Email This to a Friend
McCain’s Best Choices for Running Mate
John McCain's vice presidential choice should have experience and reassure conservatives. Here are two politicians who are probably on the short list.
The vice presidential sweepstakes are in full gear. For John McCain there are is no shortage of contenders. Every pundit has ideas for how to solidify McCain’s base and more importantly, how to bolster his domestic credentials as the economy has moved to the top of the list of voters’ concerns.
Some suggestions seem to be the product of pundits’ active imaginations or wishful thinking.
Mitt Romney is featured on most lists, in part because of his business background and in part because of his supposed appeal to conservatives. But neither seems a well reasoned basis for putting him on the ticket. Despite his business credentials Romney routinely polled worse than John McCain among Republican primary voters on his ability to handle the economy. Somehow voters never bought him as the steward of the government’s economic policies. And as for conservatives, Romney’s third place finish in Red states on Super Tuesday and reputation as a Johnny-come-lately to conservative causes would suggest he is not going to attract many voters based on his conservative credentials.
Moreover, since Barack Obama has become the target of widespread criticism for flip flopping on every significant issue in the campaign, Romney’s reputation for doing the same would pose a central problem for the McCain team. It would be hard to maintain this increasingly successful line of attack against Obama if McCain’s own VP had a history of the same propensity to blow with the political winds.
Sarah Palin, the first term governor from Alaska, is another one to pop up on VP lists. Much has been made of the phenomenon of disaffected Hillary Clinton supporters, especially women, failing to fall into line with Obama, so it is not surprising that some would tout a female running mate for McCain. But if Obama is attacked for lack of experience, what defense will McCain have when the Democrats point out her thin resume? Yes, she favors oil drilling, is a conservative reformer and might draw in some women voters, but the first rule of all vice presidents is to “do no harm.” By undermining McCain’s claim that experience is a critical consideration, she would do just that.
Although Romney and Palin may not be the answer, there is a serious concern about rounding out McCain’s domestic policy credentials and convincing voters he cares about more than just national security. As he begins his policy offensive this week on the economy, he must fend off concerns that he lacks focus on the bevy of domestic issues (e.g. employment, trade, entitlements) which concern voters. For that reason, two other Republicans, both with considerable economic experience, may get a second look.
Rob Portman offers an attractive portfolio of domestic experience. Hailing from the critical state of Ohio, Portman held jobs in the administration of both George W. Bush (as Director of OMB and then as U.S. Trade Representative) and his father (as Associate Counsel to the President and later as Director of the White House Office of Legislative Affairs.) He also served twelve years in the House of Representatives. Described by one conservative publication as “bright, articulate, and photogenic” and “a rising star of the party even before he came to Congress in a special election in 1993,” he also sports an 89% lifetime conservative rating by the American Conservative Union.
Page 1 of 2 Next ->
Jennifer Rubin is PJM's Washington, DC, editor. She also blogs at Commentary’s Contentions.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
84 Comments
1. Nick Guariglia:Romney is clearly the right choice, from any angle of looking at it. In terms of helping McCain win (Michigan, Colorado, Nevada, etc.), in terms of helping him govern if elected, in terms of being an effective attack dog, getting out the message, and being good in the VP debates, and so forth.
I was not a big fan of Romney’s during the primaries. And if he were to run in 2012, either against Obama or to be McCain’s successor, I’ll probably support someone else.
But when it comes to the ideal VP selection, with the most upside and the least downfall, Romney is it. My money’s on McCain/Romney v. Obama/Biden.
Jul 10, 2008 - 1:41 am 2. Eric Dondero:Sarah Palin Chaired the Governor’s PetroChemical Commission in Alaska for 4 years. She also served as Mayor of Wasila, Alaska’s 4th largest city and a major Anchorage suburb for 8 years.
That’s hardly “inexperienced.” 3 years as Governor of the Nation’s largest geographical state, added to 8-year Mayor and State Commisioner overseeing Energy Regulation is more than equal to a two-term State Senator with 3 years in the US Senate.
Jul 10, 2008 - 3:57 am 3. Marc:McCain – Cox, ummmmm….
His main problem wasn’t addressing the Bear Stern’s collapse, it’s his last name.
Jul 10, 2008 - 5:11 am 4. Terry Gain:Paragraph by paragraph Nick is right, wrong and then right again. Nick who wrote the second paragraph of your comment?
Given the GOP’s inability to excel at politics (unlike the Donkeys who are popular despite insane policies) the party is lucky to be able to choose someone with the impressive accomplishments of Romney.
If he were a Democrat the praise from party members would be through the roof.
Jul 10, 2008 - 5:19 am 5. Lisa:Christine Todd Whitman
Jul 10, 2008 - 5:41 am 6. cedarford:Olympia Snowe
Eric – Palin? She has 2 years experience now. Also, Wasilia is the 5th largest “city” only in the sense that up in Alaska a small town of 8700 is called a city. And anything with more than 3 trailers in eyesight of each other and with mail delivery is called a “town”.
As for Romney – he might actually think he would be best suited to be VP only to use the office as a staging base to assemble teams then provide excecutive oversight and negotiating the bipartisan support urgently needed for stuff the US has failed to do for 30 years, and now we are in semi-crisis.
(1)Setting up a national energy plan;
(2) Economic recovery of whole swaths of America devestated by Globalisation and badly negotiated trade agreements. All those Northern swing industrial states left for dead by Democrat and Republican alike just looking for a ray of hope these days.
(3) National health insurance and Medicare reform.
(4) Beginning to repair the huge fiscal damage that both Parties reckess spending, our obscene trade deficits, and deranged supply siders have done.
If Mccain doesn’t pick him as VP and goes on to lose, Obama would do well to think of selecting Romney to a Cabinet post to still lead one of more of the teams that has to fix the major crisis the US faces.
Jul 10, 2008 - 6:17 am 7. Assistant Village Idiot:cedarford – your idea that Obama would do well to pick Romney for a cabinet level position suggests that you believe Barry and the Dreamers have an interest in the job being done correctly. There is no evidence that they want to do more than get elected and fiddle with stuff.
Jul 10, 2008 - 7:23 am 8. Patrick Poole:As a Buckeye, I have to take issue with Jennifer’s mention of Rob Portman of Ohio as a possible running mate for McCain. That’s not to question whether his name is being discussed (no doubt he’s in the mix), but the wisdom of it. I’m a close follower of Ohio politics, and I could not pick Rob Portman’s picture out of a line up to save my life. That would be true for the vast majority of Ohioans. What he’s done in government? Not the slightest idea. And Portman’s former congressional district is already heavily red. The key to winning Ohio has always been Columbus. Cincinnati always goes red, Cleveland always goes blue. Columbus decides the matter.
That said, the most logical choice from Ohio would be former congressman John Kasich. His former congressional district is the eastern-half of Columbus, and he is still very popular. A solid conservative and a budget hawk, he also has a track record of reaching across the aisle (he worked closely with MN Dem Tim Penny to create one of the few congressional proposals in living memory to actually cut federal spending – and lost by six votes). Like McCain, he’s a bit of a maverick (he fought Reagan to cut the B-2 bomber). He has a great story – son of a postman, knocked off a Democratic powerbroker when he was a teenager to go to the Statehouse. He is very personable and has a young family. Here’s an added kick for his prospects in the veep stakes: while he currently lives in OH, he’s a native son of Pennsylvania.
Oh, and did I mention that Kasich has his own regular program on Fox News, “Heartland with John Kasich”, and fills in for Bill O’Reilly?
