the political shift is, I suspect.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 8, 2008 07:15 PM
Comment #266225

Rodney, yes. I considered running a few years ago, as a Republican because that was the only viable Party in this County. In the end, I simply couldn’t cross that line though. It just felt too dishonest, and the point of running was to get some honesty back into our County government.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 8, 2008 07:18 PM
Comment #266260

David,
Doesn’t the party discussion we’re having sound more like a validation of George Washington’s admonitions about the evils of political parties than it sounds like a validation of either of our current choices?

As I’ve noted before I post in the right-hand column because I’m a conservative, not because I have any particular faith in the Republican Party. If ours were truly philosophical discussions rather than apologies for the tools the parties use to leverage our prejudices we would go a lot further toward advancing your goal of building a politics of solutions rather than parties.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at October 9, 2008 09:16 AM
Comment #266362

Lee, absolutely! I have understand solidly since the months following 9/11/2001, that the political parties are themselves the corruption or our politics and producers of incompetence in our government. For it was in those months that I realized that the Parties make ALL other issues and agendas subservient to their one overarching objective, achieving and maintaining power in the next election cycle.

Washington was truly prescient to warn of the folly that would result if political parties controlled government instead of the individual merits of individuals voted into office.

It takes enormous sums of money and expertise to delude the population election after election. Individual candidates could not afford such deceptions if elected on their own merits as G. Washington was.

I am not sure about the philosophical basis for better politics. That introduces sophistry of the grossest kind into politics. Take Trickle-Down Supply Side economics for example. It has proven to be a positive policy ONLY under very proscribed circumstances. And YET, the GOP will not yield on applying it in ALL circumstances, which is why the Consumer is not capable of staying this Recession like it did in 2001-2003, when we experienced 8 years of pragmatic economics to a much larger degree (raising taxes, cutting some spending, producing a budget surplus, reforming welfare to assistance for work, for example.)

Far right Liberals are no better with their insistence on Demand Side Bottom Up economic policy under ALL circumstances.

The fact is, 2009 will be suffering NOT from a lack of supply, but, consumer demand. That is why McCain CANNOT be allowed to win and implement Supply Side economic theory. If we recover from this Recession, then it may very well be appropriate to implement more Supply Side policy along side maintenance Demand side policy. But, that won’t be until after the 2010 mid-term elections at the earliest and most optimistic.

America needs pragmatic, intelligent, leadership which bows to no philosophical dogma, especially when that dogma is exerted for the express political purpose of dividing the electorate and differentiating the Party from the other for purely election and power purposes.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 9, 2008 07:20 PM
Comment #266403

David, Strange lot here, the rural Democrats are mostly conservative and the Republicans are more moderate than the 1980s bunch my town is about 55% Republicans and 45% Democrats the cities are the other way and Ithaca is mostly Liberal with Cornell university and Ithaca college. if i ever ran i Would run as a independent .

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 9, 2008 11:52 PM
Comment #266421

Rodney,

If Texas is any guide, finding money to run a campaign as an Independent candidate is bloody tough and never permits the independent candidate to compete equally with a Dem or Rep.

Hopefully that will change with the rising numbers of independent voters, in some areas.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 10, 2008 05:53 AM
Comment #266450

After watching Governor Palin debate, I realized that she would be great for our foreign relations. After all, the French are getting tired of watching old Jerry Lewis re-runs. They need someting new to laugh at. You’re Darn Tooting, Goolly Gee, Wink Wink.

Posted by: Dean Robinson at October 10, 2008 01:54 PM
Post a comment