We’ve all heard about the army of reporters and flotilla of lawyers that Obama’s campaign and its supporters in the media have rounded up and sent to Alaska to dig up dirt on Sarah Palin and her family. So far the pickings have been pretty slim. Todd Palin, now Sarah’s husband, was cited for DUI in 1986. (As a friend wrote me: “What, only once? What a wimp.”) Sarah herself made sure that her former brother-in-law, a state trooper who tasered her 10-year-old nephew and threatened to kill her father, was fired, and she performed the same courtesy for Alaska’s public safety commissioner when he refused to cashier the rogue trooper. What, pray tell, would you have done?
But now we have the spectacle of the mighty New York Times in full investigative mode. Maureen Dowd is tramping around in Alaska, animadverting in situ about “our new Napoleon in bunny boots” who, according to Ms. Dowd, “had the same flimsy but tenacious adeptness at saying nothing” as a New York Times columnist—no, wait, as George W. Bush: that’s what Maureen Dowd wrote. The last day or so has also seen hostile pieces about Palin, McCain, or both by Bob Herbert (“She’s Not Ready”), Frank Rich (“The Palin-Whatshisname Ticket”), Frank Rich [Oops: I meant Paul Krugman] (“Blizzard of Lies”), among others. This is a full-court press. An editorial that ran on September 12 (“Gov. Palin’s Worldview”) began by taking Sen. John McCain to task for having the temerity to pick Palin as his running mate in the first place:
If he seriously thought this first-term governor — with less than two years in office — was qualified to be president, if necessary, at such a dangerous time, it raises profound questions about his judgment. If the choice was, as we suspect, a tactical move, then it was shockingly irresponsible.
What sort of game is the Times playing at here? I mean, what makes a first term Senator with no executive experience better prepared for the office of the Presidency than a first term Governor with substantial executive experience for the Vice-Presidency? (Free advice to Team Obama: retire the response “Oh, but he’s running a presidential campaign: That’s executive exeprience!”) That Palin is a woman? That the state of which she is governor has only as many electoral votes as Deleware (represented in the Senate by another Vice-Presidental candidate)? That she didn’t go to Harvard? That she likes to shoot moose? That she is a Christian and proud of it? That she chose not to end the life of her last child when she discovered it had Down Syndrome? What is it? And why for heaven’s sake does McCain’s choice raise “profound questions about his judgment”? Presumably, McCain picked Palin for the same reason that Obama picked Joe Biden: because he thought she would help him win the election. And McCain seems to have been right about that. Sure, that is a “tactical” (or shall we say, “canny”?) move: so what? Isn’t that what getting elected is all about? McCain has plenty of ideas about how to help the country: none of them will matter unless he gets elected. Would the Times have preferred it if McCain had picked some who wouldn’t help the ticket (as, I suspect, Obama has done)? (OK, they probably would have preferred it, at least probably, but they wouldn’t say that.)
So I find that editorial tendentious but also incomprehensible. Still, it is an editorial, and I expect the Times editorial page to be a swamp of left-liberal, redistributionist, politically correct boiler plate. That’s fine. I don’t agree with it, but that’s what editorial pages are for: the expression of opinion.
It’s when it turns to reporting the news that the Times really gets irritating. Consider “Once Elected, Palin Hired Friends and Lashed Foes,” the profile (aka, attempted character assassination) the paper ran yesterday, September 14, of Sarah Palin. Front-page, above-the-fold of the Politics section. Three authors. More than 3000 words. What did it amount to? As Jennifer Rubin put it, “minutiae thrown against the wall by the Times” (“Is this It? Really?”). Quoth Rubin:
[D]espite the testimony that she was ”accessible,” others find her “secretive” and inclined to put a premium on “loyalty.” The evidence? The Governor’s office declined a request for emails that would have cost over $400,000. Proof positive. Oh, and the records sought (about Polar Bears and such) were in fact obtained.
Then there is the ” she blurs personal and public behavior” charge. The evidence? A phone call from Todd Palin to a state legislator about the latter’s chief of staff, which Palin denies was mentioned. Pretty thin gruel.
Next we have her tenure as mayor, where again all heck breaks loose because — are ya sitting down? — she brought in her own team. No! Unheard of. Jeeez. Next she’ll be firing the town museum director. Oh no– it’s true! Palin says (”Oh yeah, she says,” you can hear the Times reporters hrrumphing) she was cutting the budget.
This is pathetic, really. Is there something illegal here? Is there something nefarious? What is the point?
I can answer that one: the point is to discredit Sarah Palin, by evidence of actual wrongdoing, if possible, but if not then by diffusing a rhetorical atmosphere of shadiness, collusion, and self-dealing. Journalists have been poring over her per diem expenses and every other aspect of her performance with a comb fit for an anorectic gerbil with sensitive skin and the bottom line finding is that she spent hundreds of thousands of dollars less in expenses than her predecessor.
Let’s bury that one, lads, and lead with the story that she charged the state for expenses when she was at home and for ferrying her husband and children from their home in Wasllia to Juneau. Don’t sweat the details too much, though, because the closer you look the more obvious it is that 1) Palin’s expenses were entirely legit under Alaskan rules and 2) The Washington Post’s reporting was disingenuous, malevolent, or both.
But back to the Times’s profile. It is a curious document—“thin gruel,” as Rubin says, but lots of empty rhetorical calories. The piece opens with a picture of Sarah Palin standing with the The Wasilla City Council in 1998.
“Throughout her career,” the caption informs readers, “Ms. Palin has pursued vendettas, fired officials who crossed her and blurred the line between government and personal grievance.” Doesn’t sound too good does it? Then what? Let’s take it from the top,omitting some of the extraneous watercress:
WASILLA, Alaska — Gov. Sarah Palin lives by the maxim that all politics is local, not to mention personal. [REALLY? WHERE DOES SHE SAY THAT?]
So [“SO” AS IN “THEREFORE”? HOW DO YOU FIGURE THAT?] when there was a vacancy at the top of the State Division of Agriculture, she appointed a high school classmate, Franci Havemeister, to the $95,000-a-year directorship. [SO WHAT? WHY SHOULDN’T SHE?]A former real estate agent, Ms. Havemeister cited her childhood love of cows as a qualification for running the roughly $2 million agency. [SNARK ALERT #1, LOVE OF ANIMALS DIVISION.]
Ms. Havemeister was one of at least five schoolmates Ms. Palin hired, often at salaries far exceeding their private sector wages. [GOOD FOR HER, WHAT? I MEAN, SHE KNEW THESE FOLKS AND HAD PRESUMABLY CONFIDENCE IN THEIR ABILITIES. AS FOR THE SALARIES, AGAIN, SO WHAT?]
