Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Obama and the Anger Calculation

Earlier this week when Barack Obama gave a lengthy interview with Keith Olbermann, the "Countdown" host referenced the Illinois senator's now-famous "enough" line from his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention and asked: "Have you thought of using on the campaign trail and in your speaking engagements, more exclamation points? Have you thought of getting angrier?"

At the time, Obama downplayed the idea -- launching into a riff on the need for "a sense of urgency" on the part of his supporters because of the high stakes in this election. He added that "the American people aren't stupid. . . . They are going to get it," a repeated mantra from Obama that relies heavily on voters rejecting tried and true negative attacks due to their overwhelming desire for change and a new kind of politics.

Since that interview earlier this week, however, Obama and his campaign team have changed their tone a bit -- especially in response to the charge by John McCain that Obama was referring to Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin when he used the phrase "lipstick on a pig" at a rally earlier this week.

On Tuesday night, senior adviser Anita Dunn declared "enough is enough" when discussing the lipstick incident.

Then yesterday Obama echoed that sentiment. "Enough," he said at a rally in Norfolk, Virginia. "I don't care what they say about me. But I love this country too much to let them take over another election with lies and phony outrage and Swift Boat politics. Enough is enough."

So, is this an indication that Obama is mad as hell and he's not going to take it anymore? It's hard to know -- primarily because anger and the campaign trail don't usually mix.

Voters like passionate candidates, politicians who believe (or at least appear to believe) in the positions they stake out. But, those same voters often blanch at expressions of anger, believing it to be unbecoming of a president.

Earlier this year, we wrote that McCain had lost the "happy warrior" image that had served him so well earlier in the decade; his dark demeanor and outward anger didn't translate well on the stump. (It's worth noting that since he picked Palin, McCain has seemed re-energized -- perhaps by the larger crowds -- and has reclaimed that happy warrior image.)

While some Democratic detractors believe Obama needs to take Olbermann's advice immediately, polling would seem to suggest that the Illinois senator's temperament is one of the things that draws voters to him.

In the most recent Washington Post/ABC News poll, 57 percent said that Obama has the "better personality and temperament to be president" while just 35 percent said that of McCain. It was Obama's largest edge over his Republican rival on any of the eight character/attribute questions asked in the poll.

It would seem from those numbers, at least, that Obama's calm -- some would say professorial -- demeanor appeals to voters, perhaps due to its distinct difference from the personality of the current occupant of the White House.

A sudden shift in tone then has the potential to jar voter sensibilities about Obama in a way that could negatively impact his campaign. Obama's favorable numbers in the Post/ABC poll remain quite strong (58 percent view him favorably/36 percent unfavorably) but his promise of a new (read: less negative, less partisan) politics is so central to his appeal that any significant change in the tenor of his campaign could be problematic.

During the primary, Obama's call to a new politics was the perfect "I am rubber, you are glue" strategy. If Hillary Rodham Clinton attacked him, Obama was able to dismiss the hit -- whether or not there was validity to it -- as the old politics that people had grown tired of.

Interestingly, that same frame is currently being turned against Obama. McCain's campaign -- as witnessed by its latest ad -- is at the ready to take any sign of Obama using traditional political tactics and use it as evidence to undermine the Illinois senator's brand.

Given that, Obama must tread very carefully over the remaining weeks of the campaign. Passion and emotion are good things in politics; anger and frustration are not.

By Chris Cillizza  |  September 11, 2008; 6:45 AM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Brian Schweitzer Eyes the Future
Next: Fix Picks: Inside the Mind of John McCain

Comments

Baracky Hussein Obama has an extremely liberal Senate voting record - he cannot run and hide from that fact.

Democrats for John McCain and Sarah Palin in 2008

Posted by: Helen | September 12, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Thank goodness for Pam Anderson and Matt Damon supporting Obama - true representatives of the left.

Posted by: Pacaderm | September 12, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

I am gravely sickened that almost everyone, commentators and voters alike think that Obama has to "attack" McSame to reclaim his credibility…. as a mother of an impressionable 11 yr. old , there is something very wrong with that premise.

Are we really saying that the only way to elect a President in this nation is to go into nasty, negative, attack-style politics? That is very troubling. The highest position in the land and the process is about attacking and belittling your opponent in the nastiest ways?

The media commentators are "egging" this on to the point where the public is thinking Obama will not appear qualified unless he joins McSame in the gutter.

Let me say this, if that is how we elect our President… AMERICA DOES NOT DESERVE ANY MAN OR WOMAN OF INTEGRITY TO LEAD THIS NATION.

We will remain stuck in the cyle of choosing people who will continually lie and deceive us as President. It's a simple case of… getting what we ask for….

this is a shameful day in America.

Posted by: nerakami | September 12, 2008 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Obama only needs to be true to himself and to keep repeating, as he has been, what he believes to be the best course for changing the way Washtington works. It's really that simple.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pq0rUSl3wnQ

Posted by: Thomas | September 12, 2008 5:20 AM | Report abuse

The McCain Camp and the media want the "mad Black man" to show up. Obama is not that. He is calm, thoughtful and presidential. He does not fit their story line. Obama wants to do something noble for politics-win on the issues. Mc Cain is using the media to keep the issues from being discussed and debated. It is a shame!

Posted by: Sean | September 11, 2008 11:29 PM | Report abuse

Finally, President Obama (Doesn't that sound good!, so good in fact, I plan to use this title for now onward, due from the fact of the disgrace Bush has caused this great country!, Bush does not deserve the title, and I am stripping him of it as of now.)

The real facts here are, Obama doesn't show anger because he is inside the circle, knows the game.
That we as the people of this country must realize that the past elections were rigged. That our vote may not even count.

That Palin is in the oil state now being pursued, and the highest officials in Alaska are subject to prosecution from
corruption with oil giants right now.

That Bush is getting us into war in Iran to make sure we can not withdraw troops any time in the near future.(to protect his oil there)

That we need change in our economy, change in our energy sources, equal pay, health care and take leadership as the great country we are. Republicans are out for themselves, like wolves. Democrats want all to eat a slice of pie.

We need Obama to make these changes. Obama to offer up on a silver platter Bush and his thugs for prosecution of lies about 9-11(an inside job), election rigging and war mongering.We deserve to punish all that is involved.
But, will McCain, when he has connections to the oil industries himself? I think not.

Why McBush has a different voice now? All of a sudden he is for reform, has changed his campaign completely?Why?
The voting machines that have fixed the past elections are not going to be there for him to walk away with the 51% regardless of what he say or does. If you want proof, go to www.youtube.com ,www.democrats.org , and www.congress.org , research some of these things for yourself.
Stop whining about the media not covering the truth. The truth is out there and only a few clicks away.

Posted by: Wlwatkins | September 11, 2008 8:33 PM | Report abuse

The political discourse here is pathetic

if you can't advance your candidate without taking a shot at the other candidate or their supporters

it says more about you and your candidate and less about his opponent.

this nastiness has come from both campaigns

I have voted for McCain in the primary actually twice once in 2000 and 2008.

but will be supporting Obama in the general.

comments by anonymous about black men I find interesting being one who has never hit a woman or done drugs.

it appears to me that the McCain campaign expects special Treatment for Gov. Palin because while they feel she has right experience to be VP should not be subject to questions till today.

it appears she thinks that Georgia is part of NATO and we might have to go to war with Russia to defend Georgia. I hope Gibson asked her with what Army.

but here is the score

George Bush was not up to the job

we voted for him because we wanted to have a beer with him and cut taxes and Al Gore was too friken stiff.

he had no clue on 9-11 but who would

he made the right move in Afghanistan but didn't put troops in at a critical time to catch Bin Laden

6 years later no Bin Laden

he cut taxes but not spending

this led to the slide of the dollar and the rise of Oil prices

he cut taxes again

Invaded a country that did not have Al Quaeda in it yet made people believe they were part of 9-11 even though 15 of 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.

freedoms have been reduced but without results if there had been the Bush Adminustration would have played it up more.

we didn't start becoming energy independent
we shopped and bought SUV's and put stupid stickers saying "We Will Never forget" but didn't do anything about it.

we went into a election where one party seemed afraid to defend itself and the other feels if they are not in power the world will come to an end.

We had abugrave which was known of up the chain of command

we tried to sell port security to Dubai
are you kidding?

all along America didn't mind because of tax cuts and cheap money we were buying houses we couldn't afford and running up a large national debt 4 trillion

wages have gone down 500-1000 depending on whose numbers you use.

then Katrina

are you kidding me

4,000 plus and probably 30000 to 50000 depending on how honest the deffense department

i could go into each of the scandals of the republican party or the supposed gayness in it.

Politicalization of the Military, Justice department, Intelligence

the utter incompetence of every department for Cronyism is pathetic and as a Republican who wants less government you have to show you can do more with less.

the fact is one party has been in charge for most of this time all be it the Senate is a completely different Animal.

this has made the left more angry and the right more defensive.

Republican and so called conservative have had your chance for 8 years to show us you could do it with limited government and it never happened.

so saying your change and a reform ticket doesn't sound credible to anyone with a brain or who can look at this with a non-partisan hat and begs the Ronald Regan Question

ARE YOU BETTER OF NOW THEN YOU WERE 8 YEARS AGO?

Posted by: Enough | September 11, 2008 8:32 PM | Report abuse

BARACK OBAMA
BECAUSE INTELLIGENCE MATTERS!
BECAUSE INTEGRITY MATTERS!
BECAUSE HONESTY MATTERS!

Posted by: saynotostupidpeople | September 11, 2008 7:13 PM | Report abuse

I love the family values chatter from the GOP.

My wife and I had a profoundly retarded son - he never spoke a word or walked - he never sat up - he never looked at me - for all I knew he was deaf and blind as well.

Every meal he ever ate we fed him. Every diaper he ever wore we changed him. Every foot he ever moved from where he was lying we carried him. Every time he went to bed we carried him upstairs. Every morning we carried him downstairs.

We became a test marketing project for Depends adult diapers - we got 'em free and had to let the manufacturer know what we thought of them.

He lived to be ten years old. We did nothing but worry about what was going to happen to him. Then one day he simply woke up and died.

My wife gave up the best ten years of her life caring for Michael. We got no help from any government agency except our local school for handicapped kids. No medicare ; no medicaid; no state assistance. You see I "made too much money" - I was a middle management officer in a bank with two other kids and it was the only income in my home - but I made too much money.

Michael is gone now. So is my wife. She never went to church. She was not a believer. If there is a God in his heaven then she is sitting under a massive oak watching her perfect 10 year old son play with his 12 year old brother (yes - we lost two boys) in the green grass under a sunny sky with a cool breeze moving through his hair mop - "Mommy look at me!! Look at my kite!!" and she will wave and smile.

There was no preacher at her funeral - except for a local female Methodist minister who knew how this woman, who never went to church, lived Christianity in her daily life . I will not forget her kindness. She spoke of how this woman went on to have two fine daughters after her two disabled sons and how she made a lunch hour appointment for an abortion and changed her mind at the last minute.

Talk is cheap. It’s a lot easier talk about having a kid like Mike than to be the parents. Too many of you fine religious folk feel so good about yourselves, then you smile and go on to your next “Fellowship” meeting or casserole supper knowing you saved another life.

No one should have to bear a Michael at 30 if they don’t want to.......that’s choice. Those who advocate the opposite should be prepared to urge society to provide care for that child for its entire life, even if you have to raise taxes. It’s the cost of being pro-life. Think of that the next time you see two old people pushing an adult retarded child in a wheel chair in the mall.

Posted by: toritto | September 11, 2008 6:08 PM | Report abuse

on the other hand, we can get as angry as we want to at you for being such a tool, right? Obama has to be VERY careful, eh? Of course, he will do what you tell him, you are the all-powerful, non-partisan, defender of our first amendment rights, with only the interests of the citizen in mind. your advice is wrong most of the time, why try to bamboozle another innocent candidate to play the game the way you want it to be played?

Let the dems deal with it and you report it, can you do that? the rest of us will vote.

Posted by: PreAmerikkkan | September 11, 2008 5:59 PM | Report abuse

Every time Oslamma supporters highlight Mrs. Palin's supposed 'thin' resume as an EXECUTIVE of over 20k state workers and a budget in the Billions, thats with a 'B' mind you, swing voters are effectively reminded of Barry's tenure as a community ORGANizer, learning his leninist tactics at the feet of marxist, saul alinksy, admitted American terrorist ayers, and last but not least, rev. jeremiah (G.Damn AmeriKKKa) wrong(wright).

I find it quite illustrative that when the left is forcefully and successfully challenged with fact, logic, and reason, they resort to snide, personal attacks and utilize cover in the media when confronted. The big secret is that the left can not actually promote their true intent, turning the US into this century's soviet union. Their hand is being revealed and those of us who are busy making this country work are being treated to disgusting example after disgusting example of the left's nakedly contemptuous subversion of the principles the USA was founded upon.

Please, keep it up and on Nov.5, the reluctant verbiage being despondently muttered by those in the dino-media will be. . .


COTTAILS!!!!!!!


Sleep tight all you marxists; you make this way to easy.

the Deets

Posted by: the Deets | September 11, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

All black men beat their women, smoke drugs and steal. Just kidding....I think.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Anna,
You use nice GRAMMER!! The correct usage is "you are, not your". I did not say she was "asking for it" as this sounds a bit sexist to me. However, anyone who makes a statement comparing himself / herself to a Pit Bull or anyone who makes some other type of gross exaggeration about himself / herself should be prepared to be ridiculed.

Posted by: ManintheMiddle | September 11, 2008 5:27 PM | Report abuse

ManintheMiddle your sick. Your honestly trying to suggest she was "asking for it"

You fit right in with the sexist Obama camp.

Posted by: Anna | September 11, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

My apologies but as a wife and mother PALIN'S FIRST PRIORITY should be her family. John McCain's priority be his fragile WIFE. Cindy is forever balanced on the EDGE of an OxyContin addiction and needs to be in DRUG REHAB. HE NEEDS TO PAY ATTENTION TO HER WELLBEING. That's not a slight, that's honest and from the heart.

Palin's family is falling apart at the already ragged seams-come on! How dare SHE make a PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT that her teenage daughter is pregnant then say people shouldn't comment on a PRIVATE MATTER?
IT WAS OBAMA WHO MADE A STATEMENT TO THE MEDIA: "Palin's family is OFF LIMITS." How was that ANYTHING OTHER THAN GIVING HER THE UTMOST RESPECT as a woman FIRST, then as a politician?

I'm curious as to how the GOP could spin this to the negative- but I'll let the McCain supporters think on that but use your Christian heart and mind. Would any of you sacrifice yourself or family’s well-being THEN adopt the "I've been through so many hardships" Munchausen’s tactic once you discover you made a BIG MISTAKE? Have we really taken to eating our young or do we just chew enough to get the "sympathy juice" and spit them out like tobacco chaw? What makes that a POSITIVE ATTRIBUTE in your eyes?!
I'd have more respect for her if she'd said "I cannot accept this invitation because MY FAMILY REALLY NEEDS ME NOW."

THAT'S A STRONG WOMAN.

Posted by: NoElleNo-get real! | September 11, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

This is McCain energized? Seems to me he has just become nastier and has stepped well over the line in his attacks on Obama. That sex-ed spot is shameless and crude.
I find Sen. McCain's demeanor rather creepy: "My friends. . . [insert half-truth about Obama]. That's not the change we need, my friends." He seems to think the country needs a hero and only he can be that hero. However, his delivery is stilted and dull, not heroic, and, my friends, he has that tendency not to tell the truth.

Posted by: HarrisCo | September 11, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous sayeth, "Dude...that back and forth was more intelligent than your rant. Way to go!"

Why Anonymous, how very white of you!

Posted by: the_Dude | September 11, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Obama doesn't NEED to stoop to the GOP level because THAT'S NOT ON TOPIC- OUR FUTURE AND OUR COUNTRY'S WELL BEING IS THE TOPIC. He would actually do better to IGNORE them completely. Giving energy to NOTHING makes it APPEAR to be something WORTHY of attention...like lipstick on a pig- it is indeed STILL A PIG. LOL!

People PLEASE use common sense when you choose your candidate. What WE as citizens and voters need to do is TAKE A GOOD HONEST LOOK at the family structure of ALL our candidates and look at who has their personal AND professional lives in order. If they can't take care of home WTF can they do for the country. Why give a whole chicken to a person who can't even hold an egg? Most of the McCain people posting here will go insane if they actually did it.

Did McCain and the rest of the GOP FORGET that's been Obama's platform? WE all know the CHANGE the GOP wants...but what's best for AMERICA is NOT CHANGING the wealthy into the ruling class and the have-nots into the working class...but all you REPUBLICANS just remember- THE MAJORITY of you McCain supporters WILL NOT be members of the ruling class- Maybe then you'll REALLY see how the party YOU support DOESN'T NEED YOU once they're in office.
It's YOUR KIDS dying in IRAQ, YOUR JOBS that were OUTSOURCED, YOUR HOUSES that were FORCLOSED ON. Did the last 8 years fare well for all of you as it did for the Bushavics? YOUR GOVERNMENT doesn't give a damn about YOU if you're not on THEIR LEVEL.

Posted by: ALL EYES WIDE SHUT | September 11, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Obama laughs at everything when he's wrong or confronted.
It must be a nervous habit.
Very unpresidential.
He is totally embarrassing.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

.


Obama has no economic or business experience except for buying cocaine........


.

Posted by: The Truth | September 11, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Obama got the exact reation he wanted from the McCain camp when he used the lipstick and old fish terms. He knew McCain would come after him just as he did and Obama would just say those republicans are back to their old ways which he did. So come on people wise up a little.

Posted by: Ray | September 11, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

What does my tattoo say? Dude!
What does my tattoo say? Sweet!
What does my tattoo say? Dude!
What does my tattoo say? Sweet!

Dude...that back and forth was more intelligent than your rant. Way to go!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Please! Please! Please!  Sarah Palin started all this and she set herself up for ridicule when she first compared herself to an animal, more specifically, a vicious Pit Bull (a breed now regulated in many jurisdictions).  How conceited!!! If everyone says you are a SuperStar, then indeed you are a SuperStar.  If you have to declare yourself to be a SuperStar (or in this case a Pit Bull), then you are just too full of yourself for my taste and the taste of many other Americans.  People who have values like those of Sarah Palin terrify me and I tend to avoid them at all cost.  We need to entrust leaders with humility (and great intelligence) to run our country.  If Sarah Palin actually thinks she is a Pit Bull with lipstick, how will she engage in dipolmacy?  Like a Pit Bull?  How will she be capable of compromise, one of the basic premises of our society?  Certainly, Pit Bulls have no reputation for making compromises.Beyond all this, I also have concerns that the harsh Republican reaction to Obama's "lipstick on a pig" comment has been orchestrated to give Republicans everywhere a "reason / justification" to retaliate and begin playing the "race" card now that the "gender" card has been put into play in this campaign.

Posted by: ManintheMiddle | September 11, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Sen. John McCain pick his VP, a gun-toting beauty queen Sarah Pelin. While she lacks experience, but she has a string of real accomplishments to show for her self.

This beauty queen, when it comes to change a beauty queen Sarah Pelin has done it as mayor of Alaska, which Sen. Obama has been missing in action. Majority of men and women are now shifting their vote for McCain/Palin.

Poor Barack Obama he can see that this election is slipping away from his hand.

BEAUTY IS ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL WEAPONS IN AMERICAN POLITICS.!!!

Posted by: AKBER A. KASSAM. | September 11, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Arizona Republic Forgets About McCain's "Volcanic Temper": http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/02/7072_arizona_republi.html


John McCain's Temper Preceded Vietnam: http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/8/30/123006.shtml

I love it when Chris pretends that he has the ear of the campaigns.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

J. Costa sayeth, "What a Stupid commentary by the Washington Post. Why don't you publish something useful like What each candidate proposes in a line item breakdown format including voting records and who each has as lobbyists on their political teams. Americans might have a chance of piecing together a better picture of the choices rather than being presented a bunch of useless drivel!"

That would require that WaPo journalists actually do real work. Why work when you can write frivolous stuff and pass it off as a good story and journalism?

Posted by: the_dude | September 11, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

I appreciate Obama being adult and professional enough not enter the muddy and murky waters of his opponents pond. Obama has the right to be angry because his opponents are spreading outright lie that have been debunked on every major news network, yet, their message continues to be steady and just as crooked.

The double standards and hypocrisy of the Republican party and the public has my heading spinning. I only hope that one day (it won't be in my life time though) that people learn to think for themselves and not blindly follow the masses. When people will learn to face the truth and shame the devil. When lies will be called lies and truth will set you free.

Either way this race ends, I only pray that GOD has favor and allow us to correct our past mistakes.

Posted by: Yolanda | September 11, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Chris Johnson sayeth, "You dont have to look any further than these posts to see negativity and nastiness. No wonder American politics are disappointing, Americans are disappointing."

That is because America is full of racists, white-supremacists, and Black-man hating women. The majority of this group are Republican, and with remaining make up the right wing extremist groups. It is these same people that question Rev. Wright's patriotism (despite the fact the the Wright was a marine and fought for the US). It is these same people that barely graduated high school and have limited mental ability (as evidenced by their postings here on this very board), that disparage the intelligence of a top graduate of Harvard Law school. It is these very same bigoted people, who constantly bring up Obama's middle name; as if his middle name is an inditement of his character. This is the same rabble that suggests that to be a Muslim is to disqualify one from ever being a President of the United States. Had these people any shame and morals, they would desist and repent for their reprehensible behavior.

Posted by: the_Dude | September 11, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse

And the other reasons this country is going down the tubes is that Ted Kennedy got away with murder, and Bill Clinton got away with perjury.

Posted by: M.S. | September 11, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Chris, actually, as a matter of fact, I AM better off than I was eight years ago. Thanks for asking.

Posted by: Stick | September 11, 2008 3:21 PM
-------------------------------------------
So you're still attending Sheep Buggarers Anonymous meetings, eh Stick?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

If you really believe what you just wrote you should sign your own name instead of someone else's. I would never write something like that so get your own name. You're the reason this country is in the shape it's in. This country was founded on religious freedom and people like you need to learn how to respect that!

Posted by: M.S. | September 11, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

And the only way for us all to come together is to accept JESUS CHRIST as our one, true savior, and accept the Bible as God's LITERAL word.

DEATH TO ALL MUSLIMS!

Posted by: M.S. | September 11, 2008 3:55 PM | Report abuse

OF COURSE IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT OBAMA DOES OR HOW HE ACTS ANYWAYS.

He's sunk way low in the polls. He's hitting his lowest numbers of the Summer. If he drops any lower, he'll be testing the lows from back in April. His current RCP average is 45.2, which less than half a point away from being higher than his lowest Summer number of 44.8, that he hit after picking Joe Biden and before Hillary Clinton's convention speech.

Obama can add Hillary Clinton back to his ticket, and the two of them still can't beat McCain-Palin.

Obama's fundamentals as a candidate are broken, as the "lipstick on a pig" smear, uttered in the midst of some personal meltdown he seems to be undergoing, attested. He can wear wigs and perform "Jesus Christ Superstar" on the stump, as far as any impact his behavior today can have on his future.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Lord knows that Joe Biden has better judgment than me. He actually has thought about the situation in Iraq. me? I just let Karl Rove bump me on the knee and let the reflexes take over.

Posted by: BruceMcDougall | September 11, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

I think it's interesting all the moral attacks on the Republican Party. May I remind all of you arrogant Democrats that your party is not without immorality. Let's look at the Kennedys, one of them killed a young girl but how quickly that's forgotten. People who live in glasshouses should not throw stones. This country has many issues and until we come together nothing will be solved.

Posted by: M.S. | September 11, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

And the unspoken reason that the Swift Boat vets spoke out against John Kerry is that John Kerry would not permit us to have anal sex. We don't forget and we don't forgive.

Posted by: BruceMcDougall | September 11, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Bill,

You should consider going into the polling business! Seriously!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Requiem for a Lightweight

There once was a boxer named Gentleman Jim
So tall, so elegant, well spoken and slim
Only fights cleanly for that's how he wins
No matter how others may taunt and may jinn

Now Gentleman Jim was no ill tempered man
He followed his conscience he followed a plan
But when rough edged opponents evened the score
The gentleman's fans screamed blood, more, more, more

So he clawed and he scratched and flailed and spit bile
While his fans cheered for more and more blood all the while
And after he lost he could hear no crowd's roar
For Gentleman Jim existed no more

Posted by: Michaelangelonio | September 11, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Sen. Obama picked Sen. Biden as his running mate because he's thought to have good judgement and also to add gravitas to a very weak experience portfolio.

Some examples of Bidens judgement:

During the primaries Biden said that Obama wasn't ready for the presidency and that the presidency wasn't for "on-the-job training".

In New Hampshire, on Wednesday, Biden questioned the judgement of Obama's first important decision as the nominee-selecting a running mate.

"Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president..and quite frankly might have been a bette pick than me."

Biden really does have judgement.

Posted by: BruceMcDougall | September 11, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Man, I guess I know what blog all the freakin crazy people read. Left or right, these comments are hillarious. F'ing nutters. I'm glad none of you are running. It's America, it's ok for people to have a different opinion than you. Get over yourselves.

Posted by: average joe | September 11, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

What a Stupid commentary by the Washington Post. Why don't you publish something useful like What each candidate proposes in a line item breakdown format including voting records and who each has as lobbyists on their political teams. Americans might have a chance of piecing together a better picture of the choices rather than being presented a bunch of useless drivel!

Posted by: J. Costa | September 11, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

In its context, Obama's "lipstick" comment is ambiguous. If you believe having a woman on the ticket as VP is "change," then the comment was arguably directed at her. If you don't believe a woman on the ticket is change, then it is is much-ado about nothing.

The sad truth is that describing something as "lipstick on a pig" does absolutely nothing to advance a debate on the issues. Ad hominim attacks on ideas are still ad hominim attacks . . . but then logic, reason, and issues left American politics a while back.

That is something I don't see changing.

Posted by: Carnack (the Cynic) | September 11, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

I randomly select fellow employees at work to poll them on their reactions to events.

Some interesting observations:

McCain is perceived as following Rove tactics (volunteered response of 6)

Men do not false sexism claims (1 person is considering Obama and is Christian right)

The economy is foremost; but Obama's tax message is not getting through.

McCains sex education message raised awareness sex education but some women raised the Palin abstinance issue instead.

I would encourage all of you to sample around work and get some impressions from neighbors. You will get a better picture than is in this comment section. And, it might be surprising....people whom I know are very conservative are actually getting mad at this behaviour.

Posted by: Bill | September 11, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

What a "reach" for an article. Why not ask whether Obama wears boxers or briefs? High gas prices, people without health insurance, corporate give-aways, and much more for AMERICANS to be angry about. The media reports on the race as though they were reporters for a junior high school newspaper - "guess who is hanging out at so and so's locker". Give me a break. Do your job.

Posted by: CNye | September 11, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Thack please visit any installation game and wildlife coordinator at any Army installation (under the director of MWR - morale welfare and recreation) and ask them how many registered hunters they have.
Obama was right. We too cling to our guns and religion. Two tours in Baghdad (know where Route Vernon is brother?). Call me a fake combat Soldier reveals your ignorance.

Posted by: the entire midwest | September 11, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

According to the media, he's not angry enough, he's too angry, he's too low key, and he's too strident. Hooey.

Posted by: Helena Montana | September 11, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Obama really needs to be careful not to lose what voters find most attractive about him -- his professorial image. Eureka! What malarky.

He earned his professorial reputation exactly because of how he handles his emotions.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

By the way, where is the Black Queen to be?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Obama's reaction to complaints that he shouldn't call Sarah Palin a pig was to call the citicism "Swift Boat attacks".
The "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" served with John Kerry and knew the truth about him. They told America, and America believed what they said. When Kerry visited Iraq recently and walked into a room full of soldiers all he got was a wall of silence because they also knew John Kerry.
The idea that the Swift Boat veterans told anything but the truth is strictly a notion of that inner circle of radical Democrats who talk only to each other and have no idea what real Americans think or how they live.
Someday, real Democrats might just take the party of FDR and JFK back.

Posted by: BruceMcDougall | September 11, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Actually, I think that Obama should get very, very angry. I think that he should stop channeling JFK, Reagan and MLK, and he should start channeling Keith Olbermann.

He could take female hormone tablets to simulate those 13-year-old-experiencing-PMS-for-the-first-time wounded, pouty screeds that Olbermann delivers so bombastically.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

in his Inferno, Dante reserves a very deep pit in Hell for certain kids of journalists, and fits them with trumpets in their a**holes.

Posted by: kloro | September 11, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

More McDougal stomach acid:
"...[Obama} was angry with the reforming mavericks McCain and Palin."

AHhahahahahaha. Whew. Good one. "Reforming mavericks"? Do you people just lie to your image in the mirror?

McCain has changed his views from moderate to far right wing and for religious terrorists like James Dobson *just to please the Repub right*. No guts, no glory.

McCain would continue the war, continue turning off the Constitution, continue funding large corporations with tax breaks on the middle class' backs. He would continue, endlessly, the war in Iraq, while refusing, unlike Barack Obama, to send troops to Afghanistan to get the actual target of the 0-11 attack: Osama bin Laden, the man Bush and Cheney either have been unable to capture, or as it's seeming more likely, Bush and the bin Laden family were in cahoots for this whole thing.

Maverick reformers, my butt. McCain is the biggest wuss to run for president in years. He has no identity. He picked a piece of pig crap as a running mate, totally disregarding over half the country.

Dream on.

Posted by: SteveCO | September 11, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Not true that Obama is against women, sometimes he acts like one of them

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

It's amazing to me how the media is critizing Obama for remaining a gentleman and sticking to the issues. It makes me think that people want to see "an angry black man."

What the media should focus on is the outright lies that the McCain campaign is putting out. If the media would do their job and report "just the facts" Obama would not have to resort to "...exclamation points; getting angry, feel a sense of urgency, etc.".

Posted by: Gentleman | September 11, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

The republicans lie, cheat, go to jail and say one thing while doing another.

Everyone should be angry with them, but instead we get phonies saying they are soldiers who can't wait to get home and kill some deer.

Combat soldiers usually take a long time to enter with woods with rifles as civilians after facing close combat.

Posted by: Thack | September 11, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

I'm angry. I camp. I drive a pickup truck. I ride my bike to work. I believe in hardwork. I will eat anything put in front of me. Don't waste. I love wide open spaces! I'll throw back some drinks at a cocktail party. I think hunting is more honorable than buying meat from a store. I believe the American story is one of the best in history. I'm angry at the left for thinking that rightys are narrow-minded. I'm angry at the right for thinking leftys are sheltered and unpatriotic. I'm angry at GWB for lying to us about Iraq. I will be angry if McCain is elected. GOBAMA!!!

Posted by: Dan | September 11, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Bruce McGougal spits up on himself:
"It was bad enough that Obama called Sarah Palin a pig."

He never called her a pig, you stupid reactionary liar. But she is a bag of crap: an anti-science creationist with a penchant for oil companies - just like her running mate and the ticket's parents, Bush and Cheney. Just what we don't need, another set of religiously-deluded, Constitution-hating war mongering oil company lovers - McCain and Palin.

Posted by: SteveCO | September 11, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

It was bad enough that Obama called Sarah Palin a pig. Perhaps even worse was his reaction to the outcry over him talking about a woman in that way. He really had an angry little fit attack.
Lost in all the turmoil about Obama calling Sarah Palin a pig was his disgusting Monday quote in which he described John McCain as an old, rotten and stinking fish.
"You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called 'change' it's still gonna stink after eight years."
--Sen. Obama, speaking Monday, angry with the reforming mavericks McCain and Palin.