Portman is a snooze; Kasich is a winner. Having someone with Kasich’s energy would liven up McCain’s campaign.
Jul 10, 2008 - 7:37 am 9. Colette:Did none of you read the piece? Romney lost the nomination, big time, in spite of his buckets of money. He is not popular with the base. FUrthermore, right now the only successful attack on Obama is his incredible flip-floppery. Romney on the ticket will nullify that. And Massachusetts under Romney was a disaster.
Jul 10, 2008 - 8:09 am 10. Angry African:Who would Jesus vote for? We had to ask the question, right? Everyone claims to know. Just not sure about this one. I mean really. Can they Guy even vote? He’s not American. And I doubt whether he would be allowed into the US in any case. Think about it. Long beard, wears a dress and a Middle Eastern passport. But what if He could vote? Who would He vote for? Does He even care who you vote for? Let’s speculate. It’s all we can do. We have no direct line and He doesn’t have a Facebook Group Page or radio show. Sorry Hagee, Pat and gang – neither do you have him on your “5 friends” list on your phone. I gave it a shot – but not sure I got an answer. http://angryafrican.net/2008/07/09/who-would-jesus-vote-for/
Jul 10, 2008 - 8:15 am 11. Jim Stutts:Lisa:
“Christine Todd Whitman
Olympia Snowe”
Yes, because the conservatives aren’t demoralized quite enough for Juan McAmnesty yet. He’ll want to make it worse by choosing another leftist moron.
Jul 10, 2008 - 8:24 am 12. Roark:Women who desire for political office, especially the Pres. or VP, are not real women, they’re what I call “diet men”. McCain ought to choose Bob Barr as his VP. Of course that makes too much sense so it will never happen.
Jul 10, 2008 - 8:45 am 13. Colette:Sorry Roark, but anyone gullible enough to fall for Borat’s “cheese” prank on camera is automatically ineligible for the office.
Jul 10, 2008 - 9:15 am 14. Dave II:Jennifer….on Palin…”MIGHT draw in some women voters”????
Are you kidding me? She would draw them in by the boatload!!!
This election is all about DEMOGRAPHICS! In particular…women voters…and married women at that. Now even PUMAs (disaffected Hillary voters) are coming out in favor of her!
Sarah Palin is BY FAR the choice if McCain wants to win! How do I know this?
She is THE ONLY “name” that the left, and even the MSM, could not attack with the same vigor and “despise” that they could a “typical white male” Republican. If they do…it will only create a HUGE backlash for them as women will see the same sexism rear its ugly head again like it did with Hillary. In fact, in liberal blogs like HuffPost, a typical remark is that she is “naughty-schoolteacher hot as well”… THIS is sexism, pure and simple. AND, BTW, it is just about the MOST they can say about her! Hateful, personal attacks on Palin would be hard to ignore and IMPOSSIBLE to defend.
THEY FEAR SARAH PALIN ON THE TICKET! You see it in the LACK of coverage her name is getting! This is exactly WHY she is needed!
Her experience??? You say it is a negative…I say it is a POSITIVE! First, she has had MUCH MORE executive experience than Obama has EVER had…let the left bring up her experience and THAT will only backfire, too. It only goes to point out Obama’s LACK of experience! (Believe me…they won’t do it!)
Second, if you take a CAREFUL look at what she’s actually accomplished in Alaska, where she took on the corrupt “good ol’ boys” network and beat them handily both politically and policy-wise…you see her for who she really is…a REFORM FIGHTER, with not a HINT of scandal! (Do I really need to point out the difference again with Obama here?)
Third, her experience with ENERGY issues is virtually unchallenged compared to others. Do you think the price of gas is of paramount importance with voters? Damn right!! Here Palin is FAR and AWAY a smart choice to talk about these issues…and say exactly how the DEM do-nothings in Congress are hurting the American people.
Fourth, she is a conservative DREAM! On every point possible she brings to McCain what he seems to lack in the eyes of the conservative base. There is nothing but positives in that regard!
Fifth, one thing Palin brings to the ticket is with her consistent and clear communication. Yes…she can actually speak and give an interview without a teleprompter and without all the “uhs” and “ahs”! She is extremely disciplined with her message and doesn’t commit “gaffes”…like most politicians are prone to do these days.
As far as Romney, sure, the guy HAS to be considered…but the drawbacks are many, and the positives, compared to Palin, don’t outweigh the negatives. I say, put him in the cabinet, make him part of the administration (maybe head of the FHA to clean up the housing mess), but not as a VP.
It is time for a woman to be on the Republican ticket and Palin can energize and bring some genuine excitement to the McCain campaign like no one else can….not to mention a victory in November!
Jul 10, 2008 - 9:26 am 15. Jon:Roark, Bob Barr has wrapped up the Libertarian nomination and is running opposed to McCain and Obama.
Jul 10, 2008 - 9:38 am 16. Roark:“women are competent to be President, but no rational woman should seek that position”-(para-phrasing Ayn Rand). AMEN!
Jul 10, 2008 - 9:44 am 17. Rex:Your analysis sets up a “straw man” argument, then knocks it down.
I doubt there’s ever been a perfect choice for V.P. in any election. If he were a perfect candidate, he/she would have beaten out the person nominated for President, because there’s never been a perfect Presidential candidate.
Among the imperfect choices, Romney clearly adds more votes in the marginal battleground states that McCain is weak in, and adds greater strength in economic issues than any candidate in either party – a big deal as voters see the economy falter and jobs exit the country left and right.
In addition, Romney is easily the best fund raiser of the candidates you mentioned, and Obama is so rolling in campaign money and McCain is not that financing could become important. If Obama plasters the print and electronic media with ads in key states, and McCain has none, the defects you see in Romney could become moot.
That doesn’t mean McCain will choose him. In the Senate, McCain developed the reputation for holding grudges over a period of years against those who opposed him, even in his own party.
McCain’s best strategy for Obama’s steady stream of flip-flops is to target Obama’s total lack of experience as a leader of any large organization, as the root problem of the flip flops. That’s where McCain stands out.
Obama lacks a single piece of important legislation to his credit, so all of his talk about change and finding solutions suggests to me that his expertise comes from staying at a lot of Holiday Inns.
Obama is an empty suit.
McCain should go after that day after day.
Romney’s long list of real accomplishments – not accomplishments read in a book, like Obama’s – qualify him to point out the complete emptiness of Obama’s suit.
Jul 10, 2008 - 9:50 am 18. mike:still like Fred Thompson
Jul 10, 2008 - 10:02 am 19. Colette:Rex, you’re right about Obama’s lack of experience, but the creepy brilliance of his campaign is how that’s become an asset in many people’s eyes. It’s been spun to make him seem like someone untainted by the political system which many people just want to vote against.
Additionally, I don’t think it’s fair or helpful to imply that if McCain does not choose Romney, it’s because he holds a grudge. As you yourself point out, there are no perfect choices. But there are many, just as there are many reasons McCain may choose someone other than Romney.
Jul 10, 2008 - 10:17 am 20. Herr Morgenholz:Fred. He’s serious, nationally known, and could shepherd the “Let’s Kill Puppies Act of 2010″ through any Senate. By far the best choice.
Jul 10, 2008 - 10:36 am 21. Dave II:Some interesting comments on the link you gave for Palin in the article:
“In my opinion, Gov. Palin has been doing great things for Alaska. The only thing that could change my vote from Obama to McCain, would be Sarah Palin for VP!”
“I was going to vote for Bob Barr, but I’ll vote for McCain in a heart beat if Palin is his VP.”
Typical? Maybe not…but certainly noteworthy.
