Yes, it was. However, as Ms Pain (I'm sorry, as I forgot the correct spelling, which is really bad as everyone knows) got into her speech, it became obvious that it was scripted and not from the heart, which tells me that this is a Republican response to a great man who speaks from the heart, as they don't know how to do it and don't want to give up their power. That's sick. It was again sad, but not depressive as last night; and in that light, the Republicans do not know the true heart of America. And that's suppose to be the other half of us? They did everything in their power to discredit Spirit and it was a good show, but we cannot fight a higher power than ourselves that dwells within us. But they sure might be able to fool a lot of people, which is the tough part, as Obama will have to stay true to Spirit and yet somehow show the truth without fighting back in their game. He has to stay in his own court. I believe Obama can if he just stays with the power within himself, which is the power within of all of us. There was certainly a lot of show and drama, as it was extremely entertaining to watch the move upon the game. But that's all it was ... a pawn in a game of Chess that others will see clearly thru. They are good, but ..... if we look closely, something is missing. It is what Obama saw and caught as he made it his own.

Regardless, "The next president of the United States of America will be a young male," and McCain does not fit the description, even tho I really like him.

.... just my current thoughts at the moment.

Love, Char

PS: They are copying Obama and in the duplication, they are trashing the very thing that is the thought. This is why is will not work.

Okay, I think her name is Mrs. Clain (sp?). Sorry, as I am getting confused here. And the Republican nominee for president is McCain. Did I get that right? Okay I looked it up
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client
=firefox-a&channel=s&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-
US%3Aofficial&hs=Jc5&q=alaska+governor&btnG=Search

It's Palin ... sorry :-(

Hey, I liked Mrs. Palin too, but it was staged and she really lost herself. The Republicans are desperate and we really cannot afford another 4 years of the same. We must change and everyone knows this. Only Obama has seen this vision, as the others follow. A follower cannot lead, like the blind cannot see.

Nate and Sean of FiveThirtyEight.com from inside the Excel center in St. Louis:

[Nate] This would be a terrific speech if she were still governor of Alaska and were just delivering a keynote. As a speech for a VP nominee, given all the context of the past few days, it's more complicated to evaluate.

[Nate] Not a strikeout. Not a home run. I don't know. A double, and the runner got thrown out trying to stretch it into a triple?

[Sean] I think Nate is onto something. She gave a great speech for someone who would not be vulnerable to hitting back. A keynote, or frankly the Giuliani role. But after giving that speech, if she has any kind of embarrassing moment on the trail, she will be open to serious blowback. That was a Chutzpah Speech for someone with no foreign policy credentials who is fending off the Personal Scandal of the Hour. If she threads the needle and runs a gaffe-free campaign, it might work. But if her amateurism gets exposed in any way during the next few months, look out.

________________

Nate: Palin's Speech: Second Thoughts

The way to evaluate a speech like this is by what people are going to remember in the morning, and the only thing that people are going to remember about this speech in the morning is that she went after Obama -- a lot -- and that at times it it seemed fairly personal. It was almost kind of fun at first -- I don't think people saw it coming, and she got three or four really good lines in. But then it became too much -- sarcastic and mean-spirited. Everything else -- the outsider stuff, the family stuff, the media critique -- is going to be forgotten about. In fact, the Republicans will look like whiners if they go after the media after that speech.

I don't think the Republicans are doing as good a job as the Democrats were doing about pairing their speeches to the strengths of the speaker. It's as if they wrote seven or eight speeches, and drew lots to determine who would deliver which one. So you have Mitt Romney -- one of the wealthiest men ever to run for office -- critiquing east-coast elitism, and Mike Huckabee -- who is an economic populist in disguise -- critiquing big government, and Sarah Palin -- who voters don't know one iota about -- critiquing Barack Obama's biography.

"I've been so focused on state government, I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq."
--Sarah Palin

Who needs to talk about Iraq when we just leave it up to the Lord?

"Also, [pray] for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that plan is God's will."
--Sarah Palin

Oh, yeah, she's totally experienced...in like four years:

McCain advisor Charlie Black on questions about Sarah Palin's foreign policy competence:

"She's going to learn national security at the foot of the master for the next four years, and most doctors think that he'll be around at least that long."
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/211535.php

Sarah Palin. So much executive experience that she's totally ready to serve in the executive branch...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtilB1teksc

"As for that VP talk all the time, I'll tell you, I still can't answer that question until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the VP does every day?" --Sarah Palin

Prayer is powerful, but some cannot hear the response.

Also, I wanted to say earlier, but got side tracked (ha!), the opening was like a joke as that mayor or Mr X-Mayor G appeared to be making a mockery of it all, like it was okay to poke fun of the change that America is so desperately seeking. Like the bully who wants to rule by brute strength who has decided to be mean as they push the tender feelings of the heart around. People typically joke about what they cannot possibly understand, especially when there is power in that unknown thing of truth. If America is ready and I think we are, that bully will no longer exist in our reality. I don't even think the bully believes in his own voice anymore. :-) The bully will graciously give to throne to the lamb ....

Gotham, I think you are confused. It was Obama that was campaigning in Germany.

Sarah Palin just convinced my husband!!

Back Ground: My husband is a long-time cynic and quite politically disaffected. He thinks it's ALL bullshit, though he has enjoyed listening to Barack Obama.

He sat with me through the first half of the Palin speech. And he's now convinced.

I keep asking him to get out there and canvass with me. I don't begrudge him that he doesn't want to do it. Not all of us are as into it as - well - all of us. You know what I mean. You might have a spouse similar to mine.

So during all of the ridiculously long applause for a woman who hasn't done very much, I looked at my husband... he was shaking his head.

He turned and looked at me - after a few minutes - and said "THIS is what's wrong with America" as he gestured at Palin on the TV.

I said "then you might want to get out there and canvass with me. I always ask my Republican friends one question when we're talking - 'How much time have you volunteered for John McCain'? Zero, they all say. THAT is where the difference is. Door knocking. Wanting it more than any of them do."

He's on board. He's going to start getting out there and talking to voters with me.

Thanks, Sarah.

Well, she fits the qualifications for a GOP candidate:

1.) Ability to lie without shame, and
2.) Questioning of opponent's patriotism

If there was any doubt left among voters, pundits, and politicos alike that John McCain's selection of Sarah Palin was based 'purely' on politics, tonight's speech should lay to rest any notion that Republicans chose their candidate based on anything other than a shallow political calculus.

With her snarky, amateurish, almost Student Council-like speech, Palin proved today that she can attack like a candidate for vice-president. And she demonstrated that she can support the top of the ticket like a candidate for vice-president.

But nowhere in her speech did she demonstrate that she can BE vice-president. She's still the former Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, who didn't even know what the vice-president did until a couple weeks ago, who admitted that she doesn't pay attention to Iraq, who's stonewalling investigations into her alleged misconduct, and who took advantage of the very earmark process she claims to be against.

In sum, she demonstrated that while she can serve as the second person on a 'ticket', she is unquestionably not ready to serve as the second most powerful person in the world.

Sorry, as I just read Gotham's post and I cannot stop laughing. That is funny! I'm not as politically correct, nor do I have to be :-) Initially, I was more interested in releasing some steam when I came here and when I saw the topic I wanted to address, I began rambling ... as I would have went to our favorite "Open Tread" space, which was my first direction.

She really was not genuine and did not speak from her dear heart. So how can we believe all that stuff that they told America tonight? We cannot. That's old politics, which makes it a

beLIEve

Governor Palin, you're a disgrace.

What an embarrassment.

This year, we witnessed history. A woman ran for president and received 18 million votes from a citizenry that made clear it is indeed ready to consider serious women candidates seriously.

And you, Governor Palin, are making a mockery of that message.

As has been noted by many -- from activists to members of Congress -- you, Governor Palin, are no Hillary Clinton.

But, worse than that, you are a disgrace to the culmination of 200 years of women's struggle that Hillary Clinton represents.

You did not work at the Children's Defense Fund, fighting to secure rights for children.

Instead, you used your line-item veto to strike funding for programs that assist teenage mothers.

You did not revamp the education system of an entire state -- though you are governor of a state in which the illiteracy rate is astronomically high.

Instead, your claim to reformer fame is your activities at the PTA.

You have not traveled overseas to speak in dozens of countries about the rights of women.

You did not stand on a stage among half a dozen men and make the case to the America people for why you are qualified to lead this nation.

You did not receive 18 million votes of confidence. In fact, you were nearly recalled as mayor of your tiny Alaskan town.

You have not stood up for reproductive freedom or even reproductive education.

Instead, you have championed ignorance.

And the proof of your failure lives under your very own roof.

You have agreed to accept a nomination for which you are wholly, indisputably unqualified. And in so doing, you have allowed yourself to become the punchline to a very bad joke.

Except that this isn't a joke, Governor Palin. This is our country's future. And while we have certainly found amusement in the disaster that appears to have been your "vetting process," it's really not funny.

The American people continue to learn new and alarming facts about you, but you already knew these facts when you accepted this position:

* You already knew that you were under investigation for ethical violations.

* You already knew that you turned your town's budget surplus into a deficit before you moved on.

* You already knew of your close involvement with indicted Senator Ted Stevens.

* You already knew the carwash business of which you and your husband were part owners was shut down by the government for failure to comply with regulations.

* You already knew that your husband was a member of a radical political party that advocates secession from the United States.

And you damn well know, Governor Palin, that as governor, you have not made any decisions whatsoever regarding the overseas deployment and activities of the Alaska National Guard.

And you damn well know, Governor Palin, that despite your geographical proximity to Russia, you have never been involved in foreign relations with Russia.

You know that, Governor Palin.

And you damn well know that despite your cynical attempt to link your name to the success of Hillary Clinton, you also said that you would not vote for her.

