December 3, 2008
All Palin, All the Time…
Palin credited for landslide win in Georgia
Chambliss: ‘Dynamite’ Palin turned out vote
Newly reelected Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) credited Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin with firing up his base and allowing him to cruise to a victory over Democrat Jim Martin.
Chambliss heaped praise on Palin, saying she has a “great future” in the GOP.
“I can’t overstate the impact she had down here. All these folks did a great job coming in,” he said, referring to former presidential candidates Mike Huckabee and Rudy Giuliani. “They all allow you [to] add momentum to where we were in the campaign. But when she walks in a room, folks just explode.”
Party leader credits Palin, majority for GOP victory in Georgia
“The margin you see in this race, I think you can attribute to her involvement in the end,” McKoon said.
Biden to Palin: With the race over, ‘no one pays attention to me’
“I might point out, as I told you when we walked in, since the race is over, no one pays attention to me at all … Maybe you will walk outside with me or something later and say hello to me,” Biden said,
Perry, Sanford and Palin fight for Taxpayers at Philly Conference
Republican Govs. Rick Perry of Texas, Mark Sanford of South Carolina and Sarah Palin of Alaska, led a spirited debate about the pitfalls of adding to the $10.7-trillion federal debt. “They warned that the U.S. economy could collapse”, said Governor Paterson
Palin Power: Former Vice Presidential Candidate Attracts Most Attention At The Governors’ Meeting
The most exciting politician at the National Governors Association (NGA) conference was not President-elect Barack Obama, D, nor was it the former movie action star, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, R-Calif. The politician everyone wanted was Alaska’s Gov. Sarah Palin, the former Republican vice presidential candidate.
“I still have great concerns, when much of the economic problem that we are facing today perhaps was caused by too much debt that solving those problems will not come from incurring more debt”, said Palin.
Finally, watch this…
Did Chambliss endorse Palin for 2012?
http://race42008.com/2008/12/03/all-palin-all-the-time-3/trackback/
December 3rd, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Well said Kristopher!!!
December 3rd, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Yay, more anecdotal evidence about crowds and happy politicians!
December 3rd, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Check out that kid at 2:04. “Well, I guess she’s hot!”
Love his shirt, by the way. I have a t-shirt just like it.
December 3rd, 2008 at 1:20 pm
You had better not hope so, Kris. That is a sure fire way for people to become bored.
December 3rd, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Palin’s our Britney Spears. A small but highly dedicated fan base, not much in the way of actual talent, but she has some smart people behind her giving her good material to work with. People love to hear about her, and she attracts big crowds, but it’s only because of what a trainwreck she’s been. (Britney’s having a nice little comeback, though. Will Palin?)
December 3rd, 2008 at 1:52 pm
It’s not often that I get an opportunity to agree with Alex, so I have to pipe in. Clearly, a combination of factors played into the margin of victory for Saxby, not the least of which was the Fair Tax crowd.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Yep, Obama attracted big crowds, hollywood loved him, the media gave him a lot of attention, he had smart people behind him, he was controversal, etc……and Hillary won.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Also, I’m shaking my head in disbelief that Eric Dondero is supporting Sarah Palin. First, let me say that I’d be happy, more than a bit concerned, but happy if Sarah were to become POTUS. But after Eric (and Kristopher L) declared jihad on Huckabee, the fact that Palin is acceptable to him because she’s a ‘libertarian’ makes me laugh. The idea that empty rhetoric (plus looks/gender) can cause that big of a shift in ones perception of two candidates is truly stunning.
Palin is far and away the least qualified and capable of all the potential candidates pictured to the left. As a pro-lifer, the fact (and symbolism) that she didn’t kill Trig in-utero makes her a hero in my book, but the only reason she’s a candidate is her gender.
Again, if we’re going to play affirmative action politics, lets find someone that can bring in a significant % of Hispanic and/or African-American voters to the GOP. Because he’s Catholic, a son of immigrants, and not a fair skinned Caucasian, at least Jindal might pull a few Hispanic voters. Palin makes red states redder, that’s it.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Yep, Obama attracted big crowds, hollywood loved him, the media gave him a lot of attention, he had smart people behind him, he was controversal, etc……and Hillary won.
I’m not getting your point here. Are you being serious, saying that Hillary still won the popular vote? Or being sarcastic, saying that Obama’s big crowds and media attention helped?
Are you suggesting that we try to beat fire with fire, putting up our own airhead empty suit for ‘12? We can’t beat the master at that game, so let’s not try it.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:06 pm
Not surprised…you want to put Gingrich up against Obama.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:12 pm
The fact that so many on this site, which has a reputation for being dominated by Romney supporters, are still flashing the long knives at Palin, tells me they’re not as comfortable about Romney’s “inevitability” as they like to pretend.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Not surprised…you want to put Gingrich up against Obama.
Well, yes. I think that, since Gingrich can (1) unite the entire party, and (2) put up a substantive challenge to Obama, rather than just more contrived culture war bulls#%t, he would be a good nominee.
I’m sick of having candidates that make me cross their fingers every time they open their mouths. Can’t we put up someone who knows what they’re talking about, rather than someone you’d like to go moose-hunting with? Good Lord.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:16 pm
The fact that so many on this site, which has a reputation for being dominated by Romney supporters, are still flashing the long knives at Palin, tells me they’re not as comfortable about Romney’s “inevitability” as they like to pretend.
