Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Seeing Is Experiencing, But Better

Okay, so I didn’t exactly go into Eye-rack in a technical sense, but I got close and I saw it and that ought to count for something. This is how I know about Russia, and it prepares me for the presidency, because I have actually seen Russia up pretty close, because it is right next to us in Alaska. We know the Russians from eyeballing them.

The truth is, I didn’t actually want to go into Eye-rack, and I don’t know why my campaign said I had been there, visiting the troops in harm’s way. I actually always wanted to stay in Kuwait, because if had gone into Eye-rack that would have made me like all the other politicians who have gone into Eye-rack -- a Washington insider. As a mom, I don’t have to have any experience at these things. You would not ask a man to have any experience, and so I don’t understand why I am being asked about this. Do I think I need this experience?

No, I do not.

It is the same with the bridge to nowhere. I was opposed to it all along, even though I wasn’t and then it could not happen anyway. And so I said, thanks but no thanks. We will build our own bridge if we want to. Which we do not.

Are we going to build that bridge?

No, we are not.

Sometimes, because of the media and the pundits and pollsters, I get attacked for saying things that I did say, but I didn’t want to say, if you know what I mean. I did ask about how to get books out of the library, but not because I wanted to or because I objected to a certain book, but just because I felt like asking the question. Three times.

It’s the same with Eye-rack. To me, being close and being there is the same thing, but better. Because the more you experience, the less you know, which is why experience only counts if you see it, not if you experience it. By peering into Eye-rack, I could tell the surge was working and we were winning and also that it was God’s plan. I knew all this because I am a mom, and I am the only one on either ticket who is. You can look that up.

By Richard Cohen  | September 15, 2008; 8:20 AM ET
Categories:  Cohen  | Tags:  Richard Cohen  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Money Talks
Next: One Way to Clear the Air

Comments

And the Bush Doctrine is the one about god meeting Moses on Mt. Horeb and speaking to him out of the burning bush. . .

Posted by: Tokyo2night | September 15, 2008 8:51 AM | Report abuse

tokyo2night, you can be a person of faith and still reject the Republican ticket. In fact,
my faith informs my political views, and that is why I am voting for Senator Obama.

There is nothing wrong with a person of faith occupying the oval office. But the separation of church and state is critical.
Otherwise, Christians may wake up to a government that has a form of Christianity that is not the one they thought they were voting for. And that "form of godliness" could be the law of the land. It would be too late to vote for something else.

To those who talk about this being a Christian land, just what does that mean?
The Church of England considered itself "Christian" and forced that viewpoint on other "Christians" who then felt so strongly they left their native land to gain religious freedom. Can you imagine pulling up roots and moving to Canada just so you could worship as you believe is right? And that is just a short car ride away, not months on a boat. This is an example of one group of Christians persecuting another. And then, too,
when people were brought from Africa to be used as slaves, they were converted to Christianity. Those same people who converted them were the ones forcing them to remain slaves. That was OK with those Christians. Christianity can be just about what anyone says it is. So don't vote for Christianity because a name doesn't mean anything to a despot who wants to stay in power. Without freedom to choose, it will be the Christianity the government tells you is the real one.

Posted by: Olive | September 15, 2008 9:09 AM | Report abuse

And besides, I am helping our economy by spurring a buying frenzy on expensive eyeglasses and red shoes, not even to mention hairpieces like for my pouf. Criminies, guys, get your priorities straight.

Posted by: moran | September 15, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

My goodness, Mr Cohen! So true, but . . . my goodness!

(Ignorance can get to you, can't it just?)

Posted by: Jazzman7 | September 15, 2008 9:16 AM | Report abuse

This article stinks with truthful sarcasm...I LOVE IT!

Obama/Biden '08

Posted by: BluePicture | September 15, 2008 9:23 AM | Report abuse

Spot on!

Posted by: DinahS | September 15, 2008 9:26 AM | Report abuse

Almost as funny, but even more on target than Tina Fay's impersonation on SNL. Isn't it fun to see that the emperor has no clothes after all?

Thanks for exposing Palin's lies, half-truths (or quarter truths), and her overall rabid nuttiness.

Posted by: JIM | September 15, 2008 9:30 AM | Report abuse

Could Mr. Cohen actually be seeing through the McCain/Palin lovefest? I'm shocked that he would write this, after all, Sarah Palin is the poster child for the "new" Republican Party.

No experience, no judgment, no forsight, no ideas, no McCain, no Palin, no way. Not ever.

Posted by: Martin | September 15, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

The emperor isn't wearing any clothes!

Posted by: MN USA | September 15, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

Olive:

Breathe.

Much like Mr. Cohen's article, I believe Tokyo2Night was using hyperbole to make a point.

As we now know after Gerald Ford, not every US president has flaunted his deep Christian beliefs while in office, or even considered them his primary tool for making decisions.

However, times have changed. In the past decade the extreme Christian Religious Right has somehow actually made progress in their goal to break down the walls that separate church and state. (As is evidenced by the creation of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives.)

To those of us who haven't tied their faith to their choice in political leaders, it has been troublesome. We are - in many ways - inching closer to a Christian theocracy. Mrs. Palin - and her unequivocal, immediate support by the Christian right - is evidence that faith is more important than actual qualifications to a block of US voters.

It's about the way a person's faith is implemented and utilized. Not that someone has it. Most people do get that. But it's not going to stop some from being sarcastic about Ms. Palin, a woman who is outspoken in her faith and obviously has it guide her in policy (i.e. - creationism support in classrooms, book banning, etc.)

Posted by: Chasmosaur | September 15, 2008 9:35 AM | Report abuse

The best thing I have read so far about Miss Pouffy Hair who loves to kill beautiful animals. Its astounding that some people think she has "experience" enough to be president!!

Posted by: Grith | September 15, 2008 9:38 AM | Report abuse

And the Repubs can count on the MSM to be cowed by those charges of "sexism." They will spend more time on reporting those charges than on reporting the underlying incidents that should make voters very wary of Palin. So, thanks for this small piece of sanity.

Posted by: azjimn2son | September 15, 2008 9:41 AM | Report abuse

We made need to send UN Peacekeepers to keep Mssrs. Cohen and Krauthammer separated!

Posted by: Miss Hogynist | September 15, 2008 9:47 AM | Report abuse

When I was in college I visited an older sibling who had moved to Louisiana. One day I accompanied him on a business trip to western La.
We got pretty close to Texas so we took a brief trip and crossed the border. My brother laughed and said" Now you can tell people you have been to Texas."

Posted by: toldyouso | September 15, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

If anything, this woman demonstrates how hypocritical the Christian Right is. And while they may be politically cunning, its members are downright stupid, as we can witness by looking at the current administration. You would think that people would be fed up with this worldview. She is after all, lipstick on a pig. (And that pig is George W. Bush's policies. Get it??)

Posted by: J A Reyes | September 15, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

The irony, Olive and others, about those who where their Christian religion on their sleeve and say that this is why they vote Republican is that the are voting their Christian faith. but consider the following:

1) Republicans are more pro-war and pro-military than Democrats, yet Jesus teaches us to beat our swords into ploughshares. Additionally, Republicans are more pro-gun.

2) The 10 commandments say "thou shalt not kill", yet it is Republicans not Democrats who favor the death penalty.

3) The Bible teaches us that God placed the earth under our care, yet Republicans are environmentally hostile compared to Democrats (who are referred to as "tree huggers" by McCain)

4) Jesus says that you cannot serve both God and money and teaches that to follow God one must give up money, yet the Republicans are pro-rich, while Democrats champion the poor and middle class.

5) Jesus devoted a lot of time to healing the sick, yet the Republicans fight many health care initiatives such as SCHIP that would provide health care to low income children.

it's hard to imagine how anyone call call himself or herself a Christian and be a Republican.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 15, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

Alaska has the lowest high school graduation rate of all the 50 United States.

Alaska has the highest rape rate of all the 50 United States.

What has this pathetic governor of Alaska been doing with her time?

Handing out $1,200 in oil taxes to each Alaskan. (No wonder she's popular there. The rest of America's taxpayers are paying plenty to help support many Alaskan governmental programs.)

When she was mayor of the Wasilla, she cut support for the city library while building a $12 million ice hockey rink.

Unsuitable in every way.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 15, 2008 9:56 AM | Report abuse

Honestly, I'm not worried about Palin anymore. She has proven more than I could have ever wished, that she has little knowledge about anything, even of matters only concerning Alaska. She is a crash and burn in progress.

Posted by: miknugget | September 15, 2008 9:56 AM | Report abuse

Black is white in GOP land. Palin looked like a deer in headlights when Gibson asked her about the Bush Doctrine, but the next day we see in the Post an article saying that the Bush Doctrine is unclear. Unclear, that is, to two year olds. This is the GOP spin machine at work, trying to say that there is any doubt about what it is. Palin is asked by Gibson about her comment that the Iraq war is a task from god, and she replies that she was channeling Lincoln, a perverse desecration worthy of Rove, as Lincoln loathed war and would have been aghast at the notion of starting a war based on lies, against a country that had not threatened us, while enabling war profiteer cronies of the administration to reap billions in blood money, all the while killing up to 1 million innocent Iraqis. These people spit on the grave of Lincoln while waving the flag and burning the constitution.

