Sep
12

Stating the obvious




Posted at 17:42 by Brad

Teh Shakes watches Sarah Palin and gets teh shakes:

Terrifying

posted by Melissa McEwan

[...]

When Nightline aired that section this evening, the camera was a tight shot on her face when she says, pitifully, “In what respect, Charlie?” after he asks her if she agrees with the Bush Doctrine, and her expression was just frantic. Total deer in the headlights.

This is not a person who’s remotely prepared to lead this country.

I can’t believe that serious Republican people are not just as scared and horrified watching that video as I am. I can’t believe that partisanship truly trumps all sense and rationality. She has no idea what the fuck she’s doing.

I’m not saying that as a progressive. I’m not saying that as a (historically always) Democratic voter. I’m not saying that because I looked at her résumé and decided it was too thin and automatically assumed she was unqualified. I’m not saying it because she’s a woman, or a Republican, or a conservative.

I’m saying it because it is now patently obvious.

And quite frankly, Republicans, ignoring it just because she’s on your team is not just politics as usual; it’s dangerous and it’s irresponsible.

John McCain has asked you to put your trust in a person who is manifestly unfit for the presidency. Doesn’t that bother you? Doesn’t it piss you off? Doesn’t it scare you?

Because it fucking should.

It should, but it don’t. Oh sure, some of the more literate right-wingers have expressed reservations about Sarah Palin’s qualifications, but most of them see her total lack of knowledge about world affairs to be a badge of honor. Thinking about stuff? Weighing costs and benefits? Pffft, that’s what liberals have done for years and look where it’s gotten us! Think about all the reckless wars we could’ve waged if liberals hadn’t gotten in the way! And they have the nerve to teach our kids that we evolved from apes!!!

The GOP has become one giant St00p1d Machine. They revel in being ignorant about everything, and anyone who actually has knowledge about a given topic is treated at best as suspect. The fact that Sarah Palin has, at least for the moment, been a boon to McCain’s campaign is the dark reflection of a nation that has lost its ability to think. American popular culture has done to us in 50 years what centuries of drinking lead-poisoned water did to the Romans. If you ever wanted evidence that the United States is in its official decline period, Sarah Palin is it.


UPDATE: Totally pwn3d:

The one thing I’ll say, though, is that while Ari is aggressively and smartly playing defense here, he’s still playing defense. Dems need to go more on offense.

294 Comments »

  1. Me said,

    September 12, 2008 at 17:44

    I’ll state it right up front: if Barack Obama looked that pitiful, ill-prepared and out of his depth in any interview, I could not in good conscience vote for him.

  2. Brad said,

    September 12, 2008 at 17:46

    I’ll state it right up front: if Barack Obama looked that pitiful, ill-prepared and out of his depth in any interview, I could not in good conscience vote for him.

    No, but that’s because you value intelligence. The GOP just doesn’t.

  3. AJB said,

    September 12, 2008 at 17:48

    OT, but Michelle Malkin is insane:

    http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/11/ground-zero-etiquette-a-tale-of-two-roses/

    Just a friendly reminder.

  4. the_millionaire_lebowski said,

    September 12, 2008 at 17:50

    How can we help?

    We can have a Reagan-in-frilly-dresses photoshop contest. Please, please, please?

  5. Legalize said,

    September 12, 2008 at 17:51

    I encountered a fellow on a winger blog who proudly proclaimed that Palin did a very good job. Who cares if she didn’t understand the Bush doctrine. Neither did he!!

    Ignorance as a virtue, my friends. It’s truly horrifying that this person could be shaping policy. With Cheney, a pretty experienced and well-travelled politician, setting the new standard for VPs, how can this lightweight be trusted with ANYTHING, especially considering her belief that our military struggles are religiously driven.

  6. El Cid said,

    September 12, 2008 at 17:51

    Another example in the “Civil engineers & architects are fags; if you gonna build a bridge then allsya needsta do is getcha a bunch of guys with hammers and sh*t, you don’t need no plans and gay sh*t” approach to Republican hero-making.

  7. D.N. Nation said,

    September 12, 2008 at 17:53

    I’ll state it right up front: if Barack Obama looked that pitiful, ill-prepared and out of his depth in any interview, I could not in good conscience vote for him.

    This. In fact, I was a HillRod supporter throughout 2007 because I thought Obama would have this sort of performance in him once he got away from the fancy-schmansy Bono routine. Then I got to know him a little more and realized he was far better than that, so I became a fan.

    You simply can’t spin this interview. She sucked. And not in the Dubya way, either…he gets into trouble because of his outrageous arrogance, because he has trouble speaking on the fly, and because of his still-crippling verbal ticks. She sucked because it was plainly obvious she didn’t know anything about anything.

  8. D.N. Nation said,

    September 12, 2008 at 17:55

    Gibson: What do you think of the Bush doctrine?

    Palin: I think Bush has done a good job of attacking Islamic extremism around the world.

    Wow, is that a direct transcript from your hindquarters? Because that’s not what happed, liar.

    The Bush Doctrine is the right of pre-emptive self defense. Which is exactly what Palin is talking about when she talks about attacking Islamic extremism.

    Oh please. Chuckles Gibson wanted some specifics, and all the Power Palin could fart out was some platitude about extremism. Which any politician would agree with.

    Keep hitching your wagon to this potatoe, Truth. I won’t stop laughing.

  9. mat said,

    September 12, 2008 at 17:57

    Sarah Palin scoffs at the idea Al Gore invented the Internet. She knows for a fact Jesus did it.

  10. Legalize said,

    September 12, 2008 at 17:58

    Twoofie, you ignorant slut, Palin plainly didn’t know what the Bush doctrine was and required an explanation of Gibson. She sat their bliking and said “his world view.” Moreover, the doctrine does not espouse the right of preemptive self-defense, but PREVENTATIVE self-defense, as we saw with Iraq.

  11. IasonOuabache said,

    September 12, 2008 at 17:58

    “I can’t believe that partisanship truly trumps all sense and rationality.”

    Believe it! This is what American politics has been reduced to.

  12. I'm earning my doctorate studying why The Truth is such an astounding idiot said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:00

    Know what’s great? That this thread was started under the assumption that the GOP rewards stupidity. Aaaaaaand here’s The Truth to prove just that!

    Thanks, dorkus. Now run along.

  13. El Cid said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:01

    Did Jesus work at CERN?

  14. Linnaeus said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:07

    Ignore The Truth’s psyops. He/she is screaming just a bit too loud.

  15. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:07

    The Bush Doctrine does not exist for the stupids Palin’s supposed to motivate. They don’t know what it is and don’t care.

  16. J— said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:07

    Did Jesus work at CERN?

    Would Jesus dig the Gotthard Base Tunnel?

  17. Cain said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:13

    All nations already have the right to preemptive self-defence.

    The Bush Doctrine, as set out in various National Security Strategy statements is the belief the US government has the right to drop an army wherever it doesn’t like someone, regardless of the threat they pose or who might actually control said territory.

    Ironically, it does mention a little thing we like to call “failed states” being a huge issue and security risk, but doesn’t make the links between massive armies going into third world countries and the creation of failed states.

    For some reason.

  18. Gundamhead said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:13

    Yes, but does she enjoy a nice Working Class Sandwich? What about bowling? Would I like to have a beer with her? She doesn’t know what arugula is, does she? McCain was a POW! Obama said “Lipstick on a pig”! THESE are the issues that truly matter. Quite trying to distract us, you hateful and biased Liberals!

  19. tinisoli said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:16

    People like Truth admire and cling to Palin because, like them, she didn’t know what the Bush Doctrine meant and therefore she fits the mold of the type of candidates they vote for perfectly——ones who appear to be just like them (average, ignorant, incurious, but righteous and resolute) rather than candidates who are really smart, informed, careful, pragmatic, and capable. We saw this with Bush (‘I’d rather have a beer with him than that arrogant ManBearPig or that French fag John Heinz Kerry!’) and we’re seeing it again with Palin. They will continue to love Palin and they will most certainly vote for her (and, incidentally, for McCain) come November 4.

    But anyone who isn’t as narcissistic and moronic will reject this woman as a candidate for high office after seeing last night’s interview and the inevitably similar interviews and performances that are to come as Palin is forced to operate without a script. She’s toast already, but they’ll keep going until she’s charred.

    By the way, real classy of her to conflate Iraq with Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda on the anniversary of 9/11. Even Bush has cut out that bullshit.

  20. J— said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:18

    If a maverick spent her time reading and thinking on other people’s ideas and coming up with fancy names for them like “doctrine” or “principle,” she wouldn’t be a maverick, would she? She’d be a follower. Mavericks don’t have time for such leisurely hobbies. Mavericks don’t blink!

    Never teach learn the Wu-Tang!

  21. gbear said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:21

    This is your triumph over the big scary Republican woman? Oh my – November 4 is going to be a wakeup call for you liberals.

    Gibson: What do you think of the big bang theory?

    The Truth: Oh, I love fireworks on the fourth of July, which is Independence day.

    Qualified to be McCain’s VP!

  22. JF Sebastian said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:22

    Most Republicans think the Bush Doctrine is a gynecologist.

  23. D. Aristophanes said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:25

    The Bush Doctrine for Dummies:

    See that guy walking across the street over there? We should totally beat the shit out of him and take his money. If we don’t he could become a threat to us later and then it would be too late.

  24. jim said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:26

    She already looks 5 or 10 years older than she did just a week or so ago – damn, they must be grilling that little freak 12-14 hours per day non-stop for her to look that shitty.

    Man asked her the question about Pakistan twice, & twice ahe ducked it. It’s painfully obvious she had her answers drummed into her beforehand, & what she couldn’t put an appropriately labelled happy-face sticker on, she simply ignored & whitewashed with her sloganeering.

    There’s nothing cute about ignorance seeking power. It’s no more pretty than a rockfish & every bit as lethal.

    The Bush Doctrine is the right of pre-emptive self defense.

    Wrap it in all the fancy words you want, kid – it’s real name is aggression, & once upon a time in a pretty little town called Nuremburg, a bunch of very bad people were sentenced to be hung by the neck until dead for it. The Bush Doctrine is a fig-leaf for committing war-crimes. Imperial Japan & Nazi Germany claimed self-defense too, & had really good lawyers & politicians to explain why they had to do every sickening war-crime in the book – to preserve their way of life from terrorists & subversives who were “hell-bent on our destruction” if dire steps weren’t taken to halt their evil plans.

    Changing the language you use to describe it doesn’t make it any less an act of barbaric murder, & history won’t be any kinder to the fools who either advocate or take part in it. You truly are scum if you can say with a straight face that America (or any other nation) can ever justify such loathsome acts of unilateral atrocity.

  25. The GOP’s Disdain for Knowledge and Reason is Now Total &raquo Out-Loud Brainwaves said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:26

    [...] advocates of laissez-faire and proud supporters of meritocracy. Bullshit. With the elevation of the not-ready-for-prime-time-player Sarah Palin to the Vice Presidential candidacy, the GOP’s transformation into the party of ignorant [...]

  26. FGFM said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:29

    And yet, on Nov 4, Americans are going to elect McCain and Palin.

    “Obama 268 McCain 270″

    Looks like a pretty commanding lead there, Truthy!

  27. Gundamhead said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:32

    “Because Palin is an empty suit, an ambitious ignorant fundy crackpot/hocky mom/psycho who enjoys shooting animals from a helocopter from the deeply corrupt Alaskan political machine, and voters are seeing right through her. Deep down, you know this, liberals.”

    Quoted for Truth.

  28. Mo's Bike Shop said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:32

    You better reread today’s fax Truth. The new talking point is that there has never been a Bush Doctrine.

    And Chewbacca lives on Endor.

  29. A conservative who's in the know and who's sick of this clown said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:34

    The Truth = Bob “Confederate Yankee” Owens (or one of his very close friends).

    Fire away, liberals. ‘Cause we’re sick of this guy on our side.

  30. Legalize said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:34

    Ah, proven to be an ignorant / dishonest troll, Twoofie comesback with the good old “empty suit” spiel that worked so well for Hillary and was working swimmingly for St. McCain before he drafted Molly Mooseburgers. And it even has the gaul to mention corruption. How many corruption probes has Obama been implicated in this year – or ever, Twoofie.

    I see how this will play out – Palin crashes and burns, and McLame reverts back to what has failed in the past.

  31. WOW!!!!!!!! said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:34

    That’s, what, the second day that McCain has led electoral projections since fackin’ May? Epic, Truth. Or should I say, TIDOS Wankee.

  32. El Cid said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:35

    The real question is, why do John McCain and the Republican Party oppose making our children safer from pedophiles and child molesters?

  33. comsympinko said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:35

    “Think about all the reckless wars we could’ve waged if liberals hadn’t gotten in the way!”

    Don’t forget, most of America’s modern wars have been waged by Democratic Presidents, whatever value you personally assign to the accomplishment of any particular President’s war in relation to the lives, money and time spent waging it.

    From Wilson to Roosevelt to Kennedy to Johnson, many of the most progressive Presidents in the nation’s history have had no problem pulling the trigger on killing American soldiers, foreign soldiers and innocent men, women and children in foreign countries.

    It’s always good to keep in mind that this is the team we have to play for because there’s no better alternative.

    Obama wants to ramp up the war on the Afghan-Pakistani border. Just ask him.

    There’s no hard talk about a total pullout from Iraq from anyone at the top of either party..

    It’s war for good, ladies and gentlemen. Get used to it.

    The only upside of an Obama win is that we might be able to get something accomplished in this country.

    But I doubt it.

  34. JF Sebastian said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:37

    Because Obama is an empty suit, an ambitious orator from the deeply corrupt Cook County political machine, and voters are seeing right through him.

    Interesting you portray Obama with so many images of invisibility. One might say you cast him as an Invisible Man. Hmmmm.

    If only some great American author had ever written a major widely-read work connecting the idea of invisibility imagery with the spectrum of covert and blatant racism. Like maybe Ralph Ellison or somebody.

  35. actor212 said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:39

    What do Sarah Palin and a beauty contestant have in common?

    HINT: It ain’t lipstick!