I ain’t got no ax to grind. My candidate, Sanford, is in the second tier.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Ironically enough, Palin and Sanford has near 100% identicle positions on issues, communicate the same, etc…..LOL!
I love Newt, but anyone who believes that Gingrich would be an effective candidate against Obama is smoking ganga.
Spoken like a true Obama liberal, who hates all the ‘bitter’ sportsmen in America.
Funny enough, it is you and your friends who are playing the culture war, not Palin.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:25 pm
identical*
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Kris,
You are absolutely incredible. You keep pulling the same rhetorical trick time and time again, and your opponents keep falling for it. My hat is off to you, man.
I do have to ask though, what does a liking for Newt Gingrich have to do with not understanding your point in #7? I wouldn’t wish Newt against Obama, and I am afraid I don’t fully understand your point, either. Or has that something to do with the fact that I wear my watch on my right wrist upon occasion?
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:33 pm
marK, not sure if I understood #16? And I am not sure how you being bisexual has anything to do with my comment?
I was being sarcastic, making light of the fact that some fpp’s want a candiate who appeals to political nerds, bloggers and policy wonks, not the public at large.
Some people are in a shell and do not understand the fly-over cities.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:36 pm
candidate*
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Ironically enough, Palin and Sanford has near 100% identicle positions on issues, communicate the same, etc…..LOL!
Not really. Sanford’s more articulate by far, has a record of being a serious capitalist (no, Palin does not), and presumably has some sort of intellectual curiosity about foreign policy. If he proves me wrong, then hey — I’ll switch again.
Spoken like a true Obama liberal, who hates all the ‘bitter’ sportsmen in America. Funny enough, it is you and your friends who are playing the culture war, not Palin.
Do you think that Palin is an intellectual? Are you 100% comfortable that she’ll answer the question well when she opens her mouth?
My stepdad is a sportsman. He hunts for fun. I poke fun at him because I find it so rednecky, but I have the utmost respect for him and his individualist, manly values — in a non-political sense. But he also understands the value of the intellect. He is very well-learned on military matters, applies his common-sense judgment to what he does, runs a popular local business with his family, and can articulate a defense of any conservative value he’s asked to, and even if I disagree with him, I know where he’s coming from.
You’re the one mocking people like my stepdad, when you think that they don’t care about having an intelligent president.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Okay, that explains #10. Now could you please more fully explain the point you were trying to make in #7? I am afraid you lost me.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Some people are in a shell and do not understand the fly-over cities.
You’re a freakin’ Canadian-born Northerner who thinks that people who think that being gay is a choice — SUCH AS SARAH PALIN, WHO THINKS THAT BEING GAY IS A CHOICE AND SUPPORTS THE FEDERAL MARRIAGE AMENDMENT — are secretly gay!
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Is Sarah Palin secretly a lesbian?
She thinks that being gay is a choice and supports the FMA.
According to Kristofer, that makes her gay, too, no?
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:42 pm
I know that there are a lot of people on here that would love to think that Palin is a lesbian, though.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:45 pm
#19, actually you are wrong, try to read up about Sanford.
#1 – the media has been critical of some of his tv appearances and his ‘hick’ accent. I cannot wait to see you defend Sanford from the same attacks that Palin receives? What are you going to say to defend Sanford when he is attacked for his license plate law?
#2 – Sanford shares identical social positions as Palin and both have near identical records as Governor. Do some research!
Was #21 for me or for Heath?
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:48 pm
#20, I explained my point already.
I love Gingrich and I believe he would make a great VP or RNC chair, but he is only attractive to political junkies, not the general public.
The only way to beat Obama in 2012, is to match him in $, motivated voters and volunteers.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:49 pm
#23, have you been drinking?
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:49 pm
#1 – the media has been critical of some of his tv appearances and his ‘hick’ accent. I cannot wait to see you defend Sanford from the same attacks that Palin receives? What are you going to say to defend Sanford when he is attacked for his license plate law?
That I strongly disagree with his behavior leading up to the license plate taking effect, but that it’s only part of the equation in who I choose to support for president.
#2 – Sanford shares identical social positions as Palin and both have near identical records as Governor. Do some research!
Ah, but you see, you’re knocking down straw men again. I don’t oppose Palin because she’s socially conservative. I oppose her because she’s an imbecile.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:50 pm
21 was for you, Kristofer.
And is Sarah Palin gay?
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Okay, I thought you were talking about #10 only. My bad. Sorry.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:52 pm
#28, I am a Yankee, like you.
I have no idea if Palin is gay? But she is not an angry, homophobic preacher like Nicklas Johnson (who was arrested for soliciting male hookers), so I presume she is not.
#29, np.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:54 pm
And what do I care about someone’s accent, by the way?
Would you stop hearing what you want to hear? I oppose Sarah Palin for specific reasons, and they aren’t the ones that you keep ascribing to me (sexism, intellectualism, elitism, social issues)
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:59 pm
#31, really, because I see no difference between Martha and youself. You are the same people with indistinguishable comments (LITERALLY).
All you do is call names, with no substantive/policy argument.
Lets be honest, the only two Governors who have been consistently fighting for fiscal conservatism the last month has been Palin and Sanford.
You probably just oppose her because you are a misogynist.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Oh come, come you guys. Let’s not get so personal, shall we?
What I said in #4 holds. Palin has to walk a fine line between overexposure and underexposure. She has three years to try to maintain this level of excitement. It isn’t going to happen. In 2011 she is just going to be one of the pack. Maybe on the first tier. Maybe on the second tier. But she will be just another face among many.
