The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Archives

Sarah Palin

Conservative Columnist Turns on Palin

By Jonathan Weisman
Ever since John McCain named Sarah Palin to the ticket, it has been a given that she has energized conservatives, particularly conservative women.

So nationally syndicated conservative columnist Kathleen Parker's blistering assessment in the National Review Online today is sure to sting -- especially coming on the heels of growing discontent among other conservative intellectuals who had been "wildly stoked" about her selection just weeks ago.

Parker, after a scalding critique of Palin's readiness for high office, begs the Alaska governor to step down from the Republican ticket.

"Only Palin can save McCain, her party, and the country she loves. She can bow out for personal reasons, perhaps because she wants to spend more time with her newborn. No one would criticize a mother who puts her family first," Parker advises, pleading: "Do it for your country."

Palin has given virtually no free-form interviews, but her sit-downs thus far have provided critics with ample fodder. Until quite recently, those critics have been largely partisans. Republicans have not just stood by her -- they have adored her.

Parker says: No more. She has declared her cringe reflex exhausted.

"Palin's recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity, and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League," Parker writes.

"Palin filibusters. She repeats words, filling space with deadwood. Cut the verbiage and there's not much content there," she continues. "Here's but one example of many from her interview with Hannity: 'Well, there is a danger in allowing some obsessive partisanship to get into the issue that we're talking about today. And that's something that John McCain, too, his track record, proving that he can work both sides of the aisle, he can surpass the partisanship that must be surpassed to deal with an issue like this.'

"When Couric pointed to polls showing that the financial crisis had boosted Obama's numbers, Palin blustered wordily: 'I'm not looking at poll numbers. What I think Americans at the end of the day are going to be able to go back and look at track records and see who's more apt to be talking about solutions and wishing for and hoping for solutions for some opportunity to change, and who's actually done it?'"

"If BS were currency," Parker concludes, "Palin could bail out Wall Street herself."

Posted at 1:38 PM ET on Sep 26, 2008  | Category:  Sarah Palin
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: Obama Heads to Mississippi | Next: Leaders Who Met With Palin Praise Biden


Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



If one is hypocritical, not fair and rational in making their point, then they have no credibility; just like all those who lament Palin's experience. Did those people criticize Clinton's limited experience as a 1-term governor of ARKANSAS? Also, being married to an impeached president does not qualify as adequate experience to be a carpetbagging senator, let alone President. Reagan had zero foreign policy experience.

How on earth could Palin be expected to have the answer to Couric's question about legislation McCain introduced in his near 30 years as a Senator? And regarding the Bush Doctrine question with Gibson: She answered that correctly. Gibson was the one who didn't understand it. Charles Krauthammer, who created the term the Bush Doctrine said Palin answered it correctly and Gibson didn't understand the complexities.

Palin has been a whistleblower for "bad" politicians and if she was VP or president she'd let us know exactly what people (Republicans or Democrats) are to blame for the financial crisis, or any other wrongdoings. That, is exactly what we need!

Posted by: mitchman5 | September 30, 2008 2:42 AM

And anybody who looks at a resume has to take into account the whole. Anybody in management would willingly hire somebody with an ivy league background over somebody with some years of experience. You have to look at everything the candidate brings to the table. Obama's forgotten more about how government works than either McCain or Palin will ever know. He's studied the subject at the very finest school in the nation, where he graduated at the top of his class, and taught the US Constitution at the 7th best grad school in the country for more than a decade.

He's been an elected representative of a state with twice the population as Arizona and 12.3X the population of Alaska. He's had to represent and please more people than both Plain or McCain by an order of magnitude. Obama has a 70+% approval rating among his constituents. McCain has the same. However Obama's approval rating includes more constituents than both the state of Alaska AND the state of Arizona...combined!

You look at McCain's experience and that makes up for some of his educational performance as he did attend top schools...even if he did finish near the bottom. While McCain's constituency is smaller he's held elected office for many years. What Obama lacks in executive experience he makes up for in his professional career and educational career. I view the resumes of Obama and McCain about equal. And I view Gov. Palin as a candidate not even in the same ballpark, not even in the same league, and nowhere near the quality of candidate either McCain or Obama represent.

BTW, McCain has no executive experience either. He's not served 1 second of his career in an executive branch of government.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

There's one thing you missed about McCain. He has a nasty temper. Somebody like that has no business making decisions when people's lives are at stake. Ya see how cool Obama is under pressure. That’s exactly what we need in a President. And now that we all know what McCain means by (Preconditions) I'm not sure I'd want him negotiating with anybody. Would you stand for someone telling you it's my way or the highway before negotiating. No wonder why everyone hates us.

Posted by: HemiHead66 | September 28, 2008 6:57 PM

I deny that Gov. Palin cannot think on feet.

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2008 4:11 PM

And anybody who looks at a resume has to take into account the whole. Anybody in management would willingly hire somebody with an ivy league background over somebody with some years of experience. You have to look at everything the candidate brings to the table. Obama's forgotten more about how government works than either McCain or Palin will ever know. He's studied the subject at the very finest school in the nation, where he graduated at the top of his class, and taught the US Constitution at the 7th best grad school in the country for more than a decade.

He's been an elected representative of a state with twice the population as Arizona and 12.3X the population of Alaska. He's had to represent and please more people than both Plain or McCain by an order of magnitude. Obama has a 70+% approval rating among his constituents. McCain has the same. However Obama's approval rating includes more constituents than both the state of Alaska AND the state of Arizona...combined!

You look at McCain's experience and that makes up for some of his educational performance as he did attend top schools...even if he did finish near the bottom. While McCain's constituency is smaller he's held elected office for many years. What Obama lacks in executive experience he makes up for in his professional career and educational career. I view the resumes of Obama and McCain about equal. And I view Gov. Palin as a candidate not even in the same ballpark, not even in the same league, and nowhere near the quality of candidate either McCain or Obama represent.

BTW, McCain has no executive experience either. He's not served 1 second of his career in an executive branch of government.


Posted by: fortheclueless | September 28, 2008 3:19 AM

Palin may have some executive experience but anybody who sees her interview cannot deny she cannot think on her feet. She replies the answers that have been scripted for her. When pressed she says a lot of nothing and then reiterates the scripted answer. I'm starting to think she's a human form of the chatty cathy pull string talking doll. She has 1 or 2 scripted responses she gives upon being asked a question. She has no substance. She's incredibly average. She is a dynamite lady but she doesn't measure up...not even close.

Posted by: fortheclueless | September 28, 2008 2:48 AM

McMoron under NO CIRCUMSTANCE should replace Palin. The American women are counting her to break that glass ceiling. No more sexism from the Republican- let her do as many interviews as Biden= 60, since he was nominated. We the People will not tolerate sexism that keeps Sarah under wraps. FREE SARAH NOW.

Posted by: mack3 | September 28, 2008 12:36 AM

McMoron shows the utter disrespect that he has for the USA by picking an idiot from AK

Posted by: mack3 | September 28, 2008 12:16 AM

McMoron,pick the best person to compliment his Republican team. Just saw SNL, the did a Palin skit based on the Wonderful Couric interview. "when he rears his head...Alaska..." No wonder it took her 6 Long Years to graduate with a BA.
Only idiots can think she is qualified to be VP.

Posted by: mack3 | September 28, 2008 12:14 AM

Palin is an affirmative action candidate. There is no way she would have been selected if it hadn't been for Hillary's campaign. Remember, she was selected, not nominated by voters through the primary process.

Posted by: deepthought | September 27, 2008 11:46 PM

I bet there are millions of Republican voters who adamantly support Palin openly and engage in conversations about her strengths to friends, family and associates. However, when they get home after a hard days work, and they’re laying in the bed with their spouse looking up at the ceiling, it’s a whole new conversation, they are probably asking each other, "What in the hell was John McCain thing when he picked Moose-Lips for his running mate?" Don’t think for one moment that all Republicans are that stupid! Bush, yes…..Palin, no! Not that stupid!

Posted by: FartTart | September 27, 2008 11:13 PM

The President of the United States of America fall under the Executive Branch of the Government. The Mayor and the Governor belong to the same category.

Sarah Palin has 8 years Executive experience, Obama has 0.

Posted by: theecomonist101 | September 27, 2008 9:13 PM

Gov. Palin is MORE qualified to be President than Sen. Obama.

Posted by: JakeD | September 27, 2008 8:50 PM

Palin is a mile wide and and inch deep.

In selecting her, McCain showed that he does not place country first, but his election first.

I grieve at the dishonor McCain has done to himself and our country.

Posted by: jimcummings | September 27, 2008 8:39 PM

Anything IS possible for those who love God and are called to His purpose.

