Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Sunday Reading: Steve Schmidt Examined

The Fix continues to ease his way back into everyday life -- doing chores around the house, hitting the gym and reading the Sunday papers.

One particular story -- written by New York Timesmen Jim Rutenberg and Adam Nagourney -- that profiles Steve Schmidt, the man in charge of John McCain's presidential campaign, is a must-read for political junkies looking to understand the next 58 days.

Schmidt has risen rapidly in Republican politics. Schmidt's first high profile campaign role was a decade ago when he served as communications director for Matt Fong's unsuccessful Senate bid in California. Four years later he was the head of the communications department of the National Republican Congressional Committee during the 2002 election season, which is where the paths of The Fix and Schmidt first crossed. He went on to serve as the head of rapid response in the 2004 Bush campaign and the campaign manager for California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's 2006 re-election bid.

During that string of successes, Schmidt has established himself as a major strategic force in the party with a style heavily reliant on a rigorous management and a clear campaign hierarchy.

It's those characteristics that Schmidt has brought to McCain's operation in the few months since he has taken charge of it.

Write Rutenberg and Nagourney:

In the three months since that night in June, the McCain organization has become a campaign transformed: an elbows-out, risk-taking, disciplined machine that was on display here last week at the Republican convention that nominated Mr. McCain. And the catalyst for the change has largely been Mr. Schmidt, 37, a veteran of the winning 2002 Congressional and 2004 presidential campaigns, where he worked closely with Karl Rove, then Mr. Bush's senior strategist.

Rove himself praised Schmidt in the piece; "Since the elevation of Schmidt and his new responsibilities, he's given the campaign a new focus and energy and drive that's been very impressive," Rove said.

(For you conspiracy theorists out there who believe Rove is secretly running the McCain campaign through Schmidt, here's a piece of contrary evidence: after Rove told washingtonpost.com that McCain's choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was a "campaign decision" and not a "governing" one, Schmidt publicly castigated the former White House adviser.)

Schmidt even wins praise from another notoriously hard hitting political operative -- Howard Wolfson, former communications director for Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential bid. "He brings a single-minded intensity and focus to the campaigns he's involved in," said Wolfson of Schmidt. "He's the guy who knows the value of waking up every day and knowing what you are going to say at end of the day about your candidate and your opponent."

Love him or hate him (and there are plenty of people who do both), Schmidt will play an outsized role in determining the identity of the next president of the United States. Do yourself a favor and read this piece.

By Chris Cillizza  |  September 7, 2008; 12:10 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Milbank, the Eastern Media Elite and a Fix Cameo
Next: Week in Preview: Shaping the Map

Comments

McCain and his people, particularly the new Karl Rove, Steve Schmidt, and their choice of Gov Palin, will now take to telling lies or telling more fanciful stories only to get themselves elected. That is not country first! That is country last! It is same as their leader George Bush who has lied to us for 8 years. The only truth is that McCain was once a hero - he's been honored for that now let's move on. Americans will not honor lies. McCain may count on the GOP raz-mataz and their lies to win. Not this time.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 13, 2008 10:00 AM | Report abuse

I am so glad to see that my students in the GOP right wing have been listening to me and following my advice. The way to defeat the left has always been through lies,bigger lies and more lies. We cannot afford the truth ever. Look what truth did to my friend Adolph. The right is right - that has to be said always no matter what. We have nothing to fear but the truth. Long live our lies.

Posted by: Joseph Heil Goebels | September 13, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: McCain08-Hillary2012 | September 9, 2008 6:04 PM | Report abuse

Why did the Republicans call in Schmidt? Simple. He stated himself he was called upon to get a job done. Because he has a proven record for sleazy journalism, for negative spin that induces and incites, for smoke and mirror tricks to seduce and delude the folks who don't take the time to read and then research so-called facts and their origins, thus making at best, ill-informed decisions.

When a team can't come up with real facts, feasable policies and reputable people to represent them they need to whip up some drama and wizardry. There is a phrase...truth by ommission....to tell only the truthful parts that won't hurt you instead of the WHOLE truth. Schmidt is a pro at that.Obviously Schmidt isn't concerned about integrity....he's concerned about the dollar he will make by fabricating a "winning team" in McCain and Palin.

It's time to wake up and know when you're being duped, America. Change can't happen with trickery. Sooner or later the jigs up and guess who's left holding the bag? Are you REALLY willing to take that chance with McCain?

Posted by: rdonal | September 9, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

.

Obama's people are desperate to cut apart Palin - it is unbelievable. Forget about Obama's campaign theme of the "new politics" and how different Obama is. Obama is a FRAUD TO HIS OWN CAMPAIGN THEME - JUST READ HIS BLOGGERS.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | September 9, 2008 7:45 AM | Report abuse

.

The paid staffers at Obama's headquarters have been so nasty to Sarah Palin and her family.

When it comes down to writing the history of this election -


It will be said that the paid Obama bloggers brought down the campaign with their nasty and obnoxious postings which the American people have REJECTED.


McCain and Sarah are now leading in the polls and they will pull further ahead week by week.


The paid Obama bloggers have destroyed Obama's campaign - this is completely fitting - the paid Obama staffers blogging have been harassing other posters for months and finally the American people have seen these people for who they really are - AND THEY SEE OBAMA FOR THE OBNOXIOUS PERSON HE IS FOR ALLOWING HIS PAID STAFF BLOGGERS TO ABUSE OTHER AMERICANS WHO ARE EXERCISING THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOM OF SPEECH - GOOD RIDDANCE MR. OBAMA.

.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | September 8, 2008 9:36 PM | Report abuse

This:
Democrats for John McCain 2008.

Is an oxymoron

If you are a Democrat for John McCain, change your party registration. These are not Democratic ideals in ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM - his pick of the right wing evangelical Palin has shown his judgement is to be President. Period.
He's basically handing our country over to James Dobson
Is that what Democrats for McCain WANT?
good luck
NO WAY NO HOW NO McCAIN

Posted by: Anonymous | September 8, 2008 8:25 PM | Report abuse

The fact that this election is even close, is proof of how far we’ve fallen as a nation.

The whole thing is absurd. We have morphed from a thinking country who once led the world, to a Britney Spears/ Lindsay Lohan, press driven and highly mixed up country. The fact is, we really do live in a skewed society and we should either embrace our shallowness as a nation or finally, do something about it.

The fact is your one vote won't count this year. It will just cancel out the one cast by the uneducated right winger who maybe watched PBS one time in their life. And that's probably because they found it funny to watch a group of antelopes’ mating.

This election being remotely close at this point is the proof that peoples memories appear to have suffered serious damage. Maybe it’s the millions who are taking anti depressants. Perhaps a side effect is the inability to remember the lies we have been fed by the GOP for the last 8 years. Either that or a good percentage of Republicans don’t read books or the newspaper.

Maybe they just read The Bible? Or their account statements from the brokerage firm

Posted by: TruthWalks OnWater | September 8, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Another bad day for the Baracky Hussein Obama campaign.

Rep. Charles B. Rangel paid no mortgage interest on a beach resort property for more than 10 years, a lawyer for the powerful House committee chairman said yesterday.

Democrats for John McCain 2008.

Posted by: Dennis | September 8, 2008 1:53 PM | Report abuse

Rove and Scmidt are attempting to brand our mainstream media, our favorite pundits and writers as “Piranhas!” which only means one thing The Republicans are trying to steal the fish pet Voters or the Nature Lover's Vote? Or is this a Rove, Schmit and Davis Freudian Slip – They chose Piranhas - deep down they see themselves as Piranhas?

Democrats are courting all Republicans and Independents Goldfish, Dolphin and Killer Whale fans!

Trained Goldfish Performs Amazing Tricks!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buQKZOaB6cY

Dolphin play bubble rings.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMCf7SNUb-Q

Killer Whale and Trainer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpZFfzDg5nQ

Change we can believe in.

Vote Obama/Biden '08

Posted by: Eagle Ch’áak’ Ora | September 8, 2008 9:24 AM | Report abuse

The bounce McCain got in the polls from RNC/Palin is quite impressive. There is one catch though. State by state numbers show that many of the states in McCain's column are absolutely solid in his favor. Less so for states in Obama's column. This makes national poll numbers look more favorable to McCain than electoral numbers.

Posted by: skeptic | September 8, 2008 8:08 AM | Report abuse

Bad day: NYT unable to crack the baby hoax (not one doctor or nurse interviewed).
KOlbermann unplugged from hosting further election coverage; Scarborough, Buchanan untouched.
O polls, not good.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 8, 2008 7:06 AM | Report abuse


JOHN MCCAIN LEADER OR MADMAN
YOU BE THE JUDGE.

WASHINGTON — Senator John McCain arrived late at his Senate office on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, just after the first plane hit the World Trade Center. “This is war,” he murmured to his aides. The sound of scrambling fighter planes rattled the windows, sending a tremor of panic through the room.


Erik Jacobs for The New York Times
John McCain said he had consulted Henry A. Kissinger on foreign policy before and after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Within hours, Mr. McCain, the Vietnam War hero and famed straight talker of the 2000 Republican primary, had taken on a new role: the leading advocate of taking the American retaliation against Al Qaeda far beyond Afghanistan. In a marathon of television and radio appearances, Mr. McCain recited a short list of other countries said to support terrorism, invariably including Iraq, Iran and Syria.

“There is a system out there or network, and that network is going to have to be attacked,” Mr. McCain said the next morning on ABC News. “It isn’t just Afghanistan,” he added, on MSNBC. “I don’t think if you got bin Laden tomorrow that the threat has disappeared,” he said on CBS, pointing toward other countries in the Middle East.

Within a month he made clear his priority. “Very obviously Iraq is the first country,” he declared on CNN. By Jan. 2, Mr. McCain was on the aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt in the Arabian Sea, yelling to a crowd of sailors and airmen: “Next up, Baghdad!”

Now, as Mr. McCain prepares to accept the Republican presidential nomination, his response to the attacks of Sept. 11 opens a window onto how he might approach the gravest responsibilities of a potential commander in chief. Like many, he immediately recalibrated his assessment of the unseen risks to America’s security. But he also began to suggest that he saw a new “opportunity” to deter other potential foes by punishing not only Al Qaeda but also Iraq.

“Just as Sept. 11 revolutionized our resolve to defeat our enemies, so has it brought into focus the opportunities we now have to secure and expand our freedom,” Mr. McCain told a NATO conference in Munich in early 2002, urging the Europeans to join what he portrayed as an all but certain assault on Saddam Hussein. “A better world is already emerging from the rubble.”

To his admirers, Mr. McCain’s tough response to Sept. 11 is at the heart of his appeal. They argue that he displayed the same decisiveness again last week in his swift calls to penalize Russia for its incursion into Georgia, in part by sending peacekeepers to police its border.

His critics charge that the emotion of Sept. 11 overwhelmed his former cool-eyed caution about deploying American troops without a clear national interest and a well-defined exit, turning him into a tool of the Bush administration in its push for a war to transform the region.

“He has the personality of a fighter pilot: when somebody stings you, you want to strike out,” said retired Gen. John H. Johns, a former friend and supporter of Mr. McCain who turned against him over the Iraq war. “Just like the American people, his reaction was: show me somebody to hit.”

Whether through ideology or instinct, though, Mr. McCain began making his case for invading Iraq to the public more than six months before the White House began to do the same. He drew on principles he learned growing up in a military family and on conclusions he formed as a prisoner in North Vietnam. He also returned to a conviction about “the common identity” of dangerous autocracies as far-flung as Serbia and North Korea that he had developed consulting with hawkish foreign policy thinkers to help sharpen the themes of his 2000 presidential campaign.

While pushing to take on Saddam Hussein, Mr. McCain also made arguments and statements that he may no longer wish to recall. He lauded the war planners he would later criticize, including Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney. (Mr. McCain even volunteered that he would have given the same job to Mr. Cheney.) He urged support for the later-discredited Iraqi exile Ahmad Chalabi’s opposition group, the Iraqi National Congress, and echoed some of its suspect accusations in the national media. And he advanced misleading assertions not only about Mr. Hussein’s supposed weapons programs but also about his possible ties to international terrorists, Al Qaeda and the Sept. 11 attacks.

Five years after the invasion of Iraq, Mr. McCain’s supporters note that he became an early critic of the administration’s execution of the occupation, and they credit him with pushing the troop “surge” that helped bring stability. Mr. McCain, though, stands by his support for the war and expresses no regrets about his advocacy.

In written answers to questions, he blamed “Iraq’s opacity under Saddam” for any misleading remarks he made about the peril it posed.

The Sept. 11 attacks “demonstrated the grave threat posed by a hostile regime, possessing weapons of mass destruction, and with reported ties to terrorists,” Mr. McCain wrote in an e-mail message on Friday. Given Mr. Hussein’s history of pursuing illegal weapons and his avowed hostility to the United States, “his regime posed a threat we had to take seriously.” The attacks were still a reminder, Mr. McCain added, of the importance of international action “to prevent outlaw states — like Iran today — from developing weapons of mass destruction.”

Formative Years

Mr. McCain has been debating questions about the use of military force far longer than most. He grew up in a family that had sent a son to every American war since 1776, and international relations were a staple of the McCain family dinner table. Mr. McCain grew up listening to his father, Adm. John S. McCain Jr., deliver lectures on “The Four Ocean Navy and the Soviet Threat,” closing with a slide of an image he considered the ultimate factor in the balance of power: a soldier marching through a rice paddy with a rifle at his shoulder.

“To quote Sherman, war is all hell and we need to fight it out and get it over with and that is when the killing stops,” recalled Joe McCain, Senator McCain’s younger brother.

