Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Sarah Palin, St. Louis and 2012



Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin on the debate stage in St. Louis. AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

The rapidly congealing conventional wisdom concerning last night's vice presidential debate between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden is that the Alaska governor did enough to make herself a non-issue (or at least less of an issue) in the final month of the campaign.

But it may well be a mistake to assume that the only impact of Palin's performance last night was to stop the bleeding caused by a series of missteps in interviews with CBS News Katie Couric.

Palin's performance last night -- particularly her willingness to stand by conservative principles on things such as gay marriage and do it with a smile (and even a wink) -- further endeared her to not only conservative opinion makers but the rank and file GOPers who will play an outsized role in picking the next nominee of the party in 2012 if McCain comes up short in 32 days time.

As Jim Geraghty wrote on National Review's "Campaign Spot" blog: "She's a natural saleswoman. She certainly saved her prospects for national office in 2012, if she so chooses."

What Palin did last night is bring her own national prospects back from the brink of disaster with a performance that -- while occasionally exposing her decided lack of knowledge on certain issues -- managed to keep her star ascendant for a party that may well be looking for a new face to lead it on Nov. 5.

Palin is clearly likable, charismatic and telegenic. In an insta-poll conducted by CNN, more than eight in ten people who watched the debate said she did better than they had expected while just seven percent said she had done worse. Asked which candidate was more likable, 54 percent chose Palin while 36 percent opted for Biden.

The CNN poll also showed the obvious weaknesses that Palin must address between now and 2012 -- or whenever the next time the Republican presidential nomination is open. Less than half (46 percent) of the sample said they thought Palin was qualified to be president while 53 percent said she want not. (Interestingly, those numbers were largely unchanged from a pre-debate poll in which 42 percent said she was qualified to be president and 54 percent said she was not.)

And so, judging from the polls, Palin's image to the average American is as a likable Republican who probably needs a bit more seasoning. Sub out "Republican" for "Democrat" in that last sentence and you have the general sentiment about former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards following his 2004 run for president and subsequent vice presidential bid alongside Sen. John Kerry (Mass.).

Edwards spent the next four years laying the policy groundwork for a second bid, founding the Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity at the University of North Carolina and touring the country to talk about poverty and its import as a national issue.

Palin could follow the same blueprint -- choosing a signature issue (or two) and focusing heavily on making herself a leading authority on the issue while also boning up on other policy matters (particularly foreign policy) and putting in place a political team.

And, while Palin's weaknesses are apparent to any political junkie following the last few weeks of the campaign closely, her strengths are also legion.

She is beloved by social conservative voters who view her as "one of them". She will end this race, win or lose, with extremely high name identification nationwide. Regardless of the outcome, she will be a rockstar on the Republican fundraising circuit over the coming months and years. And, for a party that may well be looking to redefine itself in 2012, Palin stands out from a field that could include former Govs. Mitt Romney (Mass.) and Mike Huckabee (Ark.) as well as Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty among others.

Last night Palin may not have materially aided McCain's chances of defeating Obama in the fall campaign but she did her own political future a world of good.

By Chris Cillizza  |  October 3, 2008; 2:14 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008 , Veepstakes  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: VIDEO: Fix on the Debate
Next: Bailout Fallout: Can Republicans Stage a Comeback?

Comments

I generally avoid responding to 36th Street & Q Avenue, but couldn't resist.

"I am personally upset that just about everyone coming from the Obama campaign is deceptive."

No you're not. You've been posting anti-Obama screeds for months. At least have the honesty of your convictions.

"McCain and Bush DO NOT GET ALONG - THEY HAVE BEEN FIGHTING FOR YEARS. Yet the Obama people keep saying they are the same. That is deceptive."

No, the campaign says that McCain will continue the policies. You know. The tax cut. Iraq war. Social Security. Health care. I couldn't care less if McCain detests Bush (not true, though true for Cheney).

"The liberals say McCain would be the 'third Bush term.' The liberals CAN NOT COUNT.

This is the third Bush term. We had his father and two terms for the younger Bush."

OK. The third term of George W Bush. If I can't count, you can't listen.

"Engage on the issues. OH the Obama campaign is unable to engage on the issues - the problem is Obama wants HIGH TAXES"

Brilliant. You state engage on the issues and then lie about Obama's positions. Tell you what. I'll engage as soon as you do.

"OBAMA IS LYING ABOUT WILLIAM AYERS THE TWO WERE CLOSE"

Really? Got some intercepted emails? Old phone calls? Warm photo ops? I didn't think so.

"OBAMA IS BEING DECEPTIVE ABOUT HIS CHURCH - THE RACIST ONE THAT HATES WHITES."

Aren't you the one who just said engage on the issues a few carriage returns ago? I think you're confused.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | October 6, 2008 12:11 AM | Report abuse


.


I am personally upset that just about everyone coming from the Obama campaign is deceptive.


It is pathetic.


McCain and Bush DO NOT GET ALONG - THEY HAVE BEEN FIGHTING FOR YEARS.

Yet the Obama people keep saying they are the same. That is deceptive.


The liberals say McCain would be the 'third Bush term.'

The liberals CAN NOT COUNT.

This is the third Bush term. We had his father and two terms for the younger Bush.

Engage on the issues.


OH the Obama campaign is unable to engage on the issues - the problem is Obama wants HIGH TAXES


That is NOT the way to go.


OBAMA IS LYING ABOUT WILLIAM AYERS THE TWO WERE CLOSE

OBAMA IS BEING DECEPTIVE ABOUT HIS CHURCH - THE RACIST ONE THAT HATES WHITES.


.


.

Posted by: 37thandOStreet | October 5, 2008 9:50 PM | Report abuse

Cillizza- Stop thinking with your pants rather than your head. The woman is a dunce. She is not even remotely qualified to be president; I think alaskans are asking themselves now if she's qualified to be governor-- her polls have gone down 14 points in the last month.
Don't set yourself up for a "little starbursts" moment-- protect yourself at least from this woman.

Posted by: lebecka | October 5, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

This sounds like the script from a Monty Python sketch. Amusing, maybe hilarious, but certainly implausible.

Palin has been fighting an investigation of her vendetta against her State Trooper ex-brother-in-law. She was apparently trying to misuse her power to illegally fire him. After all her talk about transparency and a willingness to cooperate to resolve the issues, her appointed mediocre Attorney General, retained Anchorage counsel and McCain team fixers dispatch from the East Coast, they have gotten nowhere in stopping the investigation. A last ditch effort for an injunction is almost certainly doomed to fail. The investigation results are to be released next Friday.

During the investigation so far the Alaska public has learned that in order to defeat the state open records act she has set up a parallel system of communication on personal e-mail accounts, non-state provided cell phones and Blackberries. She has refused to turn over 1,100 pages of subpoenaed documents, something even her troubled predecessor was disinclined to attempt. 100 of those e-mails were sent or copied to her husband which eliminates any claim of executive privilege.

From an assortment of friends, neighbors, church members and high school buddies, she has appointed a collection of misfits to the highest offices in her administration, few having college degrees, most doing an amateurish job.

She is an extremely mediocre intellect, incurious, with a third-rate education herself. She staggered through five campus changes in six years.

In the past five weeks or so, despite her sending $1,200 "energy rebate" checks to every man, woman and child resident of Alaska, she has dropped in the approval polls from 82 to 68%, with another large drop likely when the next poll is taken.

She has lied constantly on the campaign trail, though I understand that she is no longer making the spurious claim that she stopped the Gravina Island bridge. Her claim that she is helping provide natural gas for "hungry" consumers in the lower 48 is also mendacious. She has given a contract to a Canadian company to build a gas pipeline whenever they get around to it and has tossed them a half-billion subsidy. They have no claim on Alaskan gas reserves which are currently used in petroleum recovery from played out oil fields. The excess gas is mostly flared off. If the pipeline ever gets built, it is likely to terminate in Alberta, Canada to assist in the wasteful and incredibly polluting process of extraction of petroleum from oil sands.

For Cillizza to speculate on possible future advancement for Palin simply overlooks the facts that will increasingly bar her way.

Posted by: fsmith3 | October 5, 2008 1:42 AM | Report abuse

This is a dangerous woman. I am beginning to sense that she is as mean, down and dirty and evil as is the current vice-president whom, I am beginning to see, as her mentor. The neo-conservative, religious right is out to destroy us and, I am afraid, the blinded Joe Sixpacks and Hockey moms along with Pat Robinson and ilk will allow this to happen. Scary doesn't begin to define the threat.

Posted by: jlp2 | October 5, 2008 12:09 AM | Report abuse

well shucks. she did better than i expected too and so did biden but i find her irresponsible, shallow and dishonest. it's some kind of reflection of our national character but i'm not sure what it is yet. she may be the nominee in 2012 and run against an incumbent obama and that gives her some years to do some reading. say maybe in history, government, international relations, comparative religions, anthropology, all those things cheerleaders and beauty contestants don't have time for.

Posted by: GaiasChild | October 4, 2008 11:58 PM | Report abuse

to 37th and 0; Why Obama easy: Top of his class Harvard Law (Mccain 895th out of 900) how's that?
Mccain bombed civilians then surrendered after multiple crashes. He has flipped his position more times than a Mcdonalds burger patty; including his bald faced lies about walking the streets of Iraq w/out bady armour, that he didn;t know squat about economics in the primary debates.
Not to mention he chose Tina Fey as his second in command.
No; that is dangerous.
but hey; go ahead and vote for the weakest ticket in gop history since Goldwater.

Posted by: ukeman | October 4, 2008 11:16 PM | Report abuse

There is no doubt that Palin managed to steal the limelight from McCain. For the next four weeks, her new-found courage may become a headache instead of a boost for McCain. Lieberman would have served him more loyally in the debate, but Palin (not unlike Bill Clinton) knows only Palin. She did not help McCain in the debate; in fact, a couple of times she agreed with Obama, since she has no idea of McCain's voting record. But then, as she said herself, what can you expect after only 5 weeks?

Posted by: dunnhaupt | October 4, 2008 7:49 PM | Report abuse


.


.


Why would an American be so irreponsible as to place this nation at RISK by voting for some INEXPERIENCED AFFIRMATIVE ACTION guy whose only economic or business experience is buying cocaine ???


I feel sorry for all of you.


You apparently do not care about this country's future or your children if you would like to place this great nation in DANGER by voting to put in charge such inexperienced person. I honestly believe the Obama people are being irresponsible with this Country.


The position is one of responsibility. The position is not one for on-the-job training.


We need someone who knows Washington, who has the experience and the PROVEN LEADERSHIP ABILITY TO LEAD THIS NATION OUT OF THE ECONOMIC CRISIS AND TO MAKE THIS NATION STRONG AGAIN.

.

.

Posted by: 37thandOStreet | October 4, 2008 7:29 PM | Report abuse


.


.


Let's get one thing straight: wall street was deregulated under CLINTON in 1999.


This entire disaster is a result of the banks and insurance companies wishing to keep up with the crazy returns which the internet companies appeared to be producing for investors.


In a failed attempt to keep up with the internet companies, the banks and insurance companies had their lobbyists secure the repeal of the Glass-Steagal Act which led to this week's events.

THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE ONES WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE -


Ok


Bush's Father During the first Bush Term in the early 90s "If you want this economy to look like Arkansas, Elect Bill Clinton and see what happens to our economy."

HE WAS RIGHT.

.

.

Posted by: 37thandOStreet | October 4, 2008 6:58 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is a major plus for the McCain campaign - the pollsters I don't know what questions they are asking or who they are asking - everyone believes Sarah Palin is a major plus factor.


Posted by: 37thandOStreet | October 4, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

"Gwen Ifill has of course been officially disqualified from the journalism profession. Why? How do you tolerate a candidate telling you she's not going to answer your questions and proceeding to ignore you for 90 minutes. No follow-up questions even when Palin did not try to pretend to address the topic much less answer the question??? Gwen clearly knuckled under from Drudge-generated attacks from the previous day"
__________________________________________
I believe the McCain campaign negotiated the terms of the "debate" so that no follow-up questions were allowed, and no debating between the two principles.

So, all Gwen could do is ask the question and hope for a coherent answer, and let the viewers decide if the questions had been answered in a convincing manner.

It seems the overwhelming consensus is that Palin provided "a blizzard of words" but no substantive answers.

Posted by: DCNative69 | October 4, 2008 6:20 PM | Report abuse

How many of your know that one of the rules in the VP debate was that the moderator was not allow to ask follow up questions if the debaters didn't answer the questions? NOT ALLOWED. That they didnt have to answer the questions and was open ended to discuss any topic (Can I talk about Afghanistan?) This wasn't a real debate, this was a totally scripted 90 minutes, designed to help Palin dig her way out of a hole. "I may not answer the questions the way that either the moderator or you want to hear, but I am going to straight talk to the American people." Yeah, right!

Posted by: washingtonstate2008 | October 4, 2008 5:09 PM | Report abuse

Gov. Palin did as well as any newscaster might have done. I think her style seemed awkward, and let's face it, the reason one might think she was 'likable' but not 'ready', is that something about her must not have clicked. My take was simply that she exhibited inappropriate body language for such serious subjects, unless she is genuinely happy about the correlation between the policies she advocates (whether she knows anything about them or not) and the reality around the country. I mean she seemed to grin when she remembered a catch phrase or talking point, like she was proud of herself or something.
Maybe she should be, but 2012??? She will undoubtedly memorize more between now and then, but she isn't bright enough to anticipate obvious follow-up questions in her interviews. Gov. Palin will clearly find the ability to gaffe enough to take her out of the national spotlight so we no longer celebrate mediocrity in our leaders. 'W' was enough for one generation.

Posted by: gotoogawa | October 4, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

When she talks she is like Daffy Duck with folksy sayings and little content or real opinion. I have to mute the sound of my television because her voice and sayings are like fingernail scratchings on a blackboard. We really do cringe. Her folksy ways are more cartoon-like and worse than G.W. Bush and abusing the english language even worse with her nonsensical ramblings.

Posted by: lucy2008 | October 3, 2008 4:36 PM

Thank you. Thou hast spoken for me. I had to wait for a woman to say it. I find her so annoying with the run-on sentences and total lack of grammar and the droppin the g's, and the nasal quality of her speech, that I just cannot stand to hear her AT ALL anymore. No wonder they sent her to Texas to fundraise among the faithful. They dare not let any journalists near her, lest we become so tortured by the sound of her, that millions of suffering citizens will go out and knock on doors for Obama just to be certain we are not required to hear her at all, anymore, after this election.

Posted by: ottothewise | October 4, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

let's look at the POW factor, since someone on here is doing the cheerleader thing for McCain's POW experience.

McCain provided propaganda for the enemy. He committed treason. Without his father's protection, he would have spent time in the stockade. Instead he became the Navy liason to Congress.


Posted by: ottothewise | October 4, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

I see they sent SaraH to Texas and California. What the heck for? Neither state is in play by whatever yardstick you can use. They might as well send her back to Alaska!

FUND-RAISING. They were not public events. She took advantage of being off camera to lie and slander Obama.

Posted by: ottothewise | October 4, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

I quote RICK HOROWITZ:

The camera loves Sarah Palin -- darn right it does! You betcha! The microphone? Not so much. Folksy is nice. I like folksy. But a little folksy goes a long way with me. With most people. It's fine if you're putting on a revival of "Li'l Abner." Hey! Golly!

For running a national government in difficult times? That's a different matter.

And it's no substitute for...for... What's that word I'm looking for? For knowledge. For knowin' stuff.

And watching Sarah Palin over these last five weeks -- from her great convention speech, to stumbling around with Charlie Gibson, to imploding with Katie Couric, to surviving a debate with Joe Biden -- you had to notice:

She still hasn't given any sign that she actually knows anything about anything.

Posted by: ottothewise | October 4, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

And I quote

The camera loves Sarah Palin -- darn right it does! You betcha! The microphone? Not so much. Folksy is nice. I like folksy. But a little folksy goes a long way with me. With most people. It's fine if you're putting on a revival of "Li'l Abner." Hey! Golly!

For running a national government in difficult times? That's a different matter.

And it's no substitute for...for... What's that word I'm looking for? For knowledge. For knowin' stuff.

And watching Sarah Palin over these last five weeks -- from her great convention speech, to stumbling around with Charlie Gibson, to imploding with Katie Couric, to surviving a debate with Joe Biden -- you had to notice:

She still hasn't given any sign that she actually knows anything about anything.

Posted by: ottothewise | October 4, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

To: Cheryl201 | October 4, 2008 10:31 AM

Of all the posts I've seen, yours caught my attention. I was impressed that even rural conservative Republicans are insulted by Governor Palin's antics of flirting, "winking" to the audience and using her "you betcha", etc. phrases. Think of how embarrassed the nation would be if we had an Airhead as President confronting Mr. Putin in a crisis. Does she think she can "flirt" her way out of a crisis? She is running for the Vice Presidency of the U.S.A. NOT another beauty contest.

We need a leader who can command respect NOT someone to be fawned over.

You give me hope that the Republican party is not just a dichotomy of Rich Fat Cats and "Joe Six Pack".

One basic question:

Do "Joe Six Pack" and trailer trash EVEN VOTE?

Posted by: caudaltx | October 4, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

I see they sent Sara to Texas and California. What the heck for? Neither state is in play by whatever yardstick you can use. They might as well send her back to Alaska!

Posted by: Opa2 | October 4, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

bgreen2224


I love you. Sing it brother!!!

It's so nice to read someone that can think AND write.

Posted by: msmith97 | October 4, 2008 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Have no fears America John and Sarah are desperately trying to lose. They know they can't fix the problems their party caused and they don't want to. They're gonna lay it all in the lap of the Democrats to fix. If they do fix it, the Rep's will take credit for it. If the Dem's can't, they'll blame them for it. There's no way to win ........unless you vote out every stinking one of them from every office in the country. Send them to the cornfield forever. The Republicans should pay for what they've done to the U.S..

Posted by: msmith97 | October 4, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

No More Politics as Usual!

For a healthy choice how about a la carte voting?

Write in McCain for President
Write in Biden for VP

Why will this work? Non-partisan representation in the White House. Each candidate is known for his ability to reach across the isle, years of experience in foreign and domestic issues and seeks the same results in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Posted by: optimisticrealist | October 4, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

My husband and I watched and listened carefully as the ex-beauty queen, ex-mayor of a small town in Alaska, and current governor (for less than 2 years) did more to set back the course of women in politics than many, many years.

We were appalled at her evasiveness, "cutesy" darn rights and like, yeahs, and her lack of knowledge even after being prepared for this debate.

The interviews that we have seen that she has done on ABC and CBS only were early warnings of just how unqualified she is to be vice president or any high political office at all.

I don't care how much Palin calls herself a "soccer mom" or talks about her so-called experience or tries to relate to the 6-pack crowd. America needs intelligent, thoughtful, capable, and knowledgable leadership. Palin is none of that.

Many Republicans with whom I have spoken are not happy with McCain's choice and have mentioned better qualified Republican women (if McCain wanted a woman) that could have been vice president.

Palin is a joke -- wink, wink -- smile, smile -- but we're not laughing.

What is really tragic is that the joke is on the American people, especially if McCain & Palin are elected.

Then God help this country.

Posted by: abby0802 | October 4, 2008 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Manolete:
I hope you know sniffing glue is bad for you. But you probably don't because KKK idiots are certainly not the smartest of the bunch. So keep on sniffing and eating your possum pie but please stop diddling your children...that is just sick.

