Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Daily Double: Obama and Palin's Time on the Job

By Juliet Eilperin
GRAND JUNCTION, Colo. -- For the third time today, Sarah Palin mocked Barack Obama for serving less than a year in the U.S. Senate before running for president.

"Now let's talk about experience for a minute," the GOP vice presidential nominee told an audience of several thousand tonight at Suplizio Field. "After a few terms as a Chicago politician, Barack Obama served about 300 days in the Senate" -- here the crowd interrupted Palin with a loud round of boos -- "Barack Obama served about 300 days in the Senate before he decided to run for president. Now, John McCain has spent his entire life serving his country, and serving you."

To make that charge, the Alaska governor used some creative math. According to her spokeswoman Maria Comella, the campaign estimates that Obama served a total of 304 days in the Senate before setting his sights on the White House. The calculation is based on the number of days the Senate was in session from the day of Obama's swearing-in, on Jan. 3, 2005, to the day he announced his exploratory committee, on Jan. 16, 2007.

Including the days not spent on the Senate floor -- when senators such as Obama and McCain, spend much of their time working in their home states or traveling overseas -- Obama served 743 days as a senator before announcing his presidential bid.

Palin, meanwhile, served 633 days as Alaska's governor before McCain picked her as his running mate. For 312 of those days, Palin stayed in her Wasilla home rather than in the state capital of Juneau, according to state records. Under the McCain-Palin calculus, that would give her 321 days on the job in Juneau as governor before deciding to run for higher office.

By Post Editor  |  October 20, 2008; 9:42 PM ET
Categories:  Barack Obama , Sarah Palin  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama Leaving Trail Thursday to See Ailing Grandmother
Next: McCain Stumps with Danforth, a Moderate

Comments

I think it's all over for John McCain and his Princess Sarah Palin. It is highly anything is going to work against Obama/Biden ticket. The very choice of Princess Sarah Pelin by John McCain speaks volumes about misjudgements, now and November 04th will confirm the Obama/Biden ticket is on the right track and election is almost over.!!!!

Posted by: akber_kassam | October 23, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: jaiderbertoli | October 22, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

The reason why Sarah was not running for President because she has quite the job to do in Alaska. She was as shocked as the rest of us to be asked to be the V.P..

As to her not being qualified, what make you believe that Obama is? He is just some slick tongued politician that makes you feel good. He tells you what you want to hear. He like all slick tongued politicians are going to do the same thing that has been going on for decades take care of himself and his friends. As for you and me well that is going to be the same story only a different day and a different president.

Believe me with Obama, Queen Pelosi, Court Jesters Harry Reid and Barney Franks, and a libral media this country is doomed. Say good by to your constitutional rights.

Posted by: AKIndependent2 | October 21, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

"We are not voting for the next American Idol!"

No, that would be Palin.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 21, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

From the time Barack Obama was sworn in as a United State Senator (his first "National" Public Office), to the time he announced he was forming a Presidential exploratory committee, he logged 143 days of 'experience' in the Senate. That's how many days the Senate was actually in session and working.

After 143 days of work 'experience,' Obama believed he was ready to be Commander In Chief, Leader of the Free World .... 143 days. We all have to start somewhere. The senate is a good start, but after 143 days, that's all it is - a start.

AND, strangely, a large sector of the American public is okay with this and campaigning for him. We wouldn't accept this in our own line of work, yet some are okay with this for the President of the United States of America?

We are not voting for the next American Idol!

Posted by: vetteman | October 21, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Whether she was doing official work or not in Wasilla, Palin was taking money from the state for personal reasons and for her family. By refusing to move to Juneau, she cost the taxpayers thousands of dollars a year for her and her family's travel. Is that how she'll act as VP? Also, her number of days includes abuse of power and taking money from Congress to build a bridge she decided not to build. She took a lot of pork and was supported by her AIP pals and other anti-American people. Most that know her say she was a Republican in name only to get elected in Alaska, but her true beliefs seem to be for Alaska first, not America. That kind of experience we do not need. She is devisive and has shown an ability to lie and do whatever it takes to get elected. What are her real motives?

Posted by: childrenfirst | October 21, 2008 3:17 PM | Report abuse

JakeD,

You're right, MarkInAustin shouldn't worry about me and neither should you. Worry about all of those people; men women and children who are here now, today who have no one who worries or cares about them. We already know MarkInAustin has no worry for them since he's not an OB/GYN.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 21, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

Mark:

Thank you for answering the question. Don't worry about wes1155.

oortcloud7:

I don't just focus on abortion. I will address your concerns when I get to bokonon13's post tomorrow.

Posted by: JakeD | October 21, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

Hear hear. ALL life should be sacred, and if you're just wanting to focus on one element, like abortion, and ignore other elements, like hundreds of thousands of innocent people killed, you're missing the bigger picture.

Posted by: oortcloud7 | October 21, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

MarkInAustin,

I did answer JakeD's question although maybe not to your satisfaction. No, molestation is not right, period. Neither is trying to reach into a woman's womb and making a decision for her which is an intimate, personal decision.

Why is it so many of the same people who rail against government interference with the rights of the individual are the same people who want to inject government into the most intimate of personal decisions?