According to the London Times, even some Democrats are asking in private why Obama made the remark about the liptick on the pig so soon after the Sarah Palin comment about lipstick being the only difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull.
Obama's not used to having the spotlight on someone else-Sarah Palin-or being criticized. He's been sheltered by an American media who never ask him a probing question and have yet to investigate his connections with the corrupt Rezco and the terrorist Bill Ayers.

Posted by: BruceMcDougall | September 11, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Chris. Sometimes its seems like you are really reachin' for something to write about.

McCain has not shown anger on this campaign trail, he has invoked fear. These are two very different things. It was the idea of fear and his experience vs. Obama's hope and change. People are not turned off by McCains anger, they are turned off by his lame speeches.

Most people have not witnessed McCain's anger outside his family, the press, and Washington folks. It is an idea that has been reported to the public, but not witnessed very often.

And to characterize how Obama responded yesterday as angry is really lame. Some people would call Obama's tone "Straight Talk".

But the sad thing is that people are concerned about the "angry black man" thing and many in the press have just come out and said it. You should as well.

Posted by: Billy Pilgrim | September 11, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Where have you gone Barry Goldwater?

What happened the party where fiscal responsibility was not tied to dictatorship of religion and personal freedom?

The remnants of the GOP machine as two-faced and hippocritical as can be.

If it took Sarah Palin to energize you, what does that say about Senator McCain? Perhaps he IS too socially liberal for your tastes and the ticket should be Palin-McCain? Do you honestly want to envision Governor Palin as POTUS, given only 2 years in an office of any significance?

The election is about McCain vs. Obama, you say. Not Sarah Palin. Leave the poor woman alone. Fine, then let's quit spending all your time victimizing her and let's get back to the real issues. Interational leadership and the economy.

George Bush will probably go down as one of the worst Presidents in modern history. And McCain voted to support him 90% of the time.

I rest my case.

Posted by: Daddy-00 | September 11, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Barack won't have an easy time finding a demeanor/response to these pitiful swiftboat-type attacks because the McSame campaign is ready to label him as either "passive" or "aggressive". This is, after all, nothing more than the flip side of that unworthy swiftboat strategy.

But he knows very well the dilemma he's facing, and is actually calibrating his responses very effectively.

I personally would love to see him put a bit more fire into them, but that's just because I'm f-ing fed up with the GOP gameplaying and pilau politics (Hawaiian pidgin -- look it up!)

But if not him, then let his surrogates rip McSame a new one. Apropos of which, I'm sure Biden is well aware that he, too, will have to be careful during the Palin debate. He's no dummy; he'll roast her like a turkey on a spit, but will do it with facts rather than fury.

I'm delighted that the Dems have taken the leash off their 527s. I wish we could have had a clean, issues-oriented campaign, but since it's taken this ugly turn, it's time for every Dem but Obama to let 'em have it with both barrels!

Posted by: laboo | September 11, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

The Fix is in...for the Repubs.

What a stupid article. If anyone at all has a negative, angry personna to deal with, it's John McCain, disliked by most of his Senate colleagues for that very reason, a mercurial and rather brainless temper.

McCain is the one to worry. No one knows him well enough yet, or that anti-science religious extremist he chose for V.P.

Time for a debate. End of McCain. *That*, I predict, is when everyone will get to see ol' red-faced John blowing up on live TV.

Posted by: SteveCO | September 11, 2008 3:27 PM | Report abuse

It was bad enough that Obama called Sarah Palin a pig. Perhaps even worse was his reaction to the outcry over him talking about a woman like in that way. He really had a little angry fit attack.
Lost in all the turmoil about Obama calling Sarh Palin a pig was his disgusting Monday quote in which he described John McCain as an old, rotten and stinking fish.
"You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called 'change' it's still gonna stink after eight years."
--Sen. Obama, speaking Monday, angry at the reforming mavericks McCain/Palin.

According to the London Times, even some Democrats are asking in private why Obama made the remark about the liptick on the pig so soon after the Sarah Palin comment about lipstick being the only difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull.
Obama's not used to being criticized. He's been sheltered by an American media who never ask him a probing question and have yet to investigate his connections with the corrupt Rezco and the terrorist Bill Ayers.

Posted by: BruceMcDougall | September 11, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Sadly enough, there is only one big reason that Obama can't get too emotional, let alone angry: He's a black man. If he even scowled one half of a Popeye McCain scowl, it would mean game, set, match to the Republicans.

Posted by: Oakland Stroke | September 11, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Obama should be himself. Obama should not follow Keith Olbermann's advice. Even though I watch Keith's show, being demoted from Presidential Campaign Election anchor for MSNBC is telling about Keith and Chris Matthews.

Obama should be showing more "OUTRAGE" than "ANGER", but keep his cool demeanor. Being seen as ANGRY would fit right into the GOP's plan to portray Obama as the ANGRY BLACK MAN to scare white voters.

Obama is doing okay. It is the poll watchers who are up in arms. As long as Obama is running a strong ground support game to register voters and get volunteers involved, this the McCain archilles heel.

Posted by: Obama-Junkie | September 11, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Getting angry is fine. Not getting angry killed Kerry when he was being Swiftboated by the gop scum machine.

Posted by: Christopher | September 11, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Chris, actually, as a matter of fact, I AM better off than I was eight years ago. Thanks for asking.

Posted by: Stick | September 11, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Damn if you do, Dam if you don't. One of your writers wrote on Monday that his TV FROZE as Obama was so cool in hid Sunday interview in ABC. PLEASE MARK RIGHT-WING MEDIA ON THE SIDE OF EVERY COMMENT YOU MAKE!!!!

Posted by: Guy From LA | September 11, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

I watched the bbc clips that icwise (or whatever name he used (that's an abusive mother naming their kid like that)) refered to in an earlier post. The truth is that you can always find some soldiers that don't belong, and those soldiers may not, but there are some great soldiers over there that know that they are doing great things ever since the strategy changed and they are working with the people. They report exactly opposite experiences and are ready to continue. To base your understanding of the situation on a few video clips proves that you really don't have any idea what you're talking about.

Posted by: John | September 11, 2008 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Senator Obama will do what is necessary to show how ruthless, shameful, corrupt, wicked, evil, and hateful McCain and Palin and the republicans are in our government. McCain is the one who has been in the government for 26 years. He is Oldddddddddd, and he is not up to the challenges facing America. Hate and evil come from the republican party. They like to win by hoodwinking the gullible and the lamebrained. Senator Obama will not worry about them. Senator Obama will be supported 100% by the ones who know that he is the best leader, the smartest, most honest, and the most decent. McCain and Palin are two right wing hate/war mongers who are not qualified to be in office.

Posted by: Vicki | September 11, 2008 3:20 PM | Report abuse

But I do agree with The Truth on that castration thing.

Sorry that was Bob who posted that.

Posted by: Bob | September 11, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Rovian neocons and neochristian theocrats would love to see Obama roll over like a complacent cocker spaniel to their lies and smears like Kerry did.

Not this time. No more years.

Posted by: Roy | September 11, 2008 3:17 PM | Report abuse

But I do agree with The Truth on that castration thing.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Obama should get mad as hell at a party and a candidate bereft of ideas, principle and ability to tell the public the truth. Mad that they've turned the campaign away from the issues into a skit from MAD TV. McCain, that LYING, DECEIVING, DISHONORABLE, NO CHANGE, Washington boar- minus lipstick is a disgrace! But he is only part of the problem...the biggest part of the problem are the stupid, ignorant people who buy into the fraud perpetrated on them like they did with Bush.

Posted by: str8up | September 11, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

You media types are something. All we've heard is does Obama have the guts to stand up or is he too weak. So, he stands up and what happens. You media types jump on him for being angry.
Have you listened to McCain talk? Has there ever been an angrier candidate? Even his controlled, low voice is masking a boat load of anger. I for one am proud that Obama called McCain out on his nasty, despicable campaign tactics. The man stood up in Norfolk and said "Enough!" Enough of the swift boat tactics. Go Obama. Rub the old man's nose in his own manure.

Posted by: Disgusted | September 11, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Obama please do not be lured into assuming the posture of being an angry Black man. Continue with your peaceful demeanor. Your surrogates are gnarling and anxious to bite.

JUST UNLEASH THE HOUNDS!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

ANGRY
I tell you what angry is. Angry is all of you unemployed folk who would rather back Mc Cain/Palin on a platform that only benefits income levels of 250k or more instead of a candidate named Obama for progressive change. Late on the evening of November 5th 2008 if your candidate wins and you realize that your life is none the better for it, you will understand ANGRY.

Posted by: JB Parker1 | September 11, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Two thoughts: I Like Obama, but I don't like his "Americans aren't stupid" line. Better to say, "Americans deserve better." Also, the more he can do to focus the discussion on issues, and not responding to smears, the better off he and we will be.

Posted by: Montana Voter | September 11, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

I have so far served two tours in Iraq (total of 27 months) and I am prepared to return. We are winning and it is worth it. Do not dishonor those who have served if you have not sir. you offend me and the memory of my fallen comrades.
Maybe I'm clinging to my guns and religion. But I think 4 November you will find there are infinately more of us than you think there are. Enjoy your effete cocktail parties. I'll be hunting bucks.

Posted by: the entire midwest | September 11, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

I don't think I have ever seen a blog follow the story line.

Posted by: Bob | September 11, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

The more Obama and the Democrats spend all their energy trying to tear down a Woman VP, the more people forget about Bush and the economy. It just seems that this election is between Obama and Palin now. Issues that matter to the voters are not discussed. This pulls the voters to go to McCain since he seems like the stable person compared to Obama and the running scared Democrats. The Palin pick has proved too good to be true to the Republicans, even in the generic congressional poll, the Republicans are looking good and are now talking about gaining seats in the house.

Posted by: cbk16 | September 11, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA'S TOO MUCH OF A PRIDEFUL JERK TO CARRY ANGER ATTRACTIVELY

One of the problems with Obama shifting to being louder, more forceful and more angry is that it doesn't wear well on him personally. Anger and force is only attractive when projected by someone who is well-grounded. It tends to be disagreeable coming from effete, spoiled and narcissistic elitists.

Obama has too much pride and condescension to be an attractive "angry man" politician. He's the classic liberal Democratic wimp in that anger from him sounds disoriented and shrill due to his lack of personal grounding.

It's the humble men who wear anger best and Obama is an arrogant narcissist. That's why he has trouble being forceful.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 3:08 PM | Report abuse

Check this video out and see how these soldiers truly feel about serving in Iraq. They're on the front line. They know the truth.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/7610237.stm

Posted by: lcwisme | September 11, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7610405.stm

"No victory in Iraq, says Petraeus"

This should put an end once and for all to the McSame/Palin claim that the surge was a "success". In this Article, Gen. Petraeus states: "that recent security gains were "not irreversible" and that the US still faced a "long struggle". General Petraeus also said "the trends in Afghanistan have not gone in the right direction... and that has to be addressed". Finally, General Petraeus "said he did not know that he would ever use the word "victory": "This is not the sort of struggle where you take a hill, plant the flag and go home to a victory parade... it's not war with a simple slogan." Well, that military know-it-all, Johnny McSame, has a lot of explaining to do to the American people. If he can't tell the difference between "victory" and something less, than he is definitely not qualified to be Commander-in-Chief. Obama/Biden 08!!!

Posted by: caliguy55 | September 11, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

help us we are clinging to our guns and religion. Someone educated at a cocktail party please enlightun us? Whitetail season opens in a few weeks by the way!

Posted by: the entire midwest | September 11, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

"Given that, Obama must tread very carefully over the remaining weeks of the campaign. Passion and emotion are good things in politics; anger and frustration are not."

Have you given thought to writing text books somewhere?
Ummm...something that doesn't involve giving your opinion...

Posted by: jatox | September 11, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Cizzle, me thinks you are too young to remember Ronald Reagan's outbursts. He wished botchilism on food recepients as a result of the SLA Patti Hurst fiasco. He said in his rehearsed anger "I paid for this microphone" in New Hampshire--the incident being a well planned set up. In any event, Obama is more indignant and disgusted as most of us are with the media and with the caddy petty childish back biting and cheap shot antics of the Republicans that the press cannot resist spending so much time on. Ten billion dollars a month of debt the Republicans are cowardly passing on to whomever has the guts to face fiscal responsibility and lipstick on a pig is all the rage--no matter the phony outrage and the obvious hypocrisy. You and your colleagues would serve the country well by helping us voters learn not only what is true but what is true but misleading. It requires effort and courage. You got it?

Posted by: The Gipper Got Mad | September 11, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

As The Fix has pointed out: it is a fine line. For a while, Obama was looking close to comatose. Professionalism is good; wondering if you are an automaton is bad. Voters are repelled by dark, brooding, angry candidates (see Dole, 1996 election, McCain when he is losing.) However, they don't like pansies who won't fight. As long as Obama points out the other side's hypocrisy and can tie them to the 'divisive politics of the past' with a smile and a I'm fighting for you attitude he will do fine.

Posted by: muD | September 11, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

WHAT IS THE REAL DEAL?
While I am almost willing to accept the honest, though empty headed angry responses of a portion of the american uninformed, ignorant-as-pocket-lint public; what is it with you so called college educated members of the press? Could it be that you too were bamboozled into thinking that the "lipstick" fiasco should actually be given publication space, while you allowed your selves to be bowled over by the transparent Republican selection of a person, so absolutely underqualified, who at any other time would have been laughed back to Alaska. Have you truly lost the capacity to notice that you are being pimped? Or are you fully aware of the fraud that is being perpetuated and are wlling to continue pretending not to notice because of some more nefarious reason...? Where is your outrage concerning the ono-vetted selection of this disgusting woman whom the Republicans continue to cloister?
Maybe you are deserving of the contempt that the Republicans have for you.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Ok charlie gibson, your credibility is already shot so here is what I would do in your place. And by the way you're not going to do anything tonight but make the rest of the press mad because of your fluff, your favoritism and your selling out for high ratings, so just let me help you.

Question for you Mrs. Palin.

Is it true that your EXPERIENCE as Mayor of Wasilla left a town of about 5,400 in 20 MILLION DOLLARS worth of debt? I have another question base on this EXPERIENCE how will you handle America's budget?
Hmmm. Question for you Mrs. Palin. By the way I know about the term pitbull with lipstick but have you ever heard of the term FOOL'S GOLD? Well anyway,
There is a video Mrs Palin that FINALLY have been shown on tv of you in church on stage talking about our troops in Iraq, and I quote “Pray that our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God,” Mrs. Palin what you're saying to Christians and to those who don't understand church lingo is that our national leaders, Pres. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and others are anointed by God to carry out a Holy War? The world knows that the Iraq war was base on lies for the last few years. This video was shot in June. Ms. Palin, when was the last time you were in touch with the nation or for that matter, with God? I have another question Mrs Palin. Do you believe that God told them (the national leaders) that there were weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, because, they did say that this is why we're going to war. What's your answer on this? Also, Mrs Palin do they have Librarian Week in Alaska? Everybody loves their librarian. But you have the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LIBRARIANS trying to burn down the governor's mansion. Could you please shed some "light" on why you fired the local librarian and then had to rehire her? Another question for you please.
The words Family Values, Honor, Character and Integrity are being thrown around alot. We know of McCain's POW experience and his adulterous relationships. Now the NATIONAL ENQUIRE is reporting that you Mrs. Palin had an adulterous relationship
yourself. Is it true MRS. Palin and when are you going to sue the National Enquire and force them to reveal their sources if its not true?
On the subject of experience. Actually, I'm a little ahead of myself. I should have asked this first. Please tell us Mrs. Palin,
why did you attend 5 colleges in six years? Oh you don't remember? Let me name them for you. Hawaii Pacific University to North Idaho College to the University of Idaho to Matanuska-Susitna College then back to University of Idaho. Does this speak to your Foreign Policy experience as well?
Alright thank you Mrs. Palin. We've run out of time for tonight. We should have passed on the tour of the house and the introduction of your family and your son's leaving for Iraq ceremony but we'll have more time tommorrow. And that it folks, the vetting of Sarah Palin continues but before we go we would like to thank our sponsor,... None other than Mr. Rick Davis

Posted by: FOOL'S GOLD INTERVIEW | September 11, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

How many ways can you people try to disarm Barack Obama? Everything that happens is good news for the Republican. Every time Democrats fight the smears they are angry. Do your job and report the facts and quit trying to pretend you know the minds of ordinary people.

Posted by: Kent Hancock | September 11, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Clearly as the race tightens and the voting deadline nears Obama is starting to go to pieces. He needs to use all of the vast experience he has gained, oh, hold on - never mind. That's right he has ZERO experience, ZERO.

Joe Biden was the greatest thing to happen to this entire election campaign. Everyone knows within 2-minutes of debating Palin, Biden's true sexist narrow minded ridiculous points of view will blurt out.

Bring back Bill and the Interns.

Posted by: Hillary C. | September 11, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

More made up stuff from the Wash Po. Obama was not angry. What is that about? He was just being strong in refuting a lie. I swear. The Wash PO is so Republican. Cutting on everything Obama does. It won't work except with those determined to have snide Palin and mumbling McCain in the White House. Obama is strong and effective and just because this columnist is trying to destroy Obama, well people don't hear it the same unless they are on the other side.

Posted by: al | September 11, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

we're all still voting for mccain/palin and we like president bush. stick that in your ivy league and private school education pipes and have a good smoke!

Posted by: the entire midwest | September 11, 2008 3:00 PM | Report abuse

What sensibilities do voters have?

Either Obama takes the high road against the Republican fabrication team and is labelled "soft" or he takes them on directly and is the "angry" black man.

I think the republicans are playing to the 'base' insticts of American racism. A black man has to move mountains to prove he's capable of a job, where a white woman is presumed not just capable but inherently qualified unless proven otherwise. Absolutely disgusting.

I have now learned that baccaleureate degree at a third rate college (earned over six years) and serving the mayor of a homogenous small town are just as important as achieving academic excellence at the best universities in the United States and serving in the US Senate when the person achieving the former is white and the latter is black.

Who knew?

Posted by: Emily | September 11, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin's campaign jet is an Embraer 190, built in Brazil. They can wear all the flag pins they want, but when it comes to choosing a product, they outsourced the jobs overseas.

Might seem trivial to you, but it doesn't play well in Seattle or Wichita.

Buy American. Fly American. The job you save may be your own.

Posted by: Prattle in Seattle | September 11, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

This is one of the most racist piece I've seen a reporter write during this entire campaign. It's okay for McCain to be angry but when Obama gets angry oh be carefully boy, the white folks won't like it. You're a disgrace to the Post Chris Calizza.

Posted by: Derek | September 11, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

You people are so cynical. Not all of you but some of you to a degree. Most of the anit-Obamas on this post seem to always want to look for any thread of his to pull on.

Why is it that we do not look at Old McLame in such a way? Everyone knows he only picked the brut because he thinks this is the only way to win the White House. He is a piece of shyt! I can't stand the sight of this nor can I stomach hearing him give a speech with that raspy old voice of his. He ought to just give it up. he isn't about anything but selling his soul to try and get the presidency.

He had nothing valuable to say other than I'm a war hero that crashed and sold out the other American troops on the ground. Yeah he did it.

Not an officer just an old dog trying to learn new tricks to pull over on the American people!

Posted by: Mystikal1 | September 11, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

Really? The Republicans provoke Obama to make statements defending himself and this is considered unflattering "anger"? If he says nothing will you be calling him a wimp? The media is creating too much of the tone of this election. It's such a disservice.

Posted by: Kevin | September 11, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Let Obama run as an underdog. After all, a black man running for President is an underdog. And a progressive party, in our dumbed down country, is an underdog. People can then spend the next six weeks contemplating the next four years under senile, right-wing nut. We'll see what happens.

Posted by: mnjam | September 11, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Ok charlie gibson, your credibility is already shot so here is what I would do in your place. And by the way you're not going to do anything tonight but make the rest of the press mad because of your fluff, your favoritism and your selling out for high ratings, so just let me help you.

Question for you Mrs. Palin.

Is it true that your EXPERIENCE as Mayor of Wasilla left a town of about 5,400 in 20 MILLION DOLLARS worth of debt? I have another question base on this EXPERIENCE how will you handle America's budget?
Hmmm. Question for you Mrs. Palin. By the way I know about the term pitbull with lipstick but have you ever heard of the term FOOL'S GOLD? Well anyway,
There is a video Mrs Palin that FINALLY have been shown on tv of you in church on stage talking about our troops in Iraq, and I quote “Pray that our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God,” Mrs. Palin what you're saying to Christians and to those who don't understand church lingo is that our national leaders, Pres. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and others are anointed by God to carry out a Holy War? The world knows that the Iraq war was base on lies for the last few years. This video was shot in June. Ms. Palin, when was the last time you were in touch with the nation or for that matter, with God? I have another question Mrs Palin. Do you believe that God told them (the national leaders) that there were weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, because, they did say that this is why we're going to war. What's your answer on this? Also, Mrs Palin do they have Librarian Week in Alaska? Everybody loves their librarian. But you have the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LIBRARIANS trying to burn down the governor's mansion. Could you please shed some "light" on why you fired the local librarian and then had to rehire her? Another question for you please.
The words Family Values, Honor, Character and Integrity are being thrown around alot. We know of McCain's POW experience and his adulterous relationships. Now the NATIONAL ENQUIRE is reporting that you Mrs. Palin had an adulterous relationship
yourself. Is it true MRS. Palin and when are you going to sue the National Enquire and force them to reveal their sources if its not true?
On the subject of experience. Actually, I'm a little ahead of myself. I should have asked this first. Please tell us Mrs. Palin,
why did you attend 5 colleges in six years? Oh you don't remember? Let me name them for you. Hawaii Pacific University to North Idaho College to the University of Idaho to Matanuska-Susitna College then back to University of Idaho. Does this speak to your Foreign Policy experience as well?
Alright thank you Mrs. Palin. We've run out of time for tonight. We should have passed on the tour of the house and the introduction of your family and your son's leaving for Iraq ceremony but we'll have more time tommorrow. And that it folks, the vetting of Sarah Palin continues but before we go we would like to thank our sponsor,... None other than Mr. Rick Davis

Posted by: FOOL'S GOLD INTERVIEW | September 11, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

WHERE ARE THE FRONT PAGE ARTICLES DISCUSSING WHETHER JOE BIDEN, A FATHER WITH A BELLIGERENT BARFLY INCIDENT DAUGHTER, SHOULD BE A HEARTBEAT AWAY?

From the Tribune, Aug. 4, 2002:

The daughter of Democratic Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware was arrested early Saturday morning in Chicago after two people she was with allegedly attacked a police officer.

Ashley Biden, 21, was in the West Division Street nightlife district about 1:15 a.m. when a friend, John Kaulentis, 24, of Deerfield, threw a soft-drink can at a police officer who had told him to stay behind a barricade set up to keep clubgoers off the street, said police spokesman Thomas Donegan.When the officer tried to take Kaulentis into custody, Kelly Donohoe, 21, of Lake Forest, allegedly jumped on the officer's back, striking him in the mouth with her fist, Donegan said.

When a second officer approached to assist, Biden "verbally intimidated him" and was also arrested, Donegan said. Biden, a student at Tulane University in New Orleans, was charged with obstructing a police officer. She was in Chicago visiting family.

Kaulentis was charged with battery and resisting an officer, and Donohoe was charged with battery and obstructing and resisting a police officer. All three were released on their own recognizance.


And from the Tribune, Oct. 30, 2002:

The daughter of a U.S. senator and two of her friends were cleared Tuesday of criminal charges stemming from a fracas with Chicago police after they apologized to the officers.

Obstruction charges were dropped against Ashley Biden, 21, a college student in New Orleans and the daughter of Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.), officials said. Battery charges were dropped against John Kaulentis, 24, of Deerfield, and Kelly Donohoe, 21, of Lake Forest, according to the Cook County state's attorney's office.The three were arrested after an August incident outside a nightclub on West Division Street. Jerry Lawrence, a spokesman for the state's attorney's office, said the case was dropped in exchange for a public apology in Misdemeanor Court.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/biden_palin_gop_arrest.html

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse


and I quote...

"Is this an indication that Obama is made as hell and isn't going to take it anymore?
It's hard to tell, primarily because anger and the campaign trail usually don't mix...'

Ah, what?

The rest of this Cilliza masterpiece is as stupid at that sentence.

Does no one edit this garbage, or even look it over?

Posted by: editor | September 11, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

Well, "beth,"

The first thing I noticed about Obama is his ability to surround himself with competent people who know what they're doing. His campaign is entirely self-funded by small donations from every day people. You don't do that by just throwing up a website and waiting for the money to come in.

So he's willing to use good people and use technology (the web) in a way that works and gets results.

He comes across to me as a center-leaning Democrat. The government cannot do everything--nor should it, but it can offer incentives to business, individuals and faith organizations to address problems. I think that's where he's coming from. That's what I hear when he speaks. No free ride from the government, but maybe just borrow that small stepstool to get enough of a boost to get going.

The future of energy and where and how we'll get it is something I trust the Democrats more on. The Republicans seem to have one answer and it's one that keeps getting us into mischief--"oil." With Governor Palin coming from an oil state, I see more of the same lack of an energy policy.

Education is another area I think the Dems do me better by. I'm about to embark on 2 kids going into college. I am still suffering from sticker shock. How do people pay for it? His service program, where you go to college, then teach or do community service to pay it back, sounds like a good place to start.

Security? Clinton was a Democrat and I saw no drop in our security. He actually pushed funding for a lot of new technology and weapons that ended up getting used in Iraq. I don't want to harp on it today, because as a former New Yorker I'm in a really bad mood this sad anniversary, but how can you honestly say George W. Bush was a whiz kid on security? First he doesn't let the Security Assessment of August 2001 interrupt his freaking vacation, then he screws the pooch on Katrina. We can argue all day long about how sea-level and the location of New Orleans, but how hard would it have been to send Federal help sooner than he did? Again, Obama has a sharp mind, knows how to ask questions and will be in a good position to work with our Pentagon and security apparatus. Biden is a plus there, too.

Morale. You know, if you just love the job George W. Bush has been doing, well, golly, you should really vote for John McCain. Good for you. But I believe he's failed me and that John McCain is too close Bush to not fail me again. I will get change from Obama-Biden, but not uncertainty.

It's someone else's turn. The Republicans have controlled Congress from the mid-1990's to 2006. The Party held the Executive with Bush. 7 of the 9 justices on the Supreme are Republican appointees. I guess they could've repealed abortion if they wanted to, don't you? The GOP needs to go into time out and come back with a better attitude about serving its base---or even better, this country.

PS: you and your conservative friends might want to try and drop the tough guy talk. It's not working.

Posted by: tony the pitiful copywriter | September 11, 2008 2:52 PM | Report abuse

So, when McSame expressed outrage for the media attacks towards him or Paylin...no problem? When the uppity black man shows backbone....keep him down. BS. Get real Chris. You are such a hypocrite! Obama is angry against out right lies. McSame/Paylin....crying about truthful coverage and not lies perpetrated by Obama's campaign.

Posted by: MJO | September 11, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

we're voting for McCain/Palin because we think experience matters and we don't sepll as gooder as you guys in the east. By the way our states our in contention :-)

Posted by: The entire midwest | September 11, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Anyone hear about the nasty, lie-filled push-polling that McCain is doing in Ohio? More disgusting tactics from the GOP. They will be the absolute ruin of this country.

Posted by: trace1 | September 11, 2008 2:49 PM | Report abuse


If Obama were just the least bit more effete, he'd be Pee Wee Herman.

I think a little red bowtie and a gray suit would do the trick.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Just like the WaPo these days, apparently.

Where are the new Woodward and Bernsteins?

Posted by: I'm Chris Cilizza and I'm a Republican Shill | September 11, 2008 2:48 PM | Report abuse

First and foremost for all those people who want to vote along party lines and not look at past performance then this article falls in line with your valules and intellect.

I am doing an evaluation on a federal deficit which is 400 billion, national debt of "x" number trillion dollars, rising energy and food prices. I want to know how the candidates plan to fix the current situation. The country as a whole (I know SOME individual families/persons think things are good) is in a f%*K up state but I cant seem go get any responses from the Repub.

It seems this campaign is heavily on BS news like this article and other articles which dont address issues. I know the media loves this type of information because they put on a show and have SOME people ignore real issues.

I have to lean towards barack from the simple standpoint it is not same old "good old boy" politics. His campaign has been more about solving issues and not as heavy on the tabaolid and negative direction.

I guess SOME Americans find the negative politics, the evaluation of the past 8 years as a non factor, and not demanding more a important factor who they select.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

I think Chris has it right that Obama's edge in perceived Presidential temperament is a big advantage to have with voters. I think he needs to just beat the drum that any more Republican efforts to use distractions to keep the campaign away from issue and policy discussions are in fact more of the SAME old BUSH/Rove tactics the voters are tired of, more of the politics of the PAST.

Davis of the McCain campaign has already informed everyone that McCain does not want the campaign to be about issues, does not view the campaign as being about issues. Instead the Republicans want to fight the Culture Wars again as in 2000 and 2004. Obama has to avoid the temptation to get in the muck with them. Keep attacking McCain on the issues, on Republican policies, on fact he's out of touch on the economy. McCain has said on multiple occasions that he basically has no knowledge of the economy, and has praised the disastrous Bush economic policies enacted while Republicans controlled all levers of the national government from 2001-2006, has said the economy is basically in good shape----clearly he's brainless on the economy. Obama MUST hammer that message home. It's the ECONOMY, stupid.

The media has done a very poor job of focusing the campaign on the issues. The national media is failing to force the campaigns to focus on policies and issues. It is the media's job to represent the public in forcing politicians to address important decisions, to force the campaigns to clearly enumerate policy prescriptions for the problems facing the country, and to let the public know when the campaigns are resisting talking issues. The Media is failing in its responsibilities to the American people badly in this campaign.

Posted by: OHIO CITIZEN | September 11, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

DO YOU REALIZE THE REPUBLICANS ARE CHUCKLING AND CLUCKING AT THE DEMOCRATS' DISARRAY AND COGNITIVE DISSONANCE?

Democrats just don't get it as Sarah Palin pounds 'em
by Michael Goodwin

"The music is familiar, an old refrain best summed up as "The Long and Whining Road." Every four years, as the weather turns cooler, Democrats start crying that Republicans are playing dirty and that the American people are falling for the trick...

"Someone said Obama has had a bad few days. Actually, he's had a bad few months. He peaked before Hillary Clinton got out of the race in June and, with a few exceptions, has stagnated or trended lower in most polls ever since.

"Yet he might have had enough money and charisma to pull it off in a Democratic year against the admirable-but-beatable John McCain. The 72-year-old McCain knew as much, which is why he reached into his maverick bag and pulled out Palin.

"Bingo. Palin has energized Republicans, attracted independent voters and white women to the McCain ticket and replaced Obama as the fresh face.

"To say Dems haven't figured her out understates their cultural disconnect. They still haven't figured out why Ronald Reagan beat Walter Mondale and President Bush beat John Kerry.

"And Obama is falling into the trap of whining that everything that goes against him is a "distraction." That's what he called his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, too. A distraction.

"He makes a careless statement about putting "lipstick on a pig" a week after Palin made the lipstick joke heard 'round the world, and he wonders why everybody is picking on him.

"It's very possible Palin will yet destruct by making some killer gaffe that shows she's not up to the job. Or maybe ABC will come up with a video of her talking in tongues or beating her children or something else that will make her an overnight disaster.

"But just in case Santa Claus doesn't hand them the election, the Obama-bots ought to stop feeling sorry for themselves and start feeling the pain and hopes of ordinary Americans. Maybe then they'd understand the remarkable appeal of Sarah Palin."

THE REPUBLICANS GO "TSK TSK TSK" WHILE THE DEMOCRATS RAIL AND HOWL TOWARD ANOTHER LOST WHITE HOUSE BID... IT WAS ALL OVER WHEN THE DEMS PICKED CLINTON OVER OBAMA AND OBAMA LEFT CLINTON OFF THE TICKET!