Posted by: Godhimself1 | October 4, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

I care about Europe and China

Europe has the CERN particle accelerator and some of our best scientists
China sent men to space
Our astronauts go to space with the Russians

I got a very nice email from ms Palin about an hour after the debate the other night, very nice well thought out no use of words like maverick or Joe six pack

I thought wow she rushed straight from the debate to her computer to send me an email, but alas I hear she was at a party I was wondering how she could write so much better then she can speak?


Posted by: grandma4 | October 4, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

independentthinking1, I think you need to do some independent thinking. For example, yes McCain plans a $5K credit for health care insurance...but plans on taxing your employer provided plan to offset it...end result? Your employer will drop the plan...Biden is right! This is just one of many contradictions to your Biden list. But don't let me do your homework for you - check for yourself!

Posted by: ndolan622 | October 4, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

I am amused that anyone can suggest Gov. Palin can be ready to run for the presidency in 4 years when we have seen what she was unable to learn in the last 43 or so. People, she may have "it" if we are talking about a reality show. She does not have "it" when we are talking about the presidency, the vice presidency, any cabinet positions. There is only so much memorization you can do. I think we can all imagine that Obama would appoint republicans to his cabinet; can you imagine him asking Palin to do something? That would be laughable.

People like Romney and Huckabee and even Jindal must be boiling now to think that McCain passed them over for someone who had to "study" to figure out her position on the issues. I would be happy to support another GOP candidate in 2012, but I cannot support what McCain is offering (or not as is actually the case) this year.

I laughed as I read your article, Chris. Thanks for the amusement. Very funny.

Posted by: LoisFloridaRepublican | October 4, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

YO, indepentendthinking1: good work, except ya need to provide the same kind of list revealing the exaggerated spins and innuendos ;-) from Palin's talkin points too, doggonit.

"THANKS BUT NO THANKS?"

Posted by: iamericanperson | October 4, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

The sign is up for the first business to be created after the bailout:

WELCOME!

REPUBLICAN TRAILER PARK AND SANCTUARY
NOW OPEN!
NO CREDIT -- OK!
NO TEETH -- OK!
DOGS (PITBULLS ONLY) -- OK!
(FIGHTIN' BOX OUT BACK)
ALUMINUM CAN AND MOTOR OIL
RECYCLIN' CENTER OPEN 24/7!
CHRISTIANS ONLY -- OK?
BIBLE SCHOOL AVAILABLE
FIRIN' RANGE OPEN BY APPOINTMENT
FREQUENT MILITIA MEETIN'S

GOD BLESS AMERICA -- WEAR UR PIN

Posted by: bgreen2224 | October 4, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

The sign is up for the first business to be created after the bailout:

WELCOME!

REPUBLICAN TRAILER PARK AND SANCTUARY
NOW OPEN!
NO CREDIT -- OK!
NO TEETH -- OK!
DOGS (PITBULLS ONLY) -- OK!
(FIGHTIN' BOX OUT BACK)
ALUMINUM CAN AND MOTOR OIL
RECYCLIN' CENTER OPEN 24/7!
CHRISTIANS ONLY -- OK?
BIBLE SCHOOL AVAILABLE
FIRIN' RANGE OPEN BY APPOINTMENT
FREQUENT MILITIA MEETIN'S

GOD BLESS AMERICA -- WEAR UR PIN

Posted by: bgreen2224 | October 4, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

What is Sarah Palin going to do in the next four years that will make her qualified to lead this country? Join a think tank? Become a diplomat? Stay sequestered at John McCain's ranch to memorize a whole bunch of stuff?

The media must be really cowed by the right wing's claims of "liberal bias" to say that her debate performance remotely qualified her for the presidency. Please, don't bolster her enormous ego and outsized ambitions. She should go back to Alaska and stay there.

Posted by: jmls1 | October 4, 2008 11:23 AM | Report abuse

THE ROSETTA STONE OF AMERICAN POLITICS?

HOW POLITICAL "DISSENT" IS BEING STIFLED IN THE U.S.

IS THIS AFFECTING POLITICAL LEADERS AS WELL AS SUPPORTERS?

http://monarchnewphoenix.blogspot.com

Posted by: scrivener50 | October 4, 2008 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin IS the face of the 'new Republican party.'

Having followed Karl Rove down to the last circle of Hell, Republicans are waking up to the reality of their surroundings. Years of baiting Democrats and sneering at the 'Rainbow' coalition have produced an assembly of diverse elements that is appropriately reflected by Governor Palin.
She is as she seems.
An educational waste of tuition, Governor Palin is possessed of an anti-intellectual bias covered with such a thin veneer of functionality that even weak illumination displays the superficial beliefs of a creationist, apocalyptic, mystical homophobe and shines on through to a black hole of cognition.

Ms. Palin, you were not included in the decision to quit Michigan because your particular talents would have added nothing to the deliberations. The McCain campaign would love to sieze your offer to remain in the state and rally the base if it could. With no support,ad coverage or resources, this would be ideal, making you into the equivalent of Ambassador to the Antarctic. But it won't happen because of your exceedingly high press value to the Democrats. You can expect that within the campaign, you will be even more isolated and ignored and dropped from everything except the ticket.

However, you did buy McCain some valuable thinking time/breathing room and that was your entire purpose. The avenues of spin that you were to make happen were, nationally speaking, abject failures, as there is no 'Joe Sixpack' on earth that really wants his female equivalent running his government. I cannot imagine a cabinet meeting that would welcome your presence in any other capacity except nude silence, and dispatching you for other then a visit with the admittedly sexually addicted Kim Jong Il would be a non-starter.
But do not despair, there is an upside.
Your role as Vice President would in the sad event that a President McCain might need some form, any form of a life saving transplant insure the existence of a donor line of infinite length and real hope for a speedy and fully recovery..at least until Congress can alter the line of succession.
Be well, Sarah, just stay yourself and very visible.

Posted by: bgreen2224 | October 4, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin IS the face of the 'new Republican party.'

Having followed Karl Rove down to the last circle of Hell, Republicans are waking up to the reality of their surroundings. Years of baiting Democrats and sneering at the 'Rainbow' coalition have produced an assembly of diverse elements that is appropriately reflected by Governor Palin.
She is as she seems.
An educational waste of tuition, Governor Palin is possessed of an anti-intellectual bias covered with such a thin veneer of functionality that even weak illumination displays the superficial beliefs of a creationist, apocalyptic, mystical homophobe and shines on through to a black hole of cognition.

Ms. Palin, you were not included in the decision to quit Michigan because your particular talents would have added nothing to the deliberations. The McCain campaign would love to sieze your offer to remain in the state and rally the base if it could. With no support,ad coverage or resources, this would be ideal, making you into the equivalent of Ambassador to the Antarctic. But it won't happen because of your exceedingly high press value to the Democrats. You can expect that within the campaign, you will be even more isolated and ignored and dropped from everything except the ticket.

However, you did buy McCain some valuable thinking time/breathing room and that was your entire purpose. The avenues of spin that you were to make happen were, nationally speaking, abject failures, as there is no 'Joe Sixpack' on earth that really wants his female equivalent running his government. I cannot imagine a cabinet meeting that would welcome your presence in any other capacity except nude silence, and dispatching you for other then a visit with the admittedly sexually addicted Kim Jong Il would be a non-starter.
But do not despair, there is an upside.
Your role as Vice President would in the sad event that a President McCain might need some form, any form of a life saving transplant insure the existence of a donor line of infinite length and real hope for a speedy and fully recovery..at least until Congress can alter the line of succession.
Be well, Sarah, just stay yourself and very visible.

Posted by: bgreen2224 | October 4, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Biden's 14 Lies
Biden talks a big game, but is he honest? Make up your own mind.
1. TAX VOTE: Biden said McCain voted “the exact same way” as Obama to increase taxes on Americans earning just $42,000, but McCain DID NOT VOTE THAT WAY.

2. AHMEDINIJAD MEETING: Joe Biden lied when he said that Barack Obama never said that he would sit down unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmedinijad of Iran. Barack Obama did say specifically, and Joe Biden attacked him for it.

3. OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING: Biden said, “Drill we must.” But Biden has opposed offshore drilling and even compared offshore drilling to “raping” the Outer Continental Shelf.”

4. TROOP FUNDING: Joe Biden lied when he indicated that John McCain and Barack Obama voted the same way against funding the troops in the field. John McCain opposed a bill that included a timeline, that the President of the United States had already said he would veto regardless of it’s passage.

5. OPPOSING CLEAN COAL: Biden says he’s always been for clean coal, but he just told a voter that he is against clean coal and any new coal plants in America and has a record of voting against clean coal and coal in the U.S. Senate.

6. ALERNATIVE ENERGY VOTES: According to FactCheck.org, Biden is exaggerating and overstating John McCain’s record voting for alternative energy when he says he voted against it 23 times.

7. HEALTH INSURANCE: Biden falsely said McCain will raise taxes on people's health insurance coverage -- they get a tax credit to offset any tax hike. Independent fact checkers have confirmed this attack is false

8. OIL TAXES: Biden falsely said Palin supported a windfall profits tax in Alaska -- she reformed the state tax and revenue system, it's not a windfall profits tax.

9. AFGHANISTAN / GEN. MCKIERNAN COMMENTS: Biden said that top military commander in Iraq said the principles of the surge could not be applied to Afghanistan, but the commander of NATO's International Security Assistance Force Gen. David D. McKiernan said that there were principles of the surge strategy, including working with tribes, that could be applied in Afghanistan.

10. REGULATION: Biden falsely said McCain weakened regulation -- he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie.

11. IRAQ: When Joe Biden lied when he said that John McCain was “dead wrong on Iraq”, because Joe Biden shared the same vote to authorize the war and differed on the surge strategy where they John McCain has been proven right.

12. TAX INCREASES: Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn’t see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more.

13. BAILOUT: Biden said the economic rescue legislation matches the four principles that Obama laid out, but in reality it doesn’t meet two of the four principles that Obama outlined on Sept. 19, which were that it include an emergency economic stimulus package, and that it be part of “part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20.”

14. REAGAN TAX RATES: Biden is wrong in saying that under Obama, Americans won't pay any more in taxes then they did under Reagan.

Posted by: independentthinking1 | October 4, 2008 10:58 AM | Report abuse

I am from a rural area of mostly conservative Republicans, authentic small government/pro-constitution Republicans as opposed to the right-winger evangelical radicals who have hijacked the Republican party. If anybody came to my hometown area and gave us this phony performance (Joe Sixpack, you betcha, darn, dropping her ings, etc.) we would be insulted. She is pandering for the trailer trash vote. We rural people are not fooled by phonies like her.

Posted by: Cheryl201 | October 4, 2008 10:31 AM | Report abuse

PALIN must have written the post below:
It has two errors, one of which is in the worst Palin tradition of running on ideas without grammatical structure.
Can the poster laughing_at_dems re-write this in English?
Maybe someone will be able to help you understand the universe if you can only formulate your question.

RIGHT WING POSTER: Why can't we get a committments from the dems and libs to promise to leave to easier more intelligent digs when they win ?

Posted by: ottothewise | October 4, 2008 10:18 AM | Report abuse

Obama says, "I am my brother's keeper".

That's Christian liberalism. We progressives and liberals will care for the elderly, and for the young. Obama is going to end fed tax on social security recipients making under $50K. Obama is going to work with HRC and create a health care package that includes 20 million more people than McCain's package.

I am my brother's keeper. And so was Jesus, and so are many Christian fundamentalists who are proudly supporting Obama.

Posted by: ottothewise | October 4, 2008 10:11 AM | Report abuse

the polls show obama leading, but at the moment of truth in the booth - people will not vote for a muslim.

Posted by: zmartha7 | October 4, 2008 12:32 AM | Report abuse < I DID and I recommend YOU DO IT TOO!!!

It is fun to see the posts of TROLLS pretending to be women supporters of McCain. No Clinton supporters buy into the propaganda machine lies that Obama is supposed to be a muslim.

In fact, more people think Obama is an actual Christian than think McCain is. McCain has never been active in any church, EVER. Obama says Obama is born again. Obama supports ALL Christian church outreach programs now, just as he has for more than a decade. Mccain is new to the Christian business. For him, its some politics as usual. He smiles his fake smile and shakes a few hands. No heart.

Posted by: ottothewise | October 4, 2008 10:08 AM | Report abuse

1. 18% of previously undecided independents decided that Biden was better and will vote for Obama and Biden.
10% of previously undecided independents now support Palin and McCain.

Biden won the debate, because more people changed to support him and Obama - than changed to support Palin and McCain.

The head count on those newly won-over supports is 2% of the electorate more, for Obama and 1% more for McCain.

2. The chit chat about "Palin in 2012" does not take into account her criminal use of Yahoo to avoid state laws governing backup systems, and the freedom of information act. She will be impeached after Bush's lawyers leave Alaska. And her abuse of power hearings bumble along. Oct 10th will be the next date for information to flow to the public about her abuse of power investigation. She wont make it to 2012 as a national figure.

Posted by: ottothewise | October 4, 2008 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Damayor1's statement that liberalism is a mental disorder is the Russian approach to politics. Put the opponent in the mental hospital until they agree with the people in power.

NO. Obama says, "I am my brother's keeper".

That's Christian liberalism and its fine. We liberals will care for the elderly, and for the young. Obama is going to end fed tax on social security recipients making under $50K. Obama is going to work with HRC and create a health care package that includes 20 million more people than McCain's package.

I am my brother's keeper. And so was Jesus, and so are many Christian fundamentalists who are supporting Obama.

Posted by: ottothewise | October 4, 2008 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Do the Republican necons who guide the policies of Bush/Cheney/McCain/Palin threaten to destroy America? You betcha!

Posted by: hamishdad | October 4, 2008 9:38 AM | Report abuse

"Asked which candidate was more likable, 54 percent chose Palin while 36 percent opted for Biden."

Palin kicked Joe Biden's a** in this debate.

Posted by: Phil6 | October 4, 2008 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Dear Fans and Friends of Sarah Palin,

Please take a minute to read this note. But first, gather your children around you and hold them close - this is very important.

I want you to read the following paragraph slowly and carefully, savor each and every word.

Please take your time. As you read on you will see how important this is. Your beautiful children will understand this, if they are too young to understand, you can explain this to them.

"Oil and coal? Of course, it's a fungible commodity and they don't flag, you know, the molecules, where it's going and where it's not. But in the sense of the Congress today, they know that there are very, very hungry domestic markets that need that oil first. So, I believe that what Congress is going to do, also, is not to allow the export bans to such a degree that it's Americans that get stuck to holding the bag without the energy source that is produced here, pumped here. It's got to flow into our domestic markets first." - Vice President Sarah Palin

Read it again, carefully.

I deeply regret to inform you that President John McCain passed away late last evening. His 5th bout of cancer has overwhelmed his frail 72 year old body. Doctors say the stress of the campaign was too much for him.

Sarah Palin is now President of the United States.

Look into your children's eyes. Tell them their future and safety is now in the hands of President Sarah Palin. They need not fear. Her words (like those above) her clear thoughts and vast international experience will now guide and protect us.

I'm sorry, there's more. Intelligence agencies suspect there are terrorists in the US with a dirty bomb, Iranians are preparing to test fire a long range missle. The Pakistan goverment has just collasped and Russia is building troop levels to an all time high. Thousands of young US citizens have died so far in Iraq and Afganistan, Bin Laden has just release a new video boasting of a new planned attack, unemployment is at an all time high, gasoline is again at $4.50 per gallon. Experts say we should see the results of off shore drilling by 2014, however drilling costs are much higher than expected. Gasoline is expected to cost $7.85 per gallon.

I am so grateful that I voted for Sarah Palin because she is a soccer mom. She is just like me and reading her words comforts me.

She will make the right decisions - all us soccer moms know exactly what to do about the issues described above - we deal with things like this every day.

She's one of us!


Posted by: Assistant_Village_Idiot | October 4, 2008 9:00 AM | Report abuse

"Thinking Americans for Barack Obama and Joe Biden in 2008."

Adanielch, a mind is a terrible thing to waste. Too bad all of you latte-drinking, shoe-gazing, pseudo-intellectuals are so delusional. Liberalism IS a mental disorder. Now, you run along to your local Borders or Barnes & Noble, curl up next to the fireplace, eat your bran muffin, and pretend to be intelligent.

Palin destroyed Biden in the debate. At least HE was smart enough to know it, smiling through it all, admiring her spunk, wit, smarts, and skills. Biden showed more respect for her than any of you elitist bistro-chair analysts.

Posted by: DaMayor1 | October 4, 2008 8:53 AM | Report abuse

If the Democrats honestly believe that Barack Obama is qualified to be President of the United States of America, then it's pretty obvious that every one of these four candidates is qualified to be President.

So, take two:
The Maverick
The Gas Bag
The Chosen One
The Barracuda

Posted by: freespeak | October 4, 2008 6:46 AM | Report abuse

If the Democrats honestly believe that Barack Obama is qualified to be President of the United States of America, then it's pretty obvious that every one of these four candidates is qualified to be President.

So, take two:
The Maverick
The Gas Bag
The Chosen One
The Barracuda

Posted by: freespeak | October 4, 2008 6:43 AM | Report abuse

How anyone can defend this vapid phony who is only an expert at seducing and hoodwinking people is beyond me.

Posted by: Liberty77 | October 4, 2008 3:45 AM | Report abuse

She winked and smirked and used a lot of folksy colloquialims and LIED and refused to follow the format of the debate. She refused to answer any questions that she didn't have a precooked answer for. She came across as gimmicky and cheap.

What a charade and an insult to the debate and the American people.

Posted by: Liberty77 | October 4, 2008 3:44 AM | Report abuse

If this season's defeat teaches my fellow Republicans anything, it should be the importance of ideological inclusion and minority outreach.

Palin would just be a smiling face of failed cultural division unless she can build bridges to communities beyond the Wasillas of America.

Posted by: quatzecoutl | October 4, 2008 1:49 AM | Report abuse

How dumb do they think we are?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ycdgJoN5H8

Posted by: sobugged | October 4, 2008 1:17 AM | Report abuse

ZMartha7: You are a xenophobic, disrespectful slug. Obama is not a Muslim, and even if he were, who cares? Hillary Clinton would be ashamed to have you as a supporter.

Posted by: prongss4 | October 4, 2008 1:11 AM | Report abuse

i was hillary's supporter and now i am leaning toward mccain. obama is not experienced and i am very scared to have him in the white house. his association with rev wright for 20 years proves that he hates america.
Sarah Palin did great. and i trust that the mccain - palin ticket will be better for the country.
the polls show obama leading, but at the moment of truth in the booth - people will not vote for a muslim.

Posted by: zmartha7 | October 4, 2008 12:32 AM | Report abuse

"Inexperience has nothing to do with the rage people have towards Sarah Palin. It is 100% her political views...If Sarah Palin was a pro-choice, sexually tolerant democrat she would be beloved by most democtrats. She s very electable."

No, no, no. First, it isn't rage, it is disgust. Disgust that she was selected by John McCain to be one step away from the presidency despite her utter stupidity and ignorance. Disgust that she actually felt she was qualified and accepted the position. And third it is disgust with ignorant people that want someone just as stupid as they are to be vice president.
It has nothing to do with her views, it has to do with her lack of them. Do we really need another four years of mediocre intelligence?

Posted by: JSermarini | October 3, 2008 11:47 PM | Report abuse

She may have averted disaster last night, but I suspect that she won't appear anywhere on a national ticket again until she can give a good interview. Last night did not make her seem like a credible candidate. She just wasn't so bad as to destroy McCain's chances of being president.