Here’s another side:
“I think McCain gets more pop from a woman than Obama. Obama doesn’t need it, but it would help McCain’s old war–mongering perception.”
“GOP is lame and boring…No one is responding to this lame ticker….”
“McCain must get a woman on the ticket, or he’s through. This lady is super-sexy, and would even pull in a lot of the male vote.”
THERE’S the REAL reason McCain NEEDS Palin:
EXCITEMENT!! …a boring old GOP “white male” campaign transformed in seconds. A truly historical and paradigm shifting opportunity!
Jul 10, 2008 - 10:48 am 22. cedarford:Dave II – YOu sound waaaaay enthused about identity politics and how a VP nomination, vs. actual policy, will “seal the deal” with voters then compelled to vote along lines of race, class, gender.
Perchance were you an early Condi Rice supporter? Despite her never holding elective office or having executive credentials before State?
Convinced biography and who you saw was all there is?
“Shes black! Shes a woman! She’s HOT! She ice-skated! She might be gay and lock up that demographic, too! Women will FLOCK TO HER! She’ll split the black vote with Obama. SHe is SO SMART! She can speak English AND Russian!”
“Oh, the 8 years of making policy for her idol Bush or getting stomped by Rumsfeld-Cheney? No matter. What resonates is her parents were schoolteachers in Birmingham, her playing piano, besides setting every identity politics checkmark off except being crippled with a disability and her lack of bona-fide Hispanicness…..”
Colette:
Did none of you read the piece? Romney lost the nomination, big time, in spite of his buckets of money. He is not popular with the base.
The Republican primaries were marred by conservatives splitting the vote 3 ways between Fred, Pastor Huckleberry, Romney. While McCain had a free field with the military worshippers, the moderates, and that element heavy in the early primaries that rewards candidates from past years for all the time and effort spent schmoozing state voters – as “finally deserving their turn”. The Bush I, Bob Dole effect.
“Not popular with the base” is a nice way of saying the Religious Right Base is bigoted and had huge problems with not just Mormon Mitt, but Catholic Rudy. They’d take either over Obama, of course – but not over The Pastor.
Also, it may be true that the Religious Right distrusts anyone who did not have all their beliefs rigidly fixed as true believers by 6th Grade. And distrusts anyone who thinks for years about an issue, judges their past belief wrong and changes or modifies it – as theologically or politically unreliable – and thinks of that as flip-flopping. Just as they believe you can never fully trust a person who came to Jesus late in life, you cannot completely trust someone who coverted to pro-life beliefs after 30. After all, if they think, rather than just feel God’s grace and be guided by it and the Pastors – they could continue thinking – and even change their minds again.
Dangerous questioning of political or religious faith. Just because a person who changes their mind is on your side now, doesn’t mean they are as trustworthy as a true child of Jesus who hasn’t changed their mind on anything since age 5!
Not exactly good, IMO, if you have someone elected President and if they get in several huge messes, stubbornly not reconsider the decision-making and beliefs that got them in the messes to begin with. Even if you view “unshakable, unalterable conviction of belief and opinion” as a plus in neighbor Fred who also goes to the Superchurch and knows that tradition and doing the same things and feeling the same things just the same everyday is true character in an oyster-schucker. That neighbor is not an executive running a business in a glabal business changing with light speed, nor a President pretty confident on running or being in office that they do not have 30 of 30 critical issues perfectly right in their heads – and they would disserve the American people not changing something they later believe they were wrong about.
Or that fast-changing world has altered to a new reality & made something or some issue that the President was right on if it was way back in 1988, even 2000, completely wrong in 2008.
Not to mention the Republicans are best off not having a judgemental Base blacklisting whole sections of society as “unacceptable” to run for national office as Republicans. Mormons, Jews, Hispanic Pentacostalists, Papists, pro-choicers, environmentally-conscious people, paleocons who have not embraced the miracle of supply-side (The more you cut taxes on the rich and grow the economy with deficit-borrowed money from China for pork for the power-brokers of the Base and Corporate America – the more Government revenue grows and the bigger you can get Gov’t, get into more wars, and cut taxes for the rich even further!)
Jul 10, 2008 - 10:55 am 23. Bubba:John Bolton for VP. Attitude beats stylish everyday,let the lamebrain libs base their candidates on diversity instead of substance.
Jul 10, 2008 - 11:16 am 24. Mark E:McCain – Clinton 2008
The Ultimate Maverick Choice
Just Reaching Across The Aisle to develop the Comprehensive Bi-Partisianship Plan
Jul 10, 2008 - 11:26 am 25. Greg:Why not Joe Lieberman?
Jul 10, 2008 - 11:29 am 26. Clyde:I’d like to hear Ron Paul’s name kicked around here.
I know, sounds absurd, but something needs to blunt the excitement for people who want to vote for the first black president and feel they are part of history, overlooking what an aweful choice Obama is at this point in time, and probably anytime.
Jul 10, 2008 - 11:45 am 27. John Samford:“Romney is clearly the right choice, from any angle of looking at it. ”
Only if the objective is to lose. I’m sure when Ohhhh,,,,BAMA gets up every morning and prays to Marx he asks for Mitt as the VP choice.
Jul 10, 2008 - 11:56 am 28. Dave II:Two white males and the campaign is toast.
I’m hoping for Condi. She apparently wants the job and has extremely high name recognition. Her politics are not very conservative, but the Conservatives have screwed the pooch (Porche`?).
Time to admit that and save what can be saved. Keep the White House and rebuild the party, only this time SCREEN the crooks first.
After ‘94 every self serving crook in the country claimed to be Republican and jumped on the gravy train. Most stole a few million and crawled back into the woodwork or under the rock they emerged from. Some went to jail or are going to jail.
This time around the GOP should not support ANY candidate that won’t sign a pledge to leave office with no more money than he entered with.
Clean up the Republican party and the voters will notice. That will give them the confidence they need to vote conservatives into office that will clean up Congress.
Meanwhile it’s batter to hold your nose and support an Honest RINO over a crooked conservative.
Palin was elected with some irregularities and Mitt has always had a whiff of the Olympic Bribery thingie about him. I don’t think there is anything there, but under the current political climate, the rules for Caesar’s wife apply. Condi, on the other hand, is lily white as far as corruption goes. Never the slightest hint of her having her cute little hand in the till.
The GOP has allowed the Dems to establish a connection is the minds of voters that Conservative = corrupt. While unfair, it won’t just go away. So for the conservative agenda to move forward, things have to change.
Two white males, both rich, is NOT change.
Remember with the Democrats controlling EVERYTHING, they can destroy America by turning it into a bigger, uglier version of Europistan.
AND pin the resulting mess on the Republican party. I know a lot of Conservatives are thinking that after the Dems screw everything up, the voters will chuck them out.
That is a crack pipe dream.
The dems will be able to shift the blame to the Republicans, since they control the Media.
Think I’m wrong? Who is responsible for the WTC attacks? William Jefferson Clinton. He was the one that refused to take Osama when the Sudanese tried to give him to the US in handcuffs. It was Slick Willie’s administration that built the walls that prevented NSA from telling the CIA and FBI that something was up. It was Billie blue Dress that didn’t act on Congresses declaration of war ( cleverly worded to give President Clinton the option of doing nothing) in ‘98.
So who got blamed? PRESIDENT Bush. Learn from this.
The Democratically controlled Congress will hold a commission (911, where the person who did a lot of the damage was ON the commission), issue a bogus report and pin the blame on Conservatives. Nothing new about this. As a matter of fact, having the Media in the hands of a few left wing nutbags just makes it more effective.