Posted by: JakeD | September 27, 2008 8:38 PM

We have to remember fellow conservatives that people in Alaska have always underestimated Palin. Even the politician from Alaska that race against her for the gubernatorial position said so and even now praise Palin for her extraordinary performance during their debate.
Personally, I've underestimated this lady who look like a cat walker as brainless but the republican convention proved me wrong.
Kathleen Parker is a conservative? Will she be able to withstand media scrutiny? Is she a democrat or a republican?
Another point I would like to make is that Kathleen Parker is a columnist, not a politician. She make judgment on Sarah Palin base on how she handle the interview and not according to her accomplishment and skills.
I might be wrong but their is always hope when you believe in God. Remember, everything is possible with God.

Posted by: theecomonist101 | September 27, 2008 8:24 PM

Even in tough budget times, there are lines that cannot be crossed. So I was startled by this tidbit reported recently by The Associated Press: When Sarah Palin was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, the small town began billing sexual-assault victims for the cost of rape kits and forensic exams.

Skip to next paragraph
The Board Blog
Additional commentary, background information and other items by Times editorial writers.

Go to The Board » Ms. Palin owes voters an explanation. What was the thinking behind cutting the measly few thousand dollars needed to cover the yearly cost of swabs, specimen containers and medical tests? Whose dumb idea was it to make assault victims and their insurance companies pay instead? Unfortunately, her campaign is shielding the candidate from the press, so Americans may still be waiting for answers on Election Day.

The rape-kit controversy is a troubling matter. The insult to rape victims is obvious. So is the sexism inherent in singling them out to foot the bill for investigating their own case. And the main result of billing rape victims is to protect their attackers by discouraging women from reporting sexual assaults.

That’s why when Senator Joseph Biden, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, drafted the 1994 Violence Against Women Act, he included provisions to make states ineligible for federal grant money if they charged rape victims for exams and the kits containing the medical supplies needed to conduct them. (Senator John McCain, Ms. Palin’s running mate, voted against Mr. Biden’s initiative, and his name has not been among the long list of co-sponsors each time the act has been renewed.)

That’s also why, when news of Wasilla’s practice of billing rape victims got around, Alaska’s State Legislature approved a bill in 2000 to stop it.

“We would never bill the victim of a burglary for fingerprinting and photographing the crime scene, or for the cost of gathering other evidence,” said Alaska’s then-governor, Tony Knowles. “Nor should we bill rape victims just because the crime scene happens to be their bodies.”

If Ms. Palin ever spoke out about the issue, one way or another, no record has surfaced. Her campaign would not answer questions about when she learned of the policy, strongly supported by the police chief: whether she saw it in the budget and if not, whether she learned of it before or after the State Legislature outlawed the practice.

All the campaign would do was provide a press release pronouncing: “Prevention of domestic violence and sexual assault is a priority for Gov. Palin.”

Eric Croft, a former Democratic state lawmaker who sponsored the corrective legislation, believes that Wasilla’s mayor knew what was going on. (She does seem to have paid heed to every other detail of town life, including what books were on the library’s shelves.)

The local hospital did the billing, but it was the town that set the policy, Mr. Croft noted. That policy was reflected in budget documents that Ms. Palin signed.

Mr. Croft further noted that right after his measure became law, Wasilla’s local paper reported that Ms. Palin’s handpicked police chief, Charlie Fannon, acknowledged the practice of billing to collect evidence for sexual-assault cases. He complained that the state was requiring the town to spend $5,000 to $14,000 a year to cover the costs. “I just don’t want to see any more burden put on the taxpayer,” the chief explained.

“I can’t imagine any police chief, big city or small, who would take on the entire State Legislature on a bill that passed unanimously and not mention to their mayor that they’re doing this,” Mr. Croft said. Even if he didn’t inform her, the newspaper article would have been hard for her to miss.

In the absence of answers, speculation is bubbling in the blogosphere that Wasilla’s policy of billing rape victims may have something to do with Ms. Palin’s extreme opposition to abortion, even in cases of rape. Sexual-assault victims are typically offered an emergency contraception pill, which some people in the anti-choice camp wrongly equate with abortion.

My hunch is that it was the result of outmoded attitudes and boneheaded budget cutting. Still, Ms. Palin has been governor for under two years, and she’s running for vice president largely on her experience as mayor of tiny Wasilla — a far superior credential, she’s told us, to being a community organizer. On the rape kits, as on other issues, she owes voters a direct answer.

Posted by: Luke2 | September 27, 2008 8:16 PM

Even in tough budget times, there are lines that cannot be crossed. So I was startled by this tidbit reported recently by The Associated Press: When Sarah Palin was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, the small town began billing sexual-assault victims for the cost of rape kits and forensic exams.
Ms. Palin owes voters an explanation. What was the thinking behind cutting the measly few thousand dollars needed to cover the yearly cost of swabs, specimen containers and medical tests? Whose dumb idea was it to make assault victims and their insurance companies pay instead? Unfortunately, her campaign is shielding the candidate from the press, so Americans may still be waiting for answers on Election Day.

The rape-kit controversy is a troubling matter. The insult to rape victims is obvious. So is the sexism inherent in singling them out to foot the bill for investigating their own case. And the main result of billing rape victims is to protect their attackers by discouraging women from reporting sexual assaults.

That’s why when Senator Joseph Biden, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, drafted the 1994 Violence Against Women Act, he included provisions to make states ineligible for federal grant money if they charged rape victims for exams and the kits containing the medical supplies needed to conduct them. (Senator John McCain, Ms. Palin’s running mate, voted against Mr. Biden’s initiative, and his name has not been among the long list of co-sponsors each time the act has been renewed.)

That’s also why, when news of Wasilla’s practice of billing rape victims got around, Alaska’s State Legislature approved a bill in 2000 to stop it.

“We would never bill the victim of a burglary for fingerprinting and photographing the crime scene, or for the cost of gathering other evidence,” said Alaska’s then-governor, Tony Knowles. “Nor should we bill rape victims just because the crime scene happens to be their bodies.”

If Ms. Palin ever spoke out about the issue, one way or another, no record has surfaced. Her campaign would not answer questions about when she learned of the policy, strongly supported by the police chief: whether she saw it in the budget and if not, whether she learned of it before or after the State Legislature outlawed the practice.

All the campaign would do was provide a press release pronouncing: “Prevention of domestic violence and sexual assault is a priority for Gov. Palin.”

Eric Croft, a former Democratic state lawmaker who sponsored the corrective legislation, believes that Wasilla’s mayor knew what was going on. (She does seem to have paid heed to every other detail of town life, including what books were on the library’s shelves.)

The local hospital did the billing, but it was the town that set the policy, Mr. Croft noted. That policy was reflected in budget documents that Ms. Palin signed.

Mr. Croft further noted that right after his measure became law, Wasilla’s local paper reported that Ms. Palin’s handpicked police chief, Charlie Fannon, acknowledged the practice of billing to collect evidence for sexual-assault cases. He complained that the state was requiring the town to spend $5,000 to $14,000 a year to cover the costs. “I just don’t want to see any more burden put on the taxpayer,” the chief explained.

“I can’t imagine any police chief, big city or small, who would take on the entire State Legislature on a bill that passed unanimously and not mention to their mayor that they’re doing this,” Mr. Croft said. Even if he didn’t inform her, the newspaper article would have been hard for her to miss.

In the absence of answers, speculation is bubbling in the blogosphere that Wasilla’s policy of billing rape victims may have something to do with Ms. Palin’s extreme opposition to abortion, even in cases of rape. Sexual-assault victims are typically offered an emergency contraception pill, which some people in the anti-choice camp wrongly equate with abortion.

My hunch is that it was the result of outmoded attitudes and boneheaded budget cutting. Still, Ms. Palin has been governor for under two years, and she’s running for vice president largely on her experience as mayor of tiny Wasilla — a far superior credential, she’s told us, to being a community organizer. On the rape kits, as on other issues, she owes voters a direct answer.

Posted by: Luke2 | September 27, 2008 8:15 PM

"Even in tough budget times, there are lines that cannot be crossed. So I was startled by this tidbit reported recently by The Associated Press:

When Sarah Palin was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, the small town began billing sexual-assault victims for the cost of rape kits and forensic exams.

Ms. Palin owes voters an explanation. What was the thinking behind cutting the measly few thousand dollars needed to cover the yearly cost of swabs, specimen containers and medical tests?

Whose dumb idea was it to make assault victims and their insurance companies pay instead? Unfortunately, her campaign is shielding the candidate from the press, so Americans may still be waiting for answers on Election Day.

The rape-kit controversy is a troubling matter. The insult to rape victims is obvious. So is the sexism inherent in singling them out to foot the bill for investigating their own case. And the main result of billing rape victims is to protect their attackers by discouraging women from reporting sexual assaults.