Posted by: waters | September 15, 2008 9:57 AM | Report abuse

Its fine to question Gov. Palin's experience or readiness, but the the "Eye-rack" jab sounds like elitism at best and a flat out personal attack. I thought ""journalists" were above this, but sadly most are not.

Posted by: sarno | September 15, 2008 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Who said, "Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades"?

Anyone who supports McCain and does not find the Palin pick embarrassing has revealed their stupidity.

Support them because you want the richest 1% to get tax breaks we have to borrow from China to afford? Sure.

Support them because you believe we can't possibly have too many holy wars running at one time? You bet.

Support them because you believe people making less than 100K a year have too many healthcare and education options? Fine.

But please, have the intellectual honesty to be embarrassed that you support two academic bottom dwellers who don't know an armoured Humvee ride from a walk in the park, or a binocular view of an iceberg from foreign policy experience. Idiots.

Posted by: Jackie Lee | September 15, 2008 10:01 AM | Report abuse

That pretty well sums up the Republicun position on just about everything. Thank you.

Posted by: CT | September 15, 2008 10:01 AM | Report abuse

I see cohen is back in the fold of Chauvins for Obama. His WaPO masters must have told him it is official policy of the WaPo that the second coming Obama is the ONE!

From this point it looks like what the Cohen has to say is of no importance.

Posted by: William | September 15, 2008 10:07 AM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin meets all qualifications for the presidency. She can lie wih the best of them.

Posted by: Oscar | September 15, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

I grow tired of people taking sound bites of a larger context, especially people I respect and should know better like Charles Gibson.

The Lincoln quote comes for a book titled, "Six Months in the White House with Abraham Lincoln". The book quotes Lincoln as follows;

"No nobler reply ever fell from the lips of a ruler, than that uttered by President Lincoln in response to the clergyman who ventured to say, in his presence, that he hoped 'the Lord was on our side.'

"'I am not at all concerned about that,' replied Mr. Lincoln, 'for I know that the Lord is always on the side of the right. But it is my constant anxiety and prayer that I and this nation should be on the Lord's side.'"


Gov. Palins remarks were during a speech where she commented that her son was due to be deployed;

"My oldest, my son Track, is a soldier in the United States Army now. ... Pray for our military. He's going to be deployed in September to Iraq. Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God. That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan."

Please note that nowhere does she say that the war in Iraq is God's will. In my opinion, she speaks as a Christian mother, who's son is going off to war, that she prays that our leaders make their decisions on God's will not their will. This is a prayer uttered by mothers in this country from 1776.

It was best explained by others;

"We think it's important to note that Palin is asking the audience to "pray for" military men and women, and that national leaders are sending troops out "on a task that is from God." She even repeats "that's what we have to make sure that we're praying for." Gibson doesn't mention the words "pray for" when he questions her. Praying for something implies that you don't yet have it or that it there is some uncertainty, so it seems logical that Palin is expressing a hope that something is true, not a certainty."


If your going to disqualify somebody, some something real to base it on. And please don;'t get me started on the fact that McCain doesn't understand the Internet because he doesn't send emails. I think that has more to due with ejecting through a planes canopy and breaking alot of bones.

Posted by: Cal Maise | September 15, 2008 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Palin is a lying amateur compared to the lying professional grinning sarcastically at her side. And the puppet master Steve Schmidt rolls in his cage.

Posted by: ratl | September 15, 2008 10:23 AM | Report abuse

If being sure of yourself was the mark of great President, we would be celebrating the last eight years of the Bush/Cheney administration. I shudder at the prospect of a cocksure McCain/Palin presidency, particularly if John McCain's cancer returns. At least you get the sense that McCain is knowingly lying during the campaign. That doesn't inspire confidence, but one hopes he might understand that truthfulness in government might just be crazy enough to work. With Palin, there isn't a whole lot of self reflection going on. She's a very scary woman and it frightens me how popular she became so suddenly. Our public is not very sophisticated - we knew that, but I didn't think it was as bad as this.

Posted by: Chuck | September 15, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Wonderful posting. For the first time I was laughing at this dimwit rather than scowling and pounding my desk. It has been dispiriting that that anyone is reduced to laboriously spelling out how humiliatingly lame this woman is ... when her drivel on its face labels itself loudly. Thank you Mr. Cohen.

Posted by: Kathleen | September 15, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Hey, she looked those countries in the eye. She found them to be very straightforward and trustworthy. They had a very good dialogue. She was able to get a sense of their souls; countries deeply committed to their countries and the best interests of their countries. And she appreciated so very much the frank dialogue.

**Cough**

Posted by: Barack Li,ke Me | September 15, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

What is the point of this? Palin never said she went to Iraq.

Posted by: AK | September 15, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Sorry about the repost: I accidentally posted this to the wrong blog earlier. It belongs here.

The LA Times had another story about McCain camp untruths a week and a half ago that slipped under the radar at the time, but will probably resurface:

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-earmarks3-2008sep03,0,284198.story

It turns out McCain had three times singled out Palin's small town as a worst pork offender while she was mayor, and that the McCain campaign has been misrepresenting her actions at the time, saying that she tried to reduce her town's dependance on federal earmarks, when the record shows she hired a lobbyist and dramatically *increased* it.

It seems pretty obvious to me that the McCain campaign has lost any respect they might have once had for voters, and just wants to see how far they can go with blatant cynicism and simply making stuff up.

Posted by: DJ333 | September 15, 2008 10:34 AM | Report abuse

Breathtakingly politically incorrect but so refreshing - after weeks (can it be only two???) of pussyfooting (that's NOT a subtle sexist comment!) around about how ignorant she is, it just feels good to see it actually written down. Thanks. (I'm a woman and cannot stand Sarah Palin. I find her just too embarrassing.)

Posted by: aladdin | September 15, 2008 10:34 AM | Report abuse

Nice try Cal Malaise -- when your explaination is that long-winded and also that off target, it's easy to see that you are drinking the NeoCon cool-aid. The issue here is that Palin is a chronic lier because she does not have much experience, has the intellectual stamina and strength of a common 13 year old, and is a fringe right looney. So the Republicans have to resort to lies, mudding the waters with misleading "facts", and play the anger/fear card. Same old right-wing politics and same old tactics -- gotta confusion the electorate.

Posted by: JIM | September 15, 2008 10:35 AM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin's self-aggrandization might prove she's just another Duke Tully - the war hero who wasn't. Does McCain ever learn from past mistakes?

Posted by: Wise Arizonan | September 15, 2008 10:35 AM | Report abuse

Democrats for John McCain and Sarah Palin in 2008

Posted by: Helen | September 15, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Very funny, Cohen!

Yes, it was!

Posted by: binkynh | September 15, 2008 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Just what we need for someone who is a heart-beat away from becoming President. A politician who believes that the world is about 6,000 years old and that the dinosaurs and humans walked the earth at the same time. But faith trumps all...who cares about the reality and evidence...when we know for certain that God is on our side.

Well the election will again show us whether the electorate can be fooled again. Probably so.

Posted by: SkepticalM | September 15, 2008 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Cohen -- hits the nail on the head. Exposes Palin's pure bunkum. Bravo!

Posted by: Orbiter Dictum | September 15, 2008 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Cohen, very well written!
I really enjoyed it!
So the truth is that Sarah Palin was confused by the "Bush doctrine" question because Bush:"looked into his eyes and saw his soul" while Palin just looked at his homecountry, I would be confused too, what is the right strategy to assess a foreign entity? after all they speak a different language don't they? (i'm not sure).
ale, calgary

Posted by: alessandro biglioli | September 15, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is frankly the most embarrassing choices for VP I've seen since Dan Quayle.

I can only hope enough other Republicans feel the same way and avoid the McCain/Palin ticket in November like I plan to.

I'm reluctantly voting Democrat, but I'm happy to avoid voting for this clownish woman.

Posted by: Surin | September 15, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Palin and Lincoln?

Lincoln's sole experience in national government was one term as a Congressman, in which he voted against the Mexican War (which was provoked by a lie) and was promptly retired by his constituents.

His only military experience was a few months in a frontier militia during a small Indian War, and he never was in combat.

So how did he become our greatest war leader? Intelligence and a habit of self-education, many years of thought on the important questions, the ability to change course (as in the Emancipation Proclamation, surely one of the great "flip-flops" in our history), willingness to hear -- and listen to --- dissenting opinions, and a true sense of dedication to the principles so well articulated in the Gettysburg Address, and an unmatched ability to mobilize support by eloquent speech --- without speech-writers.