  36. JF Sebastian said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:41

    The real question is, why do John McCain and the Republican Party oppose making our children safer from pedophiles and child molesters?

    Maybe because if John McCain had met his wife Cindy when he was nineteen years old, Cindy would have been two?

  37. JK47 said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:41

    If this miserable fucks win the presidency, I’m just gonna say “fuck it,” empty out my savings and use it to procure as many hookers and as much blow as possible. Why bother to plan for a future that ends with Sarah Palin “rapturing” us all to Kingdome Come?

  38. MzNicky said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:41

    Beyond her predictable ignorance, it’s the mannerisms and nuances that give her away as a rank amateur. She tried to pull off the high-school principal role with Charles Gibson when he asked about the Bush Doctrine (leaned forward, tilted her head and asked exasperatedly, “What IS it, Charlie?”). When he didn’t play along but instead turned it back on her, she froze up, and for a second almost looked like she wanted to say, “How dare you talk to me like that!” Later she actually WINKED at him when talking about how wonderful it is that her “first-born son” is being deployed to Iraq while trying, clumsily, to sidestep his asking about crossing into Pakistan.

    Like I said elsewhere not long ago, I know this woman. I’ve met her many times. She’s coasted along all her life on her good looks and glibness and has found that affecting a sass-ay attitude only sweetens the deal for an awful lot of folks. But this ain’t the PTA or the local library. To widen her eyes and say “Well, yeah, maybe so!” when asked about confrontation with Russia didn’t give her the “bring it on” tough-talkin’ cred she seems to think it should have. It made her look like the beauty-contest runner-up that she is. I’d have almost felt sorry for her if she weren’t such a loathesome piece of work.

  39. owlbear1 said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:42

    Hey now, at the :43 second mark she not only blinks, she winks!

    Right after selling Charlie on the wisdom of elections every four years.

    Sarah Palin: A Wink, A Blink, and a ______ from the Presidency!

  40. J— said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:43

    Same as it ever was.

  41. LittlePig said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:44

    Why bother to plan for a future that ends with Sarah Palin “rapturing” us all to Kingdom Come?

    I think that’s where picking a fight with Russia comes in.

  42. LittlePig said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:45

    Sarah Palin: A Wink, A Blink, and a ______ from the Presidency!

    I know, I know! “myocardial infarction”.

  43. freejack said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:49

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1sE1E3z7jU

    I didn’t know the movie “Idiocracy” was really a documentary about the Palinican winning the culture war.

  44. Gary Ruppert said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:49

    The fact is that Charles Gibson doesn’t even know what the Bush Doctrine is. Sarah Palin knows that, and she is a thinking woman who wanted more information about the question.

    McCain and Palin is a ticket that talks to America, instead of talking down to America.

    Obama is so desperate that he’s attacking John McCain’s age.

    In 1982, John McCain was on his way to Washington.
    In 1982, Barack Obama was doing cocaine in college.

    America WILL pick McCain.

  45. Candy said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:51

    OT, well not really since Republican stoopid is always on topic, but Cal Thomas is touting the idea of a third Bush Preznitcy. It is too funneh 4evah.

  46. Bigby said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:54

    I never saw the movie Idiocracy because while I thought the satire might be decent given Mike Judge’s talent, I ain’t a Wilson Brothers fan and I heard it wasn’t that good anyway.It has been playing a lot on cable movie channels lately, so I watched it.

    I never realized that the GOP considered it a training film. People will stop buying, the more people see of this absolutely stone cold ignorant bint, and the more they’ll think: “Dan Quayle in a dress, ‘cept when he’s wearing a dress, which as we discussed before, Marge, I mean Marilyn, is strictly for comfort”. She will eventually pull down the vote, just like he did in ’88 and ’92. Economy in the shitter like ’92? Check. Dumbass on the GOP ticket? Check. People unwilling, after the hype dies down, to vote for Dumbass knowing Dumbass may inherit an unstable economy and world so they go with the relatively unknown but proven competent quantity? Check.

  47. Tagg said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:55

    Did Sarah’s interview remind you of anything. Well it reminded me of this.
    http://www.tagg-lines.com/2008/09/when-is-vice-preidential-candidate-just.html

  48. WereBear said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:55

    My focused attention has been answered. (As an Esoteric Independent, people could say I don’t “pray.”)

    This is the ad Defenders of Wildlife is running in Ohio.

    They want money to run it more places. I borrow money to live at the end of the month, and I gave them some.

    The Charlie Gibson thing highlighted her ignorance. You’re worried nobody cares? Probably right.

    But this ad shows Palin’s cruelty. It goes for the gut.

    And almost everybody will care.

  49. Ripley said,

    September 12, 2008 at 18:59

    “In what respect, Charlie?” I thought Republicans didn’t do nuance. Regardless, I look forward to her next performance of Just Jack Sarah!

    A Hummer in every garage and a boner in every pant! err.. pants!

  50. Nylund said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:01

    They throw her softballs and she still strikes out.

  51. Dan Someone said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:01

    Here’s the disturbing thing about the Palin interview.

    In this hyperdemocratized society, the national conviction that anyone can succeed is morphing into a belief that experience and knowledge may almost be disqualifying credentials.

  52. Arky - Chuthuhlusexual said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:04

    And quite frankly, Republicans, ignoring it just because she’s on your team is not just politics as usual; it’s dangerous and it’s irresponsible.

    Further proof that there is an alternate universe.

  53. Gary Ruppert said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:05

    That Defenders of Wildlife ad fails when you realize that either you go with Palin’s policy, or you have wolves and bears attacking homes in a lot of parts of Alaska. Not to mention that most of the west hates wolves and they want the wolves gone.

  54. D.N. Nation said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:08

    Like many at the rally, Victoria Robinson-Worst sees Palin’s lack of experience as an asset. “I know people who have experience who are totally incompetent,” said Robinson-Worst, who lives in Loudoun County, designs wedding flowers and raises two children. “And I know people who have no experience who step in and get it right. I mean, women can do amazing things.”

    Again, this should be on the legislative agenda next year:

    1) The ERA
    2) The draft

    Only then will a certain demographic category start taking their votes seriously. Mercy, what morons.

  55. freejack said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:08

    Republicans & Palinicans all drink BRAWNDO

    …..it’s got electrolytes!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tbxq0IDqD04

  56. JM said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:08

    OMG I could have handled that better standing on my head – and I have *no* public life experience at all.

    Gibson: “Do we have the right to follow terrorists with or without the permission of the Pakistani government?”

    Me: “If we had permission fine. If not, only a hot pursuit would be tolerable, and then not in all circumstances. Imagine Ossetian militia attacking US advisers in Georgia and then retreating into Russia – even a hot pursuit in that circumstance would not be acceptable, in fact it would be dangerous. The rules of engagement have to be set with due regard to the particular situation.

    What we do have the right to do is to insist that Pakistan police its borders and western provinces so that Al Quaeda do not have safe havens outside the rule of law.”

    There not so hard was it?

    This person is unqualified and incompetent for the position.

  57. OB-GYN Kenobi said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:09

    Guessie: “The Bush Doctrine is the right of pre-emptive self defense. Which is exactly what Palin is talking about when she talks about attacking Islamic extremism.”

    Please explain, cogently, if possible, why the Bush Doctrine does not apply to the situation in the former Soviet republic of Georgia.

  58. dBa said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:10

    So, if I’m understanding the Gary at 18:49…it’s ok if Palin’s uninformed on the issues, because her supporters are also uninformed?

    Vote for Palin, she’s as dumb as a troll.

  59. Gooper Gumby said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:14

    I believe in PEACE! And bashing two bricks together!

  60. J— said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:15

    CBS:

    Tonight, McCain said, “Look, Governor Palin was responding to the criticism of her inexperience and her job as a mayor in a small town. Of course I respect community organizers.”

    Of course, it wasn’t just Palin who attacked community organizing. Giuliani talked the same shit in his speech. It was one of the convention’s messages.

    And now this:

    The Arizona senator said the GOP vice presidential nominee would be good for the country because she would reform government, and specifically cited curbing federal spending for earmarks.

    When pressed about Palin’s record of requesting and accepting such money for Alaska, McCain ignored the record and said: “Not as governor she didn’t.”

    And this (same article):

    McCain also used the appearance to defend his TV commercials criticizing his Democratic opponent, Barack Obama. McCain stretches the truth in several of them that have been debunked by fact checkers.

    “They’re not lies,” McCain said.

    See, of course, the video in Brad’s update.

    Is John McCain in charge of his own campaign? Is he aware of his own campaign?

  61. Unidentified Monty Python Character said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:15

    I’m raising polecats for peace!

  62. JK47 said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:16

    The real stroke of genius in the Palin pick was that she neutralizes peoples’ guilt complex. People who would normally feel slightly guilty about voting for McCain only because Obama is black now blindly support Palin because, well, she’s a woman! See, I’m not prejudiced! Um, I’m voting for the ticket with a woman on it!

    She’s providing cover for the racists. The only problem with this strategy is that Palin is such a drooling moron, she may end up fucking up the whole thing anyway.

  63. MzNicky said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:17

    Re: the update. Please note the newscaster was the one who put the Rethug flack’s feet to the fire. She wouldn’t let up, even when the jackbag kept trying to shout her down. Nice to see media doing their job for a change.

  64. dBa said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:20

    The fact is because she’s a drooling moron, her chances of being elected are rising, indeed, that is central to their point.

  65. Mo's Bike Shop said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:21

    That Defenders of Wildlife ad fails when you realize that either you go with Palin’s policy, or you have wolves and bears attacking homes in a lot of parts of Alaska.

    Republicans are pussies.

  66. You Can't Put Lipstick On A Repig said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:22

    Here is McPOW saying that governors and mayors are unqualified for the Presidency. He said it to criticize 9iu11ani and MagicUnderpants:

    “I am prepared. I am prepared. I need no on-the-job training. I wasn’t a mayor for a short period of time. I wasn’t a governor for a short period of time.”

    Here is Mooseburger criticizing McPOW during the Gibson interview:

    “Charlie, again, we’ve got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time,” she said to the ABC host. “It is for no more politics as usual and somebody’s big, fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they’ve had opportunities to meet heads of state.”

  67. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:23

    Only then will a certain demographic category start taking their votes seriously.

    Fuck you D.N. No, really, fuck you. There’s zero evidence that women vote any differently from men in the aggregate. There are idiots and there are the informed, but dipshits like you have been perpetuating the goddamn xkcd fallacy ever since we got the vote in the ’20s. Go ahead and blame women when you lose, maybe you’ll feel better, but the reality is it’s going to take a lot of people to lose this election, and at least half of them are male.

  68. Candy said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:24

    WereBear, that ad made me cry.

    I hate that woman so much I can taste it on my tongue, like hot copper.

  69. comsympinko said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:25

    “Not to mention that most of the west hates wolves and they want the wolves gone.”

    Nice try fake Gary, but you didn’t do the linky.

    When doing fake Gary you gotta do the linky!

    Plus, you only said “the fact is” one time and never once mentioned the Heartland. Overall a very poor fake Gary performance.

    Still, fake Gary illuminates something interesting about the GOP lizard brain here. If you hate it, kill it! Problem solved.

    That’s really all there is for them, sad, sorry, fucked-up murderous gang of savage troglodytes that they are,.

  70. MzNicky said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:26

    Is John McCain in charge of his own campaign? Is he aware of his own campaign?

    J–: This is the bye James Carville, among others, is trying to use to excuse these abominable ads. “The John McCain I know is so honorable, this must be the work of his people, he doesn’t know”, blah blah blah. Uh — isn’t that why they put that little thing at the end of these ads where the candidate says “I’m John McCain, and I approve this message”?

  71. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:28

    Charlie Gibson was clearly not deferential enough.

    Next Palin interview: Sean Hannity.

    (No, I’m not making this up.)

  72. Gary Ruppert said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:29

    See? Like this.

  73. Josh Marshall said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:32

    Total deer in the headlights.

    Everyone knows this is code to reference the expression “a doe, a deer, a female deer.” And everyone knows what, in turn, that means. Sexism. Misogyny. I’m so repulsed I can’t read the rest of her post, sorry.

  74. MzNicky said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:32

    Preemptive strikes on marauding hordes of Islamofascist wolves would be one thing. Bringing their hacked-off bloody legs to Her Majesty for a reward is quite another.

  75. alec said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:33

    To quote a good friend of mine, Actually, they really do make a great team, these two. McCain wants to aid pederasts and Sarah Palin wants to charge victims for rape kits. Is “pro-sexual assault” now a major plank in the Republican platform or something? GO TEAM RAPE

    I’m poking him to make bumper stickers. One imagines for the GOP base rape is part of what makes America great, but for most people, you’d be surprised.

  76. WereBear said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:34

    Nice to see media doing their job for a change.

    Yes, it is. I see three factors.

    1) The Palin pick is so in-your-face stupid that the newspeople are offended. How are they going to sell this without looking stupid? They can’t. This makes them resentful.

    2) The McCain campaign added fuel to the grievance by sequestering her. It’s like throwing chum in the water. They go to bed at night fantasizing about tripping her up on camera for those golden, golden ratings.

    3) This is more of a gut hunch, but I am going with our current press as not being sociopaths. Gutless, spineless, sellouts, yes. But even they, in their blowdried bubbles of air kisses and jolly barbeques, have gotten queasy at the thought of a Palin Presidency. Yeah, Nixon got drunk and had to be steered away from the football, but there were plenty of people who worked for Nixon who kept him away from the football. I mean, they were nuts, they worked for Nixon.

    But they weren’t that nuts.

    —-

    Candy: Yeah, I know.

  77. alec said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:35

    I feel a little guilty plugging my own shit twice, but the wolves, the disdain for community organizing, the complete and utter contempt for anything that can’t be given a combover and taught to synergize, the whole shebang – I’ve got it all covered.

  78. J— said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:36

    This is the bye James Carville, among others, is trying to use to excuse these abominable ads. “The John McCain I know is so honorable, this must be the work of his people, he doesn’t know”, blah blah blah.