Cedarford- I could only WISH this election were more about policy rather than “identity” politics. If so, Obama would not even be the nominee…and he SHOULD be falling like a rock now, with his flips on VERY important issues with his supporters, rather than just having a few “disappointed” comments on KOS or elsewhere. See… Obama KNOWS it’s ALL about identity politics! That’s WHY they fear Sarah Palin.
Fortunately, Palin has some things to say about policy. Particularly reform in government spending and energy policy.
As for Condi…smart woman, to be sure, but WAY TOO tied to the Bush administration. Period.
Funny…the reason you give for not having PALIN on the ticket is because having CONDI RICE
would be too “identity politics” focused???
Right! Makes sense……..NOT!
BTW…this is typical of what one can expect to see about Palin, and what we have seen on the MSM. With nothing really “bad” to say…change the subject, change the arguement, change the context…just change the topic of Sarah Palin on the ticket….PLEASE!!!
Jul 10, 2008 - 12:16 pm 29. Dave II:John Samford- I admire most of your comments, and totally agree with your “two white males” theory, but this one puzzles me. Can you elaborate on how “Palin was elected with some irregularities”???
I don’t know of ANYTHING irregular…except beating a former (corruption tainted) governor in the primaries, and then an INCUMBENT governor in the general. Now THAT’S “irregular”!
Palin, as far as I know, is as “lily-white” (corruption-wise) as Condi…the difference though is that Condi has NEVER run for political office, and Palin has the highest approval rating of ANY elected official in the country…85%-90%!
Jul 10, 2008 - 12:43 pm 30. Believer:I’ve been leaning toward Palin for some time now. Romney second, I guess.
Haven’t seen anyone make the case as strongly as Dave II. Nothing more needs to be said. But “irregularities”?? Say it ain’t so!
This choice will tell us alot about McCain. Let’s hope he doesn’t blow it.
Jul 10, 2008 - 12:52 pm 31. Women here me roar:I can understand that you don’t like someone – especially as you say, you don’t like Romney. But there is no wiff of scandal from the Olympics on him. So please state why you don’t like him, but don’t lie about his background. I know, I was there, I know who was responsible for the scandal and Mitt was not even part of it when it happened. Geeeeez, please get your facts right! He wss the one who completely turned it around!
Jul 10, 2008 - 12:59 pm 32. Women hear me roar:Whoops Hear me roar!
Jul 10, 2008 - 1:01 pm 33. Turfmann:I too am intrigued by Sarah Palin as the choice for VP. I have been impressed with the resume, both personal and political. She seems to be a woman of principle first and foremost and has unimpeachable evidence that she practices what she preaches. I have long been disgusted with the liberal Democratic mantra of identity politics mostly because those who engage in it are likely to be the least capable of successfully achieving what they seek when they come to the table with their hyphenated variant of their American identity. Would it not be a delicious irony if Sarah Palin ascended to the Vice Presidency by virtue of intellect, political philosophy, depth of character and success at prior endeavors? John McCain would be by most measures a perfectly fine President, but lets be honest folks, he’s not exactly exciting now is he? The others mentioned as possible VP candidates are the same old, same old…. boring… Hey, John, choose Sarah. Tell her to go out and beat the living s*** out of the Democrats with a solid energy plan based upon what she has been talking about in the last weeks. I’d love to see the far left squirm as she hit them right between the eyes.
Jul 10, 2008 - 1:47 pm 34. lee:Just pick Joe Lieberman. Not my first choice as VP, but he’ll help Mccain win. Lieberman bolsters Mccain’s appeal as a maverick and a moderate. Remember, he ran as an independent against an antiwar liberal in the Barack Obama mold. If I recall correctly, a good amount of people voted for Gore in 2000 because Joe was VP.
The GOP needs an image makeover, and Mccain was a good candidate for it. I’m as conservative as you can get, but I recognize this. Americans had their chance to nominate someone more coservative in the primaries. Why didn’t they? At one point Mccain was basically penniless and reduced to holding meetings over an intercom. The people in the middle (no friend of George Bush but skeptical of far left policies) probably found their candidate and pounced.
It’s a wonder that Mccain has remained generally competitive with big O in the polls, even when his areas of strength are no longer top priorities and conservatives divided. There’s a REAL chance that Mccain might eek out a victory. There’s a reason why Obama is “refining” his positions and reaching out to the middle.
Jul 10, 2008 - 2:11 pm 35. Believer:Heard on Fox yesterday that a woman representing (PUMA?) will be meeting with Carly Fiorina to discuss McCain’s interest in including women in his Cabinet.
PUMAs and other women are looking for reasons to support McCain now that they can’t vote for Hillary. Palin would hopefully aid that group. And those “sweeties” are fighting mad. And not small in number.
Also, O. is slow again this month to report his fundraising — another disappointment like last month? I was also reminded at americanthinker that O. will be fundraising during the fall campaign. Got me thinking — more flipflops ahead?! Maybe that campaign finance decision will backfire on him, big time.
Jul 10, 2008 - 3:13 pm 36. Libertarian Dan:Dave II, I agree with you on Sarah Palin.
A McCain-Palin ticket will have the same kind of appeal as Nicolas Sarkozy did in the 2007 French presidential election. Like McCain, Sarkozy was in the unattractive position of running as a member of the centre-right party of an unpopular incumbent president. He faced an attractive socialist, who positioned herself as a change candidate. Sound familiar? Yet, Sarkozy won by making the election about what kind of change the French people wanted, rather than change just for the sake of something new.
McCain-Palin will do the same. That is, they will position themselves as mavericks to clean house within their own party. They will refocus the debate on the struggling economy from abstract platitudes (e.g. debating the merits of NAFTA) to concrete policy proposals (e.g. debating each candidates plan to bring down energy prices). And the outcome here will be the same as the outcome in France.
Jul 10, 2008 - 4:00 pm 37. Dave II:Libertarian Dan- Interesting analogy with France. Let’s hope McCain has the smarts to make the election about Obama’s “change”, the kind that will only bring us more government taxes and more government spending…oh, and the smarts to pick Palin!
Here’s a link (with a video) you might be interested in seeing on Libertarian Republican blog. Hopefully, we will see more Dems at a loss for words when it comes to Palin:
Jul 10, 2008 - 5:17 pm 38. Jun-Jpn:http://libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com/2008/06/leftists-hate-sarah-palin-and-loathe.html
A few months ago, Mitt was a reasonable VP choice but now with gas price crosses 5 buck mark Palin is the right choice.
Jul 10, 2008 - 5:28 pm 39. legaleagle:I agree with Dave II above. Sarah can bring some excitement and real change to this coming election.
I’m a Republican.
But McCain needs to get organized, and get a central message in his campaign. I asked some of his California campaign organizers what McCain’s theme was and they couldn’t tell me.
I’m afraid. Very afraid.
Note to McCain: Get some energy and discipline in your campaign or we’ll all be speaking Arabic and paying higher taxes, that is, if we survive the nuclear attack certain to come.
Oh, and GET A MESSAGE!
Jul 10, 2008 - 5:59 pm 40. Believer:Just read an old article by a Dem office holder in Alaska welcoming Palin to Juneau – saying he didn’t vote for her, but respected that she took a tough, politically risky stand on ethics in government. Exposing those in her own party. He looked forward to working with her.
I therefore can’t imagine any “irregularities” in her campaign. And her ethics would stand in stark contrast to Obama’s. Haven’t they just opened an investigation into the sweet mortage financing deal on his mansion? Not that that would be the only thing they might look into…
Yes, she could provide the “change” — a fresher, cleaner politician — Obama can only talk about, and that so many Americans are hoping for. You hear it in her answers – she doesn’t dance around issues – very straightforward and knows her values. And that would stand in stark contrast to Obama as well.