Vietnam, for Senator McCain, reinforced those lessons. He has often said he blamed the Johnson administration’s pause in bombing for prolonging the war, and he credited President Richard M. Nixon’s renewed attacks with securing his release from a North Vietnamese prison. He has made the principle that the exercise of military power sets the bargaining table for international relations a consistent theme of his career ever since, and in his 2002 memoir he wrote that one of his lifelong convictions was “the imperative that American power never retreat in response to an inferior adversary’s provocation.”


But Mr. McCain also took away from Vietnam a second, restraining lesson: the necessity for broad domestic support for any military action. For years he opposed a string of interventions — in Lebanon, Haiti, Somalia, and, for a time, the Balkans — on the grounds that the public would balk at the loss of life without clear national interests. “The Vietnam thing,” he recently said.

In the late 1990s, however, while he was beginning to consider his 2000 presidential race, he started rebalancing his view of the needs to project American strength and to sustain public support. The 1995 massacre of 5,000 unarmed Bosnian Muslims at Srebrenica under NATO’s watch struck at his conscience, he has said, and in addition to America’s strategic national interests — in that case, the future and credibility of NATO — Mr. McCain began to speak more expansively about America’s moral obligations as the only remaining superpower.

His aides say he later described the American air strikes in Bosnia in 1996 and in Kosovo in 1999 as a parable of political leadership: Mr. McCain, Senator Bob Dole and others had rallied Congressional support for the strikes despite widespread public opposition, then watched approval soar after the intervention helped to bring peace.

“Americans elect their leaders to make these kinds of judgments,” Mr. McCain said in the e-mail message.

It was during the Balkan wars that Mr. McCain and his advisers read a 1997 article on the Wall Street Journal editorial page by William Kristol and David Brooks of The Weekly Standard — both now Op-Ed page columnists at The New York Times — promoting the idea of “national greatness” conservatism, defined by a more activist agenda at home and a more muscular role in the world.

“I wouldn’t call it a ‘eureka’ moment, but there was a sense that this is where we are headed and this is what we are trying to articulate and they have already done a lot of the work,” said John Weaver, a former McCain political adviser. “And, quite frankly, from a crass political point of view, we were in the making-friends business. The Weekly Standard represented a part of the primary electorate that we could get.”

Soon Mr. McCain and his aides were consulting regularly with the circle of hawkish foreign policy thinkers sometimes referred to as neoconservatives — including Mr. Kristol, Robert Kagan and Randy Scheunemann, a former aide to Mr. Dole who became a McCain campaign adviser — to develop the senator’s foreign policy ideas and instincts into the broad themes of a presidential campaign. (In his e-mail message, Mr. McCain noted that he had also consulted with friends like Henry A. Kissinger, known for a narrower view of American interests.)

One result was a series of speeches in which Mr. McCain called for “rogue state rollback.” He argued that disparate regional troublemakers, including Iraq, North Korea and Serbia, bore a common stamp: they were all autocracies. And as such, he contended, they were more likely to export terrorism, spread dangerous weapons, or start ethnic conflicts. In an early outline of what would become his initial response to the Sept. 11 attacks, Mr. McCain argued that “swift and sure” retribution against any one of the rogue states was an essential deterrent to any of the others. But Mr. McCain’s advisers and aides say his “rogue state” speeches stopped short of the most sweeping international agenda put forth by Mr. Kristol, Mr. Kagan and their allies. Mr. McCain explicitly disavowed direct military action merely to advance American values, foreswearing any “global crusade” of interventions in favor of relying on covert and financial support for internal opposition groups.

As an example, he could point to his 1998 sponsorship of the Iraqi Liberation Act, which sought to direct nearly $100 million to Iraqis who hoped to overthrow Saddam Hussein. The bill, signed by President Bill Clinton, also endorsed the ouster of Mr. Hussein.

Mr. McCain said then that he doubted the United States could muster the political will to use ground troops to remove the Iraqi dictator any time soon. “It was much easier when Saddam Hussein was occupying Kuwait and threatening Saudi Arabia,” the senator told Fox News in November 1998. “We’d have to convince the American people that it’s worth again the sacrifice of American lives, because that would also be part of the price.”

Hard Calls

Mr. McCain spent the afternoon of Sept. 11 in a young aide’s studio apartment near the Capitol. There was no cable television, nothing but water in the kitchen, and the hallway reminded him of an old boxing gym. Evacuated from his office but stranded by traffic, he could not resist imagining himself at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. “There are not enough Secret Service agents in the world to keep me away from Washington and New York at a time like this,” Mr. McCain told an adviser.


Over the next days and weeks, however, Mr. McCain became almost as visible as he would have been as president. Broadcasters rushed to him as a patriotic icon and reassuring voice, and for weeks he was ubiquitous on the morning news programs, Sunday talk shows, cable news networks, and even late-night comedy shows.

In the spotlight, he pushed rogue state rollback one step further, arguing that the United States should go on the offensive as a warning to any other country that might condone such an attack. “These networks are well-embedded in some of these countries,” Mr. McCain said on Sept. 12, listing Iraq, Iran and Syria as potential targets of United States pressure. “We’re going to have to prove to them that we are very serious, and the price that they will pay will not only be for punishment but also deterrence.”

Although he had campaigned for President Bush during the 2000 general election, he was still largely frozen out of the White House because of animosities left over from the Republican primary. But after Mr. Bush declared he would hold responsible any country condoning terrorism, Mr. McCain called his leadership “magnificent” and his national security team the strongest “that has ever been assembled.” A few weeks later, Larry King of CNN asked whether he would have named Mr. Rumsfeld and Colin L. Powell to a McCain cabinet. “Oh, yes, and Cheney,” Mr. McCain answered, saying he, too, would have offered Mr. Cheney the vice presidency.

Even during the heat of the war in Afghanistan, Mr. McCain kept an eye on Iraq. To Jay Leno in mid-September, Mr. McCain said he believed “some other countries” had assisted Osama bin Laden, going on to suggest Iraq, Syria and Iran as potential suspects. In October 2001, when an Op-Ed page column in The New York Times speculated that Iraq, Russia or some other country might bear responsibility for that month’s anthrax mailings, Mr. McCain interrupted a question about Afghanistan from David Letterman on that night’s “Late Show.” “The second phase is Iraq,” Mr. McCain said, adding, “Some of this anthrax may — and I emphasize may — have come from Iraq.” (The Federal Bureau of Investigation says it came from a federal government laboratory in Maryland.) By October, United States and foreign intelligence agencies had said publicly that they doubted any cooperation between Mr. Hussein and Al Qaeda, noting Al Qaeda’s opposition to such secular nationalists. American intelligence officials soon declared that Mr. Hussein had not supported international terrorism for nearly a decade.

But when the Czech government said that before the attacks, one of the 9/11 hijackers had met in Prague with an Iraqi intelligence official, Mr. McCain seized the report as something close to a smoking gun. “The evidence is very clear,” he said three days later, in an Oct. 29 television interview. (Intelligence agencies quickly cast doubt on the meeting.)

Frustrated by the dearth of American intelligence about Iraq, Mr. McCain’s aides say, he had long sought to learn as much as he could from Iraqi opposition figures in exile, including Mr. Chalabi of the Iraqi National Congress. Over the years, Mr. McCain often urged support for the group, saying it had “significant support, in my view, inside Iraq.”

After Sept. 11, Mr. Chalabi’s group said an Iraqi emissary had once met with Osama bin Laden, and brought forward two Iraqi defectors who described terrorist training camps and biological weapons efforts. At times, Mr. McCain seemed to echo their accusations, citing the “two defectors” in a television interview and attesting to “credible reports of involvement between Iraqi administration officials, Iraqi officials and the terrorists.”

Growing Impatient

But United States intelligence officials had doubts about Mr. Chalabi at the time and have since discredited his group. In 2006, Mr. McCain acknowledged to The New Republic that he had been “too enamored with the I.N.C.” In his e-mail message, though, he said he never relied on the group for information about Iraq’s weapons program.

At a European security conference in February 2002, when the Bush administration still publicly maintained that it had made no decision about moving against Iraq, Mr. McCain described an invasion as all but certain. “A terrorist resides in Baghdad,” he said, adding, “A day of reckoning is approaching.”

Regime change in Iraq in addition to Afghanistan, he argued, would compel other sponsors of terrorism to mend their ways, “accomplishing by example what we would otherwise have to pursue through force of arms.”

Finally, as American troops massed in the Persian Gulf in early 2003, Mr. McCain grew impatient, his aides say, concerned that the White House was failing to act as the hot desert summer neared. Waiting, he warned in a speech in Washington, risked squandering the public and international support aroused by Sept. 11. “Does anyone really believe that the world’s will to contain Saddam won’t eventually collapse as utterly as it did in the 1990s?” Mr. McCain asked.

In retrospect, some of Mr. McCain’s critics now accuse him of looking for a pretext to justify the war. “McCain was hell-bent for leather: ‘Saddam Hussein is a bad guy, we have got to teach him, let’s send a message to the other people in the Middle East,’ ” said Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts.

But Mr. McCain, in his e-mail message, said the reason he had supported the war was the evolving threat from Mr. Hussein.

“I believe voters elect their leaders based on their experience and judgment — their ability to make hard calls, for instance, on matters of war and peace,” he wrote. “It’s important to get them right.”

Posted by: Anonymous | September 8, 2008 2:19 AM | Report abuse

Big Johns' problem is his VP pick, the Schnauzer in lipstick, Palin.
Teaching the book of Genesis in a public school classrooms as an alternative to evolution is problematic from a legal point of view. The first question is why Genesis? Why not the Hindu creation myth or just tell them

" It was from the Nameless that Heaven and Earth sprang;
The named is but the mother that rears the ten thousand creatures, each after its kind. "
Tao Te Ching

This is, at least, a plausible description of the big bang, the event that science suggests triggered the creation of the universe.
Best of all, it fits on a laminated 3x8 card. Think of the money we'll save in alternate physics and biology textbooks.
The opposite problem is if we ARE teaching Genesis, wouldn't we have to teach the rest of it in English? It is, after all, the inspired word of God, doesn't that bump "Little Women" or something on the 8th grade English curriculum?(Sorry Louisa May Alcott)
Finally, are we going to start burning witches, or is getting them drunk and sleeping with them still going to be enough?

Posted by: Dijetlo | September 8, 2008 1:30 AM | Report abuse

THE EXPERIENCE MYTH OF OBAMA

I have worked with the Obama campaign on a local level since December and have met and spoken with Obama numerous times. Anyone who thinks Obama is not prepared for the office of president does not know Barack Obama. I don't think the campaign has spoken about it, although there have been articles written, maybe because it may have seemed kind of presumptive doing all this so many months before he even had the nomination, but that is not how Obama works.
Little is left to chance. So here is what the deal is:

Does Obama have the experience to be president, is he ready? It would be hard to say anyone is ready to be president, but what prepares one for the job?

Obama has been getting ready when his nomination was still no more then a dream. Obama has an advisory staff of over a 300. Most all are the top people in their fields. 4 of his staff are the top people on middle east politics in the world. He has numerous people on pretty much everything you could think of from global warming to world economics to energy and foreign policy to the military. Generals to scholars you name it, he has been working with these people for more then a year. Obama is a brilliant man, who easily knows more right now then any candidate who ever ran for the office of president. He is so up to speed it is astounding. John Mccain does not know or grasp a fraction of what Obama does. Mccain is in effect, a dinosaur, compared to Obama now. Mccain has no real practical experience or understanding in many of these areas at all. Just being in Washington for many years does not necessarily make you an expert nor knowledgeable in "Anything".
Bill Clinton said it best when he said,
"No one is really prepared to be president".
He was right and Obama understood that better then anyone long before he even began his journey for the presidency. So for over a year he has been quietly preparing. Like anything such as being a doctor or lawyer or any profession, your first introduction is academic, you go to school. Obama will by no means be learning on the job, he has been in school for more then a year. When enters office, Obama will be the most well prepared and ready president to ever walk into the white house.
He will also be surrounded by the finest staff ever assembled by any president in history.

If you do not want to vote for Barack Obama I can respect that, but by no means think he is not ready to be president. He will be the most ready man to ever win the office.

Thanks for listening
A Florida Obama worker
=========

The truth is Sarah Palin has more experience than Obama - everytime the Obama people make a comment otherwise they come off as liars or deceivers - I guess we have another Bill Clinton on our hands.

.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 9:57 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 8, 2008 12:51 AM | Report abuse

You have to read the right sights
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
Zogby by the way is pretty much worthless

==========
"MAVRICK" MCCAIN SEEMS TO HAVE GOTTEN A BOUNCE IN MOST RECENT POLLS. HOWEVER, I AM HOLDING MY APPLAUSE TILL ZOGBY RESULT!!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 11:22 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 8, 2008 12:47 AM | Report abuse

“Folks are playing closer attention, there’s more focus, the arguments are more precise, they cut more cleanly,” said Danny Diaz, communications director of the Republican National Committee, adding that Mr. Davis and other staff members deserved credit as part of what several aides called a more cohesive team.
Is a quotation from the suggested article. I don't know about most folks but I don't usually, PLAY ATTENTION. Incorrectly spelling a name and misquoting people are the two cardinal sins in journalism. So it's difficult to take this N.Y. Times article seriously.

Posted by: Nick D | September 8, 2008 12:17 AM | Report abuse


Picture it, Trinity Church 2006. Michelle Shiniqua Obama is speaking from the pulpit. Her prominent nostrils are flared, brow furrowed, and a scowl across her face. With all the inner-ghetto she can muster, Michelle Shaniqua is ranting against "whitey" and how they keep "raising the bar". All the while punching the air with a fist-bump. This my friends is what we will see in October when they release her "whitey-gate" tapes on YouTube.