For Palin to attempt to link herself with such a giant only emphasizes her utter lack of stature, her hubris, her shallowness and immaturity. And this has absolutely nothing to do with her gender...just with her lack of stature, hubris, shallowness and immaturity. She is Bush trans-gendered.

And that McCain chose her says far more about his processes of decision-making and quality of leadership than any of his so-called speeches.

But as Barnum said...there's a sucker born every minute.

Posted by: jrosen | September 15, 2008 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Humor can cut so quickly to the truth. Bravo!

You left out her supposed sale of the plane on Ebay. Which in truth she didnt sell it on Ebay. She tried to sell it there and had no buyers. Then she ended up selling it at a loss to a republican associate who had given her money for her campaign.

Posted by: YetAnotherElitist | September 15, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

Christian Right and the Taliban. Whats the difference. The Christian Right doesn't cover there women heads. That's about it.

By Chris Hedges

Sarah Palin may be a governor and a vice presidential candidate, but in the hyper-masculine world of the Christian right she is subservient to a male hierarchy that claims to speak for God.

A cult of masculinity defines the Wasilla Assembly of God Church and the Juneau Christian Centre where she worshipped. This cult propagates a vision of the world where believers are warriors. They are taught to ready themselves to engage in a final cataclysmic clash with the forces of Satan. This cosmic struggle, infused with the language of war, death and violence, leads inevitably to the slaughter by the righteous of all non-Christians. The photos of Palin hunched over dead animals she has shot are not simply images of a woman who is a member of the National Rifle Association. They are images of a woman who believes violence against nonbelievers is ultimately part of her religious life.

The cult of masculinity is used to banish ambiguity, especially sexual ambiguity. It fosters a world of binary opposites: God and man, the saved and the unsaved, the church and the world, Christianity and secular humanism, and male and female. All in life is rigidly defined. Disorder and chaos are banished. Reality, when it is defined in these absolutes, is predictable and understandable, something deeply comforting to believers who have often had trouble coping with the messiness of human existence.

All configurations of human life that do not conform to the rigid Christian model, such as homosexuality, are forms of disorder, tools of Satan, and must be abolished. This is why Palin opposes gay marriage and calls for gays to be cured. A world that can be predicted and understood, a world that has clear markers, can be made rational. It can be managed and controlled. The petrified, binary world of fixed, immutable and established roles is a world where people, many of them damaged by bouts with failure and despair, can bury their chaotic and fragmented personalities. They can live with the illusion that they are strong, whole and protected. Those who do not fit into these narrow definitions must be proselytized and converted.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 15, 2008 11:11 AM | Report abuse

Some very nice comments here this morning: far superior to the drivel we've been experiencing lately on these boards. In the spirit of comity, I'm willing to concede accurate points made by Cal Maise, who provides a salient quote from Palin:

'Gov. Palins remarks were during a speech [actually, she was "testifying" at church which I think further exonerates her] where she commented that her son was due to be deployed;

"My oldest, my son Track, is a soldier in the United States Army now. ... Pray for our military. He's going to be deployed in September to Iraq. Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God. That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan."'

I think, charitably, that she IS saying the same thing, though far less artfully, than Lincoln: she's praying that our mission has some moral (holy in her conception) basis. The strong implication is that if it is immoral/unholy, we ought not make war. So yes, I think it can charitably be said that, like Lincoln and many world leaders, she's seeking assurance that the mission/plan is just.

Unfortunately, there's an important distinction that she and the Bush/Cheney/McCain crowd completely misses: it's too late. The cat's out of the bag and the whole world has known for at least the past 5 years that this war was based on lies. Many folks, including Obama, recognized this at the very outset.

It is not possible to win a war based on lies. It is not holy to pray for a "plan" that you know on its face is unholy. Does the Christian right (and I am a Christian, too) really think God is oblivious to the lies that predicated this conflict? Does the Christian right (and their AIPAC neo-con supporters) truly believe that God the Father of Jesus would countenance a conflict based on an immoral foundation that directly affronts the 10 Commandments?

Leaders with spiritual “leaven” have a place in the Oval Office; but as a previous poster so wisely observed above, spirituality that has become perverted to unholy political sanctification of that which is manifestly immoral is something we must all fight to oppose. Palin’s word reveal one of the greatest shortcomings of the Christian right: she believes continued prayer exonerates past sin and provides insurance against future sin. In every honest spiritual practice, when you have sinned as this nation has in Iraq, prayer is not enough: you MUST CORRECT THE SIN.

Posted by: abqcleve | September 15, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Wonderful summing up of Palin's mentality. Those who are defending Palin (and McCain's picking her) are trying to defend the indefensible, and are revealing their ignorance, their their ignonimity, and their prejudices.

I am not as sure as the poster who feels reassured that Palin is a crash in the making. Never underestimate the capacity of enough Americans (I'm not saying of Americans in general) to be conned and fooled by the likes of Schmidt and Rove, and led around by their prejudices.

Please, everyone who is having sleepless nights at the thought of McCain getting elected with That Woman waiting in the wings: DEMAND that McCain's full medical records be made public, and that competent medical professionals--and not just picked journalists with no medical expertise and without being allowed even to copy what they are briefly allowed to peruse--be empowered to interpret these records for the benefit of an informed voting public.

Too many times in the twentieth century presidents were elected (or reelected) despite being dangerous health risks. Harding had a serious heart condition, which killed him within three years of his inauguration. FDR by 1944 was a walking corpse, and died of a cerebral hemorrhage within three months of his fourth inauguration (after undertaking a life-threatening wartime trip to Yalta). JFK had so many things wrong with him that, if fully known, would have made his election impossible (and that very likely would have killed him had he not be assassinated). LBJ had suffered several massive heart attacks in the 1950s and was so clearly damaged by five years in the White House that he too was a walking corpse by 1968; he died (after living a severely restricted life) just four years after going back to his Texas ranch. Nixon's mental health issues and alcoholism should have been made public before and not after he got into the White House. Reagan was probably afflicted with incipient Alzheimers by the time his second term began.

For the love of God, people, don't we deserve to know how serious McCain's health risks are--not just his Stage IIa melanoma but also the state of his cardiovascular system, considering his POW experiences and the fact that both his father and his grandfather suddenly dropped dead at relatively young ages?

Think about that--and then contemplate Ms. Palin in the White House.

God protect the United States! We're gonna need it!

Posted by: jm917 | September 15, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

This ? From Cohen ? Wonders never cease

Posted by: Polaris | September 15, 2008 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Right on, Richard! The fate of the unvetted...Once each layer of media manufactured b.s. is stripped away, there is nothing there. A political souffle, mostly hot air!

Posted by: braultrl | September 15, 2008 11:18 AM | Report abuse

" ...are sending them out on a task that is from God. That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan."

Please note that nowhere does she say that the war in Iraq is God's will?

HUH?
While Cal Maise's resourcefulness in quoting Lincoln is to be admired, he/she misses the forest for the trees. This type of spinning only underscores my point. A task from God and God's plan sure seem to be implying God's will. It is not possible to separate the troops from the mission. All of the stories about the good the troops are doing ( which should be admired ), begin to look rather minor when put in the context of 1 million innocent Iraqis having died on the mission from god, a devastated country and the incalculable cost to our country's standing in the world. If Sarah Palin wants to send Boy Scouts out to do Peace Corps work, maybe she can talk about god's task, but when the Boy Scouts are the ones who destroy a country, god is off the table. You can't destroy a country and then claim only credit for rebuilding it. What is especially galling is using our troops in a war of choice as a political tool, like some cheap stunt on an aircraft carrier. They want to believe they are doing the right thing, but are actually being used. It does not get much lower than that. My god's plan would have involved no war in the first place, but failing that maybe trips abroad for the current administration where they can be arrested for war crimes.

Posted by: waters | September 15, 2008 11:21 AM | Report abuse

holy cow, that was mean

Posted by: jennifer | September 15, 2008 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Sigh, Lincoln was avidly against using religion to justify any action. He was very skeptical about religion.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln. Please scroll down to the section "Religious and philosophical beliefs".

Here is a quote from Lincoln...

"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 something different from the purpose of either party—and yet the human instrumentalities, working just as they do, are of the best adaptation to effect his purpose. I am almost ready to say this is probably true—that God wills this contest, and wills that it shall not end yet. By his mere quiet power, on the minds of the now contestants, He could have either saved or destroyed the Union without a human contest. Yet the contest began. And having begun He could give the final victory to either side any day. Yet the contest proceeds.[62]"

Palin was claiming somehow, that was she was saying before the congregation was something Lincoln had said which was absolutely false. She did correctly state that Lincoln was cautious about saying the "will of god".

Posted by: YetAnotherElitist | September 15, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Perfect! As Ed Koch said, this woman "scares the hell out of me." Thank you for making my day.