Jul 10, 2008 - 6:31 pm 41. Believer:Another plus — I’m thinking adding Palin would generate excitement and media coverage to discover who this ‘unknown’ is — and it would take the spotlight off Obama. He’d sure hate that.
Oh, the MSM would want to limit the coverage, but I don’t see how they could.
I have every confidence she’d come out looking awfully good.
Jul 10, 2008 - 6:51 pm 42. liz:There IS a way McCain could win by “overpowering Obama with charisma and style”… Sarah Palin.
Jul 10, 2008 - 9:59 pm 43. CindyK:Dave11 and others have made all the great points already. She’s the perfect candidate to address the voters’ number 1 concern, which is gas prices.She’s smart and fierce on the subject.
Legaleagle, you’re so right about McCain getting on message. They had better get it together clearly and concisely and start fighting for this! Sarah would be a good start. No more boring republican men! It’s just not enough this year.We need some media coverage as Believer said and Governor Palin would certainly attract plenty of that;it seems so obvious to me!
I’m with Dave II. Palin would add incredible excitement to the ticket. It would be fabulous to see Republicans promote a woman to VP before the Dems, who have practically made identity politics part of their party ideology. Not to mention, she’s intelligent, speaks well and hold responsible positions. She also knows how to defend her positions, and she’s no shrinking violet. She’s more conservative than McCain, and Libs will like her in spite of themselves.
Jul 10, 2008 - 11:12 pm 44. PoliGazette » McCain’s Best Choices for Running Mate:[...] Rubin has compiled a list of ‘McCain’s best choices for running mate.’ Since we all love to talk [...]
Jul 11, 2008 - 3:01 am 45. Tollin:PALIN for VP!!!!!
Jul 11, 2008 - 4:36 am 46. Fred Chittenden:Oh gag me with a unknown such as Paine. The logic for not choosing Romney is flawed. Romney was outpolled by McCain in part because he was one of several conservative choices. Then as the primary season moved on, lots of constitutional conservatives sat at home while McCain swatted the Huckster.
If one is looking for someone off the radar to mention as vp, there’s Haley Barbour. From the South, good governor thru Katrina, and led the RNC’s successful years before the GOP Congress choked on pork. This last point of managing the RNC shouldn’t be overlooked. McCain (uh make that the GOP) needs someone who has experience getting the GOP Congress out of it’s swamp and back into the majority. It ain’t happening with McCain in charge — he’d be happy with a Dem Congress.
Jul 11, 2008 - 6:08 am 47. Tom:Palin brings more to the table easily than any other veep prospect. I’ve got it mapped out on my Excel file. The checkmarks are all over her column in my analysis. Where she clearly pulls ahead of Romney and other white guys is:
Energy industry experience
Political experience
Executive experience
Effectiveness (high due to cleaning up her own party)
TV qualities
Family
Youth
Woman
Consistency
Convictions (includes sticking to them)
Popularity (high within Alaska)
Exciting
Gain base
Gain Independents
Her negatives were:
Not a lot of foreign policy experience (shortfall for almost all prospects)
Not as well known nationally (this will change if she is chosen combined with People Magazine, and other media, etc.)
Her experience is executive, but not national (problem with All prospects).
In my analysis, it isn’t even close when I added it up. Palin just is head and shoulders above the others. I suppose that could change, but I don’t think it will. She is an extraordinary woman with an extraordinary story with a wonderful all-American family.
I don’t see how she wouldn’t win the hearts over to McCain and Co.
Seems like a no-brainer. Nobody can criticize her on the experience issue comparing her to Obama after what Palin did in Alaska. Nobody.
Jul 11, 2008 - 7:43 am 48. Roark:McCain NEEDS to pick a VP who is much much more conservative and a lot less politician than he is. Three excellent choices that come to mind are; Bob Barr, Jeff Flake, or John Ensign. First order if he gets elected; sign an executive order overturning the ban on the incandescent light bulb.
Jul 11, 2008 - 7:59 am 49. robert verdi:To Senator McCain,
Jul 11, 2008 - 8:29 am 50. Believer:Our nation faces an extraordinary election this year. It is not your job to attack your allies and supporters. Just recently you could have pointed out the reality of how artificially high gas have exacerbated economic pain, instead you attacked and made jokes at an allies expense, pretty much everything you should be doing in regards to the Democrats. You will not win this election if you accept the Obama campaigns narrative. Playing by the rules of Pundits and media elites is a recipe for defeat. What kind of America do we want? For the Democrats it will be the affluent, connected and fashionable living out their dreams. While the rest of us are put on waiting lists for goods and services. And they will call it equality. Or will we get an America where people have a chance to rise and maybe fall, and America where opportunity and freedom are allowed to flourish. The Republic will not collapse because of the Democratic party, I have no paranoid doom and gloom over seeing politicians I support losing an election, I leave that to the rage filled fools on the left who define themselves in opposition and hatred to American institutions and values. But we can do better then the Democrats, and step one is being in this thing to win it. And you can win this.
Robert C. Verdi
McCain needs to tell the American people he knows the issues of greatest concern to us and will have the people on his team most qualified to handle them.
Then, at appropriate times, announce each one – sure to get media coverage – and each one will be a star compared to what Obama will offer up. Have you looked at the uninspiring, horrible (even creepy) advisors he’s got?
Show Americans the far superior team he will assemble to bring us out of troubled times.
War/Terrorism
Energy Independence/Gas Prices
Economy/Government Waste
Immigration/Border Security
That last one McCain has to get tough on. I know he’s pandering to the Hispanic vote, thinking they won’t like him if he’s tough. But those are the illegals – and they shouldn’t be voting anyway. Law abiding immigrants shouldn’t have a problem with a tough stand. If they do, then I’ve got a problem with them as a fellow citizen.
We know the people who inspire confidence in us. McCain has to energize us to vote for him by showing us the quality of his team – one that will have the integrity and the intelligence to handle the problems we face.
And whatever reservations we have about him might be countered by enthusiasm for another team member or two.
Jul 11, 2008 - 10:23 am 51. Jbl:Romney! No. Two boring white guys will not win against Obama’s glamor.
Jul 11, 2008 - 10:39 am 52. Jbl:People have to get over Fred Thompson. He’s not interested.
Palin for Veep.
Giuliani for AG or Homeland Security
Jul 11, 2008 - 10:42 am 53. You can’t have two old ’sick’ guys on a ticket | The Anchoress:[...] Over at PJM Jennifer Rubin looks at the question of John McCain’s running mate. [...]
Jul 11, 2008 - 10:49 am 54. Dave II:Tom- Good breakdown of how Palin rates compared to others. (An Excel spreedsheet? …what can I say? I’m speechless!)
Anyway, you may be interested in seeing this good chart from http://www.palinforvp.com that shows how she matches up with McCain. Now THAT’S the important part for HIM… and hopefully he will see the wisdom in picking her.
Also, for those interested in doing so (I have), the email, phone #, and address of the McCain campaign is there to let him know how you feel about picking her.
http://www.palinforvp.com/2.html
Jul 11, 2008 - 12:22 pm 55. dwacpa:Roark, quoting Ayn Rand. Could that be short for Howard Roark?
Jul 11, 2008 - 1:16 pm 56. dwacpa:Tom, please. That’s all great. But don’t overlook that she is a pretty nice piece of eye candy to, especially for us old farts. The 900 pound gorilla in the room, no one dares speak about.