TSK TSK TSK. DID IT TO YOURSELVES AGAIN.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Just keep hammering Bush and the Party, no matter what tone you use. Rumsfeld's "military you wish you had" statement when answering the soldier about shoddy body armor. The richest military in the history of the world, as represented by the Bush Administration, pays an underbidding contractor for armor to protect our troops and that counts for more than the troops. Support the troops indeed, the greedy snakes. The Republicans have gone the extra mile to prove Eisenhower right. They've fought two wars for the monetary gain of the defense contracting and oil industries. Whatever happened to industry regulation under Bush? Stay tuned to the Interior Dept. scandal and find out. Sex, drugs and oil drilling. Sounds like W.'s college days. Keep stinkin' GOP, nobody does it like you. You truly stink the best. All time, hands down.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

This is so ridiculous. The man can't win. First he's criticized for being too cool and detached. Then the second he shows the slightest bit of passion and emotion, it's "oh, he's angry!!!!!"

Give me a freakin' break. I can think of all kinds of incidents when Republican candidates have thrown hissy fits on the campaign trail, and no one dubbed them as too angry. Do you recall in 2000 the little tantrum W. threw when McCain ran an ad that compared him to Bill Clinton? Do you recall how McCain went off all nutso on Falwell and Pat Robertson?

I'm going to vote for Obama. But my biggest concern with him is that he's TOO MUCH of wussy. Show some fight man. And don't worry about getting put in the "angry, scary black man" box, which is inevitable. Heck, you'll get that just because you furrowed your brow once when someone criticized you. If you let yourself get pushed around you'll lose for sure. If you get angry, you might still lose, but at least folks will know you've got some nuts.

Posted by: Mike T | September 11, 2008 2:44 PM | Report abuse

Who said he was getting angry.
I find it odd that he hasn't said or acted angry, yet you stupid reports and media people are making something out of nothing. GET OVER IT. He hasn't changed his stance on not getting angry or being a pointing finger kind of guy and YOU PEOPLE just can't stand that the man is like that. You are really trying to make him into some phony individual. YET EVERYONE WHO HAS EVER KNOWN HIM, have all said he has always been that way. DO YOU THINK HE IS GOING TO CHANGE???? I DON'T THINK SO. HE is who he says he is and that's why people understand him. He doesn't HIDE anything. Unlike McCain who can hide his many houses, hide his affair with his first wife, and hide the fact that he only chose Palin because he thought he could win the Evangelical vote and the woman vote. WE AREN'T STUPID!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: What | September 11, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Friends, compatriots, fellow-lamenters,
>> We are writing to you because of the fury and dread we have
>> feltsince the announcement of Sarah Palin as the Vice-Presidential
>> candidate for the Republican Party. We believe that this terrible
>> decision has surpassed mere partisanship, and that it is a dangerous
>> farce in the part of a pandering and rudderless Presidential
>> candidate that has a real possibility of becoming fact.
>>
>> Perhaps like us, as American women, you share the fear of what Ms.
>> Palin and her professed beliefs and proven record could lead to for
>> ourselves and for our present or future daughters. To date, she is
>> against sex education, birth control, the pro-choice
>> platform, environmental protection, alternative energy
>> development, freedom of
>> speech (as mayor she wanted to ban books and attempted to fire),
>> the separation
>> of church and state, and polar bears. To say nothing of her complete
>> lack of real preparation to become the second-most-powerful person on
>> the planet.
>>
>> We want to clarify that we are not against Sarah Palin a a woman, a
>> mother, or, for that matter, a parent of a pregnant teenager, but
>> solely as a rash, incompetent, and all together
>> devastating choice for Vice President. Ms. Palin's political views
>> are in every way a slap in
>> the face to the accomplishments that our mothers and grandmothers
>> and great-grandmothers so fiercely fought for, and that we've so
>> demonstrably benefited from.
>> First and foremost, Ms. Palin does not represent us. She does not
>> demonstrate or uphold our interests as American women. It is
>> presumed that the inclusion of a woman on the Republican ticket
>> could win over women voters. We want to disagree, publicly.
>>
>> Therefore, we invite you to reply here witha short, succinct message
>> about why you, as a woman living in this country, do not support
>> this candidate as second-in-command for our nation.Please include
>> your name (last initial is fine), age, and
>> place of residence.
>>
>> We will post your responses on a blog called "Women
>> Against Sarah Palin,"which we intend to publicize as widely as
>> possible. Please
>> send us your reply at your earliest convenience?the greater the
>> volume
>> of responses we receive, the stronger our message will be.
>> Thank you for your time and action.
>> VIVA!
>> Sincerely,
>> womensaynopalin@gmail.com
>>

Posted by: lndlouis | September 11, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

to Beth: Voting for the man who has;EXPERIENCE---Pow forty years ago? HONOR lies Palin sold the jet on e-bay and made profit, etc. CHARACTER---- Cheated on first wife and three children ?FOREIGN POLICY----voted for a war and wants to continue same, that has cost thousands of lives and disabled thousands of more.Has to travel with his whisper advisor's Lie-ber-man and Graham? OBAMA/BIDEN
Connie from Indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

For this guy, anything Obama does is going to be perceived as "wrong". This is the same guy who wrote an entire article JUSTIFYING the insepid media obsession over the false lipstick controversy. He's an idiot - there's no reason to mince words.

Its an election year and this is what the laziest of the beltway insiders does - they handicap the Democrat. It all goes back to Carter or whatever. My advice? Stop reading his column. Its predictable, sophmoric, and insulting.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 2:38 PM | Report abuse

LOL. You seem to be on track, Cillizza. The LA Times notes that anger isn't the only ratchet-up Obama might attempt. They say he's getting a lot louder and indignant:

Barack Obama's message gets a lot louder
By Peter Nicholas

"NORFOLK, VA. -- Barack Obama is known for his eloquent speeches, but as he tries to regain his lead in the polls and beat back an energized Republican ticket, he is adding something new to his delivery: volume....

"At ear-splitting decibels, he pressed his point Monday that people could pay a heavy price if they make the wrong decision on election day. At stake are constitutional liberties that can mean the difference between freedom and unjustified imprisonment, he told the crowd in Farmington Hills, Mich....

"Obama is recalibrating his tone at a time when the race is in flux. Palin's nomination as vice president has shaken up the election in ways Obama campaign aides concede they don't fully understand. Obama professes not to care about poll numbers, but his campaign is well aware that his lead over McCain has evaporated. Within the Democratic Party, some politicians are getting antsy about the latest polling trends, having seen previous Democratic nominees blow leads at the end."

more at http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-campaign11-2008sep11,0,4703724.story

He won't have the money advantage, guess it helps to start hammering in the message with more volume and more emotion?

If this is what is meant by anger, versus "attacking" and "negativity" then, yeah, he obviously needs to do something to improve his delivery, since his message is losing power to connect lately.

He might also try wearing brightly colored clothes designed by those who created the Munchkin constumes for "Wizard of Oz".

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Well, what is it? Does he roll over and take it or fight back? The Republicans don't seem to care if they are thugs. As I have always said, people have grudging repect for brutes, but will not tolerate the nice guy doing brutish things. We are a strange lot. Professional wrestling seems to mirror society fairly well.

Posted by: ChuckB | September 11, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Chris: I'd be happy to answer this question; Yes I am better off now than I was eight years ago. I retrained myself after the IT market crashed, got my MBA, started my own company and I'm making more money than I ever made before as a small company in spite of the fact that I'm pay about 50% of my income in taxes. In addition, my constitutional rights are being protected by a Supreme Court majority that follows the US Constitution and doesn't do any creative interpretation based on European law. I'm also much safer. The federal government has thwarted at least 20 major terrorist attacks against US interests since 2001. There hasn't been a successful attack on the US homeland since 9/11. If you're not doing as well as you were eight years ago, it's probably a reflection on your own drive to succeed and not the federal government's ability to create a cradle to grave nanny state.

Posted by: Bill | September 11, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

He didn't seem angry to me - just passionate. I think he hit the right tone during his acceptance speech and also yesterday. Keep it up, Barack - we love it when Democrats fight back against the Republicans' politics of lying. You gotta call it when you see it - the press won't do their job, so you have to do it for them.

Posted by: Chuck | September 11, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

The "news" media is a Republican asset, and in this vein Chris Cillizza amplifies what every other outlet has done ever since Obama became the Democratic front runner last spring: Force him into the role played by Sidney Poitier in "Guess Who's Coming To Dinner."

To extend the analogy, it's time for Obama to switch movies. He must now be Virgil Tibbs in "The Heat of the Night." The media, of course, will cite this as evidence that Obama is now a Dangerous Black Man.

Posted by: Magic Dog | September 11, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

This is a silly approach. Obama is still winning the electoral college--ahead by a large margin, and especially the battleground states. That's what matters in this election. Obama is right to be angry, we the voters are angry at 8 years of decline and courruption courtesy of GWB and the GOP! We want a candidate that is not affrait to stick to the issues and go swinging at McCain when they try to smear him. If there is somethingn to be learned from 2000 and 2004 is that we Democrats don't care about what the media pundits think; playing cool cucumber does not win elections. If they hit Oabama, HE must respond and hit back. He can deliver a two-prong attack on the issues and against the smears. We deserve no less. I'd say, forget about the media pundits. They have consistently gotten it wrong for Dems.

Posted by: Irreverent_in_DC | September 11, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin does not deserve any respect until she comes out of hiding and talks to the press and the American people without her crib sheet

Obama has been inspected from every angle for four years and the best you can come with is that he is potentially "angry"?

Posted by: mister.earl | September 11, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

For all of the kowtowing to McCain's "service to our country" it is disgusting that his reprehensible behavior is being so obligingly tolerated. He's an insult to true heroes. His conduct is totally unbecoming an officer and a gentleman. Heroes don't whine and play the victim. That's not how McCain won his status as an untouchable American. He's manipulated the media and population to accept and justify anything he says or does. It is disgraceful! I'm ashamed of him and I'm ashamed of the media and voters for letting him get away with such slimy behavior.

Posted by: Truth Maverick | September 11, 2008 2:33 PM | Report abuse

ENOUGH--the voters say--of OBAMA

Obama's lipstick on a pig comment--documented on his teleprompter-- is much more than just a sexist slur.

It is a deeply rooted Muslim slur.

Obama was indoctrinated in Muslim theology from birth. His Mother twice married Muslim men, voluntarily embracing their worldview.

Obama was further indoctrinated in Muslim schools.

And ask yourself, If schools can't indoctrinate children with religion, why does the US prohibit religion in our schools?

Obama admitted in a freudian slip on ABC Sunday his "Muslim faith", which the "neutral journalist" quickly correct FOR Obama.

Obama says he is a Christian, but denies he ever listened to his Pastor's sermons etc....

So Gov. Palin is a fundamentalist Christian who Obama, with a strong Muslim indoctrination, compares to a pig--highly disdained in Muslim theology

Posted by: JaxMax | September 11, 2008 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Hey right-wing cry-babies: watch this and drop it now please, ok? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2N6ezlV1qQ

Chris - would you please grow up and do your job? Palin apparently thinks that dinosaurs roamed the earth 4 thousand years ago - ask her about that. And, oh yeah - since she said "no thanks" to that bridge, can the tax payers have our money back now? For all her bluster, she had no problem spending our money... she is a LIAR.

Posted by: Tiredofthisnonsense | September 11, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Senator Obama's tone was perferect he needs to confront McCain head on and let him know that he not going to tolerate this type of swiftboating.

Senator Obama is cool and calm he knows how to get his point across. I thought his speech in Norfolk Va should be repeated on all his campagin stumps.

What's up with Senator Joe Biden how come he's not getting any love from the media it seems that he's being outcasted or something. I would like Senator Biden to get fired up like he was at the convention in Denver he needs to step up his game and get focused on the issues and ignore Palin she's just a distraction...remember that Biden don't pay attention to her small talk stay focused on the issues and what's happening today.

Obama/Biden

Posted by: Jacie - San Leandro, Ca | September 11, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

I have to agree with HRC. Let's face it... At the first sign of any opposition to his power, Obama crumbles. He was weak from the beginning. Clinton was stronger, but was kicked out by the DNC powers that be. The DNC made a mistake, clearly. I am thinking a Palin v Clinton in 2012. What a sight that would be.

Posted by: Agree with HRC | September 11, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Look, the American Main Stream Media got out of the news reporting business a long time ago. While Fox News is pretty clearly biased on the right and Keith Olbermann is biased on the left, the rest are just trying to sell advertising. It is in their interest to keep this looking like a horse race until the last possible moment. If this circus degenerates into an actual debate about issues, it will be over long before November 4th. Can't have that.

Posted by: joebewildered | September 11, 2008 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Black men cannot get angry

The Obamas are already "uppity" enough

"Black people, get to the back of the line!"

Posted by: mister.earl | September 11, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

CHRIS, I STILL THINK IT WILL COME DOWN TO THE WAR, IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE LEARNT A LESSON ABOUT WAR THEY WILL VOTE FOR OBAMA IF NOT THEY WILL VOTE FOR MCCAIN.

Posted by: J | September 11, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Palin was hand-picked by the oil lobby.

Posted by: michael4 | September 11, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

If this is all it took for the Obama campaign to fall apart I'm glad he didn't make it to the White House...

HRC in '12

Posted by: Disappointed Dem | September 11, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if Mccain knows that no matter what happens with this election, he will be forever remembered as the biggest flip flopper of all time. Such a honorable man before, a total sell out lame azz, cancer ridden, hitler waving, raisin liar. Conservative should be calling him a traitor! He doesn't work for you, the party remember? he is such a f'n loser! Palin don't matter.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Excellent article. That was exactly my take when I saw his response-a school is not the place to do it. On the other hand, he could have been firm during the ABC or MSNBC interviews on TV-that would have been the perfect venue to do it.

Posted by: Hobbs | September 11, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

tony the pitiful copyrighter, can you please tell me how Obama is going to fix all the things you whine about. Things are bad but they are that bad and I haven't heard one thing that will fix any of it from either candidate. However, since McCAin does have a little experience, honor, character and foreign policy knowledge, my vote will be for the lesser of two evils. Neither one of them are Bush but Obama is the closest match.

Posted by: beth | September 11, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Any comment which contains the phrase "no one believes that..." is evidently from a newcomer to blogs...

There are obviously plenty of people who will believe ANYTHING. (How else to explain the last eight years?)

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

A recent study has shown that if all men were required to be castrated prior to accepting public office, 99% of all government corruption would be eliminated.

Posted by: the truth | September 11, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Let's face it most of the media are kissing Palin's butt and if you notice when she is speaking John McSenile keeps looking down. His he looking at her butt? Watch out Cindy you know he likes those younger women. OBAMA/BIDEN
Connie from Indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Aspercream, when you heard Obama's comment about "putting lipstick on a pig", did that hit a nerve? You are as usual posting your tripe, but it seems more angrier. Or is it a sugar rush? A box of donuts will do that...

Posted by: Give Aspergirl food for thought, and she'll eat it... | September 11, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

I'm f'ing Matt Damon!!!

Posted by: John Kerry | September 11, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Changes in Obama's demeanor...while McCain and Palin kick his arse?

You know,Chris, I just lost all respect for you.

Why don't you join Rush Limbaugh and call it a day.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

No matter what happens, you guys in the media always interpret it as potentially damaging for the Democrat, in this case Barack Obama. I'm so sick and tired of you "professional" journalists who assist Republicans in their smear campaigns. John McCain makes a ridiculous, insulting charge, rather than call it what it is, who first publicize it widely for him, analyze the political impacts, criticize Obama for his non-response, report on the potential dangers of responding, and reinforce the Republican narrative. You guys are nearly single-handedly responsible for abetting the Republicans in their demonstration that the worst in our politics can be a winning strategy if "journalists" such as yourself act as accomplices.

Do you love your country? Are you just interested in your career and advancing it and getting invited to McCain's "cabin" in Arizona?

Have some self-respect and stop being suckered into Republican crimes.

Andrew Bellinger

Posted by: Andrew Bellinger | September 11, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

"Angry" is code word of the day for the GOP. Yesterday, the word was "Pig and Lipstick".
Do you mind forwarding tomorrow's key phrase?

Thanks,

Steve

Posted by: Steve | September 11, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Biden is rubbing off on Obama because Biden is an angry, 66 year old, squinty-eyed man. I hope democrats keep spewing their liberal rhetoric because the more they do it, the better McCain/Palin do.
McCain has been cool and level headed during these times whereas Obama and his camp have been acting like 5 year olds.

Posted by: Ken | September 11, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Has anyone heard any actions the Pig and her running mate will take to rid this country of its problems caused by the GOP? Nope, didnt think so. They have nothing constructive to say so they pull out the lipstick... We are all suckers if her and McCain get elected....

Posted by: American First | September 11, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Wow, I thought better of the Washington Post before I saw this article. Are you guys also feeding into this whole fiction? I think most intelligent people by this point already know what they want, and you or the news stations aren't going to change that. But PLEASE, stop twisting things around to be what they aren't.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPd4yk0x-eg

Does he even SAY Palin in this talk? NO. He's not even refering to McCain as a person here. He is talking about the issues of the McCain campaign, which is what he is suppose to be focusing on. I am really disappointed in you guys, I thought better of you....

Posted by: Lindsey | September 11, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Please disregard last post, I thought I was at the boys blogg for conservatives for alternate life styles. At the risk of retaliation from my conservative friends, GO OBAMA!!! he's so good looking! oops, darn did I say it again? I have to go and find my Dick friend before he goes after my buddy McCain again!!

Posted by: Senator Craig | September 11, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

I'm so happy for you Jennifer S.

I got laid off and lost my health insurance.

Posted by: A noun, a verb and POW. and now a pit bull with lipstick, too. | September 11, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

What's really being conveyed here in Journalistic cowardice is simple. White Racist tendancies will begin to surface. Nothing frightens "Regular" White Americans than an Angry Black Man. It's time to stop tiptoeing through the tulips and be honest. As an African American I find this whole thing refreshing. The White lie about Racism is being shown to the entire world who are keenly focused on this election because the Democratic nominee is Black! Eight years of corruption, lies, isolation, wrecked economy, failing schools, job loss, rising prices, home loss, loss of pensions, health care, you name it we got it! White Men are now patsies for their wives. Stay Home Dad is now a term of endearment. Bread winner is now on the trash heap of history and Blue Collar Men are holding on to their wives skirt. DISGUSTING! It's time for Men to have a conversation, and do a little soul searching especially our White Brothers. As men right now you guy's are stinking up the place!

Posted by: Martin | September 11, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

THIS IS SO FUNNY AND WELL WRITTEN.. MUST ... CUT-AND-PASTE... WHOLE THING

Joe Biden and the Incredible Lightness of Being
by Victor Davis Hanson

"Watching Joe Biden is better than examining the polls or listening to talking heads, since he instantaneously reflects cockiness, aggression, bombast, depression, and loss of confidence, predicated on the emotional pulse of the campaign.

"Every day is something new: Palin is variously good looking, a step backward for women, a Lieutenant Governor, her Down's syndrome child should prompt her to support stem-cell research, Biden is going to save Obama with the working classes given he lived in Scranton until 10, and like a wounded kitten he meows that Hillary may have been the better VP candidate—at precisely the time of Democratic meltdown when many of his colleagues would agree.

"Almost any thought that comes into his head goes out his mouth, and the strange thing is that no one seems to mind (imagine if Sarah Palin had said Obama was good looking, or a step backward, or that Romney would have been a better pick than herself), or even takes what he says seriously. He seems to have established a new Biden's Law: if one makes enough gaffes, they soon reach a point that none of them matter. And even stranger is Biden's Second Law of Politics: the more you sound obnoxious and offend, you soon reach a point where the shocked listener turns from anger to indifference and finally no less to empathy!

"Biden may be arrogant and vain, but he has an odd charm as everyman's nightmare when we root for him not to say something embarrassing, know that when his eyes start spinning he will and can't stop—and know that we will end up either not taking it too seriously or feeling bad for him that he did. I have heard a lot of conservatives rattle off all the reasons why Biden is duplicitious, a bully, and often mean-spirited—before ending up with an inexplicable sigh, "But I sort of like Joe Biden." Even weirder—I sort of do too, but don't know quite why either."

(VDH just slays me. What a writer and thinker. Agree with him or not, his articles are consistently rewarding. He does this week after week, so well.)

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Why is it that Rs are able to show anger and outrage at the most insignificant things while Ds need to "be VERY careful" about showing anger over the most outrageous things as to do so may "backfire?"

The RW is outraged over the lipsticked pig comment, but Ds shouldn't be outraged over the false outrage and outright lies being trumpeted by the McCain campaign?

Right. And a soon as the Ds follow such advice they're skewered for being spineless (ref: Kerry, Dukakis).

Sorry, Chris, but the Ds and the rest of the country aren't buying it this year. My suggestion to Rs who don't like having their BS called out: get used to it.

Posted by: Mr Mark | September 11, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

"People you can google more facts on Palin than MSM is giving and they are not pretty so ask your self WHY????"

How 'bout because then the MSM will be damned for being "biased". Seems to me they can't win.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

To Anonymous 2:08, I don't know if Obama thiks your dumb,but I think the American people are really dumb if they think McSenile is going to change anything the Bush administration has done. The only change will be the name on the oval office door.Old white smart women. OBAMA/BIDEN
Connie from Indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

this is silly chris. he didn't look angry, and expressing frustration over gutter politics wont scare people away from him. the mccain attacks have been disgusting divisive and diversionary. people have a right to be upset.

plus the news coverage completely drowned out his education plan that he was outlining and took a b-line to "lipstick on a pig." please take your job at informing the public on the issues at stake seriously.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

This campaign is pointless.

Bush, the neo-cons, the Bilderberg group, the New World Order, whatever you call them, Karl Rove maybe? They or their agents will "capture" or "find the remains of" one Osama Bin Laden in October, 2008. That is what the "October Surprise" will be.

There's good reason to believe Osama has been dead for some time. The French secret service (don't laugh, France is still a country--they didn't survive by being nice guys) reported he was on dialysis. It's not easy to run the necessary machines on the run. There is also a report from a Pakistani man who said he was at the Osama funeral.

Their wallets empty, their homes losing value by the minute, gasoline still at almost $4 a gallon, a weary and grateful American public will reward the GOP and its titular head, John McCain, with their votes in the November election.

Then those boys will clean up big time. McCain, 72, will be unable to complete his term of office. His much younger wife, Cindy, will be among the first to notice and express her "concern" to the Nation. His much younger Vice President, former freshman Governor of Alaska, a state with a smaller population than many counties in any metropolitan area, will have the energy and force of will necessary to defy the wishes of Congress. She will veto as many bills as the Democratic Congress can pass. She will also take a page from George W. Bush and when she does sign a bill into law, she will use signing statements in a way that will make Bush look like George F. Washington. She will use her office as a bully pulpit and with help from the MSM and Fox, demonize Congress.

The youthful Palin will stonewall the will of the elected Congress on energy issues, civil rights, the war in Iraq, our trade imbalance with China and of course the deficit, which, I dunno, wouldn't you say $407 billion is a lot of money to owe on?

Once the United States goes bankrupt, a process will be put into place to "make do" with our Chinese trading partners.

Start learning how to speak Mandarin, I guess.

The Republicans are drunk on power. They have no intention of repealing abortion. That is a wedge issue that works too well for them to get "single issue" voters who may find the rest of the GOP platform morally objectionable. The Republicans have no intention to limit or reduce pornography or sex on TV. A population distracted by sexuality and arguments over it, is a population too busy to pay attention to the process of their nation coming apart at the beck and call of special interests.

I will continue to campaign for Democrats, who are not perfect. That is probably why I like this party the best. I will work for the Obama-Biden campaign. I will give this my best shot.

I invite any independent voter or Republican to re-examine both tickets. I feel it is wrong to claim any moral superiority. This is politics after all. But I only ask you think twice, then again, about the consequences of more Republican rule at this point in history.

Republicans can reform their party to its former glory as a defender of traditional values and caution in the face of so-called progress and technology. But how? I'm not sure I know how.

The Republican convention did not have the word "Republican" any where on the podium or in the stands. Why was that? As a group, they looked like a sad, joyless people. Why was that? For some weird reason, every Republican woman felt it necessary to wear a dress, not pant suits. Why was that? I wish these things didn't matter, but looking back, they do. Because it all looks like everyone was following a script and not their passion or own mind.

And where's the freedom in all that?

Posted by: tony the pitiful copywriter | September 11, 2008 2:16 PM | Report abuse

I thank all conservatives on this blog for letting these dems know exactly how corrupt we are! No one can beat us at being the lowest, dirtiest, skank the political world has ever known and we will own that title forever. We work hard at looking like the complete idiots that we are, how dare anyone else make that claim but us. The only thing that I find uneasy about Senator McCains pick is that he picked a woman when a big burley, muscular, tanned man would've done the job so so so so much better, mmmmmmmm I can't wait to get to the bathroom again at the airport and this time darnit, I'll make sure not to tap my feet but whisper sweet nothings into some mans lovely ears so LETS GO REUBLICANS MEN! Lets meet and greet other republican men and supporters of us republican men in the bathroom for a war room pow wow. Long live the GOP GAY OVER PRIDE! THE NEW REPUBLICAN MOTTO!

Posted by: Senator Craig | September 11, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

I think it should be illegal to sell sharp objects on or near November 4th. Just so our liberal democrat bretheren won't hurt themselves.

Posted by: Adrian | September 11, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Unbelievable. Where's the part about McCain selling out his principles to engage in dishonest attacks? Or having a "cocky wacko" VP nominee who isn't willing or able to answer policy questions?

Posted by: Dem | September 11, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous wrote:

well, no one belives that obama believes in any of his positions. that tends to happen when you flip-flop on:

*taxes
*the war in iraq
*negotiating with terrorists
*repealing free trade agreements
*support for a racist pastor

all changes in position rejecting the leftish position and acknowleging the conservative position as the correction one, all in span of 6 months, all in front of a transfized media and listening audience. how many times will he flip-flop in the course of 4 years? and he tries to pass it off as "over-heated rhetoric"!! meaning, "i will say anything to advance my career as a politician"

does obama think we're dumb?
--------------------------------
Looks like class just got dismissed at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies, any oxymoron if ever there was one.

Posted by: joebewildered | September 11, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Matt Damon you are f'ing up our chances - keep your pie hole closed until after Nov 4!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh yeah, and I'm f'ing Matt Damon too!!!

Posted by: David Axelrod | September 11, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

So your saying that Obama must be more like JOHN KERRY to win this election?

Stick to typing, bub.

No, Obama needs to gently mock and needle John McCain as a dishonorable panderer, because Mccain is the one who is famous for his thin skin and volcanic temper. John will pop his cork soon enough.

Posted by: Burford Holly | September 11, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

There's a fine line between anger and outrage, and while I agree Obama can't be seen as "angry" in some ways (he has to keep that sunny disposition) NOT being outraged by the lies and the phony attacks coming from the McCain campaign would just as surely sink his campaign, just like it sunk Kerry's.

Perhaps the media should become angry and being played over and over by Karl Rove and his disciples?

I'M certainly angry, I'll tell you that. Angry that the country I love falls for this bull hockey over and over and over. Angry that what passes for election coverage is repeating paid advertisements that are simply smears. Angry at coverage of non-events like Sarah Palin saying, again, that she said "Thanks, but no thanks to that Bridge to Nowhere." Angry that TV news shows 5 second clips that are either fluff (see above), attacks, or applause from crowds of pre-screened supporters.

No policy positions presented? Hey, guys, NO NEWS. Attack ads are NOT NEWS. Just say NO, and don't show them and don't comment on them unless you comment simply to say "Candidate X released another ad today that lied about his opponent."

Jon Stewart's takedown of Crossfire applies to ALL of YOU. Do your job. Fifth estate my a$$. You don't DESERVE 1st amendment protection as you add nothing to the comity of this country. You're turning into entertainment, pure and simple. VERY simple and purely disgusting.

Posted by: CalGal | September 11, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

All this talk of anger, and on 911 for heavens sake. On this day, of all days, can we not come together as one america and agree that REPUBLICANS SHOULD BE EUTHANIZED?

AMEN

Posted by: metoo | September 11, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Chris

Add your name to the list of pundits all giving Barack conflicting advice. Arianna thinks he should be outraged, you think he should be a sweetheart, others think he should call (correctly) the McCain campaign a campaign of lies and still others think he should pose as Mother Teresa and let his surrogates come out swinging.

I just have one question for you: where's your outrage, Chris? You know the Repubs are lying through their teeth, often in personal, vicious ways. You know the fugitive Karl Rove is actually running the McCain campaign (he finally admitted he's involved). Where's your commentary on the total pollution of the American electoral process? Where's your indignation that the media, gleefully agreeing to be manipulated, are doing "lipstick" 24/7 instead of addressing the critical issues facing America at a crucial time in history.

Stop talking about "process", Chris and start reporting some truth. The nation is in the crosshairs.

Posted by: Alan Katz | September 11, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

I got a thousand bucks that says 'Jennifer S' husband cheats on her!

Posted by: Repubsux | September 11, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

When I read these paranoid posts trying to defame Obama, particularly those with lots of CRAZY CAPITAL LETTERS TO INDICATE HOW VITALLY IMPORTANT SOMETHING IS, all I see are nervous little Republican operatives trying the "kitchen sink" strategy again. When you keep reposting the same crap over and over again, it just makes you look more insane, so by all means, guys, keep doing it.

It didn't work in the primaries, and it won't work in the general. Americans have simply had enough and aren't going to just forget the last 8 years just because you have mastered the art of cut-and-paste.

Posted by: AsperGirl's Mom | September 11, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

This article is more medis propaganda. This is so surreal to me can't all of you see what they are doing. I could care less about Obama or Palin my voting decision is mad but the MSM and press not doing their job not reporting the facts just spin and fiction is disturbing to me on so many levels. People you can google more facts on Palin than MSM is giving and they are not pretty so ask your self WHY????

Posted by: Brandon | September 11, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse

McCain is showing what a sellout he is. Any respect I had for the man is gone.

Posted by: michael4 | September 11, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Voters like passionate candidates, politicians who believe (or at least appear to believe) in the positions they stake out. But, those same voters often blanch at expressions of anger, believing it to be unbecoming of a president.
*********

well, no one belives that obama believes in any of his positions. that tends to happen when you flip-flop on:

*taxes
*the war in iraq
*negotiating with terrorists
*repealing free trade agreements
*support for a racist pastor

all changes in position rejecting the leftish position and acknowleging the conservative position as the correction one, all in span of 6 months, all in front of a transfized media and listening audience. how many times will he flip-flop in the course of 4 years? and he tries to pass it off as "over-heated rhetoric"!! meaning, "i will say anything to advance my career as a politician"

does obama think we're dumb?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 2:08 PM | Report abuse

The unfortunate truth is that the average American is not very bright. The republican strategists do a slightly better job of tapping into the ignorance of your middle class american than do their democratic counterparts.

Posted by: andrew.capece | September 11, 2008 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Hmmmmm....drill, baby, drill is curiously like bomb, baby, bomb or one size fits all. Obama should laugh, baby, laugh, while encouraging guerrilla war.

Posted by: psk | September 11, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

I'm f'ing Matt Damon

Posted by: Ludacris | September 11, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

So Chris, why haven't you talked about the convicted felon that McCain and his good buddy lobbyist campaign manager were visitng on the guys yacht? There are pictures available you know. Or how about something on why Palin keeps insisting on saying "I told Congress Thanks but no thanks to the bridge to nowhere," when she ran for the bridge as part of her campaign for governer. And why would anyone in their right mind vote for someone to be Prez when all they do is repeat the same speech that was written for her over and over. Who can't take any questions, except from some hand picked Fake fair and balanced station, or why they can't let her campaign alone?? Hum, so if the old geezer keels and she's the preez will she be calling the Rove's or Cheney's to ask them what to do?