When Ms. Palin had to cut her first state budget, she avoided the legion of frustrated legislators and mayors. Instead, she huddled with her budget director and her husband, Todd, an oil field worker who is not a state employee, and vetoed millions of dollars of legislative projects. [YES, AND THE POINT IS? SNARK ALERT #2, OFFICE OF BLUE COLLAR SNOBBERY.]
And four months ago, a Wasilla blogger, Sherry Whitstine, who chronicles the governor’s career with an astringent eye, answered her phone to hear an assistant to the governor on the line, she said.
“You should be ashamed!” Ivy Frye, the assistant, told her. “Stop blogging. Stop blogging right now!” [AGAIN, THE POINT IS?]
Ms. Palin walks the national stage as a small-town foe of “good old boy” politics and a champion of ethics reform. The charismatic 44-year-old governor draws enthusiastic audiences and high approval ratings. And as the Republican vice-presidential nominee, she points to her management experience while deriding her Democratic rivals, Senators Barack Obama and Joseph R. Biden Jr., as speechmakers who never have run anything. [YES, THAT IS ABOUT RIGHT . . . ]
But [“BUT”? WE EXPECT SOME NEWS THAT WOULD CONTRADICT OR QUALIFY WHAT CAME IN THE PARAGRAPH BEFORE . . . ] an examination of her swift rise and record as mayor of Wasilla and then governor finds that her visceral style and penchant for attacking critics — she sometimes calls local opponents “haters” — contrasts with her carefully crafted public image. [WHAT COULD THIS POSSIBLY MEAN? THAT SARAH PALIN IS AGGRESIVE AND DOESN’T SUFFER FOOLS GLADLY? AGAIN—IT’S MY CONSTANT REFRAIN—SO WHAT?]
Throughout her political career, she has pursued vendettas, fired officials who crossed her and sometimes blurred the line between government and personal grievance, according to a review of public records and interviews with 60 Republican and Democratic legislators and local officials. [REALLY? AND THE EVIDENCE OF THE MALFEASANCE IS?]
Still, Ms. Palin has many supporters. [DIGRESSION TIME: THE TIMES BRIEFLY ENTERS THE ON-THE-ONE-HAND, ON-THE-OTHER-HAND PSEUDO-OBJECTIVITY MODE.] As a two-term mayor she paved roads and built an ice rink [SNARK ALERT #3, DEPARTMENT OF SMALL-BEER REJOINDERS: SO SHE PAVED ROADS AND BUILT AN ICE RINK: BIG DEAL, RIGHT?]], and as governor she has pushed through higher taxes on the oil companies that dominate one-third of the state’s economy. She stirs deep emotions. In Wasilla, many residents display unflagging affection, cheering “our Sarah” and hissing at her critics.
“She is bright and has unfailing political instincts,” said Steve Haycox, a history professor at the University of Alaska. “She taps very directly into anxieties about the economic future.”
“But,” he added, “her governing style raises a lot of hard questions.” [AND THOSE QUESTIONS ARE?]
Ms. Palin declined to grant an interview for this article. [WE ALREADY KNEW SHE WAS SMART. I AM GLAD TO SHE SHE IS AVAILING HERSELF OF THE KIMBALL CONSENSUS FOR CONSERVATIVES DEALING WITH THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA.] The McCain-Palin campaign responded to some questions on her behalf and that of her husband, while referring others to the governor’s spokespeople, who did not respond. [SEE ABOVE.]
Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell said Ms. Palin had conducted an accessible and effective administration in the public’s interest. “Everything she does is for the ordinary working people of Alaska,” he said.
In Wasilla, a builder said he complained to Mayor Palin when the city attorney put a stop-work order on his housing project. She responded, he said, by engineering the attorney’s firing. [SO, HO-HUM. WHAT?]
Interviews show that Ms. Palin runs an administration that puts a premium on loyalty and secrecy. [OOO—“LOYALTY”—THAT’S A GEORGE W. BUSH WORD, ISN’T IT? AND “SECRECY”: I GUESS THAT MEANS THE NEW YORK TIMES HAD TROUBLE FINDING MUCH WORTH REPORTING: IMAGINE THAT!] The governor and her top officials sometimes use personal e-mail accounts for state business; [AND THE POINT IS?] dozens of e-mail messages obtained by The New York Times show that her staff members studied whether that could allow them to circumvent subpoenas seeking public records. [WHERE IS THIS ONE GOING?]
Rick Steiner, a University of Alaska professor, sought the e-mail messages of state scientists who had examined the effect of global warming on polar bears.[NO, I AM NOT MAKING THIS UP.] (Ms. Palin said the scientists had found no ill effects, and she has sued the federal government to block the listing of the bears as endangered.) [GOOD THINKING, SARAH.]An administration official told Mr. Steiner that his request would cost $468,784 to process. [I DON’T DOUBT IT, DO YOU?]
When Mr. Steiner finally obtained the e-mail messages — through a federal records request — he discovered that state scientists had in fact agreed that the bears were in danger, records show. [WELL, I’D LIKE TO SEE THE DATA.]
“Their secrecy is off the charts,” Mr. Steiner said. [GOSH, WHAT A PUT DOWN]
State legislators are investigating accusations that Ms. Palin and her husband pressured officials to fire a state trooper who had gone through a messy divorce with her sister, charges that she denies. [OH, THE ALASKS TROPPERGATE STORY! NO JOY THERE FOR THE TIMES: TURNS OUT THAT CHAP WAS A BAD HAT WHO WAS FOND OF TASERING 10-YEAR-OLDS. SEE ABOVE FOR SOME DETAILS.] But interviews make clear that the Palins draw few distinctions between the personal and the political. [GEE WHIZ!]
Last summer State Representative John Harris, the Republican speaker of the House, picked up his phone and heard Mr. Palin’s voice. The governor’s husband sounded edgy. He said he was unhappy that Mr. Harris had hired John Bitney as his chief of staff, the speaker recalled. Mr. Bitney was a high school classmate of the Palins and had worked for Ms. Palin. But she fired Mr. Bitney after learning that he had fallen in love with another longtime friend. [THAT METALIC NOISE YOU HEAR IS THE SOUND OF THE REPORTER’S PEN SCRAPING THE BOTTOM OF THE BARREL.]
There follows a bit of more or less neutral biographical material, and then the Times gets back to attack mode. When Palin was mayor of Wasilla, the Times reports,
[C]areers were turned upside down. [THAT HAPPENS. SO WHAT?] The mayor quickly fired the town’s museum director, John Cooper. Later, she sent an aide to the museum to talk to the three remaining employees. “He told us they only wanted two,” recalled Esther West, one of the three, “and we had to pick who was going to be laid off.” The three quit as one. [SO LONG, FAREWELL, SAYONARA . . . ]
Ms. Palin cited budget difficulties for the museum cuts. Mr. Cooper thought differently, saying the museum had become a microcosm of class and cultural conflicts in town. “It represented that the town was becoming more progressive, and they didn’t want that,” he said. [AND WHO CAN BLAME THEM?]