Posted by: anna | September 15, 2008 11:23 AM | Report abuse

I lol'd

Posted by: Anonymous | September 15, 2008 11:24 AM | Report abuse

If sister Sara is as dumb as a clam she will fit right in. After W how low can we go?

Posted by: rachel | September 15, 2008 11:26 AM | Report abuse

There was a parade in my small town this weekend in which the Women Republicans marched and guess what they were all holding - tubes of lipstick. Looks like lipstick is going to be the punchline for all jokes in this 'silly season'.

People are suffering and McCain is offering more of the same last 8 years. That's why he wants to make this election about lipstick and start a new culture war. The war is economic, and for the vast majority of Americans, McCain is on the wrong side.

Vote for your own self interest - vote Obama/Biden.

Posted by: UpstateNY | September 15, 2008 11:27 AM | Report abuse

If people thought that Bush/Cheney was a disaster, wait until they get a load of McCain/Palin. You'll be lucky if the country survives.

Posted by: str8up | September 15, 2008 11:28 AM | Report abuse

Black is white in GOP land. Palin looked like a deer in headlights when Gibson asked her about the Bush Doctrine, but the next day we see in the Post an article saying that the Bush Doctrine is unclear. Unclear, that is, to two year olds.
________
Perhaps YOU should google Bush Doctrine before you make claims that Bush Doctrine is clear to anyone above 2 , you do how to google right? Cause in it it says... "Foreign policy experts argue over the meaning of the term "Bush Doctrine," and some scholars have suggested that there is no one unified theory underlying Bush's foreign policy. Jacob Weidberg identifies six successive "Bush Doctrines" in his book The Bush Tragedy, while former Bush staffer Peter D. Feaver has counted seven." That's makes it sound pretty UNCLEAR to me.. Or can you name the 6 or 7 they are talking about. In fact it seems to me when Palin responded in "In what regard Charlie".. she realized something Charlie didn't.. there are MORE THAN ONE!!!

Posted by: rss | September 15, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Cohen, beautifully done. At this point, disciplined intellectual discourse with the Repulicans is wastful and useless. The only counterpunch to their madness is assiduous incendiary sarcasm that caricatures their mind-numbing nihility.

Posted by: Tariq From Iraq | September 15, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

And I thought Charlie Gibson was sexist. I mean I'm a hockey mom focused on killing moose and wolves too. If I get questions about foreign affairs and the economy, I should at least be allowed to have a life-line or poll the audience.

My future bumperstickers:
"Don't blame me, I voted for Obama-Biden."
"Don't blame me, I voted for the Harvard scholar not the hockey mom."

Posted by: Lisa | September 15, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Keep it up! You guys are well on your way to electing Sen. McCain.

With every trash attack on Sarah Palin, the rest of America, the ones who truly love this country, love God and aren't filled with a hatred for the normal are strengthened in their conviction that this country needs a real man of character in charge of the executive office.

About the "lies" that you're snidely talking about - Gov. Palin can't prevent staffers from making mistakes in her name. She never personally said that she was in Iraq or Ireland.

And please, Mr. Cohen, stop with the childish characterizations of southern speech. ("Eye-rak") You're just exposing yourself for what you are, a snide, overpaid pundit who hates real Americans.

Posted by: MarkF | September 15, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

I could've written that, but then again apparently I'm good enough to be VP as well.

Posted by: Lisa | September 15, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

Has Governor Palin ever actually stood on the Alaskan island from which Russia is visible and seen Russia? Or is she saying that she could, if she wanted to, but she hasn't, and thus she hasn't?

Posted by: Responsible Republican | September 15, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

I can see Mars and Jupiter from my house. Does that make me qualified to take over NASA?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 15, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Ooooo!! Iyrack is sceeerie, dontcha know!

Posted by: Miss Piggy | September 15, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

Dear Cal Malaise:

"If your going to disqualify somebody, some something real to base it on. And please don;'t get me started on the fact that McCain doesn't understand the Internet because he doesn't send emails. I think that has more to due with ejecting through a planes canopy and breaking alot of bones."

Wow. What a well thought out rebuttal to the fact that John McCain can't send an email!! That POW stuff is really going to come in handy. Who knew that breaking alot of bones qualifies you to run the country??? I broke my arm once. Can I be Speaker of the House?

Fondly,
The Democratic Warrior
PS. For the record also, I can see Washington, D.C. from my balcony....maybe that qualifies me further?

Posted by: The Democratic Warrior | September 15, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

reality-testing exercise:

1. Read the Angler series about spying in the Washington Post
2. Disregard, if possible, who was right or wrong in those discussions
3. Insert Gov. Palin as a substitute for *any* of the players in that discussion

Does she belong? Is she qualified? Does she have the judgement?

Posted by: caddsifly | September 15, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

It's laughable. But, Americans voted twice for the same thing before.

Posted by: I'mafraid | September 15, 2008 11:55 AM | Report abuse

Dear Mr. Cohen,

Kudos on a brilliant piece .... if I wasn't laughing so hard, I'd be literally ill thinking that our country has sunk to such a low point in its history that the collective "American people" would seriously be considering putting such an unqualified individual so close to the presidency. Every day since McPalin debuted, I have wondered how it came to be that I am so "out of touch" with many of my fellow citizens ....

Posted by: GGB-Tampa | September 15, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

The funny thing is that the christian right will never vote Jesus as president of the US.
and most Americans wouldn't either.
because if Jesus was president universal health care would be his most rightist policy, that's the truth and that's why we have a separation between church and State.
Otherwise why not just elect pious men to the office and be over with it.
but having someone using his/her piousness as a "selling point" for crafting policy over qualification and then finding out that this piousness is only one sided simply shows to me you are in bad faith.
(unless of course you have god's ear and he has yours......but the problem then is which god are you listening to?....)

Posted by: biglioli | September 15, 2008 12:02 PM | Report abuse

str8up

I understand what youre talking about. In the last election, I looked at the 2 candidates as if I was out of toilet paper, and all that was available was sandpaper and corn cobs. So I stayed out of it. This election, I was starting to think the same thing, until I heard a man by the name of Bob Barr speak about issues. But not just speak about an issue, but about a way to actually put it into action.

McCain and Obama both have nice sound bites, to make the people feel good and create a false momentum. Obama wants the government to subsidize a national healthcare plan... with taxpayer dollars. He wants to increase taxes on the rich, I'm not rich, but the 'rich' are basically the people that own businesses and employ people. By taxing them and punishing them for stepping out and trying to help themselves and others (by providing jobs), that will reduce the common man from starting a business and trying to succeed at that, which is what a Capitalist nation is supposed to do in the first place. Obama initiated a bill in congress called the Global Poverty Act of 2007 in it, he states that the US along with the rest of the G8 (at the time of the bill's creation) should get together and GIVE the entire continent of Africa (sit down) $25,000,000,000 per year, doubling to $50,000,000,000 by the year 2010 and have the debts of the 18 poorest nations erased. What happened to his comment about lets start building the US? I dont pay my taxes and live check to check, so that we can go and get an entire continent out of poverty. Sure thats a noble cause, but not at the expense of driving the US deeper into debt, or pretty soon we will be needing help. By the way, the link to the bill is http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-2433&version=rs&nid= check out paragraph (9)

Now lets hop over to McCain, he has lied about the success in Iraq on national TV talking to Wolf Blitzer and in an interview said that he 'was just trying to make a point'. THat clip can cbe seen right here, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y395Tftgz0E the statement I just quoted is at approx 2:30 and 3:30, but watch the entire thing. He supported the bailouts with all of this financial market breakdown, with taxpayer dollars. In a capitalist society, if you own a business and it fails...you just lost. With these bailouts, whats the incentive to actually run a business properly with real competition and standards, if Uncle Sam is going to come along and bail it out if it tanks? The next industry already in line is the automotive industry.

These reasons, along with many more, are why I am supporting Bob Barr this year. He wants to reduce the size of the federal government(which admittedly will take time... but you must walk before you can run), create a fairer tax system and privatize medical insurance, private retirement accounts (get rid of the failing Social Security system which is trillions of dollars in the hole). He does not support these government bailouts of failed businesses and wants the government to stop spying on its own citizens.

www.bobbarr2008.com to research his point on the issues and see for yourself.

Posted by: Brian S | September 15, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Even if you are completely w/o religion, if John McCain is elected President, you just have to drop to your knees every day and pray that he lives through his term.

When did we stop caring about whether a person who might be President was at least somewhat capable of performing that job? If we were going to "hire" a President, Palin's "resume" wouldn't even get her an interview, much less the job. While she has zero relevant work experience, maybe she is a fast learner? Well, not so much. She took 6 years and 3 or 4 colleges to get an undergraduate degree. Shameful? Not at all -- for a neighbor. For a President? Shouldn't we want someone a bit . . . how do we say it politely . . . . smarter?