Posted by: Sue F | September 11, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Yawn...Oblama is toast, he knows it.

Hurry up and get here 11/4 so we can wipe all of the dems tears.

McCain/Palin
Prosperity-Resolve-Peace

Posted by: independents09 | September 11, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Here's another case of a story with content not much different that the of bull patties.

First we hear that Obama is too meek; now we hear that he might too angry. I watched and listened to Obama speak yesterday. He is calm and relaxed. He delivered the rebuttal without any sign of anxiety or anger. He knows better than to express anger and buy into the Republican traps.

So what are you talking about, Chris? Answer, nothing but bull patties.

Folks, always remember that media jabber heads have greater egos than the candidates for President. And, remember, too, they have no responsibility for what they say. Let me repeat that, NO responsibility for what they say.


Posted by: Peter | September 11, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

So, the media needs to stop criticizing her? They have to be nice to her because she's just a mom?

But she said she's a pitbull.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 2:02 PM | Report abuse

SARAH PALIN IS A REPUBLICAN STOOGE WHO DOES WHAT SHE IS TOLD AND THAT INCLUDES KEEPING HER MOUTH SHUT UNLESS THEY TELL HER WHAT TO SAY.
SO MUCH FOR THE REFORMER WHO IS GOING TO SHACK THINGS UP. THIS MORON ACTUALLY THINKS SHE IS RUNNNG FOR VP. SHE IS AN F'n PROP.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Brilliant insight Bob. I wish you had included your resume. because I'd hire you right away.

Posted by: Realist | September 11, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

I've had it with those wolves from the librul media picking on little Sarah "Piggy" Palin. We're all mavericks now.

Posted by: branfo4 | September 11, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Chris Cilizza: You're a conservative, we get it. If you want us moderates and liberals to continue reading your entries, however, why don't you cease the GOP booster routine?

Posted by: David | September 11, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Most of the anti-Obama posters seem not to be listening, what are you afraid of? A stronger middle class? Fairness and equality? As Obama said it best in the video in this article: If you are happy with the last 8 years, vote McCain; if you are unhappy and want change, vote Obama.

From a Thomas Frank article:
A few days ago I talked politics with Donn Teske, the president of the Kansas Farmers Union and a former Republican. Barack Obama may come from a big city, he admits, but the Farmers Union gives him a 100% rating for his votes in Congress. John McCain gets a 0%. "If any farmer in the Plains States looked at McCain's voting record on ag issues," Mr. Teske says, "no one would vote for him."

Posted by: oline | September 11, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

BO’s ’shoulder brush off’
********

i cant believe how unreported it was. it was so juvenile of him. pure ego. definately not becoming of someone who wants to handle serious matters as president.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

The McCain campaign's wolf/"Fact Check" ad "drew a measured rebuke from nonpartisan FactCheck.org, which tries evaluating the veracity of campaign ads and called it 'less than honest.'"

"With its latest ad, released Sept. 10, the McCain-Palin campaign has altered our message in a fashion we consider less than honest," FactCheck.org writes. "The ad strives to convey the message that FactCheck.org said 'completely false' attacks on Gov. Sarah Palin had come from Sen. Barack Obama. We said no such thing. We have yet to dispute any claim from the Obama campaign about Palin."

And it was a busy day for FactCheck.org, as it also debunked the McCain campaign's ad on Obama and "sex ed" for kindergartners. "[T]he claim is simply false, and it dates back to Alan Keyes' failed race against Obama for an open Senate seat in 2004. Obama, contrary to the ad's insinuation, does not support explicit sex education for kindergarteners. And the bill, which would have allowed only "age appropriate" material and a no-questions-asked opt-out policy for parents, was not his accomplishment to claim in any case, since he was not even a cosponsor -- and the bill never left the state Senate.

"In addition, the ad quotes unflattering assessments of the Illinois senator's record on education but leaves out sometimes equally harsh criticism directed at McCain in the same forums."

As a woman, Palins pick is a direct insult to me and the REST OF US SANE women. McCain and Palin are the worst liars and I hope they pay for their lies or we definitely will. We should run them two clowns out of the country, on FIRE!

Posted by: Hillaryfanvoting4Obama | September 11, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Jennifer S
I'm glad to hear about your good fortune, it would be a rational choice for you to vote republican and I wish you good luck with that. I don't think that most Americans can say that and I don't think that your children will be happy that the Republican party managed to turn a budget surplus and solvent Social Security into a smoking crater. Be sure to ask them when they will be called to support you in your retirement.

Posted by: Chris | September 11, 2008 1:58 PM | Report abuse

to JenniferS: I am so happy to hear your family is doing well, but I am truly concerned about the hundreds of thousands of people who are not doing well.Fathers and mothers unable to keep a roof over their families heads, food on the table and on and on.God has Blessed you and your family, ask God to Bless others vote for a change. OBAMA/BIDEN
Connie from Indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:58 PM | Report abuse

so obama's change is just the same liberal policies kerry proposed?

and unemployment when down under bill clinton but not president bush? what about that record 4.6 percent unemployment rate in 2006? never happened?


also, obama has a lot of nerve to say that palin's history does not indicate that she is an agent of change. THATS a bold-face lie, under any objective standard

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

I swear some of you posters must live in a fairy tale world dreaming that maybe the Obama or McCain campaign will notice your brilliant work and offer you a big job.

Posted by: Bob | September 11, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

If anyone has a right to be angry, it's the American people for the subpar campaign being waged by BOTH PARTIES. I'm hoping that today's joint appearance at the former WTC site will give all parties a chance to take one step back and rethink how this campaign goes forward. Both candidates have gross misrepresented the others policies and views and the campaign would be better if they would stick to explaining to us how they intend to change the country for the better.

I personally am fed up with the way we conduct our political campaigns. We have two very good candidates this time around- both of which I'd be okay with becoming the next president. But we continue to be subjected to campaigns that seem to be directed at those at the very bottom of the primodial gene pool. Both candidates need to reign in their surrogates, their partisans, and get back to the issues or else we'll be stuck with 4 to 8 more years of polarization. It's hard to unite the country when roughly half the populace is conditioned to hate the other.

Posted by: Independent | September 11, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

And you attribute all this success to the Bush administration how?

========
Chris:

Yes, I am MUCH better off 8 years ago than I am today. Since 9/2000, I have had 3 (#4 is on the way) beautiful children with my wonderful husband. We've owned 2 houses, one of which was an investment property that generated income for us so that we could afford to live in a larger house in the Washington DC suburbs. My husband's salary has increased substantially such that (with some financial sacrifices, of course) I was able to quit my job before my 3rd was born. I'm working on starting my own business in my "free" time. I volunteer at my children's school and with their soccer teams. But you know...I don't think our combined income has really changed that much between 2000 and 2008. In 2000, I was the bread winner, but combined we made about the same as my husband makes today. So, being "better off" isn't always about how much money you make. Soemthing to think about.

Posted by: Jennifer S | September 11, 2008 1:52 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Saying "enough" might imperil his bid for the presidency! You've got to be kidding. The link led to another McCain lie. Factcheck is objecting to the quotation saying it is wrong, and John Fund's WSJ article was clipped and snipped that he wouldn't even recognize it.

Posted by: Annie Joyce | September 11, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

McCain is a disgrace. His running partner is bloviating propaganda tool. She is Church in charge of State fanatic who will be a pliable mouthpiece for big oil. John McCain is a torture supporter who also supports government spying on Americans and 95% of Bush's other emperor in chief policies that have gutted the US middle class, our treasury, trashed our armed forces, privatized our govt (trans. make Bush's cronies trillions of US $$), handing over our defense to mercenaries and our public interests to thieves. The economy is in smoking ruins, the oil barons and sheiks and russian mobsters are filling our gas tanks with tyranny and McCain & Palin and their corrupt military/industrial/media/big oil/corporate puppeteers are laughing at the stupidity of Americans who would give the Bush 3rd term 2nd team 4 more years. Americans are suffering while the top 1% like sissy McCain and his ridiculous heiress wife Judy or Gillia or Jacuzzi are laffing all the way to the bank!

Posted by: artforhumans | September 11, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

When Obama responds personally to the petty McCain-Palin attacks, he degrades his campaign. He ends up looking like a candidate for city council instead of the presidency.

Posted by: Grier Horner | September 11, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Sounds to me from the comments on this blog that it is the republicans who are agitated. (Don't shout 37th and O - just take your meds.) What some of us like about Obama is that he is genuine and good natured. But even genuine people get PO'd sometimes. The only way a more strident tone will hurt him is if it seems contrived and constant (like McCain's). BTW, McCain is starting to remind me of Spongebob's superhero Mermaid Man. (Old, cranky and past his prime.)

Posted by: Realist | September 11, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Another entirely worthless Clizza post.
Memo to Mr. C: some of us are trying to elect an actual president here.

Posted by: HeavyJ | September 11, 2008 1:32 PM
__________________________________________

Amen to that, HeavyJ. Sometimes I can't believe someone actually pays these clowns write this crap! Talk about contributing absolute zero to society. First he's not angry enough, now he's too angry, next he should smile more, then he should cry openly and hug more people. Jeez! Shut the F-up already!

Posted by: Repubsux | September 11, 2008 1:41 PM

AMEN!! Jaysus, I hear you - what a load of crap! I don't know what's worse, reading this or having Cilliza spewing this nonsense in his "basement of the science building" voice. Where do they find these people?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:53 PM | Report abuse

A little anger is what Obama needs. He is at a critical point right now, probably pondering whether it is worth his time to become President. Who would want to lead a nation of people as dumb as those in today's United States? If he decides it's not worth it, I would have no problem with it, even though I contributed $200 to his campaign.

If some anger gets him motivated, though, he'll perhaps do what needs to be done. He'll have to educate the ignorant masses a least a bit, and that won't be easy. Maybe impossible. It's up to Barack to decide if he wants to try.

If he plays out the clock to a loss, he can do whatever he wants after the election. Write books, teach law, have a talk show (I hope he avoids that!).

If Americans aren't ready for change (and I doubt they are) his victory won't accomplish much anyway, except for the retinue of Democrats who want jobs in the Administration.

If America is ready for change, Palin/McCain won't be able to stop the wave.

Posted by: Matthew | September 11, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Chris:

Yes, I am MUCH better off 8 years ago than I am today. Since 9/2000, I have had 3 (#4 is on the way) beautiful children with my wonderful husband. We've owned 2 houses, one of which was an investment property that generated income for us so that we could afford to live in a larger house in the Washington DC suburbs. My husband's salary has increased substantially such that (with some financial sacrifices, of course) I was able to quit my job before my 3rd was born. I'm working on starting my own business in my "free" time. I volunteer at my children's school and with their soccer teams. But you know...I don't think our combined income has really changed that much between 2000 and 2008. In 2000, I was the bread winner, but combined we made about the same as my husband makes today. So, being "better off" isn't always about how much money you make. Soemthing to think about.

Posted by: Jennifer S | September 11, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

As a white person , I can say white people are really, really stupid. White people are prepared to do this year what they have done in the past two elections.You can put lipstick on a pig and it is still a pig. For you stupid repubs that means you can put lipstick on McCain he is still Bush.
Connie from Indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

"And for all of you screaming that because 90% of black people are voting for him, WHY IS THIS AN ISSUE? Bill Clinton got the same Black support and Nobody thought twice about it! Why is it the we have to justify WHY we are voting for him and NO OTHER RACE DOES?"

It's because more than 90% of blacks voted for Obama in the Democratic primaries.

Posted by: AK | September 11, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous,

Thanks for the thoughtful critique. My respond follows:

You comment: ‘They now enjoy many tax loopholes that allow them to defer what would otherwise be profit in to other areas such as R&D.”

I would amend what you say and add that all companies with R&D have the same incentives as oil companies it is not unique for that industry alone. Eliminate incentives in R&D for oil companies and you will see slower progress in the development of alternative energy sources. I would note I have meet with scientist from ConocoPhillips working on biofuels and they have been doing this for some time.

Your comment: “Oil companies are unique in the sense that they provide a product that MUST be used by the consumer where choice is limitted. Currently the industry is unregulated. Because it is, they can pretty much control the pricing structure as we have seen them do over the past 8 years.”

You are correct to say oil companies provide a need product, but oil itself is a commodity just like corn, soybean, hogs, and metals are all commodities. Choices in commodities such as these are all limited there is nothing unique about oil. I disagree with your unregulated comment for the oil industry is heavily regulated hence why new refineries just spring up from independent operators. It should be pointed out that much of the consolidation of the oil industry occurred during both the Clinton and Bush II administrations. It consolidation in the oil industry that has help drive the cost through elimination of excess refinery capacity (i.e., limiting supply on the supply and demand curve).

Your comment: “When we started reducing our demand then we saw that price adjusted. We (consumers) can have control with the right leader.” See my previous post:

“I would add Obama’s approach would have one positive outcome a further reduction in the use of oil. Most likely people will not drive as much due to higher prices which should lower oil consumption and lesson our carbon foot print. I am sure this is not his intended purpose, but it is a positive outcome. This is speaking as a free market environmental scientist.”

I have no problem with reduction in consumption of oil, but to call it a stimulus package is rather deceitful or naive if you truly believe it is one. I think the old McCain could also help lower consumption as much as Obama.

On your second defense its nothing but a pipe dream to think 50 billion dollars will have stimulus effect on a 13.8 trillion dollar economy (GDP). It may have a psychological effect but no real effect. If a psychological problem is what’s wrong with the economy then Obama is lying when he talks about problems in the economy since its really fundamentally sound. In reality, the only ones to benefit will be the Wal-Mart’s and Chinese since nobody’s going to go out buying American made products with such a paltry sum of money.

Posted by: sltiowa | September 11, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Hey STICK,

Are you better off now than you were eight years ago?

Posted by: Chris | September 11, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

So all the media are complaining that Palin won't sit with them for an interview. After all the disgusting commentary and stories, why should she?

Posted by: Kate | September 11, 2008 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Bush, Palin and McCain are basically the simple stooges told what to say by the real power in the Republic Party. That power base is led by Cheney, Wolfowitz and the rest of the PNAC group, along with the American Enterprise Institute. The simple truth is that the Republic Party front people are liars. They lied about Iraq, they lied about getting Bin Ladin, they lied about respecting our Constitution, they lied about respecting our personal liberties, they lied about keeping government small and spending under control, they lied about building up the middle class. Now these liars are saying Obama called Palin a pig. That is an utterly false and stupid lie. Obama likened McCain's "change" to putting lipstick on the pig, which is a metaphor for idiot Bush's insane policies. The Republic Party operatives, including the hitmen on such Web sites as this one, are paid liars. They are such bad liars, in fact, that even a kid can see through their wild tales. Enough stupidy. Our financial system is in meltdown. And the Republic Party is playing games.

Posted by: Constitution lover | September 11, 2008 1:49 PM | Report abuse

"But, those same voters often blanch at expressions of anger, believing it to be unbecoming of a president."

There's a difference between what voters say they want and what they react to.

The SAY they don't like negative campaigning, but they REACT to it. "I didn't know that about senator so-and-so. I guess I won't vote for him."

Kinda like how women SAY they want a "nice guy" but REACT to aggressive jerks. Duh!


.
.
.

Posted by: el_barto | September 11, 2008 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Those crowds don't care a bit about Mccain or his message. Most are probably just people who went to see what was going on. It is a novelty act just something to see. I have gone to a few Mccain rallies and town hall meetings and I hate the guy. You just go for the hell of it.
I hope you did see what happened yesterday when Mccain was by himself. Hardly anyone came and he even got heckled. He canceled the rest of the day. So much for people actually caring about Mccain or what he has to say, they just wanted to see the dancing bear, the stooge, Palin. Those are not votes.

---------
Palin attracts huge crowds, so McCain gets energized and has a bigger audience to speak to when they go together. It's more effective for her to serve as opening act for him so that he can speak to thousands than if he speaks to maybe a hundred of people or so at a time.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Deeeemocrats! Come out and plaaaay!

Posted by: Stick | September 11, 2008 1:47 PM | Report abuse

he doesn't want to be picked on
but
he sure does know how to pick on women.

what a wuss!

wait till KGB Putin comes over to beat his ass. He's gonna grab him by his hair to pull him out from hiding under the presidential desk in the oval office.

definitely not the kind of president i want.

Posted by: pj | September 11, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Just wondering when McCain's VP will begin taking unscripted interviews from the media. She's been shielded thus far. Surely they don't want her to get crushed during the debates?

Posted by: MBAcapitalist | September 11, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

aren't you worried about mccain's negative image if he goes legit/honest?

Posted by: moe | September 11, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Well Aspergirl, I have to give you credit for persistence. Your daily prognostications about the demise of the Obama campaign have been a constant on these blogs since, what, February? Are you not getting tired of being wrong? Maybe your getting paid to be wrong. Is that you George?

Posted by: joebewildered | September 11, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Noun 1. baloney - pretentious or silly talk or writing

Obama/Biden 08

Posted by: Blue Star Mom | September 11, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

I am sick of both parties. Nothing is going to be accomplished by the government until something terrible happens and forces each side to work together. That really sucks.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Bump
>Anger is a reasonable response, but it is incorrect. Just as the republicans use fear and lies they also use anger. If you look at the republicat posts on this thread they are all designed to appeal to negativity, fear and anger. From the very first post through to the end it is the desire of the republicats to stir strong visceral responses because it is only in the cess-pool that they stand a chance of winning. Every time that the republicats use an old political gambit, Obama needs to turn it around and ask the governing party what they have done about the plight of ordinary Americans and point out what they have done to cause it. Obama needs to ask if Americans are better off now than they were eight years ago.

Are YOU better off now than you were eight years ago?

Posted by: Me | September 11, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Another entirely worthless Clizza post.
Memo to Mr. C: some of us are trying to elect an actual president here.

Posted by: HeavyJ | September 11, 2008 1:32 PM
__________________________________________

Amen to that, HeavyJ. Sometimes I can't believe someone actually pays these clowns write this crap! Talk about contributing absolute zero to society. First he's not angry enough, now he's too angry, next he should smile more, then he should cry openly and hug more people. Jeez! Shut the F-up already!

Posted by: Repubsux | September 11, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

You dont have to look any further than these posts to see negativity and nastiness. No wonder American politics are disappointing, Americans are disappointing.

Posted by: Chris Johnson | September 11, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

For goodness, sake, could you please talk about issues of substance? The horse race is not the most important thing. Not amateur psychology. Not amateur social psychology.

There are lots of issues that the press needs to be all over: healthcare, the war in Afghanistan, the erosion of civil liberties, the economy, the qualifications of Sarah Palin, the insulating of Sarah Palin by the McCain campaign from free questioning by the press, etc., etc., etc.

Mr. Cillizza, please live up to your responsibilities as a member of the press!

Posted by: thomasa | September 11, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

I thought pitbulls were outlawed in DC. Does that mean she'd have to stay in alaska? Lipstick or not?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Are you better off now than you were eight years ago?

Posted by: Chris | September 11, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Hopefully the debates will give us a little clearer picture. Would be nice though if they were real debates.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

what a whiner! 'ENOUGH, leave me alone.' this guy's not even man enough to take a punch.

i wonder what he'll say when the leader of China, Russia and Iran slaps him around?

this guy's embarassing.

Posted by: JP | September 11, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

The Obama campaign is in a state of intellectual bankruptcy. Some examples: Donna Brazile said on Sunday that Jesus was a community organizer while Pilates was a governor. Sen. Schumer argued on Tuesday that the U.S. economy is in a recession, even though the economy grew by 3.3 percent during the second quarter, on the grounds that “if you ask the average middle-class American, they would clearly say we are in a recession.” Sen. Stabenow contributed to the logic by arguing “we are absolutely in a recession” on the grounds that “in Michigan we have 8.5 percent unemployment.” Sen. Casey’s dutifully agreed, ”I think we have been in a recession.” These contributions to biblical history and economics remind one of Sen. Read’s recent contribution to generalship when he declared, “The war in Iraq has been lost.”

Posted by: GMDIM | September 11, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

I can't believe it. Less than two months before the election and things are breaking down pretty much exactly the way Obama said they would, with a bunch of ridiculous picayune distractions that divert our attention away from the issues.

This is the most important presidential elections in most of our lifespans. Not since the time of Kennedy, FDR, Lincoln and Washington has the fate and direction of this nation been so determinable by one man, and not just for the next 4 years, but the next 10-20. Does anyone out there really question the relevance of this election?

And yet how do we rise to the occasion, how do we step up this great responsibility that time and circumstance has charged us with? With foolish games and ill-advised coverage about semantics and remarks taken out of context, with well-beaten dead horses like military service records and convention speech soundbytes, and glasses, and moose hunting, and abortion, and kids out of wedlock, and private planes on ebay, and of course lipstick. Good job America, you get a gold star.

We as a nation are behaving like a bunch of mediocre college students, who rather than work on their term paper or study for their finals instead choose to waste time cleaning their dorms or playing video games. Brothers, Sisters, our future is in our hands. Our future and that of the next generation. What are we going to do about the economy? What are we going to do about energy? About healthcare? Education? Our standing in the world? For heaven's sake, what are we going to do about Iraq? Bin Laden? Anybody who doesn't have or doesn't wish to talk about ideas for these problems shouldn't be running for President, anybody who participates, facilitates or encourages the diversion of our attention elsewhere should be flogged.

Shame on any candidates who would seek to cheat us by making this election into a popularity contest. Shame on any in the media who treats negative frivolity like it's news. Shame on us for the part we play in letting them think it's acceptable. We've spun our wheels in this muck long enough, it's time to do the very real work of moving this country forward.

Posted by: 4Real? | September 11, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse


You saw that republican convention, it looked like a gathering of the Nazi party. Signs wit "Country first" and all the speeches in the effect of "You are either with us or you are not real americans or patriots"
Another good quote from the Nazi's that applies to the republicans is:
“…it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. … All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.”
- Hermann Goering, founder of the Gestapo and one of the main architects of Nazi Germany.
See anything familiar?
========

McCain is devoid of any ideas, so the only thing left is to roll out all the lies, distortions, distractions, hearsay, and dirty politics that he cried about in 2000. What a hypocrit! Straight from the double talk express.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:33 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Steve Schmidt is rolling in his cage.

Posted by: ratl | September 11, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Some campaigns will do anything to win. I get so tired of hearing all the attacks and no solutions to the problems that we as Americans are facing. The sad part about it is that many Americans buy into the attacks and don't recognize or fail to acknowledge the issues at hand.

Posted by: Karl P. | September 11, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Are you better off now than you were eight years ago?

Posted by: Chris | September 11, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

>>joebewildered wrote: "Exactly, Mccain is running all out and Obama is coasting at the moment. Mccain doesn't even have a VP that can campaign on her own. He has to waste his time playing nurse maid to her as she reads the same 10 minute speech over and over."

Palin attracts huge crowds, so McCain gets energized and has a bigger audience to speak to when they go together. It's more effective for her to serve as opening act for him so that he can speak to thousands than if he speaks to maybe a hundred of people or so at a time.

>>"Mean time Obama, Biden, Hillary, Obamas wife, Bill Clinton, and about a dozen powerful democratic men and women are all going on the road."

Obama needs help campaigning because he gave up federal funding. So he has to spend the next 2 months both campaigning and fundraising. So that puts a dent in his schedule and he needs help.

Hillary Clinton is just ensuring that people don't blame her if Obama loses, which she is doing quite sensibly by helping him as much as she can. If it weren't for that, Obama wouldn't be on their Fall schedule at all.

"Powerful democratic men and women". LOL. People only care about celebrities or those candidates who were eliminated in earlier primaries and had a passionate following. Is anyone supposed to care if Claire McCaskill shows up at some Mall for Obama? LOL.

Biden is on the trail, but he's a ridiculously bad campaigner. He's about at compelling as any old blowhard doofus could be. He speaks as if mesmerized by the sound of his own voice droning.

>>"It is easy now to see what Obama has planed as an end game. He is going to out campaign Mccain 10 to 1 all the way to the wire. He is already even now or maybe a little ahead now. Although it may be closer then they originally thought, they will cross the line with a pretty good margin."

I think he's always counted on "the ground game".

>>"I find the strangest thing that Mccain doesn't seem to have even one prominent Republican out there campaigning for him, not one. Not even Graham or Lieberman his best buddies. Romney has already said he is exploring running in 2012 so we know how much he cares about Mccain."

I'm not sure what you think is "campaigning out there for him" means. Who is campaigning out there for Obama who makes a difference except for the Clintons?

Republicans don't really like McCain. They think he's a liberal and bucks the party too much. They think he'll just work along with the Democrats and pass a lot of environmental and pro-Immigrant legislation, if he gets elected.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Anger is a reasonable response, but it is incorrect. Just as the republicans use fear and lies they also use anger. If you look at the republicat posts on this thread they are all designed to appeal to negativity, fear and anger. From the very first post through to the end it is the desire of the republicats to stir strong visceral responses because it is only in the cess-pool that they stand a chance of winning. Every time that the republicats use an old political gambit, Obama needs to turn it around and ask the governing party what they have done about the plight of ordinary Americans and point out what they have done to cause it. Obama needs to ask if Americans are better off now than they were eight years ago.

Are YOU better off now than you were eight years ago?

Posted by: Chris | September 11, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Everybody knew that it was going to be a nasty campaign. We know the Democratic personalities pretty well after a year of primaries. The surprise element is really McCain who not only betrayed Bush for whom he still campaigned in 2004, but also his primary voters. Having outlined
the exact qualifications his VP would need during the primaries, he weakly caved in to the extreme Right, and picked a VP instead who possesses NONE of these qualifications.

Posted by: bodo | September 11, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

"Anger is what's killing Obama's campaign and eating up the Democrats. The anger directed by Democrats towards people who would dare vote for someone other than Obama continues to grow and is driving more people away from him."

Already been through that in the primary. At some point you have to start questioning the divisiveness of the Obama campaign. Is everyone who is against him really racist, dumb, or clinging? Could it be we just are not thrilled by him? Not that I like McCain. I think this year is going to be a 3rd party or write-in for me.

Posted by: hdimig | September 11, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, sure, right! Obama has to be very cautious lest he offend someone, somewhere...but McShame and Pallid can spew just the worst sort of obscene lies and vicious attacks and that's OK? Maybe the media could get off its collective a$$es and do its job and actually let the public get a glimpse of the complete and total HYPOCRISY that permeates every syllable, every nuance of the Republican campaign message.

Posted by: nighthawksoars | September 11, 2008 1:35 PM | Report abuse

McCain is devoid of any ideas, so the only thing left is to roll out all the lies, distortions, distractions, hearsay, and dirty politics that he cried about in 2000. What a hypocrit! Straight from the double talk express.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Another entirely worthless Clizza post.

Memo to Mr. C: some of us are trying to elect an actual president here.

Posted by: HeavyJ | September 11, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

America has to wake up. Two consecutive mistakes did cost us too much. We should learn to research about the candidates ourselves and not just watch the TV. We must learn to recognize the "Lies and the lying liars who tell them".

Posted by: Ron | September 11, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse


I have met Obama and like him or not. Take a look at his political past. If people don't think he doesn't know how to win they are crazy. He said just the other day "He may not throw the first punch but he always throws the last".
That is not boastful rhetoric. Obama is a winner he has been his whole life. He can be nice and he can be ruthless if he needs to be. I have to tell you, I go to the Obama office as a volunteer and they are not worried in the least. They seem to really know what they are doing, and know they know what they are doing.

=========
I think Obama and his team knew that McCain and his campaign are nasty. But it hit him in surprise that they are so nasty - out of any normal people's wild imagination.

Posted by: Sam | September 11, 2008 1:18 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

McCain tells spurious lies like he's got two minutes to live and wants to swindle as many people as he can before he kicks off - and Obama isn't supposed to push back against this idiotic nonsense? Please.

I simply cannot people are crazy enough to vote for this geezer fool and his out-of-nowhere VP choice who is so inexperienced that she's scared to death of even submitting to an INTERVIEW from the media. McCain votes with Bush over 90% of the time after 8 years of Republicans destroying this country - and then has the gall to try to run on the mantle of reform and change. He must think the US populace is a bunch of idiots. I guess we'll find out if that's true come election time...

Posted by: edsbowlingshoe | September 11, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

There are plenty of unexamined assumptions in this piece ("Voters like passionate candidates, politicians who believe (or at least appear to believe) in the positions they stake out." What does this even mean?). Note that when McCain goes negative/angry, he is a 'happy warrior,' but when Obama does it, it is 'problematic.' Obama is the one who must 'tread lightly' while the Mccain camp accuses him of being sexist and teaching kindergartners about sex. Also, 'emotion' is good while 'anger' is bad. Isn't 'anger' an 'emotion?' Would pointing out the injustice of, say, Guantanamo Bay qualify as 'anger' or 'emotion?'

Leave the punditry to the 24-hour news channels. The Post is better than this.

Posted by: Deconstructing | September 11, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse

As a former candidate, journalist and observer of American politics, I agree that Obama must be restrained when he unleashes his displays of anger and outrage. However, if he's too restrained it will mark him as a docile, Adlai Stevenson/John Kerry type: too hamstrung by his intellect and sense of fairplay to fight back. He should say "Enough!" if he gets a dumb flag pin type question in the debates or if McCain tries to play the Patriot card. And Joe Biden should forcefully, intelligently and unequivocally take Palin to school on how the world is beyond moose burgers and being a hockey mom.

Posted by: Soonerthought.blogspot.com | September 11, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Chris, you got it wrong. This election is not a personality contest unless you live in strong red states where McCain will win with or without Palin. Voters are sensitive on economics and who has better economic plans. It's Obama.

Voters are concerned on national issues ranging from Iraq to economy to education to national security to on and on and on. Obama has much more superior plans than McCain does.

People in a small number of red states where McCain will win anyway are turning this election into a high school popularity contest. And they think McCain is a cool stud. But they do not see McCain's character flaws.

McCain's recent attacks against Obama clearly show that he has a mind of a rapist. McCain had in the past committed sexual sins and I would not be surprised if McCain had ever raped women in Vietnam before he was captured.

In this election, McCain is a bad high school bully with serious moral depravity. I would never vote for a guy like McCain in a high school prom king election, even if he dates a beauty queen that everyone in his red high school adores.

Posted by: American Spirit | September 11, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Obama and his advisors will do well in figuring out best tone to use, as they are very, very talented.

Bu we liberals are not helping our case by getting so confrontational. Keep the focus on the issues, because people are hurting. That's what many people want....

Posted by: upwards | September 11, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

I'm f'ing Matt Damon!

Posted by: Michelle Obama | September 11, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Anger is what's killing Obama's campaign and eating up the Democrats. The anger directed by Democrats towards people who would dare vote for someone other than Obama continues to grow and is driving more people away from him.

Posted by: Ted | September 11, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Lipstick or not, mad pitbulls (or pigs for that matter) must be terminated.

Posted by: Ron | September 11, 2008 1:25 PM | Report abuse

The fact is we know who John McCain is. For better or worse, what you see is what you get. Not so with Obama. Axelrod has managed to put a mask on Obama that none of his worshipers are attempting to remove. However, we have his past records, his associations and his comments during unguarded moments. Obama is the Marxist, socialist Manchurian Canidate. If you want to see permanant damage to our military, economy and constitution, vote BHO.

Posted by: Bill | September 11, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

What else can the affirmative action boy do? He can't run on his record, because there isn't any. No governing experience either. Now, some of his supporters are trying to compare him to Jesus, but Jesus wasn't pro abortion and homosexuality. That won't work either.
He doesn't need to met with Predator Clinton, since he already lies about a much as Clinton does.