Posted by: Dianne72 | September 8, 2008 12:00 AM | Report abuse

Jesus Christ was a community organizer and Pontius Pilate was a governor.

Posted by: Christian | September 7, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

Americans love celebrity and hype. Let's face it. The only person who doesn't have celebrity status on the 2 tickets right now is Joe Biden.

John McCain was the celebrity before Obama was.

Then Obama became the celebrity.

Now Palin is.

It's the flavor of the month.

The way celebrity works is that you get built up and then you get torn down. People love you and then they hate you and mock you.

Palin's already been torn down to some extent, but I don't think that process is complete by any stretch.

Some of the people who are in love with her now, may not be in a month.


Regardless of how the celebrity curve operates, I do think that McCain's campaign style is always that of an insurgent. I think it was inevitable that he would grab momentum at some point in the final 60 days--some poll numbers are now showing him with a lead nationally. It's probably better for Obama if McCain gets built up now in prep for the debates so that Obama is the underdog and everyone underrates him. As McCain emerges as the frontrunner, the media will finally give him the attention he so desires and it will become about John McCain for the first time in this race, and the picture won't be pretty.

Obama will have a better chance of winning as the underdog in the final 30 days than as the favored one. HE will be the insurgent and McCain will have become the incumbent.

People want a real look at McCain to see how they feel about him sitting in the White House, just like they wanted a look at Hillary in New Hampshire.

In the end, they won't like the look. But, if Obama leads all the way up to election day, people might be tempted to vote impulsively thinking of the undercovered McCain in idealistic terms instead, only knowing that there are things they don't like about Obama and not fully considering all the things they hate about McCain after seeing him in the spotlight for awhile.

Posted by: MNobserver | September 7, 2008 11:35 PM | Report abuse

Well is the MSM going to do its job and really question the McCain people on why they are hiding Sarah away? Or are they going to abandon their job and just report on fluff like mooseburgers? Come on! This is serious. This woman could be president! And we know nothing of her actual opinions on health care, stem cell research, Iran, Georgia, global warming, censorship,.... All we have is a speech! There are a lot of issues for Gibson and Ifill (VP debate moderator) to cover if those are the only two times we will hear words come out of her mouth that were not on a teleprompter! Don't let us down, MSM!! We have a right to hear what this woman believes and stands for if she wants us to put her a heartbeat away from the presidency! And there are only eight weeks left! Not a word from Palin in the first 10 days....except a prewritten speech read from a teleprompter.


Posted by: KLP | September 7, 2008 11:35 PM | Report abuse

Dear Lord, I hope so! We can't have another four years of these policies. The regressive party has been appointing incompetent people for 30 years, far too long. Over and over, our rights, and our jobs have been stolen by the regressive party. We want the America that believes in freedom and a government that doesn't destroy infrastructure, or discard major cities, (see Dennis Hastert). We want leaders who are competent. This may not be Obama, but I'm a hundred percent positive that it is not McGrampy pants or Mrs. Moosehead.

You seem to forget that the largest unpolled constituency, by virtue of them only having cell phones is what I call the ringtone majority. They are young people, lower income, minorities, overwhelmingly Democratic voters. They see in Obama a hope, a chance, the fact that their $5 is mentioned and appreciated that they donated. this constituency are galvanized and energized like never seen before. The Republicans have ignored them to their own peril. CHANGE was started many months ago, in Illinois, not a few days ago in Minnesota.

Posted by: Steve in Hawaii | September 7, 2008 11:22 PM | Report abuse

"MAVRICK" MCCAIN SEEMS TO HAVE GOTTEN A BOUNCE IN MOST RECENT POLLS. HOWEVER, I AM HOLDING MY APPLAUSE TILL ZOGBY RESULT!!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 11:22 PM | Report abuse

This was a GREAT story in the NY Times.

My main comment about McCain/Palin is:

If they are so much about "changing Washington", then why is their chief strategist a protege of Karl Rove -- someone who worked for George Bush's re-election in 2004??

I don't get it!! Are people really not paying attention?? How can McCain say with a straight face that he and Steve Schmidt are going to change Washington??

Posted by: JJ | September 7, 2008 11:16 PM | Report abuse

You seem to forget that the largest unpolled constituency, by virtue of them only having cell phones is what I call the ringtone majority. They are young people, lower income, minorities, overwhelmingly Democratic voters. They see in Obama a hope, a chance, the fact that their $5 is mentioned and appreciated that they donated. this constituency are galvanized and energized like never seen before. The Republicans have ignored them to their own peril. CHANGE was started many months ago, in Illinois, not a few days ago in Minnesota.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 10:33 PM | Report abuse

One should judge a man by the people he hangs out with:

Emil Jones, who allowed the electric company to raise everyone's electric bills,

William Ayers terorist who bombed the Capitol Building.


Tony Rezki indicted and convicted on federal corruption charges


Michele Obama belonged to a racist-against-whites church for years and raised her children in that church

Obama used his JUDGEMENT to select these people to be his friends and close associates - unbelieve LACK OF JUDGEMENT IS MORE LIKE IT.


.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 10:30 PM | Report abuse

scrivner,

That's very astute. Maybe Palin was picked to throw under the bus, because McCain himself (or the VP he really wants to pick) has some skeletons and moose meat is being tossed out for the media to pounce on.

I wouldn't be shocked if with 30 days to go Palin is forced out and someone that's waiting in the wings is brought in.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 10:30 PM | Report abuse

To Media Types:

Maybe Palin is not the real story.

Maybe who's pulling her strings is the real story.

Maybe by focusing on her "vetting" you are missing the real story.

When she ultimately is forced to withdraw as a candidate, the real story remains.

Visit:

http://www.theocracywatch.org
http://www.nowpublic.com/scrivener - "Expose State-Supported Domestic Terrorism"

THE PALIN PARADOX: A PAWN IN THEIR GEOPOLITICAL GAME?
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/palin-vp-paradox-pawn-geopolitical-game-get-political-w-vic-livingston

If you have trouble accessing either site, complain to your internet service provider.

Posted by: scrivener | September 7, 2008 10:25 PM | Report abuse

The reaction of the Obama people against Sarah Palin shows that Obama believes that she is strong and she makes Obama look really bad.

Obama is in trouble.

First Sarah Palin is now the coolest kid on campus, sorry Barack you can go back to the law review. We are bored with you.


Now Alaska is cooler than being black.


Last year Obama was happy that being black was cooler than being Hillary, however those days are long gone.

.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 10:16 PM | Report abuse


Obama is half-white and Biden the last time anyone checked is white. How can the Obama campaign be racist against whites?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 10:15 PM | Report abuse

We can add SEXIST to the RACIST AGAINST WHITES as the characteristics of the Obama campaign.

.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 10:13 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl, why sign self-identify as "Anonymous" to defend yourself? Anyway, hallucinations about paid staffers (unless perhaps it takes one to know one and the Republicans have decided to outsource because its cheaper) are not topical to this forum.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 10:12 PM | Report abuse

The only economic experience Obama has is buying cocaine

I have to wonder how irresponsible are the Obama supporters to want to place such an inexperienced person in a important position for which Obama is clearly not ready.


It is a disaster waiting to happen - the Obama supporters are risking the national security of this nation in order to make an affirmative action gesture which no one cares about.

.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 10:10 PM | Report abuse

The poster at 742 is probably a paid Obama staffer - this post is extremely disrepectful and it is inappropriate for this forum - it is even more inappropriate for the Obama campaign to pay people to say things such as this and not identify the posting as "Paid for by the Obama Campaign"


.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

The only economic experience Obama has is buying cocaine.

.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 9:54 PM

If you are right he at least was buying it, and didn't fire anyone related to it.

"In 1989, Cindy McCain became addicted to Percocet and Vicodin, opioid painkillers,[37] which she initially took to alleviate pain following two spinal surgeries for ruptured discs,[38][39] and to ease emotional stress during the Keating Five affair.[37] The addiction progressed to where she was taking upwards of twenty pills a day,[14] and she resorted to having an AVMT physician write illegal prescriptions.[40] In 1992, her parents staged an intervention to force her to get help;[21] she told her husband about her problem, attended a drug treatment facility, began outpatient sessions, and ended her three years of addiction.[37] Surgery in 1993 resolved her back pain.[37][39]

In January 1993, an AVMT employee, who had discovered her illegal drug use, was terminated on budgetary grounds.[41] Subsequently, he tipped off the Drug Enforcement Administration,[41] and a federal investigation ensued resulting in McCain paying the costs of the government's investigation, and enrolling in a diversion program.[40][9][41] In a move that critics described as a preemptive strike,[9][37] Cindy McCain publicly revealed her past addiction: "Although my conduct did not result in compromising any missions of AVMT, my actions were wrong, and I regret them."[9]"

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

Posted by: bill42 | September 7, 2008 10:06 PM | Report abuse

If I was blogging such ridiculous comments, I'd sign in as Anonymous too.

Posted by: amaikovich | September 7, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

The Obama people keep on attacking McCain's age when everyone knows that McCain is the best man for the position - no one is saying that Obama is too young and inexperienced which is the reality.


The Obama people keep on attempting to distract people from the truth.


If they can't do that the Obama people turn to outright lying.


.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 9:59 PM | Report abuse

The truth is Sarah Palin has more experience than Obama - everytime the Obama people make a comment otherwise they come off as liars or deceivers - I guess we have another Bill Clinton on our hands.

.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

McCain is 72 and has a family history on his father's side of men dying from sudden massive heart attacks. His father died at age 70 and his grandfather at age 61. Now of course nobody wants to think of someone dying in the next four years, but given his age, family history, and his own cancer history, I think it would be foolhardy not to at least consider the possibility that Sarah Palin could be the President of the United States before 2013 if their ticket wins. Is she ready? McCain thinks so. But how do WE know enough to make an informed judgment? One tiny interview later this week will be the ONLY time we have heard her speak without a script or teleprompter since we heard of her selection 10 days ago on August 29! There are only eight weeks left until the election!! How much unscripted media exposure is the McCain camp going to give us of Palin? We have a RIGHT as voters to hear this woman's views. And not in just one interview and one debate! McCain, Obama, and Biden have been on the national scene for YEARS! Palin for 10 days! We need to hear her NOW!! Hasn't she had enough time to learn the difference between Sunni and Shiite?


Posted by: Sally | September 7, 2008 9:54 PM | Report abuse

The only economic experience Obama has is buying cocaine.

.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 9:54 PM | Report abuse

The paid Obama staffers on here should be more respectful.

.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 9:53 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl, Just say no to drugs, and wave bye bye to the elephants on parade.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 9:51 PM | Report abuse

"AsperClown, to quote insider Peggy Loon-nan when she slipped up and told the truth on MSNBC's hot mike, Mrs. Todd Palin is "BS" and "it's over.""

That's a really outdated slip where Noonan was just caught brown-nosing some low-I.Q. liberal media types, BEFORE Palin's speech.

Even if what you say is true, it still wouldn't matter. McCain's fixed his base problem & Palin only really needs, at minimum, to come out for the Oct. 2 debate and help McCain raise money. She passed her big first test & could get by with little face time from here on out if she wants to govern, etc.

It's Obama who's got the problem. He's got no Fall strategy now, since McCain has reshuffled the cards. LOL he was trying to take back his Saddleback church answer today. Talk about being in reactive and defensive mode instead of having the initiative.

We'll see in the next couple of weeks. But I think McCain might own him at this point. Can't really see how Obama's going to regain his initiative from here against McCain. Obama might do best to focus on the game on the ground in the states, like Clinton.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 7, 2008 9:44 PM | Report abuse

Mccain's campaign is so full of Schmidt...

Posted by: JEP | September 7, 2008 9:38 PM | Report abuse


McCain, Schmidt, Rove, and the rest of the neocons are going all out to discredit the media so that they can invent their own reality. Here's an excellent article:


http://www.creators.com/opinion/roger-simon/media-to-republicans-we-re-sorry.html

Posted by: barbara | September 7, 2008 9:29 PM | Report abuse

Ah, Steve Schmidt gets to make an angry public rejection of his Svengali! How authentic. Somehow, Howard Wolfson's praise doesn't validate the sense that Mr. Schmidt does anything genuine.

His candidate, the agent of change, has changed all the positions on which he took a principled difference from the Republican party.

In the meantime, has Schmidt opined about the $300,000 regalia Cindy wore to the all-white Republican convention?

What a shame. Thought he was better at message control.

Posted by: Helen | September 7, 2008 9:25 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl wrote:

"Would I still probably would have voted McCain anyways. Obama's fully of mistakes lately."

Sounds as if you're "fully of mistakes lately" too.

Posted by: Skeptic | September 7, 2008 9:20 PM | Report abuse

"She's got potential period" and so did W. And that is the best you can come up?
Again answer my question: If he had chosen Ann Coulter or Phylyss Schlaffley, someone with similar positions as Palin, would you be supporting her just b/c they are women.
As for education I believe she attended 6 different colleges in 4 years. Actually I am less disturbed about her right wing stands then I am with her lack of expertise about simple matters like the mtg crisis and technical economic policies. Don't recall them making a big deal about her graduating with honors from College, at the Convention, a member of any honor societies etc; more about her prowess on the basketball court,her handling of a gun and a beauty queen. I am more angry then you about O's not choosing HC, but that certainly does not lead me to rationalize that McCain didn't make an absolutely cynical choice. Even HC money people are now totally ticked off about Palin, folks who were fully prepared to support McCain like me.

Posted by: Leichtman | September 7, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse


News interviews I'd like to see Palin take:

-- Discuss the specifics and the international implications of her the Republican plan for U.S. energy policy with the BBC in a live broadcast.

-- Discuss health care policy and where care for special needs children fits into it on NPR in a live broadcast.