Where is their outrage for the children who are living in poverty in this country? Where is their outrage for the men, women and children who cannot afford health care? Where is their outrage for the tens of thousands of innocent victims who have died as a result of war started because of a personal vendetta?

Posted by: wes1155 | October 21, 2008 2:33 PM | Report abuse

The interesting thing about this election is that no matter which side you are on you will skew the numbers to make your case. For this writer he makes the assumption that Palin was not doing official business in Wasilla, which everyone knows is not true. The same goes for the small business % used by different writers. To sum it is only those corporations that pay federal business taxes, which is a very small % of the businesses, you will know these writers when they use 15% 25% and 35% as tax rates. A great deal of small businesses are sole proprietors, partnerships, and s-corporations which of course donot pay business taxes, the profits and certain deductions are flowed through to the personal adjusted gross income. Neither of these have anything to do with McCain's claim of some 64% of the business making more than 250,000 which is true or that small businesses create 84% of the new jobs which is true. Since so many business pay no taxes but do have them pass through, and so many are just investment shells the 98% of small business make very little money is blatantly misused to confuse the uninformed or pro-Obama not matter what the facts are.

Posted by: johs | October 21, 2008 2:02 PM | Report abuse

JakeD, although you didn't ask me, it seems like you can't get a direct answer, so I will answer your question: "If 5 men wearing robes declared child molestation within the penumbra of privacy rights too, would you only be privately anti-molestation?"

No.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | October 21, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

I'm not an OB/GYN, so please spare me a lecture about my "responsibility" not stopping at the end of the birth canal. If the comparison is SO DIFFERENT, though, why is it so difficult to answer JakeD's question?

Posted by: MarkInAustin | October 21, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Dear JakeD,

You can't seriously say that the only litmus test you have for VP or for the top spot is that they're against abortion? Is that because it's murder? What about all the innocent civilians killed in Iraq and Afghanistan? Isn't that important too? It's also murder. Or how about the people who die unnecessarily because they can't afford decent health care? Aren't "we" Christians supposed to defend all life, and not just those who haven't been born yet?

Everytime a Republican's in office, everyone gets their panties in a bunch, and then we have extreme military conflicts and the economy tanks. Every time. Every time a Democrat gets into office, they improve our foreign relations and fix the screw-up left by the Republicans. Saying that you're for one candidate or the other based solely on the abortion issue is a grave disservice to your fellow Americans (and Christians too, I might add).

Posted by: oortcloud7 | October 21, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

MarkInAustin,

You are offering a comparison which suits you but is an attempt to twist the discussion to your personal belief about what is a decision between a woman and G-d, not between you, her and G-d. Offer alternatives not your rhetoric with continued support beyond the proselytizing and help build a world which offers hope and opportunity for her and her child. Your responsibility doesn't stop at the end of the birth canal. Better yet, work to prevent an unwanted or unplanned pregnancy to being with through education then the conflict will never arise.

In the case you offer you suggest the issues are one and the same. Well in a way they are, they are both cases of violating an individual's rights. On the one hand you of the woman and in the other the molester of the child.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 21, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

FROM TODAY'S FORBES-
AN ACTUAL COLLEAGUE OF OBAMA (I THOUGHT THEY WERE ALL UNDER LOCK AND KEY UNTIL NOV 5TH!) TELLS US WHY NOT TO VOTE FOR OBAMA

"...And third, he is in favor of progressive individual taxes and high corporate taxes. It is as though the U.S. does not have to compete for labor and capital in global markets. My fear is that with his strong egalitarian bent, he has not internalized the lesson that high rates do not offset declining revenues.

Thus, even before we get to the added bells and whistles of the modern welfare state--windfall profits taxes, ethanol subsidies, health care--an Obama administration could lock us into a downward spiral by ignoring the simple fundamentals of sound governance."

Richard Epstein writes a weekly column for Forbes.com. He is a senior fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution and a professor of law at the University of Chicago, visiting this fall at the New York University School of Law.

...as I was saying...

Posted by: thecannula | October 21, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

jakeD:

You must be a retired lawyer!

Not "NO" small business makes less than $260K/yr

98% of them make less than $260K/yr do.

boy it's big.

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio

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

Flavio, you must not be a retired economist. A business with 7 employees earning $40,000 per year each must take in at least $280,000 annually. There are thousands of businesses like that. You are saying that 98% of small businesses make less than that. There are thousands of individuals who make more than that annually. Obama wants to raise the tax rate for small businesses earning above $250,000 to 39% from 36%.

Posted by: ttj1 | October 21, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Mark:

That's one issue of course.

Wes:

You have not answered my question.

Posted by: JakeD | October 21, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

wes1155, so "indirectly" you would be "anti-molestation in public"? As for legitimate reasons, while I can't presume to speak for JakeD, here are some of NAMBLA's "legitimate" reasons:

1) We need to end the oppression of men and boys who have freely chosen mutually consenting relationships, who are hurting no one else.

2) We call for the abolition of age-of-consent and all other laws which prevent men and boys from freely enjoying their own bodies.

3) We call for the release of all men and boys imprisoned by such laws.

4) We need laws that both protect children from "unwanted" sexual experiences and at the same time leave them free to determine the content of their own sexual experiences.

5) What happens in the privacy of the bedroom should stay there.

6) Sex After Eight Is Too Late.