Posted by: LarryG62 | September 11, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

Great post "MarkInAustin"!

Posted by: Maceo from Maryland | September 11, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

KEITH OLBERMANN SHUT UP!!! YOU ARE THE REASON OBAMA IS TANKING YOU POMPOUS A55HAT!!! YOU THINK YOU'RE HELPING BUT IT'S BLOWING UP IN OUR FACES!!!! GO SOMEWHERE AND HIDE UNTIL AFTER NOV 4TH FOR GOD'S SAKE!!!!

Posted by: Obama '08 | September 11, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

Exactly, Mccain is running all out and Obama is coasting at the moment. Mccain doesn't even have a VP that can campaign on her own. He has to waste his time playing nurse maid to her as she reads the same 10 minute speech over and over. Mean time Obama, Biden, Hillary, Obamas wife, Bill Clinton, and about a dozen powerful democratic men and women are all going on the road. It is easy now to see what Obama has planed as an end game. He is going to out campaign Mccain 10 to 1 all the way to the wire. He is already even now or maybe a little ahead now. Although it may be closer then they originally thought, they will cross the line with a pretty good margin.
I find the strangest thing that Mccain doesn't seem to have even one prominent Republican out there campaigning for him, not one. Not even Graham or Lieberman his best buddies. Romney has already said he is exploring running in 2012 so we know how much he cares about Mccain.

=======
So McCain fired his best (and only) shot with the Palin selection and achieved what Aspergirl calls "rough electoral parity" including being behind in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. His national lead (as much as 10 points in one poll) has evaporated in a few days.

Meanwhile, Obama is running competitively in traditional red states including Colorado, and North Carolina, and is at least challenging in states like Montana and Missouri.

When you get down to brass tacks, McCain will have to pull out every dirty trick in the book just to stay even and will likely blow through his $85 million in short order. Will he have anything left to fund on the ground operations come November?

Obama has well funded and well organized ground operations in all 50 states. If McCain is no better than a few points up come election day he will be crushed by Obama's ground game.

Whaddya think Aspergirl?

Posted by: joebewildered | September 11, 2008 1:02 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

--"What is "swift boat" politics?"--

It's where you make up fabrications about your opponent, put them in your advertising as if it's true. Everyone but the fact check people would call these 'lies', but there you go.


--"How does complaining about "lipstick on a pig" qualify?
Posted by: Ed | September 11, 2008 12:45 PM
"--

Because the charge that Obama was referring to Palin when he used the expression 'Lipstick on a pig' - is a lie. That would make the people who say such things 'liars'. You'd think that a large swath of the decent hard working America voters wouldn't really appreciate liars, but the current polls show otherwise.


Posted by: NoOneImportant | September 11, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Obama can't win. If he doesn't respond with anger he is considered too soft, in the image of Kerry or Gore. He can't win. I personally like the fact that he is angry that precious time that should be devoted to the many serious issues this country has is being wasted on the "Lipstick on a pig" BS!!!

Posted by: Maceo from Maryland | September 11, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

I think Obama and his team knew that McCain and his campaign are nasty. But it hit him in surprise that they are so nasty - out of any normal people's wild imagination.

Posted by: Sam | September 11, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse


Most Muslims shy away from pork. But apparently not in case of the Socialist Obama.

He loves Pork. $1 BILLION in PORK spending. How Much? ONE BILLION in less than 3 yrs as a not so impressive most Liberal Senator.

Wow, that is a huge plate of pulled PORK!

Obama and Biden are first class blue plate PORKERS. Huge potbelly LIBERAL PIGS!!


Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:16 PM | Report abuse


Fight Fight Fight !!!

I am a Pittbull with lipstick !!!

and
"Enough" is a sign of getting mad ????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????

Get a life


Posted by: Enough | September 11, 2008 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Friends, compatriots, fellow-lamenters,
>> We are writing to you because of the fury and dread we have
>> feltsince the announcement of Sarah Palin as the Vice-Presidential
>> candidate for the Republican Party. We believe that this terrible
>> decision has surpassed mere partisanship, and that it is a dangerous
>> farce in the part of a pandering and rudderless Presidential
>> candidate that has a real possibility of becoming fact.
>>
>> Perhaps like us, as American women, you share the fear of what Ms.
>> Palin and her professed beliefs and proven record could lead to for
>> ourselves and for our present or future daughters. To date, she is
>> against sex education, birth control, the pro-choice
>> platform, environmental protection, alternative energy
>> development, freedom of
>> speech (as mayor she wanted to ban books and attempted to fire),
>> the separation
>> of church and state, and polar bears. To say nothing of her complete
>> lack of real preparation to become the second-most-powerful person on
>> the planet.
>>
>> We want to clarify that we are not against Sarah Palin a a woman, a
>> mother, or, for that matter, a parent of a pregnant teenager, but
>> solely as a rash, incompetent, and all together
>> devastating choice for Vice President. Ms. Palin's political views
>> are in every way a slap in
>> the face to the accomplishments that our mothers and grandmothers
>> and great-grandmothers so fiercely fought for, and that we've so
>> demonstrably benefited from.
>> First and foremost, Ms. Palin does not represent us. She does not
>> demonstrate or uphold our interests as American women. It is
>> presumed that the inclusion of a woman on the Republican ticket
>> could win over women voters. We want to disagree, publicly.
>>
>> Therefore, we invite you to reply here witha short, succinct message
>> about why you, as a woman living in this country, do not support
>> this candidate as second-in-command for our nation.Please include
>> your name (last initial is fine), age, and
>> place of residence.
>>
>> We will post your responses on a blog called "Women
>> Against Sarah Palin,"which we intend to publicize as widely as
>> possible. Please
>> send us your reply at your earliest convenience?the greater the
>> volume
>> of responses we receive, the stronger our message will be.
>> Thank you for your time and action.
>> VIVA!
>> Sincerely,
>> womensaynopalin@gmail.com
>>

Posted by: lndlouis | September 11, 2008 1:16 PM | Report abuse

I'm f'ing Matt Damon!

Posted by: Keith Olbermann | September 11, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

I think Obama has enough talent to walk the line between passionate and too angry.

He needs to show some anger to keep his base happy because of what happened last year with the Swift Boaters.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

So Obama is not allowed to be angry - after not only 8 YEARS of BushCo lies and crimes, but the blatant LIES and McBush spews about him day after day? But McBUSH who aided and abetted BushCo can be angry all he wants and that's just A-OK?

Congratulations...this has to be the stupidest article I've ever read in the McBushington Post...and that is really saying something!

Posted by: ccatmoon | September 11, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl?

Posted by: joebewildered | September 11, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: manythings: I guess we NOW are going to vote for the younger generation? Well, IMO the younger generation knows absolutely nothing about how the government works. They will, however, listen to you and probably vote for the "WANNABE STAR". One because they think is so good looking, even though, not to the middle age or older group and now you are telling them to vote for HUSSEIN OBAMA just because he is young. Are you famaliar with what so many of the young people are doing today? Maybe you should be the one to wake up and see just what you are wanting for OUR COUNTRY! Actually, we are left with NO one capable, to vote for, what a shame! NO PRESIDENT HUSSEIN!!!!!!!

Posted by: smaggie | September 11, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse


You don't have an F'n clue what you are looking at. You make money on intrade by jumping in and out. You don't make a buy and ride it to the end. I bought Mccain a few days ago and I am voting for Obama.. I bought Mccain at 39 and dumped it today. I may buy him again but I doubt it, the flash in a pan effect may be over. Look to see Mccain really drop as people take their profits over the next week or so. When you see intrade say they predicted the winners so accurately it is usually in the last few days. People will buy who they really think will win.

===========
OH YEAH, THE ATTACKING OBAMA REALLY IS A WINNER:

INTRADE 09/11

MCCAIN WIN: 51.5
OBAMA WIN: 48.0

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 12:50 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

So McCain fired his best (and only) shot with the Palin selection and achieved what Aspergirl calls "rough electoral parity" including being behind in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. His national lead (as much as 10 points in one poll) has evaporated in a few days.

Meanwhile, Obama is running competitively in traditional red states including Colorado, and North Carolina, and is at least challenging in states like Montana and Missouri.

When you get down to brass tacks, McCain will have to pull out every dirty trick in the book just to stay even and will likely blow through his $85 million in short order. Will he have anything left to fund on the ground operations come November?

Obama has well funded and well organized ground operations in all 50 states. If McCain is no better than a few points up come election day he will be crushed by Obama's ground game.

Whaddya think Aspergirl?

Posted by: joebewildered | September 11, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Obama's problem is that he's still running for the Democratic nomination. Anger at the present state of affairs, Republicans think you're stupid, vote for me because I'm the most not like Bush -- all these themes play well to decided Democratic voters. But that's not who he needs to reach to win. Anybody who's angry at Bush and Republicans is already in Obama's column. The one who aren't simply don't feel that angry about Bush and the state of the country - and showing anger will only turn them off.

Posted by: posteroid | September 11, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

The republicans know they are going to lose. They are desperate because they won't get all of the electoral college points needed to win the election. Obama should stay calm and just do what he did to Hillary. Sit back and let McCain show that he's just another crooked politician. He's the one whose not smearing. He's the one who doesn't need to make mountains out of mole hills. It's his election to lose not McCains to win. McCain reminds me of Bob Dole. No way do we elect leaders who look that sickly and old. Bill Clinton won because he was a "younger" fresher face. Thats why Obama will win. He embodies change where McCain merely just talks about it.

Posted by: manythings | September 11, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

The Democratic primary was instructive. Despite the vituperative attacks on the internet between supporters, the action was actually mild between the two candidates. Obama saw the effect of the "teary moment" in New Hampshire and was circumspect and Hillary, with African Americans such a key constituency in the primary and the general was fairly circumspect up until near the end when AA's abandoned her in the party.

Now, in the general, there is another dynamic. The AA vote is a write off from the Republicans so they are free to attack while they have used Palin successfully as a stalking horse branded with the Democratic victim meme.

Posted by: Ed | September 11, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Mccain tried to have a rally yesterday after Palin left and could not draw flies. In fact he got booed and people were yelling Obama. He could not even draw enough people to even look like he had support. Palin is a novelty we can see that now. No one cares one bit about Mccain. After what happened yesterday Mccain canceled his other stops. Palin is a stooge and a novelty that will wear thin soon.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

This sums up the election.

republican voters are stupid.

Posted by: OneFreeMan | September 11, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

OH YEAH, THE ATTACKING OBAMA REALLY IS A WINNER:

INTRADE 09/11

MCCAIN WIN: 51.5
OBAMA WIN: 48.0

Note that the last, REALLY BIG drop was yesterday, on the "lipstick on a pig, smells like a fish" flap day. The chart looks like a spike on the right hand side.

Which brings us to an interesting point as to whether the media helps or hurts Obama anymore in attacking Palin or providing cover for attacks on the other ticket.

Despite how it might seem to liberal journalists like the Washington Post, which put up all these articles attacking the McCain campaign for objecting to the language, it seems that others agree.

If there was an Intrade about media credibility, I bet it took a big hit in the past day, too.

What credible argument is there, really, for attacking someone who objects to scurrilously-worded insults? I mean, either you agree with their opinion on how they were offended or you don't disagree with their opinion. But there is never any legitimacy for attacking someone for claiming to be offended.

The media yesterday (and with its current cheerleading for Obama to get angry and more attacking) is willing to lend its destructive help to Democrats ever election cycle, helping them fail.

I would suggest the best and only constructive thing the media can do at this point is try to redeem itself, report objectively, and let Obama work out his strategy without anymore "help", "advice" and by setting aside its "villagers with pitchforks" assistance attacking the other side.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Wonder if there is truth that the actual candidate that bumps off mutual opponent will win November's elections? Apparently the mutual opponent exposed corruption within both parties and now is targeted by candidates.

Since both candidates are side by side today in NYC for 9/11 ceremonies and mutual opponent is nearby, wonder if attempts will be made on his life when he jogs after work nearby Hackensack, NJ since all his habits and plans are known in advance due to bugging devices both in public and private? Or will it be in the town next door Bogota, NJ where he sometimes veer into and detail well known?

Will the candidates engage in the popular law enforcement activity of 'sweetheart exchange deals' where crimes/murders are committed in exchange for less jail time on behalf of real culprits? For example, will GOP use Guiliani-like mob ties such as his protege convicted Bernard Kerik with 140 years jail time? Or will Dems use OJ Simpson-like convict with jail time instead?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

That may be behind many of the posts here but I live in the south and I can tell you, I know people who are down right bigots who will be voting for Obama. At a point you have to put your own issues ahead of the silly feelings of the past. I am sure there are some who just will not vote for black man but the number may be much lower then people think. I go to a diner that was segregated and the place where there was a sit in in the 60's that resulted in a small riot back then. Today you will find the good old boys voting for Obama. I am old enough to remember and would never have believed it.
========

To all McCain supporters out there who comb the swamps and manure piles to justify their support, why don't you own up to the fact that Obama is not white enough for you. Instead of taking an objective look at the candidates, you would rather wallow in the muck and mire of a 'saying' which said absolutely nothing to disparage this unworthy Vice Pres. candidate. Try going back to school and learn to read and comprehend the written word, so you can understand how the phrase was used to describe policy and not personalities. But I guess it would be too much strain to put on your small, uninformed brains, to put your prejudices aside and look at the facts. I guess you also applauded going to war without knowing the facts because a Republican was in the White House. The real patriot is someone who is willing to stand up and say "its wrong", no matter who is in the White House.

Posted by: Thud | September 11, 2008 12:38 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl:

Care to comment on the most recent Ohio poll?

Posted by: joebewildered | September 11, 2008 12:47 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA ON ELECTORAL MAP DECLINE LAST WEEKEND AFTER THE REPUBLICAN CONVENTION

Below are all the states where there has been a shift in status favoring one candidate over the other, since last weekend (after the Republican convention was over) at RCP. All the shifts favor McCain.

DATE STATE ----------- HOW CHANGED

09/11 Florida -------- "toss up" to "leaning McCain"
09/11 Georgia -------- "leaning McCain" to "Solid McCain"
09/09 North Carolina - "toss up" to "leaning McCain"
09/09 New Jersey ----- "Solid Obama" to "leaning Obama"
09/08 Washington ----- "Solid Obama" to "leaning Obama"
09/07 Pennsylvania --- "leaning Obama" to "toss up"

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/election_2008/electoral_count.html

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 12:36 PM

------

Asper, is this all related to the "Biden Bounce"

Posted by: Obama2012 | September 11, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Since the lame duckers are addressing energy, that will be the next issue with substance. That doesn't bode well for Obama either. Thank you, Speaker Pelosi, for your awesome sense of timing.

Posted by: Ed | September 11, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

"Okay morons, we all know that others, including McCain have used the phrase "lipstick on a a pig" before. BFD None of them used it a few days after a female candidate used lipstick in a joke."

So, once Palin makes a joke, the subject matter is off-limits? Is that true for McCain too - how about for the Dems - do they get to lay claim to various swaths of material that McCAin-Palin can't touch? Hey - maybe that's why McCAin Palin aren't talking policy. Obama-Biden talked about it first, so McCain Palin aren't allowed. Same goes for live interviews.

Posted by: bsimon | September 11, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

What is "swift boat" politics? How does complaining about "lipstick on a pig" qualify? I'm beginning to think that anything that keeps the Democrats from setting the terms of political debate is "swifboat" politics.

Posted by: Ed | September 11, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Before the RNC convention McCain's focus was on Obama's inexperience. Now that he has Palin he can't use that line, so his campaign is using innoculous comments like lipstick on a pig to distract voters away from what really matters in any campaign - the candidate's stand on the issues. If Palin weren't in this campaign and the same statement were made, it wouldn't have gotten the attention it has.

Women who are making a big issue of this are doing no favors to the women of America. Women want equality, by raising this issue of the lipstick you're playing the gender card which distracts voters from learning about Palin's ability to be Vice President. You just want Palin because she's a female, irregardless that she may not be the best qualified person to be VP.

McCain doesn't want to talk about the issues, especially the economy since he and his family are well insulated from the effects of high gas prices, rising food costs, deteriorating health care systems, a broken public education system.

McCain and Palin don't represent the kind of change we need in Washington. They would continue the Bush-Cheney tradition of "executive privelege" keeping everything secret (look at Palin's use of "Executive Privelege" to protect her e-mails as governor - some that included on her husband on the list of official e-mails). We need executive leadership that is transparent. For the past 8 years we've had an executive who's decisions are made under a cloak of secrecy and look where that has led.

As a female I don't see anything sexist in comments being made by the Obama campaign. Obama has always tried to keep his campaign focused on what a campaign is all about the real issues. This election is too important for voters to be way laid by petty statements like lipstick on a pig. If voters priorities are based on such comments then they will have to take responsibility for their actions if McCain gets in and nothing changes and America slips further behind.

This election gives Americans a chance to be part of the solution to our problems. If we elect more of the same then we're part of the problem. So if you choose more of the past 8 years - don't complain about your money being spent on Iraq, don't complain when your jobs are sent overseas, and don't complain about Roe B. Wade being overturned.

Just look at the last election. Not long after you re-elected Bush and he started to do things or not do things that you didn't like you began to complain. You knew before he was re-elected what his administration was like yet you chose to give him another 4 years and look at the mess we're in. Will the same thing happen this year? I hope not.

Posted by: nevadaandy | September 11, 2008 12:43 PM | Report abuse

The RCP electoral map now shows rough parity in its electoral vote projections:

Obama/Biden 217

157 Solid 60 Leaning

McCain/Palin 216

157 Solid 59 Leaning

Toss Up 105

105 Toss Up

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

To all McCain supporters out there who comb the swamps and manure piles to justify their support, why don't you own up to the fact that Obama is not white enough for you. Instead of taking an objective look at the candidates, you would rather wallow in the muck and mire of a 'saying' which said absolutely nothing to disparage this unworthy Vice Pres. candidate. Try going back to school and learn to read and comprehend the written word, so you can understand how the phrase was used to describe policy and not personalities. But I guess it would be too much strain to put on your small, uninformed brains, to put your prejudices aside and look at the facts. I guess you also applauded going to war without knowing the facts because a Republican was in the White House. The real patriot is someone who is willing to stand up and say "its wrong", no matter who is in the White House.

Posted by: Thud | September 11, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

There is a very clear reason for Obama not picking Hillary for VP. It is his inner, well hidden chauvinism against women. I know many Islamic men and one thing they all have in common if their disregard for women. Just look at how women are treated in Muslim countries to know this is the norm. Now you may ask what this has to do with Obama. Well it is widely known that children are very susceptible to indoctrination of a given belief system. The Muslims know that by getting to children young and indoctrinating them in the ways of the Koran keeps them i the fold as they grow older. Obama received this vary indoctrination as a young student in a Muslim school located in Indonesia. This indoctrination he received is now manifesting itself in the fact he passed over Hillary for the VP slot. Any normal thinking politician would have never passed over a candidate that garnered 18 million votes. Can you image McCain passing over Romney if he had received the same number of votes as he did in the primaries? Of course you can't. IMO, the claims of sexism against Obama are probably more truthful than anyone can possibly believe.

Posted by: obiewan | September 11, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA ON ELECTORAL MAP DECLINE LAST WEEKEND AFTER THE REPUBLICAN CONVENTION

Below are all the states where there has been a shift in status favoring one candidate over the other, since last weekend (after the Republican convention was over) at RCP. All the shifts favor McCain.

DATE STATE ----------- HOW CHANGED

09/11 Florida -------- "toss up" to "leaning McCain"
09/11 Georgia -------- "leaning McCain" to "Solid McCain"
09/09 North Carolina - "toss up" to "leaning McCain"
09/09 New Jersey ----- "Solid Obama" to "leaning Obama"
09/08 Washington ----- "Solid Obama" to "leaning Obama"
09/07 Pennsylvania --- "leaning Obama" to "toss up"

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/election_2008/electoral_count.html

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

For everyone except the JasonKs and Jabbers here (and are they for real?) it was pretty clear that the'lipstick on a pig' comment was precisely on point, discussing McCain's economic policies, and McCain's pretenses that those policies are something other than what they are. It had nothing to do with Palin, who wasn't even mentioned.

The contrived outrage of the McCain campaign about this is just more of the same venemous dishonesty we got from Rove and Friends in the LAST two elections: intentional deception. That is to say, lies.

Posted by: Iconoblaster | September 11, 2008 12:33 PM | Report abuse

I will give you an analogy I have to write grants for research but if the institution that I work at was to raise the percentage of my grant they took for administrative overhead I would factor that into my grant proposals (I would not eat that money). In the same way, Obama’s proposal will only cost tax payers more. His proposal would also hurt many businesses that depend on the energy sector most noticeable trucking and airline industries. The mark-up in fuel will affect them which will be passed on to us through added surcharges on products and services we use (I have seen it when ordering laboratory supplies).

His other proposal is to add a 50 billion dollar stimulus package to the economy. If the previous 100 billion dollar stimulus package did not work that well what will another 50 billion do. Why not another 100 billion does he have a reason for the number other than appearing to be doing something.

To say that either candidate has thought of constructive ways at stimulating the economy is to wear blinders. McCain is a do nothing approach, while Obama is a stick it to the man (i.e., populous) approach. Neither approach will do much.


Posted by: sltiowa | September 11, 2008 11:55 AM
=================================
sltiowa...it is not often that you find a post that actually offers intelligent discourse. So thank you.

However, on your post to mentioned that the oil companies will reap their tax back from the consumer which is true in any business. Increased costs are often handed down to the consumer because businesses are in business to make a profit. But, some of the incentives that are offered to oil companies can be curbed. They now enjoy many tax loopholes that allow them to defer what would otherwise be profit in to other areas such as R&D. Most companies do not get that exemption. If a company wants to do research and development they pay for it themselves. Like you many look at the profit margins of the oil companies under the guise of 6-8% on the dollar which is fair but not telling. The profits for the sake of the consumer should be looked at in dollars not percentage. Oil companies are unique in the sense that they provide a product that MUST be used by the consumer where choice is limitted. Currently the industry is unregulated. Because it is, they can pretty much control the pricing structure as we have seen them do over the past 8 years. The cost of production has not necessarily increased bu the cost of the product has. Earlier this year the president requested the OPEC produce more oil; their response was why? There is plenty of supply. When we started reducing our demand then we saw that price adjusted. We (consumers) can have control with the right leader.

As far as the stimulus is concerned, the first payment went towards paying down debt or paying for utility services by a large part of the population. In order for the the economy to see a boost, the checks need to be spent not saved. A second stimulus would hopefully see consumers in a better position where that money can be spent not saved or used towards utilities thereby adding the needed boost that we are hoping for.

Thanks

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 12:32 PM | Report abuse

It's good that everyone is discussing lipstick and personality based campaign strategy. It's so much more fun than boring stuff like deficits, jobs, and health care. WaPo should look at the NYT for how to cover an election: with a front page story on the hockey playing teenagers in Alaska. That's what the voters want to know about!

Posted by: turningfool | September 11, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

It's interesting to read about the stupidity of these fearful and rough tough trash bashing REPUBLICANS. Funny how they have done nothing but trashed Obama with lies and they have the audasity to be offended because he talked about a pig and lipstick. Once again another Republican tactic since they have nothing better to talk about and no credibility what about our jobs and healthcare and housing. We hear nothing out of McCain and Palin but the war. A war we the American people are frustrustrated and tired about. To Karen who said Obama is telling untruths about McCain's comment about the war and the 5 million that's a true statement he said it on TV. To AsperGirl how idioc you are, you have the nerve to talk about Obama doesn't sound like a president. Well hell Bush was a drunk wasn't too bright and he was president. In addition, McCain talks like an old creepy version of the someone who played on the show the "Monsters". Don't continue to sound ignorant which is what it appears to be. But oh thats right another FEARFUL OUTSPOKEN REPUBLICAN right. They can bash everyone else but we have to sit by patiently and let you try to discredit and degrade us. Not! think again. Remember Igonarance is dangerous look at our country now its the laughing stock of the world because of the REPULICANS and McCain oops I mean George Bush.

Posted by: commonsense | September 11, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Did you know that John McCain is in support of child molesters? (He seems like such a nice old man.) Obama supported legislation enabling kindergarten teachers to instruct our kids about inappropriate touching. But McCain? He's against that commonsense idea. It's time McCain got some education in what needs to be done in schools today.

Posted by: Shocked parent | September 11, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

I am a paid operative of the McCain campaign. It's getting hard to keep it up; I keep getting this irresistable impulse to confess.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

The weak and faltering John McCain is not in control of his own campaign:

-- They produce tawdry ads that try to attack Obama but end up making McCain look filthy.

-- They issue silly pronouncements full of fake outrage about casual turns of phrase that McCain uses all the time.

-- They are afraid to let the shallow Sarah Palin speak for herself with serious reporters.

-- They are afraid to offer specific areas in which McCain differs from Bush... because there are none at all.

-- The McCain's slime campaign is part of the culture of ethical failure that has been the hallmark of the Bush administration (Check the current sex scandal at the Interior Department for the most recent manifestation of this sick crowd's work.)

The voters have had enough of this diseased and deceitful group. McCain is trying his worst to keep the Republicans in power, but we are turning against them and will throw the rubbish out in November.

Posted by: DaleEvans | September 11, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

McCain needs to get a DVD player; that old Beta copy of Top Gun that he watches every night is getting old.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Kagne West (sp?)

Wasn't this that guy that sand that stupid song at the Dem's Convention?

Just arrested at the Airport and hauled off in handcuffs at LAX for attacking a news person.

Another in the long line of Thugs that Barack Obama calls friends and hangs with.

Bill Ayers The Terrorist Pentagon bomber
Tony Rezco Convicted Felon
Rev Wrong The Racist "reverend"
( not worthy to be called Reverend
Gagme West Thugs Inc.
"Father Flagler" another racist divider
etc, etc, etc

The guy can't even judge the character of these people. Like your Mom used to say, she can tell what your up to by the character of the people you hang out with.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

NoToBo,

It's interesting that you pretend to think Obama's self-obsessed, and yet suport McCain, whose use of the word "maverick" is starting to sound like Rudy G. and his pitiful use of "911" as an answer to everything. And his pretense of being a hero, evoking his Vietnam experience at every turn is lame and unseemly... almost as much as being stupid enough to be shot down and captured by the North Vietnamese when he was trying to kill them from above with little chance of being hurt himself...

since when did dropping bombs on defenseless kids become heroic? and what about taping political statements for the Vietcong denouncing the country he now wants to lead?

Posted by: God | September 11, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

I find it amusing when right-wingers pontificate on what intelligent people think.

I predict that Obama will surgically slice McCain to pieces and you won't even see his hands move. I think its already begun.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

NoToBo,

It's interesting that you pretend to think Obama's self-obsessed, and yet suport McCain, whose use of the word "maverick" is starting to sound like Rudy G. and his pitiful use of "911" as an answer to everything. And his pretense of being a hero, evoking his Vietnam experience at every turn is lame and unseemly... almost as much as being stupid enough to be shot down and captured by the North Vietnamese when he was trying to kill them from above with little chance of being hurt himself...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

"Asper Girl, Are you ever going to come up with something that makes sense?"

NO

Posted by: Aspergirl | September 11, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Obama is in a catch 22 and it has been perpetuated by the GOP. If he is too defensive and sinks to the name calling, then he will be just another politician turned dirty. If he says nothing than people will say he doesn't display the leadership needed for the President. This is disconcerting when our country faces real issues.

Obama will get my vote for two reasons. 1) He at least talks about the issues and tries to come up with viable solutions and 2) The alternative is simply too scary a proposition in my opinion.

Posted by: Josh | September 11, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

"I mean, you have Rush Limbaugh playing and replaying the audio of how he said this stuff, with his audience hooting and cheering and shouting "No pit bull", and then asking his audience, Isn't it obvious it was a smear?"

Only to lame-brained wing nuts. What else is Rush telling you to think?

Posted by: bondjedi | September 11, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Okay morons, we all know that others, including McCain have used the phrase "lipstick on a a pig" before. BFD None of them used it a few days after a female candidate used lipstick in a joke.

Look at the crowd behind Obama. Regardless of what Obama intended, its clear that the crowd thought he was finally hitting back at Palin, the same way the moonbats have been taking cheap shots at her on this blog.

Same for the bridge to no where. Yak on about it. Eventually someone in the biased liberal media will ask why both Obama and Biden voted against killing the bridge to no where and using the money for hurricane relief. How do they talk about a bridge so much and never get around to mentioning that Obama and Biden VOTED FOR IT.

Posted by: Razorback | September 11, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

>>DB wrote: "Stunningly, I agree with AsperGirl on this one."

Oh come on, you have to at least also agree with at least one other point of mine:

"The only group of people Biden helps Obama relate to are baggage handlers."

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 12:21 PM | Report abuse

John McCain used the lipstick on a pig crack against Hillary Clinton's health care policies; Barack Obama used the exact same phrase against McCain's Bush-like policies.

What was the difference? The Repulsives (with the collaboration of the media) blew Obama's comments sky-high in order to distract us from considering the serious issues facing our nation today.

This approach is already backfiring on the GOP. Voters are wondering why the McCain campaign is afraid to let Sarah (Porkbarrel) Palin answer questions from serious reporters. Voters want to know what McCain plans to do about getting our troops out of Iraq in the next 16 months. We want to know what McCain proposes to do to create new jobs, to jumpstart our faltering economy, and to revive our decimated international standing.

In short, how is McCain different from Bush? Since the Republicans do not have an answer to this basic question, they are trying to cloud up the screen and confuse the public.

Are we stupid enough to fall for the McCain cover-up? Time will tell, but the outlook is not good for the Republicans.

Posted by: dee | September 11, 2008 12:17 PM | Report abuse

I think Obama's "lipstick and pig" comment was a deliberate, and brilliant double entendre. The people who were never going to vote for him anyway took the comment and reacted rather predictably, and they will keep this issue alive for at least a few more days. In the mean time, undecided voters at the political center have had the McCain/Palin ticket and a lipsticked pig have become linked, fair or not. An additional benefit is that the "pit bull with lipstick" phrase that worked so well initially with Sarah Palin has been rendered essentially useless now.

Obama has now proven that the GOP is not the only group that can manipulate the intellectually challenged on the right. He hasn't changed their minds, but he's gotten them to trumpet his message - McCain/Palin=Lipstick on a pig.

One of the definitions of leadership is keeping your head while all those around you are losing theirs. Steady on Obama, you're the man.

Posted by: joebewildered | September 11, 2008 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Les,

When Palin goes home, do you suppose she'll bill the taxpayers per diem again for the nights she spends there?

Posted by: God | September 11, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

What this shows clearly is how little honor McCain has: exactly none. If he had any, he'd sink that line of attack and say "hey, guys, I used that line too..." That would be the decent thing to do. Clearly he has no decency, and is trying to distract people from how bad he and Bush screwed everybody.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 12:14 PM | Report abuse

Pitbull Palin went home today so she could interview with Charles Gibson and to send off his son to Iraq NOT out of some 9/11 devotion.

I hear it's funny how people try to connect dots when they're NOT there.
Incidentally the spokeswoman for the McCain phony lipstick indignation is former Gov Jane Swift.

Swift boats and swift coincidental? think about it.

Posted by: LES | September 11, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Asper Girl,

Are you ever going to come up with something that makes sense? I think once Palin give interviews and starts her flip flopping she will destroy herself and the GOP ticket. She cant think on her feet, and her and McCains policy's will do them in. Im still waiting to hear one word from them on how they will clean up the country. Oh wait a minute, they belong to the same party that ruined this country...

Posted by: What? | September 11, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Lehman Bros. will be the next major Wall Street bank failure.

Get the taxpayers money ready "free market" Republicans!!!