-- Explain how she would handle Iraq policy as president through 2012 (if the need should arise) on Meet the Press in a live broadcast.

-- Present her views on the pros and cons of government intervention in the mortgage crisis on a television network of her choice.

-- Go on The View and make a case for her candidacy to women who don't understand why she's choosing to campaign despite having a special needs baby.

This is for starters.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 9:13 PM | Report abuse

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

Please see my blog, "Spiro T. Palin?" (http://www.topix.com/forum/city/juneau-ak/T4TQIJ56AB2TIL6QP), and this three days later in The Nation by John Nichols. ...

The Nation

Spiro T. Palin
posted by John Nichols on 09/04/2008 @ 01:28am

ST. PAUL – Forty years ago, mounting a comeback campaign after losing a presidential race eight years earlier, Richard Nixon secured the Republican nomination and then selected as his running-mate a former local official who had served a scant twenty months as the governor of a small state. ... There is a Spiro Agnew, and her name is Sarah Palin.

Posted by: Martin Edwin Andersen | September 7, 2008 9:10 PM | Report abuse

AsperClown, to quote insider Peggy Loon-nan when she slipped up and told the truth on MSNBC's hot mike, Mrs. Todd Palin is "BS" and "it's over."

Both the Republican Leader of the Alaska State Senate and the Republican Speaker of the Alaska State House have said Palin is not qualified to be governor much less vice president. Her own state party regards her as a joke.
________________

>> Leichtman wrote: "So Ann Coulter or Phyllis Schaffley would be OK with you as VP, Aspergirl as long as they wore a skirt?"

No, not at all.

Sarah Palin is qualified for the VP slot. She's got potential to develop into a great leader and first female president.

She is exceptional.

Would I still probably would have voted McCain anyways. Obama's fully of mistakes lately.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 7, 2008 8:59 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 9:09 PM | Report abuse

"she took her team to win the championship)", and you forgot to mention that she was a runnerup beauty queen and Ms.Congeniality? Whoopie. Sounds exactly like the perfect skills needed to deal with the mtg. crisis and to set national economic policies.

Posted by: Leichtman | September 7, 2008 9:04 PM | Report abuse

>> Leichtman wrote: "So Ann Coulter or Phyllis Schaffley would be OK with you as VP, Aspergirl as long as they wore a skirt?"

No, not at all.

Sarah Palin is qualified for the VP slot. She's got potential to develop into a great leader and first female president.

She is exceptional.

Would I still probably would have voted McCain anyways. Obama's fully of mistakes lately.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 7, 2008 8:59 PM | Report abuse

asspergirl,

Last tiem I checked you won based on the electoral college vote.

RCP Electoral Count Obama 238 McCain 174
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/

Once we are past the RNC/Pailin bump (not Bristol's) I think we will see clearer numbers.

Posted by: bill42 | September 7, 2008 8:58 PM | Report abuse

""You know, I would play her a game of horse" — Sen. Barack Obama, telling ABC's George Stephanopoulos that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin "looks like she's got some game" on the basketball court. But, he added, she'd be "a better shot" in target practice."

OH PULEASE.

Then after she beats him on the basketball court (she took her team to win the championship), we can all hear him complain about how she cheated (which is his narcissistic coping mechanism for losing debates) or how he thinks she is a racist for beating him (play the race cards all over!).

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 7, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

POOR KARL!!! POOR STEVE!!! POOR RICK!!! Karl Rove, Steve Schmidt, and Rick Davis think that they are such smart men. They figured that women like me who voted for Hillary in our Ohio primary are just so angry that she lost that we will vote for McCain JUST because he picked a woman to be his VP. Oh, Karl, Steve, and Rick! Poor, poor misguided souls! Why, if I didn't know better, I would think you all are male chauvinists. Wait, you all ARE male chauvinists! If you think that we women are so vacuous, so unthinking, so shallow that we will vote for McCain over Obama just because John picked Sarah you are totally out of touch! We Hillary supporters liked Hillary - but we CARE about certain issues! And Palin is not anywhere close to Hillary on the issues that we women care about! (neither is McCain!!) A woman's right to choose, equal pay for equal work, the Supreme Court, etc.... No way! No how! No McCain/Palin!!! And the Rovian gang is at it again! They think SO LITTLE of their woman VP that they HAVE NOT LET HER SPEAK AN UNSCRIPTED WORD since her name emerged last Friday, August 29!! And they won't let her talk without a teleprompter until later this week when she'll sit down with one reporter - Gibson - for a quick Q&A on the ABC Evening News! Male chauvinism at work yet again! You guys don't think your woman VP can handle the press??? Well, maybe on this one you are right! Anyone who has said in the past, as has Palin, that Iraq is 'God's Mission' would worry me too!


Posted by: Marie | September 7, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

Didn't someone Troll-spray AsperClown? Remind me to get the extrastrength can for irredeemable bigoted fools.

Asperclown, O is still ahead in the poll of polls. You are cherry-picking polls and in any event, as Dan Rather reported recently, polls don't mean much in this historical race.

And, Asperclown, you said you are unoccupied so get some sleep so you can get up early tomorrow and email some resumes to Mickey Ds, Arbys, and Sizzler. Goodnight...
____

MCCAIN/PALIN POLLS ABOVE OBAMA/(WASSIS FACE AGAIN?)

Gallup Tracking 09/06
Obama 45, McCain 48

Rasmussen Tracking 09/06
Obama 48, McCain 48

Wasn't that tough, was it? McCain just made the obvious pick that Obama was too sexist, self-sabotaging and/or screwed up to pick himself.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 7, 2008 8:45 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

So Ann Coulter or Phyllis Schaffley would be OK with you as VP, Aspergirl as long as they wore a skirt?

Posted by: Leichtman | September 7, 2008 8:52 PM | Report abuse

Actually Gibson will likely be a moderator for one of the debates. She needs to be grilled on a Sun talk show, its really too bad that Russert is no longer with us; he would certainly know how to pin her down about policy positions and tear away her celebrity veneer.

Posted by: Leichtman | September 7, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

MCCAIN/PALIN POLLS ABOVE OBAMA/(WASSIS FACE AGAIN?)

Gallup Tracking 09/06
Obama 45, McCain 48

Rasmussen Tracking 09/06
Obama 48, McCain 48

Wasn't that tough, was it? McCain just made the obvious pick that Obama was too sexist, self-sabotaging and/or screwed up to pick himself.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 7, 2008 8:45 PM | Report abuse

Forget about Chelsea. Sorry.

The point is Gibson is not a hard news interviewer. Chatting with him is like showing up on the View. He is not going to pin her down on her reported [alleged] scandals and will ask no follow up questions. That's why Palin is okay talking with him. My best guess at Gibson's questions of Palin:

1. What's your sign?
2. Do you wear a sports bra?
3. Is a mooseburger as good as a hamburger?
4. How old is your grandson, er, youngest son?
5. How do you like New York?
6. Are those real eyeglasses?
7. What was your money answer in the Miss Alaska pageant?
8. Will the Yankees make the playoffs?
9. Do you think that Toby Keith loves his country as much as you do?
10. I heard you support Pat Buchanan. Do you agree with his views on -- the best steak in Manhattan?
11. You support Alaska seceding from the Union so my question is: How cold does it get in Alaska?
12. When you watch morning TV who creeps you out more, Ann Curry or Robin Roberts?
13. Why do those meanies keep wanting to serve you with subpoenas to testify about illegally firing your brother in law's boss?
14. Who's better? Mariah Carey or Jennifer Lopez?
________
"How in the world can Gibson interview her without asking questions?
And why would another O supporter use that as another oppotunity to launch a cheap shot against a Clinton? Haven't we heard enough of that garbage?

Posted by: Leichtman | September 7, 2008 8:30 PM"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 8:38 PM | Report abuse

PROMINENT AMERICAN WOMEN ?? in who's world? I presume you must believe in book censorship and ploitical retaliation against subordinates and leading a school system to lead the county in drop outs.

Posted by: Leichtman | September 7, 2008 8:37 PM | Report abuse

I must have missed something asspergirl, what ticket is Daily Kos running on again?

Posted by: bill42 | September 7, 2008 8:35 PM | Report abuse

>> bondjedi wrote: "Once more - cut-and-paste if you will, but please find something new for us to read."

OK, hope this is more new & entertaining for you...

*************

MORE ON THE CORE OBAMA DEMOCRATS BEHIND-THE-SCENES WOMAN-TRASHING: MORE SEXUAL BELITTLING OF WOMEN POLITICIANS ON DAILYKOS

::::::::

HERE THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT PALIN LIKE SHE'S A HO

headline: Palin chges equation Palin = spit take (3+ / 0-)
by henry dribble on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:22:26 PM PDT
::::::::

HERE'S ONE WHERE HILLARY'S PRESENCE IN THE PARTY IN THE FUTURE MAY BE TOLERATE IF SHE PLAYS THE TOOL FOR ATTACKING REPUBLICAN WOMEN FOR OBAMA

 Yeah, nothing like a Sarah Palin out there to (16+ / 0-)
make you think Hillary doesn't suck as much as you thought, and we should probably welcome her back into the fold a little, if only to block the Palins of the world.
by voracious on Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 09:35:56 PM PDT

 Sarah Palin Is A Job (0+ / 0-)
for Hillary Clinton.
by IrascibleFachna on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:04:45 PM PDT
::::::::

ALSO, ACCORDING TO DAILYKOS, PALIN'S A MILK MACHINE

 Palin on the campaign trail (0+ / 0-)
The selection of Sarah Palin as vice-presidential running-mate gives a whole new meaning to the term 'Family Values'.   Maybe Sarah can be equipped with a little breast-pump-necklace she can use on the campaign trail when her feeding-modules begin to leak. 
Very shortly, we understand, Trig's nutritional requirements can be fulfilled by sister Bristol, while mommie is out dowsing for votes, but Sarah will still need the pump - - at least until she quits lactating.
by SGaston on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:39:33 AM PDT
::::::::

HERE THE GAY KOSSACK PEDOPHILES JOIN THE PERV-FEST!

Drill Baby Drill - Palin Daughter's Boyfriend!!! (0+ / 0-)
Let me drill baby, let me drill! LOL
by PunditHater on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:16:12 PM PDT
::::::::

YOU SHOULD SEE THE PATHOLOGICAL STUFF THAT GOES ON OVER AT DAILYKOS IN THE "HIDDEN" THREADS THE PUBLIC CAN'T READ! LOTS OF WEIRD SICKO FANATICS OVER THERE!

(IS THIS THE NEW "TONE" YOU PROMISED TO BRING TO POLITICS, OBAMA? TREATING PROMINENT AMERICAN WOMEN LIKE GHETTO HOS?)

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 7, 2008 8:31 PM | Report abuse

How in the world can Gibson interview her without asking questions?
And why would another O supporter use that as another oppotunity to launch a cheap shot against a Clinton? Haven't we heard enough of that garbage?

Posted by: Leichtman | September 7, 2008 8:30 PM | Report abuse

Bin Laden must be having last laugh in his Caves.. He need not do anything to destroy America.. His job is being done by Repbulicans... and gullible american media and equally gullible right wing christians.. If Mccain/Palin gets elected this will be the last straw in the death of American empire....

Posted by: Samina Hayaat | September 7, 2008 8:29 PM | Report abuse

Bin Laden must be having last laugh in his Caves.. He need not do anything to destroy America.. His job is being done by Repbulicans... and gullible american media and equally gullible right wing christians.. If Mccain/Palin gets elected this will be the last straw in the death of American empire....

Posted by: Samina Hayaat | September 7, 2008 8:29 PM | Report abuse

Praise the Lord. PTL PTL PTL!!!!!! Unfounded "rumor," indeed.

Good work, Internet journalists (yes, bloggers you are journalists; when the MSM stood down you stood up!) and the Enquirer. We salute you.

Pooh, to the MSM, except the NY Times, our paper of record.
____________________

"NEWS FLASH

SUNDAY NIGHT 8 PM

DRUGE REPORTS NEW YORK TIMES TO PUBLISH EXPOSE INTO

PALINS PREGNANCY ON MONDAY

1. Todd is NOT the father?
2. The baby was her daughters?
3. What did McCain know?

OH SWEET JESUS, THE CHRISTIAN COALITION CAUGHT IN A SIN

AND LIES AGAIN

Posted by: Bob From an Elite State | September 7, 2008 8:11 PM

Posted by: Broadway Joe | September 7, 2008 8:27 PM | Report abuse

MSM, where are you.

During the primary we were told the press was correct in not asking any questions of a 30-year-old senior adult surrogate for HRC. Her name was Chelsea. That of course was irresponsible of the press.

Now we are told a vp candiadte (Palin) on a ticket with a 74 year old person with health problems can't be asked anything about any scandal that the alternative media has reported because they are family issues -- or about any policy issues. And that Palin will only sit down for a chat with Charlie Gibson rather than submit to a legitimate news- and issues-based interview. Oy, what a world.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 8:22 PM | Report abuse

NEWS FLASH

SUNDAY NIGHT 8 PM

DRUGE REPORTS NEW YORK TIMES TO PUBLISH EXPOSE INTO

PALINS PREGNANCY ON MONDAY

1. Todd is NOT the father?
2. The baby was her daughters?
3. What did McCain know?

OH SWEET JESUS, THE CHRISTIAN COALITION CAUGHT IN A SIN

AND LIES AGAIN

Posted by: Bob From an Elite State | September 7, 2008 8:11 PM | Report abuse

"This is a pairing that is so perfect for what McCain needed"
.. but out of step with mainstreet America.
We don't want our libraries censored and our books burned and certainly don't want the Gonzales style of governance, politicizing nonpolitical bureaucrats like librarians and troopers.
How about pairing what is perfect for America and a countryin turmoil, rather than just making a desperate political stunt. Rove and Noonan were right on the mark when they labeled the choice as the worst form of political cynicism, which is otherwise beneath John McCain. Apparently he has become so desperate to win in November that he is willing to place our nation in peril with his female version of Heck of a job Brownie, not in charge of FEEMA, but a heartbeat away from leading the most powerful govt in the world. Maybe we should check to see if she has un a horse farmas part of her cedentials, we certainly know that she was a heck of a point guard. And this comment is from someone who recently took my John McCain yard sign down. Aspergirlyou constantly come here and brag about your superior education. How in the world would someone with any education believe that Palin was the best R choice for governance? Rove was spot on. Aspergirl do you as a so called educated person believe in censorsing our libraries and book burning. If so I don't think much of that diploma you throw in our face every day. That was certainly not anything we learned about in Con Law. Did you bother to read Friday's story of HC's top female fundraiser who had recently backed McCain now agrees with me and is saying no way in h*** with Palin. You have lost all of your credibility with this HC supporter.