Posted by: grm135 | October 3, 2008 11:36 PM | Report abuse

look, if McCain & Palin are so horrible. Why can't we get a committments from the dems and libs to promise to leave to easier more intelligent digs when they win ?

come on libs...step up

Posted by: laughing_at_dems | October 3, 2008 11:20 PM | Report abuse

Grampa needs to go take a nap and Hacky Mam needs to go back to guarding Alaska from the Russians. THESE two dimwits are what America needs right now? what a joke!

Posted by: Hillary08 | October 3, 2008 11:13 PM | Report abuse

Wait a minute. Sarah Palin is "likeable"? Well here's a "shout out" for ya -- she grates on my nerves more than anyone I've seen in years except W himself. I can't take four more years of "nucular" and dropped consonants, not to mention those creepy tic-like winks.

I come from rural Montana, and I haven't talked to anyone around me who likes her. Even those who are happy about her candidacy due to her social conservatism are irritated by the persona she's invented for herself. I know intelligent educated people who talk and act like her, but they are just as phony as she is.

Posted by: terryhill2 | October 3, 2008 10:56 PM | Report abuse

Welcome bsimon1: Rest assured, you are making the RIGHT choice. Much respect for your revelation.

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 10:47 PM | Report abuse

dbw1 writes
". I wasn't debating who specifically is the best candidate of the past 20 years, I was simply calling out the short-sighted assertion that it is Obama.

I think you would have a hard time finding many even among Democrats who would say Obama is a better candidate than Bill Clinton, Al Gore, or even John Kerry. Heck, almost half of Democrats wanted Hillary Clinton more than Obama, so it was hard enough for you guys to find consensus that Obama was the best candidate THIS year, much less the last 20 years."

Thanks for the response. Firstly, I'm not a dem, so don't typically find much consensus with 'those guys'. But, point is, I laid out my criteria: we need a leader & Obama is an exceptional leader. Experience can be overrated, sometimes its helpful, sometimes not. GHWB, for instance, had a stellar resume, but is a one-term president that his own son didn't cite as an influence for the son's subsequent presidency. In any case, I explicitly said 'candidate'. The record clearly shows that Gore & Kerry were not effective candidates, nor was Dole, or GHWB the second time around - and arguably not the first, given the competition. In 2000 I wanted McCain over Gore, but the fools in the GOP nominated W instead. I'm still confused about that one. I think its safe to say they shot themselves in the foot. Took a long time to see the results - but they sure ain't pretty.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 3, 2008 10:37 PM | Report abuse

Sarah will go over BIG in the "trailer park" crowd. Shes got the jargon down and can relate (probably keeps a 6-pak under her desk). Let's hope her base doesn't cross Alaska's borders when that time comes.

Posted by: inewsmaster | October 3, 2008 10:22 PM | Report abuse

Look laughing_at_dems:

There's a reason why NOBODY is responding to your puerile flame need: It's cuz yer stooopid. OK?

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 10:14 PM | Report abuse

how many liberals can we sign up tonite with an oath to leave the good old US of A when McCain takes office ?

Come on. Don't be spineless like Rosey O'Donnel and Baldwin who were going to leave when GW was elected ?

Can we count on you just this once liberals ?

Posted by: laughing_at_dems | October 3, 2008 10:11 PM | Report abuse

Once a cheap gimmick, always a cheap gimmick. I say

"TINA FEY, SNL AND 2012"

will more likely affect the majority of Americans' energies in four years, especially after McCain's cancer kicks in. Then folks can talk more intelligently about old white guys chasing the sparky, young beauty queens (she IS McCain's 3rd ya know ;-)) But she knows her butt is sagging even now--why else would she try to get herself some more face-time in MI paid apart from The Maverick's support team?

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

HOW DO YOU LIKE THE NAME 'THE SOCIALIST STATES OF NORTH AMERICA'?
If it means the Mexican immigrants will have to pay taxes, I'm for it.
Right now the Mexican are used to drive down wages for union workers.

And Obama is going to enforce the laws against illegally hiring Mexicans. How do you like those apples?
The businesses say they cannot tell who is a citizen. That is so lame. I had to provide my birth certificate and passport and my fingerprints and go through an FBI screening to get my job in the Federal Reserve Bank. Betcha the wetback's managers are going to find ways to establish the legal immigration of their employees after they do time in the slammer.

Posted by: ottothewise | October 3, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

quoting the business journal to prove something about socialism is just silly.

And by the way, SOCIALISM was pretty neat for those fat cats when they were receiving our $100 billion wasnt it.

You cannot have it both ways. Socialism just means the system helps people. Its not disproved. England and Canada use it effectively. Medicines cost pennies in China. the same meds cost $50 here. And dont go on about abuses in China. We dont have to put political prisoners in jail. That is, if we stop Condi and mccain from their CIA backed plans to take anyone into custody without charges.
ONLY OBAMA WILL RESTORE HABEAS CORPUS.
McCain is for the HITLERIAN LAWS ON THE BOOKS to catch terrorists under your bed. See any terrorists lately?
I bet not. the only terrorists are working for the CIA with bin Laudin.

Posted by: ottothewise | October 3, 2008 10:02 PM | Report abuse

love234america:

You're one of those crazy's that I was warned about and you take up a lot of space.

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 9:59 PM | Report abuse

Palin's investigation for abuse of power will start to become public on October 10th.

Thereafter she can still be tried for the crimes related to failure to use the state required email system.

Her use of Yahoo to avoid freedom of information act is a crime.

Palin's use of yahoo, which does not provide backups the state can get at, is a crime.

Posted by: ottothewise | October 3, 2008 9:56 PM | Report abuse

A bank of tape-recorders, one per major policy area and one as a general catch all message, could have substituted for Palin.

Regardless, even if Obama wins the election 25 points ahead of McCain, the fact remains that this country, after re-electing and suffering through the incompetence of GWB, seriously considered yet another incompetent.

Thus, it is but a matter of time before incompetence even greater than that of GWB will eventually find itself at the helm of America. An Obama victory only buys time for those of us who have already decided, either way, that the best course to take is a course away from whats left of this country.

Posted by: bushieisa | October 3, 2008 9:55 PM | Report abuse

EDITORIALS &
OPINIONRead more at: IBDeditorials.com

View Archive | E-mail | Print | License | Republish | Post

Barack Obama's Stealth Socialism
INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Posted 7/28/2008

Election '08: Before friendly audiences, Barack Obama speaks passionately about something called "economic justice." He uses the term obliquely, though, speaking in code — socialist code.


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

IBD Series: The Audacity Of Socialism


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


During his NAACP speech earlier this month, Sen. Obama repeated the term at least four times. "I've been working my entire adult life to help build an America where economic justice is being served," he said at the group's 99th annual convention in Cincinnati.

And as president, "we'll ensure that economic justice is served," he asserted. "That's what this election is about." Obama never spelled out the meaning of the term, but he didn't have to. His audience knew what he meant, judging from its thumping approval.

It's the rest of the public that remains in the dark, which is why we're launching this special educational series.

"Economic justice" simply means punishing the successful and redistributing their wealth by government fiat. It's a euphemism for socialism.

In the past, such rhetoric was just that — rhetoric. But Obama's positioning himself with alarming stealth to put that rhetoric into action on a scale not seen since the birth of the welfare state.

In his latest memoir he shares that he'd like to "recast" the welfare net that FDR and LBJ cast while rolling back what he derisively calls the "winner-take-all" market economy that Ronald Reagan reignited (with record gains in living standards for all).

Obama also talks about "restoring fairness to the economy," code for soaking the "rich" — a segment of society he fails to understand that includes mom-and-pop businesses filing individual tax returns.

It's clear from a close reading of his two books that he's a firm believer in class envy. He assumes the economy is a fixed pie, whereby the successful only get rich at the expense of the poor.

Following this discredited Marxist model, he believes government must step in and redistribute pieces of the pie. That requires massive transfers of wealth through government taxing and spending, a return to the entitlement days of old.

Of course, Obama is too smart to try to smuggle such hoary collectivist garbage through the front door. He's disguising the wealth transfers as "investments" — "to make America more competitive," he says, or "that give us a fighting chance," whatever that means.

Among his proposed "investments":

• "Universal," "guaranteed" health care.

• "Free" college tuition.

• "Universal national service" (a la Havana).

• "Universal 401(k)s" (in which the government would match contributions made by "low- and moderate-income families").

• "Free" job training (even for criminals).

• "Wage insurance" (to supplement dislocated union workers' old income levels).

• "Free" child care and "universal" preschool.

• More subsidized public housing.

• A fatter earned income tax credit for "working poor."

• And even a Global Poverty Act that amounts to a Marshall Plan for the Third World, first and foremost Africa.

NOTE; HE WROTE ABOUT 'FRANK' IN HIS FIRST BOOK, THE LATE COMMUNIST FRANK MARSHALL DAVIS WHO WAS OBAMA'S MENTOR. HOW DO YOU LIKE THE NAME 'THE SOCIALIST STATES OF NORTH AMERICA'? How would you like to be told what job you will work, what type of insurance you will have, all the news is programmed by the government (it's pretty bad now), have your businesses taken away and socialized, etc. I have neighbors that lived in Czechoslovakia during the communist reign and their business and home were taken from them. It happens and it could very well happen in America.

Posted by: love234america | October 3, 2008 9:49 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin will be hosting a local morning variety/news show in Anchorage by 2012.

Posted by: PulSamsara | October 3, 2008 9:49 PM | Report abuse

kbuckingham777 noone cares about Europe. They are just sheep. They have done nothing on the world scene in 60 years. fleeced dailey by their own government. On the other hand, we have 14 million illegals that will be looking for a home soon. can you take them ?

Posted by: laughing_at_dems | October 3, 2008 9:47 PM | Report abuse

4taz:

Ya know, I'm a raised Catholic, as is my entire family, and I can't understand for the LIFE of me why Catholics tend to vote republican... If we can just get beyond the issue of Choice, I think Catholics that do ANY element of critical thinking will figure out that killing off another culture that disagrees with capitalistic ideology is WRONG. Well, yea, there were those crusades, but that was a long time ago, wrong and should NOT justify present day actions. Fact is, a vote for anti-choice is a vote now for killing many innocent Iraqi's. Sorry, but that's not what Jesus taught. If it is, I'm changing my religion!

Please, Christians, look beyond the nose on your face and ask yourselves "would Jesus really be advocating crusades?"

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 9:43 PM | Report abuse

98% of the independents CBS polled thought Biden is knowledgeable.
half say Palin is NOT qualified

Therefore BIDEN WON.

Also, 18% of those PREVIOUSLY UNDECIDED independents decided to vote for Biden/Obama after watching the debate and 10% decided to vote for Palin/MCCain after watching the debate. So Biden won on the key issue, whether PREVIOUSLY UNDECIDED INDEPENDENT people would decide to vote for him.

The net result is that 2% of the electorate decided to vote for Obama and Biden and 1% of the electorate decided to vote for Palin and McCain, on the basis of watching the performance.
So be it.

PS it was not a debate. It was performance art.
If it were a debate, Palin would have lost.
She cannot speak with correct English grammar.
She is incoherent. In a debate you dont get cue cards with catchy phrases. And you have to answer the actual question, not invent a new process.


Posted by: ottothewise | October 3, 2008 9:43 PM | Report abuse

Biden is in public life 35 years and can barely come to a 'draw' ?? With a woman 4 weeks on national scene ? Talk about a disgrace

Palin won it. Deal with it liberals. You have always been a losers and always will.

Posted by: laughing_at_dems | October 3, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

malis,

Yes, I know that churchgoers give more to churches...that is the result of giving tithes. For those who are unaware, tithes help pay the bills of the church as well as support Church missions and other charity work. Anyway, you receive a statement to use for claiming charitable giving on your taxes.

But regardless of religious doctrine or sect, each of us is responsible and accountable for what we do in every aspect of life.....including making assertions and assumptions about another's way of giving. I just don't think it is right to try to analyze someone's taxes and use it to determine another's 'goodness.' We'll be better off when we look at ourselves and stop labeling others.

Posted by: 4taz | October 3, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse

READ THE ARTICLE BELOW. PALIN's hiding her emails shows she is just like Bush. She's a criminal. Using Yahoo, so her emails cannot be called into a trial.

In 18 months of searching, Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine and Office of Professional Responsibility chief H. Marshall Jarrett have uncovered new e-mail messages hinting at heightened involvement of White House lawyers and political aides in the firings of nine federal prosecutors two years ago.

But they could not probe much deeper because key officials declined to be interviewed and a critical timeline drafted by the White House was so heavily redacted that it was "virtually worthless as an investigative tool," the authorities said.

Posted by: ottothewise | October 3, 2008 9:31 PM | Report abuse

The bar for Palin was set so low that so long as she didn't barf on stage during the first five minutes, people would regard it as a success for her. However, that is a far cry from saying that she won the debate.

It is clear how McCain's people changed their strategy during Palin's preparation for the debate, and she showed her hand very early during the evening.

Rather than answering the questions posed by the moderator (something which she was apparently struggling to do successfully during the practice sessions), she simply gave a prepared speech almost every time it was her turn to speak. She even admitted that she had no intention of "playing by the rules" and addressing the topic at hand. She had a shopping list of talking points, and had rehearsed them with her faux folksy delivery (wink, wink, shucks, you betcha, yawl.)

If you were looking for substance, Palin fell short. If you were looking for another GWB-type--folksy but lacking depth of understanding, she's your gal.

Posted by: labman57 | October 3, 2008 9:30 PM | Report abuse

McCain claimed he discussed policy many times with Palin. He didn't even tell her that he was pulling out of Michigan! She was picked as an ornament. A disgusting, cynical move.

Posted by: thebobbob | October 3, 2008 9:29 PM | Report abuse

Sinz52:

I don't know about your judgement, but whatever Obama does in 4 years cannot POSSIBLY s*rew this country more than the past couple GOP administrations... Revisionist history notwithstanding.

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 9:24 PM | Report abuse

"My guess is that over the next 10 years, the GOP will fracture beyond repair."

Oh, please.

I've heard that same spiel about a political party, each time it has lost in a landslide: The Republicans in 1964, the Democrats in 1980, the Democrats in 1994, etc. "The party is dead! It will never recover from such a blow!"

And yet each time, the losing party came right back, sometimes in just two years: 1966 for example.

We will continue to have a two-party system composed of two viable parties and some irrelevant tiny parties.

Being out of power is actually healthy for the losing party: It can search for a new message, and it can wait patiently for the winning party to screw up.

And judging by the type of fellow I believe Obama to be, if he becomes President, it won't take very long for him to be perceived as screwing up. I fully expect his term to be a train wreck in less than 4 years.

Posted by: sinz52 | October 3, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse

Those da*n Ruskies...

Hey "The Russians are Coming, The Russians are Coming!"

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 9:07 PM | Report abuse


If the government truly wants to help the American People I have a great suggestion.
Why not, with this 800 billion dollar rescue plan, write some legislation that will require banks to refinance all the foreclosure loans, put the interest rate at 4.5 % , and make it a forty year fixed loan ?
This would be a fantastic procedure that would benefit millions of Americans, and show that the government is SINCERE about helping MAIN Street.
This would be a MAJOR SOLUTION to the banking foreclosure issue.

Thank You

James Garrahan

Posted by: dylan915 | October 3, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

Anyone advocating Palin in 2012 should have their mouth washed out with soap for uttering such an obscenity.

Posted by: jeffl240 | October 3, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

If McBush has health problems (he's 72 years old, had cancer 3 times and is on 6 different meds) this random Palin woman will become president. What is her international experience? "I can see Russia from my house". Yep...that's who you want leading your country? (sarcasm).Here in Europe, she wouldn't even be allowed anywhere near the parliament's cafeteria let alone allowed to have the top job in office!!

Posted by: kbuckingham777 | October 3, 2008 8:43 PM | Report abuse

BIDEN SMOKED HER!!!

The best part was how Biden craftilly cornered Pitbull Palin regarding her views on same-sex couples... she admitted supporting their rights and that the two tickets didn't differ on that issue--- Hmmm...I think some right-wing conservative religious zealots are not going to be too happy...

Posted by: kbuckingham777 | October 3, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin ,s debate last night was alittle better than I expected her to be, but no real improvement overall. She skips answering a question put to her, places more shift to her Alaskan achievements which are small in comparison to what a world would expect from a person holding such high position of office of the United states. Her knowledge and experience is limited to that small region and clearly showed as she admitted herself to Biden when he opened up his store of knowledge in foreign affairs she seemed shaken and became nervously preoccupied with some papers infront of her. Her smile and winks was so inoppropriate but to me seemed to be a clever-coverup' for her weaknesses or lack of more experience in a world setting format. And I got the impression that she wants the whole enchillada if given the opportunity of being thrust in a lead role should something happen to McCain;Bush heir to office. she as much again said so when she said a "vice president should have more power in the white house than they have." Her ambition is mis-alighned to her religous fanatical bearing and should send off alarm bells when you check out her background upbringing. Some people are fooled some of the time but most folks given enough time to stop and think will see through her veneer of folksy quirky socker mom created forcade of deceit. She most definitely is to be studied before you take her at her smile and fast talking words that amount to nill or out of context,to what is presently being discussed as was demonstrated last night Who is really best for *You the people.*
Obama Biden 08

Posted by: grdn_nell | October 3, 2008 8:41 PM | Report abuse

HAHAAHA Pitbull Palin was a disaster!!

"We're gunna get'cha, by darn dog'gone it!" She sounded a lot like Bush!!! Seriously, this is who Americans want as the 2nd leader of their country?

She couldn't stop regurgitating Republican verbal diarrhea--- such empty words, with no substance.

BIDEN SPOKE ABOUT THE ISSUES and time and time again had to correct her lies and fabrications.

VOTE OBAMA

Posted by: kbuckingham777 | October 3, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

If you were the boss, who would you hire???

OBAMA: Harvard law professor, Juris Doctor of law degree, constitutional law expert, Senate committees: foreign affairs, homeland security, veterans affairs, family, education, health.

BIDEN: Juris Doctor of law degree, Senate committees: Foreign affairs (chair), economy, health, crime, women's affairs, education, technology, environment

McBUSH: graduated from the naval academy in the bottom 5% of his class, senate committees: economy, environment, official conduct (arguably the 3 biggest Republican failures!!!!!!!!!)

PITBULL PALIN: went to 6 different universities before finally getting a BA degree in journalism, no domestic or foreign policy experience but can see Russia from her house.

SERIOUSLY, THIS IS A NO BRAINER!!!!

If you vote McBush/Pitbull, the fate of your country will be in jeopardy. Everyone here in Europe is laughing at Americans--- America has become the butt of all jokes--- people are asking, how can they seriously consider voting for McBush and his Pitbull for another 4 years of Bush's failed policies? Don't they ever learn???

Remember the frontpage headline of London's Daily Mirror newspaper back in 2004 when Americans re-elected Bush: HOW CAN 59 MILLION PEOPLE BE SO DUMB?

Posted by: kbuckingham777 | October 3, 2008 8:39 PM | Report abuse

The big question is while Sarah Palin was yammering it up with Joe Biden in St. Louis, who's keeping an eye on the Russians? What happens if Putin decides to rear his head?"

Posted by: OB1Kinobi | October 3, 2008 8:35 PM | Report abuse

"Dear Julia Roberts,
..........."

Posted by: abovetheassault | October 3, 2008 8:35 PM | Report abuse

Fan1:

"Alaska's own Chauncy Gardener" has to be the funniest thing I've heard in a week! I love it!

For those that are not sipping Chardonnay on the Vineyard or Napa Valley Merlot on Balboa island, the reference is to Peter Seller's Character Chauncy Gardener from the movie "Being There".

Explanation for dbw1: Chauncy made it to wonderful heights in statesmanship through absolutely no meritorious actions of his own...he was simply a "victim" of circumstance....Oh, but I'm "lecturing to you"...