Posted by: toritto | September 11, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

I don't think that Senator Obama's response to smear ads from the Republicans should be one of anger, but rather one of concern for the elderly Senator McCain. McCain has said in the past that he is not in favor of smear tactic campaigning, and yet here come these ads from his own house. Isn't he aware? Can he not control it? With all the corruption that the Bush administration has been "unaware" of, do we really want someone who is too befuddled or too sold out to keep this crap he has said he opposes from being channeled from his own campaign into the media?

Posted by: John Banister | September 11, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

"There's a reason why Obama seems paralyzed. He is surrounded by landmines if he goes into negative territory.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 12:01 PM"

Stunningly, I agree with AsperGirl on this one. Obama faces a set of tough choices if he goes negative on McCain-Palin.

I think his best road is to avoid anger but show passion; he has done a nice job ("Enough!") in the last couple of days, as the campaigns shift back toward issues and away from spectacle.

Give it another week and Palin won't be the focus any longer-- and the minute that happens, McCain's cabal will get desperate. Just watch.

Posted by: DB | September 11, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Was it clear ro "His listerner", Jason K?

Clearly, you're full of it. The man said that McCain and/or his campaign was the pig, and that Palin was the lipstick. Anyone with any sense can see that. Try again. next thing I know you'll be telling us McCain is a "maverick..."

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Jason K,

First your an idiot. To say he was targeting her when he has used this phrase before just shows the utter stupidity on your part. So where was your outrage when McCain said Chelsea Clinton was ugly because Janet Reno was her father? Let me guess you werent outraged because your GOP blowhard uttered it. Get a life looser and stick with the issues facing this country....

Posted by: Huh | September 11, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

For all those people pathetically trying to twist Obama's comments around in hopes of helping the political terrorist John McCain play the sexist card from the bottom of the deck:

Just stop the BS right now! Democrats ain't putting up with it this time.

In fact, when YOU jump to the conclusion that 'lipstick on a pig' must be a sexist remark, YOU are revealing that YOU ARE A SEXIST!

Posted by: ENOUGH | September 11, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

block
I too have noticed the difference in "The Fix" since the RNC. There is something very attractive to be able to brush shoulders with high powered lobbiest and the likes of Karl Rove. It's the vicarious kick a banker gets from dealing with people with mega bucks even though his salary is still peanuts. I hope this adoration of McSame and McSwine ends quickly

Posted by: one of the wolves | September 11, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

To all those who keep writing that John McCain used the "lipstick on the pig" line in reference to Hillary, are you not intelligent enough to understand he said,
in regard to those policies..., it's like putting lipstick on a pig.

Clearly, his object in his sentence was "her policies".

Obama's use of the phrase was clear to his listerner... his object in his sentence was Sarah Palin.

You can rail against that all you want but intelligent people understand what he meant. He knows what he meant.

He drips with sexism... from how he and his surrogates treated Hillary, to the "sweetie" line and now to calling Palin a pig.

Who here is really the pig? I think we all know.

Posted by: Jason K | September 11, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

To: Used Cars and Politics

I thought the punchline of your story would be that the convertible was like Barack Obama and the pickup truck was like John McCain.

Posted by: Balto | September 11, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

I would add Obama’s approach would have one positive outcome a further reduction in the use of oil. Most likely people will not drive as much due to higher prices which should lower oil consumption and lesson our carbon foot print. I am sure this is not his intended purpose, but it is a positive outcome. This is speaking as a free market environmental scientist.

Posted by: sltiowa | September 11, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

I'm praying for JABBER's caps lock key.

Posted by: OfficerMancuso | September 11, 2008 12:03 PM | Report abuse

Let us remember how Obama succeeded because he destroyed Bill Clinton based on comments taken out of context. What was done to Hillary and Bill was disgusting. Obama said words matter, and he is finding out it is a 2 way street.

Posted by: NoToBO | September 11, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

>>abqcleve wrote: "I'm sorry: of what possible interest, relevance, and certainly currency is this? "A real interesting article today"?? This is a rehash of the same crap that cost Clinton the primary nomination: what on earth would lead a rational person to think it could possibly work now?"

Your candidate faces a lot of problems in opening up an angry, righteous, attacking campaign strategy against the McCain-Palin ticket. In particular, he's got big negatives. Taking off the gloves will open him to attacks that are each and individually worse than what he can push about his opponents.

I.e.:

-- how to attack Palin on religion without reprising the Rev. Wright stuff that the media whitewashed for him before the worst stuff got out

-- how to attack Palin & McCain for lying without his own lies (mostly about himself which is his greatest obsession) being replayed in front of his eyes

-- how to attack the personal quality of McCain-Palin people without reprising his own strange family background

-- how to attack ... (on and on)

Even in making sexist attacks on Palin and trying to smear the McCain-Palin ticket as a "pig with lipstick" that "smells like a fish", Obama got blowback from a lot of partisans who were fed up with his race-card-playing, trumped up accusations of racism all year.

I mean, you have Rush Limbaugh playing and replaying the audio of how he said this stuff, with his audience hooting and cheering and shouting "No pit bull", and then asking his audience, Isn't it obvious it was a smear? When none of the candidates against Obama have said sneaky, insidious coded smears like that and gotten that kind of response (which would have been clear sign of rabble-rousing using racism). I know the liberals have convinced themselves that their guy was wronged, but out there in Limbaugh land, Obama looks like a big hypocrite for smearing Palin and then denying it, after all his specious accusations of racism this year.

So even when trying to attack using sexism like he did with Clinton earlier this year, Obama's going to get a lot of blowback (except from the left, which is with him anyways).

Just HOW is Obama supposed to get angry and go on the attack without getting eaten alive?

All of these media geniuses and cheerleaders who have led Obama and the Democrats down one delusional path after another this year, do they have a sense of what strategy that Obama can execute that will pull that off?

There's a reason why Obama seems paralyzed. He is surrounded by landmines if he goes into negative territory.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

About 2 months ago, I bought a used car: a cherry red convertible. I gotta be honest, I didn't do much research before buying. I only test drove it once before making a commitment to buy, and it was made by an obscure manufacturer that nobody really ever hear of before. But, at first blush, I was in love with this car. It looked so pretty on the outside. Professional paint job, smooth finish, great curves, and a confident, although perhaps pretentious, feel to it. My rival in the neighborhood had just decided against buying a convertible and instead bought a reliable pickup truck. Certainly, my rival made a more practical and well thought out decision, but where was the 'splash'? I wanted the headlines in the neighborhood! I didn't admit this at the time, but the fact that my rival opted against the flashy choice made me feel as though I simply HAD to pick the convertible.
The first few weeks were like a honeymoon. Heck, you could say I was 'energized' to drive it. But suddenly, almost on a daily basis, things have been falling apart. Turns out, my convertible has an oil leak. As time passes, more and more oil drip drip drips out of the car. The engine stalls out on the highway, almost as if it has no experience with being driven over 60 mph. The interior computer malfunctions when I turn on the radio and the AC at the same time... perhaps multitasking so many responsibilities at once overwhelms the motherboard. I asked the manufacturer for a copy of the owners manual, but they are stalling and acting as if the information is classified. What are they hiding? And now, the roof is stuck in the closed position. So, in reality, this isn't even a real convertible at all!! Needless to say, I made a horrible decision for me and my family. While my rival in the neighborhood enjoys using his pickup to accomplish daily chores, my convertible stays parked behind my garage. But, I think I made the right call when I decided to give my "convertible" a name: Sarah Palin.

Posted by: Used Cars and Politics | September 11, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

JUST A NOTE FOLKS, I STILL THINK THAT COMMENTY WAS MADE FOR SARAH, AS I THINK THE FISH WRAPPED IN PAPER STILL SMELLS! SARAHS HUSBAND WAS A FISHERMAN, AND I THINK THAT WAS MADE FOR HIM. TODAY AS WE HONOR THE PEOPLE THAT GAVE THIER ALL .SACRIFICED THIER OWN LIVES FOR OURS, WE SHOULD ALL SAY A PRAYER! AND THAT GOES FOR SEN JOE BIDIN, WHO SCHOOSE TO CAMPAIGN TODAY INSTEAD OF ATTENDING THE 9 /11 TRIBUTE! SHAME ON YOU JOE BIDIN!!!!!! SARAH IS BACK HOME HONORING THE YOUNG MWEN AND WOMEN LEAVING TODAY FOR IRAQ, SHE IS IN CHARGE OF THIER DEPLOYMENT> GOD BLESS THEM ALL.

Posted by: JABBER | September 11, 2008 11:59 AM | Report abuse

The Republicans fight dirty using phony gimmicks such as pigs on lip arguments.

ENOUGH ENOUGH ENOUGH!!!

Yes, Obama has to get angry and NOT get swift-boated like Kerry or Willie Hortoned like Dukakis.

He has to attack McCain and his pitbull on the issues and on the phony charges. Hopefully Bill Clinton will give him some good pointers today.

Posted by: LES | September 11, 2008 11:59 AM | Report abuse

Loser repubs!! Write on here like 10 tens lol losers!!! How can you call obama sexist when McCain:

A. Used the same term 4 times "lipstick on a pig" accept he was referring to Hilary Clinton and her policies.Which anyone with common sense could tell he wasn't referring to lil Ms. All I can do is lie if McCain says so of course!!

B. Referred to her(Hilary) as a BIT** you know the rest

C. Makes jokes about women getting rapped by gorillas

D. Does not even agree with women receiving equal pay or anything else that favors women.
You guys are some of the biggest losers, who thinks its good when your presidential candidate is trying to play you and you find that clever. Like picking a women to get evangalicals vote as well as small town moms and your like "OK" But if he was to become president what do you think is going to happen to her, she has nothing to offer him and he could already careless about women.SoI guarantee she will have plenty of time to be with her family because he wont need her after the voting process. If he wins and messes up like he will and puts her to the side. Do everyone a favor and make people take an IQ test before voting so these idiots will never be able to vote again!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: O wow | September 11, 2008 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Obama goes to a public school with student roaming the halls and spews his hatred and venom. Then he goes on Letterman and calls Palin "lipstick". Is he just stupid? Now we can question he judgment because his own VP candidate says OBama didn't pick the most qualified person for VP. Uggh. He is a horrible candidate. Give us Hillary. Obama attacks the press, and they fold. McCain attacks the press, and they attack McCain. McCain uses an Obama saying out of context, and the press rushes to defend Obama. Obama misuses a McCain saying (100 years in Iraq, $5 million is rich, etc) and the press apes Obama's lies.

The media will be the big loser. They will end this campaign diminished and beholden to the radical left-wing.

Posted by: Karen | September 11, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

Illinois gets about $30 per person in federal earmarks. Alaska gets $500 per person. When Palin was mayor of Wasilla, each of the 9,000 residents of that city got $1,360 in federal earmarks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xbn_AXlaeY

Posted by: Patrick | September 11, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

As I make my decision for the next President I have been reading policy statements by both. I give Obama a little more credit on policy statements that are more tangible rather than visionary. First thing I looked at was how the two were going to jump start the economy. Obama’s plan is to sock it to the oil companies and also giving us a 50 billion dollar stimulus package. I for one do not share his rosy scenario for stimulating the economy. However, McCain really did not have much of a plan since McCain’s policies are more geared at stabilizing the economy for growth. Obama also has ideas on stabilizing the economy for growth.

Problem with Obama’s proposal:
Oil companies make about 6-8% profit on revenue so by socking it too the oil companies we are really only socking it to ourselves since the oil companies will pass along the tax with an added 6-8% bonus. This is more like a stimulus plan for the oil companies. The money returned to us will be the money we are paying more at the pump and for goods and services affected by increased costs. So in essence we are paying for our own stimulus package. McCain’s gasoline tax holiday was a bad idea and a gimmick, but Obama’s is just as bad and probably worse to the average tax payer not to mention its also a gimmick.

I will give you an analogy I have to write grants for research but if the institution that I work at was to raise the percentage of my grant they took for administrative overhead I would factor that into my grant proposals (I would not eat that money). In the same way, Obama’s proposal will only cost tax payers more. His proposal would also hurt many businesses that depend on the energy sector most noticeable trucking and airline industries. The mark-up in fuel will affect them which will be passed on to us through added surcharges on products and services we use (I have seen it when ordering laboratory supplies).

His other proposal is to add a 50 billion dollar stimulus package to the economy. If the previous 100 billion dollar stimulus package did not work that well what will another 50 billion do. Why not another 100 billion does he have a reason for the number other than appearing to be doing something.

To say that either candidate has thought of constructive ways at stimulating the economy is to wear blinders. McCain is a do nothing approach, while Obama is a stick it to the man (i.e., populous) approach. Neither approach will do much.

Posted by: sltiowa | September 11, 2008 11:55 AM | Report abuse

How's this for a belly laugh:

"Democrats Must Shake Elitist Label - Lynn Forester de Rothschild, WSJ"

Ms. Forester de Rothschild graciously discusses how Barack Obama has failed to connect to the great unwashed horde out there due to some "elitist' label. LOL.

Hilarious points she makes that only an out of touch elitist could make:

-- picking Biden, an out of touch blowhard doofus left-wing partisan, helps Obama "relate to working- and middle-class voters in swing states". (The only group of people Biden helps Obama relate to are baggage handlers.)

-- while correctly pointing out that "elite" (privileged) doesn't equate to "elitist" (the cult of snobs), she seems clueless in failing to recognize the phoniness of Obama's own affectations of elitism.

-- Ms. Forester de Rothschild wonders why "In spite of his lofty liberal rhetoric, Mr. Obama is not connecting to millions of middle- and working-class voters, as well as women voters of all classes" without any apparent memory that Clinton supporters were complaining for months that the rhetoric was empty, unspecific and pie-in-the-sky.

Ms. Forester de Rothschild clearly doesn't know what is wrong with an expectation that the flowery, empty rhetoric of Barack Obama could have moved the working masses. But she admits "But I must face the uncomfortable truth that liberal elitism has been a weakness of the Democratic Party for more than half a century." (REALLY?)

But the rest of the article shows that whether or not she gets how and why being elitist makes a leader fundamentally out of touch in a capitalist democracy, she knows what's wrong with her candidate:

"Despite Mr. Obama's assertions that his campaign is about "you," much of his campaign is, in fact, all about him. In the months since the primaries ended, his creation and display of a mock presidential seal with his name on it, his speech at a mass rally at the Prussian Victory Column in Berlin, and his insistence on delivering his acceptance speech in front of fabricated Greek columns in a stadium holding 80,000 chanting supporters have crossed the thin line that separates galvanizing voters and plain old demagoguery."

You have to hand it to Ms. Forester de Rothschild. Elite though she may be, she has a better sense of what's wrong with the Democratic ticket than all in the fourth estate.

And Obama getting angry and attacking, isn't going to fix his fundamental defects as a candidate.

(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122109030550621451.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries)

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Obama's calm demeanor sometimes comes across as detached, but I appreciate that he hopes to keep the political discourse elevated.

http://www.politicswithagrin.blogspot.com/

Posted by: Kristen | September 11, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

abqcleve, give it up. AsperGirl is as immune to reason and rational argument as cockroaches are to radiation.

Posted by: DB | September 11, 2008 11:40 AM
***************

I know, I know. I've given up on her: she used to be interesting to discuss things with, but since Hillary bit the dust, she has turned into a rogue spammer. My main intent was to weigh in again (and again and again) on the silly Hannity talking points. Obama has been saying a lot lately that "the American people are not stupid. They get it." Noble, beautiful sentiments and I'm really glad he's taking the relatively high road; but I'm happy to do some of the dirty work smacking around the numerous idiots that, like your cockroaches, infest these boards.

Posted by: abqcleve | September 11, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

LET HE WHO IS WITHOUT SIN CAST THE FIRST STONE"


On this commemoration of 9/11/01, let us petition our government to get our own house in order:

"Government Agencies Support Domestic Torture and Gang-Stalking..."

http://nowpublic.com/world/government-agencies-support-domestic-torture-and-gang-stalking-says-noted-nowpublic-com-columnist
http://members.nowpublic.com/scrivener

Posted by: scrivener | September 11, 2008 11:45 AM | Report abuse

W. Post Editorial 9/11/08:

"John McCain is a serious man who promised to wage a serious campaign. Win or lose, will he be able to look back on this one with pride? Right now, it's hard to see how."

Posted by: Skeptic21 | September 11, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

abqcleve, give it up. AsperGirl is as immune to reason and rational argument as cockroaches are to radiation.

Posted by: DB | September 11, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

"If Democrats had any brains, they'd be Republicans.

Posted by: Ann Coulter | September 11, 2008 11:21 AM"

Yeah, because things have been going SO well for our country and the world with Republicans running the show.

There isn't enough space in this comment box to list the ways the Republicans have trashed our government, defiled our Constitution, shown contempt for the rule of law, and damaged our nation's standing internationally, much less hold the Administration accountable for 9/11 happening in the first place.

Are we supposed to believe that the Republicans deserve four more years of McSame?

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

OBAMA THE LIAR

There's a good article today on realclearpolitics.com reviewing how Obama's lied about some past stands taken. (It's not about whether he was right or wrong in those stands, just that he lied about them and was later exposed.) E.g......

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 10:31 AM
********************

I'm sorry: of what possible interest, relevance, and certainly currency is this? "A real interesting article today"?? This is a rehash of the same crap that cost Clinton the primary nomination: what on earth would lead a rational person to think it could possibly work now?

No, the gotchas aren't a rehash of Wright, Ayers, and silly Illinois abortion political games; the gotchas are McCain completely selling out his former high principles, cynically foisting an utter incompetent and hideously ignorant liar on the public to distract from his deficiencies, and offering zip, zero, nada in the way of "change" from the current Republican policies.

It's time to throw the bums out. They've proven amply that their corruption and incompentence knows no bounds. They've utterly destroyed this country, pretending, as Cheney infamously said, that deficits don't matter. Yes, they do. It's time for responsible, rational and sane people to lead. Move out of the way, shill.

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

American's can see the hypocricy of acting 'above the fray' when BO's in it up to his eyeball

Posted by: ripster24007 | September 11, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

The Royal BO wants so badly for everyone to think he has been wrongly accused of implying Palin is a pig who could use some lipstick. He rails against those mean people who deliberately misinterpreted his "innocent remarks". Yet if it had been anything, ANYTHING AT ALL, resembling a racist comment (even unintended) he would be screeching. Ask good old Bill Clinton, who ran into this particular double standard when making a speech in South Carolina earlier in the year. All he did was say Jesse Jackson's name and Obama started yelling "Racist"! The Royal BO never does anything without having thrashed it around in that combine he calls a mind. You can bet he knew exactly the impression he would make by talking pigs and lipstick; to say nothing of adding smelly fish (remember Sarah Barracuda anyone?).

Posted by: cmfarms | September 11, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse


It's high time for B. Obama and his staff to kick back as hard as possible.

We are accustomed to these Rovian (no doubt about it now, that's his trademark) sladerous ad campains.

The lipstick/pig metaphor, has been sexed up and beautifully launched and thrown to the moronic sheeple to grind a useless bone while dirty business as usual is going on.

Just like with WMDS, yellow cake, the 45mn threat, Saddam/ connections, etc, everything is bull, of course.

The aim is to have the sheeple getting hysterical on a non- issue: Obama was talking about McCain's approach to economics -sic!-), so they shamelessly took the image out of context in a way to have everybody instantly thinking- thanks to the huge echo in the, once more, enabling MSM that the Obama camp are dirty ba$tards.

The insistence on his middle name, the utter lie about him being a closeted Muslim (these people hate women and pork, you know) all this with the aim of having so-called phony-one-day- feminists go for a kill. That Palin is against abortion and women's rights is not important, as they know that the hockey moms would swallow any bull imaginable. They proved it before: remember the farcical show of women Hillarites crying and vowing to vote McCain if their gender is denied access to the Hihg Office.

What a strange and frightning country!

Watch Oberman, he gives 5 recorded instances of McVain using the same "lipstick/pig metaphor, to the cheering, smiling, rapturous female audience.

Don't fall for it ladies. Gender is just the hoax to still muddy the murky waters: the guys having it hard in Afghanistan and Iraq, with no viable strategy out. The banks collapsing. Your neighbour's house lost through the subprime con job. Your jobs outsourced. Wall Mart female employees treated like slaves for extra minimum wages. Multi billion government contracts to close friends and allies. And of course Bully Dick trying hard to set fire in the Caucasus and go after the Russians before leaving.

Open your eyes, and use your brain. Forget Vagina and penis till November, than you can drivel on it as long as you wish.

Posted by: bekabo | September 11, 2008 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Since the press have become parrots with steno pads, Obama/Biden will have to call out the McCain/Palin lies EVERY TIME AND POUND THE POINT HOME REPEATEDLY LIKE A BROKEN RECORD.

There is simply NO WAY that the NEO-CON scum in agencies (like the oil royalty interior department agency's sex/coke playground) are going to be swept away with McCain.

Karl Rove is an advisor to the McCain campaign.

All the Bush handlers are holding Palin's hand and keeping her away from reporters' questions.

CALL OUT THE LIE OF THE BUSH/MCCain ticket!

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

Olbermann just got a demotion. He was taken off live coverage of political events because he was in the tank for Obama. When Hilary fell out of contention for the nomination, yet refused to concede stating: 'anything can happen, remember the Bobby Kennedy assination", Olbermann foamed at the mouth, screamed and demanded she get out of the race after intimating "assassination is possible'. While classless and typically 'Clinton, win at any cost' politics, the statement was not incorrect or false. Just far-fetched and a pipedream. I applauded Olbermann for his ridicule of Hilary for not just that comment but other more blatant lies like: 'being under fire on a runway, ducking for cover to avoid gunshots'. Clinton's "mispeaking'(lying to the rest of us) was a style of politics that Olbermann cannot forgive and will never forget. Hilary said "so I mispoke....get over it'. 18 million democrats forgave and forgot, almost immediately, and still voted for Clinton. What do these loyal Clintonites know that Olbermann doesn't? Maybe that a lying, scheming, carpetbagging liberal with more experience is much better than an a more liberal, inexperienced, radical, America-hating liberal with no clue what he is doing other than offering freebies to already dependent citizens. Olbermann is good for Obama and Obama is good for Olbermann. They can console each other. They both detest the fact that more than half of the citizens in this country are personally responsible, hardworking, proud Americans that don't want or need government assistance or unwanted government intervention in their lives. They wish the scales were more balanced by yet more short-sighted, immmature, unproductive, mooches, looking for government to solve all their problems. Remember Keith O. and Barrack O., the words of a different breed of Democrat: "It's not what your country can do for you... but what you can do for your country".

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

On the way home yesterday, I became very worried Obama might just quit the race.

He was in full meltdown mode. Sarah Palin is in his head. The apostle of unity and change can't get that woman out of his head. The smart thing would be to ignore her... but he will put all his energy in trying to destroy her. This will make her more popular.

Please stay in the race Barry. You make it so entertaining!

Posted by: Tom NeSmith | September 11, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Maverick McCain should be off limits to Washington. We don’t need any more bandits raiding taxpayers for big oil and financiers. McCain is still part of the Keating Gang. He enabled the last attack on taxpayers with the savings and loan debacle. He will do the same with his deregulation terrorism. No one will be safe except his billionaire pals in their multiple mega-mansions. We can no longer afford to continue this business as usual. McCain may be a hero, but only to the status quo. Real heroes don’t play victim the way he and Palin do. Real heroes don’t demonize opponents. Real heroes don’t cheapen their service for personal gain. Stop thinking of McCain as any kind of hero. Those medals have long tarnished. America lost his war. Now he threatens to lose America’s war. For such a decorated and celebrated hero his behavior is reprehensible. He truly dishonors the reputation and memory of other American heroes.

Posted by: Truth Maverick | September 11, 2008 11:25 AM | Report abuse

Obama is distantly related to Harry Truman as well as a number of other Presidents and one vice president (Cheney). I'd like to see him give the Republicans hell or just tell the truth about their policies in a to the point fashion.

Posted by: ejgallagher1 | September 11, 2008 11:25 AM | Report abuse

Let's revisit the fact that Magoo is admitted adulteror.

Magoo and Palin want to appeal to the religious right and outlaw abortion.

But adultery? Out of wedlock childbirth?

You know, the bible forbids sex outside of marriage. That's why Palin's church, among the Dobson clan, want to outlaw gay marriage, because it is simply a step to outlawing gay sex.

But Palin's kid apparently didn't learn about not having sex outside of marriage. Nor did the adulteror Magoo.

Why don't they practice what they preach?

Do rules not apply to the Rep-Tards?

Or are the ten commandments just 'talking points' used to shakedown parishoners for cash?

Posted by: Vote Magoo he's an adulteror too! | September 11, 2008 11:24 AM | Report abuse

Please! If anybody should be instulted by the lipstick on a Pig comment it should be Gov. Palin, but not because he said it! Which, BTW, he wasn't even talking about her! But that her party thinks that she is a PIG!!

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

The pig around here is Obama, the sexist pig... in the frying pan, unscripted, melting down.

OBAMA: "You can put, uh, lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig. (cheers) You know, you can, uh, you know, you can, uh, you -- you -- you can wrap an old fish in a -- in a piece of paper and call it change, it's still going to stink after eight years. We've had enough of the same old thing. It's time to bring about real change to Washington."

SEXIST PIG SEXIST PIG SEXIST PIG SEXIST PIG SEXIST PIG SEXIST PIG SEXIST PIG SEXIST PIG SEXIST PIG SEXIST PIG SEXIST PIG SEXIST PIG SEXIST PIG SEXIST PIG

OBAMA MELTDOWN
OBAMA MELTDOWN
OBAMA MELTDOWN
OBAMA MELTDOWN
OBAMA MELTDOWN

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

If not for double standards, Democrats would have no standards.

Posted by: Karl Rove | September 11, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Go on the attack?

Maybe they should insult Sarah Palin as a "small town mayor"?

Maybe they should attack Sarah Palin for ASKING for earmarks while Obama and Biden VOTED for earmarks?

Maybe they should say that Palin's only qualification is that she didn't have an abortion?

Maybe they should respond to Palin's lipstick joke by saying you can put lipstick on a pig, but its still a pig.

Maybe they should say that the only reason that McCain is winning is that because small town bigots are clinging to their guns and religion?

Maybe they should attack by joining Rev. Wright and screaming "GD America."


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

If Democrats had any brains, they'd be Republicans.

Posted by: Ann Coulter | September 11, 2008 11:21 AM | Report abuse

McCain would have a better position in the "Lipstick Battle" if he had not used the exact same phrase a few months ago. Calling it sexist is simply another effort to boost Palin - while keeping her hidden from questioning by the press. Rather queer at times that McCain camp.

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

Everybody knows that Magoo is an ill-tempered, bitter old man.

But when they learn just how much he derides, insults and actually HATES the ordinary, average American, then they will turn against him.

The infatuation with Palin ends as soon as she opens her mouth with that flat, stupid accent. The convention was the affair, now the drunks are waking up, putting their pants on and running out the door.

BUT, being Rep-scum-lickins, they ACCIDENTALLY took her home to THEIR house - so NOW THEY CAN'T LEAVE!!!

BWAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAH

Posted by: Magoo equals Bitterness and Hate | September 11, 2008 11:18 AM | Report abuse

And the ELITE label really floors me, this coming from the McCain camp when it was Cindy McCain who donned a $300k outfit! And they would have you believe they can relate to normal every day working people! And Obama is ELITE? Her outfit cost more that most homes in the Washington area are worth thanks to the Mortgage mess! And guess what? She probably will NEVER wear the outfit again! Now I ask you again, WHO IS ELITE?

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

I am mad! We have so many things wrong in this country and we need to hear about who said what and whose feelings got hurt?
Get to the Issues! Issues Issues!
I want to hear about what they intend to change and how they intend to change it!
I want to hear what they intend to do about the;
economy
energy
education - what they feel is wrong and how they intend to change it.
Health care and the continuing rising cost.
I want to hear what and how the treatment of our returning soldiers will change
I want to hear the plans for ending these stupid unjust wars that were based on lies.
I want to hear the plans for capturing the person responsible for the 911 attacks on this country. I don't want to hear anything about going to the ends of the earth as it is obvious he is not there.
NO more nasty attack ads that are half untruths or slanted truths. They are really turning me off.
Get to the ISSUES! Issues and more issues.
Please journalists NO more of reporting crap. Cover only the Issues!

Posted by: Spotless Crab | September 11, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

OBAMA'S GOT NO GAME LEFT SO MEDIA WANTS HIM TO GET ANGRY

I was surprised to find that a Rush Limbaugh transcript was linked to the Realclearpolitics.com website today. Curious about why a Rush Limbaugh rant would be linked in, I read it. Rush's theory is that Obama's demeanor is crumbling and he's got no game left. Actually, that really fits with the cheerleading from the media, like Cillizza's article above notes, that Obama's got to get angry or something. It does seem like Obama's having some kind of meltdown and is impotent and/or is flailing with his "lipstick on a pig" and "smells like a fish" slurs. At minimu, as Rush points out, these remarks are more scummy than presidential.

Because it seems kind of relevant to ask, Is Barack Personally Imploding? (If the answer is Yes, the follow up is, Is Getting Angry and Attacking the Answer?) I'm posting the below segments from the Rush Limbaugh transcript here.

"...I think Obama needs to start smoking again. I think he's losing his way. I think he looks bedraggled. I think he looks tired out there. He is off his game. This is a cheap nightclub comic act now. The only thing missing is the rimshot, you know, after he delivers his little punch lines. He needs to go out with the drink in his hand and the cigarette like Dean Martin and Sammy Davis, Jr., used to do, Flip Wilson, and have a drummer out there for rimshots. I mean, he is melting down right before our very eyes. Now, the Obama talk, ladies and gentlemen, that was not to the people, it was to the media to give them cover. He said he wants to talk about real issues, that his real policies have changed. Like energy, where he changed his energy policy on drilling. Like taxes, where he changed his tax increase policy 'til after the recession. Like Iraq, where he's changing his complete withdrawal..."

"...I want to go back to audio sound bite number one here, with Obama and the "lipstick on a pig" comment. Forget for a moment who he's talking about, what he's talking about. I just want you to listen to it within the context of "Does this man sound presidential? Does he sound disciplined?" I think he's coming unhinged right before our eyes. You don't hear McCain and Palin saying intemperate things that could be interpreted in incorrect ways and so forth. There's just far more discipline with both of them. Listen to this...

[plays audio clip] "OBAMA: You can put, uh, lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig. (cheers) You know, you can, uh, you know, you can, uh, you -- you -- you can wrap an old fish in a -- in a piece of paper and call it change, it's still going to stink after eight years. We've had enough of the same old thing. It's time to bring about real change to Washington."[end audio clip]

"...All that aside, he just does not sound presidential. He sounds thin-skinned, very, very intemperate. He just stutters, doesn't sound confident. This is not good. I guarantee you, Democrats are starting to worry. They've been worried for a long time here, but I think they're getting serious about it now..."

"...But you go back and you contrast this version of Barack Obama with the version of Barack Obama in January and February when he was making all these platitudinous speeches and people were fainting, and we were told he was drawing crowds of 25 to 50,000 people. We were not told that he had a lead-in act of a rock band at some of these events. But people didn't care what he was saying. He was always on teleprompter. You go back and you listen to some of his debate performances and so forth, and you realize he was living and feeding off of his speeches up to the time that he started the debates, and if you look at the electoral process in the Democrat primaries, the bloom was off the Obama rose in March..."

transcript at http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_091008/content/01125106.guest.html

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

This all feels like the last two presidential campaigns where we ended up with .... Bush.

What bothers me most is the continued divisiveness and utter disrepect by so-called "Americans" on both sides.

What happened to integrity?