The North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) is a New York City and San Francisco-based unincorporated organization in the United States that advocates the legalization of sexual relations between adult males and under-aged boys. NAMBLA describes itself as a "support group for intergenerational relationships," and uses the slogan "sexual freedom for all."

Does ANYONE defend this?

Posted by: MarkInAustin | October 21, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

JakeD,

I thought I did answer if indirectly. Your comparison is akin to comparing a snowball to a rock. They are both matter, but different states and different compositions.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 21, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Creative math, huh, Juliet? Let's be generous and give Obama 3 years (1000 days). That's still 23 fewer years of experience than John McCain has. Further, you are comparing a vice-presidential candidate to a presidential candidate. And finally, Palin is a governor...Obama is a senator.

So, what is your point, Juliet? Is this supposed to be a news article or a cheering section for Obama? What a crappy, biased newspaper the Wapo has become.

Posted by: ttj1 | October 21, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Palin probably spent all of one day thinking and reading about serious policy issues. She's fluff.

Just how much foreign affairs has Obama spent thinking and reading about? Does he know how to balance a budget? Does Biden?

How many employees does Obama or Biden have? Not 26,000 as Palin has?

This "inexperience" argument is nil when it comes to Palin. Also, some of the posters forget about advisors to help with foreign and domestic affairs.

Posted by: ca67klein | October 21, 2008 12:47 PM | Report abuse

Whether you two feel it is "relevant" or not, please answer the question. I'm not being cynical. I'm sincerely curious.

Posted by: JakeD | October 21, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

JakeD,

I don't believe you offer a relevant parallel scenario. To me they are very different cases although I am sure you disagree. It is your right to believe as you do and I will respect it and defend it even though I may argue it.

I do not feel it is hypocritical to have a personally held belief about what I would do or how I feel in a personal matter as opposed to what I feel is personal choice. I can have my opinion and personal belief, but I don't care to have my opinion and personal belief about a most personal decision promulgated upon others.

The difference between our opinions is always going to come down to the definition of when a person is a person. I don't know the answer since I cannot possibly know G-d's mind. As far as I can recall it is not explicitly addressed in any biblical text, so we are left with interpretation by flawed humans trying to divine the answer. I am not so presumptuous to believe I positively know. If you are comfortable in your personal belief of knowing the answer, that's wonderful, but again I suggest you and others should demonstrate equal vigor in protecting the rights of those already born as well. Maybe you do, but many, many do not. Here I have no ambiguity relegated to personal beliefs because it is clearly enunciated in biblical terms to do so.

The most effective way to proselytize if one is so inclined is not by word but by deed. People will be much more open and accepting to what someone else believes and espouses if they see them living those beliefs. I am not suggesting you do not, but many many don't.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 21, 2008 12:21 PM | Report abuse

OK, Jake - I do not believe that your equating abortion and child molestation is valid. There are legitimate reasons for which a woman might choose to end a pregnancy, but there are none for which an adult might choose to abuse a child sexually.

Posted by: bokonon13 | October 21, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

OK, Jake - I do not believe that your equating abortion and child molestation is valid. There are legitimate reasons for which a woman might choose to end a pregnancy, but there are none for which an adult might choose to abuse a child sexually.

Posted by: bokonon13 | October 21, 2008 12:02 PM | Report abuse

bokonon13:

I'm posting from my iPhone today, so I will have to get to your deep theological questions tomorrow. Could you answer my question to wes1155 re: legalizing child molestation, in the meantime? Thanks.

Posted by: JakeD | October 21, 2008 11:41 AM | Report abuse

OBAMA CAN SUCK MY BIG HAIRY BEARDED CLAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Lalalu | October 21, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

go McCain

Posted by: Lalalu | October 21, 2008 11:31 AM | Report abuse

OBAMAS GONNA LOSE, MCain Rules

Posted by: Lalalu | October 21, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Also, JakeD, you say "Being personally pro-life, but pro-choice in public, is called hypocracy."

Two things: first, it's spelled "h-y-p-o-c-r-I-S-y." Second, I do not at all think it is hypocritical to establish moral standards for yourself, but to allow others to decide for themselves how they feel about divisive moral issues.

And the global scientific community is pretty clear, by the way, as to when dinosaurs lived on Earth. Millions of years ago, long before man evolved from the common ancestor(s) we share with apes.

Posted by: bokonon13 | October 21, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

The number of days in office means nothing. What matters is the magnitude and strength gained there. Analogy: Does it matter if you earn much or little in your lifetime if you spend your money foolishly or criminally?

Sarah Palin has proven at EVERY juncture that she brings negative, riotous energy to everything she is involved in.When the base is invigorated by those who aren't educating themselves about the world at large and their latent anger towards others is being brought to surface, is that a service to our nation? NO. It throws us back to a time we fought hard to reform. Palin throws that legislative work back 40 years and undermines the justice and understanding gained.

The sweet reformer that was presented to us at the RNC who believes in family first, God and country, has gone on to neglect a child who needs her daily, has showcased her children as poster children for her perfect little family. She has waged little wars on us, dividing us as a nation,with her mob-mentality rallies that inject and incite hatred for those who do not agree with her personal positions. She has made it VERY CLEAR that she will continue to use the political arena to shout from the rooftops her personal beliefs regarding abortion, God and church twisiting the constitution at every turn. Her personal agenda is even trumping her position as a running mate for McCain as she separates herself from his campaign views. Shame on him and those who have run the show for allowing this to become a runaway trainwreck.