Let me save you the tedium: when she was mayor, Palin fired some people. The Times endeavored mightily to make something of that, but new brooms do have a way of sweeping things clean . . .
Ms. Palin ordered city employees not to talk to the press. [SMART THINKING, IF THE PRESS IS REPRESENTED BY ORGANS LIKE THE NEW YORK TIMES.] And she used city money to buy a white Suburban for the mayor’s use — employees sarcastically called it the mayor-mobile. [GUTSY MOVE ON THE PART OF THE TIMES: PALIN’S TRAVEL EXPENSES AS GOVERNOR LAST YEAR WERE $93,000; HER PREDECESOR’S EXPENSES FOR 2006 WERE $463,000.]
The new mayor also tended carefully to her evangelical base. [AGAIN, GOOD FOR HER. GLAD TO SEE SHE HAS THE EYE ON THE BALL.] She appointed a pastor to the town planning board. [YES, AND SO???] And she began to eye the library. For years, social conservatives had pressed the library director to remove books they considered immoral. [AH, THE BOOK-BANNING-BURNING-CENSORSHIP RUMOR. NICE TRY, FOLKS, BUT IT’S BEEN SHOWN TO BE A RED-HERRING.]
“People would bring books back censored,” recalled former Mayor John Stein, Ms. Palin’s predecessor. “Pages would get marked up or torn out.” [I’D BE WILLING TO BET THAT SARAH PALIN OBJECTS TO PEOPLE DEFACING LIBRARY BOOKS AS MUCH AS I OR ANY REPORTER FROM THE TIMES: IS THE TIMES SAYING, OR IMPLYING, OR HINTING, OR JUST SORT OF GETTING IT ON TO THE TABLE THAT PALIN WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEFACEMENT?]
Etc., etc. Other high crimes and misdemeanors: “ Ms. Palin and aides use their private e-mail addresses for state business.” Call in the cavalry! What a scandal. “Many lawmakers”—no names or numbers provided—“contend that Ms. Palin is overly reliant on a small inner circle that leaves her isolated.” Guess what, Palin as some political enemies. So what?
In the course of this seemingly interminable article, the Times frequently mentions the high regard Palin enjoys among here constituents. Indeed, most polls show her with a general approval rating of about 85 percent and an approval rating among Democrats of 75 percent. As Glenn Reynolds observes, “Gosh, if you read the New York Times reporting on Palin, that’s hard to believe.” Of course, what’s really “hard to believe” is The New York Times. I suppose there is some satisfaction in having one’s prejudices so flagrantly corroborated.
PJM Home
The New Criterion
The Rape of the Masters: How Political Correctness Sabotages Art
Lives of the Mind: The Use and Abuse of Intelligence from Hegel to Wodehouse
Art’s Prospect: The Challenge of Tradition in an Age of Celebrity
Experiments Against Reality: The Fate of Culture in the Postmodern Age
Tenured Radicals, NEW, EXPANDED EDITION FALL 2008! How Politics has Corrupted our Higher Education
Counterpoints: 25 Years of The New Criterion on Culture and the Arts
The Long March: How the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s Changed America
Against the Idols of the Age
Lengthened Shadows: America and Its Institutions in the Twenty-First Century
The Survival of Culture: Permanent Values in a Virtual Age
Physics and Politics, by Walter Bagehot, edited with an
Introduction by Roger Kimball
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.
73 Comments
1. John N. Frary:Her “base” includes 75% of Alaska’s Democrats in one of the most unchurched states in the Union.
Sep 15, 2008 - 7:40 am 2. Paul:All this will emerge, when the history of these events is written (but not in my lifetime, which sweats still under the miasma of the 1960s), as the death of all the pretensions of Feminism. There has not been a peep, not a single complaint, nor will there be, from any feminist voice or organization, against this ridiculous and indeed shameful attempt at the political murder of an alive WOMAN who has done everything the boss feminists have been promoting — in principle — to their acolytes across the whole academic landscape, for the last 30 years. She has behaved like a MAN, and beaten the MEN at their own game, and yet has not given up her — shall we call them “reproductive options” or the rewards of family life. No wonder the NYTimes finds her intolerable: all that and a Republican too? Faugh!
Sep 15, 2008 - 9:14 am 3. runbei:Where can I get a lipstick bumper sticker? No, two. Go Sarah! (And a Miss Piggy for my back-window deck.)
Sep 15, 2008 - 9:28 am 4. Pajamas Media » Parsing the NY Times on Sarah Palin:[...] Read the entire story here… [...]
Sep 15, 2008 - 9:29 am 5. Steve McCullough:The American so-called “mainstream media” is nothing but a corrupt, immoral, agenda-driven, liberal propaganda tool for the Democrat Party. Joseph Goebbels and Adolf Hitler would admire the work of this group of gutter snipes.
Sep 15, 2008 - 9:33 am 6. Concerned Citizen:Cancel my subscription to the NY Times effective immediately.
Oops, almost forgot – I quit reading that paper that sells opinion masquerading as news ten years ago….
Sep 15, 2008 - 9:36 am 7. BackwardsBoy:Thae NYT article was also front page news down here in the Orlando Slantinel. If it weren’t for the coupons, I’d cancel my subscription.
Sep 15, 2008 - 9:46 am 8. mickeyc:Did the NYT ever report on Hillary Clinton’s firing and pro(per)secution of the travel office staff, or her husband’s dismissal of all the US Attorneys? Did it ever do anything but laud Pres. Clinton’s (alleged)use of his wife for advice on political and policy questions?
Sep 15, 2008 - 10:05 am 9. Chuck Pelto:TO: Roger Kimball
RE: Reading the Papers
I like the way Thomas Jefferson put it….
RE: Another Anecdote
It seems that all cadets at the US Military Academy are required to subscribe to the New York Times.
One cadet approached his TAC Officer and asked, “Why are we required to subscribe to this ********* newspaper?”
To which the TAC Officer replied, “Know your enemy.”
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Sep 15, 2008 - 10:15 am 10. Concerned Citizen:[Advertisements contain the only truths to be relied on in a newspaper. -- Mark Twain]
Hey BackwardsBoy…. go to Starbucks and there are usually piles of free, previously read newspapers. Someone foolish enough to part with Fourbucks for a fancy cup of coffee is probably not paying attention to the coupons in the newspaper, d’ya think?
Sep 15, 2008 - 10:17 am 11. Robert Hurley:The Times gets it right and Roger gets it wrong
Sep 15, 2008 - 10:25 am 12. Sandra:I want more personal information. Really. Does she handwash her undies and stockings? What does she like in her coffee? Who makes the morning coffee at the Palin house? How late does she stay up at night and what does she watch on late night TV? What size shoe does she wear? Does she like synthetic or natural fabrics (silk,cotton) for her wardrobe? What’s with the hairdo? Does she prefer tailored pants or does she like elastic in the waistband? And what does all this say about her? Really. I’m sure the intrepid team of reporters who have made the pilgrimate to Alaska will be able to provide this vital information – and more – over the next week or so.