Posted by: Mr. Moderate | September 11, 2008 11:08 AM | Report abuse

"They are going to get it," a repeated mantra from Obama that relies heavily on voters rejecting tried and true negative attacks due to their overwhelming desire for change and a new kind of politics."

If the primaries showed me one thing, it was that Obama is just as negative as any politician out there. He is just very careful that the attacks are coming from someone else and not him. That way he can benefit from the effects of the negative attack without appearing to be negative himself. Look at all of those "news" stories that came out after Palin was chosen. I am sure if you dug deep enough you could find a connection for most of them to the Obama campaign through MoveOn.org, DFA, the Daily Kos or some other such organization. There are countless examples of the same technique used against Hillary in the primary. The hypocrisy of it is what bugs me. Sure HRC or even McCain use negative adds, etc. but they do not attempt to hide it.

Posted by: hdimig | September 11, 2008 11:07 AM | Report abuse

What you guys fail to realize is that as soon as he shows any real anger, he is going to be painted as the 'Angry Black Man' and the Repugnantcans will use that to try to scare America even more. The man is in a impossible position, being the first Black person to receive their parties nomination. Everything he says and does will be used against him, so it is the classic Catch 22! And for all of you screaming that because 90% of black people are voting for him, WHY IS THIS AN ISSUE? Bill Clinton got the same Black support and Nobody thought twice about it! Why is it the we have to justify WHY we are voting for him and NO OTHER RACE DOES? And guess what, BLACK aren't the only ones voting for the man, he couldn't win with the BLACK Vote alone. So please drop the foolishness and focus on whether or NOT you want 4 more years of this BULLSH**!

Posted by: Angryman | September 11, 2008 11:07 AM | Report abuse

When Obama was running above politics and talking about the country, he was doing so much better.

As soon as he made the "Bush=McCain" silly public relations/poll based political calculation, he became just another politician and has been dropping ever since.

I remember when Gore and Kerry decided to become "angry" and "fight for the people" by going on the attack. With 20/20 hindsight, you can see that the moment of "anger" was the moment they figured out that they were going to lose.

Posted by: Razorback | September 11, 2008 11:04 AM | Report abuse

"YOU CAN DRESS A MONKEY IN TUXEDO BUT IT IS STILL A MONKEY".

Had McCain used that phrase to refer to Obama's policies, the MSM's accusation against the Mac as racist would have gone to the level of inciting a civil war in this country.

I'm glad His Highness is getting all this flack for his sexist comment.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse

You criticized him for being too cerebral and cool, too wordy and obtuse, not being angry enough, and suddenly SHAZAM! He transforms himself into Senator Sexist Pig.

You gotta be careful what you wish for.

Posted by: alance | September 11, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

I wonder how much "phoney anger" the left would muster if McCain had said, in any context, "Let's call a spade a spade."

Posted by: sumlukelark | September 11, 2008 10:47 AM | Report abuse

wow, what insight. Now go crawl back under your rock.

It couldn't be that we just completely disagree with the guy and see him repeatedly lying over and over now could it.

It couldn't be because he hangs with Terrorist.

It couldn't be that he does not protect life.

It couldn't be that he waffles.

It couldn't be that he funneled Millions of Dollars to a man that helped him by his mansion.

It couldn't be that he has no foreign policy and suggested the UN address Russia, not knowing that Russia had veto power.

It couldn't be that the man has the courage of a slug voting present over 150 times.

it couldn't be that the guy has never hired anyone, fired anyone, met a payroll.


No.....you're right. Gotta be racism.

You argument is pathetic.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 10:29 AM

Anon,

Please give FACTS instead of just random statements. Rezco and Ayers "scandals" have not only had the Primary season, but also Obama's Senate race to "uncover" any actual FACTS. And where are we? NO WHERE! I appreciate your willingness to share your views, but in the future google some of this political spew and provide some backing to your half baked attempts to smear.

On a side note I have DVR'd the O'Reilly Factor for the first time ever. Obama held his own last week and I was waiting for when I could knock it out in one shot. Excited and amused to hear buzz that Obama and O'Reilly were 'friends' in the end.

Posted by: Sunny in CO, not today | September 11, 2008 10:47 AM | Report abuse

if john mc cain had said in ANY context, "let's call a spade a spade." i wonder how much phoney anger the left would muster up.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Baloney. Obama should let loose. Voters (especially men) will cheer him on. He needs to get humor and emotion back on his side. Like it or not, he's running a negative campaign (enough!) so he might as well have some fun with it. Voters are tired of him just arguing against the Republicans and I think they need a break from the overly serious, professorial approach.

Posted by: Ernie | September 11, 2008 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Stick a fork in him. He's done.

Posted by: mike | September 11, 2008 10:40 AM | Report abuse

Asspergirl - Why no more poll postings? Could it be that McCain has peaked, and the world has had enough of phony haters and wingnut cut-and-pasters like you? Obama up in Ohio, PA, MI, all the places you were crowing about in here a few days ago. The lipstick has been removed from the pig, it would seem.

I wonder what it feels like to show up every day for your ritual lashing. Please express yourself with a Michelle Malkin cut-and-paste hate piece about race.

Posted by: bondjedi | September 11, 2008 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Obama's ANGER with McCain in a political campaign, where conflict is to be expected, makes me question his potential when dealing when problems and foreign leaders if he would be elected president. He's fulfilling the prophecy that he really is an empty suit.

Posted by: Jean | September 11, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

wonder wht the guy will lie about today?

Posted by: Obama2012 | September 11, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Remember one of the debates where Obama told Hillary she was "likable enough"? Part of the same arrogant tone.

Posted by: Lisa | September 11, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Well the phony "lipstick on a pig" brou-ha-ha sure got the evidence of Palin's malfeasence vis a vis her billing the State of Alaska for nights spent in her Own home off of the MSM....

What is is about Americans and snake-oil salesmen like Rove and his ilk? We just can't help ourselves but fall for the crapola can we?

Posted by: radical_moderate | September 11, 2008 10:24 AM

-----------

well your right you radical. she cut the expenses of the Govenors office by $600,000 in a single year.

Well that's outright scandelous.

Go back to third grade you moron. Juneau is the capital, not Anchorage. Govenors in AK have done that since it became a state

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Jill wrote: "This country is as racist as it's always been and this election proves it."
......... right ... and that is why over 90% of blacks voted for Obama!!

McCain-Palin '08
Hillary Clinton 2012!

Posted by: Francisco Cardenas | September 11, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse

...OBAMA..OR'EILLY.. LOVEFEST................
Obama won O'Reilly Over!

Holy guacamole!

Somebody please put this up on youtube!

Last night's O'Reilly Obama interview was AMAZING!

They were like pals.

Obama won O'Reilly Over!
http://jamestshirley.blogspot.com/

Posted by: ChipShirley | September 11, 2008 10:31 AM | Report abuse

OBAMA THE LIAR

There's a good article today on realclearpolitics.com reviewing how Obama's lied about some past stands taken. (It's not about whether he was right or wrong in those stands, just that he lied about them and was later exposed.) E.g.:

-- lied about never being for banning handguns: "When a 1996 questionnaire surfaced that had asked if Mr. Obama supported banning all handguns, his one-word written answer was "yes." He said an unnamed staffer must have filled it out without his knowledge. Then another copy surfaced -- this one with his handwriting on it."

-- stated last month that his opposition to the federal Born Alive Infants Protection act, was due to the his position that it conflicted with state authority and he said would support a state version of the law. "Those suggesting otherwise were lying, he said. Then it was revealed that a second bill was introduced in the Illinois Senate, and this one was identical to the federal version. Mr. Obama opposed that bill as well."

-- reviews Rev. Wright & how no one really believes that Obama didn't know about the things Rev. Wright preached for 20 years. "When Rev. Wright's outrageous diatribes surfaced, Mr. Obama refused to renounce him. Then when Rev. Wright repeated the same statements at the National Press Club, and Mr. Obama had clinched the nomination, suddenly he denounced him. Why? He said Rev. Wright's statements in D.C. were unlike anything he had heard before.... But those statements had been in the news for months. Are we to believe that Mr. Obama had not read or heard any of the news for weeks? Or that he never heard anything similar in more than 20-years of listening to Rev. Wright's sermons?"

-- Obama claimed in ABC News debate with George Stephanopolous earlier this year that Bill Ayers just happened to be a neighbor of his, and not really an associate. "When Mr. Obama was asked about Mr. Ayers, he implied that he barely knew him. But once again facts have surfaced. We now know that Mr. Ayers hosted a fundraiser for Mr. Obama. [Obama launched his political career at a "coming out" event at Ayers' house]. They served for years together on a board with only a few people, and they worked closely on financial matters during those years."

-- Barack Obama is using anti-war sentiment to argue that the fact that he stated opposition to the Iraq War in 2002 while a state senator makes his judgment superior to other, older politicians who voted for it. "...Mr. Obama, who was in the Illinois Senate at the time and thus had no vote, opposed the war. He says that this shows his superior judgment, and that those voting for the war, like John McCain, lack the judgment to be president. But his vice presidential pick Joe Biden voted for the war, and Mr. Obama says Mr. Biden has the judgment to be president."

The relevance of this article is that the Obama campaign launched a post-Palin series of attacks on the McCain-Palin ticket describing them as a pair of liars this week. Mostly, Obama campaing rhetoric is coordinated with some articles that focus on Palin's evolving positions regarding earmarks as she matured from being a mayor with a local budget and state funding to being a governor with state budgets and national funding. I.e. they attempt to paint Palin's fiscal evolutions, which happened as she matured as a politician growing from the local to state and national-stage politics, to support some kind of "liar" argument.

This article reviews instances when Obama's own lying about himself and his past work and accomplishments, made the news this year. There's a stronger case to be made for Obama being a liar than McCain/Palin being a liar, at least when the subject is Obama talking about Obama.

Words Obama Will Regret
by Ken Blackwell
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/words_obama_will_regret.html

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 10:31 AM | Report abuse

TAP INTO THE AMERICAN ANGER AND FUSTRATION. There is a spiritual and emotion bubble that is ready to explose. SCREW THE ISSUES. Deal with them when you are in office. Now is the time to rally people. No bore them to deal over intellectual nuance. ROME IS BURNING right before our eyes. John McCain and Sara Palin are REPUBLICANS and their deception and lies has destroyed this country. ENOUGH. Should be our rallying cry.

ENOUGH!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Obama's too stupid to support.

That "lipstick on a pig" that landed smack on her public tagline ("pitbull in lipstick") was either a grossly revealing Freudian slip on the part of someone who is supposed to be a sophisticated political animal, or it was a snide, sleazy initial attempt to establish a sexist bashing verbal pattern around her. Either way, it shows that the VP on the McCain ticket is dominating Obama's mind or strategy. Palin has gotten into Obama's head, either way.

Obama's getting beaten by everything. McCain outwitted him pathetically in the VP-picking game, suckering Obama into believing he'd pick an old white man by studiously ignoring Palin (and other republican women) all year while Rush Limbaugh trumpeted her this Summer on his radio show.

Then, to avoid Clinton as his VP pick, Obama crafted a post-convention campaign strategy, that he squandered his convention on laying the foundations for, of spending the rest of the Fall attacking Bush and linking McCain to Bush. So his fall strategy execution would amount to attacking all Republicans, Bush in particular, thereby continuing to demonize them and proving that McCain is "the Same" as Bush.

For Obama to pull that off, he has to succeed on 2 fronts: (1) demonizing Republicans and Bush and (2) proving that McCain is the same as Bush.

By picking Palin, McCain has made it impossible for Obama to successfully execute (2). This is an implicit, existential disproof of (2) that Obama can do nothing about.

So now the media is flogging Obama to go on a direct attack, an all out scorched earth negative campaign to smear and take down McCain and Palin directly, and it looks like this is what Obama is warming up to, with the "lipstick on a pig" remark. The first step of demonizing is dehumanizing. The more dehumanizing imagery and smears that are repulsive, that Obama can tag McCain and Palin with, the more successful he will be at demonizing them.

But this is an ultimate fail, too. Because this "negative politics of personal destruction" campaign strategy fundamentally, existentially undermines Obama's only compelling argument for his candidacy. It negates his "hope" "change" and "post partisan" message of "transcendence" and makes him, no matter how hard he might try to posture himself, an angry, negative black man against a little old white man and a cute white mother of five.

Before the convention, and before picking Biden, Obama had 4 ways to win the election this Fall. After picking Biden, he had 3 ways to win. After his convention and after McCain's pick of Palin, Obama had 2 ways to win this Fall.

Given what appear to be Obama's personal (not cultural) misogyny problem, I think that it's only feasible to say he has one way, and only one way, left to win this election with the time he has left.

And it ain't by being negative and going on the attack.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

You white people are in a maniacal frenzy! It's hilarious to sit back and watch the garbage and hate you spew! You ABSOLUTELY will do ANYTHING in your power to ensure that a black man is NEVER elected President. Despite the fact that Republicans have ruined this country, you're still willing to cut off your nose to spite your face. Pure lunacy! Let's call a spade a spade. This country is as racist as it's always been and this election proves it.

Posted by: Jill | September 11, 2008 10:15 AM

------

wow, what insight. Now go crawl back under your rock.

It couldn't be that we just completely disagree with the guy and see him repeatedly lying over and over now could it.

It couldn't be because he hangs with Terrorist.

It couldn't be that he does not protect life.

It couldn't be that he waffles.

It couldn't be that he funneled Millions of Dollars to a man that helped him by his mansion.

It couldn't be that he has no foreign policy and suggested the UN address Russia, not knowing that Russia had veto power.

It couldn't be that the man has the courage of a slug voting present over 150 times.

it couldn't be that the guy has never hired anyone, fired anyone, met a payroll.


No.....you're right. Gotta be racism.

You argument is pathetic.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

"Obama needs to take Olbermann's advice immediately ...."
......... and look what happened to Olbermann ....
........ Obama had the Media in his pocket but Palin has taken his shine away ... and all the criticism of Palin just brings out Obama's same lack of experience and judgment!

Posted by: Francisco Cardenas | September 11, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

I forgot to mention the use of Katie Couric's commentary on sexism in the HRC campaign in the McCain ad. Totally out of context and makes Katie look like she supports McCain. I'd be pretty pi$$ed if I were her.

Posted by: MWS | September 11, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

THE PALIN SELECTION AND THE DIMINUTION OF DEMOCRACY:
IS A SILENT COUP HAPPENING IN THE U.S.A?

• Could the Palin Phenomenon be a symptom of a seismic power grab that is transforming our government?

• Could John McCain's vacillations on the vice president issue and his eventual acquiescence to those who recommended Palin be part of a skillful campaign to influence and oversee his decision-making?

• Is the Palin selection part of a larger plan to seize control of the Executive Branch and make it beholden to another set of decision-makers -- unelected, entrenched, and in charge of the forces of power and control?

• Could the federal takeover of more than half of the mortgage market via the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bailout signal a turn toward autocratic control of the economy by hard-right conservatives who comprise the corporate/military/security complex -- what Eisenhower in his farewell address called the "military-industrial complex"?

• Could this seizure of economic control further the interests of those who are using government policy as "social engineering" to neutralize political opposition and transform society to suit their far-right ideology?

• Could this plan dovetail with recent reports from a Dutch newspaper that the U.S. is planning to strike Iran's nuclear facilities?

• Could the fruition of the "Help America Vote Act," which led to the widespread use of electronic voting machines, the vast majority of which leave no voter-verified paper trail, also be part of this mosaic?

• Are we in the midst of a silent coup that is resulting in the loss of personal freedom via the extra-legal targeting of American citizens in an unconstitutional bypass of the judicial system, a denial of due process under the law?

• And is this power grab resulting in the emasculation of both Congress and the Judiciary, rendering those institutions little more than symbolic of power, when in fact power has been quietly usurped by unelected officials of entrenched institutions of power and control?

• Is anyone -- in the media, in Congress, in think tanks, in academia -- pondering these questions?

• If not, can we afford not to be asking these questions?

http://www.theocracywatch.org
http://members.nowpublic.com/scrivener - "Gov't Agencies Support Domestic Terrorism"


Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 10:25 AM | Report abuse

Well the phony "lipstick on a pig" brou-ha-ha sure got the evidence of Palin's malfeasence vis a vis her billing the State of Alaska for nights spent in her Own home off of the MSM....

What is is about Americans and snake-oil salesmen like Rove and his ilk? We just can't help ourselves but fall for the crapola can we?

Posted by: radical_moderate | September 11, 2008 10:24 AM | Report abuse

ENOUGH!! ENOUGH!!! ENOUGH!!.

That should be the new Obama mantra. Go back to holding big rallies and have the crowd go into a call and response wtih ENOUGH.

One of the strong suits of Barack Obama was that he came off early as somewhat of a preacher or crusader. He needs to get back to rallying people. He's allowed folks to get him into being a policy wonk.

The average person is not that sofisticated. ENOUGH!

Should be the chants coming from the crowds as he lay out a sweeping indictment of Bush/Cheny and McCain/Palin tactics.

ENOUGH! Should be our rallying cry to save our country from disaster.

Scare the HELL out of people and say ENOUGH!!

Obama was on to something but he did not realize it. ENOUGH! Should be this NEW OBAMA SPIRITUAL AWAKENING.

Oh by the way. GET HILLARY ON THE TICKET.

I love Barack but I love Hillary also. Her supporters are FANATICS. I'm an African American male and I do know that there will be problems electing a Black president. I"m not mad. Its just a fact.

But ENOUGH. Should be the new movement that take back the campain.

Posted by: David | September 11, 2008 10:23 AM | Report abuse

NY Governor Patterson just came out and said it. "Community Organizer is code for Black." The McCain campaign is running a blatantly racist campaign. All the fuss about Palin isn't for women - it's to get the BUBBA VOTE. After all Big Daddy McCain has to defend his Lily White Lady VP against that Uppity N*******.

Posted by: Ct.Dem | September 11, 2008 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Barack' greatest fault has been his LACK of passion. And now you counsel him to be dispassionate? With friends like this...

Posted by: Angry Young Man | September 11, 2008 10:22 AM | Report abuse

I am a female that supported HRC. What I can't for the life of me understand is some of you so-called HRC supporters now supporting McCain because he picked Palin! Palin's positions are almost the exact opposite of HRC's. I supported HRC for her policy positions, not because she is a female. As far as sexism goes, you know I haven't heard one word about this from Sarah Palin herself. All I have heard are MEN in McCain's campaign complaining of sexism, like they would actually know what that is. Having worked in Corporate America for the last 28 years, I KNOW what sexism is. This lipstick on a pig is such BS, what IS sexism is McCain's Men thinking (knowing) that women are so stupid they will fall for this. Just insulting.

Posted by: MWS | September 11, 2008 10:17 AM | Report abuse

You'll know it's all over for the Dems when Obama starts taking advice from Keith Olbermann!

Posted by: WashingtonDame | September 11, 2008 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Need a break from - Schmit/Rove/McCain/Bush Attack Ads?

Democrats and Obamacans's courting all Republican and Independent Voters!

Obama’s message rings of a “Beautiful day coming to America” which is similar to Reagan’s “Its morning in america again”

Beautiful day coming to America

U2 - beautiful day
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omFdpnSu57U

Obamacan's - “The best defense against usurpatory government is an assertive citizenry.” William F. Buckley, Jr. quote

The real change team for the last 19 months
Change we can believe in.

Vote Obama/Biden '08

Posted by: Cooday | September 11, 2008 10:15 AM | Report abuse

You white people are in a maniacal frenzy! It's hilarious to sit back and watch the garbage and hate you spew! You ABSOLUTELY will do ANYTHING in your power to ensure that a black man is NEVER elected President. Despite the fact that Republicans have ruined this country, you're still willing to cut off your nose to spite your face. Pure lunacy! Let's call a spade a spade. This country is as racist as it's always been and this election proves it.

Posted by: Jill | September 11, 2008 10:15 AM | Report abuse

So much for your political acumen or judgement Mr. Cillizza.

You are recommending that a person sho is being assaulted by commercials attqacking his very being, promulgating lies, and trying to further divide the country not get angry!!!! Unbelievable.

Posted by: toldyouso | September 11, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

You know what Chris? Ever since the start of the RNC your blog has been all about fawning over the new "american sweetheart"/"pitbull in lipstick" and how clever and ingenous the McCain campaign is. On the other hand, you've been all about downsizing Obama, telling us what he does wrong, what pitfalls he faces and how he's losing the personality battle..

You tell us that politics is about perception. Well, what you're doing is constantly putting Obama down visavi constantly praising the McCain campaign. In essence you keep telling us; Obama is a loser. McCain is a winner. In doing so you're forwarding the goals of the republican campaign.

Thus I find it highly ironic that Dana Milbank included you in his "Eastern Media Elite" sketch, or maybe you're going out of your way to prove that impression wrong?

Try to remember every once in a while that you're writing for a liberal newspaper. The very least we could, and should, expect from you is some balance.

Posted by: block | September 11, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

>>Ginney wrote: "foomonkey Obama is sexist get over it. Even Biden thinks Hillary was more qualified than he is. But Obama chose him anyway? Can you say gender discrimination!"

Obama is individually sexist, probably for personal or psychological reasons probably having to do with his mother's questionable adult sex life which in Muslim societies would be Haram (unclean) and the way his life is defined by roaming around looking for fathers and not finding any. He's shown he has a lot of problems with Hillary Clinton's candidacy, almost to the point of him being self-sabotaging and undermining his own campaign.

This Sarah Palin woman has also, hilariously, obviously gotten under his skin if he's recalibrated his campaign to attack the other ticket's VP.

That "lipstick on a pig" that landed smack on her public tagline ("pitbull in lipstick") was either a grossly revealing Freudian slip on the part of someone who is supposed to be a sophisticated political animal, or it was a snide, sleazy initial attempt to establish a sexist bashing verbal pattern around her. Either way, it shows that the VP on the McCain ticket is dominating Obama's mind or strategy. Palin has gotten into Obama's head.

I'd say Obama has problems with strong white women. Problems that will add up to derail and defeat him this year.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 10:11 AM | Report abuse

"People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" McCain & PALIN have been pushing Sen. OBAMA'S buttons just so this column could be written. He had every right to push back! GO OBAMA!

Posted by: puredemo | September 11, 2008 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Is this all you dip sh!ts have to talk about? neenre neener got you last...grow the F up!

Posted by: Tom | September 11, 2008 10:11 AM | Report abuse

John McCain wrote:

"Hello, I'm John McCain. I was a POW many, many years ago. I know that I promised to run an honorable campaign, a campaign that all Americans could be proud of. But that was before I realized that I had no new ideas, that my program is the same as the last eight years.

The last eight years have been terrible for America. We have wasted a trillion dollars on a war we never should have started. We've rewarded the rich with tax breaks, while the middle class and poor have seen their real earnings stagnate. We've dishonored our heritage by condoning torture and trashing the Constitution.

If I tell people the truth, that I am going to give you four more years of running this country into the ground, you won't vote for me. My only chance is to lie about Obama and try to keep the subject away from issues. So, have a little sympathy for an old man. Did I tell you that I was a POW?

I'm John McCain, a former POW, and I approved this message."

Posted by: Skeptic21 | September 11, 2008 10:09 AM | Report abuse

Hey Ginny:

ENOUGH ALREADY!!!! WE GET YOUR MESSAGE!!!!

YOU CLUELESS SEXIST PIG!!!!!!

Can't wait for Obama to clean the Canoe U's
clock
heyheyhey SU E !!! SU E !!!

Posted by: NOMcCain | September 11, 2008 10:08 AM | Report abuse

No Hillary, no NoBama vote!

Posted by: Suzanne | September 11, 2008 10:06 AM | Report abuse

foomonkey Obama is sexist get over it. Even Biden thinks Hillary was more qualified than he is. But Obama chose him anyway? Can you say gender discrimination!

Posted by: Ginney | September 11, 2008 10:03 AM | Report abuse

Hogwash!

If one is NOT angry about the state of affairs in this country today AND the tenor the Campaign has taken since McCain accepted the nomination-You probably are not paying attention....

When MLK, for instance, excoritated his friend Lyndon Johnson over LBJ's build-up of the Vietnam War he did'nt assume a placating tone, Martin Luther King let him have it and with good effect! When Bobby Kennedy acting as attourny general appeared before Congress and went after the corrupt Teamsters under Jimmy Hoffa he didn't pussy foot around-HE called a Pig,a Pig! When William R. Murrow went toe-to- toe with Joe McCarthy he did'nt make nice in hopes that McCarthy would start playing fair-He busted McCarthy in the chops and called him a Clown and Charlaten!

Sometimes a rightious anger IS the correct response against bully and subterfuge and anything less sounds placating and will only encourage the SOBs....

BIRDDOG

Posted by: Birddog | September 11, 2008 10:01 AM | Report abuse

I always saw McCain's temperament as evidence of transparency. Conversely, I always saw Obama's equanimity as unreal and a cover-up- an act so-to-speak. I could be wrong, but a little emotion from Obama might make him look more human and relatable. He has a lot to be emotional about.

Posted by: dcp | September 11, 2008 10:01 AM | Report abuse

>>"Thank you Asper Girl, 37 and 0, Mirken, and Ginney for validating the pettiness of women."
AsperGirl: "Thank you for validating how important we are in your mental landscape by having us figure so prominently in the theories and problem solving you are engaged in. Presumably, you have no other women in your life."
>>"Your very welcome! I do have women in my life, but they dont play to all the stereotypes that you are continuing to perpetuate."
>>"A woman can be president and it would be good for the country, but to pick a woman as an obvious ploy to get votes, women SHOULD be able to see it for what it is, a slap in the face."

So, let me get this straight, the "pettiness" of women that is being validated by our actions is our willingness "play to all the stereotypes". Isn't that kind of circular and solipsistic? I mean we're validating your perception that women play to stereotypes; i.e. your perception that women play perception games.

The universe of your thinking relies on an assumption that what you perceive to be a cynical stereotype ploy is not mistaken. The lack of external reference means that you can live in a circularly-referenced delusional pattern of social theories, so long as your belief in the cynicism of others remains unshaken.

I.e. we're only playing games so long as you believe it's all a game.

Therefore, the only real objective truth that can emerge out of your circularly-referenced theory-making is this fact: you believe it's all a game. You can't know anything else to be true or false except that one thing. And you also can't know when you're theories are drifting over la-la land.

It's more useful for your own intellectual growth to focus on what people really mean, people really do, and what people really need out of a situation and the things they need to do to win, if you're interested in political and social theories. I would suggest avoiding analyzing other people's behavior by focusing on what games you think they are playing. Otherwise, you'll just spin your tires or fall into a relativistic despair.

And you'll be wrong a lot.

Democrats are too subjective and relativistic. This is why the McCain campaign is outwitting, outstrategizing and confusing the Obama campaign. Republicans may be out of touch with rapid evolution of intellectual theories in today's information society, but Democrats are fundamentally too relativistic to run effective campaigns in war or politics.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Joe Biden is a mental lighweight and should be an embarassment to all democrats. Yesterday at a campaign rally he pointed out a state legislator and ask him to STAND and wave to the crowd. The man was WHEELCHAIR BOUND! What an idiot.

Obama is an empty suit and is now being exposed as just that. His recent performance reminds me of tellig quote: "Adversity does not build character, it reveals it."

Posted by: throwtheflag | September 11, 2008 9:57 AM | Report abuse

The Republican Party: Your Bridge to Nowhere.

Posted by: cbmtrx | September 11, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

This "lipstick on a pig" flap reminds me of the final weeks of the George Allen/Jim Webb race in Virginia. The Allen campaign started pulling passages from Webb's books in hopes that voters would be offended. Instead, a lot of them saw the tactic as "grasping at straws." A lot more voters have grown wise to this diversion tactic since then, plus the media are openly calling it that.

Posted by: Tom | September 11, 2008 9:51 AM | Report abuse

A Hardwick wrote: "Just don't be shedding crocadile tears about HRC. In fact, I believe you all in suceed weeks will be trashing her as she goes about the business of electing the Democratic ticket."

-----

Puhleeeze! Hillary's support of Obama has been lukewarm at best. Her speech at the DNC convention showed a distinct lack of enthusiasm. She's clearly hanging back so she can make another run for President in the future. She'll pay lip service to Obama's campaign, but nothing more.

Posted by: Brad Pitt | September 11, 2008 9:51 AM | Report abuse

When did emotionally dead come to mean "professional?"

Obama is outraged when he or his wife evoke anything but mindless adoration. He can't handle being questioned. Obama not "fighting dirty" is a media-perpetuated myth. His campaign has been filty with race-based innuendo.

The only thing professional about Obama is that he's spent his life as a professional victim.

Posted by: Lynn | September 11, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

@37 & O

Uh, you are not "angry about Bush"? If not, you're just a Republican troll?

To all the purported women posters on this thread, think on this: McCain would fill Supreme Court vacancies with appointee committed to overturning Roe v. Wade. If you, like the extremeist old school Cultures War fighter Palin, fair enough. Just don't be shedding crocadile tears about HRC. In fact, I believe you all in suceed weeks will be trashing her as she goes about the business of electing the Democratic ticket.

Posted by: A Hardwick | September 11, 2008 9:47 AM | Report abuse

THE MEDIA IGNORES THE 2ND PART OF OBAMA'S SLUR:

"SMELLS LIKE A FISH"

IT WAS "LIPSTICK ON A PIG" & "IT SMELLS LIKE FISH"

Obama described the McCain-Palin ticket while mocking the McCain campaign's new "change" message. "You can put lipstick on a pig," he said to a laughing Ohio audience. "It's still a pig. You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change. It's still gonna stink"

It's obvious from the crowd's reaction that they associated the comment with Palin and personally and not some other aspect of McCain's ticket. The AP notes his comment was received with an eruption of "laughter, shouts and raucous applause from his audience." (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080910/ap_on_el_pr/obama_lipstick;_ylt=ArLDnvAaUAideIavkamZCHlp24cA)

This is also not a "Freudian slip" as some have suggested -- Joe Biden tested out the line the day before!

Obama: "lipstick on a pig" & "it smells like a fish"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPd4yk0x-eg

Obama's so rhetorically gifted, why do something as clumsy as mixing pig and fish metaphors? It's bad rhetorical style unless you're trying to make some point with the juxtaposition.

So what kind of lipstick-wearing pig smells like a fish, Obama?

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 9:45 AM | Report abuse

PEOPLE ARE IGNORING THE SECOND PART OF OBAMA'S SEXIST SLUR:

"SMELLS LIKE A FISH"

"LIPSTICK ON A PIG" & "IT SMELLS LIKE FISH"

Obama described the McCain-Palin ticket while mocking the McCain campaign's new "change"

message. "You can put lipstick on a pig," he said to a laughing Ohio audience. "It's still a

pig. You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change. It's still gonna stink"

It's obvious from the crowd's reaction that they associated the comment with Palin and

personally and not some other aspect of McCain's ticket. The AP notes his comment was received

with an eruption of "laughter, shouts and raucous applause from his audience."

(http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080910/ap_on_el_pr/obama_lipstick;_ylt=ArLDnvAaUAideIavkamZCHlp24c

A)

This is also not a "Freudian slip" as some have suggested -- Joe Biden tested out the line the

day before!

Obama: "lipstick on a pig" & "it smells like a fish"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPd4yk0x-eg

Obama's so rhetorically gifted, why do something as clumsy as mixing pig and fish metaphors? It's bad rhetorical style unless you're trying to make some point with the juxtaposition.

So what kind of lipstick-wearing pig smells like a fish, Obama?

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 9:44 AM | Report abuse

>>"Thank you Asper Girl, 37 and 0, Mirken, and Ginney for validating the pettiness of women."

Thank you for validating how important we are in your mental landscape by having us figure so prominently in the theories and problem solving you are engaged in. Presumably, you have no other women in your life.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 9:25 AM

Your very welcome! I do have women in my life, but they dont play to all the stereotypes that you are continuing to perpetuate. They also aren't so easily deceived by the media blowing little things out of proportion.