In 1976, Reagan almost stole the nomination away from Ford. No-one had more excitement around him than Reagan. But by 1979, it had pretty much evaporated and when the 1980 campaign got started, he was just one of many.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:07 pm
You probably just oppose her because you are a misogynist.
You’re right! The jig is up! (That’s why I’m gay, too: because I hate women.)
Was Palin fighting for fiscal conservatism in her career when she supported a tax increase to build a sports arena in Wasilla that still hasn’t been paid for to this very day?
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Well, you certainly do not ‘like’ women, or you would be straight!
#33, you were getting personal a couple of posts ago.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Poll: Clinton, Palin open doors for women
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/12/03/Poll_Clinton_Palin_open_doors_for_women/UPI-12621228334808/
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:16 pm
HA! HA!
Kris,
Step back a minute and take a close look at your #32. Pretend that you didn’t write it.
Don’t you find it deliciously ironic that a post accusing someone of using nothing but insults and insustantive arguments is itself so full of insults and insustantive arguments?
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Palin, Clinton treated unfairly, poll says
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/12/palin_clinton_treated_unfairly.html
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:18 pm
marK #33: Yes, skins get mighty thin quickly in debates about Palin.
True. But by showing herself to be a team player as she has done by explicit invitation in GA, she’s also gaining traction within the party’s establishment. It remains to be seen how well she keeps this up, and whether she can avoid inserting herself into the conversation uninvited.
She’s also got the important task of performing well in AK in the meantime.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:18 pm
#37, your comment is discombobulated. I do not understand?
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:21 pm
“All you do is call names, with no substantive/policy argument…You probably just oppose her because you are a misogynist.”
- Kristofer Lorelli
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Misogyny is hatred (or contempt) of women.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:26 pm
I wonder if you might honestly misunderstand what misogyny is..?
Misogyny is hatred of or contempt for women because they are women. If you dislike a particular woman, it doesn’t make you misogynistic any more than my loathing of Romney makes me misandric.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Kris.#35“you were getting personal a couple of posts ago.”
If pointing out your rhetorical tricks is getting personal, then guilty as charged. You are certainly more than welcome to point out any and all tricks I use in my posts. Chances are I will likely laugh, state “you caught me”, and move on.
By the way, the trick I just used now is found in the Book of Proverbs “Agree with thine enemy quickly…” Works every time.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:28 pm
I guess I became misogynistic sometime within the past three months, because I was actually quite the Palin booster before I found out that she didn’t have any brains in her head.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:28 pm
Kristopher,
I have a real problem with your work. I have no problem with you liking Palin, she has some strengths to her credit, but you simply have a problem with answering direct questions.
Alex is right, you fight a fair point such as Palin’s intellectual capacity and curiosity with lines calling Alex a “true Obama liberal.” You then turn around and say he is without substance and only resorts to name calling, also resorting to the intellectual attack of “You probably just oppose her because you are a misogynist.”
I think that the final straw was even when he gave you substance of the sports arena, you ignored it and make a gay crack. The pity is that you could be a fine front page commentator, but you lose all credibility when you simply dismiss what you do not like. No one minds that you like Palin, many do, but I, like many others who have come to this site for a long time, depend on the front page as a place for open intellectual curiosity and great insights (such as Sean Oxendine). Please go back to that or leave the front page.
James
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:28 pm
44 – Dale Carnegie’s How to Win Friends and Influence People is great stuff, too. (Just gotta remember it more often…)
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:29 pm
#43,
you are male, how could you be misandric?
Well, if all you can do is called her dumb and compare her to Miss. Spears, then I would suspect you are misogynistic, although I am not 100% sure, yet.
go back and read you comments on Palin, nearly identical to Martha, as if you were the same person, with twi different user names.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:30 pm
MarkG.#39
Spot on. She is certainly being a team player. AND she has to perform well in Alaska now that the eyes of the media are upon her. That will be tough. Let’s see how she does.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:30 pm
46, I’ll ask it again for him:
Was Palin fighting for fiscal conservatism in her career when she supported a tax increase to build a sports arena in Wasilla that still hasn’t been paid for to this very day?
Don’t tell me how it was approved by referendum. I know that. But that’s not my question. Why did Palin support it?
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Kristopher,
On behalf of those who read this site, please just respond once to his questions with facts, not more misleading rhetoric. I am not taking Alex’s side on everything, he has made mistakes and occasionally overreaches, but he is right here on this comment thread.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:32 pm
48 – What evidence do you have that I “hate or hold contempt for” women? Does thinking Palin a birdbrain make one a woman-hater? Did I become a misogynist sometime in the past three months?
I do compare her to Britney Spears (whom I think makes lovely pop music), and I think that the comparison is quite amusing. Big crowds, lots of Google hits, a small but dedicated fanbase, lots of media coverage, draws record TV ratings, and yet a massive trainwreck.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:34 pm
#46 James,
Please start a petition to have me removed from fpp status. You can even have a free vote for all R42012 visitors, which I would respect, like they did in Wasilla, when the citizens (not mayor Palin) voted for the arena funding.
(btw, the ‘gay’ comment was made in #34, which I responded to).
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Alex,
You need to stop giving into this, you have shown flashes of intellectual curiosity and good writing, and every time you get involved in this petty fights, it cheapens your other arguments. Pick your battles better, you don’t need to defend every ridiculous charge.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:36 pm
#52, yep, that is sexist.
#51, ask all your questions, I answer them without pointing out the foolishness of them.