This has been her contribution to change. Instead of working with her constituents to outline a plan for renewal and restructuring, instead of being an instrumental part of the think-tank that will begin to govern us as a nation in a better way, instead of offering specific decisive actions for a better America she chooses to go to our poorest neighborhoods, our most depressed towns and cities and shout from her podium about socialism and racial bias. This is not change for the good of all. And the world is watching her help us to implode.

I,for one, don't give a hoot how many days she turned the Wasilla government upside down. What I care DEEPLY about is how one person can be catapulted into fame and lauded for her ANTI-democratic stance and be so open about it. This is a dangerous dance that she vows to continue throughout our country as VP...and the truth of that devastation will be seen in her wake. If elected with McCain, her VP chair will be empty. Empty of intelligence,sound thought,experienced input,substance and honor. Sarah Palin IS a shill.

I vote for the intellegent leadership that Obama and his team will bring to our country. He will stabilize us with his sincere concerns and ACTIONS about our futures that goes way beyond his personal desires. Sarah Palin's whole style is based on an EGOCENTRIC need to bring all of us along to join in her Rapture. God help America and deliver us from evil.

Vote Obama for a strong America!

Posted by: rjs_donal | October 21, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

OK, JakeD, a couple things:

-You seem to be a single-issue voter. How do you feel about capital punishment, especially in light of the recent study which found that many on death row are/were innocent, or at least not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? And how do you feel about the undeniable racial discrepancy in executions; i.e. a non-white is more likely than a white person to be executed, even if they have been convicted of the same crime?
-When do you feel life begins? How do you know? How does the value of that potential life stack up against the value of persons already alive and taking part in society?
-At a time when the Earth's population is exploding is it really responsible to have the default response be to add to it? What if the "family" into which the child is born demonstrably lacks the resources to care for him or her?
-You might suggest adoption. Be aware that he demand for adoptive children is often predicated on their race, gender, and physical and mental health. Be aware also that many babies are currently aborted because they are unhealthy. Should we really bring these fetuses to term, knowing that they are extremely unlikely to survive, and if they do, to be placed in a good home?
-As an aside, is it responsible to force a child to be brought into a world in which one of the most powerful people on the planet might be a pretty airhead who believes that Armageddon is near? and who has access to weapons of mass destruction?
-Finally, do you damn those who believe abortion to be a regrettable but viable option when the man and woman involved do not believe that they are ready or able to be parents financially, emotionally, psychologically, let alone the parents of a baby born with a serious medical condition, or one who is the product of rape or incest?

You asked if I believe in God and/or Satan. The answer is "no." I am an agnostic, and do not believe that we as humans will ever know for sure how or why we came about. Maybe it was more than biology, but maybe not. I'm OK with not knowing, but I'm not OK with attempts by others to enforce their ideas on me and everyone else culturally and legally.

Posted by: bokonon13 | October 21, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

As Hillary DIANE Clinton pointed out, Barack HUSSEIN Obama is not ready to be President on Day 1 either.

Posted by: JakeD | October 21, 2008 10:18 AM | Report abuse

Forget Gov. Palin. She is a joke. No serious and thoughtful person believes she is ready on Day 1 to step in as President if needed.

Palin is the celebrity that she is because she is attractive. Plain and simple. The reason Saturday Night Live ratings have soared is due to Tina Fey's accurate and comical depiction of Sarah Palin.

When Colin Powell explained why he was voting for Obama, he gave thoughtful and honest reasons that many educated moderate Republicans and Independents will relate to.

Posted by: AJ2008 | October 21, 2008 10:13 AM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is the campaign's built in SNL sketch. The kids see her as a joke, if a dangerous one. The fringe base of the Republican party see her as confirming the hidden truth about those dangerous radical Democrats. Then there's guys, who under one circumstance or another, just want to do her. My take is Obama's: Give her a knowing smile. After all its all a game (the vp candidate's role in the campaign). It will all be over soon and HOPEfully we can get down to the massive amount of real work that needs to be done. Two (at least) new Supreme Court Justices; getting rid of all those Bush mid-level department appointments there to subvert the purpose of their agencies; and re-establishing the balance of power in the federal government.

Posted by: lernerlaw | October 21, 2008 9:56 AM | Report abuse

wes1155:

Being personally pro-life, but pro-choice in public, is called hypocracy. If 5 men wearing robes (with, who knows what, underneath?) declared child molestation within the penumbra of privacy rights too, would you only be privately anti-molestation?

Posted by: JakeD | October 21, 2008 9:41 AM | Report abuse

It's incredible that the media (not to mention readers and bloggers) spend any time comparing the qualifications of Obama and Palin (and some on both sides of the spectrum have). In case they haven't noticed, Palin is not running for president. Obviously, comparing her experience with Biden's--and McCain's with Obama's--is relevant. What bothers me most about the choice of Biden may be that, in one important sense, he has TOO MUCH experience. If Obama is really serious about being an agent of change, why run (voluntarily) with a guy who has been so long entrenched, even arguably part of the problem with the status quo?