You sweetie are still upset that Billary didnt win, so you are throwing a tantrum and band wagon hopping, hoping you latch onto a winner so you can tell us all how right you were. If Ron Paul would have grabbed a woman and McCain took a man, you would be on here spewing the same vile, except it would be towards McCain and Obama.

A woman can be president and it would be good for the country, but to pick a woman as an obvious ploy to get votes, women SHOULD be able to see it for what it is, a slap in the face. He is playing on the emotions of all women and they are falling for it. If your truly believed in Hillary, you would have taken to heart what she said, what is about her or what she stood for. For you jumping on the Palin bandwagon, shows your true colors as well.
You are not to be trusted. You will abandon anything and everyone to suit your needs. You have no honor. Therefore you get no respect, no matter how much whining you do and attention you seek, you will never get respect.

Posted by: Sad Asper | September 11, 2008 9:43 AM | Report abuse

It is time
for Obama to show righteous indignation and anger for the lies and distortions perpetated on the American voter...Clinton was one thing but Mccain and his running mate and these ads are another thing entirely!!!

We need people to be reminded that mccain was part of the RTC Keating 5, That his 'WET START' resulted in the deaths of 100 on the USS Forrestal..That the 'maverick' that was has sold his soul to the right wing religious nuts like Dobson with his running mate choice! He denigates women --even his wife.

Then to be reminded that he has voted with Bush 90% of the time and we have a $403 Billion dollar debt as a result!

Then to be aware that his running mate has less econnomic experience than mccain, that she is in the pocket of Big Oil, that she is an earmark queen and the lower 48 have paid for her generousity to Alaskans, that she is excellent at sarcasm and does not care that she lies in the process. She nigates women by not supporting rape victim and making them pay for their tests


The running mate is CHENEY IN A BEEHIVE AND LIPSTICK!!

Posted by: bink | September 11, 2008 9:43 AM | Report abuse

All this back and forth about what Obama meant with his lipstick remark is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is how it was perceived by the public, and many of those who heard it were offended by it. Obama, as a lawyer, should know this. Juries don't care about the law or the facts, they vote based on their gut feeling about who is right and who is wrong.

Posted by: George Washington | September 11, 2008 9:39 AM | Report abuse

The author wrote: "A sudden shift in tone then has the potential to jar voter sensibilities about Obama in a way that could negatively impact his campaign."

Exactly. He would become just another angry black male. And there goes his "post-racial" appearl.

Posted by: tas13 | September 11, 2008 9:37 AM | Report abuse

Voters want to see passion in their candidates. They view above the fray reactions as somehow proving the validity of even the most spurious allegations. Obama is very guilty of that behavior this week and through his general run.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | September 11, 2008 9:36 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Ginney | September 11, 2008 8:56 AM

I posted this and am asking what is your take?

i think it's absurd to call him a sexist jerk, then ignore the horrible crap that mccain has tossed out

a joke about a woman being raped by a gorilla?
calling his wife a c**t?
joking about chelsea clinton?

the sexism is on mccain, choosing a woman to pander to the female vote.

this is insane... palin has brought nothing but nastiness to the campaign, with her sarcasm, condescension and lies. she is supposed to be this rough and tough woman, and they flip out about this? she hides from the press?

and, my god, people are falling for it!!

Posted by: foomonkey | September 11, 2008 9:29 AM | Report abuse

Of course he is trapped. That is the beauty of it to the McCain campaign. People want them to play nice? Politics ain't tiddlywinks.

Posted by: Ed | September 11, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

>>"Thank you Asper Girl, 37 and 0, Mirken, and Ginney for validating the pettiness of women."

Thank you for validating how important we are in your mental landscape by having us figure so prominently in the theories and problem solving you are engaged in. Presumably, you have no other women in your life.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 9:25 AM | Report abuse

How can you write an entire column on Obama and anger and not explore that he is trapped if he is and trapped if he isn't - that he is more limited in what he can do that other politicians - because he is Black. How can you not anaylze this good question in terms of race, too?

Surely, he has to be careful not to become The Angry Black Man. No?

And do you think it is beneath the republicans to try and exploit that trap? How does he fight back, and stay "safe" for - precisely the voters Palin is designed to appeal to?

I think you might might explore that at some point.

Posted by: J Miller | September 11, 2008 9:24 AM | Report abuse

WHY ALL WOMEN AND REPUBLICANS SHOULD SUPPORT THE MCCAIN CAMPAIGN WHEN IT COUNTERATTACKS AGAINST AN OBAMA SEXIST SLUR WHETHER OR NOT EVERYONE GETS WHY THE SLUR IS SEXIST

A culture of verbal belittling springs up around a woman when no verbal boundaries are ever set. Sexist verbal belittling has a verbal bullying dynamic in the sense that the offenders who wish to define a woman first cross her boundaries repeated, which has an implicit sexual violation feel that excites the audience (as we saw in how Obama's audience erupted in raucous, clapping approval of his "lipstick on a pig" remark). Sexist bashing of a woman is a kind of bullying dynamic because it starts in this hilarious, exciting way with the initial violations of her boundaries that is subliminally sexual, and proceeds quickly to contempt and marginalization.

During the Democratic primaries, Hillary Clinton rejected running "as a first female president" and ignored gender-specific appeals or defenses during her campaign. She also ignored sexist-coded attacks. As a result, the Obama camp & supporters got free license to develop a sexually inappropriate verbal bullying culture around Clinton's campaign, in which sexist memes, gender-coded bashing and witchhunting glee resulted in a torrent of verbal sexism during her campaign, much of it coded in snide, sleazy imagery used to depict her actions, policies, stands, etc.

In order to prevent a misogynistic verbal bullying culture from springing up around Palin as well, the McCain campaign has to set and enforce boundaries. I.e. aggressively posture and attack all slimy attempts by their opponents from crossing the line and establishing a verbally abusive foothold in sexist-woman-bashing land.

The McCain campaign is trying to set boundaries in 2 ways:

(1) The campaign has imposed a firewall around Palin, where they rewarding the media for its initial sexist, inappropriate trashing of Palin after she was announced. The campaign manager stated the media will not get access Palin until they show her more respect. They are simultaneously allowing Gibson to have an extensive interview with Palin. He announced early on that the family and sexual issues have no place in evaluating her candidacy. So they are rewarding Gibson while shutting out other media as a show of enforcing boundaries they have already described that they want respected.

(2) They are defending against initial, slimy and incirect attempts on Obama's part to start introducing sexist slurs linked to Obama's verbal treatment of Palin. Before allowing it to take hold as it got established around Clinton's campaign. They must decry and attack these initial forays on Obama's part to use sleazy, sexist-coded insinuations and imagery when describing Palin or the McCain-Palin ticket. The McCain camp shows it will attack and turn against Obama any and all attempted incursions into snidely concealed, sexually offensive imagery.

Once the culture of sexually and sexist inappropriate verbal depiction of Clinton took hold while she ignored those tried to bait her on her gender, it got out of control. Clinton never really got her public image under her own control again.

The McCain campaign is learning how to deal with verbal discrimination and the various sleazy forms it takes when a smear campaign is deployed against an executive woman. They're doing a good job by making attempts to set boundaries. They may be able to reverse a culture of media bashing of women candidates -- all those trash-the-executive-women memes and permissions the media gave itself -- that became a verbal subculture this year during the primary season.

I applaud their attempts, as should any woman, Democrat or Republican.

All GOP & women bloggers should be aware of this effort to set boundaries, and echo the McCain campaign when it calls out the Obama camp on insidious attempts to insert sexist memes into depictions of the McCain-Palin ticket. Don't ask questions, just pitch in and counterattack, even if you're a man and don't really get it at first.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 9:23 AM | Report abuse

A big bunch of whining women on here playing to the stereotypes of women, that they are weak and cannot play with the big boys.

Thank you Asper Girl, 37 and 0, Mirken, and Ginney for validating the pettiness of women.

It is a common known fact women are more emotional than men, and you are all proving it. I dont want a VP who is as thin skinned as all of you above. Grow some balls and man up!! Or go home and put on some slippers and cook your man a meal, he needs it if he has to deal with your whiny selves.

Posted by: Whining women | September 11, 2008 9:23 AM | Report abuse

This Obama is a sexist jerk!
Why would he feel the need to say that at all. It's a very telling statement. Palin is cleary just window dressing to this jerk.


Obama: “It does. But keep in mind that, technically, had I meant it that way, she would have been the lipstick, you see?” (audience, Dave laugh) “But now we’re…”

Dave: “I don’t know, you’re way ahead of me.” (audience laughs)

Posted by: Ginney | September 11, 2008 8:56 AM

I posted this and am asking what is your take?

Posted by: Ginney | September 11, 2008 9:06 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Obama is cracking under pressure. Obama is a has ben and old news. Palin is cool, sexy and sassy. She does not take any cr@p from anybody.

Obama only has $13 million in his campaign fund.
Early voting begins in Iowa and Ohio in 2 weeks.
Women are voting for Palin because we need a woman in the White House. We hoped it would be Hillary but we like Palin.

We don't have to write Hillary's name on the ballot we can vote McCain/Palin 2008.

Posted by: grace | September 11, 2008 9:16 AM | Report abuse

It's clear that Obama wasn't talking about Palin per se when he made the lipstick/pig comment, he was talking about their adopting the mantel of 'change'.

Not that it matters though; Obama has done a good job in letting his proxies do the sniping at McCain and (especially) Palin, while he's tried to stay above the fray. If I were Republican, I might wonder if that were a coordinated strategy. If he wants to be president, he needs to get a thicker skin. People will say far worse things about him, especially OCONUS.

He should either sack up or shut up.

Posted by: JD | September 11, 2008 9:16 AM | Report abuse

8 years got us here.

what will 12 or 16 do?

Don't be lazy go read their full plans... McCain's ispretty short...and a quick read...

it's the same as what we have been doing.

Posted by: dl | September 11, 2008 9:15 AM | Report abuse

When are you guys in the media going to start giving McCain all the free advice you give the Chosen One? Every single one of you is so pushes Obama we've started to tun you out. But America is tuning in McCain/Palin including this former Hillary supporter! Breaking the glass ceiling, is breaking it. And I want Nobama to be sitting alone in January wishing he had picked Hillary.

Posted by: Sam in FLA | September 11, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

"I see your outrage and raise you an outrage!" That's how campaign poker is played. We will add in a swiftboat charge as well, although how this outrage yelling relates to military service is unclear. As we double down on outrage, let's call for reasoned debate on policy, shall we?

That will come in the lame duck session of Congress on energy. Obama might find something in that to relate to swiftboats as well since he will not like what happens when the one issue in which he is clearly defined as behind in the polls takes center stage.

Posted by: Ed | September 11, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

Head of State
http://tinyurl.com/65qxee

Sunday, September 07, 2008

10 Ways in Which, For Women, Sarah Palin Is *Exactly* Like George W. Bush

1) Like Bush, she is completely against a woman's right to choose (in fact, she exceeds Bush in that she is against a woman's right to choose even in cases of rape or incest;

2) Like Bush, she opposes stem cell research to prevent fatal diseases in men, women and children;

3) Like Bush, supports the teaching of Creationism alongside Evolution in public schools;

4) Like Bush, does not believe that Global Warming is man made;

5) Like Bush, has supported abstinence-only sex education methods that have proven ineffective;

6) Like Bush, has virtually no foreign policy experience prior to running for national office--(in Palin's case, despite a 72-year old, chronically ill running mate)

7) Like Bush, has engaged in conduct that has resulted in current government investigation of her actions;

8) Like Bush, has made statements which indicate lack of knowledge of basic elements of the office they are running for (Palin, July 2008: "What exactly does the Vice President do everyday?");

9) Like Bush, has been sequestered to prevent her being asked questions that she has not yet been prepared to answer;

10) Like Bush, talks like a reformer--yet in her actions (i.e., relying on lobbying, supporting the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it) acts in the most typical, all-too-familiar fashion.

Posted by: yam | September 11, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

As a 9/11 survivor, I'm particularly outraged that Sarah Palin is ignoring the call to remove politics from the anniversary of the terrorist attacks. This is not the right time for her first tv "celebrity" interview, and aquiescing to host the event on this date was am indefensible choice by ABC News. I encourage you all to write and tell them as much: http://abcnews.go.com/Site/page?id=3052660

Posted by: Youba | September 11, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

This Obama is a sexist jerk!
Why would he feel the need to say that at all. It's a very telling statement. Palin is cleary just window dressing to this jerk.


Obama: “It does. But keep in mind that, technically, had I meant it that way, she would have been the lipstick, you see?” (audience, Dave laugh) “But now we’re…”

Dave: “I don’t know, you’re way ahead of me.” (audience laughs)

Posted by: Ginney | September 11, 2008 8:56 AM

I posted this and am asking what is your take?

Posted by: Ginney | September 11, 2008 9:06 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

and the man who brought us the last 8 years

is back on Mccain's payroll.

remember the manipulation cover-ups and lies that faked us into all the tragic mistakes over the past 8 years...

well the architect has just been found receiving those moneys again.

2000 and 2004...they are trying to do to 2008.

don't be blind.

Karl Rove is trying to steal your nation again. We now are finding out that he really didn't leave Bush's side to be a consultant on Fox. He left Bush's side to conitnue to be "the architect" and help Mccain continue the last 8 years of destroying our country.


No answers. No changes...

same team same tactics...same 8 year path repeated.
Don't let them...

Posted by: dl | September 11, 2008 9:11 AM | Report abuse

John McCain wrote:

"There was a time when I didn't have lipstick and I didn't have a pig. And even if I had, the Vietnamese guard would not have let me put the lipstick on the pig. Now, I don't care if you vote for me or not, but I do care about the right to put lipstick on a pig.

I tried to put lipstick on Gov. Palin, but she said, "Thanks, but no thanks. If I want lipstick I'll go out and shoot it myself."

I tried to put lipstick on Cindi, and she said, "I've already got three coats of primer and face paint. Any more, and I'll look like Heath Ledger in that Batman movie."

I'm John McCain and I approved this message.

Posted by: Skeptic21 | September 11, 2008 9:09 AM | Report abuse

This Obama is a sexist jerk!
Why would he feel the need to say that at all. It's a very telling statement. Palin is cleary just window dressing to this jerk.


Obama: “It does. But keep in mind that, technically, had I meant it that way, she would have been the lipstick, you see?” (audience, Dave laugh) “But now we’re…”

Dave: “I don’t know, you’re way ahead of me.” (audience laughs)

Posted by: Ginney | September 11, 2008 8:56 AM

I posted this and am asking what is your take?

Posted by: Ginney | September 11, 2008 9:06 AM | Report abuse

I have to say, I once had a good amount of respect for McCain, but its gone after these last two days of new ads by his campaign. His recent distortions and lies have gone past ugly politics and have come close to being truly evil. How is he going to reach across the aisle after this?

Posted by: Scrapster | September 11, 2008 9:05 AM | Report abuse

Anger and frustration not good? Neither are lies! Never again should a President you want to have a beer with be allowed to lie the American public into a False & Phony war and ignore the real war as George W. Bush was able too! National Security strength, I don't think so, after all 911 happened on the Republicans' watch, but they distorted that message too and you would think that Democrats are weak on national security! Politicans who lie to the public are engaged in a betrayal of the public trust and such distortion should be deemed unethical and in some cases, criminal!

And, it is an outrage or should be that the government can give millions of dollars to CEO’s from the failed Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac and yet, cannot give a second stimulus check to American citizens in these hard economic times?

Republicans say No to a second stimulus while the Democrats say Yes to a second stimulus!

Is the Republican Congress working for CEO’s or are they working for you, the people?

Posted by: Angellight | September 11, 2008 9:04 AM | Report abuse

WHY ALL WOMEN AND REPUBLICANS SHOULD SUPPORT THE MCCAIN CAMPAIGN WHEN IT COUNTERATTACKS AGAINST AN OBAMA SEXIST SLUR WHETHER OR NOT EVERYONE GETS WHY THE SLUR IS SEXIST

A culture of verbal bullying springs up around a person when no boundaries are ever set. Hillary Clinton rejected running "as a first female president" and rejected all gender-specific appeals or defenses during her campaign. The Obama camp & supporters got free license to develop a verbal-abuse, bullying culture around her campaign, in which sexist tirades, gender-coded bashing and witchhunting dynamic meant that she was subjected to a torrent of verbal sexism thoughout her campaign, much of it coded in snide imagery used to depict her actions, policies, stands, etc.

In order to prevent a misogynistically themed, verbal bullying culture from springing up around Palin as well, the McCain campaign has to set and enforce boundaries. I.e. aggressively posture and attack all slimy attempts by their opponents from crossing the line and establishing a verbally abusive foothold in sexist-woman-bashing land.

The McCain campaign is setting the boundary against sexist bashing of Palin in two ways, initially: they have imposed and enforced a media firewall around Palin, where they are punishing the media for its sexist, inappropriate bashing of Palin out of the gate. As recently as the day before yesterday, the campaign manager stated the media will not get access to her until they treat her with more respect. That is a hard boundary, also aided by allowing Gibson to have an extensive interview with her today, after he announced on his website early on that the family and sexual issues have no place in evaluating her candidacy. I.e. they are rewarding Gibson and shutting out other journalists who don't respect her boundaries.

The other way they are setting and enforcing boundaries that help prevent a verbally abusive sexist culture from taking hold around Palin as it took hold around Clinton's campaign, is to call out and attack initial forays into sleazy, sexist-coded insinuations of the Obama campaign and its supporters. Rightly so, they will attack and use against Obama any and all such attempts to cross the line.

Once the culture of sexually and sexist inappropriate verbal abuse and verbal bashing of Clinton took hold while she was running on ignoring those who tried to bait her on her gender, it got out of control and Clinton never really got it under control. In a sense, she had to create the tough, fighter, gritty persona of the second half of the primary season to compensate for the absurd spectacle of her attempts to run while at the center of a misogynistic media bash-fest.

The McCain campaign is learning how to deal with discrimination and the sleazy forms it takes when deployed against women. They are doing a good job at their initial attempts to set boundaries. Whether or not they get control over the sexist bashing of women candidates -- all those trash-executive-women memes -- that became an established culture this year during the Democratic primary season, is yet to be seen. But I applaud their attempts, as should any woman, Democrat or Republican.

All Republican bloggers and commentators should be aware of this effort and pitch in to support and echo the McCain campaign when it calls out the Obama camp on insidious attempts to insert sexist slurs into depictions of the McCain-Palin ticket. Don't ask questions, just pitch in and counterattack and support the McCain campaign in this subject area, even if you're a man and don't really get it.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 11, 2008 9:01 AM | Report abuse

This Obama is a sexist jerk!
Why would he feel the need to say that at all. It's a very telling statement. Palin is cleary just window dressing to this jerk.


Obama: “It does. But keep in mind that, technically, had I meant it that way, she would have been the lipstick, you see?” (audience, Dave laugh) “But now we’re…”

Dave: “I don’t know, you’re way ahead of me.” (audience laughs)

Posted by: Ginney | September 11, 2008 8:56 AM | Report abuse

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/10/joe-biden-questions-obamas-judgment/#comments

Joe Biden questions Obama’s judgment
By Michelle Malkin • September 10, 2008 05:58 PM He means it. “Frankly” and “sincerely.” We believe you, Joe:

Transcript:

[MSNBC's] SEN. JOE BIDEN: Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more than I am to be vice president of the United States of America. She is say close personal friend and qualified to be president of the United States of America. She is easily qualified to be vice president of the United States of America and quite frankly it might have been a better pick than me, but she is first-rate. I mean that sincerely.

Yes, Joe Biden is questioning Barack Obama’s judgment out loud.

The Palin effect. Savor it.

***

Eagleton?

Comments
Comment pages: « 1 [2]

#101On September 10th, 2008 at 8:24 pm, travlinman said:
If Biden is found shot 27 times in the head with a single shot, .44 Mag pistol in his ‘weak’ hand, sitting with a clean suicide note pinned to his back, in Ft. Marcy Park on a park bench with no blood on or around him, I think that Obama needs to “one-up” McCain and put a lesbian on the ticket. It might just be time for Oprah to “come out dat closet, girl”! Gayle could become the 1st, First Butch, since Eleanor Roosevelt.

No matter what happens, I just can’t see Hillary on the ticket with Obama. I mean, Barack would be afraid to eat or drink anything on the campaign trail or at the White House if they won, and might succomb to his sudden onset of anorexia. His disorder would most likely be rooted in a fear of poisoning, not a fear of looking fat.

Posted by: Joe | September 11, 2008 8:56 AM | Report abuse

One thing is to reject the old politics from McCain and another one is letting McCain and Palin tell lie after lie after lie without saying anything. As Senator Obama, I'm really mad because I don't believe that the American people is really falling into the game the McCain campaign is playing. They don't care about the issues, they are just playing the "fake change" and personality cards right now to win no matter what. I hope everyone realize what they are. Both of them are lying and aren't proposing any real solution to the issues. By the way, maybe the McCain campaign speakers should ask to him to reject the 'lipstick on a pig' phrase but wait...there's a problem...is one of McCain's favorite phrases!

Posted by: dan | September 11, 2008 8:49 AM | Report abuse

Please feel free to repost this!!!!
This type of sexist attitude needs to be denounced.


Posted by: Maggie | September 11, 2008 12:13 AM

Again, you take what he said out of context.

He said IF he had been talking about her, which he WASN'T, she wouldn't have been the "pig" but the "lipstick". He was using as an illustration of how stupid this whole thing is.

Get a life. This country is going down the drain thanks to 8 years of Republican plunder and mismanagement, and this is the best you can do?

Finally we have a candidate who is intelligent and has studied the issues, and the McCain campaign which has issued NO substantive policy proposals other than the inane "drill baby drill" comes out with the sleaziest, most factually challenged, most unserious campaign in history

If these backward thinking reactionaries with their 19th century views on energy (McCain and Palin) get elected we truly will have gotten the leadership we deserve, and this once proud nation will be a colony of China within 25 years.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 8:48 AM | Report abuse

Obama said Sarah Palin was McCains Lipstick gleefully! What a sexist jerk.

Posted by: Anna | September 11, 2008 8:46 AM | Report abuse

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/11/obama-letterman-pigs/

is a transcript of Sen. Obama's remarks to Letterman as reported by FOX. It belies Ms. Maggie's interpretation of the conversation. Please feel free to forward the link instead of forwarding Ms. Maggie's viral email.

Posted by: MoreAndBetterPolls | September 11, 2008 8:43 AM | Report abuse

Palin supporters cry sexism where there is none. If Palin is going to throw BS like the boys she has to expect the same coming back at her. Pitbulls deserve no mercy.

Posted by: nancy | September 11, 2008 8:43 AM | Report abuse

What "attack"? there was one.

Obama is the one who is owed an apology.

this is just an example of how unserious McSame and co. are, and how unfit to lead they are.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 8:37 AM | Report abuse

Yea Chris why are you not making any mention of what Obama said on Letterman.

He considers her McCain's Lipstick.
What a pig himself ehh Chris...

Posted by: Keller | September 11, 2008 8:32 AM | Report abuse

Obama when interviewed on Letterman just said that Sarah Palin was just Lip-stick for McCain!

How is that not sexist. Sarah Palin is not mere window dressing despite what Obama's pattern of thinking is.


Please feel free to repost this!!!!
This type of sexist attitude needs to be denounced.


Posted by: Maggie | September 11, 2008 12:13 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 8:29 AM | Report abuse

Maggie has an excellant point. That is clearly sexist. Obama said it like a happy moron.

Posted by: Harbor1 | September 11, 2008 8:26 AM | Report abuse

Breaking news!

Breaking news!

Breaking news!


Obama when interviewed on Letterman just said that Sarah Palin was just Lip-stick for McCain!

How is that not sexist. Sarah Palin is not mere window dressing despite what Obama's pattern of thinking is.


Please feel free to repost this!!!!
This type of sexist attitude needs to be denounced.

Posted by: Maggie | September 11, 2008 12:13 AM

I saw a man being very glib and insensitive until he made this new reference on Letterman. Now I know it was sexist.

Posted by: Tamara | September 11, 2008 1:29 AM

I saw this and it is so true. I know why your not talking about this Chris but your buddy Keith Obamaman's interview was a just two grown men playing Kissey Face. Obama is a sexist! Talk amongst yourselves. Chris will take no part.

Posted by: Mirken | September 11, 2008 8:22 AM | Report abuse

From:
Head of State
http://tinyurl.com/6qr95o

Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Truth

Mark Halperin, on Anderson Cooper 360, September 9, from Talking Points Memo:

"AC: Mark, has there ever been a vice presidential candidate who has yet to talk to the press at this point in the race?

MH: No. And it's another thing I get that I'm embarrassed about our profession for. She should be held more accountable for that. The "bridge to nowhere" thing is outrageous. And if you press them on that, they falter because they know they can't defend what they're saying. They're saying it on the stump, as a core part of their message. It's in their advertising. I'm not saying the press should be out to get John McCain and Sarah Palin. But if a core part of their message is something that every journalist...journalism organization in the country has looked at and says it's demonstrably false, again, we're not doing our jobs if we just treat this as one of many things that's happening."

Cite:
Head of State
http://tinyurl.com/6qr95o

Posted by: Marie Stewart | September 11, 2008 8:16 AM | Report abuse

.


OBAMA IS CRACKING - is this how Obama and his people are going to handle a National Security Crisis ???


Clearly Obama is NOT ready.


The way that Obama AND his paid staff bloggers at the Obama headquarters have attacked Sarah Palin over the past few weeks clearly PROVES THAT OBAMA IS NOT THE PERSON FOR THE POSITION OF PRESIDENT.


OBAMA CLEARLY CAN NOT HANDLE THE PRESSURE.


Obama is now making mistakes and he is losing it. Obama is clearly UNABLE to handle a FOREIGN CRISIS OR STAND UP TO FOREIGN LEADERS IF THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS TO HIM WHEN CONFRONTED BY THE GOVERNOR OF ALASKA.


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | September 11, 2008 8:16 AM | Report abuse

Who do we want for President - someone who is cautious and careful - or someone who shoots from the hip?. ...........
http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/09/11/john-mccain-is-general-george-armstrong-custer/

Posted by: Ohg Rea Tone | September 11, 2008 8:14 AM | Report abuse

.


MarkinAustin


NOT THIS WEEK - no "cool detachment" for Obama - THIS GUY OBAMA IS CRACKING - is this how Obama and his people are going to handle a National Security Crisis ???


Clearly Obama is NOT ready.


The way that Obama AND his paid staff bloggers at the Obama headquarters have attacked Sarah Palin over the past few weeks clearly PROVES THAT OBAMA IS NOT THE PERSON FOR THE POSITION OF PRESIDENT.


OBAMA CLEARLY CAN NOT HANDLE THE PRESSURE.


Obama is now making mistakes and he is losing it. Obama is clearly UNABLE to handle a FOREIGN CRISIS OR STAND UP TO FOREIGN LEADERS IF THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS TO HIM WHEN CONFRONTED BY THE GOVERNOR OF ALASKA.


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | September 11, 2008 8:12 AM | Report abuse

.

Not for nothing, but wasn't what Obama did to Bill Clinton in South Carolina "swift-boat politics?"


Obama really has to watch out for the hypocrite label.


Obama was supposed to be the "post-partisan post-racial" candidate - and all he has done has been to be a FRAUD to those two campaign themes.


It really is unbelievable.


The attacks on Sarah Palin have made a COMPLETE FRAUD out of any claim that Obama has made of being "post-partisan." What is really bothering the ANGRY LIBERALS is that a WOMAN can be PROFRESSIONAL, ASSERTIVE AND HAVE CONSERVATIVE VALUES ALL AT THE SAME TIME. THAT SIGHT INFURIATES THE OBAMA AND HIS CRAZY BAND OF ANGRY LIBERALS.


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | September 11, 2008 8:08 AM | Report abuse

Every account of BHO's demeanor and style has emphasized his cool detachment - even his Harvard Law Review colleagues remember him for it. This is a workable demeanor for a successful management style as well as for patiently negotiating difficult disputes, foreign and domestic.

Asking him to change the comfortable style of his adult lifetime is a mere media conceit. He is who he is. He does what he does. He will win or lose the election as his own man. He can only lose as someone else's.

IMO, Gore tried to be "someone else" in 2k. He might have lost anyway, but GWB did seem more "genuine", which was partly the result of an unnecessary and gratuitous adoption of an "image" by Gore.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | September 11, 2008 7:55 AM | Report abuse

BAsically then Obama should just stab McCain in the back with a smile.

McCain's "honor" erodes with each fallacious attack. Imagine where it would be if the media started getting tough with him (In my lifetime!)

Posted by: nancy | September 11, 2008 7:51 AM | Report abuse

excellent post luck

Obama is an adolescent with the maturity of an 18 year old frat boy.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 11, 2008 7:44 AM | Report abuse

.


Not for nothing, but wasn't what Obama did to Bill Clinton in South Carolina "swift-boat politics?"


Obama really has to watch out for the hypocrite label.

Obama was supposed to be the "post-partisan post-racial" candidate - and all he has done has been to be a FRAUD to those two campaign themes.


It really is unbelievable.

The attacks on Sarah Palin have made a COMPLETE FRAUD out of any claim that Obama has made of being "post-partisan." What is really bothering the ANGRY LIBERALS is that a WOMAN can be PROFRESSIONAL, ASSERTIVE AND HAVE CONSERVATIVE VALUES ALL AT THE SAME TIME. THAT SIGHT INFURIATES THE OBAMA AND HIS CRAZY BAND OF ANGRY LIBERALS.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | September 11, 2008 7:40 AM | Report abuse

I've read other similar posts and they all do the same thing - tell Obama what he shouldn't do in the face of a drastically altered race where his opponents don't give a spit about public opinion and are subsequently gaining by playing to the baser instincts. What I haven't seen anyone do is actually tell us what Obama should be doing - don't decry how it's politics as usual, discuss how one can compete with lies and deceit effectively. Kerry couldn't do it, Gore couldn't do it, Dukakis couldn't do it...the Democrats have got to carry a bigger stick and pundits like yourself have got to stop trying to emasculate them when they try to use it.

Posted by: robdeemer | September 11, 2008 7:38 AM | Report abuse

.


Obama's ANGER IS SUPPRESSED.


He is an ANGRY LIBERAL


Obama and Michele Obama are still ANGRY about the Jim Crow era.


They are ANGRY about Bush.


Thay are ANGRY that any election gains for the democrats from the Iraq war have been erased by the SUCCESS OF THE SURGE.

NOW they are ANGRY that a WOMAN CAN BE PROFESSIONAL, ASSERTIVE AND HAVE CONSERVATIVE VIEWS.


BOY DOES THAT MAKE THEM ANGRY.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | September 11, 2008 7:35 AM | Report abuse

I don’t recall anyone questioning that BO’s ’shoulder brush off’ and ‘checking his shoes’ - at the same rally that he seemed to give HRC ‘the finger’ - were not dismissive gestures. And he did so solely because HRC had performed better than him in a debate - not dismissed/insulted him.

So while BO disputes that his lipstick comments were not meant to be dismissive - we all know that he has made dismissive gestures before - and made them when he is upset about being bested by a woman.

That is why BO can not spin his way out of this this time. Silly season my bxtt.

Posted by: lucky | September 11, 2008 7:28 AM | Report abuse

If you want to see anger, just wait for the Biden/Palin debate. It's widely known that Biden is a hot-head and once you get him going, he starts exaggerating wildly. I'm certain the Republican strategists are carefully prepping Palin to try to get under his skin at the debate. Perhaps, as Biden himself said at a rally yesterday, Obama should have picked Hillary as his running mate.

Posted by: Howard Dean | September 11, 2008 7:25 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company