What a disaster if the first woman President was one as unqualified for the job either by experience or by proven intellect!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 15, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

I RESPECT OPPOSING VIEWS IN POLITICS BUT I REALLY DESPISE LIES. WHEN YOU LIE YOU DISRESPECT EVERY ONE INCLUDED THE PERSON WHO LIES. YOU CAN NOT ARGUE WITH PEOPLE WHO LIES AT EASY. MCCAIN AND PALIN ARE LYING THE SAME WAY BUSH JUNIOR DID ABOUT BEING A RANCHER, A REAL COWBOY, HE NEVER WAS CHALLENGED EITHER BY THE STUPI.D DEMOCRATS OR THE CORPORATE MEDIA. I LIKE COWBOYS BUT HE IS NOT ONE. THANKS TO THE GROW OF THE INTERNET BLOGGS THESE PROFESSIONAL LIARS ARE GOING EXPOSED, BIG TIME AND FOR GOOD.

Posted by: trivia | September 15, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Just keep talking. Your handing the election to McCain/Palin. Anything I perceive as an attack on Sarha I perceive as an attack on my religeous beliefs, Jesus and the rich people I continue to vote with (because I aspire to be one some day). So keep it up. I can "la la la la" with my fingers in my ears all the way to the voting booth. We could use a little naivety in the Oval office. (I'm sticking my tongue out at you now).

Posted by: dennism | September 15, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Third person hypothetical Palin? Eye-rack?

I also noticed this was very short (200 words?). Was this just a way to make a point very fast? Is this some kind of experimental op-ed?

Posted by: Brian | September 15, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

The funny thing is that that area of Russian that's close to Alaska has an area of 737,700 km2 (284,800 sq mi) and population of 53,824 (according to the 2002 Census), and just over 55,000 in 2004.

I wonder how many Russians has she seen during her regular surveillance of the frontier.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chukotka_Autonomous_Okrug

Posted by: Thor | September 15, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

As we watched Sarah Palin on TV the last couple of days, we kept wondering what on earth John McCain was thinking. . . . . . . . . . . . . If he seriously thought this first-term governor — with less than two years in office — was qualified to be president, if necessary, at such a dangerous time, it raises profound questions about his judgment. If the choice was, as we suspect, a tactical move, then it was shockingly irresponsible.

It was bad enough that Ms. Palin’s performance in the first televised interviews she has done since she joined the Republican ticket was so visibly scripted and lacking in awareness.

What made it so much worse is the strategy for which the Republicans have made Ms. Palin the frontwoman: win the White House not on ideas, but by denigrating experience, judgment and qualifications.

The idea that Americans want leaders who have none of those things — who are so blindly certain of what Ms. Palin calls “the mission” that they won’t even pause for reflection — shows a contempt for voters and raises frightening questions about how Mr. McCain and Ms. Palin plan to run this country.

One of the many bizarre moments in the questioning by ABC News’s Charles Gibson was when Ms. Palin, the governor of Alaska, excused her lack of international experience by sneering that Americans don’t want “somebody’s big fat résumé maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment where, yes, they’ve had opportunities to meet heads of state.”

We know we were all supposed to think of Joe Biden. But it sure sounded like a good description of Mr. McCain. Those decades of experience earned the Arizona senator the admiration of people in both parties. They are why he was our preferred candidate in the Republican primaries.

The interviews made clear why Americans should worry about Ms. Palin’s thin résumé and lack of experience. Consider her befuddlement when Mr. Gibson referred to President Bush’s “doctrine” and her remark about having insight into Russia because she can see it from her state.

But that is not what troubled us most about her remarks — and, remember, if they were scripted, that just means that they reflect Mr. McCain’s views all the more closely. Rather, it was the sense that thoughtfulness, knowledge and experience are handicaps for a president in a world populated by Al Qaeda terrorists, a rising China, epidemics of AIDS, poverty and fratricidal war in the developing world and deep economic distress at home.

Ms. Palin talked repeatedly about never blinking. When Mr. McCain asked her to run for vice president? “You have to be wired in a way of being so committed to the mission,” she said, that “you can’t blink.”

Fighting terrorism? “We must do whatever it takes, and we must not blink, Charlie, in making those tough decisions of where we go and even who we target.”

Her answers about why she had told her church that President Bush’s failed policy in Iraq was “God’s plan” did nothing to dispel our concerns about her confusion between faith and policy. Her claim that she was quoting a completely unrelated comment by Lincoln was absurd.

This nation has suffered through eight years of an ill-prepared and unblinkingly obstinate president. One who didn’t pause to think before he started a disastrous war of choice in Iraq. One who blithely looked the other way as the Taliban and Al Qaeda regrouped in Afghanistan. One who obstinately cut taxes and undercut all efforts at regulation, unleashing today’s profound economic crisis.

In a dangerous world, Americans need a president who knows that real strength requires serious thought and preparation. – NYTIMES
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~```
Sarah Palin looked like a college freshman who had crammed for an oral exam. Her sometimes halting style, her all to often reliance on memorized one or two sentence platitudes, and yes, her bewilderment at what was Bush’s doctrine, made her look quite flimsy. . . . . . Nevertheless, she did reasonably well and earned a B+ – for a freshman. But was very, very unsteady for a VP nominee.

Posted by: Coldcomfort | September 15, 2008 12:21 PM | Report abuse

At least the Gibson interview laid to rest one question I'd been asking myself for months: Whatever became of Miss Teen South Carolina, anyway?

Posted by: GRF76 | September 15, 2008 12:21 PM | Report abuse

I guess the vacant look on her face was actually one of deep intellect, evident from her belief that the earth is only 6,000 years old! Maybe she can bluff her way into office by reprising the Peter Sellers role in Being There, one in which a simpleton is perceived as someone with deep insight. I can see it now, as her foreign policy expertise of being able to see Russia from Alaska is spun into deep thought, or her perversion of Lincoln's abhorrence of war is turned into a part of her myth.
Ask ninety percent of Americans who have anything between the ears what they think the Bush Doctrine is and they will tell you what he told the country and was widely reported when he first enunciated it. They won't go into the doctrine version 2.0, although stupidity, hubris and monumental ignorance should be wrapped up in it. It is laughable to construe Palin's vacant look with any semblance of deep thought!

Posted by: waters | September 15, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

dennism

Did you hear the interview in which she said that Russia invaded Georgia without provocation? Russia responded to georgia using its military in South Ossetia on Russia's own border. How can we even think we have a position that Russia was wrong in that? We invaded Iraq, a sovereign country on the other side of the globe and the reason for the invasion in the first place was a lie in which Bush joked about and we are still there. If Canada used it's military (this is strictly a hypothetical situation) to attack British Columbia because they decided they wanted to be a part of the US, do you think the US would just idly sit by and watch what happens?

If anybody remembers the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, the Soviets wanted to base ICBM's just south of the US in a sovereign country. Understandably this was something we would not stand for and the situation was thankfully resolved without too much incident. Now lets fast forward to 2008. We want to base a missile defense system in Poland, right next door to Russia. They have no guarantee that those missiles are strictly for defensive purposes, yet we keep on pressing. Isnt it understandable that Russia is concerned about that? By saying that they must accept it, is a double standard.

Posted by: Brian S | September 15, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Prediction: once again, the American electorate falls for the BS and elects a 72 year old and his unqualified beauty queen. The old man dies in office and the beauty queen takes over. Things get really weird when she begins to run things as she did back home, with unqualified loyalists taking key positions. She loses reelection in a Democratic landslide that seals control of Congress and the White House for the next eight years.

Posted by: mike in CA | September 15, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for lightening up my day. You made breakfast fun this morning.

Posted by: Ping Pong Paling for VP | September 15, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

"Oh, And I sorta got pregnant before I married Todd. By the way like Eye-Rack, we was just looking at each other after a newscast one night and lo and behold!, I got prego! So we decided to run off to the office and got married and poor Todd had to go and get some old folks from the old folks home across the street to witness the marriage. This has nothing to do with my belief in the sanctity of marriage and the abstinence I practice before my God. It is now the media that seems to pass judgement on all this. I would want to be a role model to every young girl in America and all the world once I become President..I mean Vice President. "

Posted by: Westerner | September 15, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

Palin is very unimpressive. So is Obama. Palin is running for vice-president. Obama is running for president.

McCain is not ideal, but, really, compared to Obama?

Obama's almost four years in the Senate are the longest he's held a full-time job in his life (he's 47) and he's spent most of it running for President and the rest writing another book, "The Audacity of Hope," to cash in on his celebrity.

While Obama would make a marginally better president than Palin (she hasn't written 2 books yet nor travelled internationally nearly as much, though neither speaks a foreign language and giving speeches in Germany and looking "presidential," whatever that means is pretty-much not better than going to Epcot).

So can we all focus on McCain's credentials and capabilities vs. Obama's thin resume and unproven capabilities.