That’s why when Senator Joseph Biden, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, drafted the 1994 Violence Against Women Act, he included provisions to make states ineligible for federal grant money if they charged rape victims for exams and the kits containing the medical supplies needed to conduct them. (Senator John McCain, Ms. Palin’s running mate, voted against Mr. Biden’s initiative, and his name has not been among the long list of co-sponsors each time the act has been renewed.)

That’s also why, when news of Wasilla’s practice of billing rape victims got around, Alaska’s State Legislature approved a bill in 2000 to stop it.

“We would never bill the victim of a burglary for fingerprinting and photographing the crime scene, or for the cost of gathering other evidence,” said Alaska’s then-governor, Tony Knowles. “Nor should we bill rape victims just because the crime scene happens to be their bodies.”

If Ms. Palin ever spoke out about the issue, one way or another, no record has surfaced. Her campaign would not answer questions about when she learned of the policy, strongly supported by the police chief: whether she saw it in the budget and if not, whether she learned of it before or after the State Legislature outlawed the practice.

All the campaign would do was provide a press release pronouncing: “Prevention of domestic violence and sexual assault is a priority for Gov. Palin.”

Eric Croft, a former Democratic state lawmaker who sponsored the corrective legislation, believes that Wasilla’s mayor knew what was going on. (She does seem to have paid heed to every other detail of town life, including what books were on the library’s shelves.)

The local hospital did the billing, but it was the town that set the policy, Mr. Croft noted. That policy was reflected in budget documents that Ms. Palin signed.

Mr. Croft further noted that right after his measure became law, Wasilla’s local paper reported that Ms. Palin’s handpicked police chief, Charlie Fannon, acknowledged the practice of billing to collect evidence for sexual-assault cases. He complained that the state was requiring the town to spend $5,000 to $14,000 a year to cover the costs. “I just don’t want to see any more burden put on the taxpayer,” the chief explained.

“I can’t imagine any police chief, big city or small, who would take on the entire State Legislature on a bill that passed unanimously and not mention to their mayor that they’re doing this,” Mr. Croft said. Even if he didn’t inform her, the newspaper article would have been hard for her to miss.

In the absence of answers, speculation is bubbling in the blogosphere that Wasilla’s policy of billing rape victims may have something to do with Ms. Palin’s extreme opposition to abortion, even in cases of rape. Sexual-assault victims are typically offered an emergency contraception pill, which some people in the anti-choice camp wrongly equate with abortion.

My hunch is that it was the result of outmoded attitudes and boneheaded budget cutting. Still, Ms. Palin has been governor for under two years, and she’s running for vice president largely on her experience as mayor of tiny Wasilla — a far superior credential, she’s told us, to being a community organizer. On the rape kits, as on other issues, she owes voters a direct answer.

Posted by: Luke2 | September 27, 2008 8:15 PM

We have to remember fellow conservatives that people in Alaska has always underestimated Palin. Even the politician from Alaska that race against her for the gubernatorial position said so and even now praise Palin for her extraordinary performance during their debate.
Personally, I've underestimated this cat walker as brainless but the republican convention proved me wrong.
Another point I would like to make is that Kathleen Parker is a columnist, not a politician. She make judgment on Sarah Palin base on how she handle the interview and not according to her accomplishment and skills.
I might be wrong but their is always hope when you believe in God. Remember, everything is possible with God.

Posted by: theecomonist101 | September 27, 2008 7:50 PM

At least SOMETHING put the fear of God into you. Gov. Palin is MORE qualified to be President than Sen. Obama.

Posted by: JakeD | September 27, 2008 6:43 PM

After nearly 8 years of leadership by a President who clearly has limited intellegence, the prospect of Palin's position sitting next to an aging McCain--yes, she could advance to the Presidency by his death--puts the fear of god in my heart. Fortunately the right sees this problem-in-the-making and one of them has spoken out. It sounds like the truth and can hardly be overlooked by the rest of us.

Posted by: Tucsonbill | September 27, 2008 5:55 PM

Just the sheer support for Palin, indicates the lack of sufficient intelligence and education of this country. I truly, believe we are at a crossing point where the rest of the developed world is catching and at some point will surpass our progressive movement. We'll be left with nonsense debates about teaching creationism in schools, the right to carry arms, and people like Sarah Palin running this nation. For those of us that think she's out of her league; wait a generation or two and she's going to look like an Einstein!

Posted by: bb1123 | September 27, 2008 4:27 PM

It's truly amazing to me that Palin keeps on defending her foreign policy experience with nonsense. She is completely out of her league. I do feel sorry for her. She has been used to gather up Hillary's voters and energize a doll campaign thanks to Carl Rowe's advice, but at some point the fire will run out of fuel, and she has to face her lack of intelligence and try to use the fear mongering tactics played very well this last two terms.

Posted by: bb1123 | September 27, 2008 4:08 PM

I love the people blaming Katie Couric for Palin's stupidity. This is priceless! Republicans have turned self-delusion into an artform.

Posted by: TheDukeStir | September 27, 2008 3:08 PM

I want to say upfront that I am a firm supporter of Obama, but looking at the Palin issue I cannot help but feel sorry for her. I think McCain and his spin doctors have put her way above her league and have used her as a tool. Looking at the McCain strategy, we have seen the repeating themes of "working the ref", rounds of lies and distortions, and hail mary passes at opportune moments to change the conversation. The Palin pick, just like McCain's 'suspension' of his campaign three days ago, was a typical hail mary pass, designed to give McCain a statistical advantage right out of the DNC and after Obama's stirring promise to America. While she may be a good governor of Alaska, it is now without doubt that the McCain campaign have cruelly used her as a campaign prop, and did not seriously consider her qualifications and basic ability to be held up for scrutiny by the media. We can only blame the media that much, but what is raising alarm bells for me right now is McCain's judgement....he has shown that he is willing to do anything to win, and that may be fine for some of us, it's just part of the game, i suppose. To me, putting national interests at risk, like derailing the bailout talks this week, and having us potentially accept Sarah as our president, is just plain dangerous, and it shows that John McCain cares more about winning than helping us. Sarah Palin will become the first casualty in McCain's blind ambition for power...and us ordinary Americans, just like Sarah, will fall under this ruthless and irresponsible power if John McCain becomes president. Very very scary.

Posted by: andytoh | September 27, 2008 2:12 PM

Country First!

Palin needs to stay in the race and tough it out. She can recover from this. She's a strong woman. She's a hunter. She can field dress a moose. She's had 5 kids. This election is a cake walk compared to those things.

Anyway, she's already committed. Her country is first. COUNTRY FIRST! It comes before everything else, including family. Suck it up. Gird up your loins and handle it like a man... or woman as the case my be.

Sarah! Sarah! Sarah!

Obama/Biden '08


Posted by: DougH1 | September 27, 2008 12:45 PM

Posted by: thecannula | September 27, 2008 11:42 AM

Edward6:

No, but I do remember Bill JEFFERSON Clinton saying that about Barack HUSSEIN Obama.

Posted by: JakeD | September 27, 2008 9:07 AM

Must say, being a Obama backer from Canada, I feel very sorry for Senator Palin. They used her like a fiddle. I don't think she is stupid, but just not ready for the hateful and cruel media and Republican leaders. They never gave her a chance in there greed for instant votes. Hold your head up Sarah.

Posted by: justada56 | September 27, 2008 8:21 AM

She answers questions like its a test, and then stumbles or answers incorrectly. Thanks, but I get my 'answers' from Google. From leaders I want perspective, guidance and solutions.

The thought of someone like her offering us solid guidance as a nation... well it will never happen.

Posted by: rd3309 | September 27, 2008 2:49 AM

Remember when she was first selected, and someone asked the leading Republican in the Alaska legislature what qualifications Sarah Palin had to be President? "She is over 35 and she is a native born citizen." I've never been in politics, just read and try to stay informed, and I could do as well in an interview, or better.

Posted by: Edward6 | September 27, 2008 2:35 AM

Katie Couric's style of interviewing has been going downhill for sometime now and is probably the reason CBS has unloaded her. A lot of the questions were indirect and inconsistent which left an unbalanced impression during the entire interview. Asking many questions that could not be answered with those one line sound bites that Couric was after. Interview locations were also really bad. Palin was clearly frustrated with Couric's inept line of questioning.

Posted by: Campbell3 | September 27, 2008 12:29 AM

palling one hot tamaley i wanna ride her holyrollercoaster for eight years me like macaine he funny he say obama dont understand nuthin me like palling she got safety goggles and say no i aint doin no interviews im president she gonna get payback for irak attacking on 9-11 with weapons mass instruction so vote for palling and macaine for our leaders they no more stuff than obama she even met leaders at un said hiya. palling macaine o8!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: DaveMiner | September 27, 2008 12:23 AM


Also, Kathleen Parker has turned on her friends before. Sadly, when she doesn't get sufficient attention, she eats her young.