Sep 15, 2008 - 10:34 am 13. Sandra:I want more personal information. Really. Does she handwash her undies and stockings? What does she like in her coffee? Who makes the morning coffee at the Palin house? How late does she stay up at night and what does she watch on late night TV? What size shoe does she wear? Does she like synthetic or natural fabrics (silk,cotton) for her wardrobe? What’s with the hairdo? Does she prefer tailored pants or does she like elastic in the waistband? And what does all this say about her? Really. I’m sure the intrepid team of reporters who have made the pilgrimage to Alaska will be able to provide this vital information – and more – over the next week or so.
Sep 15, 2008 - 10:36 am 14. Annabel:What exactly does Roger get wrong, Robert? Could you be just a tad more specific and give some evidence? And can you explain why Palin has such a high approval rating even among democrats in her state if she’s such a lousy vindictive governor as the NYTimes insinuates?
Sep 15, 2008 - 10:51 am 15. RE:The NYT pretty much has to keep thowing this chaff up in the air to keep people distracted from names like Ayers, Wright, Annenberg, Woods, Alinksy, Rezko, Dohrn, ACORN, etc.
They’re trying to implement ‘the best defense is a good offense’ strategy but the public does not appear to be buying it.
Sep 15, 2008 - 11:04 am 16. airbound dude:the left is mad at palin because she is a success both as a woman and a mother. at first i was sceptical of her choice as VP but after seeing the press viciously attack her and her family i decided to support her. The reaction of the press allowed the public to see their true colors and where they truly stand.
and i no longer trust the “MAINSTREAM MEDIA”
Sep 15, 2008 - 11:06 am 17. Mike Shuster:I think any governor who is in a state with a massive oil surplus that allows her to send out $1200 checks to any resident is going to be pretty popular. And she obviously did do a lot of valuable reforming. That said, I am curious to learn more about the issues raised in this piece. And I basically agree with David Frum here:
http://frum.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTcxOGRiMWY0MmQzMWRhMzg2NzQ1MjE2NTNiYmM2NzY=
Sep 15, 2008 - 11:08 am 18. Boris:“SNARK ALERT #1, LOVE OF ANIMALS DIVSION [sic]”
Nice defense of cronyism. I’m sure the cow lover is doing a “heckuva job.”
I guess you guys believe the government should pay for employee meals at home now. Way to stick to your principles!
Sep 15, 2008 - 11:18 am 19. beck:I just LMAO when I went over to NYT and read some of the over 1,000 comments that go something like this “finally the media is exposing the truth”. These people are rabid because they know they are going to lose and are grasping at anything that will bring her down. That’s probably the reason the McCain is closing in on Obama in NY.
Sep 15, 2008 - 11:30 am 20. Krusty:Please be honest with yourselves. If she was a democrat you would be incensed that the “dumbo-crats” placed this person in a position to break ties and become leader of this country. It’s insane. The conservatives I know in the Nordqvist mold are beside themselves. Heck even Peggy Noonan, off-mic criticized the pick. The intellectual dishonesty here is amazing.
Germany’s head of state is a PhD recipient in quantum chemistry. The U.S. gets a sportscasting, talk-points only idiot? There were better choices and Palin was cynical. Just be honest and move on to McCain’s policies of change.
Sep 15, 2008 - 11:45 am 21. Robert Hurley:Anna:
Even the WSJ has pointed out that she is lying about ear marks.
Sep 15, 2008 - 12:01 pm 22. colagirl:Isn’t this the same paper that ran those gossip-mongering allegations of a McCain affair with a lobbyist?
Sep 15, 2008 - 12:32 pm 23. srlucado:Sarah Palin must be flattered that she is generating so much unvarnished hatred.
She’s definitely doing something right when the NY Times, the Washington Post, and every other Democratic lickspittle organ is out for her blood.
Go get ‘em, Saracuda.
Scott
Sep 15, 2008 - 12:32 pm 24. always right:Sarah Palin ran the reform ticket against the incumbent GOP candidate, and got Alaskans’ support (won the election).
For argument’s sake, let’s say the first thing she did was not ‘bring her own team’, but instead Gov. Palin retained all the good old boys club on her staff.
What the media headline would have been now? Yes, you guess it, “Gov. Palin Not a Reformer”.
Sep 15, 2008 - 12:35 pm 25. jerry:Robert:
The Wall Street Jountal did indeed point out that she requested money from Congress. However, it wasn’t clear in the article if they were true earmarks, i.e., attachments to unrelated legislation or if they were straight forward requests for National Funding as a specific appropriation. The latter are not earmarks.
The Obama Earmark attack is little more then an application of the moral equivalence principle. She is much better on spending then Earmark Barry O who has earmarked money for his wife in the US Senate and ranks pretty high on the Earmark hall of fame. Let’s not forget his $100K Illinois Senate earmarck to his buddy for the “Englewood Garden.” You know the one where his buddy ran off with money and no garden appeared. In Chicago politics if you want to use an earmark to pass taxpayers money to a friend you make sure he has enough money to complete project and get is cut too. The Chosen One isn’t smart enough to know how to do it right.
Sep 15, 2008 - 12:50 pm 26. Voolfie D:In her interview with Charlie Gibson
Ms. Palin pointed out that the
trooper is still employed.
The accusation was that she
pressured the trooper’s boss
to fire him.
He still works as a state trooper.
Sep 15, 2008 - 12:56 pm 27. SAF:The sole agenda of the New York Times is to get Obama elected and then with him in power silencing conservative news.
And it is clear they will do what ever is necessary to get this done.
I stopped reading the times decades ago since there really wasn’t any news. Everyday you get “republicans suck here is why and democrats are great here is why.” It isn’t news if you know what they will print before they print it.
Sep 15, 2008 - 1:18 pm 28. Macgawd:Krusty writes, “Germany’s head of state is a PhD recipient in quantum chemistry.”
So what? That only means that she’s qualified to understand quantum chemistry–it certainly doesn’t qualify her as a head-of-state. This is what’s known as a non sequitur–common among those who lack the ability to reason.
Sep 15, 2008 - 1:32 pm 29. USPatriot:This continuous, overly excessive,over the top, absurd and totally unnecessary scrutiny and attempted lynching of the Republican nominie for the Vice President of the United States by the filthy Jackals of the leftist Media complex is fruitless.
This perpetual harassment of Governor Sarah Palin is only angering the American people even further beyond their current abject disdain for the dinosaur media. The anger is palpable and growing.