Yeah, I may be a pig, but not a liar. She’s hot, in a naughty librarian sort of way, and that would account for something.
Jul 11, 2008 - 1:37 pm 57. Roark:John Bolton would be an excellent VP.
Jul 11, 2008 - 9:13 pm 58. Jbl:Bolton is a good man but he’d be a lousy politician. Have to be realistic about the veep slot. Thompson is too old, too white and he has a history of cancer.
McCain needs a woman on his ticket, because Obama is probably going to have one. Seriously.
Jul 12, 2008 - 1:22 am 59. Savethecountry:Romney is a financial genius, a guru, graduated as valedictorian of his college class, and then went on to graduate with both a law degree and an MBA, magna cum laude. While he was Governor of Massachusettes, he took the state from deficit to surplus.
Under Romney, the children in his state ranked #1 in Reading and #1 in math nationwide. Remember, he had to deal with a hostile, Democrat controlled State house. He drove out the most corrupt of the leadership of the big dig.
Romney was double teamed by Huckabee and McCain. More people did NOT vote for McCain in the primaries than voted for him. Romney was able to get elected in a very liberal state, which means he is able to attract swing voters.
Jul 12, 2008 - 6:39 am 60. Dave II:In today’s political climate Romney would not even help carry Michigan or Massachusetts…
Put two white guys on the ticket and it is DEATH for the Republicans. Voters will just NOT warm up to them this time, as much as all you “policy-wonks” think they will…the vast majority just DOES NOT CARE! They want CHANGE and only something completely different will bring them to vote for an old white Republican again. Sorry, all you brilliant conservative “thinkers” out there…but there is not enough of you (and not enough of you that are even excited about McCain!) to win this election!
McCain’s only hope is a woman on the ticket. Period!
Jul 12, 2008 - 10:16 am 61. Turfmann:Dave II, I’m completely with you on this but be careful how you frame your argument, my friend. You certainly make a compelling case for Palin as the VP nominee yet it should not be made based upon gender or race, for that matter any other identifier; such are the bona fides of the liberals. Sarah is an exciting candidate because she believes in something and lives by those beliefs. Contrast that with the opponents who change their position more often than their socks. She will have no problem holding her own from what I can see. I think she has the right message at the right time.
Mr. McCain, we know you’re reading the blogs so here’s the message from Joe Six-pack out here:
Step outside the box.
Pick Sarah sooner rather than later. Obama is digging his political grave. Give him a hand doing it.
Put her and the family on a plane, send her across the country with her (and your) message about energy independence and energy policy.
Tell her to leave the kid gloves at home. Go on the attack and bury your opponent, NOW.
Good luck and God bless.
I’d be happy to come to D.C. for the inauguration. Last one was RWR’s first. Keep me on the list!
Jul 12, 2008 - 11:41 am 62. bee:Christine Todd Whitman or Olympia Snowe
What? Why not Boxer or Pelosi?
Let’s use reason. Christine Todd Whitman and Olympia Snowe are GARBAGE with little more than their sex to speak for them.
Jul 12, 2008 - 2:31 pm 63. Believer:Well, bee, that was a bit rough on the old girls. But I do agree with your basic reaction to the two.
And please, McCain, if you ARE reading this — don’t choose Carly Fiorina for Veep or a Cabinet post. She seems likable enough, but doesn’t inspire confidence. Maybe it was her exit from HP…You need someone with only “success” written all over them.
Jul 12, 2008 - 3:32 pm 64. Jim Stutts:Jbl:
“Giuliani for AG or Homeland Security”
Why on Earth would that be a good idea? Guiliani is sleaze with a noted contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law.
Jul 12, 2008 - 7:09 pm 65. LBR:Guys get real!
McCain was thrown a curve ball when Teddy Kennedy was found to have cancer because that’s his first choice for VP. I’m sure Teddy will be there to help him out… They are two of a kind! How about Fox of Mexico? McCain has more than once said that he would open the lower border and give instant citizenship to any hispanic illegal. Fox could help McCain make the U.S. the next third world country. Not many can say that! Now that’s the kind of help McCain needs… “He’s more liberal than Obama and I can PROVE it! Just look at my voting record.”. Now I understand why so many are moving their money out of this country. Why invest in the mess these two idiots are going to push us into? You think Jimmy Carter was a boob just wait!
Jul 12, 2008 - 10:56 pm 66. SLT:If you think Palin is the right choice for VP read this:
I live in Alaska, as I believe most of you blogging here do not. There is the “Palin Image” and the “Palin Reality”. They don’t mesh. Trust me, the Dems would love Sarah Palin on the ticket because she would be SO EASY to discredit. Her extremely thin resume could be picked apart in minutes.
1. She is a RINO. She has managed to do more damage to our state’s economic future in such short tenure due to her extreme anti-industry attitude and policy-making than perhaps any prior governor. Business doesn’t want to do business with her. Newsweek has compared her to the likes of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez.
2. She has no private sector work experience.
3. She has a journalism degree which took her 5 years to complete. Bachelor’s that is.
4. She was the mayor of a town of around 3,000 people at the time and left the city in shambles economically, imposing a sales tax that did not exist prior to. Conservative?
5. She’s not a leader, she’s a populist. Everything she has done has been to please the masses, not do what is right for the good of the state long-term. For example, she recently proposed a $1200 energy payout for every individual living in Alaska to offset the high energy prices- another welfare program. Instead of taking the $1.2 BILLION this would cost and investing it in long-term alternative energy solutions she is bribing us with state money. Who wouldn’t love a governor who gives out free money? And where does this money come from? 90% of our state budget is funded from the oil industry. Guess who Palin despises? Big Oil.
6. She is adamantly “pro-life” yet she risked her son’s life recently by traveling back to Alaska from Texas after a self-promoting trip at 36 weeks with preterm premature rupture of membranes without seeking any medical care prior to travel. This is all documented in the April 22nd edition of the Anchorage Daily News (www.adn.com). The medical community here is outraged by her callousness and obvious lack of regard to her son, all for the sake of self-promotion. Never mind the potential for major inconvenience to the airline and the other passengers should a diversion been necessary. Please take the news article and show it to anyone with any obstetrical background and you’ll see what I mean. Just wait until the Dems get ahold of this information, and they will. None of it is secret. I guess to pro-life Palin fetal rights end at 36 weeks gestation.
Only a fool or a relative would want to see Palin on the McCain ticket. So all of you believers out there, which are you?
Jul 13, 2008 - 12:32 am 67. ZagChuck:Anna Escobedo Cabral is a name that should be on the short list.
Jul 13, 2008 - 3:24 am 68. Kelly:She is an attractive female with economic experience (currently the Treasurer of US Treasury) who also has experience in the inner workings of the US Senate(A former Deputy Director of several Senate committees including the Judiciary)
What about Condoleezza Rice?
Jul 13, 2008 - 6:06 am 69. Turfmann:SLT,
I don’t think anyone’s suggesting that she be approved by acclamation. Let her come forward and be vetted just like any other candidate. Sink or swim. I guess that its fair to say that you didn’t vote for her in the last election, huh?
Jul 13, 2008 - 12:12 pm 70. seeker:WHY WOULD I GO TO MCCAIN RALLY? NO NEED.
But I will vote for McCain come November. My principles are consistent with his party’s platform.
Is that all?
DEFINITELY NOT! We need somebody to shout with and we know that our Old Pal Mac doesn’t have that click like with that of Obama.
VOTE FOR PALIN NOW. The two complement each other. Palin is a bombshell! Everyone will go after her just to have autographs – like the Hillary appeal.