Posted by: Leichtman | September 7, 2008 8:04 PM | Report abuse

"The Tony Rezko material is going to become more important in the next few weeks as the focus on reform and corruption by the McCain campaign starts taking a sharper look at contrasting with Obama"

Right. Rezko was a few weeks away from being important and relevant in January, too. And February. And March. And April. And May. When you and your ilk trot it out again in October, it will be on the crest of breaking again.

Once more - cut-and-paste if you will, but please find something new for us to read. I will make another request for more Steve Forbes material.

Posted by: bondjedi | September 7, 2008 8:03 PM | Report abuse

I always thought it was buy the land, then build the building, but hey what do I know...

"WASILLA, Alaska -- The biggest project that Sarah Palin undertook as mayor of this small town was an indoor sports complex, where locals played hockey, soccer, and basketball, especially during the long, dark Alaskan winters.

The only catch was that the city began building roads and installing utilities for the project before it had unchallenged title to the land. The misstep led to years of litigation and at least $1.3 million in extra costs for a small municipality with a small budget. What was to be Ms. Palin's legacy has turned into a financial mess that continues to plague Wasilla.

"It's too bad that the city of Wasilla didn't do their homework and secure the land before they began construction," said Kathy Wells, a longtime activist here. "She was not your ceremonial mayor; she was in charge of running the city. So it was her job to make sure things were done correctly.""

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122065537792905483.html

Posted by: bill42 | September 7, 2008 8:01 PM | Report abuse

Palin is the self-proclaimed "pit bull". She has no excuse if she wants national office but to answer questions everything a vice president deals with -- health, education, taxes, foreign affairs, dealing with the other party, dealing with foreign leaders, war and peace, conflicts of interest, previous legal issues and scandals etc. Any well educated American should be capable of speaking to most of these issues. She wants the national office so there is no complaining about questions.

The press has the right to question and to follow-up till the answer is clear for the public. The free market of ideas will have the candidate who is best able to handle things come out on top. She is not only not a real seller in that market now, by ducking the press she is not even in the real game. That means the GOP ticket is really just one person -- McCain.

Keep the pressure on Palin to compete for the White House on the merits not on personality and phony imagery by answering questions.

Under pressure for being shielded for questioning, Sarah Palin has a agreed to sit down with Charles Gibson of ABC’s “World News Tonight,” according to an ABC News official.

No other interviews are scheduled. It will be the first TV interview for Palin since she was named 10 days ago as running mate to John McCain. It took Dan Quayle one day, Ferraro 6. Sarah should make up for her ducking the media.

All three real candidates were on the media today -- Obama, Biden and McCain. No Palin. The smiling critic of the GOP convention is too elite perhaps to answer to the national media. Its easy to read someone else's speech and be a smart aleck. That's hardly real American.

Demonstrate some people power. Post questions for Sarah Palin that should be asked by the press, so that she will be forced to come forward with answers. Shame her and the establishment media by getting a hundred thousand posters who demand answers now. Show them up.

Posted by: Paul Nolan | September 7, 2008 7:58 PM | Report abuse

It's the mainstream media's fault, too.

If Tim Russert were alive he wouldn't have stood for this junk. He would have demanded she appear and, if she didn't, then totally discredited her as a candidate. If she had appeared he would have grilled her, with nothing "off limits," on Breakwater-gate, Troopergate, and all the other skeletons reported by Internet journalists and alternative media like the Enquirer (don't laugh at 'em, they are the only newspaper reporting news rather than running away from it).

The MSM has taken a dive. A chat with Charlie Gibson is not an interview on Meet the Press.
_____

Do we want someone who is so terrified to go before the Mainstream Press possibly put in a position where she could become president at any moment after 12 noon on January, 20, 2009 and have to go up against Putin? I don't think so!!! Puhleezzz! After 10 days since her selection as McCain's VP and STILL not ONE UNSCRIPTED WORD FROM PALIN'S MOUTH??? Pitiful! And what does this say about McCain's judgment if the person he handpicks to possibly replace him does not instill enough confidence in his campaign that she is allowed to speak without a script after 10 days?? And now just one short interview with Gibson scheduled for the end of this week? Pathetic.

Posted by: Hailey | September 7, 2008 7:41 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 7:50 PM | Report abuse

>> Concerned Americans wrote: "Anybody have some good extra-strength Troll spray for AsperClown?"
********

WHAT THE OBAMA-LOVIN' MEDIA WON'T SAY ABOUT OBAMA'S ENERGY PLAN
OBAMA'S A CORN HO FROM ILLINOIS, IN THE POCKET OF KING CORN
JUST LIKE BUSH FROM TEXAS IS IN THE POCKET OF BIG OIL

The U.S. corn ethanol biofuels program is pure evil, pure pork, and pure corrupt politics picking taxpayers pockets for no good public benefit, and Obama is all for it because it pays big $$ in subsidies to Illinois farmers, fuels the Midwestern farm boom and creates a spike in the agribusiness-agricultural commodities boom.

Groups tracking world hunger spikes and food inflation problems this year are blaming the U.S. corn ethanol program for diverting farmers from growing food into growing fuel. Global warming advocates point out that it takes more carbon, overall, to produce, distill, refine and burn corn ethanol biofuels than regular oil or natural gas. Making ethanol from corn is so inefficient that we can never use it for energy independence; we already use 25% of our national corn crop for ethanol. Finally, it costs more to use gas blended with ethanol as cars get markedly fewer miles per gallon than they do with regular 100% gas, but you pay as much at the pump for the ethanol blended gas. Motorists who know what they are doing seek out 100%, no-ethanol blend gas stations, even.

The corn ethanol biofuels program solves no problems, creates food inflation, and it's a ripoff -- a King Corn welfare program to already-flush farmers. From one pocket, the taxpayer pays massive subsidies to corn ethanol growers in farm states, while from the other pocket we pay higher prices at the grocery store for food as a result of the biofuels-caused food inflation. Meanwhile we get poorer gas mileage from ethanol blends while paying the same prices as we pay at stations that sell 100% gas.

We could solve a big chunk of our crippling economic problems this year if we do away with the corn ethanol biofuels program because of the big role that program plays in the inflation side of this years' problems.

From 2006 to 2007, 15 million new acres of corn were brought into production in the United States, contributing to the depletion of fresh water supplies and adding to agrochemical runoff from the country’s corn belt that has already created an enormous dead zone where the Mississippi River enters the Gulf of Mexico. The Gulf of Mexico is an ecologically important zone; for example, serving as the breeding ground for many Atlantic species, like dolphins. The dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico, caused by agricultural, sewage and industrial runoff, is expected to grow just as Bush's Environmental Protection Agency denied a petition to waive the federal ethanol mandate in the 2007 energy bill. The EPA decided not to interfere with Bush's federal ethanol mandate despite how destructive the corn ethanol programs have been environmentally.

Obama is all for corn ethanol subsidies programs and has been a staunch supporter of them. Illinois is the second largest recipient of corn ethanol farming subsidies. Obama supports corn ethanol even as there are food riots in Southeast Asia and a price-caused famine in Africa where people are starving due to world price spikes in grain.

Why doesn't the mainstream media discuss Obama's striking support for corn ethanol biofuels, which has been denounced by energy experts and economists alike, in covering the candidates' energy stands? In fact, it seems that mainstream media has stopped covering how bad and damaging the corn ethanol biofuels program is, ever since Obama's strong support for it has emerged.

John McCain, by the way, has taken a principled stand against the corn ethanol biofuels program, even though it cost him votes in Iowa. On the other hand, Obama scored his widely-acclaimed Iowa caucus victory on the back of his unscrupulous corn ethanol support that wins him critical support from special interest constituencies. The corn ethanol biofuels issues is not only an argument for McCain's energy platform over Obama's, but an example for his taking principled stands against defective federal programs that are popular with powerful special interests, losing the support with that constituency.

IF BUSH FROM TEXAS WAS IN THE POCKET OF BIG OIL, OBAMA FROM ILLINOIS IS OWNED BY KING CORN

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 7, 2008 7:47 PM | Report abuse

Heard of the Keating 5 asspergirl?

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

Posted by: bill42 | September 7, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

Anybody have some good extra-strength Troll spray for AsperClown? Does Home Depot have the industrial stuff that works on clinically observable bigotry?
_____

AsperClown posted: "I think that Obama both lacks respect for the white "culture" of his childhood and longs for identity as a man, because of his mother's codependent and powerless relationships with her Muslim men. I think that Obama probably has mommy issues with older white women having power or influence over him, or dependence on him."

Posted by: Concerned Americans | September 7, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

Do we want someone who is so terrified to go before the Mainstream Press possibly put in a position where she could become president at any moment after 12 noon on January, 20, 2009 and have to go up against Putin? I don't think so!!! Puhleezzz! After 10 days since her selection as McCain's VP and STILL not ONE UNSCRIPTED WORD FROM PALIN'S MOUTH??? Pitiful! And what does this say about McCain's judgment if the person he handpicks to possibly replace him does not instill enough confidence in his campaign that she is allowed to speak without a script after 10 days?? And now just one short interview with Gibson scheduled for the end of this week? Pathetic.


Posted by: Hailey | September 7, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

>> bondjedi wrote: "Asspergirl: If you're going to cut-and-paste from hate sites, at least you can find some hate sites with current material. Rezko? You're the only person talking about that chestnut."

I'm only posting that particular opposition research material because it's relevant to the Annenberg project materials that were just opened to review and are being examined this week.

The Tony Rezko material is going to become more important in the next few weeks as the focus on reform and corruption by the McCain campaign starts taking a sharper look at contrasting with Obama. I.e. it's going to become more front-and-center very soon, if the campaigns take a very negative turn.

And I'm only posting opposition research material in response to the offensive harassment. I.e. I'm not going to respond directly to abusive or harassing posts, but will post Obama dirt in response.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 7, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

asspergirl, interesting how there is nothing but old disproved hate for Obama where as Palin is a whole new game.

You have to wonder about the timing, 60 days is just enough to get her really vetted in time for the election.

I bet they wished they could have "introduced" her at about 10 days before and then played the stalling game.

Posted by: bill42 | September 7, 2008 7:38 PM | Report abuse

BREAKING BREAKING BREAKING

From Drudge: "NYT PREPARES TO FRONT EXPOSE ON PALIN'S BABY... DEVELOPING..."

Hopefully our national paper of record will expose this so-called "rumor" as a fairly elaborate and foolish hoax by Mrs. P on the American people.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 7:38 PM | Report abuse

>>Concerned Americans wrote: "Asperclown"
***********************

WHY COULDN'T OBAMA JUST PICK HILLARY, WAS IT THE NARCISSISM
OR A MOMMY PROBLEM? (MAYBE IT WAS BOTH?)

Obama's momma seems to have had at least some traits of a dependent personality disorder, which tends to be a complementary, coincident problem in families in which narcissism occurs.

In the Muslim world, there is a thing such as "temporary marriages". Men can even take "temporary" wives when they already have wives and families. This activity is legal under Sharia law, and the woman aren't respected but they aren't punished. The men usually pay them and the women are usually poor but pretty and have no prospects in life.

For an American woman to serve as a "temporary wife" and "second wife" to Third World Muslim men, who don't even give her money and support, but just uses the brief marriage without any traditional settlement for her, was the cultural equivalent of her being a valueless woman. I.e., in a cultural sense, Obama's momma served her Third World Muslim men as a pump-and-dump without value. The fact that a couple of these Muslim pump-and-dumps comprises Obama's mother's adult married life, is dysfunctional. Obama's mother was, in my opinion as a woman, a sexually desperate loser.

I think that Obama both lacks respect for the white "culture" of his childhood and longs for identity as a man, because of his mother's codependent and powerless relationships with her Muslim men. I think that Obama probably has mommy issues with older white women having power or influence over him, or dependence on him.

It's unsurprising Obama has sought to find a culture and identity in a harsh, black radical Church that cauterizes and rejects corrupt white culture. I think that his finding his identity in that Trinity Church is real, not pretense, just as I don't think it was extraordinarily difficult for him to take the step to repudiate the father figure that Rev. Wright has become in his life.

To be more specific, the narrative of Obama's father in his autobiographies is romanticized and fictionionalized. Obama's mother wasn't taken advantage of by some black man who left her with a child, but she was complicit in a degrading second-wife marriage and was a serial temporary wife to two Third World Muslim men, had kids and were dumped by them. Obama's father was her first such codependent relationship, her first "temporary [Muslim] husband". Instead of how Obama portrayed him, his father was an alcoholic, polygamous, womanizing Kenyan ethnically Arab Muslim (failed) communist who was already married when he got Obama's then-17-year-old mother pregnant. Obama's mother wasn't underprivileged and he wasn't disadvantaged but went to private schools when his grandmother took over his care after his mother sent him back from Indonesia with his stepfather uninterested in him.