    Right, and the next step is, or should be, to say either he is on top of it, which makes him despicable, dishonest, and cynical, or he is out of the loop, which makes him unfit to lead. If he’s not calling the shots, who is?

    And as you note, “I’m John McCain, and I approve this message.” The buck should stop there, regardless of the campaign’s internal dynamics.

  79. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:41

    McCain and Palin is a ticket that talks to America, instead of talking down to America.

    That is tremendously sad.

  80. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:41

    Personally I think this post captures a lot of Palin’s incredible (to us) appeal: http://www.tinyrevolution.com/mt/archives/002544.html

    Yeah, it’s shooting yourself in the foot and it’s (imo) pretty dumb, but it would well behoove the democrats to pay attention to it.

  81. alec said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:41

    Yes, it is. I see three factors.

    1) The Palin pick is so in-your-face stupid that the newspeople are offended. How are they going to sell this without looking stupid? They can’t. This makes them resentful.

    2) The McCain campaign added fuel to the grievance by sequestering her. It’s like throwing chum in the water. They go to bed at night fantasizing about tripping her up on camera for those golden, golden ratings.

    3) This is more of a gut hunch, but I am going with our current press as not being sociopaths. Gutless, spineless, sellouts, yes. But even they, in their blowdried bubbles of air kisses and jolly barbeques, have gotten queasy at the thought of a Palin Presidency. Yeah, Nixon got drunk and had to be steered away from the football, but there were plenty of people who worked for Nixon who kept him away from the football. I mean, they were nuts, they worked for Nixon.

    But they weren’t that nuts.

    So basically you’ve got the Media talking to McCain here, right?

    ‘OK, buddy. We’ve been hammering the guy, making all the grunts out there feel sorry they ever liked him. We got him pinned down – everyone thinks he’s an America-hating pansy-boy lunatic, that America’s not ready for a minority member with that kinda power and Obama’s not ready for it either. We’ve got scripts all worked up for any of the frontrunners in the primaries. Hell, you pick Ron Paul and fiat money’ll be for faggots by Monday.’

    ‘What was all of that? I was just talking to some nice kids from the College Republicans and they had the best choice lined up.’

    ‘Uh… you’re going with Paul, right? Christ, at least let it be Tancredo.’

    ‘Get this: the governor of Alaska.’

    ‘…what, was America’s fattest Counterstrike champion busy? Nice one, but seriously.’

    ‘No, really. She’s got lots of experience. She’ll rile up the base good.’

    ‘Uh, like what?’

    ‘She’s gonna kill the shit out of some cay-otes, that’s for Goddamn sure, not like that lazy Five-O nigger they got.’

    (FACEPALM VISIBLE FROM MOON)

  82. Brian J said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:43

    Shorter Brad Blakeman:

    We can’t say that McCain’s ads are lies. We can only say that it’s unclear from the publicly available records what was in the bill, except that it was all bad.

  83. alec said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:47

    This has been Horrific Narrative Derailment with ‘Cay-otes’, your phonetically transcribed bullshit cowboy affectation of the day.

  84. D.N. Nation said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:48

    Fuck you D.N. No, really, fuck you.

    Meh.

  85. J— said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:49

    Palin may be their standard (as in battle flag, not as in weekly; others have used the term figurehead), but let’s remember it’s McCain who’s supposed to be their field marshal.

  86. MzNicky said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:50

    The Palin pick is so in-your-face stupid that the newspeople are offended. How are they going to sell this without looking stupid? They can’t. This makes them resentful.

    So sez Howie Kurtz.

    I think my irony meter just laughed itself to death.

  87. MzNicky said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:53

    They go to bed at night fantasizing about tripping her up on camera for those golden, golden ratings.

    I have no doubt. Also, WereBear, the media are vain and they are blind. They hate people when they’re not polite.

  88. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:53

    If anyone can shovel stupid, it’s Howie Kurtz.

    He has a lifetime of experience!

  89. justme said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:57

    Wrap it in all the fancy words you want, kid – it’s real name is aggression, & once upon a time in a pretty little town called Nuremburg, a bunch of very bad people were sentenced to be hung by the neck until dead for it. The Bush Doctrine is a fig-leaf for committing war-crimes. Imperial Japan & Nazi Germany claimed self-defense too, & had really good lawyers & politicians to explain why they had to do every sickening war-crime in the book – to preserve their way of life from terrorists & subversives who were “hell-bent on our destruction” if dire steps weren’t taken to halt their evil plans.

    Thank God somebody mentioned that. I was going to bust.

    My thought was a bit shorter, at “The Bush Doctrine? You mean The Refutation of Nuremburg?”

    It’s going to be very interesting to see if the Republican coalition will hang together with this level of idiocy staring it down. Of course, the two legs of the stool that are the racists and the fundies are just thrilled by her being completely, honestly stupid. The corporatists may just see her as shiny stuff for the rubes, which she is, but even they have to be wondering if they can’t get nearly as decent a deal from Democrats without the whole, “Let’s just go to war with the only other country that has a comparable nuclear arsenal” thing.

    Anybody, and I mean anybody, who isn’t deeply entrenched in one of those camps is going to be forced to see just what a supremely bad fucking idea the Republican ticket really is. If this election is really about the center, we seriously need to get Palin front and center a bit more between now and game day.

    —————–

    Oh, and Teh (remaining) Tooth? Don’t you have to go clean your room, or something?

  90. Brian J said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:58

    Does anyone want a good laugh? Look at this insanity.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/09/021484.php

  91. dim-witted badger said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:58

    fucking palinicans

  92. You Can't Put Lipstick On A Repig said,

    September 12, 2008 at 19:59

    I would like to officially introduce a new phrase into the cultural maelstrom:

    “Sarah Palin looked like a MOOSE in the headlights during her interview with Charlie Gibson”

    Thank you, thank you. I’ll be here all week. Try the caribou burgers.

  93. Should Know Better said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:02

    Nice to see media doing their job for a change.

    Eh. They simply need something that sells. Obama trouncing McCain doesn’t sell for week after week so they had to manufacture a hotly contested race.

    Now they have Palin and they’ve got something that sells again.

    We’ll see what happens when they get bored with their new toy.

  94. Arky - Chuthuhlusexual said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:03

    Is John McCain in charge of his own campaign? Is he aware of his own campaign?

    Yep, just another corkscrew turn on the Republican Logic Loop-de-Loop.

    You see, John McPOW is a bold, brave, tough, sharp hombre who is all about responsibility. I mean, the guy was a POW, how dare you question the POWer he’ll wield in DC? He’s a lone wolf, a maverick, no one can tell him what to do. If he sees a wrong he’ll right it!

    But … he can’t control his campaign staff.

    So vote for McCane because he’ll stand up and speak out.

    Until his aides tell him to sit down shut up.

    I really think they’re testing their key defense for Dubya. “Aw, he was just a nice boy led astray by those naughty kids.”

  95. Sadly, true : A Different Street said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:04

    [...] Brad at Sadly, No! … some of the more literate right-wingers have expressed reservations about Sarah Palin’s [...]

  96. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:06

    D.N. – Hey, whatever helps you sleep at night.

    Calling the voters stupid and saying they’re getting what they deserve may be self-righteously pleasing, but it doesn’t win elections.

  97. You Can't Put Lipstick On A Repig said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:10

    > In this hyperdemocratized society, the national conviction that anyone can succeed is morphing into a belief that experience and knowledge may almost be disqualifying credentials.

    This phenomena will only speed up the end of the American Experiment. It’s on life support now.

  98. WereBear said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:13

    He’s a lone wolf

    Then McCain should REALLY watch his back.

  99. dBa said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:15

    You’re right UiP, CALLING them stupid doesn’t win elections, but knowing they are and using it to your advantage without actually saying it DOES win elections.

  100. Arky - Chuthuhlusexual said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:21

    Calling the voters stupid and saying they’re getting what they deserve may be self-righteously pleasing, but it doesn’t win elections.

    Quite right. The way to win elections is to call some of the voters terrorist loving baby eating kw33rs who heat their homes with Bibles wipe their asses on the flag. Throw in a few Purple Heart bandages and voila! Victory.

  101. anangryoldbroad said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:21

    I think there might be another reason for the choice of Palin. The Hard On Factor.

    Look,she’s considered hot in certain old(and young,I guess) white dude circles,that’s where all that GOP “excitement”is coming from (and,ewww). I honestly don’t think she was chosen to get women all excited to vote GOP. I think alot of your average white male conservo-dudes weren’t looking forward to voting. Maybe even deciding to keep their racist asses home on election day. Now they can vote for Rush’s babe. Whee. Idiots.

    I’m betting women don’t like Palin as much as the wingnuts want everyone to think. I’m with MzNicky on this one,I know this woman too. She takes all the joy out of school volunteering or being a football or soccer mom. If you live in suburban or small town America and you happen to be a Mom,you’ve met Sarah Palin. She has unresolved cool kid’s clique/bully issues from jr high school. That’s where the emotional development stopped(and it’s not just Palin,the whole GOP has devolved into this nonsense) She’s all drama and finding someone to rip to pieces. And if she can do it from a place of any sort of official power,well hell,that’s what Power is for,isn’t it?

    Oh yeah,I know her,lots of women do. Don’t underestimate that little tidbit.

  102. PS said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:24

    J— is absolutely right. McC is in a classic double-bind: either (1) he is fully aware of what his campaign is doing, in which case he is dishonorable; or (2) he is not, in which case he is incompetent. Any Democrat (Carville, Biden …) who is willing to grant him his honor (I know Brutus …) MUST slam him for being hopelessly out of touch, incompetent and therefore unqualified …

    Of course anyone (in the wider audience) who prefers to think he’s dishonorable may. Both can be true. But attacking him on competence gets to the heart of it.

  103. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:24

    Hey, I didn’t say they weren’t stupid. But since we keep losing elections, you’d think the Dems would get past the point of just bitching about it and hoping it would change on its own.

  104. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:26

    …While quietly capitulating on the only issues that have ever proven to really interest the public (remember how we thought the 2006 Congress was going to de-fund the war? Remember how we thought Obama was going to actually bring our troops home and not just move them a few countries over?)

  105. a different brad said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:31

    I just hope Hillary starts appearing in public with a stuffed polar bear in the very, very near future.
    She’s got to step up and publicly go after Palin, hard, often, and brutally. Yes, it will help Palin with her base, but it’s already her base. Hillary is the only Dem with the standing to be vicious here, and if she doesn’t step up I’m worried.
    Obama can’t go after her for the double reasons of gaming the ref sexism charges, and because the pres candidate shouldn’t be preoccupied with the opposing veep. Biden will get the Gore v Bush treatment in the debate, unless Hillary changes the terms. Go after Palin hard a day or two before, and inject herself and her criticisms into it. If Biden is echoing Hillary he’s have a much longer leash.

    N yeah, I guess I’m sort of off topic.

  106. MzNicky said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:38

    I don’t see Hillary getting “vicious.” She’s too cool for that, and she doesn’t have to do it. It’d be better for her not to anyway — show the nice contrast between the party that actually put forth a legitimate woman candidate and the one that did so after the fact and for transparently cynical purposes.

    I’d bet Hill and Bill are toying with Obama as payback for his getting the nomination. They’re negotiating for positions in his administration; once they make him suck up enough and give them what they want, they’ll get out their faces out there and do the thing.

  107. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:39

    Every time someone talks about Palin and it’s not about her policies, what Gary’s beloved “heartland” people hear is “stupid hick.” And they’re not entirely wrong to hear it, and not entirely wrong to get pissed off by it.

    I think making Hillary do Obama’s dirty work will not come off well. Obama and Biden should attack her positions relentlessly. When her family or her inexperience comes up, they should dodge the question and go right back to her policies. Anything else is playing right into the GOP’s hands.

  108. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:43

    You’re right UiP, CALLING them stupid doesn’t win elections, but knowing they are and using it to your advantage without actually saying it DOES win elections.

    Yeah, the Republicans sure are great at that. You’d think we’d take a few tips.

  109. kenga said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:45

    just bitching about it and hoping it would change on its own.

    Screaming “Don’t be fucking stupid!” seems like it’s not that.
    So what do you suggest?

  110. Lex Palianated said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:46

    Yep, the mere fact that she is even in the running and not a shock to the whole nation is definitely proof of major decline. You know, other than the financial decline.

  111. Aaron said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:50

    Obama and Biden should attack her positions relentlessly. When her family or her inexperience comes up, they should dodge the question and go right back to her policies. Anything else is playing right into the GOP’s hands.

    Isn’t talking about her at all “playing right into the GOP’s hands”?

    Regardless of Palin’s shortcomings, it’s the guy at the top of the ticket who’s going to get elected. Obama and Biden are, have been, and I think will continue to paint McCain as an out of touch old coot who’s going to continue to do the stuff that got us into this fix. And that’s exactly what they need to do. Palin’s a sideshow, and McCain’s only shot at winning is to keep the rubes distracted from his shortcomings.

  112. bernard quatermass said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:52

    Where is The Truth with the Dull, Old, Rich White Guy in a Suit’s perspective?

    I’m wired, and I need to be bored.

  113. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:53

    kenga – My post at 20:39 would be a good start. Attack, attack, attack on issues. Most voters agree with many liberal issues, they just don’t want to call themselves liberals thanks to the GOP hold on the media. Instead of crying about how it’s unfair, say fine. We’re the conservative ones and here’s why. The Dems actually are, is the funny part. Much more fiscal responsibility than the Republicans and everyone SHOULD know that by now. Also, if liberals in the campaigns and the media could try to refrain from dripping with totally obvious scorn and disgust when talking about voters we don’t agree with (see the egregious and damaging Salon article on Palin for one example), while simultaneously overkilling the respect shown to McCain, that might help too.

    Either way we’re following the same script from 2000 and 2004, and it’s not working any better this time.

  114. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:54

    Aaron – Palin’s a sideshow, and McCain’s only shot at winning is to keep the rubes distracted from his shortcomings.

    Eh, maybe, but I think it could be turned into an advantage if played right. That Dominionist shit is scary as hell to most people, but instead we’re snickering like 12 year olds over her stupid kid’s stupid kid.