The larger and much more critical question is this:
How can a major American political party; and what kind of political party would accept and allow an individual to be pushed forward and lifted to their party’s nomination for President of the United States, who has close ties and very friendly relations for twenty years with a radical “black liberation theology” preacher who blames the white man and America for every problem, who has close ties for at least 15 years to an unrepentant domestic terrorist(William Ayers) and his wife(Bernadine Dohran) that included various board member relations and political coming out parties, who was mentored(8 years?) as a very impressionable young man by an admitted card carrying Communist party USA member(Frank Marshall Davis),who has very close ties to various radical muslim groups and Islamists, who took an unexplained trip to Pakistan when Americans were forbidden to travel to that country in the 1980’s and still has not explained how he entered that country since an American passport would have been rejected, who admittedly gravitated to the radical elements(Socialists,Anarchists,communists,anti-america types,fringe outcast types) on campus when at college, who used his position as US Senator and traveled to Kenya twice to support and campaign for a Muslim cousin(from the same tribe that his father came)who was attempting to be elected to president of Kenya and subsequently caused mass riots, mayhem and death(to Christians) post Kenyan election, who refuses to release any information regarding grades, transcripts and senior thesis related to his college experience at Occidental, Columbia and Harvard,who has “lost” his Illinoise State Senate files, who was recruited while at Columbia by a disciple of Saul Alinski(Marxist) to become a “community organizer” affiliated with the corrupt ACORN in Chicago Illinoise, who was chairman of an Annenberg funded organization(founded by William Ayers) in Chicago that burned through over 100 million dollars with no accountability….allocating funds to very shady and questionable recipiants, who as an Illinoise State Senator maintained very nefarious and questionable relationships with the likes of individuals such as convicted felon Tony Rezko….funneling him at least 14 million dollars to “refurbish” low income housing by using the power of his political position, and many other questionable relationships and dealings,as well as admitting to using cocaine and marijuana on a regular basis at certain periods in his life?
WHAT KIND OF POLITICAL PARTY WOULD ALLOW AN INDIVIDUAL WITH THESE CREDENTIALS TO RISE AS THEIR NOMINEE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES?
Answer: An absolutely corrupt,subversive, deceitful, morally bankrupt, unscrupulous, anti-America party, that has no traditional American values left in it’s platform and has been taken over by extremist, leftists and has totally lost it’s way.
My point is this: Barack Obama would not pass a background check to be hired by the local police force in any town, let alone be President of the United States! Barack Obama would fail a background check and be ineligible to be employed by the FBI, CIA or Secret Service. The very secret service that is charged with protecting the President of the United States! Barack Obama would not qualify for even the lowest of security clearances based on his past relationships and actions.
Shame on the American people if Barack Obama is elected President of the United States. And shame on the Democrat Party for allowing this individual to worm, lie and deceive his way to within seven weeks of possibly being elected President of the United States.
Sep 15, 2008 - 1:48 pm 30. ricpic:Apparently baby blue shirts coupled with blue jeans – a truly horrid combination – rule in Alaska. And no, I’m not gay.
Sep 15, 2008 - 1:48 pm 31. Rachel Peepers:I applaud the exposure of the New York Times to the light of what it’s sadly become; hack central; the journalistic campaign headquarters for the Democratic Party.
Why, they’re so in bed with Marxist, left wing ideology that they don’t even have the decency to try to cover up their biases by pulling up their soiled sheets.
In flagrant disregard for what fair and open-minded people think, these journalistic frauds are throwing handfuls of mud, globs of goo, a smorgasbord of smear at Sarah and Todd, John and Cindy, plus their children; hoping beyond hope that something sticks.
All it’s done for Obama is get his dirty little campaign stuck in neutral. Because the dirt throwing wordsmiths have deeply offended the sense of fairness of the Jones’, the Wilsons and the hard-working decent folks who make this country great.
If being a neutral observer of the world’s events is too much of a burden for the Times to bear, let it go the way of the 8-track tape, the white wall tire, the skate key, the three martini lunch, the wash board, the mud pack.
Just think, to work as a reporter on the New York Times used to be the highest journalistic calling. My have the mighty fallen.
Say, I have an idea that’s so crazy it just might work. For sure it’ll cut expenses for the Times.
Sell the building, the equipment; the assets.
Then take the people, you still gotta have people, take them to Westchester County. Find an open field, and ask the nearest fire department to shoot a hundred or so gallons of water in about a 50 foot square area of dirt.
Let it soak in good. Then at the count of three have everybody pick up handfuls of mud and throw it at big pictures of John McCain, Sarah Palin and everybody else who cares enough about this country to pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe whose purpose in life is to hurt our families, degrade our children, kill our unborn, deface our flag, demean American traditions and blapheme our God.
In short, do our nation dirt.
Sep 15, 2008 - 2:36 pm 32. Larry J:I think any governor who is in a state with a massive oil surplus that allows her to send out $1200 checks to any resident is going to be pretty popular.
[sarcasm]Yeah, it just goest to show how stupid those Alaskan rubes are. Where do they get off sharing the oil revenues with the citizens? Don’t they know that money would be better spent on massive government spending programs with lots of union member government employees? Why, those rubes will probably spend that money to make ends meet instead of paying taxes![/sarcasm/
Sep 15, 2008 - 2:38 pm 33. George Clarke:The one area where most people agree the First Amendment gives way to the intelligent public’s right to restrict information is the area of child pornography. Funny how it’s never mentioned that the type of books Mayor Palin was concerned with, and asked about taking off the shelves, were CHILDREN’S BOOKS designed to introduce new readers to adult subjects like homosexuality. No compulsion, or sanctions or government punishments were threatened or discussed, a necessary element given our free speech rights, for government censorship to be a likely fear, but is not the question of child access to sexual material a proper subject for public discussion? Most people would say, “Go, Sarah” for bringing it up, so I’ll just add this little bit to the chorus of sensible people saying that this much bally-hooed “censorship” fear is a bit overblown. Note how nobody on the left, in promoting these fears, ever particularizes what books this “evangelical mayor” was concerned about in her inquiries to the local Librarian.
Sep 15, 2008 - 2:42 pm 34. Mike Shuster:Larry J: you misunderstand– I’m not saying she was wrong to distribute the surplus, I’m just saying, well, I’m saing what I said: that any governor who does that is going to have a high popularity rating. That’s all.
Sep 15, 2008 - 3:48 pm 35. Judy, NYC:we know that it is just destroy-hillary clinton filth now being poured on sarah palin. the nytimes and cable media practiced on clinton until they figured they got it just so. and while they were laughing at clinton wearing pantsuits, she was winning every big state and every swing state in the democratic primaries. whatever the agenda, and the fanatical support for barry obama, it seems to have little or nothing to do with getting votes. obama will just end up in the toilet, where he began, and where he belongs for injecting racial hatreds, pathological lies about himself, and the shocking refusal to debate. this bizarro world that barry obama inhabits, along with his media partners, and secret donors who keep coming up with endless supplies of money, have attempted to burrow themselves into our democratic process. literally, get under our skin and infect the body politic. not so much the votes, it is the process itself they have meant to destroy. of course, the voters know this now. we will look back on this with a shudder, just as we did when we thought of how close we came to losing our rights with joe mccarthy (who the newspapers loved to promote, no matter how crazy his accusations). the strange candidacy of barry obama will be a cautionary tale for eternal vigilance. as fate would have it, we seem always to need yet another one.