The fight for women's equality is a long and continuous struggle. And you, Governor Palin, are clearly on the wrong side of history. While we fight to prove that we deserve to be taken seriously, your name on this presidential ticket at this time makes a mockery of that struggle.

And now, although you chastised Hillary Clinton for "whining" about unfair and sexist treatment by the media, because Senator McCain's campaign -- your campaign -- cannot answer the myriad legitimate questions surrounding your vetting process and qualifications, it has instead accused the media, the Democrats, and Obama's campaign of sexism.

And you damn well know, Governor Palin, that just isn't true.

Your own party adamantly opposes affirmative action, and yet, tonight you stood on a stage and accept the nomination for vice president of your party, a nomination for which you are unprepared and unqualified and which you did not earn and do not deserve.

This is not why Hillary Clinton ran for president, and it is certainly not why 18 million of us voted for her. We were not drawn to her because she won a beauty pageant; we were drawn to her because we believed that decades of work and service and education gave her the wisdom and experience to be able to lead our country out of its current darkness.

That, Governor Palin, was why we stood with Hillary Clinton.

Your candidacy makes a mockery of Hillary Clinton's campaign. It makes a mockery of those who supported her. It makes a mockery of decades and centuries of women who were beaten and jailed, who fought with all their might for a day when there would be no more glass ceilings.

You, Governor Palin, are not a continuation of that legacy. You are an insult to that legacy.

Shame on you, Governor Palin. Shame on you.

"Gotham Chopra: I thought her speech was very impressive. I bet it's amazingly persuasive in the original German."

Agree, Hitler was an “amazingly persuasive” speaking in German and he energized the masses and he liked to speak in front of the Greek/Roman columns, too....(see Leni Riefenstahl films). Hmmm, it's reminded me of someone else, also. Who, I wonder? Stalin, Mussolini and the list can go on and on....

"he liked to speak in front of the Greek/Roman columns, too....(see Leni Riefenstahl films). Hmmm, it's reminded me of someone else, also. Who, I wonder?" #14

Yes, that reminds me of President Bush, who consistently gives speeches fwith such column settings. For ex. see his 2004 convention speech stage setting. And who also energizes the religious zealots with his speeches of mission Accomplished and such. And John McCain too, who stands beside columns in his official campaign photo. And his many meeting where he uses the fancy Corinthian columns, while Obama's was boring Doric columns. Oh, btw, McCain and Joe Lieberman in their foreign trip to Israel had a photo-pop and press meeting in a Greek-Roman architectural ruins with standing columns.

Oh, not to forget Lincoln and Martin Luther King who gave their memorable speeches before such columns too. They must be Hilers and Stalins too.

Its amazing how ignorant these people are that the republican smear campaign goes on.

"Gotham Chopra: ... her speech was very impressive. I bet it's amazingly persuasive in the original German."

Just to be clear and for Mr. Welsh: Hitler liked to speak on the stadiums setting pretty much (check Leni Riefenstahl's films). I did not see any columns or stadium settings during Sarah Palin speach tonight for this matter. And if you pay attention it was Mr. Gotham Chopra who put Gov. Palin on the line with Hitler.

In order to distract from the real questions being asked about Sarah Palin, the right is resorting to the only arrow it has in its quiver to distract from the substance of the concerns about Palin: the victimhood card, i.e. that unnamed liberals and the media are "piling on" Sarah Palin.

The other day Rep. Michelle Bachmann claimed that James Carville's merely questioning Palin's experience was "offensive to women." Then rightwing mouthpiece The AP asserted that:

"Many liberals are belittling the choice, suggesting that as a mother of five children -- including an infant with Down syndrome -- she has neither the time nor the experience to become vice president."

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jFc4EX2rL-QH42l0-xIQsWX3PdJgD92UUJOO0

Umm, really? Who exactly? The article doesn't say and MoveOn pushed back.

And now today on Hardball, McCain's political director Mike Duhaime and Rep. Adam Purnam tried to claim that the media was "piling on" but when challenged to name examples, all they could really come up with was "tabloid headlines" and US Weekly. Chris Matthews was having none of it.

http://pol.moveon.org/emails/fournier_moms.html

After so many years of the media kow-towing to the right's intimidation tactics, it's funny to see the right so utterly unprepared for when the media -- new or old -- actually does challenge the premise. But, really, what else do they have? So, tonight, in her speech, even Palin herself will join in the media bashing:

"I’m not a member of the permanent political establishment[...] And I’ve learned quickly, these past few days, that if you’re not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone. But here’s a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I’m not going to Washington to seek their good opinion — I’m going to Washington to serve the people of this country."

Blaming the media is a tried and true tradition on the right.

In order to distract from the real questions being asked about Sarah Palin, the right is resorting to the only arrow it has in its quiver to distract from the substance of the concerns about Palin: the victimhood card, i.e. that unnamed liberals and the media are "piling on" Sarah Palin.

The other day Rep. Michelle Bachmann claimed that James Carville's merely questioning Palin's experience was "offensive to women." Then rightwing mouthpiece The AP asserted that:

"Many liberals are belittling the choice, suggesting that as a mother of five children -- including an infant with Down syndrome -- she has neither the time nor the experience to become vice president."

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jFc4EX2rL-QH42l0-xIQsWX3PdJgD92UUJOO0

Umm, really? Who exactly? The article doesn't say and MoveOn pushed back.

http://pol.moveon.org/emails/fournier_moms.html

And now today on Hardball, McCain's political director Mike Duhaime and Rep. Adam Purnam tried to claim that the media was "piling on" but when challenged to name examples, all they could really come up with was "tabloid headlines" and US Weekly. Chris Matthews was having none of it:

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

After so many years of the media kow-towing to the right's intimidation tactics, it's funny to see the right so utterly unprepared for when the media -- new or old -- actually does challenge the premise. But, really, what else do they have? So, tonight, in her speech, even Palin herself will join in the media bashing:

"I’m not a member of the permanent political establishment[...] And I’ve learned quickly, these past few days, that if you’re not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone. But here’s a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I’m not going to Washington to seek their good opinion — I’m going to Washington to serve the people of this country."

Blaming the media is a tried and true tradition on the right.

Preity,

It seems John McCain has lost Joe Klein of Time...

Here's Joe Klein's defense that was read out by the conservative pundit Brian Williams on TV:

"There is a tendency in the media to kick ourselves, cringe and withdraw, when we are criticized. But I hope my colleagues stand strong in this case: it is important for the public to know that Palin raised taxes as governor, supported the Bridge to Nowhere before she opposed it, pursued pork-barrel projects as mayor, tried to ban books at the local library and thinks the war in Iraq is "a task from God." The attempts by the McCain campaign to bully us into not reporting such things are not only stupidly aggressive, but unprofessional in the extreme."

http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/09/angry_amateurs.html

Has John McCain managed to lose both Joe Klein and Brian Williams?

Sorry this long (warning: LONG comment!), but I think it needs tio be posted.

It's a reprint the observations of a person who has known Sarah Palin since childhood, lives in her hometown, and attended lots of city council meetings when she was mayor.

This person knows Sarah Palin very, very well. And she has some things to say that we need to hear. I'll let the readers be the judges:

The Truth About Sarah Palin:

Dear friends,

So many people have asked me about what I know about Sarah Palin in the
last 2 days that I decided to write something up . . .

Basically, Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton have only 2 things in
common: their gender and their good looks. :)

You have my permission to forward this to your friends/email contacts
with my name and email address attached, but please do not post it on
any websites, as there are too many kooks out there . . .

Thanks,
Anne

ABOUT SARAH PALIN

I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992.
Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a
first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her
father was my child's favorite substitute teacher. I also am on a
first name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more
City Council meetings during her administration than about 99% of the
residents of the city.

She is enormously popular; in every way she's like the most popular
girl in middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice and
won't vote for her can't quit smiling when talking about her because
she is a "babe".

It is astonishing and almost scary how well she can keep a secret. She
kept her most recent pregnancy a secret from her children and parents
for seven months.

She is "pro-life". She recently gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby.
There is no cover-up involved, here; Trig is her baby.

She is energetic and hardworking. She regularly worked out at the gym.

She is savvy. She doesn't take positions; she just "puts things out
there" and if they prove to be popular, then she takes credit.

Her husband works a union job on the North Slope for BP and is a
champion snowmobile racer. Todd Palin's kind of job is highly
sought-after because of the schedule and high pay. He arranges his
work schedule so he can fish for salmon in Bristol Bay for a month or
so in summer, but by no stretch of the imagination is fishing their
major source of income. Nor has her life-style ever been anything
like that of native Alaskans.

Sarah and her whole family are avid hunters.

She's smart.

Her experience is as mayor of a city with a population of about 5,000
(at the time), and less than 2 years as governor of a state with about
670,000 residents.

During her mayoral administration most of the actual work of running
this small city was turned over to an administrator. She had been
pushed to hire this administrator by party power-brokers after she had
gotten herself into some trouble over precipitous firings which had
given rise to a recall campaign.

Sarah campaigned in Wasilla as a "fiscal conservative". During her 6
years as Mayor, she increased general government expenditures by over
33%. During those same 6 years the amount of taxes collected by the
City increased by 38%. This was during a period of low inflation
(1996-2002). She reduced progressive property taxes and increased a
regressive sales tax which taxed even food. The tax cuts that she
promoted benefited large corporate property owners way more than they
benefited residents.

The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration
weren't enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed
money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it
with indebtedness of over $22 million. What did Mayor Palin encourage
the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said
she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? or a
new library? No. $1m for a park. $15m-plus for construction of a
multi-use sports complex which she rushed through to build on a piece
of property that the City didn't even have clear title to, that was
still in litigation 7 yrs later--to the delight of the lawyers
involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the
community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it
would be. She also supported bonds for $5.5m for road projects that
could have been done in 5-7 yrs without any borrowing.