  115. David Robinson said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:55

    A comment on Redstate regarding Palin’s lack of knowledge regarding The Bush Doctrine:

    ‘If they hit too hard that she didn’t know what it is, couldn’t McCain/Palin turn around and say it demonstrates the “four more years of Bush” mantra is false?’

  116. Ringo the Gringo said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:56

    The “Bush Doctrine” is a term used to describe a number of different foreign policy principals and has different meanings depending on who you are talking to.

    There is no document titled “The Bush Doctrine”. It is a name, created by the media and political pundits. When the term is used by someone on the left side of the spectrum it is almost always used as a pejorative. In the Leftwing blog world the term “Bush Doctrine” is synonymus with unjustified, imperialistic, preemptive war.

    Charlie Gibson was using the term just that way and Sarah Palin was smart to force him to deifne what he meant by “the Bush Doctrine” before answering his contempteous questions.

  117. dBa said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:59

    Ringo the Gringo, you know more about then Palin, and you’re not even the VP candidate.

    I think that’s the real problem here.

  118. actor212 said,

    September 12, 2008 at 20:59

    They’re negotiating for positions in his administration; once they make him suck up enough and give them what they want, they’ll get out their faces out there and do the thing.

    I disagree, MzN, respectfully. There’s nothing either of them gains by being in an Obama White House.

    More to the point, Hillary is dangling a legislative agenda in front of Obama. Two reasons:

    1) She’s resigned herself to a long Senate career and wants to make history (less likely than)

    2) She’s calculating that in even eight years, she can run for Prez.

    Biden was not a coincidental choice for Veep. I’m sure the Clintons pushed him harder than anyone else. He’s 66 now, he’d be older than McCain if Obama wins and serves two terms, pretty much a slam dunk, to coin a phrase.

    In other words, too fucking old to run.

    Enter Hillary, who would “only” be 69, a quite palatable age, particularly for a senior stateswoman. And if Obama loses, unlikely to be sure, she runs in 2012.

  119. eidos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:01

    Even under the benign circumstances of a Charlie Gibson interview she is in way over her head. That such a person is on a presidential ticket should be a national embarrassment. Don’t expect her to face another unscripted interview outside of Fox news until after the election.

    However, it doesn’t really matter how badly she does, it will not shake the support she has from the Republican base. After all, they are harvested from the fundamentalist pews. That is, they are deliberately selected for their lack of critical thinking. I would say that the only event that might break the spell she has on the true believers would be an extra-marital affair scandal. In other words, barring an unexpected disaster McCain has the South sewed up.

    Check out this account of a recent McCain/Palin rally. Its funny that the GOP would accuse the Dems of being a personality cult.

    On the other hand, the fact that Palin’s lies and lack of qualification are receiving scrutiny will affect her appeal to swing voters. The McCain/Palin ticket needs those voters to win midwestern swing states to have a hope for victory. She could be on her way to being a laughing stock to the public at large.

  120. actor212 said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:02

    Ringo,

    WRRRRRRRRONNGGGGGGGGGGG!

    The first usage of the term to refer to the policies of George W. Bush may have been when conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer used the term in February 2001 to refer to the president’s unilateral approach to national missile defense.[6]

    ^ Krauthammer, Charles (2001-02-26). “[http://edition.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/2001/03/05/doctrine.html The Bush doctrine: In American foreign policy, a new motto: Don't ask. Tell]“, CNN.

    Any self-respecting fascist would have read this article.

  121. BDIII said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:05

    God Damn. I can’t wait for the debates.

  122. a different brad said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:06

    I say attack Palin because I think the only way to disenchant the non-base who she is, unfortunately, genuinely attracting is to show her for the Heather she is. Hillary getting up in her grill and giving Palin no easy out would force Palin into a corner of either accepting criticism, hah, or getting pissy herself.
    No one actually likes the most popular girl in school, n the country needs to be reminded why.
    She’s a sideshow, but she has to be dealt with, and Hillary has the best chance of doing so.

  123. actor212 said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:09

    Its funny that the GOP would accuse the Dems of being a personality cult.

    I had the same thought this morning, eidos: Dee Dee Myers pointed out that McCain can’t fill a lunchbox at a rally, but Sarah Lee can draw them like flies to shit.

    Literally.

    And McCain had the nerve to put down Obama’s popularity?

  124. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:09

    a different brad: OR, it could get their backs up, identify with her as the victim, etc, etc. At this point, it’s a double-edged sword.

  125. Edmund Schluessel said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:09

    Yes, but does she enjoy a nice Working Class Sandwich?

    That’s…what, Joe Biden on one side, Ed Rendell on the other side, and Jennifer Granholm in the middle?

  126. jgmurphy said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:11

    Yes, the depressing part of this whole thing is that apparently, Palin’s stunning lack of profundity, dearth of conversance with international affairs, or just plain inability to think through issues, are a problem only for Democrats! The folks that cheer Palin on in Western Pennsylvania and other sylvan loci consider these traits assets!

    Which makes me wonder whether it isn’t futile (or even counterproductive) to keep pointing them out. After all, the people who care are already Democrats (and mostly liberals).

    The only way to put a chink in her armor is to find some aspect they DO care about it and hone in on that (like when it came out that Romney was somewhat less of a hunter than Elmer Fudd.)

  127. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:12

    Mandos – Just what i’ve been saying. Depends entirely on how they do it. More “you want to attack Russia? REALLY?” and less “she’s a vapid whore” please.

  128. Ringo the Gringo said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:14

    actor212,

    Are you saying that Charlie Gibson was referring to Bush’s “unilateral approach to national missile defense” when using the words “Bush Doctrine” in his question?

    I don’t thinks so, which proves my point that the term has different meanings depending on who’s using it.

  129. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:15

    This election should at the very beginning of the primaries been about Republican failure on breadnbutter issues. Now, it isn’t.

  130. dj said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:15

    I think i cried a little after watching that video : ( Who wants to move to France with me after the election!

  131. a different brad said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:16

    That’s why it has to be Hillary. Palin’s whole “don’t hit me, I’m a girl” defense is based on piggybacking on the legit sexism Hillary faced. If Hillary comes at her, obviously on the right issues in the right way, there’s no way to resort to the sexism defense, and it opens up those lines of attack for Biden.
    Palin will be back in 2012 no matter who wins, unless she’s dealt with now, and she’ll be way better coached by then.

  132. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:16

    Mandos – Just what i’ve been saying. Depends entirely on how they do it. More “you want to attack Russia? REALLY?” and less “she’s a vapid whore” please.

    Welcome to D. N. Nation’s Concern Troll club—ie, anyone who doesn’t think that Democratic strategy is the bee’s knees or has the temerity to bring the bad news.

  133. Nimrod Gently said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:17

    Sarah Palin is the 45th President of the United States. She’s winning the election for McCain.

  134. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:17

    Few know that the Bush Doctrine mandates the Department of the Interior’s Oil for Nude program.

  135. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:17

    That’s why it has to be Hillary. Palin’s whole “don’t hit me, I’m a girl” defense is based on piggybacking on the legit sexism Hillary faced. If Hillary comes at her, obviously on the right issues in the right way, there’s no way to resort to the sexism defense, and it opens up those lines of attack for Biden.
    Palin will be back in 2012 no matter who wins, unless she’s dealt with now, and she’ll be way better coached by then.

    Hillary would be seen as a thoroughly transparent play for exactly this feeling. The voters you are going for, you may consider to be idiots on matters of substance, but they definitely know the politics of personal resentment.

  136. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:21

    Mandos – Yep, check out his first post, where he blames it all on the stupid wimmenz.

    a different brad – no, that’s why it can’t be. Can’t you see the “catfight!” headlines now? And the resulting conclusion that Palin won, because Hillary is old and ugly? I can.

  137. a different brad said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:22

    So wait, dumb voters are cynical and smart?
    How’s about the Dems just have “Yay Sarah Palin” party, would that be ok to you?

  138. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:23

    Is “attack her on her policies, nothing else” really that hard to grasp? Swing voters may not know much about the issues, but they all went to junior high.

  139. a different brad said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:24

    Oy, brad is right, the left needs a testicle transplant.

    Yes, going negative has risks, that’s why you get a surrogate like Hillary to do it. You’re just giving the base all the definitional ground in this, which is plain defeatist.

  140. WereBear said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:24

    In the spirit of the “I”m proud to be a woman” speech from Tootsie, I hear John McCain went on The View and got savaged.

    This will make all the men want to pile on too, I hope.

  141. a different brad said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:24

    Ummm, when did I say Hillary should call her a bitch?

  142. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:27

    UiP: That sort of thing is his MO, along with Nader Purity Tests.

    ADB: I have always believed that voters are not stupid, and that assuming that they are is a recipe for failure. Rather, they vote the way they do because their priorities and worries are not yours.

    Attacking Sarah Palin, or paying much attention to her at all, actually, is playing into McCain’s hands. Sarah Palin, like it or not, has a biography familiar to a lot of people in the USA in the demographics that (D) must capture. Attacking her leads to a trust issue among that demographic—do you really want to vote for people who have contempt for someone like you?

    Sending out the Hillzilla is another demographic FAIL, for the reasons that UiP pointed out. People are not stupid.

    The right way to win would have been to neutralize the demographic issues AND, at the very beginning, make this campaign about the soccer mom breadnbutter issues. The Sarah Palin gambit would have been completely unavailable to a boxed-in McCain.

    That didn’t happen.

  143. a different brad said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:28

    And stop pretending policy discussion will accomplish a damn thing.
    Dems have been losing that way for 36 years now.
    Elections are about the politics of personality, sadly. Palin’s personality needs to be redefined, more accurately, and only Hillary can begin that process.

  144. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:30

    a different brad – You didn’t, but this So wait, dumb voters are cynical and smart? How’s about the Dems just have “Yay Sarah Palin” party, would that be ok to you? implies that you somehow don’t get the difference between what’s going on now (she has five kids and she’s a stupid hick) and what should be happening (you want to mandate WHAT?)

    But even with Hillary doing everything right, the media hates her and loves them some sexism, so the hot chick will be seen as the victor no matter what happens, which is why I think she’s a bad choice for it.

  145. a different brad said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:30

    I’m reminded of the Onion’s Our Dumb Century piece about the 80 election.
    Carter: Let’s talk better mileage
    Reagan: kill all the bastards!

    It’s time for Dems to deign to dirty their hands.

  146. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:30

    Dems learned the wrong lesson, because they attempted to bring forth policy discussion without neutralizing the identity issues.

  147. HelenWheels said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:31

    AJB – Malkin venerates McLame now but what was she saying last January:

    “Mr. Shamnesty-Short Fuse almost walked off the stage during a campaign event with the AFL-CIO in Michigan. Audience members didn’t like his soft-on-illegal immigration blather. They booed. He pouted:

    Sen. John McCain threatened Tuesday to cut short a speech to union leaders who booed his immigration views and later challenged his statements on organized labor and the Iraq war.

    “If you like, I will leave,” McCain told the AFL-CIO’s Building and Construction Trades Department, pivoting briefly from the lectern. He returned to the microphone after the crowd quieted.

    “OK, then please give me the courtesy I would give you.”

    And what would the profanity-spewing McCain know about courtesy towards those with whom he disagress on immigration?”

    http://michellemalkin.com/2008/01/14/mccain-booed-in-michigan/

    Unbelievable.

  148. a different brad said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:32

    Believing voters are stupid has borne electoral fruit for 4 Republican presidents, folks.

  149. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:32

    I have always believed that voters are not stupid, and that assuming that they are is a recipe for failure.

    It is a recipe for winning if you’re a Republican.

  150. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:32

    People fear for their economic positions. They fear the obsolescence trumpeted by Silicon Valley, which supported Obama in a major way. An obsolescence they feel keenly, where they live. THAT was the optimum point between identity politics and policy. If someone is going to sell them leftist positions, it has to come from a voice that they trust. Otherwise, the OTHER identity issues take over. McCain wins on those OTHER issues.

  151. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:35

    Believing voters are stupid has borne electoral fruit for 4 Republican presidents, folks.

    Just to follow Mandos a little bit, I think the stupids are outnumbered by reasonable folks. You only have to peel of X percent or reasonable folks to go along with your base of loons to win.

  152. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:35

    “of reasonable folks”

  153. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:36

    Also “peel off”. I do not rule.

  154. justme said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:36

    A comment on Redstate regarding Palin’s lack of knowledge regarding The Bush Doctrine:

    ‘If they hit too hard that she didn’t know what it is, couldn’t McCain/Palin turn around and say it demonstrates the “four more years of Bush” mantra is false?’

    Oh. Dear. Lord.

    Yup. That’s the ticket. What we need is four years of “makes Bush look smart.”

  155. Never Cry Wolf said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:37

    Heed the words of Farley Mowat . . . (wolf howl sound effect)

  156. a different brad said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:37

    I think it was Josh Marshall who put forth the bitch slap theory of politics, but my memory is muddied by the hash in the pipe next to me, so apologies if I’m mistaken.
    Obama is getting his ass handed to him by an incompetent woman right now.
    For the Dems to win, they have to step up.
    Bill wasn’t afraid to go negative, and he won.
    It’s very, very simple.
    I disagreed with bradrocket pre-Palin, but now I think he’s right. It’s time to take off the gloves and stop acting like being high minded is a successful strategy.

  157. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:37

    Republicans may or may not believe that voters are stupid, but nationally, they don’t *act* like voters are stupid. The *act* like they are on the same level as voters, and worry about the same social stability issues that they do. That builds trust.

    Confronted with no evidence that a better alternative is realistic or available, votes go with what they relate to. That’s the lesson of the Bush administration. And the Pelosi/Reid Congress hasn’t helped at all, not at all.

  158. BDIII said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:38

    To co-opt a good ol’ Dead Milkmen song:

    President Palin shaves her head
    Pushes the button and bombs the Reds
    Reds hits back with all they’ve got
    Now we’re all in the melting pot
    Let’s have a big cheer for the government
    Who’s finally ended our descent
    Vaporized masses in the shopping mall
    Never got to see the H-bomb fall

  159. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:39

    And stop pretending policy discussion will accomplish a damn thing.