Barack Obama clearly has middle-age white woman problems. His refusal to even consider Hillary Clinton as his VP when it was his most obvious and possibly his only real path to winning the election, speaks of some kind self-defeating, self-sabotaging personal issue.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 7, 2008 7:34 PM | Report abuse

Asperclown, more hate radio junk?

Obama wasn't implicated in any way, shape, or form in the Resko trial. He wasn't even mentioned. Get some sleep.

By the way, you did not respond to the "Bigoted Troll" Help Wanted ads we were kind enough to post so you need to get up early Monday to email your resume.

Look, if you are currently unoccupied, to put it kindly, we need to get you occupied. Regards.

Posted by: Concerned Americans | September 7, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

Asspergirl: If you're going to cut-and-paste from hate sites, at least you can find some hate sites with current material. Rezko? You're the only person talking about that chestnut.

Why don't you find some more articles about the genius of Steve Forbes?

Posted by: bondjedi | September 7, 2008 7:27 PM | Report abuse

AsperClown, how idiotic.

Bill Ayers was a "terrorist," your word for 1960s antiwar activists, when Barack was eight years old. This junk has been repeated endlessly on hate TV and hate radio, often in an endless loop.

Palin is under investigation by Alaska's Republican-led state legislature for abuse of process (the same kind of offense that led to two felony convictions and removal from office in Kwame Kilpatrick's case) and the press won't touch it. Is that a family issue, too?

AsperClown, share your important insights and info with the White Citizens Counsel and similar groups and leave the rest of us in the world, the multiculturalists and the mud people, alone.

Posted by: Concerned Americans | September 7, 2008 7:23 PM | Report abuse

"Palin Says She’s a Change from The Scandal-Plagued Republicans, But She’s More ofthe Same.

Palin Says She’s a Change from The Scandal-Plagued Republicans, But She’s More of
the Same. Palin built her reputation on criticizing state Republicans for ethics questions, but Palin has questions of her own, as she used city resources when she campaigned for Lt. Governor; Palin chaired the campaign of another candidate in a race dominated by resource issues when she was on the oil and gas commission and said that she saw no conflict of interest. For years, Palin supported Murkowski,
campaigning for him across the state, and he supported her campaigns as well.

Palin Touts Fiscal Conservatism, But She Increased Spending Tremendously and
Supported Tax Increases. Palin constantly reminds us that she is a fiscal conservative. But during
her time as mayor, she increased the city’s budget at a rate far outpacing the city’s growth with spending
on large projects. She supported sales tax increases and left the city with thousands in per-capita debt,
where none had existed when she came in. Palin brags about eliminating the personal property tax, but
with the same legislation, the city increased motor vehicle fees that almost matched the lost income of the
personal property taxes.

Palin Is Too Socially Conservative for Libertarian Alaska. Palin is a strong conservative—
something she repeated throughout her primary campaign but now seems to try to back off from. She is
not only pro-life but is involved with—and even steered tax money toward—organizations that give
misleading information on abortion. She called herself a “hard-core fiscal conservative” who wanted
government to get to the bare bones. The Anchorage Daily News asked whether her “socially
conservative positions square with Alaska's generally libertarian approach to those issues.” Palin also
supported a flat tax, an idea even Bob Dole thought was absurd.

Palin’s Management Style is to Bully and Demand Political Loyalty. Palin’s tenure as
mayor of Wasilla was marred by tremendous staff turnover, first when she fired most of the top staff—
including the city’s librarian—because she questioned their loyalty, and then later when staff quit because
of her micromanaging style. Wasilla even lost the opportunity to hire a police chief because he said the
job seemed too political.

Palin’s Not Ready for Primetime. Palin argues that she was the mayor of the fastest growing city
in Alaska. While that may be true, Wasilla’s population is still 1 percent of the rest of the state of Alaska.
The last budget Palin approved, $12.5 million, is .2 percent of the $7.3 billion budget Tony Knowles
approved.

Palin’s Not Tough Enough to Be A Strong Negotiator for Alaska. As mayor, Palin fired
someone because she said he intimidated her with his size and because he gave her a “stern look.” She
asked her department heads to give her only good news and once complained because we are so desperate
in Alaska for any semblance of glamour and culture.”

All this and much more...

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM106_palin_doc.html

Posted by: bill42 | September 7, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

As noted above, he is a rove disciple and that is evident; the celebrity ad (ironic now that Palin is now a celebrity), the hiding of Palin which is the equivalent of the closed campaing stops of '04 and no mention of why we should vote for his ticket. Note there has been no mention of what McCain-Palin will do to change the stock market from tumbling, foreclosures from rising and it sounds like Palin thinks the bailout goes to far. When and if we ever hear her talk perhaps she should explain how in 10 days she now knows more that the current treasury department and why a collapse of the banking system and financial markets would be good.

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

I hope the media is smart enough to see Troopergate as a Red Herring....The real issue is that her husband was a member of the FREE Alaska party. What is their platform? They want to leave the Union and take all the tax money we have given them and take all of our resources. This is NOT AMERICAN BEHAVIOR....Its Traitorous.

Posted by: Becky | September 7, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

>>Concerned Americans wrote: "Asperclown"
***********************

BARACK OBAMA'S CORRUPT RELATIONSHIP WITH CONVICT TONY REZKO

Please watch a report on Obama, Obama's slums, Rezko, and $100M of wasted taxpayer money, from NBC news, Chicago's leading TV news program.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDHsHM0laT8&feature=related

How do you explain away the fact that Barry Obama never followed up on the 11 slums that his friend Rezko was supposed to repair in Obama's district in Chicago, and continued to do nothing about the 40 slums that Rezko was supposed to repair or replace in Chicago, even after Obama joined the US Senate?

From the Chicago Sun Times:

For more than five weeks during the brutal winter of 1997, tenants shivered without heat in a government-subsidized apartment building on Chicago's South Side.

It was just four years after the landlords -- Antoin "Tony'' Rezko and his partner Daniel Mahru -- had rehabbed the 31-unit building in Englewood with a loan from Chicago taxpayers.

Rezko and Mahru said they didn't have the money to get the heat back on.

But their company, Rezmar Corp., did come up with $1,000 to give to the political campaign fund of Barack Obama, the newly elected state senator whose district included the unheated building....

The building in Englewood was one of 30 Rezmar rehabbed in a series of troubled deals largely financed by taxpayers. Every project ran into financial difficulty. More than half went into foreclosure, a Chicago Sun-Times investigation has found.

"Their buildings were falling apart,'' said a former city official. "They just didn't pay attention to the condition of these buildings.''

Eleven of Rezko's buildings were in Obama's state Senate district....

Rezko and Mahru had no construction experience when they created Rezmar in 1989 to rehabilitate apartments for the poor under the Daley administration. Between 1989 and 1998, Rezmar made deals to rehab 30 buildings, a total of 1,025 apartments. The last 15 buildings involved Davis Miner Barnhill & Galland during Obama's time with the firm.

Rezko and Mahru also managed the buildings, which were supposed to provide homes for poor people for 30 years. Every one of the projects ran into trouble:

* Seventeen buildings -- many beset with code violations, including a lack of heat -- ended up in foreclosure.

* Six buildings are currently boarded up.

* Hundreds of the apartments are vacant, in need of major repairs.

* Taxpayers have been stuck with millions in unpaid loans.

* At least a dozen times, the city of Chicago sued Rezmar for failure to heat buildings.

Barack Obama jointly bought a property with Tony Rezko while Rezko was under indictment for corruption. (Rezko has recently been convicted). That's how Obama got his Georgian mansion with 7 fireplaces.

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

Troopergate just keeps on getting better...

"John Cyr, executive director of the Public Safety Employees Association, which represents Alaska's law enforcement officers, said the governor's grudge against Wooten clouded her judgment and led her to hold down trooper salaries and other funding.

"The trooper budget was held hostage because they wouldn't fire Mike Wooten," Cyr said."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/06/AR2008090603024_5.html?hpid=topnews&sub=AR

Posted by: bill42 | September 7, 2008 7:11 PM | Report abuse

AsperClown, please answer the question. Did you answer the Help Wanted for "bigoted anti-Obama troll" and did you apply at MickeyD's as fries consultant, as we recommended you do? We are truly concerned. You said pn your post you are unoccupied, shall we say. We want to hook you up.
Regards.

Posted by: Concerned Americans | September 7, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

>>Concerned Americans wrote: "Asperclown"
***********************

GEE WONDER WHY OBAMA LEFT THIS OFF HIS RESUME

Obama's Lost Annenberg Years Coming to Light
By Thomas Lifson

The cloak of media invisibility is slowly beginning to lift from Barack Obama's most important administrative leadership experience, helming an expensive educational reform effort in Chicago that failed to produce any measurable academic gains, according to the project's own final report, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC).

Add in the fact that former Weatherman and admitted terrorist William Ayers (whom Obama described in the Philadelphia debate as merely a "neighbor") was head of the operating arm of the CAC, working with Obama on distributing scores of millions of dollars to grantees in the wards of the city, and you have a topic that the Obama campaign wishes to avoid at all costs.

A compliant media has averted its eyes so far. A timeline of Obama's career from George Washington University omits it....

The four plus years (1995-1999) Barack Obama spent as founding chairman of the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC) represent his track record as reformer, as someone who reached out in a public-private collaboration and had the audacity to believe his effort would make things better. At the time he became leader of this ambitious project to remake the public schools of Chicago, he was 33 years old and a third year associate at a small Chicago law firm, Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland.

This was a big test for him, his chance to cut his teeth on bringing hope and change to the mostly minority inner city school children trapped in Chicago schools. And he flopped big time, squandering lots of money and the time of many public employees in the process.

...

(more at: http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/08/obamas_lost_annenberg_years_co.html)

An update concerning the mysterious files for the CAC, for which Obama chaired the board for five years until early 2000. A liberal blogger revealed on Sept. 6 that it a CAC executive director blocked the National Review's Stanley Kurtz from accessing the CAC files to investigate the William Ayers-Barack Obama working relationship. See: http://globallabor.blogspot.com/2008/09/obamaayers-update-chicago-annenberg.html

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 7, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse

"(For you conspiracy theorists out there who believe Rove is secretly running the McCain campaign through Schmidt, here's a piece of contrary evidence: after Rove told washingtonpost.com that McCain's choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was a "campaign decision" and not a "governing" one, Schmidt publicly castigated the former White House adviser.)"

Rove was obviously totally out of the loop. He predicted that Obama would make a political pick versus a substance pick, which was wrong. Then he cluelessly thought Palin was a political pick.

Palin was clearly a substance pick (energy policy and reform governance), a "base" pick (social conservative Christian, NRA member), an identity politics pick (woman, blue collar small town) and a "personality politics" (charismatic orator) pick all at once. She is each of these important things in just about equal measures.

This is a pairing that is so perfect for what McCain needed this year, that it was obviously planned for a long time. He kept her deep in his hat, so as to not tip his hand. Meanwhile, Rush Limbaugh was hyping Palin to the base all Summer, sounding like he was out in left field when he was tilling the earth for McCain.

The only way McCain could win this Fall is if Obama were suckered into not picking Clinton as his VP. The McCain campaign misled Obama into being completely confident no women were seriously considered. Then, after Obama's pick was cemented at the convention, McCain pulled her out of his hat. McCain clearly outmaneuvered Obama, like an old warrior with a little kid.

McCain is playing chess and Obama's been playing a big-stakes, young man's poker game. it's like watching an old general with a small army outmaneuver an arrogant, overconfident boy-king.

Rove was totally out of the loop. He's obviously a peripheral advisor. The fact that he would even think Palin was a political pick shows he's not even able to see the contours of the strategies McCain is playing. Rove is not in a circle that is "inner" enough to have access to the playbook.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 7, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

Concerned Americans -- Have you no shame? Back off. The children of campaign managers are absolutely off limits!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 6:49 PM | Report abuse

AsperClown, you recently disclosed to the world on this blog you are "unoccupied" shall we say, with nothing to do.

Concerned about you, we posted a "Help Wanted" ad for "Idiot troll available to post from 9am - 11pm, M-F, foolish bigoted rants against Barack Obama and thinking people."

We also advised you to put in an application with Mickey Ds as fries special consultant.

We hope you followed through on the Help Wanted ad and the MickeyD application. Did you? Regards.

Posted by: Concerned Americans | September 7, 2008 6:44 PM | Report abuse

"Country First," Senator McCain? Don't think so! If you cared about the country you wouldn't hide away your VP choice from the country's scrutiny. Palin is a total unknown. She has not been on the national stage for the last 19 months as have Obama, Biden, and McCain. The country doesn't know her! And we have only 58 days left until you are asking us to pull the lever for someone who COULD become PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA during the next four years!! She should have been put before the people - via the PRESS - in totally UNSCRIPTED formats starting last Friday, August 29! We need to size her up! We need MANY UNSCRIPTED opportunities under MANY DIFFERENT settings to see if she has what it takes to be PRESIDENT from day one. Because she COULD BE! So why would you keep her hidden away from us? From the COUNTRY that you say comes FIRST in your thinking? WHY? LET PALIN SPEAK! She should be on all of network news shows NOW, on all of the Sunday shows NOW - morning and evening, in multiple press conferences NOW - and, yes, the debate with Biden. But if you think just one interview with Gibson this week along with one debate in a month will allow the COUNTRY you put FIRST the time to evaluate Palin's qualifications and READINESS for the job of VP (and potentially President) then you are sadly mistaken. The clock is ticking...58 days....


Posted by: Ann | September 7, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

Schmidt, have to hand it to him, he's great.