For me:
DAVE wins this argument over cedarford.
GO. MCCAIN/PALIN IT IS.
Jul 13, 2008 - 12:57 pm 71. seeker:Rice will remind the independents of Bush.
Let her continue her service in National Security. She’s doing well contrary to the popular belief.
Jul 13, 2008 - 12:58 pm 72. seeker:SLT:
If you think Palin is the right choice for VP read this:
I live in Alaska, as I believe most of you blogging here do not. There is the “Palin Image” and the “Palin Reality”. They don’t mesh. Trust me, the Dems would love Sarah Palin on the ticket because she would be SO EASY to discredit. Her extremely thin resume could be picked apart in minutes.
YOU LIVE IN ALASKA. EXPLAIN MORE THAN 80% APPROVAL RATING.
1. She is a RINO. She has managed to do more damage to our state’s economic future in such short tenure due to her extreme anti-industry attitude and policy-making than perhaps any prior governor. Business doesn’t want to do business with her. Newsweek has compared her to the likes of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez.
NEWSWEEK? NO REPS USED THAT AS REFERENCE.
POLICYMAKING? FIGHTING CORRUPTION EVEN WITHIN REPS PARTY.
BUSINESS? PROMOTING ANWR OIL. CURRENTLY WORKING ON GASPIPELINE. BUT AGAINST DOMINANCE OF LARGE OIL CORP. SMALL & MEDIUM BUSINESS DEVT IS HER TASTE.
CHAVES? THIS THE REAL “TOUGH-LOVE”. IMPRISON GOVENRMENT OFFICIALS FOUND CORRUPT. TOTAL 180 TO BHO’s CUDDLING OF CHICAGO CROOKS.
2. She has no private sector work experience.
ASSUMING PRIVATE SECTOR AS BUSINESS DEVT. THEN,
DOES OBAMA HAVE?
YOU DON’T HAVE TO BE INVESTOR TO LEARN THINGS. SEE THE ABOVE POINTS.
3. She has a journalism degree which took her 5 years to complete. Bachelor’s that is.
SO? SHE’S BUSY HUNTING USING HER RIFLE.
4. She was the mayor of a town of around 3,000 people at the time and left the city in shambles economically, imposing a sales tax that did not exist prior to. Conservative?
YOU CALL THAT OUTPUT-BASED TAX. SHE WANTED TO BUILD AN INFRASTRUCTURE USING THE SALES TAX. WAS THE INFRA BUILT? YES.
5. She’s not a leader, she’s a populist.
LEADER? PUTTING YOUR OWN CORRUPT REPUBLICAN PARTY MEMBERS IN PRISON NOT LEADERSHIP?
POPULIST? DAVE MADE A GOOD CASE ON IDENTITY POLITICS. SO HAPPENED THAT YOUR CANDIDATE IS SO OLD AND COULDN’T RELATE MUCH TO 20-35. TEACHING THEM GOOD REPUBLICAN VALUES WILL BOIL DOWN TO UNPOPULARITY OF BUSH, OUR MAIN PROBLEM TO DATE.
Everything she has done has been to please the masses, not do what is right for the good of the state long-term.
For example, she recently proposed a $1200 energy payout for every individual living in Alaska to offset the high energy prices- another welfare program.
GAS PIPELINE EARNINGS. SO WHAT? RETURN TO PEOPLE THE TAX OBTAINED. THAT’S WHY YOU’RE TAXING RIGHT – TO FURTHER SERVE THE PEOPLE. IN PURE CONSERVATIVE ECONOMICS, YOU CALL THAT ADDRESSING EXTERNALITIES.
Instead of taking the $1.2 BILLION this would cost and investing it in long-term alternative energy solutions she is bribing us with state money.
BRIBING: YOU ARE INCONSISTENT! LET THE PRIVATE SECTOR DO ITS WORK – NOT GOVERNMENT. THAT MONEY WILL JUST BE CORRUPTED BY POLITICIANS.
Who wouldn’t love a governor who gives out free money? And where does this money come from? 90% of our state budget is funded from the oil industry. Guess who Palin despises? Big Oil.
COMPARE THE TAX LEVEL OF YOUR BIL OILS AGAINST OTHER RED STATES. SHE’S JUST DOING FINE.
6. She is adamantly “pro-life” yet she risked her son’s life recently by traveling back to Alaska from Texas after a self-promoting trip at 36 weeks with preterm premature rupture of membranes without seeking any medical care prior to travel.
YOU’RE A LIAR! ARE YOU HER DOCTOR?
LIAR BECAUSE YOU HID A FACT: SHE KEPT HER BABY EVEN IF SHE AND HER HUSBAND KNEW THAT THE BABY HAD A DOWN SYNDROME. SHE KEPT THE BABY BOY EVEN THOUGH THE CHILD MIGHT NOT BE NORMAL.
This is all documented in the April 22nd edition of the Anchorage Daily News (www.adn.com). The medical community here is outraged by her callousness and obvious lack of regard to her son, all for the sake of self-promotion.
ADN HAS MSM MENTALITY.
THANK GOODNESS. OTHERWISE, SHE WOULD END UP LIKE BUSH.
THAT’S THE PROBLEM OF THE PARTY. WE DO NOT KNOW HOW WE SELL THE PARTY TO OTHERS, EVEN TO OURSELVES. YOU ARE AN EXAMPLE.
Never mind the potential for major inconvenience to the airline and the other passengers should a diversion been necessary.
NONSENSE.
Please take the news article and show it to anyone with any obstetrical background and you’ll see what I mean.
NONSENSE. THE BOY LIVED. YOU’RE NOT THE DOCTOR. PREGNANT WOMEN UP TO 7 MONTHS SHOULD CONTINUE DOING THEIR THINGS: TO KEEP THEM FROM FATS.
Just wait until the Dems get ahold of this information, and they will. None of it is secret. I guess to pro-life Palin fetal rights end at 36 weeks gestation.
NONSENSE.
Only a fool or a relative would want to see Palin on the McCain ticket. So all of you believers out there, which are you?
YOU ARE A FOOL.
Jul 13, 2008 - 3:07 pm 73. seeker:SLT,
I THINK YOU ARE A DEM.
Jul 13, 2008 - 3:10 pm 74. seeker:SLT,
I missed on thing. You’re referring to “a pregnant woman” to stop working.
For the Dems, that’s sexism.
I admit I have a doubt that you’re a dem. But you’ll surely pass as Obambi Dem, since you have sexist mentality, as per Dems.
Jul 13, 2008 - 3:23 pm 75. Anonymous:The one and only Dr.Rice
Jul 13, 2008 - 4:46 pm 76. Dave II:Seeker- Thanks for picking apart (ruthlessly!) the point-by-point attack on Palin. It’s true, Palin will need to be vetted, and the press will put her family through the microscopic-”meat-grinder”, but I have every confidence she walks her talk and means what she says (unlike one “presumed” nominee!).
Funny…the ONE point SLT brings up as a NEGATIVE that the left likes to bash over the head of any conservative is that they are “in bed” with BIG OIL.
But when Sarah takes on Big Oil to get her state’s fair share of revenue coming from the state’s VAST natural resources…it’s used AGAINST HER!!??
Riiiiight~! Like I said, the left has NOTHING that they can attack her with that sticks, and it only makes them look silly in the end! Another example was her late-term flight arguement…silly liberals!
It’s common knowledge that 85%-90% of Alaskans think Sarah Palin is doing a GREAT JOB as Governor. That puts SLT in the same catagory of those who think CONGRESS is doing a great job!! Around 10%!!!!