    You can attack much harder on policy than the Dems are doing, and you can boil it down to much better soundbites. I agree, the dry “here’s my policies and here’s my opponent’s, judge for yourself” tactic Gore used is useless, because people require spoonfeeding. And ignoring personal attacks doesn’t work either. But there is another way, young Skywalker. Hit back hard, keep it clean and memorable. I don’t know how to phrase those kind of attacks, but I’m not paid oodles of money to do so.

    Note that I do not share Mandos’s respect for most voters, tho’ I do think he has some good points.

  160. a different brad said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:40

    I think y’all give the average American waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much credit.

  161. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:41

    Oh, yes, and for the people who were shoving vote-efficiency arguments in my face, here.

    It’s the trend that matters, not the actual numbers. We are way past convention bounce.

    Now, why do I want to harsh your mellow? Because there’s no better time to learn the lessons for 2010 and 2012.

  162. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:42

    The *act* like they are on the same level as voters, and worry about the same social stability issues that they do. That builds trust.

    This is why I like the idea of appropriating the “conservative” label. It wouldn’t really be that hard. Fiscal responsibility, not so much “big government.” We wouldn’t even be lying.

  163. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:42

    I think y’all give the average American waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much credit.

    Even if The Average American is a complete idiot, s/he is still capable of voting against you when it’s clear to him/her that you think so. Consequently, it is bad strategy to base a campaign on this feeling, and particularly to base a campaign on the feeling that you can uplift them from their ignorance with pretty words.

    It’s just transparent.

  164. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:43

    Confronted with no evidence that a better alternative is realistic or available, votes go with what they relate to. That’s the lesson of the Bush administration.

    This doesn’t take the dog-whistles into account. It’s not that the stupid base needs a hug, it’s that they fear sodomy and race-mixing.

    The gist of your comments seem to me to be that the Republicans are producing a positive image people are drawn to when I think it’s the case that they are demonizing the opposite party.

  165. WereBear said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:44

    It wasn’t until I read Nixonland that I realized just how much resentment was THE strategy of Nixon.

    And now it’s like a horror movie, where they’ve brought him back to life as a hockey mom from Alaska.

    McCain doesn’t or can’t do it. But no wonder certain parties nearly fainted from joy when she made ruthless fun of everyone but them.

    Nixon II: And your little dog, too.

    However, I have been quite cheerful since Tuesday night. I see two irrefutable facts that have not been shaken by recent events:

    I cannot imagine picking a veep to secure one’s base as anything but an admission of weakness.

    This is the same old pattern Obama has followed in the past, as has so many of his own base: something heinous happens, fuss fuss fuss, Obama steps in like Samuel L. Jackson and throws the MF snakes off the MF plane.

    Not that I’m sanguine. I’m phonebanking all next week. But I see Palin as a “OMG, Brangelina’s having twins!” kind of thing.

    And more importantly, the press is starting to act that way, too.

  166. a different brad said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:44

    I was saying the same thing, UiP, before Palin was injected.
    She changed the dynamics of the election, and has made it about personality. Besides which, swing voters are “low information” voters. The very factors that make them undecided tend to make them unable to recognize the truth in the sea of competing claims. So they turn to personality, and a more visceral level.
    Good policies, no matter how well explained, will not reach them.

  167. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:45

    The gist of your comments seem to me to be that the Republicans are producing a positive image people are drawn to when I think it’s the case that they are demonizing the opposite party.

    They are doing so by implication. When they put Sarah Palin up, they are saying to the critical voting bloc, “Here’s YOU.” Then when Democrats take the bait, they say, “And here is what they do to YOU. (And remember Hillary, ladies…)”

  168. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:46

    Well, attacking Palin personally is making the Dems look like those stupid “elitist” attacks of the GOP actually have some basis to them. They are hurting you intensely. So whatever you think is best to do, this clearly isn’t it.

    I really have to go to a Boston SadlyNo meetup so we can discuss this stuff in person. I’m not claiming to have all the answers either, but then it’s a tricky situation.

  169. a different brad said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:47

    And I’m not saying Obama should start slagging Palin. Quite the opposite. I’m saying his best positioned supposed surrogate should do some of the heavy lifting against the Republican attack machine she was so eager to do not so long ago.
    But a dent has to be made in this myth, and soon, otherwise she’ll have permanent teflon and we’re fucked in 2012.

  170. WereBear said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:48

    What Dem has attacked Palin personally?

  171. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:48

    Good policy is not enough. A feeling that you will perform on that policy is what is needed. The Pelosi/Reid congress destroyed the credibility of that claim. It could have been salvaged with the Clinton name, but that option was rejected for good or ill.

    Otherwise, identity is what people use as a marker for likely performance. You trust people who look like you to benefit you, regardless of whether this is true or not. And on the lack of evidence to the contrary, why not?

  172. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:49

    What Dem has attacked Palin personally?

    It doesn’t matter which. The Obama campaign should have spiked any and all lipstick references, to Palin or not to Palin. I mean, how obvious?

    The primary is not the general. The primary is not the general. …

  173. WereBear said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:49

    Just to be clear, I know some Democratic figures have disparaged her position on issues, but I don’t know of any personal attacks.

  174. Legalize said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:50

    Folks, I believe that it is now on:

    http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/obama_campaign_mccain_would_ra.php

    I hope.

  175. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:51

    You trust people who look like you to benefit you, regardless of whether this is true or not.

    This doesn’t square well with the “voters are not stupid” argument.

  176. WereBear said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:52

    Now, Mandos, you are getting a little silly here with the “lipstick” stuff. This political reference is as old as lipstick, since pigs are considerably older than that.

    And McCain used it to refer to a Hillary Clinton policy not too long ago.

    This is a made-up line of attack, and I refuse to think cowering in front of R’s does any good at all.

    Geezum Crow, Michelle Malkin got all bent out of shape for the way Obama put down a vase of flowers or something. There is absolutely nothing a Democrat can do that a wingnut can’t complain about.

    That’s their whole reason for being.

  177. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:54

    Now, Mandos, you are getting a little silly here with the “lipstick” stuff.

    I agree with Mandos. Anything even mildly gender-coded is unwise to lean on.

    This is a made-up line of attack

    Yes.

  178. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:54

    Werebear – None. The media is what matters, and like it or not, they’re associated with the Democratic brand. Erica Jong, Joan Walsh, and (of course) Daily Kos have all indulged in personal attacks on Palin that reek of not just sexism (which everyone loves) but classism which is the deadly sin of Democrats.

  179. Brian J said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:55

    People fear for their economic positions. They fear the obsolescence trumpeted by Silicon Valley, which supported Obama in a major way. An obsolescence they feel keenly, where they live. THAT was the optimum point between identity politics and policy. If someone is going to sell them leftist positions, it has to come from a voice that they trust. Otherwise, the OTHER identity issues take over. McCain wins on those OTHER issues.

    Translation*: It doesn’t matter that Obama’s positions are supported by the majority of the public. They’re never going to trust him because the public just don’t undastan them there gadgets and masheeeeeens created by that industry that has given him help and support (the one sector of the economy whose leaders aren’t hanging themselves, by the way).

    *I would have done a “shorter,” but my response was almost as long.

    This claim by Mandos might be the stupidest I’ve ever heard, which is saying a lot since Republicans are still repeating the idea that Palin has dealt with Russia by way of living next door. There are many reasons–some legitimate, others not–why Obama is behind, but technological obsolescence is not one of them.

  180. a different brad said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:56

    Yeah, the base hates Hillary, but she does decently with swing voters. And the white moms that Palin is supposedly doing best with outside the base will listen to Hillary’s critiques with a much more open mind than they would Biden or Obama.

    Only Hillary can say, Yes, it’s good for women that we have one of our own on a major ticket. But it’s bad for us that’s she’s so unqualified, and her actual positions are all but misogynistic. She has no right to hide behind sexism. John McCain laughed when a supporter called me a bitch. Sarah Palin laughed when a radio shock jock called her political opponent a bitch. Neither of them respect women enough to feel they deserve control of their own bodies. Sarah Palin is a talented politician and a boon to the Bush base of the Republican party, but she’s a tragedy for women.

  181. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:59

    Werebear – it is entirely bullshit. However, the bullshit only is credible because of the lazy indolence of the media, which we can do nothing about, and the actual personal attacks on Palin. WTF was DailyKos thinking, posting that stupid rumor that Trig was Bristol’s kid? That kind of shit is making it really hard for Obama, and, regardless of how unfair it is, his giving them any kind of opening by using gender-coded words is going to be waving a red flag at a bull.

  182. D.N. Nation said,

    September 12, 2008 at 21:59

    They are doing so by implication. When they put Sarah Palin up, they are saying to the critical voting bloc, “Here’s YOU.” Then when Democrats take the bait, they say, “And here is what they do to YOU. (And remember Hillary, ladies…)”

    Dear critical voting bloc:

    I hate you. Vote for McCain, I don’t give a crap. But when Putin invades through his next door neighbor, Alaska, I’m selling you out first. Because that is what I do to YOU.

    Toodles,
    D.N. Nation

    PS- I hate you.

  183. Grand Moff Texan said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:00

    The Obama campaign should have spiked any and all lipstick references, to Palin or not to Palin.

    Just think, if Mandos breeds, we’ll have to listen to this shit for another generation.
    .

  184. jim said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:03

    The comments at Shakespeare’s Sister brought up one of the best names yet for Sarahcuda, & now I can see why it fits so well -

    George W. Palin.

    The unctuous smarm, the deranged glittering gaze of the power-whore smelling fresh meat, the total gleeful ignorance … it’s all right there, staring America in the face … yet slap a nice set of bazongas & a dimply smile on it, & a lot of folks seem no longer able to see it anymore. They better wake up soon, because Chimperor was just faking HIS Jeebus-lovin’-patriotism: she fucking means it, man. Which makes her potentially WAY more deadly in power than Bush & Cheney combined, as of the day Wet-Start punches his ticket.

    And yet, on Nov 4, Americans are going to elect McCain and Palin.

    Except that not all the polls seem to agree with you.

    Worth noting that Wikipedia set – quite the large selection & comprehensive range there, & most of it says you’re so full of shite your eyes are brown. McCain’s best lead is 5%, Obama’s best is 15% … oh, & by the way, did I happen to mention that polls are for dummies?
    If you look under your desk you’ll find your helmet & safety-vest – welcome to the short bus, The Trout! Basket-weaving is at 9, story-time is at 11, & try not to pick your nose in front of the others.

    It’s okay, everyone – I think he’s toilet-trained … well, at least until November.

  185. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:04

    This doesn’t square well with the “voters are not stupid” argument.

    No, it’s exactly that argument. From the perspective of the average voter, he/she has very little power to change his or her circumstances. S/he doesn’t live in Silicon Valley with a shot at a plum Google position. The people en haut have always been a source of fear. Fear of job loss, etc. In this environment, your so-called “low-information” voters are thus because they have little evidence available to them that they shouldn’t be. And therefore using cultural markers as political shibboleths is an obvious strategy.

    Grasping this, in my opinion, is a necessary step in either turning this around or salvaging 2012.

  186. atheist said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:06

    Because Obama is an empty suit, an ambitious orator from the deeply corrupt Cook County political machine, and voters are seeing right through him.

    I love all the Chicago hate coming from conservatives. Somehow, it actually makes me happy seeing that they really hate my city.

  187. D.N. Nation said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:07

    You sound like fucking David Brooks. Knock it off.

  188. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:07

    a different brad – I was worried about the media hating Hillary, not the base.

    Only Hillary can say, Yes, it’s good for women that we have one of our own on a major ticket. But it’s bad for us that’s she’s so unqualified, and her actual positions are all but misogynistic. She has no right to hide behind sexism. John McCain laughed when a supporter called me a bitch. Sarah Palin laughed when a radio shock jock called her political opponent a bitch. Neither of them respect women enough to feel they deserve control of their own bodies. Sarah Palin is a talented politician and a boon to the Bush base of the Republican party, but she’s a tragedy for women.

    That’s nice and all, but I really think Palin’s appeal has less to do with gender than it does with class. All the sexist shit is doing is making liberal women want to stay home on election day. Which is bad, obviously, but I think it’s the hicks we have to lure from Palin (without, y’know, letting on that we think they’re hicks) not women.

  189. jgmurphy said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:09

    I agree with the strategy that the best way to neutralize Palin is to ignore her as much as possible. She has already sucked up way more heat and light than she warrants. Why add to it? Go after the old McFart; it’s his race to lose and he is Obama’s true opponent.

  190. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:12

    You sound like fucking David Brooks. Knock it off.

    Brooks’ belief is that a Democratic party “base” agenda cannot be sold at all, because it *is* elitism.

  191. zuzu's petals said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:12

    An interesting take from an AEI guy, of all people:

    Norman J. Ornstein, Resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute:

    She had me at hello Charley– had me scared to death. Not a single doubt that she is ready to be president– everyone, no matter how experienced, should have doubts about the ability to take that job. A combination of utter inexperience and utter arrogance is about the worst possible combination I can imagine. Not knowing what the Bush Doctrine is would be bad enough, but saying unequivocally that Georgia should be in NATO– meaning we would now perhaps be in a state of war with Russia– and then without a beat saying that military action should be the last resort– shows a series of knowledge and logic gaps that ought to shake every foreign policy specialist, liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican, to his or her roots. Maybe they can force feed her enough facts to skate through a debate, and maybe her self-confidence will still play well with many voters, but this first cut performance underscores our worst fears.

    Politico: The Arena

    Wow.

  192. WereBear said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:12

    WTF was DailyKos thinking, posting that stupid rumor that Trig was Bristol’s kid?

    This same rumor had apparently been raging through Alaska for months, so discussing it, to me, is as much reporting as it is rumormongering.

    And why do some rumors get traction in the first place?

    As a student of Urban Legends, I can say that each story, no matter how bizarre, grows out of some psychological trigger. The lurking maniac at the make out spots was to subliminally warn horny teenagers of the danger of promiscuity, and so forth.

    What would be the deeper meaning of such a story, which, after all, started among her own constituents and neighbors, in her home state?