Getting the press to back off on pretty much every scandal Palin's immersed in: Breakwater-gate (the [alleged] baby hoax involving her [alleged] grandson), Trooper-gate, her relationship-with-husband's-best-friend-gate, etc., etc. -- by bogusly characterizing them as "family" issues that are out of bounds.

And how about Schmidt arranging for the sole interview with Palin to be with ABC's Charlie Gibson. Imagine what would have happened if Obama had said: I'll do only one interview and it will be with NBC's Gene Shalit.

We can expect real hardball questions from Gibson (probably suggested by George Stepanopoulos). It'll probably go something like this:

1. What's your sign?
2. Do you wear a sports bra?
3. Is a mooseburger as good as a hamburger?
4. How old is your grandson, er, youngest son?
5. How do you like New York?
6. Are those real eyeglasses?
7. What was your money answer in the Miss Alaska pageant?
8. Will the Yankees make the playoffs?
9. Do you think that Toby Keith loves his country as much as you do?
10. I heard you support Pat Buchanan. Do you agree with his views on -- the best steak in Manhattan?
11. You support Alaska seceding from the Union so my question is: How cold does it get in Alaska?
12. When you watch morning TV who creeps you out more, Ann Curry or Robin Roberts?
13. Why do those meanies keep wanting to serve you with subpoenas to testify about illegally firing your brother in law's boss?
14. Who's better? Mariah Carey or Jennifer Lopez?

That's it, President, er, Vice President, er, Mrs. Palin. Thank you for coming. Our next guest this morning is Soupy Sales. Soupy, it's so nice to see you here again....

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

>> lydgate wrote: "I really don't think it would have mattered whom McCain picked. There are too many racists in this country for an African-American, even one as supremely qualified as Barack Obama, to become President. In twenty or thirty years, as the demographics change and more and more of the old bigots die off, it will be different."

Barack Obama's got more advantages than any politician in history ever. From total blowout, historic donations pouring in to him to a press that concealed his negatives and attack his opponents for him, to the party posses shifting rules and priming the pump for him so that little issues like delegates that Clinton won in MI got actually taken away from her and given to him, no candidate in history got his advantages.

What kind of idiot would reject the other historic candidate who split the democratic electorate with him almost evenly, to pick some old doofus blowhard who couldn't get elected "Most Likely To Eat Lunch" for his VP?

He's been squandering money left and right; what's with that $6 million stage for his acceptance speech?

The guy is an arrogant, King-of-the-Hill narcissist. He beat Clinton with a massive blast of sexist bullying from the press and his campaign's accusations of racism that were overplayed.

He's blown and mismanaged away his own lead in this race, and squandered the goodwill of the Clinton supporters and overall has acted like a self-centered, sexist narcissist. Many former Clinton supporters were planning on voting for McCain anyways on account of the sexist bullying and the race card playing, and Sarah Palin is just icing on the cake.

Obama wouldn't have won anyways, because passing over Clinton and picking Biden was the last straw in his go-it-alone-historic-candidate who wanted to stand alone on the stage of history this November. McCain picking Sarah Palin is just speeding up Obama's inevitable collapse after the Biden pick. Obama has no compelling arguments for his leadership, and the fact that he had to pivot to a dems vs. repubs theme reveals the failure of his attempt to run a pop-cult campaign off a personal mystique alone. Obama was going to go down in some way or another, after passing over Clinton (and with such disrespect!)

Obama's missteps should be a lesson to any minority candidate for a national election, who leverages a win over an opponent by using bashing, belittling and marginalizing another group of people. That's not leadership and it's no way to attain an historic election win.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 7, 2008 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Newsflash to Steve Schmidt: Walter Reed Elementary School and Walter Reed Army Medical Center are not the same place.

Second Newsflash to Steve Schmidt: Insofar as the truth matters, tell your candidate to stop running around saying Obama opposes nuclear energy. From Obama's presidential nomination acceptance speech: "...as president, I will tap our natural gas reserves, invest in clean coal technology, and find ways to safely harness nuclear power. I'll help our auto companies re-tool, so that the fuel-efficient cars of the future are built right here in America."

Third newsflash to Steve Schmidt: One *taped* interview with Charlie Gibson between now and October 2 isn't going to convince anyone that Sarah Palin is really facing the press. She needs to do several live interviews with news reporters who could credibly be considered skeptical to her position. Why not put her on live (or even taped if you have to) with Rachel Maddow on MSNBC? This would only seem fair since Obama went on O'Reilly. Turning down press availability on the grounds that she's not comfortable or "the campaign" doesn't think it's advantageous to take interviews is condescending. Bravo for picking a woman for your ticket -- Why now treat her like she's a little lady that can't stand on her own, but can certainly stand by her man?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 6:09 PM | Report abuse

McCain Candidacy: - Courtesy of Karl Rove, Schmidt and Company.

American electorates deserve respect from their presidential candidates. The handlers pedal half truth and lies, knowing that the initial perception is hard to dispel. In other words, deception and lies pay off because the lies unconsciously become ingrained truth in the voters mind. Experts in this manipulative politics, in which Karl Rove and Schmidt are the masters, intentionally target voters’ psychology with no regard for truth or integrity. It worked in 2000 and 2004 on McCain and Kerry. They would go to the extent of having candidates lie in major speeches and continue to pedal the lies on the stump speeches. The question is who should be held accountable? The answer is the candidate.

I would like McCain to answer a few questions on his Olympic ads, VP pick roll-out, and recent stump speeches.

First, why did McCain claim that Obama will raise the taxes on middle class Americans, although facts reveal the opposite? Did he truly believe it was truth or was he deceived by his handlers?

Secondly, why did McCain continue in his stump speeches, claiming that Palin sold the plane on e-bay for a profit? This had been debunked by the media and it is just not true. The Alaskan government uses E-bay. Therefore, selling on e-bay is not a trail blazing action introduced by Palin. Governor Palin did try to sell the plane on E-bay, but with no success. The plane was sold with a $600,000 loss to a campaign donor, who is asking for additional $50K for unexpected repair cost. So again, what is the reasoning behind McCain’s claims? Does he truly believe this is an example of trail blazing proposal of his VP pick or was he deceived by his handlers?

Thirdly, Palin in her speech stated that she said, “thanks but no thanks” to the “bridge-to-no –where” ear marks spending. This segment of the speech was supposed to be a major example of why Palin was chosen. The speech was written by McCain’s campaign and it was their responsibility to ensure that advertising merits of the VP pick should be based on the truths, not fiction. McCain should have at least some responsibility on the accuracy of the major highlights of the speech. Did the campaign check on the fact that as a mayor of Wasilla Palin hired a lobbyist for ear marks? The national average is $50 per person and Wasilla got $1000 per person? So what is the deal? Did McCain intended to deceive the public or was he deceived by his handlers?

We need to know exactly what McCain is aware of and what does he control? We know his cell phone is sequestered from him, just as his VP pick is sequestered from the media. We also do know that he is not known to pay attention to details. So his executive skills and capability is weak and his ability to run a tight ship is questionable. Before the reshuffle, the campaign advisors had contradicted the candidate and this was not because of a gaffe, but rather a position difference. So the question is who is in control of the McCain campaign? McCain extols his character as a major asset of his candidacy. What are we suppose to expect from McCain presidency in terms of governance, integrity and vision.

It has become apparent now that McCain candidacy is brought to you by Schmidt and Karl Rove. His VP pick is also brought to you by Schmidt and Karl Rove. Truth in terms of positions held by McCain will not be discussed. He had changed his positions on many fronts. According to Rick Davis, McCain’s senior advisor, the 2008 campaign is not about issues. In other wards, it is “an inconvenient truth” to let the voters know where McCain stands on issues. It is about marketing deception and incorrect perceptions in terms of McCain’s positions and pedaling “empty words.”

As for the VP pick, Karl Rove and Company sequestered Palin on an intensive training so that she can respond intelligently on foreign policy and does not contradict the current McCain positions. This is close to the “Spice Girls” endeavor. Palin is intelligent and could possibly pick up the general thread on issues. However, what is bothersome is that in the long term you cannot grasp nuances on world affair if by in large, you do not have world view historically, geographically and politically. You can easily be manipulated.

My friends, McCain is offering another Karl Rove style presidency, with weaker candidates. Weaker in terms of McCain in his inability to calmly analyze the emerging issue, listen to advice from opposing views, and reach conclusion based on facts at hand. As McCain stated in his memoirs “often haste is my mistake.”

Maybe another Republican Party primary is in order here.

Posted by: ZAZ | September 7, 2008 6:06 PM | Report abuse

McCain's may be the ultimate "wag the Dog" candidacy. Far too many in the US would rather drink the koolaid than think about reality.

Posted by: nclwtk | September 7, 2008 6:02 PM | Report abuse

I just don't think that McCain can fix our economy. He's out of touch with the problems. We can't fund two wars and have a healthy economy. He doesn't know what to do, the people he picks don't know what to do. Palin can't help him with this.

Having a brillant campaign strategist won't change the fact that McCain won't be an effective leader.

Posted by: Sunshine | September 7, 2008 5:52 PM | Report abuse

"There are too many racists in this country for an African-American, even one as supremely qualified as Barack Obama, to become President."-lydgate

Qualified in what exactly? Cutting up lines or rolling blunts? Get real. You're as high as BO.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 5:52 PM | Report abuse

I really don't think it would have mattered whom McCain picked. There are too many racists in this country for an African-American, even one as supremely qualified as Barack Obama, to become President. In twenty or thirty years, as the demographics change and more and more of the old bigots die off, it will be different. But not this time. Bush/Cheney have mortally wounded America, economically, militarily, and politically; McCain/Palin will finish it off.

Posted by: lydgate | September 7, 2008 5:39 PM | Report abuse


Why does Obama call woman 'sweetie'?

"BROs BEFORE HOs!" .. Obama's campaign slogan.

LIBERAL=SEXIST

Posted by: julia | September 7, 2008 5:37 PM | Report abuse

The question of Gay Marriage was recently brought up on one of the Sunday talk shows.
Here'e my stance. If they legalize Gay Marriage, then the legalization of Incest is right around the corner. It's just as morally wrong and every bit as disgusting.
But it will open the door for what the Dem's are really pushing for. Gay Incest Marriage. Obama can make it happen. Go BO!
Idiots

Posted by: Bobo4bush | September 7, 2008 5:28 PM | Report abuse

PALIN MUST BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR HER BLATANT LIES ABOUT THE BRIDGE TO NOWHERE

(The following headline is from an article by Sam Stein):

Palin In '06: I Won't Let "Spinmeisters" Turn Bridge To Nowhere Into "Something Negative"

On October 2, 2006 she told the Ketchikan Daily News, "We need to come to the defense of Southeast Alaska when proposals are on the table like the bridge and not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that's so negative,"... "There needs to be a link between Ketchikan and its future and its future opportunities and progress, opening up land in this area," she said.

Posted by: DogBitez | September 7, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

McCain's slogan is 'Country First.' Should be 'Me First.' If McCain were truly thinking about the welfare of this country he would not have chosen someone like Palin who is so blatently not ready for the job that she is afraid to show her knowledge and qualifications by simply appearing before all of the media immediately after her selection and as often as possible - press conferences, Sunday morning shows, 60 Minutes, network anchors (ALL of them, not just Gibson who was roundly criticized last spring for that dreadful Democratic debate where 50 minutes went by before any substantive questions were asked)!), etc. What a hypocrite McCain is to say his slogan is 'Country First' when, if, God forbid, something happened to him on day two, Palin would have to step in. Charlie Black even said she won't be ready until their second term!!! He said she will spend the first four years at McCain's knee on a learning curve! Well, what about America if she is thrust into the Presidency before her four-year training is complete? No, it is 'Me First' with McCain in a calculated POLITICAL move to win over his base and some women swing voters. Shame on you, John McCain. This Palin pick says volumes about what you really think.


Posted by: Teresa | September 7, 2008 5:09 PM | Report abuse


From:
Head of State
http://tinyurl.com/5mbefu

Sunday, September 07, 2008

"Actual Responsibilities": If You Can't Manage a Hockey Rink, Can You Manage Economic Policy and National Security?

From the Wall Street Journal:

Palin's Hockey Rink Leads
To Legal Trouble in Town She Led >
By MICHAEL M. PHILLIPS
September 6, 2008; Page A5

WASILLA, Alaska -- The biggest project that Sarah Palin undertook as mayor of this small town was an indoor sports complex, where locals played hockey, soccer, and basketball, especially during the long, dark Alaskan winters.

The only catch was that the city began building roads and installing utilities for the project before it had unchallenged title to the land. The misstep led to years of litigation and at least $1.3 million in extra costs for a small municipality with a small budget. What was to be Ms. Palin's legacy has turned into a financial mess that continues to plague Wasilla.

"It's too bad that the city of Wasilla didn't do their homework and secure the land before they began construction," said Kathy Wells, a longtime activist here. "She was not your ceremonial mayor; she was in charge of running the city. So it was her job to make sure things were done correctly."

Ms. Palin, now Alaska's governor and Republican Sen. John McCain's running mate, has pointed to her two terms as Wasilla's mayor, from 1996 to 2002, as evidence that she has enough executive experience to take on the presidency, should the need arise -- more than Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, who touts his own background as a community organizer in Chicago.

"I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a community organizer, except that you have actual responsibilities," Ms. Palin said Wednesday in her acceptance speech at the Republican convention.

Litigation resulting from the dispute over Ms. Palin's sports-complex project is still in the courts, with the land's former owner seeking hundreds of thousands of additional dollars from the city.