Posted by: DennisHinde | October 21, 2008 9:32 AM | Report abuse

Oh, snap!

Posted by: ASinMoCo | October 21, 2008 9:15 AM | Report abuse

To constantly belittle, besmirch a political opponent with her belittling, mean minutiae speaks more realistically about the person attacking.

Palin makes a mockery of every subject she touches. Like a (Mrs.) Midas, only instead of turning to gold, what Palin touches turns to farce and vaudeville.

Her Republican trade mark: farce and vaudeville, Made by Palin.

Posted by: hchiba | October 21, 2008 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Palin probably spent all of one day thinking and reading about serious policy issues. She's fluff.

Posted by: ShriekingDenizen | October 21, 2008 9:08 AM | Report abuse

Math is not going to win over any right wing zealots. They only like numbers that support their talking points.

Posted by: yellojkt | October 21, 2008 8:44 AM | Report abuse

IF PALIN IS SO QUALIFIED...

Then why didn't she run for president?

Makes you wonder what the Republican Primary would have looked like? ...

"I've been Governer for TWO WHOLE MONTHS and I'm READY to be President"

---

18 Million people for Obama in the primaries because of his vision for America not his experience.

Palin got one vote and the only vision I know of from her is her view of Russia.

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 21, 2008 8:40 AM | Report abuse


Academic Background:

Theodore Roosevelt: Bachelor of arts degree (cum laude) in history and government from Harvard College (1880). Attended Columbia Law School (1880-82). Author of numerous works on history and politics, including The Naval War of 1812 (required reading at the U.S. Naval Academy), Life of Thomas Hart Benton, Life of Gouverneur Morris, Essays in Practical Politics, The Winning of the West (four volumes), History of New York, Hero Tales from American History, American Ideals, and The Rough Riders.

Sarah Palin: Bachelor of science degree in communications-journalism from the University of Idaho (1987).

Law Enforcement/Military Experience:

Theodore Roosevelt: Deputy sheriff in the Dakota Territory, police commissioner of New York City, captain in the New York National Guard, colonel with the 1st US Volunteer Cavalry Regiment, veteran of the Spanish-American War.

Sarah Palin: None.

Political Experience:

Theodore Roosevelt: Member of New York state assembly, U.S. civil service commissioner, New York City police commissioner, Assistant Secretary of the Navy, governor of New York.

Sara Palin: City council member and mayor of Wasilla, Alaska; governor of Alaska.

Posted by: RiverCityVA | October 21, 2008 8:38 AM | Report abuse

Settle who is or is not ready by having Palin and Obama debate since the issue is who is more qualified and is Palin " presidential enough.

Think we know the results though. If Palin can handle the veteran Biden, Obama will be a cake walk. Palin will walk over Obama, just like Putin will.

Russia is in the Caribbean, and has agreed to help Chavez go nuclear. We can't stop Iran, so just how will the man with "the steel spine" apply the Monroe Doctrine?

Posted by: 5280sail | October 21, 2008 7:00 AM | Report abuse

Give me the guy who lives in the present day over the guy with Early Onset Alzheimers any day.

Give me the guy who loves America over the “Alaska should secede from the Union” America HATERS any day!

Give me the guy who disassociates from questionable characters over the guy who deals with (Keating) and hugs it out with (Libby) any day!

I say, vote for the ticket that LOVES America. Vote for the ticket that’s for the PEOPLE, not special interest groups like BIG OIL. Vote for the ticket that’s not in the early stages of dementia (McCain) or completely demented (Palin).

VOTE OBAMA/BIDEN!

Posted by: techrat | October 21, 2008 4:46 AM | Report abuse

Teddy Roosevelt indeed. Beyond the nostalgic view held and commonly taught about Mr. T. Roosevelt, he was one of the biggest pandering, populist presidents certainly of the 20th century. He had rather grandiose ideas of the role of government and was quite anti business.

Maybe you should study the history of Teddy Roosevelt before espousing what a great model he is. The only policy I can think of which he championed which I agree with was his establishment of national parks. Beyond that he was a populist hack. Read some of Mark Twain's commentary on Teddy Roosevelt some time.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 21, 2008 2:51 AM | Report abuse

Trivia for those who say that Palin is not ready for being in the White House.

Was elected Governor of New York in 1899. Was sworn in as Vice President in 1901 with President McKinley. Was known to be an activist and reformer. He had battled against corruption in New York and in the White House battled against the power of the big corporations.

The man became President only after six months as Vice President and 1 year as Governor of New York.


Who is he?


For those of you not taught American history because the public school system frowns upon our children being educated, the man was Teddy Roosevelt.

Posted by: AKIndependent2 | October 21, 2008 2:36 AM | Report abuse

JakeD,

Thank you for your candor. I don't necessarily agree with you on the Pro this or that, but I respect your right to decide according to your conscience.

I don't expect it will have any influence but you are aware Biden feels, as many of us, abortion used as birth control is wrong. But he also feels the government has no right to interfere with a decision of the most personal nature between an individual and, if they so believe, G-d. He has not and will not vote for legislation which involves any federal money which would be used for abortion.

What it comes down to is a person's right to privacy as guaranteed by the constitution and I agree with that interpretation. This country was founded on laws and freedom of religion, not ascribing to and imposing one single theological view.