Go ahead…
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Kristopher,
I think you add plenty here, I am saying I just want you to defend your arguments on the comments intellectually.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:38 pm
You need to stop giving into this, you have shown flashes of intellectual curiosity and good writing, and every time you get involved in this petty fights, it cheapens your other arguments. Pick your battles better, you don’t need to defend every ridiculous charge.
Perhaps, but it amuses me, which is more important than proving something to people.
#52, yep, that is sexist.
Why?
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Me in 50:
Was Palin fighting for fiscal conservatism in her career when she supported a tax increase to build a sports arena in Wasilla that still hasn’t been paid for to this very day? Don’t tell me how it was approved by referendum. I know that. But that’s not my question. Why did Palin support it?
Kristofer in 53:
Please start a petition to have me removed from fpp status. You can even have a free vote for all R42012 visitors, which I would respect, like they did in Wasilla, when the citizens (not mayor Palin) voted for the arena funding.
…
You have no shame!
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Those of you who are trying to elevate this loon to queen of the GOP are setting the party up for disaster.
NO WAY does Palin beat Obama. What does she have to run on? “I’m more attractive”? “I attract bigger crowds”? Or how about “The media pays more attention to me”?
Substance. zero.
Policy knowledge. zero.
appeal to independents. zero.
Serious economic experience. zero.
Military experience. zero.
experience in a mid to high-level position? two years as Gov. of the smallest state in the country.
And you really want to put this woman in charge of the free world? You want to give her control of the GOP? You want to make her the face of the party for the next 12 years?
No thanks. Send Caribeau lady back to AK, let her work up an actual resume, school up on policy knowledge, and gain some experience, and maybe, in eight or twelve years, come back as a serious politician.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:44 pm
SEXIST ^
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:45 pm
#56, James I have been all through this will Alex on this site and offline for months, what else can I say, all he focuses on is an arena the public voted on and the fact that he believes Bush is a genius and Palin is a “dumb woman”.
James, I never call out another fpp on my front page posts, I never use the name of a guest in a negative connotation on my fpp’s.
I have spent months in my fpp’s focusing on Palin’s achievments and policy positions as Governor.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:50 pm
#59 MatthewK, does Romney have the same views on women as you and Alex do?
Does your mother know you talk like that?
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:52 pm
“SEXIST”
call it what you want…Palin would make a terrible nominee, and anything that I can do to prevent her from getting to that position, I’m going to do it.
I’ve got no problem with a woman nominee – I have a huge problem with an incompetent nominee who is more cut out for a nightly comedy show than for the oval office.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:53 pm
“#56, James I have been all through this will Alex on this site and offline for months, what else can I say, all he focuses on is an arena the public voted on and the fact that he believes Bush is a genius and Palin is a “dumb woman”.”
I don’t think he’s a genius. I think he’s got moral clarity in the fight against jihadism. Palin doesn’t know the first thing about the war.
My mom is a sexist, too, I guess.
James, I never call out another fpp on my front page posts, I never use the name of a guest in a negative connotation on my fpp’s.
Yes, you wait until page 2 to call me a woman-hater.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:53 pm
call it what you want…Palin would make a terrible nominee, and anything that I can do to prevent her from getting to that position, I’m going to do it. I’ve got no problem with a woman nominee – I have a huge problem with an incompetent nominee who is more cut out for a nightly comedy show than for the oval office.
NO, YOU HATE WOMEN
SO DO I
SO DOES MY MOTHER
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:53 pm
So if you felt the same way about a latino or black candidate, you would, “do anything to prevent them”, like burn a cross on their lawn?
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:54 pm
It is one thing not to have Mrs. Palin as not your favorite candidate. It is quite another to call her a loon a give her zeros. This kind of talk just strengthens Palinism.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:55 pm
certainly, but never on a fpp, that is improper.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:56 pm
I wonder if Mrs. Palin’s son would agree that his mother knows nothing about the War!
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:59 pm
So if you felt the same way about a latino or black candidate, you would, “do anything to prevent them”, like burn a cross on their lawn?
ARE YOU INSANE???
I wonder if Mrs. Palin’s son would agree that his mother knows nothing about the War!
That makes no sense whatsoever. He’s a soldier. That’s his job. It doesn’t give Palin any more insight into the war. Just an emotional connection to it. If I end up being a political commentator, it doesn’t make my mother a foreign policy expert.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Now we have it, folks: if you think Palin is dumb, you may as well be burning a cross on the lawn of a black man.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:59 pm
I agree #69, you’d think she would take an interest when he first-born is in combat.
Of course, Alex is naive, as Bush just admitted he was naive about war and foreign policy, but Alex must have missed that on the news wire yesterday.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:01 pm
I agree #69, you’d think she would take an interest when he first-born is in combat.
I’d have thought that, too, but apparently not. I’d have also thought that she’d take an interest in it when, you know, she’s a sitting governor, but I guess not.
Of course, Alex is naive, as Bush just admitted he was naive about war and foreign policy, but Alex must have missed that on the news wire yesterday.
What are you going on about this time? You’re a neo-con, too; you support the Iraq War and all of that!
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:02 pm
#71, you are playing with words, MatthewK just admitted that he was going to do “anything”to stop a candidate he does not support, like sexism (notice he did not refute the charge), so I asked if we would do the same with a visible minority candidate?