Cite:
Head of State
http://tinyurl.com/5mbefu


Posted by: Cara Prado | September 7, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse


The tabloids will finish her off. Only political junkies like us watch hardball and read blogs like this. They are walk through the supermarkets and read those headlines. I was out garage saling yesterday and people were talking about the Affair being reported in the Enquirer. I was also in the Walgreens and the girl behind the counter was reading it and people were all looking at the headline standing in line. They are alluding to another story coming out. They story has to do with an abortion she had before she was married. This is probably what shapes her extreme views on abortion. Women often have strong guilt even years later.


============
The media and pundits have said that the dems do not know how to treat Palin so it does not look like they are beating up on her. In truth it is the media that has taken a hands off approach to her. Why is she any different than Hillary or any other candidate, male or female.Did anyone hear what Peggy Noonan said when she thought her mike was off.LOL
Connie from"Blue" Indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 3:13 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

If Steve Schmidt intimidates the media into not pursuing the Palin stories, it will be the equivalent of the media rolling over in the run up to the war in Iraq.

Posted by: Cara Prado | September 7, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Best lines of the day:

PALIN: "...A frat joke on the American public." (Post below)

"Jesus was a community organizer -- and Pontius Pilate was a governor." (Mark Shields on "This Week in Washington," probably quoting someone else who said it first...)

Posted by: scrivener | September 7, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

What are the odds that Gibson will pitch her one softball after another? Here's what he should be asking her:

How is it that you took a tiny town of 6000 from zero debt to $22 million in the red, in spite of hiring a lobbyist who netted you $27 million in funding?

You say you support special needs children, but how does that square with the fact that, as governor, you slashed funding for special needs kids by 62%?

Your husband was a member, on and off, of the Alaskan Independence Party -- a secessionist party whose platform is "Alaska First - Alaska Always". And you, as a private citizen, attended a couple of conferences. For some Americans, that puts your patriotism and loyalty to country into question. Explain your position in regards to Alaska's right to secede.

You say you told Congress, "Thanks, but no thanks," for the Bridge to Nowhere... but you're on record as having fully supported the Bridge to Nowhere, and you kept the money that you received for it. Can you explain that?

In a face to face encounter with Iranian President Ahmadinejad, what would you say to him? And Putin? Mahmoud Abbas? Nuri al-Maliki? Hassan Nasrallah? Kim Jong? Hu Jintao? Role play for a moment and tell us what you would say to each of these leaders.

But you know what he's going to ask her instead? What's it like being a supermom, juggling family and career? What was it like being raised in Alaska? How are you coping with all the media attention? Meaningless question after meaningless question... Glamour magazine style. And we, the voters, will be left with no more information about Palin than we had before the interview. I have low hopes that ANY interviewer will EVER treat Palin in the same way they would have if she'd been a man.

Posted by: DogBitez | September 7, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if Sarah Palin will be wired for her interviews like W was for the Pres. debates in 2004??

Is the going to vet her for that?

Posted by: Liz | September 7, 2008 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Gore. Kerry. Hillary. Obama...

All should've won. All went down in flames (Obama's now behind in the polls). All because your donations are being wasted on poorly run campaigns.

Quit complaining about Republican attacks/lies/dirty tricks and hire yourself a pro like Rove or Schmidt!

Oh, and maybe buy 51% of Diebold stock...

Posted by: Rob Iola | September 7, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

I do not believe the Obama camp attacked her personal life , quite the opposite , I believe Senator Obama made that clear, unlike the repubs who critized him after his girls were on the front of a magazine. Get your stories straight. Connie from "blue" indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 3:38 PM | Report abuse

I do not believe the Obama camp attacked her personal life , quite the opposite , I believe Senator Obama made that clear, unlike the repubs who critized him after his girls were on the front of a magazine. Get your stories straight. Connie from "blue" indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

" In truth it is the media that has taken a hands off approach to her"

LMAO>> after being slapped back for attacking her personally, the media and barack don't know what to do.

the personal attacks on her family were repugnant and Oh-so-Obama attacks backfired.
shame on Obama

Posted by: obamaisgawd | September 7, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

at least he doesn't use race and sex to divide us like the obama campaign does.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 3:27 PM | Report abuse

Don't like him? Wish you had someone like him working for the Democrats? Then take some of the millions you've been showering Obama and Hillary with and HIRE HIM!!!

Posted by: Rob Iola | September 7, 2008 3:17 PM | Report abuse

The media and pundits have said that the dems do not know how to treat Palin so it does not look like they are beating up on her. In truth it is the media that has taken a hands off approach to her. Why is she any different than Hillary or any other candidate, male or female.Did anyone hear what Peggy Noonan said when she thought her mike was off.LOL
Connie from"Blue" Indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Yup, whoever said the American people are stupid was right.

That's why Schmidt's plans ARE WORKING.

Can you imagine a country which accepts when a media and message manipulated like Rick Davis comes boldly onto the television set and refuses to make his candidate available to the press?

The MAINSTREAM press???

Does anyone see the irony in that? "Mainstream" press is the term. Mainstream! Schmidt's plan, therefore, is to hide Palin from "the mainstream" of our society!

Of course, the average person couldn't care less what someone else does with their body, woman or man. The average person is to darn preoccupied with trying to earn a decent living and keep a roof over their heads to give a damn about the extremist crap the far right wants to impose on our society.

The question, however, is whether we'll remain so preoccupied with our own little worlds that we'll allow wool to be pulled over our eyes by blatant manipulators liek Schmidt?

Posted by: pasc | September 7, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Whispering campaign: "The L is silent."

Posted by: hayeseric | September 7, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

Obama junkie

I agree with almost everything you said but it is VERY important...not so much to get into Plain blah blah...

bit it is the clearest and biggest blunder and cover up that shows clearly McCain is almost a carbon copy of the leadership of the other wealthy military son who thinks chanting aggressively toward the world is the same as strength...

his choice in Palin and it's marketing qualities would work if we do not make sure they don't fool the American public with this same game/tactic that has been used for 8 years...

and has been successful... and has gotten us here.

The Palin pick and cover up and removal from the public vetting process in the face oh her overwhelming record of answers or understanding ...or statements that have any or show any claer grasp of the issues that face the sinking of our nation ...

is a clear showing that mccain's team that brought us the cover ups and lies and skills of the last 8 years...are fighting and planning on doing the same thing for the 9th year.

It stops now.

Throw these bums out.

We have had enough of shutting down the wall of silence and the press and covering up and stashing/educating witnesses to manipulate our country for their benefit...

not the countries.

throw the crooks out.

So we should fight for the good guys... but make sure the bad guys are called out on these tactics we have seen for the past 8 years.

Palin not answering questions ...is Nixon, Libby, wmd lies, katrina cover ups, justice department shenanigans...and a highlight of what they plan on doing for the next 4 more.

Posted by: dl | September 7, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Palin is all of a sudden credible because she gives a coherent speech?!?!


What a bunch of crap, she's an ethics challanged creationist thug who's used to bullying here way around in small little ol Alaska where no one notices it.


Palin is a small time Dick Cheney and she knows that she can't go off script or she'll be sunk so the McCain campaign will leave it to rightwing propaganda outlets like Faux Noise Channel and Rush etc. to sell Palin's talking points for her while not bothering to ask why she can't or won't answer any questions that are off her Karl Rove written and approved script.


Palin = Empty Pantsuit!
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sqWkaGv89E
.

Posted by: McCain = Bush's third term | September 7, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Steve Schmidt=Bull S***, plain and simple.

Posted by: NotBubba | September 7, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

The real discussion here has to be that 8 weeks is not time to vet an unknown candidate for VP. This is not about gender, it's not even about party, it is about the critical importance that Americans take this vote seriously and that we have the right to know what is under the wrapping. We do not vote a blind date into the vice presidency of the USA. This is a frat joke pulled on the American people by the Republicans - and they are making everyone talk about everything except that we as a people cannot allow ourselves to vote for an unknown like Sarah Palin. Shame on McCain for falling for this after having met her 2 times. We've all met people who we later found out were scoundrals or criminals. Bottom line, no blind dates for the White House. The only responsible vote is for Obama/Biden.

Posted by: Former Hockey Mom | September 7, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

As an Obama-supporter, I think my fellow Obama-supporters should not get distracted by the Republican offering of Palin. We should do our parts as community support to have drive up voter registration for Democrats, donate, may calls, and in general, work hard for the Obama/Biden ticket.

There is a reason why the McCain camp has such tight rings on Sarah Palin. They just think she is ready for national politics. Palin's policies and views are to the extreme right of John McCain. Many people just aren't familiar enough with her to know this, especially outside of the Internet world.

McCain better hope he doesn't have a health scare or concern that comes up between now and Nov. 4th because his polling numbers will drop significantly.

Posted by: Obama-Junkie | September 7, 2008 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Schmidt learned well from Rove, or is Rove actively advising Schmidt? Let's see, if Bush cast himself as a uniter and has been the polar opposite; now McCain casts himself as a reformer and does not that cause us to fear he, too, will likely be the polar opposite should he become president?

McCain has lost his moral compass. If that because of the influence of Schmidt or simply because of his own ambition?

Posted by: Byron | September 7, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

I still can not believe that during McSeniles speech he stated Palin sold the state plane on E-Bay and made the state a profit and then smiled.Now that has been proven to be untrue as with many of his statements , now how is that different than the lairs that are running the country now????
Connie from "blue" Indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Comunity organizer in Alaska, maybe has nothing to do because, there is no comunity, but in one Chicago neighborhood with 500,000 people (whole Alaska has 670,000 people) it's a tasking job and responsibility with no empty promises, and you don't even get paid for it. Now, that is a difference between small town mayor in Alaska with 5000 people, from comunity organizer in Chicago.

Posted by: ComunityOrganizer | September 7, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Johm McCain got $7M soon as he picked Sarah Palin as VP. Barack Obama picked up on extra $10M and thousands of supporters.
Oh by the way, the change is alredy in at McCain's campaign; FROM TOUGH GUY MESSAGE AND BUSH SUPPORTER, HE CAHNGED HIS MESSAGE TO MESSAGE OF CHANGE.

Hm, wondering why!!! where did he get that from??!!!

Posted by: BOBSTER | September 7, 2008 1:58 PM | Report abuse

same team

and same hide and seek ethics...

different year...

don't eb played throw the bums out who castigated the press when they asked about wmd, katrina hirings, justice department, Libby,

and the list goes on ...

all the way to the McCain campaign tucking their VP mistake in a back room teaching her the witness the cliff notes on our problems we face...

that she has absolutely NO record or awareness on...

(and if anyone brings up the pipeline that was already in the works in an oil and gas economy dpeendent state as "energy expertise" or alaska being near Russia as "defense expertise" I am going to finally puke my brains out)

This was the most selfish scary decision we have ever seen by a Presidential candidate... up there with the manipulation to go to war by this same team.

No more slimey hide the facts and call fire to the press...

throw these crooks out.

Posted by: dl | September 7, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

(For you conspiracy theorists out there who believe Rove is secretly running the McCain campaign through Schmidt, here's a piece of contrary evidence: after Rove told washingtonpost.com that McCain's choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was a "campaign decision" and not a "governing" one, Schmidt publicly castigated the former White House adviser.)
---------------
Sorry that means nothing coming from the biggest bunch of liars in our lifetime. Rove's finger prints are all over this one, Schmidt may be the public face, but he is reading from the Rove play book.

Posted by: patrick nyc | September 7, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse


To Media Types:

Maybe Palin is not the real story.

Maybe who's pulling her strings is the real story.

Maybe by focusing on her "vetting" you are missing the real story.

When she ultimately is forced to withdraw as a candidate, the real story remains.

Visit:

http://www.theocracywatch.org
http://www.nowpublic.com/scrivener - "Expose State-Supported Domestic Terrorism

THE PALIN PARADOX: A PAWN IN THEIR GEOPOLITICAL GAME?
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/palin-vp-paradox-pawn-geopolitical-game-get-political-w-vic-livingston

If you have trouble accessing either site, complain to your internet service provider.

Posted by: scrivener | September 7, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse


Well, lf you "APPEASEMENT KID" supporters your day has been ruined.
BREAKING NEWS BY VJ Machiavelli

It seems the "IN" team McCain/Palin is going to have a bigger bounce than the "APPEASEMENT KID" Just a minute ago on fox news Larry Sabato said that at least one National poll will show them ahead of the "APPEASEMENT KID" by more than the margin of error. How is'i that what I have been saying.

The "IN" team UP and the "APPEASEMENT KID" down

VJ Machiavelli
http://www.vjmachiavelli.blogspot.com
ps so is Doug Schoen
pps NOW WE WHO HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING MY RANTS ALREADY KNEW THAT.

Posted by: VJ Machiavelli | September 7, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Steph | September 7, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

I am a supporter of Senator Obama , but I think McSenile is right about one thing American people are STUPID.Anyone who wants more wars, supports Bush's economy plan and opposes a womens right to choose and people are willing to vote for him, Americans are STUPID,no way, no how , no McSenile.
Connie from "blue" Indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Great...another campaign being driven by Republican dirty tricks.

Karl Rove has cast the mold. Whether Schmidt does or does not take marching orders from him is irrelevant.

Anybody with a brain knows that the entire McCain campaign has been built around smearing Barack Obama.

The fact that Obama has not come out swinging, thus forcing McCain to play defense, is troubling.

I am not a cunsultant, but I do know one thing....if, like 4 years ago, the Dems spend all their time fending off attacks instead of creating their own, we will have handed the White House to the GOP on a silver platter.

Don't think the rest of the world thinks it's a terrible joke that Palin's presence on the ticket actually caused a bump?

What Obama needs to do to win:
http://scootmandubious.blogspot.com/2008/09/when-are-dems-going-to-learn-how-to.html

Posted by: scootmandubious | September 7, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company