Posted by: wallace | September 15, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

it's hard to imagine how anyone call call himself or herself a Christian and be a Republican.
-anon
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
You are painting republicans and right wing religious extreemists with the same brush. While is is somewhat true, and Republicans exploit these wingnuts for votes it is mostly true that Republicans actually DO NOT follow through and give
the religious right what they want. Our US Constitution prevents it.
The religious right has been energized by the pick of Palin but she will mostly end up being a liability in the next few weeks for the nascent Republican "reform" moderates (such as McCain).
There are more differences between Palin and McCain than Obama and McCain. These truths will be explored,, rounded up and presented over the next few weeks.

Posted by: Rich Rosenthal | September 15, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Does the Religious Right teach their children that lieing is ok? Sarah's children can see their mother lie. Do we eleminate one of the commandments?

Posted by: Robert Cannon | September 15, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

"And please, Mr. Cohen, stop with the childish characterizations of southern speech. ("Eye-rak") You're just exposing yourself for what you are, a snide, overpaid pundit who hates real Americans.

Posted by: MarkF"

Uh, Mark, do you really think Sarah Palin is from the south? or that only southerners say Eye-rak? or that anything OUTSIDE the south is not "real" America?

Hey, buddy, I'm not from the south, and I'm just as "real" an American as you. So there.

In fact, because I actually THINK about my country and what's best for it rather than just parroting what I'm told by Rush Dumbaugh, I AM a better and therefore more real American than you.

So there, again.

Posted by: A noun, a verb and POW. and now a pit bull with lipstick, too. | September 15, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Rich, You do have a point. Time will tell.

Posted by: w | September 15, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Only one complaint about this article -- the idea that Sarah Palin has actually "seen Russia up pretty close." I doubt that she's been within 200 miles of the island in question. Wasilla and Anchorage are about 800 miles from the Russian border. And the island in question is at least 30 miles from the Russian coast -- awfully hard to "eyeball" it from there.

Yes, I know it's incredibly absurd to even be bringing this up. The only reason I do so is that it's a nice metaphor for Palin herself -- the idea (which she and McCain both stated) of equating this with foreign policy experience in and of itself disqualifies the both of them for serious consideration to be our leaders -- him for his lack of judgment, her for her appalling ignorance. (McCain's actual response: "Alaska is right next to Russia. She understands that."
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/03/mccain-russia-alaska/

Please, any self-respecting independent voters out there, think about this carefully and what it means. If you knew that your prospective president/VP were capable of this level of deception, how could you trust anything else they said?

Posted by: eyeball | September 15, 2008 12:43 PM | Report abuse

tokyo2night, you can be a person of faith and still reject the Republican ticket. In fact,
my faith informs my political views, and that is why I am voting for Senator Obama.

There is nothing wrong with a person of faith occupying the oval office. But the separation of church and state is critical.
Otherwise, Christians may wake up to a government that has a form of Christianity that is not the one they thought they were voting for. And that "form of godliness" could be the law of the land. It would be too late to vote for something else.

To those who talk about this being a Christian land, just what does that mean?
The Church of England considered itself "Christian" and forced that viewpoint on other "Christians" who then felt so strongly they left their native land to gain religious freedom. Can you imagine pulling up roots and moving to Canada just so you could worship as you believe is right? And that is just a short car ride away, not months on a boat. This is an example of one group of Christians persecuting another. And then, too,
when people were brought from Africa to be used as slaves, they were converted to Christianity. Those same people who converted them were the ones forcing them to remain slaves. That was OK with those Christians. Christianity can be just about what anyone says it is. So don't vote for Christianity because a name doesn't mean anything to a despot who wants to stay in power. Without freedom to choose, it will be the Christianity the government tells you is the real one.

Posted by: Olive | September 15, 2008 9:09 AM
************

Well said, Olive. Despots and tyrants for thousands of years have wrapped the Christian mantle around their shoulders. The credulous assume that means they share their values, when the reverse is more often true.
It's a relief to see a truly Christian perspective on these boards after viewing so many venomous, angry and intolerant posts by those who claim to be Christians.
Way to go!
DB

Posted by: DB | September 15, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Cohen,
Loved your article, but you forgot to eliminate ALL ending "g's" It should be "somethin'" and "eyeballin'", and "visitin'" and "peerin'". Can't they teach her how to speak? Apparently not. They couldn't teach Bush, either.

Posted by: irritated English speaker | September 15, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

I think, charitably, that she IS saying the same thing, though far less artfully, than Lincoln: she's praying that our mission has some moral (holy in her conception) basis. The strong implication is that if it is immoral/unholy, we ought not make war. So yes, I think it can charitably be said that, like Lincoln and many world leaders, she's seeking assurance that the mission/plan is just.

Unfortunately, there's an important distinction that she and the Bush/Cheney/McCain crowd completely misses: it's too late. The cat's out of the bag and the whole world has known for at least the past 5 years that this war was based on lies. Many folks, including Obama, recognized this at the very outset.

It is not possible to win a war based on lies. It is not holy to pray for a "plan" that you know on its face is unholy. Does the Christian right (and I am a Christian, too) really think God is oblivious to the lies that predicated this conflict? Does the Christian right (and their AIPAC neo-con supporters) truly believe that God the Father of Jesus would countenance a conflict based on an immoral foundation that directly affronts the 10 Commandments?

Leaders with spiritual “leaven” have a place in the Oval Office; but as a previous poster so wisely observed above, spirituality that has become perverted to unholy political sanctification of that which is manifestly immoral is something we must all fight to oppose. Palin’s word reveal one of the greatest shortcomings of the Christian right: she believes continued prayer exonerates past sin and provides insurance against future sin. In every honest spiritual practice, when you have sinned as this nation has in Iraq, prayer is not enough: you MUST CORRECT THE SIN.

Posted by: abqcleve | September 15, 2008 11:13 AM
***********

Hear hear.

Posted by: DB | September 15, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Great article! Absolutely spot on!

Thank you for calling it as it actually is.

Posted by: Lassair | September 15, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Wallace wrote
"So can we all focus on McCain's credentials and capabilities vs. Obama's thin resume and unproven capabilities."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Obama resume is not monolithic like McCain's to be sure but Obama, while much younger, has been working for the public good AND achieving the top rated academic credentials all devoted to public service and leadership. Both became focused on public service during the early eighties. Obama has had more of a hands on approach (street creds). McCain really did not get involved until he was much older and politics was a midlife career change (new wife, new job). McCain has had his setbacks with some scandal and has learned from these mistakes. Obama appears to have the intelligence and temperment to not make the mistakes in the first place.
Obama compared favorably to Hillary Clinton who is also a better choice than a Republican McCain.
The experience argument is weak. The only unknown about Obama is the degree of greatness his Presidency will achieve.

Posted by: Rich Rosenthal | September 15, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Dear Wallace:

You said "So can we all focus on McCain's credentials and capabilities vs. Obama's thin resume and unproven capabilities.:

McCains credentials equal the last 8 years. Anything GWB did you can expect from the McCain-Palin administration. I'd rather take a chance on Obama's "thin" resume than have another 4 years of the MESS that we have now. Are you better off now than you wore 8 years ago?

Regards,
The Democratic Warrior

Posted by: The Democratic Warrior | September 15, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Will we need an intertreper when she holds a press confernce on "speaking in tongues"?

Posted by: Mark the B | September 15, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Just like Bush, she apparently doesn't read the papers or she would know that Georgia invaded South Ossetia, and it sounded fairly brutal at that. Maybe I'm qualified to run for president, too, yeah, that's the ticket. I'll buy a gun and start talking about Jesus, call James Dobson, yeah...

Posted by: gh in co | September 15, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin's blindling ambition will be her downfall. The question is will she screw up before, or after the election?

Posted by: DDS | September 15, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Gotta luv it - at least you dems can laugh at an article as Obama's campaign goes up in flames....nice to see that you all maintained you sense of humor.

Now what exactly is BO's experience to be the heartbeat of the Presidency? Organizing - honorable - but No . State Leg - maybe - but as President - one needs to stake a position and be decisive...so BO's more than 130 votes of 'Present' takes that away. His senate experience - all those 4 years w/ 2 on the campaign trail...naaa...not that. So exactly what is it?

And - how about that Joe B's charitable contributions of 380.00 each year....He wont spend his own money - but will gladly spend ours.......

Posted by: Anonymous | September 15, 2008 1:25 PM | Report abuse

too funny...

Posted by: Tony in Albany, NY | September 15, 2008 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Ted Land (907) 762-9269 of KTUU TV an NBC affiliate in Alaska who did the news story of a hugh rally in Alaska against Sarah Palin. I told him that I was amazed that none of the networks carried or asked for any of the footage. He said that he was just as amazed as I was especially when NBC did not request any footage. He also said that CNN was there. I told him the only story that I heard concerning a protest on CNN was about Oprah. What's going on here folks? I found out about the story at KTTU.COM There are a lot of people especially women, democrats and republicans unlike who disagreeD with Palin and thinks she's dangerous for the country. The protest started with 8 to 10 women sitting around realizing that Palin doesn't represent them. A nasty radio host broadcast their names over the airways and others tried to stop the rally. It was big news in Alaska and you can see the story on KTTU.COM website. This goes to show you that Rick Davis has far reaching arms. Palin will be hidden from the legit media as well as any negative press. Alaska is a small community so there will be some backlash but still these people weren't afraid to speak out. What happen to our press coverage here about the protest IN ALASKA. CALL TED AND ASK HIM ABOUT THE STORY

Posted by: NBC, CNN NEVER AIRED THE PROTEST | September 15, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse

She has been made into a barbie doll already for heavens sake. How could anyone treat her with any seriousness now.