It also comes down to a right to life after the womb, not just inside of it why is it so many people who believe the former seem to ignore the latter in direct contradiction to Jesus' teachings? So there seems to me to be plenty of hypocrisy by many people on both sides of the issue.

Have you seen the video from this past summer of Palin speaking at the Wasilla Assembly of G-d talking about Alaska as a refuge for those of us (who survive) in the lower 49? It was quite interesting. She seems to believe it is imminent, like so many have believed over the millennia and have been wrong.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 21, 2008 2:19 AM | Report abuse

"The will of God prevails — In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be wrong. God cannot be for, and against the same thing at the same time. In the present civil war it is quite possible that God's purpose is somewhat different from the purpose of either party — and yet the human instrumentalities, working just as they do, are of the best adaptation to effect this."

Abraham Lincoln - Second Innagural

Posted by: JohnQuimby | October 21, 2008 2:02 AM | Report abuse

JakeD

If you want to hear God laugh, tell him your plans.

Posted by: JohnQuimby | October 21, 2008 1:48 AM | Report abuse

So, Juliet, either way you measure it Palin has either more experience than Obama or 110 days less... I thought you guys were in the tank for Obama- get it together and give him some more fluff pieces...

Posted by: jwilkes1 | October 21, 2008 1:37 AM | Report abuse

Oh, end times: "no one knows the time of the end of time". Anyone who tells you otherwise is lying. Every knee will bend, and tongue confess, that Jesus is Lord, even in Alaska.

Posted by: JakeD | October 21, 2008 1:28 AM | Report abuse

http://www.need4trth.blogspot.com

Now as to McCain and his TIRED ANTICS....

All McCain is interested in doing is winning the presidency no matter the cost. Even at the lost of his HONOR and INTEGRITY. He charges Obama with being ambitious. Yet, his very own ambition is controlling him and it has taken precedence, over judgement, honor, integrity, and common sense. In other words McCain has given himself over to FOOLISHNESS and LIES. The Center piece of his campaign is guilt by association, false charges of treason and socialism, hate/race baiting, demonizing Islamic people ie Muslims, accusations of domestic terrorism (from 40 years ago),using ACORN as a scapegoat ie voter fraud, to cover up the attempt of the RNC and John McCain's campaign of Voter suppression, voter purging, and vote caging, and now trying to tie Obama's fund raising to "scandal", and Watergate. The Audacity of John McCain, who is the current friend of convicted Watergate scandal participant and "Domestic Terrorist" G. Gordon Liddy, to even hint at this, is beyond HYPOCRITICAL. McCain said of Liddy, "he is a Good American" and "My Friend", This is the same G. Gordon Liddy who instructed his radio audience on how to kill ATF agents. This is McCain's friend. A convicted Watergate Participant, and domestic terrorist. Judgement and Character. McCain is a sad study in fools.

Posted by: need4trth | October 21, 2008 1:24 AM | Report abuse

Yes, I honestly believe she is more qualified than Biden. Being pro-choice DOES disqualify any candidate for Vice President or President IMHO. That being said, there were probably tons of pro-life people I'd rather see as VP, but they're too smart to run. I can also vote for whomever I please, for whatever reason I want. As for dinosaurs, I have no idea -- I'm old but not that old -- if carbon dating is accurate, no. Did that answer all of your questions?

Posted by: JakeD | October 21, 2008 1:23 AM | Report abuse

JakeD,

Can you honestly look in the mirror, looking into your own eyes and say she is more qualified than Biden? That she is the most qualified person McCain could have picked? If so why? Because you are a single issue voter? Do you believe dinosaurs and biblical man walked the earth at the same time? Do you too believe the End Times are at hand and Alaska is a refuge?

I'm not being cynical, I'm sincerely curious.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 21, 2008 1:07 AM | Report abuse

John McCain needs to go back to the Senate and then retire. Palin needs to go back to Alaska and serve out her term as governor and then get her own talk show like Huckabee.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 21, 2008 1:03 AM | Report abuse

Obama needs to get back to the U.S. Senate and get some seasoning. He has run a great campaign, especially after lying to his opponent about not taking private funding. Anyway, there is no other job on this planet that a man or woman could could jump ranks in like Obama is doing. He ahsn't find his way around the Hill and suddenly wants to run it. THAT IS RAW AMBITION! If there is someone out there in WAPOLAND that has done this in their career I'd like to hear about it.

Posted by: TyroneJonessr | October 21, 2008 12:56 AM | Report abuse

Palin. Next question?

Posted by: JakeD | October 21, 2008 12:53 AM | Report abuse

Who is tne best Vice President Palin Or Biden? http://www.frizle.com

Posted by: roverfind | October 21, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

janefree0513:

"Non-essentials" like right to life?

Posted by: JakeD | October 21, 2008 12:31 AM | Report abuse

bokonon13:

You don't believe in God / Satan?

Posted by: JakeD | October 21, 2008 12:15 AM | Report abuse

The Small Business Administration ("SBA") size standards for "Plumbing HVAC Contractor" is $14 million and lower -- still not sure what that has to do with the thread topic -- allow me to remind you: how many days did each candidate serve in his/her current office before deciding to seek higher office?