Fair question.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:03 pm
By the way, circa 2000, I’d likely have been an Independent and probably would have supported Gore-Lieberman. Bush-Cheney was a populist, non-interventionist team. 9/11 changed the political landscape forever, and I find myself with the GOP.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:04 pm
#71, you are playing with words, MatthewK just admitted that he was going to do “anything”to stop a candidate he does not support, like sexism (notice he did not refute the charge), so I asked if we would do the same with a visible minority candidate?
He wants to stop her because he thinks she’s stupid, not because she’s a woman.
And we just did do the same with a visible minority candidate. Hello? Look who we just opposed?
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Alex, it was major news…Bush admitted he was naive about war and foreign policy.
Palin supports achieving victory in Iraq, in Afghanistant and the global war on terror.
That is enough for me. At least she is not advocating timetables like Mitt.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Kristofer,
I like Palin as much as the next guy, but you are quite the demagogue. It’s possible to think Palin is dumb (which I don’t) without being a sexist. I happen to think most of the “Palin is dumb” stuff is cultural elitism as opposed to sexism, but their are certainly, who feel that way, who are neither culturally elitist nor sexist. If you think they’re wrong, you should argue them on the merits. Or if you think they’re sexist, you should point out instances in which they’ve treated similarly situated males more kindly. It’s inane to simply respond to every Palin criticism with “you’re a sexist”. It does neither you nor her any good at all.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:10 pm
THIS kind of infighting is why Reps have lost big two elections in a row. If we don’t do something about it, we’ll have 3, then 4, then on and on. It’s ridiculous (and comes from all sides of the issue)!
Alex, you should appreciate the difference between stupidity and ignorance. I will grant that Gov Palin is very ignorant of what a Pres needs to know to be effective, but you consistently refer to her as being stupid. Intellectually curious? Apparently not nearly enough about important nat’l issues up until it was too late to be meaningful for ‘08.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:10 pm
76 – Yes, although act-blog/MatthewK was banned on this site, so I am not sure if his bigotry extends to black people, or just women. That is why I ask, when he made his ‘at all costs’ statement.
As well, Bush is still not a neo-con. If he was, he would have invaded Lybia and Syria, not Iraq. At least we had confirmed evidence that those nations supported terrorism.
It also would have been much easier to oppose Saddam if we had control over Syria.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:12 pm
I guess it’s “culturally elitist” to support smart people.
I happen to respect rural types enough to think that they might actually care about having someone with an IQ above that of a toaster?
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:13 pm
#78, Matt E. Miller,
Read post #59 and please tell me how that was not sexist?
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:17 pm
I think my credentials as a Romney supporter are pretty well established by now, but I just don’t get this anti-Palin mania on the part of some of you guys. Study her record in Alaska, where she has a solid record of cutting back on taxes and corruption. She has eliminated programs and agencies while fighting for the people. How many governors would send $1200 checks to every constituent? I’ll fight for Mitt, but if he loses the nomination to Palin, I’ll be a lot happier than I was when he lost the nomination to McCain.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Alex,
No, it’s culturally elitist to infer that ignorance of specific subject areas, which she’d never dealt with before, indicates “stupidity”. I’d bet every Rubel in Russia that had Mitt Romney given two horrific interviews at the beginning of his campaign, demonstrating a lack of policy knowledge or fuzziness on foreign affairs, you wouldn’t have dared to call him “stupid” or suggest that he had an “IQ lower then a toaster”. You’d have called him a charlattan, just because, but that Harvard MBA, blue-blood, and good blue-state, upbringing is protection against actual stupidity. Everyone knows that.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Oh and rural “types”? Quite so, quite so.
Kristofer,
That post looks more like cultural elitism. Notice the sneering way in which he calls her “Caribou lady” as though Caribou was a sort of garish thing you only found in National Geographic magazines depicting aboriginals.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Kris.#82.
Okay, let’s try an experiment. Here is Post #59 gender switched:
I am afraid I fail to see anything particularly sexist about it. The part about being attractive? Was it sexist when Romney had the same thing said about him?
Would you care to enlighten us further on it?
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:30 pm
No, it’s culturally elitist to infer that ignorance of specific subject areas, which she’d never dealt with before, indicates “stupidity”. I’d bet every Rubel in Russia that had Mitt Romney given two horrific interviews at the beginning of his campaign, demonstrating a lack of policy knowledge or fuzziness on foreign affairs, you wouldn’t have dared to call him “stupid” or suggest that he had an “IQ lower then a toaster”. You’d have called him a charlattan, just because, but that Harvard MBA, blue-blood, and good blue-state, upbringing is protection against actual stupidity. Everyone knows that.
Romney also turned the Olympics around and had been CEO of a company.
Palin’s problem is that she’s like, never actually done anything.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:30 pm
Now I do admit that mockingly calling Sarah Palin “Caribeau lady” is perhaps elitist, but certainly not sexist.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:31 pm
I have a lot of respect for you for using that term.
As for “Caribou lady” I would agree with you, but act-blog is a working class Catholic, so it makes no sense?
Of course, if act and Knepper have their way, the working class will be voting Democratic is the same numbers they did before the 70’s, then we will be in permenent minority status.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:33 pm
As well, Bush is still not a neo-con. If he was, he would have invaded Lybia and Syria, not Iraq. At least we had confirmed evidence that those nations supported terrorism.
Iraq was a necessary first target. Saddam was legions more repressive and tyrannical than the Assad dynasty has been, first of all. But the key problem is that Saddam had shown a tendency to invade neighboring states (Iran and Kuwait in just one decade!), so he was a powder keg and a cauldron of volatility that needed to be eliminated before other states could be dealt with first. If we’d invaded Syria, he’d have probably just marched right on in.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Alex,
“Palin’s problem is that she’s like, never actually done anything.”