Posted by: Marilyn | September 15, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Hysterically funny piece. I won't really be able to laugh about it until November 4th. Until then, I plan to cower under my bed.

Posted by: Enemy Of The State | September 15, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Any belief in vestiges of honor remaining from John McCain's 2000 campaign were firmly dispelled when he picked Palin. Would it have been possible for him to be more cynical? No. He chose the most incompetent person as his VP in an attempt to get the lowest of low-information voters. He is basing his campaing on lies and having the same Bush-Rove acolytes who smeared him in 2000 smear Obama in the same manner he condemned eight years ago. John McCain once said he wouldn't campaign as he is now because it is the equivalent of selling one's soul to the devil. Now he thinks a trade that lands him in the White House with his laughable side-kick is a bargain.

Posted by: Jackie | September 15, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Cohen, there is hope for you yet. :-)

Posted by: treetopflyer | September 15, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Like, so to the point.

Posted by: jfp | September 15, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Don't shoot us, Sarah!

Eat mor chiken!

Posted by: Moose and Wolf | September 15, 2008 3:08 PM | Report abuse

She is reel purdy and smart to.

I wuz wachin' the teevee and saw a whole futbawl game wif the redskins teem and the blu teem. Kan I play kawrterbak fur the red teem pleeze? I wached reel gud.

Posted by: Won't get fooled again | September 15, 2008 3:26 PM | Report abuse

A previous post says
"Now what exactly is BO's experience to be the heartbeat of the Presidency? Organizing - honorable - but No . State Leg - maybe - but as President - one needs to stake a position and be decisive...so BO's more than 130 votes of 'Present' takes that away. His senate experience - all those 4 years w/ 2 on the campaign trail...naaa...not that. So exactly what is it?"

I would rather have 130 votes of PRESENT than one "FOR" oopsy couple of months later I changed my mind "AGAINST" then tell an entire nation that I was "AGAINST" all along.

Regards,
The Democratic Warrior

Posted by: The Democratic Warrior | September 15, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

it is going to be so funny to see how all of you react on november 5th when you realize john mccain has just won the presidency

Posted by: Lisa B | September 15, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Dear Lisa B-

There will be nothing humorous when the ignorance of this country, yourself included, puts the nail in the coffin of our slowly dying country by electing these two IDIOTS into office. I'm pretty sure there is nothing funny at all about people having zero health care, no money in their pockets and fertile myrtle Palin telling people, YOU INCLUDED, what to do with their vaginas.

Fondest regards,
The Democratic Warrior

Posted by: The Democratic Warrior | September 15, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

As my 5 year old niece says, "God rest America."

Posted by: slk1918 | September 15, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

All sarcasm aside, the whole Palin brouhaha merely points out that we want shallow leaders, that we want people in office who are "certain" of the call from God to lead us out of this wilderness of liberalism and back to the shelter of a vengeful God. Sorry folks, but America the Land of Shining Opportunity has closed its doors - and its mind. Intelligence is no longer valued; we can say goodbye to science, quantum physics, and the cure for cancer. Man on the moon? Human habitation on Mars? Not from America.

Posted by: Tess | September 15, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Excellent point Tess. Well said.

Posted by: The Democratic Warrior | September 15, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

"I can see Mars and Jupiter from my house. Does that make me qualified to take over NASA?

Posted by: Anonymous"

ROFLMAO!!!! In this day and age, the answer would YES

Posted by: Tess | September 15, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Insane.... doesent anyone care that Obama is a Socialist in Democrats clothing? Or that McCain has already got his eyes set on a war with Iran? Both of them are ok with these Govt bailouts of companies that were mishandled by the leadership of those companies. If I were to run my business like they had, and my business failed, its MY fault for running it the wrong way. Why shoud us taxpayers pay for the errors of those CEO's?

Just in case hadn't heard. Obama has sponsored a bill in 2007 that wants to have the US foot part of the bill that is designed to get the Entire Continent of Africa out of poverty! Thats a nice idea for the Red Cross doing it with donations, but using US taxpayer dollars, which are supposed to be used to fund the operation of the US Government, to get another CONTINENT out of poverty?? SOCIALISM!!! The US taxpayer shouldnt be EXPECTED to pay for that. Here is the link to that bill, see for yourself. The numbers are in paragraph (9)

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-2433&version=rs&nid=

Posted by: Brian S | September 15, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

I'm inviting all posters/readers to check out the www.bobbarr2008.com website. If you want to debate on issues, read about the issues on his page. You might even like what you read. I am not a Libertarian, but I do like his stance on the issues.

Posted by: Brian S | September 15, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for cutting to the chase, Mr. Cohen. Every minute that the media doesn't spend rolling on the floor, alternately laughing and crying at Palin's candidacy, is a moment that the media is failing to do their jobs in favor of the kind of relativism that passes for a lack of bias these days.

Posted by: davestickler | September 15, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

This article was so funny I had to read it twice. Too bad most of Palin's supporters don't read ;)

Posted by: Mike | September 15, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Mike-

They don't read because Sarah got rid of all of their books in the library.

Posted by: The Democratic Warrior | September 15, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Senator Barack Obama is a fraud. He lacks executive experience. Senator Obama is just a social construction.

Posted by: mmarii | September 15, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

I find it sad that my 10th grade students are aware of the basic principles of the 'Bush Doctrine' and Sarah palin hasn't the slightest idea what this doctrine is or that it even existed until "Charlie" told her what it was. That's just sad. How can we take her seriously. She didn't even have the good sense to study before her test.

Posted by: King | September 15, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Thanks Mr. Cohen,

Whenever I would ask a question in class, people would always stop me later and thank me, saying they didn't understand it either, but they didn't want to be the one to ask. In 1992 any politician who said America wasn't perfect was beaten to a pulp. Then along came Ross Perot asking how we were going to fix all the problems in America, and suddently the game changed.

Mr. Cohen, I'm officially stopping you after class to thank YOU for asking the questions. For having the courage to say the emperor has no clothes. Sometimes it only takes a few key people to make it OK to stop drinking the coolaid.

Posted by: patriot | September 15, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Well Richard, ya know that John McCain, Richard, has a plan for Eye-Rack and John McCain's plan, Richard, is a GREAT plan that will keep America safe, Richard, and we need that great plan of John McCain's for Eye-Rack Richard and don't you be forgetting that! And for Russia too, which I can see from my State, Richard, and which John McCain has a plan for too Richard..................

Posted by: nisswapaddy | September 15, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

I'm having deja vu from 2000: a man who got into top schools because his daddy was a famous alumni, settled for a C-average, dodged the draft, did a lax job in the National Guard (which saved him from the draft), and never was a success at much of anything - in fact, he was widely known as the "black sheep" in his family and rich powerful daddy had to bail him out more than once - this man was seen by 51% of the population as being "more like us," "a guy you'd like to have a beer with," "a manly man who chops wood on his ranch," etc. People who voted for him liked that he claimed being saved by Jesus and aligned with their views on social causes. George W. Bush was more telegenic than Al Gore who was seen by W voters as "intellectual elite," "wooden," "the smart kid who is disliked," etc.

I always found it interesting that the republican establishment got behind Bush rather than McCain in 2000. A screw-up who was an okay governor versus the "war hero maverick." I thought then, and it has played out now, that they wanted Dick Cheney moved into the white house to take the executive branch to new levels of power. Cheney was not a good, likable candidate so they needed a dim bulb, an incurious, detached, candidate who could be a blank slate and would need a wise elder's help.

Now, Sarah Palin, to me, fits this same bill. Of all the conservatives or conservative women McCain could have chosen, why Sarah Palin? No doubt she has an appealing persona, but talk about an empty suit. Anyone who can say with a straight face that her foreign policy experience is influenced by the fact that "you can see Russia," isn't aware of how lame that is. You can tell the McCain campaign knows this, too. They're calling "sexism" at every turn. This from the campaign that scorned Obama for supposedly "playing the race card," anytime he responded to attacks. Yes, they know she's a political pawn, just as W was - and she accepts that role because, just like W, her own impression of herself and her knowledge is elevated. God help us if we vote in another W.

Posted by: bethechange1 | September 15, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

I once spent seven hours at a Russian airport, waiting for a connecting flight. Will you all vote for me?