While Mayor, City Hall was extensively remodeled and her office
redecorated more than once.

These are small numbers, but Wasilla is a very small city.

As an oil producer, the high price of oil has created a budget surplus
in Alaska. Rather than invest this surplus in technology that will
make us energy independent and increase efficiency, as Governor she
proposed distribution of this surplus to every individual in the state.

In this time of record state revenues and budget surpluses, she
recommended that the state borrow/bond for road projects, even while
she proposed distribution of surplus state revenues: spend today's
surplus, borrow for needs.

She's not very tolerant of divergent opinions or open to outside ideas
or compromise. As Mayor, she fought ideas that weren't generated by
her or her staff. Ideas weren't evaluated on their merits, but on the
basis of who proposed them.

While Sarah was Mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire our highly respected
City Librarian because the Librarian refused to consider removing from
the library some books that Sarah wanted removed. City residents
rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin's
attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew
her termination letter. People who fought her attempt to oust the
Librarian are on her enemies list to this day.

Sarah complained about the "old boy's club" when she first ran for
Mayor, so what did she bring Wasilla? A new set of "old boys". Palin
fired most of the experienced staff she inherited. At the City and as
Governor she hired or elevated new, inexperienced, obscure people,
creating a staff totally dependent on her for their jobs and eternally
grateful and fiercely loyal--loyal to the point of abusing their power
to further her personal agenda, as she has acknowledged happened in the
case of pressuring the State's top cop (see below).

As Mayor, Sarah fired Wasilla's Police Chief because he "intimidated"
her, she told the press. As Governor, her recent firing of Alaska's top
cop has the ring of familiarity about it. He served at her pleasure
and she had every legal right to fire him, but it's pretty clear that
an important factor in her decision to fire him was because he wouldn't
fire her sister's ex-husband, a State Trooper. Under investigation
for abuse of power, she has had to admit that more than 2 dozen
contacts were made between her staff and family to the person that she
later fired, pressuring him to fire her ex-brother-in-law. She tried to
replace the man she fired with a man who she knew had been reprimanded
for sexual harassment; when this caused a public furor, she withdrew
her support.

She has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in
help. The City Council person who personally escorted her around town
introducing her to voters when she first ran for Wasilla City Council
became one of her first targets when she was later elected Mayor. She
abruptly fired her loyal City Administrator; even people who didn't
like the guy were stunned by this ruthlessness.

Fear of retribution has kept all of these people from saying anything
publicly about her.

When then-Governor Murkowski was handing out political plums, Sarah got
the best, Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission: one
of the few jobs not in Juneau and one of the best paid. She had no
background in oil & gas issues. Within months of scoring this great
job which paid $122,400/yr, she was complaining in the press about the
high salary. I was told that she hated that job: the commute, the
structured hours, the work. Sarah became aware that a member of this
Commission (who was also the State Chair of the Republican Party)
engaged in unethical behavior on the job. In a gutsy move which some
undoubtedly cautioned her could be political suicide, Sarah solved all
her problems in one fell swoop: got out of the job she hated and
garnered gobs of media attention as the patron saint of ethics and as a
gutsy fighter against the "old boys' club" when she dramatically quit,
exposing this man's ethics violations (for which he was fined).

As Mayor, she had her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork from
Senator Ted Stevens. Lately, she has castigated his pork-barrel
politics and publicly humiliated him. She only opposed the "bridge to
nowhere" after it became clear that it would be unwise not to.

As Governor, she gave the Legislature no direction and budget
guidelines, then made a big grandstand display of line-item vetoing
projects, calling them pork. Public outcry and further legislative
action restored most of these projects--which had been vetoed simply
because she was not aware of their importance--but with the unobservant
she had gained a reputation as "anti-pork".

She is solidly Republican: no political maverick. The State party
leaders hate her because she has bit them in the back and humiliated
them. Other members of the party object to her self-description as a
fiscal conservative.

Around Wasilla there are people who went to high school with Sarah.
They call her "Sarah Barracuda" because of her unbridled ambition and
predatory ruthlessness. Before she became so powerful, very ugly
stories circulated around town about shenanigans she pulled to be made
point guard on the high school basketball team. When Sarah's
mother-in-law, a highly respected member of the community and
experienced manager, ran for Mayor, Sarah refused to endorse her.

As Governor, she stepped outside of the box and put together of package
of legislation known as "AGIA" that forced the oil companies to march
to the beat of her drum.

Like most Alaskans, she favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge. She has questioned if the loss of sea ice is linked to
global warming. She campaigned "as a private citizen" against a state
initiaitive that would have either a) protected salmon streams from
pollution from mines, or b) tied up in the courts all mining in the
state (depending on who you listen to). She has pushed the State's
lawsuit against the Dept. of the Interior's decision to list polar
bears as threatened species.

McCain is the oldest person to ever run for President; Sarah will be a
heartbeat away from being President.

There has to be literally millions of Americans who are more
knowledgeable and experienced than she.

However, there's a lot of people who have underestimated her and are
regretting it.

CLAIM VS FACT
*"Hockey mom": true for a few years
*"PTA mom": true years ago when her first-born was in elementary
school, not since
*"NRA supporter": absolutely true
*social conservative: mixed. Opposes gay marriage, BUT vetoed a bill
that would have denied benefits to employees in same-sex relationships
(said she did this because it was unconsitutional).
*pro-creationism: mixed. Supports it, BUT did nothing as Governor to
promote it.
*"Pro-life": mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby
BUT declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life
legislation
*"Experienced": Some high schools have more students than Wasilla has
residents. Many cities have more residents than the state of Alaska.
No legislative experience other than City Council. Little hands-on
supervisory or managerial experience; needed help of a city
administrator to run town of about 5,000.
*political maverick: not at all
*gutsy: absolutely!
*open & transparent: ??? Good at keeping secrets. Not good at
explaining actions.
*has a developed philosophy of public policy: no
*"a Greenie": no. Turned Wasilla into a wasteland of big box stores
and disconnected parking lots. Is pro-drilling off-shore and in ANWR.
*fiscal conservative: not by my definition!
*pro-infrastructure: No. Promoted a sports complex and park in a city
without a sewage treatment plant or storm drainage system. Built
streets to early 20th century standards.
*pro-tax relief: Lowered taxes for businesses, increased tax burden on
residents
*pro-small government: No. Oversaw greatest expansion of city
government in Wasilla's history.
*pro-labor/pro-union. No. Just because her husband works union
doesn't make her pro-labor. I have seen nothing to support any claim
that she is pro-labor/pro-union.

WHY AM I WRITING THIS?

First, I have long believed in the importance of being an informed
voter. I am a voter registrar. For 10 years I put on student voting
programs in the schools. If you google my name (Anne, last name redacted

Alaska), you will find references to my participation in local
government, education, and PTA/parent organizations.

Secondly, I've always operated in the belief that "Bad things happen
when good people stay silent". Few people know as much as I do because
few have gone to as many City Council meetings.

Third, I am just a housewife. I don't have a job she can bump me out
of. I don't belong to any organization that she can hurt. But, I am no
fool; she is immensely popular here, and it is likely that this will
cost me somehow in the future: that's life.

Fourth, she has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100
or so people who rallied to support the City Librarian against Sarah's
attempt at censorship.

Fifth, I looked around and realized that everybody else was afraid to
say anything because they were somehow vulnerable.

CAVEATS
I am not a statistician. I developed the numbers for the increase in
spending & taxation 2 years ago (when Palin was running for Governor)
from information supplied to me by the Finance Director of the City of
Wasilla, and I can't recall exactly what I adjusted for: did I adjust
for inflation? for population increases? Right now, it is impossible
for a private person to get any info out of City Hall--they are
swamped. So I can't verify my numbers.

You may have noticed that there are various numbers circulating for the
population of Wasilla, ranging from my "about 5,000", up to 9,000. The
day Palin's selection was announced a city official told me that the
current population is about 7,000. The official 2000 census count was
5,460. I have used about 5,000 because Palin was Mayor from 1996 to
2002, and the city was growing rapidly in the mid-90's.

Posted by: christopher | September 3, 2008 11:27 AM

I was thinking about this while I went to bed last night: Why the repeated attacks on "community organizers"?

It kept popping up in all the RNC speeches I saw last night -- Romney's, Guiliani's and of course Palin's:

"I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a "community organizer," except that you have actual responsibilities."-- SP

On the face of it, it's a pretty weird repetitive theme. Obama's done lots of stuff -- teaching, state legislature, president of Harvard Law Review, civil rights' attorney, writing books, etc. -- but "community organizer" seems like an odd one to fixate on. The words themselves have generally positive connotations, particularly that first one: everybody is in favor of "community" (as long as its 'their' community).

Which is exactly the point, I think. Used the way the GOP speakers used the words last night (i.e. with a sneer), community = ghetto and organizer = activist.

It essentially was a coded way of pointing out Obama's work in, with and for the black community (see? even I'm doing it) on the South Side of Chicago. Also the fact that his work involved helping low-income people stand up for their legal rights, as opposed to a GOP-sanctioned "real" job like business owner or career military officer (or moose hunter.) They were trying to put Obama back on the same level as Jesse Jackson -- i.e., the black protest candidate -- and mocking him for it.

To cut right to the nasty, they were using "community organizer" as a euphemism for "poverty pimp."

And, as a special bonus, to a GOP audience (country club division, at least) organizer = union. What could be worse than a black, radical activist union organizer from the South Side of the Chicago?

Why, I bet some of those delegates won't sleep for a week -- even with the double locks and the chain on the door.