Sep 15, 2008 - 3:50 pm 36. Tina Trent:Howdy “There has not been a peep, not a single complaint, nor will there be, from any feminist voice or organization, against this ridiculous and indeed shameful attempt at the political murder of an alive WOMAN who has done everything the boss feminists have been promoting” Paul. Good news. There is. You can look to Phyllis Chesler. You can look in her comment threads for other feminists expressing disgust. You can check the comment threads in lefty on-line sites, which are stuffed to the gills with disgusted feminists. You can look on any of the scores of pro-Hillary sites, where there is debate between differing groups of women. You can look to Feminists for Life. You know there is a selection process that goes on in the MSM excluding and ignoring idiosyncratic feminist voices, so it’s hard to name well-placed feminists expressing disgust, but there are many, many of us, and we have been speaking with consistency about these issues for longer than this election cycle.
Sep 15, 2008 - 4:00 pm 37. Sandra M:An absolutely terrific article, Mr. Kimball. Just great.
I so hope that she will continue firing people when she gets to DC. Energy and Government Reform will be her assignments.. She will be in position to save us much, much money.
Sep 15, 2008 - 5:16 pm 38. ImHappynBP:This is the end for the Main Street Media. They have squandered their believability. Now they are ranting into an empty well.
Sep 15, 2008 - 6:13 pm 39. Victor Erimita:The cool kids are hoppin” mad (Palinesque dropped “g” there.) How DARE the flyover rubes not crown the messiah? Tina Fey and Amy Poehler are mad. Charley Gibson is mad. Lindsay Lohan is mad. The nerds have risen up and defied their social betters. And as bearers of the Boomer generation Eternal Flame of narcissitic obsession, the betters will now tantrum. Not ANOTHER unsophisticated rube from some large state distant from the Upper West Side! Ooohhhh nooo!! OMG, she hunts? She drops her “Gs”? Her husband is a…a…oil worker or something? She was in Vogue but still doesn’t know how WE are wearing our hair these days? I just can’t stand four, or oh God, eight, more years of bad taste. It isn’t so much the policies. It’s the tackiness! And the defiance of the supreme will of the cool people. Unthinkable. Spoons are banging on high chairs on both coasts.
Sep 15, 2008 - 6:13 pm 40. MarkJ:In the land of Al-Aska, in the fires of Mount McKinley, the Dark Mistress Sarah-on forged in secret, a master ring, to control all others. And into this ring she poured all her cruelty, her malice and her will to control all discretionary spending. One ring to rule them all. One by one, the free peoples of Blue America fell to the power of the Ring. But there were some who resisted. A last alliance of Moonbats and Kossacks marched against the armies of Al-Aska, and on the very slopes of Mount McKinley, they fought for the freedom of Middle-America. Victory was near, but the power of the ring could not be undone. It was in this moment, when all hope had faded, that Obama-dur, son of the king, took up his father’s sword. And Sarah-on, enemy of the free peoples of Middle-America, was defeated. The Ring passed to Obama-dur, who had this one chance to destroy evil forever, but the hearts of Messiahs are easily corrupted. And the ring of power has a will of its own. It betrayed Obama-dur, to his death. And some things that should not have been forgotten were lost. History became legend. Legend became myth. And for two and a half thousand years, the ring passed out of all knowledge. Until, when chance came, the ring ensnared another bearer. The ring came to the creature Gore-um, who took it deep into the highway tunnels under the Smokey Mountains, and there it consumed him. The ring gave to Gore-um unnatural long life. For five hundred years it poisoned his mind; and in the gloom of Gore-um’s cave, it waited. Darkness crept back into the forests of the world. Rumor grew of a shadow in the North East, whispers of a nameless fear, and the Ring of Power perceived. Its time had now come. It abandoned Gore-um. But then something happened that the Ring did not intend. It was picked up by the most unlikely creature imaginable. A hobbit, Jobo Bidens, of the Delaware Hundreds. For the time will soon come when hobbits will shape the fortunes of all…
Sep 15, 2008 - 6:24 pm 41. ZEITGEIST:[...] Related item here. [...]
Sep 15, 2008 - 6:36 pm 42. JL:Glenn Reynolds has a link to the Wasilla library book banning narrative which is used to whip up the elites:
http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/273420.php
As with most institutions, there is a *procedure* for that (lest somehow one think the cranky librarian thought she was really being tested to do it). Seems the appropriate response should have been “Well Mayor Sarah, we have a procedure we follow if someone brings that up.”
Confederate Yankee lists the FIVE books that were challenged over TWENTY-ONE years. None were removed. Only one was challenged during her terms. CY writes “No books have ever been banned in Wasilla at the request of Sarah Palin, or anyone else. Further, only one of the five books challenged even occurred during her terms in office.”
Can we bury that story now, please.
Sep 15, 2008 - 6:58 pm 43. John Lilly:It’s “poring,” not “pouring” over. Sorry to be a boaring pedant, but let’s please maintain the distinction. Anyway, you’re otherwise entirely right, Mr. Kimball
Sep 15, 2008 - 7:24 pm 44. mike:Mike Shuster:
Sep 15, 2008 - 7:24 pm 45. John Lilly:So, since the Unicorn Rider is promising to give a lot of other people’s money to his supporters, he’s also an evil vote buying politico?
Well, he is, she’s not!
If you can’t see the difference, go buy some/any MSM stock.
Sorry. Add this to rhetoric: “.”
Sep 15, 2008 - 7:25 pm 46. jms:All this talk about firing Liberals makes me more and more interested in voting for her.
Perhaps she can apply some of her refreshing liberal-firing skills to the State Department where they are so desperately needed.
Sep 15, 2008 - 7:49 pm 47. Wolf Pangloss:Sarah Palin was the first in her family to graduate from college, but she didn’t get the right degree. Big deal. Harry Truman was a born executive. Remember “the buck stops here”? He was also a failed haberdasher (that’s a hat-seller for the Democrats in the audience). George Washington was a surveyor and land developer before he became a general. Lincoln was a small-town lawyer who became a legislator before becoming President. They all dealt with huge issues, and didn’t have PHDs in quantum physics. In fact, Lincoln was probably the only good lawyer president we’ve ever had. If anything, Obama’s and Biden’s JDs are disqualifications for the office of president. Arguably, lawyers are part of the judiciary and should be prohibited from being part of a different branch of government, as it is a conflict of interest.