Posted by: Kat | September 15, 2008 7:13 PM | Report abuse

Great, Cohen. Just Great!

The ridiculous absurdity of the desperate Republicans ("We can't find a good VP choice, so let's go with a woman....Any woman!") is being completely lost on 50% of the people. It may be coincidence, but that happens to also be the 50% with the lowest IQ scores!

Posted by: Arjuna9 | September 15, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse


Thank you Mr. Cohen!!!!!

Posted by: ams40 | September 15, 2008 9:54 PM | Report abuse

Well Mr. Cohen, I can see that you have joined rank with your collegues. Congratulations! Now I know I was right about Sarah. She is a terrific lady, superior in every way to Obama. But as to your spoof about her international relations experience. She doesn't have any really. So what!! I would rather trust her than all the other goof ball " experts " who have been messing things up for the last three or four administrations. The fact is ( if facts concern you at all ) is that no President or Vice President is alone when they go into the Oval Office. They go, if not in company with their staff and cabinet, at least with their well seasoned advice. The final decision is theirs and Sarah is used to making final decisions as the Governor of a state. Tell me what executive decisions has Obama ever made?

Posted by: Edward Reinhart | September 15, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

Now she's refusing to cooperate with the investigation re. the state trooper. She previously said she wants "transparency" would fully cooperate. So much for transparency! Is there any part of her narrative about herself that hasn't been debunked? Of course, now that republicans have fallen in love with their own "celebrity," they won't care about the facts. She lies, but she's christian! She's misrepresented herself, but she's pro-life! She's sarcastic and condescending, but she's so captivating (and we need that because John McCain is a snoozer and we really don't trust that he's on the "right side" of God and our values).

Posted by: bethechange1 | September 15, 2008 10:04 PM | Report abuse

Tess wrote: All sarcasm aside, the whole Palin brouhaha merely points out that we want shallow leaders, that we want people in office who are "certain" of the call from God to lead us out of this wilderness of liberalism and back to the shelter of a vengeful God. Sorry folks, but America the Land of Shining Opportunity has closed its doors - and its mind. Intelligence is no longer valued; we can say goodbye to science, quantum physics, and the cure for cancer. Man on the moon? Human habitation on Mars? Not from America.
*********
Tess, I feel your pain and have said all of the above to myself, in one form or another. But we must not give up. "We"---you, me, Dem.Warrior, and millions of others not yet heard from--
"We" DON'T want shallow leaders. "We" DO value intelligence.

Yes, and "we" care about health care issues, and stem cell research, and cures for cancer. Those folks who don't---
they will, when they get sick enough.

Posted by: Martina | September 15, 2008 10:34 PM | Report abuse

Funny, but you can see why the right-leaning folk might think jokes like these are a little smarmy and condescending.

How many red staters pronounce Iraq that way?

The base will chuckle about it, but we won't win any converts.

Posted by: Drew | September 16, 2008 2:49 AM | Report abuse

You forgot to mention that you are a hockey mom and so what if there aint much scholastic hockey in the D.C. area, and that shooting a moose is like hitting the broad side of a barn with just about anything.

Posted by: J Lauber | September 16, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Yep - that was great. Sometimes the truth hurts, doesn't it?

Posted by: AZrebel | September 16, 2008 11:41 AM | Report abuse

AND NOW! . . And now, Palin's Attorney General for the state of Alaska is refusing to allow ten state employees to testify before a panel convened to investigate Trooper-Gait. And the panel, is made up of ten Republicans and only four Democrats.

Palin stated that her main concern was that her exbrother-in-law threaten her family and threatened to kill her father. . . . . . But she never calls the police?!

If someone seriously threatened your family, would you: . .
a) get a gun,
b) call the police,
c) scream for help
d) go to a meeting

Sarah Palin chose d) go to a meeting. And then she wonders why no one took her seriously. . . . . BUT WAIT, they did. Two groups of investigators looked into the matter and decided there were no grounds for dismissal. And note, both panels were headed by people who were beholding to her for their jobs. And one got fired.

And now, the Attorney General is refusing to honor any suboenas given to these ten state employees. . . . . . Boy does this sound just like the Bush Administration.

Posted by: Coldcomfort | September 17, 2008 4:35 AM | Report abuse

It gets worse: McClatchy is reporting that under Palin, Wasilla rape victims were actually CHARGED for the rape kits needed to prosecute!


And, it turns out, Palin as governor supported a second bridge to a second Nowhere - now which of her cronies would have benefited from that bridge?

Charging victims for rape kits! Just when you think it can't get more surreal

http://www.twincities.com/politics/ci_10438129

Posted by: Mom | September 17, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Keep making fun of her, folks, and all it does is create more sympathy for her, and that equals votes from other folks who say "eye-rack", too. Remember that other guy we made fun of for his mispronunciations?
Well, we're just as effed as if we'd said "nuke-u-lar" ourselves. Did not matter.
They voted for him. Remember "You're no John Kennedy." Great line. That guy lost, and I forget his name. But I remember Dan Quayle.

Posted by: Elite Redneck | September 17, 2008 10:26 PM | Report abuse

Elite Redneck

Believe me, I dont want her nor McCain anywhere near the Oval Office, nor do I want Obama in there. Both McCain and Obama are going to drive this country deeper in debt. The Govt has got to stop these bailouts, we have to get out of Iraq, as we have no business being there in the first place, not to mention we can spend money building the Unites States up instead of rebuilding countries across the globe.

I'm going to invite all blog posters, readers to check out the web site www.bobbarr2008.com and check out the Issues tab. Not only are there positions, but there are actually plans to implement those plans. Obama and McCain have done alot of lip service (no, not saying anything about pigs or lipstick) in finding catchy phrases for their campaigns, but that's all it is... catch phrases.

Posted by: Brian S | September 18, 2008 7:35 AM | Report abuse

Simple solutions to complicated problems is the Palin mantra. Her selection is an
insult to the office and demeaning to women everywhere. Mr. straight talk is in
an abyss of senility and if he ever had
vision it is blurred by his overwhelming,
zealousness to win an election he is ill
equipped to handle.Say anything to get a vote, no matter how ludicrous, or inaccurate it may be. Mr.straight talk
has a total disregard for truth as indicated by his continous change of facts
and his nonsensical spin when the lies he
promulgates are exposed.It's time not only
for change but also decency and truth and if you want either you cannot vote for Frick or Frack namely Palin or McCain.

Posted by: Jack B. Rubin | September 18, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Jack...

I too want change, but I want a change for the better, not just an alternative bad reality. Obama is a Socialist in Democrat clothing. Wanting to raise taxes on the rich to give to the poor, with Govt subsidized healthcare, he is opposed to privatizing Social Security... a program that is on its death bed because of the debt that we are in. Our grandchildren that arent even born yet will be paying for that fiasco. Both of them have been suppoters of these ridiculous bail-outs of failed mortgage companies and banks. Who is next, auto manufacturers, airlines??? If someone runs a business into the ground, why should they be rewarded by the government in extending the time before the company dies? If I was to run my business and it failed, guess what... it fails and I go get job working for someone else. All these bailouts are costing you, me our children and it will go for generations unless something is done to stop the cycle.

I invite all viewers and posters to go to www.bobbarr2008.com and read the issues tab. McCain and Obama are more of the same, just different shades of red.

Posted by: Brian S | September 18, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Everything about this lady is a lie. IS THERE ANYTHING TRUE ABOUT HER ANYMORE? NOTHING! But she still draws a crowd. I know what the guys are looking for, but the ladies? What are they doing in those rallies?

Posted by: Guy from LA | September 18, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

Three weeks of Palin news, and I'm ready to join the Alaska secession movement. Just as long as they TAKE HER WITH THEM!

Posted by: Nauseated | September 19, 2008 12:12 AM | Report abuse

Republicans have been jealous for a year that Dems are so excited about Obama, so they have whipped themselves up to mirror that phenomenon. They don't realize how silly this looks when the subject of their rabid excitement is a blow-up doll wearing a cross.

Posted by: Just don't get it | September 19, 2008 12:14 AM | Report abuse

Just don't get it

That is part of the problem. I'm not for McCain/Palin either, but comments like that are along the lines of pigs and lipstick. Obama is nobody to get excited over either. He wants to create multiple Government funds to 'help' the common citizen, which only makes the government monster even bigger. With the increases size of whatever agency will be monitoring the imaginary money. That will in turn, drive our deficit even deeper. Not to mention the Global Poverty Act that he introduced (along with Biden) in 2007 that sends yet another 25 Billion dollars to the continent of Africa. The total is 25 billion until the year 2010 in which it doubles to 50 Billion. The countries that are to 'donate' to create that amount are the G8 nations at the time of the bill's creation. The US amount if divided equally would be approx 3 Billion. But we all know that the US is going to be stuck with way more than that.
Do the research yourself, here is the link. Check out the numbers in paragraph (9)

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-2433&version=rs&nid=

Posted by: Brian S | September 20, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company