Yes, now we have Dr. Strangelove and Chauncy Gardener...Two of my favorite Peter Sellers characters!

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 8:13 PM | Report abuse

To suggest that Sarah Palin did anything to bolster her further national political credentials is akin to saying that Jack Kemp benefited from the failed bid of Bob Dole to win the White House in 1996.It's a non-starter.
Go ahead and stir the pot,Chris.The Fix is yours.Just spare us the goofy and inane rap video intros...please!
Once a loser in politics,always a loser.That goes for journalism,too,pal.

Posted by: klowry57 | October 3, 2008 8:07 PM | Report abuse

media can try to drum up a contest all they want to sell papers and clicks, and a few of the kool-aid drinkers will think Hussein has a chance

but i can tell you, on Nov. 5th you will absolutely not wake up to Barry 'affirmitive action' Hussein. There is no way the USA is putting a Muslim in office.

Posted by: laughing_at_dems | October 3, 2008 7:57 PM | Report abuse

"Palin is clearly likable" has to be the silliest bit of incorrect analysis I've recently seen. She comes across as beauty-pageant or newscaster phony, not likable, and with no personality behind the blah blah blah. She's a caricature, and not a very bright one at that. Alaska's own Chauncy Gardener.

Posted by: fan1 | October 3, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

4taz, the actual finding of those studies is that, unsurprisingly, CHURCHGOERS give more to CHURCHES, and this is registered as charitable giving.

This was the non-highlighted finding of a study highlighted in a George Will column a few months ago...I found out it had other categories only during a follow-up discussion in the WaPO/Newsweek 'On Religion' blog.

When broken out into categories, the lowest-giving category of all turns out to be....non-sectarian conservatives (the ranking was conservative churchgoers; liberal churchgoers, a close second because they gave more to civic charities; liberal non-sectarians; and, bringing up the rear by a substantial margin, conservative non-sectarians).

Posted by: malis | October 3, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

For anyone who doubts Mr. and Mrs. Wm. J. Clinton are actively campaigning AGAINST O (as Maureen Dowd reported months ago), there's this quote today from the Missus:

HRC: "It's amazing, you know, she's [Palin's] been thrust into the national spotlight with very little preparation and I think that, all things considered, you saw a very composed and effective debater last night."

When does this narcissistic craziness end? We just finished Bill's two week foolish "Say-No-to-O TV" tour and now, we have her "Enshrine the Whine" review with the tiresome reminder of the 127 grievances she has against O, Biden, Patti Solis Doyle, Claire McCaskill, men in general, the system, the media, "the Man," Bill Richardson, Chris Matthews, and the guy in the front row who five months ago yelled at HRC to iron his shirt.

Look, if "campaigning" involves BOTH praising the candidate AND challenging his opponent(s), by that standard, Bill and Hill haven't campaigned for O for even one day. Oy.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | October 3, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

I like Sarah Palin. I think she's a decent person and has a decent family, but she's not ready to be President. McCain picked her because he knew that it would help his campaign. He is simply using her to get into the White House. If she thinks that she is going to sit in on cabinet meetings and make a meaningful contribution, she is naive. McCain's neocon advisers will tell her what to say and what to think.

The Bush Administration took a budget surplus and in 8 years turned it into a $11 trillion debt. We are now in the worst crisis since the Great Depression. States are asking the federal government for money just to make payroll!

I have no faith that the policies of McCain/Palin will be any different than those of Bush/Cheney. They will continue to gut the FDA, EPA, USDA, and every other government agency that protects Americans from corporate greed. If you want America to end up like China, then go ahead and vote for McCain.

Posted by: hamishdad | October 3, 2008 7:43 PM | Report abuse

Yea..dbw1....I'm going to lecture to you, just like you say all the "liberals" do...

Please don't let this be an excuse for you not to try to improve your integrity-- you need to.

The reason I say this is that you don't seem to see an ethical issue with McCain meeting with regulators on behalf of Keating. Can ya think why this might be wrong?

You instead chose to spin it as non-criminal because his legal representation was skilled enough to prevent him from technically breaking any established rules. You also spin it as SIMPLE partisan wrangling when you say the ethics committee were all democrats. You don't seem to have the moral integrity to admit that there was wrongdoing here. You simply cling to some chosen facts to cobble your convenient worldview together. I can't believe in your heart of hearts that you really believe that McCain was completely innocent of even "poor judgement".

I firmly believe that is why Obama is gaining such steam here. People are tired of the politics of cynicism and the kool-aid guzzling minions that are created as a result.

Good luck to you and may the best man win.

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

It is all a matter of expectation...
When it is -70 F, -30 F feels hot ... but it is freezing hard!

Posted by: Jacqmotte3675 | October 3, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse

I don't know about "likeability" and all that junk. The fact is Biden won according to the two most reputable polls: CNN and CBS. The only clowns who thought she won were those losers who thought Palin was winking only at them. Snap out of it!

Biden graded in as an A-; Palin got an "incomplete" for not providing one coherent, responsive answer and acting like a "Hee Haw" goof ball. After the debate I half-expected Granny, Jed, Jethro, Miss Hathaway, and Mr. Drysdale to run out to congratulate Palin. You betcha! Was Palin auditioning for the Betty Hutton role in "Annie Get your Gun"?

Gwen Ifill has of course been officially disqualified from the journalism profession. Why? How do you tolerate a candidate telling you she's not going to answer your questions and proceeding to ignore you for 90 minutes. No follow-up questions even when Palin did not try to pretend to address the topic much less answer the question??? Gwen clearly knuckled under from Drudge-generated attacks from the previous day. She should have been replaced by some stand-by warhorse like Daniel Schorr.

To paraphrase George C. Scott in the Paul Newman film, "The Hustler": Gwen, keep your day job but don't ever be walking into a big-time TV debate again.

By the way, did legendary author Erica Jong get Palin right in HuffPo today?

Jong on Palin: "She is the woman politician advertisers have been waiting for -- all style and no substance. Full of confidence and full of beans, the walk of feminism without the talk. Nobody can object because there's nothing to object to. Hillary Clinton and Geraldine Ferraro had ideas you could disagree with. But Sarah Palin is perky and inscrutable at once, you betcha. She talks. We listen but we have no idea what's been said."

Posted by: broadwayjoe | October 3, 2008 7:25 PM | Report abuse

McCain's Savings & Loan Scandal involvement:

McCain was criticized by the Investigating Committee for exercising "poor judgment" when he met with the federal regulators on Keating's behalf.

McCain would wrote in 2002 that attending the two April 1987 meetings was "the worst mistake of my life".

-This must be the same "poor judgement" that McCain exercised when he srewed us in AZ by pushing electricity deregulation and the same "poor judgement" that's been the hallmark of John "Stable as Plutonium" McCain's campaign.

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

Did you read the tax returns? Several thousand dollars of that was old clothes and furniture they donated to the Salvation army. Probably stuff you would not have gotten $100.00 at a yard sale. That was just one year I did not read them all but the M.O. obvious. They just take deductions for BS charity stuff. Their Business only made a net profit of $7000.00 for the year? With expenses of over $21000.00? And it is a cash business. Yea they really do honest reporting.


=============
Sarah Palin just released her tax returns. Over the past two years, she and her husband had income of $300k, and gave $8,000 to charity.

Over the same two years, Joe Biden and his wife had almost twice as much income ($569k), but only gave $1,375 to charity.

Well, now I'm confused. Could one of you Democrats give us that lecture again about how liberals are more compassionate than those mean-spirited conservative Republicans?"

Forking over money to your church because you're scared of going to hell isn't compassion.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 3, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: popasmoke | October 3, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

dbw1: Ummm...NO.

Let's see if you can not pull a Palin and actually answer this question:

If McCain was innocent of the S & L scandal, then why has he himself admitted that this was his biggest mistake and that it was the lowest point in his life?

Please sip AFTER you answer.

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 6:22 PM | Report abuse

Non-Americans would really like to like the US. However the placing of Sarah Palin on the presidential ticket is indicative of the large body of Americans who share her disturbing values, (pride in ignorance (particularly of the wider world), private gun ownership, killing wild animals for self-gratification, oversize cars, actors with perfect teeth, etc.

Sarah Palin, (like those who think she would make a fine president if it came to it) really scare me.

Like one of your founding fathers once said, 'government without representation is tyranny'. Since your government regrettably still has global influence, I am disenfranchised.

When you vote, remember those whose are affected and can't.

Posted by: JulianPrang | October 3, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

The liberals are coming to get your freedom, America. Be very afraid.....

Posted by: The_Emperor | October 3, 2008 6:18 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD:
"Forking over money to your church because you're scared of going to hell isn't compassion."

And jumping to conclusions based on religious bigotry isn't the picture of "tolerance" I was led to believe is common among liberals.

Posted by: dbw1 | October 3, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse

DBW1 said:

The point is that liberals are constantly lecturing conservatives on 'compassion', when in practic liberals are only compassionate with other peoples money.

Study after study finds that conservatives (and more specifically, those whacko religious conservatives), give far more of both their time and money to charitable causes, than the average person who identifies themself as a political "liberal"."

Then you confuse me with this point regarding comparing Palin and Biden because Palin is one of those "whacko religious conservatives" who's tax report does not show she gave the 'religious' 10% tithes.

Hooray for you if you gave more....my point is that we can always find someone to compare against to make another seem small or to belittle them. Neither you or I know what either Palin or Biden do with their money. Income tax paperwork only show what they CLAIMED, not what they did.

You don't like Democrats, that is fine, but making assumptions about people going by something as esoteric as taxes is not a good conservative or liberal trait.

That is all I am trying to say.

Posted by: 4taz | October 3, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse

mjthompson2,

I thank your brother for protecting us and hope that he comes home safe.

Posted by: hamishdad | October 3, 2008 6:16 PM | Report abuse

Obama now has an unprecedented 40 point lead on Mccain on intrade. Take it for what it is worth but Palin did nothing for him. I think the polls were frozen waiting to see what she would do last night giving her the benefit of the doubt. She was a big nothing and now people are making up their minds. A lot of people have been waiting and they are now beginning to move. Not really anything left as game changers for Mccain. The bad economy will be with us for months to come, long past the election and Mccain barring a new war has played all his cards. Where does he go from here?

Posted by: popasmoke | October 3, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin might be the darling of the right-wing of the GOP, but how much influence will they have 2012?

If the only thing Obama does in the next 4 years is make FEMA work he'll be re-elected by a landslide of historic dimensions.

Posted by: Roofelstoon | October 3, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

dbw1-- I think you are UnAmerican and UnPatriotic because you want to elect a person who has been under criminal investigation to America's highest office. YOU are supporting an administration that will surely compromise America's role in the world by following failed economic platforms that are turning us into a 3rd World Country. Unpatriotic I say!

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

JustinMcC:

Actually, you implored us all to get our facts straight....and then said you refused to believe the finding that McCain was not involved in any criminal activity with Keating.

So, if you refuse to believe the findings after what, a nearly two year investigation, exactly what passes for 'facts' in your book?

You know, before you make another plea for sticking to the facts, you might want to decide what you mean by "facts". If you mean promoting known lies like your posts seem prone to do, then I'm sorry I won't be able to engage in such 'factual' discussion.

Posted by: dbw1 | October 3, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

JustinMcC:

Actually, you implored us all to get our facts straight....and then said you refused to believe the finding that McCain was not involved in any criminal activity with Keating.

So, if you refuse to believe the findings of a nearly two year investigation by a DEMOCRAT led ethics commission, exactly what passes for 'facts' in your book?

You know, before you make another plea for sticking to the facts, you might want to decide what you mean by "facts". If you mean promoting known lies like your posts seem prone to do, then I'm sorry I won't be able to engage in such 'factual' discussion.

Posted by: dbw1 | October 3, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

"

Sarah Palin just released her tax returns. Over the past two years, she and her husband had income of $300k, and gave $8,000 to charity.

Over the same two years, Joe Biden and his wife had almost twice as much income ($569k), but only gave $1,375 to charity.

Well, now I'm confused. Could one of you Democrats give us that lecture again about how liberals are more compassionate than those mean-spirited conservative Republicans?"

Forking over money to your church because you're scared of going to hell isn't compassion.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 3, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

bsimon1:
"I'm still waiting for your argument for the best candidate in the last 20 years."

And I'm afraid you will grow old waiting. I wasn't debating who specifically is the best candidate of the past 20 years, I was simply calling out the short-sighted assertion that it is Obama.

I think you would have a hard time finding many even among Democrats who would say Obama is a better candidate than Bill Clinton, Al Gore, or even John Kerry. Heck, almost half of Democrats wanted Hillary Clinton more than Obama, so it was hard enough for you guys to find consensus that Obama was the best candidate THIS year, much less the last 20 years.

Posted by: dbw1 | October 3, 2008 6:10 PM | Report abuse

dbw1:
Ya know how I can tell that you're a republican kool-aid drinker? Cuz you don't let intellectual honesty play an issue when ya say somethin'

We were discussing McCain and Keating's relationship in terms of the CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION of McCain by the congress...

Last time I checked, Obama had never been under criminal investigation for his relationships with the folks you mention...

Db: Try to get the whole picture before ya take another sip...

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 5:58 PM | Report abuse

4taz:
"DBW1, This Democrat made 84k last year and gave as much as Palin. Big Deal. Look at yourself. What did you do? What is your point?"

The point is that liberals are constantly lecturing conservatives on 'compassion', when in practic liberals are only compassionate with other peoples money.

Study after study finds that conservatives (and more specifically, those whacko religious conservatives), give far more of both their time and money to charitable causes, than the average person who identifies themself as a political "liberal".

I applaud your charitable giving, as it is far more than the norm for a Democrat. My wife and I gave a little more, on about the same income, because we would prefer to help those in need directly rather than rely on Obama to do it for us, with our money.

The point is that liberals can stop any day pretending they are the sole source of "compassion" for helping others.

Posted by: dbw1 | October 3, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

"No pundit could offer a single point of policy that Obama beat McCain on."

It was pretty much unanimous that Obama had McCain beat on the economics stuff as well as the Iraq stuff. (maybe not UNANIMOUS for Iraq)

The pundits declared it a draw overall, but the people care a lot more about Iraq and bailout than they do about Georgia.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 3, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: parsonsscott | October 3, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

JustinMcC:

Since you are so obsessed with McCain and Keating, I must assume you don't have all the facts so let me help:
"The Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of McCain in the [Keating]scheme was also minimal, and he was cleared of all charges against him."

By the way, I was astonished to find that those found guilty in the Keating scandal were ALL Democrats. Astonished, I say. I thought Democrats were the protectors of all things holy, decent, and honest?

Posted by: dbw1 | October 3, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

I think Gov. Palin did better than expected, but I do not think she has the skills or knowledge or interest to do what a President has to do. I also think that the real interest in drilling in Alaska is motivated by money because all that rich black oil will line many a oil & gas business owner as well as line the pockets of the State of Alaska. Imagine if you were the Governor at the time that all that oil was being sold. :)

Posted by: 4taz | October 3, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

dbw1, I'm still waiting for your argument for the best candidate in the last 20 years. First, what are your criteria, second, who best meets them?

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 3, 2008 5:48 PM | Report abuse

DBW1,

This Democrat made 84k last year and gave as much as Palin. Big Deal. Look at yourself. What did you do? What is your point?

Posted by: 4taz | October 3, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

JustinMcC:
"Keating was the one that gave McCain his political start, financially supported McCain's campaigns and was overall very close friends with McCain."

So Justin, do I assume you are equally appalled by Obama's ties to Bill Ayers, Tony Rezco, and Jeremiah Wright? You know, the ones who gave him his political start, financially supported his campaigns, and who were his close friends?

By the way, I thought you guys said it was McCain's wife's money that supported his early campaigns? Now it's Keating?

If it's not too much to ask, could you Democrats make up your mind as to which lie you want to use....

Posted by: dbw1 | October 3, 2008 5:40 PM | Report abuse

Palen the saleswoman

Palin: Hi, welcome to Sarah's used car dealership
Me: I'm looking for a car with good gas mileage
Palin: I understand ya. Ya feelin' the price at the pump. Let me show you this Chevy Suburban, it's American ya kno' and we need to support America unlike that other guy Barack.
Me: Do you have something smaller?
Palin: This vehicle is a maverick, it'll do whatever ya want (wink) whether your' big or small. And it is more efficient also ya know. With that big tank of gas, you will have to stop at the pump less often (smile).

Posted by: JPHT | October 3, 2008 5:40 PM | Report abuse

FairFax3:
"How is it possible that anyone could be less qualified to be President than Sarah?"

I assume, of course, you mean anyone other than Barack Obama?

Posted by: dbw1 | October 3, 2008 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin just released her tax returns. Over the past two years, she and her husband had income of $300k, and gave $8,000 to charity.

Over the same two years, Joe Biden and his wife had almost twice as much income ($569k), but only gave $1,375 to charity.

Well, now I'm confused. Could one of you Democrats give us that lecture again about how liberals are more compassionate than those mean-spirited conservative Republicans?

Posted by: dbw1 | October 3, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

I really hope Palin is the GOP nominee for Prez in 2012.

Pres. Obama won't have to campaign at all - just sit back and watch her self-destruct.

How is it possible that anyone could be less qualified to be President than Sarah? She can't even answer simple questions like what news sources she reads, which suggests she doesn't read anything at all.

She is like the rest of the Cons, as Obama said, one who takes pride in being ignorant.

Posted by: Fairfax3 | October 3, 2008 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Whad'ya got? Ya got nuthin!

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Last night's debate, which I considered a narrow Biden victory immediately upon completion, became much simpler to address this afternoon.

Who REALLY won, a woman who obviously didn't have command of all the issues but spoke directly to the people and directly from her heart, or a man who has 35 years experience and all the knowlege of the issues who resorted to knowingly lying at least a dozen times to make his "points?"

As far as I'm concerned, false points = no points. Sarah Palin wins by default.

Posted by: The_Emperor | October 3, 2008 5:30 PM | Report abuse

JustinMcC you are quite humorous.

Posted by: sagedutch | October 3, 2008 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Sagedutch:

It's worldview affirmative for me to see that you, like a true republican, don't let the facts get in the way of your reality:

1)Completely disagree with you on McCain's involvement with Keating. Since Keating was the one that gave McCain his political start, financially supported McCain's campaigns and was overall very close friends with McCain, I, like most rational people, find incredibly difficult to believe that McCain didn't try to prematurely end the investigation of his best friend. Won't buy it.

2) Even though it was both parties that chose not to regulate FMae FMac, this is a side issue to the bailout. As a RE Broker and someone who has been in mortgage for 20 years, I can unequivocally tell you that Fannie Mae doesn't need regulatory oversight in their underwriting guidelines-- you see, they don't do stated (liar) loans, high LTV HELOCs and they do their own apprasals...

What I can assure you of is that the toxic loan programs that had such a hot secondary market were NOT purchased by Fannie Mae, but packaged and sold by Wall Street firms like JP Morgan, etc... Now THESE firms were in need of underwriting regulation...Because that lack of oversight combined with the opaqueness of the securities is what is causing the credit squeeze which is where the bulk of our taxpayer money will go to bailout...

Also, these toxic loan products (Option Arms, etc.) and the secondary market's appetite for these products were slowing drastically towards the end of 2006...So, ya see, it's kinda hard to blame the Democrats taking control of congress for this one too. The high point of toxic loans began building in 2003 and peaked in about 2006.

I suggest you get your facts straight, sagedutch, BEFORE you take another sip of the Kool-aid.

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

"As Jim Geraghty wrote on National Review's 'Campaign Spot' blog: 'She's a natural saleswoman.'"