And don't forget who writes her paycheck:
The Washington Post.

Follow the money. Mystery solved.

Posted by: moralliberal | September 27, 2008 12:18 AM

This paper thinks GANG RAPING SARAH PALIN

is hilarious. Some of your staff should

be arrested for encouraging violence.

Obama's endorser and fundraiser, comedian Sandra Bernhard, screamed that she would
have her black brothers GANG RAPE PALIN

Your paper thinks that is funny ????

Your paper spews so much hatred, and violence that you have lost all credibility with any moral person, liberal or otherwise.

GANG RAPE SARA PALIN

Posted by: moralliberal | September 27, 2008 12:07 AM

Sarah Palin brings somethng to the table that none of the other candidates do, other than being a woman.
Common, middle class people can relate to her. She can explain things on their level and she can represent their interests. She understands. OK, so she's not an overeducated intellectual, but why do candidates have to be a certain thing? Any group is stronger when all members aren't exactly the same. She is refreshing!


=============

Alright then. The next time you want surgery just ask the middle class person who is just an emt to do it.

I for one, want the educated M.D. to do mine.

Posted by: sandnsmith | September 27, 2008 12:06 AM

Sarah Palin brings somethng to the table that none of the other candidates do, other than being a woman.
Common, middle class people can relate to her. She can explain things on their level and she can represent their interests. She understands. OK, so she's not an overeducated intellectual, but why do candidates have to be a certain thing? Any group is stronger when all members aren't exactly the same. She is refreshing!


=============

Alright then. The next time you want surgery just ask the middle class person who is just an emt to do it.

I for one, want the educated M.D. to go mine.

Posted by: sandnsmith | September 27, 2008 12:04 AM

Love the blind backing and defense of the cardboard cut-out Palin by the GOP backers. You people didn't even know who Palin was few short weeks ago. You take and support anyone the party shoves down your throats. Disturbing.

Posted by: WilyUSA | September 26, 2008 11:51 PM

who in the hell is this K. Parker? Never heard of her and I'm 69 yrs. old and watch the news on TV everyday, read the 4th largest city's newspaper daily, and read U.S. News and other magazines each week.

I like Palin. She's much better than mistaking Biden.

Posted by: love234america | September 26, 2008 11:11 PM

Despite his recent flubs, the New Republic (as far as I know) is not calling for Biden to bow out. Why the National Review is giving Parker a forum on this is a mystery to me. Her article is self-serving. She is seeking to be rewarded for her bravado in making glib observations about Palin, who is doing at least as good as Biden is -- although she is far less experienced than he is.

Palin will do fine. She has good instincts, and she'll improve in her answers as she gains more experience. Go Sarah!

Posted by: APalinFan | September 26, 2008 10:28 PM

Palin can't drop out. Too much pure comedy lost to the banality of presidential elections. She must keep on keeping on so McCain will be screwed and we can all have a good hearty laugh about moose burgers: http://www.236.com/news/2008/09/26/sarah_do_not_listen_to_those_b_9168.php
It's for the good of the country.

Posted by: alyssa-cruz | September 26, 2008 9:04 PM

OK, so she's not an overeducated intellectual, but why do candidates have to be a certain thing?

------------

Its not that she isn't an over educated intellectual, it's that she's barely educated at all.

And few middle class Americans can identify with a woman who has a voodoo doctor exorcise her demons.

This is the White House not Animal House.

Posted by: wpost4112 | September 26, 2008 8:15 PM

what the hell are you talking about Jake D.?

I never once mentioned the NPT in any of my posts. In fact i was willing to give your girl a total pass on that one.

and sorry MrsT2. she's very nice indeed, but I'm middle class and i would not suggest I'm qualified to be President of the United States. Its not a popularity contest.

And while its nice that she can communicate with the middle class, very few foreign heads of state are members of the American middle class.

Posted by: Vizier6 | September 26, 2008 8:12 PM

I hope they ask McCain about Charles Keating and Phil Gramm.


McCain knows all about bailing out rich bankers and screwing over middle class and poor people, he's been doing it for years:
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAzDEbVFcg8
.


McCain - Founding Member of the Keating Five:

McCain was one of the "Keating Five," congressmen investigated on ethics charges for strenuously helping convicted racketeer Charles Keating after he gave them large campaign contributions and vacation trips.
Charles Keating was convicted of racketeering and fraud in both state and federal court after his Lincoln Savings & Loan collapsed, costing the taxpayers $3.4 billion. His convictions were overturned on technicalities; for example, the federal conviction was overturned because jurors had heard about his state conviction, and his state charges because Judge Lance Ito (yes, that judge) screwed up jury instructions. Neither court cleared him, and he faces new trials in both courts.)

Though he was not convicted of anything, McCain intervened on behalf of Charles Keating after Keating gave McCain at least $112,00 in contributions. In the mid-1980s, McCain made at least 9 trips on Keating's airplanes, and 3 of those were to Keating's luxurious retreat in the Bahamas. McCain's wife and father-in-law also were the largest investors (at $350,000) in a Keating shopping center; the Phoenix New Times called it a "sweetheart deal."

Here's some more straight-talk, my friends:
.
http://www.realchange.org/mccain.htm
.

Posted by: DrainYou | September 26, 2008 8:08 PM

Sorry, I asked loulor that. Gotta go.

Posted by: JakeD | September 26, 2008 8:03 PM

Sarah Palin brings somethng to the table that none of the other candidates do, other than being a woman.
Common, middle class people can relate to her. She can explain things on their level and she can represent their interests. She understands. OK, so she's not an overeducated intellectual, but why do candidates have to be a certain thing? Any group is stronger when all members aren't exactly the same. She is refreshing!

Posted by: MrsT2 | September 26, 2008 8:03 PM

(yep, that's the same hypothetical question I recall being asked ; )

yeah? this is the part where a normal person would explain their point. going to war with russia is kinda a big deal, no? the funny thing is its staring you in the face, you've been told twice, and you STILL don't get it! its the ramifications of war at issue, not the mechanism of NATO's mutual support pact.

like talking to the wall but less interesting.

Posted by: Vizier6 | September 26, 2008 8:03 PM

Gov. Palin is MORE qualified to be President than Sen. Obama."

Aren't you supposed to pound on a table when you say that?

Posted by: JohnQuimby | September 26, 2008 7:59 PM

Vizlier6:

You never did answer my first question to you: "Was she asked what the NPT was?"

Posted by: JakeD | September 26, 2008 7:57 PM

Anyone notice the double standard MrsT2 applies? If she can answer the question, then it demonstrates Palin's gravitas. If she can't, then its a 'gotcha' question.

With the scale tilted so far in your favor, how can you lose?

Posted by: Vizier6 | September 26, 2008 7:56 PM

How would anyone do on nat'l tv with someone holding a gun on them?

What the hell does that even mean? Never ceases to amaze how people BASH the 'media elite' but give a free pass to 'financial/cultural elite' at the top of their own party. Nobody has to help Sarah Palin fail. she does that on her own by failing to answer serious questions any 3rd year Poli Sci student could answer.

I suggest you quit blaming on your shoes the fault of your feet, MrsT2.

Posted by: Vizier6 | September 26, 2008 7:53 PM

GIBSON: And under the NATO treaty, wouldn't we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?

(yep, that's the same hypothetical question I recall being asked ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 26, 2008 7:52 PM

I'm a foreigner living in this country and I'm amused and also scared by some of these comments. What scares me is that people feel that Palin is more qualified than Obama... come on now!!! You can't compare her with Obama just as you can't her with Hillary Clinton.... I know American women are smarter than that...
What saddens me is that in this 2008 people are still so narrow minded and hateful and rather vote for someone air head who can see Russia from her living room (I'm sure Putin is shaking in his boots by now - her empty phrases scare me too), over a qualified candidate because of his racial background.
Well, the world is watching....

Posted by: QQout | September 26, 2008 7:51 PM

It is particularly disturbing that another woman would be so harsh on Sarah Palin!
Women seem to want other women to be on presidential tickets, but when it happens,other women try to knock them down.
Is Ms. Parker an intellectual snob? Who is she to say Sarah Palin is "out of her league? It's as condescending as Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric were to Sarah Palin in their interviews.
I think Sarah Palin would be excellent in any negotiation with any adversary. The leftist press are not your ordinary adversaries. They want Sarah Palin or anyone who doesn't agree with them, to fall flat on their faces. How would anyone do on nat'l tv with someone holding a gun on them?