Posted by: JakeD | October 21, 2008 12:00 AM | Report abuse

jAKED likes Palin because he could sit at home, on his retired lawyer arse, and watch FOX NEWS and spank his pygmy marmoset at the same time.

I could see jAKED's stupidity from my house--boy it's big.

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 20, 2008 11:32 PM | Report abuse

There is as much at stake in this election as in any time in history. Political tactics are magnified and justified. It is as much a study in psychology as in political science. ...................


http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/10/20/justifying-political-tactics/

Posted by: glclark4750 | October 20, 2008 11:30 PM | Report abuse

And how 'bout that exorcism, Jake? Real modern, reassuring to those of us that believe in Darwin, evolution, the moon landing, global warming, etc.? Dude, give it up. This is not an argument you can win. She's a ditz.

Posted by: bokonon13 | October 20, 2008 11:29 PM | Report abuse

jAKED spewed: "That's your canard?"

That's the facts jACKED. I read the report.

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 20, 2008 11:27 PM | Report abuse

Ormsfang:

McCain would have a better shot if he supported Obama.

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 20, 2008 11:25 PM | Report abuse

the"notorious"flavio:

That's your canard?

Posted by: JakeD | October 20, 2008 11:24 PM | Report abuse

After a thorough analysis of Republican talking points and their effect on the race, I have come up with McCain's best shot at winning the presidency. Effective immediately he should tell every one in his campaign and all of his supporters to shut up. The silence will do a lot better than anything they have been spewing.

Posted by: Ormsfang | October 20, 2008 11:24 PM | Report abuse

My move.


Palin broke the law because she and her hubby engaged on a witch hunt for her ex-brother-in-law using the power and resources of the Governer's office, thus breaking an Ethics Statute in Alaska.

Now she aint' guilty (yet) because she still would have to be impeached, censured, indicted or put on trial or whatever they do up there.

But according to the investigation, SHE BROKE THE LAW

That's all we need, ANOTHER VP who abuses power.

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 20, 2008 11:23 PM | Report abuse

jAKED spewed: "I wouldn't have voted for her if I didn't think she could do the job"

Clearly, that says more about you than it does about her.

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 20, 2008 11:21 PM | Report abuse

I use "canard" (and IN SPITE OF Monegan being fired for not firing Wooten, the Report concluded she exercised proper and legal authority). Your "move".

Posted by: JakeD | October 20, 2008 11:20 PM | Report abuse

jAKED:

Next canard.


boy it's big.

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 20, 2008 11:18 PM | Report abuse

The more the GOP candidates talk about non essentials and then get discredited the loonier it sounds. I think the example of the young congress woman dissing Obama and then her challenger getting 700,000 in support says it all. It's not working. The fact is obvious that Obama has educated himself and she has remained Alaska-centric.

Posted by: janefree0513 | October 20, 2008 11:17 PM | Report abuse

News flash: Joe the Plumber is not a licensed plumber, and his name isn't "Joe." He owes over $1,000.00 in back taxes, and he's nowhere near being ready to buy a $250K business. If he DID buy it, thought, the couple hundred extra dollars in tax he would pay under Obama's plan should be manageable. Until then, like the rest of us who aren't wealthy, he gets a tax break.

Next canard, Jake?

Posted by: bokonon13 | October 20, 2008 11:15 PM | Report abuse

That's not the SBA definition.

Posted by: JakeD | October 20, 2008 11:15 PM | Report abuse

Actually, Jake, I listed several things. But you're right - her brother-in-law was not fired. It was his BOSS who got canned for REFUSING to fire her brother-in-law when she asked him to.

Is that your idea of a good Christian, brother?

and how do you feel about the exorcism?
That's some spooky 19th century superstitious garbage, Jake. That's almost as old as McCain is! I want a President and Vice President who are fully up to date and conversant with the 21st century.

(And by the way, no one uses 'canard' any more. It sounds a little pseudo-intellectual. Just a friendly tip.)

Posted by: bokonon13 | October 20, 2008 11:11 PM | Report abuse

jakeD:

You must be a retired lawyer!

Not "NO" small business makes less than $260K/yr

98% of them make less than $260K/yr do.

boy it's big.

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 20, 2008 11:09 PM | Report abuse

We already did an entire thread on the Branchflower Report, and Joe the Plumber was asking a hypothetical question. Are you saying that no small businesses gross more than $260,000?

Posted by: JakeD | October 20, 2008 11:04 PM | Report abuse

Last month when a citizen asked Palin about Pakistan – she ended up contradicting McCain’s position on the same issue.
How did McCain reconcile this discrepancy? – He claimed that the citizen’s question was a “gotcha question”

Now he is evoking ‘Joe the plumber’ daily.
This guy Joe told Obama that he is planning to buy a 250K – 280K businesses (just over Obama’s tax cut-off… how co-incidental?). It now turns out that this guy is nowhere near buying any businesses and he only earns 40K – thus would be getting a TAX-CUT under Obama plan!!! If anything Joe’s question was a well set-up ‘gotcha question’ just to put Obama on the defensive and make him uncomfortable. Obama knew this guy will not vote for him but still spent 6 minutes explaining his situation (Compare this to McCain’s/Palin’s response when confronted by a non-supporter – He will call the person “un-American”, “not real American”, “communists” and what not)
We know McCain will never acknowledge that Joe’s question was the real ‘gotcha question’!! He will continue raking-up ‘Joe the plumber’ for next 2 weeks like what he done since last Wed.