Precisely.

Haven't we had enough of "Salesperson-In-Chief" around the White House?

Posted by: CuckooRaja | October 3, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Got three words for you, Chris: true; per; gate.

Let's wait and see if she and her family are in jail in 2012, shall we?

Posted by: tellthetruth01 | October 3, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

People should cut Mrs. Palin a little bit of slack here. She is not an idiot !
You don't acquire her diversified resume
with an empty head.

As a Washington outsider (very refreshing),
In the matter of just a little over a month, she was -
1. Offered the position
2. Needed to bone up on McCain's strategy.
3. Surely put her Alaskan affairs in order.
4. Be cast into the national limelight just
about over night.
5. Give immediate interviews which seemed
at times quite harsh.
6. Prepare for a National televised debate.
7. Debate a 35 year veteran of DC.(who has
been praised with having given the best
debate of his life)and do it well.
By holding her own and being able to
standing her ground.
8. Be careful not to give any responses
that may be interpreted as opposing
Sen. McCain.
9. Concentrate on letting the people know
her own convictions and understanding
of what the public needs to know and
work that into the debate. While also
reviving her reputation after the harsh
interviews, pudit criticism and then
the caricatures comedians and talk show
hosts have created.

How many people, even former candidates
would have been able to do that ?
She did very well - you betcha !

Posted by: JUNIORSBOX | October 3, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

I suspect Chris Cillizza doesn't even believe the laughable notion that Pale'n earned herself a 2012 nomination by blatantly refusing to answer questions and spewing senseless rhetoric.

Instead of doing that hard work that Pale'n might pronounce "jerneelizzam", he probably concocted this "article" to pull in web traffic. He gave it a title that pushed it onto the front page when Google News started aggregating it.

Perhaps, as an earlier comment suggested, he gets a boner for Pale'n. Or perhaps it's more likely that he didn't even come up with the idea; he got it as part of today's right wing talking points fax or in a phone call from a rovian.

In the old days, we could at least use junk like this to line the bird cage. Sad to see WaPo stooping this low for web traffic.

Posted by: sobugged | October 3, 2008 5:12 PM | Report abuse

erin5:
"the only thing that Palin supporters have written on this blog is about how she should win and she nailed it last night. Not one blogger has SUBSTANCE or reasons to support why they favor Palin/McCain."

You know, that sounds like the morning after the McCain/Obama debate last week. No pundit could offer a single point of policy that Obama beat McCain on. Yet they all rushed to announce Obama the "winner" because he smiled more, looked at the camera more, did better than expected,.....sound familiar?

My my my.....amazing how no Obama supporter wanted to talk "policy points" after the debate a week ago, yet now they are obsessed with it.

Hold up, though.....the next Obama/McCain debate isn't too far away, so you will want to make sure you move quickly to get back on the other "likable/smiling/camera-presence" defines the debate 'winner' side....

Posted by: dbw1 | October 3, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Yep,

Sarah Palin and the Karl Rove Team, coming next soon, only at Foxy News, bringing you the "News to Nowhere".

Posted by: ElMugroso | October 3, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

What Palin did last night is bring her own national prospects back from the brink of disaster with a performance that -- while occasionally exposing her decided lack of knowledge on certain issues -- managed to keep her star ascendant for a party. Palin is clearly likable, charismatic and telegenic.

If there a bit of credibility to this nonsense, the blogger who said America is a nation of morons, is right on the money!

Posted by: tydicea | October 3, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

sagedutch says
"I may disagree with your conclusions, but applaud your thoughtfulness. I wish more people in this pivotal point in our history would focus on what they are looking for and not on character assignations. There is hope yet."

Thanks. From time to time we have fruitful discussions here. More often its bickering, insulting and yelling past one another.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 3, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

I don't see Sarah Palin as presidential material.
-But, wouldn't object to her replacing Bill O'Really the commentator. She'd fit the audience.

Posted by: ElMugroso | October 3, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

" Even among Democrats your delusional Obama-love is exceptional. You just placed a guy who is less than 3 years removed from a part-time job as a state legislator ahead of the likes of Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Al Gore, John McCain, Bob Dole, and both George Bush's.

I thought liberals were 'intellectuals'?"


I laid out my argument later in the post. But, to address the people you reference, I think GW Bush was a terrible candidate - and proved to be a terrible President. Kerry was a terrible candidate. Gore was a mediocre candidate who somehow couldn't beat a terrible candidate. I liked McCain in 2000, but do not think he's the right person for the job now, in 2008. He doesn't have a vision for where he wants to take our country - or, if he does, he's certainly not explaining it well. That, to me, makes him a less attractive candidate than Senator Obama. President Bush was the most experienced of all the people on your list, but he was a mediocre president (looking better and better in hindsight). But as a candidate didn't exactly inspire the country. He beat a mediocre candidate (Dukakis) by a small margin. Clinton was clearly the most charismatic candidate we've had, and very effectively made the 'its the economy stupid' argument work. His victory primarily benefitted from the Perot factor, not Clinton winning over the electorate in large numbers.

In any case, if you disagree, feel free to spell out your criteria for who the best candidate(s) of the last 20 years was or were.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 3, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Most of you sound like typical Washington Post admirers. DUH!
Sarah sounds like a lot of intelligent folks on the main street. Is that bad?
She sure is not an elitist, like most of you seem to be. Believe me there are a lot of talented, intelligent people who don't live in Washington DC. They are the ones who pay the taxes to pay your salaries.

Posted by: jamesrtaylor1 | October 3, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

I know Cillizza chronically values style over substance but this is ridiculous. Is he suggesting she could top a ticket?

Palin will never be able to truly grasp the issues in a way that Biden, Obama or even McCain can, because she simply doesn't care about them. Politics for her is a beauty contest. If she came from a blue state, she'd be a Democrat airhead instead of a GOP one. In either party, the entire focus of her being would be on getting everyone to look at Sarah Palin, beauty queen.

Biden is a notorious narcissist and camera-chaser, but even he looks thoroughly issue-driven next to Palin.

I betcha Palin doesn't even really know her fundie Bible. Everything about her is a put-on.

And by the way, with each successive year, she's going to look more and more like Rudy Giuliani in a wig.

Finally, as it becomes increasingly clear that she's the candidate of the crazy GOP base, the End-timers, evolution deniers, and WW3 advocates, ordinary Americans will find her less and less cute.

She's best off governing a deep-red state with a shortage of educated people. Somewhere like Alaska.

Posted by: Bud0 | October 3, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin's problem is none other than the falsity of her pretense.

She tries hard, but it shows: She uses the wink of a crook to an accomplice when about to screw someone, and she had her unavoidable Freudian slip, when asked for her favorite Vice President, she said "George Bush" and immediately volunteered 'why', without being asked "Because he became president", she said, in the same sentence.
-We need a really TOUGH and straightforward, and prepared person like Obama to really stand up to all kinds of crooks running our country.
=
A crook would't do, nor wouldn't a fool.

Posted by: ElMugroso | October 3, 2008 4:55 PM | Report abuse

JustinMcC:

S&L Bailouts - yup, Bush 41 was out of it on this one.

As for McCain, even Bennet (Clinton's lawyer) said that he was not involved and should be removed from the investigation.).

Wall St Bailout -- you only get partial credit. For full credit, how about the Dems completely dismissing calls for structural regulatory reform of Fannie and Freddie? That is no different than your Waler reference. Instead they chose to say that the calls were unnecessary and disgusting.

Posted by: sagedutch | October 3, 2008 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Palin has an engaging personality, and politically talented. Even with far right conservative views herself, she seems to govern with a pragmatic approach. Limited by her experience, she is apparently not ready as VP/P at this time. I agree that she has a political future in the republican party. A lot of people in the country will be curious enough in to keep watching in the years to come. She earned herself at least that last night.

Posted by: SuperClearVision | October 3, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

While the Republicans will certainly be huge underdogs again in 2012 as Obama seeks reelection, I'd be surprised to see them hand their nomination to Palin. That would be a ticket toward a base election, which would only serve to further reduce the number of Republicans. If things are really going well for the country, and the Republican nominee is merely a sure loser, a sacrificial lamb as Dole was in 1996 or Mondale in 1984, then Palin's a possibility. But if the Republicans actually have a chance to win, they'll be smart enough to nominate someone more mainstream.

Expect 2009 to be a somewhat rocky year economically, but that the Obama middle-class tax cut and domestic investment initiatives will result in keeping the economy afloat in the middle part of the year, with the economy returning to strength by the end of 2009 and head into 2010 with momentum. This should present a climate where major health-care reform is politically manageable, and will then set the table for Democrats to comfortably defend their Congressional majorities in 2010, while expanding their base in the states in state legislatures and Governor's offices. The country will be feeling good about itself by 2011 with the Iraq War ended, the economy growing, the government realizing profit from this week's Wall Street Rescue. And with the continually increasing minority share of the population and Democrats able to control Congressional and legislative redistricting in many states where they have been disadvantaged in recent decades, Democrats will continue to expand their base in 2012 and Obama will be reelected in a virtual landslide exceeding 55% of the popular vote and pushing, if not exceeding 400 Electoral Votes---the biggest Democratic victory since 1964, and the most consequential since 1936.

We are likely entering a generation of Democratic ballot-box and philosophical issue-dominance, as the Conservative Reactive Era of American politics which began with Nixon's election in 1968, was delayed by Watergate during the 1970s, then was reinforced and invigorated by Reagan's 1980 election and his Presidency, winds to a close.

Posted by: OHIOCITIZEN | October 3, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

bsimon1, I may disagree with your conclusions, but applaud your thoughtfulness. I wish more people in this pivotal point in our history would focus on what they are looking for and not on character assignations. There is hope yet.

Posted by: sagedutch | October 3, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

Sagedutch:

The only kool-aid being sucked down in America is by the GOP party:

Every time a Republican administration leaves office, it's only after their scorched earth policy has been completed.

S&L Bailouts (For God's sake McCain was in bed with Keating!): Cost the US tax payers over $500 Billion. Bush Sr. ignored Danny Waller's testimony in front of congress for so long, we were too far in the hole to climb out-- had to burden the tax payers...

Wall Street Bailout: Will cost the US taxpayers over a $ Trillion.

Coincidence? I don't think so, but you decide: Is it slash and burn, nihilistic behavior (ala Strauss), sheer greed or have they been drinking Milton Friedman Kool-aid too long?

While you're deciding, I'm going to go ahead and vote for the Democratic party since as a proud American, I don't want to see America turn into a Third World Country.

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

bsimon1 said:
"I still believe [Obama] is the best candidate for President we've had in the last 20 years."

WOW. Even among Democrats your delusional Obama-love is exceptional. You just placed a guy who is less than 3 years removed from a part-time job as a state legislator ahead of the likes of Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Al Gore, John McCain, Bob Dole, and both George Bush's.

I thought liberals were 'intellectuals'?

Posted by: dbw1 | October 3, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

She is another Dan Quayle - her actions do not support her promise to Joe Six Pack. ..........
http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/10/03/respecting-joe-six-pack/

Posted by: glclark4750 | October 3, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Obama has not shown any more respect for the Constitution of this great country than McCain or Palin. That is a truly appalling statement. If elected, I hope he does and is able to forestall the forces of the far left who would have the Constitution turned inside out to make the US more European and follow the laws of other nations rather than the great work of our founders. All we need is more Ruth Bader Ginsburg's designing new elements to the Constitution to meet their philosophical bent. (Actually, with any luck, maybe there will be 40 votes in the Senate to conduct themselves on Supreme Court matters the way Biden described last night. They can and should stop the practice demonstrated in Ruth's approval. From now on, stop voting for and in fact prevent a full floor vote on extreme left judges. If that happens, that Obama's hand will be forced to the middle on Constitutional matters. Here's hoping!)

Posted by: sagedutch | October 3, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Inexperience has nothing to do with the rage people have towards Sarah Palin. It is 100% her political views. Political parties will push people who are electable.
Barrack is electable, Hillary might not have been.

If Sarah Palin was a pro-choice, sexually tolerant democrat she would be beloved by most democtrats. She s very electable.

Posted by: mellowj | October 3, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

**I thought it was Cheney and Rumsfeld the deep intellectuals on foreign policy who's evil genius ruined us.**

Genius?....I don't think anybody has ever suggested either of those two people are geniuses.
Palin appeals to the portion of American who likes their politicians to be no smarter or more knowledgeable than they are. Before that gets dismissed as a tiny minority, that group contributed to the election of the Bush regime...twice.
That said, she doesn't interest the portion of the population who can understand smart people when they talk and don't like to be winked at by thier elected officials.
What that means for her national electability is similar to what happened to Hillary Clinton during her husbands presidency. Palin has become polarizing, which generaly bodes ill for her long term prospects on the national stage.

Posted by: dijetlo | October 3, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

So, the qualifications of the highest office(s)of the land have been reduced to a wink and a nod? What is it with these conservatives and why do you in the media fan and tacitly support it by giving credence? The nation is going through some of the toughest times in its history. Instead of encouraging serious debate so the best people get to lead us, the media is behind this wink and nod frenzy. The mainstream media is once again being totally irresponsible.

Posted by: krvishwanath | October 3, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

Maddonna would be more suitable to run the country if we want to experiment.

Posted by: ElMugroso | October 3, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

"Chris, I think your hyperbole on 'her strengths being legion' is excessive."

The Fix's propesity for excessive hyperbole is legion.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 3, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin in 2012???

What McCain did by choosing her for his running mate was an act of brutality upon her. I feel sorry for her, but she will not be back as a major force in national elections in 2012.

Posted by: scpato | October 3, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

It is clear Mrs. Palin has a following. But with all of my middle-aged 50+ friends and family, we don't see it.

When she talks she is like Daffy Duck with folksy sayings and little content or real opinion. I have to mute the sound of my television because her voice and sayings are like fingernail scratchings on a blackboard. We really do cringe. Her folksy ways are more cartoon-like and worse than G.W. Bush and abusing the english language even worse with her nonsensical ramblings.

Posted by: lucy2008 | October 3, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Vimrich:

It's not enough to be an "intellectual" (and I'm not sure that Cheney or Rumsfeld really fit that description). You need to be right, as well. And narrow-thinking ideologues rarely are.

Posted by: rlaw1 | October 3, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

sagedutch writes
"As for those who think that Obama is some how a walk on water candidate, do you really think that 2 years (effectively) in the senate and 2 years (effectively) running for president make him qualified? Do you rally believe he has shown the judgment or demonstrated the capacity to lead this country?"

Well, I support Obama, but I don't think he walks on water. I think he's made plenty of mistakes in the campaign and disagree with several of his policy positions. However, I still think he's the best candidate for President we've had in the last 20 years. The job of being president is one of leadership and judgement. In order to lead, a person has to have a vision. Obama has that vision and he has the ability to convince people that his approach is the right one. We suffer from an enormous leadership vacuum in this country right now - and we have for some time. I think Obama understands the big picture - how economic policy intertwines with foreign policy. He understands how trade policy intertwines with energy policy. They're not perfect, but Obama's plans for focusing on two things - better education for our students and investment in new technology will accomplish far more than creating good students and good jobs. An educated workforce returns on our investment in ourselves by boosting productivity here. Promoting investment in technology here can create jobs & industries here instead of overseas. If we're selling technology to the world, we're getting back the dollars we currently send offshore, for oil. If we can convert from an oil-based economy to an alternative energy economy, we can simultaneously 1) boost the economy, including creating better jobs for the domestic workforce. 2) reverse the trade deficit. 3) fight climate change. 4) stabilize parts of the world that are currently destabilized by petro-dollars - venezuela, the mid-east, central africa & Russia.

Frankly, I don't think McCain sees how all these issues intertwine. Obama does, therefore Obama is the better candidate to lead our country out of the hole we're in. It won't be easy, but he's the right person for the times.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 3, 2008 4:34 PM | Report abuse

"Palin is certainly not experienced enough. But, neither is Obama. Too bad the koolaide drinkers on this site can't admit it!"

This isn't about experience. Obama hasn't been a US Senator for very long, but he can speak intelligently about the issues. Palin can't. She went so far as to directly refuse to answer a question posed to her. That is just unacceptable.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 3, 2008 4:32 PM | Report abuse

hamishdad,

My brother just went off to war on saturday to fight for our freedoms, rights and reason to call this a great. The comment you made about Sarah Palin being worse than Osama Bin Laden...disrespectful. You're an example of why america isnt the beautiful. Grow up. If you feel that strongly about it...by all means move into the cave with him. I'm sure you would love to help him on the next one. Go back home. You belong there...not in this country.

Posted by: mjthompson2 | October 3, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Thinking Americans for Barack Obama and Joe Biden in 2008.

Posted by: Adanielch | October 3, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

I don't think Obama walks on water. He is untested and I worry about that. But I am going to give him a chance.

Sarah thumbs her nose at the Law of our Land, the Constitution. Doesn't that concern anyone?

Obama is a Constitutional scholar, and he RESPECTS the Constitution. Sarah would rather just make up her own rules. Apparently many of you are not concerned about the fact that she wants to grab more power as Vice President???

Posted by: mavisdarling | October 3, 2008 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Ms. Palin acquitted herself far better than I expected. I'm amazed at how much her handlers were able to cram down her throat in such a short period of time.

Yes, what she had to say was limited and repetitive. After all, her knowledge is so limited that she had to fall back on the exhaustively rehearsed energy spiel.

I find it hard to believe that informed, intelligent people, being aware of how little she knows, would fall under the spell of the contrived "aw shucks," "you betcha," folksy style. (wink, wink)

As for the people who say they are or were Democrats, but they're voting for Sarah, by golly, ya hey dere, obviously the Democratic Party's positions on the major issues of our day weren't really part of these voters' party commitment. Because the stance of the McCain/Palin ticket is just like the last eight years--but even more hawkish, trigger-happy and impetuous. And for the fallen Dems, it must just boil down to a popularity contest.

One thing to consider about Sarah, though--she should be witch-free. If not, she knows where to turn for help.

Posted by: symorris | October 3, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Kay Bailey must be turning in her gut. How can anyone believe Palin can ever be qualified to be president or even be the GOP nomination for 2012, 2016, or ever? Sorry, Kay, you appear to be too educated and smart now (too skinny and old looking as well I guess).
If not for the "bubba" factor, Obama would have double digit leads for a long time now and this strange Palin story would be way over by now.

Posted by: pearland_voter | October 3, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Chris, I think your hyperbole on 'her strengths being legion' is excessive. She's been on the national political scene all of 15 minutes and will fade as rapidly as Quayle, Edwards, Kemp etc. There are/will be far more fresh-faced qualified Republicans for 2012 (as well as a few holdovers from this year.) And I don't think her coy/faux cheerleader persona will go down well in the long-term

Posted by: RickJ | October 3, 2008 4:24 PM | Report abuse

unshrub writes
"Look at the facts people.

Palin did not answer any questions put forth by the Moderator. Why was Palin allowed to ignore the questions and format of the debate? Why is she so special? She failed and the Moderator was too scared to say a word."


That's one way to look at it. Another is for the moderator to ask the question & accept the answer, letting the viewers decide if the answer is appropriate. My feeling is that while people think Palin exceeded expectations, people do not seem to find her particularly appealing as a Vice President. After the fiascos of the Gibson/Couric interviews, people expected Palin to stumble badly in the debate. She didn't stumble, but she also didn't answer any questions. While I would have preferred that Ifill follow up and push for answers, I think she made the right choice by letting Palin off. The voters aren't so dumb that they didn't catch on to her game.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 3, 2008 4:24 PM | Report abuse

I'm from a 'Moose State'... Montana. I drop my G's when I talk.