Posted by: MrsT2 | September 26, 2008 7:43 PM

Now you've demonstrated NEITHER of you are qualified to be Vice President, JakeD.

Posted by: Vizier6 | September 26, 2008 7:41 PM

Jeez JakeD, read the post!

You thought the question was about what NATO means. It wasn't. It was about inviting someone into NATO who could mean INSTANT war, and not with the usual tinpot dictator either. You didn't mention it; she didn't mention it.

thats how you've embarassed yourself.

Posted by: Vizier6 | September 26, 2008 7:40 PM

Time to take you meds, Jake. Better double the dose.

Posted by: loulor | September 26, 2008 7:35 PM

Gov. Palin is MORE qualified to be President than Sen. Obama.

Posted by: JakeD | September 26, 2008 7:33 PM

Not at all, Beck. In fact, when she gets home, we're going on one of those date-nights. We've already agreed to both vote for McCain-Palin, so no need to even watch tonight.

P.S. to Vizier6: perhaps you can share with the class how you think I've embarassed myself?

Posted by: JakeD | September 26, 2008 7:29 PM

Palin has shown us she is not even qualified to be president of the Wasilla Three Stooges Appreciation Society, let alone the potential president of the USA. I don't see how McCain can keep her on the ticket, unless, of course, the GOP somehow manages to steal another election on Nov. 4.

Posted by: copynp | September 26, 2008 7:29 PM

Oops, my mistake Kathleen Parker hasn't been listening too closely.

Posted by: cmecyclist | September 26, 2008 7:26 PM

Palin has shown us she is not even qualified to be president of the Wasilla Three Stooges Appreciation Society, let alone the potential president of the USA. I don't see how McCain can keep her on the ticket, unless, of course, the GOP somehow manages to steal another election on Nov. 4.

Posted by: copynp | September 26, 2008 7:26 PM

JakeD,

Any fourth grader knows about NATO obligations. Even you do.

Would you vote for her based on that answer?

Admit it pal, she's an idiot bimbo who belongs in the cast of "Laverne and Shirley."

Posted by: loulor | September 26, 2008 7:21 PM

Jonathan,

You're, um, not listening closely enough to Palin, the word is verbage.

Posted by: cmecyclist | September 26, 2008 7:20 PM

loulor:

Gov. Palin knew enough about our NATO obligation to accurately answer Charlie Gibson's hypothetical. Was she asked what the NPT was?

She did no such thing. she proved she knows what 'treaty' means, but she had NO IDEA and MADE NO MENTION of the ramifications of admitting a nation to NATO that could directly lead to all-out war with a REAL opponent. She embarassed herself, as you've just done.

Posted by: Vizier6 | September 26, 2008 7:16 PM

wpost4112

I'm not sure I agree. It could be that Lieberman works because the party is already split, the far right has nowhere else to go and the independents will decide the race.

And as far as I know, "the decider" is still the President.

Posted by: JohnQuimby | September 26, 2008 7:14 PM

But seriously, Jake: I realize that you are in your 70's like McCain, but at least you've stuck with Janet in spite of everything, unlike your libidinous hero. Do you spend all your time trolling liberal sites (instead of supporting conservative sites) because Janet, John and Jeff are sick and tired of you? That would be my guess.

Please let me know. If I don't hear from you, I'm sure I'll run into you in SD soon.

Regards,
Beck

Posted by: Dawny_Chambers | September 26, 2008 7:11 PM

wpost4112:

Just you wait and see.

Posted by: JakeD | September 26, 2008 7:11 PM

The National Review argument was deliberate to get the dialouge started by Sunday's talk shows.
There's a closed door meeting take place in Washington this week to devise an exit strategy for Palin. The official reason will be to "remove her family from pressure surrounding the publicity of the campaign"; the understanding is that Palin cannot survive the Troopergate fallout to occur within the next two weeks.
McCain's photo-op appearances over the last several days have been non-stop McCain-Lieberman. This is in the works: it's a done deal. It is uncertain how involved Palin herself is in this.

-------------------------
Watching too much TV?

Selecting the liberal Leiberman after dumping Palin would effectively kill every right-wing Xtian vote.

Never gonna happen.

Romney is his only chance and even then, his judgment call on Palin has basically sunk him...add on his grandstanding over the bail-out...he's toast.

Unless he hits a homer tonight. Then, and only then, will he be on the way to the White House, even if Palin strikes out in her debate.

Tonight is the decider.

Posted by: wpost4112 | September 26, 2008 7:08 PM

Sarah Palin = Harriet Miers

Posted by: pali2500 | September 26, 2008 7:05 PM

loulor:

Gov. Palin knew enough about our NATO obligation to accurately answer Charlie Gibson's hypothetical. Was she asked what the NPT was?

Posted by: JakeD | September 26, 2008 7:04 PM

Blame the media, especially the CNN crew of Campbell Brown (who is now crying and shrilling to the McCain campaign to free Palin), Anderson Cooper, Gloria Borger and Wolf Blitzer (to a lesser extent) for edifying mediocrity on the night that Palin read from the teleprompter to deliver a shamelessly distasteful and porous speech at the Republican Convention in Minneapolis. They raved, marveled, gushed and probably peed in their underpants. They were supposed to be bright and discernible but they lost all jugement that any freshman in College will see through. The opportunistic John McCain and CNN made her to be what she was not. Almost everyday, CNN has been raving about Palin. They even sent crew of reporters to welcome her back to Alaska recently. Very opportunistic. Now the curtain has been lifted and we have seen who Palin is: shallow, unintelligent, liar, vindictive and irresponsible.

Since that dirty speech she gave, I have not listened to any of her campaign speeches or watched any of the three interviews because I did not believe anything decent or intelligent can come out of that mouth. I will not have my intelligence assaulted and insulted. Until America stops voting people who tell them lies like GW, Palin, Tom Delay, John McCain and on the basis of emotions; we will continue to be inundated with people like Sarah Palin who looked so childish meeting with those so called "world leaders" this week. It is a shame the McCain campaign will stoop so low to organize sham meetings with these presidents just for political reasons and make a fool of the entire country before the world. How much longer will these people continue to disgrace this beautiful country of ours before the world having been saddled with a person like GW for 8 years.

We shall see on November 4.

Posted by: midas20874 | September 26, 2008 7:04 PM

info42

That's a great Hollywood script but this is a game with higher stakes.

The McCain campaign is spending valuable political capital to provide cover. They can't keep it up, especially if it gets any worse. She's a bad hire and they can't afford the liability.

I'd say htimothyjones has it right.

Posted by: JohnQuimby | September 26, 2008 7:04 PM

Jealousy roars loud and clear.
----------------------

LOL. Jealousy? Of what? Dimness?

She's a looker, has charisma, a good-looking hubbie and apparently great kids, but otherwise, she's way over her head.

This has never been personal...it'sd all about selecting leaders for our country and Palin is nowhere near prepared.

And yes, Obama is.

Did you see his interview with O'Reilly? Brilliant. Even that nut case O'Reilly was impressed.

Jealous. Maybe over her moosehead collection, but that's about it.

Posted by: wpost4112 | September 26, 2008 7:03 PM

sandinsmith:

McCain's going to announce his plan and pick for Secretary of the Treasury during the debate.

Posted by: JakeD | September 26, 2008 6:57 PM

You small-brained fools who think Sarah's worth saving, consider this:

McCain somehow and against all odds wins the presidency. Then, after about six months in office, he drops dead.

Enter President Palin, who thinks foreign policy has something to do with living across the strait from Russia. DUH!!!!

The same President Palin who brags about being "prayed over" by some Kenyan retard who framed that Nairobi woman as a witch who he insists created car accidents by casting spells. "He's just so bold!," Sarah said breathlessly of the witch-hunter. (Check YouTube).

The same President Palin who doesn't have a clue about our key treaties with foreign governments and can't tell you (because she doesn't know)what, for example, the NPT is and why it is globally important. She knows nothing about trade or deficits, and ZERO about banking.

She is the prototype of the modern bimbo idiot, who knows NOTHING about ANYTHING. When McCain keels over and dies, she and her husband will simply have to be removed from office.

Question. Do you want someone who picked Sarah-the-Idiot as a running mate running this country? On what grounds, his good judgment?

Posted by: loulor | September 26, 2008 6:55 PM

I'm glad I'm not the only republican that feels this way, thanks Kathleen for speaking out. If McCain wanted a women there were way better choices. If he wanted someone other than those that were competing with him he could have picked Governor Christ from Florida, he is progressive, eloquent speaker, he has class, something Palin does not, and he cleaned up after Jeb Bush, he also popular with the democarats. Sorry McCain, with this choice you showed me we can't trust you to make sound decisions.