I gotta admit, I'm impressed in spite of myself. When it comes to playing the dog whistle, these guys are Mozarts.

At the Republican convention I have noticed that we could hardly find any colored face. Contrast this to Democratic convention, where literally every shot of the public had whites, Hispanics, blacks and Asians in them. At least in 2004, Bush could manage to get at least one rain bow coalition for print and TV shots.

The Republican party has been a monolithic coalition of prominently southern White and Evangelic Christians for many decades. But its kinda scary the other night. "It's all white!"

Palin is here as a part of a plan to reignite the 'culture wars'. Its their only way to win. I am sure the republican base is all excited. But the independents? They need them. My guess is McCain will play safe tonight, and let his campaign and surrogates do the dirty work for him.

Marc Ambinder on Twitter:

"Unanswered question: she's smart and likeable and funny... But why did McCain choose her?"

Hey Irvine,

I think the dog whistle reference in your post (#21) is to radicalism, not race.

I had the misfortunate to sit in a cab recently with Rush Limbaugh blairing on radio. I told driver switch the station or lose your tip after hearing Rush going off the wall screetch about community organizer = radicals.

They are reframing community organizing as VERY LEFT WING, filled with gasp RADICALS.

It's part of their Obama's too radically liberal for country meme.

Irv, Nate at 538 writes regarding Palin's overreach:

"...it seems awfully petty for a party campaigning on the theme of service (of which there are other types apart from enlisting in the military) -- especially when Obama and Biden, if not always their supporters, have by and large been exceptionally gracious toward Palin . If you want a punchline that underscores liberal "elitism", why not go after Obama's time as the President of the Harvard Law Review instead?"

Sean: A Great Speech, For Both Bases

St. Paul delegates are giddy with Sarah Palin’s speech. The mood is buoyant, enlivened, energized. It’s a party. There are revelers. The faces shine with joy and pleasure at a convention finally fully underway. Their VP nominee did it – she hit it out of the park. There is joy in Mudville, here on the ground.

And it worked wonders – for the Dems.

In the past several hours, Dems I’ve spoken with and who’ve flooded my inbox are energized. A woman friend and Democrat who had not worked for Obama’s campaign: “I am volunteering tomorrow.” An Obama organizer who was operating on fumes five months ago: “They are not getting away with this. 10 hours of call time tomorrow.” A shorter read of the mood: “Let’s get it on.”

The mockery went too far. They played the “Obama doesn’t love America, just himself” card, over and over and over. For people already inclined to believe that (i.e., the hardcore Republican base), the speech was a smashing success. Maybe they will work a little harder, volunteer a few more hours, dig a little deeper into their pockets. But so will partisan Dems, who are far more plugged into watching the election coverage.

So my reaction: St. Paul loved this speech… and so did Chicago. Palin swung for the fences, mocking the very notion of community organizing. So did Giuliani. This was the day after “Service” was the theme, and Republicans fell all over themselves praising their party’s commitment to give back to the community. Jarring.

Fire up both bases equally, it’s not even close. Obama wins going away. In 2008, there are so many more Democrats, numerically.

So, everyone on both partisan sides has reason to celebrate tonight. Republicans can celebrate a true champion in the VP role. Dems can celebrate because the numbers don’t lie, and no energy occurs in a vacuum. Republicans can’t tie this year.

[FiveThirtyEight]

Nate: Cognitive Dissonance

Virtually all of the conservative commentariat, and a greater-than-would-care-to-admit-it share of the liberal commentariat think that Sarah Palin hit a home run tonight. I guess I'm just going to have to stick my neck out (along with Josh Marshall) and disagree.

You can tar-and-feather me with this later if I'm wrong. I will make this disclaimer: I'm not necessarily offering a prediction about how the polls are going to move over the next several days. Almost all conventions produce bounces, and this one probably will too (though whether it comes from Palin's speech rather than McCain's, or Fred Thompson's or Rudy Giuliani's, we probably won't be able to tell). But I don't think the speech will be effective beyond the very near term (the next 3-7 days) at moving votes in McCain's direction, if it moves them at all. And here's why:

I think some of you are underestimating the percentage of voters for whom Sarah Palin lacks the standing to make this critique of Barack Obama. To many voters, she is either entirely unknown, or is known as an US Weekly caricature of a woman who eats mooseburgers and has a pregnant daughter. To change someone's opinion, you have to do one of two things. Either, you have to be a trusted voice of authority, or you have to persuade them. Palin is not a trusted voice of authority -- she's much too new. But neither was this a persuasive speech. It was staccato, insistent, a little corny. It preached to the proverbial choir. It was also, as one of my commentors astutely noted, a speech written by a man and for a man, but delivered by a woman, which produces a certain amount of cognitive dissonance.

In exceedingly plain English, I think there's a pretty big who the fuck does she think she is? factor. And not just among us Daily Kos reading, merlot-drinking liberals. I think Palin's speech will be instinctively unappealing to other whole demographics of voters, including particuarly working-class men (among whom there may be a misogyny factor) and professional post-menopausal women. As another of my commentors put it:

__________________________________________________
Not only does Palin's inexperience trump Obama's... her "otherness" also trumps his. Where she comes from, the way she talks, her bio, lifestyle, and all the moose and caribou stuff... it makes her seem more exotic than Obama, who after all lives in the middle of America and has a life that people can readily understand.

Palin may be just as American as anybody, but she still seems to come from Somewhere Else.

This would be fine... even interesting and appealing... if she weren't attacking. But we have a deep, instinctive aversion to people who are part of us (even if we don't really like them much) being attacked by people we perceive as outsiders. Our instinct is to stiffen up, to protect.
__________________________________________________

This point may be a little bit overstated, but the fact remains that Barack Obama is extremely well known and Palin is largely unknown, and when that is the case, your perception of the known commodity is more likely to influence your perception of the unknown commodity than the other way around. If there's a certain Italian restaurant that you've been going to for years, and some stranger stops you on the street and tells you that they don't know how to cook their pasta, you're going to think that the stranger is a kook -- not that the restaurant is poor.

And not only is Barack Obama exceptionally well known, but perceptions of him are exceptionally well entrenched. In today's Rasmussen numbers, 63 percent of voters had either a very favorable or a very unfavorable perception of Obama. This is an extremely high figure. I looked up the Rasmussen numbers for other prominent politicians, and this number was the highest I could find ... actually tied with Bill Clinton for the highest:

Percentage viewing as Very Favorable
OR Very Unfavorable

Obama -- 63
B. Clinton -- 63
Gore -- 61
H. Clinton -- 60
Bush -- 60
Cheney -- 59
Pelosi -- 51
T. Kennedy -- 48
Palin -- 45
Kerry -- 45
McCain -- 43
Romney -- 38
Biden -- 33

This is why folks like Barack Obama and Bill Clinton (and Hillary Clinton, for that matter) are Teflon politicians. It's not that they have some magical quality that keeps them out of trouble ... it's just that a very high percentage of voters have already made up their minds one way or the other about them, and can't possibly be persuaded otherwise. With John Kerry, the swiftboating worked because voters didn't have particuarly strong feelings about him. With Obama, the Republicans spent tens of millions of dollars in an effort to brand him negatively, and moved his favorables by ... a point or two at the margins.

Ultimately, it's not that I don't think there aren't people who will find Palin's performance effective -- I just don't think there's much overlap between those people and the universe of persuadable voters.

[FiveThirtyEight]

#24 disputes over what I have written in #21. Commenter (or should I say comrade?) Tipper offers up this anecdote:

"I had the misfortunate to sit in a cab recently with Rush Limbaugh blairing on radio. I told driver switch the station or lose your tip after hearing Rush going off the wall screetch about community organizer = radicals.

They are reframing community organizing as VERY LEFT WING, filled with gasp RADICALS.

It's part of their Obama's too radically liberal for country meme."

The pieces start to fit together a bit: Rush blasts out the message in its raw form to the true believers, and then they dog whistle back to it at the convention. Classic.

The two theories (race or radicalism?) aren't incompatible, of course: It looks like the game plan is to keep trying to paint Obama as the scary black radical (which would also fit with the recent round of Weathermen ads).

I'm thinking the Rovians may have just tipped their hand to their post-convention attack strategy.

Well, nothing else has really worked (nor has this, so far). I guess they don't have any other bright ideas.

Personally, I thought they'd go with the Secret Muslim Terrorist slur. But what do I know?

Freyja, thanks for the excellent unbiased commentary by Sean and Nate (26, 27.)

Josh Marshall at TPM writes:

Is Sarah Palin really comparing herself to Harry Truman since he only served as vice president for a few months?

... This really does put the 'party' in party rally.

... A few other thoughts. You'll notice that Rudy Giuliani apparently ran too long and they had to drop the Palin mini-movie that was supposed to introduce her speech. Normally people get fired for goofs like that. They didn't want Rudy's blood and iron speech the day after Gustav so they bumped it until tonight. Big mistake. He positively dripped with a kind of curdled anger, the origin of which is difficult to grasp. But he actually seemed to get angrier and angrier as the speech progressed -- off chopping his hands around, baring his teeth. I know the people in the hall loved it. But I think a lot of people will see it as whacked. Rancid. Curdled. Palin's speech ended up being much more partisan than I expected. But that was added to by the fact that she had to start her speech while the auditorium was still awash in the teeth-gnashing froth ginned up by Rudy's speech. I've seen political events that I totally got and others that I thought I got but was totally wrong about. So who knows? But take this as a sign that the McCain campaign has abandoned an effort to compete for swing voters and go back to the base energizing strategy that worked for President Bush in 2004. The numbers make that look like a tough proposition. But I think a few months from now, everyone will agree this was a mistake.