I still think Sarah Palin is an uneducated fake.

Posted by: mavisdarling | October 3, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

Am I on WP.com or Daily Kos? Not sure anymore with the vitriol and sheer nonsense that people write on this site. Palin a dope? Yeah right. Is she the policy wonk that Biden is? Of course not. Is Biden's policy wonk capability a benefit if he is elected VP? Not automatically.

I certainly can understand differences of opinion or philosophy, but too many posters here do not seem to have the intellectual capacity to add to the discourse on that front, preferring instead to take pot shots at personality and dialect.

As for those who think that Obama is some how a walk on water candidate, do you really think that 2 years (effectively) in the senate and 2 years (effectively) running for president make him qualified? Do you rally believe he has shown the judgment or demonstrated the capacity to lead this country? Be honest! if you are, there is no way you can. Palin is certainly not experienced enough. But, neither is Obama. Too bad the koolaide drinkers on this site can't admit it!


Posted by: sagedutch | October 3, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

The time is now!
To remind Americans that Barack Hussein Obama is just another politician that will do or say whatever it takes to fulfill his political ambitions. Barack is calculated and methodical about hiding his true convictions and intentions, and uses deception to get elected.

The time is now!
For Americans to remember Barack Hussein Obama’s intimate 20 year relationship with the Priest of Hate, Jeremiah Wright, who blessed Barack and Michelle marriage and baptized both their daughters. AND, to remember the hideous videos of Jeremiah Wright’s congregation which included the Obamas, damning America with bombastic joy, after the Muslim’s criminal attack on America on 9/11.

The time is now!
For Americans to remember how Barack's Priest of Hate, Jeremiah Wright used his tax-exempt church to exercise a radical political agenda, and how he refers to Israel, as well as America, as a "racist" State. Barack's religious leader, Jeremiah Wright believes that the true 'Chosen People' are the blacks; and that black values are superior to middle-class American values.
 Indeed Barack's Priest of Hate, Jeremiah Wright is a black supremacist.

The time is now!
To remind Americans that Barack Hussein Obama wants to be president to implement Jeremiah Wright’s dream of a black supremacist society in America.

The time is now!
For Americans of all political parties to come together to preserve the future of the country we love and have always been proud of, by voting for a True American Patriot and War Hero who risked his life for our country:
John McCain for President of the United States of America.

Country First!
Americans for John McCain/Sarah Palin

Posted by: Manolete | October 3, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

While I disagree with you Chris, I'm sure Tina Fey is forsquare behind you.

During the debate - I wonder how many people looked at Sarah Palin but saw Tina Fey??

Posted by: DonJasper | October 3, 2008 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Ms. Palin acquitted herself far better than I expected. I'm amazed at how much her handlers were able to cram down her throat in such a short period of time.

Yes, what she had to say was limited and repetitive. After all, her knowledge is so limited that she had to fall back on the exhaustively rehearsed energy spiel.

I find it hard to believe that informed, intelligent people, being aware of how little she knows, would fall under the spell of the contrived "aw shucks," "you betcha," folksy humor. (wink, wink)

As for the people who say they are or were Democrats, but they're voting for Sarah, by golly, ya hey dere, obviously the Democratic Party's positions on the major issues of our day weren't really part of theese voters' party commitment. Because the stance of the McCain/Palin ticket is just like the last eight years--but even more hawkish, trigger-happy and impetuous. And for the fallen Dems, it must just boil down to a popularity contest.

One thing to consider about Sarah, though--she should be witch-free. If not, she knows where to turn for help.

Posted by: symorris | October 3, 2008 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Chris wrote:
To my fellow Obama supporters,

Yes, Palin doesn't answer questions. Yes, she repeats the points given to her. But in 8 years, she will be able to stand on her own. Then we can make a better assessment. I think it is unfair to write her off forever. Obviously, SHE IS NOT READY RIGHT NOW. But in the future, things may change.
-------------------------------------
Chris,

I agree. Give her about four more years experience. Perhaps even a two year stint in Congress, then look at her again.

My voting record would bear out that, while mainly voting along Democratic lines, it is not a lock. I've had no issue with the Virginia Republican top leadership in my immediate congressional area, nor in the governorship.

Posted by: kban495 | October 3, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Katie Couric: Governor, I notice that you drop your 'g's when talking. Is that something Alaskans do a lot?
SP: Well, you see we're just a few miles from Wasila, which is on the border with the Dropped G Valley and bein' just a few miles from Russia we pretty much don't have a lotta use for them 'g's when were tryin to get things straight aroun' here...
KC: Why is that Governor? Why is dropping your 'g's important in getting things straight here?
SP: Well, first, you're not from around here an' people who wanna get things done, well, they just don't pretend to be fom somewhere else, so droppin' 'g's is important, you know....what is droppin' 'g's anyway, is it some sorta climate somethin' 'cause I've been in the Droppin'g G Valley and it seems like it's 'bout the same as here, except maybe it's warmin' up a little an'
KC: Governor, dropping 'g's means that words that end in 'ing' are said as if the actually end in 'in'.
SP: End in 'in'. Well, that's just funny, you know, 'cause endin' in in is like finishing outta out, donja think? And I still think that God makes the climate change and 'g's don' have nothin' to do with that and takin' our country back fromthose that have it is what John McCain an' I are all about..
KC: Governor, I seem to notice that you drop your 'd's, too.
SP: Well, Katie, can I call you Katie, Katie, droppin' these things aren't nearly as important as droppin' IN on folks and bein' friendly and gettin' things done for the people....
KC: My God, you're right,dropped 'g's and 'd's don't matter at all.
SP: See, Katie, Alaska changes you. And it'll change you all, too.

KC: I see your point

Posted by: bgreen2224 | October 3, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Justin McC hit the nail on the head. Sarah Palin is a DOPE. And anyone who thinks she did well in the debate is a DOPE. And anyone who votes for the Republican ticket is either a DOPE or wealthy (or both).

If McCain/Palin get in, America will be as reviled as we are now, or more, by the rest of the world. And, if M./P. get in, I guess, as a country of DOPES, we will get what we deserve. More of what we have gotten for the last 8 years of misery!

Posted by: alm52 | October 3, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

You liberals need to make up your mind. I thought it was Cheney and Rumsfeld the deep intellectuals on foreign policy who's evil genius ruined us.

Palin is Truman or Reagan and doesn't take crap from anyone no matter how smart they think they are. Rumsfeld would not have lasted a month after the disaster he made of Iraq. Of course, she would have laughed him out of the oval office when he tried to pitch the Iraq war when the American people were clearly against it. She did as much to all the supposed "oil experts" in Alaska.

However, you paint Palin, one has to admit the disaster of the deeply knowledgeable intellectuals like Cheney and McNamara, and success of the simpletons like Truman and Reagan.

Posted by: vimrich | October 3, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Way too hard to predict, but the route of failed VP candidate to the Presidency is not an easy one. John Edwards, Joe Lieberman, Fritz Mondale, etc.

Also, her "star power" is fueled in large part by the disdain that many in the party have for McCain. You put her up against a Huckabee (who has folksy charm and command of the issues) a Romney (who seems very competent) and others out there, I'm not sure she'll stand out as much.

Plus, she's headed to Alaska if she loses. Even if Fox likes her, I doubt they'll be flying up to interview her very much.

Posted by: MShake | October 3, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

I can understand republicans trying to spin Palin's performance but I am getting tired of the media being scared of their criticism and acting like Palin did almost as good as Biden.

Look at the facts people.

Palin did not answer any questions put forth by the Moderator. Why was Palin allowed to ignore the questions and format of the debate? Why is she so special? She failed and the Moderator was too scared to say a word. Just because she did better than expected is a meaningless goal. (I have a goat that surprises me every once in a while with how smart he is, but I set the bar quite low for what I consider being smart.) She should have had the same expectation as Biden. She did not know any facts, all she did was advertise McCain's talking points. THAT WAS NOT A DEBATE.

People, Palin did NOT KNOW the duties of the VP as defined by the constitution. She believes that as VP she can do what she wants in Washington and ignore the constitution. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? She wants to be VP of the United States and impose her will upon Congress. They call that a dictator when there are no separation of power between branches of government.

Media should tell it like it is. Palin should get a F in this debate. When people take the same test, they are not scored relative to their own level of knowledge, unless they are in kindergarten. We are dealing with the second most important, and could be the most important, position in the world.

Republicans, wake up, this is not a game. Why are you so interested in someone whose only purpose is to ridicule democrats? We know why you are this way. You believe that Democrats will destroy this country, and you must win at all costs. You are scared that big bad Obama is going to take away your gun (actually it’s our guns since I own 4 guns myself) and tax everyone to death. Because of that irrational fear instigated by the right wing of the republican party, you are willing to have a VP who is out of her league.

Posted by: unshrub | October 3, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Palin is stupid and ignorant. I you can't see that, you are just too stupid to know stupid when you see it. God help us if we have to deal with four more years of stupid leadership.

Posted by: JSermarini | October 3, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

"That she might have already overachieved, even as the Governor or Alaska?"

I'm kind of back and forth on this one. She seems to be aware on some of the provincial issues she faces. Wildlife issues, energy issues, etc. However, her lack of knowledge on the stock market stuff was appalling. Foreign policy, I'll give her a pass, but she needs to know about the economics of the country.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 3, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Just as pre-debate chatter exaggerated Palin's inadequacies, post-debate analysis has probably exaggerated her strengths. Indeed, for those who thought she would drool or perform imitation bird calls, she exceeded expectations. Most viewers, I think, would have correctly predicted that she would be well coached to respond to questions with about 25 rehearsed talking points, and if a question failed to match any of these, she would recite one of them anyway. She did that well, but it doesn't suggest any ability to compete effectively in an arena where she's on her own. My own impression is that she's a likable and cheerful intellectual lightweight, and in the long run, I doubt her abilities will suffice to bring her to the top of a national ticket in the future.

Posted by: fmoolten | October 3, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

the level of hate and outrage aimed at Sarah Palin here at the Post is amusing. She is a politician, and not unlike most other politicians in our country (except without a law degree, which may be a plus)when they started out on the national scene. Disagree with her positions if you wish but she isn't going away anytime soon. The level of rage aimed at someone is also a good barometer of the oppositions fear. I think we will have Ms. Palin around for some time, so get used to it.

Posted by: mellowj | October 3, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

the only thing that Palin supporters have written on this blog is about how she should win and she nailed it last night. Not one blogger has SUBSTANCE or reasons to support why they favor Palin/McCain. This is to be expected, as they support a candidate because they like her, rather than the substance she can contribute to issues that effect our country. To this crowd: please change the way you approach voting. It's about what the candidate's positions are: and all we heard from Palin last night was generalities and the same Bush rhetoric. She will NOT bring change; she has no legitimate policy recommendations. Vote on competence, not charm!

Posted by: erin5 | October 3, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

--"Last night Palin may not have materially aided McCain's chances of defeating Obama in the fall campaign but she did her own political future a world of good."--

If you think so Chris. I think that most people have a hard time naming the VP's of losing presidents. Gerald Ford. Michael Dukakis. Walter Mondale. ;)

Posted by: DonJasper | October 3, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Chris: Who's been buying you those fancy lunches?

Posted by: scrivener50 | October 3, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

I think when McCain loses, she's going to disappear. She'll retry in 2012, do as well as Huckabee, and that will be that. Her folksy schtick will just get too annoying too fast, even for the majority of Republicans. She's got to have more than that. She's essentially a one trick pony. I have to think that people have learned something, SOMETHING, for god's sake, in the last eight year, and will see through all that.

I also think that the intervening years will just give her more time to do really stupid things that will count against her. I think there will be more Troopergates in the next four years, you betcha.

Posted by: gbw1 | October 3, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Well, a lot CAN happen in 8 years. Since she doesn't believe in birth control, what's to keep her from getting pregnant again? She still has about 8 years until menopause.

And she might be charged with some crimes in Alaska before it's all said and done. She has been very hypocritical so far. No surprise there. She isn't one of "us"... she's a typical politician!!

Posted by: mavisdarling | October 3, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

I stopped by, not to read what I am supposed to think, but to say that Sarah Palin most definitely, in my opinion, is qualified to hold the post of Vice President of the United States of America. I would also add that intelligent voters will completely disregard the rubbish that has been offered up by the agenda driven mainstream media. In short, nobody with any sense gives a hoot what you think or what you write. In the days, weeks and months ahead that will become abundantly clear to you.

Posted by: jcarob | October 3, 2008 4:09 PM | Report abuse

The fundamental flaw with this column is it assumes that all Sarah Palin needs is another few years experience to be a political heavyweight.

But not all politicians, even ones who are likable, are fit for higher office.

We're talking about a beauty queen who went to multiple different colleges and became sports broadcaster on local TV. Did you ever think that she might not have the intelligence necessary to take the next step? That she might have already overachieved, even as the Governor or Alaska?

If the Republicans want to run Sarah Palin for national office anytime between now and 2050, I'm sure the Democrats would more than welcome it. That would put her in over her head yet again.

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | October 3, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse

I don't care how "likable" a candidate is, nor do I care if I want to have a beer with the candidate. I want a competent, intelligent candidate who knows how to do things. When I select a doctor, I want the best doctor, not one who's main claim to fame is that he/she is "chummy." We've seen from the past 8 years what "chummy" will get you. The biggest problem we've had in politics over the past 30 years is that voters have chosen the "chummy" candidate over the qualified candidate. Anyone have any questions as to why government is is such a mess? Remember: pick your politician the same way you pick your doctors--and dropping "Gs" (as in nothin' goin' on here) isn't a good sign.

Posted by: gcoyne | October 3, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

She STILL hasn't come clean about her thoughts on the sub-prime mortgage crisis. She would NOT be able to hold her own in a discussion of that issue. She just flat-out refused to answer that question last night, and that is one of THE biggest issues facing our country today.

Of course, her fans didn't even notice THAT. She would have FAILED high school debate class for refusing to answer questions.

She reminds me of a TV preacher... remember Jim Bakker and Tammy Faye? Remember how they duped the foolish, uneducated faithful? Sarah has taken a few pages out their playbook.

Posted by: mavisdarling | October 3, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

If last nights debate performance qualifies her for the high office in 2012, then we are in a sad state of affairs. What has happened to the Republican Party? It seems it has become nothing but a slogan-dropping brand with no core or soul. IMHO, time for a re-alignment and weed out these social conservative crazies. Let them try to succeed on their.

Posted by: danielburns | October 3, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

To my fellow Obama supporters,

Yes, Palin doesn't answer questions. Yes, she repeats the points given to her. But in 8 years, she will be able to stand on her own. Then we can make a better assessment. I think it is unfair to write her off forever. Obviously, SHE IS NOT READY RIGHT NOW. But in the future, things may change.

At this point, Palin is a non-issue. McCain = Bush and America can't afford more of the same. Obama has real ideas to get us out of these messes.

Obama-Biden 2008
Obama-Biden 2008
Obama-Biden 2008

Posted by: ChrisStewart | October 3, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is George Bush in a skirt, full of colloquialism and empty of contemplative wisdom. People like this appeal to the common man because language that is generated from knowledge, experience and contemplation can seem remote and somewhat intimidating. But for God's sake if the people are willing to accept, hook line and sinker, talk that is empty of substance yet again, well, they deserve what they get.
Both Sarah and George would be amazing general managers of a Red Lobster or Olive Garden. John McCain would make a splendid curater of an Atlantic City wax Museum.

Posted by: NOSEBLOB | October 3, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse
------------------------------------

I think you are selling general managers of a Red Lobster or Olive Garden short. Bush would bankrupt the companies and Palin would be feeding her family there for free.

McCain should be in a Museum.

Posted by: info4 | October 3, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

The last time we elected a gee-whiz, gosh darn it President (who also can't pronounce "nuclear"), we got 8 years of Boy Wonder and his sidekick Darth Cheney. Between the two of them, they managed to ignore 40+ warnings of an al-qaeda attack, then further unsettle the Middle East, gave Iran a real boost in influence, missed Bin Laden and Mullah Omar, and, oh yeah, bankrupted America for the next two or three generations or so.

If we're really dumb enough to elect another one just like Dubya, only female, then God have mercy on our souls 'cause we're doomed.

Posted by: windrider2 | October 3, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Katie Couric: So, again, what newspapers do you read?
SP: Well, we're only a few miles away from Russia, you know and John McCain who is a hero and I, were takin' shots, an we have a lot of papers in the Governor's office...
KC: So, which ones do you read?
SP: Well, there are magazines, too and it's important to take our country back from the folks on Wall Street that are makin' all the decisions and did you see the Lava lamps?
KC: So, you read magazines, too. Which ones are helpful to you in your role as Governor?
SP: Well, you know, first they vote for somethin' and then they vote against somethin', and I think you should know we're cuttin' taxes and addin' taxes to the oil companies and the lamp was a gift from the CEO-O-O of one of the drillin' companies but we decided we were taxin' em anyway..
KC: Well, it's a nice lava lamp. Do you know how they work?
SP:...........
KC: Not to belabor the point, but do you know how a lava lamp works?
SP: Didya know that by cuttin' taxes on the people that we could be creatin' jobs and tryin' to get the Iraqis to be steppin' up more and somebody sent me a coupla puppies....
KC: Two puppies were sent to you as a gift?
SP: Ya, a coupla chocolate labs, so I named them Michelle and Barack and you know, everybody's saying what great dogs they are an we're really happy to have em an....
KC: You named two dogs the same as the Obamas?
SP:.......Are they named Michelle and Barack? Well, I'll be...that's just funny donja think? No point in lookin' at the past..with Russia just over there, we know about foreign policy here an' we're thinkin' we'd like a sports team up here......

Posted by: bgreen2224 | October 3, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

mavisdarling:
"Respected, educated Republicans in Alaska know more about her than we do."

And she has an 80% approval rating. So if those who know more about her than we do like her even more than we do, then I guess you are saying voters in the lower 48 will eventually like her even more than they do today?

Wow, that's a pretty encouraging statement of support for Palin coming from an Obama-wonk.....

Posted by: dbw1 | October 3, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

"more than eight in ten people who watched the debate said she did better than they had expected "

well, that's hardly a surprise I think everyone expected a Couric interview reponse. The bar was so low of course she did better than "expected!"

Posted by: KeMill | October 3, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Let's not beat around the bush here -- Sarah Palin is a DOPE. Of course she held her own, she didn't answer any difficult questions. Most rational folks would say she was way out in left field. I, for one, truly wanted to hear her response on some of Gwen's questions.

Instead, I felt like I was watching a cheezy political sequel to "Fargo" (Ya...We're straight shoooters here, you betcha!)

Any success she had in this debate was purely attributable to such low expectations of her to even be able to hold her own.

alk about a walking national security issue...

-Justin McCarthy

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

I agree. Palin could have a future in 2012 (prob. 2016). I disagree with many of her views, but she is likeable. I have to believe that she doesn't really believe in her current ticket.

But on Nov 4, 2008, you all know the choice is Obama-Biden. It's pretty clear which way America will vote.

Just don't forget to vote!!

Obama-Biden 2008
Obama-Biden 2008
Obama-Biden 2008
Obama-Biden 2008
Obama-Biden 2008

Posted by: ChrisStewart | October 3, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Palin supporters are scary-Palin supporters should be ashamed of themselves- Continuing to spread lies about
Barack Obama, comparing him to Osama, calling him a Muslim is despicable.Get you facts straight. One the other hand, we have Sarah Palin, who continues to embarass herself in
one-on-one interviews- She can't answer a decent question to save her life ! Now, who do we blame ?The media ? No, McCain, for only choosing Palin to only pacify the conservative christian right vote,a political figure who is clearly not ready to serve, and at the same time, tells the American peopleshe wants to see the V.P. position expanded- give her more power ? Now that's scary. Sounds alot likeCheney. Palin thinks she cute with her "Gotcha's" and "Drill, baby drill", "Joe six-pack" euphanisms.Palin is no Joe six-pack. Her estimated worth is 1.2 million. She is not your average Joe.What's scary here, is the number of people who think they relate to her.- By the way, I live in Alaska, and thousands of Alaskans are NOT voting for Palin/McCain- oops- I guess we mean McCain/Palin...