    With my Sociology Hat on, I would say it came from a deepseated uneasiness with her caretaking skills. Add some mysterious behavior on her part (and, as it turned out, she was hiding scandal, or trying to, until the Enquirer forced her hand,) and you have an anxiety that was going to be addressed, one way or another.

    She is, deliberately, a polarizing figure. Expecting either half of the electorate to ignore that is to go against human nature.

  193. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:12

    jim – Yeah, the fact that McCain is ahead now is convention bounce, and a tremor of Palin-induced celebrity, which will die down somewhat. But we can’t just win, we have to win by a LOT, since all of the vote stealing apparatus that lost us the last two elections is still very much in place, if not worse. I usually follow Greg Palast and add 5% to McCain’s numbers to allow for cheating and disenfranchisement.

  194. D.N. Nation said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:13

    That’s nice and all, but I really think Palin’s appeal has less to do with gender than it does with class.

    Agreed.

    All the sexist shit is doing is making liberal women want to stay home on election day.

    Yeah, because that’s always worked to get shit done.

  195. actor212 said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:14

    And therefore using cultural markers as political shibboleths is an obvious strategy.

    Except that there’s two shibboleths here.

    Obama was right to say it, but he has to let it drop now. It’s like arguing a case before a judge: you make the point, but you never EVER waste the judge’s time repeating it and you force the other side to rebut it and take offense at it.

    And Obama has to be uber-careful, now that people are paying attention, to make sure he doesn’t slip another crack at Palin in.

    He’s running against McCain and that’s where his case should be made. Let Biden, or better, Hillary, take on Palin.

    I suspect it will be the latter, now that 9/11 has passed. I think that’s what the Dems were waiting for before launching an air strike. Hillary would force Palin’s focus of attention away from the candidates, and force her to defend herself as a woman who wants to be a candidate.

    Plus, Hillary knows the lingo of the people Palin’s trying to reach: neither Biden nor Obama have that strength. She can zing Palin in ways that not only would be unseemly coming from the candidates, but in language that would frustrate McCain enormously.

  196. D.N. Nation said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:15

    Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick Pig with lipstick

    Oink oink. Embrace it.

  197. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:16

    Werebear – I don’t care who started it, or even if it was true. It looks really, really bad, and it did not go over well at all with undecided voters, or even with decided ones. It has no place in a national campaign.

    it came from a deepseated uneasiness with her caretaking skills

    Yeah. That. No place in a national campaign. Also, deeply sexist.

    Comparisons to GWB, on the other hand, cannot be made too often.

  198. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:17

    Yeah, because that’s always worked to get shit done.

    “I hate you and drip with condescending insults for you. Now do as I say!”

    Yeah, your strategy’s way better.

  199. g said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:18

    She’s all drama and finding someone to rip to pieces. And if she can do it from a place of any sort of official power,well hell,that’s what Power is for,isn’t it?

    One reason I truly fear McCain being elected, because a person like this is truly vindictive and gets even. You’re looking at Monica Goodling on Steroids as an elected official, not just someone’s flunky.

    and I’m not only fearful for the groups and causes that opposed her.

    Look at her history. she’s turned on her own team, both as mayor and as governor, and that weird little Oil Commission gig she had in between. I can just see 4 months into a McCain/Palin administration a serious rift between the 2 Executive offices.

    I mean, just look at the two families. Can you see the Palins and the McCains being compatible in any way? They don’t share anything – not religion, not culture, not interests, not a way of life. I see plenty of opportunites for someone to get their nose out of joint over some perceived slight or gauche error.

    And on policy, too – they really aren’t on the same page politically, even though they’re lying that they are. And there’s definately going to be a power imbalance – I don’t see Miss Mooseheart taking that for long.

    Plus their temperments – McCain’s got a short fuse, and Palin’s someone who is quick to take offense.

    We could end up with a seriously dysfunctional government, and I don’t just mean in an idealogical sense.

  200. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:18

    actor212 – Plus, Hillary knows the lingo of the people Palin’s trying to reach: neither Biden nor Obama have that strength. She can zing Palin in ways that not only would be unseemly coming from the candidates, but in language that would frustrate McCain enormously.

    Hm. You might be right. I just shudder at the media’s inevitable “catfight” and “Hillary is so old and ugly” narrative.

  201. g said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:21

    That’s the ticket. What we need is four years of “makes Bush look smart.”

    Oh, I like it. “McCain/Palin. Stupider than Bush.”

  202. OB-GYN Kenobi said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:22

    Yeah, your strategy’s way better.

    If I may intrude upon this impending argument, I’d like to point out that this is exactly:

    A) The sort of thing that Republicans do all the time with impunity; c.f. ‘latte-sipping Volvo-driving elitists,’ and,

    B) The kind of argument that posters like Guessie and Mandos would like for us to have.

  203. D.N. Nation said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:22

    Yeah, because that’s always worked to get shit done.

    “I hate you and drip with condescending insults for you. Now do as I say!”

    Yeah, your strategy’s way better.

    That assumes I don’t have the ability to take over this country. Which, admittedly, I don’t.

    Yet.

    (get on my good side.)

    We could end up with a seriously dysfunctional government, and I don’t just mean in an idealogical sense.

    And it will be grand. And I will spend 90% of my time the next 4 years rubbing it in everyone’s face.

  204. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:26

    And it will be grand. And I will spend 90% of my time the next 4 years rubbing it in everyone’s face.

    You do that.

  205. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:29

    We could end up with a seriously dysfunctional government

    Considering the current government, dysfunctional might be a vast improvement.

    ‘latte-sipping Volvo-driving elitists

    Latte-sipping volvo-driving elitists aren’t the Republican base, and never were. You can’t expect liberal chicks to take an endless amount of condescending shit and just keep falling in line. It’s not human. (Though, I doubt it will make much difference. You can probably browbeat most of them into compliance one more time.)

    The kind of argument that posters like Guessie and Mandos would like for us to have.

    Maybe it’s overdue then.

  206. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:29

    This doesn’t square well with the “voters are not stupid” argument.

    No, it’s exactly that argument.

    It isn’t. “I want the person like me” is the stupid argument. It’s what sunk McCain in South Carolina: there was the possibility that McCain might have had sex with a black person. Clearly Republican voters could not stomach the thought.

  207. Linnaeus said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:29

    It’s pretty clear that, in spirit, it’s Palin who leads this ticket, not McCain. He is hiding behind her.

    Lies and fear are all McCain has. Keep sounding that message.

  208. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:31

    And it will be grand. And I will spend 90% of my time the next 4 years rubbing it in everyone’s face.

    Wow. I never thought I’d see the liberal version of the Doughy Pantload. Smug, pointlessly spiteful, completely convinced of his own superiority, and unresolved issues with women that could fill a swimming pool.

  209. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:33

    Yes, we know that there are cross-burning voters in SC.

    But that’s not the demographic the (D) is going to get. That demographic is in Ohio. Which may have its share of racists as well. But, I suspect, passive ones. The passive ones can be brought over by a good campaign.

  210. D.N. Nation said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:37

    Wow. I never thought I’d see the liberal version of the Doughy Pantload. Smug, pointlessly spiteful, completely convinced of his own superiority, and unresolved issues with women that could fill a swimming pool.

    Please do note in your write-up that I at least work my ass out and enjoy a diet not entirely consisting of Flamin’ Hot Cheetos and Game Fuel.

    It’s what sunk McCain in South Carolina: there was the possibility that McCain might have had sex with a black person. Clearly Republican voters could not stomach the thought.

    Good thing none of their long-time senators never did such a thing. Mercy me, would they ever be so upset.

  211. Ringo the Gringo said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:37

    Er, which candidate is the dangerous one?

    http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/which_candidate_is_the_dangerous_one/

  212. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:38

    Please do note in your write-up that I at least work my ass out and enjoy a diet not entirely consisting of Flamin’ Hot Cheetos and Game Fuel.

    Hey, if you’re pleasant to look at, all sorts of sins can be forgiven. I should know.

  213. FuriousGeorge said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:38

    It’s what sunk McCain in South Carolina: there was the possibility that McCain might have had sex with a black person. Clearly Republican voters could not stomach the thought.

    It’s not the sex part, most of those kinds of people have at least harbored fantasies of tasting some brown sugar. It’s the baby part that they couldn’t stomach, he should have had it quietly “taken care of” like a good ol’ boy is supposed to.

  214. D.N. Nation said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:39

    FWIW, South Carolina is 30% black. I worked at an alt-weekly in SC for a time…the most back-asswards conservative freakos I interviewed were…you guessed it…

  215. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:43

    And I do also believe in the value of spite. But it has to be the right kind of spite. It’s not enough to say that McCain has eleventy-one houses. Of course he has eleventy-one houses—he married rich, every dude should be so lucky. It’s that he has eleventy-one houses and he cannot be trusted to prevent foreclosure on your house.

    He could have been the Republican John Kerry.

  216. D.N. Nation said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:46

    It’s that he has eleventy-one houses and he cannot be trusted to prevent foreclosure on your house.

    Um, Obama has made a point of this, yes.

  217. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:48

    The passive ones can be brought over by a good campaign.

    Sure. But Obama – like McCain – is not like most people who will be voting for him.

  218. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:49

    Too little, too late, and it wasn’t sustained.

    I don’t think Obama can really do it effectively anymore. That’s not how he defined himself as a candidate and won the primary.

  219. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:50

    I thought he won the primary with an anti-war message that’s now been completely abandoned, but maybe that’s just me.

  220. actor212 said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:51

    I just shudder at the media’s inevitable “catfight” and “Hillary is so old and ugly” narrative.

    Yes, but she’s not the candidate, is she? And what this does is take the media away from Obama like fish to a bag of bread crumbs to get their daily dose of diss.

  221. D.N. Nation said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:51

    I thought he won the primary by winning dunk contests.

    /See? I can ignore reality, too.

  222. OB-GYN Kenobi said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:52

    Latte-sipping volvo-driving elitists aren’t the Republican base, and never were.”

    You mistake my point, which was that condescension and derision are far more frequently and commonly emitted from the GOP ranks than from the Democratic ranks.

    You can’t expect liberal chicks to take an endless amount of condescending shit and just keep falling in line. It’s not human.”

    I have no such expectation, and I hold no such opinion. Perhaps you have mistaken me for someone else?

    (Though, I doubt it will make much difference. You can probably browbeat most of them into compliance one more time.)”

    I can’t speak for anyone else, but I’m certainly not trying to browbeat anyone. Though I do enjoy pwning Guessie from time to time.

    Maybe it’s overdue then.”

    While I agree with you that such a discussion is overdue, I do not believe that the next 60 days are the time for it.

  223. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:53

    I can ignore reality, too.

    D.N. – we’re all aware of that, but really, where do you get the idea that an anti-war sentiment wasn’t a huge huge part of his campaign?

    actor212 – Yeah, I can see that as being possible. I’m willing to be convinced at any rate.

  224. Ringo the Gringo said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:54

    Melanie Phillips hits the nail on the head:

    http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/2079871/stasi-tactics-from-camp-obama.thtml

    Apparently Camp Obama has parachuted dozens of operatives into Alaska to find the skeletons in the Palin closet that it just knows must exist. Unable to process the fact that the left might not come into its rightful inheritance of power, which as we all know is the natural order of the universe, it is behaving like an American Stasi.

    And the more it behaves in this grotesque manner, the more counter-productive it all is. Palin is a kind of barium meal for the US body politic: as she is ingested deeper into the system, the nastiness and sheer malevolence of the Democratic party and its bullying cheerleaders in the media are being sickeningly illuminated all around her. As a result, the media and the Democrats are merely doing untold damage to themselves, particularly since the blogosphere is shredding the smears being hurled at Palin as fast as they are being produced.

    But hey – this is the only way left-wingers know of dealing with ‘the right’. They characteristically flinch from engaging in proper argument with their political opponents by debating the issues. No, what they invariably do instead is to reach for the insult and the smear, the character assassination, the career-ending labels of ‘racist’, ‘sexist’, ‘homophobe’, ‘Islamophobe’, ’hard right’, ‘fundamentalist’ and all the rest of it. Because their aim is not to discuss but to destroy their opponent altogether and thus to shut down the argument before it can get going.

    What does that tell us? That the totalitarian left is terrified of argument because it knows itself to be on very weak ground. It does not have the confidence of its own supposed convictions. For sure, it is fearful that its opponents might win the electoral battle; but much more urgently, it is absolutely terrified that they might be right. That’s really why the left never wants to have the argument – in case it exposes the vacuity of its own position to itself.

    A vital part of leftist thinking is the assumption that to be on the left is the only sensible/decent/principled position to hold and therefore cannot ever be wrong; and that is because to differ from the left is to be of ‘the right’, and the right is irredeemably evil. (The idea that to be opposed to the left is not necessarily to be on ‘the right’ or indeed to take any position other than to oppose ideology and its brutal effects is something that the left simply cannot get its head round). And so the true nightmare is that if ‘the right’ turns out to be actually right on anything and the left to be wrong, by accepting this fact the left-winger will by his own definition turn into an evil right-winger. His entire moral and political identity will crumble and he will grow horns and a tail. So to prevent any possibility of this catastrophe occurring, the opponent has to be eliminated.

    That is what is being done to Sarah Palin.

  225. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:55

    I thought he won the primary with an anti-war message that’s now been completely abandoned, but maybe that’s just me.

    Really? That’s not what I saw. I saw an anti-war message somewhere in there, but it was wrapped up in a whole lot of aspirational rhetoric about what it meant to be an American, about the failures of Washington culture, etc, etc, etc. And a lot of wishful thinking from supporters giving personal anecdotes of converting (R)s to the Obama cause and all that.

    While I agree with you that such a discussion is overdue, I do not believe that the next 60 days are the time for it.

    I think that this is exactly the right time for it, or the lesson won’t stick.

  226. Ugly In Pink said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:56

    You mistake my point, which was that condescension and derision are far more frequently and commonly emitted from the GOP ranks than from the Democratic ranks.

    Sure, but it’s towards the other side, not your own people who fail to fall into line as quickly as you’d hoped.