I’d disagree, but it’s a fair enough point. Argue on those grounds then. But, there’s no logical connection between “she doesn’t have impressive accomplishments and was ignorant of subject material outside of her ordinary experience” and “she’s dumb and has an IQ lower then a toaster”. The conclusion is a non-sequitur springing from, who knows where, but certainly not from reasoned and thoughtful deliberation.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:36 pm
Also, Syria’s got more ethnic divisions than Iraq and the same ethnic problems (ruled by a representative of a tiny minority, in this case, the Alawites, which Assad is a member of), so it’s not as if any of that would have been changed.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:36 pm
#87, sure let us vote based on length of resume. Of course, when we nominate the most experienced candidate, WE ALWAYS LOSE
#86,
Knepper anti-LDS campaign in the spring and summer was his angle to attack Mitt.
markK, you know what they said about Reagan in 76 and 80.
Substance. zero.
Policy knowledge. zero.
appeal to independents. zero.
Serious economic experience. zero.
Military experience. zero.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:37 pm
#90,
You might want to research your statement. Syria invaded Lebanon and controlled it for years, has sponsored terrorism and funded attacks on Israel.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Also, Saddam did support terrorism. He gave safe harbor to terrorists, including the bombmaker in the ‘93 WTC bombing, and paid off Palestinian suicide bombers’ families. Iraqi intelligence agents met with al-Qaeda members on multiple occasions, according to intelligence documents recovered post-war.
I’d disagree, but it’s a fair enough point. Argue on those grounds then. But, there’s no logical connection between “she doesn’t have impressive accomplishments and was ignorant of subject material outside of her ordinary experience” and “she’s dumb and has an IQ lower then a toaster”. The conclusion is a non-sequitur springing from, who knows where, but certainly not from reasoned and thoughtful deliberation.
I’m just making the general point that she’s an ignoramous. I suppose that saying that she’s stupid and that she’s ignorant are two different things, yes, but it’s the same general idea. She’s just not all ‘there’ on the intellectualism front.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:39 pm
Alex is setting himself up to vote for Obama in 2012. It is clear.
Expect Deja vu on this site.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:40 pm
You might want to research your statement. Syria invaded Lebanon and controlled it for years, has sponsored terrorism and funded attacks on Israel.
I’m aware of this, but the attacks on Israel were always with a large coalition (Egypt, Jordan, etc), and the occupation of Lebanon was always very underhanded, rather than some full-scale war of conquest. The Iran-Iraq War and the annexation of Kuwait were very different types of wars. Syria would have never had the balls to start lobbing resources into Iraq, as we’ve seen. Plus, we thought that Iraq had WMD, so with that in mind, why would we have gone into Syria, given Saddam’s nutty propensity to fuel instability?
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:41 pm
Alex is setting himself up to vote for Obama in 2012. It is clear.
I’ll certainly consider it if he governs competently. I’m in politics because I support certain ideas, not to be a member of some sports team.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Syria has 30,000 troops in lebanon, controlled the lebanese military, police, politicians and civil service, as well as continually killed off opposition and forced Christians out of the country.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Of course you will.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Kris.#93
Yes, I definitely remember what they said about Reagan back then. I also happen to disagree with nearly everything IlliniDude said in his checklist in #59. However, you stated in #82 that the post was sexist. I do not see it. Elitist, perhaps. Ignorant, maybe. Flat out wrong, most probably. But I still don’t see any sexism. Even after swapping all gender terms to male, I cannot see it. So I am asking, where is the sexism?
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:47 pm
had* not has (98)
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Syria has 30,000 troops in lebanon, controlled the lebanese military, police, politicians and civil service, as well as continually killed off opposition and forced Christians out of the country.
But it wasn’t some full-out invasion, media-grabbing crap. The difference was in tactics. Assad whined about the US but has done nothing more than give his tacit approval of jihadists going into Iraq, while I do believe that Saddam would have taken serious action against the US if it were to have gone into Syria.
I mean, we have evidence on one side: Syria’s regime really did not do anything (official) in Iraq. It’s not done a lot of things that would have helped us, but that’s to be expected.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:48 pm
Of course you will.
You won’t?
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:48 pm
Alex,
Not really. If we were dealing with Linear Algebra, I’m sure I’d feel justified in calling you ignorant, but it’s not as though I could have a reasonable expectation that you’d be knowledgeable there. Two years ago, Sarah Palin was an on-again off-again fisherwoman. Her only experience, above the local level, was in dealing with oil and natural gas issues. When she became governor, she became governor of a state with a unique economy, so unique that groups like CATO don’t even feel any judgment can be made about a Governor’s performance there, that essentially only relate tangentially to the types of things with which federal officials deal. These are all, perhaps, good reasons why she shouldn’t have been selected by McCain, but they say nothing meaningful about her lack of knowledge about issues Presidents face. Perhaps you believe that every human being should, just casually, pick up detailed knowledge about federal issues, but that expectation is both unreasonable and bizarre.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:50 pm
105 – If it’s unreasonable and bizarre to expect her to casually pick up detailed knowledge on federal issues, then what the hell is she doing thinking of running for president?
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:50 pm
#101, either either way, is it any less wrong?