Sep 15, 2008 - 8:08 pm 48. john franklin:A massive delusion has come over the Lib Left. Its scarey when the mainstream media becomes hysterical with delusion. This has been a witchhunt that is still not over: its like accusing Joan of Arc of being a witch. Some dark subconscious forces have arisen here – repressed stuff, covered over by all that phoney liberalism – hell, they’re ready to goose-step down the street; Gay Goose Steppers! Ring any bells? its the Liberal SS…
Sep 15, 2008 - 11:58 pm 49. Kirk Parker:I went and looked up the state population figures, because I was pretty sure Alaska wasn’t the smallest, but unsure about which states were smaller.
So, as of the July 2007 Census Bureau estimates, there were 3 states with lower populations: North Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming (along with DC.)
Does the name “Vermont” ring a bell? I recall lots of antipathy toward Howard Dean when he ran for the 2004 Democratic nomination, both before and after “the scream”; but one thing I don’t remember is lots of people dissing his qualifications because of Vermont’s small size.
And you know. . . “Wyoming” has kind of a ring to it, too. Let’s see, isn’t that the only place where Dick Cheney won elective office before he was selected to be Bush’s VP? I don’t have to remind you all of the sh*tst*rm that accompanied his selection, but again, did even a single note of it make any reference to Wyoming’s last-place status in the state population rankings?
Sep 16, 2008 - 12:40 am 50. Warren Bonesteel:Wanna see the fur fly? Wait until both parties figure out that she’s a Constitutional Originalist…and actually means it!!
(Why do ya think Stein, Rove, et al, have problems with her candidacy?)
Most Americans, however, when you pose questions based upon the Constitution, regardless of party affiliation, appear to be totally at ease with Constitutional Originalism.
As for the election, right now, the outcome depends on who pins the flailing economy on whom.
Get the big bucket of popcorn and the milk duds. This is gonna get interesting.
Sep 16, 2008 - 4:26 am 51. willis:“Larry J: you misunderstand– I’m not saying she was wrong to distribute the surplus, I’m just saying, well, I’m saing what I said: that any governor who does that is going to have a high popularity rating. That’s all.”
If distributing money buys popularity, how did she manage to defeat her predecessor. After all, the program did not originate with her.
Sep 16, 2008 - 4:54 am 52. Rubicon:With regards to those who want to claim a “pedigree” would make a better political leader, I mention that among those with pedigree’s, we have had some of the most corrupt, despicable, & pathetic leaders of times.
Sep 16, 2008 - 6:58 am 53. megapotamus:Nixon had a pedigree. Carter had a pedigree.
Etc., etc. Based on some of the asinine decisions made in Washington by our pedigreed lawyer crew running the show, having an average citizen will be a refreshing “change.”
Many of our founders (the old dead white men who had the vision to actually create this nation in which we all enjoy our current freedoms), also did not have pedigree’s & many mentioned often that the government was “of the ‘people’, by the ‘people’, for the ‘people.’” In short, it was to be a citizen Congress, not a professional political class.
I have met many “educated” people who I would not trust with my trash, let alone my nation. Many I went to college with, are now accomplishing nothing. But, they sure talk a good game.
In short, Sarah Palin has shown all she can lead & based on her activities since becoming governor, its obvious she can stand up & punch it out with even many of the more practiced politicians.
One clown tried to make something of her associating with Senator Ted Stevens. Now, never mind he has only been accused of wrong doing & not convicted (that innocent until proven guilty thing apparently only applies to liberals), or that he is actually one of the two United States Senators who represent her state in the national Congress, just HOW was she to avoid dealing with him? Hmmmmmmmmm? Better yet, WHY would a governor avoid dealing with one of her two US Senators who represent her state in the national legislature? Such babble exposes the vacuous nature of such attacks & those doing the attacking!
If you wonder where the “hate” comes from I’m not sure you’ve been paying attention. They hated Reagan, they hated Bush Sr. They hated Newt Gingrich. You can find even dedicated Hastert-haters. But it is true that Palin hate is especially bitter even by the standards of the W era. The “why” is simple. She delivered Trig instead of killing him. Her choice shows up those malevolent harpies as not pro “choice” at all but pro-abortion. Pro-death. Death. It’s not much of a campaign slogan.
Sep 16, 2008 - 9:08 am 54. Fla Chuck:Uh, Judy. History has shown that Joe McCarthy was mostly right. And we have lost many freedoms because he lost.
Sep 16, 2008 - 10:01 am 55. VekTor:Mike Shuster wrote:
“you misunderstand– I’m not saying she was wrong to distribute the surplus, I’m just saying, well, I’m saing what I said: that any governor who does that is going to have a high popularity rating. That’s all.”
By that logic, her predecessor should also have had a high popularity rating, since he was giving distributing the surplus before she was.
Did you bother to check his approval rating, Mike, to see if your premise holds water at all?
Sep 16, 2008 - 10:34 am 56. Heather:In fact, Lincoln was probably the only good lawyer president we’ve ever had.
Probably because he didn’t go to law school.
Sep 16, 2008 - 12:40 pm 57. Robert Hurley:If Obama wins, I can see that a lot of you will have to be put on a suicide watch
Sep 16, 2008 - 1:26 pm 58. solomonpal:No Not really Robert…We will sit it out and pick through the rubble and rebuild 4 years later…if it even goes 4 years. Been there done that.
Sep 16, 2008 - 1:42 pm 59. Big Ben:Obama’s teleprompter malfunctioned;he really meant to say that when you wrap your old fish in the New York Times,it stinks even more.
I stopped reading all the news thats made to fit their propanganda print in 2002 after their coverage of the Israeli “atrocity” in Jenin, which subsequently was totaly disproved.
You could see the Times’ “influence” by the new Sienna College poll. Jews in New York favor McCain over Obama by 54% to 32%.
Sep 16, 2008 - 3:13 pm 60. Joe:Thia ia truly a cosmic change and the dinasours at the Times must be eating their liberal hearts out.
Are you guys serious?
All people do is whine about “liberal” or “conservative” bias, but there are some pretty basic principles we should all be able to agree to: a) that candidates SHOULD be subjected to media scrutiny, b) repeated and audacious liars should not hold high office in the US.
Whenever your precious Palin is exposed as a petty tyrant or a liar, your first reaction isn’t “hey maybe this woman isn’t so great” but “she’s a conservative and anyone who attacks her is a liberal”. What if the ghost of Ronald Reagan told you Sarah Palin was a liar? Would that finally make it sink in?
Sep 16, 2008 - 4:05 pm 61. Typical White Person:Great column…but I had to stop reading and check the NYT original story when I saw the quote re: the blogger who covered the governor’s office “with an astringent eye.” ROLFL!!!!!!!!
Methinks they meant a stringent eye…but were too furiously trying to make ordinary and mostly mundane political decisions into a scandal. Hard work it is!!!!!!!!!