    I have no such expectation, and I hold no such opinion. Perhaps you have mistaken me for someone else?

    I was using the plural ‘you’. I’m fighting with DN and you stepped in on his side, so I assumed you agreed with him.

    I do not believe that the next 60 days are the time for it.

    After the election will be too late, as you will have already lost a substantial number of dispirited voters.

    Anyway work is over, and I am out. See you all later.

  227. LittlePig said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:57

    What does that tell us?

    Pretty much that you are a fucking nut, Ringo-cut-n-paste.

  228. N.C. said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:57

    Thanks Ringo! It’s like International Wingnut Exchange all up in the hizzy today!

  229. D.N. Nation said,

    September 12, 2008 at 22:58

    Ringo-

    Coach Urban Meyer and Matt McMahon have market cornered on cut-and-paste trolls. Try again.

  230. OB-GYN Kenobi said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:00

    “What does that tell us? That the totalitarian left is terrified of argument because it knows itself to be on very weak ground. It does not have the confidence of its own supposed convictions. For sure, it is fearful that its opponents might win the electoral battle; but much more urgently, it is absolutely terrified that they might be right. That’s really why the left never wants to have the argument – in case it exposes the vacuity of its own position to itself.”

    That is completely ridiculous piffle. The McCain campaign has been desperately — and by their own admission — trying to turn the campaign to a discussion of personality, not a discussion of issues. McCain can’t win this election on issues because he doesn’t want them highlighted. In many cases, his positions are close to those of President Bush (and having that illuminated makes his “maverick” claim a lie), but in many others, he’s moderated his positions to get them closer to the political center (which begs the question of how conservative he actually is).

    If McCain and Palin were burning up the airwaves with policy statements and issue ads, that opinion piece would have some traction. But as it is, it’s complete bullshit.

  231. OB-GYN Kenobi said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:03

    “Sure, but it’s towards the other side, not your own people who fail to fall into line as quickly as you’d hoped.”

    Um, what exactly do I hope? Are you a fully licensed and bonded telepath?

    “I was using the plural ‘you’. I’m fighting with DN and you stepped in on his side”

    I did no such thing.

    “so I assumed you agreed with him.”

    You assume much, and you assume incorrectly. Perhaps you should engage me in a dialogue before leaping to so many conclusions.

    “After the election will be too late, as you will have already lost a substantial number of dispirited voters.”

    I respectfully disagree, and submit that you are playing into the hands of the conservative FUDmeisters here and elsewhere.

  232. LittlePig said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:03

    They characteristically flinch from engaging in proper argument with their political opponents by debating the issues

    It is to laugh. Debate cannot occur without a common point of reference, and Republicans insist their definitions must be used. I mean, come on, “totalitarian left”? It is the Republicans that vetoed the 4th Amendent. Republican lawyer David Addington says Republican President George Bush is above the law. Fundamentalists want abortion to be made illegal. And yet despite all this evidence that authoritarianism has a lot better home on the right than on the left these days, you copy-and-paste something about the “totalitarian left”?

    You guys are fucking nuts. If government regulation is “totalitarianism” but throwing out basic American legal principles like due process and habeas corpus is “defending freedom” then up is down in Republican-Cloud-Cookoo Land and there is no debate possible.

  233. OB-GYN Kenobi said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:06

    “I think that this is exactly the right time for it, or the lesson won’t stick.”

    I disagree. I think that you’d have Democrats waste valuable time and energy on self-reflection at a critical phase in the election cycle.

    I believe that the discussion would — if done properly — take much longer than 60 days, and I suspect you think so as well.

  234. Enough, already said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:06

    Isn’t it time we stopped having any candidates? Why do we let other people run our lives, when things like the Metagovernment can free us from all these stupid leaders at once?

  235. Simba B said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:07

    Some days I wonder if D.N. Nation isn’t responding to his own sockpuppet parody trolls.

  236. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:14

    I believe that the discussion would — if done properly — take much longer than 60 days, and I suspect you think so as well.

    It will but…the illustrative points in this campaign have to be marked as they appear.

  237. LittlePig said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:15

    Yep. A Field Guide To Sadly, No! is needed.

  238. mat said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:15

    Spiro T. Palin?

  239. OB-GYN Kenobi said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:18

    “It will but…the illustrative points in this campaign have to be marked as they appear.”

    Then what would be the purpose of starting the discussion now? I’m afraid I don’t see the immediate imperative that you appear to be pressing.

    It seems to me that, as I said, valuable time and effort would be wasted at a critical phase of the election.

  240. Simba B said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:18

    Isn’t it time we stopped having any candidates? Why do we let other people run our lives, when things like the Metagovernment can free us from all these stupid leaders at once?

    Bwahahaha. Somebody takes the Internet, or at least the way the Internet works, waaaay too seriously.

  241. J— said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:24

    URL: http://www.RingosPictures.com/

    Title: RingosPictures.com, photographs of protests in Los Angeles, California

    Description: Description: Pictures of Protests and Anti-War demonstrations in Los Angeles, Hollywood, California – Leftists, Anarchists, Communists & Moonbats.

    It’s nice to have a hobby.

  242. Ringo the Gringo said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:31

    J— said,

    It’s nice to have a hobby.
    ——————————————————-

    I also enjoy gardening.

  243. J— said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:31

    Here you go, PS. Bob Graham on John McCain (ellipsis in original):

    “That sort of stuff is not the kind of remark for a presidential candidate or a presidential campaign,” Graham said, “and I’m hopeful that Sen. McCain will revert to what I think is legitimately defined … as a life of honor and valor and he will carry those values through his presidential campaign, and by doing so maintain the good feelings that he he has with many Americans, including those who are not going to vote for him.”

    From The Buzz.

  244. Mandos said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:34

    Then what would be the purpose of starting the discussion now? I’m afraid I don’t see the immediate imperative that you appear to be pressing.

    It seems to me that, as I said, valuable time and effort would be wasted at a critical phase of the election.

    Once the election is over, everyone will go home. So full of disappointment/triumph people will be that they’ll lose perspective on the details.

  245. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:38

    I think that you’d have Democrats waste valuable time and energy on self-reflection at a critical phase in the election cycle.

    Why not here though? This is an internet comment thread that a few potty-mouthed nerds read. Nobody here speaks for anybody in power as far as I know, although if The Fool was here he could speak for that Senator he fetches coffee for.

  246. Jrod said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:42

    The time for navel-gazing discussions is long, long fucking past, people.

    Well, the likes of us can have them, sure, but on an official campaign level? Fuck no. It’s time to hammer McCain/Palin and talk up Obama/Biden. That’s it. End. Of. Story. And for fuck’s sake, can we please not leave any ammo behind over concern about what the stupid goddamn media will say? Can we pretty please drop the stupid fucking myth that if the Dems just play things perfectly they won’t catch shit from the media? Can we finally, after thirty fucking years, stop pretending that it’s possible for us to satisfy those vultures?

    “Oh noes, we can’t have Hillary Clinton attack palin, because the media will call it a catfight!” So fucking what? She’ll still get her message out there. Besides, do you really think it’s going to help Palin’s image to be getting involved in petty catfights while Obama is out on the stump acting presidential? That’s the whole point of having surrogates do the attacking! If it doesn’t play out that way, then we simply have a superior politician trashing a pretender. Having Clinton play the part of the superior pol takes away Palin’s trump, the sexist-attack-by-the-mean boys card. Granted, I don’t think it’ll be a particularly effective defense for her, but Dems should be trying to neutralize every advantage the Repug might have.

    Seriously, stop holding back because the media might say something mean. Fucking assume that the media will be against our candidates and storm through that breach.

    Jesus H. Fucking Christ, some people never learn.

  247. OB-GYN Kenobi said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:44

    “Once the election is over, everyone will go home. So full of disappointment/triumph people will be that they’ll lose perspective on the details.”

    Respectfully, I do not share your perspective.

  248. Smut Clyde said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:44

    Melanie Phillips hits the nail on the head:
    Apparently Camp Obama has parachuted dozens of operatives into Alaska to find the skeletons in the Palin closet that it just knows must exist.

    I’ll say this for Melanie Phillips — she puts the keystone untruth of her columns right in the first sentence, so you don’t have to hunt around for it.

  249. Johnny Coelacanth said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:47

    “This is an internet comment thread that a few potty-mouthed nerds read.”

    Fuck you, I’m going to go read comic books.

  250. Candy said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:48

    Jrod, you’ve been absolutely spot on correct in your posts the past couple of days. I’ve really been enjoying them.

    It’s time to hammer McCain/Palin and talk up Obama/Biden. That’s it. End. Of. Story. And for fuck’s sake, can we please not leave any ammo behind over concern about what the stupid goddamn media will say? Can we pretty please drop the stupid fucking myth that if the Dems just play things perfectly they won’t catch shit from the media? Can we finally, after thirty fucking years, stop pretending that it’s possible for us to satisfy those vultures?

    Yes.

    Rip the gloves off and start loudly asserting the truth and fighting the lies. Call the lies what they are. Do not back down when the ‘thugs and the concern trolls dive choking and gasping for the fainting couch. It’s time to really fight. If we’re not willing to do that, then I’m for just getting the fuck out of Dodge.

  251. OB-GYN Kenobi said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:52

    Why not here though?

    Of course; willing individual participants can certainly do as they please, though for a wider, more formal discussion such as Mandos appears to advocate, I have to emphasize that now’s not the time.

  252. J— said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:54

    Nerds!

  253. OB-GYN Kenobi said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:55

    “Rip the gloves off and start loudly asserting the truth and fighting the lies. Call the lies what they are. Do not back down when the ‘thugs and the concern trolls dive choking and gasping for the fainting couch. It’s time to really fight.”

    I wholeheartedly agree.

    “If we’re not willing to do that, then I’m for just getting the fuck out of Dodge.”

    Well, I’m not planning on leaving anytime soon, but the wife and I do plan to retire overseas, in a pleasant location where our retirement funds will keep us in greater comfort.

  254. erlking said,

    September 12, 2008 at 23:56

    As long as we’re stating the obvious, Peggy Noonan is fucking nuts:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122116841707025101.html?mod=todays_columnists

  255. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:03

    Peggy Noonan is fucking nuts:

    You must aim your fire at the top of the ticket, John McCain, and not at this beautiful girl, Sarah Palin, about whom you can do nothing.

    You can never kill her now. Forget it. She can hurt herself, but in terms of Democratic attacks she is bulletproof.

    I for one am writing the Acme Corporation to refresh my supply of anvils.

  256. justme said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:04

    It’s pretty clear that, in spirit, it’s Palin who leads this ticket, not McCain. He is hiding behind her.

    Oh, my. There’s a photoshop of McCain peekingb through the petticoats just screaming to be free.

    A vital part of leftist thinking is the assumption that to be on the left is the only sensible/decent/principled position to hold and therefore cannot ever be wrong; and that is because to differ from the left is to be of ‘the right’, and the right is irredeemably evil. (The idea that to be opposed to the left is not necessarily to be on ‘the right’ or indeed to take any position other than to oppose ideology and its brutal effects is something that the left simply cannot get its head round). And so the true nightmare is that if ‘the right’ turns out to be actually right on anything and the left to be wrong, by accepting this fact the left-winger will by his own definition turn into an evil right-winger. His entire moral and political identity will crumble and he will grow horns and a tail. So to prevent any possibility of this catastrophe occurring, the opponent has to be eliminated.

    Wowsers. Project much?

  257. J— said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:08

    Is there a viral corollary to Rule #34?

    SAN FRANCISCO (AFP) — Cyber crooks are trying to cash in on fascination with the US presidential race by sending trick email promising a sex video starring candidate Barack Obama, according to Sophos computer security firm.

    Email recipients gullible enough to click on an enclosed link get to see a seemingly homemade sex video that doesn’t feature the presidential contender but does secretly install malicious software on people’s computers.

    “This email has been spammed out widely across the Internet, claiming that US senator Barack Obama has been in a sex video while he was in the Ukraine and all you have to do is click on the link to view the movie,” Sophos technology consultant Graham Cluley said in a video posted on the firm’s website.

  258. justme said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:10

    And Smutty,

    Ironic, isn’t it, that the real parachute force was the lawyers sent by the McCain campaign to shut up the witnesses in the trooper scandal.

    Oh, I guess that’s more projection.

    I suppose that if we really want to know just what their up to, all we have to do is look at what they accuse us of.

  259. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:11

    I suppose that if we really want to know just what their up to, all we have to do is look at what they accuse us of.

    Strangely enough, I have not been accused of diaper sex.

  260. justme said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:19

    Whoops, “they’re”. It’s even a pet peeve. I need to eat.

    Also, paging Mrs. Palin. Your comments are reaching their target audience.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080912/ts_nm/russia_medvedev_dc

  261. justme said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:21

    “They’re”

    Gah.

  262. J— said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:23

    Palin spokeswoman Maria Comella said in an e-mail that the governor “does not believe, nor has she ever believed, that rape victims should have to pay for an evidence-gathering test.”

    “Gov. Palin’s position could not be more clear,” she said. “To suggest otherwise is a deliberate misrepresentation of her commitment to supporting victims and bringing violent criminals to justice.”

    That’s in USA Today.

  263. justme said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:24

    On the lighter side,

    http://www.personal-space.com/palin/index.php

    What’s your Palin moniker?

  264. justme said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:25

    RB, they just don’t know you like we do.

  265. thesebastiancat said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:27

    Did Atrios’ comments get linked here by mistake? What a bunch of drama queens!

    Where’s the snark?

  266. mikey said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:27

    Rip the gloves off and start loudly asserting the truth and fighting the lies. Call the lies what they are. Do not back down when the ‘thugs and the concern trolls dive choking and gasping for the fainting couch. It’s time to really fight. If we’re not willing to do that, then I’m for just getting the fuck out of Dodge.

    So this plaintive wail has, over the last couple weeks, begun to turn into a virtual tsunami of screaming demands for the harshest of political violence.

    And I always wonder the same thing. Just who are you talking to?

    The Obama campaign? Pretty sure they heard you. Your concerns have been noted, and factored in. Hectoring them at this point seems useless at best, and perhaps even counterproductive.