Posted by: pc32303 | September 26, 2008 6:53 PM

Beck_Childs:

A retired attorney (although I was golfing this morning ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 26, 2008 6:52 PM

Jealousy roars loud and clear.

Posted by: realist4 | September 26, 2008 6:51 PM

I think this is McCain's PLAN:

Dump Palin 2 weeks before the election, and go with Joe Lieberman.

Not enough time to have lugubrious Joe put the electorate to sleep... and would have reaped all the benefit out of Palin's celebrity status.

Celebrity (noun): someone famous for being famous.

Posted by: NorwegianBlue | September 26, 2008 6:51 PM

Pitbulls make horrible vice-presidential candidates. Everyone knows that.

Posted by: LeftCoastNative | September 26, 2008 6:46 PM

"So I have a prediction: the day after the VP debate, I bet we will be spending more time pondering whether Obama should drop Biden than we will wondering whether McCain should drop Palin"

Its stupid debating people like you (and Palin) who cite no facts, but seriously. your prediction is that after embarassing herself 3 TIMES IN A ROW in softball interviews, she's going to come out and wax a Senator with 30 years experience on the issues?!? with what- her winning smile?

HAHAHA

and maybe monkeys will fly out of my...

Posted by: Vizier6 | September 26, 2008 6:46 PM

In one of my earlier posts, I actually called the ticket, "McCain-Lieberman and oh yeah Palin ticket." I'm going to see if I can track it down.

Posted by: MILLER123 | September 26, 2008 6:43 PM

I like Palin. In fact, she's the only reason I'd even consider voting for McCain.

But I have to admit everything Parker said about her was true. Too true.

I was really pulling her. I, like many others, wanted her to be Maggie II. But that doesn't make it so.

The only point I disagree with Parker is having Palin pull out. That would be disaster for the Republicans (and it's near disaster right now.)

Her only chance is the debate. Expectations couldn't be lower. If she pulls off a miracle, who knows?

Posted by: info42 | September 26, 2008 6:42 PM

LonewackoDotCom

If what is posted on this site is so upsetting to you, why are you on here?

Your link for the Free Republic website simply highlights how uncivil and just plain angry your "base" is. Sad, sad, sad.

Posted by: codysea | September 26, 2008 6:40 PM

Could it really be? A conservative with a mind of her own, willing to call face truth?
I really didn't think such a thing existed...

Posted by: jeffc6578 | September 26, 2008 6:39 PM

McCain is going go after Condi Rice now or better yet do his maverick thing and select Hillary Clinton as his running mate.

Posted by: MILLER123 | September 26, 2008 6:39 PM

The National Review argument was deliberate to get the dialouge started by Sunday's talk shows.
There's a closed door meeting take place in Washington this week to devise an exit strategy for Palin. The official reason will be to "remove her family from pressure surrounding the publicity of the campaign"; the understanding is that Palin cannot survive the Troopergate fallout to occur within the next two weeks.
McCain's photo-op appearances over the last several days have been non-stop McCain-Lieberman. This is in the works: it's a done deal. It is uncertain how involved Palin herself is in this.

Posted by: htimothyjones | September 26, 2008 6:39 PM

"If BS were currency," Parker concludes, "Palin could bail out Wall Street herself."

That boys and girls says it all.

Posted by: MILLER123 | September 26, 2008 6:37 PM

It doesn't matter whether Palin bows out or not. The fact remains that McCain made the decision to recklessly put this entire nation in harm's way by choosing this inept woman to back him up.

He has already shown that he cannot be trusted to make our most important decisions.

Posted by: Arjuna9 | September 26, 2008 6:36 PM

I know exactly what Parker means. I cringed watching her performance with Katie Couric.

This poor woman, Palin, is too ignorant to realize what a laughing stock she is becoming. And, that jerk McCain used her to corral the conservative base, without regard to the fact that he set her up to be publicly humiliated. For goodness sake, Couric herself knows more about the world than this rube.

This pick is beginning to flame out. Why with troopergate and abuse of power in her history to remind us Bush's years, McCain has managed to self-destruct his campaign. Add to that his recent stunt to not debate, then to debate, he has become a cartoon. A stereotype of a doddering old Mr. Magoo.

I can't wait to see what surprises he comes up with in tonight's debate.

Posted by: sandnsmith | September 26, 2008 6:34 PM

I think it's more like:

JakeD
8th grade dropout
currently unemployed

Who else has so much free time to troll these pages day after day with hundreds of posts and shill for a broken geriatric and a moose-lodge poster girl?

Posted by: Beck_Childs | September 26, 2008 6:30 PM

I'd be bummed now if she dropped out. Her presence on the McCain ticket makes them WAY easier to defeat.

Obama/Biden 08

Posted by: julieds | September 26, 2008 6:27 PM

The "dolt" went to Yale undergrad and has an MBA from Harvard. Ronald Reagan, on the other hand, graduated from Eureka College.

So, you were saying?
----------------------

And I would bet that Eureka College in Reagan's day was probably equivalent to an ivy league education today.

Of course, RR has YEARS of real world experience before he ran for office.

Palin is inexperienced, barely educated, and incapable of holding a serious conversation about national or international matters. She speaks in cliches and platitudes when not talking in nonsensical circles.

I agree that the place of education is not necessarily important, but native intelligence is, and Palin is about 5 or 6 eggs short of a dozen in that area. Charismatic? oh yup. But dangerously shallow.


Posted by: wpost4112 | September 26, 2008 6:23 PM

dbw1 believes that the world is flat and the sun revolves around the earth.

Why give him any credence?

Posted by: bhuang2 | September 26, 2008 6:22 PM

I guess so, toritto ; )

JakeD:
Stanford -- B.A. political science
Stanford -- Juris Doctor (J.D.) summa cum laude

Posted by: JakeD | September 26, 2008 6:19 PM

dbw1:

So what ARE her qualifications?

Obama beat Hillary Clinton, took control of the Democratic Party and raised more money from individual donations than any other candidate in history.

That's how you get to be President.
We don't generally appoint them.

And the Reagan comparison fits Obama better than Palin...brilliant speaker, visionary,
both from Illinois...Who BEAT DOWN a rival with a gimmicky ticket.

Posted by: JohnQuimby | September 26, 2008 6:13 PM

I am beginning to get an idea why Sarah attended five colleges to earn a degree in a relatively simple discipline, if you can call it that; journalism.

Posted by: FactFinder44 | September 26, 2008 6:11 PM

I was scared by her views on women and her dogmatic religious views. Now, we find out that she isn't muc hmore than an idiot. No thanks to the Mind to Nowhere.

Posted by: FactFinder44 | September 26, 2008 6:08 PM

markinaustin: The dolt went to Yale cause daddy went to Yale - its called mediocre entitlement.

Proves that education cannot penetrate a dull mind.

:-)

Posted by: toritto | September 26, 2008 5:26 PM

The "dolt" went to Yale undergrad and has an MBA from Harvard. Ronald Reagan, on the other hand, graduated from Eureka College.

So, you were saying?

--

Oh, we were just saying that Bush's Dad is the only reason he got into Yale and Hravrd. That's all.

Posted by: jelow | September 26, 2008 5:24 PM

Obama:
Occidental College - Two years.
Columbia University - B.A. political science with a specialization in international relations.
Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude

Biden:
University of Delaware - B.A. in history and B.A. in political science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)

McCain:
United States Naval Academy - Class rank 894 of 899

Palin:
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism
Matanuska-Sus itna College - 1 semester
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in journalism

Posted by: jelow | September 26, 2008 5:22 PM

The "dolt" went to Yale undergrad and has an MBA from Harvard. Ronald Reagan, on the other hand, graduated from Eureka College.

So, you were saying?

Posted by: MarkInAustin | September 26, 2008 5:22 PM

dbw1, Obama has already shown himself to be presidential by the way he conducted himself during this last week. He has shown himself to be focused under pressure and articulated when explaining himself.

You may call this elitist, but most of us call it hope.

Posted by: alan15 | September 26, 2008 5:15 PM

dbw1: I'll take Obama's Columbia and Harvard education over St. Sarah's of the Snow's community college level as a good starting point.

Of course you wouldn't undeerstand that - you dopes elected the biggest moron to ever hold the Presidency.

ANYONE would be an improvement over the dolt Bush.

:-)

Posted by: toritto | September 26, 2008 5:12 PM

do you realize that Rep. ticket is truly historic this year? They got to female candidates: Sara Palin and John "The Drama Queen" McCain.

Posted by: thor2 | September 26, 2008 5:11 PM

This is sort of like the week leading up to the convention. The liberal press and bloggers were just merciless in their bashing of Palin. Not a sliver of anything was passed up as an opportunity to bash her up one side and down the other, and many happy-fingered journalists pondered how soon McCain would drop her from the ticket.