Interesting discussion guys. I was watching CNN last night. Roland Martin was reporting from the convention on CNNs recap. As he came onscreen, his eyes were visibly red. I thought it might have been the alcohol at those conventions. Little did I know what it was.

When asked by Wolf Blitzer what he thought of the speech and how, it became obvious that the redness was from tears, not of joy but of anger.

Roland's response: This is a rough paraphrase--it occured at about 11:50 pm.

Wolf: what did you take from the speech and how can Obama/Biden

Roland: Let me just say all of this talk of Biden dancing around going after Palin in the debates, is over. I say go after her. Now how would or should Obama respond? Let me get to the point in Palin's speech that she mocked "community organizers". My 2 parents are sitting home in Houston, Texas and they are both community organizers and the GOP and Sarah Palin might have well have said "being community organizers doesnt matter" to my parents face. I'm disgusted. Community organizers keep people in their homes, keep their lights on, keep food in the fridge. The GOP wants to talk about small town issues, well being a community organizer, addresses just that. So what did I hear from the speech--this is a quote from Roland, "The GOP doesnt give a flying flip about community organizers."

During his whole passioned rant, he was visibly angry and upset that he had watched someone belittle what his parents had done to raise him and help others there whole lives.

I have to agree. If the GOP want to talk about small town issues, that's fine. But dont get up and diss the very people who are "in the trenches", actually organizing. And especially don't do it, when your campaign is touting you as someone who understands small town America. And really dont do it after your campaign has had you sequestered for a week, claim sexism at any legit question youre asked, and write 75 percent of your speech.

This isnt Alaska anymore. It's a little different in the lower 48.

PS. Gotta applaud when anchors show a backbone on tv live and not off camera like Peggy Noonan and Murphy.

Today's email from the Obama team has a good one line come back over this attack involving community service experience versus governing experience. They say:Community organizing is how ordinary people respond to out-of-touch politicians and their failed policies.
Thanks to yogi one for forwarding the Wassila Anne's information. When is the media going to report stuff?

Here's Matt Stoller, a Progressive who also critiques Barack Obama's policies:

I'm in New York City now, having flown out of Minneapolis earlier this evening. And I suppose it's fitting that my last experience in that city was to tour foreclosed houses in St Paul with ACORN, a group of community organizers. I'm watching the Republican line-up, just getting done with Giuliani, and what strikes me is the utter sense of hatred and contempt for ordinary people emanating from this Christian white group.

Steve Clemons says that Palin added some sizzle to the convention, and I'm sure that's right.

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2008/09/saint_sarah_bea/

When I left, this was a deadened and frustrated group. But now I see on TV an air chopping Giuliani dripping with hatred in a symbiotic relationship with a lustful and excited crowd. This hatred, this anger, this rage is what they love. This is who they are.

This party is aroused by a raw primal screeching bitterness. I don't know if independents see Rudy's prime time speech like I see it, but what I see is a vicious white mob who laugh and sneer at people losing their homes in the name of small town American values and who hate community organizers standing up for those people.

... Ok, I watched Palin. She's terrific.

e14studio,

Joe Klein (Ref. #19) nails it.

Yeah, I'm not a big fan of Klein's. But he makes what should be an obvious point, but an important one. And one that, obvious though it may seem, needs to be said to everyone out there who considers themself a serious journalist.

http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/09/angry_amateurs.html

"There is a tendency in the media to kick ourselves, cringe and withdraw, when we are criticized. But I hope my colleagues stand strong in this case: it is important for the public to know that Palin raised taxes as governor, supported the Bridge to Nowhere before she opposed it, pursued pork-barrel projects as mayor, tried to ban books at the local library and thinks the war in Iraq is "a task from God." The attempts by the McCain campaign to bully us into not reporting such things are not only stupidly aggressive, but unprofessional in the extreme." [#19]

Sure, the sheep eat the "liberal media" meme up like ice cream. It drives the ignorant armies of the right mad. It makes them donate more, volunteer more. It makes them feel they are fighting a righteous fight against an all-powerful media determined to the work of the devil, ie. the Democrat Party.

They believe that Bill Clinton committed untold numbers of crimes and the media covered them up. They believe the media tried desperately to "steal" an election from Bush and give it to that media darling, Al Gore. They believe this evil liberal media was too tough on Larry Craig, too soft on Eliot Spitzer. And now they believe that Obama has gotten a free pass while McCain has been too harshly attacked. And, of course, that all the bad we've heard of Sarah Palin is because the left wing TV and Newspaper folk are terrified that her brilliance and charm will destroy the Obama candidacy they have so much invested in.

Again, this works brilliantly for the GOP. But, make no mistake, it's not even the main purpose of the "attack the media" drive of the last 30+ years.

No, the main point is the obvious "work the references" strategery. Insulate themselves from whatever stories are reported about their misdeeds while trying to intimidate the media to back off those stories all together. And even if the reporting on the Republicans is 80% positive and reporting of Democrats is 80% negative, we'll still complain. Don't go after us AT ALL or we'll continue to drive the public's hatred of you up.

No wonder John McCain canceled his Larry King interview on CNN a couple of days ago because an anchor on CNN asked him a tough question about Palin pick.

This was no coincidence tonight, folks: Palin repeated her de-bunked lie about saying "no thanks" to the Bridge to Nowhere. And, in virtually the next breath attacked the "media elites". The message was clear- "I will lie as much as I please. And if you dare call me on it, I will accuse you of bias. Those skeletons better stay in my closet and my BS better go unchallenged, or else." And the fact that she was virtually inciting a crowd against the media tonight, with all the big names of TV news sitting right on their edge, added a nice touch of physical intimidation to it, as well.

This is a test for the media. Do your jobs, or cower to the McCain/Palin mud-slinging against you. Frankly, I'm not optimistic. But at least Klein spelled it out correctly.

Liberals are just mad b/c choosing Sarah Palin was a brilliant political maneuver on John McCain's part. And funnily enough, America actually LIKES Sarah Palin. McCain will win the election now b/c of this. Liberals need to just deal with it.

Hello Gotham and Everyone,

What is there to say except the Republicans little filly of a show horse...jumped all her fences....of course the speech writer deserves some of the credit....but she has good timing, believes in the cause and yes, Gotham, Palin is impressive enough that one even feels that even though she is working for "McCain's" cause, right now....you get the feeling she has even "better and bigger" causes she would "love" to bring to the table..... I got a feeling she would like to be the "hockey mom" for all America....grrrrrrruuuuffffffff....

I really do not want to play with this sick pick of a nomination by the republicans. To even play with putting this lady into the vice presidency is beyond irresponsible, and, as I have said, really, it is just a mockery of our electorial process by the republican party...

I think with this election the Nation is at a crossroads and the way I see it if the Nation elects the Democratic ticket we at least have a chance at redemption, at being saved inspite of our ignorance....but if we choose this republican ticket....we are just plain f--ked, and we are actually celebrating how ignorant we f-ing are.

It is not rocket science and with McCain choosing Palin it has made the road signs more than clear there can be no confusion.

So, yes, in many ways Palin nomination has made the choice so much easier for the serious and mindfull voter....

Frankly, if we go by our past voting history electing Bush twice even after the truth was apparent....it looks like we might just be f--ked.

hmmmm, ruth

"PS. Gotta applaud when anchors show a backbone on tv live and not off camera like Peggy Noonan and Murphy." #30

Indeed Preity.

From HuffPo:

Wall Street Journal columnist and former Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan and former John McCain adviser, Time columnist, and MSNBC contributor Mike Murphy were caught on tape disparaging John McCain's selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his Vice Presidential running mate.

>>>>>

Mike Murphy: You know, because I come out of the blue swing state governor world: Engler, Whitman, Tommy Thompson, Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush. I mean, these guys -- this is how you win a Texas race, just run it up. And it's not gonna work. And --

PN: It's over.

MM: Still McCain can give a version of the Lieberman speech to do himself some good.

CT: I also think the Palin pick is insulting to Kay Bailey Hutchinson, too.

PN: Saw Kay this morning.

CT: Yeah, she's never looked comfortable about this --

MM: They're all bummed out.

CT: Yeah, I mean is she really the most qualified woman they could have turned to?

PN: The most qualified? No! I think they went for this -- excuse me-- political bullshit about narratives --

CT: Yeah they went to a narrative.

MM: I totally agree.

PN: Every time the Republicans do that, because that's not where they live and it's not what they're good at, they blow it.

MM: You know what's really the worst thing about it? The greatness of McCain is no cynicism, and this is cynical.

CT: This is cynical, and as you called it, gimmicky.

MM: Yeah.

Yeah, Sarah Palin is a true celebrity. Why doesn't America LIKE her?

This move is brilliant because it fires up the GOP base, but this is no 2004 when they won Bush's re-election. Make no mistake, the democrats are fired up too. The indies hardly buy this bullshit reformer lie, and it is up to McCain to appeal to them. Yeah, this is brilliant because Republicans are good at campaigning and at winning elections--not at governing though---and this is McCain's only way to victory anyway.

See the highly insightful posts #26 and #27 by Freyja on the electoral aspects of Palin pick and the base energies.

Hehehehehehe!!

This is rich! Baby G has his panties bunched up so tightly he just can't avoid the "hitler" thing!

Ruthie is gagging in the bathroom again....

Irvin/John/Pretty/Freeya stayed up all night, turned all their customers away from the Motel 6, so they could research.....

Republicans...well...for the most part..they got a good nights sleep! Kinda like the Allstate commercials....we're in good hands now.....

Ruthie Baby....the filly analogy...you can do better than that....a little sexist, you think? What if I'd said, "Well, Obama sure picked all the cotton last night, didn't he?" You'd have been all over that....

y'all have a great day....

small town mayors....community organizers who have responsibility!