    Or are you yelling at us, the other Obama supporters? Are WE the ones you are imploring to take up the mantle of the mean, ripping off the figurative gloves and starting a good old ideological dust-up? If so, with whom are you encouraging us to fight? We should insult McCain/Palin, but while in conversation with whom? The auto mechanic? The grocery bagger? Our colleagues at work? Umm, tell you what. You go first, and let me know how it all works for you.

    Perhaps it is entirely rhetorical? You know that by shouting your strategic political recommendations at your fellow blog-comment-readers you are actually accomplishing less than nothing, but it’s what you WOULD tell David Plouffe if only he would talk to you? If so, I honestly wish you’d phrase it that way.

    Because listen. I don’t make strategy. I don’t make commercials. I can’t take your advice even if I thought it was profound. So maybe we can accept that a significant percentage of you think the Obama campaign needs to be more like the bush/mccain/rove type of campaign, and you all can stop endlessly repeating yourselves.

    Just my $0.02…

    mikey

  267. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:30

    Just my $0.02…

    That was at least $0.07.

  268. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:34

    What’s your Palin moniker?

    Scat Dubya Palin

  269. comsympinko said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:46

    Falter Locust Palin.

  270. comsympinko said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:47

    Putting in my full name gives me Chase Rooster Palin

    Gotta say I like that one better.

  271. Righteous Bubba said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:51

    Falter is a great name. Sounds really masculine and tough as opposed to its meaning.

  272. justme said,

    September 13, 2008 at 0:56

    I got Buster Taint Palin.

  273. PS said,

    September 13, 2008 at 1:00

    Thanks, J–, but Bob Graham doesn’t cut it. This, however, does, the full response from Obama spokesperson Hari Sevugan:

    “Today on “The View,” John McCain defended his campaign’s latest ad campaign, which has been debunked repeatedly as both false and sleazy. In running the sleaziest campaign since South Carolina in 2000 and standing by completely debunked lies on national television, it’s clear that John McCain would rather lose his integrity than lose an election.”

  274. mikey said,

    September 13, 2008 at 1:02

    Sparklepants McGillicuddy Palin

  275. Candy said,

    September 13, 2008 at 1:02

    Um . . . mikey, I believe we were having a debate here about what the Obama campaign needs to do to win this one. I don’t know why you are taking particular exception to my comment, as I certainly was not the only one expressing the view that it’s a mistake to back off and play it the way the Gore and Kerry campaigns did, but whatevs.

    Do you disagree that Obama and Biden should call out the lies for what they are? Do you believe that worrying about looking like the nice courtly guys is going to make the media suddenly start love-festing for the Obama campaign? Do you think we Democrats should just ignore the swiftboating?

    Actually, engaging your co-workers and anyone else given a good opportunity to do so is a good idea. You don’t have to be an asshole about it. My partner has actually been explaining some things to a few less well-informed people with whom he works, and it’s worked extremely well.

  276. PS said,

    September 13, 2008 at 1:07

    And Obama himself here:

    “Because John McCain didn’t just oppose the requirement that the government buy American-made motorcycles, he called Buy American provisions ‘disgraceful.’ Just ask the workers across this country who have seen their jobs outsourced. The very companies that shipped their jobs overseas have been rewarded with billions of dollars in tax breaks that John McCain supports and plans to continue.

    “So when American workers hear John McCain talking about putting ‘Country First,’” Obama said, “it’s fair to ask – which country?”

  277. Lesley said,

    September 13, 2008 at 1:09

    “The democrats protest too much”

    I hate these assholes soooooooo much. It’s alright for them to insinuate Obama’s a pedophile supporter – the most outrageous slander – and then they get to come back on national television with “you protest too much” without so much as a “you’ve got to be SHITTING ME, YOU FUCKING COBAG” from the hired-for-being-pretty anchor.

    Over the past eight years Republicans have gotten used to being openly and habitually sociopathic; and if they’re smug about it it’s because they get the “fair and balanced” air time to say whatever the hell they want about anybody and get away with it.

    A few thousand illiterate thoughtless assholes can be expected to vote for them, but anyone with even a quarter of a brain will not be forgiven if they even consider giving these shitbags a kick at the can.

  278. Lesley said,

    September 13, 2008 at 1:14

    Wheels turning in Palin’s head as she receives the question about the Bush doctrine:

    “so this is the shit the VP candidate has to know about…first thing Monday, I’ll ask my assistant to look up “doctrine” in the dictionary.”

  279. mikey said,

    September 13, 2008 at 1:21

    Oh, Candy, I wasn’t trying to be an asshole, or even take exception.

    I did quote your comment, but only as representative of hundreds, if not thousands of comments in left blogistan, and I was commenting on the trend in those kind of comments with my tongue firmly in my cheek.

    Man, sometimes blogs just flummox me. I’ve been around these parts, as have you, for years now. In any other venue we would know each other well enough, and recognize the people we are dealing with on a daily basis, and you would know that I don’t “go after people”, especially not you.

    It sometimes amazes me how much easier it is to hurt people’s feelings and be grossly misunderstood in a browser.

    So I’m sorry, ma’am. Didn’t mean it the way you took it, and I’ll be a lot more careful with your feelings in the future.

    I just thought that by now – ahh, it don’t really matter what I thought…

    mikey

  280. Candy said,

    September 13, 2008 at 1:28

    I believe it was the idea that I was in some way extolling the worst kind of political violence which set me off. Yes, I was quite surprised by what I perceived as an attack – especially since half my comment was a quote – because I did think I knew you better than that.

    I obviously misunderstood, and I do apologize. I wasn’t particularly mad, just very surprised You don’t need to take any especial care with my feelings, I’m not a particularly wilting flower. ;-)

    I’m having an extremely bad day, and probably shouldn’t be doing to blog thing. In fact, I think I’ll go see if I can find something to eat.

  281. J— said,

    September 13, 2008 at 1:49

    Thanks, J–, but Bob Graham doesn’t cut it.

    Yes and no, depending on the scale. I was just giving a local example. I certainly would like to see this coming from current and former members of Congress, elder statespeople as well as currently active political leaders.

  282. birdseatbugs said,

    September 13, 2008 at 1:52

    it came from a deepseated uneasiness with her caretaking skills

    Yeah. That. No place in a national campaign. Also, deeply sexist.

    Considering that the job of the president is to look after — take care of — and guide the country much like a parent and child, I’d say that a candidate’s caretaking skills are quite relevant to the campaign. If you aren’t comforatble with the whole “Whose Baby?” thing, try this:

    Look at how well Palin took care of Wasilla (20 million in debt!); look at how McCain cared for his severely injured first wife. If this is the kind of care that they show in small ways, with limited power, do we really want them caring for the entire country?

  283. jim said,

    September 13, 2008 at 4:18

    jim – Yeah, the fact that McCain is ahead now is convention bounce, and a tremor of Palin-induced celebrity, which will die down somewhat. But we can’t just win, we have to win by a LOT, since all of the vote stealing apparatus that lost us the last two elections is still very much in place, if not worse.

    Sadly, yeah!

    I’m hoping what truly pisses in Rove’s Wheaties this time around is a BIG organized campaign to monitor the polls – no, that dig at community organizers was not a mistake. They fucking hate them, & they’ve got several good reasons for that hatred.

    What’s your Palin moniker?

    Claw Washout Palin.

    We’re all Palins now!

  284. jim said,

    September 13, 2008 at 4:24

    It sometimes amazes me how much easier it is to hurt people’s feelings and be grossly misunderstood in a browser.

    If you’re not offending people who agree with you, practice, practice, practice …

    My comments are guaranteed to offend only the literate.
    Unless I post a jpeg.

  285. WereBear said,

    September 13, 2008 at 4:28

    Thanks, birdseatbugs.

    That was what I was getting at, only was called away from the computer.

    That’s why I mentioned her constituents as the ones uneasy about it.

  286. Jrod said,

    September 13, 2008 at 4:44

    Thanks for the kind words, Candy. They’re definitely appreciated, especially coming from you.

    mikey, I think a lot of the wailing, as you put it, it simply people working out some frustration. The last two presidential campaigns were lost, in part, as a result of our guys trying to play nice and strictly honorable while being slammed by all the slime and dirty tricks the other guys could muster. I can’t blame anyone for fearing that it was just going to happen again.

    I don’t think it’s happening again this year. Seems to me Obama’s been running a rope-a-dope on McCain. He’s letting the Repugs use up their best attacks while conserving his for when it counts. I think it’s a great strategy: unless the Repukes have a doozy of an October surprise in the works, everything they have to throw at Obama is now old news, while the attacks his campaign is about to unleash will be novel and exciting.

    I certainly don’t trust the media to be on our side, but I think we can trust them to chase after the shiny new baubles like the mental children they are.

    To extend the boxing metaphor a bit further, when Palin was added to the ticket McCain unleashed what seemed to be a wicked flurry of punches that looked like they did some real damage. However, most of that force went right through Obama and into the ropes. Now, McCain has worn himself out with that volley, and what seemed like an effective attack actually made himself more vulnerable to the still fresh Obama.

    Man I hope I’m right.

    Another point: I don’t think that fighting back requires us to be dishonorable or mean. We have the fucking truth on our side, after all. (as opposed to The Truth, of course) It does require not counting on the American people to simply see how good and honorable we are because we don’t do anything nasty like saying anything bad about our opponent. Our opponent is bad, we just have to point it out. And when I say “us,” that’s exactly what I mean. If politics comes up, then yes, we all need to argue for Obama and against McCain. Honestly, I think for a lot of people seeing and hearing an actual flesh and blood person argue for Obama is worth a dozen TV spots. Just don’t get yourself arrested, fired, or beat up over it. Obviously I’m not advocating crashing a Klan rally to pass out Obama/Biden bumber stickers.

    It’s election time. Believe it or not, a lot of people do want to talk about politics, so the opportunities to sway an undecided are there if you watch for them.

    And finally, my Palin name is Cuppa Invader Palin, which is fuckin roxxor.

  287. Jrod said,

    September 13, 2008 at 4:48

    Know what else is roxxor? Bumber stickers. I totally just invented those.

  288. Joe Max said,

    September 13, 2008 at 6:45

    Apparently Camp Obama has parachuted dozens of operatives into Alaska to find the skeletons in the Palin closet that it just knows must exist. Unable to process the fact that the left might not come into its rightful inheritance of power, which as we all know is the natural order of the universe, it is behaving like an American Stasi.

    Liar. “Apparently” is weasel-word bullshit. Cite reliable sources or please STFU.

    And the more it behaves in this grotesque manner, the more counter-productive it all is.

    “Grotesque manner.” Got it. A political ad that depicts Obama looking down with a leer on his face and “teaching sex to children” is not at all “grotesque.”

    Have a nice, big steaming cup of STFU.

    Palin is a kind of barium meal for the US body politic: as she is ingested deeper into the system, the nastiness and sheer malevolence of the Democratic party and its bullying cheerleaders in the media are being sickeningly illuminated all around her.

    Yeah, blame the “lie-bruls” and the “lie-brul media” for your vapid clown of a VP candidate who regurgitates the same speech day after day, outright lies and all, and looks like a caribou caught in the headlights when subjected to a softball interview with milquetoast Charlie Gibson for fuck’s sake.

    Oh, I remember now – she was selected because “she’ll piss of the liberals!” What do you think this is, a fucking TV game show? This is life & death, war, catastrophe, and economic meltdown, you pathetic sack of shit. So kindly STFU, okthx?

    No, not kindly. Just STFU.

    As a result, the media and the Democrats are merely doing untold damage to themselves, particularly since the blogosphere is shredding the smears being hurled at Palin as fast as they are being produced.

    When we want your fucking advice, we’ll ask for it. Since there’s no reason in the world wingnut trolls like you would give us advice you really thought would help Obama’s campaign, that’ll be about half-past never in a million fucking years.

    Just to be sure we understand each other, STFU. No really, nobody gives a diseased goat-scrotum what you think. You have no power here. So begone, before somebody drops a house on you.

    And…

    http://www.commentbuddy.com/comments/STFU/fourwords.jpg

  289. The Truth said,

    September 13, 2008 at 20:10

    It has been ages since I have been able to see my belt.

  290. Dr Zen said,

    September 14, 2008 at 2:20

    I think she handled it pretty well, and that would have played well with the hicks. She shows resolve, yet she’s not war hungry. She supports Bush’s approach to terrorism but she sees the “Bush doctrine” in a broader context.

    She’s been well coached and you’re grasping at fucking straws here.

  291. Mo's Bike Shop said,

    September 15, 2008 at 0:28

    …I usually follow Greg Palast…

    Dude, I’ll save you the suspense. Go look up his DailyKos diaries from Fall 2004 or Fall 2006. You can read the whole shill in one sitting.

    Spoiler: He never shows you his Pokemons.

    Once the election is over, everyone will go home. So full of disappointment/triumph people will be that they’ll lose perspective on the details.

    …And this would be a perfect demonstration of why you can’t seem to understand that you are a concern troll.

    You should have thought of that before we left the house.

  292. OB-GYN Kenobi said,

    September 15, 2008 at 14:59

    “Oh my. I’d start with the massive voter fraud that the Democrats perpetrated in Wisconsin”

    I am eager to see your supporting evidence for this claim.

  293. Mccain/palin: The Week That Was…thus Far…but It’s Not Done Yet…oh God - Palin, Sarah… | Sarah Palin - Sharpy News said,

    September 25, 2008 at 19:47

    [...] After a disastrous interview with Charlie Gibson, and bizarre spoon-fed answers with Sean Hannity, Sarah Palin moved [...]

  294. McCain/Palin: The Week That Was…Thus Far…But It’s Not Done Yet…Oh God - John Mccain… | John McCain- Sharpy News said,

    September 28, 2008 at 19:08

    [...] After a disastrous interview with Charlie Gibson, and bizarre spoon-fed answers with Sean Hannity, Sarah Palin moved [...]

Leave a Comment

  • Things of Interest

  • Meta Goodness

  • Clunkers

  • httpbl_stats()