And then she kicked them in the teeth at the convention.

So I have a prediction: the day after the VP debate, I bet we will be spending more time pondering whether Obama should drop Biden than we will wondering whether McCain should drop Palin.

Even though the media has been doing their best to pick apart every little thing about Palin, and gloss over the almost daily gaffe-machine that is Joe Biden, at the VP debate Americans will get to see them both on stage together and decide for themselves what they think without the daily slanted media filters we are currently subjected to.

I can only hope most Americans will watch the debate and then shut the tv off before all the liberal pundits come on to spin, spin, spin, and tell us that what we saw wasn't really what we saw.

Posted by: dbw1 | September 26, 2008 5:09 PM

Don't we have enough people in Washington who disappoint, embarrass, or let us down? Why would McCain put this person in a position for which she is clearly unprepared? There are, no doubt, many many people that McCain could have chosen that are qualified to serve as VP regardless of their political views. Dear, dear Sarah, you are not one of them. Sort of reminds me of Alberto Gonzales. But not as smart.

Posted by: jake2485 | September 26, 2008 5:05 PM

toritto:
"She is truly undereducated and unprepared for the VP spot."

And yet you and your fellow Obama supporters continue to fail to show any reason why Obama is prepared to be PRESIDENT.

You can't keep piling on Sarah Palin's lack of experience to be VP without making your own candidates resume for PRESIDENT look pretty bad.

Posted by: dbw1 | September 26, 2008 5:00 PM


As a Obama supporter, I was worried after the RNC because McCain did pull a rabbit out of his hat by letting the christian right select Palin. For a brief moment the Republicans had a bit of enthusiasm about their ticket, at this stage, I'm more enthusiastic about their ticket.

Thank you McCain for caving in to the religious right by selecting Palin and "first dude" as your running mates, this is beautiful.

Please Sarah, do your country a favor and stay on the ticket!

Obama 08

Posted by: alan15 | September 26, 2008 4:52 PM

Sad to have watched the decline of American conservative throught from Buckley's "God and Man at Yale" and Goldwater's "The Conscience of a Conservative" to "I can see Russia from my house"!

She is truly undereducated and unprepared for the VP spot, let alone the Presidency (god help us all).

I would have had more respect for McCain if he had picked Elizabeth Dole.....

Posted by: toritto | September 26, 2008 4:50 PM

I am a replublican and I must say that the reason Palin has bit the dust is because of McCain.

McCain is a ultra micro manager. He has plainly made it clear tha Palin can't go to the bathroom without his say so.

McCain is going to lose this election because he stiffles creativity and wants to run things himself.

As a bipartisan 'maverick", McCain is. He has no problem going to the democrats. The problem is, no other republicans go with him.

Its ironic, now that Palin has been taken out of the focus of his campaign, his poll numbers are going back to where they were before she arrived.

I feel sorry for Pailn, but I bet right now she regrets say yes to McCain.

McCain will blame his defeat on her, because he cannot accept the fact that he is what us replublicans are going to reject.

Posted by: ChrisP1 | September 26, 2008 4:48 PM

Posted by: thor2 | September 26, 2008 4:29 PM

"Palin's religion is not AOG anymore."


Yeah, she attends "many churches" now. Just like McCain...

Posted by: AgnosticEngineer | September 26, 2008 4:25 PM

That's right, dbw1, but at least Ronald Reagan NEVER boiled down foreign policy to "good guys" and "bad guys" (LOL).

Posted by: MarkInAustin | September 26, 2008 4:25 PM

I have to agree - Gov. Palin is out of her league. Boiling down foreign policy to "good guys" and "bad guys" were the final nail in her coffin for me. Part of me feels sorry for her but then again, she accepted the job. And she can't bow out because of "family" reasons. She knew about her daughter's pregnancy and her son's special needs before she accepted.

Posted by: jk_newhard | September 26, 2008 4:21 PM

As "stoked" as Weismann must be to giddily re-print a conservative criticizing Palin, he and K Parker would do well to remember the story of Ronald Reagan.

One of Reagan's inner circle famously admitted of the actor: "we weren't just amateurs; we were novice amateurs." And if I recall, Reagan did fairly well as a politician.

And considering how similarly inexperienced the Democrats nominee for PRESIDENT is, I think K Parker can step down from her elitist wall over the Republicans VICE-Presidential nominee.

Posted by: dbw1 | September 26, 2008 4:12 PM

Palin's 15 minutes are up.


Caribou Barbie can take her corrupt pathological serial lying butt back to Alaska anytime now.

Posted by: DrainYou | September 26, 2008 4:07 PM

"When Couric pointed to polls showing that the financial crisis had boosted Obama's numbers...."

The same polls, of course, that Katie Couric and her liberal friends dismissed two weeks ago.

Posted by: dbw1 | September 26, 2008 4:06 PM

For Pete's sake, Senator McCain must be forced to stand by at least one of his decisions.

Given the past few months, very little can help the GOP ticket. It's not Palin's fault. Senator McCain, who was nominated by his party, has created this drama. The Republicans made their bed --- now let them lay in it.

Posted by: vote08 | September 26, 2008 4:05 PM

I disagree with Gov. Palin on most things, but think she is probably a bright person, who was selected way too soon for the national spotlight. Sen. McCain did a huge disservice to her, I think, and may have ruined any future chances she may have had.

Posted by: croison | September 26, 2008 3:57 PM

I am an Obama supporter and keeping Palin on the ticket would probably help our chances of winning -- but -- I have to agree that she should step down even if it makes a more challenging election for Obama. She really is that bad. McCain could replace her, but that is going to make him look even more like a knucklehead. She needs to do it herself. It may well be moot however, as he seems content in destroying his chances for the White House all by himself.

Posted by: mo11 | September 26, 2008 3:53 PM

Jim Lehrer should open the debate with a glance toward McCrazy and the line, "well, look what the cat dragged in."

Posted by: bclark3 | September 26, 2008 2:08 PM | Report abuse

LOL

Posted by: thor2 | September 26, 2008 3:43 PM

"If BS were currency," Parker concludes, "Palin could bail out Wall Street herself."
---------------

That's a classic

Posted by: thor2 | September 26, 2008 3:31 PM

Palin's religion is not AOG anymore.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | September 26, 2008 3:18 PM

Amen!

Posted by: lndlouis | September 26, 2008 3:16 PM

Maybe Palin speaks in tongues, or wants to. Her Pentecostal churches really push this "gift of God". Maybe that's what she did in her private meetings with the World leaders, let God talk to them in their own language through her. Wow, wouldn't that be wonderful!
Or how about that financial crisis? Palin's religion (assembly of god) is prone to use emotional hokus pokus to fix such problems, like putting all the bills on an alter and praying like crazy to make them go away. I've seen it, I've done it. the bills don't go away, only one's sense of reality. I'm a preacher's kid, and the older I get the more I realize what's been taken from me by such radical religious freaks.
"Onward Christian soldiers" They "really" believe they'll go up in the rapture at the world's end, even to the hastening of the lords return. Delusional grandeur as President? What's new?

Posted by: boomerbabe | September 26, 2008 3:14 PM

Maybe Palin speaks in tongues, or wants to. Her Pentecostal churches really push this "gift of God". Maybe that's what she did in her private meetings with the World leaders, let God talk to them in their own language through her. Wow, wouldn't that be wonderful!
Or how about that financial crisis? Palin's religion (assembly of god) is prone to use emotional hokus pokus to fix such problems, like putting all the bills on an alter and praying like crazy to make them go away. I've seen it, I've done it. the bills don't go away, only one's sense of reality. I'm a preacher's kid, and the older I get the more I realize what's been taken from me by such radical religious freaks.
"Onward Christian soldiers" They "really" believe they'll go up in the rapture at the world's end, even to the hastening of the lords return. Delusional grandeur as President? What's new?

Posted by: boomerbabe | September 26, 2008 3:14 PM

cao091402:

It does "bolster" the argument that the GOP base is ready to defend her to the death. I especially liked Ms. Parker's "example" about Palin not worrying about polls. Oh, no. God forbid! I was actually cheering that answer!

Seriously, if you at least read some of those comments, you might learn why the GOP base is so excited. My favorite: "there's nothing wrong with Palin that can't be fixed by what is right with Palin."

Posted by: MarkInAustin | September 26, 2008 3:14 PM

Parker's column is a fascinating read. She dissects Palin's three interviews and public statements with clinical dispassion, though it's clear her disappointment is immense.

Basically, she boils it down to a simple meme: Palin is not qualified to step into the Presidency if circumstances warrant. Considering that is the ONLY important qualification for the job, that's a remarkably damning statement.

I would suggest everyone read the column. It's quite something.