130 'present' votes in Illinois...it's just too hard to make decisions....makes me wanna poopy!!

Two memoirs...and....and...awww hell...there really isn't anything else is there?

Proud of being American...always!! Up yours, Obama's baby mama!!

Little O....is going down...

She'll shred Joe Biden....

dis is fun....

:)

okay, I just have to add a bit, you see I am in a "downer" mood today...the clouds are thick.

Watching some of the republican convention last night and listening to Rudy and then Palin has had and effect on my mood, for sure.

this is might better describe my mind state this moring...remember flight 93 and how the passengers tried to take back control of the plane from those who had hijacked it....well, after listenting to the media and press and the convention speakers I kind of felt that maybe it might not happen....maybe we( Americans who want this republican fiasco to end) won't wrestle back the controls to steer our Nation to safety in November....maybe we are too far gone already.

and that baby was only 5 months old....never in a million years would I have subjected my newborn, and, yes, 5 months is still a newborn, imo, to that kind of overwhelming noise and confusion in that arena....whether the baby minded or slept through is not the point....I think it is pretty safe to say that other than figuring out who is going to hold the baby, this 20 minutes, not a hell of a lot of attention was paid to the babie's sensitivies.......but, after all, that is a real live child....it's the embryo's that need all their(republicans) attention.

oh, just some of my downer ponderings this late morning...ruth

Hi there skinny,

oh, it is so great you stopped by because I needed an example of the celebration of ignorance....I guess one would call this synchronicity......:)

and yes....I am preparing for the coming election results by trying not to be too obnoxious to your side since you guys might be our rulers....is it heil? or hell? when one salutes.....hmmmm...rut

After the first 10 minutes of the Palin speech, I switched to the US Open. At least what I was watching there was reality!:)

Yogi-one and others, check this out:

Real Vetting Roundup

"The vetting process was completely thorough and I'm grateful for the results." - John McCain

As the true vetting of Sarah Palin continued yesterday, we learned more about John McCain's pick for vice-president. Here's a recap of what we learned about the person John McCain thinks should be a 72-year-old heartbeat away from the presidency:

>>>>She was involved in yet another ethical scandal, this time relating to her firing of a longtime local police chief, who "says he was fired because he stepped on the toes of Palin's campaign contributors, including bar owners and the National Rifle Association."

>>>Although the McCain campaign has stressed her command of the Alaska National Guard as "experience," she never issued a single order. Watch CNN's Campbell Brown call McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds out on his spin on this and more here.

>>>Video surfaced of Sarah Palin at her church just three months ago, claiming that regardless of what policies are enacted, it doesn't mater if "people of Alaska’s heart isn’t right with God." Palin also claimed that American soldiers have been sent to Iraq "on a task that is from God." (Full videos here and here).

>>>She can't "fix" Washington when she's played the Washington game so well:

"Wasilla had received few if any earmarks before Palin became mayor. She actively sought federal funds -- a campaign that began to pay off only after she hired a lobbyist with close ties to Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), who long controlled federal spending as chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. He made funneling money to Alaska his hallmark."

Alaska, by the way, ranked #1 in earmarks last year.

>>>She lied--and continues to lie without shame--regarding her alleged "opposition" to the Bridge to Nowhere.

>>>A 62 page opposition research document from Alaska was released, filled with strange tidbits like the fact that she presided over a wedding at Wal-Mart ("it was so Wasilla") and that she once "founded a company called "Rouge Cru" -- what she called a "classy" way to say redneck -- in case her political career didn't work out a few years ago."

>>>Just two weeks ago, she sat in the pews while her pastor delivered an anti-Jewish sermon.

>>>In a candid, caught-on-tape moment, Peggy Noonan states the obvious--McCain's selection of Palin was "political bullshit" and nothing more than a gimmick.

>>>Yesterday morning, we learned that the Troopergate report was due out on the eve of the election, October 31st. Yesterday afternoon, we learned that the investigation would probably be delayed because the star witness suddenly decided not to testify.

>>>Two days ago, longtime chair of the AIP, a secessionist party, stated that Palin attended their 1994 Convention: "Palin was at the convention in 1994. She was there." Yesterday, he said he couldn't remember.

>>>Speaking of the secessionist party (and the fact that is has been confirmed that Sarah Palin's husband has been a member for almost a decade), we learned that the FBI did not conduct a background check on Palin.

>>>The McCain camp worked the refs before Palin's speech, claiming that the media were being sexist by asking questions. Meanwhile, in the reality-based world, McCain's National Co-Chair stated that the press coverage has been "completely fair."

>>>Palin isn't helping McCain in the polls. In fact, it's Obama who is enjoying a Palin bounce.

All that, in just 24 hours. But members of the press, John McCain is telling you to back off asking questions, so you should just trust his judgment. Because clearly, from what we have learned in just the last five days, 'judgment' is something McCain has by the bucketful. --Georgia Logothetis

Palin Bounce:

">>>Palin isn't helping McCain in the polls. In fact, it's Obama who is enjoying a Palin bounce."

Chris #43

Indeed.

http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/08-us-pres-ge-mvo.php

There was a Democratic convention bounce, but the aggregated 3 day polling gains (Gallup and Rasmussen tracking polls) have come 'after' the Palin pick.

There has been a Palin bounce ... for Obama.

oh, something else,

Palin considers herself a "hockey mom" and the hahaha joke is that the difference between her and a pit bull is lipstick....hmmmmm..she doesn't mind being compared to a pit bull. I don't know too much about dogs but the only time I have really heard of pit bulls is when they are in the news because they have just killed or mauled a child..........in the OT I wrote she compared herself to a bull dog....yes, I simply blocked out the pit bull line...because...well, you get the ugly picture....America....watch your children...Palin is on the loose!!!!!!grrrrruuuuufffff....ruth....

Talking of pitbulls, Palin sits proudly on a stuffed Grizzly(sofa,)--in her living room--a bear killed by her father and grandfather. She has a stuffed giant Alaskan crab displayed on a bench in front. And there also these disturbing violent images of her standing beside a moose she and her gang hunted down. Wow, so much for feminity and compassion for wildlife.

Ruth...you're trying a little too hard....take a couple tylenol...and get a little nap!

Remember...you're in good hands now!!

Oh yeah, she lost the telelprompter thru a lot of her speech...can you imagine if that had happened to Obama? He's as bad as GWB when he doesn't have a prompter.....uh, well, uh...uhh...uh..well....uh...

hehehehe!!

I hope we have an exciting Nadal/Federer US Open final!

Go Nadal!

"He's as bad as GWB when he doesn't have a prompter....."

Yeah, at least he writes his own speeches and he is a brilliant writer and a 'thinker' who can analyze and reason like only a few in public service can. Although he is not a 'great' debater, for at least now, he always tends to improve every skill of his as he goes along, or at least he gives it a genuine try. That's the difference.

Ruth, are you serious? Oh wait I have to say it one more time, are you SERIOUS??????? About Palin exposing her 5 month old to all the noise for a few minutes and now you are trying to portray her as what? Only kind to fetuses but not to 5 mos. old babies?
As if there is ANY comparison between a 5 mos. old being in a noisy atmosphere for a few minutes and the choice to abort a fetus.
But again, I see you are not alone amongst the posters here on not just this thread but others frantically and desperately trying to make this woman look bad. But please I wish you all would take a few deep breaths before you say things that just...geez...that just don't make sense. Yes, they are going to win and that is upsetting for democrats. BLAME YOUR PARTY DEMOCRATS!!! If Obama had put Hillary on the ticket you guys would have won. But oh well.
Please act like liberals, cut it out with the double standards and sexism. I thought liberals accepted everything and everyone???

skinny,
Your reverse psychology to get Obama elected is at an all-time high. And it's working. Thank you.
Sharon

Olivia, cut down your fake outrage and keep your generalizations about liberals and democrats to yourself.

Actually, I am not outraged. More like befuddled by the
mind-bending statements about Sarah Palin found not just on this thread but on others started by Gotham. And why shouldn't I generalize? This is what liberals do--make absurd statements, refuse to address them and then act defensive that they are being questioned about the statement. I have never met a liberal who does not do that--I am open to the possibility that they exist somewhere perhaps in a galaxy far, far, away...
But anyway, I will butt out of this discussion as I prefer to use reason and logic and I feel those 2 things are not prevalent here.
Good day!

It's been five days now and John McCain has not allowed his vice-presidential pick to be interviewed by the press 'even once'.

If the McCain-Palin ticket is about "tranparency" and "reform," why are they so afraid about letting Sarah Palin talk to the press?

Oh, that's right. Because as a result of John McCain's two-minute "vetting" process (Rush Limbaugh loves her, so it's a go), reporters (and bloggers, for matter) have undertaken the real vetting process. And if John McCain is so intent on keeping his vice-presidential pick away from questions, well, what does that have to say about how she might answer?

oh, Hi, Olivia,

It is called sarcasim. And, yes, putting a 5 month old baby in that environment is just plain inconsiderate to a baby, an infant, imo. I sure wouldn't have done it and frankly I do not even know of a mother who would have. I mean she could have kept the baby somewhere less noisy, less front and center and brought him out for a quick look see event instead of subjecting his sensitive ears to all that yelling and screaming. Really, there were much more considerate choices available if one were at all interested or concerned about the effect on this infant....but as you see....she was just A-okay for that baby to be on show for that long a time....now, that might not bother any, such as yourself...but I am funny like that....it bothered me.

so there...that is my story and I am sticking to it:)))....ruth

"I will butt out of this discussion as I prefer to use reason and logic and I feel those 2 things are not prevalent here." Olivia

Good. cut and run. Take the escape route.

You have ample reasoned and logical arguments from posters here. But you choose to ignore them, and cherry pick the one's likes of Ruth's and make a generalization about everyone.