Obama is much classier than McCain… at least he doesn’t whine and blame others when caught in a spot… he takes responsibility for his and his campaign’s action/words. McCain will blame his follies on someone else – “gotcha journalism”, “gotcha question”, “liberal media”, “partisan legislature” etc…

Posted by: chill45 | October 20, 2008 10:52 PM | Report abuse

Palin broke the law because she and her hubby engaged on a witch hunt for her ex-brother-in-law using the power and resources of the Governer's office, thus breaking an Ethics Statute in Alaska.

Now she aint' guilty (yet) because she still would have to be impeached, censured, indicted or put on trial or whatever they do up there.

But according to the investigation, SHE BROKE THE LAW

That's all we need, ANOTHER VP who abuses power.

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 20, 2008 10:47 PM | Report abuse

Her brother-in-law was not fired. Next canard?

Posted by: JakeD | October 20, 2008 10:41 PM | Report abuse

Juliet Eilperin:

Good job! I see it's possible to shill for BHO not just with words but with math.

However, can I suggest you put down the calculator and actually do some real reporting for a change?

For instance, I don't think the WaPo has yet reported that Ayers and BHO shared the same floor of a small office building:

http://24ahead.com/blog/archives/008183.html

Why hasn't the WaPo reported that? What else isn't the WaPo telling us? What do they know and when did they know it?

Posted by: LonewackoDotCom | October 20, 2008 10:40 PM | Report abuse


IF PALIN IS SO QUALIFIED...

Then why didn't she run for president?

Imagine her announcement for a Presidential bid...

"I've been Governer for TWO WHOLE MONTHS! I think I'm ready to be president now. Wink, wink."

18 MILLION people voted for Obama in the Democratic primary to lead this country not because of his experience, but because of his vision for America.

Palin got ONE vote and the only vision I know of from her is her view of Russia.

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 20, 2008 10:40 PM | Report abuse

Oh, and you may remember that Obama and Biden have been running for longer than a few weeks, and have answered lots of serious policy questions each.

They were running for president while:
Palin was having her brother-in-law fired,
advocating FOR the Bridge to Nowhere, shortly before
claiming she didn't want the Bridge (yet keeping the funding).
shooting moose from an airplane,
gazing dreamily at Russia,
and addressing the convention of a half-baked secessionist party of which her husband was a member.

I'd list more, but THERE IS NO MORE.

Add to that the fact that she believes that the Earth is only 6000 years old and you don't see a problem with her becoming Vice President of the United States?

Posted by: bokonon13 | October 20, 2008 10:35 PM | Report abuse

Juliet:

As you know, the time she spent at home in Wasilla was PAID per diem for work she did there, unlike Obama at his home --another relevant point -- Gov. Palin never promised to not run for Vice-President.

Posted by: JakeD | October 20, 2008 10:28 PM | Report abuse

bokonon13:

Because she has executive experience, is pro-life, and because I believe her when she says that Jesus is her Lord and Savior.

Posted by: JakeD | October 20, 2008 10:20 PM | Report abuse

Snakeheader:

Just because people won't vote for Obama doesn't necessarily make them "racist".

Posted by: JakeD | October 20, 2008 10:17 PM | Report abuse

Well, what makes you think she can do the job? Is it her penetrating insight? Her policy chops? Her experience with Putin? Her advanced education? None of those? Then what?

Posted by: bokonon13 | October 20, 2008 10:16 PM | Report abuse

I wouldn't have voted for her if I didn't think she could do the job. BTW: she's been taking more questions from the press in the last month than Obama or Biden. Get new talking points.

Posted by: JakeD | October 20, 2008 10:12 PM | Report abuse

Oh, and by the way, you needn't worry about Palin taking questions from Juliet or anyone else. She doesn't generally like to talk to people who use too many syllables.

Seriously, Jake, you think Palin could do the job? She can barely govern a state with the population of a mid-sized American city... and she's even run into legal trouble doing that in only 2 years. Before that, a short spell as mayor of Podunk, Alaska, and before that, a TV sportscaster -! For someone who claims to be as intelligent as you claim to be, those should all be huge red flags.

Posted by: bokonon13 | October 20, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

yes they are

Posted by: Snakeheader | October 20, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

They aren't racist.

Posted by: JakeD | October 20, 2008 10:00 PM | Report abuse

Check out this video of Islamic Republicans tell off some racist McCain supporters:

http://liesliesmorelies.blogspot.com/2008/10/racist-mccain-rally-goers-7-mccain.html

I'm a democrat but this is something I've wanted to see...

Posted by: Snakeheader | October 20, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

Jake, in order for Palin to be right "again," she had to have been right at least once already, and she hasn't.

Posted by: bokonon13 | October 20, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

Juliet:

Seriously, you think Obama didn't "decide" to run for President until January 2007?! Hopefully, Gov. Palin doesn't take any questions from you.

Posted by: JakeD | October 20, 2008 9:53 PM | Report abuse

Obama was "running" President before he formally announced -- in spite of his promise to NOT run -- Gov. Palin is right again.

Posted by: JakeD | October 20, 2008 9:49 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company