Posted by: dbitt | September 26, 2008 3:09 PM

Strangely enough, I am actually beginning to feel rather sympathetic for Palin. Not that I want here anywhere near Washington except as a visitor taking in the sights, but she is so obviously in over her head. I know, no one put her in the situation but herself and I pray she returns to Alaska and stays there, but still it is rather a sad situation to witness.

McCain on the other hand I have absolutely no sympathy for. He's the one who made his deal with the devil.

Posted by: wes1155 | September 26, 2008 3:07 PM

That's the thing about 'brilliant tactical strokes'. They offer only a temporary advantage and are no substitute for a winning strategy. McCain has max'd out as a Senator. He can do that job. He has neither the temperament nor perspective to be President.

Posted by: twstroud | September 26, 2008 3:05 PM

I hope this is the beginning of a movement to remove Palin. Many Obama supporters think that this is a joke but the American people could choose McCain, a choice that would be very unfortunate for us as well as them. But I would like to know that the person who will replace her is qualified to be more than a small town mayor.

Posted by: Gator-ron | September 26, 2008 3:04 PM

Today Parker writes this:

"She (Palin) can bow out for personal reasons, perhaps because she wants to spend more time with her newborn. No one would criticize a mother who puts her family first."

On September 3 - less than a month ago - Parker wrote this:

"Some also have questioned whether Palin, whose son Trig has Down syndrome, can be both a mother and a vice president? These questions aren’t coming from the Right — so often accused of wanting to keep women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen — but from the Left. Did someone switch the Kool-Aid?"

Hey, someone DID switch the Kool-Aid!

Posted by: HughBriss | September 26, 2008 3:02 PM

"A month ago I gave Palin until Oct 1.

Now I expect to see the tearful resignation speech either just before or just after the scheduled VP debate."


Before. If she were to participate in a nationally televised debate, the damage would be irreparable for the Republican party.

It's a shame too, now the Republican's will get one more chance to grandstand at the last moment and potentially win over the gullible American public. Remember how big of a surge in the polls the Republicans got when they picked Palin?

Posted by: AgnosticEngineer | September 26, 2008 2:58 PM

She's the political equivalent of the Iraq Beauty Queen ("um, uh, such as, the Iraq...")

This is what happens when you let hard-right neo-cons pull the puppet strings.

There will be no silent coup after all (unless, of course, the coming economic End of Days brings with it martial law and the new world order...)

Posted by: scrivener50 | September 26, 2008 2:57 PM

Siting the Free Republic, a known hate wesite, does not bolster one's argument.

Posted by: cao091402 | September 26, 2008 2:46 PM

A month ago I gave Palin until Oct 1.

Now I expect to see the tearful resignation speech either just before or just after the scheduled VP debate.

Posted by: JohnQuimby | September 26, 2008 2:42 PM

Not just one, Lonewackodotcom. Parker has plenty of company in her assessment of conservatives. See:

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/09/links_13.html?imw=Y

Posted by: delawder | September 26, 2008 2:39 PM

Gov Palin was the perfect choice for Senator McCain politically. She bolsters his right wing left vulnerable by his maverick approach to the issues. But....she is a terrible choice practically for a nation that is under siege on many fronts. We are a nation at war on 2 fronts, face an economic crisis that promises to bring Americans another "Great Depression", face environmental woes resulting in unaffordable fuel for cars and homes, and perhaps most important have a politically gridlocked Congress that is unable to pass any significant legislation to get us out of these messes. Governor Palin can step down for a number of admirable and politically acceptable reasons but who will ever forgive Senator McCain for playing politics in such perilous times. The U.S. Naval Academy teaches graduates to always put country in front of self. Senator McCain admirably demonstrated these principles during the Vietnam War but must have retired them when he retired from the navy. The damage is already done.

Posted by: rgn1 | September 26, 2008 2:38 PM

The worm began to turn when John McCain made this selfish, nakedly political choice for his veep -- not even conservative commentators can keep up the ruse that this selection put "Country First." John McCain is willing to have an unprepared naif a 72 year old heartbeat away from the presidency in order to win the election. LIAR.

Posted by: Omyobama | September 26, 2008 2:19 PM

Just LOOK around YOU !

Piss-Poor State-Craft...
A Bungled Economy...

Is this the America you remember growing up?
So where does the Buck Stop NOW ?

Why would America REWARD complete Republican failure ?

We wont.

Posted by: PulSamsara | September 26, 2008 2:18 PM

Clearly, the WaPo - a site that's repeatedly lied about McCain and Palin and allowed BHO to lie about them unchallenged - has spotted a trend... of one person.

Meanwhile, here are some comments from the base:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2090916/posts

Posted by: LonewackoDotCom | September 26, 2008 2:13 PM

It's not McCain's fault that he ended up with Palin. He wanted Gracie Allen, but his staff broke it to him that she had been dead a while. So it came down to a choice between Palin and Kathie Lee Gifford. Palin answered the phone first.

Posted by: Skeptic21 | September 26, 2008 2:11 PM

Jim Lehrer should open the debate with a glance toward McCrazy and the line, "well, look what the cat dragged in."

Posted by: bclark3 | September 26, 2008 2:08 PM

I saw the interview on CBS and my mouth was gaping. It was an interview by a national reporter who knew more about the subject than the interviewee. Ms Palin behaved like a small town mayor who was discussing something like the national economy and referencing the economy in her hamlet as the basis for making national policy. This is a case irresponsible vetting. The lady is very nice and may mean well though I can not tell. Being on Katie Couric was more like being on SNL. John McCain failed in his duty to country when he nominated her.

McCain's health is really not known, his medical records have not been vetted by doctors of differing expertise. When voting for McCain you are voting for Palin with a probability of her becoming president as high as 30% by some experts. They really do not know because McCain's records are NOW secrete.

Posted by: Gator-ron | September 26, 2008 2:02 PM

Even if I don't agree with them on most (every) issue, I have a little bit more respect for the conservative authors and commentators who come out against Palin. It lets me know that while I strongly disagree with them on major issues, they at least won't put partisan politics ahead of basic responsibility for our country. Sarah Palin is beyond not ready to be Vice President or, God forbid, President. Her selection as McCain's running mate was a cynical ploy to bring on board both Hillary supporters and Evangelical Christians, and nothing more.

On November 5th, we'll be on wholly seperate pages again. But today, thanks go out to George Will and Kathleen Parker.

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | September 26, 2008 2:00 PM

McCain has a long record of trying to bail on Debates. He totally rejected the last primary debate refusing to debate Mike Huckabee and the Media let that slide like snot. http://www.hotpres.com

Posted by: pastor123 | September 26, 2008 1:58 PM

So, Remember, how until today 11 am ET, McCain was not going to Debate until the deal went through? Well, if you needed more proof of this blatant political stunt, McCain campaign has web ads out saying he has won the Debate...BEFORE the debate has even happened.


http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/09/mccain_wins_debate.html


Look at this pic:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/images/26Sep_Friday_WSJ.JPG


So:


1.) McCain planned to attend the Debate all along.

2.) McCain pulled his stunt not only for Political Reasons but because his Campaign was going to the crapper.

3.) He took the MSM narrative away form the dreadful Palin-Couric interview and from the ties of Rick Davis (his campaign manager) to Fennie and Freddie Mac.

4.) The Campaign is already ready with Ads to say that McCain won the debate, before the debate happens, because their need to lie to the American people has not died down.

5.) McCain put cold water over the Bailout Deal because if the deal had passed, more people would have been interested in the debate, now there is a good chance people will be interested more in what is going on with the deal.


This is what the McCain campaign wanted to pull attention away from....Palin:

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-onthemedia26-2008sep26,0,3542588.story
.

Posted by: DrainYou | September 26, 2008 1:58 PM

Uh oh., the wolves eat their own when times get tough. http://www.veeppeek.com

Posted by: pastor123 | September 26, 2008 1:56 PM

Kathleen Parker is a hack. Always has been, always will be. Writing something I agree with doesn't change that one iota. She has an angle, it's just a matter of waiting to find out what it is. My guess, she's building cred for when she rediscovers the wonder of Palin next week and can write, "I haven't always been a supporter, but...".

Posted by: zukermand | September 26, 2008 1:54 PM

What did Palinmean by this: 'who's more apt to be talking about solutions and wishing for and hoping for solutions'?

She should take up comedy in order to make us laugh because she cannot be taken seriously.

Posted by: robertjames1 | September 26, 2008 1:52 PM

For the first time in memory, I agree with Parker. How odd this election year has become.

It's time to stop the circus, the issues facing this country and the world are too great to let this keep going on the way it has.

Posted by: wes1155 | September 26, 2008 1:44 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2009 The Washington Post Company