This antic is no differnt form the what the rethugs use, when they blame the liberals.

Too bad, you silly comments (in the past ) are the ones without lacking reason, and I know you are unhappy that few fell for you concern troll comments. I know your antics at Intentblog. And know what's your (Olivia ID) agenda is here. Get lost.

John,
She carried herself amazingly well during her speech, seems highly intelligent. I doubt he fears she will answer questions in some crazy way.

Coming back to the topic, while you could say a lot of things about Sarah Palin's screed of an acceptance speech, it would suffice to simply note that it's pretty damn rich for John McCain to dispatch a 'secessionist' to criticize any American's patriotism.

Ruth wrote "Palin considers herself a "hockey mom" .."

To use Palin's formulation: when the convention delegates have retreated to their Hummer dealerships and gated communities, and when the hockey mom platitudes have faded back to Wasilla, Sarah Palin is still a petty, corrupt, pork-barelling, flip-flopping secessionist terrified of anyone inclined to peel back the veneer on her shady recent past.

"I doubt he fears she will answer questions in some crazy way."

It's enough, she speak truth. That's the pitfall. She has a lot of questions she simply CANNOT answer with conviction, without shooting herself in the foot herself, however smart and intelligent she is at lying.

Palin represents an extreme version of the hypocritical right-wing myth of proud Western independence from the federal government.

I urge anyone interested in the subject to read The Legacy of Conquest: The Unbroken Past of the American West by Patricia Limerick. Professor Limerick exposes this long tradition where those who scream the most about the evils of the federal government happen to be the same ones who gobble up federal funds (ranching subsidies, irrigation projects in the deserts, bridges built by Ted Stevens' pet contractors) well beyond what they contribute in taxes.

Maybe the hatred comes from a subconscious sense of shame from their hypocrisy.

Even McCain is denying the press any access to himself. I hadn't realized until I heard them talking about how he was keeping them all at a distance, these people he always claimed to love and admire.

That dates back to his changing the seating on the plane so that only those journalists who were on his "good boy" list got to talk to him on the plane; the ones who pissed him off had to get out and walk.........

It could massively backfire on him too. He had the press in his pocket prior to that (but couldn't launch a Rovian "Liberal media" smear).

Personally I think having a pliant press is far better than some bs manufactured outrage against the press.

You know, Palin is mccain's bridge to Limbaugh. She was chosen to bring the talk radio base together for the convention and give Limbaugh the excuse to endorse McCain while keeping face.

If they continue to avoid the media, the Obama campaign should take the opportunity to define them as Talk Radio/Limbaugh republicans. Everyone in America know who Limbaugh is and what he stands for and Americans need to know that's who they are voting for when they vote for McCain/Palin.

Kerry tried on Stephanopoulous last weekend with a good line when he said McCain is the prisoner of the Limbaugh republicans. The PBS talking heads mentioned Limbaugh half dozen times last night after the speech- mostly by David Brooks, who seemed to think that was enough to say.

There are some who are claiming that Palin is a jimdandy candidate given her extensive executive experience as mayor (like Rudy) and her experience as governor (like Mitt) and her personal Christian commitment (like Huck) and her business acumen (like Mitt.)

She is all the other candidates rolled into one. (May be her military experience is like McCain's, having been of the Alaska National Guard and leading them in Iraq.)

The sooner the media starts talking to her the sooner it unravels.

Ruth,

I didn't realize it was a sarcastic statement b/c it seemed you went into some detail to point out how troubling it was that the 5 mos. old was around noise. The baby to me looked like it was sleeping during the speech and it looked very loved by both the father and the sister who was patting his hair.
As far as the cheering, yes it was quite loud, but the baby did not look upset or distressed--his expression seemed to be one of curiosity or interest. I think most babies do experience being around loud noises at one time or another whether it be an airplane flying low or thunder or whatever. My whole point is that it just seems people are taking cheap shots at her.

John,

Save your acidic jabs for someone else!!! That is right, you always try to cast me aside and ORDER me out as if you have some authority here at intentblog by virtue of your towering intellect. Yes, your intellect is massive, impressive and labirinthean in its scope. But please...DO NOT COMMAND ME!!! Thank you.

"My whole point is that it just seems people are taking cheap shots at her."

Good point. You don't need to take cheap shots like the rethugs do. But I agree with Ruth, in that, she intentionally/unintentionally allowed her child to be used as a political pawn to excite the religious fundie base. The dems don't get any points--rather they lose points--if they criticize her regarding her family matters. There are ENOUGH genuine and PC reasons to criticize her (see posts up thread.)

That's all I was saying John. And yes, that is why I called McCain's political maneuver brilliant. The Dems will trip themselves up criticizine her family matters, etc. They make themselves look like parranahs.

John McCain selected Sarah Palin to try and combat Barack Obama's message of change, yet yesterday's hate-fest was a stunning admission that the Republican Party has nothing to offer but more of the same.

The night began with Mitt Romney, who stepped onto the stage and into the 1970s. If "liberal" were a four letter word, half of his speech would be censored. But that was his intent, of course--to hurl the word out to the dazed, white masses below as if the word "liberal" was an epithet, and as if by its mere utterance, a hoard of rioting dirty fucking hippies would pour onto the convention floor.

Next came Mike Huckabee, who entered stage right and brought along with him the 1980s and a school desk. A timely quip about Madonna's wardrobe triggered the start of what was a somewhat stumbling stroll down Ronald Reagan lane. Warning against the rise of "centralized government," he weaved a foreboding narrative of an Obama presidency, stitched from scraps of fears two decades old that the is an ever-present red haze on the horizon, eager to chomp into your paycheck and tear apart your private home.

Huckabee was followed by Rudy Giuliani, who cheered for the Republican Party of the 1990s. He tried to paint Democrats as haphazard and unethical controllers of the government, and sold the tale to the audience that it was the Republican Party that had all the answers. Stopping short of drafting another Contract with America, he promised that Republican rule would "shake up Washington" and delivered the rest of his speech in a voice dripping with sarcasm, betraying a jealously that a Democratic official dare to be beloved. He looked so very small on the stage not because of his stature, but because of his style. He delivered a line followed by a pause, grinning and chuckling, as if he were waving a blue-stained dress to the world.

And then, Sarah Palin took the stage. By the end of her speech, she made it abundantly clear that this "change agent" relishes playing the same Bush/Rove politics of the last eight years. The "rising star" of the Republican Party sunk to barrel-scrapping levels as she spit out attack after attack on everyone from Barack Obama to Harry Reid. Snide remarks were followed by more caustic insults, with little if any substance in between. As the monochrome audience roared, and as many in their homes watching winced at the sharpness of her personal attacks, she twisted her verbal knife not in an effort to skewer Democratic policy or governing philosophy, but to draw blood from the bodies of her political opponents. It was Rovian rhetoric at its finest. It was Rush Limbaugh to its core.

Four speakers yesterday demonstrated why four decades of conservative politics have led us here today, to this broken system where a "successful" speech is not one that speaks to the issues, but is one that speaks to the ugliest side of human nature and appeals to hate rather than hope.

It against this ragged landscape of the same, exhaustive politics that John McCain will accept the Republican nomination for President. And though he will style himself as a reformer, he will bleed into the background of these small politics that have long plagued our social discourse and that have stood as deliberate barriers to real change.

The DNC held a news conference this morning for the press and it included Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius and Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. They both take on Palin and her speech point by point. And it's an unexpected surprise from the loyal Clinton supporter Wassmerman. Good for her. From HuffPo:

Sebelius:

On being a "small town" mayor:

"I live in the American heartland, and have been a governor [here] for six years," she said. "I don't know any mayor in any small town in Kansas -- and we have a lot of mayors of small towns -- who hires a lobbyist and goes after earmarks the way Sarah Palin did." On Tuesday, the Washington Post reported that, as mayor of Wasilla, Palin secured more than $27 million in federal earmarks for a town with only 6,700 residents."

On the lack of substance in Palin's speech
Sebelius would have none of it. "What I hear from these folks in the heartland, is that people want to know how they're going to afford health care ... whether they're going to keep their jobs [and manage] the cost of gas and groceries," Sebelius said. "Again last night, what we heard were partisan attacks and no real solutions. ... I work with a Republican legislature every day. And I know what people expect us to do ... is to roll up your sleeves and get the job done."

That was just a warm up.

Wasserman Schultz:

On Palin's habit of lying:

"Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz hammered a similar theme to Sebelius, saying that Palin "had a real problem with the truth last night" and adding that "even her hometown newspaper said she stretched the truth." (a reference to Thursday's Anchorage Daily News headline: "Some Of Palin's Remarks Stretch The Truth.")"

The lack of "authenticity" of her speech:

"Whenever I have had to give significant speeches, I've spent a lot of time with the people assisting me in drafting remarks, adding my own voice," Schultz said. "Last night, I only heard Sarah Palin's voice [through] negative partisan attacks, with no substance or vision of where she thinks the country should go."

And the "reformer" label the McCain's camp has been pushing:

"Where is the beef? Where is the evidence? Sarah Palin is not a reformer, she is under investigation in her home state for the abuse of power in trying to get a state trooper fired... If her best example of being a reformer was trying to sell a plane on E-Bay, that is not my definition of reform."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/04/sebelius-accuses-palin-of_n_123883.html

And there is much more in the article. Please go read it. This is the type of pushback we have to see day in and day out. And like it or not, such criticisms will need to come from a woman. Whether it's fair or not, a man making these attacks would be labled a sexist in heart beat.

It's also ESPECIALLY good to see Wasserman out there defending Obama. She was one of the staunchest Hillary supporters during the primaries and her visible presence in the media as an Obama surrogate only solidifies that yes, the party is unified. I look forward to seeing Hillary deliver some knockout blows, and SOON!