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Alex,
I wouldn’t consider voting for Obama, because I couldn’t in good conscience vote for someone with his abortion position (I draw the line at partial birth), but I could certainly see myself “approving” of him. But, it’s hard to understand what would prevent someone like Kristofer from voting for Obama if, against all odds, he revives the economy, keeps us safe, revitalizes the military, etc.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:53 pm
#104, nope.
#106, uhm, so in the last two weeks, what has she said about foreign policy that you have disagreed with????????????
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:58 pm
#106, uhm, so in the last two weeks, what has she said about foreign policy that you have disagreed with????????????
Nothing. But I know that she only is echoing what her handlers are giving her. There’s literally nothing that she’s ever said beforehand that gives me the impression that she knows anything about foreign policy.
I wouldn’t consider voting for Obama, because I couldn’t in good conscience vote for someone with his abortion position (I draw the line at partial birth), but I could certainly see myself “approving” of him. But, it’s hard to understand what would prevent someone like Kristofer from voting for Obama if, against all odds, he revives the economy, keeps us safe, revitalizes the military, etc.
If Obama is serious about this DLC approach that he seems to be taking with his appointments, I could vote for him. Hillary at State and Richardson at Commerce? Not too shabby. Richardson at State and Clinton at Commerce would horrify me, but, well, that’s not what happened. But I’m not going to judge him before he doesn’t even implement a policy, which Kristofer’s doing.
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:58 pm
Where to start…
No, I didn’t refute the sexist remark because it is an absurd claim. Exactly what did I say that was sexist? That she was attractive? Sorry, but if Palin supporters are going to push that as a reason to support her – which at least one on this site does – then its fair game. That I called her “caribou lady”? That – like it or not – is her reputation with much of the American public, a showgirl-type figure without experience or policy knowledge, and, lets face it, it isn’t inaccurate.
—
“76 – Yes, although act-blog/MatthewK was banned on this site, so I am not sure…”
Then I suggest you do a little research before you start talking out of your ass like that. I was banned by Kavon – as was Knepper – after Palin was announced because I criticized the ticket, said that I couldn’t support her, and made several predictions about the disasters that I believed Palin would bring. Surprisingly enough, almost all of them turned out to be accurate.
—
“markK, you know what they said about Reagan in 76 and 80.
Substance. zero.
Policy knowledge. zero.
appeal to independents. zero.
Serious economic experience. zero.
Military experience. zero.”
Yep, many people did say those things – and you know what? Rather than whine about how he was being picked on, Reagan proved the critics wrong by accumulating a resume, displaying serious policy knowledge, appealing to independents, etc. Palin has had her chance, and in the three months that she was in the spotlight (and, to a lesser degree, since then), she has reinforced – not disproven – the criticisms.
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Palin mocks anyone who opposes her; Reagan used good humor and good arguments to win them over. Reagan expanded the GOP; Palin wants to make it a secret club.
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:00 pm
#110 said,
That was the most insane argument against her foreign policy views I have ever seen.
Just answer the question, now that she is not a Vp surrogate, what has she said about spending, taxation, foreign policy, energy policy, etc….that you have disagreed with?
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Alex,
She’s thinking of running for President in 2012, and her attempt to pick up knowledge will not, presumably, be casual. I guess I differ from you in the sense that I don’t place much importance in the Vice President, since I feel that, if the worst strikes, someone in that position can be appraised of the raw facts of policies/arenas relatively quickly. I would not have supported Palin for President in 2008. The distinction I make is a probability distinction: there was a relatively low probability that a Vice President, even with a President McCain’s age, will become President in so short an amount of time that she can’t be appraised of the bare facts of salient issues and that, in this unlikely event, something critical will arise immediately. It’s such an unlikely event that I simply discounted it.
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:02 pm
An said,
What Republicans has she mocked??? Please give examples?
MatthewK, you are yesterdays news.
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:04 pm
An said,
Please provides examples of statements that Palin has made to this effect???
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:04 pm
Just answer the question, now that she is not a Vp surrogate, what has she said about spending, taxation, foreign policy, energy policy, etc….that you have disagreed with?
Nothing.
My support for someone relies on more than them just spouting off the right crap. Otherwise I’d support Romney.
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Alex, you are becoming predicable and boring.
Everything I see on MSNBC regarding Palin, you repeat the next day on this blog.
You were original and substantive (most of the time) in your arguments against Romney.
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:10 pm
Everything I see on MSNBC regarding Palin, you repeat the next day on this blog.
You’re like a caricature of yourself, really. This is what I caricature you with.
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:11 pm
#106
Alex, she agreed to run because Sen McCain asked her to run with him, and she felt the honor was too great to refuse. Before that, she very likely had NO expectation of ever running. Ergo, she was completely ignorant of what she needed to know to be Pres, but not necessarily stupid. As for the gaffes, I have no idea how I’d react being put in her position (one she accepted, true, but that doesn’t change the position, just the blame).
I know you’re asking about running for Pres, but she hasn’t declared yet. Assuming she wants to (not unreasonable), maybe her experiences on the trail won her over to the idea of running. It would be dumb of her at that point to NOT start brushing up and developing a coherent message. Until then, I think it’s unfair, unseemly, and counterproductive to sling personal insults at ANY of the candidates.