——————————-
Astringent – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
An astringent substance is a chemical that tends to shrink or constrict body tissues, usually locally after topical medicinal application. The word “astringent” derives from Latin astringere, meaning “to bind fast”. Two common examples are calamine lotion..
stringent
(strĭn’jənt) pronunciation
Sponsored Links
River Cruising in Europe
Sites on Rhine, Danube & Others! Sign up for Special E-mail Offers.
VikingRiverCruises.com/EuropeOffers
adj.
1. Imposing rigorous standards of performance; severe: stringent safety measures.
2. Constricted; tight: operating under a stringent time limit.
3. Characterized by scarcity of money, credit restrictions, or other financial strain: stringent economic policies.
——————————————-
If that blogger was going after her with astringent eyes I’d give her hell too!!!!!!!!
Sep 16, 2008 - 5:00 pm 62. Pinkie Ann LeBrainne:Actually Kirk Parker … I WAS rather snooty about Howard Dean being the governor of such a low population state and said so. But it was because he was telling Texans how to handle the illegal immigration problem. I didn’t think there was much to compare between Vermont and Texas on that subject.
Sep 16, 2008 - 8:40 pm 63. deguello:The garbage from this flatulent collection of frustrated stalinists,reflects their growing feelings of political impotence,and cultural irrelevance.This is the same crew that proclaimed the vicious thug Eminem a “genius”.We can gleefully anticipate the coming financial bankruptcy of the Times,(finally matching its moral one), during the first McCain-Palin term.
Sep 17, 2008 - 8:14 am 64. deguello:Joe,Palin will not exposed as a liar,petty tyrant, or anything else,because she is none of those things. On the other hand, Obama has sent thugs to try and censor a radio station for presenting Stanley Kurtz’expose of his radicalism.Where is your precious media scrutiny of that truly tyrannical behavior? Audacious liars,already hold high office in the US remenber Clinton? You probably voted for him hypocrite!
Sep 17, 2008 - 8:24 am 65. Rachel Peepers:To Bob Hurley,
Robert, what’s a suicide watch? Is it the telling-time kind where the face is a picture of the moment Barack decided to invite Biden, rather than Hillary onto the ticket? Killing his chances of victory.
Or do you mean somebody keeping an eye on us Republicans so we don’t kill ourselves?
Which, I guess is a decent joke, albeit, a very old joke, kind of like the kind of mud slinging, old style politics that’s coming from what was supposed to be a fresh faced new politician with a new kind of hope/change politics.
Though, I guess, the hope part still makes sense because after all his mistakes, like leaving Hillary off the ticket, hope, pretty much, is all Barack’s got.
Barack has figuratively kissed Florida and Virginia and Ohio goodbye. He may win Pennsylvania, but Mo., is going to Palin/McCain too. Along with the whole south, including Texas. For Barack, it’s the bottom of the seventh, and the home team is starting to leave so they get an early out of the parking lots.
Palin, having driving in two in the top of the 7th, will be batting in the top of the eighth.
Obama is still on the mound, slinging behind-the-plate-Axelrod calls for mudballs.
Michelle is in the first row behind the dugout first base side with a scowl on her face that seems etched in stone.
Oh, the top of the eighth started and the crowd roared as McCain drove one of Obama’s mudballs out of the park for his second homerun of the contest.
Whoops, we can see a fight break out in the right field stands. Let me grab the binoculars. Somebody’s just gotten punched in the face and is bleeding profusely from the nose. Looks like Jill Greenberg. Now a cop is helping her, no, he simply helped her stand up, then kicked her down some stairs.
Gotta go. The game of politics can get rough and tumble Jill is finding out.
Incidentally, I don’t think Republicans will be needing any free watches. Looks like Barack’s 15 minutes of fame is coming to a pathetically abrupt end.
P.S. Michelle is still scowling.
Sep 17, 2008 - 8:54 am 66. Robert Hurley:Rachel:
Check the latest polls. Oops, I guess you sent that before todays polls were released.
Sep 17, 2008 - 12:07 pm 67. Jeff Dorfman:“You should be ashamed!” Ivy Frye, the assistant, told her. “Stop blogging. Stop blogging right now!” [AGAIN, THE POINT IS?]
The point here is that the constitution forbids any representative of government from curtailing free speech. He did not call her up to argue a point or note errors of fact she may have made. He purported just told her to stop speaking. Last time I checked, our government and its representatives cannot do this.
Sep 18, 2008 - 8:40 am 68. smith:What’s wrong with using personal e-mail for state business? A million reasons, but a couple of very obvious ones: – First, she does it for the express reason of avoiding subpoenas for public records (a highly dubious and frankly, misinformed attempt to avoid legal public information disclosure requirements – her attorney must be as naive as she is); second – Yahoo is not secure – anyone who has worked for any business, even Jiffy-lube, knows the importance of internet security – but apparently not Sarah Palin – the fact they were able to hack her account so easily merely confirms that she is not qualified to be trusted with matters of national security – were her yahoo account only truly personal items then it would not be any big deal, BUT she not only used it for official business, but was expressly requiring others to use if for her most politically sensitive government and RNC business. Your average 8th grader would know not to put truly confidential info at such risk. This is truly naive behavior. Finally, I would not be surprised if it did not violate Alaska State Government internet usage rules and other rules concerning conduct of official business, if Alaska even is savvy enough to have promulated such rules as most other states have.
Sep 18, 2008 - 4:57 pm 69. William:And sorry, Republicans have lost most of their attack lines. The series of virtues Palin was supposed to bring to the ticket: She’s a reformer, a steadfast opponent of earmarks, a proponent of transparency and clean government. Subsequent reporting has revealed that Palin embodies the precise opposite of every one of these virtues. She appointed unqualified cronies, abused her power to punish personal enemies, and has displayed a Cheney-esque passion for government secrecy.
Game over. As the NYT said, ““the Palin effect” was, at least so far, a limited burst of interest.”
Sep 18, 2008 - 11:18 pm 70. The Wide Awake Cafe » She’s Got The Gams:[...] zoo opened its door and all the wild animals spilled out in a rage. The media has gone on a fugue of attack on those who don’t suscribe to Barack Obama’s kind of politics. Thirty lawyers have been [...]
Sep 19, 2008 - 2:23 am 71. Tom:I am pretty sure that “state scientists had in fact agreed that the bears were in danger” is supposed to be “state scientists had in fact agreed that the bears were NOT in danger”. Otherwise this anecdote makes no sense.
Sep 19, 2008 - 1:55 pm 72. deguello:William:keep deceiving yourself,you and other brain-dead libs.
Sep 19, 2008 - 6:53 pm 73. Wadsy:Regarding Brain Dead Libs: I am not sure that their brains comprehend the error of their ways.
Sep 23, 2008 - 7:01 pm