Posted by: messa1 | October 3, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

The problem with Sarah Palin is she doesn't answer any questions, instead she replies, John McCain ia a maverick, I'm a maverick, were both mavericks, we're going to go to Washington to change Washington because we're mavericks. No substance just talk. If she wants to run for president, she better start learning about the world and give some answers because Romney will chew her up and spit her out. He won't be as polite as Biden.

Posted by: info4 | October 3, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

hamishdad:
"Sarah Palin is more dangerous to America than Osama bin Laden."

It's idiotic statements like this, 'hamishdad', that tell people why so many liberals are out of touch with every day Americans. If you believe Sarah Palin is a bigger threat to American than bin Laden, then by all means....pack your crap and move to Afghanistan. I'm sure you will feel much safer there.

Or, maybe you should just be thankful that there are people who have sacrificied so you can have the freedom to be utterly stupid.

Posted by: dbw1 | October 3, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Palin's little moment in the sun may be short-lived. The abuse of power investigation against her is going full-steam ahead in Alaska. Respected, educated Republicans in Alaska know more about her than we do, and THEY are calling for the investigation to continue.

The woman is definitely a good actress, I will grant her that. But substance, integrity and honesty? I don't think she has much. Why isn't she cooperating with the investigation? Why did her husband just blow off a legal subpoena?

I think she's pretty fishy. She apparently thinks she can do whatever she wants and damn the consequences. She is drunk on her own power; wants to expand her power if she wins the vice presidency. Why is nobody mentioning THAT aspect of the debate?

I find her extremely annoying. And she needs to learn how to pronounce "INFRASTRUCTURE".... she lost a "R" there when she pronounced it "INFA-STRUCTURE". She is none too bright, that's for sure.

Posted by: mavisdarling | October 3, 2008 3:55 PM | Report abuse

If she gets curious about the world rather than the fishbowl she lives in, studies hard and champion's some important measures than she's got a good shot since it will be difficult for any politician to lead us out of this mess by 2012

Posted by: JRM2 | October 3, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is George Bush in a skirt, full of colloquialism and empty of contemplative wisdom. People like this appeal to the common man because language that is generated from knowledge, experience and contemplation can seem remote and somewhat intimidating. But for God's sake if the people are willing to accept, hook line and sinker, talk that is empty of substance yet again, well, they deserve what they get.
Both Sarah and George would be amazing general managers of a Red Lobster or Olive Garden. John McCain would make a splendid curater of an Atlantic City wax Museum.

Posted by: NOSEBLOB | October 3, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin was the WINNER last night. Biden just lied and he looked as if he had a face-lift to look younger! We need someone who hasn't been in politics for decades, like Palin. She is AWESOME!! News media is trying to spin this to make it look like Biden won when he SOOOOO did NOT!

BTW-I am a former Democrat turned Republican.

PALIN 2012!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: sugliasjunkmail | October 3, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

what's the pin above the American flag pin? She wears that pin everywhere.

Posted by: funhog | October 3, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Of course she'll be President.
Of a USA no longer worthy of the Constitution. But so goes the world. Nothing lasts forever.
You betcha.

Posted by: wpost4112 | October 3, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

If you have any doubts that Palin won the debate hands-down last night, just hit the 'back' button on your browser and take another look at the headline the Post has had on their main politics page all day:
"Palin Delivers; Doubts Linger."

After running out 2-3 bash pieces EVERY SINGLE DAY for the past month, if that's as critical as a liberal rag like the Post can be today you can be sure there is no question in their minds that Sarah Palin won the debate last night....going way.

You don't have to like it, Obama worshippers. Just accept it.

Posted by: dbw1 | October 3, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse


kathrowe40 said it all.

First the incompetent George W. Bush, who had no natural curiosity about the world around him, and now Palin--who amazingly has LESS?

Is the Republican Party just going to bank on idiots for the duration? This is worst than when CBS's idea of "comedy" was Petticoat Junction, Beverly Hillbillies, Green Acres, Gomer Pyle, etc.

Oh wait. I get it now.

Sad, but I get it.

It's still wrong though. Aren't there any smart Republicans who aren't wing nuts?

No, really, I'm serious. Do you thing I LIKE being a Democrat?

I take this cause up grudgingly because the other side has lost its way.

Posted by: tony_in_Durham_NC | October 3, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Chris: Joe Biden expressed his unwillingness to go along with gay marriage last night, also. Does this endear him with the wing nut base, too?

Posted by: bondjedi | October 3, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

"Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!! "

That is an excellent idea. I think they should have one of those town-hall forums that McCain likes so much.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 3, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

drgrepper writes
"In 2002 and 2004, I can't tell you how many mainstream pundits I heard announcing the death of the Democratic party. Too fractured, they said. Not patriotic enough, they said. Not religious enough, they said. And now the Democrats are powerfully ascendant.

I'm just saying. History has a way of proving everyone wrong."


Also note that in 2002 & 2004 the Republicans were talking about a 'permanent Republican majority'. While talk of their coming decade(s) in dark ages are a touch on the hyperbolic side, a significant loss this year will clearly shake up the GOP. At the moment, all signs point to a significant loss this year, across the board - losing the Presidency, losing more seats in the Senate & more seats in the House. They basically don't have a party leader - certainly not outgoing President Bush, and at the moment not their candidate McCain either. If McCain-Palin loses, who's in charge? My guess is The Newt tries to fire up the Contract for America again. Whether he can pull it off a second time remains to be seen.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 3, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Obama picked a vice president more likely to help him govern the country

_______________________________________

Lord knows he needs alot of help. Thanks Erin!

Posted by: blevins20061 | October 3, 2008 3:48 PM | Report abuse


Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!

Sarah, challenge Biden to ANOTHER debate!!!!


Posted by: JPVanderbilt | October 3, 2008 3:48 PM | Report abuse

We never met before, but can I call you Joe? Because if I can't, I won't be able to use my zinger, "Say it ain't so, Joe."

Sarah Palin is more dangerous to America than Osama bin Laden. Why, because bin Laden is inside a cave on the other side of the world, but Sarah Palin is almost a heartbeat away from being Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces, including our nuclear arsenal.

Palin for President? Thanks, but no thanks. (wink)

Posted by: hamishdad | October 3, 2008 3:48 PM | Report abuse

"can't vote for a Bush or Reagan Republican, and I will not vote for Obama, or any other black,Posted by: mike92"
........................................
TO MIKE92: Racists LIKE YOURSELF shouldn't be allowed to vote. You are willing to put your own ridiculous, out-dated and detestable personal prejudices before the good of the country. Shame on you, and grow up.

Posted by: erin5 | October 3, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Lip gloss.

Posted by: ArtM72 | October 3, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Quote: "...judging from the polls, Palin's image to the average American is as a likable Republican who probably needs a bit more seasoning." I'm an average American and I don't see her that way at all! She's been a big fish in a little pond (Alaska only has 700,000 residents) and is clearly not interested enough in national or international events to learn about them. I'm a woman. She's a woman. She has five kids. I raised five kids. That's where the similarity ends. She may be cutesy and folksy (which I find extremely off putting), but couldn't possibly garner the respect of heads of state around the world. Sorry, but, she just doesn't have the "right stuff." McCain seems to like her cutesy rear end, 'though.

Posted by: kathrowe40 | October 3, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

If Palin is the best they can present to us now..... then again in 2012.... the republicans will not succeed. I'm shocked at how low US standards have dropped regarding expectations in a potential Pres and VP.

Independent for Obama/Biden

Posted by: jess71 | October 3, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

How many times did we hear the word "maverick" last night?

John McCain is no "maverick", he just doesn't play well with others. He doesn't defer to expertise or delegate complex decisions: Witness the past turmoil in his campaign-- he fired advisers, insisted on doing things his own way, chose Palin for VP, etc.

We don't need an unstable character who can't build a consortium, accept input from people that have more experience or keep an open mind on a difficult situation. Voting for McCain would be a mistake in terms of national security (it will be a long, dark and lonely path for the US) and the economy.

Posted by: JustinMcC | October 3, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Other than "Joe Six-Pack", the majority of viewers saw a person out of their depth, struggling just to keep from drowning.

If you aren't insulted by the idea that Sarah Palin's performance last night makes her "qualified" for the back-up position to the most powerful position in our nation, then there's something seriously wrong with your judgment, Chris.

And if you're as insulted as I am (and ALL of my friends are, too) by the pure absurdity of this propoganda, then you should come out and say so.

Take a risk and tell the truth, Chris. (It's your duty as a member of the fourth estate.)

If ever our nation needed to hear the truth, it's NOW.

Posted by: miraclestudies | October 3, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

I wish Hillary had been on the debate team as V.P. What a killing it would have been.

Posted by: burrise | October 3, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Man, Chris,

Sometimes I just couldn't disagree with you more. You're usually so right on, but I think you've really missed the nail's head on Sarah Palin. I don't know if it's because of where you grew up or something, but Palin is NOT a normal American and it's insulting to even suggest this. People don't honestly think that the "aw shucks" attitude is one that should be in the White House. I would have thought an insider would understand that first and foremost.

Posted by: thecrisis | October 3, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

When McCain announced Palin as his VP pick, I immediately thought of 2012. This campaign gives her national exposure and gives her a crash course in presidential politics, helping to prepare her for the next election.

Who else does the GOP have in 2012? It will have to be someone new to national politics, since none of the primary candidates from this year will be credible in 4 years. (Giuliani, Romney, Huckabee, and Thompson are all out of office, and will be very old news in 4 years.) Palin is immediately on the short list for the next election. Of course, a lot can change in 4 years.

Posted by: Blarg | October 3, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

I think the only thing Palin really proved is that she can memorize scripts and make broad generalities. She certainly didn't demonstrate an in-depth understanding of the issues like Biden did. And when she didn't have a prepared response to the question asked, she reverted to talking about "reform," "removing corruption and greed," and "the maverick." There were NO policy suggestions for the economy, and her foreign policy stances (which are not hers, they are McCain's) were quite dangerous. Because the elecorate of this nation has proved it's intelligence in electing Bush twice, it came as no surprise that she won people over with her charm. But liking and relating with her is not enough reason to vote for McCain/Palin. Her Vice Presidency would equate to Cheney's....but worse.

Posted by: erin5 | October 3, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Sarah can run the PTA. But keep her away from the military and nukes.

Posted by: purple61 | October 3, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

The republicans whose views Sarah Palin reflects are losing influence faster than polar regions are losing ice.

Posted by: mac8 | October 3, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

sbklein, you are slightly incorrect. In 1920 the losing candidate for the Vice Presidency was a Democrat named Roosevelt, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Twelve years later he won the first of four terms as President. So a losing candidate for VP can not only win the nomination, but also the election in a later year. Palin may get her shot at the big one in four or eight years. Even if McCain wins, would he be a candidate in 2012, or just a one term guy. And I might vote for her. I've always been a Democrat, but my party is always living us Blue Dogs behind, in favor of sucking up to the abortion lobby, the homosexual lobby, the black panther lobby, and I have about had enough of this nonsense. I can't vote for a Bush or Reagan Republican, and I will not vote for Obama, or any other black, but I can sure vote for Ron Paul. And I am honest about it too.

Posted by: mike92 | October 3, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

We see who the real stars of this election are. Participate in a national poll give your oppinion about the VP debate.
http://www.mccanes.com/watchdebatevp.html

Posted by: pastor123 | October 3, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, I don't grade on a curve. She did fine, especially with a lower expectation on her "performance", but was she presidential? Hardly. She still had little command of hard facts at her disposal. Instead she rattled off talking points and I wanted to scream when she constantly avoided actually answering on details or disputed facts. She has the "humble, intelligent hockey mom" schtick down, but does THAT make her presidential?

Posted by: tdub55 | October 3, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

"And she follows it right out of the gate with a wide ranging interview with Fox's chief political correspondent - takes on the court cases, newspapers, and Couric, admits misteps and blasts forward."

I look forward to Gov Palin giving voters a better idea of who she is through more media interviews & press conferences. Her debate performance indicates that the campaign has missed weeks of opportunities to get her out more, to spread the campaign's message.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 3, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Democrats for John McCain and Sarah Palin in 2008

Posted by: hclark1 | October 3, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

She was just mad she had to answer a question. She actually said it. She was not allowed to just do her talking points and she didn't like it. If that all she wanted to do she can buy the time then. Other wise do the interview like you agreed. Don't look to see her talk to another interviewer again between and the election. She is little more then a "TALKING POINT STOOGE".


-----------
And she follows it right out of the gate with a wide ranging interview with Fox's chief political correspondent - takes on the court cases, newspapers, and Couric, admits misteps and blasts forward.

She comes off so well, it's almost certain the MSM will not cover it.

Posted by: vimrich | October 3, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: popasmoke | October 3, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

In its modern usage, hubris denotes overconfident pride and arrogance; it is often associated with a lack of knowledge combined with a lack of humility. An accusation of hubris often implies that suffering or punishment will follow, similar to the occasional pairing of hubris and nemesis in the Greek world. The proverb "pride goes before a fall" is thought to sum up the modern definition of hubris. In reference to someone being in hubrity: hubrity is a fulfillment of being hubristic or a continual behavior of being prideful. Victor in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein exudes hubris in order to become a great scientist, but is eventually regretting this previous desire. Faustus in Christopher Marlowe's play Dr. Faustus exudes hubris, all the way until his final minutes of life.

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

I know 5th graders who could be more articulate. I wouldn't let her drive my kids to practice. She'd be bobbing and weaving all the way. They'd likely never even make it there.

She shouldn't be in charge of any single individual's life and certainly not in charge of all of ours.

I feel very sorry for her children.

She's actually frightening. And the thought of having her as the US VP, that'd be our own vice-president, is worse than a bad dream brought about by reading a modern-day sci-fi novel.

So glad to hear you've all given her a free pass on our backs. NOT!

What are you thinking?

Or do you actual "think"?

Posted by: jmod35 | October 3, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

This may sound extremely sexist, but I've never said this about another female politician: Her sex appeal will drop significantly in the next four years. I spent last night's debate texting back and forth with my conservative friend. My messages were typically along the lines of "How can a $5K tax break per family be budget neutral?" His were...well...not appropriate for this blog.

Posted by: squatty418 | October 3, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

Obama picked a vice president more likely to help him govern the country than win the chance to do so. McCain did the exact opposite–he chose Palin to help him win the election (due to her obvious charm and ability to perform), not because she was the most capable of creating the change that we really need. I think this should say it all–about each candidate’s ambition, judgment, motivations, and goals. It’s about those who just want the power–i.e. Palin’s claim that she would try to expand vice presidential powers–and those who want the power so that they can better the US. Who do you want in charge of our future? The team that uses the exact rhetoric we’ve been hearing since Bush (and as far back as Reagan), or the team that talks about change and how they specifically intend on achieving it?

Posted by: erin5 | October 3, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

To quote the great John McEnroe, "YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS!" She's washed up. She's Quayle on toast. Give the baby her bottle: http://soonerthought.blogspot.com/2008/10/palin-annoyed-by-couricwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.html

Posted by: soonerthought | October 3, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

And she follows it right out of the gate with a wide ranging interview with Fox's chief political correspondent - takes on the court cases, newspapers, and Couric, admits misteps and blasts forward.

She comes off so well, it's almost certain the MSM will not cover it.

Posted by: vimrich | October 3, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

"You're making a big assumption, Chris: that there will be a viable Republican Party 4 years from now. It has increasingly become the party of the far right."

Four years ago, people were saying the same thing about the Democratic Party.

In fact, if Bush was half competent, this prophecy may as well have come to fruition.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 3, 2008 3:14 PM

DDAWD, you have a point. However, this mess wasn't engineered solely by Bush-- it's been building since the days of Lee Atwater, who worked in the Reagan White House. He was preceded by Donald Segretti in the Nixon White House, and then in turn mentored Karl Rove. I've no doubt there are people on the Democrat side who are also disciples of "dirty tricks politics," but it seems to have become a fine art under Atwater and Rove. I sure don't see this level of nastiness on the Dem. side. It's interesting that Atwater publicly renounced this brand of sleaziness before he died.

If Bush had been "half competent," as you put it, I doubt he would have become president. Those who were running the party at the time wanted someone they could control.

I think the American public may, just MAY, have caught on to the fact that this is a destructive way to govern. I see the Republicans who control the party as being greedy and power-mad, and counted on the public being too complacent to care.

Posted by: dcgrasso1 | October 3, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

Palin now showing her perception of power as she now wants to begin dictating to the Mccain campaign. She doesn't get it at all. To her this is all just a pageant. She has no concept what is really going on in this country beyond memorized talking points. Everyday she becomes more and more scary. She thinks this is a reality show I guess.

Quote:

"Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said Friday that she disagrees with the John McCain campaign’s decision to pull staff and resources out of Michigan.

“I want to get back to Michigan, and I want to try,” Palin said in an interview on Fox News. “Todd and I, we'd be happy to get to Michigan. We'd be so happy to speak to the people there in Michigan who are hurting.”

Posted by: popasmoke | October 3, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

Chris,
Not less than, but fewer than...
Besides your comment being a stupid comment, it wasn't even grammatically correct, but at least you didn't plagiarize it like slick old "facts" Biden.

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

The saddest part of this whole situation is that she will likely end up the scapegoat of the red team. You can almost hear it now, "If it weren't for that woman..." The reality is that she should have said, "thanks but no thanks" to the VP slot on a losing ticket.

Posted by: djeterpt1 | October 3, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, Dan Quayle ran for president too. She'd be better off getting a show on Fox News Channel. Don't they have another former beauty queen on in the mornings?

Posted by: pgolkin | October 3, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

She is a bright intelligent woman and if she spends four years learning national issues she might have a chance in 2012. She has come a long way from being a small town mayor. This was too much of a leap.

Posted by: bradcpa | October 3, 2008 3:27 PM | Report abuse

So what that Biden has a million facts and figures at his disposal - those facts and figures have gotten the American taxpayer into a financial mess -
All the Dems want is PROCESS - Reid and Pelosi and PROCESS all the time.

A democracy will die on PROCESS - Obama's ideal, along with his Marxism.

A democracy must have principle - the exact point of Abraham Lincoln.
Sarah Palin has principle!
She is NOT an insider.

Funny how zerObama screeches change and hope and then turns back to inside Washington with Biden -
that's not hope - THAT"S DOPE - that's nothing more than process.
So Biden's going to be beside Obama for every policy in the White House? VP Biden sounds just like VP Cheney.
McCain doesn't need his VP to sit beside him for every policy.Obama is a zerO.

McCain/PAlin are principle.
I'll take Sarah Palin any day over Biden -
after all Bidens had 35+ years and this is where we are...
The American voter has to ask: am I better off after 30+ years of Senator Biden's facts and figures.
What has he ever done - When did he warn Americans about the Fannie Mae crisis - after all, he has all the facts!!!

Palin has had two years as governor of Alaska and look where Alaskans are -
much richer with a government they can trust!

McCain/Palin.

Posted by: mainlobster | October 3, 2008 3:27 PM | Report abuse

Chis,

You actually think Gov. Palin can run the United States of America, leader of the free world?