Silly liberals.
Jul 13, 2008 - 9:38 pm 77. Dave II:For those of you in the lower 48 worried about what Sarah Palin thinks on environmental issues vs. tapping the state’s oil and gas resource…here’s a GREAT interview with her from Investor’s Business Daily where she addresses BOTH issues.
Let her words speak for themselves:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=300668510518137
Jul 14, 2008 - 12:06 am 78. Believer:That IBD interview with Palin is excellent.
This energy issue should be one of the most important – and emphasized – issues in the campaign. It’s a loser for the Dems. And Obama.
Repubs should make the case as often as possible that the Dems have held up our nation’s energy independence – and will continue to do so if they have control of Congress. And they’ll have Obama with them on it. Remember he said he didn’t have a problem with the $4.00/gallon gas, except that the price rose too fast.
Not only is it straining our pocketbooks, but it’s a matter of national security as well.
We need to open the eyes of the voters to get as many Republicans in office as possible. This issue is critical, both for our economy and for national security.
And it looks like Palin is uniquely positioned to make that case.
Jul 14, 2008 - 2:37 am 79. Jim Stutts:“seeker:
Rice will remind the independents of Bush.
Let her continue her service in National Security. She’s doing well contrary to the popular belief.
Jul 13, 2008 – 12:58 pm”
Define “doing well”.
Jul 14, 2008 - 7:16 am 80. redhawk:My Choices
Jul 14, 2008 - 8:48 am 81. Believer:Mc Cain -Carly Fiorina
Obama- Ramsey Clark..BHO he needs someone that might make him appear Conservative!
Just heard the tail end of Laura Ingraham chatting with Larry Kudlow.
He mentioned his recent interview with Sarah Palin – and sounded like he was impressed with her. She told him she would talk McCain into drilling in ANWR.
Both were sorry that Carly Fiorina confirmed on a weekend show that Phil Gramm was dumped over the “inartful” words he recently uttered. She might only be the spokesperson, but Fiorina isn’t scoring points with me. Especially if she’s his advisor on some of these decisions.
She could have more “artfully” made the very valid point that Dem politicians have been repeatedly crying “recession” hoping to make it a reality – in the minds of Americans if nothing else. They’ve wanted to hang a recession around Bush’s neck for years.
Interesting article at “americanthinker.com” – about Schumer and the Pasadena bank collapse. I don’t trust the Dems (or their pals like George Soros – doesn’t he have a history of destroying some small nations’ economies?) to do what’s best for us.
Get them all out of office and give us only patriots. This is a critical election in our nation’s history.
Jul 14, 2008 - 2:34 pm 82. LBR:Remember how Billy Clinton won… He had all the major news channels and outlets report how bad the ecomomy was eventhough the numbers didn’t quite show that. The democrats have gone back to what worked in the past. Make the ecomomy bad as they can. Tell people repeatly that the ecomomy is bad and is going to get that much worse. And then push how the rich are getting richer and not paying their “fair” share of the taxes. Just watch, in the next several weeks one of the ‘60 Minutes’ shows will have an hour long show all about how the poor pay more in taxes in the last eight years than the rich. How the poor are the ones that are hurting the worse because of the Housing Crisis and how the last eight years increased all this. Nightline just did a leading storing on the bank in California and howin people are standing in line all day trying to get their money. They had a guy on saying that this normally happens at the end of a recession not the beginning so there were going to be a whole lot of banks that will fail in the future. How better to scare the crap out of people… Your money is going to be lost just like the start of the depression. I can’t wait to see what is coming next… The only thing is – What if they go too far and really screw things up?
Jul 14, 2008 - 8:52 pm 83. deguello:Mcnumbskull’s best running mate(whether offifial or not)? Why it’s a no brainer! Vicente Fox: he’s unemployed,corrupt,hates the US,and is dedicated to fostering the Mexican invasion of the US.As such, he would be a worthy behind the scenes vp for Mccain and the plutocracy. Also, he has a lot of experience bossing around US presidents,and is a minority! MCcain-Fox!`It has a nice ring to it.Viva el globalismo!Yes, I know he’s not a US citizen but are millions living in US!
Jul 16, 2008 - 11:21 am 84. virginia:This has been a very interesting discussion – however, SEEKER – wow, you suddenly came out of nowhere with a personal attack on SLT. Your “response” to SLT was a cross between:
(1) attacking SLT personally: “You are a fool” “I think you are a dem.” Is that supposed to be persuasive? That kind of personal attack is not only NOT persuasive, it makes us question – why your need to attack personlly? If you have a solid argument, you don’t need to attack anyone – just state your case.
(2) completely ignoring legitimate questions: For example when the issue of her education is raised, you respond: “SO? SHE’S BUSY HUNTING USING HER RIFLE” You call that a response? There is not even a logical connection betwen the question SLT raised and your respose.
(3) Who is the DEM? In the issue raised by SLT in point 4 – new taxes created by Palin, your response essentially is: “so what if she created a new tax, she wanted to use the taxes to build infrastructure and it was built.” You call that a response? The Dems tax and spend all the time – are we supposed to be happy te be taxed because they use the money for public works? Wow, that is basic Dem doctrine – tax the people build some project then take credit for the bribe so you can be re-elected.
Also in point 5 you also are fine with adding additional taxes on the oil business. There you claim that is OK because it is “returning to the people the tax obtained.” You claim that is “conservative economics” – whose economics? Ted Kennedy’s? Taxing corporations for direct payment to the people? That doesn’t even approach “conservative” economics.
(4) You seem to believe that the quality of a statesman is determined by popularity rates. That is your standard? Scary – takes us back to the Bill Clinton era when every decision was based on polls. Palin is good because she is popular (Oh – the $1200 payment pretty much explains the rating doesn’t it? Who wouldn’t be popular?).
(5) No private sector work experience. You gave no answer except – “What about Obama?” That is like comparing Kennedy to Lennin and asking which would you rather have. Cmon, address the issue, don’t just try to do an end run and ignore it. Face the issue honestly and straitforwardly. Admit there may be an issue and move on. “You can learn things” just isn’t an answer.
(6) Your answer to the charge that she is a populist: First you ignore the question, then you attack another candidate that is not even mentioned by SLT? (”YOUR CANDIDATE IS SO OLD AND COULDN’T RELATE MUCH TO 20-35, etc. etc.) HEY, SLT didn’t even mention another candidate. You are now a mind reader? WOW, good logic. Again, stop the DEM tricks and address the issue.
(7) Baby issue: Again, you gutlessly fail to address the issue. Neither SLT or NO ONE else accused her of not keeping the baby! The issue was her pre-natal care of the baby. You call SLT the liar, but you fail again and again to honestly address some legitimate questions. You assert: “the boy lived . . .Pregnant women up to 7 months should continue doing their things: to keep them from fats.” Wow, that is an intelligent response. With logic like that, no wonder we have problems in this party. If there is a premature rupture of membranes medical advice is a necessity. ANY physician will tell you that.
Sara Palin may in fact be the best running mate for McCain. She is certainly worth considering, but: (1) let’s honestly face the issues and not run from them. Yes there are issues with her and they need to be addressed. Let’s not try the duck and run approach or goofy logic – the American people won’t buy it; (2) Let’s look at the potential running mates based on legitimate credentials. Is gender a legitimate credential – yes. Is it THE compelling credential? No;
McCain has a problem. Unlike some candidates in the past, he will need someone who can help bring legitimate experience and a record of accomplishment to help him get elected.
Jul 21, 2008 - 1:56 am