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:14 pm
I also differ from you in the sense that I don’t think many politicians know anything beyond surface facts, and sometimes not even that. Joe Biden had been a Senator for 36 frickin years and he thought Roosevelt was President in 1929. As you read history, you’re just shocked by how little politicians know about critical political and historical issues, beyond their narrow range of interest. The average Senator knows more about federal issues then Palin, because they deal with the issues daily, but while her knowledge is a half-inch deep, there’s is maybe two inches deep. Lucky, for them most interviews and debates occur at the two inch level. And it’ll take you, if you’re serious about it and can devote a fair amount of time, a year or less to reach that level. Sure, it takes a lifetime to become a Churchill, but given that just about everyone perpetually exists at a far lower level, it’s clear to me that sheer depth of knowledge isn’t necessary to do the job competently.
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:21 pm
Your word of the month, repeated dozens of times (you sexist). LOL!
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:22 pm
#121 is correct. Politicians only know briefing papers. They use surface points from each issue and their job is to expand the policy positions and information in to a 5 minute answer.
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:28 pm
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/election/568
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:46 pm
It wasn’t the McCain campaign that made her inexperienced, and it certainly wasn’t the McCain campaign that made her make numerous slip-ups in public, fail to appear well-versed on policy issues, etc.
December 3rd, 2008 at 6:13 pm
There is no denying that Sarah Palin as she is now has definite appeal to a fair portion of the populace. There is also no denying that Sarah Palin as she is now has definite problems with a fair portion of the populace. You cannot place all the credit nor all the blame upon McCain’s staff. It wasn’t the staff giving all those rambling, bordering upon incoherent answers to off-the-cuff questions. It was Sarah front and center.
Did she help in Georgia yesterday? Unquestionably. Was she worth 10 percentage points? Very questionably. Did she put Chambliss over the top? Not likely.
Give her three years until 2011, and we will see how much power Sarah continues to have.
December 3rd, 2008 at 8:44 pm
# 75 Hmmm…Imaginary Bush-Cheney 2000 was my favorite. Non-interventionist, compassionate conservatism, bi-partisanship: it was glorious
# 95 I see your point. I know Hussein played some role in terrorist activities, but there were other states which had a much greater involvement in financing terrorism, etc. We aren’t fighting them in part because the cost-benefit would be way out of proportion and because we have other ties and relationships with them. Personally, I don’t think Iraq was benign. I just think (and thought) the evidence of a WMD threat was way too thin to prompt an invasion. It wasn’t worth the cost to me.
At any rate, we used to think our relationship with Iraq was worth too much to endanger in any way (and the enemy of our enemy, etc). When do friends become enemies and when do the resources we’ve provided start being used to attack us? Personally, I’d prefer a cautious realism to these wild swings.
Also: ignorant? stupid? What does it matter if the result is the same?
Ok, I know I’m commenting when this conservation is pretty much over; man, I hate it when that happens!
December 3rd, 2008 at 11:24 pm
I love the stones on this woman. She just lost an election and is out there fearlessly campaigning. This is the kind of energy our party has been missing.
Editors, you need to clamp down on Mr. Knepper. His views on Palin are known, we don’t need this site inundated with it every time Palin is mentioned.
December 3rd, 2008 at 11:55 pm
Palin and her supporters are all the better for the criticism – if you really can’t stand the heat from your own side, how will you ever take it from the other? This is still very far out to see what ultimately will happen, but I am certain that whatever the outcome, Palin comes out all the stronger from the scrutiny – don’t fret it, if unbased it won’t hold over, and if legitimate, then by all rights it ought to be taken seriously. I think in all of it there has been a good deal of both.
What I do like very much about Sarah Palin, something I originally did not appreciate so much, is her charisma and energy. That she does share with Reagan, perhaps better than any major candidate since the Gipper himself. What she needs to dispel is the concept of her as a culture warrior, divider, ideologue. Had Obama come onto the national stage, with his considerable energy, posing as a new Jesse Jackson he wouldn’t have gotten so far. Obama demonstrated the ability to be a unifying and capable national leader, if not one we necessarily agree with on everything. That is what Sarah needs to do – turn that charisma into the power to build the nation, not just assemble the base. She doesn’t need to be a policy wonk, but she does need show Americans more skeptical of her that she is in fact on their same page. An olive branch from the tribuness of the plebs is in order.
December 4th, 2008 at 12:10 am
128 – I don’t think anyone needs to be clamped down on. I don’t think Graham should be censored from his Huckabee cheerleading even though I do not agree with it, and I don’t think Alex should be silenced because he interrupts someone’s “Crush on Obama” moment with Sarah Palin, or even because he hates my current preferred candidate Romney. I like reading the different perspectives. Helps keep me informed to consider all sides.
December 4th, 2008 at 5:43 am
FFS maybe just maybe Chambliss won because he was the better candidate and because 100’s of 1000’s of blacks had less incentive to turn out to vote!
It’s not rocket-science. To ascribe this win to Palin (or Romney, Huck, etc) is absurd.
This whole every single thing that happens in the world has to be considered in the chism of Mitt v Sarah is too much 4 years out!
I need a break! Hopefully when I retrn Kris would have resigned or been sacked but I fear he has no shame!
Good bye and merry Xmas y’all.
December 4th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
It’s not the only race she can be accredited with winning. Before Palin showed up on the scene, congressman Dave Reichert (R – Seattle’s Eastside) was a gonner. After Palin showed up he won by twice the margin of 2006 despite a opponent nearly three times as well funded.
December 4th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Now Jeremy. Let’s not let your enthusiasm carry you away. I happen to live in WA-08. I lived through the Reichert/Burner election. To say that Reichert was a goner before Sarah showed up is a bit of a stretch. And that HUGE new margin? Reichert won with 51% in 2006. He won with 52% this year.