She has granted less than ten interviews and zero press conferences with questions.

Are you crazy?

You are a journalist, DO YOUR DUTY!

Posted by: rfpiktor | October 3, 2008 3:27 PM | Report abuse

If you or I go on a job interview and say something along the lines of I'm going to disregard your question and talk about what I want to talk about, we would not get the job. And neither will Sarah.

Posted by: cao091402 | October 3, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Once upon a time, I was mayor of a town three times the size of Wasilla, in the San Francisco Bay Area. So what? The hired hands run the city and the Mayor, albeit in a leadership role, is one vote on a City Council. I also spent 16 months on a radar site in Alaska, on the Bering Sea. Guess I should have contacted John McCain, had I only known that he was looking for folks with no qualifications.

Enough of Ms. Palin. Last I looked, it is not about her. It is about a philosophy and process within which the United States will be led through the next four years. Being "mom" and a two-year governor of Alaska, does not give me the sense of qualification that I'm looking for in what should be one of the world's most powerful leaders. (Dick Cheney has shown us just how much damage that person can do. Being a "war hero" is not a qualification in itself, either. Had that been the case, Audie Murphy, the most decorated American ever, would have been President for Life instead of a pretty bad Grade B cowboy movie actor.

Adams, Jefferson, Madison and Monroe did pretty well leading the country without "hero" status. They just happened to be smart and articulate. Works for me.

Posted by: evmvlv3 | October 3, 2008 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Consideration of Ms. Palin for higher office in the future is Hannity insanity and reason to perform a mental health intervention post haste. First, she must remain free from impeachment in any one of several Alaskan issues that may be construed as abuse of power, mis-appropriation of public funds, Mis-conduct in office. Should she escape those issues she must then escape the reputation of being just another religious crusader out to rule the world.Smart people will withhold judgment until some of these issues play themselves out as real or imagined.

Posted by: anOPINIONATEDsob | October 3, 2008 3:23 PM | Report abuse

The saddest part of this whole thing is that she will become the scapegoat of the red team. "If it weren't for that woman..." The reality is that she should have read the writing on the wall, and said, "thanks but no thanks" to the VP slot.

Posted by: djeterpt1 | October 3, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Pet Rock 2012 vs. Sarah Palin 2012
Results: Pet Rock wins by 6

Posted by: pgiaquinto | October 3, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

It is not a job she would want. She has shown herself to be not very worldly and not really interested in much outside her little orbit in Alaska. When this is over she will be very happy I am sure to go home. I actually put Mccain is the same boat. He never impressed me as someone who has had a lifetime ambition to be president. He reminds me of a dog who caught a car that stopped and now doesn't know what to do with it. He goes through the motions but somewhere inside if he loses he will be happy.


-------------
For all the Palin skeptics, remember, we are talking about 2012 or, god forbid, 2016. She has the oratorical skills and the faux folksiness. She lacks the knowledge, though.

However, she was sort of thrust unexpectedly into this situation. No one can possibly learn all this stuff in a few weeks. However, if she applies herself to spending a lot of thought on weighty matters, doesn't anyone feel that she can get up to speed in four or eight years? I think so. And don't forget that the Republican Party is a lot more forgiving with its losers than the Democrats are with theirs.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 3, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: popasmoke | October 3, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

"My guess is that over the next 10 years, the GOP will fracture beyond repair."

I dislike the GOP as much as the next human being with a conscience and half a brain, but when you make declarations like this, you're essentially asking for your own words to be made into hamburger and stored in the freezer so you can eat them with ketchup and onions come 2016.

In 2002 and 2004, I can't tell you how many mainstream pundits I heard announcing the death of the Democratic party. Too fractured, they said. Not patriotic enough, they said. Not religious enough, they said. And now the Democrats are powerfully ascendant.

I'm just saying. History has a way of proving everyone wrong.


Posted by: drgrepper | October 3, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Just a couple more comments, since Chris, our dear leader, wants to flog the idea of Palin2012. At some point reporters are gonna go back to her story, her personal story once they get over the Bristol effect.

That affair with the First Dude's fishing buddy is not gonna look good to her Evangelical base.

While her kids shouldnt be fodder for attacks, at some point a brave reporter will do one of the, "just what kind of a hockey mom is she" pieces.

One kid in the Army after he got busted for cutting the brake lines on schools buses and getting the jail/army choice of old.

Another an unwed mother (no Levi is not going to marry her...and may not be that father) who was a party/available girl extraordinaire in both Juneau and Wasilla.

And then there is the issue of her being pregnant when she got married. Lets hope, and I mean this sincerely, Willow doesnt get into any trouble between here and there.

BTW, is Willow really going to public school? Sure seems like she has missed a bunch of class.

Posted by: WOW9 | October 3, 2008 3:17 PM | Report abuse

Cillizza no longer has any credibility to evaluate Palin. He's become nothing but a cheerleader.

Here's a perfect example of his manipulation. He says "Palin is clearly likable, charismatic and telegenic." His evidence? A poll that said most people thought she did better than expected. Well, (a) the expectations were so low it would have been hard not to exceed them, and (b) outperforming expectations has no obvious connection to likablility, charisma, or being telegenic.

Because that piece evidence does not remotely support his panting after Palin, Cillizza then offers another. Polls show the public like Palin better than Biden. Again, all it shows is compared to Biden, more people liked her than him. It says nothing about likability in the abstract, let alone being telegenic.

It's nice that Palin gives Cillizza a boner. But because she does, he should stop writing about her, because he can't be objective.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 3, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

"You're making a big assumption, Chris: that there will be a viable Republican Party 4 years from now. It has increasingly become the party of the far right."

Four years ago, people were saying the same thing about the Democratic Party.

In fact, if Bush was half competent, this prophecy may as well have come to fruition.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 3, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

For all the Palin skeptics, remember, we are talking about 2012 or, god forbid, 2016. She has the oratorical skills and the faux folksiness. She lacks the knowledge, though.

However, she was sort of thrust unexpectedly into this situation. No one can possibly learn all this stuff in a few weeks. However, if she applies herself to spending a lot of thought on weighty matters, doesn't anyone feel that she can get up to speed in four or eight years? I think so. And don't forget that the Republican Party is a lot more forgiving with its losers than the Democrats are with theirs.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 3, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

You're making a big assumption, Chris: that there will be a viable Republican Party 4 years from now. It has increasingly become the party of the far right. I have been an election judge for several cycles now, and live in a well-to-do area. Each election, I've seen the percentage of people who are registered as Republican dwindle. Four years ago this precinct was something like 60-65% Republican; it's barely over 50% now. Each primary, I see people come in who, when I ask their party (only to be sure they're getting the correct ballot), tell me, "Well, I should be registered as a Democrat now."

My guess is that over the next 10 years, the GOP will fracture beyond repair. I can see a splinter group forming of extreme right-wing people (such as those who think Gov. Palin is the best politician alive) and splitting off, leaving a small cadre of moderates and less fanatical conservatives to rebuild their party. I think the party has been damaged very deeply.

Posted by: dcgrasso1 | October 3, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Sarah for President! Yes!!!

Posted by: DaMayor1 | October 3, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

I copied the transcript of the debate into an MS Word doc and did a word search (OK, maybe I'm a geek). Palin referred to herself and/or McCain as "Maverick" 6 times throughout the debate. Biden used the word 9 times when he finally called her out on it in one of his responses towards the end.

Does she not remember the movie Top Gun? She would have been in college when it was a popular blockbuster.

Maverick (played by another religious zealot, Tom Cruise) was the reckless, dangerous character who took unnecessary chances all the time and dragged Goose along for the ride. They ended up in a flat spin over the ocean, Goose puched the eject button, hit his head on the canopy and died. Of course, Maverick came out of it fine, almost choked when tested again in battle, but then came out a "hero." Maverick's heroism must have been small consolation to poor dead Goose's widow and son. I hope that America does allow itself to be Goose to their "Mavericks."

Posted by: VirginiaHoya | October 3, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

The wingers think Palin was a smashing success because when you pulled the string in her back, she looked down at her cue cards and recited her talking points perfectly. Awesome! Of course, it's easy to avoid any deer-in-headlights moments when you ignore the questions you can't possibly answer, but let's give it to her.


Palin is totally awesome, an asset to the ticket, and really, really competent to be vice president.


So let her free. Take her out of Cheney's undisclosed location and let her campaign. Let her do media interviews. Let her do town hall meetings. Take her out of tightly-scripted environments, shed the McCain chaperon (which is a bit creepy and quite a bit sexist), and "let Palin be Palin".


I'm sure she'll just do great. Because really, all that Palin awesomeness shouldn't be limited to the single vice-presidential debate. It should be unleashed on the country! If not, Republicans will be deprived of a potent weapon in this final weeks of the campaign.


And yes, this is concern trolling. The only question is whether the McCain campaign is stupid enough to take this "advice", given facetiously by me, but in all seriousness by the deluded crazies in the wingnutosphere.

Posted by: DrainYou | October 3, 2008 3:08 PM | Report abuse

This same basic argument has been made at various times for Bob Dole, Jack Kemp, Joe Lieberman, and John Edwards. Bottom line, the only losing VP candidate (who have never held the office - so Mondale doesn't count) who got his party's nomination for the top spot was Dole, who waited 20 years. Losing candidates are a reminder of an unpleasant experience. Most never overcome it. None have ever profited from it politically.

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

Remind me – how did that Quayle for President campaign do in 1996?

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

Sarah Palin in 2012? Have we really sunk that far? Is the right really so anemic that she is the best it can do?

Posted by: pghbil | October 3, 2008 3:00 PM | Report abuse

I was not impressed at all with Sarah Palins performance. I don't understand why reporters, pundits and journalist are making a big deal of Palins performance. The questions still remain about Palin being ready to be a heart beat a way from the presidency. There was nothing that Sarah Palin did during the debate that change the perception to the majority of Americans who believe she's not ready to be a heart beat away from the presidency. The problem Palin had going into the debate still remains leaving the debate, which is she's not well informed of the issues, not very substantive and doesn't have good answers if any to many questions that are asked. Sarah Palin herself said during the debate that she wasn't going to answer the questions the way the moderator would like her too. That is the point, the Sarah Palin problem. She hasn't spoke to the American people for so long now and when she started giving interviews she couldn't talk substantively, or was well versed on the issues, at some instances she didn't answer the questions and Sarah did the same thing during the debate. Don't answer the moderators questions just talk about what she knows little about. If thats the case and for everybody to agree that she did that or think its o.k. for her do it than why have a moderator or a debate. Common, this isn't about helping Palin get over her hurdles, this is about the future of our country and after the disaster of George W. Bush and all he's put the American people through these past 8 years, We deserve to chose the next president and vice president wisely. I think the media is being too soft of Palin and letting her get away with too much. Palin did not pass the threshold yesterday because she again couldn't answer the questions and speak with authority about the issues, She change the subject allot to talk the campaigns talking points and about issues that weren't asked or mentioned. Palin didn't look comfortable at all, She looked as if she was speaking from memory and what she rehearsed to say. I don't think Palin did a good job because she wasn't able to speak in detail with substance on a variety of issues and thats exactly what we need as vice president. Its clear she would be no help to Mccain and he himself isn't politically correct himself and need someone who can independentaly give their oppinion according to the understanding and knowledge of a variety of issues. During that debate, I thought Palin was closer to Obama/Biden ticket on energy and taxes than Mccain. I think Biden was brilliant to make a point of that during the debate. What Palin has done in Alaska was take on Big Oil and tax them and give the credit to the people of Alaska, which is exactly what Obama/Biden wants to do, and Mccain opposed that bill. As far as energy, solar, and coal are concerned Mccain opposed a big that he likes to say Obama voted for that gave the oil companies the big tax breaks but it also gave an extension for renewable energy like solar, bio fuels. Palins shows an interest in renewable energy the Obama/Biden does also but Mccain voted against the bill to extend the research for renewable energy. Therefore, Palin is closer in policy position to Obama/Biden than Mccain. Also, Palin did nothing to counter attacks against Mccain from Biden on foriegn policy or economic policy. Palin hardly knew what Mccains healthcare tax credits was. On allot of Mccains policy issues and differences from Bush again Palin couldn't distinguish between them or speak of them in great detail. Palin is clearly not ready to be VP and all of the pundits know it. We have to remember that were facing real economic turmoils and I don't think theirs anybody who really thinks Palin is up to the job ot handling them hands on if she can't even explain what the problem is. How can you solve a problem if you don't understand what the problem is.

Posted by: amosdefnails | October 3, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Oh, GOP, please please PLEASE!! Pretty please with sugar on top! PLEASE nominate Sarah Palin in 2012!!

Chris, you have to be kidding me. So she stood up there and delivered a memorized script -- regardless of the questions -- for 90 minutes. Big whoop. She also lacked the presence of mind or quickness to spontaneously respond to some absolutely lethal broadsides from Biden on John McCain -- the maverick comments and the evisceration of McCain'ss health-care plan come to mind -- and just let them sit there unrefuted.

She's awful, and four years of "seasoning" or whatever you want to call it will not make her appreciably less so.

Posted by: jac13 | October 3, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

You know, when my sons are studying for tests they look over their notes and then they say, "okay Mom, you can test me now." And I tell them the same thing each time. "Wait a while - I'll test you later." Because I know that they'll do best when the information they studied is still fresh in their mind. The true test of their knowledge comes with the passage of time.
Sarah Palin was good at memorizing everything she learned by the little creek in Arizona. Over the next few days the information she crammed will be lost and so, once again will she.
The real Palin is forever etched in our minds along with the look of carefully controlled disbelief on the face of Katie Couric.
Joe Biden knows his stuff-off-the-cuff. I am not voting for him because of his cheerleading skills. If he decides not to run again in 2012 and Obama picks let's say, HRC, it will be another huge loss for Miss Wazoo, I mean Wasilla.

Posted by: Peakmom | October 3, 2008 2:49 PM | Report abuse

The notion that Sarah Palin's debate performance establishes her as a serious contender for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination only underscores the fact that the conservative movement is intellectually spent.

Ronald Reagan was clearly likable, charismatic, and telegenic, but unlike Ms. Palin, Reagan actually had some core convictions - and had governed the largest and perhaps most complex state in the country for eight years. I'm not a great fan of Reagan, but - doggone it! - I have to say he looks like a heavyweight compared to Sarah Palin.

Posted by: pkrell1 | October 3, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

After welcoming George Bush as America's savior and destroying any claim by the Republican Party of being good on defense, good on the economy, or that it's the "moral" values party, The Republican brand is dead. The recent choice of a repressed nut-case as a Presidential candidate who would recklessly and cynically choose Palin as a VP closes the deal.

They will spend 40 years in the political wilderness for worshiping false idols.

Posted by: thebobbob | October 3, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Palin will be thrown in jail with Ted Stevens.

Her place in history will go alongside Geraldine Ferrado.

Posted by: bs2004 | October 3, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

I hope Sarah becomes the republican party Hillary. They deserve her!The aside to the general discussion about the debate is that Gwen Ifel did a terrible job. She had become an issue because of her book, and should have bowed out. No follow ups, not even for Palin's extreme views on the role of the vice president which align with Cheney. Palin stating from the outset she was not going to answer questions. I hope Gwen watches it again and learns something.

Posted by: tgarahan | October 3, 2008 2:40 PM | Report abuse

The Fix writes
"Last night Palin may not have materially aided McCain's chances of defeating Obama in the fall campaign but she did her own political future a world of good."

Before concluding what good Gov Palin may have done herself for future political races, one has to ask what will happen to politics between now and then. Given that the premise of this column is that the GOP nomination will be open in 2012, it seems The Fix is predicting a Dem win of the presidency this year. The critical followup question for the GOP is: who takes leadership of the party?

If McCain-Palin loses, it seems like it makes a clear case that the GOP is struggling to reach swing voters. Whomever grabs the reins of the party will have to determine what course of action is most likely to regain the interest of moderates and swing voters. Once that happens, we can determine whether Gov Palin will be a 'rockstar' within the party - or not.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 3, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

I watched the debate at the local Public radio station here in Juneau. While I think most of the folks in the room have a favorable impression of the Gov, the laughter and derision were evident throughout. Then on the local radio station this morning there were comments from local Alaskan's about Palin's performance. Its was roundly panned, with not one positive comment from the 7 or so interviewees.

But my wife thought she did well, called it a draw. I was very unhappy at her not answering the question given. Made me wonder if the preemptive attacks on Ifill (shes writing a book praising Obama, for shame) worked their intended magic. I mean if someone in debate says they aren't gonna answer the moderators questions, tell them to get the hell off the stage!

BTW, there are a bunch of other "facts" uttered by Palin that no one seems to have caught. I'll try to post a few later if I get some time.

Posted by: WOW9 | October 3, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

She may become more seasoned politically by 2012, but she'll remain a rightwing idealogue and that's something the country does not need. Heck, if we are lucky, she'll will follow the same course as Edwards did and thankfully take herself out of the conversation by 2012.

Posted by: we-the-people | October 3, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

I think you have to win a few primaries to be a presidential candidate. If she is the best they have in 2012 the republicans might as well turn out the lights, they no longer are a political party.

Posted by: popasmoke | October 3, 2008 2:33 PM | Report abuse

To think that Sarah Palin has a chance at the 2012 Republican Nomination is absurd. Wildly popular, yes. But she's been on the national stage for only 4 weeks. While she started out strong her negatives are way up and not just on the national level, but in her home state of Alaska.

With all the attention she's getting about not being up to the job of VP, the poor showings with the national media and her record as Mayor and Governor exposed, I'd be willing to bet that if the Alaska Democrats can field a decent candidate for 2010, Palin may have a hard time getting reelected as governor of her home state.

Posted by: rosenberg2 | October 3, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Palin is young enough for 2012, 2016 or 2020. She just has to stay governor in a very Republican state.

Republican chances in 2012: It is unlikely the situation in the US will get appreciably better in four years, so a President Obama may be vulnerable. On the other hand, any fears of secret black militancy or radical Islamic tendencies, will have been dispelled, bringing him several points in swing states and maybe a shot at WV. However, the Republican party is philosophically bankrupt and is unlikely to have a compelling message in only four years time.

Republican chances in 2016 assuming an eight year Obama Presidency: Biden's age should keep him from running in 2016. Senator Clinton may think about it, but she will also be a bit long in the tooth. The Democratic nomination will be open, after eight years in power the in-fighting should wound everyone helping Republican chances. They may also have a retooled message. On the down side for Republicans, the economy should have worked through all the bad loans and things could be going well. The real question is will Congress be divided or will it still be Democratic. If it is not divided, expect the electorate to go for divided govt.

Republican chances in 2020 assuming 12 years of Democratic rule: Run, baby, run.

Posted by: caribis | October 3, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Dear Lord, this has to stop. I must be so different than huge swaths of our nation. That performance made her likely to win the GOP nomination in 2012? Heaven help them.

Posted by: steveboyington | October 3, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

46% of people thought she is qualified to be president??

*sigh*

Posted by: DDAWD | October 3, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin likeable? I think only a homophobe, or someone really disconnected from civil rights issues, could come away with that opinion after watching last night's debate. Did you hear how many times she said she was "tolerant" of gay people? That's a code word, folks, meaning more or less, "I don't recommend concentration camps or neutering for these people, but then again. . ."

Imagine if Biden had said he was "tolerant" of Pentecostals, or if either candidate said they were "tolerant" of Muslims.

Palin faithfully repeated her party's talking points, and she made it clear to all right-wing Christians in the audience that she endorses their reactionary social agenda from A to Z.

To me, this does not add up to "likeable."

Posted by: SeattleVoter | October 3, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company