Ruth, an observation re: "Pit Bull with Lipstick" (#46)

A genuine dog expert will be able to expand on this point further, but for the moment allow me to note that Palin's description of herself as a "pit bull with lipstick" is quite apt.

See, American Pit Bull Terriers are capable of hurting humans, particularly if they're ill-treated. However, the more likely problem with APBT's is "dog aggression," meaning antipathy towards their own kind. Due to their breeding as fight dogs, they hate their own kind.

And I really can't disagree with Ms. Palin on this point. She's against teaching science and sex ed in school. She's against the right to choose. She used her veto to cut funds to help teenage moms recoup. She's against help for the middle class. She cut special education for disabled as a governor. This isn't an essay, so I won't go further, but the essence is: Palin dislikes women.

She's George Bush in women's clothing

minus

the naive quality that
lends to his verbal foibles
giving us all a chuckle and
exposing a little heart
and a real person
hiding in there
somewhere

Well said John. Re. Olivia generalizations.

Palin has grown popular among the conservative base primarily because she has been able to satisfy the conservative persecution lust that is at the core of the American conservative system of belief. Without an evil, stereotyped, identity group out to attack them, there is nothing holding together the conservative system of belief. So, as First Read notes, in order to raise money from conservatives, Palin has simply invented a generalized Other that is engaged in unfair and immoral attacks her:

"This afternoon, the McCain campaign issued a Palin fundraising solicitation for the joint McCain-Palin-RNC fund. (After this week, McCain no longer can raise money after accepting $84.1 million in public funds, but the Republican National Committee and state parties can.)
"I cannot tell you how special last night was for me and how enthused I am to be John McCain's running mate," Palin said in the email solicitation, adding: "Unfortunately, as you've seen this week, the Obama/Biden Democrats have been vicious in their attacks directed toward me, my family and John McCain. The misinformation and flat-out lies must be corrected."

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/04/1347741.aspx

Unless we're mistaken, neither Obama nor Biden nor the campaign has attacked Palin's family.

It is true that neither Obama nor Biden, nor their surrogates, have attacked Palin's family. That fact, however, is irrelevant to the conservative worldview. That anyone even mentioned Palin's family is enough to indict several groups of people on grounds of immoral attacks against Palin, and indeed against all conservatives in general. Obama, Biden, Democrats, the media, liberals, non-Christirans, homosexuals, immigrants, judges, academia, communists, city dwellers, DFHs--they are all rolled up into a single, dangerous Other identity by Palin and her supporters. If anyone from any of those groups even said anything remotely negative about Palin, then all of them were attacking Palin and her family.

Lacking these attacks, the conservative worldview collapses. Without an immoral Other engaged in hateful attacks against the idealized, hard-working, white Christian, small town American conservative, then there is no good reason why their preferred identity is superior to others, and no good reason why the world is such a dangerous place for that identity. It is only because the idealized conservative identity is being attacked by this evil, immoral other that makes anything in conservatism make any sense at all. The attacks on the Ideal Identity from the Other Identity make the Other Identity evil and the world dangerous for the Ideal Identity.
Now, because a hard-working, small town, white Christian mom is being attacked by this vast, generalized, evil Other, conservatives are really, really excited. It doesn't matter who actually made the attacks, because stereotyping and group blame are the order of the day. Because someone they don't like is somehow attacking Palin, conservatives have their persecution lust, which for so long has gone unsatisfied, scratched, and scratched good. Without moments like these, their entire worldview doesn't make any sense.

Well said John. Re. Olivia generalizations.

Palin has grown popular among the conservative base primarily because she has been able to satisfy the conservative persecution lust that is at the core of the American conservative system of belief. Without an evil, stereotyped, identity group out to attack them, there is nothing holding together the conservative system of belief. So, as First Read notes, in order to raise money from conservatives, Palin has simply invented a generalized Other that is engaged in unfair and immoral attacks her:

"This afternoon, the McCain campaign issued a Palin fundraising solicitation for the joint McCain-Palin-RNC fund. (After this week, McCain no longer can raise money after accepting $84.1 million in public funds, but the Republican National Committee and state parties can.)

"I cannot tell you how special last night was for me and how enthused I am to be John McCain's running mate," Palin said in the email solicitation, adding: "Unfortunately, as you've seen this week, the Obama/Biden Democrats have been vicious in their attacks directed toward me, my family and John McCain. The misinformation and flat-out lies must be corrected.

Unless we're mistaken, neither Obama nor Biden nor the campaign has attacked Palin's family."

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/04/1347741.aspx

It is true that neither Obama nor Biden, nor their surrogates, have attacked Palin's family. That fact, however, is irrelevant to the conservative worldview. That anyone even mentioned Palin's family is enough to indict several groups of people on grounds of immoral attacks against Palin, and indeed against all conservatives in general. Obama, Biden, Democrats, the media, liberals, non-Christirans, homosexuals, immigrants, judges, academia, communists, city dwellers, DFHs--they are all rolled up into a single, dangerous Other identity by Palin and her supporters. If anyone from any of those groups even said anything remotely negative about Palin, then all of them were attacking Palin and her family.

Lacking these attacks, the conservative worldview collapses. Without an immoral Other engaged in hateful attacks against the idealized, hard-working, white Christian, small town American conservative, then there is no good reason why their preferred identity is superior to others, and no good reason why the world is such a dangerous place for that identity. It is only because the idealized conservative identity is being attacked by this evil, immoral other that makes anything in conservatism make any sense at all. The attacks on the Ideal Identity from the Other Identity make the Other Identity evil and the world dangerous for the Ideal Identity.
Now, because a hard-working, small town, white Christian mom is being attacked by this vast, generalized, evil Other, conservatives are really, really excited. It doesn't matter who actually made the attacks, because stereotyping and group blame are the order of the day. Because someone they don't like is somehow attacking Palin, conservatives have their persecution lust, which for so long has gone unsatisfied, scratched, and scratched good. Without moments like these, their entire worldview doesn't make any sense.

H.O.L.Y C.R.A.P

Obama just took it straight to the Republicans.

I knew Obama was smooth, but i never realized just how smooth.

Watch Obama hit back on the "community organizers" crap. He takes it straight to them. Just watch, I couldnt believe it when i heard it.

All you folks like Ruth that thought Obama couldn't hit back, beware, you are about to get your ass disproven like a republican theorem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SwwO00aWqM

This is AWESOME!

I love kicking republicans in the teeth.

A rough transcript below:

Question: How is community organizing relevant for the presidency?

Obama: This is very curious. They havent talked about the fact that I was a civil rights lawyer, or taught constitutional law, my work in the state legislature, or US Senate, they focused on this 3 years where I worked as a community organizer, right out of college. As if I make the leap from 2-3 years out of college to the presidency.

I would argue that doing work in the community, try and create jobs, rejuvenate the communities that have fallen on hard times, bring people together, setup job training programs in areas that have been hard hit where the steel plants have closed. That's relevant only in understanding where im coming from, who I believe in, who I'm fighting for and why I'm in this race.

The question I have for them is
Why would that kind of work be ridiculous?
WHO ARE THEY FIGHTING FOR? (emphasis mine)
What are they advocating for?

Do they think that the lives of those folks struggling each and every day, that working with to try and improve their lives is somehow not relevant to the presidency.

I think that is part of the problem, that they are out of touch and don't get it because they havent spent much time working on behalf of those folks.

Re. Vanessa #69 Re. Ruth #46

I only have one question after McCain's speech tonight: What did John McCain mean when he said Sarah Palin "worked with her nose."

Looks like these guys are serious about playing out this "pit bull with lipstick" image of her.

Ref. #55

McCain Camp Says Palin Won't Talk To Media During Campaign

"According to Nicole Wallace of the McCain campaign, the American people don't care whether Sarah Palin can answer specific questions about foreign and domestic policy. According to Wallace -- in an appearance I did with her this morning on Joe Scarborough's show -- the American people will learn all they need to know (and all they deserve to know) from Palin's scripted speeches and choreographed appearances on the campaign trail and in campaign ads."

http://www.politicalbase.com/profile/Mark%20Nickolas/blog/&blogId=3591

At first we waited for our national papers to denounce the repetitive lies about Plain put forth by the McCain/Bush campaign... that didn't happen!

and the lies persisted...

Then we hoped beyond hope that the TV would denounce the repetitive lies put forth by the McCain/Bush campaign... and that didn't happen!

and the lies persisted...

Then we said she won't be able to repeat these lies when she faces the interviewers, as surely she must, in the remaining months...and that's not going to happen!

and the lies persisted...

Yes, a very powerful speech indeed.

It shows important qualifications for upper echelon Republican operative positions. It also shows her level of judgement and morality.

1. If she gave the speech by Scully without checking it for facts, then it shows her trust for her fellow Republicans and proves she is a team player. Or does it just show that she is more driven than smart?

2. If she did check for facts and gave it anyway, it shows her fellow Republicans the extent of her commitment. Or does it just show the depths of her desire for power?

The ability to lie with a smile is very telling. She has the makings of a first rate tool or stooge for the party. GW was proud, even in his disdain.

Although I think they brought her up to the big leagues a little too soon, perhaps she could be educated and trained to be another Cheney. I would have recommended a few years seasoning in the intelligence community to be sure of her abilities, but she has the temperament and lack of morality and ethics to be a star.

Perhaps this is what they vetted her for.

Oh, Tired - yes! Well done, well-written, well-thought... in reverse order. Cheers to you for an utterly fresh & brilliant comment. Sorry I didn't read it sooner.

love, h

Gotham wrote: "I bet it's amazingly persuasive in the original German."

The hate and anger inherent in such a statement is the mindstuff of war and violence.